Blowback: Protesters In Kiev Demand Resignation Of Ukraine President

While the CIA-staged government coups in Libya and Egypt at least managed to last nearly a year before the inevitable “Thermidorian reaction” resulted in a blowback response that saw a overthrow of the interim US-handpicked rulers, Ukraine may not even last that long. According to reports by both Russian Interfax and Ukraine’s Unian press services, for the first time since the coup that overthrew Ukraine’s president Yanukovich in late February, hours ago a group of protesters assembled in front of the parliament building and on Independence Square in central Kiev, with demands for the resignation of both the interior minister Avakov as well as the acting president Turchinov.

Additionally, reports that the protesters have issued a 24 hour ultimatum to the government to suppress protests in the South East where, as is widely known, “pro-Russian separatists” have effectively taken over the bulk of the cities bordering with Russia.

Simply stated, the people are tired of a figurehead government that already folded when it handed over Crimea to Russia on a silver platter and are demanding at least a token resistance before the rest of the cities in the east flip over to Russia effectively splitting the country in two.

A clip of the protesters taken earlier this evening.


More from Unian:

The Interior Ministry of the capital noted that it is unknown to what protesters are demanding positions remove Turchinova.


According to law enforcement treated protesters politely, but for law enforcement in the event of a breach to the scene, police officers directed.


Also in the Interior Ministry of Ukraine in Kiev urged protesters not to resort to radical actions and do not disturb the public order “as any problematic issues could be resolved through dialogue.”

Ironically, the protesters may just get their wish. Russian RT reported that “Ukrainian tanks and heavy military equipment are moving towards the eastern town of Slavyansk, ITAR-TASS reported quoting acting mayor Vyacheslav Ponomarev as saying. On Monday, protesters ignored the ultimatum to leave by 9 am, and a Russian flag continued to fly over the besieged police HQs in Slavyansk. Ponomarev added that they are getting ready and are monitoring the situation. “We don’t want bloodshed, we are committed to negotiations,” he said.”

Finally, and rather surprising, a clip was also released earlier today showing Ukraine troops and APC dispersing anti-tank “hedgehogs” along the Odessa coastline, as if in anticipation of a marine landing.

Finally, while all this is happening, Obama keeps on talking:


That… and this pearl: “White House warns Russia of more ‘costs’ over Ukraine.”  Does the White House mean these “costs” we wonder?

via Zero Hedge Tyler Durden

Martin Armstrong “It’s Not the Rich – It’s The Total Cost Of Government That Is Killing The Economy”

Submitted by Martin Armstrong via Armstrong Economics,


QUESTION: Do you believe in a fairer system where there is a minimum income cap and a maximum asset cap? We live in an age where productivity has risen through the roof due to technological advancement. Don’t you think humanity is at the stage where it can afford to offer basic income to people so better checks and balances can be set in place to thwart the exploitation of people (see the third world).

A maximum asset cap would also act as a  positive filter in business ownership, don’t you think? The businessmen interested mainly in greed won’t fill those positions, but those who are driven more by other means, hopefully positive ambitions, will fill those roles (CEO,COO, managers, etc.)

Can you form a good argument against an asset cap of, say, $20mm? Can you think of a situation where 1 individual NEEDS more than 20 million, aside from using it to exploit others? If a cap isn’t set, that leads to the development of a tycoon, i.e., exploiter, of an industry. Increased capital permits the further increasing of capital at the accelerated rate. When left unchecked, greed and self-serving goals create a net loss, rather than a net gain.

Remember Martin, everything is connected. You can’t think on an individual level and expect it to not hurt evolution. This is what life is about. Evolution.

We’re headed towards doom, and the enemy is not just socialism, political cronies, and economic mobsters.

ANSWER: The standard of living has collapsed and it now takes two incomes to survive not one. That isn’t because of wages are not high enough. Do not forget, if you raise the wages you raise the cost of production and the consumer will pay that higher level in the end. There is no one-sided solution – you cannot raise wages without prices also rising. People would have more disposable income and would bid up prices by demand. If there was no 30-year mortgage, the price of houses would decline sharply because if people had to PAY CASH for a house, then the price of a house would fall to the point where the average income could afford it. Roosevelt created the 30-year mortgage to try to give people LEVERAGE to buy real estate to raise the price. That LEVERAGE has now impacted prices over the course of decades.


