Democrats Ro Khanna (Calif.), Don Beyer (Va.) and Joe Kennedy III (Mass.) unveiled the bill, the Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act, on Friday. If passed, the act would institute regular appointments to the Supreme Court every two years, with new justices serving for nonrenewable 18-year terms. After 18 years, appointees would become “senior justices” able to temporarily rejoin the court in the event of an unexpected vacancy. Although the current eight justices would be exempted, the two-year appointment cycle would take effect immediately, without waiting for them to retire.
For reasons outlined here, I very much support the idea of term limits for SCOTUS justices (see also Steve Calabresi’s recent NY Times column defending them). But enacting them by statute is both unconstitutional and likely to set a dangerous precedent. Legal scholar Michael Ramsey has an excellent discussion of the constitutional problems at the Originalism Blog:
The consensus of legal scholars seems to be that this is unconstitutional if done by statute. I’d like to be a contrarian and say otherwise, but I can’t. Indeed, I think this is another example…. where the Constitution’s text is clear, if read carefully and without a view to evasion.
Article III, Section 1 provides:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour…
I’ll assume here that the “good Behavior” standard means the judges hold their offices for life unless impeached and removed under Article II, Section 4…. So, as a starting point, a simple term-of-years for Supreme Court Justices is a constitutional non-starter.
The Khanna et al. proposal apparently tries to get around that restriction by redefining the “office” of Supreme Court Justice as hearing cases for 18 years (I’ll call it phase 1) and then serving as a backup “senior Justice” in case of temporary vacancies (phase 2). Rotating from phase 1 to phase 2 wouldn’t be a removal from office, it is argued, because the office, by definition, includes both phases of service.
This doesn’t work for me. Article III, Section 1 creates “Offices” of “Judges … of the supreme and inferior Courts.” Necessarily, holding the “Office” of judge of the supreme Court means acting in a judicial capacity as a member of the supreme Court, not simply having the title and filling in occasionally. This constitutionally defined office can’t be redefined by statute to mean the office of acting in a judicial capacity as a member of the supreme Court for a while and then doing something else for the balance of one’s tenure. (Otherwise, Congress could define the “Office” of Supreme Court Justice as serving as a Justice for 5 years and then serving as dogcatcher in East Outback, Alaska, for the rest of the time). And Article III, Section 1 goes on to say that the judges shall hold “their Offices”—that is, their offices as members of the Supreme Court—during good behaviour.
Ramsey’s critique implicitly highlights a possible negative consequence of assuming Congress has the power to impose term limits by statute: If Congress can impose an 18 year term limit, they can also impose much shorter ones, such as five year limit or a two year limit. That would make it easy for any party that controls both Congress and the White House to get rid of justices whose rulings they dislike, and replace them with more supportive jurists. And if Congress can impose term limits on all justices, they can also selectively impose them on specific justices it especially wants to get rid of, while leaving the others alone. For example, if a Democratic Congress wished to get rid of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, or Amy Coney Barrett (assuming she gets confirmed), they could pass a law imposing very short terms on justices appointed in 2017, 2018, and 2020, respectively. Republicans could use similar tactics to target liberal justices who might otherwise become thorns in their side.
One can argue that politicians would be prevented from doing such things by political norms. But, as we have all seen in recent years, norms have a way of fraying and even collapsing in times of intense polarization. If you’re a Democrat, would you really trust Republicans to follow norms on this issue, when it becomes inconvenient for them to do so? If you’re a Republican, would you trust the Democrats to do the same?
I’m not suggesting that the Khanna proposal is itself motivated by such partisan calculations. To the contrary, I think he and his co-sponsors are acting in good faith. One indication is that they exempt current justices from the term limits, thus making it impossible to use the bill to get rid of current conservative justices liberals dislike. In theory, Amy Coney Barrett might be subject to the term limits if the Khanna bill passes before she gets confirmed. But in practice, such a scenario is highly unlikely.
But once it is generally accepted that Congress has the power to impose term limits on Supreme Court justices by creative redefinition of the office, that power can be also used in less scrupulous ways. And such tactics are likely to be attractive to politicians seeking partisan advantage.
And most politicians not exactly known for their principled adherence to inconvenient norms. The recent history of Supreme Court nominations and other judicial nomination battles shows that most aren’t even willing to stick to normsthey themselves embraced just a few years ago. Democrats and Republicans have repeatedly jettisoned their own professed principles on such matters as whether the Senate should consider nominations for vacancies that arise during an election year, whether it is appropriate to filibuster judicial nominees, whether senators can legitimately oppose nominees based on ideological considerations, and so on. The GOP’s egregious recent flip flop relative to their 2016 positions is just the latest in a long string of “hardball” tactics deployed in the ongoing political battle over judicial nominations.
By all means, adopt term limits for Supreme Court justices. But let’s do it by constitutional amendment. That is both the legally correct path, and the one less likely to create a dangerous slippery slope.
