news – Page 21698

“Central Banks Now Own $25 Trillion Of Financial Assets”

With 85% of Wall Street telling Citi they expect a “dovish hike signal” from Yellen tomorrow, which means a polite request for another BTFD opportunity, even if as BofA says “expectations for a dovish Fed are coinciding with macro strength in the US (most obviously in housing & consumer spending) as well as highest level of wage inflation since Jan’10“…

… here is a quick reminder of where we currently stand from BofA’s Michael Hartnett, from a brief note titled The Liquidity Supernova & the “Keynesian Put.”

* * *

Risk assets are now supported by the new ”Keynesian Put”, the expectation that fiscal measures will be deployed to combat any renewed weakness in the economy/markets (independently of any larger political projects). But asset prices remain primarily supported by excess monetary abundance across the world:

There have been 667 interest rate cuts by global central banks since Lehman;

G7 central bank governors Yellen, Kuroda, Draghi, Carney & Poloz have been in their current posts for a collective 17 years, yet only one (Yellen in Dec’15) has actually hiked interest rates during this time;

Central banks own $25tn of financial assets (a sum larger than GDP of US + Japan, and up $12tn since Lehman);

There are currently $12.3tn of negative yielding global bonds (28% of total);

There is currently $8tn of negative yielding sovereign debt (54% of total).

Do not expect any unwind of this $25 trillion in risk asset support to be unwound any time soon, or perhaps ever, or else…

The Crab Nebula supernova

via http://ift.tt/2bQ1acR Tyler Durden

Services PMI Tumbles To 6-Month Lows: “GDP Growth Is Failing To Accelerate In Q3”

Following Manufacturing PMI’s drop from a two-month bounce, Services PMI also tumbled. Against expectations of a rise from 51.4 to 51.8, Services dropped to 50.9 – lowest since Feb 2016. With the lowest jobs data in 20 months, new orders at their weakest since May, as Markit warns, “GDP growth is failing to accelerate in the third quarter from the weak 1.2% pace seen in the second quarter.”

“but but but , the Services economy will save us…”

Commenting on the flash PMI data, Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at Markit said:

“The ongoing lacklustre economic growth signalled by the flash PMI suggests GDP growth is failing to accelerate in the third quarter from the weak 1.2% pace seen in the second quarter.

“Historical comparisons indicate that the PMI is signalling an annualised GDP growth rate of just under 1% in the third quarter, based on the data for July and August.

“With job creation also waning alongside subdued price pressures (the August PMI is consistent with non-farm payrolls rising by just under 130,000), the survey data will fuel expectations that the Fed will be in no rush to tighten policy again.

“However, as anecdotal evidence from the survey suggests that business activity is being dampened by uncertainty due to the upcoming presidential election, there’s a good chance that the economy will pick up speed again after the vote, leaving a December rate hike on the table.”

Who could have seen that coming? A recessionary collapse in manufacturing led to a services economy plunge? Just don’t tell Obama, The Fed, or CNBC.

via http://ift.tt/2bj0gXQ Tyler Durden

Baltimore Police Deploy Surveillance Tech Designed for the Iraq War

If you’ve visited Baltimore at any point during 2016, there’s a good chance your every movement was tracked by the city’s newest high-tech surveillance program.

The city is filthy with police surveillance cameras, but until this week little was known about the Baltimore Police Department’s latest and most controversial tool for watching residents and visitors: a small aircraft that circles the city on an almost continuous basis, recording the movements of cars, people and everything else.

That aerial surveillance technology is the subject of a fascinating feature story published by Bloomberg Businessweek on Tuesday. Among the most startling details in the piece: the same program now being used in Baltimore—and being pitched to other police departments in other major cities—was originally designed to catch insurgents planting roadside bombs during the occupation of Iraq.

This is how the War on Terror comes home to roost.

More than six months after the covert eye-in-the-sky program was launched, the city is still barely admitting that it exists. The Baltimore Police Department never asked the public for permission—or, heck, even told them it was happening.

