Month: January 2025

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov elaborated on his country’s approach to the global systemic transition in an interview with Rossiyskiaya Gazeta in late November, which followed him elaborating on its Afro-Eurasian grand strategy in a separate interview earlier that month that was analyzed here. His latest one concerned the need to rebalance the developing countries’ economic relations with the West and cautioned against them being misled by the ‘green agenda’.

Regarding the first, he reminded his interlocutor about how a lot of Western wealth is derived from lopsided deals with the Global South, which is being exploited through neocolonialism. For example, only 2.6% of the US’ $2.5 billion worth of aid to Haiti after its 2010 earthquake reached companies and organizations there while the rest went into the pockets of American contractors. Another damning statistic that he cited is how African countries only get 10% of the global coffee industry’s profits.

The IMF and WTO have been politicized by the West in order to keep developing countries at a disadvantage. Despite high-sounding rhetoric on occasion, the West has yet to meaningfully reform these institutions and won’t ever do so willingly. “Therefore, both we and our like-minded people from the countries of the World Majority believe that it is high time to bring the principles and management system of the Bretton Woods institutions into line with the real situation in the world economy”, he said.

Lavrov added that “the ‘seven’ (referring to the G7) account for less than a third of the world GDP, and the BRICS member states – 36 percent”, thus illustrating how unfair everything has become. It’s therefore strongly implied that BRICS, including its new partner countries, should collectively pool their capabilities and coordinate their efforts in order to bring about long-overdue institutional reforms. This imperative adds context to why Russia wanted to resume relations with the IMF in September as explained here.

As for the second part of Russia’s approach to the global systemic transition, Lavrov explained how the global trend towards green energy shouldn’t come at the expense of investments in traditional energy, which could lead to “shocks in energy markets and aggravation of the problem of energy poverty.” He also strongly implied that the prevailing view on climate change is inaccurate and therefore possibly being politicized. Here are his exact words:

“It is implied that CO2 emissions create a greenhouse effect, which in turn leads to global warming. It is concluded that if CO2 emissions are limited, there will be no increase in temperature or it will not happen as quickly. At the same time, we as professionals must take into account that not all scientists adhere to such assessments.

There is also a ‘school of thought’ whose representatives, using specific facts and very convincingly, show that climate change is a cyclical process, and, therefore, the significance of the anthropogenic factor in the calculations of supporters of the ‘fight against climate change’, to put it mildly, is greatly exaggerated.”

He didn’t directly say so, but the innuendo is that the West is weaponizing the ‘green agenda’, both as part of a ploy to “aggravate the problem of energy poverty” in the Global South via higher costs for traditional energy like he earlier warned and also as an instrument of control at home and abroad. Cynics might assume that Lavrov has ulterior motives in lending credence to these concerns since Russia is an energy superpower, which might be partially true, but he also wants to foil his Western rivals’ plots.

Circling back to the first part of his interview about the need for developing countries to rebalance their economic relations with the West, his attack against the ‘green agenda’ advances that goal by getting such countries to think twice about blindly comply with their neocolonizers’ demands on this issue. Those that prioritize green energy over traditional energy abandon more reliable energy sources, make themselves dependent on unreliable ones, and might thus be setting themselves up for disaster.

If unpredictable environmental changes cause problems with wind, solar, and hydroelectric power generation after developing countries become dependent on these sources, then the West can exploit the situation through emergency financial and other forms of relief with neocolonial strings attached. That would bring those developing countries back to square one by instantly reversing whatever prior progress they’d made on liberating themselves from the West.

It’s therefore much better for them to only gradually transition to green energy by relying more on natural gas in the interim, which Russia also has in spades and Lavrov correctly described as “the cleanest of all hydrocarbons”, instead of radically shifting gears like the West wants. Moreover, it would also be wise to diversify their energy production through nuclear power generation, which Russia can also help them with as explained here. This portfolio would most effectively hedge against strategic risks.

Putting everything together, Russia’s approach to the global systemic transition as elaborated by Lavrov envisages developing countries collectively reforming existing financial institutions while avoiding the neocolonial trap that the West is setting for them through its ‘green energy agenda’. The first will deprive the West of the wealth that it extracts from the latter, thus speeding up their long-overdue rebalancing, while the second will prevent any serious reversal on the progress that they make in this respect.

Any reduction in the West’s overall influence and power brought about by the aforementioned rebalancing will work to Russia’s advantage by weakening its rivals. They’ll correspondingly find it more difficult to destabilize Russia, wage proxy wars against it, and obstruct its Afro-Eurasian grand strategy. What’s good for the Global South is therefore naturally good for Russia, thus making them equally important for one another, and wider awareness of this should serve to further expand their ties.

