Individual Economists

10 Sunday Reads

The Big Picture -

Avert your eyes! My Sunday morning look at incompetency, corruption and policy failures:

I’ve Covered Police Abuse for 20 Years. What ICE Is Doing Is Different. There were no promises of an impartial investigation. There was no regret or remorse. There was little empathy for her family — for her parents, her partner or the children she left behind. From the moment the world learned about her death, the administration pronounced the shooting not only justified but an act of heroism worthy of praise and celebration. (New York Times)

We Are Witnessing the Self-Immolation of a Superpower: With Donald Trump’s actions in Greenland, Minneapolis, and Venezuela, a foreign enemy could not invent a better chain of events to wreck the standing of the United States. (Wired) see also America vs. the World: President Trump wants to return to the 19th century’s international order. He will leave America less prosperous—and the whole world less secure. (The Atlantic) see also This Is the End: Putinism abroad always morphs into Putinism at home. And we chose this path. Why? Because something-something the price of eggs. (The Bulwark)

The rich are powering spending, with the U.S. economy in a danger zone: The health of the economy increasingly depends on rich people spending money, a new analysis of government data finds. That puts the U.S. in a fragile place because consumer spending drives growth — so the entire economy is now relying on a smaller number of people to keep things afloat. (Axios)

When Chicago pawned its parking meters: The deal Chicago made would go down as one of the most notorious miscalculations in the history of city government. It would call into question what the government is even supposed to do, and become a textbook case on the potential pitfalls of privatization.  (NPR)

They’ve bought themselves a Congress: Coinbase calls the shots in the Senate; former New York City Mayor Eric Adams faces rug pull allegations, and a crypto executive is breaking up with Trump. (Citation Needed)

Inside Bari Weiss’s Hostile Takeover of CBS News: The network’s new editor-in-chief has championed a press free from élite bias, while aligning herself with a billionaire class more willing than ever to indulge Donald Trump. (New Yorker)

How Donald Trump Has Transformed ICE: A former D.H.S. oversight official on what, legally, the agency can and can’t do—and the accountability mechanisms that have been “gutted beyond recognition.” (New Yorker) see alsoICE 101″ — How Trump changed ICE and CBP into a fascist secret police: ICE and CBP are fatally flawed products of the post-9/11 War on Terror — now Trump has weaponized those very flaws to occupy America. (Doomsday Scenario)

DOGE staffer signed deal to share Social Security data with election deniers: In an extraordinary court filing, “NOTICE OF CORRECTIONS TO THE RECORD,” government lawyers representing the SSA revealed that in March 2025, a DOGE staffer signed an agreement to share the private data of Americans with a “political advocacy group” seeking to “overturn election results in certain States.” WTF? (Popular Information)

Rejecting Decades of Science, Vaccine Panel Chair Says Polio and Other Shots Should Be Optional: Dr. Kirk Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist who leads the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, said a person’s right to refuse a vaccine outweighed concerns about illness or death from infectious diseases. (New York Times) see also The Quiet Misogyny of RFK Jr.’s War on Science: The burdens of so many of these proposals fall disproportionately on women, and moms in particular. (Slate)

A Year Inside Kash Patel’s F.B.I. Forty-five current and former employees on the changes they say are undermining the agency and making America less safe. (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business this weekend with Zach Buchwald, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Russell Investments. The global investment firm was founded in 1936, and today has ~$370 billion in AUM. Previously, he had a 15-year tenure at BlackRock, where he served as the head of its $2 trillion Institutional Business, leading the company’s Financial Institutions Group and helped establish its Retirement Solutions and Financial Markets Advisory platforms.

 

The most important chart in US politics

Source: @FredLambert

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Sunday Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

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

Zero Hedge -

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

MiB: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman 

The Big Picture -



 

 

This week, I speak with Zach Buchwald, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Russell Investments about his career in investing. We discuss the creation of the smart beta philosophy by Russell 40 years ago. The company also pioneered the idea of an outsourced CIO.

We discuss the transition from pensions to 401ks for retirees. Specifically, the onus for investing has moved to the individual. Zach also describes his proposal for a program, that is now in effect, for a $1000 to every newborn who’s parents open a count to show the importance of compounding.

Zach explains why being “a gay guy in finance” impacted his perspective on the industry, giving him a different viewpoint.

A list of his current reading is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, SpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Bob Moser, CEO and founder of Prime Group Holdings, a private investor in unique real estate holdings. They created Prime Storage, one of the largest, privately-held self-storage brands in the world, with over 19 million rentable square feet of space and 255 locations across 28 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The firm has acquired over $10 billion in real estate assets.

 

 

 

Current Reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman  appeared first on The Big Picture.

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

Zero Hedge -

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. 

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...

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"

Zero Hedge -

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"

Zero Hedge -

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.

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

Zero Hedge -

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."

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

Zero Hedge -

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

Zero Hedge -

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. 

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

Zero Hedge -

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

10 Weekend Reads

The Big Picture -

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

Netflix’s $82.7 billion rags-to-riches story: How the DVD-by-mail company swallowed Hollywood. It’s a story so good it could have been a screenplay. In 2000, Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph sat down across from John Antioco, then CEO of video rental giant Blockbuster, and pitched him on acquiring their still unprofitable DVD-by-mail startup, Netflix, which at the time had around 300,000 subscribers. But when they told him their price—$50 million and the chance to develop and run Blockbuster’s online rental business—Antioco balked. By 2010, Blockbuster had filed for bankruptcy, and Netflix had stormed Hollywood with its entertainment streaming service. (Fortune)

Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger and the Reading Unlock: One Buffett lesson I’ll share with my kid: read, read, read. (SatPost by Trung Phan)

The Multidisciplinary Approach to Thinking. Using a true multidisciplinary understanding of things, Peter identifies two often overlooked, parabolic “Big Ideas”: 1) Mirrored Reciprocation (go positive and go first) and 2) Compound Interest (being constant). A great “Life Hack” is to simply combine these two into one basic approach to living your life: “Go positive and go first, and be constant in doing it.” (Farnam Street)

The Crisis Whisperer: how Adam Tooze makes sense of our bewildering age: Whether it’s the financial crash, the climate emergency or the breakdown of the international order, historian Adam Tooze has become the go-to guide to the radical new world we’ve entered. (The Guardian)

