Zero Hedge

Trump Brings Stellantis Jobs To Illinois... Pritzker Takes Credit

Trump Brings Stellantis Jobs To Illinois... Pritzker Takes Credit

Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

Illinois had some rare, good news yesterday.

Stellantis, the Big 3 auto maker, announced it will be investing $1.2 billion in its Belvidere assembly plant and bringing back about 1,500 jobs there.

You’ll never know who really got it done if you listen to Illinois’ leadership.

It was a  “dramatic turnabout,” as the Detroit Free Press put it.

As you may remember, Gov. JB Pritzker announced to much fanfare in October 2023 that the Stellantis facility in Belvidere, idled with layoffs just before the previous Christmas, would be reopened. But no deal was ever signed and, last year, Stellantis indefinitely postponed any Belividere expansion, blaming “market conditions.”

But that was before Trump, his tariff threats and four days of meetings last week between Stellantis, Trump and his team.

Here is a headline on one of many stories linking yesterday’s good news about more jobs in Illinois to Trump’s pressure on Stellantis:

“Stellantis responds to Trump’s tariff threat, will restart Illinois plant and build new Durango in Detroit.”

And from the Wall Street Journal:

John Elkann, chairman of Jeep-maker Stellantis, wasted no time reassuring President Trump of the global automaker’s commitment to U.S. manufacturing. The scion of Italy’s famous Agnelli family met with Trump last week to emphasize the company’s support for American workers.

On Wednesday, following the meeting, Stellantis reaffirmed plans to reopen a now-idled factory in Illinois to make a new midsize truck, according to an internal memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Pritzker, however, claims full credit for himself and his friends.

Not a word even acknowledging Trump’s role.

From Pritzker’s statement yesterday about Stellantis’ new announcement:

This would not be possible without proactive collaboration and coordination between the State of Illinois, Stellantis, UAW, the Biden-Harris Administration, and our champions in Congress, including Senator Durbin, Senator Duckworth, Representative Bill Foster, and Representative Eric Sorensen,” said Governor JB Pritzker.

“My administration has worked tirelessly with our partners to secure this investment and we are excited to see it come to fruition.

Illinois Senator’s Duckworth and Durbin were no better.

Their joint statement likewise doesn’t mention Trump.

One big loose end is that we still don’t know how much state money Illinois initially offered Stellantis as part of the initial deal that fell apart. Pritzker and the state never said and nobody in the media ever pressed him for an answer. Some or all of that money is presumably still on the table. In any event, that does not mean Trump’s role wasn’t essential to Stellantis’ new committment.

Why does Pritzker figure he can get away with deceit and ingratitude so extreme?

Because the Illinois press never calls him out on such things.

He knows they won’t lay a hand on him.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 20:05

Thacker Dismantles WSJ Propaganda Over Gain-Of-Function Research

Thacker Dismantles WSJ Propaganda Over Gain-Of-Function Research

The Wall Street Journal is playing sleight of hand over an (allegedly) upcoming Trump executive order that would halt federal funding for gain-of-function (GoF) research.

For starters, they frame opposition to GoF as partisan, and suggest that concerns over it are recent. Journalist Paul Thacker of The Disinformation Chronicle breaks it down.

For example, the WSJ writes "The gain-of-function studies had been a staple of research into viruses, but became an object of controversy and criticism during the pandemic crisis. Republicans in Congress criticized the studies."

Wrong: GoF has been under scrutiny for more than a decade. In fact, the Obama Administration banned it in 2014, which is why Dr. Anthony Fauci offshored it to Wuhan, China via EcoHealth Alliance.

Next, the Journal suggests that only "some Republicans" who think GoF caused Covid-19, when in fact a majority of Americans think that's the case, including 53% of Democrats.

The article also cites scientists with huge conflicts of interest, and that "Many scientists and public-health officials have said there isn’t any public evidence that an experiment at the Wuhan lab could have created the virus that caused the pandemic."

Wrong: The government was concerned at the highest levels that the virus started in a lab.

And about those conflicts of interest...

Amazing.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 19:40

Meet The 'Crunchy' Moms Who Support RFK Jr. As Health Secretary

Meet The 'Crunchy' Moms Who Support RFK Jr. As Health Secretary

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A term once reserved for granola-eating hippies, “crunchy” moms has evolved into a label for women who embrace a more natural lifestyle for their families.

Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock, Courtesy of Lyndsey Mulherin, Courtesy of Kristen Taylor, Courtesy of Krista Cobb, Jeff Louderback/The Epoch Times, Courtesy of Samantha Adams

These are women who favor herbal treatments over physician-prescribed and over-the-counter medications, cooking with butter or beef tallow instead of seed oils, examining food labels at the grocery store, and exercising caution about vaccinating their children.

When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ran for president—first as a Democrat and then as an independent—these moms were among his most vocal supporters.

Fighting chronic disease, improving children’s health, and addressing corporate influence on government agencies were vital parts of Kennedy’s campaign platform.

Ultimately, Kennedy suspended his presidential campaign and backed the Trump ticket in August 2024.

Since then, Kennedy has launched his Make America Healthy Again campaign, with the intention to curtail what he calls America’s chronic disease epidemic. He is seeking to have toxic chemicals from the nation’s food supply removed and he wants to address what he has branded the corporate capture of federal health agencies, among other objectives.

In November, President-elect Donald Trump nominated Kennedy to serve as secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the latter promptly pledged to make sweeping changes to its subsidiary agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Several moms told The Epoch Times they are ecstatic about the possibility of Kennedy as HHS secretary, pending Senate confirmation.

“With RFK Jr., we have a champion in our corner,” Lyndsey Mulherin told The Epoch Times.

A homesteader in northwest Ohio, Mulherin has devoted her life to being a stay-at-home mom caring for her three children, including her middle son, Jack, who was diagnosed with autism at age 2. She blames a vaccine.

“Everything we put in or on our body affects our health. In its simplest form, that is what crunchy moms are all about,” Mulherin said.

“People have questioned our decisions to not vaccinate our [other] kids, and avoid certain foods and cleaning products among other items we use in everyday life.

“Now, because of Kennedy’s platform, Trump nominating Kennedy, and what Kennedy plans to do, people are starting to learn what we learned a long time ago,” Mulherin said.

Lyndsey Mulherin. Courtesy of Lyndsey Mulherin

Kristen Taylor is a South Carolina mom who embraces a holistic lifestyle. She wasn’t always that way.

“There was a time I believed and trusted conventional doctors. I thought they knew everything about health. I believed what the media told us about health,” she said.

“I thought vaccines were necessary and getting my children vaccinated was a sign I was a good mother. Simply put, I was indoctrinated.”

Taylor was motivated to dig deeper into products when she investigated the ingredients of a self-tanning wipe she used and found they included parabens, which have been linked to causing cancer.

“I started reading the ingredients of every single product our family was putting on our skin and if I saw an even somewhat questionable ingredient, I trashed that product. I woke up.”

A fitness enthusiast, Taylor has a Master’s degree and taught in public school before she decided to become a stay-at-home mom and a homeschool teacher.

“The collaboration between Trump and RFK Jr. gives me hope that I haven’t felt in a long time. Those of us who are crunchy, holistic, natural—whatever you want to call it—believe in RFK Jr. because he is one of us and he didn’t dismiss us,” Taylor told The Epoch Times.

“He takes the time to deeply learn about a topic, and if he finds reason to stand up for it, he does it loud and clear. That’s why so many of us back him, regardless of political beliefs, because he genuinely cares and is committed to making positive change,” she said.

“That’s been lacking in our health care agencies for a long time,” she added.

Kristen Taylor is a South Carolina mother and fitness enthusiast who is excited about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination as Health and Human Services secretary. Courtesy of Kristen Taylor

Krista Cobb, a 41-year-old mother of three, grew up in the hills of southeastern Kentucky where her grandparents taught her all about canning, gardening, and hunting.

