Individual Economists

Trump Says Tech Giants Must Bear Cost Of Data Center Electricity, As Microsoft Joins OpenAI In Demanding Subsidies

Zero Hedge -

Trump Says Tech Giants Must Bear Cost Of Data Center Electricity, As Microsoft Joins OpenAI In Demanding Subsidies

We have been warning about this for months...

... and months....

... and now that even the deep state spies at the WaPo finally catching on...

... the future finally caught up to the present, and last week we noted that according to Bloomberg soaring retail electricity prices have become a political issue in several US states, especially in PJM, the Mid-Atlantic regional grid, which as we discussed recently, is woefully under-energized.

As Bloomberg said, paraphrasing us 5 months ago, "Power prices emerged as a a major campaign theme in off-year elections in New Jersey and Virginia in 2025, and will play a big role in 2026's upcoming national midterms and state elections."

This is just the start: as we discussed over a month ago, data center power demand could reach a staggering 106 GW in 2035.  For context, the US had about 25 GW of operating data centers in 2024 (according to Bloom Energy). Which means that unless all these data centers somehow find "behind the meter" sources of collocated power, electric bills will, pardon the pun, go nuclear. 

A July report from the Department of Energy estimated an additional 100 GW of new peak capacity is needed by 2030, of which 50 GW is attributable to data centers. Those facilities could account for as much as 12% of peak demand by 2028, according to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Bloomberg's conclusion: "Affordability politics have mixed implications for climate (renewables are cheap, but some programs expensive), and for data centers, which take the blame for rising prices."

Overnight, Trump's staff appears to have read our post again, and in a late night post on Truth Social, the president - addressing American voter concerns about rising electricity prices - said his administration had been in talks with one of the largest energy hogs, Microsoft, to ensure that consumers “don’t pick up the tab” for enormous data centers.

In a Truth Social post, he added that while the data centers "are key" to the artificial intelligence boom, the "big Technology Companies who build them must ‘pay their own way.’"

He said that Microsoft would make “major changes,” but was not specific. 

A few hours later, on Tuesday morning, Microsoft unveiled an initiative to curb water usage at its US data centers and limit the impact on the general population from surging in power prices.

Microsoft said it will pay utility rates high enough to cover its power costs and work with local utilities to expand supply when needed for its data centers. It also pledged to replenish more water than its data centers consume, saying it would start publishing water-use information for each data center region in the U.S., along with its progress on replenishment.

"Especially when tech companies are so profitable, it's both unfair and politically unrealistic for our industry to ask the public to shoulder added electricity costs for AI," Microsoft Vice Chair and President Brad Smith said in a statement.

The company said on Tuesday that as part of its investment in Wisconsin, it is supporting a new rate structure that would prevent data center power costs from being passed on to consumers. Microsoft will also train local residents to fill construction and maintenance jobs at its data centers, as well as provide AI literacy training to communities.

Political leaders across the U.S. are urging a rapid expansion of data-center capacity and new power production to keep the country competitive in AI. However, local communities are voicing concerns over how the power-hungry facilities will impact their utility bills and use land, water and other natural resources in the region.

But before you get the false impression that Microsoft is actually doing something out of the goodness of its heart and is not seeking the highest possible IRR, last night Microsoft made its true intentions clear when it warned that US AI groups are being outpaced by Chinese rivals in the battle for users outside the west, as China combines low-cost “open” models with hefty state subsidies to gain an edge.

Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, told the FT that the rapid adoption of Chinese AI start-up DeepSeek’s technology in emerging markets such as Africa underscores the competition American firms face around the world. 

Microsoft president Brad Smith says Chinese AI companies are undercutting US rivals because of state subsidies

“We have to recognize that right now, unlike a year ago, China has an open-source model, and increasingly more than one, that is competitive,” he said. “They benefit from subsidization by the Chinese government. They benefit from subsidies that enable [them] to basically undercut American companies based on price.”

Translation: the US has to subsidize its own AI companies (such as Microsoft wink wink) if it wants to defeat China in the new arms race. 

And while first OpenAI and now Microsoft are begging for US subsidizes and, eventually, bailouts of their AI businesses, China has already overtaken the US in the global market for so-called “open” AI models, which are often free to use, modify and integrate by developers. And, after a few years when instead of competing with China on the merits of technology the US hyperscalers are hoping for the US to eliminate Chinese competition, we fully expect China to overtake the US in closed models as well. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 15:25

SBA Investigating $1.2 Trillion On Payments As Part Of Fraud Probe: Loeffler

Zero Hedge -

SBA Investigating $1.2 Trillion On Payments As Part Of Fraud Probe: Loeffler

Authored by Travis Gilmore and Jen Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

Federal officials are reviewing approximately $1.2 trillion in payouts to root out fraudsters, according to Kelly Loeffler, administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA).

“Federal contracting and the fraud that happens within it in Washington, D.C., around these programs are probably the worst kept secret in Washington,” Loeffler said during an interview with “American Thought Leaders” host Jan Jekielek.

She highlighted patterns of fraud impacting the government, including the widespread abuse of the SBA’s 8(a) business development programs that offer funding for small businesses, including education and child care organizations, revealed in Minnesota

“It’s a huge cost to the American people when these programs are defrauded,” Loeffler said. “So, we have a whole path, we’re cracking down on that.”

An investigation looking back 15 years will include audits—the first in the program’s 45-year history, according to the administrator.

Approximately 7,000 borrowers—representing about $400 million in fraudulent payouts—were suspended in Minnesota last year.

Fraud Spread Nationwide

Officials will next use the investigative framework “to go state by state” and identify illegitimate payouts that were “very much driven during COVID,” she said.

Businesses asked to reduce operations—or shut down entirely, in some instances—were negatively impacted during the pandemic, which Loeffler said necessitated federal intervention.

“It was devastating, and would have been even more devastating had that federal assistance not come out,” she said. “And most small businesses were legitimate and used it for good, kept their employees on the payroll, and made a huge difference locally.”

Others saw the influx of federal benefits as a chance to reap rewards, which, combined with limited oversight, led to widespread abuse of the program, she said.

“There’s a certain group of actors that saw opportunity in disaster and defrauded the government,” Loeffler said. “What we know now is they come back to the trough.”

President Joe Biden’s administration forgave thousands of loans that were flagged as potentially fraudulent, she noted.

“They were not ever further investigated,” Loeffler said. “Those cases were closed; those loans were being forgiven.”

Federal investigators are now reviewing each loan to determine if further action is warranted.

“No more sweeping this under the rug,” Loeffler said. “We’re going to hold people accountable.”

Cross-Agency Cooperation

Fraud affects agencies across the federal government, with administrators from the Departments of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Health and Human Services, among others, increasing audits and review practices. Leaders are coordinating efforts to better identify problem areas and solutions.

Contracts for social and economic benefit programs funding 4,300 organizations are under scrutiny after improper payouts were discovered, according to the administrator.

“There’s a lot of fraud in those programs,” Loeffler said.

The SBA sent letters to individuals associated with the organizations last year, with responses due back this month. Anyone who fails to provide financial details and other requested information will face penalties.

“We are going to remove them from the program, and we are not going to operate programs that traffic in abuse, waste, and fraud, and we’re not going to traffic in DEI,” Loeffler said, referencing the diversity, equity, and inclusion policies that President Donald Trump has outlawed through executive action.

Investigating Debanking

Officials are also looking into debanking practices—where individuals and businesses are forced out of financial institutions for ideological or political purposes.

“We understand that debanking is a real thing in this country,” Loeffler said, highlighting SBA efforts to investigate the issue, with approximately 5,000 letters sent inquiring for more information.

Trump and Loeffler were among many other individuals who had accounts forcibly closed in recent years, she noted.

“There’s discriminatory actions that are being taken,” Loeffler said. “To use the banking system to be a choke point for disfavored political people is abjectly wrong, and the president is reversing that.”

Supporting Small Businesses

The SBA was founded in 1953 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to guide small business development by providing access to capital through guarantees to lenders, consulting services, and opportunities to procure government contracts.

Loeffler said the Biden administration deprioritized the agency while overseeing a change in workforce logistics that saw approximately 90 percent of employees working from home.

“Well, particularly in the last four years, the SBA was dormant,” she said. “So sadly, our main street job creators saw a complete absence of the SBA.”

Trump’s focus on America first and reshoring manufacturing are an abrupt shift from prior administrations’ agendas, she said.

“Small businesses are really refueling our onshoring renaissance, along with President Trump’s policies,” Loeffler said.

Under her leadership, she said the agency is committed to guiding Congress toward deregulation and pro-business legislation.

“We’re here to empower the private sector and make sure that we’re getting out of the way, but yet making sure that they have the capital and the regulatory environment to build,” Loeffler said.

