Month: December 2022

Via The Cradle,

The Lebanese parliament on Thursday failed for the eighth consecutive time to elect a new president, as a majority of lawmakers continue to oppose the options laid on the table.

During the first round of voting on Thursday, 111 votes were cast in the 128-seat parliament, with 52 lawmakers casting blank votes, while 37 voted in support of Michel Moawad, the son of the late president René Moawad.

The 37 votes cast for Moawad are a drop from last week’s session, when 42 lawmakers voted for the candidate who is backed by the anti-Hezbollah bloc made up of the Lebanese Forces (LF) party, the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP), the Kataeb party, and a few ‘independent’ lawmakers.

Some lawmakers even wrote in mock choices on their ballots, with one vote cast for Brazil’s socialist president-elect Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Following the voting session, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri announced that a ninth attempt to elect a president will take place next week.

The Lebanese presidency, which has been reserved for the country’s Christian Maronite sect since the National Pact of 1943, has remained empty since the end of Michel Aoun’s term in September after six years in power.

Hezbollah’s ‘Loyalty to the Resistance’ party, along with its allies in the Amal Movement and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) all oppose Moawad’s candidacy. Hezbollah’s lawmakers, specifically, have maintained that their preferred candidate for the presidency is the leader of the Marada Movement, Suleiman Frangieh.

The pro-resistance bloc has also been calling for dialogue to elect a “consensual president” among all political sides. However, US and Saudi-backed parties like the LF have opposed this. Christian political leader Samir Geagea said earlier this week that “dialogue with [Hezbollah and its allies] is a waste of time.”

In response to this divisive stance, PSP leader Walid Jumblat called Geagea’s remarks “absurd” and said that “talking to all parties is necessary to elect a new president.”

According to Article 49 of the Lebanese constitution, a presidential candidate is elected either by winning a two-thirds majority of parliament on the first ballot – 86 members, the same number required for a legal quorum – or by a simple majority of 65 votes in subsequent rounds.

So far, no candidate has been able to secure the support of enough lawmakers, in either the first or subsequent rounds of voting. Former president Aoun’s own election in 2016 came after a more than two-year vacancy at the presidential palace, as lawmakers made 45 failed attempts before reaching a consensus on his candidacy.

Further muddying the waters, the US, France, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have all expressed their desire to see the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) commander, Joseph Aoun, be named as Lebanon’s new president. Since 2019, the Levantine nation has been shouldering what the World Bank describes as the world’s worst economic crisis in the past 150 years, caused by rampant corruption in the financial sector.

There was recently a similar hold-up at a Lebanese bank by someone demanding their own money. And as Lebanon sinks deeper into financial turmoil, we will likely see more of these. https://t.co/93901KOT6W

— Thomas Abi-Hanna (@ThomasRiddIe) September 14, 2022

A prolonged power vacuum would only exacerbate the situation, as Beirut is currently unable to enact sweeping reforms demanded by international lenders as a condition for releasing billions of dollars in loans.

At a forum organized on 4 November at the Wilson Center, US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Barbara Leaf, warned that the current situation in Lebanon could lead to a “complete disintegration of the state and the collapse of its security forces.”

Leaf added that, as the crisis becomes more unbearable, she expects Lebanese lawmakers to pack their bags and leave for Europe, abandoning the country as “unsalvageable.” “We are putting pressure on political leaders to do their job, but nothing is as effective as popular pressure. Sooner or later, people will rise again,” Leaf pointed out.

She added that collapse will enable Lebanon “somehow to be rebuilt from the ashes, freed from the curse of Hezbollah.” The US official concluded that the US and Saudi Arabia share the same vision for Lebanon, and are cooperating to achieve it.

By Zachary Stieber of the Epoch Times

The U.S. Senate on Dec. 1 approved legislation aimed at heading off a nationwide rail strike, a day after the House passed the measure.

Senators voted 80–15 to pass the bill, which would impose a tentative agreement on rail workers and prohibit a potentially costly strike. Congress is allowed to take such action under the Railway Labor Act; it last took action to prevent a shutdown in 1994.

President Joe Biden has said he will sign the bill.

A dozen unions representing more than 100,000 workers hammered out the agreement in the fall, but four of the unions later voted against ratifying it.

Workers had been preparing to strike on Dec. 9 absent the legislation or a new deal being reached.

