'The Canary Is Sick': Blackrock's Fink Says Most CEOs Telling Him 'We're Already In Recession'
'The Canary Is Sick': Blackrock's Fink Says Most CEOs Telling Him 'We're Already In Recession'
Blackrock CEO Larry Fink says most CEOs he talks to say the country is 'already in recession,' and that the 20% market drop in three days will have 'potential ripple effects' on clients, and added that he "still won't rule out another 20% market decline."
?itok=RE-eDSk1
"Are we in a recession?" asked https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2025-04-06/markets-react-to-us-tariffs-china-retaliation?srnd=homepage-americas
TV host Erik Shatzker.
"Most CEOs I talk to would say we are probably in a recession right now," Fink replied, adding that the canary "is sick."
Wow! Blackrock CEO Fink says that we are in a RECESSION right now. https://t.co/gkvXmuNinr
— Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/1909289669482651656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
"The economy is weakening as we speak," Fink told Bloomberg TV, adding that US markets could drop further - and that 62% of Americans are exposed to equities. He also suggested that fed rate cuts are unlikely this year, and that a hike may actually be in store.
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says he is concerned about elevated inflation and higher rates during an interview with Erik Schatzker at The Economic Club of New York https://t.co/WGfDIbZiqL
— Bloomberg TV (@BloombergTV) https://twitter.com/BloombergTV/status/1909293867205111921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
He also says that the administration needs to deliver on the pro-growth policies Trump promised on the campaign trail, such as tax cuts, deregulation and streamlining permitting for big infrastructure projects.
Long Term Buying Opportunity?
That said, Fink sees this as a buying opportunity "in the long run."
BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says he sees the recent selloff in US equities as a buying opportunity during an interview with Erik Schatzker at The Economic Club of New York https://t.co/me3X0eGFCX
— Bloomberg TV (@BloombergTV) https://twitter.com/BloombergTV/status/1909289169160982658?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
When asked by Shatzker whether corporate leaders need to tread more carefully under Trump, Fink deflected, answering that they always need to tread carefully. When pressed further on recent controversies involving Big Law firms who have capitulated to Trump, Fink replied: "Let's move on."
* * *
Grow your own food with https://store.zerohedge.com/wise-food-storage-heirloom-seed-vault-39-varieties-4-500-seeds/?utm_source=zerohedge.com&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=store_promo
Free shipping in the USA.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Mon, 04/07/2025 - 13:22
'The Canary Is Sick': Blackrock's Fink Says Most CEOs Telling Him 'We're Already In Recession'
'The Canary Is Sick': Blackrock's Fink Says Most CEOs Telling Him 'We're Already In Recession'
Blackrock CEO Larry Fink says most CEOs he talks to say the country is 'already in recession,' and that the 20% market drop in three days will have 'potential ripple effects' on clients, and added that he "still won't rule out another 20% market decline."
?itok=RE-eDSk1
"Are we in a recession?" asked https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2025-04-06/markets-react-to-us-tariffs-china-retaliation?srnd=homepage-americas
TV host Erik Shatzker.
"Most CEOs I talk to would say we are probably in a recession right now," Fink replied, adding that the canary "is sick."
Wow! Blackrock CEO Fink says that we are in a RECESSION right now. https://t.co/gkvXmuNinr
— Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/1909289669482651656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
"The economy is weakening as we speak," Fink told Bloomberg TV, adding that US markets could drop further - and that 62% of Americans are exposed to equities. He also suggested that fed rate cuts are unlikely this year, and that a hike may actually be in store.
He also says that the administration needs to deliver on the pro-growth policies Trump promised on the campaign trail, such as tax cuts, deregulation and streamlining permitting for big infrastructure projects.
When asked by Shatzker whether corporate leaders need to tread more carefully under Trump, Fink deflected, answering that they always need to tread carefully. When pressed further on recent controversies involving Big Law firms who have capitulated to Trump, Fink replied: "Let's move on."
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Mon, 04/07/2025 - 13:00
Wedbush's Dan Ives Cuts Tesla Price Target, Says Brand Has Morphed Into A "Political Symbol Globally"
Wedbush's Dan Ives Cuts Tesla Price Target, Says Brand Has Morphed Into A "Political Symbol Globally"
US equity futures plunged early on Monday, with the S&P 500 teetering on the edge of a bear market. The sell-off comes in the wake of President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff blitz, which aimed to reshape global trade in accordance with his 'America First' doctrine. Market tremors are already rippling through individual names —Tesla tumbled another 5% in premarket trading in New York, compounding Friday's brutal 10.5% decline.
On Sunday, Wedbush Securities analyst Daniel Ives (uber bull) told clients that he slashed his Tesla price target by 43%, citing a brand crisis sparked by CEO Elon Musk's involvement with DOGE as the Democratic Party melts down over fraud, waste, and abuse being cut out of the bloated federal government.
"Tesla has essentially become a political symbol globally," Ives said, whose analyst rating on the stock remains "Buy" rated with a $315 target, down from $550. He added: "It is time for Musk to step up, read the room, and be a leader in this time of uncertainty."
Ives pointed out that the possibility of Tesla getting caught in the crossfire of the trade war between Trump and Beijing keeps him up at night—especially since the company generated over a fifth of its revenue in China last year.
Last week, Chinese President Xi Jinping responded to Trump's tariff bazooka on Chinese goods by matching the US' effective tariff rate of around 54%.
?itok=qTLeDSGS
"This will further drive Chinese consumers to buy domestic such as BYD, Nio, Xpeng and others," Ives told clients, adding, "We now estimate Tesla has lost/destroyed at least 10% of its future customer base globally based on self- created brand issues, and this could be a conservative estimate."
On Friday, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/jpms-longtime-mega-tesla-bear-warns-about-brand-damage
— Tesla's most bearish analyst — warned about "unprecedented brand damage" amid the Democratic Party's meltdown over Musk's DOGE involvement.
Brinkman's decade of Tesla "Sell" ratings...
?itok=5MOIae_F
Also, last week, Tesla https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tesla-deliveries-tktktktk-draft-do-not-publish
330,000 vehicle deliveries in the first quarter, missing Goldman, JPM, Morgan Stanley, and UBS's estimates of between 351,000 and 375,000.
?itok=zRZTYNdR
Tesla shares have been halved since their record high on Dec. 17. In premarket trading, shares are down 5%, extending Friday's 10.5% decline.
?itok=6gFR-e_j
As of the latest Wall Street consensus (data via Bloomberg), 55% of analysts covering Tesla maintain a "Buy" rating, 23.3% rate the stock as "Hold," and 21.7% assign a "Sell" rating.
?itok=Gl6871W4
The question becomes: What will Xi do with Tesla if Trump’s trade war escalates from here?
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Mon, 04/07/2025 - 07:45
Gold Price Hike Sparks Surge In Electronic Metal Detecting
Gold Price Hike Sparks Surge In Electronic Metal Detecting
Joe Marihugh caught the gold bug years ago while running buckets of sand through a washer to extract flakes of the precious yellow metal.
He and his wife once ran 50 buckets to retrieve two grams of gold, which was worth nearly $200 at the time.
Since then, he has been using his dependable Minelab Gold Monster 1000 metal detector, with high expectations and his eyes fixed on the ground.
“I love searching for gold. It’s what we do,” Marihugh said as he swept the metal detector’s search coil across the hard, dry soil south of Tucson, Arizona, hoping to discover something valuable beneath the surface.
?itok=01jpGmZT
On March 22, Marihugh and more than 20 members of the https://desertgolddiggers.com/
set out to make profitable discoveries during the club’s annual spring outing for metal detecting.
Like forensic investigators searching for evidence, the metal detectorists worked with focused determination in a close formation under the bright morning desert sun.
“There are people out here that do find gold nuggets,” said club president Ralph Montano. “I tell everybody: you’re not going to get rich” metal detecting, but, “you might get lucky.”
It’s not just the thrill of the hunt that draws metal detector enthusiasts, like the Desert Gold Diggers, to remote locations in search of hidden treasure.
It’s the attraction of discovering precious metals following gold’s recent surge to more than $3,000 an ounce—marking the first time in U.S. history.
At the same time, silver continues rising and is more than $34 an ounce.
Montano told The Epoch Times that it’s not merely by chance that the club has been receiving more inquiries from individuals interested in metal detecting.
?itok=pH7Mt3N_
Desert Gold Diggers President Ralph Montano coordinates the metal club's annual spring outing near Tucson, Ariz., on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
There seems to be a direct connection between gold prices and interest in the hobby.
“We’ve gotten a lot of interest lately. In the last couple of months, we’ve gotten a lot of new members,” Montano said.
“They’re coming out and learning from us about what equipment they will need and what to look for—how to look for the spots that might produce.”
Not since gold reached an all-time high of $1,896 and silver hit $49.52 per ounce in 2011 have precious metals—often considered “barbarous relics” in the financial world—commanded such prices.
A Global Run On Gold
According to investment consultant https://www.troweprice.com/en/us/insights/what-is-driving-gold-prices-to-all-time-record-highs
, there are several factors causing the price of gold and silver to breach the $3,000 high-water mark.
Since late 2022, the company observed that the long-standing inverse relationship between gold prices and real interest rates had become disconnected from the U.S. dollar and stock market.
“This reflects the growing influence of global fiscal policies and currency debasement, a sharp rise in central bank buying, as well as an environment of heightened geopolitical risks,” T. Rowe Price noted.
“Geopolitical risks only seem to be growing. Wars rage in the Middle East and Ukraine. Conflicts between China and its neighbors are a looming threat.
“The coalition of countries hostile to the West will continue to look for ways to decrease dependency on the [U.S. Dollar] as a reserve currency and medium for international exchange.”
Gold.org https://www.gold.org/goldhub/gold-focus/2025/03/you-asked-we-answered-gold-hits-3000-what-comes-next
that gold reached more than 40 new highs in 2024, with an additional 14 highs so far this year.
This significant upward movement is considered “no coincidence,” according to the analyst, who indicated that a potential “perfect storm” is forming for the yellow metal.
“The focus isn’t just the number itself but the pace at which gold has reached it. The jump from U.S. $2,500 [per ounce] to $3,000 took just 210 days—a notably faster move that underscores the momentum gold has built over the past two years.”
?itok=X6xhX7Pq
Joe Marihugh, from Tucson, Arizona, displays a vial containing roughly 1 gram of gold flakes he extracted from buckets of sand through a washer, on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
While the demand for retail gold and silver remains high, more adventurous individuals are discovering the potential riches of metal detecting.
“All detectorists have dreamt of making that one great find at some point,” noted the Massachusetts-based metal detector seller https://www.metaldetector.com/pages/learnbuying-guide-articlestop-metal-detector-finds10-best-historical-metal-detecting-finds?srsltid=AfmBOoqtv1P_cL9JbBeEhVNNUOa59vLXGQs5Qu0yzcelXe3WXa9gm6ux
.
“The most common items found are usually older coins, gold or silver coins, gold nuggets, Roman coin treasures, medieval coins, ferrous metals, Civil War buttons, and other buried treasure or gold objects.”
Another Gold Rush?
Ron Shore, the owner of https://www.windycitymetaldetectors.com/
in Chicago, has noticed a definite increase in metal detector sales since the price of gold surpassed $3,000 per ounce on March 14.
However, this recent “bump” in purchases is not nearly as substantial as the high volume of metal detectors he sold during the “gold rush” of the 1980s. The company was established in 1985.
In January 1980, gold first reached a price of $850 per ounce, marking a historic milestone.