The covert eye-in-the-sky is run by an Ohio-based company called Persistent Surveillance Systems and relies on a “sophisticated array of cameras” attached to the belly of a small Cessna aircraft, according to Bloomberg’s Monte Reel. The cameras can capture an area of roughly 30 square miles (about one-third the size of Baltimore) at any given time and continuously transmit real-time images to a group of analysts on the ground. All the footage is saved on hard drives for an unknown length of time.

Police have used the cameras to track suspected criminals and investigate a wide variety of crimes—”from property thefts to shootings,” they claim in the article—but the secret cameras have also been used to keep tabs on peaceful protestors, like those who stood outside the city’s courthouse on June 23 when one of the police officers accused of killing Freddie Grey was acquitted on all charges.

“This is a big deal,” says Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst for the ACLU. “It continues to be stunning that American police forces feel that they can use deeply radical and controversial surveillance systems, which raise the most profound questions about our society and its values, without telling the public that will be subject to these technologies—the public they are supposed to be serving.”

Even now that the program has been revealed by Bloomberg, the city still won’t admit that it’s happening. The police department refused to comment for the Bloomberg story and did not return calls from Reason.

Before Baltimore, Persistent Surveillance quietly conducted a nine-day trial with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in 2012, flying surveillance planes over Compton. The people being watched—including Compton Mayor Aja Brown—weren’t told about it until a year later, and they were rightfully outraged when they found out.

Residents of Baltimore should be equally outraged that this has happened without their consent or knowledge, though perhaps the city’s long history of intrusive surveillance and abusive policing has numbed the response—being observed from the sky certainly beats getting kicked in the chest (literally), right?

Ross McNutt, founder of Persistent Surveillance, tells Bloomberg that he believes the aerial surveillance can help police departments reduce crime by as much as 20 percent, though he also admits that he has no actual data to back-up that claim. The usage of the planes in Baltimore seems like a trial run before the company tries to market the same program to other cities—McNutt says he’s already approached police departments in 20 different jurisdictions.

This is actually the second time in less than a year that residents of Baltimore have found out they were subjected to secret aerial surveillance. In 2015, it was revealed that mysterious planes had circled the city for hours at a time during the violent protests that erupted across the city after Freddie Grey’s death in police custody. The FBI later admitted that those planes were part of a fleet of surveillance planes used by federal law enforcement, but the AP reported that the FBI’s fleet was not equipped for “bulk collection activities.”

At the time, the ALCU noted the existence of Persistent Solutions and wondered if it was that company’s technology at work. It wasn’t, but only a few months later, the Baltimore Police Department allowed Persistent Surveillance to start making similar flights—without telling anyone it was happening or asking permission from city officials and the general public.

As the Bloomberg story makes clear, these flights are very much about bulk collection. Videos are saved on “massive hard drives” and can be accessed at a later date.

There would seem to be some major constitutional issues with police surveillance on such a massive scale, but decades of court rulings have given wide deference to cops’ ability to observe and track anyone and everything—with human eyes or cameras, it doesn’t seem to matter.

If cities can put surveillance cameras on every street corner, if police can use license plate scanners to identify and track vehicles even when they are merely sitting in their owners’ driveways and if cops can fly a drone over a fenced-in backyard to see if someone might be growing marijuana—well, at that point what Persistent Surveillance is doing might be a difference of degree but not of kind. McNutt’s company is just taking the big picture, literally.

Still, this is the first time police have had the ability to surveil a city

In the Bloomberg piece (and in a presentation McNutt gave to the ACLU, in an attempt to gain their approval for his technology—or at least to head-off a lawsuit from them), Persistent Surveillance argues that their technology is actually less intrusive than many forms of street-level surveillance because the resolution is too low to identify individual people. Rather, people are merely “pixelated dots.”

Stanley says that’s a hallow argument, since surveillance systems never stand in isolation. Those “pixelated dots can be followed forward and backward in time as they move around the city. Used in conjunction with street-level surveillance, these aerial observations have the potential to track almost anyone in the city.