Operators have warned that lost economic output resulting from a shutdown could reach or even eclipse $2 billion a day, while business groups have said a strike would disrupt the transport of crucial items, including food and chemicals.

“A rail shutdown would’ve killed our supply chain, hurt workers and small businesses, and sent consumer prices through the roof. Passing legislation to avoid one was the right move to protect American jobs and keep our economy moving,” Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said after the vote.

The Senate is split 50–50. To pass the filibuster, a measure needs at least 60 votes. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) was among the Republicans pledging to vote against the bill, which would impose a tentative agreement on rail workers.

The House of Representatives on Nov. 30 passed the bill in a 290–137 bipartisan vote, and separately approved seven days of paid sick leave, which wasn’t part of the original agreement.

The agreement includes a 24 percent pay increase over five years and five $1,000 payments.

Reaction

The Association of American Railroads, which includes major operators, hailed the Senate vote.

“The Senate acted with leadership and urgency with today’s vote to avert an economically devastating rail work stoppage,” Ian Jefferies, the group’s president and CEO, said in a statement.

“As we close out this long, challenging process, none of the parties achieved everything they advocated for. The product of these agreements is a compromise by nature, but the result is one of substantial gains for rail employees. More broadly, all rail stakeholders and the economy writ large now have certainty about the path forward,” he added.

The industry thanked the Biden administration for pressuring Congress to act, even as many unions had urged Congress not to intervene.

Some spoke out against the Dec. 1 vote.

“What took place in the United States Senate today is a symptom, and further illustration, of a larger issue in our country. Almost every elected member of Congress campaigns on being ‘for the working class’; the actions of many today demonstrated they are for the corporate class,” the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen said in a statement.

“The dereliction of duty and inability to hold corporations accountable for a lack of good faith to their employees will not be forgotten. Those who spoke against us provided no basis and resorted to their only skill set: passing blame and avoiding the issues.”

Amendments

Before taking up the bill itself, the Senate voted on amendments.

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) offered an amendment that would have implemented a 60-day “cooling-off period” during which a strike couldn’t be initiated.

“My amendment would certainly avoid a strike. We all agree on that,” Sullivan said on the floor. “It will give negotiators more time to get to an agreement, and it will not make Congress the entity of last resort in these kinds of negotiations where the knowledge of the issues that are very complicated have not been thoroughly studied and have not received the due diligence that I believe every American, every union member wants us to have.”

The proposal was defeated 26–69.

Another amendment, offered by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), would have added seven days of paid sick leave to the agreement, as the House did. It was rejected in a 52–43 vote—it needed 60—despite support from some Republicans, including Sens. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) voted against the amendment.

“I am proud that the House of Representatives passed legislation to guarantee seven days of paid sick leave for all rail workers. While I’m disappointed that we were unable to get the 60 votes we needed in the Senate, we did receive the votes of every Senate Democrat, but one, as well as six Republicans,” Sanders said in a statement after the vote.

He said that he would do everything he could “to make sure that rail workers in America are treated with dignity and respect.

As if the Pentagon and US intelligence hadn’t already escalated its presence enough inside Ukraine, given there are already literally a small contingent of “boots on the ground” – as we detailed last month, CNN is now reporting that the Biden administration is considering “dramatically” increasing its training of Ukrainian forces.

The proposal would involve US advisers training “much larger groups of Ukrainian soldiers in more sophisticated battlefield tactics” at American installations in Germany, and perhaps other locations in Europe, according to the new report.

CNN begins by reporting that “The Biden administration is considering a dramatic expansion in the training the US military provides to Ukrainian forces, including instructing as many as 2,500 Ukrainian soldiers a month at a US base in Germany, according to multiple US officials.”

“If adopted, the proposal would mark a significant increase not just in the number of Ukrainians the US trains but also in the type of training they receive,” the report continues, also noting that this far “only a few thousand” Ukrainian soldiers have been trained on specific US-provided weapons systems. 

According to further details in CNN:

Under the new program, the US would begin training much larger groups of Ukrainian soldiers in more sophisticated battlefield tactics, including how to coordinate infantry maneuvers with artillery support – “much more intense and comprehensive” training than Ukraine has been receiving in Poland or the UK, according to one source briefed on the proposal.

