The AI Factor Behind Trump's Power Play On China's Oil Suppliers

Authored by James Gorrie via The Epoch Times,

Why is it so important to the Trump administration to take control of Venezuela and encourage the people of Iran to overthrow the Islamic regime?

The link between the two is obviously oil.

Of course, the strategy in Venezuela involves oil, but also includes restricting China’s influence in the Western Hemisphere, undermining the BRICS currency, and shutting down Venezuelan drug trafficking, illegal immigration, and other nastiness.

Same for Iran regarding oil. Both are important energy suppliers to China, but especially Iran.

But it’s not the whole picture. President Donald Trump’s broader strategy is about restricting China’s access to cheap, reliable oil at the exact moment it needs that energy to compete with the United States in artificial intelligence (AI).

Venezuela Was a Great Deal—For China

Looking back, Venezuela was as an unbelievable good deal for China. Sanctioned by the United States and shunned by much of the West, Caracas sold heavily discounted crude to Chinese refiners willing to tolerate risk. It wasn’t glamorous oil—but it was dependable and cheap. Venezuela provided about five percent of China’s annual oil needs; not a huge figure, but enough to matter.

Trump’s decision to blockade Venezuelan oil exports and assert control over the country’s oil infrastructure effectively ends that dream deal. With U.S. control, China loses a meaningful slice of supply, about four percent, that helped buffer it from global price swings.

That matters more than it sounds.

As the world’s largest oil importer, even small disruptions force Beijing to scramble for alternatives—often at higher prices, longer shipping distances, or greater political cost.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi (R) speaks during a meeting with Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza (L) at the Diaoyutai State Guest House in Beijing on Jan. 16, 2020. Ng Han Guan-Pool/Getty Images

Iran: The Bigger Pressure Point

But the Venezuelan oil flow to China is small potatoes compared to that of Iran.

China is Iran’s largest oil customer, buying the vast majority of Tehran’s exported crude, up to 80 percent, often at steep discounts, and is the life blood to China’s independent refineries, its petrochemical sector, and its power-hungry industrial base. In other words, Iranian oil is critical to China’s continued economic and technological growth.

That fact puts Trump’s renewed pressure on the ruling Islamic regime in Iran in a different light. The tariffs, sanctions enforcement, secondary penalties, and encouraging rebellion by the Iranian people is more than just punishment for Tehran. It puts China in an energy bind.

Should Beijing keep buying Iranian oil and risk broader economic retaliation, or comply and lose one of the cheapest energy sources available?

Either way, Beijing pays more for less reliable oil supplies.

Why Oil Still Matters in the AI Age

There’s a popular myth that AI runs on “clean” digital infrastructure—clouds, algorithms, and software. In reality, AI runs on electricity, and electricity is still largely generated through nuclear power and fossil fuels, i.e., oil, natural gas, and coal. Training large AI models requires staggering amounts of energy, and a single hyperscale data center can consume as much electricity as a mid-sized city. Multiply that by hundreds of facilities, and energy, not chips, becomes the real bottleneck in the AI race.

Beijing understands this. That’s why it continues to approve a record number of new coal plants, expand its gas infrastructure, and secure long-term oil contracts—even while leading the world in renewables.

What’s more, China knows that oil and gas help stabilize power grids that support data centers. Intermittent renewables alone can’t guarantee the always-on power that AI systems require. Plus, AI hardware depends on petroleum-based products—plastics, resins, coolants, lubricants, and advanced composites used in chips, servers, and cooling systems. Oil is a non-negotiable industrial input.

Finally, oil is relatively inexpensive, lowering the cost of training models, which compounds quickly, because whichever nation can train more models faster and cheaper leads the AI race.

Cutting China off from discounted oil doesn’t just raise fuel prices, it raises the cost of intelligence itself.

A worker rides bicycle at an oil refinery of China’s Sinopec in Wuhan, a city in China’s Hubei Province on May 10, 2011. STR/AFP/Getty Images

Energy as a Hidden AI Weapon

This is where Trump’s strategy becomes clearer.

The United States doesn’t need to out-build China in data centers if it can out-price and out-power them. America has abundant domestic oil and gas, expanding LNG exports, and deep capital markets to finance new, energy-hungry infrastructure.

China, by contrast, is vulnerable. It imports over 70 percent of its oil. Much of that comes from politically unstable or sanctioned states. Disrupt those flows, and China’s AI ambitions become more expensive, more fragile, and more dependent on geopolitical goodwill.

In that sense, oil becomes a second-order AI weapon, in that it is not something that directly attacks technology, but something that quietly determines who can afford to scale it.

What This Means for the Global Balance

Yes, Russia still matters in this equation—but more as a background variable than the main event. Lower oil prices and tighter markets can squeeze Moscow’s revenues and complicate its war financing. China’s increased reliance on Russian crude also deepens a partnership that carries long-term risks for Beijing.

But the real target of Trump’s energy denial strategy isn’t Russia. It’s China’s momentum.

Trump’s energy foreign policy is about slowing China’s rise without firing a shot—forcing it to spend more, plan more cautiously, and accept structural disadvantages in the most important technological competition of the century.

The Bigger Picture

AI dominance won’t be decided by who writes the best code. It will be decided by who can power the most machines, the longest, at the lowest cost.

By squeezing Venezuela, pressuring Iran, and reshaping global oil flows, Trump is betting that energy strategy, not algorithms, will decide the winner in the AI-driven economy.

And if that bet is right, the future of AI may be decided not in Silicon Valley or Shenzhen, but in oil fields, shipping lanes, and sanctions that most people aren’t paying attention to.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/25/2026 - 07:00

Lefty Protestor Bites Off Federal Officer's Finger

Authored by Catherine Salgado via PJMedia.com,

It seems long past time for President Donald Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act.

In the chaos and violence following the death of an armed Minneapolis would-be terrorist shot while fighting Border Patrol, another protester has bitten off the finger of a federal officer.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin posted photos on X showing the loathsome protestors who so viciously assaulted federal officers, and also photos of the one officer’s wounded hand and the severed finger.

What absolute scum these protestors and the politicians who encourage them are.

McLaughlin explained, “In Minneapolis, these rioters attacked our law enforcement officer and one of them bit off our HSI [Homeland Security Investigations] officer’s finger. He will lose his finger.”

What a proud victory for Walz and co.! They managed to ruin a brave officer’s life.

Just ponder how deranged and bestial you have to be to seek out a federal law enforcement officer for the express purpose of assaulting him, and then deliberately bite off his finger.

I can't help but think of Gollum biting off Frodo's finger at the climax of The Lord of the Rings to obtain the Ring; and the fiction has a parallel to the reality. As Tolkien meant the Ring to represent sin and evil, and as Gollum is destroyed and driven mad by it, so leftist domestic terrorists seem drunk on and driven mad by their lust for violence and revenge.

Indeed, the protestor who bit off the HSI officer's finger is d*mn lucky he didn't get shot. One hopes he at least faces some legal accountability, but that seems in precious short supply in Minneapolis.

As for the shooting that triggering the other violence, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem explained that Border Patrol officers were simply trying to carry out the arrest of an illegal alien who was wanted for violent assault.

“During the operation, an individual approached U.S. Border Patrol officers with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun. The officers attempted to disarm the suspect, but the armed suspect violently resisted. Fearing for his life and the lives and safety of fellow officers, an agent fired defensive shots,” she declared.

“This violence is directly fueled by hateful rhetoric from Minnesota's sanctuary politicians. It must end now.”

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz rushed to frame the armed protester as an innocent victim of eeeevil federal goons, raving about a “horrific shooting by federal agents” and labeling them “violent, untrained officers.” 

This is why there is violence. The gunman who died had two magazines of ammunition and no ID on him, indicating he planned to trigger a mass casualty event. Furthermore, he was trying to intervene on behalf of a violent criminal illegal alien — which is in itself a felony (as is protecting illegal aliens, as Minnesota politicians do).

There is no possible way a sane person could be on the side of such a man, and yet Democrats are all on his side. Of course, fully committed Democrats are also insane.

Pray hard for our brave HSI, Border Patrol, and ICE officers in Minneapolis.

Local police are not helping them, local authorities are lying about them, and mobs of protestors are literally out for their blood.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 22:10

Would Term Limits Make The DC Swamp Even Worse?

Via Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities

Though America is beset by increasingly bitter political divisions, there are two convictions that unite Americans across party and demographic lines. Large majorities are certain that Congress isn’t serving the interests of the American people, and that Capitol Hill would become far more virtuous with the imposition of term limits.

Despite their broad appeal to our “throw out the bums” instincts, term limits would probably make Congress even worse than it is now. Even as a proposed policy, the concept does the country a disservice by distracting Americans from the more extreme remedies required for a federal government guiding us along a dangerous path into mounting partisan hostility, unconstitutionally-concentrated power, and obliviousness to coming financial ruin.

According to a 2023 McLaughlin and Associates poll, an overwhelming 87% of US adults favor congressional term limits, a finding that’s consistent with other surveys. Proposals vary. Reflecting a common recommendation, one of the term-limit bills introduced this session would limit House representatives to six two-year terms, and senators to two six-year terms, thus maxing out both varieties of legislator at a dozen years. Notably, members who served before 2023 -- including the bill’s introducing sponsor, Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) -- would be exempted.