The Shape of Time: In the 19th century, the linear idea of time became dominant, forever changing how those in the West experience the world. (Aeon)

GLP-1s And Your Brain: The Surprising Impact On Addiction, Anxiety, ADHD, And More: What started out as a medication for diabetes and weight loss is offering something unexpected—and completely life-changing—for many women. (Womens Health)

The Education of the Broligarchy: The same sources that inspired tech moguls to bend matter, minds, and markets to their will may also help explain their foray into other forms of power (Colossus)

Can Congress Still Check the Commander in Chief? Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, discusses Venezuela, NATO and the limits of congressional power as global crises multiply. (Bloomberg)

An exclusive look inside the largest effort ever mounted to keep the Great Barrier Reef alive: Australia is doing absolutely everything to protect its most iconic ecosystem — except, perhaps, the one thing that really matters. (Vox)

Mike Macdonald is a genius, but that’s not the only reason his Seahawks are Super Bowl favorites: The Seahawks are arguably the best team in football because they have elite talent. But everyone in the NFL has talent, especially in the postseason. Marrying that talent with the vision and bringing it to life, Macdonald believes, starts with intent and attitude. That’s their foundation for getting players to play fast and free. (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business this weekend with Zach Buchwald, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Russell Investments. The global investment firm was founded in 1936, and today has ~$370 billion in AUM. Previously, he had a 15-year tenure at BlackRock, where he served as the head of its $2 trillion Institutional Business, leading the company’s Financial Institutions Group and helped establish its Retirement Solutions and Financial Markets Advisory platforms.

 

January 2026 set to be a record in Geopolitics

Source: Jim Reid, Deutsche Bank

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

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

Zero Hedge -

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

Zero Hedge -

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

Zero Hedge -

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

Obama's Fingerprints All Over Investigations Of Trump And Clinton

Zero Hedge -

Obama's Fingerprints All Over Investigations Of Trump And Clinton

Authored by Paul Sperry via American Greatness,

In the run-up to the 2016 Democratic Party convention, FBI Director James Comey gained access to at least eight thumb drives containing large volumes of former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s sensitive State Department emails—as well as some from President Obama—that appeared to have been compromised by foreign hackers.

Instead of investigating the explosive new batch of evidence revealed in recently declassified documents, Comey rushed ahead to close an investigation into whether Clinton improperly transmitted and received classified material from a private, unsecured server she kept in her basement. Comey also took the extraordinary step of bypassing the attorney general and personally exonerating Clinton of wrongdoing during an unusual press conference on July 5, 2016.

Just hours later, Obama invited Clinton—who would be formally nominated as the Democrats’ standard bearer three weeks later—aboard Air Force One to help launch her multicity campaign tour, during which he officially endorsed Clinton as his preferred White House successor. “I’m ready to pass the baton,” Obama declared, as he stumped for her for the first time.

Comey’s decision to remove the cloud of scandal over Clinton’s campaign, allowing the president to get on with the business of campaigning for her, is just one avenue of investigation the Justice Department is pursuing in wide-ranging probes whose targets include a figure largely unscathed by his era’s scandals: former President Barack Obama.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said prosecutors are investigating, among other things, “possible coordination between the Clinton campaign and the Obama administration to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.”

Jason Reding Quiñones, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, has impaneled a grand jury to hear evidence related to an alleged “grand criminal conspiracy” by Obama and Biden officials to enlist law enforcement and intelligence agencies in rigging elections and carrying out political espionage against Donald Trump.

The fate of these investigations is still unclear. Actions against former presidents—especially for conduct in office—have been exceedingly rare, with the exception of President Trump. And the courts have pushed back on the Trump administration’s recent efforts to indict other Obama-era figures, including Comey.

Nevertheless, a RealClearInvestigations look at the evidence Trump administration prosecutors are presenting to the grand jury, which includes a raft of recently declassified CIA and FBI documents, shows Obama’s deep involvement in both protecting Clinton and advancing the conspiracy theory that Trump conspired with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Drawing from thousands of pages of documents and exclusive interviews with law enforcement and intelligence officials, RCI’s analysis shows the former president was repeatedly at the center of events surrounding both the closing of the Clinton investigation and the subsequent opening of several investigations targeting the Trump campaign. Post-election, Obama also ordered the manufacturing of anti-Trump intelligence, which set Trump’s presidency up for continued investigations.

On the Tarmac

Airports played an outsized role in the 2016 election. It was former President Bill Clinton’s June 27 meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on his parked plane at a Phoenix airport that reportedly convinced Comey that Lynch might appear compromised and that he should go around the proper charging officer for federal crimes to clear his wife.

About a week later, Obama signaled the all-clear after Comey’s press conference by inviting Hillary Clinton to fly to campaign rallies on Air Force One.

“I’m here today because I believe in Hillary Clinton,” Obama said during their July 5, 2016, rally in Charlotte, N.C. “I have had a front-row seat to her judgment and her commitment.”

Some presidential security experts and Secret Service sources contacted by RCI said the timing of the trip was suspicious.

They point out that the president authorizing Clinton to fly aboard Air Force One on the same day his hand-picked FBI director absolved her of crimes was almost certainly not a last-minute decision because it would have required extensive pre-planning.

The security involved in setting up that tour took weeks of advance work, which means Obama knew she was going to be cleared and not charged,” said a veteran Secret Service official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. “Obama wasn’t going to risk endorsing her and joining her on the campaign trail without her first being cleared of federal crimes,” he added. “He knew about the end of the investigation well ahead of time.”

Although the FBI did not interview Clinton about her emails until July 2, 2016, Comey had been circulating drafts of his exoneration statement at FBI headquarters for months and conveying to agents there was an “extraordinary sense of urgency” to complete the investigation, according to the declassified documents released recently by the Justice Department. Critics note that the reasoning he offered for clearing Clinton in his July 5 statement was rife with contradictions. “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” Comey said, “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

It is not known if any of the drafts were shared with the White House. Secret Service entry logs show Comey visited with Obama at least three times in 2016. “The timing and presumption that Clinton would eventually be the Democratic Party nominee for President was part of the defendant’s decision-making process,” according to court papers the DOJ filed in November detailing why it alleges Comey predetermined Clinton’s innocence.

Pulling Punches

The new evidence suggests that Comey wasn’t acting alone. It indicates that Obama was more involved in the Clinton probe than previously reported and that Comey, whose entire family supported Clinton, may have pulled his punches to placate the incumbent president and avoid getting on the wrong side of the woman he assumed would be Obama’s successor.