This is a significant statement given the ongoing British program at multiple UK bases is large in size. However what’s being mulled by the Pentagon would see some 15,000 Ukrainians trained by the United States every six months. Multiple US officials have meanwhile projected they expect the war could take years before there’s a final ceasefire and resolution. 

The UK’s own infantry training program for Ukraine forces has a stated goal of training at least 10,000 Ukrainian troops. 

The Kremlin for its part has warned repeatedly of such deepening Western involvement which clearly is now going far beyond just weapons shipments. Russia this week walked away from New START nuclear arms reduction treaty negotiations with the US while citing its growing involvement in backing Kiev as a major reason for halting resumption of talks. 

Earlier in the conflict, Russia’s military vowed to attack any inbound foreign weapons shipments or training grounds inside Ukraine…

Two months ago, I wrote a thread about U.S. forces training Ukrainians at the de facto NATO base in Yavoriv.

Today, that base was leveled by Russian missiles. https://t.co/Vv8nxBsugt pic.twitter.com/rQUsaTWyN2

— Clint Ehrlich (@ClintEhrlich) March 13, 2022

Prior to Russia’s February invasion, the Pentagon as well as US intelligence had been deeply involved in advisory training for Ukraine forces. US advisors however withdrew (in an official capacity at least) just prior to the Feb.24 assault. 

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Nov. 30 issued a warning about a “heightened threat environment” ahead of the holiday season in the United States.

“Our homeland continues to face a heightened threat environment—as we have seen, tragically, in recent acts of targeted violence—and is driven by violent extremists seeking to further a political or social goal or act on a grievance,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement.

Faith-based institutions, government buildings, U.S. infrastructure, schools, and public gatherings could be targeted by groups of people or lone actors who might have “a range of ideological beliefs” and “personal grievances” in the coming weeks and months, the DHS’s National Terrorism Advisory System stated in a Nov. 30 bulletin.

The bulletin is the seventh of its kind since January 2021 after President Joe Biden took over, and it’s set to run through May 24, 2023.

The bulletin made reference to the Nov. 19 mass shooting targeting a gay bar in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Officials haven’t established a motive in the shooting, and the suspect, 22-year-old Anderson Aldrich, later identified himself as “nonbinary” and used “they/them pronouns,” according to lawyers.

“Perceptions of government overreach continue to drive individuals to attempt to commit violence targeting government officials and law enforcement officers. Some domestic violent extremists have expressed grievances based on perceptions that the government is overstepping its Constitutional authorities or failing to perform its duties,” the DHS added.

Other Alleged Threats

Other threats, the DHS stated, could be linked to Islamist terrorism. ISIS leader Abu al-Hassan al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi was recently killed in a battle in Syria, the terrorist group reportedly confirmed, marking the second ISIS leader to die in 2022.

“Recent incidents have highlighted the enduring threat to faith-based communities, including the Jewish community. In early November 2022, an individual in New Jersey was arrested for sharing a manifesto online that threatened attacks on synagogues,” the DHS bulletin stated. “The individual admitted to writing the document, in which he claimed to be motivated by … (ISIS) and hatred towards Jewish people.”

A view of the home of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi where her husband, Paul Pelosi, was violently assaulted after a break-in at their house, according to a statement from her office, in San Francisco, Calif., on Oct. 28, 2022. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

The bulletin also noted the alleged attack targeting outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) husband, Paul, in late October. Court papers filed by local and federal prosecutors say the suspect, David DePape, 42, broke into their San Francisco home, made threatening statements, and later attacked Pelosi with a hammer.

“While violence surrounding the November midterm elections was isolated, we remain vigilant that heightened political tensions in the country could contribute to individuals mobilizing to violence based on personalized grievances. Over the past few months we observed general calls for violence targeting elected officials, candidates, and ballot drop box locations,” the DHS stated.

“In October 2022 in San Francisco, California, an individual allegedly broke into the home of a Member of Congress and attacked their spouse with a hammer.”

DePape, according to DHS, was “allegedly inspired by partisan grievances and conspiracy theories.” However, people who know DePape have called the incident into question, said that he previously held progressive viewpoints, and said he wasn’t violent.

NBC News also retracted a report on Nov. 4 in which journalist Miguel Almaguer cited sources who gave conflicting information about the attack. No explanation was given by the network, and NBC hasn’t responded to several requests for comment.