Shore said that his customers are now seeking an economical way that will “help them find gold” as the price of precious metals trends higher.
“There’s a few people that know the cost of gold is up. They want to get into the hobby because of that,” he said.
“But it’s not even close to what it was in the 80s. I mean, there was literally a gold rush on. I had cars pulling up [outside the store.] I couldn’t get gold detectors in the cars [fast enough]—that’s literally how many were being sold.”
Shore said he hadn’t seen anything like it since he began metal detecting in the 1970s.
However, this could change if the value of gold continues to rise, and indications suggest that it will, he added.
In addition to metal detecting, panning for gold remains a popular activity for those interested in traditional prospecting methods, according to precious metals advisor GMR Gold.
?itok=rwtJoISf
Members of the Desert Gold Diggers metal detecting club fan out as they search for buried treasure south of Tucson, Ariz., on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
There are several methods for gold prospecting. The traditional technique of gold panning can be enhanced by using a Rocker Box, also known as a cradle.
This tool is more efficient than simple panning, as it consists of a wooden box with a sieve and a rocking mechanism.
Another method is the sluice box, which features a long trough designed to capture gold particles while directing water and sediment through it.
In areas with scarce water, dry panning is an efficient method that relies on air instead of water to separate gold from the sediment.
“Many enthusiasts enjoy the thrill of panning for gold in rivers and streams, reliving the experiences of the early prospectors,” GMR Gold https://www.gmrgold.com/blog/the-fascinating-history-of-panning-for-gold.cfm
on its blog.
“The history of gold panning is a testament to human ingenuity, perseverance, and the enduring allure of gold.”
Steve Moore, the marketing director of Texas-based electronic metal detector manufacturer https://garrett.com/
, concurred that the rising price of gold has increased interest in electronic gold prospecting.
Moore said that Garrett, a privately held business, could not speculate on the actual increase in sales volume. Nonetheless, “we expect to see nice increases this year in our prospecting detector sales,” he said.
“Garrett will certainly expect additional sales in 2025 of our best prospecting detectors"—the Goldmaster 24k, specifically made for gold nugget hunting, and the Axiom, Moore told The Epoch Times.
Moore said that there is still subsurface gold to be found in many regions, including Australia, the Yukon, Arizona, California, and Nevada.
“One of the keys to finding gold is having a gold-producing region, which requires some research,” he said. “Then they must gain access to a claim where they can properly search.”
?itok=p8C8EgoG
A member of the Desert Gold Diggers metal detecting club searches for buried objects during the club's yearly outing near Tucson, Ariz., on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
Marihugh credited his uncle with sparking his interest in gold prospecting during his youth. In 2010, the Gold Rush series premiered on the Discovery Channel, and from that moment, Marihugh said he was hooked.
“We’ve just been finding gold ever since. I’ve got ounces that I’ve found over the years.”
To illustrate, he presented a vial containing approximately a gram of gold flakes he recently discovered.
Other detectorists search parks where they may find lost rings and valuable objects, he said.
Gold Side-Hustle
“It’s out there—it’s still out there,” Marihugh said. “People lose rings. The kids lose necklaces.”
As gold prices continue to rise, he said: “It’s going to draw more and more people” to metal detecting as a money-making hobby or pastime.
“Ever since gold hit over $2,200, people have been getting out there more and more. I hope it keeps going up,” he said.
Montano said that Desert Gold Diggers formed about 35 years ago, and currently maintains 19 claims for members to search for buried treasure.
“I’m still learning since I started like six years ago” using an entry-level Garrett 250, he said.
Jose Lizarraga, a club member from Tucson, has been metal detecting for the past two years and used a Monster 1000 at the outing.
He believes it was his “beginner’s luck” to discover a gold nugget during another metal-detecting adventure.
“And so what I did is last year for our anniversary, I made it into a necklace,” Lizarraga told The Epoch Times. “That was my anniversary present for my wife. She loves it.”
?itok=bJCSSqzi
Jose Lizarraga, a member of the Desert Gold Diggers metal detecting club, stands with his Minelab Gold Monster 1000 near Tucson, Ariz., on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
Bob Burgette, 62, who hails from Wisconsin, began gold prospecting and metal detecting in his youth.
He currently has six Minelab metal detectors to search for various types of metal objects.
“I had a couple sisters that lived out here, so I came out and visited and I got hooked on looking for gold,” Burgette told The Epoch Times.
“They were more into arrowheads, but I used the same amount of time to go out and prospect in washes.”
One of his best discoveries was an 1886 Seated Liberty silver dime, which he found about a foot deep in the ground.
?itok=lROb_Fc7
Bob Burgette, 62, holds up the 1937 Indian Head nickel he found with his Minelab metal detector during the annual Desert Gold Diggers spring club outing, near Tucson, Ariz., on March 22, 2025. Allan Stein/The Epoch Times
During the club outing, he uncovered a 1937 Indian Head nickel in good condition.
NGC Coin, an independent coin grading service, estimates that these nickels can sell for between 50 cents and $20, depending on their condition. Nickels with mint defects may fetch much higher prices.
Over time, such finds can offset the cost of a metal detector, said Burgette, who paid $399 for the Minelab machine he used on March 22.
“I’ve been all the way over to California and Oregon looking for gold. I found a nice big hefty 3-gram nugget [panning] over there,” he said.
“And when you see something like that, it just shines in your pan, you know—when the sun hits it. So it just gives you that gold fever.”
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 22:10
https://www.zerohedge.com/precious-metals/gold-price-hike-sparks-surge-electronic-metal-detecting
USDA Cites Wildfire Risk, Invasive Insects In Orders To Expand Logging In National Forests
USDA Cites Wildfire Risk, Invasive Insects In Orders To Expand Logging In National Forests
(emphasis ours),
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued a memo on Friday allowing the use of more than 112 million acres of national forests for logging to increase timber production and reduce wildfire risk.
?itok=OwV_WjyA
In the https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sm-1078-006.pdf
dated April 3, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins declared these forests—making up 59 percent of national forests—to be in an emergency situation due to their high risk of wildfires and hazardous tree conditions. The memo was released on April 4.
Rollins stated that the national forests are in crisis due to “uncharacteristically severe wildfires, insect and disease outbreaks, invasive species, and other stressors.”
Those threats—combined with overgrown forests, the growing number of homes in the wildland-urban interface, and decades of rigorous fire suppression—have contributed to a “full-blown wildfire” and “forest health crisis,” according to the memo.
“Healthy forests require work, and right now, we’re facing a national forest emergency,” Rollins said in a https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/04/04/secretary-rollins-announces-sweeping-reforms-protect-national-forests-and-boost-domestic-timber
. “We have an abundance of timber at high risk of wildfires in our National Forests.”
The emergency designation would allow the Forest Service to expedite approval for logging activity in the designated forests, bypassing the usual processes required under national environmental laws.
The memo directs Forest Service personnel to increase timber production by 25 percent over the next four to five years, while also meeting the minimum requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental laws.
In a https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/implementation-secretarial-memo-1078-006.pdf
to Forest Service regional foresters, acting associate chief Christopher French said he will direct regulatory authorities to streamline approval processes for timber production in the designated forests.
French called on regional foresters “to the maximum extent practicable, use existing and new categorical exclusions for timber stand improvement, salvage, and other site preparation activities for reforestation, consistent with applicable law.”
Environmental group Earthjustice has rejected the USDA’s emergency designation.
“This absurdly vast, and poorly justified, emergency determination aims to boost logging and reduce environmental safeguards across most national forestlands in a handout to the logging industry,” Earthjustice legislative representative Blaine Miller-McFeeley said in a https://earthjustice.org/press/2025/earthjustice-responds-to-emergency-forests-directive-that-lays-groundwork-for-widespread-industrial-logging
.
Miller-McFeeley said that cutting down trees that currently serve as “important buffers against climate change” will not help to reduce the threat of wildfires, and that it could cause “significant harm” to forest ecosystems and negatively impact the outdoor recreation economy.
The memo follows President Donald Trump’s https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/trumps-orders-to-boost-logging-and-lumber-production-draw-praise-and-criticism-5820080
directed the commerce secretary to investigate the national security implications of timber imports.
Trump stated that the country’s abundance of timber resources is “more than adequate” to meet domestic needs, but that “heavy-handed Federal policies have prevented full utilization of these resources” and caused it to rely on imported lumber.
“It is vital that we reverse these policies and increase domestic timber production to protect our national and economic security,” Trump stated in his order issued on March 1.
His second order states that the United States’ softwood lumber industry has the practical production capacity to meet 95 percent of its softwood consumption last year. Despite this capacity, the country has been a net importer of lumber since 2016, it stated.
The Forest Service has sold about 3 billion board feet of timber annually for the past decade. Timber sales peaked several decades ago at about 12 billion board feet amid widespread clear-cutting of forests.
Volumes dropped sharply in the 1980s and 1990s as environmental protections were tightened and more areas were put off limits to logging. Most timber is harvested from private lands.
Steven Kovac and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 21:00
Dems "Openly Defending" Hiring Illegal Immigrants After Wash. ICE Raid
Dems "Openly Defending" Hiring Illegal Immigrants After Wash. ICE Raid
ICE raided Mount Baker Roofing in Bellingham, Washington this week as part of an “ongoing criminal investigation into the unlawful employment of aliens without legal work authorization”, https://mynorthwest.com/ktth/ktth-opinion/wa-democrats-defend-illegal/4071615
.
The agency reported arresting 37 illegal immigrants “who had fraudulently represented their immigration status and submitted fraudulent documents and/or information to seek employment.”
Rantz this week writes to point out that Democrats are simply "openly defending businesses hiring illegal immigrants".
ICE described its investigation as targeting “worksite violations and/or the exploitation of workers”—a goal Democrats usually support, unless it involves illegal immigrants.
?itok=HhTxr2Ip
The Washington State Senate Members of Color Caucus (MOCC) condemned the raid, claiming it harms business. “Businesses also face significant challenges, including labor shortages, operational disruptions, and uncertainty in their ability to provide goods and services,” they stated.
Rantz https://mynorthwest.com/ktth/ktth-opinion/wa-democrats-defend-illegal/4071615
that Washington Democrats appear more concerned about businesses allegedly hiring illegal workers than about the violations themselves. They've even funneled millions into helping illegal immigrants avoid deportation and continue working unlawfully.
Illegal workers are often exploited, but Washington Democrats seem fine with that—as long as they can use them to posture as champions of the marginalized. Even if the arrests had involved violent criminals, their outrage would still be directed at ICE, not the lawbreakers.
Roofing isn't one of those jobs Democrats claim Americans refuse to do, so why defend illegal employment? Is it just about securing cheap labor while locals face a 4.9% unemployment rate in Bellingham?
If you're questioning their priorities, the MOCC's statement says it all—and not in a flattering way, Rantz concludes.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 20:30
Trump 2.0: Back To Basics
Trump 2.0: Back To Basics
By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities
Trump 2.0 – Back to Basics
After a tumultuous week in stocks (Nasdaq 100 down 10%, the S&P 500 down 9%, and the Russell 2000 down somewhere in between), it seems like a good time to get back to basics.
Though it hasn’t just been a bad week – the Nasdaq 100 is down almost 15% in the past month and 17% year-to-date.
Credit spreads were also starting to show signs of wear and tear – the Bloomberg Corporate bond OAS went from 93 to 109 and CDX IG went from 61 to 72. Not alarming, but worth watching. The high yield market, which has been so resilient, also experienced some weakness, with CDX HY rising 100 bps, to 439 since March 25th.
