Blow to Assange extradition after Chelsea Manning is freed and grand jury disbanded – The Canary

War crimes whistleblower Chelsea Manning has been released from prison for refusing to testify before the WikiLeaks grand jury, which has been disbanded. This is not good news for the US government, which is hoping to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, in part, on charges linked to Manning.

On 11 March 2020, news emerged that Manning had attempted suicide and was hospitalised. The next day it was announced that judge Anthony Trenga, who was overseeing the WikiLeaks grand jury, had ordered the release of Manning from prison.

Manning was imprisoned in March 2019 for refusing to co-operate with the WikiLeaks grand jury. After two months she was released, but then re-arrested and imprisoned in May.

In February 2020, Mannings lawyers filed a motion arguing that their client was incoercible and so should be released.

This motion was crucial and stated that Chelsea Mannings declaration (Exhibit A):

articulates her perceptions and the moral basis for her recalcitrance. Her solemn patience during eleven months in jail without having been accused, let alone convicted of a crime, speaks for itself.

The motion referred to a psychological assessment by Dr Sara Boyd (Exhibit B [under seal]) that:

identifies and explains the characterological attributes from which Ms. Mannings persistence and morals spring, and those attributes that function to entrench and fortify those morals.

There was also support from Nils Melzer, UN rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, whose letter (Exhibit C):

not only casts serious doubt on the permissibility of coercive sanctions, but provides profound moral support for Ms. Mannings self-perception.

Other material included a petition supporting Manning signed by 60,000 people (Exhibit D) that provided:

compelling evidence of Ms. Mannings wide social support, and the kind of impact the withdrawal of that support would have on Ms. Manning, were she to change her position.

The motion concluded:

No realistic possibility remains that continued confinement or other sanctions will bring about Ms. Mannings testimony. Further confinement cannot attain its stated coercive purpose, and therefore will be not simply futile, but impermissibly punitive.

The motion clearly worked.

In 2013, Manning, a former US army intelligence analyst, was convicted of violating Americas Espionage Act along with other offences and sentenced to 35 years imprisonment. She was responsible for leaking hundreds of thousands of documents relating to the invasion of Iraq and the Afghanistan conflict. These were subsequently published by WikiLeaks.

Mannings most infamous war crime expos was the video of a US Army helicopter in Baghdad firing on civilians, including a Reuters photographer and his driver. The crew also fired on a van that stopped to rescue one of the wounded men.

Manning is the recipient of many awards, including the Guardians Person of the Year and the Sean MacBride Peace Prize.

In January 2017, former US president Barack ObamacommutedMannings sentence to end in May 2017.

With the release of Manning the WikiLeaks grand jury has been disbanded:

Mannings release could directly affect the outcome of the extradition hearing against Assange, due to resume in May. Indeed, the US authorities would no doubt have regarded Mannings testimony in regard to the initial charge of Conspiracy to Commit Computer Intrusion against Assange as pivotal.

Mannings continued silence may weaken the case generally against Assange, given she is referred to numerous times in the additional charges relating to the Espionage Act.

The extradition farce should end now and Assange be released.

Meanwhile, Manning desperately needs help to pay off her punitive court fines, which amount to $256,000.

Featured image via Time Travers Hawkins Wikipedia / Cancillera del Ecuador Flickr

Continue reading here:
Blow to Assange extradition after Chelsea Manning is freed and grand jury disbanded - The Canary

Chelsea Manning hospitalized after suicide attempt, legal …

Chelsea Manning, the former US army intelligence analyst who leaked hundreds of thousands of secret documents to WikiLeaks in 2010, tried to kill herself in a Virginia jail on Wednesday, legal representatives said.

According to the Alexandria sheriffs department, officials at the Alexandria adult detention center responded to an incident at 12.11pm.

It was handled appropriately by our professional staff and Ms Manning is safe, Sheriff Dana Lawhorne said.

No other details of the incident were immediately made available.

The news came days before a hearing regarding Mannings request to be released.

Manning has been held on grounds of civil contempt since May last year, for refusing to testify in front of a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks, which disseminated the cables and files leaked by Manning to outlets including the Guardian in 2010.

Manning served six years in military prison for the 2010 leak, until Barack Obama commuted her 35-year sentence. While in jail, for long stretches in solitary confinement and while completing gender realignment, Manning attempted suicide twice. She also mounted a hunger strike.

In a statement on Wednesday, Mannings representatives said she has previously indicated that she will not betray her principles, even at risk of grave harm to herself.

Her actions today evidence the strength of her convictions, as well as the profound harm she continues to suffer as a result of her civil confinement.

In court in 2019, after an initial spell behind bars over the contempt issue and before being returned to prison, Manning told a judge she would rather starve to death than testify.

In 2018, Manning ran for the US Senate in Maryland. The attempt to unseat the longtime Democratic senator Ben Cardin failed and later that year, Manning told the Guardian the experience had driven her closer and closer to being on the edge of really deep, dark depression.