One dynamic that makes term limits appealing is the overwhelming power of incumbency in US electoral politics: Federal incumbents who sought reelection had a 98% success rate in 2024, matching the pace of 2022 and edging the 96% rate seen in 2020.

Jarring as they are, those stats create a false impression of the degree of stagnancy in the House and Senate. That’s because -- over the dozen years often floated as a term-limit maximum tenure -- a substantial number of legislators already leave on their own. According to the most recent Pew Research calculations, over a 12-year period, 69% of House seats and 62% of Senate seats had different occupants at the end versus the beginning.

With those numbers in mind, Republican Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie -- who has backed term-limit bills-- cautioned that the idea is not a “silver bullet.” Pointing to the notion that term limits would open more seats to good people since incumbents are otherwise hard to dislodge, Massie noted the substantial churn in seat-holders, and asked, “Where are all the good guys/gals?”

Note that about 84% of congressional seats are “safe seats,” where party control isn’t in question, and the real election happens in the party primary. This incentivizes primary candidates to take positions that maximize their appeal to their party’s extreme, which contributes to polarization in Washington. Term limits wouldn’t change that, other than increasing the frequency of contested primaries, which, if anything, might make the phenomenon slightly stronger.

Cook Political Report's House Race Ratings as of Jan 15

Cycling more people out of Congress may exacerbate one of the worst dynamics of Washington: the “revolving door” that sees legislators frequently moving on to lobbying posts and board positions, and incentivizing them to cater to lobbyists and corporations before their swing through the door happens. “Mandating member exits ensures a predictable and consistently high number of former members available to peddle their influence,” wrote Casey Burgat at Brookings.

Term-limit proponents are hopeful that bringing new faces into Washington would reduce the power of special interests, lobbyists and the entrenched bureaucracy -- the last of which is sometimes called the “Deep State.” However, lacking understanding of complex federal issues and experience with DC’s legislative machinery, wide-eyed, rookie legislators are even more susceptible to outside influences who bring clear guidance sprinkled with money and favors.

Advocates of term limits often envision a warm, fuzzy new era where career politicians are replaced by humble “citizen legislators” who come from all walks of life and professions. However, the great majority of US representatives and senators held some other office before winning their current seat, and there’s no reason to think term limits would do away with the inherent advantages that state and local officeholders have when they seek federal office.

Many champions of term limits are convinced that term-limited federal legislators would spend far less time on electoral politics and fundraising. Don’t bet on it. First, until a legislator’s final term, they’d still be focused on re-election. More importantly, much and perhaps even most of the time and energy that members spend on fundraising isn’t for their own campaigns, but for their parties.

Here, it’s important to spotlight a little-known yet powerful congressional dynamic, one that guarantees that even term-limited legislators would continue spending substantial time on party fundraising: Each party ties committee assignments to how much money a legislator raises for the party.

The numbers are big. “Between 2023 and 2024, Democratic Party members were expected to raise between $100,000 and $30 million per year in dues to the party to move up in the [House] chamber,” wrote Maya Kornberg of the Brennan Center for Justice. It’s the same on both sides of the aisle. Here’s how Republican Massie candidly described the arrangement to Reason’s Matt Welch:

“[Members] have to raise money and give it to the party in order to rent or buy their committee assignments. Literally, the party comes to you, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, and says, ‘if you want an important committee, you’re going to have to pay us this much money,’ not one time, but every election cycle. You can’t go back to your district and ask your constituents at a fundraiser to help you buy a seat on a committee. You get that money from the lobbyists who are in Washington, DC.”

For members striving for plum committee assignments, there’s another major avenue of fundraising, one that turns legislators into glorified telemarketers, calling party donors across the country and asking for donations or inviting them to events that require them. It’s illegal to make such calls from their offices, so legislators walk to nearby party call centers to do it.

A hidden-camera glimpse inside the GOP call center showed a dozen tiny offices with phones; a board displays how much each legislator has raised (CBS News)

“You’re told…don’t even ask for one of these ‘A’ committees unless you’re ready to do the hard work across the street,” said Massie. He refuses to participate, and pays the price via exclusion from powerful committees such as Ways and Means, Appropriations, or Energy and Commerce.

As Florida Democrat and then-congressman David Jolly told CBS News, dialing for dollars is a major part of life on the Hill:

“The House schedule is actually arranged, in some ways, around fundraising…You never see a committee working through lunch because those are your fundraising times. And then, in between afternoon votes and evening votes, that's when you can see Democrats walking down this street, Republicans walking down that street to spend time on the phone making phone calls.”

Under term limits, the only thing that would change in this bleak picture are the particular faces trudging off to a Red Team or Blue Team call center, or lunching with lobbyists offering fundraising help -- rather than learning about any of the infinite issues subjected to federal governance. (Knowing their time on the Hill is limited, legislators will have even less reason to invest their time in building mastery of complex issues.)

In fact, to the extent that term limits manage to put a modest dent in the power of incumbency and render a few more of their seats vulnerable, parties would be even more concerned with raising money to either defend a majority or take it over, and would thus exert more pressure on members to refill the party’s coffers.

There’s one more way term limits would exacerbate the problem of outside influences: With a shortened span on Capitol Hill, more members would be focused on what they’ll do next. Though “citizen-legislator” daydreamers may have quaint visions of a farmer returning to his tractor, most term-limited legislators will be either planning a run for a different office, or looking for a job. Either ambition makes them susceptible to the policy overtures of people outside the chamber promising funding for future campaigns, help getting the inside track on a lobbying job of their own, or maybe a private-sector post in the industry the lobbyist represents.

Term limits would bring many unintended consequences that run counter to their advocates’ noble intentions. However, the concept’s worst attribute is that, even as a mere proposal, it diverts attention from what’s most wrong in Washington. Term limits focus on the frequency with which Washington’s power is exchanged, when the biggest problem is the power itself. For more on that, see the most-read article at Stark Realities: Americans Are Fighting For Control Of Federal Powers That Shouldn’t Exist

* * *

Stark Realities: Invigoratingly unorthodox perspectives for intellectually honest readers. Join thousands of free subscribers at starkrealities.substack.com

* * *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 21:00

Tehran Rejects UN 'Protest Killings' Resolution, Blasts Western Moralizing

Iran has flatly rejected a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution condemning what it described as the "violent crackdown on peaceful protests" by Iranian security forces, after two weeks of raging economic protests earlier this month, which also included a government enforced total internet shutdown.

Following a closed-door session in Geneva on Friday, 25 council members - including France, Japan, and South Korea - voted in favor of the formal censure.

SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

But there were significant voices among the seven that voted against, including China, India, and Pakistan. Fourteen others abstained.

The council demanded that Tehran halt arrests linked to the protests and take steps to "prevent extrajudicial killing, other forms of arbitrary deprivation of life, enforced disappearance, sexual and gender-based violence."

UN human rights chief Volker Türk told the council that "the brutality in Iran continued, creating conditions for further human rights violations, instability and bloodshed."

Tehran blasted the resolution as another display of Western hypocrisy, arguing that the sponsors of the emergency session have never genuinely cared about human rights in Iran.

Iran’s envoy Ali Bahreini pushed back at the meeting, saying as follows:

"It was ironic that states whose history was stained with genocide and war crimes now attempted to lecture Iran on social governance and human rights."

This past week in Davos for the World Economic Forum, there was an interesting moment where US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent actually openly boasted that US sanctions helped drive the protests, after crippling the economy.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent argues that US sanctions on Iran were intended to cripple the economy so people would take to the streets: "This is economic statecraft, no shots fired"
* I made this argument last week, and was accused of spreading Iranian propaganda... pic.twitter.com/O3Q32WhWhh

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) January 21, 2026

So Islamic Republic leaders are right to be skeptical when American, Israel, or European officials claims they 'stand' with the Iranian people, and seek 'democracy'. Already, UN officials are invoking historical "genocide" instances and are dubiously comparing them with what's going on in Iran:

A prosecutor said at least twice more people were killed in Iran in half the time compared with the Srebrenica genocide.

Iran's Bahreini reiterated some of his government's official casualty figures from clashes with police and security services, which were initially issued days ago via state sources. He said 3,117 people were killed during the unrest, but he also claimed that 2,427 of those deaths were caused by "terrorists" - covertly funded by enemies of Iran - namely the United States, Israel, and their allies.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 18:05

Last Look At Snowfall Models As 'Snowpocalypse' Begins

How Will This Weekend's Mega-Storm Compare to the Winter Blasts of 2016 and 1996?

Meteorologist Ben Noll says this weekend's snowstorm could be similar to the Blizzard of 1996. For our more seasoned readers, 1996 was an unforgettable winter. Many younger readers, however, have grown up in snow droughts and years of corporate media narratives centered on Al Gore's global warming alarmism.

Yet here we are on Saturday morning, looking over the latest weather models that show more than half the country under a winter storm warning. Noll wrote on X earlier that "55 percent of all people living in the United States — some 190 million — were under an alert related to the storm."

The latest snowfall predictions stretch from Texas to the Northeast.

"This is legitimately one of the biggest storms I can recall tracking. Snow spans from Arizona to DC this evening," private weather forecaster BAWMX wrote on X.

This is legitimately one of the biggest storms I can recall tracking. Snow spans from Arizona to DC this evening... pic.twitter.com/GaxnLzjF9U

— BAM Weather (@bam_weather) January 24, 2026

Winter appears locked in across the Lower 48 for the next several weeks.

