Zero Hedge RSS News Feed

rss

Submitted by GoldCore

It is the 'opinion of the European Central Bank' that the deposit protection scheme is no longer necessary:

'covered deposits and claims under investor compensation schemes should be replaced by limited discretionary exemptions to be granted by the competent authority in order to retain a degree of flexibility.'

To translate the legalese jargon of the ECB bureaucrats this could mean that the current €100,000 (£85,000) deposit level currently protected in the event of a bail-in may soon be no more. But worry not fellow savers, as the ECB is fully aware of the uproar this may cause so they have been kind enough to propose that:

"...during a transitional period, depositors should have access to an appropriate amount of their covered deposits to cover the cost of living within five working days of a request."

So that's a relief, you'll only need to wait five days for some 'competent authority' to deem what is an 'appropriate amount' of your own money for you to have access to in order eat, pay bills and get to work.

The above has been taken from an ECB paper published on 8 November 2017 entitled 'on revisions to the Union crisis management framework'.

It's 58 pages long, the majority of which are proposed amendments to the Union crisis management framework and the current text of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD).

It's pretty boring reading but there are some key snippets which should be raising a few alarms. It is evidence that once again a central bank can keep manipulating situations well beyond the likes of monetary policy. It is also a lesson for savers to diversify their assets in order to reduce their exposure to counterparty risks.

Bail-ins, who are they for?

According to the May 2016 Financial Stability Review, the EU bail-in tool is 'welcome' as it:

 
 

...contributes to reducing the burden on taxpayers when resolving large, systemic financial institutions and mitigates some of the moral hazard incentives associated with too-big-to-fail institutions.

As we have discussed in the past, we're confused by the apparent separation between 'taxpayer' and those who have put their hard-earned cash into the bank. After all, are they not taxpayers? This doesn't matter, believes Matthew C.Klein in the FT who recently argued that "Bail-ins are theoretically preferable because they preserve market discipline without causing undue harm to innocent people."

 

Ultimately bail-ins are so central banks can keep their merry game of easy money and irresponsibility going. They have been sanctioned because rather than fix and learn from the mess of the bailouts nearly a decade ago, they have just decided to find an even bigger band-aid to patch up the system.

 
 

'Bailouts, by contrast, are unfair and inefficient. Governments tend to do them, however, out of misplaced concern about “preserving the system”. This stokes (justified) resentment that elites care about protecting their friends more than they care about helping regular people.' - Matthew C. Klein

But what about the regular people who have placed their money in the bank, believing they're safe from another financial crisis? Are they not 'innocent' and deserving of protection?

When Klein wrote his latest on bail-ins, it was just over a week before the release of this latest ECB paper. With fairness to Klein at the time of his writing depositors with less than €100,000 in the bank were protected under the terms of the ECB covered deposit rules.

This still seemed absurd to us who thought it questionable that anyone's money in the bank could suddenly be sanctioned for use to prop up an ailing institution. We have regularly pointed out that just because there is currently a protected level at which deposits will not be pilfered, this could change at any minute.

The latest proposed amendments suggest this is about to happen.

 

Why change the bail-in rules?

The ECB's 58-page amendment proposal is tough going but it is about halfway through when you come across the suggestion that 'covered deposits' no longer need to be protected. This is determined because the ECB is concerned about a run on the failing bank:

 
 

If the failure of a bank appears to be imminent, a substantial number of covered depositors might still withdraw their funds immediately in order to ensure uninterrupted access or because they have no faith in the guarantee scheme.

This could be particularly damning for big banks and cause a further crisis of confidence in the system:

 
 

Such a scenario is particularly likely for large banks, where the sheer amount of covered deposits might erode confidence in the capacity of the deposit guarantee scheme. In such a scenario, if the scope of the moratorium power does not include covered deposits, the moratorium might alert covered depositors of the strong possibility that the institution has a failing or likely to fail assessment.

Therefore, argue the ECB the current moratorium that protects deposits could be 'counterproductive'. (For the banks, obviously, not for the people whose money it really is:

 
 

The moratorium would therefore be counterproductive, causing a bank run instead of preventing it. Such an outcome could be detrimental to the bank’s orderly resolution, which could ultimately cause severe harm to creditors and significantly strain the deposit guarantee scheme. In addition, such an exemption could lead to a worse treatment for depositor funded banks, as the exemption needs to be factored in when determining the seriousness of the liquidity situation of the bank. Finally, any potential technical impediments may require further assessment.

The ECB instead proposes that 'certain safeguards' be put in place to allow restricted access to deposits...for no more than five working days. But let's see how long that lasts for.

 
 

Therefore, an exception for covered depositors from the application of the moratorium would cast serious doubts on the overall usefulness of the tool. Instead of mandating a general exemption, the BRRD should instead include certain safeguards to protect the rights of depositors, such as clear communication on when access will be regained and a restriction of the suspension to a maximum of five working days by avoiding a cumulative use by the competent authority and the resolution authority.