Germany’s largest automaker has recorded sliding profitability, with its China unit under pressure as demand for luxury automobiles wanes. Specifically, demand for its Porsche Taycan has run out of juice, leading to significant markdowns. 

Bloomberg Intelligence’s Joel Levington published a note on Monday highlighting the bleak demand story for the Porsche Taycan, which has forced the struggling German automaker to offer markdowns of $22,500. Additionally, the vehicle’s used value plummeted in 2024, while data from iSeeCars research finds the Taycan the most expensive alternative fuel vehicle to drive on miles used per year.

More from Levington’s report: 

Porsche Taycan $22,500 Markdown, Yet It’s the Most Expensive EV

Porsche is offering a $15,000 match on top of $7,500 in lease incentives to clear out 2024 Taycan models, yet iSeeCars research finds the model the most expensive alternative fuel vehicle to drive based on miles used per year. Porsche’s increased use of discounting and rapid deterioration in its core China market has slashed more than $30 billion from its market cap since April, and has reduced risk views below luxury rivals Ferrari, BMW and Mercedes for the first time since its IPO in 2022.

China Swoon Accelerates Risk

Porsche’s one-year default risk has nearly tripled since cutting its revenue outlook last July, supporting our view of a strong, albeit weaker, risk profile. Porsche’s default risk screens similar to low-A peers like Anheuser-Busch, Adidas and Reckitt Benckiser as well as higher-rated but more volatile issuer Alibaba. The outcome from Bloomberg’s DRSK matches Credit Benchmark’s view of the unrated company. Porsche screens as between Honda (A3/A-/A) and Mercedes (A2/A/Au) in our fundamental analysis utilizing Moody’s global automotive methodology.

Taycan Value Plummets in 2024

Financial Services Poised to Fall for Third Consecutive Year

Porsche’s captive finance unit’s profit may bottom in 2024 at approximately $300 million, a decline of 20% from peak 2021 levels, yet is a modest profit driver, with the automotive unit expected to generate $5.3 billion in operating profit this year. The finance unit has taken price increases to offset higher funding costs, yet margin compression, lower penetration in China and a higher credit risk are impairing profitability, which is below Mercedes and BMW from a margin standpoint. The unit is supported by ample liquidity of €6.2 billion and a €4 billion master loan agreement with Volkswagen.

Declines in used pricing can impair Porsche residuals, potentially a headwind to financial services earnings

Porsche Falls Behind Mercedes on Ratings Track

Porsche AG’s standalone creditworthiness screens at A2, slightly behind Mercedes (A2/A/Au) and a notch below BMW (A2/A) and unrated Ferrari. Our views are largely unchanged from our June analysis, but the company’s weaker 2024 outlook has reduced flexibility. The analysis incorporates 2024-25 profit and cash flow expectations under Moody’s global automotive methodology. Our analysis is also fairly consistent with Credit Benchmark, which screens to a low A rating on a positive trend. The complexity of the Volkswagen organization structure, including the sharing of the chairman, could weigh on raters’ views of Porsche’s ESG profile. The lack of a well-defined leverage target and goal of a 50% dividend payout may also be a constraint.

Iconic Luxury Brand Viewed as Metal Bender

Porsche AG would likely be rated by an automotive team instead of a luxury goods group at the agencies, based on our conversations with them for Porsche and Ferrari. Yet, our checks against these peers suggest an A tier rating might also be warranted under the different methodology. Porsche’s scale, geographic diversity and modestly leveraged balance sheet generally screen well against issuers such as Richemont (A+), Diageo (A3/A-/A-u) and Estee Lauder (A2/A). While robust for the auto sector, Porsche’s margins and cash generation are somewhat of a shortcoming relative to the luxury peer group and Ferrari.

The Volkswagen Group, which owns 10 brands, including Porsche and Audi, has faced significant challenges in the EV demand game amid a price war with Tesla and Chinese EV companies running circles around the Germans. Meanwhile, Germany’s manufacturing recession highlights the broader economic troubles across the continent.

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

The United States is facing a “heightened threat environment” following the deadly New Orleans attack on New Year’s Day, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said on Jan. 5.

The attack left 14 people dead and dozens injured after a man drove a truck into crowds on Bourbon Street in the historic French Quarter of the city. The suspect, identified as Shamsud-Din Jabbar of Texas, was later killed in a shoot-out with police.

