Apple and the Irish government are launching a two-pronged attack on the European Union’s record $14 billion ruling against their tax deal. …read more
Source: Apple, Ireland go on offensive against EU’s tax bill
This is one of the most important articles that I have written in a long time. The strange events of the past year and a half have befuddled and mystified many, and in this article I am going to explain why America has been given a temporary reprieve. If you go back to June 2015, I warned my readers that major financial problems were imminent, and sure enough in August 2015 we witnessed the greatest financial shaking that we had seen in seven years. I remember getting emails from my readers applauding me for absolutely nailing that prediction, but we were all concerned about what was coming next in September. If you will recall, there was more buzz about September 2015 than any other month that I can ever recall. That was the month of the last blood moon, the end of the Shemitah year and the Pope’s visit to the United States among other things. There was a tremendous amount of anticipation that the crisis that had begun in August 2015 would greatly accelerate in September and lead us into a period of cataclysmic global chaos. But that did not happen. Instead, U.S. financial markets calmed down and eventually recovered. There was a shift in the political realm as well, as the second half of 2015 marked the rise of Donald Trump. During those key months, Trump miraculously built a commanding lead in the race for the Republican nomination that none of his opponents were ever able to overcome. And now that Trump has won the election, an economic surge appears to be happening that is unlike anything that we have witnessed in many years.
Compared to much of the rest of the world, America appears to have been blessed over the past year and a half. Our financial markets have performed extremely well, the U.S. dollar is the strongest that is has been in over a decade, and jobs are coming back to the United States.
None of this was supposed to happen. In fact, our financial system was in such bad shape a year and a half ago that it was being projected that the U.S. would be on the bleeding edge of the next crisis. But instead here we stand safe, prosperous and seemingly secure.
How in the would can we explain this?
What I am about to share with you I have previously shared on national television down at Morningside, but it has been brought to my attention that I have never shared this with my readers on The Economic Collapse Blog. I apologize for this, because the past year and a half doesn’t make any sense until you understand these things.
When people look back at September 2015, they always forget the most critical event. In addition to everything else that was going on that month, France had a UN Security Council resolution all ready to go that would have permanently divided the land of Israel, that would have given formal UN Security Council recognition to a …read more
Source: The Real Reason Why America Has Been Given A Reprieve
By Tyler Durden
There are some very somber, pragmatic articles circulating as of late that present a true snapshot of the difficulties the U.S. faces after eight years of Obama. One of these articles is a well-written, thought-provoking piece by Susan Duclos of All News Pipeline, entitled We are Facing the Most Important Battle of All at the Most Dangerous Moment in History. The piece shows what we’re up against and cautions all of us not to rely on the “magic fix” of Trump’s victory to side rail our preparations and vigilance. Here is an excerpt from that excellent article:
“We at ANP are noting a lot of optimism from investors with stocks soaring, to economic confidence reaching new highs, to small business owners, to household spending and even prepping has hit a “multi-year low,” all the articles I am reading are crediting the election of Donald Trump as reason for all this optimism, but as much as I hate to rain on everyone’s parade… now is the most dangerous time in history, not a time to assume just because one man was elected, all the wrongs will be made right, the failing economy will automatically just magically fix itself.”
Susan deserves special thanks, as well as Stefan Stanford; their coverage of developments has been spot-on and unwavering in their attempts to present objective and factual reporting, while warning readers akin to modern Paul Reveres that the battle is not over by any means. In reality, it is not even close to being over. I recommend reading the article’s section toward the beginning under “THE ECONOMY IS COLLAPSING” paragraph introduction for statistics on where we stand economically at this moment in time.
There was a piece released by Michael Snyder of the Economic Collapse Blog on December 8th entitled It is Like a Nuclear Bomb Went Off in the Prepping Community, another timely piece that warns of the complacency settling in now that most conservatives believe that Trump will be the vaccine for the country’s illnesses. Here is an excerpt from that article:
Not since the election of Ronald Reagan has the mood on the right shifted in such a positive direction so suddenly. But now that everyone is feeling so good about things, very few people still seem interested in prepping for hard times ahead. In fact, it is like a nuclear bomb went off in the prepping community.