Even after a year of studying and reading bail-ins I am still horrified that something like this is deemed to be preferable and fairer to other solutions, namely fixing the banking system. The bureaucrats running the EU and ECB are still blind to the pain such proposals can cause and have caused.

Look to Italy for damage prevention

At the beginning of the month, we explained how the banking meltdown in Veneto Italy destroyed 200,000 savers and 40,000 businesses.

In that same article, we outlined how exposed Italians were to the banking system. Over €31 billion of sub-retail bonds have been sold to everyday savers, investors, and pensioners. It is these bonds that will be sucked into the sinkhole each time a bank goes under.

A 2015 IMF study found that the majority of Italy’s 15 largest banks a bank rescue would ‘imply bail-in of retail investors of subordinated debt’. Only two-thirds of potential bail-ins would affect senior bond-holders, i.e. those who are most likely to be institutional investors rather than pensioners with limited funds.

Why is this the case? As we have previously explained:

 
 

Bondholders are seen as creditors. The same type of creditor that EU rules state must take responsibility for a bank’s financial failure, rather than the taxpayer. This is a bail-in scenario.

 

In a bail-in scenario the type of junior bonds held by the retail investors in the street is the first to take the hit. When the world’s oldest bank Monte dei Paschi di Siena collapsed ordinary people (who also happen to be taxpayers) owned €5 billion ($5.5 billion) of subordinated debt. It vanished.

Despite the biggest bail-in in history occurring within the EU, few people have paid attention and protested against such measures. A bail-in is not unique to Italy, it is possible for all those living and banking within the EU.

Yet, so far there have been no protests. We're not talking about protesting on the streets, we're talking about protesting where it hurts - with your money.

As we have seen from the EU's response to Brexit and Catalonia, officials could not give two hoots about the grievances of its citizens. So when it comes to banking there is little point in expressing disgust in the same way. Instead, investors must take stock and assess the best way for them to protect their savings from the tyranny of central bank policy.

To refresh your memory, the ECB is proposing that in the event of a bail-in it will give you an allowance from your own savings. An allowance it will control:

"...during a transitional period, depositors should have access to an appropriate amount of their covered deposits to cover the cost of living within five working days of a request."

Savers should be looking for means in which they can keep their money within instant reach and their reach only. At this point physical, allocated and segregated gold and silver comes to mind. This gives you outright legal ownership. There are no counterparties who can claim it is legally theirs (unlike with cash in the bank) or legislation that rules they get first dibs on it. Gold and silver are the financial insurance against bail-ins, political mismanagement, and overreaching government bodies. As each year goes by it becomes more pertinent than ever to protect yourself from such risks.

 

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 3:46 pm

Argentinians breathed a collective sigh of relief Saturday night after authorities revealed that the crew of a missing submarine had attempted to make contact for the first time since communication with the sub suddenly ceased on Wednesday. Defense Minister Oscar Aguad said over Twitter on Saturday night that the submarine, which was carrying a crew of 44 sailors, had sent seven “communication attempts” earlier in the day. He did not provide further details.

“We received seven signals from satellite calls that would come from the submarine San Juan. We are working hard to locate him and we convey hope to the families of the 44 crew members: that they may soon have them in their homes.”

Recibimos siete señales de llamadas satelitales que provendrían del submarino San Juan. Estamos trabajando arduamente para localizarlo y transmitimos la esperanza a
las familias de los 44 tripulantes: que en breve puedan tenerlos en sus hogares.

— Oscar Aguad (@OscarAguadCBA) November 19, 2017

The vessel disappeared from radar last week, forcing the Argentine navy to hastily organize a search and recovery effort. The last registered position of the vessel was on November 15 at 07:30 in latitude 46 ° 44 ‘south and longitude 59 ° 54 West, at the height of Puerto Madryn and off the coast of Patagonia. Since then, the vessel has not reappeared on radar, or been spotted by the search party, according to the Associated Press.

The whereabouts of the vessel, the subject of an intensive search involving eight nations including the US, remains a mystery. Officials don’t even know whether it’s at the surface or underwater.

The submarine ARA San Juan left Argentina Monday to participate in naval exercises off southern Argentina before departing Monday from the city of Ushuaia for a naval base in Mar de Plata. The last contact was made after the northbound vessel passed the Valdes Peninsula about 270 miles off Argentina’s coast.

NASA joined the search effort on Saturday with a P-3 Orion propeller-driven patrol airplane, equipped with magnetometers, infrared cameras and other sensors that can detect a submerged submarine. The aircraft, which can also measure ice thickness, is temporarily based in Ushuaia to take part in a NASA survey of Antarctica.

Argentine naval officials said they received no distress signals from the vessel, a German-built TR-1700 model, before losing contact. Vessels from Chile, Brazil, Peru, Uruguay, South Africa and the United Kingdom are also assisting in the search.

Pope Francis, a native of Argentina, said in a statement issued by the Vatican earlier Saturday that he was praying for the safe return of the submarine and its crew, and for “spiritual serenity and Christian hope” for Argentina. He said he felt especially close to family members “in these difficult moments."

