Denmark Cuts Ukraine Aid Nearly In Half Amid Corruption Scandal

Denmark plans to scale back its military assistance to Ukraine next year, and the amount cut is being widely reported as a huge amount - up to almost half of what's it's been since 2022.

According to Danish Broadcasting Corporation, the tiny northern European country has long stood out for its exceptionally high contributions that it made earlier in the conflict, but now the Danish government wants other countries should shoulder more of the burden.

Via Reuters

The country's Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen has informed parliament that the government intends to allocate 9.4 billion kroner (around $1.5 billion) in aid to Ukraine in 2026.

This marks a decrease from the 16.5 billion kroner (about $2.6 billion) provided this year and the nearly 19 billion kroner (roughly $3 billion) distributed the prior year.

Danish media has described that this is partly the result dwindling resources in the Ukraine Fund, which is a dedicated pool established in 2023 with broad political support among European allies.

In total, since the start of the war in early 2022 Denmark has provided a whopping nearly $11 billion in military aid to Kiev. It has also provided F-16 jets and hosted fighter pilot training programs for Ukrainians.

Simon Kollerup, a member of the Denmark's Defense Committee, has stated that "it is natural that we are seeing a stabilization of the level of support being provided".

"We decided to be one of the countries that took the lead at the beginning of the war by providing large-scale support. I also think it is fair to say that this support somewhat exceeds what is actually dictated by the size of our country. Therefore, I find it quite natural that the support is decreasing," Kollerup added.

This comes at a time that Washington is also withdrawing much of its outsized support to Ukraine, with Trump's preferred scheme being to sell weapons to Europe, which will in turn sell or transfer them to Kiev.

The timing of Denmark's announced major reduction in aid also comes as the Zelensky government is mired in a corruption scandal which goes straight to the presidential office itself (with top aides having been dismissed and investigated), so perhaps some EU countries are finally wising up, and no longer wish to act in a blank check manner.

Ukraine’s top donor Denmark to nearly halve military aid in 2026

It will be $1.5bn next year, down from $2.6bn spent this year. It was $3bn in 2024.

Denmark sees that their $11bn weapons support incl. F-16 did not yield a win.

The Danes hate corruption more than Russia. pic.twitter.com/RQjR1HxWIr

— Alternative News (@AlternatNews) December 7, 2025

Even the NY Times has just acknowledged in a report that "President Volodymyr Zelensky's administration has stacked boards with loyalists, left seats empty, or stalled them from being set up at all. Leaders in Kiev even rewrote company charters to limit oversight, keeping the government in control and allowing hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent without outsiders poking around."

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 11:05

As The Year Ends, What Does 2026 Hold

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Markets opened in December with a surge in optimism as retail investors regained their “bullish spirit.” That improvement continues to build on the bullish case we discussed last week:

“Seasonality, positioning, and trend still lean in favor of the bulls. December is historically one of the stronger months for equities, particularly when the market is already up by double digits year-to-date. Expectations for a December Fed rate cut, and a gradual cooling of inflation, support the “soft-landing” narrative, while corporate buybacks and under-invested managers create fuel for a “chase into year-end” if resistance gives way. With volatility easing and breadth improving, the path of least resistance near term remains higher if key support zones are maintained.”

The increase in optimism is also attributable to the significant policy pivot from the Federal Reserve. On December 1, the Fed officially ended its quantitative tightening (QT) program. The halting of the runoff of its balance sheet and the injection of fresh liquidity into financial markets are essential. We will discuss this more momentarily. But for investors, this change removed a persistent headwind and reignited expectations for a more accommodative stance in 2026.

Speaking of Fed policy, the next FOMC rate decision is this coming week. The CME futures markets now reflect a very high probability of a 0.25% rate cut. Furthermore, expectations for further rate cuts in March of next year have risen. However, as discussed in last week’s brief, seasonality, dip-buying, and institutional positioning are already in play, and the removal of QT adds fuel to that narrative, helping to lift asset prices.

Notably, there has been a shift away from stretched growth names toward lagging sectors, such as energy, financials, and healthcare, which has improved market breadth. That improvement is a necessary component of a more sustainable rally. However, much of the action still appears technical and remains inconsistent with bullish markets.

Next week, the focus will shift toward confirmation as the markets closely scrutinize the Fed’s commentary for clues on the timing and scope of further rate cuts. Liquidity indicators in repo markets and short-term funding will also be critical. If those stay stable, the rally could continue. Lastly, economic data, particularly inflation and employment figures, the first since the Government shutdown, will also play a role in shaping expectations.

For now, the rally has legs, but once we enter 2026, the fundamentals will need to improve to sustain it.

Markets have reached a crossroads.

Investors are staring down two sharply opposing narratives as 2025 comes to a close. On one side, there’s optimism: the Federal Reserve has ended quantitative tightening, liquidity is rising, and key sectors are flush with capital. On the other hand, significant risks remain unresolved: narrow market leadership, elevated valuations, growing household stress, and deepening concerns in the credit market.