Humble Beginnings

A fourth-generation small farmer from Illinois, Loeffler’s path to Cabinet official started in the field at 8 years old.

The first college graduate from her family, she worked as a waitress in high school and college before launching her career as a financial analyst.

“I felt like, based on my financial acumen, I wanted to bring that to Washington, because I saw it completely absent when I was in the private sector, and being regulated and being told what we could and couldn’t do by people who didn’t know our business, didn’t understand free enterprise or fair markets or transparency or reporting or accountability,” Loeffler said.

“So that’s what I went to Washington to do, because I knew that as a farm kid, I owed it to every other young person who didn’t believe that the federal government understood them, that they had someone up there fighting for them.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 15:05

2026 Will Be Breakout Year For Autonomous Driving And Humanoid Robots; Deutsche Bank

Zero Hedge -

2026 Will Be Breakout Year For Autonomous Driving And Humanoid Robots; Deutsche Bank

In a note out this week, analysts from Deutsche Bank led by Edison Yu said the global auto and mobility industry is entering a pivotal transition year, with 2026 shaping up as a major inflection point for both autonomous driving and humanoid robotics following the CES technology conference in Las Vegas.

“We attended CES in Las Vegas last week and sensed a meaningful surge in enthusiasm and relevance,” the analysts wrote. “Vehicle autonomy (robotaxi + consumer L4), and most notably, humanoids took center stage at the show, illustrating the spread of AI to the physical world.”

They said they expect self-driving vehicles to move beyond pilot programs and into full-scale commercial deployment, while humanoid robots transition from research labs into early real-world use. “Overall, we predict 2026 is a year where self-driving cars increasingly transition from testing/validation to scaling, and humanoids move from lab experiments to small deployments.”

The analysts highlighted the emergence of a new humanoid robotics supply chain, with traditional automotive suppliers repositioning themselves to serve what could become a massive new market. “While early innings, we see suppliers trying to pivot toward the humanoid supply chain in hopes of enabling large volumes in the future.”

Nvidia continues to dominate the computing backbone of this ecosystem. “Nvidia continues to be the dominant onboard processor seemingly due to performance and ease-of-use,” the team wrote, noting that most major humanoid developers are relying on Nvidia’s Jetson Orin and Thor platforms.

They also described a major shift in how robots are trained, away from rigid programming toward systems capable of reasoning through complex tasks. “There is a concerted move away from ‘pre-programmed’ or ‘scripted’ actions toward vision-language-action (VLA) where the robot ‘reasons’ its way through a variety of tasks.”

Commercial deployment of humanoids is initially focused on narrow, task-specific roles. “In the near term, we think the ‘general purpose’ humanoid is mostly being funneled into specific use cases to prove commercial viability before truly going into the home,” the analysts said.

Cost reduction will be driven by scale. “Increasing volume to improve overhead absorption was cited as the main cost driver,” the report noted, adding that one company on the tour has already reduced unit costs from $200,000 to $100,000, with a roadmap toward $50,000 as volumes rise.

On autonomous driving, the analysts said robotaxi programs are now entering a new phase of momentum. “With Tesla launching Robotaxi in 2025, we expect further commercial momentum from multiple players in 2026,” they wrote, citing expansion efforts by Waymo, Amazon’s Zoox, and partnerships involving Mobileye, Volkswagen, Uber and others.

They also pointed to Nvidia’s new autonomous driving platform as potentially transformative. Nvidia is “attempting to make it easier for automakers to deploy high level capabilities at scale” by providing both the “brain” and the “skull” of autonomous systems, reducing the need for automakers to build full AI stacks from scratch.

Among suppliers, the team said companies such as Aptiv and Visteon are entering critical execution years as they roll out next-generation AI-powered vehicle systems. In the case of Visteon, the company is “effectively democratizing the software-defined vehicle,” extending advanced computing and connectivity features into lower-cost vehicles and emerging markets.

Taken together, the analysts concluded that CES 2026 marked a turning point for the industry, with artificial intelligence, robotics and autonomous driving shifting decisively from experimentation into early commercialization.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 14:45

Marxist Network Behind Pro-Maduro, Anti-ICE Protests Faces Congressional Scrutiny

Zero Hedge -

Marxist Network Behind Pro-Maduro, Anti-ICE Protests Faces Congressional Scrutiny

Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times,

After the U.S. capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro sent shockwaves worldwide, activist groups aligned with Marxist ideology and sympathetic to Chinese communist causes staged protests in America.

The same network of groups that fueled anti-Israel protests and the June 2025 Los Angeles riots against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has organized dozens of pro-Maduro and anti-ICE protests around the country.

One group, Answer Coalition, declared on social media an “emergency day of action” on Jan. 3.

The coalition’s national director, Brian Becker, after taking part in a New York protest, appeared in a segment on Chinese state media CGTN—a registered foreign agent with the Department of Justice—to condemn the U.S. move.

The United States, he said, “might be considered a rogue nation at this point.”

U.S. actions in Venezuela, he alleged, followed a pattern “where the U.S. demonizes … the leader of the targeted country, Gadhafi in Libya, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Milosevic in Yugoslavia … and then the U.S. goes to war; carries out unilateral acts of aggression.”

The groups’ focus expanded to call for protests against ICE following the fatal shooting of a protester, Renee Nicole Good, in Minneapolis on Jan. 7.

The Party for Socialism and Liberation, another group in the network, on Jan. 9 shared a poster depicting President Donald Trump as holding cash in one hand and oil in the other, with an ICE agent kneeling next to him. The poster showed the two figures encircled by red fists—imagery often used by communist and anarchist groups.

The activities of the groups are now facing scrutiny in Congress, with lawmakers pointing to their connections to a pro-Beijing U.S. millionaire, Neville Roy Singham, who lives in Shanghai and has appeared alongside Chinese officials in at least one forum that promotes the regime’s agenda.

“He is definitely someone that is anti-American in ideology, and regardless of where you might stand, even on topics like Israel versus Palestine, is funding certain groups that actually sow discord in this country with no efforts to actually resolve the issues, only to get us to fight one another,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said at a House Oversight Committee meeting on Jan. 7.

She proposed a motion to subpoena Singham and hold him in contempt of Congress if he fails to answer it. The motion passed after a voice vote.

Luna, asked about the motion, noted that then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) had pressed in July 2024 for investigation into the groups over concerns about “efforts by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its allies to sow discord in the United States.”

The lawmakers at the time named 18 groups in the network they said may have violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a U.S. law requiring public disclosure for individuals and organizations advocating for foreign interests, over their alleged ties to Beijing. The list included Answer Coalition and The People’s Forum.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) speaks at Turning Point USA's America Fest in Phoenix, Ariz., on Dec. 20, 2025. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Luna said she is following up on the matter.

“We have credible reason to believe that [Singham] is an unregistered agent of China in violation of FARA,” Luna told The Epoch Times.

There’s “absolutely a connection” between the network and “the anti-ICE riots that we saw in Los Angeles and across the country earlier this year, as well as the stuff happening in Minnesota,” she said.

It would be up to the Justice Department to decide the potential penalties if Singham doesn’t comply with the subpoena; regardless, the groups are done “playing their games,” she said.

Singham has sent money to the People’s Forum, one of the groups named by the lawmakers, according to a July 2024 Instagram post by the organization, which described Singham as “our friend,” and a “former Black Panther and life-long socialist.”

In October 2024, the Manhattan-based People’s Forum hosted a three-part course series on the Chinese Communist Party’s 75-year rule of China. The course descriptions said the regime’s founding in 1949 “ushered in a new era in China’s history” and praised Chinese socialism as a “unique model of socialist construction.”

A Jan. 6 X post from the organization proclaimed, “Our movement is fighting on all fronts,” including for “a free Palestine,” “to get ICE off our streets, and for socialism.”

The organization’s founder and executive director, Manolo De Los Santos, appeared at the World Trade Center on Jan. 8 with a bullhorn, leading a protest against ICE as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem held a press conference inside.

Some Venezuelans have said the protests against U.S. operations in Caracas don’t represent them.

“I think these are paid protesters probably from the CCP,” exiled Venezuelan Jorge Galicia, who fled political persecution in Venezuela in 2017, told The Epoch Times’ sister media NTD.

He said those who take part in the protests should go to Venezuela and see things for themselves.

“I have a really good friend who was put in prison by the Maduro regime in the middle of the night; they broke into his house,” Galicia said.

China and Venezuela have long maintained close relations. Maduro met with a Chinese delegation just hours before the U.S. raid in Caracas that captured him and his wife. He posted a video of their exchange online, saying it reaffirms the “strong bonds” and friendship between the two countries, a “relationship that stands the test of time.”

Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington on Jan. 8, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

Jiang Pinchao, a Chinese dissident and writer, told The Epoch Times that the U.S. military action jeopardized the interests of certain communist and communist-aligned groups, prompting them to “cause disruption” in an attempt to steer U.S. society in a direction that’s favorable to them.

