While the mainstream media desperately tries to convince the public that there is no such thing as a deep state, politicians keep letting everyone know it’s the real deal. Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment farce is nothing more than a distraction from the corruption and intricacies of the deep state.
Pelosi had, at one time, pushed back at politicians who demanded President Donald Trump’s impeachment. However, in September, she decided to run with it. Hoax or not, the impeachment farce is ongoing so that there is a distraction for the public to focus on while the deep state continues to run it’s nefarious and enslavement schemes, according to Townhall.
After the failure of the long-running Mueller investigation to produce anything of value, the thin gruel of President Trump’s phone conversation with the president of Ukraine has never seemed any less than absurd as a basis for removing a United States President from office in accordance with the constitutional standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” –Townhall
In other words, for some reason, Trump is in the way of the deep state, and he needs to be out of their way. And Nancy Pelosi’s “flip-flopping” on the issue of impeachment can be explained easily;
That transparently preposterous conspiracy theory, cooked up by the Clinton campaign as an explanation for their disastrous loss, was then propagated with help from the exiting Obama administration, the intelligence community, anti-Trump operatives in the federal bureaucracy, and of course Democratic members of Congress and their lapdog allies in the mainstream media. Both of these reports will confirm every one of Donald Trump’s allegations of a baseless witch hunt orchestrated by the Deep State to overturn the results of the 2016 election. –Townhall
Author Mike Lofgren covered the corruption and government takeover of the deep state in his book, The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government. Hooked on war, genuflecting to big donors, in thrall to discredited economic theories and utterly bereft of a moral compass, America’s governing classes are selling their souls to entrenched interest while our bridges collapse, wages, stagnate, and our water is increasingly undrinkable.
Mike Lofgren was the first to use the term Deep State, in an essay and exclusive interview on Moyers and Company, to refer to a web of entrenched interests in the US government and beyond (most notably Wall Street and Silicon Valley, which controls access to our every click and swipe) that dictate America’s defense decisions, trade policies and priorities with little regard for the actual interests or desires of the American people.
The Democrats have taken on the impeachment farce in order to create a distraction from those who are really pulling the strings: the deep state. And it’s been astonishing to watch just how well the propaganda scheme, with the mainstream media’s help, has worked. Every single one of President Trump’s supposedly “unhinged” assertions about Comey’s FBI were proven true by the IG report, according to Townhall. Yet, almost all the mainstream media coverage parroted the Democratic talking points that the report had somehow “exonerated” the FBI of accusations of political bias – that is unless you’ve been paying attention.
The impeachment circus has made it possible for people to overlook the obvious and focus on exactly what the mainstream media has told them to.
Social media tycoon makes out like a bandit in 2019 despite controversies
(INTELLIHUB) — Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s wealth rose by an astonishing $27.3 billion in 2019, according to new reports circulating throughout the media.
It looks as if Zuckerberg is set to finish the year off with a bang despite the mogul’s testimony in late October to House Financial Services over the company’s long-awaited Lybra crypto-currency which some pundits argued would have a negative impact on the CEO’s bottom line.
Now, top analysists are saying that Facebook is currently going strong because advertisers are willing to support the liberal-leaning platform which has garnered 8% more users over the last 12 months.
Democrats are now all-in on the effort to spark a civil war in America before Trump can win re-election in 2020. The philosophy of Democrats, of course, is, “If we can’t rule it, we will destroy it.” And they know the Trump administration is inching closer every day to revealing the full breadth of corruption and criminality of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, James Comey and other treasonous criminals (including John McCain).
Notably, all Americans need to understand that until John Brennan, James Comey, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are arrested and indicted, there is no legitimate, functioning rule of law in America. If the most malicious, treasonous criminals can still walk the streets as free people, even after carrying out the most heinous conspiracy of crimes against America, then we do not have any functioning rule of law at all.
If a civil war is ignited in 2020, it won’t be like the North vs. South arrangement of 1861 – 1865. Rather, it will be structured as a series of state-focused mini-civil wars that pit the armed, rural, pro-American patriots against the treasonous, lawless, anti-American Democrats in their capital cities.
Conflict will be local or regional, in other words, not national. If such conflicts occur where you live, you could very easily find yourself caught up in life-threatening disruptions such as power grid outages, local martial law or truckers refusing to enter the war zones, resulting in long-term supply line outages of food, fuel, medicine and other important supplies.