Winter is LOCKED in for the next 3-4 weeks.

Several cold blasts
Several storm threats

Its 2014 version 2.0
Period. https://t.co/jvirtQ6o4e pic.twitter.com/17YGcYyarZ

— BAM Weather (@bam_weather) January 24, 2026

Next, let's refine the snowfall outlook for the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast. Courtesy of private weather forecaster NY NJ PA Weather weighs in below.

Thanks to early-week client notes from energy research firm Criterion Research, we were well ahead of the curve in explaining how the Arctic cold blast, combined with a major winter storm, could create power-grid risks. The storm threatens to crimp natural gas supply through production freeze-offs and reduced pipeline flows, increasing pressure on already stressed-out regional power grids. Our focus will be on the PJM grid this weekend.

Here's the reporting:

• NatGas Futs Erupt As Arctic Air Invasion Penetrates Deep Into US South

• US NatGas Spikes Most Since Ukraine Invasion On Arctic Blast, Major Winter Storm Threat

• US NatGas Poised For Biggest Weekly Spike On Record As "Blizzard Of '96" Fears Resurface

• Appalachian NatGas Output Faces "Intense Losses" As Arctic Blast Drives Power Grid Risk Higher

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

• NatGas "Tightening Shock" Sparks Historic Weekly Rally As Major Winter Storm Imminent

• Winter Storm Threatens Appalachian NatGas With 'Freeze Offs' As Data Center Demand Tightens PJM Grid

Crickets from Greta and the climate crisis cult this week. Oh, wait, that's because the climate money ran out and the focus shifted entirely to Palestine. For those grounded in reality, prepare for what could be a historic winter storm this weekend. We've told readers in the PJM region and the Northeast to consider buying a whole-house generator, citing a Goldman note (read here). Become ungovernable with a wood fireplace and/or a coal-burning stove.

As for the travel space, it's a nightmare. For anyone traveling over the next 24 to 48 hours, expect delays and cancellations.

So far, roughly 9,000 flights have reportedly been canceled.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 17:55

Duffy's Nuclear Option Remains On The Table: California Could Lose Authority To Issue Any CDLs

Authored by Rob Carpenter via FreightWaves.com,

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy just dropped what I’ve been calling the nuclear option.

In an appearance on Katie Pavlich Tonight Thursday, Duffy made clear that withholding $200 million in federal funding isn’t the end of this fight. If California doesn’t come into compliance on the non-domiciled CDL issue, Duffy said, “we will eventually pull their ability to issue commercial driver’s licenses to anybody in California.”

Not just the 17,000 non-domiciled CDLs at the center of this fight. Every single CDL in the state.

I’ve written extensively about this standoff since the FMCSA released its audit findings last September, which showed that roughly 25% of California’s non-domiciled CDLs were improperly issued. I’ve covered the $160 million funding hit. I’ve warned about the decertification authority in 49 U.S.C. 31312 and 49 CFR 384.405, which most people in this industry didn’t even know existed.

How We Got Here

This didn’t start with the Trump administration’s September 2025 emergency rule restricting non-domiciled CDLs to certain visa categories. That rule, which limited eligibility to H-2A, H-2B, and E-2 visa holders, has been stayed by the D.C. Circuit since November. The court found that petitioners were “likely to succeed” on their claims that the FMCSA violated federal law in its rulemaking.

The California problem predates all of that.

FMCSA’s August 2025 Annual Program Review found California had been violating federal regulations that existed long before Duffy took office. The state was issuing CDLs with expiration dates extending years beyond drivers’ lawful presence documentation. In one case that still makes my blood boil, California issued a driver from Brazil a CDL with passenger and school bus endorsements that remained valid months after his legal presence expired.

That’s not a new rule problem. That’s a California screwed-up problem.

California agreed in November to revoke all 17,000 improperly issued licenses by January 5, 2026. Then, on December 30, the California DMV unilaterally announced a 60-day extension to March 6, citing the need to ensure it doesn’t wrongfully terminate licenses for drivers who actually qualify.

Duffy’s response on X was blunt: “Gavin Newsom is lying.”

FMCSA never agreed to the extension. California proceeded anyway. On January 7, DOT made good on its threat and withheld approximately $160 million in National Highway Performance Program and Surface Transportation Block Grant funds. That’s on top of the $40 million already withheld over California’s refusal to enforce English language proficiency requirements.

The Nuclear Math

California has more than 700,000 CDL holders. The state is home to the nation’s largest trucking workforce, with over 138,000 truck drivers moving freight through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the agricultural heartland of the Central Valley, and every retail distribution center feeding the country’s largest consumer market.

Under full decertification, California would be prohibited from issuing, renewing, transferring, or upgrading any commercial learner’s permits or commercial driver’s licenses until FMCSA determines the state has corrected its deficiencies. Previously issued CDLs would technically remain valid until their stated expiration dates, but here’s where it gets ugly.

Other states could refuse to recognize California credentials during the noncompliance period. FMCSA could issue guidance declaring CDLs issued by a noncompliant state invalid for interstate commerce. The Commercial Driver’s License Information System, which enables interstate verification, could flag every California license.

For the 700,000 CDL holders in the Golden State, decertification wouldn’t just be an administrative headache.

It would effectively ground them from operating in interstate commerce.

I’ve been doing compliance work in this industry for over 25 years. I’ve never seen a federal-state confrontation escalate this fast or this far.

What’s That Look Like? 

The 17,000 non-domiciled CDLs at the center of this fight represent just over 9% of California’s for-hire carrier base. I believe that number represents just under half the total increase in CDLs 

This isn’t really about 17,000 drivers anymore.

J.B. Hunt’s analysis suggests that, between non-domiciled CDL restrictions and English language proficiency enforcement, we could see 214,000 to 437,000 drivers removed from the U.S. supply over the next two to three years. FMCSA estimates that 97% of the current 200,000 non-domiciled CDL holders nationwide won’t be able to satisfy the new requirements under the September rule, assuming it survives legal challenge.

Transport Futures economist Noël Perry puts the at-risk population even higher when accounting for undocumented drivers and new-hire restrictions: potentially 600,000 drivers, or 16% of the active workforce.

Whether those numbers hold up or not, one thing is clear. The days of states running their CDL programs with what Duffy called “reckless disregard” for federal requirements are ending.

What Happens Next

California is stuck between a rock and a hard place it created for itself.

On the one hand, the federal government is withholding $200 million and threatening to revoke the state’s authority to issue any commercial credential. On the other hand, a class-action lawsuit filed by the Asian Law Caucus, the Sikh Coalition, and Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP argues that the DMV’s own administrative errors caused the mismatches in expiration dates and that drivers should be able to immediately reapply for corrected credentials.

The lawsuit names five individual plaintiffs and the Jakara Movement, a Fresno-based organization serving the Punjabi Sikh community. An estimated 150,000 Sikh truck drivers operate in the United States, and many of the affected drivers argue they’re being punished for what amounts to clerical errors by the state.

They’re not wrong about the clerical errors. The DMV admitted in correspondence with federal regulators that “shortcomings of its technical systems and processes” led to the mismatched dates.

That admission doesn’t help California’s legal position with FMCSA. It strengthens it.

If California knew it had systemic programming errors that extended CDL expiration dates beyond work authorization periods, why didn’t it fix them before the feds came knocking? That’s the question that should concern every carrier operating in interstate commerce. A CDL issued in violation of federal requirements may not be valid for interstate operation, meaning drivers holding those credentials could face enforcement action in any state, and carriers dispatching them could face significant liability exposure.

Governor Newsom told the press that DOT had agreed to the March 6 extension. Duffy says that’s not true. FMCSA Administrator Derek Barrs has been equally clear: “We will not accept a corrective plan that knowingly leaves thousands of drivers holding noncompliant licenses behind the wheel of 80,000-pound trucks in open defiance of federal safety regulations.”

California’s argument that its CDL holders are involved in fatal crashes at a rate far below the national average, and that Texas-issued licenses have a 50% higher rate of fatal crashes, might play well in press releases. It doesn’t address the fundamental regulatory compliance issue.

FMCSA didn’t withhold $160 million because of crash rates. It withheld funding because California admitted to issuing 17,000 licenses in violation of federal requirements and then refused to revoke them on the agreed timeline.

The nuclear option remains on the table, and based on everything I’ve seen from Duffy over the past six months, I wouldn’t bet against him using it.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 17:30

Stablecoins: A Quiet Revolution In Finance

Authored by Robert Burrows via BondVigilantes.com,

With geopolitics taking centre stage, the seismic tremors of Stablecoin activity go largely unnoticed. Stablecoins sit at a fascinating intersection of finance and technology. They promise the speed and programmability of cryptocurrencies with the price stability of traditional money.

What began as a niche settlement tool for crypto markets is now being discussed as a parallel monetary system—with profound implications for banks, credit creation, and financial stability.

What are stablecoins?

Stablecoins are digital tokens designed to maintain a stable value, usually pegged to a fiat currency like the US dollar. While there are several types, fiat-backed stablecoins dominate the market, accounting for roughly 90% of usage.

Two of the most widely used examples are USDC (Circle) and USDT (Tether). 

Both are backed by reserves, but the composition of those reserves varies:

 

Stablecoins are becoming major players in the treasury market with Tether now the 17th largest holder of treasuries on the planet.

Source: US department of Treasury as of October 2025

How are stablecoins different from cash?

