Sedition Before Tradition: American Needs A Break

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak."

 - Sun Tzu

You understand, don’t you, what the aim was of the “Seditious Six” politicians who made last week’s now-notorious video suggesting that US military personnel should refuse the president’s orders if they deemed them to be “illegal?”

This was the old Lefty game of provoking the authorities to react intemperately so they can be labeled “fascist.”

It’s like the old schoolyard game of the kid who goes I’m touching you. . . I’m touching you. . . until the touched kid explodes. . . so the toucher can then say, look, he’s hitting me!

And they certainly succeeded in pissing-off the president enough for Mr. Trump to suggest they could be hanged for their little prank — though he was probably incorrect about the legal niceties therein.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe in a pensive moment

That members of the out-party in Congress and the Senate must resort to this kind of skylarking japery tells you how desperate they are.

The organizer, Minnesota Senator Elissa Slotkin, is a former CIA officer. Is she in communication regularly with any of her former colleagues at the Agency? And did she coordinate any part of her prank with them? I bet DNI Tulsi Gabbard could find out and let CIA Director John Ratcliffe know so he can fire their ass.

The intel bureaucracy remains a hotbed of resistance to the swamp-draining project underway since 01/20/25. The swamp creatures like their swamp fecund and fetid as it has been, with the rich revenue stream it is used to feeding on, and Mr. Trump has done much to change that. Alas, the CIA remains the most implacably opaque major operation in government. It insists that its activities require secrecy, and the awful downside is that the Agency has run without real oversight since its inception after the Second World War. Gawd knows how many John Brennan clones are still lodged over in the Langley, VA, HQ.

Of all the celebrated new appointees in the agencies, Mr. Ratcliffe has been the least visible.

He went into the job with very promising credentials, having served as DNI in the last months of Trump 1.0. He must know where a whole lot of bodies are buried (some of them actual bodies) but the public has heard squat from him all year.

Surely Mr. Ratcliffe must also know by now who in the CIA was scheming along with John Brennan to perpetrate RussiaGate, and who was on the leak-line to the news media. He must know how Adam Schiff coordinated impeachment No. 1 with CIA agent Eric Ciaramella, then Intel Inspector-General Michael Atkinson, Col. Alexander Vindman, and Lawfare ninjas Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, and Andrew Weissmann. He must know who in “Joe Biden’s” White House was coordinating the 92 felony prosecutions against Mr. Trump with DA Alvin Bragg and AG Letitia James in New York and DA Fani Willis Fulton County, GA.

He must know how BLM and Antifa were allowed to burn down Minneapolis in 2020, and riot in scores of other places. He must know what agencies and what persons in them coordinated the Covid-19 operation and which foreign entities were involved. (Was it the US military, as many suspect, and how, if at all, did freelance players such as Bill Gates and George Soros’s myriad organizations fit in the picture?) And how is the machinery of the Democratic Party entangled in the workings of US intel? (Prime suspects: Sen. Mark Warner and his staff.)

You can say much the same thing about FBI Director Kash Patel and his Deputy Director, Dan Bongino. They were apparently horrified by the rot they encountered there on taking office earlier this year. What is so difficult about firing people, even a whole lot of people? And why wouldn’t you say you are doing it? Likewise, Pam Bondi, at her resistance-infected DOJ?

My bags are packed, I’m ready to go. . . .

Mr. Trump had a rough week working through his “divorce” from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Both of them behaved rather badly; he the usual name-calling; she playing up to the cluster-B ignoramouses on The View, and then resigning from Congress in a snit (walking away from Daddy). The Epstein Files legislation she was twanging on the president about got passed in a flash and signed, but it contained rules that can easily be used to keep key documents suppressed. The suspicion will linger that it’s all about protecting Israel, and thereby stir-up continued animus against the Jews.

Mr. Trump had a ju-jitsu session in the Oval Office with NYC mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, the avowed communist jihadi — putting the young insta-celebrity pol off-balance by acting all nice and accommodating. “I want him to do a great job. . . “ “We agree on a lot more than I would have thought. . .” “It was a great honor [to meet him]. . . .” the president declared on his Truth Social account. Stand by on what any of that means.

And now, as we plunge into Thanksgiving week, comes the Ukraine peace proposal. Everybody knows it is a recognition that Russia is grinding toward victory in any case, and carrying-on further slaughter and destruction on-the-ground is insane. But then, Ukraine’s ruler, Mr. Zelenskyy, is insane (probably high on drugs, too), and the EU leadership is insane seeking to start a war with Russia that it has zero ability to prosecute — and nevermind whatever the obdurate defenders of the UK’s sclerotic empire think they’re doing to keep the Ukraine War going. But, bottom line: there’s a good possibility that the war will be over before Christmas, and the world will be better off for that.

With all the above going on, America needs a break.

Enjoy a turkey, if you can afford to buy one, and count your blessings — for we are still a blessed people in a blessed land, and we should all show a little gratitude for the privilege of just being here on a planet so superbly suited to our needs.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 16:20

Ignored Red Repo Signals = More Obvious Golden Tailwinds

Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via VonGreyerz.gold,

Markets are many things, but in simplest terms, they are a paradox.

From the Complex…

By this, I mean they are incredibly and intentionally complex, which makes them a kind of exclusive environment managed, allegedly at least, by cadres of well-versed experts (?) trained in, and comfortable with, complexity.