The answer lies in the consumption of wealth not that someone has more assets than another. Eliminate taxation and you will reduce the cost of labor, bring back jobs, and you will also eliminate the lobbying to escape taxes. Henry Ford invented the assembly line and brought the cost of cars down to the middle class at $240. He made a lot of money and expanded his business with it. If there was a cap on assets, you would destroy job creation. It REQUIRED the concentration of wealth to create innovation. If wealth is evenly distributed, you will not get enough people to agree to risk it all. Most small businesses fail after start-up. Some make it while a few really strike it big. That is the risk reward.

Big corporations die because they become eventually run by lawyers not entrepreneurs. I have been called in to many board meetings and watched the process first hand. As soon as a new company becomes public, the bureaucrats enter and the creativity vanishes. This is why they pay huge money for start-ups because they create what the big companies cannot – innovation.

It is not what an individual needs that is the issue. Take all the money away from Bill Gates. How will this improve your life at all? The issue is HOW MUCH is government consuming. But as long as they point to the “rich” they get to waste your money.

Social Security has altered society in ways people do not respect. Previously, family units were stronger because the system was the young took care of the old. Introducing Social Security changed everything. What children today save to take care of their parents?  That’s the state’s job. Welfare altered the system by rewarding women not to get get married. New Zealand nearly went bust on its program that sounded nice that if a woman had no idea who the father of the child was, the state took care of everything and gave her a house. They ended up with the highest percentage of women who had NO IDEA who the father of their child was. What woman does not know that except victims of rape?

China’s one child rule has seriously altered society there as well. Couples are now offering their estate to females to come in from SE Asia if they will take care of them. You cannot create these types of changes without seriously impacting society.


Pictured above at the beginning is the tax burden upon society back in 1988. Even currently, the top 1% pay about 33% of all income taxes. At the start of 2000, the total amount of revenue collected by federal and state government in the USA exceeded 40% of GDP. This is outrageous and this is why the economy is slowing declining. This has nothing to do if somebody earned $100 million or $50 million as a CEO. That has ZERO impact upon your life – but what government takes out of your pocket REDUCES your standard of living – DIRECTLY.


The solution is NOT to raise taxes on the rich, for government will still spend more than it takes in regardless of who pays. This is like fining your wife because the guy next door did not sort his trash for recycling. This is indirect. It is taxes that we must address – not how much someone else makes.


via Zero Hedge Tyler Durden

To the 34% of American Adults Who Are “Worried a Great Deal” about “Global Warming”

Preface:  A recent Gallup poll showed that 34% of American adults worried “a great deal” about “global warming”.  This essay is written for that 34%.

Many well-intentioned people are desperately trying to stop climate change …

And yet they are proposing things that will put more C02 and methane into the air and otherwise do more harm than good.

Frack That

Many propose nuclear and fracking as a way to reduce carbon emissions.

In reality, scientists say that fracking pumps out a lot of methane … into both our drinking water and the environment.

Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas: 72 times more potent as a warming source than CO2.

As such, fracking actually increases – rather than decreases – global warming.

Are Nukes the Answer?

It turns out that nuclear is .

Mark Jacobson – the head of Stanford University’s Atmosphere and Energy Program, who has written numerous books and hundreds of scientific papers on climate and energy, and testified before Congress numerous times on those issues – notes that nuclear puts out much more pollution (including much more CO2) than windpower, and 1.5% of all the nuclear plants built have melted down. More information here, here and here.

Jacobson also points out that it takes at least 11 years to permit and build a nuclear plant, whereas it takes less than half that time to fire up a wind or solar farm. Between the application for a nuclear plant and flipping the switch, power is provided by conventional energy sources … currently 55-65% coal.

Scam and Trade

One of the main solutions to climate change which has long been pushed by the powers that be – cap and trade – is a scam. Specifically:

  • The economists who invented cap-and-trade say that it won’t work for global warming
  • Many environmentalists say that carbon trading won’t effectively reduce carbon emissions
  • Our bailout buddies over at Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and the other Wall Street behemoths are buying heavily into carbon trading (see this, this, this, this, this and this).

