en Trump's Appointments - What Do They Mean? <p><a href=""><em>Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,</em></a></p> <p><em>Before I give an explanation, let&rsquo;s be sure we all know what an explanation is. <strong>An explanation is not a justification.</strong> The collapse of education in the US is so severe that many Americans, especially younger ones, cannot tell the difference between an explanation and a defense, justification, or apology for what they regard as a guilty person or party. If an explanation is not damning or sufficiently damning of what they want damned, the explanation is interpreted as an excuse for the object of their scorn.<strong> In America, reason and objective analysis have taken a backseat to emotion.</strong></em></p> <p>We do not know what the appointments mean except, as Trump discovered once he confronted the task of forming a government, that <strong>there is no one but insiders to appoint.</strong> For the most part that is correct. Outsiders are a poor match for insiders who tend to eat them alive. Ronald Reagan&rsquo;s California crew were a poor match for George H.W. Bush&rsquo;s insiders.<strong> The Reagan part of the government had a hell of a time delivering results that Reagan wanted.</strong></p> <p>Another limit on a president&rsquo;s ability to form a government is Senate confirmation of presidential appointees. Whereas Congress is in Republican hands, Congress remains in the hands of special interests who will protect their agendas from hostile potential appointees. Therefore,<strong> although Trump does not face partisan opposition from Congress, he faces the power of special interests that fund congressional political campaigns.</strong></p> <p>When the White House announced my appointment as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Republican Senator Bob Dole put a hold on my appointment. Why? Dole had presidential ambitions, and he saw the rising star of Republican Representative Jack Kemp as a potential obstacle. As I had written the Kemp-Roth bill that had become Reagan&rsquo;s economic policy, Dole regarded me in the Treasury as a one-up for Kemp. So, you see, all sorts of motives can plague a president&rsquo;s ability to form a government.</p> <p><strong>With Trump under heavy attack prior to his inauguration, he cannot afford drawn out confirmation fights and defeats.</strong></p> <p><strong><em>Does Trump&rsquo;s choice of <u>Steve Mnuchin</u> as Treasury Secretary mean that Goldman Sachs will again be in charge of US economic policy?</em></strong> Possibly, but we do not know. We will have to wait and see. Mnuchin left Goldman Sachs 14 years ago. He has been making movies in Hollywood and started his own investment firm. Many people have worked for Goldman Sachs and the New York Banks who have become devastating critics of the banks. Read Nomi Prins&rsquo; books and visit Pam Martens website, Wall Street on Parade. My sometimes coauthor Dave Kranzler is a former Wall Streeter.</p> <p>Commentators are jumping to conclusions based on appointees past associations. Mnuchin was an early Trump supporter and chairman of Trump&rsquo;s finance campaign. He has Wall Street and investment experience. He should be an easy confirmation. For a president-elect under attack this is important.</p> <p><strong><em>Will Mnuchin suppport Trump&rsquo;s goal of bringing middle class jobs back to America? Is Trump himself sincere?</em></strong> We do not know.</p> <p>What we do know is that <strong>Trump attacked the fake &ldquo;free trade&rdquo; agreements that have stripped America of middle class jobs just as did Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot.</strong> We know that the Clintons made their fortune as agents of the One Percent, the only ones who have profited from the offshoring of American jobs. Trump&rsquo;s fortune is not based on jobs offshoring.</p> <p><strong>Not every billionaire is an oligarch. </strong>Trump&rsquo;s relation to the financial sector is one as a debtor. No doubt Trump and the banks have had unsatisfactory relationships. And Trump says he is a person who enjoys revenge.</p> <p><em><strong>What about the hot-headed generals announced as <u>National Security Advisor and Secretary of Defense</u>?</strong></em> Both seem to be death on Iran, which is stupid and unfortunate. However, keep in mind that Gen. Flynn is the one who blew the whistle on the Obama regime for rejecting the advice of the DIA and sending ISIS to overthrow Assad. Flynn said that ISIS was a &ldquo;willful decision&rdquo; of the Obama administration, not some unexpected event.</p> <p>And keep in mind that Gen. <strong>Mattis is the one who told Trump that torture does not work, which caused Trump to back off his endorsement of torture.</strong></p> <p><strong>So both of these generals, as bad as they may be, are an improvement on what came before</strong>. Both have shown independence from the neoconservative line that supports ISIS and torture.</p> <p><u><strong>Keep in mind also that there are two kinds of insiders</strong></u>. Some represent the agendas of special interests; others go with the flow because they enjoy participating in the affairs of the nation. Those who don&rsquo;t go with the flow are eliminated from participating.</p> <p>Goldman Sachs is a good place to get rich. That Mnuchin left 14 years ago could mean that he was not a good match for Goldman Sachs, that they did not like him or he did not like them. That Flynn and Mattis have taken independent positions on ISIS and torture suggests that they are mavericks. All three of these appointees seem to be strong and confident individuals who know the terrain, which is the kind of people a president needs if he is to accomplish anything.</p> <p>The problem with beating up on an administration before it exists and has a record is that the result can be that the administration becomes deaf to all criticism. It is much better to give the new president a chance and to hold his feet to the fire on the main issues.</p> <p>Trump alone among all the presidential candidates said that <strong>he saw no point in fomenting conflict with Russia.</strong> Trump alone<strong> questioned NATO&rsquo;s continued existence</strong> 25 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union.</p> <p>Trump alone said that he would <strong>work to bring middle class jobs back to America.</strong></p> <p>And Trump said that he would <strong>enforce immigration laws. </strong>Is this racism or is this a defense of citizenship? How is the US a country if there is no difference between illegal aliens and citizens?</p> <p>Commentators of all stripes are <strong>making a mistake to damn in advance the only government that campaigned on peace with Russia, restoring middle class jobs, and respect for the country&rsquo;s borders.</strong> We should seize on these promises and hold the Trump administration to them. We should also work to make Trump aware of the serious adverse consequences of environmental degradation.</p> <p><em><strong>Who is blowing these opportunities? Trump? Mnuchin? Flynn? Mattis?</strong></em></p> <p>Or us?</p> <p><strong>The more Trump is criticized, the easier it is for the neoconservatives to offer their support and enter the administration. </strong>To date he has not appointed one, but you can bet your life that Israel is lobbying hard for the neocons. The neocons still reign in the media, the think tanks, university departments of foreign affairs, and the foreign policy community. They are an ever present danger.