If you can already pay with a bank card, does it matter if settlement takes two days instead or instantly?

For most consumers, the benefits of stablecoins look incremental compared to existing digital banking services.

But there is one notable difference: interest.

The GENIUS act and interest rules

The GENIUS Act, proclaimed by Donald Trump to have been named after himself, was signed into law in July 2025 and created a federal framework for stablecoins. Its aim is to provide regulatory clarity, consumer protection, and oversight. Crucially, the Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest directly to holders, ensuring they behave like cash rather than investment products.

However, third-party platforms, such as Coinbase or Binance can still pass through yield to users. That is, the interest earned by Circle or Tether from holding the interest bearing reserves is passed on to the exchanges, which then pass through to holders of the stablecoins through a process called ‘staking’. It is important to note that these yields are not guaranteed to be passed through and remain poorly understood, which has likely limited adoption.

Core use cases driving adoption

Payments and Settlement: Stablecoins enable near-instant, 24/7 settlement without relying on correspondent banking networks. For cross-border payments, this can be far cheaper and faster than SWIFT. Global remittance costs on average about 6.5% per transaction on flows of roughly $900 billion. Stablecoins could cut that close to zero. It’s no surprise Western Union is exploring its own stablecoin as its business model faces disruption.

Cryptocurrency market infrastructure: The cryptocurrency universe has gone from strength to strength (less so lately). Stablecoins act as the base currency of the crypto ecosystem, allowing traders to move in and out of risk assets without touching the banking system.

Financial Inclusion: In countries with weak banking systems or high inflation, dollar-pegged stablecoins offer a stable store of value without requiring a bank account. With the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, adoption in South America and Africa is easy to imagine. Asian markets may lean towards both US-backed and yuan-backed stablecoins. Financial inclusion can cut both ways, as it may accelerate capital flight from emerging economies and funnel more funding into US debt markets.

The funding threat to banks

Banks rely on deposits to fund loans.

Stablecoins disrupt this in three ways:

1. Deposit disintermediation: If households and corporates hold stablecoins instead of bank deposits, banks lose a cheap and stable source of funding.

2. Reduced credit creation: Stablecoin reserves are typically invested in:

   • Treasury bills

   • Reverse repos

   • Cash at central banks

This shifts money away from private lending and towards government financing. For the US, this is convenient given its $38 trillion debt stock, with 40–45% needing rollover in the next 18 months.

3. Pro-cyclicality risk: In a crisis, depositors may rush into stablecoins perceived as safer, amplifying stress on bank funding and making bank runs increasingly likely.

The stablecoin market is currently $300 billion in size, with bullish growth forecasts of $4 trillion by 2030. If this growth is realised, it will likely come at the expense of bank deposits and not from new external sources. This is a problem for the banks, and it won’t come as a surprise that recent crypto legislation stalled just last week amid banking industry lobbying against stablecoin interest payments. Stablecoins are not necessarily a catalyst for widening but is another concern for a sector which has spreads trading at all time tights.

To summarise, for everyday consumers, stablecoins offer little beyond what bank accounts already provide. For banks and the economy, the stakes are much higher. If stablecoins disintermediate banks, lending costs rise, credit availability shrinks, and growth slows, unless alternative credit channels scale up quickly.

The US Government will welcome the extra demand for short-term debt, but the cost could be a fundamental reshaping of the banking system.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 16:20

Newsom Announces California Will Remain In WHO Despite US Withdrawal

California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Friday that the Golden State will remain a part of the World Health Organization's network, even though the Trump administration just completed the United States' withdrawal from the WHO.

“The Trump administration’s withdrawal from WHO is a reckless decision that will hurt all Californians and Americans,” Newsom wrote.

“California will not bear witness to the chaos this decision will bring. We will continue to foster partnerships across the globe and remain at the forefront of public health preparedness, including through our membership as the only state in WHO’s Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network.”

As Jacki Thrapp reports for The Epoch Times, Newsom, who confirmed in October that he’s considering a 2028 presidential bid, revealed the new collaboration after meeting with WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland.

Newsom’s decision goes against the Trump administration’s approach to the agency, which is managed by the United Nations.

Trump, a critic of the WHO’s pandemic responses, has wanted the United States to exit the WHO ever since his first term. His administration formally made the split on Thursday.

“This action responds to the WHO’s failures during the COVID-19 pandemic and seeks to rectify the harm from those failures inflicted on the American people,” said Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr in a joint statement Jan. 22.

The Trump administration said the agency “abandoned its core mission and acted repeatedly against the interests of the United States,” even though America was a founding member and the largest financial contributor.

All U.S. funding of WHO has ended, amounting to about $111 million in annual “mandatory dues” and $570 million in “voluntary contributions,” according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

“We right these injustices and bring an end to the bureaucratic inertia, entrenched paradigms, conflicts of interest, and international politics that have rendered the organization beyond repair,” the press release by Rubio and Kennedy added.

“We will get our flag back for the Americans who died alone in nursing homes, the small businesses devastated by WHO-driven restrictions, and the American lives shattered by this organization’s inactivity. Our withdrawal is for them.”

Rubio and Kennedy said the WHO refused to give the United States its flag back after the departure announcement.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 15:45

Niall Ferguson: How Trump Won Davos

Authored by Niall Ferguson via X,

There is a rapidly forming narrative in the European and liberal media that the Europeans “won Davos”: primarily by getting Trump to “de-escalate” his demand that the United States acquire Greenland from Denmark.

This is a very wrong take.

The reality is that Trump won Davos, hands down.

And not only did he win it; he owned it.

I have never before seen a single individual so completely dominate this vast bazaar of the powerful, the wealthy, the famous, and the self-important.

Trump never seriously meant to annex Greenland or to impose new tariffs on the Europeans.

Why would he when the U.S. already enjoys all the military access to the frigid island it could every possibly need?

Fact: Trump means what he says on Truth Social only about half the time.

Ten years ago, Europeans made the mistake of taking Trump neither seriously nor literally.

Now they make the opposite mistake of treating him both seriously and literally.

The reason Trump forced Greenland to be the No. 1 topic at Davos was to keep European leaders from meddling in America’s Middle Eastern and Eastern European policy.

Why might Trump prefer the Europeans to be talking about Greenland instead of Iran or Ukraine?

Because Europe would be bound to make its usual pleas for “de-escalation” with respect to Tehran. And because the Americans think it was the EU and UK who last year impeded progress

Of course, this goes wholly counter to the Davos consensus, which is that wicked Trump has torn up the sacred liberal international order.

But, as I never grow tired of reminding you, the Davos consensus is always wrong. Always.

Read Niall's full essay here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 15:10

DHS Says 5-Year-Old Was "Abandoned" By Parents During ICE Operation In Minnesota

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Jan. 23 refuted reports that ICE agents detained a 5-year-old boy in Minnesota, saying the child was abandoned by his parents during an immigration enforcement operation.

Columbia Heights Public School District had previously said that 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos was taken into custody along with his father while in their driveway on Jan. 20. School officials said an ICE agent asked the child to knock on the door to see if there was anyone inside.

DHS on Friday provided details on the situation and said the primary concern of its officers was the child’s safety and welfare.

“ICE did NOT target, arrest a child or use a child as ‘bait.’ ICE law enforcement officers were the only people primarily concerned with the welfare of this child,” DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said on X.

McLaughlin said federal agents conducted a targeted operation to arrest the child’s father, identified as Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias, an illegal immigrant from Ecuador, but he fled and abandoned his child.

For safety reasons, one ICE agent remained with the child while other officers apprehended Conejo Arias, according to McLaughlin.

McLaughlin added that officers had tried to ask the “alleged mother,” who was inside the house, to take custody of the child and assured her she would not be taken into custody, but she refused.

“During this situation, agitators swarmed the scene and began yelling and blowing horns, scaring the child,” McLaughlin said.

“Following the mother’s abandonment of the child, officers abided by the father’s wishes to keep the child with him and even got the child McDonald’s and played his favorite music. Father and son are together at Dilley,” she added.

According to McLaughlin, parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children, or ICE will arrange for the children to be placed with a safe person the parent designates.

The move, she said, aligns with how the former administration conducted immigration enforcement.

Zena Stenvik, superintendent of the Columbia Heights Public School District, told a press conference that another adult living in the home, who was outside during the encounter, had begged the agents to let them take care of the child, but was denied.

“Instead, the agent took the child out of the still-running vehicle, led him to the door, and directed him to knock on the door, asking to be let in, in order to see if anyone else was home—essentially using a 5-year-old as bait,” Stenvik said.

Stenvik said Liam’s middle-school brother came home 20 minutes later to find both his father and brother missing. Two school principals from the district came to the house to offer support to the family.

The superintendent said that four students from the district, including Liam, have been apprehended by ICE so far.

The operation in Minnesota is part of the Trump administration’s broader immigration enforcement targeting illegal immigrants.

As of Jan. 19, ICE has arrested 10,000 criminal illegal immigrants, many of whom were “killing Americans, hurting children, and reigning terror in Minneapolis,” according to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 12:50

Shockwaves In Beijing: Xi Targets His Own Top General, Longtime Confidant, In Elite Purge

Another significant military purge appears underway in China, as Saturday morning the West woke up to news that China's most senior military officer, who is second only to Xi Jinping, has been put under investigation over alleged "grave violations of discipline and the law."

