Yale No Longer Has A Single Republican Professor Across 27 Departments

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Yale has finally achieved liberal nirvana.

According to a recent report from the Buckley Institute, there is now not a single Republican found across 27 of 43 departments at Yale University. In a nation roughly evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats (with a slight advantage to the GOP), only 3 percent are Republicans across all Yale departments.

In comparison, roughly 83% of faculty are registered Democrats or primarily support Democratic candidates.

The Buckley Institute’s report looked at Yale’s undergraduate departments, as well as its School of Management and Law School.

The report is hardly surprising. In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss these arguments to justify the current levels of intolerance and orthodoxy in higher education.

As we have discussed for years, universities have been effectively cleansing their ranks of Republicans and conservatives.

Many departments no longer have a single Republican faculty member in this academic echochamber.

A Georgetown study found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters found in the new poll.

There is little evidence that faculty members are interested in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools.  In places like North Carolina State University, a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.

Not long ago, I had a debate at Harvard Law School with Professor Randall Kennedy on whether Harvard protects free speech and intellectual diversity.

Kennedy rejected the notion that the elite school should strive to “look more like America.”

It is not just that schools like Harvard “do not look like America,” it does not even look like liberal Massachusetts, which is almost 30 percent Republican.

The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”

Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”

Consider that, according to Gallup, the U.S. population is roughly equally divided among conservatives (36%), moderates (35%), and liberals (26%).

So Harvard has three times the number of liberals as the nation at large, and less than 3% identify as “conservative” rather than 35% nationally.

Among law school faculty who have donated more than $200 to a political party, a breathtaking 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to democrats.

The student body exhibits the same biased selection. Harvard Crimson previously found that only 7 percent of incoming students identified as conservative. For the vast majority of liberal faculty and students, Harvard amplifies rather than stifles their viewpoints.

This does not happen randomly. Indeed, if a business reduced the number of women or minorities to less than 5 percent, a court would likely find de facto discrimination.

Again, universities have shown no serious commitment to ideological diversity. Faculty members have little incentive to add dissenting voices to their ranks. Moreover, faculty are now arguing against such ideological diversity. 

Likewise, some sites, such as Above the Law, have supported the exclusion of conservative faculty.  Senior Editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” by arguing that hiring a conservative law professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university.

Nothing is likely to change so long as donors continue to blindly fund these programs and ignore the obvious intolerance for opposing views.

For now, most Yale departments have succeeded in creating a safe space for the ideologically intolerant.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 17:00

Feds Charge Mexican-American With Trying To Arm ISIS Via Undercover FBI Agent

The FBI has arrested a 21-year-old Texas resident and charged him with attempting to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization -- namely, ISIS. Depending on their level of faith in domestic counter-terror enforcement, some observers will applaud the news unquestioningly, while others may wonder if it's another situation where the man in handcuffs wouldn't have progressed to criminal action without police encouragement and assistance.  

That man in custody and facing up to 20 years in federal prison is John Michael Garza, a 21-year-old resident of Midlothian, Texas, a town about 25 miles southwest of Dallas. As is so often the case when the feds announce the foiling of a US-based terrorist plot, Garza didn't actually get in touch with ISIS, but was instead maneuvered into engaging with undercover police and federal agents posing as terrorists. 

Garza's father tells NBC 5 that his son has been diagnosed with a neurological disorder, and never expressed pro-ISIS sentiments. He says authorities preyed on his impaired son, pushing him to take actions he'd never have taken of his own volition. 

Garza's father says his son has a diagnosed neurological disorder and wouldn't have tried to aid ISIS without undercover cops' encouragement (photo via NBC 5) 

Garza was arrested last week, but the case began in mid-October, when a "New York police employee" (as the DOJ release describes the person) came across Garza's social media account, and noticed that he followed several pro-ISIS accounts, and commented on one post by such an account. Next, that NYPD undercover contacted Garza via social media. After describing himself as a Mexican-American in Texas, Garza engaged with the undercover throughout November and December. He said he ascribed to ISIS's philosophy, and sent the undercover various official ISIS media releases. 