</p> <p>Trump&rsquo;s personality means that <strong>he is likely to see more reward in being the president who reverses American decline than in using the presidency to augment his personal fortune. </strong>Therefore, there is some hope for change occuring from the top rather than originating in the streets of bloody revolution. By the time Americans reach the revolutionary stage of awareness the police state is likely to be too strong for them.</p> <p><u><strong><em>So let&rsquo;s give the Trump administration a chance. We can turn on him after he sells us out.</em></strong></u></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="511" height="354" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Banking in the United States Congress Donald Trump Economy of New York City Economy of the United States goldman sachs Goldman Sachs Goldman Sachs Iran Israel national security Neocons North Atlantic Treaty Organization Obama Administration Obama administration Political positions of Donald Trump Politics Presidency of Donald Trump Rockefeller Center Senate Steven Mnuchin Subprime mortgage crisis Trump Administration White House White House Sun, 04 Dec 2016 03:00:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579420 at A Visual History Of Population In America <p>You’ve likely seen the population density map of the United States in one form or another. <strong><em>A lot of people per square mile reside in big cities, fewer people reside in suburban areas, and a lot fewer people reside in rural areas. </em></strong></p> <p>But as<a href="">'s Nathan Yau explains</a>, <strong>cities weren’t always cities though. </strong>Rural wasn’t always rural. <strong><em>If you look at people per square mile over a couple of centuries, you get a better idea of how the country developed.</em></strong></p> <p><iframe src="" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <p><strong>The animated map above shows population density by decade, going back to 1790 and up to recent estimates for 2015.</strong> The time in between each time period represents a smoothed transition. This is approximate, but it gives a better idea of how the distribution of population changed.</p> <p><em>As you watch, keep in mind that the map is based on data that was available and that it only represents the United States population.</em></p> <p><em>This is especially notable during the first century. No data shows in much of the country, the estimates are spotty in many territories, and there were people who lived in the blanked out areas before newcomers settled.</em></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="600" height="109" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Demographics of the United States Demography Environmental issues Human geography Human overpopulation Population Population density Rural area Rural society Settlement geography United States urban area Urban area Sun, 04 Dec 2016 02:30:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579418 at Tomorrow's Vote In Italy Will Be A "Wide-Ranging F**k Off", And It's Just The Start... <p><a href=""><em>Submitted by Nick Giambruno via,</em></a></p> <p><strong>Tomorrow, December 4, Italy is holding a referendum that will determine the fate of the entire European Union.</strong></p> <p>Donald Trump&rsquo;s victory&mdash;which shocked Europe&rsquo;s political and media elite&mdash;gives the populists backing the &ldquo;No&rdquo; side of Italy&rsquo;s referendum the political rocket fuel they need for a virtually guaranteed win.</p> <p>That momentum will be all but impossible to reverse. Anti-elite sentiment is rising on both sides of the Atlantic. And I bet the global populist revolution will continue.</p> <p>If Italians buck the establishment&mdash;and it looks like they will&mdash;it will clear a path for a populist party to take power and for Italy to exit the euro.</p> <p>If that happens, the fallout will be catastrophic for global markets. The&nbsp;<em>Financial Times</em>&nbsp;recently put it this way:</p> <p style="margin-left: .5in;">An Italian exit from the single currency would trigger the total collapse of the eurozone within a very short period.</p> <p style="margin-left: .5in;">It would probably lead to the most violent economic shock in history, dwarfing the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy in 2008 and the 1929 Wall Street crash.</p> <p>If the&nbsp;<em>FT&nbsp;</em>is even partially right, we&rsquo;re looking at a possible stock market crash of historic proportions. This is why we&rsquo;re watching the December 4 referendum so closely.</p> <p><strong>The referendum is meant to concentrate more power in Italy&rsquo;s central government.</strong> On that point alone, everyone should oppose it. The centralization of power never leads to good things.</p> <p><strong>A &ldquo;Yes&rdquo; vote is effectively a vote of confidence in the current pro-EU Italian establishment. This is what the global elite wants.</strong></p> <p><strong>A &ldquo;No&rdquo; vote is how the average Italian can give the finger to the faceless EU bureaucrats in Brussels, whom many blame&mdash;quite correctly&mdash;for their problems.</strong></p> <p>Trump&rsquo;s win has been a double whammy for Italy&rsquo;s pro-EU establishment.</p> <p>First, it emboldens the populist forces fighting the referendum.</p> <p>Second, it humiliates and politically castrates Matteo Renzi, the current Italian prime minister. Renzi took a rare step when he openly endorsed Hillary Clinton. He was the only European leader to do so.</p> <p>As one of Renzi&rsquo;s rivals said after Trump&rsquo;s victory, &ldquo;Matteo Renzi is politically finished from today, he&rsquo;s a dead man walking.&rdquo;</p> <p>Other Italian politicians are furious that he weakened Italy&rsquo;s standing with the new Trump administration.</p> <p>It&rsquo;s hard to see how Renzi could get himself out of the hole he&rsquo;s dug.</p> <h3><u><strong>It Started as a Joke</strong></u></h3> <p>In 2007, Beppe Grillo, an Italian actor and comedian, launched Vaffanculo Day. &ldquo;Vaffanculo&rdquo; is Italian for &ldquo;f*** off.&rdquo;</p> <p>Grillo and his followers used V-Day to bluntly express their displeasure with Italian establishment politicians, using imagery from the movie&nbsp;<em>V for Vendetta</em>.</p> <p>Now, what started out as a joke has become Italy&rsquo;s most popular political party&hellip;</p> <p>V-Day helped organize Italians frustrated with their political system. It gave birth to the Five Star Movement, Italy&rsquo;s new populist political party.</p> <p>Grillo&rsquo;s Five Star Movement&mdash;or M5S, its Italian acronym&mdash;is anti-globalist, anti-euro, and anti-establishment. It doesn&rsquo;t neatly fall into the left&ndash;right political paradigm.</p> <p>According to the latest polls, M5S is now the most popular party in Italy. It won mayoral elections in Rome and Turin earlier this year.</p> <p>M5S is riding a wave of populist anger at entrenched political elites over economic stagnation. Italy has had virtually no productive growth since joining the eurozone in 1999.</p> <p>M5S blames Italy&rsquo;s chronic lack of growth on the euro. A large plurality of Italians agrees.</p> <p>M5S has promised to hold a vote to leave the euro and return to Italy&rsquo;s old currency, the lira, as soon as it&rsquo;s in power. Under the current circumstances, it would probably pass.</p> <p>After the Brexit vote and Trump&rsquo;s win, M5S has joyfully predicted that Renzi will be the next casualty in the global populist revolution.</p> <p>Grillo recently wrote:</p> <p style="margin-left: .5in;"><strong><em>It&#39;s crazy. This is the explosion of an era. It&#39;s the apocalypse of the media, TV, the big newspapers, the intellectuals, the journalists&hellip; This is a wide-ranging F*** off. Trump has pulled off an incredible V-Day&hellip; There are similarities between this American story and the Movement.