Anguished family members of the crew have gathered at the Mar de Plata base awaiting news.

“It’s agonizing the passing of the hours, a mixture of horrible feelings and silence,” said Marcela Moyano, wife of submarine machinist Hernan Rodriguez, in an interview at the base with TodoNoticias TV channel before Aguad’s announcement. “It’s a situation of desperation and fear. But we’re still hopeful they are returning,” according to the Associated Press.

Of the missing sub’s 44 crew members, one is a woman: Lt. Eliana Maria Krawczyk, 34, the sub’s operations chief. Her father, Eduardo, said in a TV interview Thursday that he last talked to his daughter two weeks ago.

Recién me desayuno con esto ¿alguien sabe algo? INMENSO OPERATIVO PARA DAR CON LOS 37 TRIPULANTES DEL SUBMARINO ARA SAN JUAN DESAPARECIDO ESTA NOCHE pic.twitter.com/JPfq6geVf7

— ALICIA (@AliciaVery) November 17, 2017

“She told me that after arriving at Tierra del Fuego, that the (female) governor of the state came aboard the submarine and congratulated her because a woman was on the crew,” Eduardo Krawczyk said. He added that he is praying for his daughter’s safe return and that seeing her again will be like “being born again."

Psychologists and a Roman Catholic bishop have arrived at the naval base to counsel family members. Navy spokesman Enrique Balbi said the fleet was “not discarding any hypothesis” on what might have happened to the sub.  “We are going to suppose the submarine had problems of communications, that there might have been a blackout, or power failure, and that it is now adrift,” Balbi said. “From (projected) movement after going adrift, we can estimate the search area."

The diesel-powered sub is one of three submarines in Argentina’s fleet. Measuring 220 feet long, the sub has a range of 13,000 miles. It underwent a major overhaul and reconditioning in 2008 that officials here say qualified it for 30 years more of use.

? Versión oficial de la Armada: "Aún no se ha encontrado el submarino ARA San Juan" https://t.co/ERZafwu4gA pic.twitter.com/mQPANJOFKg

— MDZ online (@mdzonline) November 17, 2017

But weather in the search area has turned rough, with strong winds and waves as high as 20 feet, complicating the rescue operation, Balbi said.

“Remember that the part of the submarine that is above surface is very small, just a third of its length. The color of the vessel doesn’t help either because it mimics that of the ocean,” Balbi told reporters.

Argentine President Mauricio Macri tweeted Friday that the government is doing everything it can to find the sub: “We are in contact with the families of the crew of the submarine ARA San Juan who is missing to inform and support them. We share your concern and that of all Argentines."

Estamos en contacto con las familias de la tripulación del submarino ARA San Juan que se encuentra extraviado para informarlos y apoyarlos. Compartimos su preocupación y la de todos los argentinos.

— Mauricio Macri (@mauriciomacri) November 18, 2017

Four Argentine ships, various helicopters and 500 marines are participating in the search.

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 2:53 pm

One of the Fed's recurring arguments meant to explain why the financial system is more stable now than it was 10 years ago, and is therefore less prone to a Lehman or "Black monday"-type event, (which in turn is meant to justify the Fed's blowing of a 31x Shiller PE bubble) is that there is generally less leverage in the system, and as a result a sudden, explosive leverage unwind is far less likely... or at least that's what the Fed's recently departed vice Chair, and top macroprudential regulator, Stanley Fischer has claimed.

But is Fischer right? Is systemic leverage truly lower? The answer is "of course not" as anyone who has observed the trends not only among vol trading products, where vega has never been higher, but also among corporate leverage, sovereign debt, and the record duration exposure can confirm. It's just not where the Fed usually would look...

Which is why in the excerpt below, taken from the latest One River asset management weekend notes, CIO Eric Peters explains to US central bankers - and everyone else - not only why the Fed is yet again so precariously wrong, but also where all the record leverage is to be found this time around.

This Time, by Eric Peters

“People ask, ‘Where’s the leverage this time?’” said the investor. Last cycle it was housing, banks.

 

“People ask, ‘Where will we get a loss in value severe enough to sustain an asset price decline?’” he continued. Banks deleveraged, the economy is reasonably healthy.

 

“People say, ‘What’s good for the economy is good for the stock market,’” he said.

 

“People say, ‘I can see that there may be real market liquidity problems, but that’s a short-lived price shock, not a value shock,’” he explained.

 

“You see, people generally look for things they’ve seen before.”

 

“There’s less concentrated leverage in the economy than in 2008, but more leverage spread broadly across the economy this time,” said the same investor.

 

“The leverage is in risk parity strategies. There is greater duration and structural leverage.”

 

As volatility declines and Sharpe ratios rise, investors can expand leverage without the appearance of increasing risk.

 

“People move from senior-secured debt to unsecured. They buy 10yr Italian telecom debt instead of 5yr. This time, the rise in system-wide risk is not explicit leverage, it is implicit leverage.”