After moving to an urban area in the Dayton, Ohio, area and living there for a few decades, she grew tired of the “concrete jungle” and bought a small property in rural western Ohio last year.

Since then, she has transformed the land into a homestead with chickens, goats, ducks, and gardens.

“I wanted to get back to my roots,” Cobb told The Epoch Times.

An ardent Trump supporter, Cobb told The Epoch Times she is “ecstatic” that Kennedy might be days away from becoming HHS secretary.

“It’s long overdue for vaccine schedules to be addressed, for toxins to be removed from our food, and for government health agencies to be managed by people who have no ties to Big Pharma and Big Ag,” Cobb said.

“I believe that Kennedy will do what he says he’s going to do, and we as a country will be better off.

“It will take some time. I don’t think it will all happen overnight, but just knowing he will be in a position to make those changes is a great feeling.”

Krista Cobb, a self-described “crunchy mom,” has goats, chickens, and ducks on her western Ohio homestead. Courtsey of Krista Cobb

Mulherin said her son, Jack, developed autism when he was 2. She stopped all vaccinations, eliminated all processed foods and artificial dyes, went to a chiropractor instead of a pediatrician, and took him to occupational and speech therapy.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 19:15

From Idlib To Davos: Al-Qaeda Linked Syrian Official On Mainstage At WEF

From Idlib To Davos: Al-Qaeda Linked Syrian Official On Mainstage At WEF

A US-designated terrorist group still remains the current de facto ruling entity in Damascus and over Syria. But for the West, all that matters is that al-Qaeda linked Jolani is not Assad. A decade-plus long proxy war in pursuit of regime change finally overthrew the secular Baath government early last month, and resulted in the hardline Islamists of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) controlling most of the country.

The West appears to be fully embracing the new rulers which we previously referred to as al-Qaeda in suits. This week we have been treated to the spectacle of a HTS representative speaking on the main stage at Davos. He's come a long way from Idlib and its black flags... straight to the red carpet jet-setting champaign-sipping insider atmosphere of world elites.

During the 55th annual WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2025. via Reuters

Syria's new HTS-appointed Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan Al-Shaibani told the World Economic Forum on Wednesday that Saudi Arabia is now the exemplar for Syria to follow.

"Where do we see inspiration for the new Syria? We have the Vision 2030 of Saudi Arabia," Al-Shaibani said during a conversation with former UK prime minister Tony Blair.

"We need Syria to be a place of peace, to be a place of development, a place free of war," the top HTS diplomat added.

On top of the irony of an AQ-linked official being invited to Davos (and merely within less than two months after HTS took power), there's the added irony that Tony Blair - one of Bush's key allies who pushed the 2003 invasion of Iraq - was hosting the Davos main stage discussion with Al-Shaibani.

Former leaders like Blair, in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, are responsible for having overseen the sectarian and Islamist nightmare which gripped Iraq and the region in the aftermath. The rise of ISIS would not have been possible if it weren't for the US/UK 'shock and awe' regime change operation, for example. Later, the West and Gulf states funded the Syrian insurgency, during which time Al-Qaeda in Iraq jihadists poured across the border into Syria. HTS was born out of this West-backed anti-Assad jihad (it was known as Nusra Front in the beginning).

But of course, the Davos elites are embracing it all: war crimes and jihad. 

Meanwhile, in Syria HTS has allowed ISIS-linked foreign fighters to intimidate the population with impunity. Alawites, Druze, and Christians live in fear as sectarian-driven killings are on the rise in the "liberated Syria" - especially in the Homs, Latakia, and coastal and countryside regions.

Did Blair extract from Shaibani a firm commitment to protect Syria's Christians and uphold secularism for Syria at Davos? Of course not.

The future looks bleak as Jolani has pledged eventual implementation of Sharia law. Already there have been widespread reports of alcohol stores being smashed, women forced to wear the Islamic veil, and imposed separation of the sexes in many public places. But the WEF has enthusiastically greeted this new Syriaistan. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 18:50

Trump MemeCoins Set To Be Sued... But To What End?

Trump MemeCoins Set To Be Sued... But To What End?

Authored by Ailsa Sherrington via CoinTelegraph.com,

Just days before US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the crypto industry was taken relatively by surprise with the launch of Official Trump (TRUMP), which was swiftly followed by Official Melania (MELANIA) — two memecoins launched by the first family that have pumped and yo-yoed in the days that followed.

​​

The president’s memecoin hit a peak of $72 on Jan. 19, then dipped to $44 on Jan. 20 when MELANIA launched. The coin briefly recovered while the president was sworn into office and has since hovered around the $40 mark. At the time of writing, the president’s memecoin is $37 — down 49% from its peak.

If speculation is to be believed, more official memecoins by the Trump family are on the way. Though touted as “memecoins,” their significance is unprecedented.

It was difficult to imagine an incoming American president launching his own memecoin before Jan. 18. Now, it’s hard to picture TRUMP and other tokens not playing a pivotal role in the US political sphere.

As crypto lawyer Preston Byrne wrote in a blog post, “Crypto is going to be a bigger political football than it’s ever been. Everyone who cares about politics is going to care about it, with no exceptions.”

This includes Democrats and disgruntled investors, who, according to Byrne, are 100% likely to sue the project within two months.

Is TRUMP even illegal?

James Thurber, founder and former director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, told the Guardian that Trump is blatantly profiting from his own pro-crypto agenda.

“There are shameful and major conflicts of interest with respect to his family business benefiting from his cryptocurrency policies,” Thurber said. 

Ryan Lee, chief analyst at Bitget Research, told Cointelegraph that TRUMP has “drawn new investors into the space.” But new audiences aren’t necessarily aware of what makes a sound investment. The launch of TRUMP and MELANIA has predictably made winners and losers, with some shedding millions of dollars as prices slumped.

Nearly 570,000 wallets have made a loss on TRUMP, compared to nearly 330,000 that made a profit. Source: 0xning

Byrne believes these lost investments will inevitably lead to litigation. But what is the legal basis?

“To my knowledge, no court in the United States has determined that memecoins are explicitly legal,” crypto lawyer Aaron Brogan told Cointelegraph.

That said, they have historically been difficult to prosecute. Brogan explained that memecoins may not be classified as securities under the Howey test.

“This is because they are basically inert. They don’t do anything and are not tied to any project with a goal of developing useful applications. They just sit onchain, and people buy them for the memes.”

This is likely why the Securities and Exchange Commission largely avoided memecoins during its Gary Gensler era, instead opting for comparatively “easier” targets like XRP and SOL.

“But regardless of why, launching a memecoin was less risky over the last four years than developing a bona fide project in cryptocurrency, which is probably the reason they have proliferated,” Brogan said.

So, memecoins exist in a sort of litigation vacuum, making it the best way for the Trump family to launch a token when all eyes were firmly on them. However, these memecoins are tied to arguably the most important people in the United States — so whether the intent or not, the value of TRUMP and MELANIA will likely serve as a litmus test of public sentiment.

As Byrne wrote:

“Trump Coin will now be tracked on CNBC financial shows, in newspapers, the price will be a reflection of the underlying tone of American society and the American project.”

Crypto lawyer Josh Lawler told Cointelegraph that the question is whether this should immediately place TRUMP and MELANIA into a different, regulated category.

“The unresolved and difficult question is whether the fact that a large segment of the global population is primed to turn this ‘consumer product’ into a major capital asset should automatically put it into a regulated category even though there is no ‘official’ communication of ongoing investment value,” he told Cointelegraph. 

“As of this moment in time, there is no law that would require that treatment.”

Democrats likely to sue anyway

Trump and his team of lawyers have clearly prepared for attacks from Democrats or others keen to see him bleed over these memecoins.