That’s why it’s important to consider the areas where local or regional civil war conflicts are likely to occur.
The states most likely to experience civil war conflicts if the lawless Democrats manage to ignite the war they want
Analysis: Such civil war scenarios are most likely to occur primarily in:
…that have large regions of conservative residents outside the capital cities
…where Democrats are increasingly aggressive in depriving rural residents of their Second Amendment rights
… and where gun ownership among private citizens is high
The states with the most restrictive gun laws are shown in the following map:
As you can see, states with the most restrictive gun laws include California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and virtually all the NE states except for Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.
Among those states with the most restrictive gun laws, the states with the largest rural areas include California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois and Pennsylvania.
This map shows the percentage of gun ownership among citizens of each state:
Note that even in anti-gun states with strict gun control laws, gun ownership is often one-quarter of the population or higher, indicating firearms ownership is very common.
And here’s a relatively recent map of which party is in charge of the governorships of each state (slightly outdated):
The states that fit the criteria for possible flare-ups of local or regional civil war are:
Virginia (due to its recent activity attacking 2A sanctuaries)
I would put Oregon, Virginia, Washington and Colorado at the top of that list. Virginia, for example, is currently engaged in an active campaign to ignite kinetic conflict over “gun sanctuaries” (2A sanctuaries) which the ruling Dems of Virginia claim they will not recognize. They’ve also passed a new budget with extra funding designated toward throwing gun owners in prison. It’s almost like they’re begging for an armed uprising. (In fact, that’s exactly what they want so that the national media can paint gun owners as domestic terrorists.)
Other states that may experience local conflicts as the rural citizens seek to eliminate pockets of left-wing tyranny
Even in states that are currently run by conservatives, there are always pockets of left-wing tyranny that may be rooted out once the rule of law collapses. After all, Leftists have been violently attacking Trump supporters in the streets for years, demonizing them with false claims of being “Nazis,” even while Leftists themselves are running fascist censorship campaigns ripped right out of the Third Reich.
I’ve learned from various sources that cops, in particular, are ready to seek out and take out Antifa terrorists who have been involved in violent attacks targeting law enforcement.
Thus, there exists the potential for local conflicts in all the following states, although this risk is likely lower than for the states mentioned earlier:
Among those states, the ones most likely to experience smaller, local conflicts are probably New Mexico, Texas, Michigan and Georgia, all of which are mostly rural states characterized by extreme corruption and tyranny of Democrats who seek to destroy the rights of rural citizens.
States with strong democrat control throughout
States where Democrat control is so strong that no pro-America forces are likely to challenge their power include:
California has a special status in all this, given that Gov. Newsom has his own private army and has already completed a secret deal with communist China to turn the West Coast ports into military landing zones for invading Chinese troops. (Newsom is a total criminal who should be indicted for treason.) This means rural Californians may find themselves fighting not only Democrat-controlled anti-America forces in the left-wing cities, but also facing invading foreign troops. The best strategy for pro-America Californians living outside the cities is to let the cities burn and don’t get sucked into urban combat. Let the Chinese troops face off against the MS-13 gang bangers and see who emerges the victor, then blow their heads off as they try to move Eastward or Northward.
Remember: California’s West Coast cities are death traps without a steady supply of food, fuel electricity and water. Cutting off the supply lines to those cities once they are occupied by enemy forces is by far the most effective strategy to reduce the effectiveness of the forces moving through those regions.
Cities, suburbs and rural areas
No matter where you are in America, you don’t want to be near the cities when it all hits the fan. Given that unprepared people will be your biggest problem, you want to be as far away from population centers as possible.
This night lights map of the USA, overlaid with state boundaries, is particularly helpful for understanding this crucial point. When things go bad, you want to be as far away from the high-density lighted areas as possible:
Note that everything east of the Mississippi, except for the far northeast, is extremely dense in terms of population. The Eastern half of Texas is also quite dense, with way too much light in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio.
Denver is lit up, too, as is Phoenix. Along the west coast, you have extreme population density in southern California, plus the Bay Area, Portland and Seattle.
All these areas characterized by bright night lights are, of course, death traps in any collapse.
If you’re looking to get far, far away from other people, the answers are obvious: Utah, Wyoming, West Texas, Montana, eastern Oregon, Nevada, and so on.
