Zero Hedge

French Navy Intercepts Russia-Linked Oil Tanker In Mediterranean: 'We'll Let Nothing Pass'

French Navy Intercepts Russia-Linked Oil Tanker In Mediterranean: 'We'll Let Nothing Pass'

Thursday saw another Russia-linked tanker, part of the so-called shadow fleet of sanctions evading vessels, boarded by a European country's navy. Such incidents are ramping up, and likely Moscow is also increasing its security deployments related to protecting the vessels.

Just as Ukrainian President Zelensky was on stage at the Davos WEF summit where he decried European 'inaction' - news hit global headlines that the French navy boarded an oil tanker from Russia. "This morning, the French Navy boarded and searched an oil tanker from Russia, subject to international sanctions and suspected of flying a false flag," French President Emmanuel Macron said on X.

French armed forces/Etat-Major des Armees via AP

"The operation was carried out on the high seas in the Mediterranean, with the support of several of our allies," he added, noting that the vessel had been "diverted".

"We will let nothing pass," Macron then stated, seeking to appear 'tough' at a moment much of European leadership is focused on the Greenland crisis.

"The activities of the shadow fleet help finance the war of aggression against Ukraine," he added.

The detail about it happening in the Mediterranean is interesting, and more rare, given that until now such intercepts typically take place in northern European waters. But this apparently underscores European resolve to go after these vessels anywhere on the globe.

International news sources have identified the seized vessel, currently under escort, as the "Grinch" and it happened in the narrow body of water between Spain and Morocco.

Per the emerging details, the operation was carried out by France in coordination with the UK, which provided vital intelligence to make the intercept possible.

The vessel was sailing under a false Comoros flag, despite having an Indian crew, with the vessel encountering French authorities near southern Spanish port city of Almería.

This incident is akin to one in last September which saw French naval forces board another oil tanker off France's Atlantic coast.

That prior vessel had departed from the Russian oil terminal at Primorsk near St. Petersburg. Known as "Pushpa" or "Boracay" - after undergoing multiple name changes - the tanker was operating under the Beninese flag, The Associated Press reported.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 14:00

Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Seeks Commutation Of Fraud Sentence

Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Seeks Commutation Of Fraud Sentence

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes, who was convicted of conspiring to defraud investors in her now-defunct blood-testing startup, has asked President Donald Trump to commute her prison sentence, potentially cutting nearly six years off her time behind bars.

Holmes was convicted in 2022 of four counts of wire fraud and conspiracy and sentenced to just over 11 years in prison.

Prosecutors said Holmes lied to investors from 2010 to 2015 by promising that Theranos’s technology could run many medical tests on one blood drop from a finger prick.

A federal appeals court upheld her sentencing last year, citing sufficient evidence of intent to defraud.

Holmes, now 41, sought to commute her sentence in 2025, and it remains pending, according to the Department of Justice’s Office of the Pardon Attorney. She is scheduled to be released from a minimum-security federal prison camp in Bryan, Texas, in December 2031.

A commutation would reduce her sentence but leave intact her conviction and $452 million restitution obligation to defrauded investors.

A full pardon, which Holmes has not publicly requested, would eliminate those requirements.

The Epoch Times reached out to the White House and the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney for comment, but did not receive a response by publication time.

Holmes was 19 when she founded Theranos in Palo Alto, California.

With 50 percent ownership in Theranos and a net worth of $4.5 billion at the time, she was listed as the “world’s youngest self-made woman billionaire” by Forbes in 2014.

Theranos became the subject of several investigations by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) after a 2015 report by The Wall Street Journal questioned the reliability of Theranos’s test results.

The flawed technology led a patient to falsely believe she had a precursor virus to AIDs, and sent inaccurate results to pregnant women and women being screened for cancer, according to the Department of Justice.

“Theranos itself eventually concluded a patient impact existed for every test run on patients and voided all tests with its analyzer,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California said in 2022.

“The government points out that Holmes was undeterred and again choose deceit over candor by downplaying the extent of the patient impact to investor-victims and continuing forward with her elaborate fraud.”

Holmes leveraged a high-powered Theranos board that included former Defense Secretary James Mattis, who testified against her during her trial, and two former secretaries of state, Henry Kissinger and the late George Shultz, whose son, Alexander, submitted a statement criticizing Holmes for concocting the scheme.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 13:40

Bank Of America, Citigroup May Launch Credit Cards With 10% Rate

Bank Of America, Citigroup May Launch Credit Cards With 10% Rate

Once again Trump's brash negotiating style appears to be paying off. 

Two weeks after Trump shocked the world by demanding lenders cap credit card interest rates at 10% for one year, Bank of America and Citigroup are exploring options to do just that in an attempt to placate the president. 

Bloomberg reports that both banks are mulling offering cards with a 10% rate cap as one potential solution. 

Earlier this week, Trump said he would ask Congress to implement the proposal, giving the financial firms more clarity about what exact path he’s pursuing. Bank executives have repeatedly decried the uniform cap, saying it’ll cause lenders to have to pull credit lines for consumers. 

The alternative proposal is to offer credit cards that would have a 10% rate specifically targeted to those consumers... who would already be eligible for the lowest rates around. And while it would do nothing to alleviate the near record high APRs for most Americans, it would let Trump declare that he managed to get the banks to yield - even if it was only a nominal success.

As Bloomberg notes, some executives have publicly said they agree with Trump’s focus on affordability, and the latest options they’re mulling are one way to potentially work with the administration in its effort to lower costs for consumers.

Many issuers including Bank of America and Citigroup already offer introductory rates for consumers as low as 0% for a period of time.

On Thursday, Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Brian Moynihan said a 10% cap would slow consumer spending, but noted that the bank has been talking to the administration about it.

“We’re working hard,” Moynihan said Thursday on a Bloomberg TV interview. “We’re trying to come up with solutions.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 13:20

Democrats Join Republicans In Voting The Clintons In Contempt Of Congress

Democrats Join Republicans In Voting The Clintons In Contempt Of Congress

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Yesterday, a curious thing happened in a House Committee.

Bill and Hillary Clinton were actually held accountable for flouting the law — at least as a preliminary matter. In the House Oversight Committee, Democrats joined Republicans in approving contempt resolutions against the two political figures after they refused to appear to answer questions about their connections to Jeffrey Epstein.

The House panel voted 34-8 to advance the resolution on Bill Clinton to a floor vote. It voted 28-15 to advance a resolution on Hillary Clinton.

As previously discussed, the Clintons adopted a position that was devoid of any cognizable legal defense. It was simple hubris, telling Congress that they did not want to appear to be saying that congressional subpoenas are discretionary for them.

From the Whitewater case to the Lewinsky matter to the email scandal, the Clintons have always escaped accountability for their actions. Courts can find perjury and prosecutors can find classified material without a criminal charge. Evidence can suddenly surface after investigations, or thousands of emails can be destroyed without any repercussions.