I criticized statutory term limits and related “rotation” proposals for Supreme Court justices in greater detail here and here.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2GkvaB0
via IFTTT
The New York Times on Sunday caused a stir with their report on President Donald Trump’s tax liability, or lack thereof. The analysis notes that Trump, whose net worth is estimated at $2.5 billion, “paid no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years,” and paid only $750 in both 2016 and 2017.
The story will likely come up during tonight’s presidential debate, and the consensus among the media and liberals broadly is that this is yet more evidence of Trump’s sketchy behavior. But focusing on Trump’s approach to reducing the amount he owes in taxes misses the larger point, which is that Trump’s returns are merely a symptom of a complex tax system that incentivizes filers to sniff out every legal strategy for reducing their tax burdens.
For context, let’s begin with Trump’s business model, which goes something like this: Launch several businesses, many of which hemorrhage millions of dollars each year, and use the publicity from those businesses to make money on personal branding. The latter is highly profitable, earning Trump $427.4 million between 2004-2018. The losses from the former—his hotels and resorts for instance—are then used to largely offset his tax liability.
The Times’ report does erode the savvy businessman brand Trump has sought to cultivate for himself, both commercially and as a candidate for office. The president is not necessarily the astute entrepreneur he claims to be, though he may be uniquely skilled at making money by wasting money. His most high-profile business successes—his golf courses—have reportedly lost $315 million since 2000. The Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., just opened in 2016, has already lost $55 million, both numbers according to the Times.
Losing money for a living is certainly an unorthodox business model, but that doesn’t make it illegal.
Trump’s deductions don’t stop there, however. There’s also the $9.7 million tax credit Trump claimed to renovate the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C., which would later become the aforementioned Trump hotel. That fell under the historic preservation tax clause, an entirely legal tax incentive meant to encourage the redevelopment of old structures.
It could be legally problematic, or just another revealing symptom of U.S. tax law, that Trump has claimed millions of dollars in unspecified consulting fees on various business projects, which typically amounted to 20 percent of his income, according to the Times. Ivanka Trump was allegedly the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars in such consulting fees. The president also declared $1.4 billion in business losses in 2008 and 2009. An IRS audit is ongoing.
“Any good tax lawyer or accountant will give options to their client. Some of them will be clearly legal, clearly allowable,” says Joseph Bishop-Henchman, Vice President of Policy & Litigation at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation. “And then there’s gray area stuff,” he continues, noting that the “payments to the [Trump] kids” may be a stretch.
It is also true that the wealthy almost always pay a hefty tax bill. Someone of Trump’s worth, that is, a person in the top 1 percent of all earners, would usually shell out more than a third of his income in taxes.
But as Bishop-Henchman reminds us, much of the behavior outlined by the Times report is not only legal but was enshrined by our lawmakers to encourage certain behaviors. He mentions the tax credits Trump received for the Old Post Office building renovation: “Congress wrote that law, and they made it available,” he says. “And it’s been on the books for 40 years, and it’s been used to rehabilitate tens of thousands of historic properties. When you write stuff on the books, billionaires are going to use it, and they’re going to use it to bring their tax liability down.”
Our tax code, which Bishop-Henchman says was written in the style of a “phone book,” is replete with overly complex rules and regulations meant to influence the public’s economic behavior. Former Vice President Joe Biden is no stranger to this. “I have nothing against Amazon,” he wrote in June of 2019, “but no company pulling in billions of dollars of profits should pay a lower tax rate than firefighters and teachers. We need to reward work, not just wealth.” The tech behemoth paid no federal taxes in 2018 after making use of legal tax incentives established by Congress, of which Biden was a member for 36 years. For example, Amazon invested $22.6 billion in research and development in 2017, something the legislature hopes will spur job creation and economic growth.
“It’s this conflict between we want to use the tax code to incentivize all these things,” says Bishop-Henchman. “And then we get upset when people use them very well.”
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/36eigzv
via IFTTT
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
– Upton Sinclair
Upton Sinclair was describing willful ignorance based upon who butters your bread. The rampant corruption of our society, as power has been consolidated into fewer and fewer hands, has resulted in our political, financial, cultural and economic systems being captured by a billionaire class who use their wealth to dictate the path we are forced to follow – or lose everything.
The sociopath class include the Silicon Valley social media titans, the billionaires running the six mainstream media companies, the rogue billionaires like Soros and Bloomberg who fund chaos and foment insurrection, the Deep State surveillance agency operatives like Clapper, Brennan, Comey and Mueller doing the bidding of the oligarchy, Wall Street criminals like Dimon, Paulson, and Blankfein doing god’s work, and last but certainly not least – Powell, Yellen, Bernanke and slimy Kashkari priming the pump for the never ending systematic pillaging of the nation’s wealth.