Treasuries performed very well, with the 10-year dropping 25 bps to close out the week at under 4%! Though Treasuries did fade off of the best levels of the day when Powell made it clear that he is watching inflationary impacts from tariffs, as well as watching the jobs data (which was surprisingly solid).
Bitcoin was the standout, as it defied recent correlations on Friday and acted as a “safe haven.” My best guess on this, or at least what I’m thinking, is that the tariff policy demonstrated that this administration will stick to their guns, and one of their guns has been to buy crypto to pay off the debt.
But let’s move on to the basics – the Mission Statement and Tariff Basics.
The Mission Statement
We have been discussing what we see as this administration’s “mission” for months. Whether you want to call it a mission statement, desired legacy, or what they were elected to do, I think this sums it up quite well:
Rebuild the American Middle Class. Create a larger, more successful middle class than we have seen in a long time, if not ever. Great goal!
Bring back jobs to America. This is front and center for the strategy. Jobs of all types should be created by various mechanisms. Drill Baby Drill is just one example. We have expected that to expand more broadly into What is Good For National Security Must Be Produced Domestically. I did think that for many of the things, “domestically” would include close allies, but I think it is now purely domestic. From chips to natural resources of all types, not just the extraction of those natural resources, but also the processing.
Reduce the deficit. Deficit reduction is one of the key elements of building a greater than ever middle class. Reduced spending, increased revenue from foreign sources, lower interest rates, etc., all play into reducing the deficit. Which in turn will lower the tax burden on individuals.
I think that accurately reflects the main mission of this administration and two major elements of what they will work towards to achieve it.
Fully on board with this mission but let’s for a moment assume the global economy is a zero-sum game.
In game theory, it is usually safe to assume that a “zero-sum game” should be “win-win” (not impossible to achieve) and “lose-lose” should largely be avoided.
So, in a zero-sum game, if the American Middle Class is to grow and get richer, it benefits the existing middle class and should reach down and help lower income families the most. I don’t think anyone can argue with that.
Well, where will the income/wealth distribution come from?
People in other countries. Clearly the strategy of this administration revolves around the concept that much of the world has been taking advantage of the U.S. for decades. The policies are meant to shift resources/money/jobs from those countries to the U.S. So, one source of transfer will be from outside the U.S. Foreign companies, when importing something to the U.S. to sell, will have to pay the tariffs, yet another way to transfer money from overseas to the U.S., in a way that should hurt the stock prices of those companies. Presumably, other countries will do what they can to mitigate such wealth transfer.
Redistribution within the U.S. The other potential is to transfer wealth within the country. That leaves the wealthy and corporations as pockets of wealth to be redistributed. It would seem at odds with the overall objective of the government to directly take the money (via taxes) from the wealthy (though chatter about taxes for those making above $1 million has emerged). That leaves corporations as the main domestic source. It is unlikely to be through “income taxes,” but it is likely to come down to lower profit margins initially. Whether paying more for workers, more for goods, or paying tariffs, one wealth source will be the transfer of wealth from corporations to the burgeoning middle class. That will likely hit stock prices (it already has, and there are a lot of reasons to think that it will continue), which indirectly transfers wealth from the wealthy. As Chamath Palihapitiya (@chamath on X) points out in a tweet this weekend – the top 10% of households own 88% of the total equities owned by U.S. households. The bottom 50% have virtually no interest in U.S. stocks. Given his success on the investing side, with his All-In podcast, and involvement with this administration, I would take the tweet quite seriously. It would argue, quite strongly, that there is no Trump Put. Which makes perfect sense as the administration if fully on board with the policies. Clearly there is the belief that the brunt of the wealth transfer will come from foreigners, but as investors, we should be aware that some can come from corporations. If the government plans work, that will change over time, as presumably the improving middle class in the U.S. is great for U.S. stock valuations. Also, U.S. domiciled corporations, doing a lot of business in the U.S., have less ability to avoid government actions than (potentially) foreigners have.
I think it is perfectly rational to believe in the mission, and to believe that the policies will be successful, and at the same time still be nervous about corporate earnings and valuations.
We won’t delve into all the policies enacted (and likely to be enacted) to achieve this mission, as it would be too long, and be total guesswork, relative to what we know now about tariffs.
Tariff Basics
We went into a lot of detail on what we considered https://academysecurities.com/macro-strategy-insights/the-new-trump-tariffs/?asmac=d4d98c66-8920-4abd-9370-7f54ab607907
in early February. In our Bottom Line in that report, we published “At the moment, I’m not that worried” and went on to discuss our lack of concern about tariffs, as we understood them back then.
Our view changed on that back in the middle of February as we evaluated the policies as implemented. Leading up to this week, we were already nervous about the combination of geopolitical policies alongside tariffs but were still, quite frankly, shocked by the tariff policy launched in the Rose Garden this week.
As of Friday afternoon, we backed off being negative on U.S. stocks for a trade (see https://academysecurities.com/macro-strategy-insights/nfp-powell-and-tariffs/?asmac=4c4f5671-463d-4fc1-b1ed-8164f0d52acc
).
What does the administration expect tariffs to deliver?
Revenue. The administration clearly states that tariff revenue will be a primary source of reducing the deficit and tax burdens (in line with their mission).
Reviving Manufacturing in America. It is also expected that more will be produced in this country. That U.S. companies will produce more domestically to sell into the U.S., thus avoiding tariffs. Presumably, there is an expectation that facing lower tariffs from other countries (once we reach that stage) will create more sales of things already made in America in other countries.
Since it will take time to build up manufacturing capacity in the U.S. (there is some excess capacity, but nothing on the scale that is envisioned by the administration), presumably the initial benefit will be the income from tariffs, and over time that income will dissipate as manufacturing shifts here (the two goals are somewhat mutually exclusive – either import and get the tariff revenue but not the jobs, or build here and get the jobs, but not the tariff revenue). But in an ideal world, the tariffs pay for a lot up front as the U.S. builds the manufacturing base, creating jobs during the buildout and even more jobs down the road, which will replenish any revenue gap from no longer receiving the tariffs.
QED.
But only if it was that simple. It seems, logically, if it was that simple, someone would have tried it already, successfully. That terms like “comparative advantage” would have dropped out of our language due to lack of use. So, let’s examine some of the risks.
Country A produces a widget that they sell for the equivalent of $100 to a U.S. importer. The U.S. now imposes a 30% tariff on that country/product combination.
That is about as basic as it gets.
As described in more detail in the February report on tariffs, 4 things can happen and in all likelihood, some combination of the 4 occurs.
Currency moves offset some of the tariffs. That was always somewhat tenuous and applied best to inventories already created. But back in February DXY (a dollar-based index) was at almost 110, up from 100 in early September. Now, it has fallen back to 102, so the tariff cannot be offset by currency moves (at least not yet).
The exporter can reduce their price. If the exporter reduces their price by 23%, then a 30% tariff on $77 gets us back to a price of $100. In this case the exporter loses, the importer is indifferent (its total cost is the same), and the U.S. government makes $23. The ideal outcome for the U.S. Prices don’t rise, and all of the pain is extracted from the foreign entity.
How likely is this? If this was the most likely outcome, we’d be off to the races and I’d be pounding the table to buy stocks, but there are many factors that make this outcome unlikely (some of the cost will be taken on by the exporter, but probably not all).
Specialty products. Many things are very specialized and have relatively few sources. The more specialized a product is, the more likely the exporter will not “eat” the tariffs. The longer it would take to find an alternative supplier (which could be measured in years), the less likely they are to bear the brunt of the tariffs.
Comparative advantage. Presumably, there is a reason the importer was buying this product for $100 from this exporter. The combination of quality, reliability, and price likely made this the best source. If there is a similar company making this for $110, then the supplier probably has to reduce their price, to keep the net cost to the importer around $110 (could be a bit higher than that - does the importer really want to open up with a new supplier?). If the next equivalent supplier is $131, why would the exporter cut their price at all? If it is something that can be manufactured elsewhere at below $130, they have to be concerned (maybe no one bothered making it at $115 because it was uneconomic, but now it wouldn’t be uneconomic, so new supply comes on to the market over time).
Many companies took the “anti-China” signal seriously. Many companies have already shifted manufacturing outside of China reading the tea leaves of Trump 1.0, even Biden to some extent, and Trump 2.0. But it wasn’t just China that was tariffed. The likelihood that the $110 producer will also get tariffed, as of the time of this report, is high. Therefore, the $110 item might have a net cost of $130 or higher (depending on the tariff rate listed in the Rose Garden), making substitution more difficult. If you planned for a tariff war, with China as the main enemy, you have been disappointed.
The more countries that get tariffed, the less negotiating they are likely to do. Picking on one or two countries would likely lead to more negotiations, but that doesn’t bring industry back to the U.S., it just shifts which country gets the U.S. business.
GDP matters. For all the tariffs put on, GDP matters for two reasons. One, “good” deals, with small GDP nations, do very little to move the needle. How much can they import from the U.S.? How many high margin, high value things can they afford? How much can they ramp up production to keep costs down (which is irrelevant if the desire is to end manufacturing elsewhere and have it all be domestic)? By the time you are at the 21st country in the world (according to Wikipedia) you are below $1 trillion in GDP. GDP per capita is also quite relevant as it likely correlates to how much stuff they can buy. Vietnam, according to the IMF, is about $17k per person, while Cambodia is $8k (mentioning them as they were quick to reach out and offer a deal). Vietnam, also has an effective tariff rate of just over 5% and an average tariff rate of under 10% (according to Grok), so seems like it should be easy for them to set it to zero as it seems unlikely that tariff rates were the main reason they don’t import much (lack of wealth seems more likely) to avoid the 35% tariffs scheduled for them. China is already pushing back, and what the EU does next will be critical. The more the EU acts as a block, the more likely they are to play it slow.
The importer can reduce margin or pass on higher costs. Whatever the net cost rises by it either hits earnings (the importer eats it) or it is inflationary, as prices increase. Yes, in theory it is a “one-time price increase” but at already high price levels for many things, that might hit hard.
This is already complex enough, but there is one more big question that we are getting mixed signals on – how long will the tariffs stay in place?
If tariffs are viewed primarily as a negotiating ploy two things are likely to happen:
Potential shortages over time as importers are hesitant to order new stock subject to high tariffs that they expect to be reduced if they wait.
The primary benefit from the U.S. won’t be from tariff income, it would have to come from increased sales of U.S. goods, once the tariffs are reduced. How much are U.S. sales into other countries affected by tariffs, vs. other factors? (design, price, regulations, etc.). U.S. jobs will only increase if we have the capacity to meet higher foreign demand (if such demand increases as tariffs are reduced).
If tariffs are going to bring back jobs, they need to be long-lasting.
To meet the administration’s goals (tariff income to replace other forms of tax and to bring jobs back to the U.S.), there needs to be a strong belief that the tariffs will last long enough to cover the cost of building out manufacturing in the U.S. and turning a profit. There is some sparce capacity that can be used right away. There are some things that can (maybe) be retrofitted or developed in months, that could come online. But in the end, many things will take years to build. While the buildout itself will create jobs, will companies believe that the tariff policy will last long enough to turn a profit on building out facilities in the U.S.? Again, some of this occurs naturally and is already in the works, but based on the mission, it is a dramatic shift and will take time. If the commitment to build is there, then the U.S. can get the tariff revenue, and then the jobs, but that is a lot of assumptions.