After that history, it is little surprise that the Clintons would believe that they, unlike other Americans, can choose whether to comply with a subpoena. After standing in flagrant contempt, the Clintons only reaffirmed the sense of entitlement by offering to allow an interview in New York without a transcript. There would be no “what the meaning of ‘is’ is” moments.

It is a demonstration of our partisan times that the mere fact that Democrats joined in the motion came as a surprise to many. Nine Democrats voted with their GOP colleagues against the Clintons

What is disgraceful are those Democrats who dispensed with any institutional or ethical obligations in opposing the resolution.

Here were the eight Democrats who voted to allow the Clintons to disregard lawfully issued subpoenas from the Committee:

  • Wesley Bell (D., Mo.)

  • Shontel Brown (D., Oh)

  • Robert Garcia (D., Cal.)

  • Ro Khanna (D., Cal.)

  • Kweisi Mfume (D., Md.)

  • Eleanor Holmes Norton (D., D.C.)

  • Suhas Subramanyam (D., Va.)

  • James Walkinsaw (D., Va.)

Then there are the two Democrats who voted “present” rather than take responsibility by making an actual decision: Reps. David Min (D., Cal.) and Yassamin Ansari (D., Wash.).

That is the “profile of courage” for some members: voting that “I’m here” without taking a position on open contempt for the Committee.

Figures like Ro Khanna have long portrayed themselves as more moderate voices, but appear to be yielding to the far left, including his recent support for the disastrous wealth tax in California.

Now he is effectively saying that congressional subpoenas simply do not apply to the Clintons like they would every other American.

The three Democrats who voted to advance the resolution against Hillary Clinton are Lee, Stansbury and Tlaib, according to Politico.

Two Democrats voted “present” for the Bill Clinton contempt resolution: California Rep. David Min and Washington Rep. Yassamin Ansari, while just Min voted “present” on the Hillary Clinton resolution.

This vote was the true test of courage for House members. There has to be something that is not entirely dispensable in the face of political advantage.

Even if you disagree with the need for a subpoena, members should be able to support the authority of their colleagues to demand that everyone, even the Clintons, respect such subpoenas.

For a party that runs on fighting the privileged and entitled wealthy class, this vote is comically ironic. They are supporting the claim of the Clintons that they get to decide when they will be subject to legal demands without offering any even remotely plausible legal defenses.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 13:00

Trump Sues JPMorgan And CEO Jamie Dimon For $5 Billion Over Alleged 'Political' Debanking

Trump Sues JPMorgan And CEO Jamie Dimon For $5 Billion Over Alleged 'Political' Debanking

President Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and its CEO Jamie Dimon, claiming the banking giant debanked him for political reasons

The lawsuit was filed Thursday morning in a Miami state court by his attorney, Alejandro Brito, on behalf of Trump and several of his hospitality companies. 

The complaint cites JPMorgan's code of conduct, which reads: "We set high expectations and hold ourselves accountable. We do the right thing—not necessarily the easy or expedient thing. We abide by the letter and spirit of the laws and regulations everywhere we do business and have zero tolerance for unethical behavior."

According to Brito, "Despite claiming to hold these principles dear, JPMC violated them by unilaterally—and without warning or remedy—terminating several of Plaintiff’s bank accounts."

Trump and his companies have "transacted hundreds of millions of dollars" through the bank, the lawsuit reads, adding that Feb. 19, 2021 was the day that "forever altered the dynamic of the parties’ relationship," when the bank allegedly "without warning or provocation," notified Trump and his companies that several of their bank accounts or were beneficiaries of, "would be closed just two months later, on April 19, 2021."

"JPMC did not provide plaintiffs with any recourse, remedy, or alternative—its decision was final and unequivocal," reads the suit. 

JPMorgan Responds

In a statement following the filing of the suit, the bank blamed "rules and regulatory expectations."

"We do close accounts because they create legal or regulatory risk for the company," adding "We regret having to do so but often rules and regulatory expectations lead us to do so. We have been asking both this Administration and prior administrations to change the rules and regulations that put us in this position, and we support the Administration’s efforts to prevent the weaponization of the banking sector."

According to Trump's attorney, his team is "confident that JPMC’s unilateral decision came about as a result of political and social motivations, and JPMC’s unsubstantiated, ‘woke’ beliefs that it needed to distance itself from President Trump and his conservative political views."

"In essence, JPMC debunked plaintiff’s accounts because it believed that the political tide at the moment favored doing so," reads the complaint. "In addition to the considerable financial and reputational harm that Plaintiffs and their affiliated entities suffered, JPMC’s reckless decision is leading a growing trend by financial institutions in the United States of America to cut off a consumer’s access to banking services if their political views contradict with those of the financial institution."

Trump’s attorney alleged that, "JPMC’s conduct, in violation of its code of conduct and Dimon’s lofty assertions, is a key indicator of a systemic, subversive industry practice that aims to coerce the public to shift and re-align their political views."

The lawsuit goes on to allege that JPMorgan Chase and Dimon have "unlawfully and unjustifiably published some or all of their names, including the names of President Trump, the Trump Organization with its affiliated entities, and the Trump family, on a blacklist." -Fox News

According to the lawsuit, the JPMorgan blacklist is accessible by federally regulated banks and is comprised of individuals and entities that are not to be served. 

"Given that Plaintiffs have always complied with all applicable banking rules and regulations and their wealth management accounts were in good standing, JPMC’s publication of President Trump, the other Plaintiffs, the Trump Organization and its affiliated entities, and/or the Trump family’s names on this blacklist, is an intentional and malicious falsehood," reads the lawsuit, which claims that the bank engaged in "an unfair and deceptive trade practice" by directing the publication of the names to the list, noting that the bank "had no legitimate basis to do so and knew that doing so would induce, and did in fact induce, other banking institutions not to deal with them."

Trump Announcement

Over the weekend, Trump quashed a WSJ article claiming that he offered JPM's Jamie Dimon the job of Fed Chairman, which he said was "totally untrue, there was never such an offer and, in fact, I'll be suing JPMorgan Chase over the next two weeks for incorrectly and inappropriately DEBANKING me after the January 6th Protest...

In response, a JPMorgan spokeswoman, Trish Wexler, told media outlets that the bank does not "close accounts because of political beliefs."

As the Epoch Times noted over the weekend, in August 2025, Trump issued an executive order to ensure that banks cannot refuse services to individuals based on their political or religious beliefs, a practice known as “debanking.” A watchdog in December found that nine large U.S. banks actively engaged in the practice between 2020 and 2025.

“To date, the [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] has observed that between 2020 and 2023, the banks maintained public and nonpublic policies restricting certain industry sectors’ access to banking services,” the report reads. “Many industry sectors were restricted based primarily on how it might appear to the public if the bank provided access to financial services to these sectors.”

