Authored by Graham Young via The Epoch Times,

“Papers please” used to be the ostinato of totalitarian systems, at least in the movies.

With the passing of the government’s Digital ID bills, Australians will have to become used to the digital equivalent - so what does that say about present-day Australia?

A few things have surprised me over the last few years, not the least the way the famous Aussie spirit of insubordination has been subsumed into a goody-two-shoes compliance with whatever capricious orders the authorities made.

I can’t imagine our forebears accepting lockdowns and forced vaccinations, and I certainly couldn’t see them accepting an identity card linking not just government accounts but private sector ones as well.

While the first proposition is an assertion based on a gut feeling, the second is very much based on fact.

Remember the Australia Card?

In 1984, the Hawke Labor government introduced the Australia Card, and for the next three years, the government and opposition parties tussled over it to the extent that it triggered a double-dissolution election in 1987.

Objections didn’t just come from the federal Opposition either.

Queensland Labor Senator George Georges resigned from the governing party in 1986 over the issue, and in the lower house, Labor backbencher Lewis Kent said:

“Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitlercard or Stalin-card.”

As a result, while the government won the 1987 election, and had the numbers to push the card through, instead, it withdrew the card when a technicality was found that could have affected its operation. One senses this was a relief.

Individual Freedom Chipped Away, One Law at a Time

Yet, apart from a few senators this time there has been little outcry in response to the Albanese government’s Digital ID, although the Liberal-National Opposition did vote against it.

A form of this ID was recommended by the Murray Inquiry into the Financial System in 2014, but the committee was careful to avoid recommending a full-blown government-issued identity card because of the Australia Card debacle.

The then-Liberal-National government acted on these recommendations, but its version of the bill was to facilitate private organisations to issue their own digital identity cards, rather than the government.

Why has the government now decided to make the card a government-issued one, when the recommendation and the draft legislation was for a competitive system?

At one level one might say it is symptomatic of this Labor government that it wants to control everything and is suspicious of both private enterprise and competition.

At another level, it has been gnawing away at the independence of the citizenry, particularly the independence of thought, so maybe there is a long-term agenda of control here.

Two pieces of draft legislation, and one draft regulation, exemplify this tendency—the proposed draft Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, the Online Safety (Relevant Electronic Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024, as well as the Religious Discrimination Bill.

The combination of these is to restrict what citizens can say, teach, and whom they associate with, depending on what is approved by the government, or worse, regulators.

Recent Tragedies Reveal How Eager Authorities Are to ‘Protect’ Us

Almost as though to prove the dangers of these proposed laws, the Commonwealth “censor” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant just days ago ordered Meta and X to remove videos showing footage from the stabbing incidents at Westfield Bondi Junction shopping centre, and the Christ the Good Shepherd church at Wakely.

I’ve seen this footage, as have many other Australians, and suffice it to say, were I the eSafety commissioner, they would still be up.

When it comes to horror, the footage I have seen from Gaza and Ukraine, and reproduced in the pages and on the websites of the major news sites, is more horrific than any of this footage.

And where is the justification for censoring the information that individuals can now access for themselves?

For a moment there, we all became citizen journalists, able to view events and make our own decisions, and now the government is trying to take our accreditation away from us.

Indeed, some of these clips are uplifting as they show acts of heroism as men throw themselves between attackers and victims, or tend to the wounded.

Ms. Grant only has powers over commercial entities, so I can still, for the moment, show the videos on my blog.

But should we all have a unique identifier, known to the government and cross-referenced to every other activity that we are involved in, who knows what petty bureaucrat will hold my free will in their hands? And what else might the government interfere with?

Voluntary? Not Really

In Canada, a country that shares our democratic norms, we saw the Trudeau government bar protestors, and any supporters who donated money to their cause, from using their bank accounts.

Imagine what an interlinking record could allow them to have done.

Is it too far-fetched to think that could happen in Australia?

The government says these concerns are absurd.

The digital ID card is “voluntary” and will only link records to the person, not link them together, and records will be encrypted. It also claims that it will protect against cyber-attacks.

The voluntary aspect is laughable.

You may be able to access your Centrelink welfare benefits without it, but you will need to physically go down to the Centrelink office, even if you live in Oodnadatta—a remote outback town in South Australia—and if the office is in Perth, Western Australia.

And if you are a company director, you will need one, full-stop, because of the now-mandatory “director IDs” introduced by the Morrison government in 2021.

If “voluntary” doesn’t mean voluntary for all people and all activities, then it doesn’t mean voluntary at all.

Believe It or Not, the Slippery Slope Is Real

So why are we acquiescing to this scheme?

Perhaps it is because we’ve become too compliant—that the irreverent generation were the original immigrants and their sons and daughters, and now we are onto third, fourth, fifth generations and more, the spirit of adventure that brought people here has dissipated.

Or maybe it’s the case that the frog has been swimming in digital waters that have gradually risen in temperature.

First, we allowed social media companies to monetise us in return for the free use of their platforms, and then we allowed them to cross-reference our online activities to create profiles to then be used for other unrelated sites.