The terms of service on the TRUMP memecoin’s official website state that TRUMP is not intended to be, in any way, “an investment opportunity, investment contract, or security of any type.”

Lawler agrees that “an early assessment indicates that TRUMP is carefully crafted to avoid literal violation of laws including the Securities Act or the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution.”

And it is “absolutely unthinkable” that Trump would face legal threats from the federal government during his term, Brogan stated.

However, Byrne says that this won’t stop Democrats or certain investors from filing, say, a civil lawsuit. In fact, he’s banking on it.

The TRUMP terms include a class-action waiver and a clause requiring any litigation to be handled in arbitration (out of court), which serve to protect the project from civil lawsuits. Byrne wrote:

“This might make it tough for initial purchasers to bring a suit, but it’ll be easier for holders of tokens on secondary sales to argue that there’s no contractual privity between them and the project and so these terms shouldn’t apply.”

According to the crypto lawyer, there’s a 100% chance of a civil lawsuit within two months and a 90% chance of one filed in the next two weeks.

“I am absolutely certain this will happen. Someone will lose money, some lawyer will come up with a theory and file.”

Brogan agrees, telling Cointelegraph:

“Frankly, I think the torrent of legal filings is about to make Noah’s great flood look like a sun shower.”
What’s the worst that could happen?

As a man who became a convicted felon and then the 47th president of the US — in that order — it’s worth asking what, if anything, litigation will do to Trump. It may be difficult to legally pursue the leader of the “free world,” but it is not impossible.

“In Clinton v. Jones, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents are subject to suit for actions they took before becoming president,” Brogan explained.

“So, it is possible that some of these lawsuits will get through.”

The issue is that Trump has developed Kevlar-grade skin. Some civil lawsuits, perhaps a few TRUMP associates hounded by state attorneys general… will these attempts lead to any real form of enforcement? Of protection for investors?

“He’s cultivated a coalition of supporters who are not interested in policing traditional mores of public conduct,” Brogan argued, “and the dividend from that effort is that he can do whatever he wants.”

“Trump has immanentized the crypto revolution,” Byrne concluded in his blog post. “We will each remember this day until we die, because we will be dealing with the consequences of this for the rest of our lives.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 18:25

RINO Defections Fail To Derail Hegseth As Senate Confirmation Advances

RINO Defections Fail To Derail Hegseth As Senate Confirmation Advances

Via Headline USA,

The Senate advanced the nomination of Pete Hegseth as President Donald Trump’s defense secretary Thursday on a largely party-line vote, despite party-line opposition from Democrats and defections from two notorious RINOs who - like most in the Senate - voted in favor of confirming grossly incompetent Biden Defense secretary Lloyd Austin.

Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine predictably broke rank with the Republican majority to elevate the former Fox News star, distinguished military veteran, accomplished author and Harvard graduate.

The vote was 51-49, with a final vote on confirmation expected Friday.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., implored his colleagues to think seriously, “Is this the best man we have to lead the greatest military in the world?”

In what has become a standard part of the Democrat playbook, Hegseth has been subjected to salacious personal smear attacks, accusing him of heavy drinking and infidelity—both of which Democrats routinely engage in with impunity and which would not impugn his competence as a military leader if true. Hegseth has denied many of the allegations.

Mukowksi, in a lengthy statement, said that his behaviors “starkly contrast” with what is expected of the U.S. military. She also noted his past statements that women should not fill military combat roles.

“I remain concerned about the message that confirming Mr. Hegseth sends to women currently serving and those aspiring to join,” Murkowski wrote on social media.

Murkowski said behavior that Hegseth has acknowledged, “including infidelity on multiple occasions,” shows a lack of judgment.

“These behaviors starkly contrast the values and discipline expected of service members,” she said.

“Above all, I believe that character is the defining trait required of the Secretary of Defense, and must be prioritized without compromise,” she said.

Trump is standing by Hegseth, and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee has dismissed the claims as factually inaccurate.

It will take a simple majority senators to confirm Hegseth’s confirmation. Most Republicans, who hold a 53-seat majority in the chamber, have signaled they will back the nominee, though Vice President JD Vance could be called in to break a tie vote.

“I am ironclad in my assessment that the nominee, Mr. Hegseth, is prepared to be the next secretary of defense,” the chairman, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said in a statement on the eve of voting. “The Senate needs to confirm this nominee as fast as possible.”

Wicker said he had been briefed a third time on the FBI background investigation into Hegseth. He said “the allegations unfairly impugning his character do not pass scrutiny.”

A new president’s national security nominees are often the first to be lined up for confirmation, to ensure U.S. safety at home and abroad. Already the Senate has overwhelmingly confirmed Marco Rubio as secretary of State in a unanimous vote, and it was on track to confirm John Ratcliffe as CIA director later Thursday.

During a fiery confirmation hearing, Hegseth swatted away allegations of wrongdoing one by one—dismissing them as “smears”—as he displayed his military credentials and vowed to bring “warrior culture” to the top Pentagon post.

Among the allegations levied against Hegseth is a claim that he sexually assaulted a woman at a Republican conference in California, which he has maintained was a consensual encounter.

A new claim emerged this week in an affidavit from a former sister-in-law who said Hegseth was abusive to his second wife to the point that she feared for her safety. Hegseth has denied the allegation. In divorce proceedings, neither Hegseth nor the woman claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Schumer said Thursday that Hegseth was unqualified for the job because of his personal behavior, including drinking, and his lack of experience.

“One of the kindest words that might be used to describe Mr. Hegseth is erratic, and that’s a term you don’t want at DOD,” Schumer said.

“He has a clear problem of judgment.”

A Princeton- and Harvard-educated former combat veteran, Hegseth went on to make a career at Fox News, where he hosted a weekend show. Trump tapped him as the defense secretary to lead an organization with nearly 2.1 million service members, about 780,000 civilians and a budget of $850 billion.

Hegseth has promised not to drink on the job if confirmed.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, herself a combat veteran and sexual assault survivor, has signaled her backing after initially opposing the choice. It is believed that Ernst herself may have been engaged in a soft campaign for the spot but that intra-party pressure and backlash led her to reconsider.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 17:40

Washington State Seeking To Legalize Homeless Encampments

Washington State Seeking To Legalize Homeless Encampments

Washington Democrats have introduced House Bill 1380, sponsored by Rep. Mia Gregerson (D-SeaTac), which would prevent cities and towns from banning or heavily restricting homeless encampments on public property, according to 770 KTTH.

The bill requires any regulations to be "objectively reasonable as to time, place, and manner," a vague standard determined by judges. It also applies retroactively, potentially nullifying existing ordinances, and provides legal advantages to homeless individuals challenging encampment restrictions.

The bill allows homeless individuals to sue cities over encampment restrictions, request injunctive or declaratory relief, and argue that the restrictions are unreasonable. If the city loses, taxpayers would be responsible for covering the plaintiffs' legal fees.

Opponents claim the bill's ambiguous language deters cities from enforcing restrictions, as its unclear standards may result in inconsistent court decisions.

State Rep. Mia Gregerson, who advocates for the right to camp on public property, has proposed legislation that could create legal confusion, with different judges potentially issuing conflicting rulings on the same ordinance.

The bill offers no clear definition of “objectively reasonable,” leaving the term open to subjective interpretation when applied to encampment restrictions. Courts are directed to prioritize the impact on homeless individuals, even permitting violations of "unreasonable" ordinances if it is necessary for survival, such as staying warm and dry.

The potential benefits of these ordinances for the broader community are not considered.

Critics argue this framework makes it nearly impossible for cities to defend their policies, likely by design. A local lawmaker told “The Jason Rantz Show” that Rep. Gregerson did not consult cities in her district before moving forward with the legislation.

The 770 KTTH report says that most cities can’t afford the lawsuits triggered by challenges to their homeless ordinances under the vague “objective reasonableness” standard, which invites endless legal disputes.