You can even get away from a lot of it in northern California, or western Kansas, for example.
Take another look at the map and notice the total death zone of Chicago. Check out Detroit. Or Miami. How about New York City? These will be locations of mass death and desperation if anything goes wrong: power grid failures, food deliveries, pandemic outbreak, financial collapse, etc. I call these areas “suicide cities.”
One more thing to consider: All the coastlines are of course vulnerable to massive tsunami waves, which means offshore, deep sea bed earthquakes and volcanoes. There are also underwater landslides that produce horrific tsunamis, too.
Living in a coastal city is sort of like begging to be “suicided.” Living in a crowded coastal city with tons of other unprepared, pot-smoking dope heads wandering around is sort of like duct taping a shotgun pointing to your own head and super gluing your thumb to the trigger while begging a friend to tickle you.
That said, the riskiest places to live in America — from a preparedness point of view, regardless of civil war risk — are Los Angeles, Seattle, San Diego, Boston, Philadelphia, New York City, Miami, Charleston and Houston. All these cities suffer from one more enormous vulnerability: You can only escape in a very limited number of directions, since these cities are facing the ocean on one side. You have to go inland, which will of course be impossible when everyone has the same panicked idea. (Or you could buy a boat and then have fun facing the raping pirates of the lawless high seas…)
A city like St. Louis, on the other hand, has many routes of egress. You can escape into rural Illinois to join the meth heads, or you can run west into rural Missouri to link up with the meth traffickers and exploding meth manufacturing trailers. You could head south into the boot hill of Missouri where you will discover the marijuana growers and heroin smugglers, or you can go north into western Illinois where Democrats run child trafficking “safe house” operations. It’s your choice, you see. Because America is a free country.
You can run in any direction you want when exiting an inland city, but in places like Miami, you can only run north or south. (Unless you enjoy being eaten by alligators to the west.)
Terrain also matters, too. That’s why some people like The Ozarks for hiding out. It’s hilly and full of forests, sort of like the pot-growing counties of Northern California where outlaws are the law. Idaho is famous as rugged country, too, and parts of rural Colorado make for some really remote getaways.
You need to consider all these factors: Geography, proximity to high density population centers, ease of egress, the ability to stay hidden, proximity to the coast (or the southern border), and so on. This is why El Paso, Texas is a really bad choice, as it’s certain to be overrun by armed illegal drug cartels at the first opportunity. Las Vegas is also bad for the obvious reason: No water. Everybody will rush to Lake Mead, which will quickly turn into a Mad Max scenario of violence and gang control.
Extreme cold weather tends to weed out really lazy people after just one winter, for some reason
Also consider the fact that cold weather tends to chase away lazy people, which is a good thing. After just one winter without a power grid, there won’t be any lazy people still breathing in places like Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. Mother Nature sort of has a way of weeding out the weak under such circumstances.
That’s why lazy people tend to flock to Southern California and Miami, by the way: It’s easier to survive there by doing nothing and engaging in no planning whatsoever. These are the very kind of people who utterly refuse to prepare for anything, and they live one day to the next with no planning whatsoever for unforeseen events. When SHTF, these are the very same people who will demand your stuff and accuse you of “hoarding” if you don’t “share equally with everyone.” It’s amazing how mild weather automatically breeds socialism and commie lunatics.
It’s also not a horrible idea to live around people who are, themselves, preppers. You’ll find lots of those people in Utah, Idaho and Wyoming. I used to live in Wyoming, and those are some really rugged, determined people there. Especially the ranchers and outfitters. They can survive almost anything. We used to rent snowmobiles and ride through Yellowstone Park when there was four feet of snow on the ground. Ah, the days…
For me, I’ve chosen to live in rural areas of Central Texas for lots of reasons, one of them being you can own, if you wish, a dozen .50 BMG rifles and that’s not considered strange at all. Slinging lead on a Saturday afternoon is practically the most popular past time in the region. As I say, if you don’t hear gunfire on the weekend, you’re either really isolated, or you live too close to a bunch of pathetic panzies who don’t know how to survive. Weekend gunfire is the music of liberty for real Americans who are going to make it through the coming hard times.