Gen. Zhang Youxia is a vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, the Communist Party body that controls China's armed forces, and this comes as somewhat of a major shock given he is widely regarded as President Xi's closest ally within the military - or at least prior to this.

Another member of the commission, Gen. Liu Zhenli, has also been placed under investigation, according to the Defense Ministry on the same day. He's in charge of the PLA military's Joint Staff Department.

AFP: Zhang Youxia, left, and He Weidong, the previous second ranked Vice Chairman who was purged in 2025.

No further details have been given regarding the accusations against General Zhang Youxia, but such language is often presented in such crackdowns as a euphemism for corruption.

Xi has described corruption as "the biggest threat" to the Communist Party, having previously several times warned that the struggle against it "remains grave and complex." But critics as well as Western observers say this has served as a convenient and public PR mechanism for sidelining political rivals, and strengthening Xi's power and hold on the levers of power.

The Wall Street Journal's Jonathan Cheng says that General Zhang's downfall is surprising as not only has he known Xi for decades, but is the "most senior member of military hierarchy to face dismissal since fallout of 1989 Tiananmen protests."

And a former Central Intelligence Agency analyst who follows Chinese elite politics, Christopher K. Johnson, tells the NY Times on Saturday, "This move is unprecedented in the history of the Chinese military and represents the total annihilation of the high command."

Chinese social media rumors: Previously, on the evening of January 21, there were online rumors that Zhang Youxia's suspected residence in Beijing was surrounded by plainclothes officers.

via X/@whyyoutouzhele

The rumors and speculation were rampant over the last several days, triggered by a conspicuous absence at a high-profile military event where Xi gave an address:

Two of China’s top generals, Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, apparently did not attend a gathering of all of China's senior political leaders on Tuesday. Their absence has fired the starting pistol on speculation they have been purged, speculation that will now continue until confirmation or they appear in public.

The event in question was the catchily-titled Study Session for Principal Officials at the Provincial and Ministerial Level on Studying and Implementing the Spirit of the Fourth Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee. President Xi Jinping attended and gave an opening speech, flanked by all six members of the Politburo Standing Committee as well as the vice president.

Eagle-eyed observers quickly noticed that while the second-ranked Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission Zhang Shengmin was sat in the audience, Zhang Youxia, who is the first-ranked vice chairman, and Liu Zhenli, who is the only non-ranking member, both appeared to be absent.

This is the latest 'anti-corruption' purge action since the October news of the expulsion of nine senior generals, which marked one of the largest such crackdowns of top military officials in decades. 

Xi ongoing purge of nearly his entire top military ranks show his total control. Also shows Stalin-like paranoia against any potential rival power bases. This purge reminiscent of Stalin’s bloody purge of Marshal Tukhachevsky and his top Red Army generals, which greatly weakened… https://t.co/EozETHyj8q pic.twitter.com/tXZDlS6vDN

— Politics1.com (@Politics1com) January 24, 2026

Zhang's political pedigree runs deep: his father was among the founding generals of the Chinese Communist Party. He joined the army in 1968 and is one of the few current senior leaders said to have actual combat experience. Zhang had remained in his post beyond the customary retirement age for military officials, which was understood as a sign Xi's confidence in him, until now apparently.

Pro-Beijing pundits are offering an alternative take to the Western reporting...

China purging officials who send their spouse and children to live abroad so Western gov can't use them as leverage pic.twitter.com/yJTSQk9Lvb

— Carl Zha (@CarlZha) January 11, 2026

More to come? It is likely as WSJ's chief China's correspondent Lingling Wei describes, "And this is far from the end. With thousands of officers having risen through the ranks under Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, these individuals now recognize they are primary targets for a systemic purge." She reports that "Mobile devices have been seized across ranks and all units are now on high alert."

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 12:15

Trump Says Canada Will Face 100% Tariffs if It "Makes A Deal With China"

Authored by Omid Ghoreishi via The Epoch Times,

U.S. President Donald Trump says Canadian goods exported to the United States would be hit with 100 percent tariffs if Canada makes a deal with China.

“If Governor Carney thinks he is going to make Canada a ‘Drop Off Port’ for China to send goods and products into the United States, he is sorely mistaken. China will eat Canada alive, completely devour it, including the destruction of their businesses, social fabric, and general way of life,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on the morning of Jan. 24.

“If Canada makes a deal with China, it will immediately be hit with a 100% Tariff against all Canadian goods and products coming into the U.S.A. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The U.S. president wrote the remarks while posting a Jan. 23 article by Just the News titled, “Deal with the Devil: How Canada’s New Partnership With China Could Backfire.”

Trump’s reference to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney as “Governor” marks a return to the relations the U.S. president had with Carney’s predecessor, former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, using the title to reflect his view that Canada should be part of the United States. Trump had not previously used the title for Carney, saying on several occasions that he likes him, but relations soured after Carney delivered a speech at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, last week in which he levied heavy criticism at the United States.

Prior to arriving in Davos, Carney met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Beijing, where he signed a series of agreements that included slashing tariffs on Chinese EV imports from 100 percent to 6.1 percent for the first 49,000 units, in exchange for China cutting tariffs on Canadian canola from 85 percent to 15 percent until at least the end of the year. While in Beijing, Carney said Canada–China relations are entering a “new era,” and that Ottawa’s pursuit of a partnership with China “sets us up well for the new world order.”

The Epoch Times reached out to Carney’s office for comment but didn’t immediately hear back.

Cutting Tariffs on China

Trump had initially shrugged off Carney’s new deal with China, telling reporters on Jan. 16 that, “It’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If he can get a deal with China, he should do that.”

But senior members of his cabinet were concerned. U.S. Transport Secretary Sean Duffy said Canada will regret the decision to partner with Beijing and allow Chinese EVs into its market. “I love my friends in Canada, but they will live to regret the day they let the Chinese Communist Party flood the market with their EVs!” Duffy said in a Jan. 17 post on X.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CNBC on Jan. 16 that the deal is “problematic for Canada,” and that Washington had imposed tariffs to protect autoworkers. He said that while Canada made the deal to bring relief to agricultural producers, in the “long run, they’re not going to like having made that deal.”

Canada first imposed 100 percent tariffs on Chinese EVs, along with levies on steel and aluminum, in 2024, in lockstep with the United States, which has long been concerned about China dumping products.

Canada’s other deals with China include agreements on energy, public safety, and lumber.

Davos Speeches

In his speech at the WEF in Davos on Jan. 20, Carney criticized U.S. pressure to acquire Greenland, while saying middle powers should band together to resist pressure from major powers. “Great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited,” he said.

Trump said the next day in his speech at the WEF that Carney “wasn’t so grateful,” adding that Canada “lives because of the United States.”

Carney said in another speech on Jan. 22 in Quebec City, this time to Canadians, that Canada “does not live because of the United States. Canada thrives because we are Canadian.”

Later that day, Trump said he is rescinding his invitation to Carney to join the U.S.-led Board of Peace that is going to help rebuild Gaza.

In another Truth Social post on Jan. 23, Trump criticized Ottawa’s position on Greenland and China, saying, “Canada is against The Golden Dome being built over Greenland, even though The Golden Dome would protect Canada. Instead, they voted in favor of doing business with China, who will ‘eat them up’ within the first year!”

Meanwhile, Beijing’s envoy to Ottawa weighed in on the Greenland issue while taking a swipe at the United States, saying this week that Canada and China “see eye to eye” on supporting Greenland’s territorial integrity, according to The Canadian Press.

Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick also criticized Carney’s recent comments and deal with China, suggesting that his recent remarks may be related to an upcoming election. He added that Ottawa’s EV deal with Beijing could jeopardize Ottawa’s chances when renegotiating the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement which is set for renewal this year.

“When the USMCA gets renegotiated this year… do you think the president of the United States is going to say you should keep having the second-best deal in the world?” he told Bloomberg on Jan. 22, making the point that Canada’s current trade deal with the United States ranks second after Mexico. Under the USMCA, 85 percent of Canadian goods are exempt from tariffs, while products not compliant with the trilateral deal face 35 percent tariffs. Mexico’s non-USMCA products are subject to 25 percent tariffs.

Carney hasn’t appeared at media press conferences since relations with Trump soured on Jan. 22, cancelling a scheduled press conference at the conclusion of a cabinet meeting in Quebec City on Jan. 23.

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne, who took questions from the press instead, said Carney couldn’t attend due to a “scheduling issue.”

Carney was asked by reporters about his talks with Trump late on Jan. 22 as he walked to a cabinet meeting. He responded, “Oh, that’s the most boring question. Think of a new one.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 11:40

Larry Fink Says Public Has Lost Trust In Davos Elites And He Blames "Capitalism"

The intrinsic fallacy behind the Davos conference and its supposed mission to "save the world" by molding international policy is easy to describe:  Davos is made up largely of the corporate elites, banking moguls and corrupt politicians that created the world's problems in the first place, often deliberately in order to trigger chaos and gain power. 

Why would the general public trust those people to fix the same problems they created?

This is a question that needs to be posed to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, who is currently serving as the "interim co-chair" of the WEF after Klaus Schwab's embarrassing exit.  Fink launched the Davos meetings with some stark warnings about AI, and also a surprising admission that the global populace "no longer trusts" the WEF to steer the planet in the right direction.