“Baltimore, like some other cities, has a lot of ground based cameras, but those cameras do not cover every square inch of the city, and their feeds are not stitched together with an artificial intelligence agent that is capable of using them in a coordinated fashion to follow individuals around anywhere within a 30-square-mile area,” Stanley says.

Despite claims by McNutt that this surveillance technology will only be used to help police solve “major crimes,” there are already signs that mission creep is happening. Persistent Surveillance has used their cameras to track Black Lives Matter protestors who were not accused of any crimes after Baltimore police expressed concern about possible “disruptions.”

Indeed, the whole project is an example of mission creep. McNutt’s company was originally contracted by the U.S. military to help find and catch insurgents making roadside bombs in Iraq, but now the technology is being deployed on the home front—just like so many other leftovers from a decade-plus of war in the Middle East.

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

85% Of Wall Street Expects a “Dovish Hike Signal” From Yellen Tomorrow

Earlier this week, Citi’s head of G10 FX strat Steven Englander conducted a survey among 350 participants (40% from the leveraged community, 21% real money, 23% Citi colleagues, 5% corporate and a smattering of central bankers and others), asking them what they expect from Janet Yellen’s Jackson Hole speech. According to a vast majority, or 85% of the respondents, Yellen will lean toward one 2016 rate hike with hiking risk “overwhelmingly” in December even as September hiking risk is seen as “modestly underpriced.”

He also writes that about 2/3rds expect an indication of a December hike in the speech, “with many more seeing it in abroad dovish context, rather than hawkish“, however respondents see market as expecting just over 50% probability that 2016 hike is indicated in speech. He notes that almost 50% see higher EM as the outcome, but much more split on G10 outcomes.

Englander points out that if she does deliver a dovish long-term message, but signals one 2016 hike, investors expect to:

Buy EM
Buy S&P
Buy10s
Sell 2s
A couple of respondents would buy EM debt or other parts of the US yield curve

Less than 10% think Yellen will endorse a higher inflation/nominal GDP/price level target, but 25% think she will refer to inflation asymmetry. Remaining 2/3rd expect her to stick to 2%

29% think they will change their targets in the next two years (but not necessarily signaled at Jackson Hole); 50% think the targets will change only if there is a recession

With consensus so pronounced, there is substantial risk of pain trades. This is what they are:

An indication of a September hike – she may try and spin as dovish
long-term but it remains so unexpected that it will be hard for her to
be convincing and market will sell off. Pain could be mitigated if she
indicated only one hike in 2016.

Neutral, explicitly dovish or very non-committal on hikes. Investors would see themselves as underweight risk.

The expectation of short-term dovish and long term hawkish indicate that investors are looking to buy on dips if she makes a December hike even more live (although 65% chance of hike priced for December looks pretty live to me already). The risk to this approach is if liquidity is poor and the short term selling leads to a bigger market sell-off, or if buying sentiment becomes so strong that prices move faster than investors are able to hit the buy button.

There is a very strong consensus (85%) that Yellen (85%) expects to do one hike this year, and most expect then next Fed move to be a hike (77%). About 2/3rds are looking for an explicit hiking signal at Jackson Hole. I see these odds as too high – they may hike if everything goes perfectly Yellen. But if you take out September, the benefit from having an explicit lean seems low.

My expectation is that she signals that she is open to hiking but needs to see more data and wants to see the economy running hot. I also think she feels that strong demand growth will improve productivity (more investment) and participation (higher wages induce labor supply), so she will accept a hike if things are going really well and the hike is innocuous, but not if she still feels they are failing on demand side. This will come across as dovish in my view.

Detailed charts:

1. The Fed’s next move

The ultra-dovish tail has practically disappeared. Since early January I have been struck by how many clients and colleagues were convinced that recession risk was high and that the next move was an ease. This no recession view means that USD in G5, and equities are vulnerable if the economy turns south. Long term yields have a ways to move down if data soften.