“These interests are at odds with those of the U.S. So of course they will use all kinds of ways to interfere,” he said.

Lawmakers said that although America protects freedom of expression, the groups agitating for Maduro belong in a different category.

“Free speech for American citizens is different than foreign states filtering their money through NGOs and the like to sway elections and to sow chaos into our country—that cannot be allowed,” Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) told NTD.

James Moylan, a Republican congressional delegate from Guam, said he considers the pro-Maduro protests “terrible.”

“There should be some restraints,” he told NTD. “We’re just trying to promote freedom, and they’re trying to kill it,” he said. “I think they’re communists.”

He said he sometimes sees such protesters on Capitol Hill.

“They’re right up into your face. I just feel for them. I wish they could just learn and understand,” Moylan said.

Cloud, who was at the Oversight Committee meeting, said he’s “all about continuing the investigation” into the foreign money. He said the committee will ensure “we’re turning off the spigots” on “these foreign influences that are coming to our country solely for the purposes of undermining our country.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Singham, The People’s Forum, Party for Socialism and Liberation, and the Answer Coalition for comment.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 14:25

TradFi Trust & DeFi Dominance Favor Ethereum Over Bitcoin; StanChart

Zero Hedge -

TradFi Trust & DeFi Dominance Favor Ethereum Over Bitcoin; StanChart

Standard Chartered's Geoff Kendrick raised his ETH forecasts in August 2025 to reflect Ethereum’s structural advantages, along with supportive regulatory developments and increased buying by ETFs and DATs.

The outlook has turned more nuanced since then.

In absolute terms, Bitcoin’s weaker-than-expected performance has prompted Kendricks to downgrade his BTC forecasts and push out our eventual USD 500,000 forecast to 2030 (also downgrading his ETH-USD forecasts for the next few years).

However, in relative terms, the SnanChart crypto guru thinks prospects for Ethereum have turned more positive.

He has therefore turned more constructive on ETH-BTC, seeing the cross eventually returning to the 2021 highs around 0.08...

Source: Bloomberg

Kendricks sees three main factors for ETH's outperformance:

1. Flows

We think flows – via ETFs and DATs – are less important for ETH than for BTC, as ETH has a strong use case and fundamentals, whereas BTC functions purely as a decentralised store of value. However, flows still matter – and while they have weakened overall, they are more constructive for ETH than for BTC at present.

ETF inflows have stalled for both BTC and ETH in the past few months (Figure 2).

However, we think this is a temporary phenomenon rather than a change of direction (as we detailed in Bitcoin – Lowering our forecasts). Decision-making by investment committees takes time, so we expect the buildout of both the BTC and ETH ETF markets to take several years. Gold ETFs, the most relevant historical example, took about seven years after their November 2004 US introduction to reach a structural equilibrium that allowed flows to become more cyclical.

DAT buying of digital assets has mostly ended, in our view, following the late 2025 collapse in mNAVs (a valuation metric that divides corporate market cap by the value of digital assets held). DAT buying was enabled by mNAVs significantly above 1.0, which effectively allowed DATs to turn USD 1.00 into USD 1.50. However, a number of DATs now have mNAVs below 1.0, including MSTR (the largest BTC DAT) and SBET (the second-largest ETH DAT). These mNAVs failed to rise much even after MSCI announced on 6 January that it would not exclude DATs from its indices for now (mNAVs fell in October 2025 when MSCI announced its review on this topic).

However, BMNR – the largest ETH DAT – has seen its mNAV hold at around 1.1 or 1.2. As a result, it continues to buy ETH at a reasonably fast pace, as per Figure 3.

Indeed, BMNR now holds 3.4% of all ETH in circulation and remains on track to reach its publicly stated goal of 5%, the current pace of buying would suggest that this will be achieved by late Q1 or early Q2. Against this backdrop, DAT buying of ETH appears more sustainable than DAT buying of BTC.

2. Stablecoin, RWA and DeFi dominance

We are very bullish on prospects for stablecoins, tokenised real-world-assets (RWAs) and decentralised finance (DeFi) over the next few years. Specifically, we forecast that both stablecoins and RWAs will reach market caps of USD 2tn by end-2028, up from current levels of USD 308bn for stablecoins (source: Artemis) and USD 40bn for RWAs (source: The Block).

The majority of this will be done on Ethereum. Currently, 55% of all stablecoins and 52% of all RWAs are on Ethereum, according to data from Artemis and The Block (note that the RWA share excludes Figure’s private credit project on the Provenance blockchain – this is a one-off and is not indicative of future projects, in our view). We expect Ethereum’s shares to continue to grow as more TradFi activities move into the blockchain space, given that Ethereum is trusted in the TradFi world. Ethereum has been operating for over 10 years and its network has never gone down. While other blockchains may be faster or cheaper, reliability will always trump marginal speed and cost savings for TradFi operators, in our view.

We also see stablecoins as an important driver of Ethereum outperformance. The rapid increase in stablecoin transactions has helped push the total number of transactions on Ethereum to a fresh all-time high in recent weeks (Figures 4 and 5).

Without stablecoins, which now account for 35-40% of all transactions on Ethereum, this high would not have been reached.

A breakdown of blockchain ‘GDP’ also underscore the important role stablecoins are playing for Ethereum. On this measure (which adds up the fees earned by protocols from various sources), around 60% of 2025 activity on Ethereum was associated with stablecoin issuers – a far larger share than for competitors (Figure 6).

In addition to gauging blockchains’ sectoral exposure, the GDP measure can be compared to a blockchain’s market cap to create a P/E-type measure, allowing comparison both across different blockchains and over time (as shown in Figure 7).

This measure for ETH has been very stable at around 50 in recent years, suggesting that more activity – as measured by GDP – should result in a higher market cap.

3. Enabling greater activity

In June 2025, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin announced plans to increase ETH’s layer 1 throughput by 10x over two to three years. Since then, the Fusaka upgrade in December 2025 has enabled a further increase in both the gas limit (the amount of data that can be recorded per block) and the amount of ‘blobs’ per block (the amount of information that can be squeezed into each block, increasing total information per data recorded). Proactive steps are being taken to enable the planned 10x throughput increase (Figures 8 and 9).

Achieving this is critical to ETH price action. This, combined with a stable ‘P/E’ measure, accounts for most of the long-term price growth we forecast for ETH.

Other drivers of ETH price action

Another key premise of our constructive ETH-USD forecasts is our view that Bitcoin will reach a fresh all-time high (above USD 126,000) in H1.

This would defy expectations among some in the market that BTC is poised for further price declines at this stage of its ‘halving’ cycle; we believe the halving cycle is no longer relevant.

USD 126,000 is a long way from current BTC prices around USD 90,000; reaching that level would require US equities to remain strong, FOMC rate-cut pricing to increase, and the regulatory environment to improve.

Passage of the CLARITY Act is key in this regard; the legislation is currently moving through Congress and we expect it to pass in Q1.

Kendricks' bottom line: While they lower their ETH-USD forecasts for 2026-28, in line with the recent reductions in their BTC-USD forecasts; they expect ETH to outperform BTC, and remain positive longer-term

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 14:05

Trump Admin Ends Temporary Protection For Somalis In US

Zero Hedge -

Trump Admin Ends Temporary Protection For Somalis In US

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

The Trump administration has decided to end temporary protection for Somali nationals in the United States, officials said on Jan. 13.

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem testifies before the House Committee on Homeland Security in the Cannon House Office Building in Washington on Dec. 11, 2025. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

“Temporary means temporary,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told The Epoch Times via email.

“Country conditions in Somalia have improved to the point that it no longer meets the law’s requirement for Temporary Protected Status. Further, allowing Somali nationals to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to our national interests. We are putting Americans first.”

There are 2,471 Somali nationals in the United States under the status, also known as TPS. Another 1,383 are in the country with pending TPS applications.

TPS is authorized by federal law for people from countries with conditions such as civil war that prevent the citizens from returning there safely. TPS for Somalia has been in place since 1991.

The Biden administration in 2024 extended TPS for Somali nationals until March 17, 2026. Department of Homeland Security officials at the time cited “the ongoing armed conflict and extraordinary and temporary conditions.”

“Somalia continues to experience widespread insecurity due to armed conflict involving state and non-state actors,” they wrote.

“The ongoing conflict, as well as other violence, has exposed civilian populations to ill-treatment, abuse, and displacement. Additionally, Somalia recently experienced intense flooding that damaged land and infrastructure, impeded efforts to address food insecurity, and exacerbated disease outbreaks. Significant barriers to the delivery of humanitarian aid persist.”

Noem previously terminated TPS status for nationals of multiple countries.