The recently declassified appendix of a 2018 report from the DOJ’s inspector general reviewing the integrity of the FBI’s investigation of Clinton found that the FBI never searched the eight thumb drives containing thousands of unexamined Clinton emails that were “exfiltrated” by foreign actors. Comey was first briefed about the cache of new evidence in May 2016 when he had begun drafting his exoneration statement, and then again a week before he unilaterally exonerated Clinton.

FBI lawyers admitted in internal written memos, also recently declassified, that the information was necessary to conduct a “thorough and complete investigation” and “assess the national security risks” associated with the breaches from Clinton’s use of a private email server, which cyber-forensic analysts had already found contained at least 2,063 classified emails, some at the “Top Secret/Special Access Program” level. They also thought it was necessary to divine “the full scope of unauthorized disclosure of classified emails found on the former Secretary’s server and to identify any potential cyber intrusions of the server.”

They got some thumb drives that dealt with all these issues, [and] they didn’t even bother to go through [them],” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley. “It was a complete cover-up.”

The appendix also reveals Democratic National Committee communications suggesting that Obama’s attorney general, Lynch, was secretly in communication with the Clinton campaign during the probe of her emails and had assured campaign officials that the FBI would go easy on her.

According to the communications, which U.S. intelligence analysts determined were “not fabrications,” Obama was putting “pressure” on Comey through Lynch to get rid of Clinton’s email scandal as early as January 2016. Not long after, Comey began drafting his statement exonerating Clinton—months before FBI agents had ended their investigation.

In her 2018 congressional deposition, Lynch testified that she never obstructed the probe or exerted any influence over it. But she has acknowledged that she had spoken to Comey about diminishing the probe’s significance by referring to the email investigation in the press as a “matter,” not an investigation. Lynch did not respond to requests for comment sent to her law firm.

DNC communications from March 2016 revealed that Obama also “sanctioned the use of administrative levers” to scuttle the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation. Recently declassified FBI documents show that around the same time, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe had ordered field agents to back off their investigation of Clinton Foundation donors and former Secretary of State Clinton as part of a possible pay-for-play scheme. McCabe did not respond to requests for comment sent to his attorney and to George Mason University, where he is a visiting professor.

(Just months earlier, McCabe and his wife Jill met with Virginia’s then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton ally, was at the governor’s mansion in Richmond to discuss raising money for Mrs. McCabe’s state senate race. The Clinton machine ended up pumping more than $675,000 into Jill McCabe’s Democratic campaign. McAuliffe had long maintained a seat on the Clinton Foundation board. RCI has learned, furthermore, that before moving to the D.C. area, the McCabes were 15-year neighbors of the Clintons in the hamlet of Chappaqua, N.Y., according to property records.)

Then, on July 20, just five days before the start of the Democratic National Convention, FBI headquarters shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation. “Based on the [political] sensitivities surrounding the Clinton Foundation,” a just-declassified internal FBI document reveals, agents were suddenly barred from issuing subpoenas, conducting interviews, or sharing bank information related to the case with other offices. HQ warned field offices to avoid creating “any impression we are investigating the Clinton Foundation or the Clintons.”

RCI made several requests for comment to Comey and Obama. Comey declined comment through his attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, who successfully defended him against federal perjury and obstruction charges. The DOJ is appealing the case, which was dismissed by a Clinton-appointed judge, not on the merits, but on the grounds that the federal prosecutor who indicted him had not been appointed properly. Obama’s Washington office declined comment.

At the time, the White House insisted it had no prior knowledge of Comey’s decisions.

Trump, who was on the verge of accepting the Republican Party’s presidential nomination, did not buy it. He accused Obama and Comey of running a “rigged” investigation of his Democratic opponent.

“It was no accident that charges were not recommended against Hillary the exact same day as President Obama campaigns with her for the first time,” Trump said on July 5, 2016.

Unbeknownst to Trump, July 5 would loom large for another reason: On the very day Obama’s FBI cleared Clinton, it set its sights on him.

Using the FBI To Smear Trump

That day, the bureau received the first in a series of false reports alleging Trump conspired with Russia. The reports, authored by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, then working as an FBI informant, were funded by Clinton’s campaign.

Weeks later, President Obama was personally warned by the CIA that the Clinton campaign was planning to create a foreign espionage scandal falsely tying Trump to Russia to distract attention from her own espionage investigation involving her use of a private server to transmit classified emails.

A declassified memo revealed that Clinton had personally approved a plan to “smear” and “demonize” Trump as a Putin stooge,  which was proposed by one of her foreign policy advisers, Julianne Smith, who had previously served as Vice President Joe Biden’s deputy security adviser. Clinton’s campaign manager, Robbie Mook, later testified in Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation that Clinton personally approved a plan to claim Trump had a back-channel to Putin through a Russian bank—an assertion that proved utterly baseless. “We discussed it with Hillary,” Mook told a D.C. court in 2022. “She agreed with the decision.”

According to the document, Smith said that the FBI, where Clinton had “supporters,” would help pour fuel on “the fire,” suggesting foreknowledge of the coming Russiagate investigation, which had not yet been formally opened. She added that they would also get help from the “IC,” or intelligence community, where Clinton had a lot of “sympathizers.”

Strikingly, there appeared to be an understanding among Clinton campaign aides that the FBI and CIA would get involved in an effort to kneecap Trump well before such an effort manifested in an official capacity.

In addition, the campaign solicited help directly from the White House.

In a July 25 text-message exchange with another Clinton adviser, Smith reached out to a special assistant to the president and National Security Council member for information about an “investigation” into Russia and Trump. “She went as far as she could” in divulging sensitive information, Smith told the other adviser. Sources say the Obama aide is believed to be Celeste Wallander, who at the time was also senior director for Russia and Eurasia on the National Security Council. Smith indicated she also contacted the “OVP,” or office of the vice president.

Smith told Durham she did not “specifically remember any such idea” to spread dirt on Trump. Wallander did not reply to requests for comment when contacted at her new position as executive director of the University of Pennsylvania’s office in Washington.

Grassley said that the new evidence, which he has fought for years to declassify, provides additional proof that “the Clinton campaign believed elements of the Obama administration would help them achieve their political ends against Trump.”