As University of Maryland professor economics professor and former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission Peter Morici writes:

Obama must ensure that the banks use the trillions of dollars in federal bailout assistance to renegotiate mortgages and make new loans to worthy homebuyers and businesses. Obama must make certain that banks do not continue to squander federal largess by padding executive bonuses, acquiring other banks and pursuing new high-return, high-risk lines of businesses in merger activity, carbon trading and complex derivatives. Industry leaders like Citigroup have announced plans to move in those directions. Many of these bankers enjoyed influence in and contributed generously to the Obama campaign. Now it remains to be seen if a President Obama can stand up to these same bankers and persuade or compel them to act responsibly.

In other words, the same companies that made billions off of derivatives and other scams and are now getting bailed out on your dime are going to make billions from carbon trading.

War: The Number One Source of Carbon

The U.S. military is the biggest producer of carbon on the planet.

Harvey Wasserman notes that fighting wars more than wipes out any reduction in carbon from the government’s proposed climate measures.

Writing in 2009 about the then-proposed escalation in the Afghanistan war, Wasserman said:

The war would also come with a carbon burst. How will the massive emissions created by 100,000-plus soldiers in wartime be counted in the 17% reduction rubric? Will the HumVees be converted to hybrids? What is the carbon impact of Predator bombs that destroy Afghan families and villages?

The continuance of fighting all over the Middle East and North Africa completely and thoroughly undermines the government’s claims that there is a global warming emergency and that reducing carbon output through cap and trade is needed to save the planet.

I can’t take anything the government says about carbon footprints seriously until the government ends the unnecessary warsall over the globe.

So whatever you think of climate change, all people can agree that ending the wars is important.  (War also destroys the economy.)

Anyone who supports “humanitarian war” by the U.S. is supporting throwing a lot of carbon into the air.

Dumb as a Mongoose In Hawaii

Many scientists suggest “geoengineering” the Earth’s climate. But that could actually worsen climate change. It could also increase the risk of drought.

Moreover, geoengineering would increase ocean acidification and decrease available sunlight for solar power.

And once we started, we could never stop.

Some of the geoengineering proposals are downright nuts.  For example, “government scientists are studying the feasibility of sending nearly microscopic particles of specially made glass into the Earth’s upper atmosphere to try to dampen the effects of ‘global warming.’ ” Others are currently suggesting cutting down trees and burying them. Other ways to geoengineer the planet are being studied and tested (and see this and this), involving such things as dumping barium, aluminum and other toxic metals into the atmosphere.

Remember, the mongoose was introduced to Hawaii in order to control the rats (which were eating the sugar cane used to make rum). It didn’t work out very well … mongeese are daylight-loving creatures while rats are nocturnal. So the mongeese trashed the native species in Hawaii, and never took care of the rats.

Similarly, the harm caused by many of these methods have not been thought through … and they could cause serious damage to our health and our ecosystems.

So – whatever you think about climate – you can obviously agree that we should approach climate change from the age-old axiom of “first, do no harm”, making sure that our “solutions” do not cause more damage than the problems.

So What’s the Answer?

If nuclear, fracking, cap and trade and geoengineering aren’t the answer, what is?

There are 3 main strategies which both climate activists and climate skeptics can agree on, because they have big upsides whether or not the Earth is warming:

(1) Reducing soot will quickly reduce melting of ice and snow. Reducing soot will be cheaper than the “decarbonation” which many policy-makers have proposed. And it would increase the health of millions of people worldwide


(2) Use specific smart combinations of solar, wind and geothermal energy


(3) Decentralize power generation and storage.  That would empower people and communities, produce less carbon, prevent nuclear disasters like Fukushima, reduce the dangers of peak oil (and thus prevent future oil spills like we had in the Gulf), and have many other positive effects

We don’t need fascism to make this happen …  We just need a sound plan.

via Zero Hedge George Washington

Could the Markets Be Setting Up For an Autumn Crash?

The market appears to currently be tracing out a pattern that we have seen multiple times. That pattern is:


1)   A spring mini-crisis (usually March)

2)   A summer rally

3)   An autumnal collapse


This pattern played out in 1907, 1929, 1987, 2000 and 2008.