Federal judges have blocked some of those terminations, finding that they were arbitrary and capricious in violation of federal statute. The administration is appealing those decisions.

The ending of TPS for Somalis is the latest action by the administration in the wake of alleged fraud linked to Somali nationals.

On Jan. 7, for example, officials suspended assistance for the Somali government.

Billions of dollars were “stolen by really bad and deranged people,” President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Jan. 13. He was defending how federal officers have been conducting immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota, which hosts a sizeable Somali population.

“For years, these corrupt, activist politicians have refused to protect Minnesotans and are now proposing illegal actions to keep their stranglehold on control and continue stealing from American citizens,” Noem said on X this week.

“We will root out this rampant fraud, we will arrest the criminal illegal aliens hurting Americans with impunity, and we will hold those who aid and abetted this criminality accountable.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 13:45

Trump Admin And Taiwan Close To Finalizing Trade Pact; $100B In TSMC Plants Slated For Arizona

Zero Hedge -

Trump Admin And Taiwan Close To Finalizing Trade Pact; $100B In TSMC Plants Slated For Arizona

The Trump administration and Taiwan are in the 'final stages' of negotiations on a tariff agreement which would see the United States lower tariffs on the self-governing island's exports to 15% from 20%. 

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks inside the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., November 12, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

In exchange, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) would commit to build five new chip plants in Arizona - roughly doubling its manufacturing presence in the state, along with building two advanced packaging facilities, Bloomberg reports. 

The commitments are on top of existing plans for up to $165 billion in US investment by TSMC - a company which has come into recent focus as the world eyes China's next move in light of the Trump administration snatching Maduro (and effectively Venezuela) over drugs and oil. 

Given that a single fab costs roughly $20 billion to build in the US, TSMC's additional investment would likely top $100 billion - with completion dates for the four extra fabs occurring sometime in the 2030s, the report continues. 

In a Tuesday statement, the Office of Trade Negotiations in Taipei said that the two sides had arrived at a "broad consensus" on a trade, and are now in discussions to hold a concluding meeting, which would be sent to the legislature for review. 

Assuming a pact is signed, it would mark another trade win for Trump, while bringing Taiwan's levies from the US to the same level as neighboring Japan and South Korea. 

Trump administration officials including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick had laid out their expectations for Taiwan to promise significant additional investments by TSMC in chip production on US soil. Any agreement with Taipei risks provoking China, which claims the island as part of its territory — a view Taiwan rejects.

Taiwan has been trying to conclude a deal with the US before Trump meets Chinese leader Xi Jinping in China, according to a senior official in Taipei who declined to be identified discussing the sensitive issue. The US leader is expected to visit China in April. -Bloomberg

That said, the US Supreme Court could quickly make this exercise moot - or at least delay it, with a ruling set for as soon as Wednesday on the legality of Trump's tariffs (which, as we noted earlier, has workarounds).  

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 13:25

Stellar 30Y Auction Stops Through, Sees Solid Foreign Bidder Demand

Zero Hedge -

Stellar 30Y Auction Stops Through, Sees Solid Foreign Bidder Demand

The last coupon auction of the first full week of 2026 was also the strongest one. 

Moments ago the Treasury sold $22BN in 30Y paper in a very solid auction: the sale priced at a high yield of 4.825%, just fractionally higher than the 4.773% in December, and also stopped through the When Issued 4.833% by 0.8bps.

The bid to cover was a solid 2.418, up from 2.365 last month, and the highest since June. 

The internals were also impressive, with foreigners buying 66.8%, up from 65.4% in December, and above the six-auction average of 63.7%. And with Direct Bidders awarded 21.3%, bit below the recent average of 23.9%, Dealers were left holding 11.95%, which was also below the recent average of 12.4%.

Bottom line: a very strong auction, which was also facilitated by today's surprisingly cool CPI report, which swung the long-end from an intraday high of 4.20% to a low of 4.15%, and was last trading at 4.165%.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 13:24

California Restricts Free Speech

Zero Hedge -

California Restricts Free Speech

Authored by Kenin M. Spivak via RealClearPolitics,

California’s far-left Supreme Court has ordered restrictions on the speech and expressive conduct of California’s lawyers “at all times,” including during their unrelated business activities, political endeavors and personal lives.

Just before Christmas, the even more radical California State Bar imperiously advised the state’s 200,000 lawyers “Read it, declare it, mean it.” That ominous warning introduced the California Supreme Court’s Orwellian Rule 9.7 which requires every lawyer to attest that: “As an officer of the court, I will strive to conduct myself at all times with dignity, courtesy and integrity.” The license of any lawyer who fails or refuses to acquiesce will be invalidated, and any lawyer who violates the oath is subject to “appropriate fees and penalties” to be set by the Bar.

For a nanosecond, that’s an appealing concept. But, under the First Amendment, no instrumentality of government may condition an individual’s livelihood on complying with its view of “dignity” or “courtesy,” in their political or personal endeavors. Invalidating the licenses of non-compliant lawyers also violates procedural due process under the Fifth and 14th Amendments. Tying the oath to meaningless pap about a lawyer being an “officer of the court” exposes the premeditated overreach.

As a threshold problem, even in traditional usage, “strive,” “dignity” and “courtesy” are so vague that no lawyer could know what is required, violating substantive due process. Presumably, cross-dressing is now considered dignified and proper; but, what about blackface? Or using invective, mentioning a transgender person’s “deadname,” employing grammatically and biologically correct pronouns, opposing abortion on demand, wearing a MAGA hat or T-shirt, referring to the homeless as vagrants, rather than “unhoused,” or illegal aliens as invaders, rather than non-citizens? How about singing off-key?

These statements and symbols are protected by the First Amendment, and yet, aside from singing off-key, each has been used by the far left to suppress social media posts and articles, suspend and expel students, and fire employees on grounds that their traditional beliefs and expressive conduct are discourteous and undignified. In Europe, which has no First Amendment, criminal prosecutions for speech and symbols progressives find odious are rapidly increasing. Britain made more than 12,000 arrests last year, more than 30 each day, for offensive online posts.

At last year’s Munich Security Conference, Vice President JD Vance called out elites in Europe for threatening to shut down social media to combat “hateful content,” and German police for raiding “citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments.” The Europeans retorted that they are preserving courtesy and dignity, and then most uncourteously fined X $140 million for failing to comply.

Despite the First Amendment, the Biden administration weaponized its opposition to free discourse with a whole-of-government enterprise that censored, demonetized and deplatformed conservatives, prosecuted pro-life activists, and investigated parents who opposed DEI and kowtowing to transgender militants.

It has taken considerable litigation to protect students, faculty, and other employees targeted by state and local governments for their so-called “offensive” speech and symbols, including prayer, refusal to call biological men “she,” and wearing pro-choice, pro-faith, and MAGA hats and T-shirts.

Merely regulating tone, comportment, and politeness violates the Constitution. But the threat implied by Rule 9.7 is more perniciously intended to chill free speech, and there is every reason to expect that the California Supreme Court and Bar will use Rule 9.7 to destroy the livelihoods of conservative and America First lawyers who run afoul of the left’s ever-expanding canon of dos and don’ts. Invalidating a law license can cascade into loss of other licenses, financing, and business and social opportunities.

Just last year, the California Bar proclaimed that “attorneys have an ethical duty to provide competent and diligent representation to clients, regardless of how unpopular or controversial their causes may be,” yet it concurrently suspended, and demanded the disbarment of Claremont Institute constitutional attorney John Eastman for giving legal advice to President Trump in the run-up to Jan. 6, 2021. Bar prosecutors characterized his willingness to advise Trump on his alternatives as “moral turpitude.”

The California Bar zealously promotes DEI, which unconstitutionally allocates opportunities by race and gender orientation. DEI’s advocates duplicitously label their opponents as racists, effectively a claim of undignified and discourteous conduct, two grounds for disciplinary action.

The United States Supreme Court has clearly explained that the First Amendment prohibits government from restricting speech, symbols or expressive conduct because of the message, ideas, subject matter, or content. There are no exceptions for hate speech, courtesy, dignity, or court officers.

The California Supreme Court and State Bar know this. They are counting on their power over the state’s lawyers to coerce compliance. Supporters of free speech must not let that happen.

Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including RealClearPolitics, The American Mind, National Review, television, radio, and podcasts.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 13:05

US Holiday Spending Jumped In December, Signaling Consumer Strength Into 2026

Zero Hedge -

US Holiday Spending Jumped In December, Signaling Consumer Strength Into 2026

American consumers closed out the holiday season with a strong December spending surge, adding to evidence that household demand remains resilient even as confidence surveys show lingering unease about the economy.

Retail sales during the final two months of 2025 rose 4.1 percent from a year earlier, according to a Jan. 12 report from the National Retail Federation (NRF), pointing to total spending of just more than $1 trillion.