The plan to tie Trump to Russia went prime time during the DNC convention, held from July 25 to July 28.

During his nationally televised convention speech on July 27, Biden warned, “We cannot elect a man who belittles our closest allies, while embracing dictators like Vladimir Putin.” Obama pitched in during his own speech the following night, claiming that Trump “cozies up to Putin.”

Comey also knew about Clinton’s plan to manufacture a smear campaign against Trump, according to Durham. Yet on July 31, 2016, he approved the opening of the code-named “Crossfire Hurricane” espionage investigation of the Trump campaign for alleged—and since-disproven—collusion with Russia. Three months later, Comey even obtained a wiretap to spy on one of Trump’s campaign advisers, Carter Page, based almost entirely on the false allegations in the Clinton-funded Steele dossier.

The Russia probe was headed by Peter Strzok, the same FBI counterintelligence official who led the Clinton email probe. Internal FBI communications strongly suggest Strzok plotted to take a hard line against Trump.

On July 31, Strzok texted FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked directly under Comey’s deputy, Andrew McCabe, to discuss the difference in the two investigations. He emphasized that the Trump case mattered more than the Clinton case, and suggested that the FBI merely checked the boxes in its investigation of Clinton.

“[D]amn this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure we didn’t F something up. This matters because this MATTERS,” Strzok said. “So super glad to be on this voyage with you.”

“White House Is Running This”

Strzok would soon learn he was the nominal head of the investigation. On. Aug. 3, Obama met with Biden, Comey, and several other officials inside the White House to discuss the Clinton plan to link Trump and Putin, according to declassified records.

The next day, Strzok attended a meeting with CIA officials as part of an interagency group on Russia and Trump created by then-CIA Director John Brennan. Known as the “fusion cell,” the group was quarterbacked by CIA official Elizabeth “Liz” Vogt.

The following day, Strzok texted his FBI partner Page about the meeting. “Went well, best we could have expected,” he said, though he seemed annoyed to hear his investigation was under the control of the president. “Other than Liz’s quote, ‘the White House is running this,’” he added.

Nonetheless, their goals were aligned: Help Hillary Clinton, hurt Donald Trump.

Strzok and Page had earlier agreed to aggressively probe Trump to “stop” him from being president, in contrast to the softball approach they endeavored to take investigating Clinton. “One more thing: [Clinton] may be our next president,” Page wrote Strzok. “The last thing you need [is] going in there loaded for bear.”

“Agreed,” Strzok replied, before interviewing Clinton.

Both Strzok and Page have been subpoenaed by the recently impaneled federal grand jury hearing conspiracy evidence.

Instead of alerting the Trump campaign about the bureau’s concerns, Strzok dusted off the rarely used law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, to open additional espionage cases targeting Trump campaign officials Paul Manafort (code-named “Crossfire Fury”), George Papadopoulos (“Crossfire Typhoon”), and Carter Page (“Crossfire Dragon”).

The following week, he used FARA to open another counterintelligence case on Trump national security adviser, Michael Flynn, under the code name “Crossfire Razor.”

In a Sept. 2, 2016, text exchange, Page wrote Strzok that she was preparing talking points for Comey to brief Obama on their progress because “Potus [President of the United States] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

Also, Obama appeared to be directing political strategy for the Democratic ticket from the White House.

In October 2016, Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine was caught on video saying Obama had called him the prior night to warn him Trump was in bed with “fascist” Putin. In a conversation captured in the 2020 documentary “Hillary,” Kaine said the president demanded he and Clinton go hard on Trump: “Tim, remember, this is no time to be a purist. You’ve got to keep a fascist out of the White House.” Clinton is overheard saying, “I echo that sentiment,” and hints at a nefarious relationship between Trump and Russia.

A little more than a week before the election, Comey reluctantly reopened Clinton’s email case—a controversial decision he made only after New York FBI agent John Robertson blew the whistle on headquarters trying to “bury” the discovery a month earlier of more than 300,000 new Clinton State Department emails he found on a laptop Clinton confidante Huma Abedin shared with her then-husband, Anthony Weiner, a former Democratic lawmaker from New York, as RCI first reported.

“The only reason Comey reopened the investigation is that the New York office threatened to bypass FBI headquarters and go straight to the Department of Justice regarding the additional emails that were discovered as a result of the Weiner [sex crimes] investigations,” former prosecutor and assistant FBI Director Chris Swecker said in an RCI interview.

Around the same time, McCabe denied field agents potentially valuable evidence from the Weiner laptop that could have justified reopening their Clinton Foundation probes, recently declassified FBI records also reveal.

Obama Doubles Down

After Trump defeated Clinton the following month, Obama doubled down, ordering U.S. intelligence agencies to revisit their prior assessments that found no evidence the Russian government tried to hack the election for Trump.

Within just three weeks of Obama’s Dec. 9 order, the CIA came up with new evidence to conclude Putin personally launched an influence operation to help swing the race to Trump. The publicly released version of the assessment, which helped Obama and Clinton explain her shocking defeat, hid the fact that the CIA relied in part on the Clinton-funded dossier to reach its new conclusion.

Intelligence contradicting the “key judgment” that Putin helped Trump win was omitted from the assessment, known as the ICA. Career analysts objected to using the dossier, but Obama’s CIA chief Brennan overruled them. At least one senior intelligence analyst, now a whistleblower cooperating with the DOJ in its ongoing investigation of the entire scandal, said he was “threatened” by superiors to change his pre-election assessment to suggest Putin stole the election for Trump.

The Obama White House even prevented analysts preparing the new assessment from seeing the incriminating so-called Clinton Plan intelligence that exposed the plot to frame Trump as a Russian conspirator. In denying ICA drafters access to the intel, the White House spuriously claimed it was withholding the material “on grounds of executive privilege,” according to a secret congressional report that debunked the intelligence behind the ICA. (The explosive 2018 report had been locked in a safe at CIA headquarters until its declassification and release in July.)

On Dec. 15, 2016, weeks before the assessment had been finalized, Obama let it slip out in an NPR “exit interview” at the White House that his intelligence team had essentially predetermined the conclusion of the Trump-Russia assessment.

He said that no one should be “surprised by the CIA assessment that this [Russian meddling in the election] was done purposely to improve Trump’s chances [of winning].” Obama even suggested that Putin “was helping the Trump campaign.”