As the publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog, I am in contact with a lot of people that serve the prepping community. And I can tell you that sales of emergency food and supplies have been crashing since Donald Trump’s surprise election victory. Firms that help people relocate outside of the United States have seen business …read more
100% Pure Garcinia Cambogia Extract – Appetite Suppressant – Carb Blocker Capsules – 2100 MG – 90 Caps
Looking for something special ? Find The Lowest Price HERE
By Tyler Durden
As yet another member of President Obama's administration desperately attempts to define their own legacy (with words other than “failed”, “rigged”, or “favoritism”), Attorney General Loretta Lynch put on her gentlest, quietest voice for an 'exit' interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, admitting she “regretted sitting down” with Bill Clinton because “it gave people concern” and wants to be remembered for ensuring justice to “all Americans.”
As The Hill reports, Lynch said Sunday that the fallout from her tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton was “painful” for her.
Lorettya Lynch on the fallout over her meeting with Bill Clinton: “It was painful for me” #CNNSOTU https://t.co/w3ewyrtBNb pic.twitter.com/bZA9V0qzrC
— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) December 18, 2016
“I do regret sitting down and having a conversation with him, because it did give people concern. And as I said, my greatest concern has always been making sure that people understand that the Department of Justice works in a way that is independent and looks at everybody equally,” Lynch said on CNN's “State of the Union.”
“And when you do something that gives people a reason to think differently, that's a problem. It was a problem for me. It was painful for me, and so I felt it was important to clarify it as quickly and as clearly and as cleanly as possible.”
The Clinton campaign has cited Comey's decision to send a letter to Congress just days before the election about newly discovered emails as one of the reasons she lost.
“But certainly if Bill Clinton hadn't gotten on the tarmac that time and gone to you, things might have been different,” said host Jake Tapper. “You would have had more say. You would have been able to control Comey more … It might have changed the letter that he gave at the end there.”
Lynch replied: “I don't think it would have changed his view of what he had to say or not say to Congress.”
So to be clear, Lynch regrets the meeting only because she was caught and it caused controversy… not because it was clearly a bad judgment call!
But, as Lynch went on to explains, she wants her legacy at DOJ to be one of inclusion…
Once again, defining the narrative is key – “inclusion” – which appears to defined by her and the DoJ as easing and deciminalizing any law-breaking activity that appears to bias against poor or minorities (whether or not they actually broke the law or not). As a reminder, The New York Post noted earlier this year that even a senior Justice Department official predicts the decriminalization-cum-deincarceration movement will backfire in higher crime nationwide. “In five years the crime rate is going to be crazy again,” he said.
The official, who oversees probation of felons paroled from federal prisons and who requested anonymity, worries the new department policy will be abused.
“I don’t see liberal judges even attempting to make people pay or spending the time making an accurate determination of a person being ‘indigent,’ ” …read more
Source: AG Lynch Admits She "Regrets" Tarmac Meeting With Bill Clinton
100% Pure Garcinia Cambogia Extract – Appetite Suppressant – Carb Blocker Capsules – 2100 MG – 90 Caps
Looking for something special ? Find The Lowest Price HERE
By Tyler Durden
On Saturday morning, the Pentagon was eager to announce that China would return a U.S. Navy underwater drone after its military scooped up the submersible in the South China Sea late this week and sparked a row that drew in President-elect Donald Trump. As previously reported, Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said that “through direct engagement with Chinese authorities, we have secured an understanding that the Chinese will return the UUV to the United States.”
In retrospect, the Pentagon may have declared victory too soon. According to the South China Morning Post, China’s handover of the drone will come “with conditions“, adding that “Beijing is expected to demand the United States scale down its ?surveillance in the South China Sea when it hands back a seized US underwater drone.” Beijing would also “seek an expansion in the code for unplanned military encounters in the disputed waters to cover drones like the one seized by a Chinese warship off the Philippine coast near Subic Bay on Thursday.”
Zhang Zhexin, a professor from the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, said he ?expected it would take about 10 days for the drone to be returned. The demand for US concessions stems from the fact that “China is worried that there will be more action from the US during its power transition period,” Zhexin said. “Beijing will possibly talk to the US about expanding the code for unplanned encounters at sea to include unmanned underwater vehicles.”
Currently the code includes a set of standard operational procedures ?designed to minimize the risks of unintended maritime encounters, but it does not have a procedure to deal with underwater drones.
China is concerned that despite the US insistence that the drone was used for purely peaceful purposes. its deployment had ulterior motives. Zhang Huang, a professor from the PLA National Defence University, said the unmanned underwater vehicle could be used to gather data on Chinese naval actions, and the navigation details of Chinese submarines, People’s Daily reported.
Zhang Baohui, a China security specialist at Hong Kong’s ?Lingnan University, said the drone could be used to collect data on factors such as currents and salinity, as well as special ?sonar signals from Chinese nuclear submarines. “Both uses have military applications. The first could be used to track possible routes by Chinese submarines,” he said.
“The second could be used to detect and trace Chinese nuclear submarines.
“The drone is part of the US’ anti-submarine ?warfare.”
Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports that after Trump lashed out at China over the weekend, saying it stole an underwater drone from the U.S. Navy in an “unprecedented act”, Beijing’s official response was muted, although there was far more “passion” in the local nationalist tabloid press, such as the Global Times which mocked Trump’s demeanor as “lagging far behind the White House spokespersons.”
“China has so far practiced restraint at Trump’s provocations as he’s yet to enter the White House,” the Global Times said. “But this attitude won’t last too long after he officially becomes the U.S. …read more
Source: China To Hand Over Seized US Drone "With Conditions"
By Tyler Durden
It was just a few short days ago, on Wednesday of last week, that Ukraine’s largest lender, PrivatBank, said that reports it will be nationalized were attempts to create panic and destabilize the political situation in the country.
Local media quoted by Reuters, has speculated that Privatbank, which is part-owned by one of Ukraine’s richest men, billionaire Ihor Kolomoisky, could be privatized if it does not meet a year-end deadline for Ukraine banks to reach a capital ratio requirement agreed under an International Monetary Fund bailout program, Reuters reported.
What makes Privatbank unique is that with some $6 billion in private deposits – of 36.5% of Ukrainian banks’ total – it puts America’s own TBTF banks to shame: the bank is an absolute giant which controls nearly half of the local banking sector.
On Wednesady, the bank’s deputy chairman said its customers had received phone calls and messages telling them the bank would be taken under state control due to a failure to meet the required capitalization level. “Exploiting the ignorance of citizens about nationalization, they stir up panic,” Oleg Gorokhovsky said, without saying who was behind the reports.
In a separate statement the bank said that “the information attack on Ukraine’s largest bank, Privatbank linked to the ‘pseudo-nationalisation’ of the bank is primarily directed at clients of the bank and is an attempt to destabilize the political situation in the country.” It added that the reports of its imminent nationalization were politically motivated.
* * *
Fast forward four days, when late on Sunday night, the “attempts to create panic and destabilize the political situation” in Ukraine turned out to be true after all, and whether politically motivated or otherwise, the Ukrainian government announced hours ago that it would nationalize the suddenly very ironically named PrivatBank, unleashing one of the biggest shake-ups of the banking system since the country plunged into political and economic turmoil two years ago.
In a statement late on Sunday, the government made no mention of the size of the potential burden to the state budget, but said it would ensure a stable transition and the smooth functioning of the bank.
According to Reuters, The Finance Ministry would take over PrivatBank, with Finance Minister Oleksandr Danylyuk adding that depositors’ money was safe and secured by the state, and that the bank was functioning normally. It was not immediately clear if Ukraine had $6 billion in liquid funds to distribute to PrivatBank depositors should there be a run on the bank tomorrow, as some expect.
“The private shareholders of PrivatBank proposed to the government that it become the bank’s owner in the interests of its clients,” the government said in a statement.
“The transition period begins on 19 December. The state will ensure a smooth transition and the stable functioning of the bank.”
The unprecedented bailout could fuel instability in Ukraine, where opposition parties have repeatedly called for snap elections to unseat the pro-Western leadership that took power after the 2014 Maidan protests. As Reuters notes, the opposition …read more
Source: Ukraine Nationalizes Its Largest Bank, Which Holds 36% Of All Domestic Deposits
By Tyler Durden
There are two hot topics post the U.S. presidential election. One is “fake news”, the other is Facebook™ (FB), and its involvement in it.
The accusations and the defenses against have been all over the board. Both figuratively, as well as literally.
Management from Mark Zuckerberg on down have been professing when it came to anything “fake” it wasn’t of their doing. And gee-whiz-by-golly they’re going to do whatever it takes to make sure anything “fake” never sees the “like” of day again.
Sounds great, in theory. But there’s a very real fact that must now be considered…
If “fake” news was so wide-spread, and so devoured on FB that it had the ability to not only influence, but rather, to overturn political norms and ruin the election of what everyone in media on down believed; that this election was merely a formality on paper because, it was clear to all of them, Mrs. Clinton would win not just walking away, but running?