</em></strong></p> <p>A &ldquo;No&rdquo; vote in the December 4 referendum means M5S could come to power in a matter of months.</p> <h3><u><strong>Melting Like a Gelato in the August Sun</strong></u></h3> <p>A populist tsunami is about to wash through Europe. It will drastically change the Continent&rsquo;s political landscape in a way not seen since before World War II.</p> <p>This wave will flush away traditional &ldquo;mainstream&rdquo; parties and usher in anti-establishment populists who want to leave the European Union.</p> <p>It&rsquo;s already hit the UK in the form of Brexit, killing David Cameron&rsquo;s pro-EU government in the process.</p> <p>Croatia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, and Greece already have populist, Eurosceptic&mdash;or &ldquo;non-mainstream&rdquo;&mdash;parties in power.</p> <p>Italy is the next flashpoint.</p> <p>A &ldquo;No&rdquo; vote in Italy is virtually assured at this point.</p> <p>But it won&rsquo;t be the end of the anti-elite surge. Voters in Europe&rsquo;s biggest countries could soon throw out their &ldquo;mainstream&rdquo; parties in favor of populist and Eurosceptic alternatives.</p> <p>Here&rsquo;s the rundown&hellip;</p> <p><u><strong>Austria</strong></u></p> <p>Austria is holding a presidential election, also on December 4. It&rsquo;s actually a redo of an election held in May, where a populist candidate, Norbert Hofer of the Freedom Party, barely lost.</p> <p>Austrian courts found irregularities in the results and ordered a prompt new election. But when opinion polls showed the populist candidate in the lead, the government delayed the vote until December 4, giving a lame excuse about faulty adhesive on absentee ballots. Despite the foot-dragging, Mr. Hofer looks set to win the December 4 vote.</p> <p><u><strong>France</strong></u></p> <p>France has a presidential election next spring. There&rsquo;s a chance that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Eurosceptic National Front party, will do better than many expect. After more than a decade of disappointment under presidents François Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy, French voters are clamoring for something different.</p> <p><u><strong>Spain</strong></u></p> <p>Spain recently re-elected incumbent Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy. However, Spanish voters fled traditional political parties en masse for new populist upstarts Podemos and Ciudadanos. So Rajoy was unable to form a majority government.</p> <p>Rajoy now leads a severely weak minority government. The political power of the Spanish populist parties is only expected to grow.</p> <p><u><strong>Germany</strong></u></p> <p>Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, embodies the European establishment more than any other politician. Her party suffered a series of stinging defeats in regional elections this year, mostly because of her signature lax immigration policies, which have flooded Germany with migrants.</p> <p>Merkel&rsquo;s troubles have only helped the Alternative for Germany, a new populist party surging in popularity. The party could pose a real problem for Merkel in the 2017 federal elections.</p> <p><u><strong>The Netherlands</strong></u></p> <p>As the Netherlands approaches elections in March, Geert Wilders&rsquo;s Party for Freedom, which advocates leaving the EU, is basically tied in opinion polls with the establishment parties.</p> <p><strong>How to Profit from the Tsunami&hellip;</strong></p> <p>As populist, Eurosceptic parties surge, the entire European Union is looking shakier by the day.</p> <p>One Italian politician correctly put it this way: &ldquo;The euro is melting away like a gelato left out in the August sun.&rdquo;</p> <p>Our thesis for the collapse of the EU not only stands&hellip; it&rsquo;s getting stronger and stronger.</p> <p>There are potentially severe consequences in the currency and stock markets. We are approaching a global financial meltdown of historical proportions. It could strike America on December 4, 2016, as Italian voters decide the fate of the European Union itself.</p> <p>It could either wipe out a big part of your savings... or be the fortune-building opportunity of a lifetime.</p> <p><em>New York Times&nbsp;best-selling author Doug Casey and I just released an urgent video with all the details.&nbsp;<a href="" target="_blank">Click here to watch it now.</a></em></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="418" height="210" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Beppe Grillo Brexit Donald Trump Europe European Union European Union Eurosceptic National Front party Euroscepticism Eurozone Five Star Movement France Freedom party Freedom Party of Austria Germany Greece Hungary Italy Lehman Lehman Brothers Market Crash Matteo Renzi Meltdown National Front Netherlands New York Times Nicolas Sarkozy Party for Freedom Poland Politics Politics Politics of Europe Populism Star Movement Trump Administration United Kingdom European Union membership referendum Sun, 04 Dec 2016 02:00:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579417 at Did The Market Just Flash A Hindenburg Omen Warning? <p>Amid the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune in the stock, bond, and commodity markets this week, a few &#39;rotten&#39; things began to emerge. With major indices diverging notably, new highs <strong>and</strong> new lows soaring, and breadth deteriorating, analysts noted the re-awakening of The Hindenburg Omen signal...</p> <p><a href="">As John Hussman previously wrote, </a><strong>when we think of market &ldquo;internals,&rdquo; the number of new highs and new lows can contribute useful information</strong>. To expand on the vocabulary we use to talk about internals, &ldquo;leadership&rdquo; typically refers to the number of stocks achieving new highs and new lows; &ldquo;breadth&rdquo; typically refers to the number of stocks advancing versus declining in a given day or week; and &ldquo;participation&rdquo; typically refers to the percentage of stocks that are advancing or declining in tandem with the major indices.</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p class="largeText"><em>The original basis for the Hindenburg signal traces back to the &ldquo;high-low logic index&rdquo; that Norm Fosback created in the 1970&rsquo;s. Jim Miekka introduced the Hindenburg as a daily rather than weekly measure, Kennedy Gammage gave it the ominous name, and Peter Eliades later added several criteria to reduce the noise of one-off signals, requiring additional confirmation that amounts to a requirement that more than one signal must emerge in the context of an advancing market with weakening breadth.</em></p> </blockquote> <p><strong>And this week saw renowned technician Tom McClellan declare a Hindenburg Omen had struck</strong>...</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">Dec. 1 was Hindenburg Omen day, a study created by the late Jim Miekka. Some signals matter a whole lot, others not so much. <a href=""></a></p> <p>&mdash; Tom McClellan (@McClellanOsc) <a href="">December 2, 2016</a></p></blockquote> <script async src="//" charset="utf-8"></script><p>&nbsp;</p> <p><a href="">As we discussed over 6 years ago,</a> the dreaded Hindenburg Omen is easily the most feared technical pattern in all of chartism (for the bullishly inclined). Those who know what it is, tend to have an atavistic reaction to its mere mention. Those who do not, can catch up on its implications courtesy of <a href="">Wikipedia, but in a nutshell</a>: &quot;<strong>The Hindenburg Omen is a technical analysis that attempts to predict a forthcoming stock market crash</strong>. It is named after the Hindenburg disaster of May 6th 1937, during which the German zeppelin was destroyed in a sudden conflagration.