Retail sales excluding automobiles and gasoline stations rose 1.26 percent in December from November on a seasonally adjusted basis and increased 3.54 percent from 2024.

Core retail sales—excluding restaurants in addition to auto dealers and gas stations—climbed 1.6 percent month over month in December and rose 3.58 percent year over year.

As Tom Ozimek reports for The Epoch Times, NRF President and CEO Matthew Shay described the retail sales growth numbers as a “sharp surge” that showed consumers continued to spend eagerly on friends and family over the holidays.

“Continued economic momentum helped land 2025 holiday sales near the top of NRF’s forecast, reaffirming that consumers remain on solid footing,” Shay said.

The acceleration was broad, with sales up across all nine retail categories on a monthly basis and higher in six of nine categories on a yearly basis. Clothing, sporting goods, and digital products led year-over-year gains.

The December figures, which paint a picture of economic resilience and consumer strength heading into 2026, are based on anonymized credit and debit card purchase data. Official government data on retail spending, released monthly by the U.S. Census Bureau, are not yet available for December.

In November, NRF predicted that retail spend would reach just above $1 trillion over the holiday season, despite some gloomier sentiment surveys suggesting a possible consumer retrenchment.

“American consumers may be cautious in sentiment, yet remain fundamentally strong and continue to drive U.S. economic activity,” Shay said in November, while NRF chief economist Mark Mathews described the U.S. economy as showing “surprising resilience” in a year marked by persistent inflationary pressures and trade-related uncertainty.

Other measures also pointed to a strong holiday season. Adobe said recently that U.S. consumers spent a record $257.8 billion online from Nov. 1 through Dec. 31, up 6.8 percent from a year earlier and above its forecast of $253.4 billion.

Visa Consulting & Analytics likewise reported a solid season, estimating that U.S. holiday spending rose 4.2 percent from Nov. 1 through Dec. 23 across all payment types, including cash and check.

Mastercard also pointed to steady demand, reporting that U.S. holiday retail sales—both in-store and online—rose by nearly 4 percent from Nov. 1 through Dec. 21. The company said shoppers bought earlier in the season, took advantage of promotions, and blended brick-and-mortar purchases with online spending.

“Consumers demonstrated flexibility and confidence this season,” Michelle Meyer, chief economist at the Mastercard Economics Institute, said in a statement.

Consumer spending powers the U.S. economy, accounting for roughly two-thirds of output. Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose at a forecast-beating pace of 4.3 percent year over year in the third quarter, driven by higher exports and strong consumption.

Consumer Strength Underpins Growth Outlook

The strong holiday-season spending data comes as forecasters have grown more upbeat about U.S. growth, while continuing to flag consumer spending as the decisive factor for 2026.

Bank of America Chairman and CEO Brian Moynihan said in a recent interview that consumer demand remains steady even as some confidence readings have softened.

“At the end of the day, people are spending. They have good credit quality. They are employed ... it’s pretty solid right now,” Moynihan said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Dec. 28.

Moynihan said Bank of America’s internal transaction data showed consumer spending rose more than 4 percent year over year during the Thanksgiving-to-early-December period. He said the key risk going forward is whether consumers remain engaged.

“The real question is—will the consumer keep spending in the U.S.?” he said, adding that Bank of America economists have upgraded their economic growth forecasts for 2026 sharply, now projecting a 2.4 percent pace of growth, far higher than the 1.5 percent prediction just four months ago.

This month, the Atlanta Federal Reserve’s GDPNow model raised its estimate of fourth-quarter real GDP growth to 5.4 percent on Jan. 8 from 2.9 percent a day earlier after incorporating fresh data on trade, consumer spending, and services activity.

A day later, the Atlanta Fed lowered the forecast slightly to 5.1 percent after the U.S. Census Bureau released data showing that fourth-quarter real residential investment growth contracted by 5.8 percent.

Fitch Ratings also upgraded its outlook, saying delayed government data showed firmer momentum in the second half of 2025 than previously assumed. Fitch now estimates U.S. GDP will grow by 2 percent in 2026, up from a previous projection of 1.9 percent.

Still, sentiment signals remain mixed. The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index fell to 89.1 in December from 92.9 in November, but expectations for future household finances improved to their most positive level since January 2025, while inflation expectations eased.

The labor market has cooled but remains stable. The economy added 50,000 jobs in December, down from 56,000 in November, while the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

With consumers finishing 2025 on a strong note, economists now look to future data releases to see whether that spending momentum carried into 2026 and continued to power the U.S. economy.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 12:45

Definancialisation Doesn't Mean Peace, It Means Prep For War

Zero Hedge -

Definancialisation Doesn't Mean Peace, It Means Prep For War

By Michael Every of Rabobank

For years, some analysts talked about the problems associated with ‘financialization’ and only a small subset talked about a looming backlash ‘definancialization’. What did you think it meant? Vibes? Papers? Essays? “Because markets”?

In the big picture, an FT op-ed notes that Trump’s new ‘Great Game’ is “mining, mapping, and mercantilism,” where “the contest for resources between the US and China will continue after the president is gone and affect us all.” All true, and flagged here for over a decade now – recall 2017’s ‘The Great Game of Global Trade’? Yet as think tanks and global media notice that Venezuela and Beyond: Trump’s ‘America First’ Rhetoric Masks a Neo-Imperialist Streak, which we warned of in November 2024, markets are still brushing it all off. Apparently, they think this is all just Marco Rubio memes.

NATO Secretary General Rutte is likewise portrayed by Politico as the dog-with-coffee-in-a-house-on-fire meme for saying ‘Chill out, this is fine’ re: Greenland and that the alliance is “not at all” in crisis. Actually, he’s right given NATO is NO without the US.

But if Greenland is not a crisis, Iran could be. We don’t know if the regime will survive; if the US or Israel will strike it; if it will strike Israel and US bases; if something could happen with the remnants of its nuclear programme; who comes next if the regime collapses; if the country will hold together if it does; and what that unleashes as Great Powers abhor a vacuum: Turkey – Israel tensions are already rising. And note this is all MUCH closer to Europe than the US.

What one can say is that Venezuela and Iran are precisely what was flagged in the 2026 Financial Markets Outlook titled ‘Who Has the Cards?’: disruption of upstream commodity supplies heading to China to mirror China’s hold on rare earths, mid-stream processing, and downstream industrial and consumer goods. Much more of this is yet to come as the Great Game goes on.

For Europe (and the UK and Australia/NZ and Canada), this backdrop is beyond ‘challenging’. Via Greenland, Trump is pointing out that ‘rules-based’ sovereignty doesn’t mean a thing if you can’t defend said territory – which they can’t; and the UK government is trying to give away the geostrategic Chagos Islands, prompting a rare House of Lords rebuke… will Trump do more if the actual Chagossians, who oppose this deal, offer to name an island after him?

If it wants to get serious about defense, Europe is said to need a 100,000 strong army. The EU defense spending boost penciled in by 2035 is not enough, and it’s against moving targets – Trump wants to boost his military budget by 50% in 2027, China is forging ahead, Russia is ‘all in’ Moreover, you can’t have 27 armies acting as one, so who runs it? Even assuming it gets there, in an age of maps, mining, and mercantilism, where is Europe going to be getting its raw materials from *cheaply*, as the US is aiming for in the Western Hemisphere, at least?

Australia and the UK don’t sit prettier despite political unity. Indeed, we just saw a warning that the Brits are so short of the ability to deliver on the military front that AUKUS is potentially at risk; that’s as the UK is looking to China to build the Falsane base tugboats it will need for the new nuclear submarines it might not be able to help deliver to Australia. Taken like this, it’s the status quo ante of financialisation and neoliberal free trade that is arguably running on vibes, papers, and essays rather than any kind of hard power.

Moreover, as Politico notes, “In Venezuela, Trump expands his anti-climate empire: The U.S. president’s fossil fuel-powered world vision is a bet on the energy transition failing.”

But let’s bring this down to markets:

The US just imposed a 25% tariff on all the countries who do business with Iran, mostly aimed at China and Russia; it just invited Qatar, the UAE, and India, to join its “Pax Silica’ to create a non-China tech supply chain; it is also to hold a G7 meeting about rare earth supply chains, as Japan latter begins underwater mining for them at a test site. The US is also reportedly close to a trade deal with Taiwan, which is more a geopolitical signal than an economic one.

On the other hand, the Hong Kong press underline that China will prioritise export controls and supply-chain security to shield its economy in 2026. It has also said it’s going to double down on its current model.

Europe is apparently close to signing an FTA with India, and may have reached an agreement with China over EV tariffs that will perhaps enable minimum prices to be set instead. Indeed, the different worlds the EU and US now inhabit are best summarized by Europe celebrating the conclusion of an FTA with Mercosur that took 45 years to achieve just as the Donroe Doctrine tore up 45 years of neoliberalism and effectively trumped that achievement on the ground in Latin America. (As hedge funds prowl for Donroe Doctrine bargains.)