In fact, the way you respond to gunfire tells me everything I need to know about you. If your first inclination, upon hearing gunfire, is to panic and call the police, you are a weak-minded city dweller and probably not a survivor. If, on the other hand, it reminds you to practice your own rifle or pistol skills, and you appreciate having armed neighbors who can help lend their skills to the security of your community, then you’re probably going to be just fine.
Make a decision: Where do you want to be when the music stops?
I sincerely hope all this helps you decide where you want to be when it all comes down. Because chances are, you won’t have much of an opportunity to relocate by the time you realize what’s happening.
You won’t be able to go shopping for more supplies, either, without risking life and limb as part of a crazed mob ransacking all the retail stores. It’s safer to just stay home and safeguard what you already have.
Back in September, we reported that TV network OAN had filed a lawsuit against Rachel Maddow for the time the host said that OAN “really, literally is paid Russian propaganda.”
Now, Maddow finds herself having to come up with a defense for her statement in court. And she has also apparently hired Lionel Hutz as her legal adviser.
According to Culttture, her lawyers argued in a recent motion that “…the liberal host was clearly offering up her ‘own unique expression’ of her views to capture what she saw as the ‘ridiculous’ nature of the undisputed facts. Her comment, therefore, is a quintessential statement ‘of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false.”
Oh, it’s capable of being proved false, alright. Maddow had previously claimed, on-air, about one of OAN’s reporters:
“In this case, the most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America is really literally is paid Russian propaganda,” and added, “Their on-air politics reporter (Kristian Rouz) is paid by the Russian government to produce propaganda for that government.”
The testimony of UC Santa Barbara linguistics professor Stefan Thomas Gries, however, stands at odds with Maddow’s defense. Gries said: “It is very unlikely that an average or reasonable/ordinary viewer would consider the sentence in question to be a statement of opinion.”
Gries continued: “I am the second most widely-cited cognitive linguist and sixth most widely-cited living corpus linguist. The field of cognitive linguistics draws from both linguistics and psychology and studies how language interacts with cognition.”
OAN had filed the defamation suit in federal court in San Diego, according to AP. OAN is a small, family-owned conservative network that is based in San Diego and has received favorable Tweets from the President. It is seen as a competitor to Fox News.
OAN’s lawsuit claims that Maddow’s comments were retaliation after OAN President Charles Herring accused Comcast of censorship. The suit said that Comcast refuses to carry its channel because “counters the liberal politics of Comcast’s own news channel, MSNBC.”
It was about a week after Herring e-mailed a Comcast executive when Maddow opened her show by referring to a Daily Beast report that claimed an OAN employee also worked for Sputnik News, which has ties to the Russian government.
Maddow said: “In this case, the most obsequiously pro-Trump right-wing news outlet in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda. Their on-air U.S. politics reporter is paid by the Russian government to produce propaganda for that government.”
Except Maddow, likely still upset from spending 3 years trying to promulgate a Russian hoax that didn’t exist, didn’t quite get her facts straight.Big surprise.
This week, Presiding Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) Judge Rosemary Collyer, released two stern Orders taking the FBI to task for its repeated failures, omissions, and misrepresentations in its application and subsequent renewals to surveil Carter Page.
And while one FBI employee has received a criminal referral for doctoring evidence in the scheme to defraud the court, key players with oversight responsibilities – under penalty of perjury – have been given a pass.
Judge Collyer’s December 17, 2019 Order, written after the publication of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s long-awaited report on FISA abuse, emphasized the role the FBI plays when it makes its assessment on whether probable cause exists to a warrant. In particular, FISC requires the FBI agent swearing to the application fully and accurately provide “information in its possession that is material to whether probable cause exists.”
FISC Judge Collyer responds to the IG Report.
Court orders remedial measures.
There is also a December 5 FISC Order – currently pending classification review – discussing the court’s “concerns”
It all began just after midday with the following…
“Today, as speaker of the House, I solemnly and sadly open the debate on the impeachment of the president of the United States,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said from the House floor shortly after noon.
“It is tragic that the president’s reckless actions make impeachment necessary. He gave us no choice.”
And ended just over eight hours later
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy closes: “He is president today, he’ll be president tomorrow and he will be president when this impeachment over.”
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) closes: “All of us feel a sense of loyalty to party. It’s what makes our two-party system function. But party loyalty must have its limits…it has become increasingly clear that the limits of partisanship have been reached and passed.”