“So what the CIA is now assessing—which was, it was done purposefully to tilt the election in the direction of a particular candidate—shouldn’t be a surprise to anybody,” Obama added.

Standing in the wings, Susan Rice, the president’s national security adviser, sent Obama back into the room following the interview to reassert that the assessment was still under review.

You had something to add?” asked NPR’s Steve Inskeep.

“It is worth noting that when it comes to the motivations of the Russians, there are still a whole range of assessments taking place among the agencies,” a clearly chagrined Obama said, his voice cracking. “And so when I receive a final report, you know, we’ll be able to, I think, give us a comprehensive and best guess as to those motivations.”

He stressed that “different agencies are still looking at all that stuff, gathering it together and hopefully putting [it] into a single package.” In fact, only three of the 17 intelligence agencies were involved in the process—the CIA, FBI, and NSA—and only five analysts drafted the final intel report, all of whom were handpicked by Obama’s CIA Director Brennan, who previously worked for Obama in the White House.

Obama’s intelligence czar, James Clapper, later revealed in a 2018 interview that the Obama-ordered assessment set off a chain of investigations targeting Trump and his administration over Russia.

“If it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, Special Counsel [Robert] Mueller’s investigation,” Clapper told CNN. “President Obama is responsible for that.”

Recently declassified emails reveal that after taking his marching orders from Obama, Clapper pressured the NSA, which had partially dissented from the key judgment that Putin personally intervened in the election to help Trump, to get “on the same page” and be “supportive” of the conclusion. He suggested they would all have to “compromise” their normal standards for intelligence-gathering to rush out the report to meet Obama’s deadline.

Sen. Grassley was even more emphatic: “There’s no doubt the new intelligence assessment was a political hit that had been ordered by President Obama.

Both Clapper and Brennan have been told by federal prosecutors they are “targets” of investigation and have been subpoenaed by the grand jury looking at conspiracy charges. In a letter from his attorney, Brennan said he has cooperated with the probe, turning over documents requested for the period July 2016 to February 2017. Brennan said he stands by the ICA and complained he is the target of a “manufactured criminal investigation.” Attempts to reach Clapper for comment were unsuccessful.

Oval Office Planning Session

The first week in January 2017 was a busy time at the Obama White House.

On Jan. 5, Obama and Biden held an Oval Office meeting with Comey and other officials during which they discussed using the Logan Act, a little-used 18th-century law that criminalizes efforts by private citizens to conduct American foreign policy, against Trump’s incoming national security adviser, Michael Flynn. Later that month, Comey dispatched Strzok to the West Wing to ambush Flynn in an interview that would set a perjury trap leading to Flynn’s ouster and indictment on charges that were later dropped.

More significantly, they also discussed a plan to confront President-elect Trump with false allegations from the Steele dossier, which Comey presented as “intelligence.” On Jan. 6, Comey briefed Trump on Russia-related allegations, including those in the now-debunked Steele dossier—the same day the administration released an unclassified version of the ICA to the public.

Comey’s private briefing with Trump was later leaked to the press, lending credence to the dossier and giving Washington journalists official cover to publicize its transparently bogus rumors, starting with Buzzfeed, which published the entire Steele Dossier on Jan. 10.

On Jan. 12, still under the direction of the Obama administration, Comey also sought the renewal of a wiretap warrant to continue spying on Trump adviser Carter Page as a suspected “Russian agent”—the same day the bureau received an intelligence report warning of false information in the dossier that had put Page under suspicion. And Comey knew by that point the dossier was based on fabrications by Steele’s paid “primary subsource.”

Later that month, Comey’s investigators learned while interviewing Igor Danchenko, a former Brookings Institution analyst who worked as Steele’s primary researcher, that key allegations in the dossier were nothing more than “bar talk.” Comey nonetheless approved the affidavit—underpinned by those same dossier lies—to electronically eavesdrop on Page for another 90 days.

“With all these red lights flashing STOP, the Obama administration went full speed ahead,” Grassley said.

Some former prosecutors see a conspiracy in the unequal investigative treatment of Clinton and Trump, and they place Obama at the center of it.

“There are reasonable grounds for an investigation to determine if this was part of a broader conspiracy to protect Hillary Clinton and influence the election by smearing Trump at the same time,” said Swecker, a former prosecutor and top FBI official.

“I don’t think there’s any doubt Obama was the mastermind behind the whole conspiracy,” he told RCI. “The problem is proving it.”

Trump leveled similar allegations last year, even going so far as to accuse the 44th president of “treason.” Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush dismissed the accusations as “bizarre” and “ridiculous.”

Hannah Hankins, now acting spokesperson for Obama’s post-presidency office, told RCI, “I won’t have anything new to add for this story.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 21:45

China Has Officially Overtaken Tesla In The Global EV Race

Zero Hedge -

China Has Officially Overtaken Tesla In The Global EV Race

Chinese automakers, led by BYD, are rapidly reshaping the global electric-vehicle market and challenging long-established brands such as Volkswagen, Toyota, BMW—and even Tesla, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Once dismissed by Western buyers, Chinese EVs are now gaining wide acceptance. “These Chinese cars look fantastic,” one shopper said while browsing a BYD model in London, reflecting a broader shift in perception.

BYD has emerged as the most powerful symbol of China’s rise in electric vehicles. The company replaced Tesla as the world’s biggest EV seller and delivered more than one million vehicles outside China in 2025—more than double the previous year. China, meanwhile, surpassed Japan in 2023 to become the world’s largest auto exporter, shipping more than seven million vehicles last year.

“BYD wants to become one of the most relevant players in Europe, and in a very short period,” said Alfredo Altavilla, an industry veteran advising the company.

Chinese brands now hold about 7% of Western Europe’s auto market, selling more than 500,000 vehicles in the first three quarters of 2025. Their growing presence is putting pressure on European leaders such as Volkswagen, which has already lost ground to Chinese competitors in China and now faces them on its home turf. VW said it had “confidence in our products and our ability to innovate.”

China’s dominance is fueled by massive manufacturing capacity. The country can produce more than 46 million vehicles annually, far more than domestic demand. “You need to go global,” said Klaus Zyciora. “If you are not a manufacturer that is able to bring five million units annually to the market, you will have a hard time.”