Within the US itself, we have now seen President Trump attack multiple targets from the meat-packing industry, to health insurance companies, to defense firms; ban Wall Street from buying single family homes; force credit card companies to cap interest at 10%; take stakes in Intel, US steel, rare earths producers, and nuclear power; and now threaten to take stakes in oil companies (presumably to get them to invest in Venezuela). On top of that, the FTC has stated that it will block M&A deals that raise the cost of living for consumers – an anti-Borkian trend that the Biden White House also favored. Moreover, Trump just told AI firms they are not allowed to pass on their soaring costs of electricity to consumers, and must “pay their own way.”  

And so, to the Fed. As the Wall Street Journal warns ‘Trump’s Investigation of Powell Is Also a Warning to the Next Fed Chair’, three past Fed chairs decry the “unprecedented” assault, some media warn of the risks of a 1970’s-style inflation crisis, and even the Treasury Secretary reportedly says it’s created “a mess” (says Axios), the FT states: ‘The next Fed chair is… Donald Trump.’ Very few media are asking if it’s possible if Powell is actually guilty: is this presumption of innocence or a reflex reaction that central banks aren’t capable of sin?

Of course, as Reuters summarizes it today, ‘Trump crosses Fed Rubicon, market shrugs.’ And that is logical to the extent that we are clearly in a world where the US is going to ‘run things hot’ in some sectors. Effectively, it is what I have dubbed as using legacy US financial fartcraft to prepare for a near-future world of warcraft.

Yet at the same time gold is tipped by some to crack $5,000 ahead, as the latest exceptionally-small US trade deficit helping to see the Atlanta Fed GDPNow estimate hit 5.4%(!) was helped by bullion exports (showing the US is not accumulating it), and an Italian parliamentary panel approved the “people's” claim on its central bank's bullion with the ECB, which may crack other things people now tip. Silver is also up to a new record near $86, and copper is near a record high at $13,273. By contrast, oil is at $64, up significantly in the past week over Iran, even if the geostrategic play is clearly lower due to US action in Venezuela.

So, definancialisation doesn’t mean peace – it means prep for war. It doesn’t mean free trade – it means trade blocs. It doesn’t mean free markets – it means freeing markets from a focus on short-term profits. It doesn’t mean higher rates and lower fiscal spending – it means lower rates and higher fiscal spending for different things: consumers, and ‘maps, mining, and mercantilism.’ It doesn’t mean legacy correlations – it means new ones.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 12:25

Bessent Reveals 10% Of US Budget Lost To Fraud, Signaling Musk Has Unfinished DOGE Business

Zero Hedge -

Bessent Reveals 10% Of US Budget Lost To Fraud, Signaling Musk Has Unfinished DOGE Business

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's interview with journalist Christopher Rufo suggests that Elon Musk still has unfinished business at DOGE, as fraud, waste, and abuse from Somali networks in Minnesota, California Democrats, and other deep-blue states have dominated the news cycle for the last several weeks.

Bessent told Rufo that somewhere between 5% to 10% of the total federal budget is siphoned off by fraud and abuse each year, citing data from the Government Accountability Office.

"So it's about 10% of the federal budget, 1 to 2% of GDP. And if we can narrow that number, President Trump asked for a $500 billion increase in the defense budget to fortify, you know, 10 to 20 years of neglect, and forever wars that we've been involved in that he's determined not to get us into. We need to flex up our military budget, if we can get rid of this waste, fraud, and abuse, we can finance a safer, sounder US with with that with without taking on more debt. Sounds pretty good outcome to me," Bessent said.

Rufo asked Bessent about DOGE. Bessent responded, "Uh, yeah, and Chris, to be clear, I was in 100% alignment with Elon on the waste, fraud, and abuse. It was just, you know, the Silicon Valley motto is move fast and break things. I said my personal motto and the Treasury motto is move deliberately and fix things. And that's what you're going to see in our investigations. You're not going to see headlines tomorrow. You're not going to see them next week, but in a month or quarter, once we get people in the bear trap, they're not getting out because we will have conclusive evidence to present. And I think that they will have to, uh, make plea deals that they will be willing to negotiate to turn in higher-ups to help us map out how this happened. And again, we're going to take this Minnesota map to the other 49 states."

Bessent and Rufo also discussed ongoing investigations into dark-money-funded NGOs...

"And again, what we do is follow the money—just like we followed it with the mafia, just like we follow it. We'll find out who's done this. I announced today that we are going to put in effect a whistleblower program. And my sense is that the rats will turn on each other," Bessent said.

Elon Musk played a major role in DOGE in early 2025 before stepping away in that spring, but the recent steady flow of fraud, waste, and abuse news suggests his work there is far from finished.

The question is whether Musk returns to DOGE. He did pour cold water on the idea during Katie Miller's podcast, saying the chances of going back were zero. But with Americans outraged over Somali fraud, it is still possible Musk could feel compelled to finish the job he started.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 12:05

'Dilbert' Creator Scott Adams Dies After Prostate Cancer Battle

Zero Hedge -

'Dilbert' Creator Scott Adams Dies After Prostate Cancer Battle

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

“Dilbert” creator and political commentator Scott Adams died after a battle with prostate cancer, his ex-wife announced on Tuesday on his YouTube show. He was 68.

Scott Adams, creator of the comic strip “Dilbert,” talks about his work in his studio in in Dublin, Calif., on Oct. 26, 2006. AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez

His first ex-wife, Shelly Miles, revealed his death on “Real Coffee With Scott Adams” and said that Adams had a final message to his audience, including messages about his estate.

“If you are reading this, things did not go well for me,” Adams wrote on Jan. 1, 2026, according to Miles. “My body failed before my brain.”

Last year, Adams said that he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer, which he described as similar to the type of cancer that former President Joe Biden was diagnosed with, and indicated that he only had months to live.

Later, in November, he made a plea to the Trump administration to allow him to use a type of experimental treatment for his prostate cancer.

President Trump also offered condolences:

This is a breaking news update. More details will come.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 11:45

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

Zero Hedge -

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

President Trump isn't the only one clamming up over Jeffrey Epstein - as Bill and Hillary Clinton are both refusing to testify in front of Congressional investigators over their relationship with the dead sex-trafficking pedophile, escalating a monthslong battle with House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY). 

The Clintons were scheduled to testify this week - weeks after the Trump DOJ released volumes of 'Epstein Files' - which were highly redacted, yet featured Bill prominently.

The former US president was scheduled to testify today (Jan. 13), and Hillary scheduled for tomorrow. Hours before the deadline, however, the Clintons made it clear in an 8-page letter that they have no intention of showing up - calling subpoenas issued by Comer "invalid and legally unenforceable," adding that they'll fight Comer as long as it takes. 

"They are obligated under the law to appear and we expect them to do so," and Oversight spokeswoman said last week. "If the Clintons do not appear for their depositions, the House Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings."

Which, they're now initiating for Bill (which Hillary to follow). 

Rep. James Comer (R-KY)

Contempt of Congress is a misdemeanor that can result in a fine of up to $100,000 and up to a year in jail if pursued by the DOJ (so, nothing will happen and the Clintons know it). 

Comer subpoenaed the Clintons seeking information regarding their personal interactions with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including documented flights on Epstein's private jet. 

The Clintons said in their letter that they anticipated Mr. Comer would argue that the decision about whether to testify was not theirs to make.

“But we have made it,” they wrote. “Now you have to make yours.”

The Clintons had worked to beef up their legal team before Mr. Comer’s deadline. They brought on Ashley Callen, co-chair of the congressional investigations practice at Jenner & Block, who had previously worked as general counsel for Speaker Mike Johnson and other top Republicans, to interface with G.O.P. members on the House Oversight Committee. Ms. Callen also previously worked as a deputy staff director on the House Oversight Committee under Mr. Comer.

They also sought assistance from Abbe Lowell, the veteran lawyer famous for representing clients in the middle of political scandals. -NYT

The refusal to testify comes after a December 2025 testimony was rescheduled due to a funeral. 

"Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences," the Clintons wrote in a lengthy letter to Comer obtained by the NY Times. "For us, now is that time."

They also accused Comer of potentially bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a politically driven process "literally designed to result in our imprisonment." 

"We are confident that any reasonable person in or out of Congress will see, based on everything we release, that what you are doing is trying to punish those who you see as your enemies and to protect those you think are your friends," they wrote, adding that they expected Comer to "release irrelevant, decades-old photos that you hope will embarrass us."