In an interview on ABC’s “This Week,” Mayorkas said that his office has worked with law enforcement in New Orleans and implemented sweeping precautionary measures for the Sugar Bowl college football game and other upcoming events in the wake of the incident.

Mayorkas stated that over the past 10 years, his office has observed “a significant increase in what we term homegrown violent extremism” in the United States.

“It is a very difficult threat landscape, and it is why that we as a community, not just the federal government, but state and local officials and residents, need to be alert to it and take the precautions necessary to avoid violence from occurring,” he told the news outlet.

Mayorkas said that the New Orleans attack was unrelated to border issues, citing the suspect’s U.S. citizenship.

Jabbar was a 42-year-old former U.S. Army soldier from Texas.

“The assailant who perpetrated the terrorist attack in New Orleans was born in the United States, raised in the United States, and served in our Armed Forces. It is not an issue of the border,” Mayorkas said.

“With respect to the border, our highest responsibility and one that we work to fulfill each and every day throughout the Department of Homeland Security, throughout the federal government, is the safety and security of the American people.”

Authorities said they found an ISIS flag on the hitch of the truck used by the suspect. The FBI also said that Jabbar posted videos on Facebook in the hours before the attack in which he proclaimed his support for the terrorist group.

President-elect Donald Trump had previously condemned the New Orleans attack as an “act of pure evil” and suggested that it was connected to the country’s border issues.

“When I said that the criminals coming in are far worse than the criminals we have in our country, that statement was constantly refuted by Democrats and the Fake News Media, but it turned out to be true. The crime rate in our country is at a level that nobody has ever seen before,” Trump stated on Truth Social.

President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden will travel to New Orleans on Monday to “grieve with the families and community members impacted by the tragic attack,” according to a White House statement.

As we look forward to the first full week of 2025, DB’s Jim Reid writes that a key question for the Fed’s outlook will be how strong the US jobs report for December is, which is out this Friday. In terms of what to expect, DB’s economists are looking for nonfarm payrolls to grow by +150k in December. That would be beneath the +227k print in November, but that gain was boosted by a bounce back from previous weather disruption and the end of strikes. Indeed, a +150k print would basically be in line with the 6-month average, which is currently running at +143k. Economists also see the unemployment rate ticking up a tenth to 4.3%.

Turning to Europe, the main focus this week will be the Euro Area flash CPI print for December, which is out tomorrow. This is an important one, as it comes amidst growing concern about European inflation, particularly with the recent rise in natural gas prices, along with the recent depreciation of the euro. On top of that, the December flash print from Spain last week was stronger than expected, so the backdrop hasn’t been too favorable, and both headline and core inflation for the Euro Area are widely expected to remain above the ECB’s 2% target. We’ve seen that have an impact in markets too, and last week saw the 10yr bund yield move higher for a 5th consecutive week.

Elsewhere in Europe, another thing to look out for will be the ongoing political situation in France and efforts to put together a new budget. That comes as last week saw the Franco-German 10yr spread widen by +4.8bps to 86.3bps, which is the widest it’s been since early December, back when the National Rally confirmed they would vote against Michel Barnier’s government. That underperformance was evident among other French assets last week, with the CAC 40 down -0.99%, in contrast to the +0.20% gain for the Europe-wide STOXX 600.

Staying on politics, Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to resign as Liberal Party leader this week. Canada has to hold a federal election by October at the latest, and Trudeau’s Liberals are polling well behind the opposition Conservatives, with CBC’s poll tracker currently putting the Conservatives on 44%, and the Liberals on 21%. Trudeau has already faced calls from some Liberal MPs to resign, and his position came under further pressure last month after finance minister and Deputy PM Chrystia Freeland resigned from the cabinet.

Also as a reminder, US stock markets will be closed on Thursday for the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter, whilst bond markets will close early that day.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday January 6

• Data: US November factory orders, China December Caixin services PMI, UK December official reserves changes, new car registrations, Japan December monetary base, Germany December CPI, Italy December services PMI, Canada December services PMI
• Central banks: Fed’s Cook speaks
• Auctions: US 3-yr Notes ($58bn)

Tuesday January 7

• Data: US November JOLTS report, trade balance, December ISM services, China December foreign reserves, UK December construction PMI, France December CPI, Italy December CPI, November unemployment rate, Eurozone December CPI, November unemployment rate, Canada November international merchandise trade, Switzerland December CPI
• Central banks: Fed’s Barkin speaks, ECB’s consumer expectations survey
• Auctions: US 10-yr Notes (reopening, $39bn)