That would mean FB now has to alienate (i.e., by now not delivering “news” these people wanted to see) millions, upon millions, upon millions of now current users. What does that imply to their now “real” (ooopsy, again!) metrics going forward?
If the above hypothetical has the ability to be true (and from a business perspective it sure has) the very fact that FB will now openly censor, mark, tag, possibly defame (whether intentionally or not), and more articles of news, or anything else shared on its platform. Two questions have to be asked:
First: How many FB customers decide they don’t need or want a “mommy” deciding what they can, or can not, read or share? Second: How fast does that process begin, and by how many?
No matter what side of the political fence you’re on matters. The only thing that matters is what all this means from a business perspective to FB’s bottom line. For as much as everyone likes “free”, without Wall Street (or the Swiss Central Bank) buying? FB moves to AOL™ status quicker than you can say “You’ve got mail?.”
As of this writing some hand writing is all ready appearing on the wall as FB announced not only will it begin to find ways to forbid fact-check. But it has now joined forces with a third-party to do just that. Again, all sounds good on the surface until you’re made aware by one’s own fact-checking just whom that third-party is. e.g., Poynter™.
Who are they? Personally, I’ve never heard of them prior, but it only took seeing one man’s name on the roster of backers to understand the impact it will have on a great many current FB users, as well as content generators to imagine a most assured backlash. e.g. George Soros.
Again, it doesn’t matter what side of the political fence you sit. And it doesn’t matter whether you like or dislike Mr. Soros, or anything he’s involved with. What does matter is this: How many users, along with legitimate purveyors …read more
Source: The ‘Real’ Question: What’s Facebook’s True Valuation Without "Fake"?
By Tyler Durden
Two years ago, as part of its one-year forward forecast issue, the ten “experts” polled by Barron’s in its one year forward forecast, predicted that the S&P would close 2015 an average of 2210, roughly 7% higher then the final print of 2014, which was at 2,058.9.
Alas, their enthusiasm proved overoptimistic, and the market ended up missing the consensus forecast materially, suffering a down year in 2015, and the S&P 500 closed at 2,043.9. Which is why optimism was somewhat more muted in the Barron’s roundtable forecast for 2016, which last December predicted the S&P would close just fractionally above where these same forecasters expected the S&P would end 2015 the year prior, and predicted that the final print of December 31, 2016 would be roughly 2,220.
In retrospect, that particular forecast was far closer to the market, with the S&P500 closing Friday at 2,258, or about less than 2% above the consensus estimate.
So, what do the experts think now?
As is common knowledge by now, less than two months ago, the prevailing consensus was that while a Hillary victory in the presidential election would be bullish for risk assets, a Trump victory would likely result in a correction. And, sure enough, as almost always happens, and as David Rosenberg reminded us earlier today courtesy of Bob Farrell’s Rule #9, “When all the experts and forecasts agree, something else is going to happen.“
What happened was a dramatic surge in the market because Trump was elected, as his victory unleashe the hope of massive fiscal stimulus, something none of the experts predicted would happen.
Which brings us to the latest garthering of experts.
Over the weekend. Barron’s held its latest annual strategist roundtable. The article explaining their outlook starts, appropriately enough, with: “Nobody saw it coming.” And it wasn’t just the Trump victory. As the following chart from Barron’s notes, 2016 was a year of surprises, which however after an initial scare, were mostly to the upside, even as the news kept getting progressively worse:
But it was the outcome of the November 8 election that threw everyone for a spin:
The unexpected election last month of Donald J. Trump as president has been a game changer for the 10 investment strategists whose market outlook Barron’s solicits twice each year. As stocks took off on Nov. 9 and thereafter, fueled by investors’ enthusiasm for Trump’s expected pro-growth agenda, even our group’s bears turned bullish. Wall Street’s seers expect the bull’s romp to continue well into next year, and posit a possible awakening among institutional and individual investors of the animal spirits that were dormant for the past seven years.
In a nutshell, here is where the “experts” stand now:
To summarize:
Or as the …read more
Source: Everyone’s Bullish: Barron’s Best Guessers Say Buy Banks, Sell Staples In 2017
By Tyler Durden
Submitted by Derrick Broze via ActivistPost.com,
The corporate owned media and their partners in government are working overtime to spread the ‘fake news’ meme. This meme is designed to limit, and ultimately destroy, the independent and alternative media by censoring anti-establishment viewpoints.
Source: "Fake News" Is the New "Weapons Of Mass Destruction"
Welcome to Esh Carmel Blog.