The WSJ writes that exports have become essential to absorbing this overcapacity. BYD is expanding aggressively, aiming for 2,000 European dealerships by 2026 and opening or planning factories in countries including Hungary, Turkey, Brazil, Thailand, and Indonesia. The company raised $5.6 billion to support its global push.

Political barriers remain one of the biggest obstacles. Chinese EVs face steep tariffs in the U.S., the European Union, and Mexico. In Europe, BYD vehicles are subject to duties of up to 27%. In the U.S., restrictions on Chinese software and national security concerns have effectively blocked imports.

Still, some governments are easing resistance. In Canada, officials recently reduced tariffs on Chinese EVs as part of a broader partnership with Beijing. In the U.S., President Trump signaled openness to Chinese automakers that produce locally, saying, “Let China come in.”

To bypass trade barriers, Chinese companies are increasingly building vehicles abroad. This strategy allows them to preserve access to major markets while maintaining cost advantages.

BYD’s rise has been driven not only by scale but also by strategy. After a slow start in Europe, the company shifted from premium pricing to more affordable models and recruited experienced Western executives. Local hiring and market-specific products helped accelerate growth.

“If we focus our strategy on EVs only, we will become another Tesla, with all the bumps, the ups and downs,” Altavilla said.

Chinese manufacturers are also moving upmarket. “They will learn to upgrade, and then they will come in there as well,” said Volvo CEO Håkan Samuelsson, warning that premium brands may soon face intensified competition.

In emerging markets such as Mexico, Chinese automakers have become major players by offering feature-rich, low-cost vehicles. Analysts say they are expanding demand for electric cars in regions where affordable EVs barely existed before. “They are creating a market for affordable EVs that didn’t exist,” said Justin Fischer.

BYD’s overseas growth has helped offset intense competition at home, even as profit margins fluctuate. Despite selling more than 4.6 million vehicles globally last year, the company faces pressure from rivals inside China and slowing domestic demand.

Yet the broader trend remains clear: Chinese automakers are no longer niche exporters. With scale, cost advantages, government backing, and improving technology, they are positioning themselves as global leaders.

As Altavilla put it, BYD aims to become “a real European automaker.” More broadly, China is positioning itself to dominate the next phase of the global auto industry—putting Tesla and traditional Western manufacturers under sustained pressure.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 21:20

'Saving The Family' Should Start With Sound Money

Zero Hedge -

'Saving The Family' Should Start With Sound Money

Authored by Jeffery L. Degner and Thomas Savidge via TheDailyEconomy.org,

In the opening week of 2026, several scholars at the Heritage Foundation published a special report titled “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years.” This 168-page document covers myriad policies that negatively impact the American family and proposes solutions to those problems. Some, largely the solutions that propose repealing and reforming existing systems, can help families. But the calls to subsidize traditional family life will come with a host of unintended consequences.

The nation is indeed facing a demographic crisis, and some of Heritage’s proposals deserve praise, while others deserve criticism. One proposed reform is mentioned but given barely any attention: a return to sound money.

Helping the American family (broadly understood) is a laudable goal, but the patterns of later and fewer marriages, later and less-frequent reproduction, and a host of other family pathologies are themselves the result of a mountain of interventions.

The American family must be saved from government, not by government.

America’s Demographic Squeeze: Fewer Births, More Dependents

The demographic decline facing the US is less sudden than often claimed, but no less consequential. As the Heritage report notes, fertility has remained below replacement rates for years, ensuring that natural population growth is weak. In the absence of sustained immigration, population growth is likely to become population contraction.

Simultaneously, the retirement of the Baby Boomer generation is steadily increasing the share of the population outside of the labor force, raising the dependency burden borne by working-age Americans and taxpayers.

These trends are already becoming visible. Slower growth or even shrinkage in the working-age population, absent significant immigration, constrains labor supply and limit economic growth potential. Meanwhile, Social Security and Medicare (the two largest expenditures in the federal budget) face rising expenditures precisely as the tax base supporting them grows more slowly. Additionally, the rise of the welfare state has greatly hampered family formation, especially among low-income families.

These changes underscore the need to remove institutional barriers to family formation and reform policies that underlie present challenges.

Remove Barriers Before Adding Benefits

Several laudable elements in the Heritage report shouldn’t be overlooked. First, it acknowledges that many policies favor traditional families. While there are indeed over 1,000 forms of federal privilege granted to married couples, these have been in place throughout the period when both marriage and fertility rates are falling. This raises the question: Why are these so-called “pro-family” or “pro-natal” policies failing to achieve their stated goals? Perhaps it’s because other measures on the books outweigh them, and actually short-circuit family formation.

The report’s authors call for a repeal of multiple policies that have been shown to deter and delay marriage, alter planned fertility, and even divorce patterns. Among them are “credits designed specifically to benefit poor single mothers,” and the structure and incentives from the Earned Income Tax Credit, which “strongly favors single parenthood over marriage.” The report also demands the elimination of “needless occupational licensure laws” that block young and lower-income earners from the labor force, undermining the early wealth-building that encourages marriage. Further, it seeks the easing of local zoning and construction regulations that make home affordability more difficult for younger, poorer households.

Heritage’s report frames the Israeli case as a model for what must be done to increase marriage and fertility rates. But the main reasons cited for (slightly) above-replacement fertility rates in Israel are religiosity, nationalism, and “Jewish communal life in exile,” all of which are summarized later as “culture, faith, and national purpose to family formation.” These specific pressures can’t, and shouldn’t, be replicated in modern, pluralistic societies. Further, the report rightfully admits, “While other nations have tried to reverse declining birthrates through financially generous family policies, none has succeeded in restoring fertility to replacement levels. This demonstrates that government spending alone does not ensure demographic success.”

Turning to Eastern Europe, the report looks to Hungary for policy solutions, interventions, and expenditures that have a more positive track record in increasing marriage and fertility. Indeed, Budapest began offering eligible brides interest-free loans, equating to over $30,000 for saying “I do” back in 2019. Moreover, the debt may be forgiven if the couple had three or more children. The report belies an important fact, however: the increase in the marriage rate is largely due to formerly cohabiting couples tying the knot. One would expect that once this initial wave of marriages has passed, the impact would be negated by other factors. In fact, just four years after the policy was introduced, the marriage rate began to fall back toward EU norms. The high cost of taxpayer-subsidized loans for cohabiting couples to make it official has had only temporary effects, and may prove, in the long run, to have produced marriages that are more apt to divorce, especially when the money runs out.