These are all things we have discussed previously, but the split reflects more than market noise. It’s a clash between structural bullish support and underlying economic fragility. While both cases are grounded in data and each carries significant implications for asset allocation, risk management, and long-term investment outcomes, they are equally essential to consider.

As we will discuss, the bull case leans heavily on liquidity, fiscal support, and renewed investment. The return of easy monetary conditions, a shift in political leadership favoring tax cuts and increased spending, and massive capital expenditure commitments by the largest U.S. companies paint a picture of continued upside. If those forces hold, equities could continue to grind higher, lifting all sectors or at least sustaining current valuations.

Conversely, the bear case warns that the fundamentals are fraying beneath the surface. Household debt is rising, delinquencies are increasing across income brackets, and private credit markets are displaying early warning signs. Meanwhile, the rally remains narrowly focused on a few mega-cap stocks tied to artificial intelligence. If those names falter, the broader market could quickly give up its gains.

In today’s analysis, we will examine both arguments and outline the most likely path for markets in 2026. Whether the market skews bullish or breaks bearish, investors need a plan. What matters now isn’t conviction in one narrative. What matters is readiness for either outcome.

Let’s get into it.

Bull Case: Why the Market Could Push Higher

Liquidity has shifted significantly more favorably for risk assets and equities. On December 1, 2025, the Federal Reserve (Fed) officially ended its quantitative tightening (QT) program and is scheduled to cut overnight lending rates by another 0.25% next week. The Fed has simultaneously conducted a large overnight repurchase agreement injection of approximately $13.5 billion into the banking system, which is the second-largest liquidity injection since the COVID-19 era began.

That signals the Fed is done draining cash from the system and may even be ready to begin loosening again. Furthermore, that shift removes a significant structural drag on equities. Furthermore, as noted, adding to that backdrop are further expected rate cuts, as early as next week. As shown, the market performs well during periods of a Federal Reserve rate-cutting cycle when the economy is not in a recession. Currently, although economic data remains weak, recession risks are muted.

With easier liquidity, investors are likely to return to riskier assets. Historically, when QT ends and liquidity returns, equities have tended to rally, and the renewed cash flow may support not only large-cap stocks but also corporate cap-ex, buybacks, and broader credit-based investments. The return of liquidity breathes new life into the structural bull arguments of a fresh technology cycle, substantial capital expenditure by major firms, corporate buybacks, and deregulation or capital easing.

Furthermore, on the consumer side, while household debt rose modestly in Q3, overall borrowing increased in a controlled way. Total U.S. household debt reached about $18.59 trillion as of Q3 2025, a 1 percent increase over the prior quarter and up about $642 billion year‑over‑year. That rise was reflected in mortgages, credit cards, student loans, HELOCs, and auto loans. Notably, mortgage balances alone rose by $137 billion, bringing the total mortgages to $13.07 trillion.

Despite this, delinquency rates for mortgages remain relatively stable, while student-loan and unsecured debt are showing increased levels of strain. This suggests that households are still serviceable on their debt, which in turn could provide further support to corporate earnings in the near term. Again, I am not dismissing the rise in credit card and student loan delinquencies, but these have not yet morphed into broader economic stress…yet.

Given liquidity, consumer balance‑sheet resilience (at least in aggregate), and the potential for renewed capital expenditures and buybacks, the environment favors further upside. Stocks that had lagged or sectors outside of narrow, “hot” themes may attract renewed interest as investors seek value and diversified exposure.

Statistically, there is also a bullish case to be made. As shown in the table below, many have forgotten about the ~20% decline we saw in March and April this year. That “reset” was necessary as 20% corrections, while they happen, are more “severe” events that reverse overly bullish sentiment and positioning. However, more notable was the sharp reversal from the April lows. Such a selloff and reversal has only occurred four times since 1950. While there is still roughly one month left in 2025, if returns hold at their current levels, it suggests that 2026 could have a positive year as bullish momentum continues.

But not everything is “bullish” heading into 2026.

Bear Case: Why the Rally Could Falter

While a bullish outlook for 2026 is present, numerous and growing risks are also present. Many of the powerful catalysts that drove the post‑pandemic rally now show signs of fatigue or overhang. However, before we delve into those, let’s begin with overall performance. Over the last three years, the market has delivered extraordinarily high returns of 20% or more consecutively. That is not unprecedented, but it does lean to the more unusual side of the statistical ledger. As we noted yesterday in our #DailyMarket Commentary:

“The S&P 500 has posted a strong three-year price return of approximately 76.7 percent, excluding dividends. That translates to an annualized return of 20% to 22%. This is well above the long-term average annual return of roughly 10% to 11% with dividends reinvested. Such elevated returns over a short period suggest that the market is trading well above its historical trend. Historically, when the S&P 500 rolling 3-year return is two standard deviations above its three-year moving average, the market is statistically extended. This deviation typically precedes a shift in volatility and return outcomes. In other words, when markets reach this level of extension, two patterns emerge: increased volatility and weaker forward returns.”