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 11:25

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

Zero Hedge -

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

President Trump isn't the only one clamming up over Jeffrey Epstein - as Bill and Hillary Clinton are both refusing to testify in front of Congressional investigators over their relationship with the dead sex-trafficking pedophile, escalating a monthslong battle with House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY). 

The Clintons were scheduled to testify this week - weeks after the Trump DOJ released volumes of 'Epstein Files' - which were highly redacted, yet featured Bill prominently.

The former US president was scheduled to testify today (Jan. 13), and Hillary scheduled for tomorrow. Hours before the deadline, however, the Clintons made it clear in an 8-page letter that they have no intention of showing up - calling subpoenas issued by Comer "invalid and legally unenforceable," adding that they'll fight Comer as long as it takes. 

"They are obligated under the law to appear and we expect them to do so," and Oversight spokeswoman said last week. "If the Clintons do not appear for their depositions, the House Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings."

Which, they're now initiating for Bill (which Hillary to follow). 

Rep. James Comer (R-KY)

Contempt of Congress is a misdemeanor that can result in a fine of up to $100,000 and up to a year in jail if pursued by the DOJ (so, nothing will happen and the Clintons know it). 

Comer subpoenaed the Clintons seeking information regarding their personal interactions with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including documented flights on Epstein's private jet. 

The Clintons said in their letter that they anticipated Mr. Comer would argue that the decision about whether to testify was not theirs to make.

“But we have made it,” they wrote. “Now you have to make yours.”

The Clintons had worked to beef up their legal team before Mr. Comer’s deadline. They brought on Ashley Callen, co-chair of the congressional investigations practice at Jenner & Block, who had previously worked as general counsel for Speaker Mike Johnson and other top Republicans, to interface with G.O.P. members on the House Oversight Committee. Ms. Callen also previously worked as a deputy staff director on the House Oversight Committee under Mr. Comer.

They also sought assistance from Abbe Lowell, the veteran lawyer famous for representing clients in the middle of political scandals. -NYT

The refusal to testify comes after a December 2025 testimony was rescheduled due to a funeral. 

"Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences," the Clintons wrote in a lengthy letter to Comer obtained by the NY Times. "For us, now is that time."

They also accused Comer of potentially bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a politically driven process "literally designed to result in our imprisonment." 

"We are confident that any reasonable person in or out of Congress will see, based on everything we release, that what you are doing is trying to punish those who you see as your enemies and to protect those you think are your friends," they wrote, adding that they expected Comer to "release irrelevant, decades-old photos that you hope will embarrass us."

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 11:25

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

Zero Hedge -

Clintons Refuse To Testify About Jeffrey Epstein; Comer To Begin Contempt Proceedings

President Trump isn't the only one clamming up over Jeffrey Epstein - as Bill and Hillary Clinton are both refusing to testify in front of Congressional investigators over their relationship with the dead sex-trafficking pedophile, escalating a monthslong battle with House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY). 

The Clintons were scheduled to testify this week - weeks after the Trump DOJ released volumes of 'Epstein Files' - which were highly redacted, yet featured Bill prominently.

The former US president was scheduled to testify today (Jan. 13), and Hillary scheduled for tomorrow. Hours before the deadline, however, the Clintons made it clear in an 8-page letter that they have no intention of showing up - calling subpoenas issued by Comer "invalid and legally unenforceable," adding that they'll fight Comer as long as it takes. 

"They are obligated under the law to appear and we expect them to do so," and Oversight spokeswoman said last week. "If the Clintons do not appear for their depositions, the House Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings."

Which, they're now initiating for Bill (which Hillary to follow). 

Rep. James Comer (R-KY)

Contempt of Congress is a misdemeanor that can result in a fine of up to $100,000 and up to a year in jail if pursued by the DOJ (so, nothing will happen and the Clintons know it). 

Comer subpoenaed the Clintons seeking information regarding their personal interactions with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including documented flights on Epstein's private jet. 

The Clintons said in their letter that they anticipated Mr. Comer would argue that the decision about whether to testify was not theirs to make.

“But we have made it,” they wrote. “Now you have to make yours.”

The Clintons had worked to beef up their legal team before Mr. Comer’s deadline. They brought on Ashley Callen, co-chair of the congressional investigations practice at Jenner & Block, who had previously worked as general counsel for Speaker Mike Johnson and other top Republicans, to interface with G.O.P. members on the House Oversight Committee. Ms. Callen also previously worked as a deputy staff director on the House Oversight Committee under Mr. Comer.

They also sought assistance from Abbe Lowell, the veteran lawyer famous for representing clients in the middle of political scandals. -NYT

The refusal to testify comes after a December 2025 testimony was rescheduled due to a funeral. 

"Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences," the Clintons wrote in a lengthy letter to Comer obtained by the NY Times. "For us, now is that time."

They also accused Comer of potentially bringing Congress to a halt to pursue a politically driven process "literally designed to result in our imprisonment." 

"We are confident that any reasonable person in or out of Congress will see, based on everything we release, that what you are doing is trying to punish those who you see as your enemies and to protect those you think are your friends," they wrote, adding that they expected Comer to "release irrelevant, decades-old photos that you hope will embarrass us."

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 11:25

Beijing Responds As Trump's Iran-Related Tariffs Risk Derailing US-China Trade Deal

Zero Hedge -

Beijing Responds As Trump's Iran-Related Tariffs Risk Derailing US-China Trade Deal

China sharply criticized Washington's move to levy tariffs on countries trading with the Islamic Republic of Iran, issuing a statement Tuesday - less than 12 hours after President Trump announced the punitive action on Truth Social - condemning the decision.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning stated, "China's position on the tariff issue is very clear." She said, "We have always believed that there are no winners in a tariff war. China will resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests."

The Chinse embassy in Washington also blasted the move, characterizing the US action as "exceeding legal frameworks."

The United States will impose a 25% tariff on any nation conducting business with Iran. "Effective immediately, any country doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran will pay a Tariff of 25 percent on any and all business being done with the United States of America. This Order is final and conclusive," Trump had declared.

But this could have broader unintended consequences, and threatens to derail Washington's fragile trade deal with Beijing, which remains Tehran’s largest trading partner. According to more of the Chinese response:

The world’s top two economies had secured an interim trade deal in late October that saw a roll back of punitive U.S. tariffs on China, while Beijing paused its sweeping rare earth export controls.

In response to Trump’s tariff threat China said it “firmly opposes any illicit unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction,” while warning that it would take “all necessary measures” to defend its interests, according to a post on X by a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in the U.S.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, told CNBC that if Trump is serious about the 25% rate, "that is a massive escalation from current tariff levels."

"The last time we played this game, we ended up with tariff levels at 145%" - she added, warning about the potential for a tit-for-tat spiral, which would further halt any future plans of US soybean exports to China.

Trump's tariff decision comes amid violent unrest in Iran, described by Tehran as foreign-backed riots, which have left dozens dead - or possibly even hundreds according to unverified reports - including civilians and numerous members of the security forces.

Since the unrest began more than two weeks ago, the US president has repeatedly threatened military action against Iran, pledging to "rescue" anti-government protesters. 

Iran's national currency has collapsed to a record low, effectively losing all value against the US dollar. The economic downturn, driven largely by years of brutal US sanctions, has fueled widespread public discontent. But this street anger is also being 'hijacked' by external powers which want to see Iran destabilized, weakened, and it's ruling clerics and leaders overthrown.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 10:45

Beijing Responds As Trump's Iran-Related Tariffs Risk Derailing US-China Trade Deal

Zero Hedge -

Beijing Responds As Trump's Iran-Related Tariffs Risk Derailing US-China Trade Deal

China sharply criticized Washington's move to levy tariffs on countries trading with the Islamic Republic of Iran, issuing a statement Tuesday - less than 12 hours after President Trump announced the punitive action on Truth Social - condemning the decision.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning stated, "China's position on the tariff issue is very clear." She said, "We have always believed that there are no winners in a tariff war. China will resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests."

The Chinse embassy in Washington also blasted the move, characterizing the US action as "exceeding legal frameworks."

The United States will impose a 25% tariff on any nation conducting business with Iran. "Effective immediately, any country doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran will pay a Tariff of 25 percent on any and all business being done with the United States of America. This Order is final and conclusive," Trump had declared.

But this could have broader unintended consequences, and threatens to derail Washington's fragile trade deal with Beijing, which remains Tehran’s largest trading partner. According to more of the Chinese response:

The world’s top two economies had secured an interim trade deal in late October that saw a roll back of punitive U.S. tariffs on China, while Beijing paused its sweeping rare earth export controls.

In response to Trump’s tariff threat China said it “firmly opposes any illicit unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction,” while warning that it would take “all necessary measures” to defend its interests, according to a post on X by a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in the U.S.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, told CNBC that if Trump is serious about the 25% rate, "that is a massive escalation from current tariff levels."