The most recent example we can point to is 2008. In that year, the market experienced a mini-crisis in March with the collapse of Bear Stearns.


However, the Fed stepped in, merging Bear with JP Morgan. The relieved markets rallied into the summer on low volume. But come July, when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac failed, it became clear that the summer rally would not be exceeding the previous market top.


Then AIG failed, and the markets nosedived, collapsing into an autumnal crash.


Could the markets experience another similar autumnal collapse in 2014?  It all hinges on #2 in the list above: the summer rally.


The markets usually stage some kind of summer rally/ dead cat bounce following spring crises. The key issue is the volume and force of the move. If the market rallies hard on heavy volume during the summer, this negates the pattern.


However, if the market rallies on weak volume after a spring crisis, and fails to exceed its previous top, then LOOK OUT.


Here’s the market’s current chart:



This time around, the spring crisis involved political and geopolitical instability in Ukraine. As you can see, the market bounced off of its trendline and is now  trending sideways.


Provided we hold this line, we should see a summer rally back up to the 1,900 area on the S&P 500.


However, if we take out the trendline, then the market is in more serious trouble.


This concludes this article. For a FREE Special Report on how to protect your portfolio from a bear market collapse, swing by


Best Regards

Phoenix Capital Research




via Zero Hedge Phoenix Capital Research

Behind The Fed’s Monetary Curtain: Wizards? Or Scarecrows Who “Do An Awful Lot Of Talking”

Submitted by Joseph Calhoun via Alhambra Partners,

The Wizard: I AM OZ…the Great and Powerful! Who are you?

The Wizard: Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain! The Great Oz has spoken!

Dorothy: How can you talk if you haven’t got a brain?

Scarecrow: I don’t know. But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don’t they?

All lines from Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz

The last few years the underlying theme of the markets is one of central bank omnipotence. Don’t worry about X, the Fed or the ECB or the BOJ has your back and will do whatever it takes to make sure nothing bad happens. The acceptance of this meme by market players has pushed all manner of assets to prices that in more normal times would make no sense whatsoever. It has been a wholesale rejection of safety and prudence in favor of the risk taking the central banks believe is necessary for the global or local economy to improve. The BOJ has convinced not only themselves but the world that currency devaluation and inflation will cure what has ailed Japan’s economy for over two decades. The ECB has somehow convinced the world that Greece is a worthy borrower for 5 years at less than 5% per annum. And the Fed has convinced themselves and the entire world that a rising stock market is evidence that their policies are working in the real economy. No matter that the economic data doesn’t support that conclusion and that it gets the causation backward.

Of course, it hasn’t just been empty headed scarecrow talk that has produced this effect. The BOJ and the Fed (and maybe soon the ECB) have been buying assets in the open market to back up their talk and create the illusion of activity, the equivalent of the Wizard of Oz’s smoke and mirrors. In the case of the Fed, it is almost all illusion as the cash produced by QE has largely ended up back at the Fed in the form of excess reserves. The BOJ has been more aggressive, buying not just JGBs but also stocks and REITs on the stock exchange, something the Fed is prevented from doing (sarcasm alert) only by their strict adherence to the statutes that govern their behavior. For the ECB the threat of intervention has so far allowed them to avoid having to do much but recent emanations from the Draghi hint at a Yen to join the party. Leave it to the Europeans to be fashionably late and arrive just as the lampshades have become party hats.

The ability to talk markets into doing what he wanted without saying much that was comprehensible was a talent that Alan Greenspan had in spades and earned him the nickname of The Shy Wizard of Money. Ben Bernanke, even though he looks more like a garden gnome than a wizard, spent years building up something resembling credibility that he used to extend Greenspan’s powers of persuasion even through a financial crisis largely of his own making. Bernanke got the party going and like a lot of men, left the mess for a woman to clean up. So far, it seems Janet Yellen’s words don’t carry quite the same weight as her wizard predecessors and the market Toto has a firm grip on the curtain hiding the levers of monetary policy.