The extraordinarily complex mechanics, for example, of layered derivative trades or currency and rate swaps, the hedging of futures contracts on the New York COMEX or the maze-like liquidity and collateral movements in repo and reverse repo facilities are indeed settings of just mind-numbing complexity.

…To the Simple

But herein lies the paradox, for despite such deliberate and gated complexity, these markets—from the most basic ETF purchase to the most confusing asset-backed securities—operate upon one extraordinarily simple force, namely: Liquidity.

Or stated even more simply, everything hinges upon one question: Is there enough cash to keep these systems afloat?

And even if you have never had the time to study every market correction from the first Persian trading huts or Roman currency collapses to the great crashes of 18th-century France, 19th-century America or even the more recent ghosts of 2008, the key takeaway is equally simple: Every market crisis is at heart a liquidity crisis.

In short: Liquidity matters.

Engines Need Oil, Markets Need Cash

Liquidity—or cash flows—are like the oil levels in a basic engine, and anyone who has ever owned or driven a car knows it’s never a good thing when the dashboard signals a glowing, red low-oil warning.

Unless more oil is added soon, the warning phase progresses quickly to a stalled car phase.

What many investors may not realize is that these otherwise immortal risk asset markets are riddled with “low-oil warnings” which few are discussing, but which gold is recognizing.

Warning Lights in the Repo Market: Boring but Important

Take the current “Standard Repo Facility”—a topic so boring and complex that it’s easy to both ignore and misunderstand.

In simplest terms, the repo market is where big banks (“primary dealers”) go to get overnight loans (i.e., “liquidity”) from each other to keep their bank engines humming along.

It is here where they execute what are called “repurchase agreements”—i.e. where Party A asks for cash from Party B by offering Party B overnight collateral in the form of “safe” USTs.

The next day, Party A pays back the loan and buys back its collateral at a slightly higher price/rate than the Fed Funds Rate set by the FED (the FFR), otherwise known as the “repo rate.”

Such repo transactions keep the wheels of banking, money market yields and even hedge fund leverage tools comfortably “greased” and chugging along smoothly so long as the FFR and repo rates are aligned, affordable and hence: “Liquid.”

But when the repo rates begin to climb noticeably above the allegedly calming Fed Funds Rate, this is a dashboard warning that trust among the counterparties’ collateral is falling and that future liquidity is stalling.

Or, and stated more simply: Rising repo rates signal tightening liquidity, which for bankers is like the appearance of a rising shark fin for a weekend ocean swimmer.

Nervous “Experts” …

Recently, a bunch of market “swimmers” (i.e. primary dealers and their representatives) met at the home of the New York Fed in a very nervous mood and behind closed doors.

Why?

Because they are seeing shark fins circling and low-oil signals flashing from their dashboards.

The repo rates are decoupling from (rising above) the FFR, which means the cost of borrowing between insiders is getting painful.

This also means liquidity is drying and the engine of US and global markets (as literally everything and every asset is impacted by expensive liquidity) is slowly beginning to smoke, rattle and choke.

If repo rates go from rising to dangerously spiking, as they did in September of 2019, the engine stalls altogether, and the repair bill (i.e., Fed-injected liquidity) becomes extraordinary.

Prepare the Firehose

In other words, this means rapidly expanding liquidity measures from the Fed’s “emergency funding” source (aka: “reverse repo facility”), which is nothing more than QE (money printing) by another false title.

What’s equally creepy, and equally off the radar of most investors and coopted financial media sources, is that even before these nervous bankers met in New York, the Fed had already injected $125B of short-term funding operations to keep these repo rates “controlled,” but with little success.

Why?

Because after 3 years of Powell desperately trying to reduce the Fed’s embarrassingly fat balance sheet via QT while its commercial banking nieces and nephews on Wall Street were simultaneously reducing their own balance sheets to meet regulatory measures, liquidity was already quietly drying up even before the engine warning lights finally went red in the repo market.

The Past is Prologue

So, what does this mean going forward for markets in general or gold in particular?

By now, it should be no surprise to any that the Fed, which is a private bank owned by other commercial banks as part of a legalized cabal that is little more than a dishonest, unelected and insider trade, will do “whatever it takes” to keep themselves alive and “liquid.”

This means the Fed will inevitably, and once again, face an inflection point in which more bazooka/firehose money will flow into this “system.”

In short, “liquidity,” ultimately created from thin air, will save a now entrenched and parasitic system at the expense of the inherent purchasing power of the USD in general and the paper wealth of its citizens in particular, in this hidden backdrop of serfs and lords otherwise masquerading as free market capitalism.

The Future is Simple

As for gold, it may not be as human as our central bankers and primary dealers, but it is a heck of a lot more honest.

Its price moves today (which are increasingly less inhibited by the tapped-out COMEX and LBMA banks who lack the free-float to legally price fix precious metals) are telling us what our leadership and banks cannot, namely: Paper money is being debased at alarming levels to keep liquidity flowing into a debt-draped and broken system.

Throughout history, gold has always been nature’s honest monetary reaction to fiat currencies’ “human, all too human” debasement sins.

The market knows that more QE and QE-like liquidity is coming, which means a USD, which has already lost more than 99% of its purchasing power when measured against gold, will continue to lose its “punch” in the same way a glass of wine loses its flavor when buckets of added water dilute its vintage.

Gold, whose bull market is just beginning in such a backdrop, will continue its secular and historical rise, because fiat currencies will continue their secular, political, human and oh-so historically familiar fall.