 

“Companies are leveraging themselves this cycle,” explained the same investor, marveling at the scale of bond issuance to fund stock buybacks.

 

“When people buy the stock of a company that is highly geared, they have more risk.” It is inescapable.

 

“It is not so much that a few sectors are insanely overvalued or explicitly overleveraged this time, it is that everything is overvalued and implicitly overleveraged,” he said.

 

“And what people struggle to see is that this time it will be a financial accident with economic consequences, not the other way around.”

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 2:18 pm

Submitted by iBankCoin.com

An undercover FBI informant in the Russian nuclear industry who was made to sign an “illegal NDA” by former AG Loretta Lynch, claims to have video evidence showing Russian agents with briefcases full of bribe money related to the controversial Uranium One deal – according to The Hill investigative journalist John Solomon and Circa‘s Sara Carter.

The informant, whose identity was revealed by Reuters as William D. Campbell, will testify before congress next week after the NDA which carried the threat of prison time was lifted. Campbell, originally misidentifed by Reuters as a lobbyist is actually a nuclear industry consultant who is currently battling cancer. 

As previously reported, Campbell was deeply embedded in the Russian nuclear industry where he gathered extensive evidence of a racketeering scheme involving bribes and kickbacks.

The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion threats, all of which raised legitimate national security concerns. And none of that evidence got aired before the Obama administration made those decisions,” a person who worked on the case told The Hill, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution by U.S. or Russian officials. –The Hill

Campbell’s attorney, former Regan Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, previously told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs “He can tell what all the Russians were talking about during the time that all these bribery payments were made.”

Sara Carter and John Solomon sat down with Fox News host Sean Hannity to discuss:

Sarah Carter: He’s very sick and he’s been battling cancer and going chemo. He is in a battle for not only his life, but in a battle against what he perceives as people within the US government that don’t want this story to come out.  But there’s so much information that he is willing to share with the public to set the record straight, and believe me we’re gonna get it out there. He is going to have his say. His voice will be heard.

 

Hannity: He knew about the bribery, kickbacks, extortion of Putin’s agents in the US?  

 

Sara Carter: Yes, and he will be able to lay that all out for everyone, and he will do that for Congress. John and I have been working on this for months and months and months. He came to the [Obama] DOJ with this information. 

 

John Solomon: He is going to be an extraordinary fact witness because he gathered so much information. There are videotapes where the Russians are opening up briefcases full of cash. These are the people we then gave uranium to, that we then gave nuclear fuel contracts to. 

 

Hannity: This is happening before they sign off on Uranium One? They knew about bribery extortion kickbacks money laundering before? They knew this was Putin and they did it anyway!

 

John Solomon: Yes. The Russians really thought they had played America on this one. 

Watch:

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 2:07 pm

Update 3: After a meeting with military officials, Mugabe's resignation appears imminent...

 

Intense speculation in Harare that #Zimbabwe President Mugabe will announce his resignation within hours. https://t.co/0kOBd7Nvh2

— Steve Herman (@W7VOA) November 19, 2017

 

* * *

Update 2: Mugabe, who remains under house arrest, is meeting with the commanders of the country's military shortly after lawmakers approved an ultimatum for the long-time strongman to either resign, or be forced...

 

Mugabe is meeting heads of security forces. This is the first time we're seeing the participation of Air Force Commander Perence Shiri, Police commissioner Chihuri and Prisons chief Zimondi.

(Pics via @HeraldZimbabwe) pic.twitter.com/J44vK0hYWL

— Zim Media Review (@ZimMediaReview) November 19, 2017

 

* * *

Update: Initial media reports about Mugabe's ouster were confusing: While the country's ruling party had voted to expel him, several sources quoted by western media outlets said the vote was only the trigger to start the process of removing Mugabe, and that he is still technically president of Zimbabwe. 

Fortunately, the ruling Zanu-PF party has issued a quick clarification: Mugabe - who has obstinantly refused to officially abdicate in accordance with the military's demands - has until noon tomorrow to resign. If he doesn't, he will be impeached.

 

Mugabe given until noon Monday to resign as #Zimbabwe president or impeachment proceedings to begin, says Zanu PF official. https://t.co/TdNuMnbj1C

— Steve Herman (@W7VOA) November 19, 2017

Zimbabwe's ruling party confirmed the news in a tweet...

 

Former president Robert Mugabe has been given until 12 tomorrow to resign from his government deployment. He must now step down as president of Zimbabwe or we will be forced to remove him.

— ZANU PF (@zanu_pf) November 19, 2017

 

 

* * *

A day after thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Harare to celebrate the imminent removal of Robert Mugabe, the country’s 93-year-old dictator who’d been effectively deposed during a surprise coup earlier this week, the country’s ruling party has officially voted to remove him from office and install his former deputy, Emmerson Mnangagwa, as interim leader.