The Heritage Report correctly marks some of the causes of family disintegration: marriage penalties embedded in both welfare and fiscal interventions, especially for low-income households. The authors rightly call for their repeal. At the same time, the models they point to as ideal national cases for cultural and policy reform either can’t be replicated or are short on results. Worse still, the report’s greatest shortcoming is found in a drive-by mention of the single, foundational intervention that may actually be undermining all of traditional family life.

The Best “Pro-Family” Policy Is Price Stability

Buried within the report is a brief aside discussing the pressure a fiat monetary system and the resulting inflation has placed on families. The authors state:

High inflation can not only devastate the economy but also make it harder for families to form and grow. The US abandoned the gold standard in 1971, and the lack of convertibility of dollars to gold since then has facilitated reckless money printing and irresponsible federal spending, leading to bouts of high inflation in the 1970s, early 1980s, and the 2020s. Families rely on the dollar as a store of wealth, so the Federal Reserve must restore sound money and price stability. While many monetary rules have been proposed, the system with a proven record track record of success and stable prices is full convertibility to gold.

This passage, and its recommendation to return to full convertibility, are worth their weight in gold.

A few economists have pointed to the connection between increasing real prices in healthcareeducation, and housing as key contributors to delays in marriage and lowered fertility rates.

Outside factors like regulatory pressure and geopolitical forces have doubtless contributed to rising real prices in these categories. But among these, the ongoing loss of purchasing power due to the loose money policies of the Federal Reserve and its member banks has received too little attention.  

Even less attention is paid to the rise of what some have called the inflation culture. The Heritage report hints at this reality, but chalks it up to a loss of religiosity. But the decay of religious and civic life in the West has an undetected, underlying culprit. Because of the redistributive and impoverishing effects of easy money, a once-entrepreneurial and optimistic American culture has given way to a litany of social pathologies:

All are impacting family formation and family cohesion. All have their roots in the demoralization of persistent, slow-burning inflation, eating away the value of money. Younger generations hoping to live comfortably can reasonably ask: ‘Who has time for marriage and family?’ The answer: a lot fewer people than in generations past.

The damage done to the American family is likely reversible, but the Heritage Foundation’s report misses the root cause: inflation may be the most corrosive anti-family force of all. Policymakers who want to revive marriage rates and fertility should examine existing, counterproductive incentives, including new money creation and Congressional overspending. What they shouldn’t do is continue layering new interventions onto old ones, creating more bureaucracy and higher costs — but fewer weddings and babies.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:55

The EU-US $800BN Postwar Ukraine 'Prosperity' Plan Which Should Outrage MAGA

Zero Hedge -

The EU-US $800BN Postwar Ukraine 'Prosperity' Plan Which Should Outrage MAGA

Ukraine is now begging the EU and US for $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years at a moment its prospects on the battlefield look no better than a year ago. This reportedly includes an ask of $800 billion for "reconstruction" and $700 billion for "military purposes".

Politico is reporting Friday that EU leadership has circulated a confidential document to European heads of state outlining Ukraine's financial needs for the initial $800 billion for rebuilding the country - a figure which Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said would be comparable to "the detonation of an atomic bomb." Orbán made the remarks Friday following an emergency EU summit in Brussels.

"The 18-page document outlines a 10-year plan to guarantee Ukraine's recovery with a fast-tracked path toward EU membership," Politico writes after obtaining the document. "The European Commission circulated the plans with EU capitals ahead of the leaders’ summit Thursday evening where the document, dated Jan. 22, was addressed, according to three EU officials and diplomats who were granted anonymity to talk about the sensitive topic."

According to further details, "The funding strategy stretches until 2040 alongside an immediate 100-day operational plan to get the project off the ground. But the prosperity plan will struggle to attract outside investment if the conflict rumbles on, according to the world’s largest money manager, BlackRock, which is advising on the reconstruction plan in a pro-bono capacity."

via BBC

Various institutions alongside the US and EU government plan to contribute according to these broad milestones envisioned in the document:

  • Over the next ten, the EU, US, and major international lenders — including the IMF and World Bank — are lining up roughly $500 billion in combined public and private funding for Ukraine, according to the document.

  • The European Commission plans to commit another €100 billion in taxpayer-backed funds via budget support and investment guarantees under the EU’s next seven-year budget starting in 2028.

  • Brussels claims that this €100 billion outlay would "unlock" as much as €207 billion in additional investment 

  • Washington, for its part, says it will mobilize capital through a bespoke US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, notably without attaching a price tag.

  • The US also signaled plans to funnel investment into Ukraine's critical minerals, infrastructure, energy, and technology sectors, aligning reconstruction with long-term strategic and resource interests - an earlier theme sounded by the Trump administration.

Naturally, neither Politico nor much of the mainstream media have commented on how deeply unpopular all this will be for domestic populations, and especially MAGA in the US will likely greet this as merely setting up for another theft of taxpayer funds for corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs

And ironically this document for long-term funding is being revealed less than 24 hours after President Zelensky got up before the WEF audience in Davos and positively scolded EU governments for supposed 'inaction' and for being 'fragmented' and weak...

Biting the hand that feeds you... or also humiliating the EU while the bloc shovels billions in cash your way.

And: this speech is not gonna go down well. Europeans just approved a 90 billion euro package - fresh cash, not Russian assets - certainly not insignificant.

But Politico does inject a little realism at least, in quoting a BlackRock executive at Davos:

"Think about it. If you're a pension fund, you're fiduciary towards your clients, your pensioners. It's nearly impossible to invest into a war zone," BlackRock’s vice chairman, Philipp Hildebrand, said Wednesday in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos. "I think it has to be sequenced and that's going to take some time."

In the meantime, over in Moscow President Putin just made clear to the US delegation led by Steve Witkoff that the question of territory remains a red line. Russia has further signaled Ukraine is not going to look the same in any post-conflict scenario, especially in terms of geographic boundaries.

This unprecedented proposed long-term funding plan should infuriate American taxpayers...

Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov made clear Friday that the military will continue to consistently pursue the objectives ... on the battlefield, where the Russian armed forces hold the strategic initiative." This means, as BlackRock's Hildebrand acknowledged, the conflict which is about to enter its fifth year is going to drag on.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:30

AI-Induced Cultural Stagnation Is No Longer Speculation − It's Already Happening

Zero Hedge -

AI-Induced Cultural Stagnation Is No Longer Speculation − It's Already Happening

Authored by Ahmed Elgammal, via The Conversation

Generative AI was trained on centuries of art and writing produced by humans.