Basically, if this is just negotiating, the stated goals don’t really work (unless you believe that tariffs really are hitting sales of U.S. made goods globally really hard). In which case, the markets need to start pricing in long-lasting tariffs. The end game could work, but it will not be an easy path, and the world is likely trying to figure out alternatives (so far China isn’t coming to the table, so much as upping the ante).
Everyone is free to see how these scenarios play out, but for now I’m stuck in the camp:
No major deals that make it clear that the administration is making big strides on jobs, so tariffs likely stay to provide the tariff revenue to the government.
Profit margin erosion across the globe, but the U.S. is harder hit than China.
No big boost in jobs on sales of U.S. brands in the near-term (let’s call near-term a year).
Inflation and some shortages in the U.S. causing some angst in the next year.
New trade alliances formed, partly due to tariffs, but also due to concerns surrounding geopolitical posturing in and around the globe.
I cannot get bullish stocks, beyond just for a trade, while I see tariffs playing out this way (as my base/maybe even good case).
Bottom Line
Since we focused on mission/legacy goals and some thoughts on how tariffs might work (I think I laid out a more optimistic case than I expect, and I don’t think it is great for risk assets globally), I wanted to include one chart in this section.
?itok=TRthfJIJ
The “soft” data all points to extreme fear. CNN Fear and Greed Index. AAII Investor Sentiment. You name it, but I look at these 4 incredibly important ETFs and some had almost record inflows into the selling after April 2nd. It is great to be a contrarian, but is the contrarian trade really that it is oversold? That everyone is bearish?
The “hard” data/fund flows don’t seem to support that. If you get bored and have a Bloomberg terminal, find any ETF you want (the more speculative, the better) and append SO (shares outstanding) at the end of the ticker and hit . Massive inflows into risky funds and big outflows out of inverse funds.
Whatever we might think, there is still a lot of belief that stocks are cheap and that the plans will all work out. Down 20% from the highs, it is difficult to argue with that, and I’m long for a trade, but I think we have another 10% downside and when I look at the massive dip buying still occurring, I’m sadly more comfortable with that outlook in the next week or two.
Credit has “joined” the fray as we thought last weekend. That could turn, but as so many other factors (not discussed today, but that we’ve touched on repeatedly) point us towards recession, maybe even stagflation, I don’t think we’ve seen the wides yet.
At some point I will be bullish again on risk. Either I find the scenarios (as I probability weight them) point to better conditions for stocks, or we finally get so oversold that it is truly the contrarian trade to buy.
In the meantime, I expect more downside.
Rates are tricky, as they should be lower, but inflation pressures could be real if the tariffs go ahead as planned (and are semi-permanent). But my bigger concern, which applies both to stocks and bonds, is that the wave of capital repatriation has only just started.
It will be curious to see if (or when) retirees (or those getting close) decide that maybe it is prudent to reduce stock exposure for safety? I don’t think that has happened yet (though, it probably has occurred with Democrats already as the gap between the parties on so many fronts has never been wider at any time that I can think of).
Good luck, I hope I’m right about the bounce to start the week, and I hope I’m wrong that we won’t see enough of a policy shift, or signs of “winning,” to make me bullish beyond a trade.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 20:00
Apple Faces Tariff Turbulence After Trump's "Liberation Day" - What's Next For iPhone Prices?
Apple Faces Tariff Turbulence After Trump's "Liberation Day" - What's Next For iPhone Prices?
Most Asian countries have publicly stated that they will not retaliate against President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs - except for China, which https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/everything-crashing-after-china-retaliates-34-tariffs-us-goods
a 34% increase on all imports from the United States, effective next Thursday.
Notably, two Asian nations, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/vietnam-capitulates-offers-remove-all-us-tariffs
, have signaled a willingness to negotiate, seeking to de-escalate trade tensions and move toward what Trump has wanted: "fair trade."
And why did Vietnam and Taiwan capitulate? Goldman's research desk shows just why.
?itok=SfIvCgHh
published a note Sunday warning that a tariff escalation between Trump and Asian countries could impact the price of America's beloved smartphone: Apple iPhones:
Since the debut of the iPhone X in 2017, Apple hasn't increased the starting price of its flagship model from $999. There have been smaller adjustments, such as tweaking the amount charged for storage and introducing larger models like the 11 Pro and 12 Pro Max. In 2023, for instance, Apple enacted a quasi price increase with the iPhone 15: It boosted the starting price of the Pro Max version by $100 by eliminating the lowest capacity option.
Now, with tariffs hitting Apple's major sources of production, the specter of a price increase is back in a big way. And that's raising the question of how large such a hike might be — and how consumers would feel about it. -BBG
. . .
The current $999 level is a psychological threshold that many consumers probably don't want to cross.
Trump's Liberation Day hit Asian economies the hardest, with most of the tariff shock based along Apple's supply chain:
India, where Apple is increasingly building iPhones and AirPods, will have a 26% tariff.
Vietnam, where the company now makes some AirPods, iPads, Apple Watches and Macs, will be hit with a 46% levy.
Malaysia, where Apple is increasingly producing Macs, will have a 24% tariff.
Thailand, where the company also makes some Macs, will get a 37% levy. Ireland, within the European Union, gets a 20% tariff. Apple produces some iMacs there.
Indonesia, which will soon begin making AirTags and mesh for the AirPods Max headphones, gets a 32% tariff.
The latest tariffs will be 34% for China, bringing its total level to 54%. But the overall picture suggests Apple isn't going to get as much benefit as hoped from diversifying away from that country. Apple will still be taking a hit on iPhones made in India, AirPods made in Vietnam and Macs made elsewhere in Asia.
Trade data via the supply chain platform Sayari shows that Apple suppliers range from India to Taiwan and Vietnam to China.
?itok=sMQ1YwsR
Here's more data from Bloomberg about Apple's complex supply chain throughout Asia.
?itok=ICzUkVJC
The question becomes whether Asian countries capitulate to Trump's tariff bazooka. So far, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/vietnam-capitulates-offers-remove-all-us-tariffs
...
Vietnam, Taiwan Capitulate: Offer To Remove All US Tariffs, Boost Investment https://t.co/mON0xhlKpB
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1908916647529771371?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
But what about China? Apple still relies on the bulk of its supply chain in the world's second-largest economy. With the effective tariff rate on Chinese goods entering the U.S. now at 54%, the question becomes: How long will Washington and Beijing continue to duke it out over trade?
Goldman data...
?itok=qTLeDSGS
In the meantime, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-04-06/will-apple-raise-iphone-prices-in-the-us-after-trump-tariffs-iphone-17-details
asked whether Apple CEO Tim Cook will eat the tariff costs, push suppliers to reduce prices, pass on the expense to customers, or make supply chain readjustments.
Gurman explained that Cook will likely do a combination of the four as Trump's America First policies lead to a reordering of the global economy:
For one, you can bet that the company's procurement teams are pushing component makers and manufacturing partners to offer better pricing. That could help preserve profit margins.
Second, I would imagine Apple is prepared to eat a small percentage of the costs. With a typical hardware margin of around 45%, it has some room to play with if needed.
Third, while the company is still in assessment mode, I expect that Apple will seriously consider iPhone price adjustments. It helps that consumers have probably heard about the outside factors here and won't see it as a cash grab.
Finally, it's likely that Apple will pursue further supply chain changes. That probably won't involve a full-scale return to U.S. manufacturing, but the company will try to make itself less vulnerable to tariffs.
Recall that Cook visited the White House on February 20 to discuss trade policy and tariffs. The question now is whether Apple can maintain the current $999 psychological pricing threshold for the iPhone—or whether Trump will be able to de-escalate the trade war before the next iteration of the smartphone is released. Many questions.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 19:35
"Fundamentally Fascist": Musk Schools Italian Lawmakers On Censorship, Mass Migration, And Regulatory Overreach
"Fundamentally Fascist": Musk Schools Italian Lawmakers On Censorship, Mass Migration, And Regulatory Overreach
Elon Musk joined Italy’s Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, leader of the League party, for an interview during the party’s congress in Florence on Saturday. The world’s richest man explored a broad range of issues, from mass immigration and censorship to tariffs and EU overregulation.
?itok=qZxRpQrI
Musk, who notably exposed massive government-tech collusion to censor free speech after releasing the "Twitter Files," fiercely criticized forces opposing free expression - which comes on the heels of EU regulators https://www.zerohedge.com/political/eu-could-fine-musks-x-1-billion-over-illicit-content-disinformation
to fine Musk up to $1 billion for not curbing alleged disinformation on the platform.
"You can tell which side is the good side and the bad side by which side wishes to restrict freedom of speech,” Musk told Salvini. “The Hitlers, Stalins, and Mussolinis of the world had very strong censorship."
.https://twitter.com/elonmusk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
: "You can tell which side is the good side and the bad side by which side wishes to restrict freedom of speech."
"In pushing for censorship, it makes it very clear that the left is the side against freedom."https://t.co/cjotJfPE3E
— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) https://twitter.com/joshdcaplan/status/1908585686824812985?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
"Restriction on speech and large government is fundamentally fascists. Ironically, in pushing for censorship, it makes it very clear that the left is the side against freedom,” the Tesla and SpaceX CEO added.
Shifting focus, Musk addressed President Donald Trump’s tariffs, advocating for a zero-tariff free trade zone between Europe and North America. He emphasized greater economic integration and urged Trump to ease restrictions on individuals living and working across the two regions.
"I'm hopeful that the United States and Europe can move, ideally in my view, to a zero-tariff situation. Effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America,” Musk said. "That's what I hope occurs, and also more freedom for people to move between Europe and the U.S. If they wish to work in Europe or America, they should be allowed to do so, in my view. That has certainly been my advice to the President,” the billionaire added.
🚨 ELON MUSK: "With the tariffs, that at the end of the day, I hope it is agreed that both Europe and the United States should move to a zero tariff situation, effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America." https://t.co/ZgHTUlgO36
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) https://twitter.com/cb_doge/status/1908562827314405428?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
This week, President Trump imposed tariffs on numerous countries, including a 20% levy on the European Union, prompting EU officials to pledge https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/immense-consequences-eu-warns-countermeasures-world-leaders-respond-us-tariffs
and French authorities to call on domestic firms to suspend investment plans in the United States.
Musk also lambasted Europe’s stifling regulatory environment, calling it a significant obstacle to entrepreneurial success and pushing for sweeping deregulation. "Europe is over regulated. There are too many rules and regulations that make it very difficult to create a company and be successful,” Musk told Salvini. "So I think radical deregulation is necessary in Europe. And if that means leaving the EU, it means leaving the EU,” he added bluntly.
.https://twitter.com/elonmusk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
: "Europe is over regulated. There are too many rules and regulations that make it very difficult to create a company and be successful."
"Radical deregulation is necessary in Europe."
"If that means leaving the EU, it means leaving the EU."https://t.co/Jw02n7b66Z
— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) https://twitter.com/joshdcaplan/status/1908601730821914841?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Finally, Musk delivered a dire warning about unchecked mass immigration, asserting that a nation’s identity lies in its people, not its borders, and that unrestricted inflows could spell a country’s demise. “Mass immigration is insane and will lead to the destruction of any country that allows unfettered mass immigration — That country will simply cease to exist,” Musk warned. “A country is it's people, not it's geography. This is a fundamental concept.”