Critics argue HB 1360, proposed by Rep. Mia Gregerson, is a rebranded version of her controversial “homeless bill of rights” and worsens the crisis by limiting local leaders’ ability to address encampments, prioritizing ideology over solutions.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 17:20

Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order

Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

A U.S. judge on Jan. 23 blocked President Donald Trump’s order limiting birthright citizenship.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour after a hearing in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order that prohibits the Trump administration for 14 days from enforcing Trump’s order, which the president signed hours after taking office on Monday.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This is blatantly unconstitutional order,” Coughenour told a lawyer with the U.S. Justice Department during the hearing.

The ruling was made in a case brought by the attorneys general of Arizona, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington state. It was one of several lawsuits lodged against the executive order.

Trump’s order was set to take effect on Feb. 19. It says that the federal government does not automatically recognize birthright citizenship for children who are born to illegal immigrants in the United States.

Historically, babies born on U.S. soil receive U.S. citizenship.

That’s based on court rulings interpreting the U.S. Constitution, which says in part that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Congress also passed a law containing similar language.

Trump’s order says that the Constitution’s citizenship clause “has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States” and “has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.'”

It clarifies that the federal government does not automatically grant citizenship to babies whose mothers are in the United States and whose fathers are neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents.

In their motion for a temporary restraining order, state officials said that Trump went beyond his powers with the order, describing it as “flatly contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment’s text and history, century-old Supreme Court precedent, longstanding Executive Branch interpretation, and the Immigration and Nationality Act.”

Without court intervention, the order would leave more than 150,000 babies born this year without citizenship because their parents are illegally in the country, according to the attorneys general.

Government officials said in response that the court should not issue a restraining order because the states have not suffered any injuries and because the plaintiffs are not likely to succeed.

“Ample historical evidence shows that the children of non-resident aliens are subject to foreign powers—and, thus, are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are not constitutionally entitled to birthright citizenship,” government lawyers said.

That included a Supreme Court justice writing in legal commentaries that birthright citizenship should not apply to babies whose parents were in the country “for temporary purposes.”

Coughenour sided with the states, telling the courtroom before Department of Justice attorney Brett Shumate had even finished talking that he had signed the restraining order sought by the states.

The two-week order is in place while Coughenour weighs issuing a preliminary injunction, which would likely remain in place as the case proceeds in the courts.

Schumate during Thursday’s hearing argued the executive order was constitutional and that any order blocking it would be “wildly inappropriate.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 17:00

Kremlin Shrugs Off, Downplays Trump's Threat Of Tariffs: 'Nothing Particularly New Here'

Kremlin Shrugs Off, Downplays Trump's Threat Of Tariffs: 'Nothing Particularly New Here'

As we've reported, President Donald Trump has been warning and urging for Russia to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine or else things will get worse for Moscow, also as Trump has threatened Russia with new tariffs and sanctions if no solution is found.

But the Kremlin in response appears to have simply shrugged off this threat of sanctions and tariffs, saying in a statement that "we do not see any particularly new elements here" and that "we remain ready for equal and mutually respectful dialogue."

Trump's strong statements are intended to build some quick leverage for Ukraine at the negotiating table - leverage which it clearly doesn't have on the battlefield as Russian forces continue to make strategic advances around the key city of Pokrovsk.

Via Reuters

But Putin isn't ready to take the bait, it appears, and Trump's White House and national security team no doubt perceives it will be much tougher dealing with Putin than previously thought.

Once again, the battlefield is not in Washington or Kiev's favor: "The Chief Commander of the Armed Forces, Oleksandr Syrskyi, stated that the army is doing everything within its power to prevent the loss of Pokrovsk. At this moment, there is no talk of encircling the city—the Russians have approached it from only one direction," a Thursday war report reads.

"According to the Institute for the Study of War, the Russians remain relentless in their attempts to initiate a large offensive and are moving units from other directions to the Pokrovsk region," the report adds.

There won't a 'quick fix' to getting either side to the negotiating table, and given Moscow is completely in the driver's seat with recent battlefield gains in Donetsk, the Kremlin is unlikely to feel in a hurry.

Somewhat surprisingly, Ukraine's Zelensky has started to change his tune on the possibility of every directly engaging Putin in diplomatic talks. He has long said Kiev will never negotiate with Russia so long as Putin is in power, but now...

However, in an interview with Bloomberg on Wednesday in Davos, Zelensky appeared to have changed his stance on the issue. According to the agency, the Ukrainian leader now says he wants to secure a commitment from Trump to support and secure Ukraine before engaging with Putin.

“The only question is what security guarantees and honestly I want to have understanding before the talks. If he can guarantee this strong and irreversible security for Ukraine, we will move along this diplomatic path,” he said.

Such statements also serve to give the Kremlin side more confidence and assurance that it has a stronger hand, given Zelensky is already inching away from past absolutist statements. However, there are reports this week saying that Putin is increasingly concerned about the state of the Russian economy:

President Vladimir Putin has grown increasingly concerned about distortions in Russia's wartime economy, just as Donald Trump pushes for an end to the Ukraine conflict, five sources with knowledge of the situation told Reuters.

Russia's economy, driven by exports of oil, gas and minerals, grew robustly over the past two years despite multiple rounds of Western sanctions imposed after its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The report then emphasizes, "But domestic activity has become strained in recent months by labor shortages and high interest rates introduced to tackle inflation, which has accelerated under record military spending."

Zelensky also has little leverage to impose his demands on the White House at this point, and with the more compliant Biden team long gone...

Earlier this week, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told an audience at the Institute for US and Canadian Studies in Moscow, "Compared to the hopelessness in every aspect of the previous White House chief (President Joe Biden), there is a window of opportunity today, albeit a small one." 

He added: "It's therefore important to understand with what and whom we will have to deal, how best to build relations with Washington, how best to maximize opportunities and minimize risks." But Moscow will extract as much as possible from the other side... because it can.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 16:40

Trump White House Shuts Down Spanish-Language Website And Social Media Accounts

Trump White House Shuts Down Spanish-Language Website And Social Media Accounts

Authored by Eric Lendrum via American Greatness,

Shortly after President Donald Trump was sworn back into office, the White House deactivated its Spanish-language website and Spanish-language social media accounts.

As reported by ABC News, the site formerly listed at www.whitehouse.gov/es/, now displays an “Error 404” message whenever a user tries to access it.

Below the error message was a button that reportedly said “Go Home", but that has now been edited to "Go To Home Page."

At the same time, the Spanish-language White House X account, @LaCasaBlanca, was deactivated, along with the government website on abortion rights.

Other federal agencies’ Spanish-language sites, including the Department of Labor, Department of Justice, and Department of Agriculture, were still available.

When asked about the deactivations, White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Harrison Fields said that the Trump Administration is “committed to bringing back online the Spanish translation section of the website.”

“It’s day two,” Fields explained.

“We are in the process of developing, editing and tweaking the White House website. As part of this ongoing work, some of the archived content on the website went dormant. We are committed to reloading that content in a short timeline.”

However, the first Trump Administration used similar language after deactivating the Spanish-language website the first time, back in 2017.

The site remained deactivated for the entirety of the first term, only reinstated after Joe Biden took over.

President Trump has vowed a widespread crackdown on immigration, including completing construction of the southern border wall, carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in American history, and ending the practice of birthright citizenship.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 15:40

California's Huntington Beach Declares Itself 'Non-Sanctuary City'

California's Huntington Beach Declares Itself 'Non-Sanctuary City'

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Huntington Beach’s city council in Southern California unanimously voted on Jan. 21 to declare the Orange County city a “non-sanctuary city.”

Visitors walk on the pier in Huntington Beach, Calif., on June 19, 2024. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

The declaration, proposed by Mayor Pat Burns and intended to prevent crime, comes after Gov. Gavin Newsom convened a special legislative session to, in part, help protect illegal immigrants from deportation.