As we’ve pointed out, Mugabe triggered his own downfall when he fired Mnangagwa last week to try and clear a path for his much-younger wife, Grace, to succeed him as leader of Zimbabwe. Mugabe tried to appoint his 52-year-old wife to Mnangagwa's former position, which would've positioned her to be his successor. However, Mnangagwa’s sudden ouster outraged the leaders of Zimbabwe’s military, who decided to intervene and place Mugabe under house arrest.

Mugabe had resisted the military’s request to step down, so on Friday, the country’s 10 provincial committees resolved to oust Mugabe. That decision was ratified Sunday at a meeting of Zimbabwe’s central executives, according to the head of the country's influential liberation war veterans.

Meanwhile, ABC reported that Mugabe's wife Grace - who reportedly fled the country after the coup - has been officially expelled by ZANU-PF, the ruling party. Veterans leader Chris Mutsvangwa said now that Mugabe’s ouster is official, processes to remove the 93-year-old as President could now begin.

Attendants at the meeting sang and danced in celebration after unanimously voting to remove Mugabe.

 

It is done pic.twitter.com/Z6wSX4quoG

— andrew harding (@AndrewWJHarding) November 19, 2017

 

After the vote, members of the central committee started singing “Chengetedza” by Jah Prayzah, a popular Zimbabwean musician. According to local media, the song has become an anthem for the de facto anthem of the movement to oust Mugabe.

 

As soon as the decision to remove Mugabe as ZanuPF leader was announced, officials started singing "Kutonga Kwaro" by Jah Prayzah. It has been an anthem

— Zim Media Review (@ZimMediaReview) November 19, 2017

 

Before voting, members of Zimbabwe’s central committee sung the national anthem.

 

Zimbabwe national anthem sung as Zanu-PF prepares to oust Mugabe pic.twitter.com/chUFJCBCRP

— andrew harding (@AndrewWJHarding) November 19, 2017

 

According to one BBC reporter, journalists were asked to leave the room after the vote as the party set about formalizing the decision.

 

Journalists asked to leave again. Seems like the decisions have yet to be formalised, but they've been taken... Mugabe's party has thrown him out.

— andrew harding (@AndrewWJHarding) November 19, 2017

    In his opening remarks at a meeting of ZANU-PF's Central Committee, Obert Mpofu, the official chairing the gathering, said the party had come together with "a heavy heart,” adding that Mugabe’s wife, Grace, and others in his orbit had taken advantage of his age and feebleness to loot the country’s national resources. Mpofu then hailed the beginning of "a new era, not only for our party but for our nation Zimbabwe,” according to ABC.    

Mpofu said Mugabe was responsible for "many memorable achievements.”

Mugabe, who remains under house arrest, was reportedly supposed to meet Sunday with the military for a second round of talks to negotiate his departure. It’s unclear if this meeting has taken place.

While Zimbabwe lawmakers have voted to begin the process of Mugabe’s ouster, he technically remains the president of Zimbabwe. However, the vote greatly increases the pressure on him to abdicate, the BBC reported.

Veterans leader Mutsvangwa expressed his excitement over Mugabe’s ouster in an interview with local media.

“The president is gone! Long live the new president!”

 

"The President is gone..."
Mutsvangwa is over the moon after Mugabe is voted out. pic.twitter.com/UuntMDJPLp

— Zim Media Review (@ZimMediaReview) November 19, 2017

 

Shortly before the vote, local media captured this iconic video of demonstrators tearing down a billboard advertising the Zimbabwe Youth League, a pro-Mugabe group.

 

An iconic moment. pic.twitter.com/I4tIEcihSo

— Zim Media Review (@ZimMediaReview) November 19, 2017

 

Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe since the country won its independence from the UK in 1980. Under his watch, the economy has imploded, leaving 95 percent of the workforce unemployed, according to Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions estimates, and forcing as many as 3 million people into exile.

While Zimbabwe's ruling party led the effort to oust Mugabe, opposition lawmakers had threatened to begin impeachment proceedings if he was not swiftly removed, according to Fox News.

"If Mugabe is not gone by Tuesday, then as sure as the sun rises from the east, impeachment process will kick in," said Innocent Gonese, a member of the opposition MDC-T party.

Hope for a better future crested on Sunday. But whether life will measurably improve for the people of Zimbabwe remains to be seen…

 

A bigger crowd cheered Gen. Idi Amin's rise in Uganda. 46 violenence-and-corruption-laden years & 7 coups on, Ugandans are still clamouring for a saviour. Hope against hope Zimbabweans fare a little better. pic.twitter.com/H2Ei34itTJ

— Sam Akaki (@AkakiSam) November 18, 2017

 

 

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 12:43 pm

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Staff at the Northeast Atlanta Health and Rehabilitation Center laughed as a decorated World War II veteran took his last gasps of air after frantically calling for help six different times, according to a shocking new investigation from 11Alive.com.

The investigation included the release of a never before seen hidden camera video that not only completely contradicted statements given by the nursing home staff but also proved, without a shadow of doubt, that the nursing home essentially let the decorated veteran die as if it were a joke.

