Saudis Threaten To Move Aramco IPO Elsewhere Due To “Concerns” Over Trump, Sept 11 Law

Aside from Hillary Clinton of course, the single biggest loser from the November 8 presidential election in terms of net sunk costs, was Saudi Arabia: having “donated” tens of millions to the Clinton Foundation, and sponsored her presidential campaign directly, Riyadh was hoping for many long and fruitful years of quid pro quo in exchange for its recycled petrodollar generosity. Instead, the Saudis got not only president Trump, who has made it public he wants a clean break with a US foreign policy which panders to such Mid-east “allies” as the Saudi, but also the recent passage of legislation that could – and already has – allowed U.S. terror victims to sue Saudi Arabia.

As a result, a suddenly snubbed Saudi Arabia, is reassessing its multibillion-dollar U.S. financial strategy because of shifts in the American political landscape, including whether to go elsewhere with the public stock debut of its state oil company the WSJ reports.

In monetary terms, this means that Saudi Arabia’s giant sovereign-wealth fund has paused its U.S. investments until they can figure out the implications of the bill and the new direction of the White House, the WSJ said citing a person familiar with the fund’s decision making.

And, in what is an attempt to engage in a negotiation with the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia has already unveiled what it will use as a bargaining chip to make Trump warm up to Suadi diplomatic overtures: the initial public offering of Saudi Arabian Oil Company, the world’s biggest oil producer better known as Aramco, which is tentatively set for next year or 2018, and could raise more than $100 billion in proceeds, ranking as the largest in IPO history. The prospect has set banks scrambling for a deal that could bring $1 billion in fees.


Aramco, the world’s biggest oil producer, tentatively set its IPO for next year or 2018

It is these fees that Saudi Arabia is now threatening with taking to some other global capital market.

While Saudi officials haven’t decided where to list the shares, bankers say the New York Stock Exchange is the best place to debut such a large offering. The government has been meeting with officials from numerous exchanges, including London, people familiar with the process said.

Furthermore, with its “investment” in the Clinton Campaign now lost, Saudi officials are looking at other avenue with which to grease Washington, and specifically how they will invest money from the kingdom’s massive Public Investment Fund. Danging the carrot, Saudi officials have indicated they are effectively turning the sovereign-wealth fund into a war chest for non-oil investments abroad—a coffer that would expand with proceeds from the Aramco IPO.

So what has gotten the Saudis so riled up?  It appears that the kingdom is particularly alarmed by the federal legislation approved in September to allow victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia to seek damages.  The prospect of being found liable for the attacks has made Saudi leaders worry that big transactions in the U.S. could expose their assets to legal judgments.

Which, traditionally, would have a simple solution: just give the Clinton Foundation an extra million and it 3will go away. This time however, with Trump in charge, the Saudis have no idea how to approach the US government when it comes to “purchasing” political favors.

And while it grapples to find the right approach, Saudi Arabia had beefed up its lobbying operation to wage a furious effort to defeat the terrorism legislation. After Congress overrode a veto of the bill by President Barack Obama , lobbyists for Saudi Arabia pressed lawmakers to amend it. Lobbyists have argued that the measure is too broad and could have the unintended result of prompting lawsuits against the U.S. by foreign individuals. 

Those lobbyists also had raised the specter that the law could affect Saudi Arabia’s U.S. investment plans.

A shift in Saudi Arabia’s U.S. investing strategy now could become a negotiating point in the kingdom’s broader relationship with the U.S. Many in Washington expected legislators to soften the law after the November elections, something Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky) hinted at in September. At that time, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was forecast to win the election. The White House declined to comment. But congressional leaders haven’t revisited the law since Mr. Trump’s victory, and have now adjourned until next year, likely leaving the law to the next Congress and a president who has indicated no interest in changing it.

The biggest problem for the Saudis is that Trump has been a fervent supporter of the bill. He called Obama’s veto attempt shameful and said it would “go down as one of the low points of his presidency.”

In a statement before Congress voted to overturn the veto, Mr. Trump said: “If elected president, I would sign such legislation should it reach my desk.” Mr. Trump didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Then again, it may be just one of many other thing Trump is preparing to flip-flop on. The President-elect has said he is a friend of Saudi Arabia, and picked Gen. James Mattis, a longtime supporter of Saudi Arabia, as his defense secretary.

Yet Trump has also questioned U.S. military support to the country. In another potential challenge to Saudi Arabia, Mr. Trump has been an advocate for increasing U.S. oil production, in part to limit imports.

Saudi companies have stakes in U.S. refineries and are trying to expand into petrochemicals. But Trump adviser Harold Hamm, the chief executive of oil producer Continental Resources Inc., said recently that Saudi Arabia shouldn’t be allowed to own petrochemical plants in the U.S., since it would collide with U.S. business interests by having the plants process Saudi oil, rather than buying from U.S. producers.

* * *

Bit the real carrot is the Aramco IPO. While a Saudi Aramco IPO in New York was never a certainty, many had assumed it would take place there. However, the changes in the U.S. have further delayed Saudi decisions on how to move ahead with their plans. The offering is part of a Saudi strategy to reduce its reliance on oil and diversify its economy. The IPO is also the primary impetus behind Saudi Arabia’s change of heart, where the kingdom is now pushing for higher prices and lower production, a U-turn from its November 2014 stance. After all the probability of finding $100 billion worth of investments is much higher with oil at $60 than $30.

In July, the Saudi fund said it would invest $45 billion in a fund run by Japanese internet and telecommunications giant SoftBank Group Corp.  The WSJ sources say the Saudi officials decided to make the huge investment in SoftBank after the terrorism legislation, and the money that went into SoftBank could have gone directly into U.S. investments or U.S. investment firms. There were concerns about their exposure if they invested directly, one person said. Naturally, one can counter that they would have nothing to be concerned about if they are – as they claim – fully innocent of anything to do with Sept 11.