When you witness what passes for legislators at the Federal, State and Local levels, you must weep for our future. These pathetic excuses for leaders display none of the qualities a citizenry would want in those they have elected to manage our governmental affairs. They are bought off hacks, lacking any intellectual honesty, and selling their votes to the highest bidder. They lie, misinform, steal, and do the bidding of the monied interests who selected them because they are pliable dupes without an ounce of courage or forethought about the long-term best interests of the people they are supposed to be representing.
We are far from the republic Franklin and his fellow patriots gave us, and as Franklin foreshadowed, we were unable to keep it. As the fledgling republic devolved into a mob democracy, with the Federal government grabbing more power during the Civil War, the banking cabal seizing control of the nation’s finances in 1913 with the creation from Jekyll Island, the growth of the welfare state with FDR and LBJ doing the most damage, the metastasis of the military industrial complex, the elimination of privacy after the Patriot Act surveillance state execution, and now the final countdown to Armageddon as the state, media conglomerates, Wall Street criminals, mega-corporations, and billionaire oligarchs use this purposefully over-hyped flu pandemic to consolidate their power, wealth and control over a dumbed down, iGadget addicted, fearful, easily manipulated, compliant populace.
Most people go through life not questioning the motivations of their political, financial, economic and religious leaders. They naively believe they have achieved their positions of power because they have earned it through hard work, intellectual superiority, and moral authority. Most people are not sociopaths. They are just trying to steer around the potholes of life, raising families, earning a living, finding some enjoyment, leaving a positive legacy and trusting those in positions of power are looking out for their best interests.
They are wrapped up in their day to day existence, so are not vigilant in monitoring what political, financial and corporate power players are plotting to further reduce their liberties, freedom, and bank accounts. After decades of government school social indoctrination dumbing down of the masses, relentless propaganda propagated by the corporate media mouthpieces of the Deep State, endless technological and sports distractions, and being lured into crushing levels of debt by Wall Street and Madison Avenue, the masses are incapable of critically assessing how they have been systematically screwed by the ruling class.
Even with the self-imposed economic depression initiated by politicians, at the behest of captured self-proclaimed medical “experts” and college drop-out techno-geek billionaires (Bill Gates), resulting in tens of millions (mostly blue collar and service industry workers) being put out of work, there are still 147 million employed Americans. That’s up 14 million from the April pandemic low, but to provide some perspective, it’s at virtually the same level as late 2007 just before the Wall Street/Fed created financial collapse.
Considering there are 260 million working age Americans in the country, with 26 million employed part time, 9 million self-employed and 21 million government workers paid for by the 91 million full-time wage earners, you understand why wage earners can be intimidated into “not understanding something” because their livelihood depends upon them pretending to not understand the truth.
The propaganda phrase “we’re in this together” is another Orwellian doublespeak example, as there are 10.7 million less private industry workers than a year ago, but the number of government workers is amazingly up by almost 200,000. So much for sharing the pain. The other dichotomy is between college graduate white collar workers who can work from home and the mostly low paid service industry workers who “serve” the white-collar workers. The number of college graduate workers is up by 1 million in the last year versus down 9.3 million for all other workers. These pandemic lockdowns have devastated the job prospects of blacks, teenagers, and anyone working in the hospitality industry. We are not in this together.
The Federal Reserve actions have only benefited their Wall Street constituents and the .1% who own most of the financial assets in this country. The poor, blue collar workers, waitresses, bartenders, savers, and senior citizens (who avoided being sentenced to death in nursing homes by Cuomo and his fellow Democrat governors) have been thrown under the bus once again. The rich get richer and the poor are thrown a $600 bone and told to obey and stay like a good dog.
The Sinclair quote is even more apt in relation to the latest narrative being used by the powers that be to divide us and create chaos. The false story line of “systematic racism” is being used as a cudgel to beat us into submission and compliance. The only thing systematic is the organized and well-funded traitorous endeavor by Soros and his ilk to undermine the basic moral tenets of our society in order to institute a Marxist new world order in the U.S., Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and eventually the entire world.
They want to destroy our past by tearing down statues and promoting fake history like the NYT promoted 1619 Project. They publicize and promote division and racial strife by publicizing the few murders of blacks by whites, while ignoring the daily slaughter of blacks by other blacks in Chicago, Baltimore, Philadelphia and the other Democrat run urban ghetto kill zones. The lawlessness and savagery in black inner cities with black on black crime is ignored by the left-wing politicians who run these cities and their media mouthpieces. There is clearly something systemic about what has happened, but it’s not due to systemic racism.
The term ‘systemic’ has been in vogue lately because the propagandized narrative since a black felon dying of a fentanyl overdose was videotaped being kneeled upon by a white cop with a history of abusing citizens has been “systemic racism” is the single most important problem in America, keeping black people from getting ahead and resulting in them fearing for their lives, as cops and white people target them because they’re black. Once the narrative was unleashed, the leftist mainstream media carried the ball with a misinformation campaign, and the domestic terrorist organizations BLM and ANTIFA were funded with millions of dollars from Soros and other leftist billionaires to riot, loot, burn and destroy cities across America in the name of racial justice.