“We are going to provide the best safety for our citizens, plain and simple,” said Burns during the city council meeting. “It’s going to be what’s best for Huntington Beach. Huntington Beach first.”

The mayor also addressed concerns that the declaration would be used to attack immigrant communities, saying that it would make immigrant neighborhoods safer.

Huntington Beach City Council wrote in a joint statement that “Neither the Governor nor the State Legislature with the passage of laws may interfere with the City’s voluntary cooperation with federal authorities, nor cause or compel the City to violate federal laws such as Title 8 Section 1324 for the harboring of illegal immigrants.”

According to Huntington Beach City Attorney Michael Gates, California’s sanctuary state law interferes with local agencies’ ability to comply with federal law.

“In California in particular, fighting crime is difficult enough with the relaxed criminal laws and lack of enforcement,” Gates said in a statement. “The State should get out of the way of local law enforcement, stop handcuffing our police officers and California’s cities, and get back to the business of protecting innocent citizens. Emphatically, the State should not take a position of violating federal immigration laws or encouraging cities to violate federal immigration laws.”

During the Jan. 21 meeting, councilman Chad Williams criticized Senate Bill 54, which went into effect in January 2018 and prohibits state and local resources from being used to aid federal immigration enforcement.

“I find it fascinating and really kind of disturbing the way that Sacramento plays word games with laws like SB 54—the so-called Values Act or the sanctuary law—while they freely are admitting that entering the country illegally is a violation of federal law,” said Williams.

“As a charter city in Huntington Beach, we have the right, we have the responsibility, I think, to do better. Upholding the U.S. Constitution isn’t just some abstract idea.”

Huntington Beach’s action is in contrast to other jurisdictions, such as San Diego County, which declared itself a sanctuary region in December 2024. Around the same time, Los Angeles also finalized its sanctuary city policy.

“We’re going to send a very clear message that the city of Los Angeles will not cooperate with ICE in any way,” Los Angeles Councilman Hugo Soto-Martinez said at the time, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “We want people to feel protected and be able to have faith in their government and that women can report domestic violence, crimes.”

Huntington Beach has long supported federal immigration enforcement. The city signed in February 2024 a letter of solidarity with Texas over its efforts to secure the border.

According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, there are at least 2.5 million illegal immigrants in California.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 15:00

Federal Government Drops COVID-19 Vaccination Requirement For Legal Immigrants

Federal Government Drops COVID-19 Vaccination Requirement For Legal Immigrants

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

A COVID-19 vaccine is no longer a requirement for individuals seeking permanent residence in the United States, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said in a Jan. 22 notice.

USCIS, which oversees legal immigration, imposed the COVID-19 vaccination requirement in October 2021 on people looking to move to the United States. Applicants were required to submit proof of COVID-19 vaccination before completing medical examinations.

“USCIS will not issue any Request for Evidence or Notice of Intent to Deny related to proving a COVID-19 vaccination,” the agency stated.

“USCIS will not deny any adjustment of status application based on the applicant’s failure to present documentation that they received the COVID-19 vaccination.”

USCIS did not respond to a request for more information, including whether the change applies retroactively.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, whose guidance the USCIS cited when announcing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, did not return an inquiry.

U.S. immigration officials typically accept proof of prior infection instead of vaccination but did not offer that option for COVID-19.

They did offer exceptions for people whose doctor decided a COVID-19 vaccine was not medically appropriate, or whose religious beliefs did not permit a vaccination.

Some applicants successfully sought exceptions, Christina Xenides, a lawyer with Siri & Glimstad LLP, told The Epoch Times in an email.

Xenides said that the requirement has negatively impacted numerous immigrants while it has been in place.

“Families have endured prolonged separation due to this specific vaccine requirement, and others have had to give up their American dream due to either not wanting to receive the vaccine themselves or give it to their children as young as 6 months, as was required per CDC guidelines,” she said.

“The requirement for all residency applicants aged six months and older to receive this vaccine was particularly troubling for many reasons, especially given the clear evidence that the available vaccines do not prevent the transmission of COVID-19. Additionally, USCIS’s refusal to recognize natural immunity as a valid medical waiver and the limited scope of accepted medical contraindications effectively rendered these options inaccessible for many individuals with serious health conditions.”

Other USCIS vaccination requirements, including for the mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine, are still in place.

Xenides said that people can seek waivers for the remaining vaccination requirements.

If they’re solely opposed to COVID-19 vaccination, she said, the revocation of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate “marks a significant and positive development.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 13:40

Canada Can't Afford To Play Trade Chicken With The US

Canada Can't Afford To Play Trade Chicken With The US

Authored by Marco Navarro-Génie via The Epoch Times,

Calls for Canada to respond aggressively to U.S. trade threats ignore the economic realities of such a move. Consider Quebec and Alberta energy. The stakes for Alberta and Quebec in this morbidly anticipated trade-war gamble are profoundly asymmetric, with Alberta standing to lose far more in absolute terms and per capita. The arguments to engage in such conflict are reckless and fail to recognize the magnitude of our economic integration with the United States.

Canada and the United States share one of the world’s most extensive and intertwined trading relationships. In 2022, bilateral trade in goods and services exceeded $900 billion annually. Canada exported 75 percent of its goods to the United States. Beyond trade, bilateral investment is immense, with over $1 trillion in two-way direct investment (All amounts in Canadian dollars).

A trade war would jeopardize trade and these capital flows, which are critical for businesses and public finances. Retaliatory tariffs or export restrictions would destabilize relationships and harm key industries across Canada. During the 2018 NAFTA renegotiations, even the spectre of a trade breakdown cost Canadian industries millions in lost revenue and opportunities. A full-blown trade war would magnify these damages exponentially.

Alberta’s oil and gas sector is the backbone of its economy and a vital contributor to Canada’s prosperity. In 2023, Alberta exported  $127 billion worth of oil and gas to the United States, representing 82 percent of its energy exports. This sector accounts for 27 percent of Alberta’s GDP and contributes approximately $28,863 per capita to the provincial economy.

Halting these exports would be harmful to a weakened economy. Alberta’s energy industry supports tens of thousands of jobs and generates substantial government revenues that fund social programs and infrastructure. Alberta is also a net contributor to federal equalization payments, providing billions annually to support less prosperous provinces, including Quebec.

The suggestion that Alberta should stop exporting oil and gas to “do its part” for Canada is economically nonsensical. Unlike Quebec’s electricity sector, Alberta’s energy industry has no immediate alternative markets to replace U.S. demand. Shutting off the tap to America would devastate Alberta and weaken Canada.

In contrast, Quebec’s hydroelectric sector, though significant, plays a smaller role in its economy than oil and gas do in Alberta. In 2022, Hydro-Québec exported $3 billion worth of electricity to the U.S., representing about 12 percent of its total electricity production and 2.9 percent of its GDP. With a population of 8.6 million, these exports amount to $349 per capita.

While losing U.S. electricity exports would hurt Quebec, the economic impact would be far less severe than Alberta’s potential losses. Quebec’s export economy is more diversified, with industries like aerospace, aluminum, pharmaceuticals, and technology providing alternative revenue streams.

The notion that Alberta and Quebec will equally shoulder the burden of a trade war by withholding energy sales to the United States is deeply flawed. Alberta’s reliance on the U.S. market is far greater, and its potential losses are higher. This is partly because Quebec objected to Energy East, the proposed pipeline to carry Alberta energy to Atlantic waters. Halting oil and gas exports would cost Alberta almost 10 times more per capita than it would cost Quebec.

This asymmetry highlights the uneven stakes in any trade conflict. Asking Alberta to sacrifice its economy while Quebec faces minor losses is unfair, economically irrational, and deeply corrosive to national unity. Undermining Alberta’s economy would have repercussions far beyond the province’s borders.