2. Yellen at JH

Investors on an individual basis think she will signal one 2016 hike, but they think the market as a whole is more dovish than they are. The big difference is between personal and market view on whether she will signal 2016. This may mean that investors overestimate the short term negative reaction if she signals one 2016 hike. Note that there is an overwhelming view that Yellen wants to hike this year at least once (88%). This is why I think if she signals that she is not yet convinced, risk buying will be hand over fist.

3. Buy on dips – FX and first trades

The first chart is the unconditional expectation; the second if she delivers the consensus one 2016 hike, plus dovish. Buy EM stands out in both, but market much more split (and less excited) on G5. I assume that AUD and NZD will trade with EM. Note desire to buy 10s, sell 2s and buy S&P in addition if she delivers the dovish hike goods. I think many investors just want to be sure that she does not surprise on the hawkish side and then will proceed to buy more risk.

4. Changing targets – not so fast

Any sign that she is leaning to a target shift would be massively dovish. She has already talked about running hot and inflation asymmetry – if she makes a big emphasis on this it would probably be dovish as well, effectively in market view pushing the inflation target closer to 2.5% than 2%, even if she doesn’t explicitly say so. That is a “Feddish” compromise – keep the old target in a formal sense but wink and nod to a higher effective target, with a degree of plausible deniability. Casual reference is neutral, but making a big deal about risk management is dovish. Note that Fischer emphasized how close they are to the existing targets, but his hawkishness (which I share normatively) sounds almost quaint these days. That said, if the economy hits a pot hole – hello target change.

via http://ift.tt/2bIEEF6 Tyler Durden

Is The End Nigh? Former FOMC Member Warns “The Fed Is Vulnerable”

Authored by former Fed member Kevin Warsh, originally posted op-ed via The Wall Street Journal,

The conduct of monetary policy in recent years has been deeply flawed. U.S. economic growth lags prior recoveries, falling short of forecasts and deteriorating in the most recent quarters. This week in Jackson Hole, Wyo., the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City hosts the world’s leading central bankers and academics to consider monetary reform. The task is timely and consequential, but the Fed needs a broader reform agenda.

Policy makers around the world neither predicted nor can adequately explain the reasons for current inflation readings below their targets. So it is puzzling that so many academics are pushing to raise the current 2% inflation target to a higher target of 3% or 4%. In the telling of the economics guild, the Fed’s leaders should descend from the Grand Tetons with supreme assurance that their latest monetary policy invention will remedy the economy’s ills.

The Fed’s leaders should not take the bait. Raising the inflation target is a bad idea being considered at the wrong time for the wrong reasons.

A new inflation target would undermine the Fed’s commitment to any policy framework. It would please the denizens of Wall Street who pine for still-looser Fed policy. And households would be understandably miffed to receive a new lecture on unconventional monetary policy—this one on the benefits of higher prices.

A change in inflation targets would also add to the growing list of excuses that rationalize the economic malaise: the persistent headwinds from the crisis of the prior decade, the high-sounding slogan of “secular stagnation,” and the convenient recent alibi of Brexit.

A numeric change in the inflation target isn’t real reform. It serves more as subterfuge to distract from monetary, regulatory and fiscal errors. A robust reform agenda requires more rigorous review of recent policy choices and significant changes in the Fed’s tools, strategies, communications and governance.

Two major obstacles must be overcome: groupthink within the academic economics guild, and the reluctance of central bankers to cede their new power.

First, the economics guild pushed ill-considered new dogmas into the mainstream of monetary policy. The Fed’s mantra of data-dependence causes erratic policy lurches in response to noisy data. Its medium-term policy objectives are at odds with its compulsion to keep asset prices elevated. Its inflation objectives are far more precise than the residual measurement error. Its output-gap economic models are troublingly unreliable.

The Fed seeks to fix interest rates and control foreign-exchange rates simultaneously—an impossible task with the free flow of capital. Its “forward guidance,” promising low interest rates well into the future, offers ambiguity in the name of clarity. It licenses a cacophony of communications in the name of transparency. And it expresses grave concern about income inequality while refusing to acknowledge that its policies unfairly increased asset inequality.