Garza also sent the uncover person "small amounts" of cryptocurrency -- allegedly with the understanding that he was helping ISIS buy weapons and other supplies -- and allegedly sent a video of a suicide vehicle-bombing and another giving instructions on creating explosives. He's also alleged to have explained how to mix explosive ingredients and surround them with nails. Next, the FBI says, Garza said he intended to buy bomb components, and agreed to meet with another person whom he believed to be an ISIS follower too. That meeting with an undercover FBI agent took place on Monday, Dec 22, with Garza allegedly handing over what the FBI describes as "several explosive components." The release doesn't specify if that was more than, say, nails and a PVC pipe. 

Bombs on the menu: Garza allegedly shared this bomb-making instructional video (not his own work) with undercover law enforcement (DOJ)

FBI Director Kash Patel proclaimed victory: 

“Today’s announcement underscores the FBI’s commitment to combatting terrorism and demonstrates our continuous work to disrupt and thwart terrorist plots against the American public. Let this serve as a warning to those who plan to conduct attacks against the United States on behalf of terrorist organizations – you will be brought to justice.”

More details should come out with a Dec 30 probable cause and detention hearing at the US District Court for Northern Texas. While Garza may have someday taken deadly action on his own, for now, the pivotal roles played by undercover NYPD and FBI agents can't help make us wonder if the case can be summed up with this classic meme: 

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 16:40

From Tax-Cuts To Tariff-Stability: US Economy Poised For Solid Growth In 2026

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times,

The turbulence that defined the U.S. economy in 2025 is expected to ease next year...

Following President Donald Trump’s unveiling of his sweeping global tariffs plan, the consensus on Wall Street was that the United States would potentially face a downturn or, at the very least, a stagflation-type scenario: anemic growth, high inflation, and elevated unemployment.

Those economic forecasts had appeared to be materializing after the economy contracted by 0.6 percent in the first quarter. However, in the following months, GDP growth rebounded to 3.8 percent in the second quarter and 4.3 percent during the July–September period.

If the Atlanta Federal Reserve’s widely watched GDPNow Model fourth-quarter estimate of 3 percent is accurate, full-year growth will be 2.8 percent—higher than the 2.1 percent Blue Chip consensus.

While surveys continue to highlight consumers’ frustrations with stubbornly high prices, the data show inflation has steadied, easing to 2.7 percent in November.

In the first year of the president’s second term, consumer prices have risen by approximately 2 percent, compared with an increase of about 6 percent during President Joe Biden’s first year.

Trump’s tariff pursuits have also helped the White House achieve its goal of narrowing the trade deficit.

In September, the U.S. trade gap unexpectedly shrank to $52.8 billion, the lowest level since June 2020. This was driven by a sizable increase in exports and a minuscule rise in imports.

The president has attributed these improvements to his administration’s trade pursuits.

“Tariffs are creating great wealth, and unprecedented national security for the USA,” Trump wrote in a Dec. 27 Truth Social post. “Trade deficit has been cut by 60%, actually unheard of. 4.3% GDP, and going way up. No inflation! We are respected as a country again.”

Employment conditions, meanwhile, have continued to cool off from the red-hot post-COVID-19 pandemic era levels.

The unemployment rate rose to 4.6 percent in November—the highest reading since September 2021. Although this remains historically low, market watchers fear that economic uncertainty could adversely affect payrolls, prolonging the recent trend of a “low fire, low hire” environment.

Although a multitude of headwinds gripped the U.S. economy throughout 2025—the government shutdown, “K-shaped” trends that saw stronger growth enjoyed by the wealthy, and tariffs—the nation shrugged them off.

Looking ahead, economic observers are optimistic about 2026, although with some reservations.

Boom Town

The world’s largest economy could face boom times as a series of tailwinds support the U.S. marketplace.

Goldman Sachs projects next year’s growth will be 2.6 percent.

BNP Paribas and the St. Louis Federal Reserve’s December 2025 Blue Chip Economic Indicators suggest the consensus 2026 GDP growth rate will be 1.9 percent.

“2026 is expected to be a solid year for the economy,” Mark Malek, CIO at Siebert Financial, said in a note emailed to The Epoch Times. “Fiscal stimulus is about to kick in from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, continued AI CAPEX, smaller trade deficits, and the Fed.”

White House officials are betting big that fiscal stimulus from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will be a victory for Main Street and Wall Street, contributing to growth prospects.

President Donald Trump, joined by Republican lawmakers, signs the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law during an Independence Day military family picnic on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington on July 4, 2025. Samuel Corum/Getty Images

“We’re going to go back to the kind of non-inflationary growth where working Americans do better than supervised workers. Lower-income households do well,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox Business earlier this month.

“Main Street, Wall Street can both do well. And my guess is both have a very good year next year.”

The Federal Reserve’s less restrictive monetary policy stance could be another boon for the economic landscape.

Officials lowered interest rates three times in 2025, and the Fed is expected to cut rates at least once more in 2026. While the market has already priced in lower interest rates, they could begin to work their way through the economy as next year progresses.

At the same time, the central bank’s policy path in the second half remains uncertain as the president is expected to replace Chair Jerome Powell when his term expires in May.

“The focus now shifts to thresholds for January and 2026 and whether Powell can credibly signal a pause,” Christian Hoffman, head of fixed income at Thornburg Investment Management, said in a note emailed to The Epoch Times.

“With just one cut penciled in for 2026 and one for 2027, the Fed is threading the needle between risk management and not completely ignoring inflation.”

The continued buildout of artificial intelligence (AI), rising U.S. stock forecasts, and strong household balance sheets could be additional contributors to gross domestic product.

But while there is reason for optimism, there could still be risks ahead, says Rick Pederson, economist and chief strategy officer at Bow River Capital.

“I’m positive about the economy in 2026, with some reservations,” Pederson said in a note emailed to The Epoch Times.

“I don’t believe a recession is coming for a number of reasons, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t risks. It’s going to be an interesting year. I expect positive economic growth, but it won’t be without a few micro-level surprises.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 16:20

RFK Jr. Drops 2026 MAHA Agenda To Banish Toxic Food Dyes And Kill Off Processed Poison

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

In a game-changing move that’s set to shake up the corrupt food industry, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has unveiled his 2026 MAHA agenda – a no-holds-barred assault on the chemicals and loopholes poisoning the health of America.

The agenda, highlighted during a Fox News broadcast, targets eight critical areas: GRAS reform to close loopholes for untested additives, updating dietary guidelines to prioritize real nutrition over junk science, defining ultra-processed foods, front-of-pack labeling for radical transparency, a chemical review overhaul to weed out toxins, banning petroleum-based food dyes linked to hyperactivity and worse, enhancing infant formula safety, and launching a nutrition regulatory science program free from Big Pharma influence.

As highlighted in the segment by FDA Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods Kyle Diamantas, “2026 will be a fundamental transformational year for the Trump administration,” with Secretary Kennedy’s team at the FDA leading the charge on food reform.

? JUST IN: Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 2026 MAHA agenda has been RELEASED ?

– Petroleum-based food dyes
– Dietary guidelines
– Define ultra processed foods
– Infant formula safety
– "Generally Recognized As Safe" reform for food ingredients
– Front-of-pack labeling
-… pic.twitter.com/u9MpK0Si8Z

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) December 30, 2025

Diamantas further urged, “This is an issue that has gone on for far too long in our country when you talk about our national nutrition crisis – 70% of Americans are overweight or obese, we have over half of young adolescents who can’t qualify for military service, and 15,000 new cases of diabetes each week. So we have deep problems in this country – we want to tackle those head on.”