Far from being “anti-Canadian,” as suggested by people with a political agenda to hurt Alberta, Alberta’s reluctance to dismantle its energy sector is a defence of Canada’s broader economic interests. The province’s contributions to federal revenues and equalization payments help sustain national programs that benefit all Canadians. Conversely, Quebec’s relative insulation from the harmful consequences of a trade war explains its more relaxed stance.

For Quebec, halting exports would be akin to a paper cut whereas for Alberta, it would be a lethal wound.

Canada’s strength lies in its economic diversity and regional contributions. Alberta’s oil and gas sector, Quebec’s hydroelectric industry, Atlantic fisheries, and Ontario’s manufacturing base are all critical to the country’s prosperity.

A trade war would disrupt this relationship and risk Canada’s position as a stable and reliable trading partner. Premier Danielle Smith alone has offered a mature and reasonable approach.

The idea of a trade war with the United States is reckless when Canada’s government is in stasis and already mired in the economic problems it created.

Rather than pitting provinces against one another, Ottawa (and the premiers spoiling for a fight) should focus on preserving a proven key to our prosperity: strengthening its relationship with the United States.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 13:00

Trump 2.0 - So Far, So Good For Markets

Trump 2.0 - So Far, So Good For Markets

Authored by Peter Tchir via Academy Securities,

We are only a few days into Trump 2.0, but so far, so good.

This administration is more fully staffed on day 1 than the last time and is filled with people who are committed to his causes. That is an important difference as the level of preparation out of the gates is materially different. Depending on which direction the administration goes, this might be good or bad, but make no mistake, Trump 2.0 is far more prepared and ready to act.

We’ve had the first (of what could be many) “personality clashes” in the administration with Ramaswamy stepping away from Musk and DOGE. With so many prolific, high energy individuals, we should expect to see clashes. The only one that could manifest itself and be tough for markets would be if the Trump and Musk relationship goes sideways. There is a comfort level associated with the richest man in the world helping form and guide policy – from a markets perspective. If that gets tested, it could be trouble, but so far, so good.

Trump seemed almost like two different people. One, very “presidential” at the official inauguration, the other, far less so, promoting an almost “campaign-like rally” atmosphere at later events on Inauguration Day.

Many of the topics we discuss are related to issues covered in more detail (along with our outlooks) in Geopolitical Risks and Opportunities in 2025. So far, from the policy side, we have seen:

  • Some chatter on tariffs, but little being done. It seems obvious to everyone now that this has become a negotiating ploy. He talks about it to rally his supporters but is listening to those who caution him about being too aggressive or too pre-emptive. It looks like we are just starting the negotiations. Have said that, be prepared to see some retrenchment on Trump’s part, though at this point, it might take actual actions rather than words to move markets.

  • Immigration policy seems to be starting off “reasonably” well (in my opinion) – enforcing the borders, etc. There is very little obvious attempt to round up millions of people, especially law-abiding people, to deport them. I like the tactic of elevating the drug cartels to terrorist organizations, as that could be a big step towards Mexico and the U.S. really taking them down. That would solve so many issues (we’ve discussed “ungoverned space” in this context as well). A solution to the cartels helps the U.S. and Mexico and would set the stage for real growth.

  • China. Trump seems to want to make a “deal.” No day 1 tariffs. No ban on TikTok. Bizarrely, this makes me nervous as I expect China to try to find a deal that provides them time. That lets them get through their current economic issues, while setting them up for the future (from AI, to high tech, to controlling shipping, to selling their brands globally – with the backing of China Inc.).

  • AI and compute. The investments announced yesterday are very positive. What is possibly as important as the investments is the signal that those investors/investments are sending. There is a “bandwagon” building and people want to get on it. That could propel forward similar plans from others. I’m hearing about the “Roaring 20s” more and more in my conversations. This area might benefit further from Trump’s desire to deregulate (though I’m not sure if we will like the results, as so far, the U.S. has seemed pretty even handed in its regulation – unlike Europe which hurts the industry time and again).

  • Crypto. With the SEC setting up a crypto commission. With the pardon of the Silk Road founder. With the launch of multiple meme coins (for the president and those surrounding him). With all those “withs,” it seems plausible that a serious push is being made for a crypto reserve. It makes zero sense to me, but I wouldn’t fight it. While this might be a stretch, the contributions from the crypto community might be the single biggest force in U.S. politics. SBF clearly influenced the midterms before he fell. The crypto community clearly influenced the last election, and I expect they are just spreading their wings. Lots of access to wealth (some of which may not be traceable), potential new means of generating wealth for those they want to support (meme coins), a passionate goal (higher and higher crypto prices), and in many cases, some flair. Every politician must be thinking (or should be thinking) about how to tap into this force! I have not bought any crypto (or crypto ETFS) since the election, but am tempted to, because regardless of whatever I think, there are a lot of supporters in his inner circle in addition to the donors pushing hard.

  • Peace through Strength. I’ve seen little on the military front that has caught my eye. Though I believe that we will see successes in the Middle East and with Russia and Ukraine. We will return to a state where U.S. deterrence does just that – deter! See Bloomberg TV Last Week – Trump’s Defense Chief Must Restore U.S. Deterrence. I am going to be adding some European stock ETFs to my portfolio in the coming days, on the back of this expectation, along with positioning.

  • Commodities. From “drill baby drill” to “refine baby refine,” we are in the early stages of actions that will change the commodity space. The president (rightfully so) argues that lower energy prices will keep inflation lower. I agree as energy prices affect everything from manufacturing costs to delivery costs. More broadly speaking, it results in lower commodity prices, lower prices for goods, and potentially services as well (as a byproduct of servicers spending less on the equipment they need). I don’t like owning the commodities, but the commodity producers should do well, though that might be tricky. Companies supplying the goods and services producers need should also do well. This includes anything from heavy equipment makers, to oil field servicers, to anyone in infrastructure. As awful as the fire in Los Angeles is, it may help set the stage for changing the regulations. This is all part and parcel of infrastructure spending.

  • The Deficit. I see zero progress on this front, but for the past few trading sessions, the bond market has ignored the risk. Trump’s calls to abandon the debt ceiling were completely dismissed. The efforts to keep commodity prices down have probably helped, along with reduced fears of a tariff war. Having said that, look for yields to rise again, with my target being 4.9% on 10s.

  • Work from Office. I like commercial real estate here as everywhere I look, work from home is going back to being a luxury for the employee, rather than a requirement that employers are forced to offer.

  • Chips and Space. Nothing is jumping out so far, but I expect to hear more in the coming weeks, along the lines of what we’ve outlined.

So far, so good, but don’t forget the theme of 2025 – “messy” so as things look rosy, prepare for some negative headlines, and when things seem gloomy, expect the narrative to change more positive.

It should be an interesting year, but so far, so good for markets.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 12:20

WTI Tumbles On Trump Comments, Shrugs Off 9th Straight Weekly Crude Draw

WTI Tumbles On Trump Comments, Shrugs Off 9th Straight Weekly Crude Draw

Oil prices are lower this morning (extending a multi-day slump) following comments from President Trump to Davos that he will push Saudi Arabia and OPEC to lower oil prices. Prices had recovered some overnight weakness (due to across the board inventory builds reported by API) before Trump's comments.

“I’m also going to ask Saudi Arabia and OPEC to bring down the cost of oil,” Trump said in remarks delivered virtually to world leaders gathered in Davos Thursday. “You’ve got to bring it down.”

The remarks stifled a rebound earlier in the session that had been driven by signs that fresh US sanctions on Russian crude, introduced before Trump took office, were tightening the global market.