In the retracted report, Almaguer wrote that Paul Pelosi had opened the door when police arrived, and he then went back toward DePape. Court papers state that when police arrived, they saw Pelosi and DePape struggling over a hammer before DePape struck the elderly man in the head.

“Potential changes in border security enforcement policy, an increase in noncitizens attempting to enter the U.S., or other immigration-related developments may heighten these calls for violence,” the DHS stated, likely referring to the agency’s move to drop the Title 42 border enforcement policy.

DHS is the agency that oversees Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Authored by Matt Rosenberg via Wirepoints.org,

One hundred motor vehicle thefts a day.

That’s the recent daily count in Chicago in October as motor vehicle thefts spiked dramatically in the last three months. Compare that to the first half of the year when Chicago was averaging “just” 35 thefts a day.

It’s just one part of the Great Unraveling of Chicago’s justice system that stems from emboldened criminals, a demoralized police force and a leadership class obsessed with soft-on-crime legislation like the SAFE-T Act. Late amendments to the Act under consideration today in the final day of the fall veto session could lessen the damage somewhat but key flaws and a lawsuit challenging the Act will remain.

As will the onslaught of car thefts in Chicago so outlaws can perpetrate serious crimes. The sheer volume of vehicle thefts now in the city is striking. According to the city’s data portal, Chicago is on track to suffer 20,234 by year’s end. That would be 91 percent more than last year, more than double the last pre-Covid pre-George Floyd year of 2019, and far greater than any year since 2006. 

Worse, the motor vehicle theft arrest rate projected for year-end based on data through November 21 is a stunningly low 2.5 percent. That’s lower than at any point in the last two decades. It’s no wonder the bad guys are emboldened. They face no consequences.

Rise of the “Kia Boys”

Starting in summer months, a new phenomenon spread nationally to major metro regions including Chicago. Crafty young car thieves, self-styled “Kia Boys,” learned – and shared on widely viewed videos – how to hack into and steal late-model Kia and Hyundai vehicles by activating the ignition with just a USB computer plug. This after breaking, entering and then stripping the steering column. 

As crime website CWB Chicago reported, boosting a Kia or Hyundai leaves thieves a longer “shelf life” in which to use the stolen car compared to a carjacked vehicle which usually prompts quick notifications to police.

Other car thefts continue as well, many stemming from delivery drivers leaving their engines running while they briefly run into a building. 

Stolen vehicles often taken for shootings, robberies, carjackings

Police say some cars are stolen for joy rides but in most cases the thefts are to facilitate serious crimes. 

One Chicago cop told Wirepoints: “It’s not like 30 or 40 years ago where they’re selling the stolen car for quick cash or they’re chopping it up for parts. Most…are being stolen expressly to use in shootings or in robberies so they can get away. If police see a stolen car they’re not going to know who’s driving it and who it belongs to…and police can’t chase the stolen cars. Basically if they jump back in the car, they kind of get away scott free. Even if the car isn’t taken in a carjacking, even if it’s just stolen….it leads into these other higher-level crimes.”

The officer added, “they’re driving these cars and taking them back to go do shootings in neighborhoods where they live or hang out. Or they’re using them to do robberies, usually in nicer areas. If you catch these guys, they’ll tell you. They do robberies in nicer areas because they’re easier victims, they’re easier targets.”

Once again, Chicago’s black residents get the worst of it

Whether for shootings in the ‘hood or robberies in upscale climes, the car thefts are being committed most often in low-income minority neighborhoods of Chicago: 

• District 6 – Gresham with 1,377 or 8 percent of the citywide total.

• District 2 – Wentworth with 1,315 or 7 percent of the citywide total.

• District 3 – Grand Crossing with 1,277 or 7 percent of the citywide total.

• District 4 – South Chicago with 1,249, or 7 percent of the citywide total.

• District 12 – Near West with 1,096, or 6 percent of the citywide total.

Those five districts accounted for more than a third of all car thefts citywide. They are predominantly populated by black Chicagoans, with smatterings of Hispanic and white residents. They mainly lie on the city’s troubled South Side, though one straddles the city’s north-side divider. 

The malfeasance continues

Cook County courts have put their characteristic stamp of misfeasance and ineptitude on Chicago’s growing vehicle theft problem. 