Corporate America latched onto the narrative, along with sports leagues, Hollywood elites, and every virtue signaling toady in America. Anyone questioning the narrative with facts is cancelled, attacked and destroyed by the mob of willfully ignorant lemmings. A white person’s salary now depends upon them apologizing for being white and kneeling before BLM and begging for mercy because they are systematically racist.
The dictionary definition of systematic is:
done or acting according to a fixed plan or system; methodical in procedure or plan; presented or formulated as a coherent body of ideas or principles.
The “systematic racism” narrative has absolutely no factual basis. Are there racists in our society? Sure. There are white racists, black racists, Latino racists, and Asian racists. Harvard, Yale and other elite Ivy League institutions have been cited by Federal authorities for racist policies against Asians and whites.
If systematic racism is keeping blacks from succeeding why are there numerous examples of whites pretending to be minorities (Pocahontas Warren, Jessica Krug, Rachel Dolezal, Shaun King) in order to get an advantage in their career advancement?
Since the implementation of LBJ’s Great Society, trillions of taxpayer funds have been spent to boost the lives of black America, with a phenomenally detrimental impact on their lives. The creation of the welfare state has enslaved the black community in dependence and squalor. Incentivizing out of wedlock children has resulted in over 70% of all black children being raised in fatherless households.
Even though urban school districts spend $12,000 to $16,000 per student, the majority of blacks are matriculated into society unable to add, subtract, spell or speak the English language. Their urban enclaves are drug infested homicide zones, with young fatherless black men killing each other at an astounding rate. Chicago has at least 50 shootings every weekend, with nary a white shooter. It seems black lives don’t matter to other blacks. But, when a black rapist is shot by police while reaching for a knife, the BLM and ANTIFA terrorists use it as an excuse to loot, riot, kill white Trump supporters, kill cops, and generally act like savages.
This entire contrived fairy tale shows all the signs of being systematic, but the methodical plan being implemented has nothing to do with racism or justice. The Davos elitist lords have been emboldened by their success since 9/11, as they have utilized every crisis as an opportunity to further their agenda of consolidating power, wealth, and control over the plebs.
This pandemic “crisis” is being used as an opportunity to reset the world in a manner most beneficial for the Davos billionaires, by exploiting pandemic fear, engineered social chaos, a fake climate crisis and economic anxiety to implement a corporate fascist world order, disguised as a green new deal, MMT, socialist paradise. The apparently incomprehensible actions of left wing politicians, DA’s, the corporate media, surveillance state bad actors, compliant central bankers, and emboldened billionaires over the last few months begin to make sense when you realize it is part of the plan.
As we have learned over the last decade, conspiracy theorists have been proven right, time after time, as a coup against a duly elected president has been revealed through texts and incriminating documents; Snowden and Assange revealed the illegal surveillance program conducted by unaccountable spy agencies; JP Morgan and other criminal banks have admitted to rigging precious metals, bond and stock markets; Soros has funneled tens of millions to elect far left District Attorneys who refuse to enforce the law and prosecute violent criminals; a captured left wing judge attempts to prosecute an innocent man who was setup by Obama’s FBI hacks; and Bloomberg is using his billions to buy the votes of tens of thousands of black and Hispanic ex-convicts in Florida to steal the presidential election.
The selection of a senile handsy blunder zombie as a presidential candidate is clearly a Trojan horse to install Kamala Harris (who had 2% popularity among Democrats) as the evil conduit to inflict the Davos master plan upon our country.
“Reason is poor propaganda when opposed by the yammering, unceasing lies of shrewd and evil and self-serving men.”
– Robert A. Heinlein
I consider myself a rational fact-based person who tries to seek the truth and live my life in a manner that would make my deceased dad and my children proud. My negligible efforts, over the last twelve years, to try and expose the lies and corruption of those wielding power over our lives seems like a drop in this ocean of deceit. My message is only able to reach the few who want to know the truth, while the unceasing propaganda and lies of powerful evil men is broadcast to the masses through mainstream and social media conglomerates to manipulate their emotions and lead them on a path to destruction.
This bad flu outbreak has been seized upon by the shrewd, evil, self-serving men who rule the world to test their universal basic income scheme, pushing green new deal idiocy, consolidating commerce and profits into fewer mega-corporations, waging a war on the white middle class, tyrannically imposing job crushing government lockdown mandates, and dehumanizing the populace by forcing mask compliance in order to gain admittance to places of business.
In Part 2 of this article I will demolish the mask narrative, describe the systematic destruction of small businesses, enlighten you about the true purpose of the Federal Reserve, and try to make sense of what might happen as the climax of this Fourth Turning rapidly descends upon an unprepared nation.