The Saudi fund was also interested in SoftBank on its own merits, said a person familiar with the matter, including the ability to put a large amount of money to work with a single investment and the likelihood that the fund would have access to deals from some of the world’s top entrepreneurs.

Of course, the investment had an ulterior motive too: to get Trump on the same page as the Kingdom. Some of the money that went to SoftBank appears likely to end up in the U.S. via SoftBank investments. SoftBank Chief Executive Masayoshi Son met with Mr. Trump at Trump Tower in New York on Dec. 6 and told reporters afterward he would invest $50 billion—some of it from the fund the Saudis backed—in the U.S. and create 50,000 new jobs.

So yes, much of the money invested in the US via SoftBank will come from Saudi Arabia, just as the Saudis want it, as from that moment on they would have leverage… just like they did over Clinton.

It remains to be seen just what Trump’s policy toward Saudi Arabia will be, and if he will merely perpetuate the flawed foreign policy of his predecessor.

via http://ift.tt/2hGbRS3 Tyler Durden

hedgeless_horseman’s nearly-annual Twelve Days of Christmas shopping list

“Self-esteem is something of great value.  
It is strange, because others cannot give you self-esteem,
but they can steal it from you,
by doing for you what you can do for yourself.”

-hedgeless_horseman

 

A bit late this year, but here it is!  hedgeless_horseman’s nearly-annual Twelve Days of Christmas shopping list for the ZeroHedge readers and others in your life.

 

1) Unconditional Love. $0

 This is the one thing every person wants and needs more than anything else.  It took me nearly two years of hard work to figure this out.  The cost may be cheap, but actually delivering the goods is certainly not easy.  However, the benefits are priceless.


2) Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal: War Stories from the Local Food Front,  by Joel Salatin.  $11

mrs_horseman and I love this guy.  If you haven’t seen Joel in the excellent movie, Food, Inc., do watch it.

 

3) Real Love and Freedom for the Soul – Eliminating the Chains of Victimhood, by Greg Baer, MD.  $25

What to get for yourself if there are people close to you that frequently play the victim. Truly, this is pretty much everyone.  

“At the root of all our anger, our feelings of separation from each other, and our problems in relationships is our belief that we have been victimized: we believe we have been hurt, slighted, or treated unfairly in some way.”

 

http://ift.tt/2gJwmLZ…

 

4) Hellstorm: The Death Of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947, by Thomas Goodrich.  $26

This is the book to give those on your list that seem unable to understand how bad things can get on this planet, and the horrors we are all capable of as human beings.  

 

5) Estwing American-Made Black Eagle Tomahawk. $40

Want a quality in-vehicle accessory to give the Trump Voter on your list that either lives in a gun-free-zone or doesn’t carry a firearm, but who doesn’t want to be the next Reginald Denny to get dragged out of his vehicle and beaten without putting up a fight?  


 

 

6) U.S. Military Surplus GORE-TEX Bivy Cover. Like New, Genuine GORE-TEX® waterproof, breathable, sealed seams. $44

A great gift for your friends that just need to get the fuck out of the city for a weekend and figure shit out.

When I say camping out, I mean under a blanket, or maybe in a sleeping bag, on the ground, maybe with a pad, definitely not in a trailer, not in an RV, and not even in a tent.  If it rains, pull out a tarp, or at most a bivey sack.


http://ift.tt/2gJw1sE…

 

7) Manduka Black Mat Pro Yoga Mat and Manduka eQua Mat Towel. $150

For the person on your list that needs to practice disintermediation in their health, and build self-esteem.

It took me maybe 30 minutes to do all nine of the simple exercises, with the prescribed rest and meditation poses between each set.  I was suprised.  They were not difficult.   With a little instruction, I believe almost anyone can do them. 


http://ift.tt/2gJvYgl…

 

8) The hedgeless_horseman’s Revolutionary Call to Arms Complete Library. $175

The gift for the person on your list that thinks…

That the US Government is corrupt is not the question. They are.

The questions are;

WHAT CAN THE AVERAGE CITIZEN DO ABOUT IT?

HOW CAN THIS BE STOPPED?

For the life me, I do not have those answers.

THAT is the issue; what can someone do?

 

http://ift.tt/21ZZiSp…

  • Propaganda, by Edward Bernays. 
  • Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury. 
  • Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley 
  • The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve – 5th Edition, by G. Edward Griffin
  • 1984, by George Orwell
  • The Law, by Frédéric Bastiat.
  • The Constitution of the United States and The Bill of Rights.
  • Animal Farm, by George Orwell.
  • War is a Racket, by Smedley D. Butler.
  • On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, by Dave Grossman.
  • Anatomy of the State, by Murray Rothbard.

 

9) A Series of Five Half-Day Kiteboarding Lessons.  $1,500

 What to get for the special woman in your life, regardless if she is like Cathy, or like Amy?

When I think about Amy and Cathy, I cannot help but feel that this is the beginning of a trend caused, at least in part, by the fact that women now have a much higher labor force participation rate than men, meaning more stress, and a lower quality of life, especially in a recession.

 

http://ift.tt/27woKCS

 

10) Bike Friday Tikit folding bike.  $2,900

For the loved one that is always getting sick and injured from being overweight, or is just tired of bombing brown people to steal their oil, and wants to do something about it, TODAY, that will also improve his personal financial situation.

http://ift.tt/2gJw9sc…

 

11) A SIG Sauer Piston-Driven Rifle with Everything To Defend Your Freedom. $4759

For the person, maybe even you, that Wants To Secure a Free State and Become A Rifleman Without Joining the US Military.

  • 1 SIG Sauer SIG516 Patrol. $1,650
  • 1 Trijicon 4×32 ACOG, Dual Illuminated Red Chevron .223 Ballistic Reticle w/ TA51 Flattop Mount. $1,277
  • 1 Dueck Defense Rapid Transition Sight™ with Trijicon Night Sights – Set (Front & Rear). $300
  • 1 Urban ERT Urban-Sentry Two Point/ One Point Hybrid Sling. $50
  • 1 Streamlight TLR-2 laser and visible white light. $260
  • 1 Blue Force Gear Ten-Speed M4 Chest Rig. $78
  • 1 First Spear 5.56 Fight Strap Bandoleer. $84
  • 20 Magpul PMAG P30 Gen M3 30-Round Magazines. $300 
  • 2000 rounds of 5.56 PPU M193 55gr. FMJ Ammo In Sealed Battle Packs. $716  

The good news is that there are newer rifles that blend the reliability of the AK’s gas piston with the accuracy and lighter weight of the AR, and do so in a design that was meant to accommodate either 5.56 or 7.62 from its inception. 


http://ift.tt/2f4Z4bg…

 

12) Immersive, scenario based, tactical live fire and force on force training. $1,142

For the American on your list that already has a quality rifle, knows how to use it, and wants to learn to fight on a team.

Tactical classes specialize in the teaching of combat proven, adapted, legitimate light infantry tactics, techniques and procedures. Training is informed by a background and experience in SOF/elite forces, and additionally by close protection / paramilitary contracting work.

 

http://ift.tt/2gJsPx0…

 

Merry Christmas!

h_h

via http://ift.tt/2gJBwas hedgeless_horseman

Why Would Any Sane Investor Even Look At This?

By Chris at http://ift.tt/12YmHT5

Market dislocations occur when financial markets, operating under stressful conditions, experience large widespread asset mispricing.

Welcome to this week’s edition of “World Out Of Whack” where every Wednesday we take time out of our day to laugh, poke fun at and present to you absurdity in global financial markets in all its glorious insanity.

While we enjoy a good laugh, the truth is that the first step to protecting ourselves from losses is to protect ourselves from ignorance. Think of the “World Out Of Whack” as your double thick armour plated side impact protection system in a financial world littered with drunk drivers.

Selfishly we also know that the biggest (and often the fastest) returns come from asymmetric market moves. But, in order to identify these moves we must first identify where they live.

Occasionally we find opportunities where we can buy (or sell) assets for mere cents on the dollar – because, after all, we are capitalists.

In this week’s edition of the WOW we’re covering an update to a “freebie” I sent out a couple months ago

Like my beautiful wife, this one is going to be short and sweet.

Early September I threw out a “freebie”, partly to reward long-term readers and partly to provide a heads up and a sampling of the kind of product I was polishing, shining, and packaging up into the awesomest, shiniest independent investment service I could be proud of and one dedicated to investing in asymmetric investment. Ok, it’s not really shiny. I mean, it’s a publication, not bloody silverware.

The alert, which I sent out to everyone on our email list can be found here. This week’s WOW won’t make a whole lot of sense until you’ve read the alert so go read it now if you are new or haven’t read it for whatever reason and then come back….

Read it? Ok.

I received a lot of thank you comments after sending that out but in the melee was one from a subscriber:

“This is disgusting. Politics is dirty and I prefer to invest in non-political investments. This isn’t for me and I’m not sure I want to even read your stuff anymore”

Listen snowflake, there is no such thing as “non-political investments”.

Maybe if you’ve grown up in a cotton wool environment, spoon-fed Barney the Dinosaur as a kid, which then morphed into Hollywood sitcoms as an adult, and your idea of a “tough” world is when some pimply faced middle class pot smoking teenager gets kicked of the stage at X Factor because he cracked under the pressure, then maybe this all makes sense. But if that’s indeed the case you need to put down the scissors before you hurt yourself.

Politics matters. Deal with it. Understand it. Baseball has a hard ball. If you cock it up you get a black eye or worse. Actions have consequences. A reason not to play baseball? Hardly.

This deal is all about politics and far less about anything else. Yes, the economics matters in the long run, and fortunately it has sound math on its side here but trust me when I say that sound math on its own in opposition to political pressure rarely wins the day.

Fast forward to a meeting that just went down in Ulaanbaatar. CNBC just reported on it:

“The development of Tavan Tolgoi, which contains 7.4 billion ton of coking and thermal coal deposits and is largely untapped, hit a series of political and economic roadblocks over the past few years, but the July election of the Mongolian People’s Party is expected to ease the way forward.”

Political roadblocks? Hmmm…

And then this is what was written in the Insider alert:

“Adding insult to injury, the government owns the TT deposit and has consistently produced and sold coal for less than market prices, effectively undercutting MMC (Mongolian Mining Corporation) coal—while also creating a glut at the border and largely bankrupting the government’s coal company (ETT) in the process. Mongolian Mining Corporation stopped production, but the government’s ETT continues to produce at massive losses for no logical reason.”

Yep. Politics matters, all right?

The CNBC article goes on to state the following:

“Mongolia’s government on Friday held an initial meeting with a private consortium, led by Shenhua, which is in talks to take over development of the Tavan Tolgoi mine from the Mongolian state-owned company Erdenes Tavan Tolgoi JSC (ETT).”

Now, as soon as Shenhua agreed to come to town the probabilities for the one company that’s not even mentioned anywhere in the media to be one of the topics of discussion just got a whole lot better.

In the alert you’ll recall the one major accelerant needed is the railroad. Here’s what we said:

“In 2015, Mongolian Mining Corporation was able to put together a consortium of leading Chinese and Japanese firms (including Shenhua Energy and Sumitomo) that would pay to build a railroad to the border, build a power plant and then operate the TT mine so that the government of Mongolia would no longer be in the coal business.

Instead, the government was to earn royalties and taxes. Mongolian Mining Corporation would benefit as project operator, but more importantly, they would get access to the new railroad that would make their coal cheaper than Australian coal and let them once again ramp up production from almost nothing to nearly 10 million tons a year without substantial additional capital investment as all mining is done by a contractor.

It was a brilliant deal for all involved, but the DP government was so focused on destroying Mongolian Mining Corporation that they refused a deal that would have improved the government’s own finances.”

And we followed on with:

“It seems pretty obvious that the consortium deal is back on the table and will probably become sweeter for MMC than the prior version. In addition, there’s also a strong likelihood that MMC’s 18 million ton wash plant will be used to wash ETT coal in a toll milling situation.
The new railroad, a toll washing agreement on ETT coal, management of the ETT mine will all create huge value. No one knows the terms yet, but people are throwing around cash flow estimates to Mongolian Mining Corporation in the hundreds of millions (possibly even a billion) annually.”

Now from CNBC:

“It would also lead to infrastructure investments in Mongolia, including the development of a railway that could link into the Chinese rail network and deliver coal to destinations throughout China.”

That, folks, is the same railroad.

Here’s the bottom line. Politics always matters and the politics in Mongolia changed recently. You’d be well served to understand who is in power and what their motivations may be.

As Mark Yusko, the brilliant mind behind Morgan Creek Capital, remarked to me: “You can make a lot of money when things go from awful to merely bad.”

Oh, and before you ask… Yes, I’m fully aware it’s up 3x but if you’re buying a bankrupt Mongolian miner with a reward potential of only 3x you need your head examined.

Why?

Mongolia has a huge amount of problems ahead of them. They’ll probably default on their debt, be bailed out by the IMF, and who knows what else but things just went from goddamned awful to less bad and the political motivations favour one company right now.

Question

Currency PollCast your vote here and also see what others think

The Insider program is up and running. You can hunt it down here. It’s not for everyone, it doesn’t have some quantum code, revealing secrets from Richy Rich (they don’t exist – the secrets, that is), and it absolutely won’t solve your problems if you’re down to the last few thousand bucks looking to buy that McMansion. If that’s your problem then go read what I wrote about the easy, uncomplicated road to riches.

If, on the other hand, you would like to know about some of the most asymmetric opportunities that my team and I find and how to trade them, then it’s probably something you’d be interested in.

– Chris

PS: Please note that I’ve disclosed my interests in this company.

“You can make a lot of money when things go from awful to merely bad.” — Mark Yusko

————————————–

Liked this article? Don’t miss our future missives and podcasts, and

get access to free subscriber-only content here.

————————————–

via http://ift.tt/2gSKTtJ Capitalist Exploits

Hillary Tells Angry Donors She Lost Because Of Putin, Comey Letter

Hillary Clinton attempted to explain to a group of exasperated donors (in the words of a Midwestern fundraiser "I’m not putting another fucking dime in until someone tells me what just happened") why she lost. Her reasoning, echoing John Podesta's whiney op-ed (and every mainstream media narrative) is simple – it wasn't her flaws, it was FBI Director Comey and Russian President Vladimir Putin that caused her defeat.

When Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine greeted the very top fundraisers and donors to their failed campaign at New York’s Plaza Hotel on Thursday evening, Politico reports that many of them had one simple question in mind: Where’s the autopsy?

 The call for a deep and detailed accounting of how Clinton lost a race that she and her donors were absolutely certain she’d win didn’t begin immediately after the election — there was too much shock over her defeat by Donald Trump, and overwhelming grief. Her initial conference call with top backers, which came just days after the outcome, focused primarily on FBI Director Jim Comey’s late campaign-season intervention.

 

But in the weeks since, the wealthy Democrats who helped pump over $1 billion into Clinton’s losing effort have been urging their local finance staffers, state party officials, and campaign aides to provide a more thorough explanation of what went wrong. With no dispassionate, centralized analysis of how Clinton failed so spectacularly, they insist, how can they be expected to keep contributing to the party?

 

A lot of the bundlers and donors still are in shock and disbelief by what happened. They’re looking for some introspection and analysis about what really happened, what worked and what didn’t,” said Ken Martin, chairman of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party and a top campaign bundler himself. "It may take some time to do that, but people are still just scratching their heads."

 

Or, in the words of a Midwestern fundraiser who’s kept in touch with fellow donors, “A lot of people are saying, ‘I’m not putting another fucking dime in until someone tells me what just happened.’”

And so, as The New York Times reports, Hillary attempted to explain why she lost…

Hillary Clinton on Thursday night attributed her defeat to a convergence of two “unprecedented” events: the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election, and what she called an “attack against our country” by the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.

Comey didn't help…

Mrs. Clinton said the letter Mr. Comey released disclosing new questions about emails handled by her private server had cost her close races in several battleground states.

 

“Swing-state voters made their decisions in the final days breaking against me because of the F.B.I. letter from Director Comey,” she said.

But it was The Russians that were most responsible apparently…

The Russians, she said, sought to “undermine our democracy” through cyberattacks on Democratic targets.

 

She said the hacking into the Democratic National Committee and into the emails of her campaign chairman, John D. Podesta, were a result of Mr. Putin’s “personal beef” against her, pointing to her accusation that Russia’s 2011 parliamentary elections were rigged.

 

“Putin publicly blamed me for the outpouring of outrage by his own people, and that is the direct line between what he said back then and what he did in this election,” Mrs. Clinton said.

And then, like Podesta (and Obama), she called for retribution…

“Make no mistake, as the press is finally catching up to the facts, which we desperately tried to present to them during the last months of the campaign,” Mrs. Clinton told the group, which collectively poured roughly $1 billion into her effort.

 

“This is not just an attack on me and my campaign, although that may have added fuel to it. This is an attack against our country. We are well beyond normal political concerns here. This is about the integrity of our democracy and the security of our nation.”

Purple Reign continues…

via http://ift.tt/2h9582m Tyler Durden

University of Minnesota Football Team Boycotts ‘Unjust Title IX Investigation’

MinnA major showdown over Title IX is brewing at the University of Minnesota, where the entire football team has agreed to boycott future games in support of 10 players who were suspended for sexual misconduct violations.

Student-athlete Drew Wolitarsky read a statement on behalf of the team Thursday night in which he blamed the administration for conducting an “unjust Title IX investigation without due process.”

“We are concerned that our brothers have been named publicly with reckless disregard in violation of their constitutional rights,” he said. “We are now compelled to speak for our team and take back our program.”

Coach Tracy Claeys appears to be in full support of the boycott. “Have never been more proud of our kids,” he tweeted.

The incident in question took place the night of September 2, after the team’s season-opener. One female student alleged that she was involved in nonconsensual sex with several people, including Carlton Djam, one of the football players. According to The Star Tribune, the woman consumed “five or six” shots before heading to a party where she met Djam. He took her up to a bedroom and proceeded to have sex with her. She then engaged in sex with a number of other men—she told the police they waited in line to “take turns.” She thought as many as 12 men were involved, though she couldn’t recall the exact number.

That’s the woman’s version. Djam told police that their sex was fully consensual. He produced three video clips taken on the morning in question that showed the woman was “lucid, alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious; she does not appear to be objecting to anything at this time,” according to the police report. This satisfied the police and no charges were filed.

The woman then pursued a restraining order against six football players, and an agreement was reached: they had to stay away from her, and she agreed not to take further legal action against them.

End of story? Nope. That’s because the university has its own process for investigating sexual misconduct that is separate from the police. According to the Education Department, Title IX—a federal statute mandating equality between the sexes in public education—requires universities to adjudicate sexual misconduct internally. These Title IX proceedings often deny fundamental due process rights to accused students, since the Office for Civil Rights—the agency that ensures Title IX compliance—has instructed universities to use a lower standard of proof. OCR guidance also discourages administrators from allowing cross-examination, one of the most vital tools a defendant has to prove his or her innocent.

As a result of Minnesota’s Title IX proceeding, 10 players were suspended. The Pioneer Press reported that expulsion was recommended for at least one of them.

The New York Times wrote about the boycott, which seems likely to become a major national issue—and hopefully result in increased scrutiny of OCR. The NYT wrote that “burdens of proof used in [Title IX] investigations are by law lower than the criminal justice system’s,” which is a bit misleading, as KC Johnson pointed out. It is OCR’s opinion that Title IX—a one-sentence statute—requires university administrators to use the preponderance of evidence standard. But neither Congress, nor the courts, nor the Minnesota legislature have approved such a requirement.

That’s not the only curious thing about the NYT‘s coverage.

Note that every single one of the 10 suspended students is black. We don’t know what, exactly, they are all accused of—recall that the woman only filed restraining orders against six of them—but we do know that they are all students of color, because they were named and publicly identified.

The Times glosses over this detail.

Given the fact that the criminal justice system is plagued by implicit and explicit racism, it’s astonishing that the paper of record would ignore the racial implications of a university denying fundamental due process to 10 black students and then punishing them for sexual misconduct.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2hCNJCr
via IFTTT

The Oil Mystery Behind Saudi Arabia’s Production Cut

Submitted by Nick Cunningham via OilPrice.com,

Saudi Arabia surprised the world by helping to engineer an unexpectedly strong agreement from OPEC members to cut production by 1.2 million barrels per day, followed by additional cuts from non-OPEC members. While the two agreements incorporate cuts from a wide range of oil producers, Saudi Arabia will do much of the heavy lifting, cutting nearly 500,000 barrels per day and even promising to go further than that should the markets warrant steeper reductions.

Depending on one’s perspective, Saudi Arabia demonstrated its diplomatic prowess and made OPEC relevant again, succeeding in talking up oil prices without sacrificing much. After all, Saudi Arabia often lowers production in winter months. Other analysts look at it a different way – Riyadh was actually pretty desperate for higher oil prices, given the toll that the two-year bust has taken on the country’s economy. That led Saudi Arabia to shoulder most of the burden of adjustment, achieving only small concessions from other OPEC members, most notably Iran. Riyadh was the big loser of the deal, the thinking goes, but ultimately had no choice as the government needed higher oil prices.

There are arguments to made for both sides, but then there is a third possibility: Saudi Arabia was motivated to pullback because it was actually leaning on its oilfields too hard this year when it pushed output up to 10.7 million barrels per day, an output level that might have strained the reservoirs of some of its largest fields. Producing too aggressively can ultimately damage the long-term recovery of oil reserves. Reuters reports in an exclusive report that Saudi Aramco could have been pushing its oil fields to the limit this year, and had little choice to but to climb down from record high output levels.

Saudi Arabia has long maintained that it could ratchet production up to 12 mb/d or more if it wanted to, but such a massive rate of production has never actually been proven or even tested. Reuters raises the possibility that Saudi Arabia might not actually have the ability to go that high. A source told the news organization that Saudi Aramco might only be able to produce at 11.4 mb/d, and going beyond that level would require billions of dollars in new investment in several years of development.

But making the enormous investments needed to take its production capacity up to 12 mb/d at a time when government coffers are depleting led Saudi officials to the conclusion that it needed to take a breather, sources told Reuters. With its oilfields feeling the strain, Saudi Arabia saw an urgent need to dial back output a bit, which made it particularly determined to strike a deal with fellow OPEC members. The prospect of higher oil prices ultimately made the promised production cuts seem like much less of a sacrifice.

The question surrounding how much oil Saudi Arabia can ultimately produce if it completely opened the taps is not an academic one. Saudi Arabia is the one country in the world that is thought to have a substantial volume of capacity sitting on the sidelines for the purpose of being called upon when oil markets need additional supply in a pinch. Every other country and company pretty much produces flat out save for a few small exceptions. This “spare capacity” is a major buffer for oil price volatility, as the markets rest assured that Saudi Arabia will plug any supply deficit from an unforeseen outage such as natural disaster (Hurricane Katrina) or conflict (war in Iraq).

But Saudi Arabia is secretive about the details of its industry and capabilities. The operating assumption that Saudi Arabia can ultimately produce 12 mb/d is the basis for calculating OPEC’s (and thus, most of the world’s) spare capacity.

Riyadh’s strategy of abandoning price stability and going for market share in 2014 led to a ramp up in production. Output hit a record this year at 10.7 mb/d. That necessarily led to a drawdown in spare capacity, dropping near 1 mb/d, the lowest level in years. Historically, oil prices have spiked when spare capacity runs low. Since 2014, however, the world has been awash in oil, and rising inventories acted as a second source of spare capacity, dampening any concerns about the effects of an unexpected outage.

(Click to enlarge)

However, the oil markets could be in a tighter situation than many have expected if Saudi Arabia can’t actually produce at 12 mb/d. Oil consultancy PIRA says that the kingdom could produce 10.5 mb/d on short notice, and anything higher would damage oil fields. "Saudi Arabia could produce more but it would likely come at the expense of optimal reservoir practices. They could certainly bring on new fields but this is a lengthy process (years) and expensive as well," PIRA says, according to Reuters. "So far the kingdom is not adding any significant new producing capacity based on project announcements and rig activity but rather replacing the aforementioned 4 to 6 percent annual decline rate."

Again, since oil inventories are so high, it is not as if the world is in danger of a shortage if an outage occurs. Storage levels are so high that they will take time to come down. Nevertheless, if Saudi Arabia can produce a lot less oil than previously thought, that adds to concerns about the security of supply over the longer-term.

We will find out a bit more about Saudi Arabia’s oil secrets when it releases financial data related to Saudi Aramco in anticipation of its partial IPO in 2018.

via http://ift.tt/2gTiF0k Tyler Durden

FACTS about RUSSIA the CIA doesn’t want you to know

Rogue elements within the Shadow Government and most notably the CIA, NSA, and the left coast billionaire class have launched an anti-Trump campaign in the hail mary long shot that they can disrupt the establishment in the final days when they still hold the keys to the kingdom with the intent of malice to incite a coup, civil war, or an upset in the electoral college system.  One of the main information manipulation tactics they are using we can paraphrase as “1. Confuse, 2. Plant false facts, and 3. Reinforce the illusion” needs an underlying topic that is shrouded in mystery from an American perspective, and there is no better topic than Russia.  It’s because the CIA already spent billions of dollars during the cold war convincing a generation of baby boomers that Russians had ‘missile bases on the dark side of the moon’ and other such nonsense.  But as we explain in our best selling book Splitting Pennies – the world doesn’t work the way most people are led to believe.  

We can STOP the LIES being promulgated in the mainstream news about RUSSIA which is being used to CONFUSE AND MANIPULATE public opinion, in the pathetic petty attempt to create CONSENSUS TRANCE that can have any number of outcomes, keeping TRUMP out of the White House.  STOP this pathetic campaign by understanding RUSSIA a little better!  Spread the FACTS!

Here are a few facts to stir your brain and hopefully, break the chain of neuro linguistic programming:

1. Russia uses a public central bank system, whereby the central bank is owned by the government.  In turn, Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank, is owned by the central bank by at least 51%, making Russia’s banking system state owned and operated.  Although Russia is not a government ‘of the people, by the people’ – they own their banking system!  As opposed to the US system, which is owned by Elite rich rober baron families and banks.

2. Russia has one of the fastest growing middle classes of any country on Earth.  

3. There are more than 3 Million Russians living in the United States of America.

4. The Bolshevik revolution, was bankrolled by New York bankers, many of whom were Jewish.

5. There were at least 10x more people killed in Russia by Stalin than Hitler in Germany, maybe 20x more.  The fact is that we’ll never really know the real numbers.

6. Russia is effectively a third world country with Nuclear weapons.

7. Russia is one of few countries that have engaged in what can nearly be called ‘ethnic cleansing’ or the deportation of non-Russians back to their country.  Russia is not a melting pot, like the Soviet Union tried to be.  It is a homogeneous land of mostly White Christians.

8. Throughout the period of the Soviet Union, many Americans did business with the regime, most notably Armand Hammer.

9. While European colonists were establishing the 13 colonies, Russia was establishing Alaska.

10. George W Bush and Vladimir Putin were practically best friends, just checkout these 25 photos about their “Bromance”.  (why doesn’t the CIA call George Bush about his ‘close connection’ with Putin?  hmmm….)

11. In 1990 during a food crisis, Mikhail Gorbachev and George H. W. Bush signed a trade agreement about delivery of frozen chicken leg quarters to the USSR.  Due to the fact that in many markets these were the only chicken available, they dubbed them “Bush Legs.”  Many locals believed that it was some sort of CIA plot to genetically manipulate the population as the chickens were 2 – 4 times the size of chickens in Russia.  

Why doesn’t the CIA want you to know this?  Because Russia is an easy black box enemy.  Since people don’t know what Russia REALLY is, unless you have intimate knowledge of the place – it’s easy to lie to naïve TV watchers, and paint a picture of great villains and evil people who drink Vodka and wear fur hats.  Russia is a strange place, maybe the strangest in the world.  But everything being promulgated about Russia in the mainstream media is completely manufactured from Langley (or wherever they are doing it now).

Don’t believe us – read some of these books and articles:

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution.  

Armand Hammer: The Untold Story

A People’s History of the United States

Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich

To learn how the global financial system works, checkout Fortress Capital Trading Academy

via http://ift.tt/2gJhw83 globalintelhub

Obama Notes Stances on Russia Depend on ‘What’s Politically Expedient’—Not Talking About Himself

With just 35 days left in office, President Barack Obama says he’s vowing to do something about alleged Russian interference in the U.S. presidential elections. What that something is (perhaps more sanctions, perhaps more U.S. support for democracy groups in Russia) remains to be seen.