"The last time we played this game, we ended up with tariff levels at 145%" - she added, warning about the potential for a tit-for-tat spiral, which would further halt any future plans of US soybean exports to China.

Trump's tariff decision comes amid violent unrest in Iran, described by Tehran as foreign-backed riots, which have left dozens dead - or possibly even hundreds according to unverified reports - including civilians and numerous members of the security forces.

Since the unrest began more than two weeks ago, the US president has repeatedly threatened military action against Iran, pledging to "rescue" anti-government protesters. 

Iran's national currency has collapsed to a record low, effectively losing all value against the US dollar. The economic downturn, driven largely by years of brutal US sanctions, has fueled widespread public discontent. But this street anger is also being 'hijacked' by external powers which want to see Iran destabilized, weakened, and it's ruling clerics and leaders overthrown.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 10:45

Mamdani Declares War On Civil Discourse

Zero Hedge -

Mamdani Declares War On Civil Discourse

Authored by Charles Mitchell via RealClearPolitics,

Zohran Mamdani’s inauguration speech on Jan. 1 became instantly famous for his promise to prove the “warmth of collectivism.” Yet Americans should pay just as much attention to another deeply concerning comment from the socialist mayor of New York City’s first act in office. He declared that those who are “fluent in the good grammar of civility have deployed decorum to mask agendas of cruelty,” implying that his administration won’t tolerate public debate about his agenda.

These words mark the moment when higher education’s radical monoculture jumped into the real world of political power and cultural impact. Our experiment in self-government is now at unprecedented risk.

Mamdani’s words are familiar to anyone who has followed the decline of the university in recent decades. It reflects the idea that respectful discourse – a central Enlightenment and American ideal – is really a tool of oppression used by elites to prop themselves up while keeping everyone else down. This belief is widespread on campus: A December poll from the free-speech group FIRE found that 90% of undergraduates think that “words can be violence.” Even worse, a third of students are willing to use actual violence to prevent the saying of those words. This is a generation prepared to stifle debate it dislikes, casting even the most well-meaning ideological opponents as enemies of society.

But Mamdani’s inauguration is the first time this generation has seized the levers of power outside of the classroom. It makes sense: His candidacy was driven by zealot-like support from young college graduates and students – the groups most likely to be radicalized. Now Mamdani, in some of his first words, is spreading the message that discourse is dangerous. This isn’t simply another college professor preaching to the undergrad choir. It’s the mayor of America’s most powerful city proselytizing the broader public about the supposed moral importance of stifling debate.

Mamdani’s rhetoric is especially dangerous due to his track record of enabling and encouraging antisemitism. Since Oct. 7, 2023, the biggest security bills my organization has paid have been for events in which Jewish students could discuss the Hamas attacks openly and experience their heritage – and that’s in a small town in rural Pennsylvania. Two of the speakers we hosted in November and protected were attacked, bloodied, and hospitalized the next day. But it’s just not Jewish people who are threatened when civil discourse is discarded. Everyone is at risk from the resulting breakdown of basic human decency.

Given the ideological capture of academia, the day was always going to come when the inmates started running the asylum. What’s shocking is that so many serious people failed to see it. A generation of well-meaning centrists let such extremism run riot in higher education, assuming that what happened on campus would surely stay there. It didn’t, and the resulting damage will not easily or quickly be undone.

But it must be confronted as soon as possible, which requires immediate action from sane Americans of all political stripes. While some may pin their hopes on the Trump administration, the real reform of higher education must happen elsewhere. As we enter America’s 250th year, Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas policymakers have created new civics programs within their state universities. This is a template for further progress. At the very least, students should learn about the Enlightenment values that undergirded the American experiment before deciding whether they will join Mamdani in denouncing them.

The most important action, however, depends on philanthropists. Many of the country’s most successful people are profoundly disappointed by their alma maters, yet continue to make large, unrestricted gifts to them. This is profoundly self-defeating, insofar as it supports the training of a generation that rejects the foundations of American success. Instead, philanthropists should stop funding irreformable schools, establish new centers at the schools where there’s still a shred of hope, and even create new schools altogether, similar to the University of Austin. Whether on the sane left or the sane right, the donor’s goal should be to make civil discourse and respectful debate the defining part of a university’s work. That’s currently the case for only a handful of schools.

Zohran Mamdani is proof that the destructive ideology that defines the modern university is poised to damage America itself. He is the first of a wave of extremists who want to reshape society for the worse. Our best hope, as a country, is to begin building an even bigger wave of college graduates who practice civil discourse and promote social cohesion. This monumental challenge will take years. Untold harm will be done in the meantime. But the survival of our experiment in self-government ultimately depends on raising the next generation to choose a better, truer, and freer path than the one chosen by Zohran Mamdani and the radicalized army that elected him.

Charles Mitchell is co-founder and CEO of the Open Discourse Coalition.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 10:25

Mamdani Declares War On Civil Discourse

Zero Hedge -

Mamdani Declares War On Civil Discourse

Authored by Charles Mitchell via RealClearPolitics,

Zohran Mamdani’s inauguration speech on Jan. 1 became instantly famous for his promise to prove the “warmth of collectivism.” Yet Americans should pay just as much attention to another deeply concerning comment from the socialist mayor of New York City’s first act in office. He declared that those who are “fluent in the good grammar of civility have deployed decorum to mask agendas of cruelty,” implying that his administration won’t tolerate public debate about his agenda.

These words mark the moment when higher education’s radical monoculture jumped into the real world of political power and cultural impact. Our experiment in self-government is now at unprecedented risk.

Mamdani’s words are familiar to anyone who has followed the decline of the university in recent decades. It reflects the idea that respectful discourse – a central Enlightenment and American ideal – is really a tool of oppression used by elites to prop themselves up while keeping everyone else down. This belief is widespread on campus: A December poll from the free-speech group FIRE found that 90% of undergraduates think that “words can be violence.” Even worse, a third of students are willing to use actual violence to prevent the saying of those words. This is a generation prepared to stifle debate it dislikes, casting even the most well-meaning ideological opponents as enemies of society.

But Mamdani’s inauguration is the first time this generation has seized the levers of power outside of the classroom. It makes sense: His candidacy was driven by zealot-like support from young college graduates and students – the groups most likely to be radicalized. Now Mamdani, in some of his first words, is spreading the message that discourse is dangerous. This isn’t simply another college professor preaching to the undergrad choir. It’s the mayor of America’s most powerful city proselytizing the broader public about the supposed moral importance of stifling debate.

Mamdani’s rhetoric is especially dangerous due to his track record of enabling and encouraging antisemitism. Since Oct. 7, 2023, the biggest security bills my organization has paid have been for events in which Jewish students could discuss the Hamas attacks openly and experience their heritage – and that’s in a small town in rural Pennsylvania. Two of the speakers we hosted in November and protected were attacked, bloodied, and hospitalized the next day. But it’s just not Jewish people who are threatened when civil discourse is discarded. Everyone is at risk from the resulting breakdown of basic human decency.

Given the ideological capture of academia, the day was always going to come when the inmates started running the asylum. What’s shocking is that so many serious people failed to see it. A generation of well-meaning centrists let such extremism run riot in higher education, assuming that what happened on campus would surely stay there. It didn’t, and the resulting damage will not easily or quickly be undone.

But it must be confronted as soon as possible, which requires immediate action from sane Americans of all political stripes. While some may pin their hopes on the Trump administration, the real reform of higher education must happen elsewhere. As we enter America’s 250th year, Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas policymakers have created new civics programs within their state universities. This is a template for further progress. At the very least, students should learn about the Enlightenment values that undergirded the American experiment before deciding whether they will join Mamdani in denouncing them.

The most important action, however, depends on philanthropists. Many of the country’s most successful people are profoundly disappointed by their alma maters, yet continue to make large, unrestricted gifts to them. This is profoundly self-defeating, insofar as it supports the training of a generation that rejects the foundations of American success. Instead, philanthropists should stop funding irreformable schools, establish new centers at the schools where there’s still a shred of hope, and even create new schools altogether, similar to the University of Austin. Whether on the sane left or the sane right, the donor’s goal should be to make civil discourse and respectful debate the defining part of a university’s work. That’s currently the case for only a handful of schools.

Zohran Mamdani is proof that the destructive ideology that defines the modern university is poised to damage America itself. He is the first of a wave of extremists who want to reshape society for the worse. Our best hope, as a country, is to begin building an even bigger wave of college graduates who practice civil discourse and promote social cohesion. This monumental challenge will take years. Untold harm will be done in the meantime. But the survival of our experiment in self-government ultimately depends on raising the next generation to choose a better, truer, and freer path than the one chosen by Zohran Mamdani and the radicalized army that elected him.

Charles Mitchell is co-founder and CEO of the Open Discourse Coalition.

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/13/2026 - 10:25

Pages