Advocates against debanking have cited cases of Christians and conservatives who have stated that they have been victims of the practice by major financial institutions, including claims from the Indigenous Advance Ministries, former Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), and Trump himself, among many others. First Lady Melania Trump, in her memoir “Melania,” wrote that she, too, was denied banking services.

“I was shocked and dismayed to learn that my long-time bank decided to terminate my account and deny my son the opportunity to open a new one,” she wrote in her book.

When issuing the order over the summer, the White House said banks could face fines, consent decrees, or other punitive actions if they continue to remove financial access for certain individuals.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 12:40

Oil Prices Drop As Geopolitical Risk Eases, Gasoline Stocks At Highest Since 2020

Oil Prices Drop As Geopolitical Risk Eases, Gasoline Stocks At Highest Since 2020

Oil prices are lower this morning after Ukrainian President Zelenskiy said that the US, Russia and Ukraine will meet in coming days for trilateral team meetings.

WTI dropped below $60 as Zelenskiy urged Russia to be “ready for compromises.”

Any breakthrough to end Moscow’s war in Ukraine could iron out supply disruptions and end sanctions on Russian crude in an already oversupplied global market, sapping a longstanding geopolitical risk premium.

Adding to pressure on prices, Kazakhstan is getting closer to ending a weeks-long export constraint as repairs at a key Black Sea oil-loading facility near completion. A backlog of cargoes at the Caspian Pipeline Consortium terminal is easing.

And supplies are also returning to the global market from Venezuela.

Easing tensions returned the focus to market fundamentals, as traders look to rising global inventories as supply runs well ahead of demand (seemingly confirmed by a large build in crude and product stocks reported overnight by API).

API

  • Crude +3.04mm

  • Cushing +1.2mm

  • Gasoline +6.2mm

  • Distillates -33k

DOE

  • Crude +3.6mm

  • Cushing +1.478mm - biggest build since Aug 2025

  • Gasoline +5.977mm

  • Distillates +3.348mm

The official data showed inventory builds across the board with Cushing stocks jumping by the most since August and gasoline inventories up for the 10th week in a row

Source: Bloomberg

Gasoline inventories are now at the highest level since 2021 and the highest seasonal level since 2020. This comes as demand plummeted to the lowest weekly level since January 2023. East Coast gasoline stocks posted their largest weekly move since the end of 2021.

Source: Bloomberg

US Crude production dipped a little from record highs as rig counts continue to trend lower...

Source: Bloomberg

WTI extended losses after the across the board builds...

Source: Bloomberg

“The geopolitical temperature has eased a few degrees,” said Ole Sloth Hansen, a strategist at Saxo Bank A/S in Copenhagen.

But with a range of supply threats unresolved, and colder weather set to bolster US demand, prices will likely “hold firm.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 12:05

Court Blocks Feds From Searching Materials Obtained In Raid On WaPo Journalist

Court Blocks Feds From Searching Materials Obtained In Raid On WaPo Journalist

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge has blocked the government from searching data obtained in a raid last week on the home of Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson.

The order from U.S. Magistrate Judge William B. Porter comes after the federal government on Jan. 14 executed a search warrant at Natanson’s home. According to The Washington Post, federal authorities seized a phone, two laptops, a recorder, a portable hard drive, and a Garmin watch during the raid.

The Standstill Order granted by Porter specifically says that the government must “preserve but ... not review” the materials obtained in the raid while litigation on the matter moves forward.

An additional motion filed by Natanson and The Washington Post called on the court to order the government to return Natanson’s seized materials. Oral arguments on this motion will be held Feb. 6, with the court holding off on any intervention until then.

The brief order contains no discussions of the case’s merits or arguments, which will be delayed until after the Feb. 6 hearing.

Federal authorities say the search warrant was part of an investigation into a national security leak.

Aurelio Perez-Lugones, a government contractor with top secret security clearance, is at the center of the investigation. According to the FBI, Perez-Lugones is believed to have brought classified information from his job to his home.

In a criminal complaint, the FBI said it found documents marked “secret” and described as “related to national defense” in his basement, lunchbox, and car.

The raid on Natanson was related to this leak, though additional details on the nature of the information have not been provided.

“This past week, at the request of the Department of War, the Department of Justice and FBI executed a search warrant at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. The leaker is currently behind bars,” Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote in a post on X.

“The Trump Administration will not tolerate illegal leaks of classified information that, when reported, pose a grave risk to our Nation’s national security and the brave men and women who are serving our country.”

First Amendment Concerns

Meanwhile, critics of the move—including The Washington Post—say that the unprecedented raid represents a major threat to First Amendment protections related to freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press—which tracks issues affecting First Amendment freedoms as they relate to members of the media—the raid on Natanson’s home marks the first time in U.S. history that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has raided a journalist’s home in connection with a national security leak.

The president of the organization, Bruce Brown, described the raid as “a tremendous escalation in the administration’s intrusions into the independence of the press.”

Following the raid, The Washington Post immediately filed to have the materials returned, citing First Amendment protections and federal statutes that provide extra legal protections to journalists.

“The federal government’s wholesale seizure of a reporter’s confidential news-gathering materials violates the Constitution’s protections for free speech and a free press and should not be allowed to stand,” The Washington Post wrote. “It ... flouts the First Amendment and ignores federal statutory safeguards for journalists. The seizure chills speech, cripples reporting, and inflicts irreparable harm every day the government keeps its hands on protected materials.”

The petition called for the court to “order the immediate return of all seized materials. Anything less would license future newsroom raids and normalize censorship by search warrant.”

Privacy Protection Act

Under the Privacy Protection Act of 1980, specific procedures are mandated for obtaining notes, communications, and other work-related data from journalists, requiring that these materials be obtained via a subpoena related to an ongoing criminal investigation.

Subpoenas can also be challenged in court before being executed, in contrast to a search warrant, which is generally only able to be challenged after the fact.

The Privacy Protection Act prohibits the use of standard search warrants as grounds for such a raid.

The bill was passed specifically to overturn a 1978 Supreme Court ruling in Zurcher v. Stanford Daily. In that instance, police had raided a newsroom with a standard search warrant, which the Supreme Court ruled lawful.

Congress, disapproving of the ruling, passed the Privacy Protection Act to make it more difficult for the government to obtain journalistic materials.

The Washington Post cited the statute in its filing, writing that returning the materials is justified as “much of it is protected by the Privacy Protection Act.”

The DOJ has been given until Jan. 28 to file a response to the suit.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 11:45

Foreign Policy: Grading Trump's Second Term So Far

Foreign Policy: Grading Trump's Second Term So Far

Following Dinesh D’Souza and Dave Smith’s clash on what really is America First last week, fault lines were largely drawn on geopolitical lines. Core differences between the Carlson-Gaetz-Bannon and Shapiro-Levin-Loomer camps of the conservative movement lie on issues like the U.S. relationship to Israel, the capture of Maduro, with some GOP hawks still supporting intervention in Eastern Europe.

Given the divide is on these grounds, the question is: How has Trump done on foreign policy in his second term?

Answering this question, tonight we’ll host Trump’s former National Security Council Chief of Staff Fred Fleitz against Libertarian Institute founder and antiwar.com editor Scott Horton covering South America to Middle East to Europe to Asia.

What the President does with Iran in the face of Israeli and neocon pressure may be a key question in the coming days.

Horton is firmly is the “stay the hell out” corner while Fleitz recently made his call for intervention known, citing agreement with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich:

“The demonstrations may have stopped or ebbed because security forces are shooting at even small groups of people who gather on the street. Iran's FM yesterday told Fox that executions were off for Wednesday and Thursday but could not say about Friday. Other Iranian officials seem determined to begin executions. The regime is blaming the US, Israel, and drug traffickers  for the protests. Iranian officials are sending large funds out of the country. The US reportedly is moving military assets into the region, including the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier. I agree with Newt Gingrich that the Iranian regime is not about to fall but is struggling to survive.  I also agree with Newt that the Iranian people cannot overthrow the regime without outside help. Iran will never be the same after this brutal crackdown. The fall of the regime is within sight.”

Another open question of Trump’s foreign policy is the fate of Greenland. Hosting will be David Rand from the Human Reaction podcast.

We’ll see you tonight at 7pm ET, live on the homepage, X, and YouTube.
 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 11:25

Trump's "Green Deal" Has Fully Shattered The Liberal World Order

Trump's "Green Deal" Has Fully Shattered The Liberal World Order

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Green Stocks Land

The Greenland crisis was logically always likely to end quickly, to market approval, due to European geostrategic weakness, but still herald a new world order that markets don’t understand and won’t like once they do. That’s exactly how it’s now played out.

At Davos, President Trump ruled out the use of force but gave Europe and NATO an ultimatum on Greenland: within hours, a ‘framework deal’ was struck and threatened US tariffs on eight EU countries have been removed. This reportedly echoes the post-imperial arrangement the UK has with Cyprus. The US gains time-unlimited (Trump: “Forever”) access to areas of Greenland around military bases, as well as concessions for critical minerals, and the island will host the US Golden Dome missile defense shield. There will also be a far greater, permanent European NATO focus on its defense and the Northern Passage.

Those who say TACO all the time will cluck here. Those who see Republicans serve up ‘American Greenland’ cake at a Kennedy Centre event, Trump forcing vastly higher defense spending on all US allies, being paid tariff revenues that aren’t part of any agreed FTA, receiving trillions in pledged inwards FDI which the US will direct, and putting Iran’s nuclear programme under rubble and Venezuela’s Maduro in a New York courtroom, will argue it’s Europe that yielded, and will be forced to spend even more on Arctic defence, and to move even further under a US shield and a critical minerals processing compact, not its own independent ones.  

For markets, that’s the good news. The bad news is that the liberal world order is shattered.

Trump didn’t invade – and he was never going to except in some fevered imaginations. Yet he demonstrated to Europe he could, as could others in the future, and there’s presently nothing they can do about it. That’s how the world always worked until the past few decades, and it’s how it will work again going forwards.

For example, as Europe looks north-west, this week saw the US suddenly withdraw support for the Kurdish region of Syria that has thrived in recent years as it opts to back the former-jihadi Syrian president instead: there are already reports of appalling violence being inflicted on Kurds there. If Europe noticed that development to its south-east, it’s completely powerless to do anything about it if it disagrees – which isn’t clear at all either.

Moreover, on top of trade, energy, tech, finance, and NATO/Ukraine as points of relative European geostrategic weakness, once one accepts realpolitik, consider that if Europe ever ‘pivots to China’, as some have whispered, the US can ‘pivot to Russia’ and arm it against Ukraine and Europe. If Europe thinks it has that China card in its pocket, it needs to be aware that the US still has more of them.

That’s hardly the foundation for a solid Western alliance. Indeed, even with tariff threats removed, the European establishment loves America but in private evidently wishes Trump were gone – ECB President Lagarde walked out of a Davos dinner after anti-EU barbs from US Commerce Secretary Lutnick. Equally, the US President states in public that he loves Europe and his admin that they wish its establishment was gone (see the NSS). So where to from here?

Logically, leaderships could change. November 2026 looms, as does the French presidential election in April 2027. Yet some genies aren’t so easily put back into bottles.

As such, it’s down to the realpolitik of who has the best cards. Canada’s PM Carney, who didn’t meet Trump at Davos, earlier made a much-publicized speech which stated: “Many countries are drawing the same conclusions - that they must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable. A country that can’t feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.” That sounds exactly like Trump.

Yet as George Magnus points out, Carney citing Czech anti-communist dissident Vaclav Havel’s ‘The Power of the Powerless’ to call out Trump and the polite hypocrisies of the liberal world order doesn’t sit easily with him heading to China to strike trade deals. That’s Trump’s game, played with far weaker cards. Today, the powerless are… powerless.

Indeed, Trump noted from the Davos stage: “Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.” As the Canadian press puts it, ‘At Davos, a new great game dawns for the world. Which way, Canada?’ And all of us.

In the short term, green land - because TACO, or because Europe in 2026 is Egypt of 1956. In the long term, it’s unclear – and starkly binary.

Europe and others can try to go their own way. For example, Spain just urged the EU to create a joint army. Yet that’s the same Spain that adamantly refuses to spend 5% of GDP on defence within NATO. Talk is cheap. Preparation for war, or for strategic autonomy, is mind-blowingly expensive, and the US can block these moves every step of the way. Or European disunity can block itself: the European parliament just voted for the new EU-Mercosur deal to be given judicial review, which will delay it for a year. Trump deals seem to get agreed on a handshake or a tweet.

Or Europe and others will see policy after policy directed by the US. Consider the EU just watered down its green rules to ensure it can keep flows of Qatari LNG; and symbolically, the World Economic Forum is considering moving from Davos to new places. Like Florida?

Long-term planning is going to be very hard if you don’t know who is doing it for you – the US, or Europe – or China?

Domestic politics will also twist and turn in tandem. In Australia, the opposition coalition between the Liberals and the Nationals has just shattered again for the second time in a year. This time, it may not come back together as One Nation surge in the polls.

In markets, at Davos, ‘Wall Street Chiefs Try to Lay Low to Avoid Trump’s Trolling’ says Bloomberg, which summarises the mood.

Eyes are on the Supreme Court, which in hearing oral arguments expressed scepticism over Trump’s bid to sack Lisa Cook from the Fed, with specific mention of the importance of its independence. That Trump front matters as much, if not more, than Greenland, and potentially opens up a new world order to the same extent. If he wins there it would again mean green land at first, because “rate cuts!”, but then serious questions over what/where next.

There is also relative calm in Japan, which is also in the green following efforts to stabilize things after the wild volatility in JGB markets this week. That trend, which some try to paint as "a quarrel in a faraway land between people of which we know nothing", with no implications for sensible developed markets like Europe, is also a warning. Japan just ran its fifth consecutive annual trade deficit in 2025, and it’s that development --alongside “it’s baaack” inflation-- which is undermining its ability to stabilize its markets without relying on the kindness others.

That structural threat looms ahead for many economies and is another reason why they need to not only be ‘resilient’ but to run trade surpluses --which obviously not everybody can-- or find a bloc they can sit within that will support them. And sometimes that choice is made for them.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 11:05

Zelensky Blasts Europe's Inaction, Paralysis As Greenland Sideshow Consumes Attention

Zelensky Blasts Europe's Inaction, Paralysis As Greenland Sideshow Consumes Attention

"Europe loves to discuss the future but avoids taking action today." As Bloomberg has described it, a visibly angry Zelensky Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tore into European leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday. "Where is the line of leaders who are ready to act?" he questioned.

Highlighting that his own capital is in the midst of a power and water crisis after nightly Russian bombardment, Zelensky shamed European capitals for being unwilling to stop Putin, now nearly four years into the war. This included emphasis on the failed push to outright seize frozen Russian assets in Europe. Is he taking a page from Trump's playbook, taking the opportunity to blame and lash out at Europe? The talk had themes of a fragmented Europe which looks lost in the face of much stronger and more decisive US power and Trump's demands.

Zelensky in Davos, Shutterstock/BBC

"Why can President Trump stop tankers from the shadow fleet and seize oil, when Europe doesn't?" Zelensky posed. "If Putin has no money, there is no war for Europe."

"We should not accept that Europe is just a salad of small and middle powers, seasoned with enemies of Europe," Zelensky continued. "When Ukraine is with you, no one will wipe their feet on you. And you will always have a way to act – and act in time."

"To defend our land is a very expensive task," he had also said during the later Q&A session. Zelensky mentioned that in his meeting with President Donald Trump earlier in the day, which lasted about an hour, he left as his final communication to Trump that Ukraine desperately needs more anti-air defenses, especially Patriot missiles.

Trump for his part had said it was a good meeting, and that "Everybody wants to have the war end," - but that he'll have to "see what happens," adding that the US is meeting with Russia tomorrow.

In Zelensky's speech he interestingly alluded to distractions currently facing global leaders, including Greenland and Iran. He paralleled the deadly Iran protests with the world's 'inaction' in Ukraine. He went so far as to charge global leaders of not wanting to extend support for Iranians, "and the democracy they need".

"When you refuse to help people fighting for freedom, the consequences return - and they are always negative," Zelensky said. According to more:

Zelensky then moves on to international discussion about the Iranian protests, which he says has "drowned in blood".

Linking the example of the US's capture of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, he comes back to the impasse over Ukraine, saying that while Maduro is in New York awaiting trial, "Putin is not".

On Greenland, he said European leaders seem to believe someone else will do something to resolve the issue. Still, everyone is "waiting for America to cool down on this topic, waiting for it to pass away," he said.

One interesting moment came in Zelensky's introductory remarks, in which he referenced the early 1990s film Groundhog Day - where the lead character repeats the same day over and over again.

"No one wants to live like that," Zelensky observed, "repeating the same thing for weeks, months, years. And that's how we live now."

Meanwhile, while Zelensky spoke in Davos...

Despite the change in tone and sentiment when addressing Europe, there's not much even the 'coalition of the willing' can do in the face of Zelensky's impassioned plea - which was also filled with frustration. If the Western alliance keeps poking Russia too strongly, the bear will react in even bigger ways - already as each side is trying to keep a lid on prior nuclear threats and rhetoric.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:20

Zelensky Blasts Europe's Inaction, Paralysis As Greenland Sideshow Consumes Attention

Zelensky Blasts Europe's Inaction, Paralysis As Greenland Sideshow Consumes Attention

"Europe loves to discuss the future but avoids taking action today." As Bloomberg has described it, a visibly angry Zelensky Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tore into European leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday. "Where is the line of leaders who are ready to act?" he questioned.

Highlighting that his own capital is in the midst of a power and water crisis after nightly Russian bombardment, Zelensky shamed European capitals for being unwilling to stop Putin, now nearly four years into the war. This included emphasis on the failed push to outright seize frozen Russian assets in Europe. Is he taking a page from Trump's playbook, taking the opportunity to blame and lash out at Europe? The talk had themes of a fragmented Europe which looks lost in the face of much stronger and more decisive US power and Trump's demands.

Zelensky in Davos, Shutterstock/BBC

"Why can President Trump stop tankers from the shadow fleet and seize oil, when Europe doesn't?" Zelensky posed. "If Putin has no money, there is no war for Europe."

"We should not accept that Europe is just a salad of small and middle powers, seasoned with enemies of Europe," Zelensky continued. "When Ukraine is with you, no one will wipe their feet on you. And you will always have a way to act – and act in time."

"To defend our land is a very expensive task," he had also said during the later Q&A session. Zelensky mentioned that in his meeting with President Donald Trump earlier in the day, which lasted about an hour, he left as his final communication to Trump that Ukraine desperately needs more anti-air defenses, especially Patriot missiles.

Trump for his part had said it was a good meeting, and that "Everybody wants to have the war end," - but that he'll have to "see what happens," adding that the US is meeting with Russia tomorrow.

In Zelensky's speech he interestingly alluded to distractions currently facing global leaders, including Greenland and Iran. He paralleled the deadly Iran protests with the world's 'inaction' in Ukraine. He went so far as to charge global leaders of not wanting to extend support for Iranians, "and the democracy they need".

"When you refuse to help people fighting for freedom, the consequences return - and they are always negative," Zelensky said. According to more:

Zelensky then moves on to international discussion about the Iranian protests, which he says has "drowned in blood".

Linking the example of the US's capture of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, he comes back to the impasse over Ukraine, saying that while Maduro is in New York awaiting trial, "Putin is not".

On Greenland, he said European leaders seem to believe someone else will do something to resolve the issue. Still, everyone is "waiting for America to cool down on this topic, waiting for it to pass away," he said.

One interesting moment came in Zelensky's introductory remarks, in which he referenced the early 1990s film Groundhog Day - where the lead character repeats the same day over and over again.

"No one wants to live like that," Zelensky observed, "repeating the same thing for weeks, months, years. And that's how we live now."

Meanwhile, while Zelensky spoke in Davos...

Despite the change in tone and sentiment when addressing Europe, there's not much even the 'coalition of the willing' can do in the face of Zelensky's impassioned plea - which was also filled with frustration. If the Western alliance keeps poking Russia too strongly, the bear will react in even bigger ways - already as each side is trying to keep a lid on prior nuclear threats and rhetoric.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:20

Fed's Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway 'Trump Tariff' Costs

Fed's Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway 'Trump Tariff' Costs

Before we all get too excited, bear in mind that this is November's data - so still horribly stale (and also missing October's data point entirely) - but it's all we have for now, so let's dive in...

