Celsius Founder Alex Mashinsky Pleads Guilty To Multi-Billion Dollar Fraud Scheme

Yet another crypto giant has fallen unceremoniously - this time it's Alex Mashinsky, founder and CEO of Celsius who has "pled guilty to one count of commodities fraud and one count of securities fraud, which combined carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison."

According to a DOJ Southern District of New York press release out Monday, Mashinsky misled Celsius customers about the company’s profitability and the security of their investments, while secretly manipulating the price of the company’s proprietary token, CEL, for personal gain.

As part of his guilty plea, Mashinsky agreed to forfeit over $48 million in proceeds from the schemes.

Celsius, once marketed as a safe alternative to banks with catchy slogans like “Unbank Yourself,” promised high returns on crypto deposits through programs like “Earn” and “Custody.”

However, Mashinsky and his team engaged in deceptive practices, including misrepresenting the company’s financial health and using customer funds to inflate CEL’s price. These actions created the illusion of profitability and stability while leaving ordinary investors vulnerable to significant losses.

By 2021, Celsius claimed to manage $25 billion in assets, primarily from retail investors, before filing for bankruptcy in 2022.

Central to the fraud was Mashinsky’s orchestration of a scheme to artificially inflate CEL’s price, including using customer deposits to buy CEL tokens in the open market, the release said. This price manipulation enabled Mashinsky to sell his personal holdings of CEL for a substantial profit, totaling approximately $48 million, while misrepresenting these activities to customers.

As the company faced financial collapse, Mashinsky continued to falsely reassure investors of Celsius’s liquidity, even as he withdrew millions of his own assets from the platform, the DOJ said. 

Photo: Reuters

And among other things, the DOJ says that Mashinsky "misrepresented, among other things, the safety of Celsius’s yield-generating activities". 

The fallout from Celsius’s collapse was devastating for its customers, with over $4.7 billion in crypto assets locked up when the company halted withdrawals in June 2022.

Celsius subsequently filed for bankruptcy, leaving many retail investors unable to access their funds. 

U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said: “Alexander Mashinsky orchestrated one of the biggest frauds in the crypto industry.  He lured ordinary, retail crypto investors into investing billions of dollars in Celsius with false promises that their investments were low-risk."

"Using catchy slogans like ‘Unbank Yourself,’ Mashinsky promised that Celsius would keep customers’ crypto as safe as money in a bank, but that, unlike a bank, Celsius returned most of the profits from its business back to users," Williams said. 

He continued: "In reality, Celsius was never profitable.  To disguise the flaws in his business model, Mashinsky put investors’ money into riskier and riskier bets, and secretly used customer money to prop up the price of CEL token.  Mashinsky made tens of millions of dollars selling his own CEL at artificially high prices, while his customers were left holding the bag when the company went bankrupt.  Today’s convictions reflect this Office’s commitment to holding fraudsters like Mashinsky accountable for their crimes.”

Back in 2021, in a now-famous debate with Peter Schiff, Mashinsky was called out to his face about his firm's inability to generate yield on bitcoin out of thin air. 

Documenting the exchange, Zero Hedge contributor Quoth the Raven wrote in a November 2021 criticism of Mashinsky's interview:

The absolute worst and most irresponsible of all of the arguments from Mashinsky came when he suggested to viewers of the debate - many of whom likely lack financial sophistication - that both bitcoin and gold pay a yield.

Of course, what he meant was that they pay a yield on his Celsius platform, but he failed to qualify his statements to make that clear. Neither asset pays a yield in general and Mashinsky knows that.

QTR also documented on Zero Hedge when Celsius first paused withdrawls back in June 2022. 

Mashinsky had previously blamed short sellers for the plunge in Celsius, which should have been the tell.

“The CEO of crypto lending and staking platform Celsius Alex Mashinsky believes ‘the Sharks of Wall Street’ can smell blood in the water and are causing instability at several crypto projects. Mashinsky attributes recent Celsius (CEL) price falls, the brief Tether (USDT) depegging and collapse of Terra (LUNA) — at least in part — to short sellers on Wall Street,” Cointelegraph wrote in 2022.

“This is not a coincidence. This is somebody who decided, ‘You know what? I’m going to take down all of Celsius,’” he said during the event.

Turns out that somebody was the SDNY...

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/04/2024 - 04:15

2025 Will Bring More Energy Pain For Germans As CO2 Tax Set To Rise Again!

Authored by P Gosselin via the NoTricksZone

Germany’s CO2 tax is set to increase from the current 45 euros a tonne to 55 euros at the turn of 2025... This will drive up heating and energy costs for consumers and businesses.

The hefty rise means the tax on CO2 will almost double in just 2 years. In 2023, the carbon tax was 30 euros a tonne.

But it doesn’t stop there, reports Blackout News. The CO2 tax gets taxed by the value added tax, which is currently 19 percent.

“Households and businesses that rely on petrol, diesel, heating oil or natural gas are facing growing financial challenges, writes Blackout News. 

“A liter of petrol will be 4.3 cents more expensive due to the CO2 tax, diesel will rise by 4.7 cents per liter. Heating costs will also rise dramatically. A kilowatt hour of gas will become a further 0.21 cents more expensive, which means a total increase of 1.21 cents compared to the time before the CO2 tax. Heating oil costs 17.5 cents more per liter – an increase that affects many households.”

The sharp increases will certainly bode ill for the current SPD-Greens-FDP coalition government – which undergoes a vote of no confidence later this month in Parliament.

A no-confidence vote will lead to the dissolution of parliament and thus a new election within 60 days of the vote.

The pain at the gas pumps and from higher utility bills will make the current coalition government partners even more unpopular. But whether a new government led by Friedrich Merz (CDU) will change anything remains highly doubtful. Only the opposition AfD party has staunchly opposed the CO2 tax. Currently Merz’s CDU party is well ahead in the polls.

65 euros per tonne in 2026

The CO2 tax is set to rise to 65 euros a tonne in 2026, making the energy cost gap between Germany and other countries potentially unsustainable. Already there’s a growing dissatisfaction among German citizens and businesses as energy prices skyrocket into the stratosphere. Meanwhile the Trump administration as signaled a strong interest in making energy affordable again in USA.

Who’s profiting from the CO2 tax? The government.

According to Blackout News:

“More than 18 billion euros flowed into the coffers, including 10.7 billion euros from national emissions trading for heat and transport. Compared to 2022, revenue in this area increased by 67 percent. Revenue from European emissions trading also increased by 12% to €7.7 billion.”

Read entire article here (German)...

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/04/2024 - 03:30

Visualizing Global Rare Earth Metals Production Over The Past 30 Years

Rare earth metals are a set of 17 chemically similar elements which are integral for modern technologies.

From neodymium, used in powerful magnets that can withstand extreme temperatures, to beryllium, which is used to manufacture lightweight materials for fighter jets, these elements have a variety of crucial technological uses.

While rare earth metals are not particularly rare, they are seldom found in pure form and are often mixed with other minerals, making them costly to mine.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Kayla Zhu, visualizes rare earth metals production (in kilotonnes) of the eight leading countries from 1995 to 2023, using figures from the Energy Institute’s Statistical Review of World Energy 2024 report.

China Is Dominating Rare Earth Metals Production

Global rare earth metals production has surged the past three decades, increasing from 75.7 kilotonnes in 1995 to over 350 kilotonnes in 2023, reflecting growing demand for these metals in high-tech applications.

China has been and still is the undisputed leader in the rare earth metals industry, accounting for over two-thirds of global production as of 2023.

The United States has made a big comeback in rare earth metals production, particularly from 2017 onwards. U.S. production jumped from 15.4 kilotonnes in 2017 to 43 kilotonnes in 2023, reflecting efforts to strengthen the domestic supply chain and reduce reliance on China.

Separating and processing rare earth metals is an integral step in the supply chain, and China has a near monopoly on this process. The country currently processes 90% of all rare earth metals and 99.9% of heavy rare earth metals, meaning it is importing metals from other countries and processing them.

In December 2023, China banned the export of rare earth metal extraction and separation technology, hoping to reinforce its dominant position when it comes to the global critical minerals supply chain.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has been ramping up efforts to bolster both domestic rare earth metals production and processing capabilities, awarding millions in defense contracts to companies like Lynas Earths and MP Materials to build their own separation and processing facilities.

To learn more about which critical minerals the U.S. depends on China for the most, check out this graphic that visualizes China’s share of U.S. imports by metal.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/04/2024 - 02:45

De-Dollarization Effort In Spotlight After Trump's Tariff Threat On BRICS

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to slap a 100 percent tariff on the economies of BRICS nations if they try to abandon the U.S. dollar as the chief international reserve currency, prompting speculation among economic observers.

Russia's President Vladimir Putin gives a speech during the extended format meeting of the BRICS summit in Kazan on Oct. 23, 2024. Alexander Nemenov/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

“The idea that the BRICS countries are trying to move away from the dollar while we stand by and watch is over,” Trump wrote in a Nov. 30 Truth Social post.

BRICS—a nine-nation alliance of Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Russia, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates—has been at the forefront of the de-dollarization initiative in recent years.

The global campaign to shift away from the greenback generated significant momentum following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

Officials from these countries have been employing measures to reduce their reliance on the buck.

In addition to engaging in bilateral trade settled in local currencies, there has been years-long speculation that the bloc would establish a new reserve currency to rival the dollar.

If the BRICS nations followed through on using a basket of currencies—tossing the ruble, yuan, rupee, and real into a big bowl and creating one uniform currency—it would not affect the dollar, economist Peter St Onge said.

Internal BRICS trade accounts for a little more than 1 percent of global trade, and the group’s share of worldwide reserves is approximately 5 percent.

By comparison, according to data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the U.S. dollar still represents approximately 60 percent of foreign exchange reserves. The next closest is the euro, accounting for fewer than one-fifth of global reserves.