Bonds & Bullion Bid As Stocks & Dollar Skid Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/29/2020 – 16:00
COVID concerns (NFL cases and NYC positivity rates), a lack of stimulus progression, and the uncertainty ahead of tonight’s presidential debate weighed on stocks and the dollar, but sparked a safe-haven bid under bonds and precious metals…
The machines tried as usual to get back to even but with no lasting luck (weakness into Asia close and European close and US close…
And the 50DMAs were tested and rejected…
“Where’s my money!”
Gold futures topped $1900…
Gold bounced off its 100DMA…
Source: Bloomberg
As Real yields tumbled, precious metals were bid…
Source: Bloomberg
Election uncertainty continued to surge…
Source: Bloomberg
With the VIX curve notably perturbed…
Source: Bloomberg
The dollar leaked lower again today…
Source: Bloomberg
Bonds were bid very modestly on the day with 10Y Yields back to A 63bps handle…
Source: Bloomberg
Cryptos were lower on the day…
Source: Bloomberg
Silver futures back above $24…
Which pushed the Gold/Silver ratio back below 80x…
Source: Bloomberg
Finally, as Bloomberg notes, oil trading is grinding to a halt with the market concerned about the coronavirus pandemic’s impact on demand and supply cuts from OPEC+ producers.
Source: Bloomberg
And as the month comes to an end, we note that the USDollar is outperforming gold in September by the most since Trump was elected…
Source: Bloomberg
Still, it’s probably best not to get too excited. Year to date, “in terms of gold, the dollar is declining over 20%,” said Bloomberg Intelligence’s Mike McGlone. “I see the metal building a base around $1,800 and resuming the rally above $2,000.”
Source: Bloomberg
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33e7GGH Tyler Durden
Gov Cuomo Threatens To Send In National Guard To Pick Up Trash As NYC Garbage Crisis Worsens Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/29/2020 – 15:45
Offering perhaps the clearest indication yet of his priorities as a Democratic governor of one of the most liberal states in the country, NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo just suggested Tuesday that he might send in the national guard to help pick up trash around the city, infuriating critics who questioned his eagerness to send in the National Guard to act as glorified garbagemen, despite his unwillingness to deploy them during the unrest that followed the killing of George Floyd.
During the lockdown and the months that followed, trash has piled up on some NYC sidewalks. While kvetching about the growing trash pileup, the governor complained that he didn’t know “what was going on” in NYC – which is run by his political rival, Mayor Bill de Blasio – and claimed that he had offered to send in the National Guard to come pick up the garbage if the city couldn’t handle the job.
Complaints about negligent trash pickup have piled up alongside the mountains of garbage, largely thanks to a $106 million cut to the budget of the city’s Department of Sanitation. Complaints about trash piling up in city parks have doubled since last summer, according to Patch.com.
City politicians have demanded the mayor address the problem, which primarily impacts low-income neighborhoods, officials have argued.
If the “New York City Department of Sanitation and their resources can’t do it for one reason or another,” the national guard will be sent in, Cuomo claimed. Cuomo made the remarks during a presentation devoted to his “New York City Stabilization and Recovery Strategy,” where the governor outlined ideas on how to improve everything from schools to the city’s homelessness crisis.
“This is a public health pandemic — cleanliness matters,” Cuomo insisted. the trash comment wasn’t the only dig at de Blasio.
NYC is a shell of its former self.I walked to the Post Office this morning,trash all over the place and in that 6 block walk I was hassled for $$ from 7 different panhandlers. NYC might be lost for quite some time.
However, some on Twitter took issue with the governor’s remarks, claiming the National Guard shouldn’t be co-opted for something like picking up the trash left behind by the Department of Sanitation.
I would respectfully decline if I was in charge of the Natl Guard. This is NOT an appropriate use of the guard. https://t.co/QA6nKXiLzj
1) NY must pay for their labor 2) Gov has them do garbage not stop unrest tells you his priorities 3) THIS is what Cuomo thinks of Military. https://t.co/IKyxNjLENH
With the first presidential debate now just hours away, President Trump continues to insist that Joe Biden take a drug test. Trump’s none-too-subtle insinuation is that the former vice president is so mentally frail that he cannot hope to match the vaulting intellect of the 45th president of the United States on the debate stage.
It’s a peculiar form of Trumpian baiting – something the President has probably learned from the world of Mixed Martial Arts – or perhaps the product of a guilty conscience. Trump himself famously sniffed his way through his first debate with Hillary Clinton four years ago, and there’s been plenty of speculation over the years that the President consumes medicinal substances to combat some form of attention-deficit disorder.
Cockburn won’t weigh in on the specifics. But if Biden were to use drugs for tonight’s performance, which ones should he take? Because make no mistake, Biden should absolutely be taking drugs prior to Tuesday’s debate.