As CWB Chicago reported, one Kia Boy taken into custody had been convicted in a weapons case but released on probation before leading police on a high speed chase that required a helicopter and ground units to track and arrest him. Another Kia Boy less than two months before his vehicle theft bust this week had been charged and released for felony unlawful use of a weapon. After the gun charge he had been slotted to attend a “restorative justice” court which may include case resolution in a “peace circle.”

Motor vehicle thefts – and the Kia Boys who perpetuate them – may be just one type of criminal activity in Chicago, but they are emblematic of a city increasingly sliding towards chaos.

Count on city and state leaders to completely ignore this data as they push full steam ahead on the SAFE-T Act. 

Appendix

After yesterday’s face-ripping, short-squeezing meltup after Powell’s “more dovish than expected” speech which saw the S&P close above the 200DMA for the first time since April, any commentators were quick to opine that Christmas came early for stocks. But did it, and did the ramp on the last day of November simply pull forward what is traditionally a much more gradual December meltup?

As TS Lombard’s Skylar Montgomery Koning explains in a lengthy note from Wednesday, “historically equities outperform into year-end.” In the chart on the bottom left, she shows average and median S&P changes on a monthly basis vs the 30y comparable – and, indeed, the S&P does tend to outperform in the last three months of the year on both an average and a median basis. As for the December performance specifically, the equity rally does tend to gain momentum in the two weeks before Christmas, which mark a turning point for the bottom 25th percentile (although the December 2018 crash is still vivid for so many traders). So, there is some historical evidence for the Santa rally hypothesis.

However, as Koning observes, “it is important to note, that an observable pattern is worthless unless there is a reasonable explanation.”

To be sure, there is some logic to seasonality and many touted explanations for the Santa rally exist. For one, risk assets tend to have an inverse relationship with volatility. In this cycle, there has been a tight inverse relationship between rates volatility and equity directionality (see chart on next page bottom left). Of course, since the market has essentially traded a one-factor model (Fed funds expectations) this year, this relationship could be expected; but it also makes sense long term: as Koning notes, “as an investor, I’m much happier allocating to risk assets when they aren’t making 2 standard deviation moves on a regular basis. As market participants go off on holiday, markets close and event risk is limited (i.e., there is less uncertainty), you would expect volatility to fall” which it usually does except in some very high profile cases… such as the unforgettable brief bear market of Dec 2018.

Moreover, over time the bias is for equities to go up: over the S&P’s history, its average return is 7% per annum. In quiet holiday markets without any impetus to the contrary, equities have a bias to revert to trend and grind up. Last week’s Thanksgiving holiday was a case in point: with little on the data front, the US market closed for a day and a half, limited data announcements and many on holiday, market trading was muted, equity volatility fell and equities ground higher. In fact, across DM equity markets, Japan and the United States (both of which have national Thanksgiving holidays) outperform significantly in November.

Volatility does indeed fall into year-end. According to an analysis from the TS Lombard strategists looking at equity vol on a change and level basis  historically volatility has fallen going into the summer and Christmas holidays. The net result is lower average vol in the summer and December (see charts below left). And, indeed, we have seen volatility decline across assets from the mid-October peak, although rates and FX vol are still historically elevated.

Psychology plays a role. With regard to the end of the year, it is also important to note that money managers are judged on annual calendar year performance. Because of the propensity for equities to rally as the end of the year approaches, investors who have lost money have an incentive to chase the rally upwards, while those who have made money are more likely to settle their books. Or, in a year like 2022, where they have made money by being short risk, with the market rallying, those who have made money buy upside exposure so as not to bleed P&L into year-end. Options data back this up: the CBOE put/call ratio drops significantly in December (i.e., investors want more upside vs downside exposure – see the chart below right).

User Beware – fundamentals dominate. The major point here is that dispersion within months is massive; historically the maximum return observed in October is +11%, while the minimum is -22%. Additionally as shown in the first chart up top, both average and median numbers illustrate that while seasonality can guide returns, a large fundamental force can more than negate it. And a case in point is October, where the average return is significantly below the median. This is because October has had two historical risk asset collapses: Black Monday in 1987, when US equities fell more than 20% in a day; and the Lehman collapse, which took place in mid-September 2008 but the bulk of the equity decline came in October 2008 (-17%). Moreover, there are three stumbling blocks to the Santa rally narrative.