This push comes amid broader MAHA victories, but not without resistance from entrenched interests. Just days ago, a federal judge blocked enforcement of H.B. 2354, calling it “unconstitutionally vague” and halting a state-level crackdown on seven harmful additives like FD&C Red No. 40 and Yellow No. 5.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrissey had championed the bill, stating, “West Virginia ranks at the bottom of many public health metrics, which is why there’s no better place to lead the Make America Healthy Again mission. By eliminating harmful chemicals from our food, we’re taking steps toward improving the health of our residents and protecting our children from significant long-term health and learning challenges.”

Yet Kennedy’s federal agenda powers ahead, building on 2025 milestones like phasing out Red Dye No. 3 and reconstituting vaccine advisory committees with conflict-free experts.

The 2026 plan directly addresses the childhood chronic disease explosion – one in 31 kids now diagnosed with autism, allergies afflicting one in four children, and obesity rates that disqualify young people from defending the nation.

GRAS reform stands out as a major win against the “generally recognized as safe” scam that’s allowed over 1,000 untested ingredients into food since 1997 without proper FDA scrutiny. Kennedy’s team aims to slam that door shut, forcing real safety reviews instead of industry self-certification.

On dietary guidelines, due for a radical update in January 2026, expect a shift away from outdated saturated fat limits that have propped up processed garbage. As nutrition expert Jerold Mande noted in recent coverage, “They don’t see a strong future for animal products. They just keep getting more and more expensive,” pointing to a potential emphasis on whole foods over ultra-processed alternatives. School lunches and military meals could see massive improvements, with resources funneled toward fresh, untainted options.

Defining ultra-processed foods is another cornerstone, with Marlene Schwartz emphasizing, “If the dietary guidelines said something about ultra-processed foods that just got people paying attention, I think that would be great.” This could spark a nationwide awakening to the hidden dangers in everyday snacks, cutting into Big Food’s profits while slashing obesity and diabetes rates.

Front-of-pack labeling promises to empower consumers with clear warnings, bypassing the fine-print tricks that hide toxins. Coupled with the chemical review overhaul, this will expose and eliminate contaminants that have evaded oversight for decades.

The petroleum-based food dyes ban builds on Kennedy’s April 2025 pledge to eliminate six synthetic colors by year’s end, now extended into a full purge. Despite judicial roadblocks like the West Virginia ruling, federal action could override such hurdles, protecting kids from behavioral issues tied to these petroleum-derived poisons.

Infant formula safety gets a spotlight through Operation Stork Speed, reviewing options to ensure the youngest aren’t exposed to harmful additives. And the nutrition regulatory science program will rebuild trust by grounding policies in unbiased research, free from lobbyist corruption.

Kennedy’s 2026 blueprint is a declaration of independence from the forces eroding American vitality. By prioritizing clean food, transparent science, and family health, MAHA delivers on the promise of a stronger, freer nation.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 15:40

Zelensky Claims Trump Is Considering US Boots On The Ground In Ukraine

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has newly claimed that US President Donald Trump is considering the possibility of deploying American troops to Ukraine as negotiations toward peace with Moscow stall. This is presumably connected with promises of future 'security guarantees'.

This is somewhat of a surprise, as the White House has made no indication of this in any statement whether public or based on anonymous officials. Throughout the nearly four-long war the question of Western 'boots on the ground' has been raised at various times. 

But the US - whether under Biden or Trump - has always denied that sending American troops into Ukraine is a solution. Instead, it's well understood that this could escalate things between Washington and Russia toward full-scale war.

Zelensky made the remarks during a WhatsApp conversation with journalists, according to Reuters national security correspondent Idress Ali, who then revealed his words on social media.

But the outlet has still stressed that Zelensky understands that the final decision rests with Trump.