Pro athletes all take performance enhancing drugs, after all, and winning a presidential election is at least as important as hitting 40 home runs or making the Pro Bowl, or something.
Fortunately, Cockburn is a writer, which means he has countless friends who are perpetually in one sort of drug-induced haze or another. They quickly supplied suggestions.
1. Aricept
Aricept is used to enhance mental acuity in patients suffering from Alzheimer’s or vascular dementia. That will certainly be handy for keeping Biden from drooling on the podium. However, Aricept also has the side effect of increasing libido, and has been found to correlate with inappropriate sexual behaviors in those who take it.
…actually, Biden may have been taking this drug for a long time.
2. Fentanyl
This may seem like an odd choice. Fentanyl causes mood swings, irritation and heart failure — and the last thing Joe Biden needs is to fall asleep on stage. It would be an interesting statement in favor of globalization, however, since most Fentanyl is synthesized by our friends in China. And what better way for Biden to exhibit his legendary ‘empathy’ than by showing America’s opioid addicts that he knows what it’s like?
3. Ecstasy
Arriving Tuesday night amped on MDMA would offer a host of benefits to Biden. Besides keeping him cheerful and upbeat for the cameras, if Biden is caught, he can easily pivot in a positive direction: by taking a party drug, he will disavow one of his tough-on-crime achievements, the 2003 RAVE Act. Cockburn doesn’t understand how contributing to the dramatic collapse of crime rates nationwide is a bad thing, but in 2020 everybody is convinced that it is. Biden debating while hopped upon Molly would go a long way toward showing his remorse. ‘Loved-up’, Biden would also show a winning spirit of magnanimity towards Donald Trump, which might help sway independents.
Finally, for years Biden was known as the ‘senator from MBNA’ due to his pro-credit card activism in Congress. If he rebrands as the senator on MDMA, at the least everyone will be really confused.
4. Steroids
It’s not well-known, but then-Sen. Biden also played a key role in banning the recreational use of anabolic steroids. It’s time for Biden’s position to evolve. Putting on 10-20 pounds of lean muscle mass will alleviate concerns about Biden looking old and frail, while also providing a leg up if he and Trump decide to settle their differences through personal combat instead of rhetoric.
5. Adrenochrome
Hunter S. Thompson’s favorite would provide a mountain of psychological benefits to Biden. By inducing thought disorder and derealization, Biden will cease to believe physical reality. That in turn will produce exciting policy insights and a blunted affect that voters will mistake for sangfroid. Even better, though, adrenochrome will be easy to get. While previously obtainable only at the finest pizza arcades, today almost unlimited amounts of the drug are harvested in human sacrifice rituals held by Satan-worshipping pedophiles like Hillary Clinton — or so Cockburn is told. Biden will be able to get more than enough of the drug to power him through all three of the debates, and thanks to the drug’s youth-preservation qualities, he’ll be able to serve a full eight (or 12 — or 200) years as president.
6. Bath salts
Bath salts wouldn’t do much for Biden’s debate coherence. They may, however, trigger a psychotic break that would cause him to assault Trump on stage and try to eat him. This would demonstrate Biden’s vigor and determination to lead the country, and if he does in fact consume Trump, Mike Pence would likely prove a far less formidable adversary.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/30iv6Zw Tyler Durden
US Intelligence Investigated Hillary Clinton Over Alleged Plan To Smear Trump With Russia Accusations Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/29/2020 – 15:12
On September 7, 2016, US intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to former FBI officials James Comey and Peter Strzok concerning allegations that Hillary Clinton approved a plan to smear then-candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian hackers, according to information given to Sen. Lindsey Graham by the Director of National Intelligence.
According to Fox News’ Chad Pergram, “In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump,” after one of Clinton’s foreign policy advisers proposed vilifying Trump “by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
2) DNI info to Grahm:…by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”
4)…DNI info to Graham:…on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.’”
6) DNI info to Graham:…concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’”
Read the letter from DNI Director John Ratcliffe to Lindsey Graham below:
BREAKING: According to handwritten notes, Brennan briefed Obama on Hillary’s approval of a proposal to attack Trump in the 2016 election by tying him to Putin pic.twitter.com/lnwTFwjoAf
In 2017, it was claimed that the “blame Russia” plan was hatched “within twenty-four hours” of Clinton losing the election – while the US intelligence investigation predates that by several months.
New book by ‘Shattered’ by Clinton insiders reveals that “blame Russia” plan was hatched “within twenty-four hours” of election loss. pic.twitter.com/NDUk90Jp5q
It’s Time To Buy Value: Here Are Bank of America’s 29 Favorite Value Stocks Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/29/2020 – 15:10
Two weeks after Goldman presented what it views as the “Future Five” mega growth stocks, i.e., the next FAAMG basket which consists of VRTX, ADSK, PYPL, ISRG, NOW or VAPIN, this morning Bank of America published a report which aims a little bit lower, and instead of growth, presents its 29 favorite Value stocks, as well as 8 value traps.