Elon Musk: “Mass immigration is insane and will lead to the destruction of any country that allows unfettered mass immigration — That country will simply cease to exist... A country is it's people, not it's geography. This is a fundamental concept.”https://t.co/EdWJ4rMjR1
— America (@america) https://twitter.com/america/status/1908557679494054208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni campaigned on a promise to reduce illegal immigration, and her efforts are showing clear results. In 2022, Italy saw 105,131 illegal arrivals, a figure that jumped to 157,651 in 2023 due to worsening global conditions. However, by 2024, the number of arrivals plummeted to 66,317—a nearly 60% decrease, the https://ine.org.pl/en/italys-evolving-approach-to-illegal-immigration-under-giorgia-meloni/
reports.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 19:10
"It Would Be Easy To Keep Pumping Up The Economy, Borrowing A Lot Of Money, Creating A Lot Of Government Jobs"
"It Would Be Easy To Keep Pumping Up The Economy, Borrowing A Lot Of Money, Creating A Lot Of Government Jobs"
By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management
“It would have been easy to keep pumping up the economy, borrowing a lot of money, creating a lot of government jobs,” explained Treasury Secretary Bessent to Tucker Carlson, defending the administration’s policies, while describing the extent to which Biden juiced up the US economy, like a body builder on steroids, appearing strong while destroying his internal organs. (explained here "https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/here-1-trillion-stealth-stimulus-behind-bidenomics
")
“There was no controversy when we were doing all that, but you would have ended up in a calamity,” he said. “If you go back and look at the financial crisis in 2007-08, the economy looked great right up until then. You go back to the end of the dotcom bubble, and the whole credit problem, fraud at Enron and some other companies, the economy looked great until it didn’t.”
.https://twitter.com/SecScottBessent?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1908306903471710212?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
“My advice to every country right now is do not retaliate. Sit back, take it in, let’s see how it goes. Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation,” warned Bessent, Treasury Secretary, the Liberation Day shockwave circling the globe.
Xi Jinping listened carefully. And seeing America declaring economic war on all its allies and adversaries, along with some uninhabited islands, he mapped out his next move. Weighed the pros and cons, calculated the risk/reward, considered his nation’s ability to endure extreme and prolonged hardship relative to ours, and then blatantly ignored Bessent’s advice, matching Trump’s tariffs and limiting America’s access to critical rare earth metals.
“This would be a PERFECT time for Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to cut Interest Rates. He is always “late,” but he could now change his image, and quickly. Energy prices are down, Interest Rates are down, Inflation is down, even Eggs are down 69%, and Jobs are UP, all within two months - A BIG WIN for America. CUT INTEREST RATES, JEROME, AND STOP PLAYING POLITICS!,” posted President Trump on Truth Social, his DJT social media stock price hitting new lows, his meme coin too.
“While tariffs are highly likely to generate at least a temporary rise in inflation, it is also possible that the effects could be more persistent,” said Powell. “Our obligation is to keep longer-term inflation expectations well anchored and to make certain that a one-time increase in the price level does not become an ongoing inflation problem,” continued the Fed Chairman. “We are well positioned to wait for greater clarity before considering any adjustments to our policy stance. It is too soon to say what will be the appropriate path for monetary policy,” he added, directly ignoring America’s President.
“TO THE MANY INVESTORS COMING INTO THE UNITED STATES AND INVESTING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, MY POLICIES WILL NEVER CHANGE. THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO GET RICH, RICHER THAN EVER BEFORE!!!,” posted Trump, America’s friends and foes all wondering how much damage will be done, how much pain inflicted, wealth destroyed, before his policies will of course change.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 18:45
Oh, That Influence Peddling: Times Finds Evidence Suggesting Hunter Acted As Foreign Agent
Oh, That Influence Peddling: Times Finds Evidence Suggesting Hunter Acted As Foreign Agent
For years, some of us have https://nypost.com/2023/06/21/all-the-crimes-that-hunters-ridiculous-plea-deal-missed/
about the Biden family’s multimillion-dollar influence-peddling operation and the Justice Department’s refusal to charge Hunter Biden with being an unregistered foreign agent. Now, years later, the New York Times has found evidence suggesting that Hunter Biden was acting as a foreign agent as early as the Obama Administration, when his Dad was Vice President.
?itok=ciUw6IDZ
Last August, the New York Times ran a https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2024/08/14/nyt-by-golly-hunter-did-try-to-sell-influence-during-obama-biden-admin-n3793126
with damaging new details:
Hunter Biden sought assistance from the U.S. government for a potentially lucrative energy project in Italy while his father was vice president, according to newly released records and interviews.
The records, which the Biden administration had withheld for years, indicate that Hunter Biden wrote at least one letter to the U.S. ambassador to Italy in 2016 seeking assistance for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, where he was a board member…
The State Department did not release the actual text of the letter.
That is precisely what many of us have been writing about in asking why Hunter was not charged with being an unregistered foreign agent as was the case under cases from https://jonathanturley.org/2022/04/13/hunter-biden-likely-to-be-charged-under-fara-if-the-justice-department-applies-the-mueller-standard/
.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) covers anyone acting as “https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/frequently-asked-questions__;!!F0Stn7g!B2-kg6O_BrCPZyCdY4C2Fc-UndWfQcI1slyBLn52VRuCXYOxnSXFaI5_azOJsJQPqbilG6jsOWoweW5q24M$
,” including but not limited to (1) attempting to influence federal officials or the public on domestic or foreign policy or the political or public interests in favor of a foreign country; (2) collecting or disbursing money and or other things of value within the United States; or (3) representing the interests of the foreign principal before U.S. Government officials or agencies.
It is sweeping. So is the definition of what a “foreign principal” encompasses, https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.justice.gov/nsd-fara/frequently-asked-questions__;!!F0Stn7g!B2-kg6O_BrCPZyCdY4C2Fc-UndWfQcI1slyBLn52VRuCXYOxnSXFaI5_azOJsJQPqbilG6jsOWoweW5q24M$
“a foreign government, a foreign political party, any person outside the United States (except U.S. citizens who are domiciled within the United States), and any entity organized under the laws of a foreign country or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.”
As I previously wrote, https://nypost.com/2021/10/13/rep-adam-schiff-recalls-painful-robert-mueller-testimony/
Republican counsel Victoria Toensing and others.
However, the Justice Department and Special Counsel David Weiss seemed to tie themselves into knots to avoid tripping the wire on FARA even as it discussed Hunter’s work for foreign clients.
The government also resisted FOIA requests from the Times and other media. Vogel wrote:
The request was initially filed under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, in June 2021. After nearly eight months, the State Department had not released any records, and The Times sued. About 18 months later, the department moved to close the case after releasing thousands of pages of records — none of which shed light on Hunter Biden’s outreach to the U.S. government.
The Times challenged the thoroughness of the search, noting that the department had failed to produce responsive records contained in a cache of files connected to a laptop that Mr. Biden had abandoned at a Delaware repair shop. The department resumed the search and periodic productions, but had produced few documents related to Mr. Biden until the week after his father ended his re-election campaign and endorsed Vice President Harris for the Democratic nomination.
Now we have a copy of https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/04/us/politics/hunter-biden-burisma-letter-italy.html
that gives us an insight into the evidence buried for years:
The State Department last week released a letter that Hunter Biden wrote while his father was serving as vice president in which he sought assistance from the U.S. government for the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
In the https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/ed402b4dfb83ae19/c4dd7085-full.pdf
on Burisma letterhead to the U.S. ambassador to Italy, Mr. Biden requested “support and guidance” in arranging a meeting with an Italian official to resolve regulatory hurdles to geothermal energy projects Burisma was pursuing in the Tuscany region…
The letter requested help arranging a meeting between Burisma officials and Enrico Rossi, the president of the Tuscany regional government at the time, “to introduce geothermal projects led by Burisma Group, to highlight their social and economic benefits for local communities and develop a common action plan that would lead to further development of the Tuscany Region.”
How could any Justice Department official, let alone a Special Counsel, read that letter and not see the glaring disconnect between the handling of the case involving Joe Biden’s son and others like Manafort?
The letter references a trip on which Hunter, as was his pattern, used official travel with his father to make these business connections. The letter mentions meeting a key ambassador on Air Force Two as he seeks assistance for his client.
The ambassador then sent a follow-up letter saying he knew the president of Tuscany and identified a Commerce Department official working at the US embassy to “see where our interests may overlap.”
It was another example of alleged influence peddling through his father and work for a foreign client in lobbying the government.
During this period, the Justice Department seemed to be on a hair-trigger for FARA charges. Yet, when it came to Hunter Biden, the entire department seemed composed of legal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BFY9IkUt8w
.
Many in the media attacked those of us who have been writing about this corruption stretching back to the Obama Administration. Many simply insisted that there was no evidence while taking no steps to find out. While the media was unrelenting in investigating Trump allegations of Russian collusion and business improprieties, it took a largely passive stance in pursuing this story.
Even the New York Times, which can be credited with pursuing this FOIA information, did comparably little with the ample evidence of corruption by the Bidens in securing millions through influence peddling.
What remains is a corruption scandal involving not only what the Bidens did but also what the Justice Department did not do over this extended period. It appears to heed the advice not of whistleblowers but politicians like former Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) that “everybody needs to back off” the influence-peddling story.
Of course, Joe Biden https://jonathanturley.org/2024/12/04/the-pocket-pardon-strategy-and-the-final-corruption-of-the-biden-administration/
. What was most notable, however, was that he not only pardoned him for any crimes from human trafficking to tax evasion, but did so for a period running from Jan. 1, 2014 to Dec. 1, 2024.
This letter explains why such a sweeping, extended pardon was needed. Yet, in the end, the greatest indictment from this scandal was of the Justice Department itself.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 14:00
Israeli Army Organizes 'Hiking Tours' For Jewish Settlers In Occupied Syria
Israeli Army Organizes 'Hiking Tours' For Jewish Settlers In Occupied Syria
The Israeli army is organizing hiking tours for civilians inside recently occupied Syrian territory during the upcoming Passover holiday, https://www.ynetnews.com/travel/article/h1nkpmn6je
to Israeli media reports.
The tours, coordinated by the Israeli military's Northern Command and 210th Division alongside the "Friends on Excursions" group, are supported by the Golan Heights Settlements Council and the Israeli Nature and Parks Authority.
?itok=oNEJsrwn
Participants, who must receive special permits, will be escorted by Israeli troops as they travel up to 2.5 kilometers into Syrian land, near the village of Maaraba. Tour highlights include visits to Wadi al-Ruqad (a tributary of the Yarmouk River), the Hejaz Railway Tunnel, and the Shebaa Farms – a contested strip of Lebanese territory occupied by Israel at the base of Mount Hermon.
Though registration has closed, the army said additional tours may be offered depending on the security situation. The excursions mark the first Israeli civilian presence in areas of Syria recently taken over by Israeli forces following the fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December.
In recent months, Israel has intensified airstrikes on Syrian military bases and moved beyond the Golan Heights' demilitarized buffer zone, occupying strategic areas like Mount Hermon in violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement. Initial Israeli security plans reportedly envisioned a 15-km demilitarized zone and a broader 60-km zone of influence inside Syria.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has since called for the complete demilitarization of southern Syria, declaring that Israeli troops would remain in the Golan buffer zone and Mount Hermon indefinitely to block Syrian army access south of Damascus.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has openly https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241013-smotrich-israels-future-is-to-expand-to-damascus/
support for expanding Israel's borders beyond Palestinian territories, hinting at ambitions for a "Greater Israel" encompassing parts of neighboring Arab countries, including as far as Damascus.
In a French documentary, Israel: Extremists in Power, Smotrich endorsed a Jewish state governed by Jewish values and smiled when asked if Israeli sovereignty should extend beyond the Jordan River.
Chinese woman vlogger travel to see Israel newly occupied Syrian territory near Golan Heights.