In short, and despite pages, centuries and layers of complexity, the case for gold is ultimately as simple as that.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 15:45

The Selective Outrage Of Judge James Boasberg

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in The Hill on two controversies involving Chief Judge James Boasberg this week in Washington, D.C. Both involve claims that branches undermined or intruded on the authority of another branch. However, these separation-of-powers conflicts produced strikingly different responses from Judge Boasberg. It seemed that the court’s concerns depended greatly on whose ox was being gored in a tripartite contest.

Here is the column:

For months, District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg has been very much in the news.

This spring, he issued a 46-page decision finding that the Trump administration may be in contempt of court for violating his order to return flights of deportees being sent to El Salvador.

In that ruling, Boasberg insisted that it was essential for him to know the facts on whether “officials of a coordinate branch” had undermined judicial integrity.

After all, nothing short of the separation of powers was at stake. This week, Boasberg announced that he was moving forward without further delay to ferret out who was responsible for the alleged violation.

That message, however, has now been undermined by another Judge James Boasberg, who is in the news this week as part of the controversy over the Justice Department’s acquisition of telephone records of leading Republican members of Congress.

Boasberg had imposed a gag order on telephone companies to prevent them from informing Congress that the executive branch was snooping on who had been in contact with them.

These two James Boasbergs seem as different as the two Jeffrey Epsteins referenced this week by Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) — one a presumably respectable medical doctor, the other a deceased sex offender. However, to use Crockett’s formulation, it was indeed “that James Boasberg” in both cases.

The growing scandal over the seizure of telephone records of Republican members of Congress by former Special Counsel Jack Smith has continued to grow with new disclosures. This includes revelations that Smith obtained of records for former Speaker of the House of Representatives Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House Judiciary Chair James Jordan (R-Ohio).

It is difficult to overstate the gravity of this intrusion into the legislative branch. These records can reveal whom members spoke with and when such calls took place. It can reveal communications with journalists, whistleblowers, and others speaking confidentially with representatives. It can also reveal embarrassing information about members from their personal numbers.

The gathering of such information without an obvious good cause can potentially deter members in confronting the Justice Department, which is notorious for leaking information against critics and targets.

Ironically, such leaks are at the heart of investigations led by the very targets of these orders, including Jordan and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). It also included McCarthy, the person second in line for the presidency, who could ultimately assume authority over the Justice Department under the Constitution.

The demand under Operation Arctic Frost was unprecedented in scope, with dozens of subpoenas going to such carriers as Verizon and AT&T. Nineteen such orders for these telephone records were accompanied by judicial nondisclosure orders for subpoenas signed by Boasberg. While commonly issued, these nondisclosures have long been controversial. It did not seem to matter that the Justice Department was targeting the very members exercising oversight over investigations into its own previous abusive use of investigatory powers.

It is still not clear for what crimes these members were being investigated. The order on Jordan in 2022 covered two prior years.

Not surprisingly, some Democratic apologists such as Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) immediately dismissed the gravity of such demands by the Justice Department. However, other Democrats have expressed alarm over the intrusion into such communications.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) stated, “On the surface of it, it would strike me as a significant invasion of the right of Senators to conduct their jobs, so this is something that needs urgent follow-up.”

Indeed, the move by Judge Boasberg shattered the very rules of engagement between the coequal and “coordinate branches” that the same Boasberg has repeatedly raised in his investigation of the Trump administration.

Boasberg signed these orders despite a federal law designed to prevent precisely this type of secret investigation of Congress. Federal law requires that “no law, rule, or regulation may be used to prevent a service provider from notifying a Senate office that data or records have been sought through legal process.”

Just in case there was any doubt, the law further states that “any provider for a Senate office … shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal process seeking disclosure.”

However, Boasberg signed orders that prevented the phone providers from informing members of Congress — members who were actively investigating abuses by the Justice Department — that they were now being subjected to precisely such investigations.

There is little question how Congress would have responded. You are seeing it unfold this week. However, they were never told even as they objected to open-ended and abusive investigations of thousands of citizens after the January 6 Capitol riot.

Boasberg was fully aware of those abuses, stretching back to the debunked Russiagate investigation, in which false information had been given to courts to carry out surveillance of Trump associates.

Indeed, it was Boasberg again who ordered the resulting investigation into the false information given to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as part of the Russiagate investigation. He was criticized for appointing an attorney to assist him, David Kris, whom the Washington Post described as “highly controversial” given his past denials of any wrongdoing by the Justice Department.

The wrongdoing was very real. An attorney at the FBI ultimately pleaded guilty to lying to the court in an effort to justify surveillance. Others were fired after Inspector General investigations exposed their abuse of investigatory powers.

Despite that history, Boasberg gagged phone carriers from informing Congress of the seizure of the telephone records of key Republican members overseeing investigations of the Justice Department.

I do not support the calls for Boasberg to be impeached, but his role in this scandal cannot be ignored. He not only enabled this abusive effort but also expressly told these companies not to reveal the demands to anyone.

None of this means that there are no legitimate questions raised about the failure to comply with his orders on the El Salvador flight. But Boasberg’s separation-of-powers concerns seem strangely selective, depending on whose powers are being usurped.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” He has also represented the House of Representatives in court.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 15:05

Analyst Warns Of 2032 Demographic "Crossover Point" Poised To Reshape Housing Market

Nick Gerli, CEO and founder of the real estate analytics firm Reventure Consulting, has posted another informative housing-market update on X. This time, he outlines how a major demographic turning point will reshape housing demand and even the size of homes people will want.