When language and illusion become so important to market outcomes it doesn’t take much to upset the market applecart and Yellen started her tenure with what at the time seemed a minor faux pas. Until her first press conference the accepted scenario for monetary policy was that QE would wind down and at some point in the far future, the Fed would start to normalize interest rates (whatever normal is in this economy). Her faux pas was to provide unusual clarity for a Fed chair about what the phrase “considerable period” actually means. It turns out that for Yellen that unspecified epoch of Fed tightening could be as little as six months, something the market obviously wasn’t expecting. Except for a head fake breakout in the S&P 500, it has been downhill for stocks – especially the high beta, NASDAQ momentum darlings – ever since.

Yellen has spent the intervening time trying her best to convince the market that she didn’t actually say what she so obviously did. At a Chicago event on unemployment she said the Fed’s “extraordinary commitment” to “improving the labor market is still needed and will be for some time and I believe that this view is widely held by my fellow policymakers at the Fed.” Unfortunately for Yellen, the market, at least for now, isn’t buying it and once the momentum shifts in a market driven exclusively by that ephemeral emotion it is hard to reverse. For the traders who have moved this market for years now – HFT or actual human – momentum is momentum whether it is up or down and once they get something moving in one direction they’ll push it that way as hard as they can. For the last few weeks that direction has been down and so far Yellen hasn’t been able to change that. Or maybe she doesn’t really want to – yet. After all, there has been some angst on the FOMC recently about “financial stability” or what everyone else calls bubble behavior.

As the Fed continues to wind down QE to its inevitable conclusion, the markets will be left with the reality of our current circumstances. That reality is one that is very hard to read right now with the economic data still mixed after the winter weather distortions. The problem for Yellen and the Fed is that the only thing that will be kind to the stock market is data that is not too good but also not too bad. Data that is too strong will be seen as hastening the day of reckoning while data that is too weak will raise the fears of recession and a Fed with no policy levers left to pull. Only data that continues to show an economy growing slowly but below potential keeps the Fed in the game and the stock market going higher. And that is assuming the market continues to believe Fed policy is actually effective.

Right now, I see some indications that could push the Fed to tighten even sooner than now expected and also some indications that the economy is slipping into recession. Recent data on credit indicates that banks are finally ramping up lending. Commercial and Industrial loans are rising at a double digit annual rate of change although it is unclear whether this is an indication of business optimism or stress. After all, we did see a big jump in these loans leading into the last recession. Total bank credit has also accelerated, the annualized pace roughly doubling since the beginning of the year. Again, though it is hard to say why credit is rising other than that there is obvious demand and banks are meeting it with supply.

On the flip side, the bond market and the US dollar index seem to be flashing some warning signs about future growth. I wrote a post yesterday that covers this in more detail, but the gist is that it seems highly unlikely that the long end of the bond market would be rallying so furiously if the market was expecting a burst of growth. Similarly, if the nation’s currency is a reflection of growth expectations – and I think that is certainly one thing it reflects – then the fall in the dollar index indicates that expectations for growth are, at a minimum, better outside the US than in.

So the outlook for the economy is decidedly uncertain right now and I think so is the confidence in Janet Yellen. I think the more dire outcome for stocks would be if Toto fully pulled back the curtain on monetary policy and revealed it to be nothing more than a bunch clueless economists sitting in a conference room with no ability to control the economy or the markets. If US growth disappoints after all the Fed has done, how could anyone continue to view the Fed wizards as omnipotent? That would send the stock market back over the rainbow to the reality of an economy with big structural problems that can only be solved through political negotiation, something that has been notable only by its absence over – at least – the last 6 years. Are we headed back to Kansas?

Click here to sign up for our free weekly e-newsletter.

“Wealth preservation and accumulation through thoughtful investing.

via Zero Hedge Tyler Durden

FBI Wants 52 Million of Us in Facial Recognition Database By 2015

Facial recognitionThe Federal Bureau of
Investigation’s plan to tag and track us all is going swimmingly,
from a creepy, voyeuristic perspective, according to federal
documents. Released by the FBI in response to a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF), the records reveal plans to stick the mugs of almost one in
six Americans into the
Next Generation Identification
(NGI) program’s facial
recognition database by next year.