Additionally, the Banker for International Settlements’ 2022 Triennial Central Bank Survey showed that the U.S. dollar accounted for 88 percent of global transactions, a figure that has stayed about the same for the past two decades.

“A basket of basket cases does not stand a snowball chance of replacing the dollar, at least outside trade between BRICS countries, say, between China and Russia,” Onge said in a video posted to X in October.

“With those numbers, a basket of BRICS will barely make a dent in the dollar.”

Still, Trump has been vocal about employing the tariff weapon to halt the formation of a rival to the U.S. dollar.

“We require a commitment from these countries that they will neither create a new BRICS currency, nor back any other currency to replace the mighty U.S. dollar or, they will face 100 percent tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful U.S. economy,” the president-elect recently wrote.

“They can go find another ’sucker!'”

While he does not believe BRICS will successfully replace the U.S. dollar in worldwide trade, Trump stated that any country that attempts to “should wave goodbye to America.”

This is not the first time Trump has weighed in on imposing tariffs on anti-dollar nations.

In October, speaking at the Economic Club of Chicago with Bloomberg, Trump warned that the United States could slip into “Third World status” if it loses reserve dominance.

“We have to have that. We cannot lose it,” Trump said. “You’ll go to Third World status in this country because you take a look at the way things are running.”

He also pledged to implement a 100 percent levy on any country considering moving away from the dollar.

“If a country tells me, ‘Sir, we like you very much, but we’re going to no longer adhere to being in the reserve currency. We’re not going to salute the dollar anymore,’ I’ll say, ‘That’s OK, and you’re going to pay a 100 percent tariff on everything you sell into the United States, and we love your product. I hope you sell a lot of it into the United States, but you’re going to pay 100 percent tariff,’” Trump said.

“He will then follow it up by saying, ‘Sir, it would be an honor to stay with the reserve currency.’”

At a September campaign rally, Trump told the crowd that many countries are exiting the dollar.

“They’re not going to leave the dollar with me,” he said.

Officials attend a plenary session in the outreach/BRICS Plus format at the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, on Oct. 24, 2024. Maxim Shemetov/AFP via Getty Images

While there have been signals that the group would start a reserve currency, officials have appeared to veer away from this goal, said Michael Wan, a senior currency analyst at MUFG Research.

“While BRICS has at times talked about creating a new unified BRICS currency, the latest summit in Kazan in October did not put an emphasis on creating a new currency,” Wan stated in a Dec. 2 note.

“It’s unclear how 100 percent tariffs on a group of countries that make up 37 percent of global GDP would happen in practice, but serves as a possible preview of tariff diplomacy under Trump 2.0.”

Other countries have expressed interest in becoming official BRICS members.

Views on the Anti-Dollar Crusade

Despite the BRICS expansion and the formation of BRICS-Plus—an extension of the formal partnership of other emerging economies—the U.S. dollar hegemony has remained intact.

Its dominance in the world economy has strengthened amid the Federal Reserve’s 2 1/2-year tighter monetary policy, robust growth prospects, and geopolitical tensions.

The U.S. Treasury market has also attracted immense foreign investment, with global holdings hitting a record high of nearly $8.7 trillion in September.

The U.S. dollar index, a gauge of the buck against a weighted basket of currencies, has surged 5 percent this year, even as the Federal Reserve started its new easing cycle in September.

Other currencies belonging to BRICS members have weakened considerably against the dollar.

The Indian rupee plunged to an all-time low against the dollar on Dec. 2 after new data revealed a sharp economic slowdown in the world’s fifth-largest economy.

India’s GDP growth rate eased to a lower-than-expected 5.4 percent in the third quarter, down from 6.7 percent in the second quarter.

The Russian ruble continues to sink, trading at less than a penny to the U.S. dollar. The ruble’s descent has been fueled by falling crude oil prices and the lasting effects of U.S.-led Western sanctions.

The Chinese yuan has slumped more than 2 percent against the buck this year. A Reuters poll of market watchers suggests China’s economy will grow by 4.8 percent in 2024, falling short of the government’s target.

Beijing’s economic growth rate could cool to 4.5 percent in 2025.

Still, BRICS members appear optimistic that their long-term de-dollarization strategy will work.

At last month’s annual BRICS summit in the Russian city of Kazan, the group continued to lay the anti-dollar groundwork.

Leaders and representatives reiterated their pledge to bolster economic ties and increase the representation of their national currencies in trade and financial transactions.

The organization’s newest development is the proposal for a BRICS-based grain exchange with the institution’s New Development Work, which could play a hefty role in the worldwide agricultural market.

“A number of BRICS countries are among the world’s largest producers of grain, vegetables, and oilseeds. We propose opening a BRICS grain exchange,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the yearly retreat.

“This would facilitate predictable price indicators for products and raw materials, taking into account their special role in ensuring food security.”

Brazil controls 60 percent of all soybean exports, Russia is the world’s largest wheat exporter, and India maintains 40 percent of the international rice trade, including 65 percent of basmati rice shipments.

At the same time, there are mixed views about the BRICS nations dethroning the king dollar.

According to Dmitry Dolgin, chief economist at ING, BRICS enjoys substantial influence in global exchange reserves and the fuel trade.

However, because gold is the main rival to the dollar, the precious metal is underrepresented in the members’ central banks.

Ultimately, Dolgin says, the U.S. dollar is not facing “immediate danger” in areas such as capital markets and international banking.

“The role of BRICS is still low, helping the dollar retain its strong footing,” he stated in a note.

Economists at Capital Economics said BRICS faces “significant practical challenges” in launching a currency.

“It wouldn’t in any case solve any of the challenges they would face in trying to move away from the dollar,” they wrote in a note. “Whether or not the BRICS make an explicit pledge, a BRICS currency is not a viable challenger to the dollar.”

A noticeable trend among the group is the rise of the Chinese yuan’s share for international payments. SWIFT data show that the Chinese yuan’s share has increased to around 3 percent, up from about 1 percent before the pandemic.

While knocking the dollar off the global currency mountain “is out of the question for the foreseeable future,” Bastian von Beschwitz, the Federal Reserve’s research chief of global financial markets, says the yuan’s growth is a trend to monitor in the coming years.

The Fed researcher cited growing usage, government support efforts, and consequences emanating from Western sanctions on Russia as potential reasons for the yuan’s expansion.

“Over the last 10 years, the international role of the renminbi has increased notably from a very low starting point. Despite this increase, its international usage still lags behind even those of the British pound and Japanese yen,” von Beschwitz stated in an August paper.

“Going forward, it will be interesting to see if the renminbi usage in trade continues to increase and whether that increased usage ultimately leads to a larger fraction of FX reserves being held in renminbi.”

The renminbi is the official name of China’s currency, while the yuan is the currency’s basic unit of measure.

Trump has been wielding the tariff weapon in the weeks before he returns to the White House. He recently threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on Canada and Mexico. The president-elect also said he would hit China with a 10 percent levy in addition to the current crop of tariffs. The aim, Trump says, is to push these countries to improve border security and halt the drug trade.

Russia shot back after Trump’s latest threats, warning the measure would backfire on the United States.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that the dollar’s appeal is diminishing and that more countries are diversifying their foreign economic and trade activities.

“If the United States uses force, as they say, economic force, to compel countries to use the dollar it will further strengthen the trend of switching to national currencies,” Peskov said.

“The dollar is beginning to lose its appeal as a reserve currency for a number of countries.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/04/2024 - 02:00

Open Borders Have Created A Terror Attack Time Bomb In The US In 2025

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If US security was represented as a great dam holding back a historic flood, today it would be a Chinese built Temu dam held together with paper mache and ramen noodles, ready to snap in half and kill a million people downstream. In 2024 there is no security: The public simply operates on blind faith that no one will take advantage of the vast weaknesses built into the system and government officials hide any risks associated with their policies.

But what are the sources of the danger headed our way? Why is 2025 becoming more and more prominent as an inception date for an attack?

Donald Trump’s election win, his impending return to the White House and his promise to close the border and deport millions of illegals could be the cleansing tsunami that America needs, but it could also inversely trigger a host of foreign attacks, domestic attacks as well as false flag events. 

Here are the reasons why the next year is ripe for a large scale event…

Open Borders Have Created Threat Saturation

“Homeland Security” is a misnomer; the current head of DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas, openly admitted to a room full of border patrol agents this year that over 85% of illegal immigrants apprehended at the southern border are released into the country. Mayorkas originally claimed the release rate was 70% in an interview with FOX News, only to raise that number to 85% when agents pressed him during the private meeting.

Reports indicate that at least 400,000 known criminals have crossed the border illegally during Joe Biden’s presidency, and 13,000 of those immigrants were convicted murderers. What we don’t know, however, is how many terror suspects and foreign agents have also entered the US in the past four years.

The DHS releases limited data. Migrants that get a hit on the terror watch list are held and cataloged, of course, but with wide open borders and the Biden White House running interference there’s no way to know how many slipped through.

The political left argues that “no terror attacks have happened on Biden’s watch”, but these are the same people that originally denied the existence of Venezuelan gangs taking over apartment complexes in multiple cities across the country.  The saturation of illegal migrants will inevitably lead to a terror event in America, it’s only a matter of time.  Why?  Because now they are under threat of being removed en masse.

Whatever their original plans, the reality of mass deportation puts these people on a time table and some may act out violently in response.  Many will feel entitled to stay in the US despite their criminal entry. 

It may not happen on Biden’s watch, but his administration will have been the catalyst that made deportations necessary and the resulting attacks possible.

Geopolitical Tensions And Open Borders Don’t Mix

I believe an attack is inevitable in 2025 primarily because of the geopolitical brush fires being ignited across the globe right now. There is also always the looming danger of false flag events designed by covert actors trying to trick the public into placing blame on the wrong culprit.

The war in Ukraine and the expanding wars in the Middle East involving Israel (and the resurgence in Syria) are dependent on US support and possibly future military involvement on the ground. It’s fair to say that without US involvement, all of these wars would end rather quickly. One can debate the ethical necessity of America engaging in proxy conflicts or the need for the US to protect certain allies and assets, but a lot of foreign elements view the US as the root cause of their pain.

They also know the easiest way to attack the US is through the doorway that the current establishment has left wide open on the southern border.

The US has been hit with a mass immigration storm while also embroiled in at least two regional proxy wars that have the potential to expand into world wars. Why wouldn’t Russia, China, or multiple nations in the Middle East use that weakness to their advantage?  Even more disturbing, the globalists that want the US to send troops to defend Ukraine or Israel could also perpetrate an attack that falsely leads back to Russia or Iran.

I continue to argue that America has no reason to be involved in the majority of foreign entanglements and that we should stay out of these conflicts entirely. But we are where we are.  There are malicious people within our own government that want to force Americans into war, and there are foreign actors that hate us because of the actions of these same elites.  The dominoes have already been set in motion and guess where that leaves us?

Conservatives Inherit Disaster While Leftists Go Weather Underground

The  conservative sweep on election day means we inherit all the messes that Joe Biden and his handlers created – Economic, political, social, and geopolitical. There will also be considerable motivation for establishment elites to create chaos from thin air while conservatives hold governmental power, and this presents a third domestic threat which will definitely arise in the wake of a Trump presidency: Leftist activists.

The goal of the progressive establishment when it comes to attacking conservatives is to create so much instability and fear that conservatives feel compelled to set aside their principles and the constitution in order to restore order. In this way the left hopes to “prove” that conservatives are the “fascists” they often accuse us of being.

For the past several years conservatives have also been labeled “domestic terrorists” bent on civil war, but it’s actually the progressive left that engages in the majority of civil unrest and violence in the name of political expediency.

The first time leftists were enraged by a political loss and took to the streets to riot, most conservatives and even the Trump administration erred on the side of constitutional flexibility. The problem is, leftists have a habit of exploiting free speech rights as a springboard for mob intimidation. Also, most of the riots took place in Democrat controlled states and cities where local officials defended the violence and tried to block any intervention.

Some people argue that leftists are no longer motivated to engage in this kind of unrest and the lack of chaos after Trump’s election win is proof.  I beg to differ.  First, leftists are not a hardy bunch and they tend to wait for warmer weather before going out to cause disruption.  Second, Trump isn’t even in office yet.  Just wait until the mass deportations start and then you’ll see all kinds of riots.

The political left believes that mob violence and looting is a form of free speech and “reparations” for perceived injustices. They feel completely justified in their behavior and that makes them exceedingly dangerous. If you see the mass burning of random neighborhoods as an “ends justify the means” situation, then you can probably convince yourself that any crime is acceptable.

This trend of terrorism as activism is likely to evolve beyond simple mobs in the next round. In other words, under a new Trump Administration we should expect smaller Weather Underground-like groups among progressive activists; groups that will engage in terror attacks. The two assassination attempts against Trump this year support this hypothesis.

To summarize, there are four distinct instigators of political violence all active going into 2025:

• Organized criminal gangs crossing the border as migrants.

• Foreign agents and terrorists slipping into the US using mass immigration as a cover.

• Leftist activists radicalized to believe they are righteous in their violence.

• Establishment elites and covert agencies creating false flag events.

The types of attacks we face comprise a wide spectrum and I fear that conservatives may very well throw support behind a martial law scenario should the situation break out the way I think it will. Infrastructure attacks would be the most devastating (and would not require a high level of effort or sophistication); a lot of people may see military intervention as the best option.

I would argue that this is exactly what the establishment wants. They want the liberty movement to abandon our foundations in the name of security – They want us to take shortcuts that lead us down an authoritarian path. If we are to increase the safety of the American populace it’s going to take years of work to fix the mess that progressives have left behind. No shortcuts like martial law.

We’ll have to close the borders tight (The one place where a national guard or military presence makes sense). We’ll have to deport millions of illegal migrants already in the country. We’ll have to reduce our presence in global proxy wars. We’ll have to secure communities through localized efforts (militias).

Most importantly, should violence break out, community participation in defense is paramount. The locals need to be prepared for grid down, for rioting, for random attacks. It’s the general public that needs to be ready. Regular civilians are the people that will be there the moment disaster strikes and they must be empowered to take action.

When a terror attack takes minutes to achieve, regular people who are there when it occurs have seconds to respond. Until we can repair the damage done to our national security over the past four years, the public is the first and most important line of defense.

*  *  *

One survival food company, Prepper All-Naturals, has proactively dropped prices to allow Americans to stock up ahead of projected hikes in beef prices. Their 25-year shelf life steaks currently come at a 25% discount with promo code “invest25”.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 23:25

Ukraine Vows To Reject Any Alternative To NATO Membership

A new Ukrainian government statement has made clear the country will reject any alternative to NATO membership if it is proposed as part of a peace plan with Moscow.

Reports of President-elect Trump's peace plan say it hinges on security guarantees while indefinitely postponing Ukraine joining NATO (for at least 20 years). This is precisely what the Zelensky government is now very vocally pushing back against.

A Tuesday statement from the Foreign Ministry asserts, "Having the bitter experience of the Budapest Memorandum behind us, we will not settle for any alternatives, surrogates, or substitutes for Ukraine's full membership in NATO."

Source: EFE/EPA

The statement continued by calling upon "the U.S. and Great Britain, which signed the Budapest Memorandum,... France and China, which joined it and all the states participating in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons" to immediately back Ukraine's efforts to joint NATO. 

It further suggested that anything less is to fall in line with Russia's 'blackmail'. The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 saw Ukraine give up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons arsenal, and in return Moscow provided security guarantees and recognized borders.

The hard-hitting Ukrainian government statement further stressed, "We are convinced that the only real security guarantee for Ukraine, as well as a deterrent factor for further Russian aggression against Ukraine and other states, is only Ukraine’s full membership in NATO."

Ukraine has representation at a Tuesday through Wednesday meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels. Zelensky has been pushing allies hard to not back down on allowing full NATO membership. He's even tried to argue that the alliance's Article 5 self-defense pact doesn't necessary have to apply to parts of Ukraine occupied by the Russians.

But NATO leaders appear cold to the idea, given the risk of nuclear-armed confrontation with Russia, and given Ukraine's military is clearly losing the war in the east. NATO chief Rutte has also rejected Zelensky's plea:

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte on Tuesday sidestepped questions about Ukraine’s possible membership in the military alliance, saying that the priority now must be to strengthen the country’s hand in any future peace talks with Russia by sending it more weapons.

Rutte’s remarks, ahead of a meeting of NATO foreign ministers, came days after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that extending alliance membership to territory now under Kyiv’s control could end “the hot stage" of the almost 3-year war in Ukraine, where Russian forces are pressing deeper into their western neighbor.

“The front is not moving eastwards. It is slowly moving westwards,” Rutte said. “So we have to make sure that Ukraine gets into a position of strength, and then it should be for the Ukrainian government to decide on the next steps, in terms of opening peace talks and how to conduct them.”

Kiev is also urgently pushing for more anti-air defense weapons systems from partners. This after Russia has stepped up attacks on the country's energy infrastructure.

"We are talking about an emergency delivery of at least 20 additional Hawk, NASAMS or IRIS-T systems," Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga said Tuesday in Brussels, as quoted by RBK Ukraine. "This will help us avoid blackouts. We understand that the Russians are trying to undercut our generation capacity."

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 23:00

House Oversight Report Supports Chinese Lab-Leak Theory For COVID-19 Origin

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A Republican-led oversight subcommittee has concluded that the COVID-19 virus likely originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, following a two-year investigation into the pandemic.

The House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released a 520-page report on Dec. 2, detailing the findings of the subcommittee’s investigation.

Laboratory technicians wearing personal protective equipment work on samples to be tested for COVID-19 at the Fire Eye laboratory, a COVID-19 testing facility, in Wuhan in Hubei Province, China, on Aug. 4, 2021. STR/AFP via Getty Images

The report found that the U.S. National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and that EcoHealth Alliance Inc. used U.S. taxpayer dollars to facilitate this research at the lab.

It also found that the Chinese communist regime, agencies within the U.S. government, and some members of the international scientific community sought to cover up facts concerning the origins of the pandemic.

The committee said that COVID-19 possesses biological characteristics not found in nature and that data indicates that all COVID-19 cases stemmed from a single introduction into humans, unlike previous pandemics, where there were more spillover events.

“By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced,” the oversight subcommittee said in a statement.

The report said that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has a history of conducting “gain-of-function” research under low biosafety precautions.

Several researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell sick with a COVID-like virus months before the first case of the outbreak was allegedly detected at a wet market, according to the report.

The report said that in January 2021, the U.S. State Department published an unclassified fact sheet that stated: “The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illness.”

Citing the fact sheet, the report stated that the Wuhan Institute of Virology “has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses.”

The report said the June 2023 ODNI assessment supported this conclusion and went further, stating, “Scientists at the WIV have created chimeras, or combinations of SARS-like coronaviruses through genetic engineering, attempted to clone other unrelated viruses, and used reverse genetic cloning techniques on SARS-like coronaviruses.” The June 2023 ODNI Assessment said that some of the “WIV’s genetic engineering projects on coronaviruses involved techniques that could make it difficult to detect intentional changes.”

Among those interviewed during the panel’s investigation was Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), who stepped down from his role in December 2022.

The report stated that Fauci had “prompted” a research study titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2”—which dismissed the idea that the virus was laboratory constructed—to “disprove” the lab leak theory.

Fauci testified at a June hearing that he did not suppress the lab leak theory and did not view it as inherently a conspiracy theory but said that “some distortions on that particular subject are,” according to the report.

Security personnel keep watch outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. Thomas Peter/Reuters

“Although Dr. Fauci believed the lab-leak theory to be a conspiracy theory at the start of the pandemic, it now appears that his position is that he does have an open mind about the origin of the virus—so long as it does not implicate EcoHealth Alliance, and by extension himself and NIAID,” it stated, citing Fauci’s memoir published just weeks after the hearing. “Understandably, as he signed off on the EcoHealth Alliance grant.”

In a May 2021 Senate hearing, Fauci said his agency did not provide funds for “gain of function” research into coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

“The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Fauci told the hearing.

The report also stated that Taiwan notified the World Health Organization (WHO) on Dec. 31, 2019, about “atypical pneumonia cases” reported in Wuhan and asked the agency to investigate, but the WHO ignored the warnings.

The WHO response to the COVID-19 pandemic was “an abject failure because it caved to pressure from the Chinese Communist Party and placed China’s political interests ahead of its international duties,” the subcommittee said.

In a statement accompanying the report, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the committee, said, “The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted a distrust in leadership. Trust is earned. Accountability, transparency, honesty, and integrity will regain this trust.”

A study published in the journal Risk Analysis on March 15 found a high probability that the COVID-19 virus had an unnatural origin. Although the study did not prove the origin of the COVID-19 virus, its authors said that “the possibility of a laboratory origin cannot be easily dismissed.”

The Epoch Times reached out to Anthony Fauci, NIAID, EcoHealth Alliance Inc., and the WHO for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Naveen Athrappully contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 22:35

US Won't 'Cry' About The Pressure Syria Is Facing From Al-Qaeda-Linked Fighters: Sullivan

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com, 

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on Sunday that the US will not "cry" over the pressure the Syrian government and its allies are facing from an offensive on Aleppo led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an offshoot of al-Qaeda.

Sullivan acknowledged that HTS was "a terrorist organization designated by the United States" and said the US has "real concerns about the designs and objectives of that organization."

Commander of designated terror organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) Abu Mohammad al-Jolani. Source: Enab Baladi

But he added, "At the same time, of course, we don’t cry over the fact that the Assad government, backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, are facing certain kinds of pressure."

HTS captured Aleppo following a surprise offensive that was launched last Wednesday, which came after Israel stepped up airstrikes on Syria.

US officials have not been shy in the past about their preference for HTS and its leader, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, over other factions in Syria. James Jeffrey, an American diplomat who served as a special envoy to Syria under the Trump administration from 2018-2020, said in a 2021 interview that HTS was "an asset" to the US’s strategy in Idlib, a northwestern Syrian province that’s been under HTS control since 2017.

"They are the least bad option of the various options on Idlib, and Idlib is one of the most important places in Syria, which is one of the most important places right now in the Middle East," Jeffrey said.

Julani was formerly the leader of al-Nusra Front, which was the al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria. In 2016, Julani publicly announced he was splitting with al-Qaeda and changed his group’s name to Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, which merged with other Islamist groups to form HTS in 2017.

Julani’s rebranding campaign was part of an effort to gain more support from the West. Jeffrey said he was in regular contact with Julani and HTS while he was working as the US envoy to Syria. Jeffrey said a typical message from al-Julani was like this, "This is what we’re doing. These are our goals. We’re not a threat to you."

Jeffrey said he responded to Julani by saying, "I couldn’t agree more. … Keep me informed as often as possible."

Reminder that tens of thousands of foreign fighters landed at Turkish airports, freely crossed into Syria from Turkey, and joined ISIS, Nusra (now HTS), and other terror orgs while the US watched and denied it https://t.co/fkYpZss1Bd pic.twitter.com/nmhz06Fiox

— Lindsey Snell (@LindseySnell) December 3, 2024

Al-Qaeda and other extremist groups always made up a significant portion of the opposition to Assad after the war broke out in 2011. In 2012, Jake Sullivan, who worked as an aide to then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton at the time, told his boss in an email released by WikiLeaks that "AQ (al-Qaeda) is on our side in Syria."

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 22:10

Uranium Mining Revival Portends Nuclear Renaissance In Texas & Beyond

Authored by Dylan Baddour via Inside Climate News (emphasis ours),

In the old ranchlands of South Texas, dormant uranium mines are coming back online. A collection of new ones hope to start production soon, extracting radioactive fuel from the region's shallow aquifers. Many more may follow.

These mines are the leading edge of what government and industry leaders in Texas hope will be a nuclear renaissance, as America's latent nuclear sector begins to stir again.  

Texas is currently developing a host of high-tech industries that require enormous amounts of electricity, from crypto-currency mines and artificial intelligence to hydrogen production and seawater desalination. Now, powerful interests in the state are pushing to power it with next-generation nuclear reactors. 

"We can make Texas the nuclear capital of the world," said Reed Clay, president of the Texas Nuclear Alliance, former chief operating officer for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's office and former senior counsel to the Texas Office of Attorney General. "There's a huge opportunity."

Clay owns a lobbying firm with heavyweight clients that include SpaceX, Dow Chemical and the Texas Blockchain Council, among many others. He launched the Texas Nuclear Association in 2022 and formed the Texas Nuclear Caucus during the 2023 state legislative session to advance bills supportive of the nuclear industry. 

The efforts come amid a national resurgence of interest in nuclear power, which can provide large amounts of energy without the carbon emissions that warm the planet. And it can do so with reliable consistency that wind and solar power generation lack. But it carries a small risk of catastrophic failure and requires uranium from mines that can threaten rural aquifers. 

In South Texas, groundwater management officials have fought for almost 15 years against a planned uranium mine. Administrative law judges have ruled in their favor twice, finding potential for groundwater contamination. But in both cases those judges were overruled by the state's main environmental regulator, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Now local leaders fear mining at the site appears poised to begin soon as momentum gathers behind America's nuclear resurgence. 

In October, Google announced the purchase of six small nuclear reactors to power its data centers by 2035. Amazon did the same shortly thereafter, and Microsoft has said it will pay to restart the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania to power its facilities. Last month, President Joe Biden announced a goal to triple U.S. nuclear capacity by 2050. American companies are racing to license and manufacture new models of nuclear reactors.

"It's kind of an unprecedented time in nuclear," said James Walker, a nuclear physicist and co-founder of New York-based NANO Nuclear Energy Inc., a startup developing small-scale "microreactors" for commercial deployment around 2031. 

The industry's re-emergence stems from two main causes, he said: towering tech industry energy demands and the war in Ukraine.

Previously, the U.S. relied on enriched uranium from decommissioned Russian weapons to fuel its existing power plants and military vessels. When war interrupted that supply in 2022, American authorities urgently began to rekindle domestic uranium mining and enrichment. 

"The Department of Energy at the moment is trying to build back a lot of the infrastructure that atrophied," Walker said. "A lot of those uranium deposits in Texas have become very economical, which means a lot of investment will go back into those sites."

In May, the White House created a working group to develop guidelines for deployment of new nuclear power projects. In June, the Department of Energy announced $900 million in funding for small, next-generation reactors. And in September, it announced a $1.5 billion loan to restart a nuclear power plant in Michigan, which it called "a first of a kind effort."

"There's an urgent desire to find zero-carbon energy sources that aren't intermittent like renewables," said Colin Leyden, Texas state director of the Environmental Defense Fund. "There aren't a lot of options, and nuclear is one."

Wind and solar will remain the cheapest energy sources, Leyden said, and a buildout of nuclear power would likely accelerate the retirement of coal plants.

The U.S. hasn't built a nuclear reactor in 30 years, spooked by a handful of disasters. In contrast, China has grown its nuclear power generation capacity almost 900 percent in the last 20 years, according to the World Nuclear Association, and currently has 30 reactors under construction.

Last year, Abbott ordered the state's Public Utility Commission to produce a report "outlining how Texas will become the national leader in using advanced nuclear energy." According to the report, which was issued in November, new nuclear reactors would most likely be built in ports and industrial complexes to power large industrial operations and enable further expansion. 

"The Ports and their associated industries, like Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), carbon capture facilities, hydrogen facilities and cruise terminals, need additional generation sources," the report said. Advanced nuclear reactors "offer Texas' Ports a unique opportunity to enable continued growth."

In the Permian Basin, the report said, reactors could power oil production as well as purification of oilfield wastewater "for useful purposes." Or they could power clusters of data centers in Central and North Texas. 

Already, Dow Chemical has announced plans to install four small reactors at its Seadrift plastics and chemical plant on a rural stretch of the middle Texas coast, which it calls the first grid-scale nuclear reactor for an industrial site in North America.   

"I think the vast majority of these nuclear power plants are going to be for things like industrial use," said Cyrus Reed, a longtime environmental lobbyist in the Texas Capitol and conservation director for the state's Sierra Club chapter. "A lot of large industries have corporate goals of being low carbon or no carbon, so this could fill in a niche for them." 

The PUC report made seven recommendations for the creation of public entities, programs and funds to support the development of a Texas nuclear industry. During next year's state legislative session, legislators in the Nuclear Caucus will seek to make them law. 

"It's going to be a great opportunity for energy investment in Texas," said Stephen Perkins, Texas-based chief operating officer of the American Conservation Coalition, a conservative environmental policy group. "We're really going to be pushing hard for [state legislators] to take that seriously."

However, Texas won't likely see its first new commercial reactor come online for at least five years. Before a buildout of power plants, there will be a boom at the uranium mines, as the U.S. seeks to reestablish domestic production and enrichment of uranium for nuclear fuel. 

Texas Uranium 

Ted Long, a former commissioner of Goliad County, can see the power lines of an inactive uranium mine from his porch on an old family ranch in the rolling golden savannah of South Texas. For years the mine has been idle, waiting for depressed uranium markets to pick up.  

There, an international mining company called Uranium Energy Corp. plans to mine 420 acres of the Evangeline Aquifer between depths of 45 and 404 feet, according to permitting documents. Long, a dealer of engine lubricants, gets his water from a well 120 feet deep that was drilled in 1993. He lives with his wife on property that's been in her family since her great-grandfather emigrated from Germany. 

"I'm worried for groundwater on this whole Gulf Coast," Long said. "This isn't the only place they're wanting to do this."

As a public official, Long fought the neighboring mine for years. But he found the process of engaging with Texas' environmental regulator, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, to be time-consuming, expensive and ultimately fruitless. Eventually, he concluded there was no point.

"There's nothing I can do," he said. "I guess I'll have to look for some kind of system to clean the water up."

The Goliad mine is the smallest of five sites in South Texas held by UEC, which is based in Corpus Christi. Another company, enCore Energy, started uranium production at two South Texas sites in 2023 and 2024, and hopes to bring four more online by 2027. 

Uranium mining goes back decades in South Texas, but lately it's been dormant. Between the 1970s and the 1990s, a cluster of open pit mines harvested shallow uranium deposits at the surface. Many of those sites left a legacy of aquifer pollution. 

TCEQ records show active cases of groundwater contaminated with uranium, radium, arsenic and other pollutants from defunct uranium mines and tailing impoundment sites in Live Oak County at ExxonMobil's Ray Point site, and in Karnes County at Conoco-Phillips Co.'s Conquista Project and at Rio Grande Resources' Panna Maria Uranium Recovery Facility.

All known shallow deposits of uranium in Texas have been mined. The deeper deposits aren't accessed by traditional surface mining, but rather a process called in-situ mining, in which solvents are pumped underground into uranium-bearing aquifer formations. Adjacent wells suck back up the resulting slurry, from which uranium dust will be extracted. 

Industry describes in-situ mining as safer and more environmentally friendly than surface mining. But some South Texas water managers and landowners are concerned. 

"We're talking about mining at the same elevation as people get their groundwater," said Terrell Graham, a board member of the Goliad County Groundwater Conservation District, which has been fighting a proposed uranium mine for almost 15 years. "There isn't another source of water for these residents." 

"It Was Rigged, a Setup"

On two occasions, the district has participated in lengthy hearings and won favorable rulings in Texas' administrative courts supporting concerns over the safety of the permits. But both times, political appointees at the TCEQ rejected judges' recommendations and issued the permits anyway. 

"We've won two administrative proceedings," Graham said. "It's very expensive, and to have the TCEQ commissioners just overturn the decision seems nonsensical." 

The first time was in 2010. UEC was seeking initial permits for the Goliad mine, and the groundwater conservation district filed a technical challenge claiming that permits risked contamination of nearby aquifers. 

The district hired lawyers and geological experts for a three-day hearing on the permit in Austin. Afterwards, an administrative law judge agreed with some of the district's concerns. In a 147-page opinion issued September 2010, an administrative law judge recommended further geological testing to determine whether certain underground faults could transmit fluids from the mining site into nearby drinking water sources. 

"If the Commission determines that such remand is not feasible or desirable then the ALJ recommends that the Mine Application and the PAA-1 Application be denied," the opinion said. 

But the commissioners declined the judge's recommendation. In an order issued March 2011, they determined that the proposed permits "impose terms and conditions reasonably necessary to protect fresh water from pollution." 

"The Commission determines that no remand is necessary," the order said. 

The TCEQ issued UEC's permits, valid for 10 years. But by that time, a collapse in uranium prices had brought the sector to a standstill, so mining never commenced. 

In 2021, the permits came up for renewal, and locals filed challenges again. But again, the same thing happened. 

A nearby landowner named David Michaelsen organized a group of neighbors to hire a lawyer and challenge UEC's permit to inject the radioactive waste product from its mine more than half a mile underground for permanent disposal. 

"It's not like I'm against industry or anything, but I don't think this is a very safe spot," said Michaelsen, former chief engineer at the Port of Corpus Christi, a heavy industrial hub on the South Texas Coast. He bought his 56 acres in Goliad County in 2018 to build an upscale ranch house and retire with his wife. 

In hearings before an administrative law judge, he presented evidence showing that nearby faults and old oil well shafts posed a risk for the injected waste to travel into potable groundwater layers near the surface. 

In a 103-page opinion issued April 2024, an administrative law judge agreed with many of Michaelsen's challenges, including that "site-specific evidence here shows the potential for fluid movement from the injection zone."

"The draft permit does not comply with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements," wrote the administrative law judge, Katerina DeAngelo, a former assistant attorney general of Texas in the environmental protection division. She recommended "closer inspection of the local geology, more precise calculations of the [cone of influence], and a better assessment of the faults."

Michaelsen thought he had won. But when the TCEQ commissioners took up the question several months later, again they rejected all of the judge's findings. 

In a 19-page order issued in September, the commission concluded that "faults within 2.5 miles of its proposed disposal wells are not sufficiently transmissive or vertically extensive to allow migration of hazardous constituents out of the injection zone." The old nearby oil wells, the commission found, "are likely adequately plugged and will not provide a pathway for fluid movement." 

"UEC demonstrated the proposed disposal wells will prevent movement of fluids that would result in pollution" of an underground source of drinking water, said the order granting the injection disposal permits. 

"I felt like it was rigged, a setup," said Michaelsen, holding his four-inch-thick binder of research and records from the case. "It was a canned decision."

Another set of permit renewals remains before the Goliad mine can begin operation, and local authorities are fighting it, too. In August, the Goliad County Commissioners Court passed a resolution against uranium mining in the county. The groundwater district is seeking to challenge the permits again in administrative court. And in November, the district sued TCEQ in Travis County District Court seeking to reverse the agency's permit approvals. 

Because of the lawsuit, a TCEQ spokesperson declined to answer questions about the Goliad County mine site, saying the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation. 

A final set of permits remains to be renewed before the mine can begin production. However, after years of frustrations, district leaders aren't optimistic about their ability to influence the decision. 

Only about 40 residences immediately surround the site of the Goliad mine, according to Art Dohmann, vice president of the Goliad County Groundwater Conservation District. Only they might be affected in the near term. But Dohmann, who has served on the groundwater district board for 23 years, worries that the uranium, radium and arsenic churned up in the mining process will drift from the site as years go by. 

"The groundwater moves. It's a slow rate, but once that arsenic is liberated, it's there forever," Dohmann said. "In a generation, it's going to affect the downstream areas."

UEC did not respond to a request for comment. 

Currently, the TCEQ is evaluating possibilities for expanding and incentivizing further uranium production in Texas. It's following instruction given last year, when lawmakers with the Nuclear Caucus added an item to TCEQ's bi-annual budget ordering a study of uranium resources to be produced for state lawmakers by December 2024, ahead of next year's legislative session.  

According to the budget item, "The report must include recommendations for legislative or regulatory changes and potential economic incentive programs to support the uranium mining industry in this state."

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 21:45

Note: Mortgage rates are from MortgageNewsDaily.com and are for top tier scenarios.

Wednesday:
• At 7:00 AM ET, The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) will release the results for the mortgage purchase applications index.

• At 8:15 AM, The ADP Employment Report for November. This report is for private payrolls only (no government).  The consensus is for 166,000 jobs added, down from 233,000 in October.

• At 10:00 AM, the ISM Services Index for November.  The consensus is for 55.5, down from 56.0.

• At 1:45 PM, Discussion, Fed Chair Jerome Powell, Moderated Discussion, At the New York Times DealBook Summit, New York, N.Y.

• At 2:00 PM, the Federal Reserve Beige Book, an informal review by the Federal Reserve Banks of current economic conditions in their Districts.

Universities Have A 2025 Rendezvous With Reality

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

Public confidence in universities has sharply declined due to rising costs, administrative bloat, ideological bias, student debt issues, and discrimination concerns...

Universities have suffered a cataclysmic decline in public approval and support.

A Gallup poll taken this year found that only 36 percent of Americans polled either expressed “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in higher education - once the agreed-on touchstone to upward mobility.

Gifting to most universities has been down for two consecutive years.

There is zero intellectual diversity on most university campuses.

Speakers with conservative viewpoints are often either disinvited or shouted down—and worse.

The federally guaranteed student loan program is in shambles.

Some $1.7 trillion in outstanding loans were taken out by half of all college students.

Nearly a fifth are now not being paid back.

Marriage, child-rearing, and home ownership are all delayed by some 40 million indebted graduates, who can take decades to pay loans back.

The Biden administration demagogued the issue by illegally granting rolling student loan amnesties to win votes just before both the midterm and general elections. That proposed debt relief would be covered by taxpayers, over half of whom never went to college.

The expansion of student loan debt roughly correlates with universities raising their annual costs higher than the rate of inflation—largely due to administrative bloat.

Although the Supreme Court recently struck down the practice of using race and gender to adjudicate applications and hiring, universities are already seeking ways to circumvent the ruling.

Asian- and white-Americans for decades have been systematically, overtly, and supposedly with justification, discriminated against by ignoring or not requiring test scores and downplaying grade point averages.

Stanford University may be representative of these crises.

In the 2020 election, 94% of Stanford faculty voted for the Biden-Harris ticket. Four years later, some 96% of all Stanford-affiliated donations went to Democrats during the 2024 election season.

Former Stanford law professors Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried - parents of mega-Democratic donor and now imprisoned Sam Bankman-Fried, and recipients of millions in gifts from their felonious son—were reportedly heavily involved in either bundling large left-wing campaign donations or offering legal advice to their son’s bankrupt and Ponzi-like business.

In 2023, a federal judge was shouted down at Stanford Law School, his lecture aborted and then hijacked - by a Stanford DEI administrator!

Former Trump health advisor and Hoover Institution scholar Scott Atlas in 2020 was censured by the Stanford faculty.

Yet subsequent events supported Atlas’s prescient warning that a complete lockdown of the country and the shutdown of K-12 schools would not only not retard the COVID epidemic but would cause far greater economic, social, cultural, and health damage than the virus itself.

Two recent attempts to lift that censure failed - in part because some faculty claimed that to do so would empower the Trump reelection bid!

In contrast, Stanford Professor Jeff Hancock, who founded the “Stanford Social Media Lab,” boasts he researches “how people use deception with technology.” Yet when liberal Minnesota officials wanted such “experts” to support their new law banning “deep fake” technology at election time, they called in the expert deception-detector Hancock.

However, the references Hancock provided to prove his support for the law allegedly never existed.

In fact, the lawyers who challenged his online expertise argued his sources apparently were invented by artificial intelligence software like ChatGPT.

Who will police the deception police?

Last academic year, anti-Israel Stanford students with impunity violated university rules and camped out for months in the free speech area, shouting and disrupting passersby.

A small group of students occupied and trashed the president’s office and another vandalized historic campus architecture.

After October 7, a Stanford lecturer was suspended for singling out and targeting Jewish students in his classroom.

A Stanford faculty committee on anti-Semitism recently concluded, “The most existential problem at Stanford is the emergence of a general atmosphere in which Jewish and Israeli members of the Stanford community are denied dignity and respect based on their Jewish identities, denied treatment and protection afforded to other minority groups, and afforded equal respect and inclusion only if they denounce Israel in various ways and forms.”

Can out-of-control universities reform?

The incoming Trump administration has floated a variety of tough-love remedies.

They include predicating hundreds of billions of dollars in federal grants on campuses’ adherence to the Bill of Rights, taxing the income on universities’ multibillion-dollar endowments, and removing the federal government from the student loan business.

Recently, there have been a few hopeful signs that campuses are aware of the need to change.

At Stanford, a new president was hired, widely respected for his singular commitment to disinterested education and freedom of expression.

The SAT entrance exam is returning to many campuses and is still appreciated as crucial to most universities’ applications.

A number of partisan elite college presidents have resigned in disgrace.

So, hope springs eternal, even if it may be too little, too late.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 19:15

Majority Supports Social Media Ban For Children

Australia has passed a social media ban for teenagers and children under the age of 16, which will apply to companies including Instagram, X and TikTok.

The measure is intended to reduce the “social harm” done to young Australians and is set to come into force from late 2025. Tech giants will be up against fines of up to A$49.6 million ($32.5 million) if they do not adhere to the rules.

As Statista's Anna Fleck reports, the new law was approved on Thursday, with support from a majority of the general public.

However, the blanket ban has sparked backlash from several child rights groups who warn that it could cut off access to vital support, particularly for children from migrant, LGBTQIA+ and other minority backgrounds.

Critics argue it could also push children towards less regulated areas of the internet.

The new legislation is the strictest of its kind on a national level and comes as other countries grapple with how best to regulate technology in a rapidly-evolving world.

Data from an Ipsos survey fielded earlier this year shows that it’s not just Australians who support a full ban of social media for children and young teens.

As the following chart shows, two thirds of respondents across the 30 countries surveyed said the same...

You will find more infographics at Statista

In France, an even higher share of adults (80 percent) held the view that children under the age of 14 should not be allowed social media either inside or outside of school.

This belief was far less common in Germany (40 percent), which was the only nation where a majority did not support the ban.

Sentiments on smartphone use differed by generation.

Where 36 percent of Gen Z said they would support a ban on smartphones in schools, the figure was far higher among older generations (66 percent of Boomers, 58 percent of Gen X and 53 percent of Millennials.)

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 18:50

Democrat Staffer Carrying Ammunition Arrested At US Capitol

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Capitol Police officers arrested Michael Hopkins, a staffer for Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) at the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 2.

Officers manning a checkpoint saw on the X-ray screen what appeared to be ammunition in a bag being screened, the Capitol Police said.

The U.S. Capitol building in Washington on Nov. 19, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

“After a hand search of the bag, officers found four ammunition magazines and eleven rounds of ammunition. The staffer told the officers that he forgot the ammunition was in the bag,” a spokesperson for the agency, which is responsible for keeping members of Congress and congressional buildings safe, told The Epoch Times via email.

Hopkins, 38, was arrested and is facing charges of illegally possessing ammunition, including possession of a high-capacity magazine, according to the Capitol Police.

Visitors to the Capitol are barred from carrying guns, ammunition, replica guns, and electric stun guns, among other items. Visitors are subjected to magnetometers before entering the complex.

Hopkins did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

A spokesperson for Morelle’s office told news outlets in a statement that the congressman was made aware of the arrest.

“This morning, our office was informed that a member of our staff was arrested by Capitol Police. We are currently gathering more information regarding the circumstances of the arrest,” the spokesperson said.

“Our office is fully committed to cooperating with the investigation. As Ranking Member of the Committee on House Administration, Congressman Morelle is devoted to ensuring a safe and secure workplace for all.”

Morelle, 67, has represented New York’s 25th Congressional District since 2018. The district includes about 766,000 people and is on the northern border of the state, partly set off by Lake Ontario. Morelle won reelection in November with 60 percent of the vote.

Hopkins started working for Morelle in October, according to his LinkedIn page. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and the Cardozo School of Law. His past work experience includes a stint as an adviser for former Democratic congressman Charlie Crist’s 2022 gubernatorial campaign. Crist lost that year to Gov. Ron DeSantis after serving as the Sunshine State’s Republican governor from 2007 until 2011.

Hopkins also briefly worked for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2016.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 18:25

Jury Begins Deliberation In Daniel Penny Trial

Authored by Michael Washburn via The Epoch Times,

The jury in the trial of former Marine Daniel Penny began its deliberations on Dec. 3.

The 12 men and women must now decide whether Penny’s actions were justified when he put Jordan Neely, a mentally ill homeless man, into a headlock on May 1, 2023, and wrestled him to the ground, or whether those actions crossed the line into manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, as prosecutors allege.

The trial has captivated the attention of much of the nation and the world, and protesters sympathizing with Neely have assembled outside the courthouse at 100 Centre Street almost every morning while it has been underway.

Opinions about the case have been polarized from the beginning. Some accuse Penny of an excess of zeal and careless overuse of physical force, while others believe that Penny acted to protect innocent people on an uptown F train from a crazed, menacing individual, and that his actions were entirely understandable given the failure of the police and mental health service providers to do their job and keep the public safe.

The defense and prosecution have been in agreement that Neely, who a postmortem examination found to have synthetic cannabinoids in his system, provoked the confrontation on that day in May 2023. They concur that his words and actions were menacing and gave passengers on the train reasonable and immediate fear for their safety.

They have disagreed about the appropriateness of deadly force.

Prosecutor Dafna Yoran has repeatedly pointed out that Neely had no weapons anywhere on his person, and spent a lot of time explaining to the jury when deadly force can and cannot be justified under New York law.

The defense has highlighted Neely’s history of mental illness and drug use, his explicit threats, and the terror that multiple witnesses say Neely caused them to feel.

Central to the defense’s case are the arguments of forensic pathologist Satish Chundru, who testified that Penny had not choked Neely to death and told jurors under oath that Neely died of complications from a sickle cell condition.

Under direct examination from defense lawyer Steve Raiser, Chundru attributed Neely’s death to the convergence of a number of factors, including the powerful drugs in his system, his schizophrenia, and, crucially, a sickle cell trait that the stress of the chokehold exacerbated but did not cause.

At a time of unusual stress, red blood cells in the body of someone with a sickle cell condition metamorphose from their usual round shape to what Chundru described as a “crescent moon or banana shape,” in which they stick to blood vessel walls rather than carrying oxygen to tissue cells.

Chundru argued that during the chokehold—which would not by itself have been lethal—Neely suffered a sickle cell crisis, and died as a consequence of it.

Before the seating of the jury on Tuesday morning, defense lawyer Thomas Kenniff told Judge Maxwell Wiley that Yoran had acted as an “unsworn witness” when she presumed to tell jurors what they were seeing happen in cell phone footage of the May 2023 incident played on screens in the courtroom on past days of the trial. Lawyers are not witnesses, and Yoran’s conduct was improper and prejudicial to the jury, Kenniff said.

Yoran denied this characterization, and the judge was unsympathetic to Kenniff’s arguments.

Yoran strove to discredit Chundru, saying he wasn’t qualified to discuss the case and accused him of enriching himself by coming to a biased conclusion.

“Dr. Chundru would not have made the over $90,000 he made in this one case, if he had agreed with the evidence that Mr. Neely died from a chokehold,” Yoran alleged.

Chundru’s assessment of Neely’s death conflicted with the views of experts at the New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner, and in particular with Dr. Cynthia Harris, who said last month under oath how she believed Penny’s chokehold resulted in an asphyxial death.

She also accused Penny of having departed from the training he received in the Marines, which, she argued, clearly set forth how to apply more than one type of nonlethal choke.

Yoran argued what Penny did to Neely involved improper compression of the neck was neither a correctly applied blood choke, nor a correctly applied air choke.

“A properly executed blood choke would only hit the veins and arteries on both sides of the neck. A properly executed air choke would hit only the trachea,” Yoran said.

With the aid of cell phone footage of the incident, Yoran told the jury that the center of Neely’s neck was not in the crook of Penny’s elbow, as it would have been in a properly applied choke.

Yoran argued that the alleged prolonged misapplication of force for about six minutes culminated in asphyxial death.

At the end of her remarks, Yoran acknowledged that this case was a difficult one for jurors to have to decide, because Penny had initially tried to do the right thing, and it is not easy to convict someone for a killing that the person had not intended.

She also maintained that the prosecution had shown beyond a reasonable doubt that Penny “recklessly and needlessly” took Neely’s life.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 17:40

Wards Auto released their estimate of light vehicle sales for November: U.S. Light-Vehicle Sales Surprise on High Side Again in November (pay site).

Improved affordability, and possibly relief from the end of contentious national elections, appeared to bring more consumers into dealer showrooms in November, leading sales to post their biggest year-over-year increase in 2024.

Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows light vehicle sales since 2006 from the BEA (blue) and Wards' estimate for November (red).
Sales in November (16.50 million SAAR) were up 2.9% from October, and up 6.7% from November 2023.

Sales in November were well above the consensus forecast.
The second graph shows light vehicle sales since the BEA started keeping data in 1967.

Meta Becomes Latest Tech Giant To Embrace Nuclear Power With Open Arms

We wrote back in early November that Mark Zuckerberg reportedly told Meta workers that plans to build an AI data center powered by nuclear energy were scrapped after rare bees were discovered on the proposed site.

Now it looks like things could be back on track, according to new reporting from Axios, who writes that Meta is joining industry heavyweights like Amazon and Google in exploring nuclear energy as a zero-carbon solution.

Like Microsoft, Amazon and other giants, Meta is making a bold move to embrace nuclear energy as a cornerstone of its sustainability strategy.

The tech giant has issued a sweeping "request for proposals" (RFP) aimed at identifying developers capable of bringing nuclear reactors online by the early 2030s to support its energy-intensive data centers and surrounding communities.

Axios wrote that Meta's RFP targets an ambitious pipeline of new generation capacity ranging from one to four gigawatts. The company seeks partnerships with entities that can streamline the entire lifecycle of nuclear projects—from site selection and permitting to design, construction, and operation.

Urvi Parekh, Meta's head of global energy, underscored the company’s commitment to fostering innovation in nuclear energy. “We want partners who will be there from start to finish,” she said, emphasizing that Meta is prepared to offer long-term support and collaboration to optimize project development.

But Meta's strategy has been a bit different than some other tech giants we have written about. While other tech companies have announced specific deals with emerging nuclear startups, Meta is casting a wider net.

The company is open to a variety of reactor sizes, technologies, and locations, adopting a “geographically agnostic” approach. This flexibility allows Meta to prioritize regions where nuclear projects can be developed most efficiently, even if they are not directly tied to existing data center sites.

Meta is also open to creative partnerships and cost-sharing early in the development process to mitigate the industry’s traditional hesitancy around capital-intensive nuclear investments. Parekh emphasized that Meta’s long-term purchasing commitments aim to provide certainty to developers, accelerating innovation and deployment.

Parekh noted similarities with Meta's early renewable energy initiatives, which required securing buyers for electricity to spur development.

“There were a lot of steps in that process, and there was a lot of need for certainty that there would be someone to buy the electricity on the other side,” she said, drawing parallels between past and present strategies.

And as we have continued to report, accelerating power demand growth from AI data centers has sparked a nuclear power revival in the US:

• Amazon To Invest More Than $500 Million In Small Modular Nuclear Reactors To Power AWS

• Nuclear Names Surge After Three Mile Island Planned Restart To Power Microsoft Data Centers

• Nuclear Is Back: US Closes On $1.5 Billion Loan To Resurrect Holtec's Palisades Nuclear Plant

• Sam Altman-Backed Nuclear Startup Oklo Signs Agreement With Dept. Of Energy For Next Phase Of Siting In Idaho

For those who missed it, in our note "The Next AI Trade" from April of this year, we outlined various investment opportunities for powering up America, most of which have dramatically outperformed the market.

A favorite name of ours has been the Sam Altman-backed Oklo, which we have highlighted as the potential solution to the extreme forthcoming demands in energy as a result of artificial intelligence. It makes nuclear power plants, ranging from 15 MWe to 50 MWe, utilizing liquid metal reactor technology, in soon-to-be everywhere small modular reactors. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 17:20

Newsom's Publicly-Funded War Chest: "Trump-Proofing" California Could Prove A Costly Option For Californians

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is widely known to be angling to be the next Democratic presidential nominee after the implosion of Vice President Kamala Harris. This week, Newsom positioned not just his campaign but also his state as part of the “resistance” for the next four years against the Trump Administration. Newsom pushed a special session to secure a $25 million war chest to take the Trump Administration to court, even before the inauguration and release of policies by the incoming administration.

I wrote earlier about how the loss of both houses, as well as the White House, will mean that lawfare and obstructive efforts will shift to the states. Newsom is moving to out-position governors (and potential primary opponents) like Govs. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.  Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker moved first in a chest-pounding press conference that he would stop the incoming administration from trying to remove undocumented persons, declaring, “You come for my people, you come through me.”

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) added that he will “fight to the death” against Trump’s agenda.

Newsom has upped the ante by demanding millions to pre-fund litigation against the new administration.  With a massive budget debt burden, Newsom has continued to pile on new debt for politically popular initiatives.

I cannot recall any state pre-positioning funds for the sole purpose of litigating against any incoming administration. The most obvious area of disagreement is the effort to ramp up the enforcement of immigration laws and to carry out deportations. While polls show that the public overwhelmingly supports such enforcement, including deportations, California is seeking to take the lead in court actions designed to slow or frustrate such efforts.

It could prove costly, not just in litigation expenditures. The Trump Administration could seek to withhold federal funding from states and cities obstructing enforcement efforts.

In the meantime, sanctuary cities are continuing to face rising costs associated with rising populations of undocumented migrants.

For example, as we previously discussed, Denver Mayor Mike Johnson (D) declared that he was preparing the Mile-High City for its “Tiananmen Square moment” to fight the federal government in any attempt to deport unlawful migrants.

Johnson warned that he would have not only Denver police “stationed at the county line to keep [ICE] out” but also “50,000 Denverites.” He later walked back the comments while repeating that the city is positioning itself to be part of the resistance.

Now the Common Sense Institute (CSI), a non-partisan research organization estimated that eight percent of the city’s 2025 budget of $4.4 billion is now dedicated to housing and services for undocumented persons.  If true, that amounts to $356 million or $7,900 per migrant.

California has led other states in offering a wide array of benefits to undocumented persons.

Notably, Californian voters surprised many Democrats this election with almost 40% voting for President-elect Trump over California’s own Vice President Kamala Harris.

There is an obvious political advantage to Newsom in securing these public funds to assume the mantle as the leader of “the resistance” as a foundation for his 2028 campaign.

The question is how such an obstructive position will prove to the advantage of Californians. As citizens sought to increase criminal penalties by passing Proposition 36 by over 70 percent (over the opposition of Newsom), the governor is focusing on setting aside millions to fund a high-profile legal campaign against Trump’s administration.

Ultimately, the litigation campaign is unlikely to change federal enforcement efforts significantly. However, Newsom hopes it will significantly change his electoral enhancement efforts.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 17:00

Fani Full Release Ordered After Fulton DA Sat On RICO Records

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been ordered by a local judge to release all communications between her office, Special Counsel Jack Smith's office, and the January 6th Committee regarding her RICO case against President Donald Trump and his allies, after she was found to have violated federal law by withholding them.

"The Court also hereby ORDERS Defendant to conduct a diligent search of her records for responsive materials within five business days of the entry of this Order. Within that same five day period, Defendant is ORDERED to provide Plaintiff with copies of all responsive records that are not legally exempted or excepted from disclosure," reads a Tuesday order.

If Willis can't find them, she is mandated to follow court-ordered procedures to "provide an explanation why such correspondence does not exist."

BREAKING: A judge in Georgia just ordered Fani Willis to release all communications she had with Jack Smith and the January 6th Committee to plot the RICO case against President Trump.

The court also declared that she violated Georgia's Open Records Law.

"The Court also hereby… pic.twitter.com/MvpsMgKz7E

— George (@BehizyTweets) December 3, 2024

Willis, who had been served on March 11, 2024 in the suite involving conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, failed to respond by an April 10 deadline. After later claiming she 'misunderstood' the court's directive, she then said that the document release would jeopardize her RICO case.

Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton responds:

HUGE: Court finds Fani Willis in default on @JudicialWatch lawsuit for records on her Lawfare collusion with Biden gang and Pelosi's operation to destroy @RealDonaldTrump! Orders her to search and produce releasable records within 5 business days!pic.twitter.com/cV585vjA9Y

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) December 3, 2024

As the Epoch Times notes further...

In mid-2023, Willis told a local radio station that she was not coordinating in any way with Smith’s office in investigations and cases brought against former President Donald Trump. Smith had charged Trump, now the president-elect, with both classified documents-related and 2020 election-related charges in two different jurisdictions, while Willis brought charges against him and more than a dozen others for alleged election-related crimes in Fulton County.

“I don’t know what Jack Smith is doing and Jack Smith doesn’t know what I’m doing,” Willis said in July of that year. “In all honesty, if Jack Smith was standing next to me, I’m not sure I would know who he was. My guess is he probably can’t pronounce my name correctly.”

Since then, however, she has made no comments about Smith’s investigation. Smith, meanwhile, has never commented on Willis’s case against Trump.

Smith in November filed court papers confirming he would be dropping his election case against Trump and would stop the appeals process in his classified documents case. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump said he would terminate Smith as special counsel upon taking office.

A letter sent by Willis’s office on Dec. 17, 2021, to the House Jan. 6 committee had “requested access to any Select Committee records relevant to her investigation into President Trump’s actions to challenge the 2020 presidential election, including ‘recordings and transcripts of witness interviews and depositions, electronic and print records of communications, and records of travel,'” House Judiciary Republicans said in a report released last year relating to an investigation they launched into Willis.

Willis has been critical of House Republicans’ investigation into her office and the Trump case, accusing House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) of trying to interfere in the case at one point.

“Jim Jordan has, time after time after time, attacked my office with no legitimate purpose,” she told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow in May.  “Anyone who knows Jim Jordan’s history knows that he only has the purpose of trying to interfere in a criminal investigation.”

In a letter issued to Republicans in 2023, Willis said Republicans are trying to “obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding and to advance outrageous partisan misrepresentations.”

Her case against Trump has stalled in recent months after one of the president-elect’s co-defendants submitted a court filing earlier this year claiming Willis and then-special prosecutor Nathan Wade were engaged in a romantic relationship. The pair confirmed they were in a relationship but denied any wrongdoing.

A judge overseeing the case issued an order in March allowing Willis to remain on the case if Wade resigned, which he did hours later. Trump and several of his co-defendants appealed the decision to the  Georgia Court of Appeals earlier this year, where the case is still pending.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 16:40

The Looming Debt Crisis: Is America Following The Path Of Collapsed Empires?

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

Debt can topple even the most powerful empires.

Whether it’s Rome, Spain, France, Britain, or the Soviet Union, excessive debt has played a critical role in their decline.

The typical pattern in these examples of collapsing empires is:

Stage #1: Empires achieve success and become overconfident.

Stage #2: Overconfidence leads to extravagant spending on luxuries and wars.

Stage #3: Empires finance this lavish spending by going into debt.

Stage #4: The debt grows to an unsustainable level and creates a crushing burden.

Stage #5: Empires finance the debt through taxation and currency debasement.

Stage #6: The populace bears the brunt of debt repayment as empires raise taxes and debase the currency—to the maximum extent—until it causes internal instability.

Stage #7: Empires cannot finance their militaries because of their debt burden. This is usually the tipping point.

Stage #8: Underfunded militaries plus internal instability make empires vulnerable to foreign invasion, domestic revolution, civil war, and other existential dangers.

Stage #9: The empire collapses.

Now, it’s the US Empire’s turn.

The US federal government has the biggest debt in the history of the world. And it’s continuing to grow at a rapid, unstoppable pace.

Annualized interest on the federal debt exceeded $1 trillion for the first time this year and is shooting higher at an exponential rate.

The federal debt’s annualized interest cost is already higher than the defense budget.

It’s on track to exceed Social Security and become the BIGGEST item in the federal budget.

Historian Niall Ferguson summed it up nicely:

“Any great power that spends more on debt service (interest payments on the national debt) than on defense will not stay great for very long.

True of Habsburg Spain, true of ancien régime France, true of the Ottoman Empire, true of the British Empire, this law is about to be put to the test by the US beginning this very year.”

Consider this:

1. The American populace is nearing its breaking point as taxation and inflation rise.

2. Interest on the federal debt exceeds defense spending and is set to become the BIGGEST expenditure, and it will keep growing from there.

As a result, the US Empire is somewhere between Stage #6 and #7 in the empire collapse pattern I described above. It is nearing the point where its crushing debt burden will make it difficult to finance existing military spending.

As we saw in the historical examples, a tipping point is reached once an empire’s debt burden becomes so great that it struggles to pay for its military. It’s like someone waving a big red flag.

The US government will soon have to choose to:

1. Cut defense spending amid the most chaotic geopolitical period since WW2.

2. Default on its promises regarding Social Security, Medicare, Veterans’ Benefits, and welfare generally.

Though it may try, the US government cannot continue to pay for entitlements and defense even if their current levels stay flat into the future. But they won’t stay flat. Both are set to grow significantly in the years ahead.

Tens of millions of Baby Boomers—about 22% of the population—will enter retirement in the coming years. Cutting Social Security and Medicare is a sure way to lose an election.

With the most precarious geopolitical situation since World War 2, defense spending is unlikely to be cut. Instead, defense spending is all but certain to increase.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently said: “Barely staying even with inflation or worse is wholly inadequate. Significant additional resources for defense are necessary and urgent.”

The most likely outcome is that the US will try to have its cake and eat it too by paying for both growing defense and domestic obligations via currency debasement. However, it will likely end up just like other powerful collapsed empires that preceded it—with an underfunded military and domestic instability.

The truth is that Trump cannot make America great again any more than Gorbachev could save the Soviet Union. Once an empire struggles to pay for its military, the decline is impossible to reverse.

Consider this.

The Denarius—the Roman silver coin—lost nearly all its silver content between 180 and 280 AD.

The US dollar has lost over 98% of its value against gold since 1971.

Just as the Roman citizens realized their government was defaulting on its promises to them through currency debasement, I am confident that Social Security and Medicare recipients and others who have been promised something from the US federal government will notice they are being paid in debased currency. They won’t be happy.

Just as Roman soldiers realized they were being paid in debased currency, I am confident American soldiers will realize the same thing, and they won’t be happy either.

In short, the US will soon reach the tipping point that has caused the collapse of other powerful empires.

Its crushing debt burden is nearing the point where it will cause the military to be underfunded and internal instability as average citizens bear the brunt of debt repayment through increased taxation, inflation, and broken promises on Social Security and other programs.

Remember, the interest expense is set to exceed Social Security and become the BIGGEST item in the budget. It will only get bigger from there as the debt continues to grow at an unstoppable and exponential rate.

Therefore, I don’t think it will be long before the exploding interest expense crowds out funding for defense, Social Security, and other domestic commitments.

As that happens, I expect the US is headed for a disaster of historical proportions.

I am confident that the collapse of the US Empire, which has been in place since the end of WW2—otherwise known as the US-led world order—could happen a lot sooner than most realize.

The global geopolitical situation was already trending towards a multipolar world order.

The US debt crisis is compounding its geopolitical problems and will accelerate this established trend.

That means we’re likely to see the end of the US-led world order and the emergence of a multipolar world order in the not-so-distant future.

Russia, China, Iran, and other proponents of a multipolar world order are no doubt asking themselves: “Why start a war when your enemy’s debt burden is already leading them to defeat?”

Many people will be unprepared for the collapse of the US Empire.

However, when you look at the Big Picture, that is where I think we’re headed. And just like the collapse of previous empires, debt will play a significant role.

When private businesses go bankrupt, shareholders get wiped out.

When governments go bankrupt, those who hold its fiat currency get wiped out.

Given the historical examples, one thing I think we can be sure of is that the US government will try to service its debt costs with currency debasement, just like many empires that collapsed before it.

That’s terrible news for the US dollar.

I have little doubt the coming months and years will be the most chaotic of our lifetime.

Countless millions throughout history were wiped out financially—or worse—as previous empires collapsed because they failed to see the correct Big Picture and take appropriate action.

That’s why I’ve just released an urgent report, The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years: Top 3 Strategies You Need Right Now. This exclusive PDF reveals exactly what’s happening and the crucial steps you must take to protect yourself. Click here to download it instantly.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 16:20

US Steel Takeover By Japanese Company Will Be Blocked, Says Trump

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President-elect Donald Trump said on Dec. 3 that he would prevent the acquisition of U.S. Steel Corp. by Japan’s Nippon Steel Corporation.

“I am totally against the once great and powerful U.S. Steel being bought by a foreign company,” the president-elect said in a post on the social media platform Truth Social. “Through a series of Tax Incentives and Tariffs, we will make U.S. Steel Strong and Great Again, and it will happen FAST! As President, I will block this deal from happening. Buyer Beware!!!”

U.S. Steel Edgar Thomson Steel Works in Braddock, Pa., on March 10, 2018. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The $14.9 billion deal to buy U.S. Steel was unveiled in December last year. If the transaction goes through, it would make U.S. Steel a wholly owned subsidiary of Nippon Steel.

The Japanese corporation had offered an all-cash deal, with shares priced at $55, a 40 percent premium at the time. U.S. Steel was trading at almost $41 by the end of Monday.

In 2018, the Trump administration slapped 25 percent tariffs on imported steel via a legal provision that allows U.S. presidents to curb imports if they pose a threat to national security.

While the tariff was challenged by a New Jersey-based steel importer, the U.S. Court of International Trade sided with Trump, saying it was within his presidential authority to implement tariffs.

As part of the deal, the Japanese company agreed to retain the U.S. Steel name as well as the Pittsburgh headquarters once the takeover was complete. It also committed to honoring the employee contract agreements that U.S. Steel has with the United Steelworkers (USW) union.

Trump had opposed the deal back in January this year. After meeting with the Teamsters labor union president, Trump called the transaction a “terrible” deal and said he would “block [the deal] instantaneously” in his second term.

According to data from the World Steel Association, Nippon Steel was the fourth-largest steel-producing company last year, with U.S. Steel in the 24th position.

The multibillion-dollar deal has the backing of U.S. Steel shareholders. During a vote on the issue, 98 percent of shareholders supported the merger.

Threat to Domestic Steel

Lawmakers have opposed the takeover transaction. In a December 2023 letter to the Treasury secretary, three Republican senators warned that allowing Nippon Steel to acquire U.S. Steel would have “dire implications for the industrial base of the United States.”

Sens. JD Vance (R-Ohio), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said that domestic production of steel is “vital” to America’s national security.

“[Nippon Steel] does not share U.S. Steel’s storied connection to the United States, and its financial interests are tied into those of Japan,” the letter said.

Last year, Nippon Steel Corp. (NSC) “received more than $3 billion in subsidies from Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry,” according to the letter.

“And NSC has even flouted American trade law. As recently as August 2021, NSC was found guilty of unlawfully dumping flat-rolled steel products into the U.S. market,” the letter said.

The senators asked for the acquisition to be blocked as Nippon Steel’s allegiance “clearly” lies with a foreign state.

In early January, the federal government said that the deal required “serious scrutiny.” In March, President Joe Biden said it was vital for a U.S. steel company to remain “domestically owned and operated.”

An arbitration board, selected jointly by U.S. Steel and USW union, green-lit the transaction in September. USW had argued that the deal threatened the long-term job security of its members as well as their retirement benefits.

However, the board ruled that Nippon Steel provided enough assurances to the union, including recognizing USW as the bargaining representative for workers.

USW disagreed with the ruling, stating, “Nippon’s commitment to our facilities and jobs remains as uncertain as ever, and executives in Tokyo can still change U.S. Steel’s business plans and wipe them away at any moment.”

Autos Drive America, an organization representing carmakers, supports Nippon’s takeover of U.S. Steel.

It said in a June letter to the White House’s National Economic Council that Nippon Steel has a four-decade-old history in the United States. Allowing the transaction will “enhance productivity, drive innovation, and support the overall competitiveness of the U.S. steel industry on the global stage,” it said.

“Investments that expand production capabilities in the United States only bolster our national security capabilities,” Autos Drive America wrote.

The Epoch Times reached out to U.S. Steel for comment regarding Trump’s remarks but received no reply by publication time.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/03/2024 - 15:25