JUST IN: BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says global elites have lost the public's trust. pic.twitter.com/IC66qsqbvB

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) January 20, 2026

As noted, no one trusted the WEF before, for the same reasons that no one trusts them now.  Fink would never admit that the public despises the Davos crowd because of they operate like a cartel or cabal, constantly grasping for power while whittling down our freedoms.  Instead, the CEO blamed "capitalism" for the lack of trust. 

Fink argued that the growing wealth gap is a feature of capitalism as we know it today and that this must change.  He admonished the shift of global wealth into the hand of a narrow minority (of which his is a member) and called for the continuing institution of "shareholder capitalism" as a solution.

Shareholder capitalism, for those who are not aware, is the agenda which is directly responsible for ESG lending and the takeover of DEI in the corporate world.  The sudden surge of woke ideology in western countries was a product of corporate lenders like BlackRock and Vanguard pressuring international companies to promote wokeness in exchange for easy access to cheap credit. 

It should also be noted that the wealth gap during the decade of woke cultism (2015 to the end of 2024) increased dramatically.  Shareholder capitalism handed the top 1% another $33.9 trillion.  The wealth of the top 0.001% grew three times larger than the combined wealth of the bottom 50% of people.  In other words, shareholder capitalism expands the wealth gap, it does not reduce it.     

The World Economic Forum and orbiting globalist associations closed their latest Davos event this week looking rather subdued compared to a couple years ago.  From 2020 to 2023 the elites pulled the mask off completely and they are now hoping the public will forget and move on.

The WEF, WHO, and various captured world leaders used the covid scare to conjure up a worldwide hysteria which they intended to exploit.  Sweeping plans were made (out in the open) to institute vaccine passports which would force the population to accept regular injections of experimental treatments in order to retain the right to work and participate in the greater economy.  Intermittent national lockdowns were going to become the norm.  Digital tracking of every individual using covid apps was going to become policy. 

The globalists were going full 1984, all over a virus with a 99.8% survival rate. 

If Larry Fink and his ilk want to know why the populace distrusts them, it's not because of capitalism and free markets.  It's because they exposed themselves and their true intentions in the last several years.  They became arrogant and proved the "conspiracy theorists" right.  Once the mask comes off, it cannot be put back on. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 11:05

In Humiliating Retreat, Starmer Forced To Pull Chagos Bill After Trump Backlash

Trump wins again - or rather, Europe caves again. On Friday UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer was forced into an abrupt and humiliating retreat after his plan for the Chagos Islands detonated backlash in Washington.

Starmer had been preparing to ram the controversial legislation through the House of Lords on Monday, only for the bill to be yanked late Friday on growing fears it could unravel a 60-year-old US-UK treaty, which is the foundational Cold War-era deal that allows the US to operate the Diego Garcia military base on the Chagos Islands, or what's known as the British Indian Ocean Territory. 

The chain of events this week kicked off early Tuesday with President Trump's Truth Social onslaught. Among several geopolitical-related messages, mostly on Greenland, he went after the Starmer government.

Getty Images/BBC: Diego Garcia has been home to a joint UK-US military base since the 1970s

Trump took aim at the proposed new deal under which London would surrender sovereignty (to Maritius) while leasing back the strategically critical military base on the islands, including Diego Garcia - where US forces also have a strategic Indian Ocean base, which has been used especially for Middle East operations going back decades. 

Trump attacked the plan to hand sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius as an act of "great stupidity" and "total weakness." He further took the opportunity to say the move underscored exactly why he wants the United States to take control of Greenland.

"The UK giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY, and is another in a very long line of National Security reasons why Greenland has to be acquired. Denmark and its European Allies have to DO THE RIGHT THING," Trump wrote as his concluding sentence in the message.

The Telegraph late Friday is confirming the U-turn:

Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to pull his Chagos Islands bill in the wake of a US backlash over the deal.

The legislation was expected to be debated in the House of Lords on Monday, but was delayed on Friday night after the Conservatives warned it could violate a 60-year-old treaty with the US that enshrines British sovereignty over the archipelago.

The Foreign Office has been engaged in some last minute scrambling to verify if Trump's Truth Social message did in fact reflect active US policy:

Asked last night if Mr Trump would be willing to tear up the 1966 treaty and allow the transfer of Chagos to go ahead, the US state department referred back to the president’s criticism on Tuesday when he said: “The UK giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY.”

Still, The Telegraph notes that some confusion among British officials remains: "Much depends on whether Mr Trump’s position on the Chagos deal has genuinely changed or – as Sir Keir has claimed – that this was only being used to force a change in Britain’s Greenland stance."

"If Downing Street tried to press ahead without Washington’s approval, it could face a bruising battle with the US state department," the report concludes.

Starmer addressed the House of Commons on Wednesday and asserted it was Trump who flipped his policy. "I made out my position on Greenland absolutely clear on Monday and a moment ago. President Trump deployed words on Chagos yesterday that were different to his previous words of welcome and support when I met him in the White House," he said.

"He deployed those words yesterday for the express purpose of putting pressure on me and Britain in relation to my values and principles on the future of Greenland," he added.

From a British political commentator: "It is, I admit, a humiliating thing for Britain that the final decision should be in the hands of our American allies. We ought to have put a stop to the whole business ourselves."

CHAGOS SURRENDER UPDATE
Labour has just pulled Monday’s vote in the House of Lords. The @Conservatives had put out a three-line Whip - an exceptional step in the Upper House, taken perhaps once every three or four years - and ministers evidently concluded that their Bill would… pic.twitter.com/Gji6Kxg3Ot

— Daniel Hannan (@DanielJHannan) January 23, 2026

Conservatives are still warning that rushing the deal for the UK to yield control of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius risks violating international law, with Tory leader Kemi Badenoch having condemned the agreement outright, warning it "cannot progress while this issue remains unsolved." He has bluntly stated this week, "President Trump is right." Also, Reform's Nigel Farage praised the American president for "vetoing" it.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 10:45

House Committee Calls On IRS To Crack Down On NGOs Funding Terrorists

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

The IRS must overhaul its oversight of the nonprofit sector amid the fraud scandal in Minnesota that has led to taxpayer funds being funneled for terror activities, Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee said in a Jan. 20 statement.

House Committee on Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.) speaks during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 13, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

The lawmakers sent a letter to IRS Acting Commissioner Scott Bessent and CEO Frank Bisignano on Tuesday, raising concerns about “significant fraud, waste, and abuse” of taxpayer dollars.

“As you are aware, investigative journalists recently uncovered a network of fraud involving Minnesota’s Medicaid Housing Stabilization Services program and non-profit organizations in the state during the COVID-19 pandemic—a scheme that not only seemingly funneled millions, if not billions, of taxpayer dollars to the Al-Shabaab terrorist group, but has also resulted in the prosecutions of nearly 80 individuals by the Department of Justice (‘DOJ’) to date,” they wrote.

“This is unacceptable.”

Al-Shabaab is a militant wing of the Somali Council of Islamic Courts and is responsible for the assassination of several peace activists, journalists, international aid workers, and civil society personalities, according to the National Counterterrorism Center. It was designated a foreign terrorist organization in 2008 by the State Department.

During a press conference in Minneapolis on Jan. 9, Bessent said the U.S. Treasury had launched an enforcement campaign targeting Somali-linked fraud networks in Minnesota. According to Bessent, billions of dollars intended for disabled seniors, hungry children, and families with special-needs children were diverted, with some of the funds likely diverted to extremist groups such as Al-Shabaab.

“We have traced where the money went, and we are examining it,” he said, adding that the findings of the probe were “highly concerning.”

The GOP letter highlighted the issue of a Minnesota nonprofit, Feeding Our Future, that was launched to serve food to children from low-income groups. However, its promoters used more than $250 million to buy jewelry, real estate, and luxury goods.

Since 2022, dozens of people linked to Feeding Our Future have been convicted. During a Jan. 7 hearing, Minnesota state Rep. Kristin Robbins said the total fraud in this case had hit about $310 million. In addition, investigators are probing 14 Minnesota Medicaid programs, suspecting $9 billion or more in fraudulent payments.

This potential terror-financing scheme by a tax-exempt organization “calls into question the current safeguards in place to protect taxpayer dollars,” the letter said. “The concern over tax-exempt organizations funneling taxpayer dollars to designated terrorist organizations and other illicit purposes cannot be understated.”

Lawmakers called on the IRS to hold tax-exempt organizations accountable and ensure the funds do not end up in the hands of terror outfits.

Crackdown in Minnesota

Meanwhile, Minnesota is seeing stringent federal immigration enforcement activities. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem recently said that more than 10,000 illegal immigrants have been arrested in the state. The DOJ has started issuing subpoenas to top officials in Minnesota.

Responding to reports of the DOJ investigation, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s office said on Jan. 17 that they have not received any notice of a probe.

“Weaponizing the justice system and threatening political opponents is a dangerous, authoritarian tactic,” Walz said.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey also responded to reports of him being subpoenaed in a federal probe.

“When the federal gov weaponizes its power to intimidate local leaders for doing their jobs, every American should be concerned,” Frey said in a Jan. 21 post on X.

“We shouldn’t live in a country where federal law enforcement is used to play politics or crack down on local voices they disagree with.”

Amid reports of fraud perpetrated by Somalis in Minnesota, including convictions of naturalized citizens, Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) has introduced the Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act, his office said in a Jan. 19 statement.

The bill seeks to expand the denaturalization process for individuals who have committed fraud or serious felonies or joined up with terror outfits, it said.