"To be honest, this can only be confirmed by the President of the United States of America. These are US troops, and therefore it is America that makes such decisions. Of course, we are discussing this both with President Trump and with representatives of the Coalition [of the Willing]," Zelensky was quoted as saying.

And just like that, boots on the ground as a talking point is being echoed among EU leaders...

Polish Prime Minister Tusk:

The United States has declared its readiness to participate in security guarantees for Ukraine after concluding peace.

This includes, for example, the presence of American troops on the border or on the line of contact between Ukraine and Russia. pic.twitter.com/bIJUhyjQam

— Clash Report (@clashreport) December 30, 2025

Russian media has also picked up on the remarks...

Zelensky says US BOOTS ON THE GROUND in Ukraine being discussed

But troop deployment is ‘UP TO THE UNITED STATES’ pic.twitter.com/VCXa10ttDw

— RT (@RT_com) December 30, 2025

President Trump has regularly emphasized that he won't contemplate boots on the ground in Ukraine, for example last August:

President Donald Trump on Tuesday pledged that American troops would not be on the ground in Ukraine — but provided little other insight into the scale of U.S. security guarantees as he pushes to end Russia’s war on its neighbor.

"You have my assurance, and I’m president," Trump said on “Fox & Friends,” when asked what assurances he has that there won’t be American boots in the country to defend against another Russian incursion.

Needless to say such a moved, if he were to reverse his own policy, would be hugely unpopular among Trump's base. And broadly the American public would likely see such a risky move as recipe for another US troop quagmire abroad, and in a very complex battlespace.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 15:20

Everyone's A Lender Now: Shadow Banking USA

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

How much private credit has been put in place but isn't in the official credit total is unknown and very likely unknowable. That means total systemic risk is also unknowable.

Everyone wants to lend us money now, even though they're not banks: the insurance company Progressive offered us a loan, PayPal offers us a business loan every time we log in, and the payment processor Stripe includes a pitch to borrow money on its dashboard page.

Then there's the ubiquitous payment plans offered by seemingly every vendor / retailer.

These are parts of the shadow banking system (SBS) that we see, but most of the system is hidden in the global economy's complex financial plumbing. The shadow banking system differs from nation to nation, as it developed to avoid whatever is tightly regulated or restricted within each banking system.

Here is a general definition:

 "Shadow banking in the U.S. refers to non-bank financial institutions and activities that provide services similar to traditional commercial banks but operate largely outside of conventional banking regulations. The sector has grown significantly in recent years and plays a major role in the financial system, though it also poses systemic risks due to its lack of transparency and regulatory oversight."

In a global economy dependent on credit, leverage, artifice and speculation, the expansion of shadow banking is highly incentivized. How much of this activity and debt ends up in official statistics of credit is hard to know, even for experts, given that the goal of shadow banking is to avoid the regulations and restrictions that increase transaction costs and limit risk.

Risk brings us to the treacherous territory between known unknowns and unknown unknowns, as risk is a funny thing: it cannot be extinguished, but it can be cloaked, transferred to others, sold to the unsuspecting as "safe," or buried beneath complexity. It can also lay dormant, slowly dissolving whatever holds the system together, a process that remains hidden until the avalanche surprises everyone who thought the snowmass was stable because it appeared stable.

These links shed some light on the scale, asymmetries and risks built into a sprawling, highly interconnected, highly leveraged shadow banking system with few institutional safeguards or backstops.

Shadow banking system

Nonbank Financial Intermediation (NBFI or "Shadow Banking") and Capital Markets Policy

Shadow Banks: Out of the Eyes of Regulators

Bank Turmoil Is Paving the Way for Even Bigger 'Shadow Banks'

Total known credit is already a systemic risk. 

How much private credit has been put in place but isn't in the official credit total is unknown and very likely unknowable. That means total systemic risk is also unknowable.

*  *  *

My new book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free)

Check out my updated Books and Films. Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com. Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/30/2025 - 15:00

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.