Her Syrian driver told her that Israeli has setup road blocks and snipers to keep Syrians from visit what was still unoccupied Syria 1 month ago. https://t.co/emR3TwTQc2
— Carl Zha (@CarlZha) https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1871042633231208859?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
He referenced a biblical prophecy about Jerusalem stretching "until Damascus." While the Israeli government maintains its official goal as defeating Hezbollah, Smotrich's comments—and settler support—raise concerns about broader expansionist intentions in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and beyond.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 07:35
"Free Marine Le Pen!" — Trump Slams European 'Lawfare' Tactics In Fiery Defense Of French Nationalist Leader
"Free Marine Le Pen!" — Trump Slams European 'Lawfare' Tactics In Fiery Defense Of French Nationalist Leader
U.S. President Donald Trump came to the defense of French far-right leader Marine Le Pen on Friday, denouncing legal actions against her as part of what he described as a broader effort by European leftists to silence political opposition through “lawfare.”
?itok=RlqOWThF
In a post on Truth Social, Trump likened Le Pen’s legal troubles to his own, claiming that left-leaning politicians and lawyers are using the justice system to target their conservative opponents.
“The Witch Hunt against Marine Le Pen is another example of European Leftists using Lawfare to silence Free Speech, and censor their Political Opponent, this time going so far as to put that Opponent in prison,” Trump wrote.
Without claiming personal ties to Le Pen, Trump expressed admiration for her perseverance over the years, saying she “suffered losses, but kept on going.”
He characterized the charges against her as trivial, referring to them as a “minor charge that she probably knew nothing about” and dismissing it as a “bookkeeping error.”
On Monday, a Parisian court sentenced the de facto leader of France’s right-wing National Rally to a five-year ban on running for political office and a four-year jail term, two of which were suspended, after she and other party colleagues were found guilty of misappropriation of EU funds.
Investigators accused Le Pen and others of managing the illegal use of European subsidies between 2004 and 2016, when she served as an MEP. They stated that instead of working in Strasbourg, assistants were often working for Le Pen’s party in a domestic capacity.
Notably, the news was announced right as Le Pen led the https://rmx.news/article/le-pen-beats-all-other-presidential-candidates-with-ease-in-final-poll-before-expulsion-court-hearing/
, as Remix News reported earlier this week.
Trump drew parallels between Le Pen’s legal situation and his own experiences with investigations in the United States, accusing American lawyers and politicians of attempting to undermine him for nearly a decade.
“It is all so bad for France, and the Great French People, no matter what side they are on,” Trump concluded, ending his post with a rallying cry: “FREE MARINE LE PEN!”
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sun, 04/06/2025 - 07:00
Can We Fix Our Demographic Doom Loop?
Can We Fix Our Demographic Doom Loop?
https://amgreatness.com/2025/04/02/can-we-fix-our-demographic-doom-loop/
Throughout the developed world, birth rates have crashed.
But thehttps://www.amazon.com/Population-Bomb-Paul-R-Ehrlich/dp/1568495870
that author Paul Ehrlich warned us about in the 1970s still exists; it’s just confined to the nations with the lowest per capita income. The correlation is almost perfect. The average number of children per woman in extremely poor nations is still extremely high.
?itok=R1-ycNsC
For example,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate
is estimated to rise to 2.5 billion and is not estimated to level off until 2100 at nearly 4 billion people.
There are
. From China (1.2 children per woman), Korea (0.9), and Japan (1.3) to Germany (1.5), Italy (1.3), and the United Kingdom (1.6), populations are on track to descend by 50 percent in at most two generations. The European numbers are only slightly better than the Asian numbers because of immigration.
Because of the sensitive nature of the information, it is difficult to get reliable statistics on the birth rates of indigenous European women. But according to official data from the German government, nearlyhttps://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/zahlen-und-fakten/soziale-situation-in-deutschland/61646/bevoelkerung-mit-migrationshintergrund/
is still reported as having “German origin,” it is clear that immigrant birthrates are far higher than the birthrates of indigenous German women.
This pattern repeats itself throughout the European nations and nations of European origin. According to the Office of National Statistics in the United Kingdom, thehttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/babynamesenglandandwales/2023
white births.
What these demographic trends portend for our future is central to every major issue we face. Can we maintain economic health if we accept a population in terminal decline? So far, the Asians are betting they can, relying on automation and AI to fill the labor gaps. Can we maintain cultural stability if we import Africans and Moslems to have babies since we don’t want to anymore? That’s the bet the European nations are making.
But there is an even more fundamental question that ought to be the topic of massive public debate, without stigmatizing the participants or restricting the theories offered up. Why don’t women in developed nations want to have babies anymore?
Answers to this question typically travel into safe spaces.
It’s economics: the cost of living is too high. Or the slightly conspiratorial but increasingly mainstream explanation that endocrine disruptors in our food and water have lowered the fertility and the libido of men and women alike. And, of course, the likely possibility that social media has spawned a younger generation that is isolated, socially stunted, and intimacy challenged.
To some degree or another, all of these explanations are true, but they ignore countervailing facts: Our nations are now filled with subcultures for whom none of these reasons apply to nearly the same effect. What are they doing that we stopped doing? And here is where we dive into the topics and theories that one may risk career and political suicide to utter.
There is a pundit on X who goes by the namehttps://x.com/ItIsHoeMath
on his X account that squeezes several inflammatory explanations for low female fertility into 2 minutes and 14 seconds. Something this succinct deserves analysis, despite being horrifically biased, sexist, etc., etc., etc., because even if he is overstating his case and ignoring other factors and being deliberately offensive, he is covering the forbidden bases that need to be covered. If there were more honest scholarship available on these topics, we might by now have a more sanitized and more credible compilation. But we don’t. So here goes.
The video opens with a clip of a woman who claims women don’t need men anymore. To which “hoe_math” goes to work. He begins by saying that women’s need for men is not gone, just more indirect now, stating that “men have always been between women and the real world.”
Relying on hand-drawn pictographs, he shows seven women in pink dresses, safe inside a circle that is shielded by men who are getting killed (denoted by being crossed out with red X marks), protecting them from danger. “Your office job is not the real world,” he continues. “Men face danger and build things in order to create a safe space for women. You just don’t understand that because you’re too comfortable… If all men stopped working right now, we would all die. That’s because men make all the food and build all the houses and the walls.”
If the first half of the video asserts that that base reality still exists, requiring the presence of men, the second half explores the consequences of denying that assertion. Speaking about women, he says, “And then you look around and go, ‘Hey, men have more than us. No fair,’ so you go to the government, which writes some laws for you that make you equal, and then you are disgusted by men who are equal to you.” He then ventures his primary argument, saying, “So without equality laws, it’s very easy for women to find men they respect, and with equality laws, it’s very difficult.”
Moving from the impact of financially empowering women to the impact it has on men, he states, “And then everyone tells these men they are worthless,” while in the video placing a “not people” card over the first seven levels of men on a pictograph that has columns of men and women ranked from 10 down to 1. He then says the men who are deemed worthless decide not to work anymore and instead turn themselves into a Peter Pan type character that rejects personal responsibilities and refuses to grow up.
Whatever else you may say about this video, and despite its glib oversimplifications, it has too much substance to be dismissed. Ahttps://home.uchicago.edu/~hortacsu/onlinedating.pdf
in determining male attractiveness to women. It found that for a man 5′ 6″ in height to be as attractive as a man 6′ tall, the shorter man would have to earn $175,000 per year more than the six-footer. For a 5′ 8″ man, the gap he would have to fill drops to $138,000 per year. A man only 5′ 2″ tall would have to earn a whopping $269,000 per year more than the six-foot man to be considered equally attractive to women.
Income matters. Ahttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12110-022-09422-2
published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior found that women consistently rated men with greater income as more attractive and that these findings “tally with a much broader corpus of scientific work which found high-status men were considered more attractive by women.”
If women aren’t attracted to men who make less money, that would help explain why they aren’t marrying these men and having children. But also relevant to the decline in births are two myths that are slowly disintegrating despite ongoing mainstream denial.
The first is the familiar trope that women only make 83 cents for every one dollar earned by men. Not true.
When normalizing for job type, qualifications, and hours worked, thehttps://x.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1903843991986258154
all but disappears, thus diminishing the pool of eligible males.
The second myth is that women are more likely to find fulfillment in careers than in having children. Also not true.
Ahttps://x.com/BradWilcoxIFS/status/1903415603592864149
aged 18-55 found that married women with children were twice as likely to be “very happy” as unmarried women with no children and only half as likely to be “not too happy.” As long as this myth persists, however, women are impelled to choose career over children.
These findings all come with uncomfortable implications.
Are women choosing to be alone because they have an innate need to only be with a man who is more able to provide for them than they can provide for themselves, and there are no longer enough of those men to go around? Are the only cultures where women still have babies above a replacement level those cultures that discourage women from having education and careers?
The cost of living, toxins in the environment, and the isolating impact of technology are all playing a role in the catastrophic decline in birth rates in developed nations. But there are also profound andhttps://amgreatness.com/2024/11/20/give-me-fertility-or-give-me-death/
, we risk losing everything. The heritage we have painstakingly built over millennia may be erased because we didn’t want to talk about it. Babies don’t yet come in bottles. Women either get pregnant and give birth to them, or we go extinct.
For decades, fear of being called racist has suppressed honest debate over mass immigration. Similarly, fear of being called sexist prevents honest debate over why there is a population crash and what to do about it.
* * *
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 23:20
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/can-we-fix-our-demographic-doom-loop
Follow The Science: Why Peter Marks Was Asked To Leave The FDA
Follow The Science: Why Peter Marks Was Asked To Leave The FDA
,
On Friday, Dr. Peter Marks announced his resignation from the https://www.fda.gov/
(FDA) as Director of CEBR (Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) citing differences with Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kennedy regarding vaccines. The New York Times, Washington Post, and other media outlets such as STAT News breathlessly reported that “FDA’s top vaccine scientist had been pushed out.” We have been told that science is at risk. The irony of these reports is that Marks didn’t resign and is not a vaccine scientist. Dr. Marks was asked to leave and then subsequently wrote that he did not want to become “subservient to [Secretary Kennedy’s] misinformation and lies.”
?itok=JRo9BRCr
Peter Marks is not a hero of the resistance but instead has been subverting the scientific process at FDA for years.
The media proclamation that Dr. Marks’ is “FDA’s top vaccine scientist” is ironic because he decided to give himself that position. Marks is a physician but has no clinical or scientific training in vaccines or immunology. Dr. Marks trained as an oncologist, a field far from the important and complex area of vaccine biology. At FDA in 2021, Dr. Marks removed top career vaccine scientists so he could force through the approval of the COVID vaccine to meet an arbitrary Biden administration deadline. He also declined to convene the FDA Vaccine Advisory Committee to review his decision. These events are clearly outlined in the June 2023 House Judiciary Hearings. Marks ousted Dr. Gruber and Dr. Krause, the top scientists at the Office of Vaccine Research, due to “intransigence” of these real vaccine experts to not ram through the approval of the vaccine. Drs. Gruber and Krause had voiced concerns that they needed more time to understand the safety of the vaccine especially as it relates to inflammation of the heart, now a well known and accepted toxicity of the COVID vaccine. Marks approved the use of the vaccine in children despite the known fact that children have an extremely low risk of serious health effects of COVID-19 infection and yet a known significant increased risk of serious vaccine related toxicity.