&quot; Granted, the Hindenburg Omen is not a guarantee of a crash, and the five criteria that must be met for a Hindenburg trigger typically need to reoccur within 36 days for reconfirmation. Yet the statistics are startling: &quot;Looking back at historical data, the probability of a move greater than 5% to the downside after a confirmed Hindenburg Omen was 77%, and usually takes place within the next forty-days.&quot;</p> <p>As a reminder, the 5 criteria of the Omen are as follows:</p> <ol> <li>That the daily number of <a class="mw-redirect" href="" title="NYSE">NYSE</a> new 52 Week Highs and the daily number of new 52 Week Lows must <strong>both</strong> be greater than 2.2 percent of total <a class="mw-redirect" href="" title="NYSE">NYSE</a> issues traded that day.</li> <li>That the smaller of these numbers is greater than or equal to 69 (68.772 is 2.2% of 3126). This is not a rule but more like a checksum. This condition is a function of the 2.2% of the total issues.</li> <li>That the <a class="mw-redirect" href="" title="NYSE">NYSE</a> 10 Week <a class="mw-redirect" href="" title="Moving average (finance)">moving average</a> is rising.</li> <li>That the <a href="" title="McClellan Oscillator">McClellan Oscillator</a> is negative on that same day.</li> <li>That new 52 Week Highs cannot be more than twice the new 52 Week Lows (however it is fine for new 52 Week Lows to be more than double new 52 Week Highs). <strong>This condition is absolutely mandatory.</strong></li> </ol> <p><strong>The last Hindenburg Omen occurred as the markets began to roll over in June 2015</strong> (and did not end well) although that had followed a series of false alerts in the 2013 QE-enthused melt-up.</p> <p><a href=""><img height="300" src="" width="600" /></a></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>However, while McClellan called the Hindenburg, it appears it may have fallen just short...</p> <p><a href=""><img alt="" src="" style="width: 600px; height: 315px;" /></a></p> <p>Checking the rules:</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>1: YES - see chart above (red and green lines BOTH above the blue)</p> <p>2: YES - 74 &gt; 69</p> <p>3: YES - 10628 to 10631 (rising)</p> <p>4: YES - McClellan Oscillator -5.85 (below 0)</p> <p><u><strong>5: NO</strong></u> - 236 New Highs is more than double the 74 New Lows</p> </blockquote> <p>And so from the most strict definition, <strong>The Hindenburg Omen did not strike this week...</strong></p> <p>But it&#39;s close <a href="">and as a reminder, </a> while no Hindenburg flashed, <a href="">Dana Lyons noted</a> both the number of New Highs and New Lows set 3-month highs just over a week ago. If that sounds odd, it is.<strong> In fact, it was only the 2nd day ever in which each set a 3-month high. And since 1970, only 18 prior days saw New Highs and New Lows set as much as a 1-month high.</strong></p> <p><img alt="image" src="" style="width: 599px; height: 392px;" /></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Something which has not boded well in the past...</p> <p><img alt="image" src="" style="width: 600px; height: 438px;" /></p> <p>As the table shows, <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>the return in the S&amp;P 500 has been negative 2 months after all 11 occurrences. </strong></span>And it wasn&rsquo;t just the 2-month period that was poor. Median returns are negative across nearly all time frames from 1 week to 2 years. The 2-year result is perhaps the most eye-opening after the 2-month. The market is not typically down over a 2-year period so to see 7 of the 8 instances lower is a rare result.</p> <p><em><strong>What causes the elevated numbers of New Highs and New Lows? And why would it necessarily be a negative for the stock market? </strong></em>We&rsquo;re not sure, and we don&rsquo;t really care. We&rsquo;re never too concerned with the&nbsp;&ldquo;why&rsquo;s&rdquo; when it comes to the markets. All we care about is <em>what</em> is happening. And for whatever reason, the market has been especially weak &ndash; and consistently so &ndash; following the occurrence of lots of New Highs and Lows. <u><strong>That is a legitimate red flag currently, in our view.</strong></u></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="269" height="139" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Bond Economy Finance Hindenburg disaster Hindenburg Omen John Hussman LZ 129 Hindenburg Market Crash Market sentiment McClellan Oscillator McClellan oscillator Money New York Stock Exchange NYSE 10 Week moving S&P 500 Stock market Stock market crash Technical Analysis Technical analysis Twitter Twitter Sun, 04 Dec 2016 01:30:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579414 at Obama TV: Is Obama Planning A "Fake News" Outlet Of His Own? <p>After spending the past month blaming Hillary's loss on the rampant spread of "fake news," because choosing a failed candidate subject to numerous active federal criminal investigations and/or Obama's failed policies couldn't possibly be to blame, <a href="">Mic</a> is reporting that Obama is contemplating starting a <span style="text-decoration: line-through;"><span style="color: #ff0000;">propaganda machine</span></span> media company of his own after leaving the White House. &nbsp;</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"> <div></div> </div> <div class="quote_end"> <div></div> </div> <p>President <strong>Barack Obama has been discussing a post-presidential career in digital media and is considering launching his own media company</strong>, according to multiple sources who spoke on background because they were not authorized to speak for the president.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>Obama considers media to be a central focus of his next chapter,</strong> these sources say, though exactly what form that will take — a show streaming on Netflix, a web series on a comedy site or something else — remains unclear. Obama has gone so far as to discuss launching his own media company, according to one source with knowledge of the matter, although he has reportedly cooled on the idea of late.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>According to another source, <strong>Obama met privately with Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg in Lima, Peru, on the sidelines of the recent APEC summit to discuss the matter.</strong></p> </blockquote> <p><iframe src="" width="600" height="337" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>While Obama has been on a crusade against "fake news" of late, <strong>we're not exactly sure how adding yet another MSNBC substitute to the media arm of the democratic party will change anything in a meaningful way.</strong>&nbsp; While Obama continues to "rethink his storytelling," he and other democrats simply continue to prove that they've learned absolutely nothing from the 2016 election.&nbsp; The entire election was a rejection of "storytelling" in favor of action,<strong> it was a rejection of establishment politicians, like Obama, who have proven time and again that, while they're great at delivering emotional speeches on "Hope and Change," they are completely void of any substance beyond their rhetoric.