And the result after 219 speakers from both sides of the aisle today, as most expected, all Republicans voted against impeachment, all Democrats except three voted for the first article of impeachment…
Article 1 – Abuse Of Power – vote 230 in favor, 197 opposed, 1 present:
All Republicans voted against impeachment, all Democrats except four voted for the second article of impeachment…
Article 2 – Obstruction – vote:
Tulsi Gabbard voted “present” while New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew, who’s in the process of becoming a Republican; and Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson, who represents what’s considered the country’s most conservative Democratic district, both broke ranks and voted against impeachment.
…and Michigan Rep. Justin Amash (the sole Independent member of the House) voted for impeachment.
The question now is simple – will Pelosi keep the articles to herself (to avoid the spectacle of utter defeat in the Senate)? Or pass them on for what McConnell has called a quick decision.
What the Constitution says about what happens next
A president who has been impeached by the House can still serve as president. It’s up to the Senate to hold a trial to decide whether to remove him from office. The two other presidents impeached by the House, Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson, were both acquitted by the Senate.
The Constitution only says that the Senate has to hold a trial, with the senators sitting as jurors, House lawmakers serving as prosecutors known as managers and the chief justice of the United States presiding over it. They must take a public vote, and two-thirds of senators present must agree on whether to convict the president and thus remove him from office. But the Constitution doesn’t lay out exactly how to hold a trial.
But, as WaPo reports, a group of House Democrats is pushing Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders to withhold the articles of impeachment against President Trump that are expected to emerge on Wednesday, potentially delaying a Senate trial for months.
The notion of impeaching Trump but holding the articles in the House has gained traction among some on the political left as a way of potentially forcing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to conduct a trial on more favorable terms for Democrats.
And if no agreement is reached, some have argued, the trial could be delayed indefinitely, denying Trump an expected acquittal.
However, as Byron York noted rather pointedly:
“How do Democrats impeach and withhold when they’ve been telling everybody Trump must be removed right now because he poses an immediate threat to our elections?
Would Dems go straight from pre-emptive impeachment to deferred impeachment?”
And remember, the public is now against impeachment broadly…
Some high/lowlights from the multi-hour debacle include:
Here is what the Democrats believed…Cicilline said if they do not hold Trump accountable, then “we will live in a dictatorship.”
Democrats were, in their own words, “sad” to impeach the president…“I’m saddened, but I’m not shocked,” Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California said.
Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert passionately warned that the end of America was in sight… “This is a travesty and we’re in big trouble because Schumer was right… This country’s end is now in sight… I hope I don’t live to see it. This is an outrage.”
And finally, Louisiana Republican Rep. Clay Higgins delivered the darkest, most ominous speech of the day.
“I have descended into the belly of the beast. I have witnessed the terror within, and I rise committed to oppose the insidious forces which threaten our Republic,” Higgins opened.
“America’s being severely injured by this betrayal, by this unjust and weaponized impeachment, brought upon us by the same socialists who threaten unborn life in the womb, who threaten First Amendment rights of Conservatives, who threaten Second Amendment protections of every American patriot, and who have long ago determined that they would organize and conspire to overthrow President Trump.”
“We don’t face this horror because the Democrats have all of a sudden become constitutionalists. We are not being devoured from within because of some surreal assertion of the socialists’ newfound love for the very flag that they trod upon.”
“They are deep established D.C.,” he continued.
“They call this Republican map flyover country. They call us deplorables. They fear our faith. They fear our strength. They fear our unity. They fear our vote, and they fear our president.”
“We will never surrender our nation to career establishment D.C. politicians and bureaucrats,” Higgins closed. “Our republic shall survive this threat from within. American patriots shall prevail.”
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court slammed the FBI on Tuesday in a rare public statement over the agency’s handling of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page’s warrant application and subsequent renewals, according to the Wall Street Journal.
“In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the government’s conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes,” reads the statement.
The punchline: “The FBI’s handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the OIG report, was antithetical to the hieghtned duty of candor” required by federal investigators, adding “The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable,” wrote the court, which called the recent watchdog report from the DOJ’s Inspector General “troubling.”