On at least three additional, documented occasions during the Biden administration as Director of CBER, Marks disregarded the opinions and expert advice of long-time career scientists to advance his own dangerous agenda. In addition to ignoring and overruling FDA’s top vaccine scientists during the pandemic, Marks also overruled FDA career scientists and supported the approval of the Alzheimer’s drug ADUHELM; a decision later overturned. In 2023, he overruled his own staff scientists amid their concerns and those raised by an FDA Advisory Board to grant approval of ELEVIDYS, a gene treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Furthermore, in 2024 Marks expanded the approval of ELEVIDYS despite FDA staff objections and without FDA Advisory Committee input.
As tragic evidence of Marks’ failed judgement, just 2 weeks ago, the company that markets the therapy ELEVIDYS announced that a treated patient died of fulminant liver failure. Marks overruled his own career staff and experts to drive through a risky and unproven therapy that has now killed a patient. This tragedy should not have happened. After the initial FDA approval, the company conducted a subsequent trial which failed to meet the primary efficacy endpoint. On top of that, ELEVIDYS has proven toxicity including liver failure (22% of patients) and increase in serious adverse events. Despite the lack of proven efficacy and the concerning toxicity profile, Dr. Marks rammed through the initial ELEVIDYS approval and the full approval in June of 2024 against the counsel of his staff and the expert panel. While advocates point to the need for new therapies in severe debilitating diseases such as DMD, giving patients and families hope on a toxic therapy that does not provide a clinical benefit rises beyond simple incompetence. A patient died needlessly, and others have been harmed due to this incompetence.
Dr. Marks also failed to protect public health when he overruled career FDA scientists and supported the approval of the Alzheimer’s treatment AUDHELM, a controversial approval that was subsequently overturned. ADUHELM was approved in June 2021 despite strident objections from FDA staff and against the recommendations of an Advisory Board. In fact, two prominent members of that advisory board resigned in protest of the decision. These members cited a lack of clear efficacy and the risk of serious toxicity including brain swelling and bleeding that can be life threatening. These events led to a congressional investigation which found that FDA had “unusually close” interactions with Biogen, the AUDHELM sponsor and applicant. In January 2024, Biogen decided to remove ADUHELM from the market after confirmatory trials failed to show patient benefit. So, Dr. Marks again supported a dangerous and ineffective therapy that cruelly gave patients hope and provided nothing but risk and cost to Americans.
Both the ADUHELM initial approval and the ELEVIDYS approvals demonstrate that ignoring basic tenants of the use and interpretation of clinical trial data can be very damaging to public health. By ignoring these well-tested tenants of FDA review and approval, Marks endangered patients, gave false hope to those in desperate need and cost vast amounts of money that our health case system can ill afford. It cannot be overstated how destructive this practice is to drug development. This uneven application of basic clinical trial data interpretation calls into question the impartiality and credibility of the FDA. This is particularly relevant now as a patient who otherwise could have lived many more years died from an expected toxicity. And we have yet to fully determine the harm caused by Dr. Marks decision to remove the most experienced and trusted vaccine scientists that simply wanted more time to understand the, now proven, risks of the COVID vaccine.
While Dr. Peter Marks may try to claim differences with Secretary Kennedy on vaccines and the legacy media try to paint Marks as the FDA hero, the real reason he was terminated is that he made bad decisions that were contrary to FDA long-standing policies and which ran counter to the evaluations of professional career staff at FDA. Thanks to Dr. Marks’ terrible decisions, we are left with a drug that has no proven benefit and that just killed a young patient, a vaccine that is not completely safe is being administered to children that have no significant risk of harm from the underlying infection, and an overburdened healthcare system that had to pay billions for another unproven, harmful therapy. Advocates for Dr. Marks claim that he has acted to help patients with life-threatening conditions which have no alternative treatments. But in reality, he catered to industry and hurt patients. Of course, we should strive to advance safe and effective therapies for such conditions, but we should not approve ineffective and dangerous therapies simply to put something out on the market. Unfortunately, Dr. Marks has repeatedly disregarded long-held FDA policy that is in place to protect patients. That is malpractice not heroism.
George F. Tidmarsh, MD, PhD, Stanford University School of Medicine, Adjunct Professor, Pediatrics and Neonatology.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 14:00
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/follow-science-why-peter-marks-was-asked-leave-fda
Tesla's 1950s-Style Diner In Hollywood Nears Completion
Tesla's 1950s-Style Diner In Hollywood Nears Completion
New photos reveal that Tesla's 1950s-inspired drive-in Supercharger station, currently under construction at 7001 Santa Monica Boulevard in West Hollywood, is nearing completion. This station could serve as a prototype for a nationwide rollout, offering Tesla drivers a massive upgrade over existing, dull Supercharger stations. The drive-in Supercharger concept can be likened to a 'Buc-ee's' for electric vehicles.
The West Hollywood Supercharger station is the next generation of Tesla charging stations, featuring a restaurant, a drive-in movie theater, and dozens of charging bays. Tesla seems eager to spice up the dull charging experience by blending the 1950s/60s Americana style with cutting-edge technology.
https://x.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1907491109204361571
shared new images providing an update on the construction of the drive-in Supercharger station, with the photos suggesting that the grand opening could be just months away, if not sooner.
?itok=Zmz55AlJ
Tesla Hollywood Diner update: https://t.co/B7OGCFB7e9
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1907491109204361571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
A brief note on diners in the 1950s and 1960s: These places were social hubs and gathering spots that became a significant part of life in the post-World War II era. They symbolized the booming middle class, contributed to the car culture's explosion, and played a key role in shaping media and pop culture. This all plays into Musk and Tesla's broader mission to revive Americana.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 09:55
https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/teslas-1950s-style-diner-hollywood-nears-completion
New UK Internet Policing Law Targets US Online Forums
New UK Internet Policing Law Targets US Online Forums
Online forums based in the United States that rely on First Amendment protections are getting caught up in internet regulations in the UK, where they now risk being blocked under recent legislation.
?itok=PAu2BUAN
Hailed by the British government as the world’s first online safety law, the Online Safety Act (OSA) became law in October 2023, but the duties related to the regulation of so-called https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer
took effect on March 17.
The law requires online platforms to implement measures to protect people in the UK from criminal activity, with far-reaching implications for the internet.
Gab, an American social media network, positions itself as a champion of free speech.
Gab CEO Andrew Torba said in a March 26 social media https://x.com/BasedTorba/status/1904947417637634176
that the UK government has demanded that it submit to “their new censorship regime under the UK Online Safety Act.”
Gab—which has no legal presence in the UK—was informed in a letter from UK regulator Ofcom on March 16 that it falls specifically within the scope of the law and must comply.
Under the OSA, sites that allow user interaction, including forums, must have completed an illegal harm risk assessment by March 16 and submitted it to Ofcom by March 31.
Ofcom warned that noncompliance could result in enforcement action—including massive fines of 18 million pounds (more than $23 million), or 10 percent of a company’s annual revenue—or even court orders to block access in the UK.
OSA was designed to ensure tech companies take more responsibility for user safety.
Under the act, social media platforms and other user-to-user service providers must proactively police harmful and illegal content such as revenge and extreme pornography, sex trafficking, harassment, coercive or controlling behavior, and cyberstalking.
Gab has refused to comply with the OSA.
“We will not comply. We will not pay one cent,” Torba said.
In a statement to The Epoch Times, Gab said that this “law operates outside their jurisdiction.”
Gab’s lawyers said that their client is a U.S. company with no presence outside of the United States.
“The most fundamental of America’s laws—the First Amendment to our Constitution—ensures Gab’s right to provide a service that allows anyone, anywhere, to receive and impart political opinions of any kind, free from state interference, on its US-based servers,” they said in a statement last month.
In 2018, Gab was https://www.reuters.com/article/business/gabcom-fights-to-stay-online-after-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting-idUSL2N1X809T/
by payment processors after 46-year-old Robert Bowers allegedly posted anti-Semitic comments on the platform just hours before shooting to death 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue.
“I was horrified that this terrorist, this alleged terrorist, was on our site,” Torba said at the time.
Gab also refused to comply with legislation in other countries.
The company claimed it received a data request from the German government concerning a user who, in 2022, made a comment that was deemed offensive by a German politician.
“This comment, which referred to the politician’s weight, has prompted the German government to demand that we hand over the user’s data so they can identify and potentially imprison them for up to five years,” Torba https://news.gab.com/2024/04/gabs-response-to-the-german-governments-data-request/
at the time.
Gab has also been banned from Google and Apple app stores, as both require apps to enforce strict content moderation policies.
from Ofcom.
The platform is now blocking users in the UK because of the legislation.
British users are now greeted with a message:
“You are accessing this website from the United Kingdom. This is not a good idea. The letter states the UK asserts authority over any website that has a ’significant number of United Kingdom users’. This ambiguous metric could include any site on the Internet and specifically takes aim at the people using a website instead of the website itself.”
?itok=ZI4e33FP
The unsigned message added that the situation in the UK is “now so dire I fear for the safety of any user connecting to the Internet from the country.”
The law has already affected https://www.blocked.org.uk/osa-blocks
, from forums for cyclists, hobbyists, and hamster owners, to those supporting divorced fathers.
The regulatory pressure and the many rules have caused many of them to shut down, despite some operating for decades.
‘Locked Out of UK Internet Space’
If Gab or other companies do not comply, Ofcom can use enforcement powers.
John Carr, one of the world’s leading authorities on children’s and young people’s use of digital technologies, told The Epoch Times by email that the regulator “has the power to go to a UK court asking for orders which could compel different actors to withdraw services from Gab if it remains non-compliant with Ofcom’s directives.”
It can, for example, apply to the court for “business disruption measures (BDMs).”
These measures allow the blocking of noncompliant services, meaning UK users could lose access to certain platforms. BDMs could involve requesting payment or advertising providers to withdraw services or ask internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict access.
He said it was a “negative form of enforcement insofar as, ultimately, Ofcom can get them locked out of UK internet space,” adding that it would be a business decision.
“If they don’t have many UK users they will probably defy Ofcom and big it up as brave defiance. It’s not hard to write the script,” he said. “There is no legal basis on which an overseas company can claim it has an exemption from applying local law.”
Legal commentator Tony Dowson told The Epoch Times that the legislation does allow services to be regulated even if they are not incorporated in the UK.
He said that there is a legal test in the law over whether it has “links” with the UK, which can mean “having a significant number of UK users or the UK being one target audience.”
Dowson said that another test in the law assesses if the service is capable of being used in the UK and if there are “reasonable grounds to think that it poses a risk of serious harm through its content.”
“So, Ofcom is entitled to, under the Act, to regulate services outside the UK, as unrealistic as it could be in practice,” he said.
The UK has blocked sites via court order before.
In May 2012, British courts ordered major ISPs, including Sky, Virgin Media, TalkTalk, O2, and Everything Everywhere (EE), to block access to The Pirate Bay, a file-sharing website, after a ruling found it facilitated copyright infringement.
‘Key Figures No Longer Buy the Fiction’
U.S. lawyer Preston Byrne said he believes that enforcement of the law could set it on a political collision course with the United States.
“London should brace for significant political blowback,” he told The Epoch Times by email.
Byrne is urging American companies that received letters from Ofcom to contact his law firm, Byrne & Storm. He stated that the websites’ decision to operate from the United States appears to be a lawful exercise of their First Amendment rights.
“The UK is, in effect, asserting that the First Amendment no longer exists,” he said. “It’s increasingly clear to me that key figures in Congress and the White House no longer buy the fiction that the UK is merely trying to make the internet a bit safer for kids, and now believe the UK is trying to undo the U.S. Constitution.”