&nbsp; </strong></p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"> <div></div> </div> <div class="quote_end"> <div></div> </div> <p>When Rolling Stone asked the president about his future plans, Obama said he would begin "organizing my presidential center," where a top subject would be, <strong>"How do we rethink our storytelling, the messaging and the use of technology and digital media, so that we can make a persuasive case across the country?"</strong></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>In recent days — even before Trump's surprising victory — <strong>Obama also mused openly about what he views as the dangerous state of media and his desire to play a role in fixing it.</strong> According to the New Yorker, Obama apparently obsessed over a BuzzFeed story that documented how more than 100 pro-Trump websites peddling fake news reports had originated in one small Macedonian town. The president worried aloud that the way stories are displayed on various platforms "means everything is true and nothing is true" and that "an explanation of climate change from a Nobel Prize-winning physicist looks exactly the same on your Facebook page as the denial of climate change by somebody on the Koch brothers' payroll."</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>Obama has been outspoken in recent days about the faux news phenomenon, arguing that the rise of conspiracy theories and the easy propagation of fake stories has made it difficult to establish basic facts to frame a debate.</strong> "And now we just don't have that," he told New Yorker editor David Remnick.</p> </blockquote> <p>Of course, if true an Obama media company would threaten a long-standing tradition of former Presidents withholding criticism of their successors.&nbsp; </p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"> <div></div> </div> <div class="quote_end"> <div></div> </div> <p>Depending on what form it takes, a hard dive into media could also put Obama at odds with presidential precedent. <strong>For decades, former presidents have followed a tradition of remaining quiet about their successors in public. </strong>During his recent visit to Peru, Obama said he would uphold that convention after leaving office, but also hinted he might speak out when he feels necessary. <strong>"If there are issues that have less to do with the specifics of some legislative proposal or battle or go to core questions about our values and ideals, and if I think that it's necessary or helpful for me to defend those ideals, I'll examine it when it comes,"</strong> Obama told reporters.</p> </blockquote> <p>Remember when Obama scolded Republicans with his <strong>“Elections have consequences. Tough luck, you lost. Get over it"</strong> line.&nbsp; We guess that only applies when his team wins.</p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="400" height="322" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Barack Obama Barack Obama Democratic Party Family of Barack Obama Genealogy MSNBC Politics Politics Presidency of Barack Obama President Obama Progressivism in the United States United States West Wing Week White House White House Sun, 04 Dec 2016 01:00:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579432 at A Very Concise Explanation Of Why The Democrats Lost (And Will Keep Losing) <p><a href=""><em>Via Jesse&#39;s Cafe Americain blog,</em></a></p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&quot;This whole &#39;red scare&#39; thing has become so thoroughly ridiculous, so blatantly propagandist and overblown, so pervasively passed around by mainstream media outlets without serious investigation, so obviously picked up off a shelf in ad hoc convenience, and so completely hypocritical by the professional elite, that I am tempted to write it off and forget about it. But I should probably be deeply troubled for other reasons.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>It is a sign of the establishment going further off the deep end, and further dropping its pretenses. It is a sign of a desperate elite that will say anything, do anything, and risk everything to control the narrative and protect itself.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>We are descending into farce. Deeply dangerous farce.</strong>&quot;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Reader M. M.</p> </blockquote> <p>This is a short video from Thomas Frank.&nbsp; <em>(I have included two more short videos that are optional.)</em></p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="" width="560"></iframe></p> <p>Every pundit who is grinding their axes about the <strong>various forces that unjustly took the election from Hillary needs to listen to this.</strong></p> <p><strong>Thomas Frank is absolutely right. </strong>Everyone who had their eyes open could see this loss by the Democrats coming, or at the least a much closer race than expected. &nbsp; Donald Trump certainly saw it, and used it for his advantage.</p> <p>And even now, the core political and entertainment establishment clearly is not accepting this, does not care in their cozy complacency.</p> <p><strong>A good part of this is because of the credibility trap, and their sense of entitled superiority.</strong></p> <p>If you don&#39;t believe this, watch the Democratic establishment mouthpiece channels like MSNBC almost any evening.</p> <p>I hate to bother you with yet another posting on this subject, but the context of the situation shows that the message needs to be repeated, and driven home in order to penetrate the echo chamber of the Beltway Bubble.</p> <p><strong>The widely accepted attitude of the Wall Street Democrats was that the working middle class had &#39;no where else to go,&#39; and so their interests could be sacrificed, time and again. They chose consciously to spend their energy in the pursuit of specialized big money interests.</strong></p> <p>And they were richly rewarded with huge sums of campaign donations, personal speaking &#39;repayments,&#39; and sinecures during the out-of-office periods that the big money donors could provide.</p> <p>The courtiers in the media and big money donors around the world are very put out that their claim checks for the spoils of a Hillary victory were invalidated. &nbsp;Their outrage and disappointment is remarkable, as if they have somehow been cheated of their due, their turn at the pig sty of public looting.</p> <p><strong>They blame racism, the Russians, sexism, Bernie bros, hackers, the &#39;deplorables&#39; in a bit of an ironic twist on the Romney moment, the electoral college, and even the roots of democratic process itself.</strong></p> <p><strong>They and their strategy failed. Spectacularly.</strong></p> <p>But they cannot fail, because they are so exceptional. And there is the work to return to the real world for them, in overcoming themselves and their selfish disappointment and cognitive dissonance.</p> <p>I have been very clear that I was no supporter of Trump, and could not vote for him in good conscience under almost any circumstances I could imagine.</p> <p>But like so many others I could not in good conscience comfortably pick the &#39;lesser of two evils&#39; in this case, especially after the serial betrayals of the reforms, the reforms he promised and for which he was elected, that we had at the hands of Obama and his party. &nbsp; The nomination of Hillary was an &#39;in your face&#39; gesture to the people by the worst of the embedded and outdated elements of a inwardly focused party in its decline.</p> <p><em>The same and worse could be said of the Republicans, but that is another story. &nbsp;</em>They just were not able to ruthlessly suppress their insurgents as had the DNC. &nbsp;And if you do not realize that they did so, then you are blinded by your ambitions and should step aside.