Whatever the president decides to do, it’s unlikely to include Congress, which is controlled by Republicans who would mostly prefer to wait for Donald Trump to get into office before doing anything on anything. Additionally, it appears that the intelligence community that purportedly decided Russia was attempting to interfere in the elections is not that interested, at this moment, to talk about that except through anonymous sources to the Washington Post and other outlets. A Congressional hearing scheduled for yesterday on the issue was cancelled after the CIA declined to show up. According to the anonymous sources, all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies are in agreement on the secret report. What the role of agencies like Coast Guard Intelligence could be is still unclear.

“All we’ve heard from the intelligence community over the last several months is that they could not say that there was any attempt to undermine Hillary Clinton, to help Donald Trump,” King said on Fox News. “The consensus was that there was an attempt by the Russians to put a cloud over the election, to create disunity. Well, that’s what’s happening right now, but it’s the intelligence community that’s doing it.”

For his part, Obama in an interview on NPR this morning complained about the inconsistency of political positions in regards to Russia, and specifically Republicans. “The irony of all this, of course, is that for most of my presidency, there’s been a pretty sizable wing of the Republican Party that has consistently criticized me for not being tough enough on Russia,” Obama said. “Some of those folks during the campaign endorsed Donald Trump, despite the fact that a central tenet of his foreign policy was we shouldn’t be so tough on Russia. And that kind of inconsistency, I think, makes it appear, at least, that their particular position on Russia on any given day depends on what’s politically expedient.”

But what does that say about President Obama and the Obama administration’s positions on Russia? Four years ago, when Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney called Russia the U.S.’s number one geopolitical foe, Obama and company, and the same media now helping push Russophobia, mocked him. “His comments display either a shocking lack of knowledge about international affairs or just craven politics,” The New York Times insisted. “Either way, they are reckless and unworthy of a major presidential contender.” Trump’s more mellow approach to Russia is also, apparently, unworthy—it’s hard to imagine any Republican making any kind of comment on Russia the Times would not find unworthy.

At the Democratic National Convention in 2012, meanwhile, then-Senator and now Secretary of State John Kerry, also laid into Romney for looking at Russia as a geopolitical foe, calling it a “preposterous” idea. “Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from Alaska,” Kerry quipped. “Mitt Romney talks like he’s only seen Russia by watching Rocky IV.” The Democrats even sold the quote on a poster. By 2014, Kerry was resorting to telling Russia they weren’t in the Cold War-era movie Rocky IV.

The problem for Obama is his protestation about the inconsistency of Republicans’ Russia position will come off as politically expedient itself so long as he refuses to address his own inconsistencies, and how he and Kerry and others got to their 2016 position on Russia from their 2012 position.

Throughout the campaign, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton promised a more aggressive approach to Russia than the Obama administration had ever took. At one debate, she even admitted she was interested in imposing a no-fly zone over Syria in order to gain leverage over Russia and force the country to the negotiating table. She had previously acknowledged such actions would cost civilian lives. All this without ever once articulating a specific, substantive, national security purpose for U.S. intervention in Syria.

Obama understood Americans’ war-weariness in 2012. So he took credit for ending the war in Iraq when he had tried to expand it, and framed Afghanistan as a war that was ending even though it will now continue past his presidency. These were politically expedient lies to tell to an American population not all that interested in war. Clinton disposed of even the pretense of being a skeptic about war, effectively promising more of it when she won. It’s unsurprising she lost, and a frightening revealed preference that she refused to tone down her interventionist rhetoric on wars of choice or take responsibility for past interventionist mistakes even as she insisted Trump posed a unique threat to democracy.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2hWENo2
via IFTTT

The Great Interest Rate Contradiction

Hold your real assets outside of the banking system in one of many private international facilities  –>    http://ift.tt/2cyFwvQ;

 

 

 

 

The Great Interest Rate Contradiction

Written by Jeff Nielson (CLICK HERE FOR ORIGINAL)

 

 

 

It is both one of the greatest contradictions and greatest frauds in the entire realm of markets: the U.S. interest rate contradiction. The facts are these. At the end of 2008; the Federal Reserve (with other Western central banks in tow) embarked upon the most-extreme monetary policies in Western monetary history: “quantitative easing” (monetizing debt), and 0% interest rates (i.e. free money).

 

A so-called 0% interest rate is a prima facie fraud. By definition; an interest rate is a positive number. It is the price of capital. The price for any good which has value must be greater than zero, in any legitimate transaction. To pay a price of $0 (or less) for something of value is an obvious fraud. It is upon this fraud that the U.S. has based its monetary system for the past eight years, mitigated ever so slightly by two, token rate increases from the Fed, in recent years.

 

In 2008; when the Federal Reserve embarked upon its legal fraud, it (along with the other central banks) promised to normalize interest rates, immediately in 2009. It was the “Exit Strategy” of which Fed Chairman B.S. Bernanke boasted at the time. There was no Exit Strategy, and after a few years of lip service, the phrase was abandoned altogether by Bernanke and the rest of the central bank liars. The same central bankers who had solemnly promised to “never copy Japan” were deliberately copying Japan.

 

However, starting in 2011, something strange began happening in markets. A divergence appeared which has persisted to this day. During 2009, 2010, and the early part of 2011; equity markets (and particularly U.S. markets) were rising, and so were precious metals markets – as this central bank insanity equated to the most-bullish fundamentals in the history of precious metals markets.

 

Bernanke and the rest of the Fed liars regularly talked about raising interest rates, something which is (supposedly) bearish for both equities markets and precious metals markets. The reason why higher interest rates are bearish for equities is simple: it raises the price of capital (i.e. credit), which is bearish for equities markets in several respects. The reason why higher interest rates are supposedly bearish for precious metals is more mythology than fact, but let’s put that issue aside.

 

The Fed talked about raising interest rates, over and over, but it never did anything, and so equities markets and precious metals markets continued to rise. Indeed, while the devious Bernanke was talking “Exit Strategy” out of one side of his mouth, he was boasting “wealth effect” out the other side – pointing out how his extravagant money-printing was pumping up U.S. markets.