Wednesday January 8

• Data: US December ADP report, November consumer credit, Japan December consumer confidence index, November labor cash earnings, Germany November retail sales, factory orders, France December consumer confidence, November trade balance, current account balance, Eurozone December services, industrial and economic confidence, November PPI, Australia November CPI, Sweden December CPI
• Central banks: FOMC minutes, Fed’s Waller speaks, ECB’s Villeroy speaks
• Earnings: Samsung, Albertsons
• Auctions: US 30-yr Bond (reopening, $22bn)

Thursday January 9

• Data: US November wholesale trade sales, initial jobless claims, China December CPI, PPI, Japan November household spending, Germany November industrial production, trade balance, Eurozone November retail sales
• Central banks: Fed’s Harker, Barkin, Schmid and Bowman speak, BoE’s Breeden speaks, ECB’s economic bulletin, BoE’s DMP survey
• Earnings: Seven & i

Friday January 10

• Data: US December jobs report, January University of Michigan survey, Japan November leading index, coincident index, Germany November current account balance, France November consumer spending, industrial production, Italy November retail sales, Canada December jobs report, November building permits, Denmark and Norway December CPI, Sweden November GDP indicator
• Earnings: Constellation Brands, Walgreens Boots Alliance

Finally, looking at just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data releases this week are the ISM services index on Tuesday and the employment report on Friday. The minutes from the December FOMC meeting will be released on Wednesday. There are several speaking engagements from Fed officials this week.

Source: BofA, Goldman

Authored by Wolf Richter via WolfStreet.com,

The US dollar lost further ground as global reserve currency among many reserve currencies held by central banks. Its share has been zigzagging lower for many years as central banks have been diversifying their holdings to assets denominated in currencies other than the dollar. And they’ve also been diversifying into gold. But the dollar remains by far the dominant global reserve currency.

The share of USD-denominated foreign exchange reserves fell to 57.4% of total exchange reserves the lowest since 1994, according to the IMF’s COFER data for Q3 2024. USD-denominated foreign exchange reserves include US Treasury securities, US agency securities, US MBS, US corporate bonds, US stocks, and other USD-denominated assets held by central banks other than the Fed.

In Q1 2015, the USD’s share was still 66%. Over these 10 years, the dollar’s share of global reserve currencies has dropped by 8.6 percentage points. If this pace of decline continues, the dollar’s share will fall below 50% in less than 10 years, by the end of 2034.

The dollar’s share had already been below 50% in 1990 and 1991, at the final leg of its long plunge from a share of 85% in 1977 to 46% in 1991, after inflation had exploded in the US in the 1970s, and eventually the world lost confidence in the Fed’s ability or willingness to get this inflation under control.

But by the 1990s, central banks loaded up on dollar-assets again, until the euro came along. This chart shows the dollar’s share at the end of each year (2024 = Q3).

But they’re not dumping US Treasury securities.

Holdings of US Treasury securities by foreign central banks and other foreign holders have surged from record to record. Over the past 12 months, foreign holders added $880 billion, bringing their stash to a record $8.67 trillion, according to the Treasury Department’s TIC data earlier (we discussed the details here).

Total foreign exchange reserves.

Central banks holdings of foreign exchange reserves denominated in all currencies, including in USD, rose to $12.7 trillion.

Excluded from the total are any central bank’s holdings of assets denominated in its own currency, such as the Fed’s holdings of Treasury securities and MBS, the ECB’s holdings of euro-denominated bonds, and the Bank of Japan’s holdings of yen-denominated assets.

Top holdings, expressed in USD:

• USD-denominated assets: $6.77 trillion

• EUR-denominated assets: $2.37 trillion

• YEN-denominated assets: $0.69 trillion

• GBP-denominated assets: $0.59 trillion

The other major reserve currencies.

The euro’s share, #2, ticked up to 20.0%, the highest since 2022. But the movements have been small. The euro’s share has been around 20% for years (blue in the chart below).

The other currencies are the colorful tangle at the bottom of the chart. More on those in a moment.

The rise of the “nontraditional reserve currencies.”

We will now hold a magnifying glass over the colorful tangle at the bottom of the chart above.

These other currencies, except for the Chinese renminbi, have all been gaining share, at the expense of the dollar, while the euro’s share has remained roughly stable.

This includes the basket of “nontraditional reserve currencies,” as the IMF calls them, that are combined into “All others” (yellow in the chart below), whose combined share has been surging since 2020.

China is the second largest economy in the world, but its currency plays only a small role as a reserve currency. And it has lost ground against the USD and other currencies since 2022.

In 2016, the IMF had added the RMB to its basket of currencies backing the Special Drawing Rights (SDR). That was a big step, and lots of folks thought that the RMB would quickly become a threat to the dominance of the USD as global reserve currency.

But central banks have not been enamored with RMB-denominated assets for a variety of reasons, including capital controls, convertibility issues, and other issues. Last year, the RMB was surpassed by the Australian dollar (AUD).

Far behind the USD and the EUR, the largest currencies by share:

1. Japanese yen, 5.8% (YEN, purple).

2. British pound, 5.0% (GBP, blue).

3. “All other currencies” combined, 4.5% (yellow).

4. Canadian dollar, 2.7% (green).

5. Australian dollar, 2.3% (brown).

6. Chinese renminbi, 2.2% (red).

7. Swiss franc, 0.2% (blue).

Central banks diversify from the USD to other currencies.

The IMF found that there were 46 “active diversifiers” among central banks, including central banks in most of the G20 economies, according to a paper it published in 2022. It defined them as central banks that had at least 5% of their foreign exchange reserves in “nontraditional reserve currencies.”

Two factors contributed to the rise of the “nontraditional reserve currencies,” the IMF found:

• The growing liquidity of assets denominated in “nontraditional reserve currencies,” which makes them easier for central banks to trade in the quantities they deal with.
• Chasing higher-yielding assets elsewhere during the 0%-era in the US and Europe.

USD exchange rates impact foreign exchange reserves.

The USD has risen sharply against a basket of other currencies in recent months, as tracked by the Dollar Index [DXY], but remains below the 2022 high, well below the 2001 high, and hugely below the 1985 high. So we see these huge peaks and valleys, but now the dollar is about where it had been in 1977.

The DXY is dominated by the euro and the yen, the two largest trade currencies behind the USD. When euro arrived on the scene, the DXY’s local currencies that became part of the euro were replaced by the euro. At the DXY was started in 1973. Today it’s at 108.9 about where it had been during the high moments in 1973-1975 (data via YCharts):

Why this matters: The IMF reports foreign exchange reserves in USD. USD holdings are obviously reported in USD. But the holdings in EUR, YEN, GBP, CAD, RMB, etc. are translated into USD at the exchange rate at the time. So the exchange rates between the USD and other reserve currencies impact the magnitude of the non-USD assets – but not of the USD-assets.

For example, the Bank of Japan’s holdings of USD-denominated assets, expressed in USD, don’t change with the YEN-USD exchange rate. But its holdings of EUR-denominated assets are translated into USD at the EUR-USD exchange rate at the time. So the magnitude of Japan’s holdings of EUR-assets, expressed in USD, fluctuates with the EUR-USD exchange rate.

The other diversification: gold.

Gold bullion is not a “foreign exchange reserve” asset of central banks, and is not included in the data above. Instead, it’s a “reserve asset,” not involving foreign currency.

Central banks had spent decades unloading their gold holdings. But about 10 years ago, they started rebuilding their stash.

According to the IMF, central banks’ gold holdings have surged over this decade to 1.16 billion troy ounces – roughly $3.08 trillion, compared to $12.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves (chart via the IMF):

*  *  *

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely.

Authored by Thomas Buckley via The Mises Institute,

Typically, coup attempts do not wrap up in time for dinner…

But over the next few days, with the anniversary of the 2021 January 6 Capitol riot having become a progressive political holiday worthy of obsessive memorialization, the nation will be deluged with tales of attempted government overthrow, Trumpian lunacy, and the FBI desperately trying to explain why it has yet to catch a person who—on video—placed two pipe bombs in DC that day but has somehow gloriously managed to track down and prosecute 1,000 trespassers.

Despite what the endless and tedious and inaccurate anniversary media coverage—all delivered with a joyously smirking “kid in a candy store/evil Republicans” tenor—will be claiming, the January 6 riot had all (maybe really only some) of the hallmarks of, well, a riot, and none of the indicators of an actual “insurrection,” let alone an attempted coup d’état.

For an actual and successful coup, one need look no further than the inglorious defenestration of Joe Biden last summer.

A coup is an extremely tricky proposition, as Burt Lancaster’s character in the 1964 film “Seven Days in May,” discovered much to his chagrin. The film (and the book) note the level of detailed planning necessary, the prior co-option of various levers of power that needs to occur, the cruciality for speed of implementation, and—just as importantly—the requirement of a post-coup strategy.

January 6 had none of that—the intentional political censorship and elite scheming of the past few years and, of course, the bye-bye to Biden had all of that (except for his vicious vengeful installation of Kamala Harris, not at all being the choice of Pelosi-Obama plotters, as the heir.)

In a proper insurrection or coup, one of the key elements is control of the media. If January 6 were a legitimate attempt to overthrow the government, the planners, in theory, would have made sure that only evil Fox News was left on the air, that it had changed its logo to incorporate buffalo horns, and that all other media—including social—was broadcasting or re-tweeting or posting reruns of “Welcome Back, Kotter.”

This did not happen on January 6, unlike the instantaneous media rallying around, supporting, and explaining why it was perfectly okay for Biden to be put on an ice floe and that Harris was not at all the squishy, angry, incoherent portrait of pointlessness that it had been portraying her as for the previous four years. In fact, turns out, the media said, she was great and smart and definitely going to be met with universal acclaim by the public.

That did not exactly turn out very well.

The January 6 riot was a very odd combination of chaos and politeness, an attempt at a serious—if utterly misguided—political statement, a tragedy in the killing of Ashli Babbit, featured absurd humans doing absurd and scary things, and was politically almost unimaginably stupid.

But it was not a coup attempt.

People overthrowing a government do not wrap things up in time to get back to the hotel for dinner, they do not call the next day to check if anyone found the coat they left behind, and they do not stay within the stanchions:

In Edward Luttwak’s extremely interesting book—Coup D’état: A Practical Handbook—he outlines a series of practical necessities a successful overthrow entails. A neutralized opposition, media control, military support, dedicated and discrete supporters throughout government offices, speed of implementation, a detailed and logistically-feasible organizational action plan, and the immediate institutionalization of the new government are all among the key elements to prevailing. Since what occurred on January 6 not only lacked any of these elements but, by all accounts, had the exact opposite characteristics means, again, the premise that an actual government overthrow was in process is ludicrous.

To an extent, these simple facts are somewhat akin to the key event in the Sherlock Holmes story, “The Adventure of Silver Blaze.” Holmes focuses on a “curious incident”: the dog on the premises did not bark, leading the detective to the idea that the ne’er-do-well was known to the animal. This concept is also known as a “negative fact,” which involves the absence of one thing proving the truth of another.

A key negative fact is that only a handful of those participants the feds have rounded up and charged have not been charged with anything even remotely related to a treasonous, insurrectionist, coup attempt. Considering that some have received years-long sentences for trespassing, one would think there would be more, that is, unless they know it wouldn’t stand up in even the kangaroo courts in DC.

A second negative fact is that the riot, in fact, ended any consideration of and debate about the status of potentially questionable electors. Again, a proper coup would have let the effort move forward in the hope that it would succeed and only be triggered if there was a failure.

A final negative fact is that, despite the avalanche of anniversary coverage, little has been dedicated to the idea of what would have happened if the insurrection had been successful. If those still pushing the story now actually thought that it could have “worked,” they would be screaming about that horrifying potentiality from the rooftops. Since they haven’t, it means even they do not really take the notion seriously.

None of this is to defend the sheer obnoxiousness of the riot—not only was it wrong and illegal, it was supremely stupid from a political standpoint. With the fact that literally everything else went wrong for the administration and the Democrats in Congress in 2021, the riot provided them with the only even theoretically plausible lifeline to retain political legitimacy.

Congressional reports (St. Liz is getting a medal from Biden) and counter-reports (St. Liz may have committed felony witness tampering) have been issued and the FBI is still trying to explain the difference between informants—who were on scene—and agents, which it says (ludicrously) were not.

Friday, the FBI (presumably to have something to say during the anniversary) released “new” info on the person who put pipe bombs next to the headquarters of both the Republican and Democratic parties. The new info? He’s five foot seven. However, they declined to say why they let random people just stroll by the putative bombs even while they were on-site with robots investigating. All this apparently with a coup going on down the street.

Trump officially lost in 2020. Now whether that was due to a collaborationist media, vapor trails of zeroes worth of dark money, extremely dodgy election systems, the actual Big Lie regarding mental competence that was the Biden campaign, Trump’s personality (but probably not his policies), that there may have been 75,000 white men (the only demographic Trump saw a decline of support in, by the way) who were brainwashed into believing that to vote for him was a racist act, covid, generalized drama exhaustion, a belief that Biden would in fact be a good and decent President, or whatever other reason can be debated, but the fact is that Donald Trump left office.

But now he is back and—knowing Trump’s penchant for in-your-face troll drama—one can be certain that he, maybe half jokingly, asked if he could move the inauguration date up two weeks to January 6. Now that would be a memorable anniversary.

