US soldiers infected, had Covid symptoms at Wuhan military games before wet market! Robby Soave
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
14 minutes ago
- CNBC
Kelly Evans: Stablecoins to the rescue
Can I just say I find it highly amusing that crypto stablecoins are now being cited as a "helpful" source of demand for government debt? Let's unpack this. Bitcoin and the rest of crypto are on the rise to supposedly save us us from the financial profligacy of untrustworthy governments. But now, crypto stablecoins are becoming one of the biggest of government bonds on the planet--thus enabling the very deficits that fuel continued crypto demand. Stablecoins are basically just dollars that don't have to leave the crypto ecosystem, which can be incredibly annoying to enter and exit from the traditional banking system. They're much more an institutional than a retail product here in the U.S., although they're also in high public demand in foreign markets with unstable currencies and high foreign exchange fees. But in order for a stablecoin to be used like a real dollar, it has to have a "stable" value of exactly a dollar. It would be kind of like if your bank had to back every dollar you deposit with exactly one dollar worth of assets. Stablecoins used to be a little more loosey-goosey with that, until "TerraUSD" collapsed in 2022 and caused a run that led the two leading stablecoins--Tether, and Circle's USDC (or U.S. dollar coin)--to "break the buck." Now, Congress is actively considering legislation that would formalize much stricter regulation of stablecoins--namely, with the GENIUS (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins) Act that passed the Senate with a 68-30 vote last month, and is now being actively considered in the House as part of their "Crypto Week." It would require every dollar of stablecoins to be backed with a dollar of ultra-safe assets like U.S. Treasury bills. If and when it passes, the crypto world gets a big win--a blessing of approval on a key piece of infrastructure. Little wonder Bitcoin et al have been shooting higher in recent weeks. But it has the probably even more important side benefit of enshrining a major source of future demand for U.S. Treasuries. Stablecoins are currently thought to hold just shy of $200 billion or so in short-term Treasury bills. By some estimates, that could now explode to $1.5 trillion within the next couple years, and hit $3 to $4 trillion a decade from now. For context, there is about $6 trillion in Treasury bills outstanding, and in the wake of the GOP's budget bill, which raised the debt ceiling, Treasury is now expected to further ratchet up bill supply. This may all help explain why the administration, which had previously criticized former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen for over-relying on short-term bills to fund President Biden's deficits, is now pursuing a similar strategy. "A thriving stablecoin ecosystem will drive U.S. Treasuries," Treasury Secretary Bessent wrote on X last month. "This newfound demand could lower government borrowing costs and help rein in the national debt." But will it backfire? As Ben Emons of Fed Watch Advisors wrote yesterday, "the anticipated demand from stablecoins has depressed the short-term premium, incentivizing the rolling of deficits with T-bills." However, he added, "this game has fiscal consequences, which are reflected in long-term yields as a rising risk." (Emphasis mine.) In other words, stablecoin demand for Treasury bills could help finance the deficit more cheaply in the short-term, but enable deficits that keep -term yields--which underpin actual mortgage and business loan rates--on the higher side. To avoid this outcome, the administration will still have to push hard to curb deficits, lower inflation, and boost growth prospects. So yes, rather ironically, stablecoins are here to the rescue--unless they just exacerbate our larger borrowing problems. And if you're worried about that, I've got some Bitcoin to sell you. See you at 1 p.m! Kelly Twitter: @KellyCNBC Instagram: @realkellyevans
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Ex-Pfizer Doctor Tells Congress He Didn't Delay Covid Shot Data
A former Pfizer Inc. scientist denied an allegation made by House Republicans that he conspired to delay the release of Covid shot data to hurt Donald Trump's 2020 election prospects, the latest twist in a dispute that demonstrates how vaccines are increasingly becoming a political flashpoint. Philip Dormitzer, a former top official at Pfizer, said the idea that he and his colleagues sought to prevent Trump from winning reelection is a 'false conspiracy theory,' according to a letter to the House Judiciary Committee obtained by Bloomberg.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Here's why Trump's inconsistent support for Ukraine is so dangerous
President Trump just took a partial step back from historic ignominy when it comes to the controversial issue of Ukraine. This Monday he announced with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte a two-step transaction by which the U.S. will build and sell to NATO Patriot anti-missile systems and other weapons that NATO will then provide to Ukraine for its defense against Russia's expanding invasion. Had Trump rejected NATO's compromise deal, avoiding further U.S. costs to defend Ukraine, and reverted to his openly pro-Putin posture, he would have forever tarnished his legacy — the same way Joe Biden's Afghanistan debacle destroyed his already dubious foreign policy reputation. The Trump administration last week said that the U.S. would 'pause' military weapons shipments for Ukraine's defense against Russian aggression, the second such interruption of aid that has taken place without the