By 2032, Gerli pointed out that deaths will exceed births in the U.S., and this crossover point - four decades in the making - will have significant implications on the housing market, including: 

1. structurally lower homebuyer demand, as declining births and family formation lowers the need and urgency for young people to buy houses

2. more inventory, as incrementally more deaths and the aging out of the Baby Boomer generation increases listings (Freddie Mac estimates 9 million homes by 2035).

The U.S. Housing Market is about to get hit by a big demographic shift.

By 2032, there will be more deaths than births in the U.S.

This crossover point will be the continuation of a long-term trend over the last four decades, and ultimately will have the following impacts:

a)… pic.twitter.com/8cLAUEd4IM

— Nick Gerli (@nickgerli1) November 23, 2025

"This will likely have a disinflationary and/or deflationary impact on home prices over the long-term," Gerli said. 

He noted this trend will ultimately lead to "fewer children will invariably lead to lower homebuyer demand, and more renter demand."

He said this will ultimately lead to "an increase in the demand for other types of houses to buy — such as smaller ranch-style homes and starter homes," adding that "McMansion-style neighborhoods probably won't fare as well based on current demographic trends."

Gerli hedged his outlook with this...

8) Of course - things could shift. The current trends continuing isn't a guarantee.

Note that the 1940s and 50s in the U.S., a massive baby boom occured. Where the fertility rate soared by 56% over two decades.

Some of that was a return to normal after the Great Depression.… pic.twitter.com/W7z60pbMx5

— Nick Gerli (@nickgerli1) November 23, 2025

He did not mention the open border invasion of tens of millions of migrants and their impact on the housing market. 

Also, we pointed out the other week that multigenerational living has surged to a record high as families increasingly combine households to cope with elevated inflation after the Biden-Harris regime years, effectively pooling more resources under one roof (read the report).

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 14:45

Market Bubbles: A Rational Guide To An Irrational Market

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

We’re hearing it everywhere: AI is in a bubble. The surge in capital, the parabolic stock charts, and the bold claims from CEOs all have a familiar rhythm. Nvidia’s valuation has soared, along with AI-related startups raising billions with little to no revenue. Investment in data centers, chips, and infrastructure is happening at a scale not seen since the internet boom of the 1990s, which immediately reminds investors of what happened next. The question isn’t whether AI is important; it’s whether the price of that importance is being inflated beyond reason. That is the nature of market bubbles.

Voices in the market are split. Some, like Jared Bernstein, former Biden CEA chairman, said:

“We point out that the share of the economy devoted to AI investment is nearly a third greater than the share of the economy devoted to internet related investments back during the dotcom bubble. So, we think there are enough analogies there to make the call.”

Others argue this is not a bubble, at least not yet.

“Macro bubbles” – asset price distortions with large economy-wide consequences – have generally involved not just overvalued asset prices but also dramatic impacts on spending and capital flows that have been both clues that a bubble is under way and forces that serve to undermine it.

The 1990s was a classic example. Alongside soaring equity prices, investment spending boomed, leverage rose, capital poured in, and profitability and balance sheet strength declined, while credit spreads and equity volatility moved higher. The macro and market imbalances that we saw then, particularly from 1998 onward, are not generally visible yet.” – Goldman Sachs

This split is normal. Every major innovation cycle creates a divide between skeptics who see overvaluation and optimists who see a new era of growth. The challenge for investors is not to take sides, but to understand what bubbles do, why they’re so hard to identify in real time, and how to benefit from them without being destroyed by them.

Yes, we may be in the second market bubble of this century. Alternatively, the market may be pricing in a shift as fundamental as the transition to either electricity or the internet. Either way, investors must think clearly, act deliberately, and avoid the kind of blind speculation that turned past booms into bloodbaths.

Market Bubbles Aren’t All Bad

Market bubbles carry a negative reputation because we witness the devastation in the aftermath of their collapse.

However, from a broader perspective, market bubbles also carry active value. During the inflation of a bubble, you see excessive optimism, capital flowing rapidly, and valuations detached from fundamentals. This is undoubtedly the case with respect to Artificial Intelligence as we currently see it.

Still, this environment often gives rise to genuine innovation. As Jeremy Grantham once argued:

“Bubbles are wonderful at generating new technologies.”

His point echoes through history.

Take the British railway mania of the 1840s. Investors poured capital into rail lines, many of which failed. However, in the end, the result was a vast transport network that transformed the economy. Or consider the late‑1990s dot‑com boom. The always wrong Paul Krugman once said:

“The Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine.”

That quote was made during the height of the dot-com bubble, a period that many now consider a textbook example of financial excess. However, it also laid the foundation for the modern digital economy. The infrastructure that powers Amazon, Google, and Microsoft was created because billions of dollars flowed into companies, many of which failed. Yet their collective capital expenditures left behind fiber optic cables, server farms, and developer tools that enabled the next wave.

When capital floods into a technological frontier, many bets fail. But some win. That outcome sets a foundation for future growth.

The AI boom is following a similar path. Companies are spending heavily on GPUs, data centers, and custom models. Most of them will not survive, but their investments are accelerating real capabilities. AI is being integrated into products, streamlining operations, and driving the creation of new business models. Nvidia, Microsoft, and Meta are racing to build the next layer of compute infrastructure. This isn’t abstract theory; it’s already showing up in earnings reports and productivity metrics.