“The rampant fraud uncovered in Minnesota must be a wakeup call,” Schmitt said.

“People who commit felony fraud, serious felonies, or join terrorist organizations like drug cartels shortly after taking their citizenship oaths fail to uphold the basic standards of citizenship. They must be denaturalized because they have proven they never met the requirements for the great honor of American citizenship in the first place.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 10:30

US Pledges To 'Starve' Iraq Of Oil Revenue If Pro-Iran Parties Join New Government

Via The Cradle

Washington has threatened to block Iraq's access to its own oil revenue held in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York if representatives of Shia armed parties enjoying support from Iran are included in the next government, Reuters  reported Friday.

"The US warning was delivered repeatedly over the past two months by the US Charges d'Affaires in Baghdad, Joshua Harris, in conversations with Iraqi officials and influential Shi'ite leaders," Reuters reported, citing three Iraqi officials and one source familiar with the matter.

via AFP

The threat is part of US President Donald Trump's effort to weaken Iran through a "maximum pressure" campaign of economic sanctions, including on the Islamic Republic's oil exports. Trump also bombed Iran's nuclear sites as part of Israel's unprovoked 12-day war on Iran in June.

Because of US sanctions, few countries can trade with Iran, increasing its reliance on Iraqi markets for exports and on Baghdad's banking system as a monetary outlet to the rest of the world.

As punishment, the US government has restricted the flow of dollars to Iraqi banks on several occasions in recent years, raising the price of imports for Iraqi consumers and making it difficult for Iraq to pay for desperately needed natural gas imports from Iran.

However, this is the first time the US has threatened to cut off the flow of dollars from the New York Federal Reserve to the Central Bank of Iraq.

Officials in Washington can threaten Baghdad in this way because the country was forced to place all revenues from oil sales into an account at the New York Fed following the US military's invasion of the country in 2003.

This gives Washington strong leverage against Baghdad, as oil revenue accounts for 90 percent of the Iraqi government's budget. While occupying Iraq for decades and controlling its oil revenues, Washington accuses Iran of infringing on Iraq's sovereignty.

"The United States supports Iraqi sovereignty, and the sovereignty of every country in the region. That leaves absolutely no role for Iran-backed militias that pursue malign interests, cause sectarian division, and spread terrorism across the region," a US State Department spokesperson told Reuters.

Some Shia political parties, including several that make up the Coordination Framework (CF), are linked to the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), which see themselves as anti-terror militias formed in 2014 with Iranian support to fight ISIS and later incorporated into the Iraqi armed forces.

Iraq held parliamentary elections in November and is still in the process of forming the next government. Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani, who enjoyed good relations with both Washington and Tehran, has decided not to contend for another term as premier.

The decision has cleared the way for Nouri al-Maliki, of the State of Law Coalition and the Dawa Party, to potentially return to power. 

Maliki, who enjoys support from the PMU-linked parties, served as prime minister between 2006 and 2014, including when ISIS invaded western Iraq and conquered large swathes of the country. 

As the U.S. takes control of #Venezuela’s oil revenues, questions around transparency, oversight, & #corruption risks loom large. @politico examines the parallels with Iraq with insights from @K2Integrity’s @JCZarate1 on the challenges of accountability: https://t.co/JO7Dvq93hQ

— K2 Integrity (@K2Integrity) January 23, 2026

Trump threatened a new bombing campaign against Iran following several weeks of violent riots and attacks on security forces organized and incited by Israeli intelligence. Trump allegedly called off the bombing after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned him that Tel Aviv's air defenses were not prepared for a new confrontation with Iran.

During the war in June, Iran retaliated against Israel by launching barrages of ballistic missiles and drones, which did severe damage to Israeli military sites, including in Tel Aviv.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 08:10

Over 2 Million Ukrainians Have Already Deserted & Or Actively Dodging The Draft

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

The 2.2 million men that are currently on the run amounts to 6.8% of the Ukrainian population and is slightly larger than the percentage of Asians in the US.

New Ukrainian Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov shockingly revealed that 200,000 men have already deserted thus far and ten times more (2 million) are actively dodging the draft, which are probably an underestimate but are in any case still very large numbers. To put that into context, Ukraine claimed in early 2025 to have had a population of 32 million, likely an overestimate, so the 2.2 million men who either deserted or dodged the draft amounts to at least 6.8% of the population currently on the run.

Rada Deputy Dmitry Razumkov claimed during a parliamentary session last month that his country had already lost half a million troops by then with an equal number wounded, possibly also an underestimate, while Ukraine is thought to currently field around 900,000 active troops. All of this data enables observers to better understand the significance of these “voluntary losses” since it should be clear by now that 2.2 million more troops would have certainly made a major difference for Ukraine.

That’s not to imply that it would have been able to reverse the military-strategic dynamics of the conflict that have trended in Russia’s favor since the epic failure of Ukraine’s NATO-backed counteroffensive in summer 2023, but perhaps it might have been able to decelerate the pace of its losses afterwards. Ukraine could have thus also been in a comparatively better diplomatic position too going into Trump 2.0 a year ago and that might have in turn predisposed him to a relatively harder line towards Russia as well.

For that reason, while the scale of its desertions and draft-dodging can’t credibly be described as a game-changer, it can still be considered a significant variable that adversely affected Ukraine’s fortunes. By contrast, this was never a relevant factor for Russia, which hasn’t conscripted anyone unlike Ukraine. On that topic, it’s worthwhile reminding readers about Ukraine’s forcible conscription policy that’s been made infamous by viral videos showing officials snatching young and old men alike off the streets.

This footage and stories that draft-eligible males (25-60 years of age) heard through the grapevine are partly why 2 million of them decided to go on the run and dodge the draft. They’ve also seen drone footage of the conflict zone and are therefore well aware of how likely it is that they’ll be killed shortly after being deployed to the front. These men might sincerely consider themselves to be Ukrainian patriots in their hearts, however they conceptualize it, but they’re not willing to die for nothing.

This segues into the plummeting popularity of the conflict among the populace and increasing support for a quick end thereto per recent Gallup polling. Trump just blamed Zelensky for stalling peace talks, which is in direct opposition to the will of the same people in whose name he still acts despite the expire of his term in May 2024. Other than his authoritarian tendencies, corruption is likely responsible for his obstinance since he’s thought to be profiting from the conflict and might thus fear charges once it ends.

Whenever he’s asked about the conflict, Trump usually says that he wants to end it as soon as possible in order to stop the killing, which it’s now known has spooked at least 2.2 million Ukrainian men into either deserting or dodging the draft. The 6.8% of the population that’s currently on the run is slightly larger than the Asian population in the US (6.7%) per the last census. The sooner that the conflict ends, the sooner that they can re-enter the economy and help rebuild their country, unless they flee abroad first.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 07:00

Suicidal Empathy Is Another Front In The CCP's Hybrid War

Authored by Stu Cvrk via The Epoch Times,

The theory of suicidal empathy is gaining increasing currency among people who are deeply concerned about the apparent fracturing of Western civilization, particularly American culture.

Suicidal empathy can be defined as excessive or misdirected compassion expressed by individuals or groups that prioritizes short-term emotional responses over cultural norms and long-term societal stability and personal well-being. Over time, the concept can lead to self-destructive outcomes for individuals (the loss of traditional values in favor of equity and other false gods) or societies (robust nationalism replaced by unchecked multiculturalism and moral decay).

A good example is the European Union’s embrace of open borders policies that led to the flood of people from the Middle East and Africa in the name of “empathy for poor people” without regard to assimilation.

Who gains from this chaos and angst?

Any distress that destabilizes Western civilization serves the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which exploits anything that undermines the United States and its allies.

Some observers believe that Beijing covertly amplifies the elements of suicidal empathy in the West—excessive compassion, cultural relativism, polarization, and over-tolerance of immigrants who refuse to assimilate—as a low-cost, asymmetric front in its hybrid war against the United States.

Let us examine the issue.

What Is Suicidal Empathy?

Lebanese–Canadian evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad coined the term in 2024 to describe excessive, misdirected, or hyperactive empathy that becomes self-destructive. As with anyone who postulates a new concept, he is considered by some to be a “controversial figure.”

Saad is the author of “The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense,” a university professor at Concordia University’s John Molson School of Business, and a frequent presence on X (@GadSaad), podcasts (such as “The Joe Rogan Experience”), and YouTube. He explains how suicidal empathy fuels open borders, cultural chaos, and self-sabotage in the United States and the West in general.

He argues that suicidal empathy leads some to prioritize the needs of illegal immigrants over those of citizens and veterans, to show leniency toward criminals and addicts in the name of compassion, to refuse to confront national threats for fear of “appearing unkind,” and to value the appearance of being kind and empathetic even when the result is harmful to individuals or society.

Saad maintains that prioritizing compassion for potential threats, outsiders, or criminals over one’s own group’s safety, security, and long-term survival has led to questionable policy choices by liberal governments in the West.

Saad is critical of “woke” culture, political correctness, Islamofascism, and what he calls the Marxist corruption of academia, which he groups as “idea pathogens”—harmful ideologies that spread like parasites and supplant traditional moral, political, and cultural values, particularly those rooted in Judeo–Christian philosophy.