The Fed's favorite inflation indicator - Core PCE - rose 0.2% MoM (as expected), which leave it up 2.8% YoY (as expected), slightly lower than September's +2.9%...

Source: Bloomberg

Bear in mind that this morning's third look at Q3 GDP printed a +2.9% YoY for Core PCE.

Under the hood, the biggest driver of Core PCE remains Services costs - not tariff-driven Goods prices...

Source: Bloomberg

In fact, on a MoM basis, Non-durable goods prices saw deflation for the second month in a row...

Source: Bloomberg

Headline PCE rose 2.8% YoY (es expected), stubbornly refusing to show any signs of runaway Trump tariff costs...

Source: Bloomberg

The closely-watched SuperCore PCE rose 0.2% MoM which ticked up the YoY rise to 3.1%...

Source: Bloomberg

After surging in October, November saw Financial Services & Insurance and Healthcare cost inflation slow...

Source: Bloomberg

Meanwhile, amid rising prices, Americans' spending outpaced incomes once again...

Source: Bloomberg

...with wage growth slowing for all:

  • Private worker wages and salaries: 4.1% YoY, down from 4.5%, lowest since June 2025

  • Govt work wages and salaries 2.6%, tied for lowest since March 2021

All of which dragged the savings rate down to its lowest since Nov 2022...

TL/DR: While this data is admittedly stale, it shows no signs of 1) tariff-driven inflation or 2) a slowing consumer.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:12

Fed's Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway 'Trump Tariff' Costs

Fed's Favorite Inflation Indicator Refuses To Show Any Signs Of Runaway 'Trump Tariff' Costs

Before we all get too excited, bear in mind that this is November's data - so still horribly stale (and also missing October's data point entirely) - but it's all we have for now, so let's dive in...

The Fed's favorite inflation indicator - Core PCE - rose 0.2% MoM (as expected), which leave it up 2.8% YoY (as expected), slightly lower than September's +2.9%...

Source: Bloomberg

Bear in mind that this morning's third look at Q3 GDP printed a +2.9% YoY for Core PCE.

Under the hood, the biggest driver of Core PCE remains Services costs - not tariff-driven Goods prices...

Source: Bloomberg

In fact, on a MoM basis, Non-durable goods prices saw deflation for the second month in a row...

Source: Bloomberg

Headline PCE rose 2.8% YoY (es expected), stubbornly refusing to show any signs of runaway Trump tariff costs...

Source: Bloomberg

The closely-watched SuperCore PCE rose 0.2% MoM which ticked up the YoY rise to 3.1%...

Source: Bloomberg

After surging in October, November saw Financial Services & Insurance and Healthcare cost inflation slow...

Source: Bloomberg

Meanwhile, amid rising prices, Americans' spending outpaced incomes once again...

Source: Bloomberg

...with wage growth slowing for all:

  • Private worker wages and salaries: 4.1% YoY, down from 4.5%, lowest since June 2025

  • Govt work wages and salaries 2.6%, tied for lowest since March 2021

All of which dragged the savings rate down to its lowest since Nov 2022...

TL/DR: While this data is admittedly stale, it shows no signs of 1) tariff-driven inflation or 2) a slowing consumer.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:12

"Totally Absurd": Circle CEO Rejects Bank-Run Fearmongering Over Stablecoin Yields

"Totally Absurd": Circle CEO Rejects Bank-Run Fearmongering Over Stablecoin Yields

Authored by Helen Partz via CoinTelegraph.com,

Jeremy Allaire, CEO of the publicly listed stablecoin issuer Circle, said interest payments on stablecoins do not pose a threat to banks.

Speaking Thursday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Allaire described concerns that stablecoin yields could cause bank runs as “totally absurd,” citing historical precedents and existing reward-based financial services already in use.

“They help with stickiness, they help with customer traction,” Allaire said, adding that interest itself is not large enough to undermine monetary policy.

Allaire’s comments came amid heated debate over stablecoin yields, including in discussions over the US CLARITY Act, which aims to establish a federal market structure framework for digital assets.

Allaire points to money market funds as a historical parallel

Allaire pointed to government money market funds as a historical parallel, noting they faced similar warnings about draining bank deposits.

Yet it has been “around $11 trillion of dollar money market funds that grew in various different circumstances,” Allaire said, adding that this has not stopped lending.

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire at the WEF panel on Thursday. Source: WEF

“Meanwhile, lending is already shifting away from banks toward private credit and capital markets. In the US, much of GDP growth over multiple cycles has been funded through capital-market debt, not bank loans,” he said. “We want to build models for lending that build on top of stablecoins.”

Circle CEO says stablecoins are the only viable money for AI agents

Allaire also highlighted artificial intelligence as a major driver of future stablecoin adoption.

He said “billions of AI agents” will need a payment system, adding that “there is no other alternative other than stablecoins to do that right now.”

Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao. Source: YZi Labs

Similar views were echoed elsewhere at the forum. Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao said Thursday at Davos that crypto payments could be essential for AI-driven transactions.

In September, Galaxy Digital CEO Michael Novogratz predicted that AI agents will become the biggest stablecoin user “sometime in the near distant future.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:00

"Totally Absurd": Circle CEO Rejects Bank-Run Fearmongering Over Stablecoin Yields

"Totally Absurd": Circle CEO Rejects Bank-Run Fearmongering Over Stablecoin Yields

Authored by Helen Partz via CoinTelegraph.com,

Jeremy Allaire, CEO of the publicly listed stablecoin issuer Circle, said interest payments on stablecoins do not pose a threat to banks.

Speaking Thursday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Allaire described concerns that stablecoin yields could cause bank runs as “totally absurd,” citing historical precedents and existing reward-based financial services already in use.

“They help with stickiness, they help with customer traction,” Allaire said, adding that interest itself is not large enough to undermine monetary policy.

Allaire’s comments came amid heated debate over stablecoin yields, including in discussions over the US CLARITY Act, which aims to establish a federal market structure framework for digital assets.

Allaire points to money market funds as a historical parallel

Allaire pointed to government money market funds as a historical parallel, noting they faced similar warnings about draining bank deposits.

Yet it has been “around $11 trillion of dollar money market funds that grew in various different circumstances,” Allaire said, adding that this has not stopped lending.

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire at the WEF panel on Thursday. Source: WEF

“Meanwhile, lending is already shifting away from banks toward private credit and capital markets. In the US, much of GDP growth over multiple cycles has been funded through capital-market debt, not bank loans,” he said. “We want to build models for lending that build on top of stablecoins.”

Circle CEO says stablecoins are the only viable money for AI agents

Allaire also highlighted artificial intelligence as a major driver of future stablecoin adoption.

He said “billions of AI agents” will need a payment system, adding that “there is no other alternative other than stablecoins to do that right now.”

Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao. Source: YZi Labs

Similar views were echoed elsewhere at the forum. Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao said Thursday at Davos that crypto payments could be essential for AI-driven transactions.

In September, Galaxy Digital CEO Michael Novogratz predicted that AI agents will become the biggest stablecoin user “sometime in the near distant future.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 10:00

NatGas Jumps 75% As Extreme Cold, Blizzard Risks Threaten Appalachian Gas Supply

NatGas Jumps 75% As Extreme Cold, Blizzard Risks Threaten Appalachian Gas Supply

US natural gas futures are ripping higher, up roughly 75% in just three trading days, and are on pace to post the largest weekly gain on record.

The move has all the signs of a classic winter-driven short squeeze, with traders scrambling to cover as a polar blast descends into the Lower 48.

An intense Arctic blast and a sprawling winter storm system, drawing comparisons to the Blizzard of '96, are set to sweep across the eastern half of the US this weekend.

Weather models point to prolonged sub-freezing temperatures, raising the risk of freeze-offs in the Appalachian Basin, a critical US NatGas supply region.

Energy research firm Criterion Research was the first to warn that NatGas production disruptions across Appalachia could materially tighten balances at the worst possible time, just as heating demand spikes. Any sustained freeze-offs would not only pressure spot supply but could also stress regional power grids.

Criterion Research explained:

Winter is Coming for Appalachia

This week's Appalachian nat gas production is already down 1.1 Bcf/d versus last week, and the extreme cold is just getting started.

Pittsburgh overnight lows are headed to -6.8°F at their most intense levels next week, with this cold coming in lower and longer than Winter Storm Elliott (Dec 2022.)

During Eliott, regional production dropped 25-30%.

We cited Criterion Research on Wednesday (read here), which outlined where the production freeze-offs are likely to emerge.

At least 175 million people across the Lower 48 will face snow, rain, sleet and ice through the weekend as record-breaking cold pours into the eastern half of the US. Below-zero temperatures are expected to boost heating demand at a time when pipeline freeze-offs could disrupt gas production.

We warned on Wednesday:

Recall Winter Storm Uri in 2021, when extreme cold paralyzed the NatGas supply and collapsed the ERCOT grid in Texas for a week. A scenario like that could be in play in parts of the eastern US, regions where power grids are already tight because of bad 'green' energy policies colliding with the era of data centers.

Ole Hvalbye, an analyst at SEB AB, commented on Natty prices ripping higher: "This is a textbook winter-driven squeeze: fast, violent, and sentiment-shifting."

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 09:00

NatGas Jumps 75% As Extreme Cold, Blizzard Risks Threaten Appalachian Gas Supply

NatGas Jumps 75% As Extreme Cold, Blizzard Risks Threaten Appalachian Gas Supply

US natural gas futures are ripping higher, up roughly 75% in just three trading days, and are on pace to post the largest weekly gain on record.

The move has all the signs of a classic winter-driven short squeeze, with traders scrambling to cover as a polar blast descends into the Lower 48.

An intense Arctic blast and a sprawling winter storm system, drawing comparisons to the Blizzard of '96, are set to sweep across the eastern half of the US this weekend.

Weather models point to prolonged sub-freezing temperatures, raising the risk of freeze-offs in the Appalachian Basin, a critical US NatGas supply region.

Energy research firm Criterion Research was the first to warn that NatGas production disruptions across Appalachia could materially tighten balances at the worst possible time, just as heating demand spikes. Any sustained freeze-offs would not only pressure spot supply but could also stress regional power grids.

Criterion Research explained:

Winter is Coming for Appalachia

This week's Appalachian nat gas production is already down 1.1 Bcf/d versus last week, and the extreme cold is just getting started.

Pittsburgh overnight lows are headed to -6.8°F at their most intense levels next week, with this cold coming in lower and longer than Winter Storm Elliott (Dec 2022.)

During Eliott, regional production dropped 25-30%.

We cited Criterion Research on Wednesday (read here), which outlined where the production freeze-offs are likely to emerge.

At least 175 million people across the Lower 48 will face snow, rain, sleet and ice through the weekend as record-breaking cold pours into the eastern half of the US. Below-zero temperatures are expected to boost heating demand at a time when pipeline freeze-offs could disrupt gas production.

We warned on Wednesday:

Recall Winter Storm Uri in 2021, when extreme cold paralyzed the NatGas supply and collapsed the ERCOT grid in Texas for a week. A scenario like that could be in play in parts of the eastern US, regions where power grids are already tight because of bad 'green' energy policies colliding with the era of data centers.

Ole Hvalbye, an analyst at SEB AB, commented on Natty prices ripping higher: "This is a textbook winter-driven squeeze: fast, violent, and sentiment-shifting."

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 09:00

US Q3 GDP Revised Up to 4.4%, Highest In Two Years

US Q3 GDP Revised Up to 4.4%, Highest In Two Years

While it's ancient history now - even preceding the record long government shutdown - and nobody will care, moments ago the BEA reported that its first revision of third quarter GDP came in a bit hotter than expected as US GDP grew slightly more than initially reported, supported by stronger exports. Due to the recent government shutdown, this updated report for the third quarter of 2025 replaces the release of the third estimate originally scheduled for December 19, 2025, the BEA reported.

Inflation-adjusted gross domestic product increased at a revised 4.4% annualized rate, the fastest in two years, and up 0.1% from the initial estimate, primarily reflecting upward revisions to exports and investment that were partly offset by a downward revision to consumer spending. That said, the change was minuscule: it went up from an unrounded 4.340% to 4.370%.

Compared to the second quarter, the acceleration in real GDP in the third quarter reflected upturns in investment, exports, and government spending, as well as an acceleration in consumer spending. Imports decreased less in the third quarter than in the second. 

Real GDP was revised up 0.1 percentage point from the initial estimate, primarily reflecting upward revisions to exports and investment that were partly offset by a downward revision to consumer spending. Imports were revised up. 

Here is the breakdown: 

  • Personal consumption contributed 2.34% to the bottom line, slightly lower than the 2.39% originally reported.
  • Fixed Investment added 0.15%, also revised lower from 0.19%
  • Change in private inventories was a net improvement, raising from -0.22% to -0.12%, if still subtracting from the bottom line
  • Net trade (exports less imports) was also revised favorably up from 1.59% to 1.62%
  • Finally, government added 0.38% to the bottom line print, effectively the same as 0.39% before.

And visually:

Real gross output increased 3.2% in the third quarter, reflecting increases of 4.4% for private services-producing industries and 2.1% for government that were partly offset by a decrease of 0.1% for private goods-producing industries. Real gross domestic income (GDI) increased 2.4% in the third quarter, the same as previously estimated. The average of real GDP and real GDI increased 3.4%, the same as previously estimated.

From an industry perspective, the increase in real GDP in the third quarter reflected increases of 5.3 percent in real value added for private services-producing industries and 3.6 percent for private goods-producing industries that were partly offset by a decrease of 0.3 percent in real value added for government.  

Finally, while it's beyond ancient history now, the price index for gross domestic purchases increased 3.4% in the third quarter, the same as previously estimated. The personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index increased 2.8 percent, and the PCE price index excluding food and energy increased 2.9%, both the same as previously estimated. A much more timely print of core PCE for November will be reported at 10am today.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 08:57

House To Vote On Bill To Fund The Government

House To Vote On Bill To Fund The Government

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on a multi-bill package to fund the federal government on Thursday.

The legislation includes funding for the departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development.

Most portions of the bill are expected to pass easily as members of both parties seek to avoid a repeat of the 43-day government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history, that accompanied the previous government funding fight.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are among those, and both leaders have expressed a desire to work with Republicans to pass the 12 annual government funding bills ahead of the Jan. 30 funding deadline.

Though it includes some spending cuts, the package largely holds funding levels at fiscal year 2025 rates.

Republicans are expected to back the legislation largely along party lines.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the lead Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, praised the bill in a statement, saying it “reflects the core tenets of American strength: combat-ready forces, secure communities, effective education and health systems, and modern transportation. At every level, it applies innovation and discipline to deliver results without waste.”

In line with leadership’s desire to avoid a government shutdown, the sections of the bill related to funding for the departments of Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development are expected to gain Democratic support as well.

However, one segment of the funding has proven divisive.

DHS Funding Controversy

Ahead of the vote, Democrats came out en masse against the portion of the bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Democrats have been increasingly critical of the agency that oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), criticism that has only intensified in the wake of the ICE-involved shooting of Renée Nicole Good in Minneapolis.

In the aftermath of the shooting, Democrats have called for President Donald Trump to back off on the deployment of ICE agents to Democrat-run areas, while the party’s progressive wing has renewed calls to “abolish ICE.”

In Congress, lawmakers have largely urged funding cuts or policy reforms.

While this package includes reforms, several Democrats have indicated that they don’t go far enough and have expressed an intention to oppose the bill.

Despite this opposition, the DHS funding measure is expected to pass with wide GOP support and support from some Democrats.

ICE Reforms

The bill would implement several changes to ICE’s policies and procedures.

One measure in the bill would provide $20 million to ICE for the procurement and deployment of body cameras for ICE and other immigration agents engaged in domestic law enforcement activities. It would similarly require standardization of ICE and immigration agents’ uniforms.

It provides additional funding for civil liberties-related oversight of ICE activities.

The bill would also mandate additional training for immigration agents operating within the U.S. interior, with a focus on de-escalation.

It also instructs DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to ensure that all immigration agents are properly trained on Americans’ First Amendment right to record federal agents during public operations.

It also provides substantially fewer detention beds than were requested by the administration, instead cutting the number. While 50,000 beds were requested, an increase, the bill would cut the total number of detention beds to 41,500, marking a decrease of 5,500 beds.

It also slightly reduces funding for enforcement and removal operations, cutting $115 million.

However, for many Democrats, these reforms don’t go far enough.

Democrats Split

Democrats are split on the issue, though many have expressed opposition to the bill.

Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), a member of the House Appropriations Committee, expressed opposition to the bill in a post on X.

“The 2026 Homeland Security funding bill that the House is voting on this week is an easy NO for me. It’s a blank check with no accountability for DHS’s outrageous abuses,” Underwood wrote.

Several other House Democrats on the Appropriations subcommittee have similarly indicated plans to oppose the bill.

However, others have indicated plans to support the bill or have otherwise said they’re undecided.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the lead Democratic appropriator, has said she'll back the legislation, citing the reforms.

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), a moderate in a red-trending district, has also expressed his intention to support the bill.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 08:45

House To Vote On Bill To Fund The Government

House To Vote On Bill To Fund The Government

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on a multi-bill package to fund the federal government on Thursday.

The legislation includes funding for the departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development.

Most portions of the bill are expected to pass easily as members of both parties seek to avoid a repeat of the 43-day government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history, that accompanied the previous government funding fight.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are among those, and both leaders have expressed a desire to work with Republicans to pass the 12 annual government funding bills ahead of the Jan. 30 funding deadline.

Though it includes some spending cuts, the package largely holds funding levels at fiscal year 2025 rates.

Republicans are expected to back the legislation largely along party lines.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the lead Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, praised the bill in a statement, saying it “reflects the core tenets of American strength: combat-ready forces, secure communities, effective education and health systems, and modern transportation. At every level, it applies innovation and discipline to deliver results without waste.”

In line with leadership’s desire to avoid a government shutdown, the sections of the bill related to funding for the departments of Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development are expected to gain Democratic support as well.

However, one segment of the funding has proven divisive.

DHS Funding Controversy

Ahead of the vote, Democrats came out en masse against the portion of the bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Democrats have been increasingly critical of the agency that oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), criticism that has only intensified in the wake of the ICE-involved shooting of Renée Nicole Good in Minneapolis.

In the aftermath of the shooting, Democrats have called for President Donald Trump to back off on the deployment of ICE agents to Democrat-run areas, while the party’s progressive wing has renewed calls to “abolish ICE.”

In Congress, lawmakers have largely urged funding cuts or policy reforms.

While this package includes reforms, several Democrats have indicated that they don’t go far enough and have expressed an intention to oppose the bill.

Despite this opposition, the DHS funding measure is expected to pass with wide GOP support and support from some Democrats.

ICE Reforms

The bill would implement several changes to ICE’s policies and procedures.

One measure in the bill would provide $20 million to ICE for the procurement and deployment of body cameras for ICE and other immigration agents engaged in domestic law enforcement activities. It would similarly require standardization of ICE and immigration agents’ uniforms.

It provides additional funding for civil liberties-related oversight of ICE activities.

The bill would also mandate additional training for immigration agents operating within the U.S. interior, with a focus on de-escalation.

It also instructs DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to ensure that all immigration agents are properly trained on Americans’ First Amendment right to record federal agents during public operations.

It also provides substantially fewer detention beds than were requested by the administration, instead cutting the number. While 50,000 beds were requested, an increase, the bill would cut the total number of detention beds to 41,500, marking a decrease of 5,500 beds.

It also slightly reduces funding for enforcement and removal operations, cutting $115 million.

However, for many Democrats, these reforms don’t go far enough.

Democrats Split

Democrats are split on the issue, though many have expressed opposition to the bill.

Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), a member of the House Appropriations Committee, expressed opposition to the bill in a post on X.

“The 2026 Homeland Security funding bill that the House is voting on this week is an easy NO for me. It’s a blank check with no accountability for DHS’s outrageous abuses,” Underwood wrote.

Several other House Democrats on the Appropriations subcommittee have similarly indicated plans to oppose the bill.

However, others have indicated plans to support the bill or have otherwise said they’re undecided.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the lead Democratic appropriator, has said she'll back the legislation, citing the reforms.

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), a moderate in a red-trending district, has also expressed his intention to support the bill.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/22/2026 - 08:45

Pages