</p> <p>If anything, <strong>the antics of the DNC during these primaries showed that their callous disregard for the broader economic interests the people, and the hypocrisy which their self interests enabled, knew no bounds.</strong></p> <p><strong>Think of the arrogance of their mindset</strong>&mdash; vote for our candidate because she is not good, but less bad than the other fellow, and once again you really have no other choice.</p> <p>And they wonder why they were so soundly rejected.</p> <p><strong>The final refuge of the exceptionally arrogant is to dismiss those who have rejected them, and expect them to come crawling back, asking for another chance.</strong></p> <p>This is certainly preferable to admitting that they had the choice of the people and the winning candidate in their own ranks, and defeated him because they could, because it felt good to exercise power and influence once again, especially when it served their own selfish ambitions.</p> <p><strong>And in doing so, they defeated themselves.</strong></p> <p>But perhaps the people will not submit again, and choose whatever is offered, the less worse of a bad deal.</p> <p>Perhaps the political class will have to eventually let go of their delusory arrogance, and face the work, and the pain, of remaking themselves into what they and their party had once represented: &nbsp;a real constructive and progressive choice, and not just another flavor of less abusive but equally audacious oligarchy.</p> <p>For <strong>in truth, it is still just another form of arrogant oligarchy that serves itself, albeit under the fig leaf of a rationale of &#39;public service&#39;</strong> in constructing a false moral high ground, that is an inch above the swamp.</p> <p><strong><em>And if they have the time for it, here are two more short videos that need to penetrate the collective consciousness of the party in order for meaningful progress to occur.</em></strong></p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="" width="560"></iframe></p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="" width="560"></iframe></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="243" height="161" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> American people of German descent Business Climate change skepticism and denial Cognitive Dissonance Conscience Donald Trump Donald Trump Donald Trump presidential campaign Fail Hillary Clinton MSNBC Nomination Politics The Apprentice United States WWE Hall of Fame Sun, 04 Dec 2016 00:30:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579412 at Jill Stein Drops PA Recount, Blames Lack Of Funds, Slams System That's "Stacked Against Voters" <p>Following <a href="">disappointing results from the initial recount efforts in Pennsylvania</a>, <a href="">CBS reports</a> Jill Stein&#39;s Green Party is<strong> dropping its court case seeking a statewide recount of Pennsylvania</strong>&rsquo;s Nov. 8 presidential election, <strong>blaming a lack of funds</strong>.</p> <p>As we noted earlier, according to <span style="color: #3366ff;"><em><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;">Philly Voice</a></em></span>, an updated count Friday by state election officials shows Trump&rsquo;s lead over Democrat Hillary Clinton has <strong>shrunk from 71,000 to 49,000. </strong>If this new&nbsp;number&nbsp;is accurate,&nbsp;Trump&rsquo;s lead is at 0.8 percent, down from more than 1 percent. <strong>That is still shy of Pennsylvania&rsquo;s 0.5 percent trigger for an automatic statewide recount.</strong></p> <p><strong>On Monday, Jill Stein of the Green Party&nbsp;filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania seeking a statewide recount of presidential votes</strong> in a continuation of her mission to contest the election results in three key voting states.</p> <p><u><strong>But now</strong></u>, wanted to explore whether voting machines and systems had been hacked and the election result manipulated, <a href="">as CBS reports</a>, <strong>The Green Party is dropping its case...</strong></p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>The decision came Saturday,<strong> two days before a court hearing in the case. </strong></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Lawyers for the Green Party-backed voters who filed the case <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>say they can&rsquo;t afford the $1 million bond ordered by the court by Monday</strong></span> at 5 p.m.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>However, <strong>Green Party-backed efforts to analyze election software in scattered precincts are continuing.</strong></p> </blockquote> <p>Full statement...</p> <p><a href=""><img height="502" src="" width="600" /></a></p> <p>According to a statement, Stein plans to hold a news conference about the recount effort Monday morning outside Trump Tower in New York City.</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p><em><strong>&quot;The judge&#39;s outrageous demand that voters pay such an exorbitant figure is a shameful, unacceptable barrier to democratic participation,&quot;</strong></em></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong><em>&quot;This is yet another sign that Pennsylvania&#39;s antiquated election law is stacked against voters.&quot;</em></strong></p> </blockquote> <p>A <strong>statement from the Pennsylvania GOP</strong> sent Saturday night read, in part:</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&ldquo;The filing of a discontinuance of the Election Contest by Jill Stein&rsquo;s petitioners tonight is a <strong>recognition that their Election Contest was completely without merit, and meant solely for purposes to delay the Electoral College vote in Pennsylvania for President-Elect Trump</strong>&hellip;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Candidate Jill Stein&rsquo;s allegations <strong>created the false allusion that some unidentified foreign government hacked our state&rsquo;s voting systems when absolutely no such proof existed</strong>.&nbsp; We believe that she always knew that she had no such proof.&rdquo;</p> </blockquote> <p>So did Stein really spend <a href="">all the $6 million-plus she raised</a> or was the decision made to save the scammed millions instead of pressing ahead with a futile unwarranted recount? <em>(or did Soros run out of cash?)</em></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="277" height="136" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Bond Election recount Elections Electoral College Green Party Green Party of Alaska Green Party of Texas Green-Rainbow Party Jill Stein Nebraska Green Party New York City Politics Politics Recount Republican Party UN Court United States presidential election in Florida Vote counting Voting Sun, 04 Dec 2016 00:10:57 +0000 Tyler Durden 579430 at Goldman's Bear Case In 7 Steps: "We Are In The 98th Percentile Of Historical Valuations" <p>Having been on the fence about an upside case for the S&amp;P for the greater part of 2016, Goldman's chief equity strategist David Kostin finally threw in the towel earlier this week when, as we reported, Goldman raised its S&amp;P price target from 2,100 (as of year end 2016) to 2,400 for mid-year 2017 on what it calls "Trump Hope" (as apparently does everyone else, see "<a href="">The World Has Changed" - Average S&amp;P Target Before Trump: 2,087; After Trump: 2,425</a>"), which it then sees dipping to 2,300 by year-end 2017 on "Trump Fear."