Noting that in September value finally started to show signs of life, reversing the trend by 4ppt MTD, Bank of America’s chief equity strategist Savita Subramanian writes that value “still see more room to run for several reasons” the main of which is that BofA still views the economy as continuing its recovery, a cycle phase which traditionally supports cyclicals over defensive sectors.
A second reason for the value bet is that value has outperformed coming out of 14 of the last 14 recessions for at least three months.
Reason three is that BofA’s proprietary Regime Indicator has officially entered into a recovery phase…
… where Value outperformed 100% of the time by over 20ppt on average during this phase, with Growth lagging in previous Recovery phases, with average relative returns of -8.5%. In the first “official” month of a Recovery (i.e. after two consecutive months of improvement from the Downturn phase), Value has historically outperformed Growth and Quality by over 3ppt on average.
Despite its recovery optimism, BofA admits that it is too early to write out Growth stocks just yet: as Savita writes, “despite our Value preference, there is still a number of compelling arguments supporting Growth’s continued leadership. The Fed put (FANG stocks have been the ultimate beneficiaries of monetary stimulus), Tech disruption and the rise of ESG investing favor Growth over Value. A potential second wave also does not bode well for Value.”
Additionally, the bank notes that when growth is scarce, investors will pay up for growth. As growth broadens out, investors become more price sensitive and seek out the cheapest growth they can find.
And contrary to popular belief, Subramanian writes, “rates have very little impact on style rotations.”
Another historical observation: during the recovery phase, value has outperformed growth in all but two instances during the trough to peak profit periods.
Meanwhile, BofA warns that given the lack of fiscal stimulus (for now), Growth stocks will not be immune to a second wave and could potentially see more downside, especially given rich valuations and positioning.
Positioning also suggests that value has more upside thatn growth, as active managers maintain a near-record overweight in Growth sectors like TMT and a near record underweight in Value sectors like Financials. FANG carries an overweight of 1.7x by hedge funds, and 1.8x by long only mutual funds. At the same time, banks are at a post–GFC record underweight: “On almost any measure, and among almost every investor group, Growth is over-owned and Value is neglected.”
Predictably, when look at from a valuation standpoint, the aptly named Value stock are far cheaper (i.e., undervalued) than growth. In fact, as shown in the chart below, value sits close to the deepest discount to Momentum. The only other instances during which Value traded at such a steep discount were 2003 and 2008, after which Value outperformed Momentum by 22ppt and 69ppt, respectively, over the subsequent 12 months.
Another compelling reason to go long value: as Growth has grown pricier and Value has grown cheaper, valuation dispersion has risen to the highest levels since the GFC. According to BofA, “when valuation dispersion has been this high or higher, Value stocks have outperformed Growth 95% of the time over the subsequent 12 months, by 24ppt on average.”
One final reason to be long value: Japanification. While not its base case, BofA writes that similarities to Japan (low rates, aging demographics, a closing economy, deflationary threats and a range-bound market) are hard to ignore. In such a case, Japan factor performance during the 1990s’ “Lost Decade” indicates that Value was the best performing factor among the standard quantitative strategies.
* * *
At the same time, BofA also advises its clients to stay away from value traps: to do that, it presents its Value Trap model which attempts to steer investors out of stocks that are inexpensive for the wrong reasons: prices are falling faster than analysts are cutting earnings expectations. These are the industries which tend to remain trapped until a catalyst propels them upward. Also, since 1996, these industries have underperformed the benchmark by 4% annually and have failed to outperform the market more than half of the time. According to Subramanian, more than half of the time, industries that are identified as Value traps have failed to outperform the market in the subsequent month, and performance of Value Traps relative to the benchmark have underperformed by 4ppt p.a.
* * *
With all that in mind, here are Bank of America’s 29 top Quality Value stocks to buy and eight Value Traps to avoid. As BofA notes, “these Quality Value stocks offer attractive yields (3.4% on avg.), which analysts believe dividends are mostly secure, as well as compelling fundamental drivers.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2S8lxrE Tyler Durden
Trump’s Anti-Trust “Cop” Targets Wall Street’s Data Pricing In Blow To Exchanges Tyler Durden
Tue, 09/29/2020 – 14:55
Until now, practically all of the leaks about the anti-trust group gestating inside the DoJ and FTC have focused on big tech. But in an unexpected pivot, Bloomberg just reported that regulators are investigating the different data pricing packages sold by the exchanges to wire services like Bloomberg – along with High Frequency Traders who use the data to employ HFT strategies that rack up steady profits by inserting the “market makers” in between more trades.
Makan Delrahim, who heads the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said in an interview that he’s paying close attention to the data that securities exchanges sell to banks and investment companies. Market participants have long complained that the prices they pay to acquire the data they depend on to trade are too steep.