The Fed often treats financial markets as a beast to be tamed, a cub to be coddled, or a market to be manipulated. It appears in thrall to financial markets, and financial markets are in thrall to the Fed, but only one will get the last word. A simple, troubling fact: From the beginning of 2008 to the present, more than half of the increase in the value of the S&P 500 occurred on the day of Federal Open Market Committee decisions.

The groupthink gathers adherents even as its successes become harder to find. The guild tightens its grip when it should open its mind to new data sources, new analytics, new economic models, new communication strategies, and a new paradigm for policy.

The second obstacle to real reform is no less challenging. Real reform should reverse the trend that makes the Fed a general purpose agency of government. Many guild members believe that central bankers—nonpartisan, high-minded experts—are particularly well-suited to expand their policy remit. They fail to recognize that central bank power is permissible in a democracy only when its scope is limited, its track record strong, and its accountability assured.

The Fed is suffering from a marked downturn in public support. Citizens are rightly concerned about the concentration of economic power at the central bank. Long after the financial crisis, the Fed holds trillions of dollars of assets that would otherwise be in private hands. And it appears to make monetary policy with the purpose of managing financial asset prices, including bolstering the share prices of public companies.

With the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Fed claims the mantle of reform. It now micromanages big banks and effectively caps their rate of return. The biggest banks’ growth in market share corresponds to that of their principal regulator. They are joint-venture partners with the Fed, serving as quasi-public utilities. As the dispenser of fault and favor, the Fed is contributing to the public perception of an unfair, inequitable economic system. Real reform this is not.

Most gathered in Jackson Hole will judge that the Fed’s aggressive actions are necessary and wise. Even if that were true, the Fed finds itself in an increasingly untenable position. Congress will tag the Fed for its failures, and the public will assail the Fed for favoritism for its ostensible successes.

In the best of circumstances, the U.S. economy will accelerate to “escape velocity.” In that event the Fed might get the benefit of the public doubt.

If, as is more likely, the economy is closer to recession than resurgence, the Fed is poorly positioned to respond with force, efficacy and credibility. The Fed is vulnerable. Its recent centennial as our nation’s central bank should not be confused with its permanent acceptance in the American political system.

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

Which States Are the Most Free? Let’s Rank Them: New at Reason

NYC Which states in our union are the most tolerant of marijuana and guns? Which interfere the least with your life? Which are likelier to hand out special goodies to politically connected companies? Those are some of the questions answered by economists Will Ruger and Jason Sorens in the 2016 edition of their study “Freedom in the 50 States.”

Their ranking of the states in the U.S. in terms of freedom is based on three public policy dimensions affecting economic, social, and personal freedoms. Sorens, a lecturer in the government department at Dartmouth College, and Ruger, vice president of research and policy at the Charles Koch Institute, scored more than 200 policies, including things such as gambling restriction, trans fat bans, the audio recording of police, occupational licensing restrictions, mandated family leave, and the ability of couples to enter into private contracts, writes Veronique de Rugy.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2bPYdt2
via IFTTT

How to stay optimistic even as terrorists “threaten our existence”

Earlier this week the German government leaked a frightening 69-page memo entitled “Concept for Civil Defense.”

Citing multiple terrorist attacks, cybercrime, and a host of other threats, the report states that Germans should prepare for an event that could “threaten our existence.”

Yikes.

The report proposes a number of mandatory countermeasures, including that Germans should stockpile food and water.

There’s also peculiar language about “civil support for the armed forces” suggesting a possible return to mandatory military service, in addition to potential plans for emergency nationalization of food production and distribution.

We’ve received numerous emails from friends and readers in Germany asking if it’s time to “get out”.

Let’s be honest– most of the West is in the same boat right now.

Despite hundreds of billions spent on homeland security, aerial surveillance, police militarization, and spying on absolutely everyone…

… despite all the laws they’ve passed to award themselves even more authority and destroy citizens’ individual freedoms…

… western governments are absolutely powerless to stop radicalized militants who are willing to blow themselves up.

France, for example, has military troops deployed throughout the country patrolling the streets and airports as if they were in downtown Kandahar.

Yet despite so much security, some lunatic was still able to get behind the wheel of a delivery truck last month and mow down 80+ people like bowling pins.

Terror attacks. Mass shootings. Race riots. Cops killing citizens and citizens killing them right back. Radical politicians on the rise.

Plus Europe has additionally been suffering a full-blown refugee crisis that has turned into an international rape crisis.

Is it time to “get out”? Perhaps.

I know a lot of people are panicking right now and feel like they need to hit the eject button.

But just remember that emotional, fear-based decisions tend to be very bad ones.

Look at the facts and make a rational decision.

In my own case, I “got out” long ago. I’ve been an expat for over a decade, something that turned out to be one of the best choices I’ve ever made.

For the past several years I’ve been spending about half of my year here in Chile (and the other half traveling to dozens of countries, now totaling more than 120.)

Weather in Chile is spectacular, the cost of living (especially if you want to live extremely well) is shockingly cheap.

And on a slice of paradise in Chile’s warm, perennially sunny central region, I’m able to grow all of my own organic food.

In addition to a bountiful organic garden and countless chickens, pigs, sheep, cows, there’s just about every fruit and nut tree imaginable– peaches, plums, nectarines, figs, almonds, apples, pears, apricots, olives, walnuts, strawberries, blueberries, avocados, oranges, lemons, persimmons, cherries, grapes, etc.

We grow rice and wheat (which we turn into organic flour). We press our own olive oil. We have our own wine.

Plus there’s abundant renewable energy and an endless supply of water from underground aquifers.

This is all available in Chile at a tiny fraction of what you might expect it would cost.

My team was recently contacted by a producer at BBC requesting an interview for a piece they’re doing about people “living off the land.”

I thought it was entirely the wrong idea, and not really what I do.

Sure, I live in a beautiful place with abundant food, water, energy, etc.

But just because I grow my own organic food doesn’t mean I’m sitting in a bunker waiting for the end of the world to come.

On the contrary. Despite all these threats and risks in the world, I remain incredibly optimistic.

And maybe part of the reason for my optimism is that I’ve removed myself from the majority of those risks.

Of course Chile has its own problems.

But there’s no angry, hateful, disjointed, bitterly divided society with constant race riots, terror attacks, and mass shootings.

No one hijacks an airplane and threatens to kill all the Chileans.

Instead, I’m basically left alone here to live my life, which makes me feel very, very free.

* Immigration here for talented foreigners is remarkably easy; in another two years, in fact, I’ll be able to apply for citizenship and obtain yet another passport.

There’s also an abundance of opportunity in this country.

Just over two years ago, for example, I launched one of the largest agricultural ventures of its kind in the world, right here in Chile.

Our company has invested tens of millions of dollars in the country across thousands of acres of farmland, and we are now one of the largest employers in the region.

I’m sad to say there’s no way we would have been able to pull off this project in the US now given the absurd level of regulation and inflated land costs there.

But in Chile it’s possible; land and labor costs are so low that you can generate tremendous long-term returns with well-managed agricultural property.

(We’re not the only ones to figure this out– the Mormon Church and Harvard Endowment Fund are among the other foreigners investing in Chilean agriculture.)

I don’t mean to digress; the larger point here is that, yes, there are a LOT of issues to be concerned about in the West.

But the decision to leave shouldn’t be driven by fear. Make it about lifestyle and opportunity.

Chile is just one tiny corner of the world. There are boundless other possibilities. Your own slice of paradise may be out there somewhere.

After all, it’s 2016, not 1816. The technology exists for you to be able to work and generate income no matter where you are in the world.

There’s no reason to be beholden to something as anachronistic as geography anymore.