She also said she had been exhausted when, in May 2018, she tweeted a picture apparently showing her standing on a ledge outside a window several floors from the ground, shortly before telling followers she was OK.

In February this year, Manning petitioned for release. In a letter to Judge Anthony J Trenga, she compared her experience with the Trump administrations attitude towards congressional subpoenas.

The attorney general was in contempt of a congressional subpoena but faced no consequences, Manning wrote. The president has been instructing his associates not to comply with grand jury subpoenas and witness subpoenas for at least two years, and has even fired people for their compliance with subpoenas.

It is clear that the rules are different for different people.

In fact, though the Trump administration has fought congressional subpoenas, officials refusing to appear in front of federal or state grand juries would still face punishment for contempt of court.

Manning also wrote that she had been separated from my loved ones, deprived of sunlight, and could not even attend my mothers funeral.

It is easier to endure these hardships now, she wrote, than to cooperate to win back some comfort, and live the rest of my life knowing that I acted out of self-interest and not principle.

A hearing on her petition was scheduled for Friday.

An extradition hearing for Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is in process in London. In the US, he is charged with violating the Espionage Act.

In the UK and Ireland, Samaritans can be contacted on 116 123 or emailjo@samaritans.org. In the US, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-8255. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at http://www.befrienders.org

Read the original here:
Chelsea Manning hospitalized after suicide attempt, legal ...

Chelsea Manning Released But Still Faces Massive Fine – The Real News Network

Greg Wilpert: Its The Real News Network. Im Greg Wilpert in Arlington, Virginia. If federal judge ordered the release of whistleblower Chelsea Manning on Thursday after having been in prison for a full year, the judges order came one day after Manning had attempted suicide while in prison. The reason for the release is that the grand jury that is investigating WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been dismissed, and so Mannings testimony is no longer needed.

Manning was imprisoned and fined $256,000 when she refused to testify against Assange, whom the United States is currently trying to extradite from Britain. The U.S. government is arguing that Assange have helped Manning to copy databases of information about the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the state departments internal communications. Manning, though, always denied that she received help from anyone.

Joining me now to discuss Mannings release is Kevin Gosztola. He is a writer and publisher for the website shadowproof.com, and co-hosts a weekly podcast called Unauthorized Disclosure. He has been covering Manning and the Assange cases for a long time now. Thanks for joining us again, Kevin.

Kevin Gosztola: Thanks. Its good to talk to you.

Greg Wilpert: So lets start with Chelsea Mannings suicide attempt. What can you tell us about what happened and what led up to the suicide attempt?

Kevin Gosztola: Well, what we know is that around the time that she attempted suicide, the grand jury had apparently ramped up its effort to try and coerce her into providing testimony to the grand jury. Her lawyers had challenged a summons that was issued to bring her before the grand jury on March 10th, and it appears that the grand jury was going to intensify its effort to coerce her into testifying.

So far, they had failed to break her in such a way that she begged for mercy and came back to them and agreed to provide testimony about her involvement and what she did with the disclosures. Again, these disclosures that were talking about are the most well known disclosures that WikiLeaks published. This is the collateral murder video, this is the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs, the U.S. diplomatic cables, which numbered around 250,000.

Theyre the Guantanamo detainee files, and they wanted her to speak about how They were hoping they could get testimony that would show Julian Assange solicited these leaks from her. They were hoping she would speak about him helping her to crack a password, allegedly, and this goes back to the allegations that she has faced that Julian Assange is facing in his extradition case, and ultimately, if hes brought to United States, it would be during his trial.

So, this ever had ramped up and we already know that she was going through a lot of trauma and struggling with what we can call psychological torture because of the fact that she was in jail. She was released almost exactly a year after this all started, that the grand jury subpoenaed her, and then she was jailed for civil contempt. I should add that this isnt the first time that she has tempted suicide in confinement. When she was serving her military sentence at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas in September 2016, and maybe August, September 2016, she was going through an ordeal and was actually punished because she attempted suicide.

So rather than giving her help with her mental health, she received 14 days of solitary confinement for attempting suicide. She had books that the military didnt want her to have. There were other materials that they confiscated from her. So they accused her of these violations, and then there were also the fact that she attempted suicide. So this has happened before. Shes somebody who people have been concerned about with their mental health.

And, of course, after she had her sentence commuted, there were times in which people who were her supporters were concerned that she might be having suicidal ideations. So, its clear that the release comes, for her, at an important time because this was escalating these issues with her suicidal thoughts were escalating.

Greg Wilpert: I want to get into the issue of what this release means for the trial also against Assange, but first I want to ask, now the federal judge, Anthony Trenga, who released Manning, said that she still must pay the $256,000 fine that had accumulated during her imprisonment. Now, according to U.S. law, the imprisonment and the fine are there to coerce her testimony, not meant as a punishment. However, now that the grand jury has been disbanded, there doesnt seem to be any reason to coerce her anymore. So, why is she being required to pay the fine if she cant be coerced for anything?

Kevin Gosztola: That is a good question, and I think thats for Judge Trenga to answer, thats for the court to answer, thats for the United States government to answer because it is, as you say, supposed to be coercive and if they dont need her testimony, which by the way, in my view, they never her testimony. They were able to issue indictments against Julian Assange without getting testimony from Chelsea Manning.

And so, all along, and obviously, as this WikiLeaks grand jury has been dismissed, what I have said all along is proven that what they were doing was punishment, it was abusive, and it served no legitimate purpose to keep her in jail for all of these months. And in fact, thats what her legal team argued, that there was no legitimate purpose for keeping her in jail to provide testimony.

When they issued the indictments, she should have been released because at that moment they were in a position where they needed to put her on the list of prosecution witnesses and simply wait until Julian Assange was brought to the United States and put on trial, if that were to happen. So, the fact that these fines, which is $256,000, exist, that she is still expected to pay is cruel. And, to be clear, for most of the time that she was in jail, she was being fined $1,000 a day. For 30 of those days, she was fined $500 per day, and thats how it all added up.

And she leaves jail essentially in destitution and a complete state of poverty. She had lost her home or apartment, she had most of her items and possessions in a storage locker. She is fortunate to have such a good support network of people who have looked after her, but she leaves, in this moment, and she has to entirely rebuild her life with next to no money in her own account. And the court never conducted a basic assessment of whether she had the financial ability to pay these fines. What they presumed is because she has so many people who support her around the world in what shes doing to stand up on principle, theyve presumed that she can just launch a GoFundMe account and raise the money.

And so, because she could easily do this, then she can be fined this incredible amount, this amount that its not quite there, but its approaching what corporations are fined in order to coerce them into cooperating with federal grand juries. Its probably on par with the way someone would charge people who were wealthy and powerful in order to make them bend to a government prosecution. Its not the way to treat somebody like Chelsea Manning who has a low income, but they never wanted to respect this fact that she really doesnt make that much money being Chelsea Manning.

Greg Wilpert: Now, I just want to dig a little bit into the background. I mean, why did Manning actually refuse to testify? And what role would her testimony have played in the Assange extradition, which is still going on in Britain? And then, finally, what does the jury disabandonment mean for the governments case against Assange?

Kevin Gosztola: Chelsea Manning, in her resistance, essentially what she was doing was making it hard for the government to turn her against Julian Assange and she understood that what they wanted to do was, as her legal team called it, get her in a perjury trap, but also what they wanted to do was impeach her credibility and make it seem like the statement that she had given to the military corps about the timeline of events was not credible.

And the reason why the prosecutors want to make her statement to the court seem not credible is because it doesnt match up with the theory of the case that theyre bringing against Julian Assange. Essentially, she says that, Independently, I decided to disclose all of these documents to WikiLeaks. I went around, I tried to first go to The New York Times, I contacted wanting to contact the Washington post, but they didnt want my disclosures, and so I went and submitted documents to WikiLeaks.

On the other hand, what the government is trying to say, and so why they need to break Chelsea Manning and bend her in such a way that they get testimony thats useful to them, they wanted to say Julian Assange recruited Chelsea Manning to work on behalf of WikiLeaks and that she was inside the military going around on the network, the secret network, going through databases, finding sets of documents and picking them out because WikiLeaks told her that they wanted these particular sets of documents to be disclosed to the world.

And that doesnt match up, unless youre able to show that what she said to the military court isnt the truth. So, going forward here, we know that the WikiLeaks grand jury was dismissed. It resulted in not only Chelsea Manning being released, but Jeremy Hammond, who had been subpoenaed to appear before this grand jury, was released and he was serving a federal prison sentence related to the Stratfor hack and then the leak of that information that was published by WikiLeaks, and he returns, hes going to be completing his prison sentence.

However, had he not been subpoenaed, he would have been released from prison back in December 2019. So, he goes back to prison and its obviously a much more Its a crisis moment now because all of these prisons and everyone inside of them are hugely vulnerable to the spread of the coronavirus. And so, its something to consider here that, had the grand jury not subpoenaed him, he would not be in the situation right now where hes vulnerable to the spread of this virus. But going forward here, the critical issue is the grand jury is no more. It could have continued on. It was not done with its term, they have 18-month terms.

In fact, Chelsea Manning, last year, was in jail, the grand jury elapsed. She was out for a week and then they subpoenaed her again and she re-entered jail, and so this time, it was dismissed. The grand jury just ended. That suggests to me that there are no further indictments. That means theres no additional charges against Julian Assange. Theres no charges against any other associates or staffers of WikiLeaks, no individuals who were related or involved to any of this involved with any of these leaks. And so, that suggests to me that if youre a part of WikiLeaks and the legal team representing WikiLeaks, that you might breathe a sigh of relief.

And for people who are concerned about the implications for press freedom that Julian Assanges case poses, you breathe a sigh of relief that it isnt expanding to other people who were involved in this work in publishing the information. But you know that the focus now becomes this extradition case in the United Kingdom and upcoming, we have this hearing for three weeks where witnesses will be called for the defense and for the prosecution or for the people and the crown prosecution service that are going to be arguing for the extradition and that they are going to have this major hearing.

And so, all of the focus now has to be on a Julian Assanges case and whats at stake for press freedom and journalists throughout the world as the United States government, even though Chelsea Manning is out of jail, even though Jeremy Hammond is out of jail, even though they may have abandoned the grand jury investigation that they are still pressing onward with this case that has dangerous implications for press freedom.

Greg Wilpert: Okay. Well, were going to leave it there for now. Of course, we always continued to follow this story. I was speaking to Kevin Gosztola, writer and publisher for the website, shadowproof.com.

Thanks again, Kevin, for all of this information and for having joined us today.

Kevin Gosztola: Thank you.

Greg Wilpert: And thank you for joining The Real News Network.

Speaker 3: Thanks a lot for watching. Appreciate it. But do us one more solemn favor. Hit the Subscribe button below. You know you went to. Stay up on new videos

Visit link:
Chelsea Manning Released But Still Faces Massive Fine - The Real News Network

Chelsea Manning was stung with massive court fines but her supporters bailed her out in just two days – PinkNews

Supporters of Chelsea Manning have raised the entire cost of her court fines in just two days, after a judge ordered the activists release in prison.

In a ruling on Thursday, US district judge Anthony Trenga freed Manning a former intelligence analyst best known for exposing US war crimes by leaking classified documents but ordered her to pay a staggering $256,000 in fines.

Manning has spent nearly a year in prison for contempt of court after refusing to testify before a federal grand jury investigating WikiLeaks and has little means to pay the steep fines by herself.

However, online supporters rallied round the activist, and raised the entire amount in just two days.

A crowdfunding campaign set up by Mannings friend Kelly Wright after the ruling had reached its full goal by Saturday.

Wright said: Thank you so much for helping us reach our goal of $256,000 and 100 per cent of that money will be held in trust to pay Chelseas court fines.

Chelsea will actually be able to pay these cruel fines and move on with her life and much sooner than expected.

A separate fund to help Manning with living expenses after her release from prison has raised a further $50,000.

Wright said: She is completely exhausted from this ordeal. She lost her apartment, was forced to put all of her belongings in storage, and was unable to earn any income whatsoever over the course of the past year.

Chelsea really appreciates how fast you came through for her. It will take a while, but we believe she is on the road to recovery.

Just days before the ruling to free her,Manning was rushed to hospital after trying to kill herself while in jail.

Her lawyers confirmed the incident, condemning the profound harm she continues to suffer due to her confinement.

It was the third time she had attempted to take her own life while behind bars.

If you are in the US and are having suicidal thoughts, suffering from anxiety or depression, or just want to talk, call theNational Suicide Prevention Lineon1-800-273-8255. If you are in the UK, you can contact Samaritans on 116 123 or email [emailprotected]

View post:
Chelsea Manning was stung with massive court fines but her supporters bailed her out in just two days - PinkNews

Bitcoin, Not Governments Will Save the World After Crisis, Tim Draper Says – Cointelegraph

Amid some notable recovery of Bitcoin (BTC) after a number of subsequent market crashes last week, billionaire investor Tim Draper delivered another optimistic forecast about Bitcoin.

In a March 16 interview with 415 Stories podcast, Draper outlined decentralization powered by Bitcoin and other new technologies as a major tool that has the ability to transform the biggest industries in the world.

According to Draper, Bitcoin will be one of the most crucial tools in the times of the recovery of the ongoing global financial crisis, opposing the major cryptocurrency to centralized structures like banks and governments. Referring to the interview, Draper tweeted:

Entertainment for while you are holed up. When the world comes back, it will be Bitcoin, not banks and governments that save the day.

In the interview, Draper expressed confidence that new technologies like Bitcoin and artificial intelligence (AI) have the potential to completely transform all the industries from banking to healthcare and real estate, tapping trillions of dollars of their value. As an example, Draper cited a use case in the insurance industry, arguing that the combination of AI, blockchain-powered smart contracts and Bitcoin is a perfect start for an insurance company.

Draper said:

"For example, I could start an insurance company with an actuary AI to determine fraud and a smart contract with Bitcoin and put it all on the blockchain."

A pioneer of business ventures in the U.S. and a co-founder of Draper Fisher Jurvetson Venture Company, Tim Draper has emerged as one of the major advocates for the crypto industry. Alongside prominent Bitcoin bulls like Morgan Creeks founder Anthony Pompliano and former antivirus software magnate John McAfee, Draper is known for making some big predictions for Bitcoin. After predicting that the price of Bitcoin will hit $250,000 by the end of 2022, Draper upped the ante, saying his own prediction may be understating the power of Bitcoin. In February 2020, Draper revealed that he quit stocks for crypto in late August 2019.

Apart from being bullish on crypto, Draper is also investing in technology developments. As reported by Cointelegraph, the investor is now seeing major potential in technologies like decentralized finance. As such, on March 16, Draper invested in DeFi Money Markets DAO, purchasing a stake in the form of the upcoming governance token DMG.

Follow this link:
Bitcoin, Not Governments Will Save the World After Crisis, Tim Draper Says - Cointelegraph

Bitcoin Safe Haven Narrative in Question After Biggest Drop in 7 Years – Cointelegraph

Bitcoin (BTC) price is slowly recovering, reaching $5,500, after last weeks Black Monday style market meltdown which led to Bitcoin price pulling back sharply as traditional markets suffered the third worst trading day ever. Mondays correction was followed by major cryptocurrencies - Ether (ETH), XRP, and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) all losing 11.6%, 8.3%, and 4.2%, respectively.

Crypto market daily price chart. Source: Coin360

The dump in crypto prices has raised further doubts over the classification or use-case of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies at-large. Bitcoin's safe haven argument as digital gold is being put in question as golds year-to-date returns surpassed Bitcoin and all other asset classes.

Notable Bitcoin critic, Peter Schiff addressed the relationships between Bitcoin and traditional assets to claim its lack of value for investors:

Bitcoin is no longer a non-correlated asset. It's positively correlated to risk assets like equities and negatively correlated to safe-haven assets like gold. When risk assets go down, Bitcoin goes down more. But when risk assets go up, Bitcoin goes up less. No value in that!

On the other hand, it has been reported that financial advisors suggested that Bitcoin was a good alternative investment to consider adding to ones portfolio. This raises doubt that the relationships between crypto and traditional assets claimed by Peter Schiff are observed in different scenarios.

During January 2020, Bitcoin and Ether (ETH) saw gains of 26.2% and 32.9%, respectively. At the same time, in such a positive period for the top cryptocurrencies, traditional assets such as the S&P 500 gained (1.96%) and the Nasdaq composite remained approximately the same (- 0.16%).

Cumulative returns for BTC, ETH, Oil, Gold, S&P 500, and Nasdaq during January 2020.

Looking at the correlations between the 4 assets in January, we find the opposite relationship to the one mentioned by Peter Schiff. Bitcoin and Ether are negatively correlated with both the Nasdaq and the S&P 500.

Bitcoin is correlated at -24.4% with the Nasdaq composite during this period, while Ether has a smaller negative correlation at -16.2%.

Regarding the S&P 500, Bitcoin is negatively correlated at -19.7%, while Ether has a smaller negative correlation of 7.9%.

This is the opposite of Schiffs comments, as, during a positive scenario, Bitcoin goes up more than other risk assets, as seen from the returns obtained during January. Moreover, Bitcoin and Ether have a correlation with equities in the opposite direction (negative), which is contrary to Schiffs comments.

A correlation of 100% means that either Bitcoin or Ether and each traditional asset move completely in the same direction, while -100% correlation means they are inversely related. A correlation of 0% means that the variables are not related in any way.

In January both Bitcoin and Ether returns showed a positive correlation with gold at 24.1% and 22% respectively. The relationship between Bitcoin, Ether, and WTI oil returns was also positive and in higher magnitude 33.6% in the case of Bitcoin and 34.7% for Ether. This is the opposite of Schiff's comments as gold and Bitcoin are positively correlated instead of negatively.

In February Bitcoin price dropped about 7.5%, while Ether gained more than 23%. During this negative period for Bitcoin, its relationships with stock indexes were the opposite from the one observed during January (a positive period in price). Bitcoin was correlated at 5.85% with the Nasdaq and at 21.3% with the S&P 500.

In February, Ether gained in price and its returns were positively correlated with the Nasdaq (20.2%) and the S&P 500 (31.1%)

Cumulative returns for BTC, ETH, Oil, Gold, S&P 500, and Nasdaq during February 2020.

Throughout February, gold was still correlated at 21.1% with Bitcoin, while Ether was correlated at 17.2%. Januarys relationship with oil was also quite similar, with correlations at 32.3% and 36% for Bitcoin and Ether, respectively.

Since March, both Bitcoin and Ether cumulative returns have performed worse than equities markets. This trend follows the argument made by Schiff that when risk assets go down, Bitcoin goes down more.

However, Bitcoin and Ether returns have shown a high positive correlation in the first 12 days of March, with gold at over 70%, and between 66% and 69.5% with the stock indexes. The lowest correlation was with oil between 32% and 34%, which has also seen a great decrease in price. This challenges Bitcoin and Ether's role as safe-haven assets during severe market conditions.

Nevertheless, if we look at year-to-date returns, even after bloody-Thursday, Bitcoin still holds a better return than other risk assets like the S&P 500 or oil, even though each are negative in this period.

Year-to-Date returns for BTC, Gold, Oil, S&P 500, and US Dollar. Source: Skew.com

Looking forward, investors are now aware that under historical-negative market conditions, gold may still be the real safe-haven asset. However, Bitcoin may be an alternative during these periods, while in other periods it appears to offer the best option for investors.

Data for the S&P 500, Nasdaq Composite, Gold and Crude Oil from https://finance.yahoo.com.

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision.

View original post here:
Bitcoin Safe Haven Narrative in Question After Biggest Drop in 7 Years - Cointelegraph

Bitcoin Is Back In Free Fall And Dropping FastHeres Why – Forbes

Bitcoin has again begun moving lower, following broader financial markets down as investors count the cost of the spreading coronavirus.

The bitcoin price, which had found a temporary floor of just over $5,000 per bitcoin late last week, sunk to lows of $4,787 on the Luxembourg-based Bitstamp exchange early this morning.

Bitcoin's latest fall comes as the U.S. Federal Reserve, working with the U.K., Japan, the eurozone, Canada, and Switzerland, tried to shore up financial markets with massive stimulusbut many feel the central banks haven't gone far enough and some have warned the bitcoin price could crash even further.

Bitcoin prices had stabilized over the weekend but have now begun sliding again.

The bitcoin price surged higher when the Fed yesterday announced it would cut interest rates to a target range of 0% to 0.25% and said it would begin quantitative easing to pump $700 billion worth of cash directly into the economy.

Bitcoin briefly jumped to almost $6,000 per bitcoin before falling back almost immediatelylosing almost 10% over the last 24-hour trading period.

Elsewhere on crypto markets, other major digital tokens fell alongside bitcoin with the likes of ethereum, Ripple's XRP, litecoin and bitcoin cash all losing between 5% and 12% over the same period.

"Crypto-asset markets again seem to be mirroring the actions of the traditional markets," said Simon Peters, analyst and bitcoin expert at brokerage eToro.

"However, fear is arguably a more dominant emotion than greed at the moment, because even with this stimulus, investors are still very worried about global economies grinding to a halt due to COVID-19."

U.S. equity futures and global stocks tumbled after the Fed made its historic move, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500 futures each dropping to their out-of-hours trading limits of about 5% in out-of-hours trading.

"There can be no denying the Feds commitment to action but its dramatic move will initially stoke further debate as to whether the monetary medicine will work, on the economy or markets or both," said Russ Mould, investment director at stock broker AJ Bell.

Many senior figures in the bitcoin and cryptocurrency community have argued the Fed's bond-buying and interest rate cuts highlight bitcoin's superiority to traditional markets.

"The Fed just cut rates to zero and entered into QE again. Bitcoin was built for this moment," said Dan Held, U.S.-based bitcoin and crypto exchange Kraken's head of businesses development, via Twitter.

"Bitcoin is a hedge to this," cofounder of the U.S.-based Gemini bitcoin and crypto exchange, Tyler Winklevoss, said via Twitter.

The bitcoin price failed to be supported by the latest central bank measures to prop up the economy. ... [+]

"Bitcoin doesnt have a 'limit down' or 'circuit breakers' because it is a real market with a real clearing price," bitcoin and cryptocurrency expert and cofounder of the Satoshi Nakamoto Institute, Pierre Rochard, tweeted.

"Stocks and bonds are not real markets, they are Potemkin villages, their prices are highly manipulated and political."

Read more:
Bitcoin Is Back In Free Fall And Dropping FastHeres Why - Forbes

Experts Say the Fed’s QE Program Will Strengthen Bitcoin One Way or Another – CoinDesk – Coindesk

Another enormous program of quantitative easing (QE) ought to benefit bitcoin, both in terms of its reputation as a hedge against centralized changes to the financial system, but also directly, as asset prices gradually rise across the board.

While QE may be anathema to crypto hardliners, some experts agree the net effect on prices is positive, one way or another.

QE has helped drive up the price of bitcoin (BTC) over the past decade, according to economist and author Frances Coppola. What QE does is raise asset prices across the board and that would include new alternative assets like bitcoin, she said.

The idea bitcoin is somehow uncorrelated with the financial mainstream is now being convincingly laid to rest, Coppola added (last weeks coronavirus shock saw bitcoin shedding close to 50 percent of its value).

Central banks conducted three rounds of QE between 2009 and 2015, during which time the S&P 500 rallied by more than 200 percent. Gold, a classic safe-haven asset, rose from $800 to $1,921 in the three years leading up to 2011 only to fall back to $1,050 by December 2015. Since the last financial crash in 2008, QE helped global private wealth grow by two-thirds to $166 trillion, according to the Boston Consulting Group.

However, the notion that expending the quantity of money in developed economies leads to hyperinflation a popular idea among some bitcoin advocates is false, Coppola said.

There is absolutely no evidence that QE causes hyperinflation. The way QE works is to push investors into higher-yielding assets and bitcoin, while being unbelievably volatile, is higher yielding. So what you actually get are asset bubbles, including bitcoin, she said.

In the current state of crisis, the bazooka of measures by the Federal Reserve failed to stabilize markets caught in a desperate flight towards cash. To counteract the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, the Federal Reserve announced a $700 billion bond buying program and that it would be cutting the interest depository institutions charge one another overnight for reserves to between 0.0 and 0.25 percent.

Simon Peters, a market analyst at eToro, agreed that once the rise in COVID-19 cases outside China tails off, investors will be looking toward assets like bitcoin.

Investor sentiment could shift to, Now I have all of this cash and with the increase in monetary supply, what do I do and where do I put it? said Peters, adding:

Holding cash is not beneficial in these circumstances because the currency has been devalued and you are losing purchasing power so where do you put it? That is potentially where the likes of bitcoin and other crypto-assets may see the benefit.

A so-called Cantillon Effect refers to the change in relative prices resulting from a shift in the money supply. Assets like stocks and real estate become overpriced, meaning assets like bitcoin become more attractive over time, as noted by analyst Pierre Rochard and VanEck director Gabor Gurbacs.

Based on whats happening in the mainstream financial system, bitcoin still counts as Doomsday insurance, according to Alex Mashinsky, CEO of crypto lending platform Celsius Network.

They are printing money that did not exist yesterday and they are giving it to everybody, Mashinsky said of central banks. But you cant say, We have this disease so we are going to print another 5 million bitcoin, or, We want to be re-elected so we are going to print another 10 million bitcoin, he said.

For some time now, Caitlin Long, the force behind Wyomings blockchain legislation and now CEO of Avanti Financial Group, has been critical of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). Long called for increased capital requirements on banks to deleverage the situation, back when there were rumblings in the repo market that liquidity was starting to become scarce.

History is not going to support the decision of the FOMC to ease the banks' capital requirements, she said.

Central banks are running the same playbook as always and it's not working, Long said, adding:

The quantity of stimulus that they are throwing at this is staggering in size if you compare it to the size of QE1, QE2 they are now doing QE1s in a single day, when QE1 was done over a span of months.

The QE1 program lasted from December 2008 until March 2010 and saw the Fed buying $600 billion in mortgage-backed securities and $100 billion in other debt.

For the first time in several years, Long said she went out and bought some bitcoin right after markets crashed last week (she cautioned this is not to be read as financial advice).

All I know is bitcoin is an asset that is no one's IOU. I would prefer to diversify my wealth away from assets that are someone's IOU, when I don't know if that someone is solvent, Long said.

Halving ahead

As traditional finance zigs down the QE route, bitcoin is zagging in the opposite direction.

In two months, the supply of new bitcoin will be reduced by 50 percent an occurrence scheduled for roughly every four years known as the halving.

As the U.S. government prints another trillion-plus dollars, this will have long-term ramifications on inflation and dilution of money. On the other hand, we will still have 21 million [bitcoins] available, ever, said Alex Blum, COO of Hong Kong-based fintech firm Two Prime. The halvening will happen when its set to happen.

Bitcoins scarcity to value argument involves an ideological statement of faith, in Coppolas opinion.

There will always be people who believe that scarcity alone is sufficient to make something valuable. In actual fact, something that is so scarce that nobody wants to buy it isn't valuable at all. Things need to have liquidity, she said.

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

Read the original here:
Experts Say the Fed's QE Program Will Strengthen Bitcoin One Way or Another - CoinDesk - Coindesk

Bitcoin loses half of its value in two-day plunge – CNBC

Omar Marques | LightRocket | Getty Images

Bitcoin lost its allure as a safe-haven asset this week.

The world's first and most widely held cryptocurrency dropped 50% over the past two days. Bitcoin sometimes referred to as "digital gold" fell more than 30% Friday to its weakest level since March 2019, according to data from CoinDesk.

The cryptocurrency briefly dropped below $4,000 Friday after starting the week above $9,000. It later recovered to roughly $5,400 as of the close of U.S. markets.Bitcoin Futures, meanwhile, were on pace for its worst week since debuting in December 2017.

The digital currency had been trading near the $10,000 level in mid-February. The slide began later in the month alongside global markets reeling from the quickly spreading coronavirus.

"Bitcoin's recent price action is primarily a result of the coronavirus outbreak affecting global markets and driving investors towards the safety of cash," said Joe DiPasquale, CEO of crypto investment firm BitBull Capital. "With this sharp decline, Bitcoin's potential as a safe-haven asset is being questioned, but we believe it is too early to seek any correlations between Bitcoin and other asset classes."

The bitcoin nosedive came amidst volatile trading on Wall Street this week. On Thursday, stocks saw their worstsince the "Black Monday" market crash in 1987. Stocks rose sharply Friday afternoon on the possibility of fiscal stimulus from governments around the world.

Other cryptocurrencies also dropped this week. The world second largest digital currency, ethereum, fell 46% this week while XRP lost nearly 40% of its value.

Visit link:
Bitcoin loses half of its value in two-day plunge - CNBC

Why Bitcoin’s Safe-Haven Narrative Has Flown Out the Window – CoinDesk – Coindesk

Noelle Acheson is a veteran of company analysis and CoinDesks director of research. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors own.

The following article originally appeared inInstitutional Crypto by CoinDesk, a weekly newsletter focused on institutional investment in crypto assets.Sign up for free here.

Listen. That whooshing sound you hear is not just the bitcoin (BTC) price. Its also the sound of the safe-haven narrative flying out the window, probably for ever.

March 12 was not bitcoins worst 24-hour price crash ever. That honor belongs to April 11, 2013, when bitcoin fell by almost 50 percent.

Comparing the twocrashes helps to understand what happened this week. It also helps to form a pictureof what this sector could look like going forward.

For context, in April 2013 Ethereum had not yet launched, Mt. Gox was the largest bitcoin exchange and the Harlem Shake meme dominated the internet. The previous month, the price ranged between $34 and $94, and the average transaction (according to Coin Metrics) was under $800.

Chinese demand powered the retail-driven market. Professional custody services were just warming up (BitGo, one of the first, was formed in 2013). Coinbase was less than a year old. BitMEX had not yet created the perpetual swap. Heck, CoinDesk didnt even exist then (we started publishing the following month).

In 2013, bitcoin was the asset of the future, a decentralized representation of value, a protest against powerlessness and a way for savers to reduce their vulnerability to central bank action. Market participants believed in the story. By some accounts, the price started to rise along with international attention on the Cyprus banking crisis, in which a haircut was applied to all deposits over 100,000 at the two largest banks.

If you were a 2013 bitcoin investor and you time-travelled to now, you would not recognize the scene. Chinese demand has dissipated. Mt. Gox is a bitter memory. A lively derivatives market drives volume. Big, incumbent financial institutions have set up digital asset desks. Really, youd pinch yourself.

You might also be a bit alarmed. Youd love the legitimacy and the platform sophistication, and youd get genuinely excited about all the smart people who have left their finance jobs to work in crypto. Youd almost certainly be stunned the sector has evolved so quickly. And youd be thrilled the institutions have taken an interest. Finally, professional traders have grasped the possibilities.

But youd also wonder wherethe ideology went, where was the focus on empowerment rather than profits.

Crypto markets went and grew up. They substituted their hoodie for a button-down and put on some big-boy shoes. They made new friends, became more responsible and entered a new world of risk.

A tale of two crashes

To get a feel for howthat risk has changed the sector, lets look at the market behavior of the twocrashes.

Back then most market participants were long. The absence of a liquid derivatives market made shorting relatively cumbersome and expensive. Trading was dominated by those who had taken the time to understand bitcoin, and they acted according to whether they thought it was over- or under-valued. The April 11 crash was triggered by profit taking the price had more than tripled in the previous two weeks. It was a narrative-driven slump.

Whats more, it wasisolated. That same week, the S&P 500 was largely flat, as was gold. It wasentirely a bitcoin story.

Today the market is dominated by professional trading desks. They know about markets. While many are probably attracted to the idea of a fiat alternative, their jobs are about playing numbers. For them, its not about bitcoin, its about volatility.

Last weeks crash was a liquidity event, triggered by margin calls in crypto and other assets, and by a massive investor panic. This crash was about raising cash and covering liquidity. It had nothing to do with bitcoin itself.

Nor was it isolated the S&P 500 suffered its worst 24-hour slump in history. Bitcoins story was not part of the activity this week. Bitcoin was just another financial asset getting trampled as investors headed for the exit.

That is why its safehaven narrative has died.

And thats a goodthing. Lets look at why.

First, bitcoin was never a safe haven. Even before this recent crash it was just too volatile, too young and too untested for that role. In spite of the lack of logic, the narrative endured because so many wanted it to be true.

Now that we can put that legend to rest an asset that can fall by over 40 percent intraday is unlikely to ever be taken seriously as a safe haven more realistic expectations should emerge. This will support credibility amongst the investment community and perhaps give bitcoin a more justifiable role in portfolio management.

Also, this week has revealed there is no such thing as a safe haven. Gold and T-bills, the assets the market traditionally turns to in times of turmoil, also fell, largely due to liquidity squeezes. Investors were scrambling to raise cash this week but even that safe-haven asset could come under strain as the global economy tips into recession and geopolitics adds tensions to monetary policy as well as faith in sovereign credit.

Yet, portfolios need diversification market assumptions may have been turned upside down and trust in correlations may take some time to recover, but the underlying math hasnt changed. Even with investment principles in turmoil, the demand for alternative assets will not go away, and professional investors are already taking stock, adjusting objectives and rebalancing.

New role for bitcoin?

In a world worriedabout income, assets like bitcoin and gold that dont depend on cash flows fortheir valuation are likely to occupy an increasingly important role ininvestment allocations as alternative assets.

The greater the rangeof alternative assets, the better for investors, especially in troubling timeslike these. Analysts and fund managers will be looking for opportunities tooffset the upcoming shift in market fundamentals many are likely to take acloser look at bitcoin, which does not depend on macroeconomic metrics.

In a market whererelationships are broken and assumptions are smashed, an alternative asset vulnerable as it may be to money flows does start to take on an appealingnarrative of its own, more innovative and more credible than that of the safehaven.

With this, the integration into traditional finance that we wanted for bitcoin can do so much more than make it vulnerable to the ravages of global sentiment. It can also finally bring it the opportunity it deserves.

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

Visit link:
Why Bitcoin's Safe-Haven Narrative Has Flown Out the Window - CoinDesk - Coindesk