The video is so disgusting that attorneys for the nursing home repeatedly tried to stop its release, going through a series of court battles with the local news station in which they hoped that the media would be ordered to censor the footage.

Thankfully, the judge in the case ruled in favor of actual journalism and the nursing home, after seeing no other possible outcome, eventually dropped their appeal to the Georgia State Supreme Court.

In the 11Alive investigation, the news outlet details the fact that a nurse who was on duty at the time directly lied about what actually happened before being confronted with the hidden camera video.

In the video deposition, former nursing supervisor Wanda Nuckles tells the family’s attorney, Mike Prieto, how she rushed to Dempsey’s room when a nurse alerted her he had stopped breathing.

 

Prieto: “From the time you came in, you took over doing chest compressions…correct?”

 

Nuckles : “Yes.”

 

Prieto: “Until the time paramedics arrive, you were giving CPR continuously?”

 

Nuckles : “Yes.”

 

The video, however, shows no one doing CPR when Nuckles entered the room. She also did not immediately start doing CPR.

 

“Sir, that was an honest mistake,” said Nuckles in the deposition. “I was just basing everything on what I normally do.”

 

[…]

 

When nurses had difficulty getting Dempsey’s oxygen machine operational during, you can hear Nuckles and others laughing.

 

Prieto: “Ma’am, was there something funny that was happening?”

 

Nuckles : “I can’t even remember all that as you can see.”

“The video shows the veteran calling for help six times before he goes unconscious while gasping for air. State records show nursing home staff found Dempsey unresponsive at 5:28 am. It took almost an hour for the staff to call 911 at 6:25a.m,” the 11Alive report read.

Amazingly, the Georgia Board of Nursing told 11Alive that the nurse seen in the above video, as well as another nurse on duty at the time, were only forced to surrender their licenses in September of this year, almost three years after the disgusting incident!

“Nursing board president Janice Izlar says she cannot confirm when the state knew about the video, but the board’s action came shortly after 11Alive sent her and other board staff a link to view the video,” 11Alive continued.

The deceased veteran, 89-year-old James Dempsey was a decorated World War II veteran who was from Woodstock, Georgia. Dempsey’s family received a settlement from the nursing home in 2014 so were unable to comment on the investigation.

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 4:30 am

Authored by Robert Parry via ConsortiumNews.com,

Ever since the U.S. government dangled $160 million last December to combat Russian propaganda and disinformation, obscure academics and eager think tanks have been lining up for a shot at the loot, an unseemly rush to profit that is spreading the Russia-gate hysteria beyond the United States to Europe...

British Prime Minister Theresa May

Now, it seems that every development, which is unwelcomed by the Establishment – from Brexit to the Catalonia independence referendum – gets blamed on Russia! Russia! Russia!

The methodology of these “studies” is to find some Twitter accounts or Facebook pages somehow “linked” to Russia (although it’s never exactly clear how that is determined) and complain about the “Russian-linked” comments on political developments in the West. The assumption is that the gullible people of the United States, United Kingdom and Catalonia were either waiting for some secret Kremlin guidance to decide how to vote or were easily duped.

Oddly, however, most of this alleged “interference” seems to have come after the event in question. For instance, more than half (56 percent) of the famous $100,000 in Facebook ads in 2015-2017 supposedly to help elect Donald Trump came after last year’s U.S. election (and the total sum compares to Facebook’s annual revenue of $27 billion).

Similarly, a new British study at the University of Edinburgh blaming the Brexit vote on Russia discovered that more than 70 percent of the Brexit-related tweets from allegedly Russian-linked sites came after the referendum on whether the U.K. should leave the European Union. But, hey, don’t let facts and logic get in the way of a useful narrative to suggest that anyone who voted for Trump or favored Brexit or wants independence for Catalonia is Moscow’s “useful idiot”!

This week, British Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of seeking to “undermine free societies” and to “sow discord in the West.”

What About Israel?

Yet, another core problem with these “studies” is that they don’t come with any “controls,” i.e., what is used in science to test a hypothesis against some base line to determine if you are finding something unusual or just some normal occurrence.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaking to a joint session of the U.S. Congress on March 3, 2015, in opposition to President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran. (Screen shot from CNN broadcast)

In this case, for instance, it would be useful to find some other country that, like Russia, has a significant number of English speakers but where English is not the native language – and that has a significant interest in foreign affairs – and then see whether people from that country weigh in on social media with their opinions and perspectives about political events in the U.S., U.K., etc.

Perhaps, the U.S. government could devote some of that $160 million to, say, a study of the Twitter/Facebook behavior of Israelis and whether they jump in on U.S./U.K. controversies that might directly or indirectly affect Israel. We could see how many Twitter/Facebook accounts are “linked” to Israel; we could study whether any Israeli “trolls” harass journalists and news sites that oppose neoconservative policies and politicians in the West; we could check on whether Israel does anything to undermine candidates who are viewed as hostile to Israeli interests; if so, we could calculate how much money these “Israeli-linked” activists and bloggers invest in Facebook ads; and we could track any Twitter bots that might be reinforcing the Israeli-favored message.