Critics argue that elite-driven immigration policies, motivated by suicidal empathy, have downplayed assimilation requirements, contributing to the persistence of culturally insular communities. They often point to debates surrounding Islamist activism or illiberal norms within some immigrant-heavy areas of Minnesota, Michigan, and Texas as illustrative cases.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) confer during a hearing about fraud in Minnesota at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 7, 2026. Federal prosecutors filed charges against dozens of people in Minnesota, many from the area’s Somali community, for stealing taxpayer dollars through fraudulent social services schemes. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Perhaps even more consequential are the recent federal prosecutions uncovering large-scale fraud schemes involving Somali-American defendants, most notably the Feeding Our Future case in Minnesota, which prosecutors say siphoned roughly $250 million from a federal child-nutrition program. The scandal exposed serious failures of state and federal oversight and further eroded public trust in government institutions.

A combination of bureaucratic incompetence, risk aversion, and fear of appearing discriminatory allowed the fraud to persist longer than it should have. This reluctance to enforce rules rigorously—suicidal empathy—can weaken accountability and invite abuse, ultimately harming both taxpayers and the very communities such policies are meant to protect

These fractures in American society serve the CCP, as whatever distracts, disrupts, weakens, or causes chaos among Americans is considered good by the communists.

CCP Exploitation of Suicidal Empathy

“Unrestricted Warfare,” an important 1999 book by People’s Liberation Army Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, advocates the use of “unrestricted” or “beyond-limits” warfare, emphasizing non-military methods to weaken adversaries such as the United States without resorting to direct armed conflict.

“Beyond limits” has since been expanded to include all forms of hybrid warfare, short of kinetic warfare. While suicidal empathy was unknown in 1999, it is not a stretch to speculate that the CCP has embraced it as another important front in its ever-expanding hybrid warfare against the United States.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping would appear to recognize and champion chaos as a means to achieve Chinese global dominance, as his statement from 2021 indicates: “The world today is undergoing a great change in situation unseen in a century. Since the most recent period, the most important characteristic of the world is, in a word, ‘chaos,’ and this trend appears likely to continue.” And societal chaos is a direct result of suicidal empathy.

The CCP uses united front actions to influence Western academia and media to exploit political and societal divisions in their ongoing hybrid war. By leveraging proxies, disinformation, funding networks, and diaspora communities, the CCP amplifies polarization in the United States on issues such as race and identity politics, immigration and open borders, and the cancel culture, turning them into tools for societal upheaval and chaos.

Chinese state media, Chinese embassies, and CCP-funded nonprofit groups publicly express empathy for protected classes in America, the underprivileged, and especially illegal aliens from the Third World in a synergistic effort to amplify the suicidal empathy being pushed by American elites.

The Chinese regime routinely deploys fake social media accounts on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram to inflame public discourse and encourage street protests. For example, during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests (as a classic example of suicidal empathy in action), CCP state media and influence networks amplified narratives that portrayed the United States as racially oppressive and chaotic. Pro-CCP actors on social media posed as American activists to escalate calls for defunding police and radical reforms, aiming to prolong disorder and erode public faith in law enforcement and American institutions in general.

The CCP also directly or indirectly funds certain activist groups that promote “woke” ideology and street protests against ICE agents and law enforcement personnel in general, while using state-backed media such as CGTN or TikTok algorithms to further amplify social discord and division among Americans.

For example, Neville Roy Singham, an American tech millionaire living in Shanghai, is allegedly the “main backer” of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (to the tune of $20 million) through nonprofits such as the Justice and Education Fund and the United Community Fund. PSL has organized nationwide protests against ICE, including the 2025 Los Angeles riots, where they were implicated in violence in the streets and civil unrest.

Singham’s pro-CCP network of radical organizations also allegedly funds the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) and The People’s Forum, which promote Marxist education and progressive causes on campuses, such as immigrant rights and anti-racism, and also support anti-ICE campus protests while promoting “woke” themes like social justice and anti-oppression.

Concluding Thoughts

Did Gad Saad hit paydirt by theorizing that the practical results of decades of putting Marxist critical theory into practice in America are—as he puts it—a “tsunami of unmodulated kindness,” “parasitized suicidal empathy,” or an “orgiastic, hyperactive form of empathy” that are undermining Western civilization?

The CCP has certainly figured that out, as its actions to spread and exacerbate chaos in America, as described above, elucidate. Whatever undermines the United States from within advances its hybrid warfare objectives and world domination goals.

What is the surest sign that the CCP understands the effectiveness—and threats of—suicidal empathy?

It is the communists who stamp out all vestiges of it in China. The CCP has historically viewed universal empathy, compassion, or spiritual beliefs among individuals as potential threats to its authority, often labeling them as “superstitions” to justify eradication, persecution, and suppression—with Falun Gong adherents and minorities (such as Tibetans, Uyghurs) as among the victims. The CCP prioritizes atheism, nationalism, and Party loyalty over individual or humanitarian concerns, subordinating empathy for individuals to collective goals.

Meanwhile, the CCP is working behind the scenes to promote suicidal empathy in America.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 23:25

Vegas Casino To Accept Canadian Dollars At Par In Bid To Lure Northerners Back To Sin City

Las Vegas casino owner Derek Stevens is offering Canadian visitors a major incentive by accepting Canadian dollars at par with U.S. currency at his three downtown properties—Circa, D Las Vegas, and Golden Gate—through August 31, according to Bloomberg.

Because the Canadian dollar currently trades at about 1.38 to the U.S. dollar, the promotion gives Canadians an effective discount of more than 30 percent. The deal applies to hotel stays, bar tabs, and up to $500 in casino play.

The move comes as Las Vegas continues to struggle with declining tourism. Visitor numbers have fallen for 11 consecutive months, leaving the city heading into 2026 with weakened momentum. High travel costs, economic uncertainty, and strained U.S.-Canada relations have all contributed to softer demand. Local tourism officials say fewer Canadian travelers—traditionally a key market—have been a major factor.

Recent political and trade tensions have fueled calls in Canada to avoid American goods and travel, further reducing cross-border tourism. Under normal exchange rates, a Canadian bringing C$1,000 to Las Vegas would have only about $725 to spend, making trips significantly more expensive.

Stevens said the promotion is meant to rebuild those ties. In an online video, he recalled growing up near the Canadian border and seeing similar offers in the past. “I want to invite Canada back to Las Vegas,” he said.

The campaign reflects growing concern among casino operators and tourism leaders that Las Vegas must become more aggressive in attracting international visitors as it works to recover from a prolonged slowdown.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 23:00

Russia's Planned Revival Of RIC Is Unlikely For Three Reasons

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

The Sino-Indo rapprochement is still in its infancy, their territorial disputes remain unresolved, and India is under lots of pressure from the US nowadays.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared during his first press conference of the year that Moscow wants to revive the Russia-India-China (RIC) format. 

In his words, “[RIC] still exists – though it has not convened in some time – but has not been disbanded. We are working to revive its activities.”

For as well-intentioned as Russia’s plans are, and they make sense since those three are the engines of the global systemic transition to multipolarity, they’re unlikely to be fulfilled for three reasons.

• First off, the incipient Sino-Indo rapprochement, which began with their leaders meeting at fall 2024’s BRICS Summit in Kazan and then again at last summer’s SCO Summit in Tianjin, is still in its infancy, revolving mostly around restrained rhetoric towards their unresolved territorial disputes and increased trade. Bilateral ties are moving in the right direction but they’re nowhere near resuming anything resembling the strategic cooperation that their leaders’ participation in another RIC Summit would imply.

• The next point is that their unresolved territorial disputes place domestic pressure upon Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to eschew the aforesaid cooperation until they’re settled, ideally in India’s favor with China rescinding its claims and withdrawing from Indian-claimed territory. Meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping twice in as many years was already a bold move in this domestic political context, but resuming strategic cooperation absent a resolution of their disputes might be a bridge too far.

• And finally, India is also under lots of pressure from the US nowadays, which is due to Trump’s punitive tariffs on the pretext of India’s continued import of Russian oil and the US’ rapid rapprochement with its Pakistani nemesis. Participating in newly revived RIC talks with Putin and Xi amidst the ongoing Indo-US talks at this very sensitive moment could potentially provoke Trump and might thus lead to a further worsening of their ties. It would therefore be very surprising if Modi were to agree to this anytime soon.

Having explained the three reasons why Russia’s planned revival of the RIC format is unlikely, it nevertheless shouldn’t be ruled out that their respective leaders might meet on the sidelines of this year’s BRICS Summit in India and/or the SCO Summit in Kyrgyzstan. Something as superficial as them being photographed chatting with one another there could suffice as alleged proof that Russia is making progress on this goal even if their small talk has no significance beyond positive optics.

Such was the case on the sidelines of last year’s SCO Summit in Tianjin, which was interpreted by some as an “informal RIC meet” despite nothing of substance being discussed. Russia and the Alt-Media Community, both in general but especially the “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” therein, have an interest in presenting such talks as proof of RIC’s revival for ideological reasons. Premature declarations of this can lead to unrealistic expectations, however, which risk deep disappointment if this never actually happens.

All in all, multipolar processes would further accelerate to the benefit of the World Majority if RIC were revived, but this is unlikely to happen due to the complexity of Sino-Indo relations and US pressure upon India right now. Given the reasonable limits of Russian diplomacy, namely its representatives’ respectful unwillingness to share unsolicited solutions for resolving the Sino-Indo border disputes and inability to influence Indo-US ties, Lavrov’s goal of reviving RIC will probably remain unfulfilled for the time being.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 22:35