US Factory Orders tumbled 0.4% MoM in November (from an upwardly revised +0.5% MoM change in October), dragging orders down 1.9% YoY (the worst since June)…

Source: Bloomberg

Additionally, the final durable goods orders print tumbled 1.2% MoM (drastically worse than the 0.4% decline expected) with core Durables (ex-Transports) falling 0.2% MoM in November. The headline MoM drop dragged the YoY change in Durable Goods Orders down 6.4% YoY – the second worst since COVID lockdowns…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, what the f**k is going on here? ‘Hard’ manufacturing orders data is completely decoupled from ‘soft’ manufacturing survey data…

Source: Bloomberg

Will wee see the ‘hard’ data “ADJUSTED” back from Biden’s un-reality now that Trump is in office?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Authored by Chandra Phillip via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A Nova Scotia provincial judge has had a lawsuit challenging the conduct of her superior during the COVID-19 pandemic tossed out.

Judge Rickcola Brinton was challenging an earlier decision by the chief justice of Nova Scotia, Michael Wood, with regard to a complaint she had made about Chief Judge Pamela Williams. Brinton said Williams had pressured her to reveal her vaccination status and sought out her medical reports without consent, according to the Dec. 23, 2024, court decision.

Brinton said the fact that Williams contacted Brinton’s physician for her medical records was an ethical violation of her position.

However, Supreme Court of Nova Scotia Justice Christa Brothers disagreed that Williams’s actions amounted to misconduct. She said the case did not support a finding of judicial misconduct against Williams.

”Her decisions concerning how to assign judicial work and what medical information was required to support Judge Brinton’s medical leave fall within her authority as Chief Judge,” Brothers wrote.

”I conclude the decision bears all the hallmarks of reasonableness – justification, transparency, and intelligibility.”

Second Challenge

It was the second time that Brinton, represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), had challenged the actions of Williams.

Her first had been the complaint filed with Chief Justice Wood, who reviewed it and dismissed it without sending to a review committee.

Brinton then asked for a judicial review of Wood’s decision, saying normal procedure had not been followed. Brothers’s decision means the request for a judicial review has been denied.

The JCCF said it is consulting with Brinton about the next move, and may appeal.

According to the court record, in October 2021, Williams had contacted all the provincial judges to see if they would agree to reveal their vaccination status. Brinton and another judge were the only ones who disagreed.

At the time, Brinton said her concerns were medical privacy and the impact on “racialized communities” and the development of a “two-tier society.”

On Oct. 6, 2021, the Nova Scotia government said that all provincial employees had to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

“While court staff, including judicial assistants and others working in the court system, were subject to this requirement, judges were not,” the court decision read.

On Oct. 25, 2021, Brinton tested positive for COVID-19 and began a 10-day quarantine, Brothers wrote.

After recovering from the virus, her doctor suggested she take a four-week leave from work. Brinton went on short-term disability, which then turned into long-term disability leave.

Medical Records Request

Before Brinton switched to long-term leave, Williams sent a letter to her asking if she would be returning to work after the short-term leave entitlement ran out in March. Williams said she had not been provided with medical reports proving the need for leave, and requested evidence of Brinton’s need to be away from work.

On March 21, 2022, in a message to Wendy Hudgins of Public Service Commissions Human Resources, Williams said she had received a fax from Brinton with a doctor’s note indicating Brinton would not return to work until May 22. Williams asked Hudgins if she should provide that notice as evidence to support Brinton’s leave or not approve the leave, according to the court decision.

Hudgins said employers expected a treatment outline. She suggested Williams contact the treatment provider for those details before deciding on denying the leave request.

On March 28, 2022, Williams sent a message to Brinton’s physician requesting some medical information. However, it was not provided as Brinton did not consent to the release of the information.

Long-term disability was approved for Brinton shortly after that, and the court document indicates she is still on leave.

In June 2023, Brinton filed a complaint about Williams’s actions to Chief Justice Wood asking that her complaint be forwarded to a review committee of the Judicial Council for investigation.

Brinton had argued that Williams’s actions “were a breach of her ethical obligation” to Brinton, as well as the obligation to respect Brinton’s medical privacy.

Wood dismissed the complaint on Dec. 10, saying that Williams’s actions did not support a finding of judicial misconduct.

”Her decisions concerning how to assign judicial work and what medical information was required to support Judge Brinton’s medical leave fall within her authority as Chief Judge,” he wrote.

Following the disappointing slide in Manufacturing survey data, US Services PMI was expected to continue rising in final December data released this morning and it did, rising from 56.1 to 56.8 (although that was well below the expected and preliminary 58.5 print) – a 33-month high.

Source: Bloomberg

US service providers saw rates of expansion in business activity and new orders strengthen further in December amid a greater willingness among customers to spend following the Presidential Election result.

There were further signs of cost pressures moderating in December as the pace of inflation eased for the third consecutive month to the weakest since last February.

But, Input prices still increased markedly, however, and at a pace that was faster than the pre-pandemic average. A number of respondents mentioned higher shipping costs, while others reported wage pressures.

For now, the US Composite index is dominating and diverging positively from the rest of the world….

Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, acknowledged the ‘Trump Effect’ in the survey data:

“The US economy ended 2024 on a high according to the latest business surveys. Business activity in the vast services economy surged higher in the closing month of 2024 on fuller order books and rising optimism about prospects for the year ahead.

“Expectations of faster growth in the new year are based the anticipation of more business-friendly policies from the incoming Trump administration, including favorable tax and regulatory environments alongside protectionism via tariffs.

The improved performance of the service sector has more than offset a continued drag on the economy from the manufacturing sector, meaning the survey data point to another robust expansion of the economy in the fourth quarter after the 3.1% GDP growth seen in the third quarter…

“The strong service sector PMI reading for December sets the US economy up for a good start to 2025 but, with growth as strong as this, it’s understandable that policymakers are taking a more cautious approach to lowering interest rates.” Williamson added. 

“However, a key focus in the coming months will be the potential vulnerability of the economy to any major change in the interest rate outlook, especially as financial services activity has been an important engine of growth in late 2024, partly on the anticipation of a further lowering of borrowing costs.”

Not exactly rate-cutting weather!!

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

Congress will formally certify President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 election on Jan. 6, marking the final ceremonial step to confirm Trump as the next commander-in-chief.

Vice President Kamala Harris, as president of the Senate, will officiate the certification during a joint session of Congress and declare her erstwhile rival the winner in the presidential contest.

It’s expected to be largely a quiet, formal process this year. Harris has said she intends to treat her role as ceremonial. Democrats in Congress have already made clear that they accept Trump’s win.

For members of both parties, the day can’t help but recall the events that unfolded four years prior.

During the certification of the 2020 election results on Jan. 6, 2021, pro-Trump protesters entered the Capitol, placing the certification process on hold and putting an end to a Republican effort to object to certain electoral slates.

Following the Capitol breach, Republican leaders like Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) distanced themselves from Trump, joining Democrats in saying he was ultimately responsible for the incident.

The House quickly pushed through a second impeachment resolution against Trump, though it failed in the Senate. Pundits believed Trump’s political future was at an end.

For both sides of the aisle, the certification of Trump’s re-election four years later is likely a reminder of the magnitude of the political comeback the president-elect has achieved.

The Process

Lawmakers from both chambers will gather in the House chamber, which is traditionally used for joint sessions, at 1 p.m. ET to begin the process of certification.

Under the process mandated by law, the official electoral slates will be transported into the House chamber in large mahogany boxes. Harris will then open the sealed electoral slates and hand them to the congressional tellers to be read aloud in alphabetical order.

As these votes are read off, lawmakers have the opportunity to raise any objections they see fit, so long as both a representative and a senator sign off on the objection. At that point, both chambers would meet for two hours to debate the objection before returning to a joint session.

These objections have been a relatively common fixture of American political life in the 21st century, with objections to certain electoral votes brought in 2001, 2005, 2017, and 2021.

This year, however, Democrats have indicated that they expect no objections will be brought against certifying Trump’s win.

Jan. 6, 2021

Though Jan. 6 was once seen as a relatively uneventful day in American political life, for the past four years, the date has been a cultural flashpoint.

During a speech at the Ellipse four years ago, Trump, alleging that the 2020 election results were tainted by fraud, told his supporters to go to the Capitol to “peacefully and patriotically“ protest the certification of the results.

In the speech, Trump urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject certain electoral slates from key battleground states.

When the crowd arrived at the Capitol, chaos ensued as some protesters entered the Capitol. Most entered through the main entrances, though a minority entered through smashed windows.

Ultimately, the Capitol was cleared of protesters after Trump urged his supporters to leave. Though some damages had been done to the building and some offices, certification proceeded without further objections.

Critics of Trump alleged that the Capitol breach was the culmination of an attempted insurrection against the U.S. government.

Supporters of Trump say the narratives surrounding the events of the day have been misrepresented and note Trump’s role in ending the breach and how he left office unchallenged on Jan. 20, 2021.