No Chance

If we had this Israeli baseline, then perhaps we could judge how unusual it is for Russians to voice their opinions about controversies in the West. It’s true that Israel is a much smaller country with 8.5 million people compared to Russia’s 144 million, but you could adjust for those per capita numbers — and even if you didn’t, it wouldn’t be surprising to find that Israel’s interference in U.S. policymaking still exceeds Russian influence.

Russian President Vladimir Putin with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 10, 2015, at the Kremlin. (Photo from Russian government)

It’s also true that Israeli leaders have often advocated policies that have proved disastrous for the United States, such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s encouragement of  the Iraq War, which Russia opposed. Indeed, although Russia is now regularly called an American enemy, it’s hard to think of any policy that President Vladimir Putin has pushed on the U.S. that is even a fraction as harmful to U.S. interests as the Iraq War has been.

And, while we’re at it, maybe we could have an accounting of how much “U.S.-linked” entities have spent to influence politics and policies in Russia, Ukraine, Syria and other international hot spots.

But, of course, neither of those things will happen. If you even tried to gauge the role of “Israeli-linked” operations in influencing Western decision-making, you’d be accused of anti-Semitism. And if that didn’t stop you, there would be furious editorials in The New York Times, The Washington Post and the rest of the U.S. mainstream media denouncing you as a “conspiracy theorist.” Who could possibly think that Israel would do anything underhanded to shape Western attitudes?

And, if you sought the comparative figures for the West interfering in the affairs of other nations, you’d be faulted for engaging in “false moral equivalence.” After all, whatever the U.S. government and its allies do is good for the world; whereas Russia is the fount of evil.

So, let’s just get back to developing those algorithms to sniff out, isolate and eradicate “Russian propaganda” or other deviant points of view, all the better to make sure that Americans, Britons and Catalonians vote the right way.

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 3:30 am

A few short months after Admiral Scott Swift, Commander of the US Navy’s Pacific Fleet, said he would obey a hypothetical order to launch a nuclear strike against China if the president chose to give it, Air Force Gen. John Hyten - America's top nuclear commander - said Saturday he would push back against President Trump if the president ordered a nuclear launch the general believed to be "illegal."

When an audience member asked Hyten, who was speaking at a national security conference in Halifax Canada, about the hypothetical scenario, he responded by assuring his interlocutor that military commanders “aren’t stupid.”

Here's CBS:

Air Force Gen. John Hyten, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), told an audience at the Halifax International Security Forum in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on Saturday that he has given a lot of thought to what he would say if Mr. Trump ordered a strike he considered unlawful.

 

"I think some people think we're stupid," Hyten said in response to a question about such a scenario. "We're not stupid people. We think about these things a lot. When you have this responsibility, how do you not think about it?"

 

Hyten explained the process that would follow such a command. As head of STRATCOM, Hyten is responsible for overseeing the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

 

"I provide advice to the president, he will tell me what to do," Hyten added. "And if it's illegal, guess what's going to happen? I'm going to say, 'Mr. President, that's illegal.' And guess what he's going to do? He's going to say, 'What would be legal?' And we'll come up with options, with a mix of capabilities to respond to whatever the situation is, and that's the way it works. It's not that complicated."

Hyten said he has been trained every year for decades in the law of armed conflict, which takes into account specific factors to determine legality - necessity, distinction, proportionality, unnecessary suffering and more. Running through scenarios of how to react in the event of an illegal order is standard practice, he said.

And Hyten is not the only one who’s been thinking about how they might react to a hypothetical order to launch a nuclear strike. A few months ago, Vanity Fair reported that Defense Secretary Mattis, Chief of Staff John Kelly and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had discussed the issue, though it’s unclear, exactly, how they would respond.

Hyten apparently believes that an order from the president could be illegal, under certain unspecified circumstances. And if you execute an illegal order, he said, you could be prosecuted.

John Hyten

"If you execute an unlawful order, you will go to jail. You could go to jail for the rest of your life," Hyten said.

As CBS pointed out, Hyten’s comments come at a time when Congress is reexamining the authorization of the use of military force and power to launch a nuclear strike.

In a hearing earlier this week, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Massachusetts, said Mr. Trump "can launch nuclear codes just as easily as he can use his Twitter account."

Hyten said the military is always ready to respond to the threat of North Korea, even at that very moment. Trump has been embroiled in a war of words with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un since shortly after taking office, and has repeatedly threatened to respond with overwhelming force if he the North continues to threaten the US.

"And we are ready every minute of every day to respond to any event that comes out of North Korea. That's the element of deterrence that has to be clear, and it is clear," Hyten said.

But Hyten also said handling North Korea and its unpredictable leader Kim Jong Un has to be an international effort. Mr. Trump has continued to put pressure on China to help manage its tempestuous neighbor.