And if you do decide to stay put, at least consider a Plan B.

Where would you go if you ever did have to hit the eject button?

Don’t wait until you’re packing your bags to start thinking about it.

from Sovereign Man http://ift.tt/2blizs9
via IFTTT

Gold Slammed For Second Day As COMEX Options Expire

With COMEX option expiration looming, gold is being monkeyhammered lower for the second day in a row on heavy volume…

Notably 1300 and 1310 Strikes seem most heavily held…

For now silver is less affected…

With Gold/Silver stabilizing modestly…

via http://ift.tt/2capr1s Tyler Durden

Capital Goods Shipments Collapse Most Since 2009 As Durable Goods Orders Bounce In July (Thanks To Revisions)

Following June's disappointing relapse in Durable Goods Orders (which was revised lower), July's preliminary headline rose 4.4% (ahead of 3.4% exp) – the biggest MoM gain since Oct 2015. However, due to the revisions durable goods orders fell 6.4% year-over-year – the second big annual drop in a row.

Under the hood most of the headline data beat expectations MoM as follows:

New durable goods new orders rose 4.4%, vs Exp. 3.3%
New orders ex-trans. rose 1.5% vs Exp. 0.5%,
Non-defense capital goods orders ex-aircraft rose 1.6%, Exp. 0.3%

… but we note that Capital Goods Shipments non-defense Ex-Aircraft fell 0.4% MoM… which led to a 9.5% collapse in year-over-year core capex unadjusted orders.

However, when applying the now controversial seasonal adjustments, which on a Y/Y basis should not impact the number substantially, we get the following modestly better picture.

via http://ift.tt/2bJ25Nm Tyler Durden

WikiLeaks’ Assange Warns Clinton Campaign: More Game-Changing Emails Loom

Last night Fox News aired part 1 of a 2-part interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Assange noted that they are currently reviewing "thousands of pages of material" related to the Hillary campaign which he described as "significant." When asked whether the new material will be leaked before the November 8th election, Assange responded "yes, absolutely."

“We have a lot of material, thousands of pages of material. There's a variety of different types of documents and different types of institutions that are associated with the election campaign, some quite unexpected angles that are, you know, quite interesting, some even entertaining.”

We now know that Assange planned the timing of the previous leaks to correspond with the Democratic National Convention which has since resulted in the dismissal of 5 DNC officials, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz. We assume this leak will also be timed to maximize it's effectiveness with speculation swirling that it could be released before one of the scheduled debates in October.

When asked whether the next release could be a "game-changer" in the November Presidential election, Assange replied:

“I think it's significant. You know, it depends on how it catches fire in the public and in the media.”

Certainly the traditional media will stand ready to defend it's chosen candidate and has likely already begun preparations for the expected release.

For her part, Hillary is overtly avoiding the press as she hasn't hosted a press conference in over 260 days. Clinton seems to be pursuing a strategy to simply ignore the many controversies surrounding her campaign until after election day. At this point, even the Washington Post thinks Hillary's lack of engagement with the press is "ridiculous":

Jokes aside, it's beyond ridiculous that one of the two people who will be elected president in 80 or so days continues to refuse to engage with the press in this way.

But she does sit-down interviews! And she did a "press conference" with a moderator, um, moderating the questions!

Not good enough. Not when you are running to be president of the United States. One of the most important things when someone is offering themselves up to represent all of us is that we get the best sense we can about how that person thinks on his or her feet, how they deal with unwanted or adversarial questions. Those two traits are big parts of doing the job of president in the modern world.

There's nothing like a press conference to put a candidate for president through their paces. If you don't believe me, just watch how Clinton handled this presser — not well! — when she tried to put the email server controversy to rest.

In the end, Assange is right, of course. No amount of damning information will stop Hillary from the Presidency if it falls on the deaf ears of an electorate that has become so divided that it blindly supports one party candidate or another irrespective of whatever new data may be presented about the quality of that candidate.

via http://ift.tt/2bQXK9t Tyler Durden