Understanding that a bubble can be beneficial involves recognizing two key points.

1. You don’t dismiss the boom simply because it is speculative. You acknowledge that capital is being deployed and that it will have future positive implications.

2. You accept that risk is inherent during such periods. From one angle, the bubble looks reckless. However, from another, it seems like the stage where breakthroughs become possible. By appreciating the positive aspect, you gain clarity about what is happening and why it matters for investors.

You should treat a bubble not as a spectacle to be ignored, but as a phenomenon to be studied. Market bubbles are periods where capital loses discipline, but that loss of discipline funds the future. The value created during inflation often matters more than the value destroyed during the burst.

That’s why you don’t ignore market bubbles; you study them, respect them, and use them to your advantage.

Why Bubbles Are Only Obvious in Hindsight

Currently, many predict that the AI market bubble is set to burst. Every time the technology sector wobbles, the media is quick to push headlines of the end of the AI boom. However, each time, those warnings turned false and impaired investors who paid attention to them.

This doesn’t mean the warnings aren’t valid. Yes, current valuations are very high in many cases, and many of the companies either in the market today, or coming to it, likely won’t succeed. The problem is always the “timing” of the call.

For most investors, bubbles are never evident until they pop.

While rising prices may seem like evidence of irrational behavior, this may not be the case today or in the future if the future turns out as expected. Of course, there are a lot of “ifs” in that forecast. A good example was from Research Affiliates discussing Tesla (TSLA) in 2018:

“Tesla’s current price is arguably fair if most cars are powered by electricity in 10 years, if most of these cars are made by Tesla, if Tesla can make those cars with sufficient margin and quality control and can service the cars properly, and if Tesla can raise additional capital sufficient to cover a $3 billion annual cash drain and another billion to service its debt.”

As noted, there were many “ifs” in that statement. However, as we approach that 10th anniversary, TSLA is still operating and growing, but doesn’t sell MOST of the cars in America. However, for investors who bailed on Tesla in 2018, assuming it was a bubble, they have paid a price for that decision.

As noted, while the RA’s analysis was sound, that is what makes market bubbles so hard to identify. Valuations can exceed what you consider reasonable and remain elevated for longer than you anticipate.

In real-time, a bubble appears to be a trend backed by solid fundamentals. The early phases attract smart capital. The next phase brings in copycats and momentum traders. But by the time people start warning about a bubble, the narrative is fully established. Calling a market bubble too early can be just as costly as calling it too late. As Howard Marks wrote:

“Being too far ahead of your time is indistinguishable from being wrong.”

Even seasoned investors misjudge it. During the late 1990s, Warren Buffett was widely mocked for sitting out of the tech rally. His response was simple: he didn’t understand how to value the companies. He was right, eventually, but missed a massive run. Others, like Julian Robertson, tried to short the bubble and suffered enormous losses before it burst.

The AI surge fits the classic pattern. A legitimate breakthrough in computing power and algorithmic capability has led to rapid adoption. OpenAI’s ChatGPT reached 100 million users faster than any consumer product in history. Nvidia’s revenue tripled in a year. These facts are real. What’s unknown is how much of this growth is sustainable.

You only know it was a bubble when prices collapse and companies disappear. But by then, it’s too late to protect your capital. The Spyglass article put it well:

“You never really know it’s a bubble until the knife is already halfway through your chest.”

That’s why humility is essential.

If you think it might be a bubble, you’re already ahead of most investors. But timing it? That’s luck, not skill.

How to Participate During the Inflation and Avoid the Deflation

Participating in a bubble doesn’t mean going all in. It means allocating resources wisely, managing risk effectively, and knowing when to step back. The goal is not to call the top. It’s to avoid the worst of the collapse while capturing some of the upside..

Recognize the structural backdrop.

• AI is a genuine transformative technology. The AI surge entails substantial capital expenditures in data centers, chips, computing capacity, and cloud services. That means there is real substance beneath the hype.

• Nonetheless, the valuations and the speed of investment suggest that the market is pricing in extremely optimistic scenarios, characterized by high growth, low risk, and rapid monetization.

How you should position your investment. To participate while managing risk, you might follow these steps:

• Focus on companies with strong fundamentals and realistic business models. Since bubbles bring many “spray and pray” investments, your edge lies in filtering.

• Allocate only a portion of your portfolio to the “bubble zone,” and recognize the high-risk/high-reward nature.Do not rely on it for core returns.

• Use this bubble to invest in infrastructure and enabling technologies rather than pure “moonshot” names. The infrastructure often survives the bust. For example, in the dot‑com era, the winners included those who built the backbone rather than the most hyped storefronts.

• Consider time‑horizon and liquidity. If you invest in bubble‐type assets, you must be prepared for high volatility and potential loss of capital if the bubble deflates.

How to avoid the consequences of the eventual deflation. Since bubbles eventually correct, you must adopt safeguards:

• Set exit rules. Define ahead of time the conditions under which you’ll reduce exposure (e.g., valuation multiple, margin of safety erosion, fundamental deterioration).

• Diversify across themes. Do not place all your bets in one bubble. If the bubble bursts, you want other anchors in your portfolio.

• Monitor fundamentals. The bubble phase often disconnects from fundamentals. When you observe that the disconnect is widening, the risk rises.