?itok=L6J-NjjY
Screenshot of attempts to access the video site Rumble in France. Epoch Times
James Tidmarsh, an international lawyer based in Paris specializing in complex international commercial litigation and arbitration, told The Epoch Times that he suspects this case “is going to attract a lot of attention [UK authorities] don’t need.”
Tidmarsh referenced France’s decision to block the American site Rumble.
In November 2022, Rumble CEO https://x.com/chrispavlovski/status/1587539647932108803
turned “off France entirely” after the company refused to comply with the country’s demand for the removal of Russian state-media accounts.
Tariffs
Tidmarsh mulled that the UK could also face threats of tariffs.
This year, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/defending-american-companies-and-innovators-from-overseas-extortion-and-unfair-fines-and-penalties/
seeking to protect American companies and innovators from what he called “overseas extortion.”
Much of Trump’s ire has been focused on the European Digital Services Act (DSA), with the European Commission staring down a series of deadlines to decide whether Apple, Meta, and Google are in breach of the EU’s digital competition laws.
The chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Brendan Carr, appointed to the FCC helm by Trump in https://www.reuters.com/technology/eu-content-law-incompatible-with-us-free-speech-tradition-says-fccs-carr-2025-03-03/
, said that DSA’s approach was “something that is incompatible with both our free speech tradition in America and the commitments that these technology companies have made to a diversity of opinions.”
The U.S. State Department said in a https://x.com/StateDRL/status/1906360387366260873
statement on social media that it was “concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.”
The department was referring to the case of 64-year-old https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/free-speech-not-material-to-tariff-talks-following-buffer-zone-case-minister-says-5834828
, a campaigner who opposes abortion and was recently charged with infringing a public spaces protection order after holding a sign reading “here to talk” near an abortion facility in Bournemouth, England.
Tidmarsh said he believed there was a risk that the special relationship between the UK and the United States could be affected.
“We, as in Europe, still rely on the U.S. for so much, culturally, commercially,“ Tidmarsh said. ”My first reaction seeing this was, ‘Oh my God, how did they get the timing so wrong?’ I mean, if this goes across Trump’s desk, I mean he can very easily just extend all these tariffs to the UK.”
An Ofcom spokesperson told The Epoch Times that services that want to operate in the UK must comply with UK laws.
“The new duties that have just come into force under the UK’s Online Safety Act have free speech at their core and are all about protecting people in the UK from illegal content and activity like child sexual abuse material and fraud,” the spokesperson said. “We’re currently assessing platforms’ compliance with these new laws, and our codes of practice can help them do that. But, make no mistake, providers who fail to introduce measures to protect UK users from illegal content can expect to face enforcement action.”
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 09:20
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/new-uk-internet-policing-law-targets-us-online-forums
Tariff Turmoil Delays Nintendo Switch 2 Pre-Orders; Will This Derail Goldman's Bull Call On Mario Kart-Maker
Tariff Turmoil Delays Nintendo Switch 2 Pre-Orders; Will This Derail Goldman's Bull Call On Mario Kart-Maker
We suspect Goldman analysts Minami Munakata and Haruki Kubota will soon update clients on today's report from https://www.theverge.com/news/643483/nintendo-switch-2-preorders-delayed-tariffs
.
?itok=82b5_eXl
Nintendo spokesperson Eddie Garcia told The Verge:
Preorders for Nintendo Switch 2 in the U.S. will not start April 9, 2025 in order to assess the potential impact of tariffs and evolving market conditions. Nintendo will update timing at a later date. The launch date of June 5, 2025 is unchanged.
Nintendo plans to launch the Nintendo Switch 2 (the successor to the Nintendo Switch) on June 5. There's still no word from Garcia about when preorders will begin.
There's still no word on Switch 2 pricing following the new effective tariff rate of 24% on Japanese goods, as The Verge noted.
The Switch 2 costs $449.99 and comes with several upgrades, including a larger 7.9-inch 1080p display, 256GB of storage, and a C-button for in-game chats. We don't know yet whether the Switch 2 or its accessories will go up in price in response to the tariffs. The Switch 2 is already significantly more expensive than its $299 predecessor, while its games have a steeper $69.99 to $79.99 price.
Last month, Goldman analysts Minami Munakata and Haruki Kubota were super bulls on Nintendo, noting that "the global games market re-entered a growth phase since 2024" and forecasted "the number of active consoles to continue renewing fresh highs globally from 2025."
Their bullishness in the gaming industry was mainly because Switch 2 would "https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/nintendo-shares-jump-after-goldman-sees-switch-2-unlocking-dormant-users
" and send "the number of active consoles to continue to renew record highs."
?itok=3lfcyvx5
However, with tariffs in play, the Switch 2 and its accessories will likely be priced higher. That raises a key question for the analysts—likely to be addressed in a client note this weekend:
Will the increased cost of the device prompt a revision to their active console forecast?
And, in turn, could a downward revision in the forecast trigger a 12mo price target cut for Nintendo shares in Tokyo?
. . .
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 07:35
Ukrainian Special Ops Using US Tactical Vehicles Undisclosed By The Pentagon
Ukrainian Special Ops Using US Tactical Vehicles Undisclosed By The Pentagon
A combat unit of NATO-trained Ukrainian soldiers was photographed using a Flyer 72-LD tactical vehicle. The Department of Defense did not report that it had transferred the platform to Ukraine, which was previously operated primarily by American special forces.
The Flyers’ presence in Ukraine became public when blogger Praise the Steph https://x.com/praisethesteph/status/1906657524457123911
of the vehicle with soldiers from Kiev’s 6th Separate Ranger Regiment. "Will and faith are our weapons. Victory is our only horizon!" the blogger reported the unit’s commander said.
?itok=2vrd_8Fl
The Flyer is https://thedefensepost.com/2025/04/03/us-tactical-vehicle-ukraine-rangers/
to be a light-weight tactical vehicle that can operate in rugged terrain.
It can be carried to the front by a number of helicopters and can carry a 5,000-pound load. The Pentagon has not previously disclosed the transfer of the Flyer to Kiev. Only a limited number of NATO countries deploy the Flyer.
While the New York Times’s Adam Entous https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/29/world/europe/us-ukraine-military-war-wiesbaden.html?unlocked_article_code=1.704.litc.5MtEP2QbFXqs&smid=url-share
the Department of Defense’s transfer of weapons to Ukraine as occurring "with remarkable transparency," this is not the first time that Ukrainian soldiers have received US military equipment before the American public became aware of the shipment.
The 6th Separate Ranger Regiment is one of four Ukrainian military units trained by NATO troops that make up Kiev’s special operations force.
According to the Kyiv Post, they are designed to https://www.kyivpost.com/post/49976
"drone, reconnaissance, sabotage, and artillery targeting operations behind enemy lines."
US and Ukrainian military leaders have presented the conflict as an opportunity to test Western weapons and tactics against the Russian military.
Back in 2023, https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/15/politics/ukraine-russia-war-weapons-lab/index.html
wrote that "the war in Ukraine has also offered the United States and its allies a rare opportunity to study how their own weapons systems perform under intense use – and what munitions both sides are using to score wins in this hotly fought modern war."
Ukraine is "absolutely a weapons lab in every sense because none of this equipment has ever actually been used in a war between two industrially developed nations," an official was cited as saying. "This is real-world battle testing."
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Sat, 04/05/2025 - 07:00
Escobar: How Trump's Tariff Tizzy Is Burning Down The House
Escobar: How Trump's Tariff Tizzy Is Burning Down The House
Authored by Pepe Escobar,
Global Majority, rejoice! And step on the high-speed rail de-dollarization train.
?itok=TPlEaRbM
Circus ringmaster Trump’s Tariff Tizzy (TTT), christened by himself as “Liberation Day”, is being largely interpreted around the world – Global North and Global South alike – as Slaughterhouse Day.
This de facto uncontrolled economic demolition gambit starts with the warped fantasy that launching a customs war on China is a bright idea. As bright as collecting a few trillion extra dollars in tariffs assuming the rest of the planet will be somewhat “encouraged” to sell to the Hegemon, while pretending that these tariffs will lead to the re-industrialization of the U.S.
The tragicomic mask of a self-appointed circus ringmaster of turbo-capitalism may be as pathetic as the European chihuahua rage boosting their “revenge” via Rearmament – with funds that they plan to steal from the savings accounts of unsuspecting citizens.
The indispensable Michael Hudson has configured the key problem. Allow me a little tweak: “Sanctions and threats are the only thing that the United States has left. It no longer can offer other countries a win-win situation, and Trump has said that America has to be the net gainer in any international deal it’s made, whether it’s a financial deal or a trade deal. And if America is saying, any deal we make, you lose, I win”, that Mafia extortion gambit does not exactly reflect the Art of the Deal.
Prof. Hudson neatly describes Trump’s negotiation tactics: “When you don’t have very much to offer economically, all you can do is offer not to hurt other countries, not to sanction them, not to do something that will be against their interest.” Now, with TTT, Trump is actually “offering” to hurt them all. And they will certainly invest in all sorts of counter-tactics to “get away” from that “strategy” of American “diplomacy”.
A trade war on Asia
TTT attacks everyone, especially the EU (“born to hurt us”, according to the circus ringmaster. Wrong, because the EU was invented by the Americans in 1957 to actually keep Europe under control). The EU exports roughly 503 billion euros to the U.S. a year, while importing around 347 billion. Trump is fuming non-stop about this surplus.
So a counter-measure vendetta will be inevitably in store, as already advertised by the toxic Medusa von der Lugen in Brussels – incidentally the sponsor of every weapons producer in Europe.
Yet TTT is above all a trade war on Asia. “Reciprocal” tariffs – not exactly reciprocal – were imposed on China (34%),Vietnam (46%), India (26%), Indonesia (32%), Cambodia (49%), Malaysia (24%), South Korea (25%), Thailand (36%), earthquake-hit Myanmar (44%), Taiwan (32%) and Japan (24%).
Well, even before TTT, a first has been achieved: the circus ringmaster generated a once-in-a-lifetime consensus among China, Japan and South Korea that their response will be coordinated.
Japan and South Korea will import semiconductor raw materials from China, while China will be purchasing chips from Japan and South Korea. Translation: TTT will solidify “supply chain cooperation” among this triad that so far was not exactly too cooperative.
What the circus ringmaster really wants is an iron-clad mechanism – already being developed by his team – that unilaterally imposes whatever level of tariffs Trump may come up with on whatever excuse: could be to circumvent “current manipulation”, to counter a value-added tax, on “security grounds”, whatever. And to hell with international law. For all practical purposes, Trump is burying the WTO.
Even tariffed penguins in Heard island in the South Pacific know that the certified effects of TTT will include rising inflation in the U.S., serious pain on its – delocalized – corporations and most of all the complete collapse of American “credibility” as a reliable and trustworthy trading partner, adding to its certified reputation as “non-agreement capable” – as the Global South knows so well. > Ант: A rentier FIRE Empire (financialization, insurance, real estate, as masterfully analyzed by Michael Hudson), which offshored its manufacturing industries and was gobbled up by a pile of overleveraged hedge funds, Wall Street derivatives and Silicon Valley totalitarian surveillance in the end decides to strike…itself.
Poetic justice applies. Burning Down the House – from inside the house. As for the emerging, sovereign Global Majority, rejoice: and step on the high-speed rail de-dollarization train.
* * *
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden
Fri, 04/04/2025 - 23:25
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-how-trumps-tariff-tizzy-burning-down-house