• First: Equity performance already looks overdone. Equities have rallied 10% in the period October-November – the median rally over 4Q is 5.5% (and the average is 4.3%). Additionally, when the S&P rallies above its 50 & 100DMA, it looks technically vulnerable as it heads towards its 200DMA. Moreover, the rally in equities contrasts with the rates volatility rebound on the recent spate of Fed hawkish speak (see the chart on the previous page on the left).
• Second: There is a lot of event risk into year-end. This week alone we will have a key speech from Powell (speaking at the Brookings Institution ahead of the quiet period), US core PCE and a jobs report, followed by an OPEC meeting at the weekend. Then virtually every DM central bank will report over a two-week period. Plus there will be the US CPI one day before the final Fed meeting of the year (on 14 December), where we will get a new set of projections, dots and the markets pivot narrative will be put to the test.
• Third: Recession generally implies lower risk assets and higher volatility. As TS Lombard economists warn, the rates market and economists are telling us we are headed toward a recession – which has been our base case since the summer. We have covered the risk asset implications here. But it is also important to note that as the economy deteriorates into a recession, adverse sentiment kicks in and things tend to become non-linear, accelerating the slowdown. Correspondingly, volatility tends to rise from half a year before the recession begins, spiking at the start of the recession (see chart below).

More in the full note available to pro subs.

On Wednesday night, veteran journalist Matt Taibbi and bestselling UK author Douglas Murray mopped the floor in a Munk debate over why public trust in mainstream media has fallen to an all-time low. Their opponents, Canadian journalist Malcom Gladwell and the New York Times‘ Michelle Goldberg, were… shall we say, unpersuasive in their arguments that essentially boiled down to ‘so what if we get a ton of stuff wrong, when it comes to the big picture, we get it right!’

Prior to the debate, Taibbi and Douglas weren’t expected to win… however a post-debate poll gave the two a massive victory.

One point Taibbi made is that mainstream outlets have become a “Demographic hunting business” for which “ethical guardrails have been tossed out.”

“You feed the audience news you know they will like,” Taibbi said. 

We agree wholeheartedly – though ZeroHedge strives to call out bullshit on all sides of every aisle, while at the same time being extremely clear on where we stand. So, in our obvious bias towards Matt, who is awesome (and no offense to Douglas), you can watch his opening statement below. If you want to watch the rest of the debate, sign up for $9.99/month (Canadian) at Munk and check it out.

You can read Taibbi’s entire opener below…

Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

“Be it resolved: don’t trust mainstream media.” My name is Matt Taibbi, I’ve been a reporter for 30 years, and I argue for the resolution. You should not trust mainstream media.

I grew up in the press. My father was a reporter. My stepmother was a reporter. My godparents were reporters. Every adult I knew growing up seemed to be in media. I even used my father’s TV mic flag as a toy. I’d go in the backyard, stand with my back to the house, and play “live shot”:

Chet, I’m in Norwell, Massachusetts, where firefighters are battling a three-alarm blaze…

I love the news business. It’s in my bones. But I mourn for it. It’s destroyed itself.

My father had a saying: “The story’s the boss.” In the American context, if the facts tell you the Republicans were the primary villains in this or that disaster, you write that story. If the facts point more at Democrats, you go that way. If it turns out they’re both culpable, as was often the case for me across nearly ten years of investigating Wall Street and the causes of the 2008 crash for Rolling Stone, you write that. We’re not supposed to nudge facts one way or another. Our job is to call things as we see them and leave the rest up to you.

We don’t do that now. The story is no longer the boss. Instead, we sell narrative, as part of a new business model that’s increasingly indifferent to fact.

When there were only a few channels, the commercial strategy of news companies was to aim for the whole audience. A TV news broadcast aired at dinnertime and was designed to be consumed by the whole family, from your crazy right-wing uncle to the sulking lefty teenager. This system had its flaws. However, making an effort to talk to everybody had benefits, too. For one, it inspired more trust. Gallup polls twice showed Walter Cronkite of CBS to be the most trusted person in America. That would never happen today.