</p> <p>Having explained what "Trump Hope" <a href="">means before, </a>here is a quick recap of what "Fear", according to Goldman Sachs whose former partner Steve Mnuchin will be running the US Treasury, looks like: by mid-2017 inflation will reach the Fed’s 2% target, labor costs will be accelerating at an even faster pace, and policy rates will be 100 bp higher than today. Rising inflation and bond yields typically lead to a falling P/E multiple. <strong>Congressional deficit hawks may constrain Mr. Trump’s tax reform plans and the EPS boost investors expect may not materialize</strong>. Potential tariffs and uncertainty around other policy positions may raise the equity risk premium and lead to lower stock valuations in 2H. </p> <p>And here are the details, where as Goldman politely puts it, is where the "devil is to be found." </p> <p><em><strong>First</strong></em>, as Goldman warns, while investors have been focusing on the prospect of a lower statutory corporate tax rate, the firm's US economist Alec Phillips notes that <strong>it will likely come with provisions that will offset much of the benefit of a lower rate. </strong>For instance, under the House Republican plan, several corporate tax incentives, such as the interest expense deduction, would be repealed. Furthermore, the plan proposes a redefinition of foreign and domestic income based on where sales, rather than production, occurs. Furthermore, under Mr. Trump’s plan, <strong>the deficit as a percentage of GDP&nbsp; would jump from 3.2% in 2016 to 5.0% in 2017 and 6.1% in 2018. </strong>The annual deficit will rise from a projected $590 billion in 2016 to $960 billion in 2017 and $1.2 trillion in 2018. Our US economics team has a more restrained baseline forecast that projects the deficit as a percentage of GDP will be 3.4% in 2017 and 4.0% in 2018 while the deficit will total $650 billion in 2017 and $800 billion in 2018.</p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="396" /></a></p> <p><em><strong><br />Second</strong></em>, another key risk of President-elect Trump’s proposed economic policies is higher inflation. Realized measures of inflation have steadily risen in recent months. Core CPI now stands at 2.2% while&nbsp; core PCE, the Fed’s preferred inflation metric, has risen to 1.7% from 1.3% last year (see Exhibit 24). At the same time, reduced labor market slack has supported wage growth and our GS Wage Tracker stands at 2.6%, its highest level post-crisis (see Exhibit 25). </p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="213" /></a></p> <p><strong><em><br />Third</em>, </strong>the bond market has started to price in a macroeconomic landscape of higher inflation and interest rates. Ten-year forward inflation expectations rose by 20 bps to 1.9% in just two weeks following the election (see Exhibit 26). Higher expected inflation has pushed 10-year nominal interest rates to 2.3%, an increase of 50 bp in just a few weeks. Looking forward, Goldman's Economics team and the&nbsp; market expect bond yields will rise in 2017. Additionally, Goldman expects the short end and long end of the yield curve will rise faster than currently priced by the market (see Exhibit 27). In other words, the Fed is now behind the curve, pardon the pun.</p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="200" /></a></p> <p><em><strong><br />Fourth</strong></em>, with the 10Y yield coming just shy of 2.50% on Thursday, financial conditions as dictated by the bond market are tight enough to start pressuring stocks. Recall that as <a href="">Goldman also explained </a>last week, <strong>"a rise in US bond yields above 2.75% </strong>would create a more serious problem for equity markets: at that point we would expect the correlation between bonds and equities to be more positive - i.e., any further rises in yields from there would be a negative for stock returns."</p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong> </p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="226" /></a></p> <p><strong><em><br />Fifth</em>, </strong>as inflation expectations and yields rise, Goldman expects higher realized inflation and interest rates <strong>will restrict any S&amp;P 500 valuation expansion during 2H 2017. </strong>The S&amp;P 500 forward P/E has&nbsp; already increased by 71% since September 2011, growth surpassed only by the 1987 cycle (112%) and the Tech Bubble (115%). Historical P/E expansion cycles are usually accompanied by falling interest rates and falling inflation while Goldman now projects both bond yields and inflation will rise during the next several years (see Exhibit 28). Although the S&amp;P 500 trades at roughly fair value relative to history given core CPI of 2.2%, higher inflation is typically associated with a lower forward P/E multiple (see Exhibit 29).</p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="240" /></a></p> <p><em><strong><br />Sixth</strong></em>, higher bond yields are usually associated with a lower forward P/E multiple. Since 1976, the average forward P/E multiple when the 10-year US Treasury ranges between 2% and 3% is 14.2x. However, the S&amp;P 500 currently trades at 17.1x forward bottom-up consensus EPS and we expect some downside risk to the multiple as bond yields continue to rise during 2017.</p> <p><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="215" /></a></p> <p><em><strong><br />Seventh, and last</strong>,</em> despite Goldman's recent bout of euphoric optimism, predicated only by the outcome of a presidential election which, as Goldman itself said, is very much unclear, the firm clearly admits that, and we quote, "S&amp;P 500 valuation is stretched relative to history on nearly every fundamental metric. At the aggregate level, the S&amp;P 500 index trades at the 85th percentile of historical valuation relative to the past 40 years. <strong>For portfolio managers, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">the more important fact is that the median S&amp;P 500 company trades at the 98th percentile of historical valuation </span>(see Exhibit 33)." </strong></p> <p>... So you're saying there is a 2% chance?</p> <p>Joking aside, one quick look at the table below shows that the market would be the most overvalued <strong>ever </strong>if it wasn't for just one metric: Free Cash Flow Yield. Well, don't look for cash flows to go up once interest rates start rising, as they are doing right now.</p> <p><strong> </strong><a href=""><img src="" width="500" height="197" /></a></p> <p>And yet, despite all of the above, Goldman is telling its clients to buy all those stocks which Goldman's prop traders (because as we now know, despite Volcker, Goldman has been quietly cultivating an army of <a href="">prop traders just for this purpose</a>) are actively dumping.To wit:</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"> <div></div> </div> <div class="quote_end"> <div></div> </div> <p>We expect the 10-year US Treasury yield will end 2017 at 2.75% and the yield gap will narrow to 285 bp. The resulting earnings yield would equal 5.6%. <strong>Applying a P/E of 18x to our 2018E adjusted EPS estimate of $129 implies a S&amp;P 500 index level of roughly 2300. </strong></p> </blockquote> <p>In retrospect, there is a reason why Goldman calls its clients "muppets."</p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="594" height="428" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Bond Bond Business Core CPI CPI Economy Equity Markets Finance Financial ratios Fixed income market goldman sachs Goldman Sachs Goldman Sachs Interest rate Money Price–earnings ratio Risk Premium S&P S&P 500 Stock valuation U.S. Treasury US Federal Reserve Yield Yield Curve Yield curve Sun, 04 Dec 2016 00:08:21 +0000 Tyler Durden 579424 at Trump's Lead in PA Shrinks By 22,000 Votes <p><a href=""><em>Submitted by Joseph Jankowski via,</em></a></p> <p><strong>Reports are claiming that Donald Trump&rsquo;s lead over Hillary Clinton in the Pennsylvania popular vote has shrunk by some 22,000 votes as some counties wrap up counting overseas ballots and settled provisional ballot challenges.