Watch @comey try to squirm out of Wallace’s question. Comey is a total snake and a liar. Just watch him try to lie with the cold, hard facts placed right in front of him: pic.twitter.com/zeA54eQ1ip
Former FBI Director James Comey admitted on Fox News Sunday that he was “overconfident in the procedures that the FBI and Justice had built over 20 years,” adding “It’s incredibly hard to get a FISA. I was overconfident in those because he’s right, there was real sloppiness. Seventeen things that either should have been in the applications or at least discussed and characterized differently. It was not acceptable, so he’s right, I was wrong.”
In previewing today’s Fed statement regarding repurchase operations, on Tuesday Curvature Securities repo expert Scott Skyrm said that he expects the Fed to announce a $50 billion (at least) term operation for Monday, December 23 (double the current term ops) and a $50 billion (at least) term operation for Monday, December 30. This prediction was in response to Zoltan Pozsar’s warning that reserve levels are too low and the result would be a market crash that could spark QE4.
Well, moments ago the NY Fed did publish it latest weekly “Statement Regarding Repurchase Operations” as expected laying out the Fed’s expected repo operations for the period December 13 – January 14… and it blew Skyrm’s expectations out of the water
According to the statement, the NY Fed will continue to offer two-week term repo operations twice per week, four of which span year end. In addition, the Desk will also offer another longer-maturity term repo operation that spans year-end. The amount offered in this operation will be at least $50 billion, just as Skyrm expected.
But there was more. Much more.
In addition, to prevent a cascading year-end liquidity squeeze, Fed overnight repo operations will continue to be held each day, and just to be safe, the Fed will go to town by substantially expanding their size: On December 31, 2019 and January 2, 2020, the overnight repo offering will increase to at least $150 billion to cover the “turn” in a flood of overnight liquidity. In addition, on December 30, 2019, the Desk will offer a $75 billion repo that settles on December 31, 2019 and matures on January 2, 2020.
And just in case that’s not enough, the NY Fed’s markets desk also added that it “intends to adjust the timing and amounts of repo operations as needed to mitigate the risk of money market pressures that could adversely affect policy implementation, consistent with the directive from the FOMC.”
What the Fed means is that in addition to expanding the sizes of its “turn” overnight repos to $150 billion, the Fed will conduct a total of nine term repos covering the year-end turn from Dec 16 to Jan 14, 8 of which will amount to $35BN and the first will be $50BN, for a total injection of a whopping $365 billion in the coming month.
In other words, instead of QE4 the Fed will flood the repo market with a firehose of liquidity.
Here is how Curvature’s Skyrm summarized this:
One word: “Massive“. A few more words: The largest series of RP operations ever! The Fed announced it’s RP operations schedule for the next few weeks and it’s huge!
Here are my calculations:
There are two existing $25 billion term operations over the Turn already in the market totaling $50 billion
The Fed committed to at least a $150 billion overnight operation on year-end
A REG-start year-end operation on the day before year-end of $75 billion
Between now and year-end a total of 6 term RP operations totaling $225 billion
All total, I count the Fed committed to pump $500 billion in the Repo market over year-end. Naturally, the Turn (12/31-1/2) rallied a bit today. Trading from 4.25% yesterday to 3.80% today
There’s more: add in the incremental liquidity from the expanded overnight repo of about $50 billion and another $60 billion in T-Bill purchases, and the Fed will inject a total of just shy of $500 billion in the next 30 days!
This also means that by Jan 14, the Fed’s balance sheet would have grown by a cumulative $365BN in “temporary” repos, and together with the expanded overnight repos, and the $60BN in monthly TBill purchases, and by mid-January, the Fed’s balance sheet, currently at $4.066 trillion, will surpass its all-time high of $4.5 trillion!
The question then is whether this will be sufficient to refute the repo Doomsday predicted by Pozsar, one which was supposed to launch QE4, or will the Fed’s gargantuan liquidity injection still not be enough and lead to a collapse in the repo market. We will find out in the next three weeks.
Two Department of Defense employees shot and killed by joint base active shooter
HONOLULU (INTELLIHUB) — U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Robert Chadwick told reporters at a press briefing on Wednesday that joint base security personnel responded to an active shooter call after a Navy sailor opened-fire on three people in the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard striking three people before the sailor reportedly turned the gun on himself in a cowardly act of suicide.
Two of the victims are deceased along with the shooter.
The victims were all male Department of Defense employees.
The shooter was stationed on the USS Columbia (SSN 771), a submarine that had been undergoing routine maintenance and repairs in drydock.