Combined with the
more than 120 million faces
in state databases and the feds’
tolerance for a remarkably high false-positive rate, your chances
of getting fingered for somebody else’s misdeeds are getting pretty

According to Jennifer Lynch, Senior Staff Attorney with the EFF,

the FBI plans to have 52 million photos in its database

The records we received show that the face recognition component
of NGI may include as many as 52 million face images by 2015. By
2012, NGI already contained 13.6 million images representing
between 7 and 8 million individuals, and by the middle of 2013, the
size of the database increased to 16 million images. The new
records reveal that the database will be capable of processing
55,000 direct photo enrollments daily and of conducting tens of
thousands of searches every day.

Those 52 million images will include a planned 4.3 million faces
photographed for non-criminal purposes, but included solely for
identification purposes. Searches will be run against all records
in the database, no matter how they were obtained.

The sources for the images are varied, and a bit vague.

  • 46 million criminal images
  • 4.3 million civil images
  • 215,000 images from the
    Repository for Individuals of Special Concern
  • 750,000 images from a “Special Population Cognizant” (SPC)
  • 215,000 images from “New Repositories”

“The FBI does not define either the ‘Special Population
Cognizant’ database or the ‘new repositories’ category,” Lynch
warns. “This is a problem because we do not know what rules govern
these categories, where the data comes from, how the images are
gathered, who has access to them, and whose privacy is

Also, identification is a tad dependant on getting it right, and
that’s not a certainty. Last year, the Electronic Privacy
Information Center
extracted a separate set of documents
from the FBI revealing
that federal specifications on the Next Generation Identifiication
system facial recognition software allow for tagging “an incorrect
candidate a maximum of 20% of the time.”

Well, so long as it’s no more than one in five, I guess that’s

from Hit & Run

Edward Snowden’s NSA Leaks Lead to Pulitzer Prize; Pension Crisis Also Noticed

We won't hold our breath for a White House responseThe Pulitzer Prize has rendered
its vote on what it thinks of Edward Snowden’s revelation of the
National Security Agency’s (NSA) domestic surveillance techniques
today by giving a gold medal in public
to The Guardian US and The Washington
for breaking the stories. The Pulitzer committee credits
the Post for helping “the public understand how the
disclosures fit into the larger framework of national security,”
while The Guardian is recognized for “helping through
aggressive reporting to spark a debate about the relationship
between the government and the public over issues of security and

Snowden has already put out a

“Today’s decision is a vindication for everyone who believes
that the public has a role in government. We owe it to the efforts
of the brave reporters and their colleagues who kept working in the
face of extraordinary intimidation, including the forced
destruction of journalistic materials, the inappropriate use of
terrorism laws, and so many other means of pressure to get them to
stop what the world now recognizes was work of vital public

Rosie Gray of
BuzzFeed tracked down NSA hard-core surveillance-defender and
Snowden-hater Rep. Pete King (R-IRA).
He told her “Anybody who got a Pulitzer in the past should give it
back. The Pulitzer Prize doesn’t mean anything now.”

The NSA responded by hacking the Twitter feed of US Airways and
distracting the world by putting up a picture of a naked woman with
a model plane in her nethers. I am kidding about the hacking, but
tweet actually happened
and quickly became all everybody was
talking about online. It’s still not as horrifying as last year,
when the Boston Marathon bombing happened right as the winners were
being announced. (The Boston Globe got a Pulitzer for
breaking news for their coverage.)

Getting much less attention, partly because of the Snowden
debate but also because the subject just gets less attention,
The Oregonian’s editorial board won a Pulitzer Prize in
the category of editorial writing for its coverage of the state’s
pension crisis. The Pulitzer Prize committee praised “its lucid
editorials that explain the urgent but complex issue of rising
pension costs, notably engaging readers and driving home the link
between necessary solutions and their impact on everyday lives.”
The Oregonian ’s package of editorials can be read


The full list of Pulitzer winners can be found here.