• Avoid leverage. Borrowing into a bubble makes the downside much steeper. Many historic bubble collapses were amplified by excessive debt.

• Keep long‑term winners in view. Some companies will emerge stronger post‑bubble. Try to identify them now, hold them, but be wary of paying hype‑driven valuations.

Start with this: focus on quality. In every bubble, a few companies emerge stronger. Amazon fell by over 90% during the dot-com crash but survived because it had a real business model and strong execution. The rest disappeared. Today, investors should look for companies with free cash flow, pricing power, and tangible applications of AI. Nvidia might be expensive, but it’s selling the picks and shovels in this gold rush. That’s a more sustainable model than a startup burning cash to fine-tune a chatbot.

Even using something as simple as a 40-week moving average can help you navigate both the inflation and deflation of a bubble.

No, you won’t get in at the bottom, or out at the top. But remember what is most important: participation is optional, but survival is mandatory.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 13:45

Solid 2 Year Treasury Auction Prices At Lowest Yield In Over 3 Years

The first coupon auction of the holiday-shortened week just priced and it was a snoozer, which came in right as expected. 

The sale of $69BN in 2 year notes, priced at a high yield of 3.489%, down from 3.504% in October and the lowest since August 2022; it also priced on the screws with the 3.489% when issued.

The bid to cover was 2.684, up from 2.590 and the highest since August.

The internals were also solid, with Indirects awarded 58.1%, the highest since June, and above the six auction average of 57.9%. And with Directs taking 30.7%, in line with the recent average of 30.9%, Dealers were left with 11.2%, also right on top of the recent average of 11.1%. 

Overall, this was a solid auction, which came in line with expectations on most metrics, which explains why the market reaction was non-existent with yields trading near session lows after news of the auction priced, and why traders took one look at the results and went on their merry way.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 13:35

Dallas Fed Manufacturing Survey Sees Production Soaring As Tariff Terrors Fade

"Signs indicate business activity is improving," according to one respondent from The Dallas Fed's Manufacturing survey in November. However, the comments and the mixed data could leave readers confused...

Texas factory activity expanded at a markedly faster pace in November, according to business executives responding to the Texas Manufacturing Outlook Survey.

The production index, a key measure of state manufacturing conditions, rose 15 points to 20.5, indicating a notable pickup in output growth. Expectations for manufacturing activity six months from now remained positive. The future production index increased notably, to 33.7 from 21.0, while the future general business activity index edged up to 11.

Other measures of manufacturing activity also pointed to faster growth this month. The new orders index increased to 4.8 from -1.7. The capacity utilization index jumped 21 points to 19.4, and the shipments index increased nine points to 15.1. Price pressures remained flat as tariff talk in the survey's respondents reduced significantly.

However, perceptions of broader business conditions worsened this month. The general business activity index fell further into negative territory to -10.4 from -5.0. Outlooks also worsened, with the company outlook index falling six points to -6.3 in November. 

In pictures, it looks like this: Texas manufacturers are pumping production higher (and expect more in the future) but their headline sentiment above business activity is tumbling to its lowest since June...

Choose your own adventure...

The respondents comments continue the dissonance. Bear in mind that data were collected Nov. 10–18 (right as the shutdown ended), and 70 of the 115 Texas manufacturers surveyed submitted responses.

Bad news (but hopeful)

• We don't know if it's the shutdown or just that demand has dropped, but our orders have dropped in half.

• We continue to see soft incoming orders, with poor general activity in our industry. It's as if all the chaos in Washington is creating a lot of wait-and-see attitude among our customers' customers. We are very hopeful that things will improve in the next 6 months.

• Business is as delicate today as it was under the previous administration. Small, established businesses have nowhere to turn for help when suddenly paying new tariffs.

• We’re currently facing challenging business conditions on several fronts...

• There is a continued weakness in the retail consumer market. 

Good News:

• November was our most profitable month this year. We are seeing increased business activity and many new projects.

• Looking forward to a tax rebate for the month of government shutdown.

• It seems even the modest decrease in interest rates has assuaged fears of inflation and provided comfort that we are indeed headed in the right direction. Tariff revenue has not dramatically impacted opportunity to grow in our industry, and it has seemingly improved our overall economy. We remain hopeful of continued progress through 2026.

• Signs indicate business activity is improving, i.e. lowering of interest rate, improving economy and consumer confidence for major purchases.

And finally, we have a simple question that raises our own doubts about how 'real' these responses are: 

A 'Beverage and Tobacco product manufacturer' is worried about Fed Independence and is unsure about uncertainty?

Concerns about the economy, the independence of the Fed and tariffs continue to cause uncertainty. We are not certain that [uncertainty] has actually increased as much as it has remained at an uncomfortably elevated level.

Perhaps they'd be better off just worrying about 'beverages'?

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 13:15

Judge Dismisses Cases Against Comey, Letitia James

A federal judge has dismissed cases against former FBI Director James Comey and NY Attorney General Letitia James, after finding that US Attorney Lindsey Halligan was unlawfully appointed to the role, and that AG Pam Bondi cannot ratify her actions.

Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, a Clinton appointee, dismissed the case without prejudice over Halligan's appointment, meaning the DOJ can try again when they get their act together. 

"I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment, including securing and signing Ms. James's indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside," the judge wrote in an order in James' case.

While the White House says they'll appeal, the statute of limitations has already passed for Comey's case - which Judge Currie noted in a footnote that the DOJ could not bring a similar indictment against him, as "there is no legitimate peg on which to hang such a judicial limitations-tolling result" with a voided indictment. 