But scientists and critics have wondered what would happen once AI became widely adopted and started training on its outputs.

A new study points to some answers.

In January 2026, artificial intelligence researchers Arend Hintze, Frida Proschinger Åström and Jory Schossau published a study showing what happens when generative AI systems are allowed to run autonomously – generating and interpreting their own outputs without human intervention.

The researchers linked a text-to-image system with an image-to-text system and let them iterate – image, caption, image, caption – over and over and over.

Regardless of how diverse the starting prompts were – and regardless of how much randomness the systems were allowed – the outputs quickly converged onto a narrow set of generic, familiar visual themes: atmospheric cityscapes, grandiose buildings and pastoral landscapes. Even more striking, the system quickly “forgot” its starting prompt.

The researchers called the outcomes “visual elevator music” – pleasant and polished, yet devoid of any real meaning.

For example, they started with the image prompt, “The Prime Minister pored over strategy documents, trying to sell the public on a fragile peace deal while juggling the weight of his job amidst impending military action.” The resulting image was then captioned by AI. This caption was used as a prompt to generate the next image.

After repeating this loop, the researchers ended up with a bland image of a formal interior space – no people, no drama, no real sense of time and place.

A prompt that begins with a prime minister under stress ends with an image of an empty room with fancy furnishings. Arend Hintze, Frida Proschinger Åström and Jory SchossauCC BY

As a computer scientist who studies generative models and creativity, I see the findings from this study as an important piece of the debate over whether AI will lead to cultural stagnation.

The results show that generative AI systems themselves tend toward homogenization when used autonomously and repeatedly. They even suggest that AI systems are currently operating in this way by default.

The Familiar Is the Default

This experiment may appear beside the point: Most people don’t ask AI systems to endlessly describe and regenerate their own images. The convergence to a set of bland, stock images happened without retraining. No new data was added. Nothing was learned. The collapse emerged purely from repeated use.

But I think the setup of the experiment can be thought of as a diagnostic tool. It reveals what generative systems preserve when no one intervenes.

Pretty … boring. Chris McLoughlin/Moment via Getty Images

This has broader implications, because modern culture is increasingly influenced by exactly these kinds of pipelines. Images are summarized into text. Text is turned into images. Content is ranked, filtered and regenerated as it moves between words, images and videos. New articles on the web are now more likely to be written by AI than humans. Even when humans remain in the loop, they are often choosing from AI-generated options rather than starting from scratch.

The findings of this recent study show that the default behavior of these systems is to compress meaning toward what is most familiar, recognizable and easy to regenerate.

Cultural Stagnation or Acceleration?

For the past few years, skeptics have warned that generative AI could lead to cultural stagnation by flooding the web with synthetic content that future AI systems then train on. Over time, the argument goes, this recursive loop would narrow diversity and innovation.

Champions of the technology have pushed back, pointing out that fears of cultural decline accompany every new technology. Humans, they argue, will always be the final arbiter of creative decisions.

What has been missing from this debate is empirical evidence showing where homogenization actually begins.

The new study does not test retraining on AI-generated data. Instead, it shows something more fundamental: Homogenization happens before retraining even enters the picture. The content that generative AI systems naturally produce – when used autonomously and repeatedly – is already compressed and generic.

This reframes the stagnation argument. The risk is not only that future models might train on AI-generated content, but that AI-mediated culture is already being filtered in ways that favor the familiar, the describable and the conventional.

Retraining would amplify this effect. But it is not its source.

This Is No Moral Panic

Skeptics are right about one thing: Culture has always adapted to new technologies. Photography did not kill painting. Film did not kill theater. Digital tools have enabled new forms of expression.

But those earlier technologies never forced culture to be endlessly reshaped across various mediums at a global scale. They did not summarize, regenerate and rank cultural products – news stories, songs, memes, academic papers, photographs or social media posts – millions of times per day, guided by the same built-in assumptions about what is “typical.”

The study shows that when meaning is forced through such pipelines repeatedly, diversity collapses not because of bad intentions, malicious design or corporate negligence, but because only certain kinds of meaning survive the text-to-image-to-text repeated conversions.

This does not mean cultural stagnation is inevitable. Human creativity is resilient. Institutions, subcultures and artists have always found ways to resist homogenization. But in my view, the findings of the study show that stagnation is a real risk – not a speculative fear – if generative systems are left to operate in their current iteration.

They also help clarify a common misconception about AI creativity: Producing endless variations is not the same as producing innovation. A system can generate millions of images while exploring only a tiny corner of cultural space.

In my own research on creative AI, I found that novelty requires designing AI systems with incentives to deviate from the norms. Without it, systems optimize for familiarity because familiarity is what they have learned best. The study reinforces this point empirically. Autonomy alone does not guarantee exploration. In some cases, it accelerates convergence.

This pattern already emerged in the real world: One study found that AI-generated lesson plans featured the same drifttoward conventional, uninspiring content, underscoring that AI systems converge toward what’s typical rather than what’s unique or creative.

AI’s outputs are familiar because they revert to average displays of human creativity. Bulgac/iStock via Getty Images

Lost in Translation

Whenever you write a caption for an image, details will be lost. Likewise for generating an image from text. And this happens whether it’s being performed by a human or a machine.

In that sense, the convergence that took place is not a failure that’s unique to AI. It reflects a deeper property of bouncing from one medium to another. When meaning passes repeatedly through two different formats, only the most stable elements persist.

But by highlighting what survives during repeated translations between text and images, the authors are able to show that meaning is processed inside generative systems with a quiet pull toward the generic.

The implication is sobering: Even with human guidance – whether that means writing prompts, selecting outputs or refining results – these systems are still stripping away some details and amplifying others in ways that are oriented toward what’s “average.”

If generative AI is to enrich culture rather than flatten it, I think systems need to be designed in ways that resist convergence toward statistically average outputs. There can be rewards for deviation and support for less common and less mainstream forms of expression.

The study makes one thing clear: Absent these interventions, generative AI will continue to drift toward mediocre and uninspired content.

Cultural stagnation is no longer speculation. It’s already happening.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:05

Pages