Archive for 2019

THAT WOULD BE NICE: Oil Could Fall To $40 If OPEC Abandons Its Deal.

Siluanov said that lower oil prices would then have a negative impact on U.S. oil production, an argument that was also made as far back as late 2014 when the Saudis sought to drive U.S. producers out of business by opening the oil production spigots in spite of an already flooded global oil market.

“(If the deal is abandoned) the oil prices will go down, then the new investments will shrink, American output will be lower because the production cost for shale oil is higher than for traditional output.” He said that prices could drop to $40 per barrel or even less for up to one full year, adding that there had been no decision on the deal yet and he did not know whether OPEC countries would be happy with this scenario.

Siluanov’s comments aren’t without precedent. Russia has hinted before that it could start to pump more oil, which would in effect cause the world’s second-largest oil producer to nullify its participation in the OPEC+ oil cut deal put in place at the start of the year to remove 1.2 million b/d of oil from the market for six months, with a review period after this time.

As American frackers keep improving efficiencies, the market price they can bear and still return a profit continues to decline. ExxonMobile is eyeing getting productions costs down in the Permian to $15 per barrel, and unlike most OPEC producers (and Russia), our domestic producers are private and don’t have as their primary mission filling the State’s coffers.

Unlike 2014, the last time the Saudis tried to cut off American frackers by opening their pumps wide, now domestic producers are much better hedged financially against another big price drop.

Perhaps the real indicator of OPEC/Russia’s desperation is that this is the first time in my memory that they’ve gone this long without cheating like mad on their production quotas.

Things like that make me think that Siluanov is mostly bluffing.

LIZ SHELD’S MORNING BRIEF: The Mueller Report Beat Goes On and Much, Much More. “I’ve been right all along about this entire special counsel fiasco. The report is a political document, not a legal one. If you did not buy into the false RUSSIA collusion narrative, you will read the second part of the report outlining the ‘obstructive’ behavior of Trump as the actions of an angry man who was unjustly accused. You will see Trump’s behavior as that of someone who was getting absolutely pummled all day and all night in the media and by Democrats who were making it impossible to for him to govern and were undermining his legitimacy as president. Trump wanted to stop the Democrat-media harrassment not cover up a crime. You may remember the #resistence’s plan was to delegitimize Trump and the goal of the Mueller team was to wait until the Democrats took control of the House to turn the report into a political weapon if they couldn’t charge the Trump folks with RUSSIA-related crimes.”

SETH BARRETT TILLMAN: Twitter, Lawfare, and Conlawprof. “I, for one, do not see any obvious equivalence between an unbiased independent judge’s ‘findings’ in an opinion after the parties have had notice and opportunity to be heard, and a prosecutors office’s report which attempts to marshal one side of the evidence—where the object of the investigation (i.e., investigation=failed prosecution) has no opportunity to respond.”

ASKING THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS: Should a White Man Be the Face of the Democratic Party in 2020?

Is a white man the best face for an increasingly diverse Democratic Party in 2020? And what’s the bigger gamble: to nominate a white man and risk disappointing some of the party’s base, or nominate a minority candidate or a woman who might struggle to carry predominantly white swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that both Barack Obama and President Trump won?

Obama’s race didn’t stop him from winning those states, and Trump didn’t win them because he’s white. Just enough Obama voters in those states took a chance on Trump, because they felt they’d abandoned by the Democrats — and they have been.

Stories like this one show the Democrats haven’t learned that lesson. In fact, they don’t seem to realize that there’s even a lesson in need of learning.

But let’s keep that part amongst ourselves.

HARSH, BUT FAIR:

Related, from a friend on Facebook: “To sum up the media coverage (and Democrat response) to the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka: ‘Some people they won’t identify (Islamists) did something (killed them) to some other people they won’t identify (Christians) for reasons they can’t explain (Islamic terrorism).’ Got it?”

UPDATE:

CHANGE: Microsoft staff are openly questioning the value of diversity.

Some Microsoft employees are openly questioning whether diversity is important, in a lengthy discussion on an internal online messaging board meant for communicating with CEO Satya Nadella.

Two posts on the board criticizing Microsoft diversity initiatives as “discriminatory hiring” and suggesting that women are less suited for engineering roles have elicited more than 800 comments, both affirming and criticizing the viewpoints, multiple Microsoft employees have told Quartz. The posts were written by a female Microsoft program manager. Quartz reached out to her directly for comment, and isn’t making her name public at this point, pending her response.

“Does Microsoft have any plans to end the current policy that financially incentivizes discriminatory hiring practices? To be clear, I am referring to the fact that senior leadership is awarded more money if they discriminate against Asians and white men,” read the original post by the Microsoft program manager on Yammer, a corporate messaging platform owned by Microsoft. The employee commented consistently throughout the thread, making similar arguments. Quartz reviewed lengthy sections of the internal discussion provided by Microsoft employees.

“I have an ever-increasing file of white male Microsoft employees who have faced outright and overt discrimination because they had the misfortune of being born both white and male. This is unacceptable,” the program manager wrote in a comment later. The Microsoft employees who spoke to Quartz said they weren’t aware of any action by the company in response, despite the comments being reported to Microsoft’s human resources department.

Wow.

NICK SHORT: The FISA Court, Woods Procedures And Carter Page. “How did the FBI not violate the Woods Procedures when it presented unverified opposition research paid for by the opposing party — the “Steele dossier” — to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to obtain a warrant to spy on an American citizen for over a year? Moreover, were the FISA court Judges who signed off on the application and three separate renewals aware of the origins of the dossier and if not, why not?”

OUT SOON FROM VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY: Judgment in Moscow: Soviet Crimes and Western Complicity. They sent me an advance copy so I could blurb it, and all I can say is that things were even worse than you think. And yet now people go on about collusion with Russia. I think it’s guilty consciences.

ANALYSIS: TRUE.

Related: “Yes, this is what troubled me most about this NYT piece. It really does undercut women by insisting proactively that women be given something no man was given. That’s what’s incoherent. The idea of equality doesn’t work, because what’s demanded for women is not something any man ever had.”

Feminism today isn’t about equality. It’s about envy and resentment.

HARSH, BUT FAIR:

NEVER SAY NEVER: I really never thought I’d be praising Kim Kardashian. I’m not a celebrity-oriented kind of girl.  But her response to the celebrity college admissions scandal is actually praiseworthy: “If [my kids] couldn’t get into a school, I would never want to use privilege to try to force them into a situation that they wouldn’t thrive in anyway.”

Go, Ms. Kardashian!

Yes, if you’ve been reading Instapundit, you already know my view on race-preferential (or any other kind of preferential) admissions policies: that it’s a mistake for any student to attend a school where he or she doesn’t have a fighting chance at graduating at the top of class. What you didn’t know is that the fabulous Kim Kardashian and I are … uh … spiritual sisters (except for the killer sex appeal part).

CHANGE: FTC considering taking ‘direct aim’ at Mark Zuckerberg as it investigates Facebook privacy lapses.

According to a report from The Washington Post, federal regulators are investigating Zuckerberg’s past statements on privacy and considering holding him responsible for Facebook’s numerous privacy lapses. According to the report, FTC veterans have encouraged investigators to “take direct aim at Zuckerberg” and put him under additional federal oversight.

The FTC has also considered requiring Zuckerberg and other Facebook executives “to certify the company’s privacy practices periodically to the board of directors.”

In past federal investigations, Zuckerberg has been spared, with documents seen by The Washington Post suggesting the FTC had considered, then backed down from specifically targeting Zuckerberg in the 2011 settlement.

FLASHBACK: Facebook shareholders are getting fed up with Zuckerberg but can’t do anything about him.

Ask and ye shall receive?

“SEGREGATION NOW, SEGREGATION TOMORROW, SEGREGATION FOREVER,” THEY DEMANDED:  Williams College student newspaper demands segregated housing.