API

  • Crude +1mm

  • Cushing +500k

  • Gasoline +3.2mm

  • Distillates +1.9mm

DOE

  • Crude -1.02mm

  • Cushing -148k

  • Gasoline +2.33mm

  • Distillates -3.07mm

While API reported across the board builds, the official data was almost the opposite with only gasoline stocks rising (though only modestly... even if it was the 10th weekly build in a row). Crude inventories are down for the 9th straight week

Source: Bloomberg

Total US crude stocks dropped to their lowest since March 2022 and the seasonally lowest since 2015...

Source: Bloomberg

US crude production remains near record highs...

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was trading around $74.50 ahead of the inventory data and tricked up very slightly on the crude draw...

“Oil markets are now facing the introduction of a new variable this year, that is the ‘Trump call option’ on energy prices,” said Frank Monkam, head of macro trading at Buffalo Bayou Commodities.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 12:09

EXCLUSIVE: Piper Sandler's Kantro And Citi's King Deep Dive On Markets

EXCLUSIVE: Piper Sandler's Kantro And Citi's King Deep Dive On Markets

Piper Sandler’s Michael “Kantro” Kantrowitz was ranked 2024’s number 1 portfolio strategist by the widely followed Extel survey. Matt King was head of global strategy for Citibank for two decades and now runs Satori Insights. 

Kantro and King will meet face-to-face this Thursday evening at 6pm ET, only accessible on the ZeroHedge homepage and only visible to premium and professional subscribers so sign up now and save the date. The event will be moderated by RealVision’s Ash Bennington.

Overview of their positions below.

Kantro: Cautiously Optimistic

  • Modest economic growth ahead. Manufacturing appears to be picking up — either because of the Trump win or Fed easing cycle. PMI to increase.

  • Rates should fall, but “ifthe 10 year goes above 4.5%, then markets are going to struggle.”

  • “Ironically, that rise in the unemployment rate has actually been a good thing for stocks because it helped to get inflation down. It started to get the Fed pivoting.”

Kantro's new podcast with Piper Sandler launched last week.

King: Optimism Priced In

U.S. equities ahead of their skis compared to rest of globe (pictured bottom left). While this is not unjustified as American firms are the “biggest and the best” (bottom right)…

…money is beginning to flow out.

Both strategists agree: what Trump does on tariffs and immigration will be key to watch.

Tune into the live debate: Thursday, Jan 23 at 6pm ET right at the top of the ZeroHedge homepage but only if you are logged in as a professional or premium user so sign up now. Professional users may email debates@zerohedge.com to submit questions for the debaters.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 11:40

Supreme Court Denies RFK Jr. Request To Block California's Doctor Investigations Over COVID-19 Advice

Supreme Court Denies RFK Jr. Request To Block California's Doctor Investigations Over COVID-19 Advice

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected three doctors’ emergency request to prevent a California agency from investigating them over advice they give to patients that does not conform to the state’s position on COVID-19.

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan stands during a group photograph of the justices at the Supreme Court in Washington, on April 23, 2021. Erin Schaff/AFP via Getty Images

Justice Elena Kagan, who handles urgent appeals from California, rejected the emergency application in Kory v. Bonta late on Jan. 21. She did not explain why.

The decision came 13 days after the case was docketed by the court on Jan. 8. Kagan did not ask California to respond to the application.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was listed as one of two attorneys representing the physicians in the case.

President Donald Trump has nominated Kennedy, an activist on environment and health-related issues, to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The other co-counsel on the application is Richard Jaffe of Sacramento, California.

The Medical Board of California considers the expression of the doctors’ dissenting views on the disease as potentially dangerous misinformation that needs to be suppressed.

The board argues that it has legal authority to discipline the doctors for speech it deems to be medical misconduct. The physicians counter that they didn’t surrender their free speech rights when they obtained medical licenses.

The application was initiated by Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Brian Tyson, both medical doctors; Dr. Le Trinh Hoag, an osteopathic physician; Physicians for Informed Consent; and Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit organization founded by Kennedy.

Kennedy has resigned from the nonprofit because of his pending HHS nomination, Jaffe told The Epoch Times.

The application stated that California’s executive and legislative branches are “threatening California physicians with professional discipline for their viewpoint speech contrary to the mainstream COVID narrative.”

After the Federation of State Medical Boards in July 2021 asked its member medical boards in the United States to punish physicians for advancing perceived “COVID misinformation” and “disinformation” among patients and the public, Medical Board of California President Kristina Lawson announced in February 2022 that the board planned to sanction physicians for what it called “COVID misinformation.”

The California Legislature passed AB 2098, which took effect in January 2023, making the dissemination of “misinformation” about the disease an offense for which doctors could be disciplined, the application stated.

After a federal district judge halted the law in January 2023, the Legislature repealed the misinformation provision effective January 2024. The application said the board continued to probe physicians for violating its COVID-19 policy following the repeal.

The applicants were challenging “the practice and policy of threatening and targeting physicians with discipline for providing information and recommendations contrary to the mainstream COVID narrative,” according to the application.

On April 23, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California rejected a request to preliminarily block the state’s enforcement program, holding that the applicants lacked legal standing.

Standing refers to the right of someone to sue in court. The parties must show a strong enough connection to the claim to justify their participation in a lawsuit.

The ruling was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Nov. 27, 2024.

The California Business and Professions Code, under which the California Medical Board claims its disciplinary authority, “regulates conduct, not speech,” the appeals court stated. “It provides for enforcement of the standard of care, which is the standard for physicians’ treatment of patients,” the court added.

To demonstrate standing, the applicants had to demonstrate that there was “a credible threat that the [board] will prosecute them under the statute,” but they did not do so, the appeals court stated.

The Ninth Circuit said the court record showed that the only disciplinary action taken against a doctor “involved a physician encouraging her patient to use veterinary ivermectin and resulted in the stipulated surrender of her license.”

The applicants were asking the Supreme Court for an injunction stopping the state from “continuing their enforcement program targeting the information, opinions, and recommendations on COVID-19 which California licensed physicians may provide to patients.”

A related challenge that Kennedy and Jaffe filed with the Supreme Court was rejected by the full court on Jan. 13.

In Stockton v. Ferguson, the justices were asked to prevent the Washington Medical Commission from investigating licensed physicians in the state over their criticism of COVID-19 policies.

The application was brought by former professional basketball player John Stockton along with Drs. Richard Eggleston, Thomas Siler, Daniel Moynihan, another 50 unidentified medical doctors, and Children’s Health Defense.

Jaffe told The Epoch Times it was “not surprising” that Kagan denied the application in Kory v. Bonta given that the full court declined the application in Stockton v. Ferguson.

The lawyer said his clients in the California case will either file a petition for certiorari, or review, with the Supreme Court, or continue pursuing the lawsuit that is still pending in federal district court.

“The plaintiffs are committed to pressing their case for the right of physicians to speak their truth to patients, and to the public,” he said.

Jaffe said “the tide is turning,” and pointed to Trump’s executive order signed Jan. 20 aimed at preventing government censorship, along with Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg’s recent “admission that [Facebook parent company] Meta had been bullied into suppressing speech the government did not like.”

After Kennedy is confirmed, “we are hopeful that the government will start releasing information about the COVID vaccines and treatments which may further support the wisdom of the principle that physicians have the right to speak out against the government narrative without fear of government reprisal.”

Before the recent pandemic, the courts “fully recognized those rights, but I think COVID scared many, including judges to grant a constitutional exception in times of crises.”

Jaffe added that his side remains optimistic that in the future the Supreme Court “will reject what these two states are doing in these physician speech cases.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the Medical Board of California and to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who represents the board, for comment. No replies were received by publication time.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 11:20

Trump Blasts BofA CEO Over Anti-Conservative Bank Bias, Unleashes His "Revolution Of Common Sense" On WEF Globalists

Trump Blasts BofA CEO Over Anti-Conservative Bank Bias, Unleashes His "Revolution Of Common Sense" On WEF Globalists

Update (1320ET): Trump did not disappoint on Thursday, as he delivered virtual address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, before taking questions from people who hate him with the intensity of a thousand suns.