And how is that working out? They abuse their power.

We know that, come election time, they will be putting their thumbs on our scales and showing us material that they deem suitable, rather than allowing us to make our own decisions.

We also know that they work hand-in-glove with unscrupulous administrations to sell us lies like “safe and effective” and to suppress embarrassing facts, such as the high probability that viruses escape from laboratories more regularly than from pangolins in a market (particularly when the market didn’t have any pangolins for sale).

I don’t believe that governments are any more trustworthy than social media, especially if they are staffed with Bruce Lehrmanns and Brittany Higgins’s.

Democracy is meant to be government by the people, for the people. And Google’s motto was “Don’t be evil.”

But one seems to be converging on government by anyone but the people, and the other seems to have dropped the motto, maybe ashamed of their hypocrisy.

Either way, human institutions seem inexorably to head towards dissolution, so the less they know about you and can link together, the better.

So I’ll probably pass on my Digital ID.

Whoops, I’m a company director. Looks like they are closing in on me already.

Looks like I’ve already learned the true, government-approved, meaning of “voluntary.”

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

US officials have been quoted in Politico as saying the Biden White House is preparing a "larger than normal" weapons package for Ukraine to be sent quickly once Biden signs the bill into law authorizing $61 billion in spending, following the historic weekend House vote, which was far and away the biggest hurdle.

The officials described the new "significantly larger" tranche as including Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Humvees, M113 armored personnel carriers, and missiles - which will be ready to roll out the door. Also expected included in the package will be older Humvees and M113 armored personnel carriers. Two admin officials have told Reuters that the first single new package is expected to be valued at $1 billion.

ATACMS missile, via US Army

The White House said in a readout of Biden's Monday call with Zelensky wherein the latter thanked the US for the new assistance: "President Biden shared that his administration will quickly provide significant new security assistance packages to meet Ukraine’s urgent battlefield and air defense needs as soon as the Senate passes the national security supplemental and he signs it into law."

Interestingly (and alarmingly, given the cross-border escalation with Russia soon to follow), Zelensky touted that the new bill also included provisions for Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) with a range of about 190 miles. "In the agreement on ATACMS for Ukraine, all the details are in place," Zelensky said. "Thank you, Mr. President, thank you Congress, thank you America."

The $61 billion marked for Ukraine, among a broader final package totaling $95 billion (the rest for Israel and Taiwan), is now set for a vote in the Senate on Tuesday. "The task before us is urgent. It is once again the Senate’s turn to make history," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell stated while previewing the vote.

Biden told Zelensky that he could expect the military assistance to arrive "quickly" - at a moment Ukrainian cities and especially energy and communications infrastructure are getting pounded. One question that remains is how much of the $61 billion is going straight to major US defense contractors, as they work speedily to prepare more military hardware to be shipped out the door.

Meanwhile, the southern port city of Odesa was pummeled overnight, and there are reports of Russian drones having been fired on the capital of Kiev as well:

At least nine people have been injured after an overnight Russian air strike on the city of Odesa, Ukrainian officials said. "As a result of Russian terror, residential buildings were damaged, and there was a fire," Ukraine’s state emergency services said on Telegram.

The day prior, stunning video emerged from Kharkiv showing a large TV tower being taken out during a Russian attack...

Russia just struck the TV tower in Kharkiv, messing with Ukrainian digital signal. It's their scorched-earth tactic in action, déjà vu from spring 2022 pic.twitter.com/rwGOHyaEg2

AFP reported that an "AFP journalist in Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, saw the red-and-white spire of the 240-meter structure toppled after local officials reported a barrage by Russian forces."

The New York Times has recently observed that "War in eastern Ukraine has killed tens of thousands of people, reduced cities to ruins and displaced millions of people. It has also all but destroyed the factories and plants that were for years an important driver of Ukraine’s economy."

As for what's expected to be rushed US aid the moment Biden signs the new package into law, there are reports saying the staging has already taken place in central and eastern Europe...

According to CNN, most of the American aid to Ukraine, which still needs Senate approval, has already been pre-positioned in warehouses in Germany and Poland. This advance placement will shorten the delivery time to Ukraine.

Among the first items to be supplied will be… pic.twitter.com/1PXWI0N4ML

Hezbollah on Tuesday conducted its deepest strikes into Israeli territory since the start of the war, launching drones at Israeli military bases on the outskirts of the Israeli city of Acre.

Israel's military said none of its facilities were hit, and videos circulating online appear to show Israeli anti-air systems intercepting at least one drone which was flying low over the Mediterranean, just off the coast where Acre is located.

The IDF subsequently confirmed it intercepted two "areal targets" off Israel's northern coast. Thus far in the conflict, Hezbollah's daily rocket and drone attacks have tended to stay within within a few kilometers inside Israel. 

However, Tuesday's attack seems to be sending a message that escalation could be imminent: 

A security source told Arab News that the attack was "a sensitive targeting." The area struck is more than 15 km from the border with Lebanon.