After the Internet arrived and flooded the market with new voices, some outlets found that instead of going after the whole audience, it made more financial sense to pick one demographic and dominate it. How? That’s easy. You feed the audience news you know they will like. When Fox had success targeting suburban and rural, mostly white, mostly older conservatives – the late Fox News chief Roger Ailes infamously described his audience as “55 to dead” – other companies soon followed suit.

Now everyone does it. Whether it’s Fox, or MSNBC, or CNN, or the Washington Post, nearly all Western media outlets are in the demographic-hunting business. This may be less true in Canada, where there’s a stronger public media tradition, but in the U.S., it’s standard.

Call it the “audience-optimization” model: instead of starting with a story and following the facts, you start with what pleases your audience, and work backward to the story. In this system, the overwhelming majority of national media organizations cater to one “side” or the other. For instance, according to a Pew Center survey from a few years ago, 93% of Fox’s audience votes Republican, while in an exactly mirroring phenomenon, MSNBC’s audience is 95% Democratic.

Our colleagues on the other side tonight represent two once-great media organizations. Michelle, the Pew survey says the audience for your New York Times is now 91% comprised of Democrats. Malcolm, the last numbers I could find for the New Yorker were back in 2012, and even then, only 9% of the magazine’s readers were Republicans. I imagine that number is smaller now.

This bifurcated system is fundamentally untrustworthy. When you decide in advance to forego half of your potential audience, to fulfill the aim of catering to the other half, you’re choosing in advance which facts to emphasize and which to downplay. You’re also choosing which stories to cover, and which ones to avoid, based on considerations other than truth or newsworthiness.

This is not journalism. It’s political entertainment, and therefore unreliable.

With editors now more concerned with retaining audience than getting things right, the defining characteristic across the business — from right to left — is inaccuracy. We just get a lot of stuff wrong now. It’s now less important for reporters to be accurate than “directionally” correct, which in center-left “mainstream” media mostly comes down to having the right views, like opposing Donald Trump, or anti-vaxxers, or election-deniers, or protesting Canadian truckers, or any other people deemed wrongthinkers.

In the zeal to “hold Trump accountable,” or oppose figures like Vladimir Putin, ethical guardrails have been tossed out. Silent edits have become common. Serious accusations are made without calling people for comment. Reporters get too cozy with politicians, and as a result report information either without attribution at all or sourced to unnamed officials or “people familiar with the matter.” Like scientists, journalists should be able to reproduce each other’s work in the lab. With too many anonymous sources, this becomes impossible.

We had an incident a few weeks ago where the lede of a wire service story read, “A senior U.S. intelligence official says Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland.” That’s the kind of story where if you get it wrong, you can start a war, but they still put all their chips on one unnamed source. That’s very risky practice even if you’re right.

That story turned out to be wrong, which sadly is no longer uncommon. In the Trump years an extraordinary number of “bombshells” went sideways. From the “pee tape” to the Alfa Server story to speculation that Trump was a Russian spy (recruited before disco) to false reports of Russians hacking a Vermont utility to an evidence-free story about Trump’s campaign manager somehow sneaking undetected to meet the most watched human on earth, Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, we’ve accumulated piles of wrong stories.

I’m no fan of Donald Trump. I wrote a book about the man called Insane Clown President. But I’ve compiled a list of over 100 of these “bombshells” that went belly up, from “Bountygate” to MSNBC saying Russian oligarchs co-signed a loan for Trump to countless others, because these stories offend me. A good journalist should always be ashamed of error. It bothers me to see so many of my colleagues so unashamed.

This by the way isn’t a wholly new phenomenon. After the WMD fiasco American news media didn’t do a self-audit. Instead we promoted the people who got it wrong and fired the ones who didn’t.

The excuse, “At least we’re not Breitbart,” doesn’t even hold. Think about another of these bombshells, the one in which Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen supposedly went to Prague to meet with Russian hackers. This story came from the now-disgraced dossier of former British spy Christopher Steele. It’s been refuted multiple times, including by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who flatly declared Cohen “never traveled to Prague.” Yet the tale will not die.

From MSNBC to CNN to McClatchy we’ve had leading media outlets continue to take seriously the idea that Donald Trump’s lawyer traveled to Prague to scheme with “Kremlin Representatives” over how to fix the election using Romanian hackers, who according to Steele would afterward retreat to Bulgaria, and use that country as a “bolt hole” to “lie low.” If that’s not a conspiracy theory, I don’t know what is.