</strong></p> <p>According to <span style="color: #3366ff;"><em><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;">Philly Voice</a></em></span>, an updated count Friday by state election officials shows Trump&rsquo;s lead over Democrat Hillary Clinton has <strong>shrunk from 71,000 to 49,000.</strong></p> <p>If this new&nbsp;number&nbsp;is accurate,&nbsp;Trump&rsquo;s lead is at 0.8 percent, down from more than 1 percent. <strong>That is still shy of Pennsylvania&rsquo;s 0.5 percent trigger for an automatic statewide recount.</strong></p> <p>On Monday, Jill Stein of the Green Party&nbsp;filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania seeking a statewide recount of presidential votes in a continuation of her mission to contest the election results in three key voting states.</p> <p> <span style="color: #3366ff;"><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;">reported</a></span>:</p> <blockquote class="td_quote_box td_box_center"><p>Legal papers filed in Commonwealth Court by a lawyer for Stein&rsquo;s campaign contend the Nov. 8 election was &ldquo;illegal&rdquo; and the results inaccurate based on research suggesting there might have been irregularities with electronic voting machines, among other evidence.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&ldquo;Petitioners have grave concerns about the integrity of electronic voting machines used in their districts,&rdquo; the suit stated.</p> </blockquote> <p>Attorneys for President-elect Donald Trump moved on Thursday to&nbsp;block the vote recount effort in Pennsylvania,&nbsp;adding to similar complaints filed to stop proceedings in Wisconsin and Michigan.</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&ldquo;Despite being no more than a blip on the electoral radar, Stein has now commandeered Pennsylvania&rsquo;s electoral process, with an eye toward doing the same to the Electoral College,&rdquo; the <span style="color: #3366ff;"><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;" target="_blank">complaint</a></span>&nbsp;states.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>&ldquo;There is no evidence &mdash; or even an allegation &mdash; that any tampering with Pennsylvania&rsquo;s voting systems actually occurred.&rdquo;</strong></p> </blockquote> <p><strong>A court hearing is scheduled in the case on Monday.</strong></p> <p>Stein has admitted that there is <span style="color: #3366ff;"><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;">no concrete evidence</a></span> of voter fraud inside of any of the three state she seeks a recount.</p> <p><strong>After the first day of the Stein recount in Wisconsin, Hillary Clinton <span style="color: #3366ff;"><a href="" style="color: #3366ff;">gained one vote on Trump</a></span>.</strong></p> American people of German descent Business Climate change skepticism and denial Commonwealth Court Donald Trump Donald Trump Early/Mid 2016 statewide opinion polling for the United States presidential election Electoral College Green Party Michigan Politics Politics of the United States Statewide opinion polling for the United States presidential election The Apprentice United States WWE Hall of Fame Sun, 04 Dec 2016 00:05:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579389 at This Is The "Most Dangerous Moment In Human History," Stephen Hawking Warns <p>The majority of people are <strong>sick of the status quo and feel they have been &quot;abandoned by their leaders,&quot;</strong> writes renowned physicist Stephen Hawking <a href="">in a recent Guardian op-ed </a>warning that <em><strong>the rise of Donald Trump and Britain&#39;s Brexit vote come at &quot;the most dangerous time in the history of the human race.&quot;</strong></em></p> <p>Having previously referred to the<strong> president-elect as &quot;a demagogue who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator,&quot;</strong> <a href="">Hawking </a>appears to blame the ignorance of the people for Trump&#39;s victory...</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&ldquo;It was, everyone seems to agree, <strong>the moment when the forgotten spoke, finding their voices to reject the advice and guidance of experts and the elite everywhere</strong>.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&ldquo;For me, the really concerning aspect of this is that <strong>now, more than at any time in our history, our species needs to work together</strong>,&rdquo; he added.</p> </blockquote> <p><a href="">As RT notes,</a> Hawking says the world is facing crippling challenges, including climate change, food production, overpopulation, the decimation of other species, epidemic disease and acidification of the oceans.</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&ldquo;Together, they are a reminder that<strong> we are at the most dangerous moment in the development of humanity.</strong></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&ldquo;We can do this [overcome the challenges], I am an enormous optimist for my species; but<strong> it will require the elites, from London to Harvard, from Cambridge to Hollywood, to learn the lessons of the past year. To learn above all a measure of humanity.</strong>&rdquo;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&quot;We now have the technology to destroy the planet on which we live, but have not yet developed the ability to escape it.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&ldquo;Perhaps in a few hundred years, we will have established human colonies amid the stars, but <strong>right now we only have one planet, and we need to work together to protect it.</strong>&rdquo;</p> </blockquote> <p>And finally, Hawking also warned that artificial intelligence and increasing automation is going to decimate middle class jobs and worsen inequality, and risks creating significant political upheaval.</p> <blockquote><div class="quote_start"><div></div></div><div class="quote_end"><div></div></div><p>&ldquo;<strong>The automation of factories has already decimated jobs in traditional manufacturing, and the rise of artificial intelligence is likely to extend this job destruction deep into the middle classes, with only the most caring, creative or supervisory roles remaining.</strong></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&ldquo;With not only jobs but entire industries disappearing, we must help people to retrain for a new world and support them financially while they do so,&rdquo; he added.</p> </blockquote> <p>Still there is <strong>some good news</strong>. Hawking notes<em><strong> &quot;we could find aliens within a generation&quot;...</strong></em></p> <p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="" width="560"></iframe></p> <p>Which as we previously noted <a href=""><strong>would be a boom for the global economy according to Krugman.</strong></a></p> <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image-teaser"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <img class="imagefield imagefield-field_image_teaser" width="572" height="322" alt="" src="" /> </div> </div> </div> Academia artificial intelligence British films Business Donald Trump Donald Trump Environment Global Economy Harvard Hawking Krugman Project Steve Science and technology Stephen Hawking Sat, 03 Dec 2016 23:50:00 +0000 Tyler Durden 579408 at