"This targeting took place in broad daylight while the Israelis were celebrating the Jewish Passover," the source said.

Hezbollah said it launched the drones "in response to Israeli aggression against the Lebanese town of Aadloun and the assassination of a (Hezbollah) cadre there."

While the IDF denied that there were any direct hits on military bases, Lebanese source Al-Mayadeen reported that the headquarters of the army's Golani Brigade was struck with drones.

The below video shows an IDF intercept of a Hezbollah drone...

Another angle shows Israeli air defenses downing Hezbollah explosive-laden drones off the coast of Acre this morning. https://t.co/Km1MZNKQE6 pic.twitter.com/fbLfKo8QoZ

This was based on a Hezbollah statement claiming that the air attack "targeted the headquarters of the Golani Brigade and the headquarters of Egoz Unit 621 in the Sharaga barracks, north of the occupied city of Akka (Acre), and the drones hit their targets accurately."

Last week a major war between Iran and Israel was narrowly avoided after each side launched 'limited' strikes against the other. But tensions remain high and it could be that Iran's proxies, such as Hezbollah and Yemen's Houthis, could be set to escalate, especially as the IDF has Rafah set in its sites.

Interestingly, a fresh report in The New York Times says that Israeli leaders had actually planned a much bigger attack on Iran, but ditched the larger strike option at the last minute due to White House diplomatic intervention:

Israel reportedly abandoned plans for a much more extensive counterstrike on the Islamic Republic after concerted diplomatic pressure from the United States and other foreign allies and because the brunt of an Iranian assault on Israel soil had been thwarted, according to three senior Israeli officials:

Israeli leaders originally discussed bombarding several military targets across Iran last week, including near Tehran, the Iranian capital, in retaliation for the Iranian strike on April 13, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the sensitive discussions.

Such a broad and damaging attack would have been far harder for Iran to overlook, increasing the chances of a forceful Iranian counterattack that could have brought the Middle East to the brink of a major regional conflict.

In the end — after President Biden, along with the British and German foreign ministers, urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to prevent a wider war — Israel opted for a more limited strike on Friday that avoided significant damage, diminishing the likelihood of an escalation, at least for now.

Another angle showing a drone intercepted near Acre:

Footage purportedly shows two suspected drones being downed by air defenses off the coast of Acre a short while ago. pic.twitter.com/10iIjCn9wZ

According to a note via Rabobank, Mohamed El-Erian underlines a markets/NatSec disconnect over Mid-East events. Markets say “de-escalation”, because the oil price has gone down. National security figures worry; and those saying recent attacks were telegraphed might note reports of White House panic when Iran launched missiles, and Israel planning a larger military strike at first. We have calm now, but neither side will pass on the opportunity to weaken the other; the enmity is not over.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

"Pass"/"Over"

There is so much for markets to try to pass over right over: and they are certainly doing so.

Niall Ferguson warns us again about an escalating global Cold War 2 using Tolkien as an analogy – real Tolkien, not the insult that was The Rings of Power season 1. Markets gave that talk of a bifurcating, antagonistic, inflationary world a pass - like everyone did with The Rings of Power.

The Financial Times admits a new CRINK (China - Russia - Iran - North Korea) “axis” at war with the West and its allies on two fronts already; markets are apparently over that revelation, and its implications, despite continuous ‘surprises’ like the TikTok divestment/ban law now likely to pass in the US appearing one after the other.

SIPRI says defence spending is $2.4 trillion globally, a new nominal high. Yet that buys far less than a few years ago and is set to soar further if we are to get back to the percentage of GDP that defence took up during the Cold War, which many agree we have to: where will those trillions come from? But markets pass over that question, it seems; SIPRI is an acronym too far for those interested in monetary wonkery.

The Polish president says he’s happy to host US nuclear weapons, if needed; Russia says it will respond in kind, if necessary. Nothing to see here and ‘get over it’ for markets, apparently.

Mohamed El-Erian underlines a markets/NatSec disconnect over Mid-East events. Markets say “de-escalation”, because the oil price has gone down. National security figures worry; and those saying recent attacks were telegraphed might note reports of White House panic when Iran launched missiles, and Israel planning a larger military strike at first. We have calm now, but neither side will pass on the opportunity to weaken the other; the enmity is not over.

Ukraine keeps attacking Russian refineries; and Russia is attacking Ukraine’s grains. As Carlos Mera points out, wheat was just up 4% as the market suddenly noticed the war isn’t over. Indeed, the looming $61bn US military aid package will see fighting escalate.

There are proposals for the EU to finally sanction Russian LNG, which it is still apparently OK to buy vs. piped gas: but let’s see how that moral stance holds up against the need to fight a war as painlessly as possible for the EU economy.

Copper needed for both green *and khaki* transitions is just shy of $10,000 (+14.8% year-to-date); aluminium, also need for both, is +12.8% y-t-d; cocoa, needed to not think about expensive transitions, is around the same price (+183.4% y-t-d); coffee, for those who don’t drink cocoa, is +35.5% y-t-d. And yet markets are focused on the over / under of when we get rate cuts.