As the Epoch Times notes, the Justice Department had argued that even if Halligan’s appointment were invalid, the indictments should stand because they were approved by Attorney General Pam Bondi. Currie rejected that premise and described Bondi’s attempts to ratify Halligan’s actions as “ineffective.”

Currie’s decision focused on 28 U.S. Code Section 546, which allows interim attorneys to serve for 120 days, further providing that district courts “may appoint” a U.S. attorney to fill vacancies at the end of that timeframe if the Senate has not already appointed a replacement.

During a hearing on Nov. 13, the Justice Department argued that the law did not confine the attorney general to an initial 120 days for appointing prosecutors. Rather, it said, the law allowed for successive appointments of attorneys who would each have 120-day limits on their time in office.

Comey pleaded not guilty to charges that he lied to Congress during a 2020 hearing and obstructed their proceeding.

BREAKING

A federal judge just DISMISSED James Comey’s case without prejudice because of Lindsey Halligan’s unlawful appointment.

More soon on All Rise News.

Doc https://t.co/m6S1O9vWK5

Background https://t.co/KPpEL9WuKm pic.twitter.com/gaQwNGzB79

— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) November 24, 2025

As Axios notes;

• The indictment against Comey came as the statute of limitations was set to expire. Trump ousted U.S. attorney Erik Siebert, who had reportedly believed there was not enough evidence to bring a case against Comey or New York Attorney General Letitia James.

• Trump replaced Siebert with Lindsey Halligan, who had previously worked for him. She is now serving as the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia despite having no prosecutorial experience.

• Judge William Fitzpatrick warned in a November opinion that "a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps" could have undermined the proceedings, leaving the indictment in jeopardy.

Developing...

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 12:48

'Great Deal For US Farmers': Trump Says Relationship With China 'Extremely Strong', Will Visit Xi In April

Update (1240ET): President Trump has just posted on his Truth Social feed, breaking down his 'debrief' on the call with China's Xi: (emphasis ours)

I just had a very good telephone call with President Xi, of China.

We discussed many topics including Ukraine/Russia, Fentanyl, Soybeans and other Farm Products, etc.

We have done a good, and very important, deal for our Great Farmers — and it will only get better.

Our relationship with China is extremely strong!

This call was a follow up to our highly successful meeting in South Korea, three weeks ago.

Since then, there has been significant progress on both sides in keeping our agreements current and accurate. Now we can set our sights on the big picture.

To that end. President Xi invited me to visit Beijing in April, which I accepted, and I reciprocated where he will be my guest for a State Visit in the U.S. later in the year.

We agreed that it is important that we communicate often, which I look forward to doing. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

We do note that there was no mention of Taiwan in President Trump's breakdown.

*  *  *

At a moment US-ally Japan is in a rare full-blown diplomatic and (increasingly) military showdown with China, the country's President Xi Jinping held a phone call with US President Donald Trump on Monday, both sides have confirmed. The last time the two leaders met and talked in detail, which was on the sidelines Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in late October, they had declared a "tariff truce" in an effort to de-escalate trade tensions.

But the Taiwan issue is once again taking center stage, at a moment Tokyo has quite provocatively decided to place medium-range missiles on an island which lies less than 70 miles east of Taiwan. The White House has so far into its term been relatively quite on the issue.

Trump, rather than stoking tensions further, appears to be striking a conciliatory position: 

Chinese leader Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump discussed bilateral cooperation and the issue of Taiwan in a phone call on Monday, Beijing's state news agency Xinhua reported.

Xi told Trump that the two countries should "maintain momentum in ties" after the two leaders met last month in South Korea, and "stressed that Taiwan's return to China is an important part of the post-war international order", according to Xinhua.

And so it appears Trump is content to maintain Washington's longstanding doctrine of 'strategic ambiguity' regarding the Taiwan crisis. Trump's Taiwan policy has been a big question mark, but arguably this is precisely what strategic ambiguity seeks to convey. 

Via Reuters

Still, MIT has featured some recent analysis, also citing the non-interventionist Quincy Institute, suggesting Trump could be ready to abandon the US policy which has been in place for decades:

Despite uncertainty in the Trump administration’s China policy, dangerous trends across the Taiwan Strait continue to raise the chance of crisis. Tensions are deepening in the overall U.S.–China relationship, and the credibility of Washington’s One China policy and Beijing’s support for peaceful unification is mutually eroding. While China continues to expand its military capabilities and intimidate Taiwan, the U.S. is keen to mobilize its regional alliances to enhance warfighting against China.

These developments raise the question of whether the longstanding U.S. policy of strategic ambiguity, which contains the possibility of U.S. military intervention to defend Taiwan against China, remains the best approach to preventing war over the island.

Quincy Institute senior research fellow Michael Swaine recently published two policy briefs arguing that Taiwan is not a sufficiently vital interest for the United States to go to war over. He contends that Washington should begin transitioning to a policy beyond strategic ambiguity — a new approach that seeks to enhance support for Taiwan but rules out the possibility of joining a war over the island.

And Nikkei has recently published a report in a similar vein, suggesting Trump could be listening more to those voices which urge a more hands-off approach in China's backyard, and that the US would be unwilling ultimately to commit military forces to aid in the self-ruled island's immediate defense:

Trump's rhetorical vagueness on Taiwan, compounded by the continued absence of any authoritative policy documents on the topic, has prompted observers to look elsewhere for possible reflections of the administration's views.