president's explicit consent. Now at least temporarily reversed, this action likely would have fatally weakened Ukraine's ability to fend off Russia's assault and guaranteed the continuation of Russian President Vladimir Putin's wanton cruelty. Trump called Russia's recent bombing onslaught on civilians 'unnecessary' and untimely, given his own plans for Ukraine, which remain undefined except that he wants the war ended on almost any terms. With the Biden-to-Trump transition, Ukraine and the world saw U.S. policy shift away from a contradictory approach of strong rhetorical support coupled with erratic military aid and constrained intelligence sharing. Biden's forever-stalemate strategy took a dramatic turn for the worse under Trump, thanks to his outright admiration for 'genius' Putin's aggressive agenda. Until now, Trump has acquiesced to Putin's mockery of his 'peace process,' and brazenly done what no other president has even considered in 250 years of U.S. history: He has openly sided with one of America's leading enemies in its victimization of a democratic friend. Even now, questions remain as to whether Ukraine will receive as many weapons as it needs and at the delivery rate needed. The new 50-day delay in threatened primary and secondary sanctions casts doubt on whether Trump's heart is really into getting tough with Putin, whom he has belatedly accused of sounding 'nice' but throwing a lot of 'bulls—.' The reprieve, as more Ukrainians die and cities are destroyed, allows Putin yet more time to deliver a death blow to Ukraine. The world may be witnessing a cynical Trump-Putin kabuki dance intended to be fatal for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Communist China and North Korea have been learning the true meaning of Trump's slogans about reviving American greatness. The laudable and long-overdue strike on Iran's nuclear weapons program did not erase what threatens to become, under Trump, the hollowing-out of Reagan's policy of resisting Russian expansionism. Counterintuitively, it is perfectly plausible for Xi Jinping and Kim Jong Un to conclude that Trump's Iran operation makes him far less, not more, likely to consider using U.S. force to defend Taiwan, the Philippines or South Korea. Trump's reasoning might well be that the Iran strike has already proved his credentials as a commander in chief willing to use U.S. power in the national interest. Although the premise is sound, the perseverance of America's adversaries and the contrary message of weakness conveyed by his seeming Ukraine surrender up to now send a different message. Given his decidedly mixed record, Trump cannot afford to stand by if Beijing and Pyongyang choose to test his national security staying power. Trump has not yet endorsed the overthrow of Iran's terrorist regime. In fact, Trump has said he does 'not favor regime change in Iran' because of the 'chaos' it would cause. But he has twice cut off at the knees Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, while openly supporting Putin. In that strategic context, Xi and Kim will surely be tempted to advance their own aggressive regional plans. The interrelationship of the remaining Russia-China-North Korea entente manifests itself in various ways. Kim sent tens of thousands of North Korean soldiers to help push back Ukraine's surprise advance into Russia's Kursk region. This was undoubtedly done with Beijing's explicit encouragement, reminiscent of China's massive infusion of 'volunteers' into South Korea to thwart the allied counteroffensive during the Korean War. North Korean forces, while pushing the Ukrainians back from Kursk and gaining much-needed battlefield experience, suffered major losses and demonstrated both their strategic and tactical shortcomings — as well as the willingness of totalitarian rulers to use human lives as cannon fodder. Having entered into a 'no limits' strategic partnership with Putin j ust before his 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Xi arrogantly announced earlier this month that China 'can't accept' Russia's defeat. The statement, delivered by Foreign Minister Wang Yi, coincided ominously with Trump's announced second cut-off of support for Ukraine. Considering this latest unequivocal commitment to the success of Russia, Xi may well be signaling an intention to send Chinese forces to replenish Russia's depleted army. It was also striking that Beijing chose to make the outcome in Ukraine a matter of Chinese national interest. It will undoubtedly expect the same level of unlimited Russian support if it decides to move in the South China Sea. To discourage that kind of rash action, Trump needs to send a clear, Reaganesque message of deterrence to Putin and Xi that the U.S. will do whatever is necessary to protect the security of Ukraine, Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines and America's other friends, allies and security partners. It's worth noting the commitments of China and North Korea to Russia' warmongering in Ukraine have overtones of the escalating domino effect that triggered World War I, with one major difference: Trump has made clear that, up to now at least, this U.S. president was on the side of the aligned aggressors. If Trump adheres to that wrong-headed posture, history will not treat him kindly, and the free world will pay a grievous price. Ukraine is already paying it now. Joseph Bosco served as China country director for the secretary of Defense from 2005 to 2006 and as Asia-Pacific director of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief from 2009 to 2010. He is a nonresident fellow at the Institute for Corean-American Studies, a member of the advisory board of the Global Taiwan Institute and member of the advisory board of The Vandenberg Coalition.