Three Germans were just arrested for allegedly working for China (not the last three Chancellors!); markets pass that news off as BAU now.

The EU needs to forge strategic autonomy partly via remilitarisation says Mario Draghi (something we flagged in December): that could impact every aspect of the EU economy and markets. “Hard pass,” say markets who are only interested in when we get that first rate cut.

Yanis Varoufakis (‘A European War Union?’) also screams ‘PASS!’ in arguing “the main difference of opinion between pro-EU political forces concerned whether Europe’s continental consolidation ought to proceed by Hamiltonian means (debt mutualization precipitating the emergence of a proper federation) or in the original intergovernmental way (gradual market integration)” - but now it’s to be “unproductive” war. Yet Hamilton’s economic strategy was to build a US navy, and: “So vital were supplies to national security that Hamilton did not rule out government-owned arms factories. The godfather of American industrial policy realized that market forces, while they could bring many benefits, could not be relied upon for all of the country’s needs. Knowing that international trade was vital to the early republic, Hamilton advocated for a strong navy to protect American shipping when writing: “The want of a Navy to protect our external commerce, as long as it shall Continue, must render it a peculiarly precarious reliance, for the supply of essential articles, and must serve to strengthen prodigiously the arguments in favour of manufactures.””

Relatedly, the shortlist for Trump’s National Security Advisor is down to Grenell and Colby. In either case, that’s ‘Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum’ on steroids; and an immediate shift in US arms away from Europe towards Asia. That smells like over a trillion in new annual western defence spending could come to pass, even if markets don’t have the nose for it.

Meanwhile, Columbia University sees either 1938 or 1968 style scenes, showing political polarization and volatility are domestic as well as international, and the two are linked.

All of this would have been enough for one Global Daily, but I was inspired by John Authors’ Passover-themed article yesterday to ask just one, not four questions: why is this global market cycle unlike all other global market cycles?

Let’s answer Seder style, to four different children: the wise, the wicked, the simple, and the one who doesn’t know how to ask:

• The wise child asks: "What are the testimonies, statues, and laws of global market cycles laid down by history and different disciplinary approaches?” You can talk to them about long-run cycles, peace and war phases, and huge fiscal deficits centrality in all of this.
• The wicked child asks: "What does this all mean to you?" Because they are too busy shilling ridiculously large Fed cut forecasts, and/or low bond yields, and/or high equities.
• The simple child asks: "What does this mean?” To which a simple summary is: “Free markets brought us out from the bondage of authoritarianism and war; and then led us back there."
• The child who does not know how to ask is to be told adults need to ask difficult questions about this cycle "because of what markets did for us in the West when they were free to be efficient *and* boost Western national security".

You can opt to let all this pass over you if you want. But don’t be surprised if you then look rather ‘unleavened’ compared to others who are prepared to ask, and honestly answer, difficult questions about our very troubling, far-from-BAU backdrop.

In a move aimed at Donald Trump, House Democrats have introduced a bill that would remove Secret Service protection for any former executive sentenced to prison for a federal or state felony.   

The bill comes from Democratic Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, who, in a fitting Deep State overlap, is not only the former Jan. 6 committee chairman but also the ranking member of the Homeland Security committee. Introduced Friday, HR 8081 has 8 cosponsors so far -- all Democrats. 

These days, nearly every bill comes with a goofy, forced acronym, and this one's no exception. Thompson has titled it the “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act.”

Rep. Bennie Thompson is working to pave the path for Trump prison time (Getty Images via

The measure seeks to address an admittedly huge conundrum that would arise in the event Trump gets jail time for any of the various politically-motivated prosecutions he's facing around the country: How would Secret Service agents operate inside a prison?  

If Thompson's bill became law, they simply wouldn't. That would make possible Democrats' fever dreams of Prisoner Trump getting shivved in a prison shower, and negate their dread that a judge might choose to sentence Trump to house arrest out of mere practicality.

As Homeland Security committee Democrats wrote in a fact sheet describing the bill: 

“This bill would remove the potential for conflicting lines of authority within prisons and allow judges to weigh the sentencing of individuals without having to factor in the logistical concerns of convicts with Secret Service protection." 

Trump is currently facing four prosecutions: 

• The scandal-plagued Georgia election interference case led by DA Fanni Willis, who was having an affair with one of her prosecutors
• A federal election interference case 
• Federal charges of mishandling classified documents
• The underway New York hush money trial, which centers on alleged falsification of business records regarding payments to compensate porn actress Stormy Daniels for keeping quiet about her alleged affair with Trump  

“It is regrettable that it has come to this, but this previously unthought-of scenario could become our reality,” said Thompson -- as if he and his comrades don't want that reality more than anything on Earth. 

By Tim Martin at BreakingDefense

Global military expenditure surged to a record $2.44 trillion in 2023, the largest year-on-year rise on weapons spending since 2009, according to a new Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report.

The report, published today, said that the new figure is an “all time high,” equivalent to a 6.8 percent increase on spending in 2022 and marking the ninth consecutive year in which global military expenditure rose.

The report also shows that for the first time in 15 years, global defense spending increased across all five major geographical regions: Africa, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Oceania, and the Americas.

“The unprecedented rise in military spending is a direct response to the global deterioration in peace and security,” said Nan Tian, senior researcher at SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. “States are prioritizing military strength but they risk an action–reaction spiral in the increasingly volatile geopolitical and security landscape.”

The US remains the world’s largest defense spender, outlaying $916 billion last year, a 2.3 percent annual increase, ahead of China in second place, which spent an estimated $296 billion, a 6 percent increase over the same period. SIPRI added that Beijing’s total spending stands as the 29th consecutive spike in national military spending, year-on-year, and represents “half” of all military spending across Asia and Oceania. (China’s annual military budget is publicly recorded at $222 billion, though recently a US senator said US intelligence believes the actual budget is more than three times that much.)

Amid its invasion of Ukraine, Russia moved the needle on national military expenditure considerably too, increasing spending by 24 percent for an estimated total of $109 billion last year. The figure also accounts for 16 percent of all government money spent by the Kremlin over 2023.

Ukraine spending reached $64.8 billion, an annual leap of 51 percent. Overall, Kyiv sits as the eighth highest global military spender.

When combined, Ukraine’s spending and miliary aid of “at least” $35 billion, mainly from the US and other international partners, amounted to around 91 percent of Russian spending. Not included in SIPRI’s figures is the new $60 billion in new US assistance, including $13.8 to replenish US stockpiles, after the House passed a $95 billion supplemental on Saturday.

I am grateful to the United States House of Representatives, both parties, and personally Speaker Mike Johnson for the decision that keeps history on the right track.

Democracy and freedom will always have global significance and will never fail as long as America helps to…

At a NATO level, the 31 member states from 2023 spent $1.34 trillion, equivalent to 55 percent of global military expenditure, with the US accounting for more than two thirds of the total.

Elsewhere, as tension with China heightens, both Japan and Taiwan increased their respective military spending by 11 percent, with Tokyo outlaying $50.2 billion and Taipei pitching in $16.6 billion.

SIPRI also said that “war and tensions” in the Middle East led to the largest spending increase across the region in the “past decade”: a 9 percent jump in expenditure, working out to $200 billion for the region last year.

The change was largely a result of increased spending by Israel, the second largest spender in the region behind Saudi Arabia, and which drew on $27.5 billion in 2023 — a 24 percent increase. The push for new funding from Tel Aviv was “mainly driven by Israel’s large-scale offensive in Gaza in response to the attack on southern Israel by Hamas in October 2023,” noted SIPRI.

“The large increase in military spending in the Middle East in 2023 reflected the rapidly shifting situation in the region — from the warming of diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab countries in recent years to the outbreak of a major war in Gaza and fears of a region-wide conflict,” said Diego Lopes da Silva, senior researcher at SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme.

Full report below (pdf link)

Oil priced ended notably higher today after recovering strongly from overnight weakness (driven by a Bloomberg report that said fresh U.S. sanctions targeting vessels and refineries handling Iranian oil shipments were having a muted impact on crude supply).

If implemented and enforced, the new sanctions could add as much as $8.40 to global prices, according to ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based consulting firm.

But...

“Oil traders are nonchalant because they know Biden will certainly sign whatever waivers are necessary to keep Iranian oil flowing into the market just as he is keeping Russian barrels flowing into the market,” said Jim Lucier, managing director at Capital Alpha Partners, a Washington-based research group.

And here's why!

Source: Bloomberg

The rebound in prices came as WTI tested to a $80 handle, finding support at its 50DMA ($81.25), and after dismal PMI data prompted a 'bad news is good news' bid in stocks and bonds as rate-cut hopes were revived (modestly).

Analysts expect a fifth straight week of crude inventory builds and another drawdown in product stocks at tomorrow's DOE data dump. Tonight's API preview will confirm or deny hopes...

API

• Crude -3.23mm (+500k exp)

• Cushing -898k

• Gasoline -595k (-1.5mm exp)

• Distillates +724k (-1.0mm exp)

Crude stockpiles unexpectedly drew down last week (after four straight weekly builds), but distillates stocks unexpectedly built...

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was trading around $83.30 ahead of the API data (after a roller-coaster day)...

The conflict in the Middle East has "undoubtedly exacerbated tensions in an already volatile region," Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, told MarketWatch.

"While the recent attacks have been downplayed, the potential for further escalation cannot be entirely dismissed."

However, "there's a lesson to be gleaned from this situation, particularly in how swiftly demand responded to higher oil and gasoline prices, as evidenced by the increase in U.S. oil stockpiles," he said.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A U.S. congressman is being sued for allegedly defaming a former associate of the Bidens who claims to have personally met with President Joe Biden. The lawsuit was filed on April 22.

Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.)

Tony Bobulinski is suing Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) over his claims that Mr. Bobulinski, a military veteran, is a Russian or Chinese spy, after Mr. Raskin ignored demands to retract these claims.

Mr. Bobulinski worked for years with President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, and the president’s brother, James Biden. He has told the FBI and, more recently, members of Congress that he met with President Biden, that Hunter Biden would seek his father’s approval and advice on business deals, and that messages between himself and others indicate that President Biden, when vice president, was involved in the family’s business dealings.

“Joe Biden was more than a participant in and beneficiary of his family’s business; he was an active, aware enabler who met with business associates such as myself to further the business, despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability,” Mr. Bobulinski testified in March.

Mr. Raskin soon after appeared on MSNBC and said that Mr. Bobulinski and other witnesses that have come forward during the U.S. House of Representatives impeachment inquiry against President Biden are either a Chinese spy or Russian spy.

“And none of them has laid a glove on Joe Biden because he hasn’t done anything wrong,” Mr. Raskin said, adding later that “the only crimes we’ve identified are by their own witnesses.”

Mr. Raskin also posted a statement on social media platform X in which he called Mr. Bobulinski a “political pawn” of former President Donald Trump and said Mr. Bobulinski had been “unable to support his claims against President Biden with any evidence.”

Mr. Raskin has also accused Mr. Bobulinski of collaborating with President Trump’s campaign.

“Each of the statements is unequivocally false,” the new suit, filed in Maryland, states.

Mr. Bobulinski has paid for his own legal fees and is not affiliated with President Trump’s campaign, according to the filing. It also says he has never lied about his experience with the Biden family and has provided evidence, including emails and other messages, backing his statements.

Mr. Raskin “deliberately and maliciously made these statements, outside the scope of his employment, in an attempt to discredit Mr. Bobulinski’s testimony and to besmirch Mr. Bobulinski’s character,” the suit states. “It was a mistake for defendant to believe he was cloaked with immunity for his defamatory statements.”

A demand to retract the statements was ignored, according to the filing.

A spokesman for Mr. Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, did not respond to a request for comment.

The suit seeks $20 million in damages.

Mr. Bobulinski has also recently sued Jessica Tarlov, a Fox News host, and Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.) for defamation.

Fox has said that Ms. Tarlov appropriately issued an update in which she said she had no evidence that payments from a super political action committee for President Trump to a law firm representing Mr. Bobulinski were connected with Mr. Bobulinski’s legal fees; however, the lawsuit claims that this update was insufficient.

Ms. Tarlov “failed to retract and apologize,” it states, noting that she described the update as a clarification and not a retraction.

Mr. Goldman, meanwhile, was sued after claiming that Mr. Bobulinski’s testimony was “Russian disinformation” and that Mr. Bobulinski was a “Trump campaign plant.” Mr. Goldman does not appear to have responded to the filing.

An earlier lawsuit says that Cassidy Hutchinson, who worked for White House’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, during the Trump administration, lied about Mr. Bobulinski in her book when she alleges he wore a ski mask while meeting with Mr. Meadows.

Ms. Hutchinson, according to the court docket, has not yet responded to the suit.

As previewed earlier, today's TSLA print is likely to be ugly: the company is the only Mag7 member expected to reported negative earnings growth...

... as a result of anemic Q1 sales, where the (growing) delta between production and deliveries was 46,000+ cars. Since then, CEO Elon Musk has doubled down on his robotaxi vision and vowed to unveil said robotaxi on August 8th. He also laid off more than 10% of the workforce and lost two key executives, while over the weekend, Tesla slashed prices across its lineup yet again and also reduced the cost of Full Self-Driving, or FSD -- which despite the name requires attentive drivers to keep their hands on the wheel.

For those who missed it, this is what Wall Street is looking for, starting with the first quarter:

• Q1 Revenue estimate $22.3 billion
• Q1 Adjusted EPS estimate 52c
• Automotive gross margin estimate 17.6%
• Free cash flow estimate $651.7 million
• Gross margin estimate 16.5%
• Capital expenditure estimate $2.4 billion
• Cash and cash equivalents estimate $23.24 billion

Turning to the next quarter:

• Q2 Automotive gross margin estimate 17.9%

And the full year

• Deliveries estimate 1.94 million
• Automotive gross margin estimate 17.9%
• Capital expenditure estimate $9.91 billion

Goldman cautions that while there is clearly skepticism on both TSLA and the EV market as a whole, with deliveries already announced for 1Q (stock was down 5% on this and another -14% additionally since), much of this has been priced in with short interest is at 3-year highs. Goldman thinks the key focus for investors will be

1. Can they grow volumes in 2024? Goldman thinks investors were at +10-15% y/y to start the year and are now in the 1-2% range, and
2. What are gross margins and how low do they need to go? Consensus looks to be 15.8% (ex-credits) and bogey seems to be below 15% for the quarter.

The one thing that everyone -- from the Wall Street giant to the retail investor -- wants from this earnings print and call, is simple: Clarity. Each group historically assigns different importance to different things and never before has the dichotomy of a robotaxi thesis vs. the pursuit of an affordable EV been so important. So Elon better give the people (investors) what they want, unless he wants to see what is already a record-matching stretch of stock price declines extend further.

Musk has also given us plenty of hints on his focus (spoiler: it’s Robotaxi). And sure enough, the call with Musk will be more important than the print itself. As Bloomberg notes, do we get an expansive, optimistic Musk who sells investors on the robotaxi? Or is he testy and curt with Wall Street analysts?

While Tesla shares closed up 1.8% ahead of the results, snapping a seven day losing streak, and joining the other mega-cap names that also rose, Tesla earnings haven’t been a happy event for investors for a long time now: shares of the company have dropped at least 9% the day after its results in each of the past four quarters. Tuesday’s announcement can also lead to a volatile reaction, with options trading implying that investors are pricing in an 8.3% move in either direction.

Meanwhile, technical strategists, who analyze moves in share prices to predict their future path, are also warning that the stock currently has little support and there’s risk that any disappointment in Tuesday’s report or Musk’s conference call could snowball into a much larger decline.

* * *

With all that in mind, here is what the company reported for the first quarter:

• Q1 Revenue $21.3BN, down 9% YoY, and missing estimates of $22.3BN
• Q1 Adj EPS 45c, down 47% YoY, and missing estimates of 52x
• Q1 Operating income $1.17BN, down 56% YoY and missing estimates of $1.53BN
• Q1 Automotive Gross Margin Ex-Regulatory Credits 16.4%, missing estimates of 17.6%
• Q1 Free Cash Flow -$2.53BN, vs +$441MM YoY and missing estimates of +653.6MM

In short: a hot mess as summarized below:

Some more details on the results, starting with revenue which declined 9% YoY in Q1 to $21.3B. YoY. revenue was impacted by the following items:

• - reduced vehicle average selling price (ASP) YoY (excl. FX impact), including unfavorable impact of mix
• - decline in vehicle deliveries, partially due to the Model 3 update in the Fremont factory and Giga Berlin production disruptions
• - negative FX impact of $0.2B1
• + growth in other parts of the business
• + higher FSD revenue recognition YoY due to release of Autopark feature in North America

Turning to operating income, that decreased YoY to $1.2B in Q1, resulting in a 5.5% operating margin. YoY, operating income was primarily impacted by the following items:

• - reduced vehicle ASP due to pricing and mix- increase in operating expenses partly driven by AI, cell advancements and other R&D projects
• - cost of Cybertruck production ramp
• - decline in vehicle deliveries, partially due to the Model 3 update in the Fremont factory and Giga Berlin production disruptions
• + lower cost per vehicle, including lower raw material costs, freight and duties
• + gross profit growth in Energy Generation and Storage including IRA credit benefit
• + higher FSD revenue recognition YoY due to release of Autopark feature in North America

The company's cash at quarter-end was $26.9B, a sequential decrease of $2.2B which was the result of negative free cash flow of $2.5B, driven by an inventory increase of $2.7B and AI infrastructure capex of $1.0B in Q1.

While we already knew the operating summary, here it is again:

Charted, the results are anything but pretty:

And while the disappointing results would likely have been enough to hammer the stock even more after hours, TSLA is soaring due to these four paragraphs in the company's "product outlook" section, which promise what everyone has been hoping for: cheaper cars are coming and sooner than expected, meaning Reuters indeed lied (it also mentions the robotaxi whose August 8 unveil Musk hinted at recently):

We have updated our future vehicle line-up to accelerate the launch of new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025.

These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.

This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times. This would help us fully utilize our current expected maximum capacity of close to three million vehicles, enabling more than 50% growth over 2023 production before investing in new manufacturing lines.

Our purpose-built robotaxi product will continue to pursue a revolutionary “unboxed” manufacturing strategy.

An earlier launch of cheaper EVs would be a reversal of the Reuters news around a cheaper Tesla model being pushed back, which musk already pushed back on. Arguably Tesla does not need to just release a model to compete with a Toyota Camry to see further growth. BYD, for example, has dozens of models out there for consumers to choose from. Tesla, meanwhile, has opted for less model variety and that has contributed to some of the challenges they’ve faced.

Reuters is lying (again)

Here are some other highlights from the company's Outlook section:

• Volume: Our company is currently between two major growth waves: the first one began with the global expansion of the Model 3/Y platform and we believe the next one will be initiated by advances in autonomy and introduction of new products, including those built on our next generation vehicle platform. In 2024, our vehicle volume growth rate may be notably lower than the growth rate achieved in 2023, as our teams work on the launch of the next generation vehicle and other products. In 2024, the growth rates of energy storage deployments and revenue in our Energy Generation and Storage business should outpace the Automotive business.
• Cash: We have sufficient liquidity to fund our product roadmap, long-term capacity expansion plans and other expenses. Furthermore, we will manage the business such that we maintain a strong balance sheet during this uncertain period.
• Profit: While we continue to execute on innovations to reduce the cost of manufacturing and operations, over time, we expect our hardware-related profits to be accompanied by an acceleration of AI, software and fleet-based profits.

Some more details from the presentation:

• Tesla notes (on page 7) that it produced 1,000 Cybertrucks in a single week in April. Positive ramping signs, although the Cybertrucks were recently recalled due to issues with its pedal.
• Working capital remains a big issue: global vehicle inventory rose to 28 days, a huge jump from the 15 days at the end of the last quarter.
• Tesla said that production at Gigafactory Shanghai was down sequentially due to seasonality and planned shutdowns around Chinese New Year in Q1. It also notes that demand typically improves throughout the year, and as it enters new markets, "such as Chile, many of them will be supplied from Gigafactory Shanghai.”
• There was the following interesting acknowledgmenet: “Global EV sales continue to be under pressure as many carmakers prioritize hybrids over EVs. While positive for our regulatory credits business, we prefer the industry to continue pushing EV adoption, which is in-line with our mission.”

Turning to the company's battery division, Tesla deployed a record amount of energy storage for the quarter – 4,053 megawatt-hours – topping its prior record by 2%. Tesla has become a dominant force in the storage business, vying with competitors such as Fluence Energy and Sungrow Power Supply to deploy big batteries that can back up solar plants or prevent blackouts on the electric grid. That market is growing at breakneck speed, with US deployments in the fourth quarter jumping 358% compared to the same period of 2022, according to Wood Mackenzie.

Still, as Bloomberg notes, probably for the first time since it bought SolarCity, Tesla didn’t disclose its quarterly deployments of solar, instead noting the following: "In its Energy Generation and Storage business: “Revenues were up 7% YoY and gross profit was up 140% YoY, driven by increased Megapack deployments, partially offset by a decrease in solar deployments." In Q4, the company deployed 41 megawatts.

Another notable highlight: the company has previewed what ride-hailing will look like using the TSLA app. Watch out Waymo and Uber, TSLA is coming for you:

And so, with the stock having cratered in the past week, sliding for a record-matching 7 consecutive days, the market is finally happy with what Musk revealed and the stock is sharply higher after hours, surging some 6% and erasing the 4 most recent days of losses...

... although much will depend on Musk's tone during the earnings call, where TSLA's overtime fate will be decided.

Via The Cradle

The Israeli army is closing in on completing its plans for an assault on the Gaza Strip’s southern city of Rafah, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on Tuesday. 

WSJ cites Egyptian officials as saying that Israel’s plan to evacuate civilians from the city will take two to three weeks and will be carried out in cooperation with Washington, Cairo, and other Arab states, including the UAE. 

Image: AFP

The officials say Israel is planning on gradual deployments of troops to Rafah. The troops will concentrate on specific areas where Tel Aviv believes Hamas leaders are holed up.

The entire operation – including the evacuations – is expected to take at least six weeks, according to WSJ. The attack on Rafah will have a "very tight operational plan because it’s very complex there," an Israeli security official told the outlet. "There’s a humanitarian response that’s happening at the same time."

Israel’s evacuation plan involves moving Rafah’s civilian population upwards towards the southern city of Khan Yunis, as well as other areas of the strip, the report states, adding that shelters with tents, food supplies, and medical facilities will be set up. 

Egypt has been briefed on the details of the plan. Al-Araby Al-Jadeed reported last week, citing Egyptian sources, that Egyptian forces and agencies are "at full readiness" in northern Sinai and along the Egyptian border with Gaza. The increased readiness came after "contacts from the Israeli side" relating to preparations for the operation in the southern city.

The Al-Araby Al-Jadeed report adds that the Egyptian Red Crescent has been readying camps in Khan Yunis over the past few months in preparation for the displacement of Palestinians from Rafah. Satellite images obtained by AP this week reportedly show a new tent compound near Khan Yunis.

In February, it was reported that Egypt built a security zone in the Sinai near the border with Rafah. Many speculated at the time that the security zone would aid Israeli plans to push Rafah’s population into the Sinai desert. Egypt's State Information Service said on February 17 that the zone is a logistics hub on the Egyptian side of the Rafah border, which will be used to deliver aid into Gaza.

Israeli army radio reported on Monday that Tel Aviv is now expanding a designated "humanitarian zone" that will "accommodate around one million people." It said field hospitals have also been set up in the area. Army radio added that the zone will extend from Al-Mawasi on Gaza’s southern coast towards Deir al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip. 

Satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press appear to show a new compound of tents being built near Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip as the Israeli military continues to signal it plans an offensive on the city of Rafah.https://t.co/5bkOW5ShyF

Israel believes Rafah is Hamas’ final stronghold and is dead set on attacking the city. Washington has repeatedly said it would not accept an operation there without a plan to properly and safely evacuate civilians and move them out of harm's way.  

The UN and several countries have warned that attacking Rafah would have catastrophic consequences and that there is no safe way to evacuate the desperately overcrowded city.