This story is every bit as nuts as the idea that the 2020 election was stolen. I would venture to say it’s crazier. It’s at least more creative. No serious journalist would go near a story like this without a lot of evidence. Yet our leading media people believed it with none. Because they’re not doing journalism. They’re selling narrative, and this was good narrative.

News media shouldn’t have a “side.” The press has to be seen as separate from politics, not just because this is a crucial component of trustworthiness, but also because the media derives all its power from the perception of its independence. If a news organ is seen as too connected to one or another party, it loses its ability to serve as a check on power. How can you “hold Trump accountable” without credibility?

Getting things right is hard enough. The minute we try to do anything else in this job, the wheels come off. Until we get back to the basics, we don’t deserve to be trusted. And we won’t be.

After a month in a half since Parlement Technologies announced it had entered into an agreement in principle to sell Parler to Kanye “Ye” West, the social media site tweeted it had terminated the deal. 

Late Monday afternoon, around 1500 ET, Parler tweeted:

“In response to numerous media inquiries, Parlement Technologies would like to confirm that the company has mutually agreed with Ye to terminate the intent of sale of Parler. This decision was made in the interest of both parties in mid-November.”

In response to numerous media inquiries, Parlement Technologies would like to confirm that the company has mutually agreed with Ye to terminate the intent of sale of Parler. This decision was made in the interest of both parties in mid-November.

— Parler (@parler_app) December 1, 2022

As Variety noted, “the announcement of the termination of West’s deal to buy Parler came shortly after West appeared on Alex Jones’ Infowars — where, among other things, he expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler.” 

Parler and West in mid-October announced the deal to buy the popular social media platform, a favorite among American conservatives. Both parties were expected to close on the deal in the fourth quarter of 2022

Axios noted Ye’s crumbling financial empire, including the loss of his Adidas deal, played a crucial role in the termination. 

“Parler will continue to pursue future opportunities for growth and the evolution of the platform for our vibrant community,” the company said Thursday.

Parler will continue to pursue future opportunities for growth and the evolution of the platform for our vibrant community.

— Parler (@parler_app) December 1, 2022

It’s no secret that the Mainstream Media is in steep decline – what with the flagrant peddling of establishment narratives and occasional propaganda that almost launches WWIII.

A few recent examples:

• NBC Journalist Laments: “People Don’t Trust Us, They Don’t Believe Us”
• New Reuters Survey Finds That Trust In Mainstream News Is Rapidly Declining
• Dear Liberals, How Many Of These MSM Hoaxes Did You Fall For?
• Journalism Tops List Of ‘Most Regretted’ College Majors
• Washington Post Columnist Calls For The End Of Impartiality And Balance In Journalism

And so, it comes as no surprise that MSM outlets are in financial trouble.

To wit, on Wednesday, The Hollywood Reporter noted CNN has started layoffs as as “part of continued cost-cutting by parent company Warner Bros. Discovery.”

“It will be a difficult time for everyone,” said CEO Chris Licht in a Wednesday memo, who noted that paid contributors will learn their fate on Wednesday, while full-time employees would be informed of their status on Thursday.

“Our people are the heart and soul of this organization,” Licht added. “It is incredibly hard to say goodbye to any one member of the CNN team, much less many. I recently described this process as a gut punch, because I know that is how it feels for all of us.”

The cuts are not a surprise, with Licht warning employees in late October that the news division would be undergoing a restructuring, citing “widespread concern over the global economic outlook.”

But they do come amid decreasing morale at CNN, which has already seen significant turnover this year since the Discovery merger. One of the first moves made after the merger closed was to shut down the CNN+ streaming service, laying off a couple hundred employees in the process. -Hollywood Reporter

Meanwhile, the Washington Post is also trimming fat – announcing that it will cease publication of its Sunday magazine, and will eliminate a number of editorial positions related to the product.

In a Wednesday email to staffers, Executive Editor Sally Buzbee said that the move is part of the company’s “global and digital transformation.”

Buzbee said in an email to almost a dozen magazine staffers that the cuts were “no reflection on the quality of your work,” but rather due to “economic headwinds.”

Maybe stop being establishment hacks?

The most important video of the year was filmed in 1983. pic.twitter.com/uITMW1tGvk

— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) November 7, 2022