"President Trump by himself can't change the behavior of Kim Jong Un," Hyten said. "But President Trump can create the conditions that the international community can reach out in different ways where we can work with the Republic of Korea, where we can work with our neighbors in the region."

However, Admiral Swift, who has led the Pacific Fleet since 2015, has a very different view of the obligations that come with being a military commander in charge of the US’s nuclear arsenal.

“Every member of the US military has sworn an oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and to obey the officers and the president of the United States as commander and chief appointed over us.”

When it comes to nuclear war, North Korea, for many, is the first adversary that comes to mind. But in the long run, China, which is reportedly developing hypersonic fighter jets that would be able to reach the Continental US within 14 minutes and has been slowly expanding its military footprint in the Pacific, may pose the bigger threat.

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 3:10 am

About a week ago, we warned about the infamous bearish stock market pattern developing in US equities coined by some as the ‘Hindenburg Omen’. The pattern is known for its bearish tendencies developed after the Hindenburg disaster of 1937. The key understanding is breadth deterioration, when more stocks hit 52-week lows than 52-highs. Since the warning, a liquidity gap has developed in stocks thwarting any attempt at new all time highs.

Fast forward to this morning and a very ironic situation has unfolded in the skies 50-miles north of London. And no – it’s not a giant penis drawn by US-Navy pilots in F-18s - it’s a true ‘Hindenburg Omen’ as the world’s longest airship crashed early this morning. The £25m airship called ‘Airlander 10’ appeared to “break in two,” a witness told the BBC. Reports suggest the airship broke free from mooring less than 24-hours after a successful test. At the time, no-one was on board of the aircraft, but Bedfordshire police, paramedics and fire crews were alerted and treated a women who suffered minor injuries.

According to the Guardian,

The roads around the airfield were closed amid concerns that aviation fuel and helium could escape from the airship. However, police said they believed the helium would soon dissipate.

 

Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV), the company that developed the airship confirmed there had been an incident. It said the craft was not on a flight at the time and had since been deflated.

 

An investigation has been launched to find out what happened.

Local residents took to social media and snapped shocking pictures of the crashed airship appearing to be more deflated than Tom Brady’s footballs.

#Airlander has died ????anyone know what happened? pic.twitter.com/0kYdWKHRkr

— Mark Jefferies (@airdisplays) November 18, 2017

Another concerned resident indicated ground crews rushed to slice open the aircraft to release helium after the crash.

Nobody's laughing as #Airlander blows over and techs rush to cut it open to release helium. pic.twitter.com/pxYdG5igvN

— Annabel Ossel (@AnnabelOssel) November 18, 2017

Airship community is in tears this morning...

.@STEMAirlander We are very sorry to see this wonderful aircraft looking so sad this morning. Lots of people feeling gutted. #STEM #avgeeks #bedfordshire #cardington #Airlander pic.twitter.com/AzT7pvO52F

— Sci-Hi Education (@SciHiEd) November 18, 2017

The Airlander 10 is/was the world’s largest aircraft produced by Hybrid Air Vehicles. The airship is classified as a helium airship powered by four diesel engines driving large propellers on each side of the craft. Hybrid Air Vehicles originally built this aircraft for the United States Army’s Long Endurance Multi-intelligence Vehicle (LEMV) program in 2012, but was cancelled one-year later.

To give perspective of the Airlander’s size, a Boeing 747 can pretty much fit inside the craft.

Perhaps the United States Army made the right decision in 2013, as it appears the Airlander 10 has many kinks that still need to be worked out. In late 2016, the Airlander 10 had a slow motion crash during a landing approach where damage to the cockpit was heavily sustained, but the crew of two was untouched.

Bottomline: Back to back ‘Hidenburg Omens’ for US-stocks and now the largest aircraft in the world crashing this morning is an ominous sign and we hope it’s not a redux of 1937 where markets crashed in excessive around 50%.

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 3:00 am

Paris, schmarish...

In a February 2007 report, the United States Department of Energy made thirty-year predictions for the country's energy usage and production. As Statista's infographic below shows, using data from the non-profit international environmental pressure group Natural Resources Defense Council, these forecasts have so far been smashed.

Infographic: The U.S. Is Smashing Its Clean Energy Forecasts | Statista

You will find more statistics at Statista

Martin Armstrong details that actual CO2 emissions in 2016 have undercut the 2006 predictions by 24 percent.

In terms of the energy mix, power generated from coal was 45 percent beneath the forecast while clean(er) alternatives natural gas and wind/solar power saw overshoots of 79 and 383 percent, respectively.

Renewable energy infrastructure is also expanding at a much faster rate than was thought ten years ago. 2006's prediction for installed solar was a massive 4,813 percent shy of the 2016 reality. The U.S now also has installed wind capacity of 82 gigawatts, 361 percent more than had been hoped for.

In fact, energy consumption in total was also 17 percent lower than expected... which is odd and perhaps a better indication of the recovery-less recovery's reality?

Author: Tyler Durden
Posted: November 19, 2017, 2:00 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *