Deficits Matter — So Do Energy Reserves
There Are Two Reasons that 75 Percent of U.S. Banks Didn’t Hedge Their Interest Rate Risk as the Fed Hiked Rates at the Fastest Pace in 40 Years
Wall Street on Parade: https://wallstreetonparade.com/2023/10/there-are-two-reasons-that-75-percent-of-u-s-banks-didnt-hedge-their-interest-rate-risk-as-the-fed-hiked-rates-at-the-fastest-pace-in-40-years/
************
An academic study released in April found that during the fastest pace of Fed interest rate hikes in 40 years, the majority of U.S. banks failed to hedge their interest rate risk.
The study on hedging is titled: Limited Hedging and Gambling for Resurrection by U.S. Banks During the 2022 Monetary Tightening? Its authors are Erica Jiang, Assistant Professor of Finance and Business Economics at USC Marshall School of Business; Gregor Matvos, Chair in Finance at the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University; Tomasz Piskorski, Professor of Real Estate in the Finance Division at Columbia Business School; and Amit Seru, Professor of Finance at Stanford Graduate School of Business.
Among the key findings of the study are the following:
“Over three quarters of all reporting banks report no material use of interest rate swaps.”
“Only 6% of aggregate assets in the U.S. banking system are hedged by interest rate swaps.”
“Banks with the most fragile funding – i.e., those with highest uninsured leverage — sold or reduced their hedges during the monetary tightening. This allowed them to record accounting profits but exposed them to further rate increases. These actions are reminiscent of classic gambling for resurrection: if interest rates had decreased, equity would have reaped the profits, but if rates increased, then debtors and the FDIC would absorb the losses.”
One of the two key reasons for this lack of hedging was to window dress the bank’s earnings. The authors explain as follows:
…we show that banks with more fragile funding decreased the amount of hedging activity during the period of monetary tightening. One might conjecture that banks more exposed to solvency runs would have larger incentives to avoid further asset value declines and thus avoid failure, so they might want to increase their hedging activities. Instead, we find that banks with higher uninsured leverage (higher share of uninsured deposit funding) sold or reduced their hedges during 2022. Because of reduced hedges, these banks went on to suffer larger losses when interest rates increased further. A case study of the recently failed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) is illustrative. SVB hedged about 12% of all securities at the end of 2021. By the end of 2022, they hedged only 0.4% of all securities. During this period, the duration of their assets increased by almost two years. So, every additional percentage point increase in the policy rate led to a two-percentage point larger decrease in asset values than it would have in 2021. Reduction in hedges by the banks with more fragile funding is suggestive of gambling for resurrection. Selling profitable hedges allows weak banks to increase current accounting earnings. At the same time these banks have taken a large risk, which is profitable for bank shareholders on the upside, but the losses are borne by the FDIC on the downside.”
But the other key reason for the lack of hedging relates to a controversial accounting category called “Held-to-Maturity” or HTM. The authors explain:
“When banks report assets in their financial disclosures, two categories are relevant to hedging transactions: debt securities and derivatives. Debt securities can be classified at management’s discretion based on their intent with the securities as either available for sale (‘AFS’) or held to maturity (‘HTM’). AFS securities can be sold at banks’ discretion, and their value is marked to market (fair value) with unrealized gains and losses reported in ‘other comprehensive income.’ HTM assets are intended and designated to be held to maturity, with the bank planning to collect the cash flows of the duration of the asset. HTM assets are recorded and held at cost, with differences between cost and fair value disclosed (occasionally) in footnotes. Hedging HTM securities would require banks to record changes in the value of these assets (which are otherwise held at cost) and reflect them directly on their income statement, resulting in the loss of the securities’ HTM accounting status. This accounting treatment reduces banks’ incentives to hedge HTM securities if they perceive such fluctuations in reported earnings as costly and prefer to retain the HTM designation.”
CPA/CFA Sandy Peters posted the following at the CFA Institute website, which clarifies what the HTM category is all about at many of the banks using it:
“What that means is that the financial statement carrying value of those financial instruments held-to-maturity is reflected at amortized cost, or what management paid for the asset sometime in the past plus amortization of the discount or premium from the face value. The fair value is only disclosed on the face of the financial statement and in the footnotes. Any unrealized loss is ‘hidden in plain sight.’
“But management intent and business model do not change the value of financial instruments. The HTM classification only makes it harder for investors and depositors to see.”
Federally insured banks, backstopped by the U.S. taxpayer, are required to protect the safety and soundness of the institution. Neither of the reasons cited above for failing to hedge potentially catastrophic interest rate risk accomplishes that.
According to the FDIC’s quarterly report for the quarter ending June 30, “Unrealized losses on securities totaled $558.4 billion in the second quarter, up $42.9 billion (8.3 percent) from the prior quarter. Unrealized losses on held-to-maturity securities totaled $309.6 billion in the second quarter, while unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities totaled $248.9 billion.”
The chart below from the FDIC’s Quarterly Banking Profile shows just how dramatic the unrealized losses are this time around versus other periods of banking stress.
Tom Luongo Expounds on Theory of Everything
Some of my friends remain trapped in their woke-corps, spending more time in “trans-coming-out-days” than actually taking care of clients.
For those lost in such Bizzaro-lands … and others out there sorting through the power law dynamics of scale-free economic networks, Tom’s latest rant is well-worth the price of admission.
Always puts on a great show.
Thanks, Tom.
“The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools”
Thucydides quotes King Archidamus of Sparta in his “History of the Peloponnesian Wars” — should be required reading for all middle school kids. Was in my house back in Brooklyn.
Larry Johnson: https://sonar21.com/hope-aint-a-plan/
*********************************************************************
HOPE AIN’T A PLAN
2 October 2023 by Larry Johnson
Helmuth von Moltke, a 19th Century German Field Marshall, is credited with the aphorism, “no plan survives contact with the enemy”. The essence of his observation is this — no matter how meticulously you plan a military operation, you must be prepared to adjust on the fly based on what is happening on the battlefield. Planning is a dynamic, not a static set of unit maneuvers and rules of engagement.
Which brings me to some observations about the U.S. and NATO plans at the outset of the Russian “Special Military Operation” in Ukraine (aka “invasion”). There was an awful lot of hope undergirding the West’s plan to topple Putin and break up Russia. The West bet heavily on the “hope” that the Ukrainian Army was better trained, equipped and led than their Russian counter parts. That turned out not to be true. Russia, with a numerically inferior force, quickly knocked out key military infrastructure in the early days of the war, which included radars, air fields, air defense systems and aircraft. Western planners apparently did not realize that the ability of Ukrainian pilots to target Russian combat aircraft hinged on a ground radar system that Russia obliterated within the first 24 hours of the attack.
Western “hopium” also banked on the Russian military being a motley collection of angry conscripts led by a bevy of fat, corrupt generals raking in cash from criminal entrepreneurial endeavors. When Russia unleashed hypersonic missiles on Yavoriv — a de facto NATO base in western Ukraine near the Polish border — Western planners were caught by complete surprise. Still, notwithstanding the success of that attack, Western intelligence continued to insist during the first few months of the invasion that Russia fielded a Potemkin army and its luck was bound to run out.
Hopium also was the refrain, starting the end of March 2022, with respect to Russia’s ability to launch missile attacks. I wrote about this last November (FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, SOMEONE TELL PUTIN HE’S OUT OF PRECISION MISSILES!!). Here is one of the early examples from April 2022.
The West’s “hope” strategy also bet the farm that the West could easily isolate Russia on the international stage and devastate its economy with sanctions. Whoops!! Instead of isolating Russia and inflicting economic chaos, Russia quickly responded and re-established itself as a leader of the Global South, coalesced with China in a de facto alliance, and ramped up its defense industry to levels not seen since World War II. I think the quote attributed to Admiral Yamamoto at the end of the movie, Tora, Tora, Tora, captures the unexpected results of Western hubris — “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”
The West was put on notice over the past week by Russian leaders. Foreign Minister Lavrov, Defense Chief Shoigu, former President Medvedev and Speaker of the Duma Volodin all communicated a simple message — Ukraine must capitulate or it will cease to exist as a nation. I talked about this and other topics today with Judge Napolitano (video above).
The Case for Impeaching a Corrupt Clown
Jonathan Turley: https://jonathanturley.org/2023/09/30/ten-reasons-why-the-biden-impeachment-inquiry-is-justified/
There have been repeated references to the ten facts that I alluded to in my congressional testimony as establishing as ample basis to launch a formal impeachment inquiry. I have received emails asking about those ten developments so I wanted to post them. They are found in my written testimony, but I did not have time to go through them all in the course of my oral statement before the Committee.
While many have noted that I stated that I do not view the current evidence as sufficient for articles of impeachment, that is hardly surprising. This was the first hearing of the inquiry and was called to address why the threshold for an inquiry had been established. I was also asked to address the constitutional standards and best practices going forward. Indeed, I criticized the last two impeachments for prematurely declaring impeachable conduct without fully developing a record to support such articles. This hearing returned the impeachment process to a type of regular order in reserving judgment until all of the evidence could be acquired by the three committees.
Here are the ten developments that I cited as justifying an impeachment inquiry (a view with which my fellow witness University of North Carolina Professor Michael Gerhardt disagreed):
The record currently contains witness and written evidence that the President (1) has lied about key facts in these foreign dealings, (2) was the focus of a multimillion-dollar influence peddling scheme, and (3) may have benefitted from this corruption through millions of dollars sent to his family as well as more direct possible benefits. The President may be able to disprove or rebut these points, but they raise legitimate concerns over his role based on the accounts of key figures in the matter. Consider just ten of the disclosures from the prior investigation:
- Hunter Biden and his associates were running a classic influence peddling operation using Joe Biden as what Devon Archer called “the Brand.”[1] While this was described as an “illusion of access,” millions were generated for the Bidens from some of the most corrupt figures in the world, including associates who were later accused of or convicted of public corruption.[2]
- Some of the Biden clients pushed for changes impacting United States foreign policy and relations, including help in dealing with Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin investigating corruption.[3]
- President Biden has made false claims about his knowledge of these dealings repeatedly in the past, including insisting that he had no knowledge of Hunter’s foreign dealings which Archer has declared “patently false.”[4] The Washington Post and other media outlets have also declared the President’s insistence that his family did not take money from China as false.[5]
- The President had been aware for years that Hunter Biden and his uncle James were accused of influence peddling, including an audiotape of the President acknowledging a New York Times investigation as a threat to Hunter.[6]
- President Biden was repeatedly called into meetings with these foreign clients and was put on speakerphone.[7] He also met these clients and foreign figures at dinners and meetings.[8]
- Emails and other communications show Hunter repeatedly invoking his father to secure payments from foreign sources and, in one such message, he threatens a Chinese figure that his father is sitting next to him to coerce a large transfer of money.[9]
- A trusted FBI source recounted a direct claim of a corrupt Ukrainian businessman that he paid a “bribe” to Joe Biden through intermediaries.[10]
- Hunter Biden reportedly claimed that he had to give half of his earnings to his father[11] and other emails state that intermingled accounts were used to pay bills for both men, including a possible credit account that Hunter used to allegedly pay prostitutes.[12]
- At least two transfers of funds to Hunter Biden in 2019 from a Chinese source listed the President’s home in Delaware where Hunter sometimes lived and conducted business.[13]
- Some of the deals negotiated by Hunter involved potential benefits for his father, including office space in Washington.[14] At least nine Biden family members reportedly received money from these foreign transfers, including grandchildren.[15] For Hunter Biden, this included not just significant money transfers but gifts like an expensive diamond and a luxury car.[16]
These are only some of the serious corruption allegations facing the President, but each could raise impeachable conduct if a nexus is established to the President.
——————————————————————————————-
[1] Brain Bennett, Hunter Biden Sold “Illusion of Access” to Father, Former Associate Testifies, Time, July 31, 2023.
[2] Mark Moore, Court Upholds Bribery Conviction of Chinese Exec Patrick Ho Linked to Hunter Biden, N.Y. Post, Dec. 30, 2020,
[3] Steven Nelson, “My Guy”: Hunter Biden Partner Devon Archer Says Joe Biden was on Calls with Foreign Patrons for “the Brand,” N.Y. Post, July 31, 2023.
[4] Steven Nelson, Biden’s Claim he had no Role in Foreign Business Dealings “Categorically False”: Devon Archer, N.Y. Post, Aug. 4, 2023.
[5] Glenn Kessler, Biden said his Son Earned No Money from China. His Son Says Otherwise, Wash. Post, Aug. 1, 2023.
[6] See also Ben Schreckinger, Biden Inc.: Over his Decades in Office, ‘Middle Class Joe’s’ Family Fortunes Have Closely Tracked his Political Career, Politico, Aug. 2, 2019.
[7] John Wagner, Biden was on Speakerphone When Son Hunter was with Business Associates, Former Partner Testifies, Wash. Post, Aug. 1, 2023.
[8] Jessica Chasmar, Joe Biden Met With at Least 14 of Hunter’s Business Associates While Vice President, Fox News, July 28, 2022.
[9] Fatma Khaled, Hunter Biden Allegedly Threatened Chinese Official with his Father’s Power, Newsweek, June 22, 2023. The WhatsApp message stated:
“’I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.’”
[10] Anthony Zurcher, Senator Releases FBI’s Source of Biden Bribes from Ukraine, BBC, July 21, 2023.
[11] Jon Levine, Hunter Biden Frequently Covered Expenses, Texts Reveal, N.Y. Post, Apr. 9, 2022.
[12] Andrew Kerr & Jerry Dunleavy, Joe Biden Unwittingly Helped Finance Trysts with Russia-Linked Prostitutes, Washington Examiner, Sept. 27, 2023.
[13] Annie Grayer, House Oversight Republicans Say New Bank Subpoena Shows Hunter Biden Father’s Wilmington House in Wires from China, CNN, Sept. 27, 2023.
[14] Matt Viser, Tom Hamburger, & Craig Timberg, Hunter Biden’s Multimillion-Dollar Deals with a Chinese Energy Company, Wash. Post, March 20, 2022.
[15] Steven Nelson, Nine Biden Family Members Who Allegedly Got Foreign Money Identified by House GOP, N.Y. Post, May 10, 2023.
[16] Andrew Prokop, How Much Legal Jeopardy is Hunter Biden In?, Vox, Apr. 11, 2023.
Апокалипсис настал
What’s playing in Russia
The Money’s Run Out And I’m a Hungry Man
Zelensky Departs Washington Mostly Empty-Handed Amid Mood Shift In West
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, SEP 22, 2023 – 10:15 AM
By all accounts, Zelensky came away from his Washington visit with nothing new. Biden did announce a fresh $325 million aid package for Ukraine from already committed funds, but the hoped-for long range missile approval never came (however, more cluster bombs are being sent). And as we detailed Thursday, House Republican leadership once again failed to move forward on a mere procedural vote for the Pentagon funding bill, due in large part to GOP members rejecting Biden’s proposed $24 billion more in Ukraine aid.
Thursday’s package announced by Biden, as Zelensky visited the White House and Capitol Hill, was run-of-the-mill and entirely to be expected. “Today I approved the next tranche of U.S. security assistance to Ukraine including more artillery, more ammunition, more anti-tank weapons and next week, the first U.S. Abrams tanks will be delivered to Ukraine,” Biden said.
As for the earlier in the day (Thurs.) meeting with Congressional leaders, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy explained when asked why the Ukrainian leader’s request to address Congress was denied, “Zelensky asked for a joint session, we just didn’t have time. He’s already given a joint session.”
Instead in a closed-door meeting, Zelensky later acknowledged he discussed with lawmakers “the battlefield situation and priority defense needs.”
But if there is any level of consolation for Kiev, it’s seen in the Pentagon announcement which came late in the day Thursday. Facing potential US government shutdown on Oct.1st, given at this point Congress is not expected to pass the 12 appropriations bills needed to fund government operations before next fiscal year, the Pentagon has said it will exempt its operations supporting Ukraine from a shutdown.
The military typically suspends any activities not deemed vital to national security during government shutdowns, thus the DoD is in effect saying Ukraine aid remains “vital to national security”.
“Operation Atlantic Resolve is an excepted activity under a government lapse in appropriations,” Pentagon spokesman Chris Sherwood told Politico, in reference to the operational name still used for actions supporting Kiev.
But Politico points out a potential shutdown would still negatively impact US support to Ukraine:
Sherwood noted that while DOD’s activities related to Ukraine will continue, furloughs and other activities halted under the shutdown could still have a negative impact.
“Training would happen, but depending on whether or not there were certain personnel that were not able to report for duty, for example, that could have an impact,” said Pentagon spokesperson Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder on Thursday.
This Pentagon exemption to keep Ukraine-related support active during a government shutdown seems to be the only significant thing Zelensky came away with.
Here’s Armchair Warrior’s thoughts: https://x.com/ArmchairW/status/1705081240007946487?s=20
It appears to have been the main object of discussion when Zelensky met with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in Washington during the trip. The Pentagon said this was “to reaffirm the steadfast US support for Ukraine.”
Meanwhile, Bloomberg takes note of Zelensky “showing the strain” amid increasing divisions among allies:
The Ukrainian president allowed a dispute with one of his biggest allies to spin out of control at the United Nations General Assembly this week, and that’s just a hint of the tensions building behind the scenes.
Zelenskiy has been leading his country through Russia’s brutal assault for 19 months, all the time fighting on another front to wring the weapons and finance he needs from his US and European supporters. Now he suspects that President Joe Biden’s commitment is wavering and other leaders may be taking their cue from the US, according to a person who met with him recently.
He grew very emotional at times during that discussion, the person said, and was scathing in his criticism of nations that he said weren’t delivering weapons quickly enough.
Washington’s lackluster greeting of Zelensky this week (compared to how he was received in December 2022) came simultaneous to Poland declaring it will no longer arm Ukraine, amid a fierce diplomatic spat over blockage of Ukraine grain imports by Warsaw, to protect Polish farmers.
The Economist is also taking note of the significant mood shift among Western allies…
A “long war” indeed… given a G7 leader from a European country has told reporters this week that the West is prepared for a years-long war, something likely to last some six or seven years, according to the quote.
“A senior official from one European G-7 country said the war may last as much as six or seven more years and that allies need to plan financially to continue support for Kyiv for such a long conflict,” Bloomberg wrote.
***********
7 more years?
Yeah, sure, whatever.
A little Billy Idol to wrap things up?
The Great Financial Crisis Timeline: September 20, 2023
Army War College Assesses US Military
Jobs Bloodbath
Inside Today’s Disastrous Jobs Report: 670K Full-Time Jobs Lost In 2 Months Vs 1 Million Part-Time Surge; Worst Unadjusted August Payrolls Since Great Recession
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, SEP 01, 2023 – 11:45 AM
While the prevailing post-payrolls narrative has focused on the divergence between the stronger than expected (if soon to be revised lower) headline payrolls print (which at 187K came in just above expectations of 170K but followed two sharply downward revised months) and the unexpected spike in the unemployment rate from 3.5% to 3.8%, the highest since Feb 2022, a closer look at the details of today’s jobs report reveals just how ugly the reality behind the the Budget-Busting Bidenomics truly is.
Let’s start with revisions.
Regular readers are aware that earlier this year we spotted a peculiar trend when it comes to economic data releases by the Biden admin which – without fail – had been revised lower…
US jobless claims mysteriously surge upon “data” revision
US jobs mysteriously revised sharply lower upon “data” revision
Europe mysteriously enters recession upon “data” revision— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 8, 2023
Take a wild guess in which direction the May 339K NFP print was revised— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 7, 2023
Payrolls for every month in 2023 have been revised lower. pic.twitter.com/VwfUvBJnCe— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 7, 2023
Give up?
Ok July payrolls revised down from 187K to 157K, meaning EVERY SINGLE MONTH in 2023 has been reviser lower by the Biden Department of goalseeking high numbers and then revising them lower when nobody cares anymore— zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 1, 2023
… and this month was no different. In fact, as shown in the chart below, the jobs print from every single month has been revised lower! Why? So that the White House can take credit for a strong number (one which also sparks algorithmic buying in the market) only to quietly revise it lower one and two months later when nobody is looking to ease the glideslope for the coming recession.
But that’s just the start. Next we turn to the numbers behind the headline job prints which were actually not that terrible: the monthly nonfarm payrolls (from the Establishment Survey( may have been weak at 187K but the far more accurate Household Survey showed that the number of Employed workers actually increased by 268K to 161.3 million, the second month in a row the Household Survey bested the Establishment.
So far so good. There are just two problems with this number. First, the Birth-Death (B-D) model, which is integrated into the BLS’ Current Employment Statistics (CES) release, which contains the NFPs and which serves as one of the core “tweak” layers which the BLS uses to adjust the actual, raw underlying jobs number and goalseek a desired jobs number. It will not come as a surprise to many that in August, the Birth Death adjustment saw the fifth consecutive upward boost in a row, and at 103K, it followed the second highest contribution of 2023 when July B-D added 280K. In other words, more than half of all job “gains” were again the result of the BLS assuming that newly “birthed” “businesses created at least 103K new jobs, a number which is not based at all on observable facts but is a regression to some historical trendline which only the BLS is privy to.
Unfortunately, it gets much worse, because while the Establishment Survey only looks at jobs quantitatively, the Household Survey (which again was stronger this month) also looks at the quality of jobs gained or lost, and specifically it breaks down the jobs into full-time and part-time jobs (Source: Table A-9).
Well, one look at this month’s adjustment and it’s literally a shocker: you will not hear anyone from the Biden admin or associated economist cheerleaders mention this, but the BLS reported that in August the number of full-time jobs dropped again, sliding by 85K to 134.2 million, and followed the whopping 585K plunge in July which brings the two-month total drop in full-time jobs to a whopping 670K, the biggest 2-month plunge since the covid lockdowns in early 2020 when 12.5 million full-time jobs were lost in one month!
But if full-time jobs crashed how did the BLS get an increase of 222,000 employed workers? Simple: it was all in the latest jump of part-time workers. Indeed, in August the number of reported part-timers jumped by 32K and when added to the near-record 972K surge in July, the 2-month total was just over one million – 1,004,000 to be precise – to 27.185 million.
Going back to a quantitative read of the data, we look at the number of multiple jobholders – those workers who have to work more than one job at a time to make ends meet. In August this number was actually a modest silver lining, as it dropped by July, that number dropped by 85K to 8.028 million, but it remains just shy of the pre-covid record.
But wait, there’s more: as we noted last night, the August payroll is a made-up number almost entirely driven by the Seasonal Adjustments, and as SouthBay Research notes, in August, the Seasonal Adjustment created 159K of the 179K Private Payroll growth. 90% of the total.
Meanwhile, as SouthBay notes, it has been 6 months since the government formally ended COVID shelter-in-place. Yet the Payroll model mechanics continue to behave as if special treatment is needed. Indeed, this has been reflected all year in the absurdly bullish Seasonal Adjustments. As shown in the next chart, the un-distorted data (the non seasonally adjusted data) paints a very concerning picture of weak hiring.
In short, unadjusted hiring was the second worst since the Great Recession in 2009!
As SouthBay summarizes it, “Hiring is at a standstill…. to suggest that the labor market is strong is not supported by the actual data.”
Putting it all together, if one believes the headlines, in August the US added 187K jobs, and the number of employed workers rose by 222K. However, taking a closer look at the adjustments applied to the actual data, and its composition, we find not only that the unadjusted increase was just 20K jobs, or the worst August since the global financial crisis, but that in August, the number of well-paid, full-time workers actually dropped by 85K, offset by a 32K rise in part-time workers.
Adding to the striking July moves, we get a 670K drop in full-time workers in the past months, offset by a 1,004K jump in part-time workers. No wonder then that multiple-jobholders are just shy of all time highs, who have discovered that to keep up with the economic miracle that is “Brandonomics” they need to work (far) more than just one job.
In short: August was another dismal month for the jobs market, which is why we expect the usual theater: non-stop spin and lies from the Biden admin, and not a single relevant question from the liberal media whose job is not to educate or inform, but to carry water, spread lies and enable propaganda.
Econophysics2020 