Delrahim said that one area of potential concern is whether the exchanges are using market power to hurt competition, for example by forcing investors to buy other products or services in addition to the data feeds, a practice known as tying. He declined to comment on whether the division has opened a formal investigation related to the data feeds.
Bloomberg reported that Bloomberg News (one of the subsidiaries of Bloomberg LP) is among the companies that have contested increases in pricing for the different packages offered by the exchanges.
In recent years, the business models of the world’s financial exchanges, which facilitate trading in financial markets from stocks to commodity futures, has pivoted to rely more on these lucrative data subscriptions, and less on the actual trading fees, which have been squeezed by years of consolidation and intensifying competition. And in a world where every nanosecond of frontrunning the orderflow data latency matters, exchanges can charge an arm and a leg, and there will always be a highest HFT bidder willing to pay the price if it means guaranteed and legal “information arbitrage.”
The financial market data peddled by these exchanges provides the world with the view of the financial markets reflected everywhere from CNBC to Google Finance to the Bloomberg terminals and Reuters Eikon platforms used by financial professionals. Of course, different pricing arrangements provide different data with varying levels of delay.
Shares of exchange operators ICE, CME and Nasdaq all tumbled on the news (note: ICE owns the NYSE):
According to Bloomberg, it’s not the only party that has “long griped” about these high prices for financial data. So have Wall Street banks (though mostly because Bloomberg passes on these charges to customers).
As it turns out, an updated draft of the Bloomberg story revealed that their source was none other than Makan Delrahim, the new head of the DoJ’s antitrust division, which is working with the FTC to investigate anti-trust abuses by Big Tech. However, in the interview, Delrahim confirmed that “I want to make sure that, if there’s anticompetitive conduct on Wall Street, that we pursue it.”
In an aside that could create headaches for the banks someday, Delrahim said he is also interested in revamping the code surrounding bank mergers.
But when it comes to the exchanges, Delrahim said an area of potential concern is whether they illegally force customers to buy additional, unnecessary products or services, a strategy known as “tying”. Last year, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, the same man who let Elon Musk mock the federal government then walk away with a slap on the wrist, told the agency to start looking into potential abuses, as the agency clashed with the major exchange operators, including ICE. Clayton was apparently concerned that the rules had created a “two-tiered system”, where firms must pay exchanges for the private information just to be competitive. In May, the agency ordered the exchanges to improve the quality of public data feeds to try and reduce the market’s dependence on the private feeds. Ultimately, the standard that Clayton and Delrahim seem to be hinting at is whether firms are forced to pay exhorbitant sums just to get the data they need to be competitive. However, Delrahim declined to say whether an official investigation had actually been launched.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2GicJwQ Tyler Durden
Opinions are split about tonight’s debate: On one hand, DB’s Jim Reid says that it “will be critical, since it represents one of the last set-piece opportunities for either candidate to change the contours of the race.” On the other, as Rabobank’s Michael Every is dismissive, writing that “neither man has a reputation for eloquence, remaining calm at all times, clearly getting their point across to neutrals, or remaining gaffe free.”
In short, while the debate will likely draw huge television numbers, it is unlikely to sway many voters.
Underscoring that point, Poynter writes that the first Trump-Clinton debate in 2016 drew a whopping TV audience of 84 million, making it the most-watched presidential debate ever. That many people could watch tonight’s debate, although not all on TV. Streaming services and views on websites could make up a sizable portion of the audience.
But will it make a difference among voters? The New York Times’ Michael M. Grynbaum points to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that shows that 70% of voters say the debates likely would not influence their vote. In that case, many may choose not watch “simply because they are stressed out or just plain tired of divisive politics.”
One place where the debate could have an impact is in narrowing Biden’s lead. According to Citi, four of the past five “first debates” have seen the trailing candidate close the gap in the polls – at least temporarily.
Meanwhile, Citi claims that market focus will be on the potential for a poor showing from Biden as a turning point in the election; however, according to media reports, the Biden campaign has been preparing for the debate and will likely focus on key issues (economy, pandemic) rather than direct confrontation with Trump.
What about the outcome of the debate and the pronounced winner? Here, as Jim Reid also points out, the reality is that the candidates’ perceived debate success has in the past had a fairly random correlation as to whether they will be elected on not. Mitt Romney “won” the first debate against Obama in 2012 by a huge 52% majority according to Gallup but lost the election. More spectacularly, Trump comfortably “lost” all three 2016 debates to Hillary Clinton (according to the same media that said Hillary had 95% odds of success). A similar fate was bestowed on John Kerry in 2004 when he won all three debates against G.W. Bush but lost the election.
Extending the list, in the last 10 elections with debate reaction data stretching back to 1976, only 2 candidates who were perceived to have won the first debate went on to win the election. Which is why Reid’s advice to clients is “enjoy the spectacle but there may not be too much to read into it ahead of November 3rd.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3cHotVF Tyler Durden