There’s also some interesting topics tackled by the runners-up.
The NSA coverage beat out a report by Newsday of concealed
police abuse and misconduct by the Long Island police. And The
beat out editorials at the Des Moines
challenging Iowa’s restrictive licensing laws.

from Hit & Run

Guardian, WaPo Win Pulitzer For Proving Millions Of Conspiracy Theorists Right

After years of being mocked by the establishment and the majority of the herd, today millions of “conspiracy theorists” can pat themselves on the back because this Pulitzer’s for you. Well, technically it is for the Guardian and WaPo, since these were the media outlets that Edward Snowden picked to release his trove of whistleblowing treasures, which the Pulitzer committee decided were “worthy” of the prize for their “revelation of widespread secret surveillance by the National Security Agency, marked by authoritative and insightful reports that helped the public understand how the disclosures fit into the larger framework of national security.”

And while Edward Snowden did not directly win anything, he did comment from his new residence – where he is not wanted for three felony counts filed by the US Department of “Justice” – a few hundred miles from the unfolding events in the Ukraine, and from the CIA director’s secret weekend visit:

“Today’s decision is a vindication for everyone who believes that the public has a role in government. We owe it to the efforts of the brave reporters and their colleagues who kept working in the face of extraordinary intimidation, including the forced destruction of journalistic materials, the inappropriate use of terrorism laws, and so many other means of pressure to get them to stop what the world now recognises was work of vital public importance.”

Things got a little more awkward when the media whose sole purpose is to serve the statist masters – and to lie whenever the facade of the status quo is threatened – had to chime in: “It’s clear to me that we are all better off knowing the extent of government surveillance—-even the President has, reluctantly, admitted that,” David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, told POLITICO. “It’s a prize well-earned, and it seems to me the Pulitzer committee came to the right decision. It’s precisely because a different kind of society—-Putin’s Russia, say—-could never imagine this kind of journalism that we should value and honor it.”

The president may indeed have reluctantly admitted that. Which perhaps explains why his response was to unreluctantly make the NSA even bigger.

As for Mr. Remnick’s comment about Putin’s Russia, perhaps he should check what country the person who is responsible for today’s Pulitzer win is currently living in.

Others dared to suggest that had Obama made a phone call here and there, that the credibility of the Pulitzer prize would have been diminished: “There are times when a nominee is bigger than a prize. This was such a time,” Mitchell Stephens, a Professor of Journalism at New York University’s Carter Institute, said. “The Pulitzer Prizes would have been diminished had they not recognized the Snowden revelations. Fortunately, they did.”

Others were outright angry such as republican neocon Peter King who tweeted that “Awarding the Pulitzer to Snowden enablers is a disgrace.” Luckily nobody cares what King thinks. 

Bottom line: as lie after lie falls to the wayside, and as factual evidence disproving what had been decades of engrained, institutionalized fraud is disclosed by disgruntled whistleblowing cogs of a corrupt, bloated government that is is cracking and falling apart under its own unsustainable weight, the winner, as the lies that have kept the broken system together for so long are revealed to all, is the average person. And, of course, all those what were formerly known as “conspiracy theorists” and knew all along just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

via Zero Hedge Tyler Durden

Unrigged Market Soars On 3:30 PM Fundamental Bullish Catalyst

The US open was enough of an event to decouple stocks (up) from USDJPY (down) but as we approached the crucial 330ET "fundamental" stocks had caught down to USDJPY weakness (worth noting that USDJPY tagged 102 in the pre-open and plunged). The 330 Ramp – JPY and VIX driven – was right on time getting S&P to VWAP and up to its 100DMA and Nasdaq back above 4000. Away from the roller-coaster ride in hope, faith, and BTFD charity in stocks, Treasuries leaked higher in yield all day (with 5Y underperforming and 30Y unch). The USD was bid (+0.3%) led by EUR weakness. USD strength pressured commodities but Gold was bid (closing above $1325 at 3-week highs).  All major equity indices remain red year-to-date (and negative from 3/19's FOMC). All "normal" and full of unriggedness.

V-shaped recovery on the 330 Fundamental…


Year-to-date, Stock indices all remain red…


S&P futures were ramped to VWAP…


By selling JPY and buying USD…


and selling the shit out of VIX…


Biotech bounced (as did Momos) closing just in the red…


Stocks appeared to play catch up to TSYs early weakness…


FX markets were volatile with the USD ending up 0.3% (on EUR weakness mostly)…


and USD strength weighed on commodities – except gold…


"Hanging on" seems to be new Bullish news…


Charts: Bloomberg

via Zero Hedge Tyler Durden