 

Suddenly, in the spring of 2011, the Great Interest Rate Contradiction began. Suddenly, precious metals prices began to fall. Why? “Because the Federal Reserve was about to raise interest rates.” It was a mantra preached by the Corporate media every day, starting in the spring of 2011. It is a mantra which the Corporate media continued to preach every day. And precious metals prices fell, day after day, week after week, month after month.

 

From the spring of 2011 to the end of 2015; the price of silver fell from a high of $49/oz (USD) to a low of $13/oz, representing a decline of almost 75%. The price of silver fell by 75% because the Fed “was going to raise interest rates”, while during that time there was only one, token increase. The price of silver fell, every day, just on talk that the Fed would raise rates. Yet after each Fed meeting when it failed to raise interest rates, the price only rose for one day. The silver market moved every day on talk, it only moved for only one day on actions. Totally perverse.

 

The situation was similar in the gold market, except not as extreme. The price of gold fell from a high of over $1900/oz (USD) to a low of under $1,100/oz – a greater than 40% plunge. The price of gold fell every on Fed talk. It rose for only one day on its actions (i.e. the failure to act). Then for a brief period of time starting at the beginning of 2016, the “Fed hex” miraculously vanished.

 

For the nearly six months which regular readers now know as the Fake Rally, the same talk that had caused precious metals prices to fall, relentlessly, week after week, ceased to have any effect on these markets. Then, just like some crooked banker flipping some invisible switch, the talk of the Federal Reserve raising interest rates again began sending precious metals prices lower, every day.

 

Indeed, one of the primary reasons why readers were warned that the Fake Rally had ended was that the “Fed hex” was back. Once again, all it takes, any time, any day to send precious metals prices lower is for any of the two-faced Fed-heads to mouth the words “raise interest rates”.

 

What have we seen, over the past several weeks? We’ve seen gold and silver prices falling on the talk that finally, this time, the Fed was actually going to raise interest rates – for the second time in eight years. To say that precious metals markets had already “priced in” this rate-hike would be one of the greatest understatements in the history of the English language.

 

Yet what have we seen since the Fed raised rates? Gold and silver prices have continued to fall. Why? Just ask the Corporate media. They have fallen, for several days, because the Fed raised interest rates. Despite prices falling week after week, month after month, year after year, on mere talk of raising interest rates; despite prices rising for only one day each time the Fed failed to raise rates; prices are supposed to continue to fall (we’re told), day after day, to “price in” the rate increase. Totally perverse. But it gets worse.

 

What have we seen in U.S. equity markets since the spring of 2011? Did they turn lower on mere talk of raising U.S. interest rates? No. They continued higher in 2011. They continued higher in 2012. They continued higher in 2013. They continued higher in 2014. They continued higher in 2015. They continued higher in 2016.

 

The same “Fed hex” that managed to torpedo precious metals markets day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, has had absolutely no effect at all on U.S. equity markets. They rose when the Fed talked about raising rates. They rose even more strongly each time it failed to raise rates – and for several days afterwards.

 

Yet after eight years of these U.S. bubble markets going higher and higher, when the Federal Reserve finally announced its second, token increase, the U.S. markets paused for only one day – and then have immediately began bubbling higher again. Indeed, we have even gotten the totally absurd proclamation from the Corporate media that higher U.S. interest rates are no longer bad for U.S. equities – just gold and silver. Totally perverse.

 

Precious metals markets go down, for 5+ years, every day, on talk by the Fed liars of raising interest rates. Then they fall even harder for several days more, to “price in” any token rate increase which actually occurs.

 

U.S. equities markets go up, for 8 years, every day, despite talk by the Fed liars of raising interest rates. Then when a token rate increase actually occurs, they fall for one day. Given the “New Math” from the Corporate media, maybe U.S. equities markets will actually go up the next time a token Fed rate increase occurs?

 

Much more likely, however, is that this latest media and market perversity is simply the last gasp of euphoric insanity before the One Bank pops the bubbles which it has worked so hard to inflate – so it can shear the Sheep on the way down. Then start a new bubble-and-crash cycle.

 

For precious metals investors, you were warned. The Fake Rally wouldn’t last, prices would turn lower before gold hit $1,500, and the downturn would become part of a general “crash”, whenever the banking crime syndicate chose to detonate these bubble markets. Prices have turned lower, the bankers have ensured that precious metals “charts” look dreadful, and these U.S. bubble markets could not be more-ripe for detonation.

 

However, as has been explained previously, those readers hoping/waiting to “load up” on gold or silver at crash prices will almost certainly be disappointed. Anecdotal evidence that these markets have gotten increasingly tight surfaces often, from a multitude of sites and sources. Notably both the U.S. Mint and Royal Canadian Mint have been rationing the supply of silver to their customers.

 

During the Crash of ’08, when silver hit its $8/oz low, there was no silver to be had – except for the largest bars: 100 ounces and up. During the Crash of ’16 (’17?), we can only expect the situation to be significantly worse, after eight more years of supply deficits in the silver market.

 

To date, we have not seen similar signs of ultimate stress in the supply of gold. However, that situation could change in a heartbeat, at any time of general panic and rock-bottom prices.

 

Assume there will be little if any bullion available when the Next Crash ensues. In 2011, or even 2012; if we had been told we would be able to buy silver at $16/oz (USD) and buy gold at $1,130/oz (USD), then even with our Harper-debauched Canadian dollars, we would have leapt at the opportunity.

 

Now is certainly not the time for precious metals investors to get greedy. Assume that the “bottom” is here. For those who wish to buy; buy now. Because when the phony lows occur in the bankers’ ultra-fraudulent paper markets, it’s almost certain that all you will be able to buy there is paper.

 

 

 

Please email with any questions about this article or precious metals HERE

 

 

 

 

The Great Interest Rate Contradiction

Written by Jeff Nielson (CLICK HERE FOR ORIGINAL)

via http://ift.tt/2gSA7n8 Sprott Money