One such report that has gone viral on both sides of the Taiwan Strait came from researchers at my former home organization, RAND. Their report from last month, "Stabilizing the U.S.-China Rivalry," contained the following sentence within its recommendations: "Stabilizing the Taiwan issue should focus on creating the maximum incentive for Beijing to pursue gradual approaches toward unification [my emphasis added]." Although it seems like the authors are advocating Chinese unification with Taiwan, this is hardly the case. Rather, they were highlighting the importance of slowing Beijing's unification efforts down and basically encouraging Washington to trick China into thinking this is possible, even if the U.S. would still severely complicate forceful unification, to buy more time for the uneasy status quo to persist.

Despite Trump not having raised the issue much with Xi, there have still been a couple of Trump-approved weapons sales to Taipei of late. For now though it looks like Trump is playing nice with Xi on the issue, given the sensitivity of the subject could sour positive momentum in trade relations.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 12:45

"Never Had These Problems Before": Violent Illegal Street Takeover Rocks Queens Neighborhood, Terrifying Residents

A late-night illegal street takeover in Queens, New York, over the weekend turned extremely violent when a private security guard attempting to intervene was assaulted, and his vehicle was set on fire. The incident highlights the growing public-safety crisis in Democrat-run cities and may only suggest what's to come under Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. 

City Councilwoman Vickie Paladino, who represents the neighborhood of Malba, a small, wealthy residential area in northeastern Queens, was absolutely disgusted by the lawlessness...

On X, Paladino raged: 

Last night in Malba, a large group of individuals from outside my district conducted an illegal 'takeover' of a quiet residential street at approximately 12:30am. This is not the first time it's happened.

A private security guard attempted to calm the situation -- he was assaulted by the mob and his vehicle was set on fire. He suffered significant injuries. A local resident was also assaulted.

Response to this incident was less than ideal. Residents reporting the incident to 911 were told that 'quality of life team' and 311 should handle the situation. Unacceptable. In fact, these violent street takeovers should be met with maximum force by the police department.

We have NEVER had these problems before. Now it's an epidemic. What changed? We stopped arresting criminals.

I am meeting this morning with the chief of department and the local precinct at the scene to discuss exactly what happened last night. I have already been assured that Malba will receive four dedicated patrol cars from this point forward, as well as additional security upgrades that we cannot disclose.

However, the city MUST do something to stop this lawlessness. All the speed cameras in the world do absolutely NOTHING to prevent these incidents -- we need police response and the most severe consequences for these criminals, not to simply allow them to drive away after they've completed their mayhem.

These incidents are happening citywide, and they're happening because there are no longer any real consequences to this kind of criminality. But let me make something very clear to the criminals -- you are risking your lives bringing this chaos into our neighborhoods.

I know for a fact there were multiple armed residents who exercised extreme restraint last night, however that level of restraint is not guaranteed. If the city refuses to do what's necessary, the people might.

Once again I want to urge any residents of my district who are interested in obtaining their carry or premises permits to contact my office. We are offering assistance with the application process and legal fees to all who wish to exercise their constitutional right to self protection.

Last night in Malba, a large group of individuals from outside my district conducted an illegal 'takeover' of a quiet residential street at approximately 12:30am. This is not the first time it's happened.

A private security guard attempted to calm the situation -- he was… pic.twitter.com/sSL7aWuufC

— Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (@VickieforNYC) November 23, 2025

Paladino posted another view of the mob attack:

Another view of the chaos as a mob of criminals attack a resident on their own lawn.

This is what progressives have wrought on our neighborhoods.

A homeowner would be entirely justified using deadly force on these animals, and one day it will come to that if this isn’t stopped. pic.twitter.com/3hxD4GMGwS

— Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (@VickieforNYC) November 23, 2025

More chaos. 

Another angle of these animals attacking a law abiding homeowner in his own front yard. They do this because they know there are no consequences for criminality in New York. They’ve done this before and will do it again. pic.twitter.com/FkVX73WdPS

— Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (@VickieforNYC) November 23, 2025

This latest incident of lawlessness in NYC comes just as far-left Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani prepares to take control of City Hall. Though he's recently tried to soften his past "defund the police" rhetoric, his decision to tap radical leftist anti-cop activist Elena Leopold to his transition team tells a different story. 

Mamdani has repeatedly called for defunding the police. https://t.co/KLTfb6BTBE pic.twitter.com/KXoSkmkLI6

— America (@america) October 17, 2025

Mamdani wants to EMPTY THE PRISONS AND DEFUND THE POLICE

NYC: Do you want to live in a lawless hellhole and have career criminals running around your city freely with no police around??? pic.twitter.com/xTgqHTKa6K

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) November 4, 2025

Mamdani's policy framework mirrors the same nation-killing agenda of the Democratic Party, weakening law enforcement, opening all borders, shielding illegal aliens, promoting the climate crisis hoax agenda, and doubling down on the failed social and criminal-justice experiments that have hollowed out public safety across the country and, in some cases, sparked national security threats. 

Wait a minute, did you say anything about DHS under the last administration letting 10,000 Islamist terrorists over the southern border—now you want to use “terrorism” when you all know you set us up for the massive attack that is coming. Cute.

— Sarah Adams (@TPASarah) November 23, 2025

The result, well, more NYC outflows to red states... 

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 12:25

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.