Highlights:

  • Trump said he would ask Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations to bring down the cost of oil.
  • He then slammed Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, telling him to stop discriminating against conservatives.

Of note, the far-left activists at Bloomberg referred to this as "an unsubstantiated right-wing conspiracy theory."

Except, it's not, dicks. Amazing.

  • Trump referred to his reelection, and ensuing flurry of executive orders, as a "revolution of common sense."
  • Trump also said he hopes that China can help bring an end to the war in Ukraine.

*  *  *

Grab your popcorn...

With the 'woke' global left starting to crumble, as so well exclaimed by Argentina's Milei earlier today, President Trump will speak remotely at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this morning, delivering his first major speech to global business and political leaders.

The world will be listening closely for any details on his pledge to introduce universal tariffs on goods imported to the U.S., and for his position on major geopolitical and economic issues such as the Ukraine-Russia war, the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations and America’s economic rivalry with China.

Trump has openly criticized the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives championed by the WEF.

During his first term, Trump traveled to Davos twice, in 2018 and 2020, to attend the WEF meetings.

In his keynote address in 2020, he touted his protectionist trade policies and the United States’ position as the world’s largest oil and gas producer.

He also expressed concerns about NATO’s heavy dependence on the United States, urging member nations to increase their contributions to defense spending.

In recent years, however, the forum has increasingly faced criticism, with questions raised regarding the usefulness of its debates in resolving the struggles of regular people.

Watch Trump's speech here (due to start at 1100ET):

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 10:56

Trump's Reforms Could Radically Overhaul, Consolidate Federal Workforce

Trump's Reforms Could Radically Overhaul, Consolidate Federal Workforce

Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump wasted no time following his Jan. 20 swearing-in to sign dozens of executive orders, including seven specifically aimed at fundamentally changing the culture, costs, and size of the federal workforce.

President Donald Trump signs an executive order on birthright citizenship, at the White House on Jan. 20, 2025. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Most immediately, Trump ordered the 2.3 million career civil service government employees to report for work at their official duty stations, thus ending the teleworking started in 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A second order directed federal officials to freeze all hiring for positions vacant as of Jan. 20 and bar the creation of new jobs. The federal government hired 631,639 new civilian workers from 2020 to 2024, an annual average of 126,327, according to FedScope.

The same order also directed the directors of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to work with the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to “submit a plan to reduce the size of the federal government’s workforce through efficiency improvements and attrition.” The order did not specify how many jobs are to be eliminated.

Several of the remaining five orders on the civil service are already hotly contested by congressional Democrats with large numbers of federal employees in their districts and states, as well as by professional associations and labor unions.

The most controversial is the return of Schedule F, an executive order that Trump signed in 2020 only weeks before losing his reelection campaign to Biden. Now renamed as the “Schedule Policy/Career,” the measure is needed, according to the Trump White House, because removing an incompetent government worker typically takes at least 18 months and can go much longer.

“Only 41 percent of civil service supervisors are confident that they can remove an employee who engaged in insubordination or serious misconduct. Even fewer supervisors—26 percent—are confident that they can remove an employee for poor performance,” the order stated.

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) questions witnesses during a House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing on March 29, 2023. Cliff Owen/AP Photo

The Schedule Policy/Career reforms concern the approximately 7,000 members of the Senior Executive Service (SES), who earn between $180,000 and $246,000 annually. These positions are the top policy-making jobs that career service employees can occupy. The order could cover additional positions below the SES in the future.

The fourth order complemented the third because it established a direct line of accountability from SES managers through their respective agency heads to the president. The order directs that all SES managers must implement the president’s and the administration’s agenda and policies.

The order also abolished the current Executive Resources Boards (ERB), which oversee the SES managers in particular departments and agencies, and replaces them with new panels with majorities made up of politically appointed officials.

The fifth order barred federal agencies from hiring employees on the basis of race, sex, or religion and requires hiring decisions to “prioritize recruitment of individuals committed to improving the efficiency of the federal government, passionate about the ideals of our American republic, and committed to upholding the rule of law and the United States Constitution.”

The sixth Trump order is aimed at two specific groups and seeks to discourage federal workers from abusing their access to classified information. One of these two orders withdrew the national security clearances of the 51 intelligence community officials who signed an October 2020 letter claiming the Hunter Biden laptop computer had “all the classic earmarks of Russian disinformation.”

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton speaks to reporters after a panel discussion hosted by the National Council of Resistance of Iran–U.S. Representative Office at the Willard InterContinental Hotel in Washington on Aug. 17, 2022. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The order also withdrew the clearance of John Bolton, who was Trump’s national security adviser for a period in 2019. The order said Bolton’s 2019 memoir posed “a grave risk” of leaking classified information.

The last of the seven orders directed a 60-day freeze of all proposed regulations that have not been published in the Federal Register for public comment and prevents the issuance of any new proposed rules not previously reviewed by a Trump appointee.

Even before Trump officially issued these seven executive orders, Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) and three House colleagues introduced legislation designed to block the Schedule F/Schedule Policy Career order.

The largest federal worker union, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), criticized Trump’s proposed reforms, especially the Schedule Policy/Career order.

“President Trump’s order is a blatant attempt to corrupt the federal government by eliminating employees’ due process rights so they can be fired for political reasons. It will remove hundreds of thousands of federal jobs from the nonpartisan, professional civil service and make them answerable to the will of one man,” AFGE President Everett Kelley said in a statement.

National Treasury Employees Union officials filed suit on Jan. 21 against the order.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 10:20

Milei Gives Blistering WEF Speech: Slams DEI, Says Woke Ideology "Cancer", And Calls For Limited Government

Milei Gives Blistering WEF Speech: Slams DEI, Says Woke Ideology "Cancer", And Calls For Limited Government

Argentina's President Javier Milei delivered a blockbuster speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday, where he said that woke politics are a "cancer" on the world and must be eradicated to usher in a "new golden age" of freedom and prosperity.

"What once seemed like a global hegemony of the ‘woke’ left in politics, educational institutions, in the media, in supranational organizations or even in forums like Davos, has begun to crumble," said Milei, who took office in 2023.

The Argentinian politician says he's been forming alliances with other conservative figures and leaders.

"Over the course of this year, I have found allies in this fight for the cause of freedom in every corner of the world, from the amazing [tech billionaire] Elon Musk to that fierce Italian lady [Prime Minister] Giorgia Meloni, from [President Nayib] Bukele in El Salvador to Viktor Orban in Hungary," he said, adding "Slowly, an international alliance has been forming among all those nations who want to be free and believe in the ideas of liberty."

"Merit has been cast aside in favor of the doctrine of diversity," he continued, adding "Quotas are invented for every minority that politicians can come up with, which undermines the excellence of institutions."

Milei then said called out transgender men who adopt children to abuse. "They are pedophiles," he said.

Milei also said that if the West wants to "reclaim" its progress, "we have to drastically reduce the size of the state," adding "The function of the state must once again be limited to defending the right to life, liberty, & property."

Milei, who said that "the battle is not yet won," spoke days after US President Donald Trump's inauguration - after which Trump signed a slew of executive orders reversing woke policies from the Biden administration.

"Although hope has been rekindled, it is our moral duty and responsibility to dismantle the ideological edifice of sickly wokeism," he continued.

Libertarian Milei has been credited with revamping market confidence in Argentina’s downtrodden economy, implementing cuts to public sector spending and energy subsidies, among his policies. Inflation has also fallen from one of the world’s highest annual inflation rates of 289.4% in April to 117.8% in the year to December 2024, according to data from the country’s central bank. -CNBC

Last year Milei called on global leaders to reject socialism and instead embrace "free enterprise capitalism."

Watch the whole speech below via Rebel News.

 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 10:00

Pages