While many expect 2026 to be a continuation of 2025, we should always respect the most powerful force in investing: the principle of “reversion to the mean.”

However, adding to that concern is the continued fact that the market remains extremely narrow. Gains have concentrated heavily among a small group of high-growth companies with strong ties to AI and technology. If optimism around AI, tech investment, or “transformational technology” cracks, even slightly, whether due to earnings disappointments, regulatory headwinds, or shifting investor sentiment, the broader market could struggle. The narrow leadership leaves little margin for broader weakness, and given that the vast majority of earnings growth has come from a handful of companies, it suggests that “disappointment risk” could be a significant factor next year.

Valuations remain elevated. With forward price‑to-earnings (P/E) multiples for the broad market stretched, there is little buffer for disappointments in earnings growth, macroeconomic slowdown, or credit stress. Overpaid valuations amplify the downside if growth or liquidity fails to meet expectations.

Credit‑market vulnerabilities are rising. The rapid growth of non-bank “private credit” as an alternative to traditional lending is now drawing scrutiny. Investors are increasingly withdrawing from publicly listed funds that hold such private credit instruments. That suggests waning confidence and potential repricing of private debt risk. If borrowers across corporate or household sectors struggle, losses could reverberate through credit markets and spill into equities.

One caveat to the bear case is that while these are all very valid factors that could negatively impact stocks, they are also dependent on a more macro-type shock to “ignite the fuse.” Yes, valuations are high, but there must be an “event” to cause a rapid repricing of forward earnings estimates. Yes, debt is problematic, but only when a recession triggers job losses, leading to sharp increases in defaults across all categories.

So, yes, while these factors are essential, I do not expect them to occur over the span of the next week, month, or even quarter.

However, with that being said, what should investors expect heading into next year?

In 2026, there is a growing possibility that investors may experience both bull and bear markets. As noted, the “bear case” is predicated on longer-term, macro events that will take some time to mature. However, the “bull case” is more focused on short-term factors, such as liquidity, which, although plentiful today, can evaporate tomorrow. Given the data and dynamics, the most likely near-term outcome is a continued bull market, which may lead to increased volatility and potentially bearish outcomes later in the year.

Key Catalysts Next Week

Markets enter this week with elevated expectations. With the recent end of quantitative tightening, investors are now watching a cluster of important events that could define whether the year-end rally broadens or stalls. The most significant driver will be the upcoming meeting of the Federal Reserve (Fed). But a series of economic data releases and significant corporate earnings will also test optimism.

What Investors Should Focus On

• The Fed meeting on December 10 looms as the central anchor. A well‑telegraphed 25‑bps cut, or even the possibility of a path of cuts, could reopen risk‑asset flows. If the Fed soft‑pedals, expect volatility and potential rotation out of overvalued sectors.

• Labor market data from JOLTS and weekly jobless claims will indicate whether employment remains resilient or is starting to exhibit cracks, which has direct implications for consumer spending and credit risk.

• Earnings from big tech and AI firms (ORCL, ADBE, and AVGO) will continue to test whether growth expectations baked into valuations are realistic or overly optimistic.

• The mix of budget, trade, and cost data will inform broader macro narratives, including growth, inflation, and fiscal/credit conditions.

This week offers a high‑stakes test of sentiment. If liquidity (through the Fed’s policy) aligns with solid economic and earnings data, the rally could broaden beyond mega‑caps and extend into 2026. If not, this “year‑end bounce” risks fading or turning into a broader reassessment.

Support and Resistance Zones

Based on the 6,878 close and the latest available pivot‑point and technical data, key zones to watch in the coming sessions:

• Immediate support: ~ 6,744 – 6,757 (20- and 50-day moving average cluster)

• Secondary support: ~ 6,598 (100‑day moving average) — a zone that, if broken, would signal weakening of the broader uptrend.

• Critical Support ~6,195 (200-day moving average) – if this level fails, the market will be facing a larger corrective action.

• Near‑term resistance: ~ 6,885 – 6,900 as markets approach previous rally peaks and all-time highs

• Major resistance/breakout zone: ~ 6,920–6,940 would clear previous all-time highs moving next resistance to top of current trend line near ~7,000

The rally this past week showed signs of expanding beyond just the most significant growth and AI‑related names. As discussed last week, some underappreciated sectors, such as value and cyclical-linked areas, registered relative gains. That diversification in participation tends to support the durability of a bullish uptrend.

Caution flags also emerged and are worth paying attention to.

While the market gained ground, volume was modest, suggesting many investors remain hesitant and are not fully committing. If this remains the case, the risk of a rally built primarily on liquidity and short-term positioning, rather than broad conviction, is susceptible to swift reversals in investor sentiment. Additionally, with prices exceeding the 200-day averages, the risk of a correction also increases.

Overall, the technical backdrop is bullish but is not devoid of risk. Continue to maintain a disciplined approach, respect support and resistance levels, and manage risk exposures accordingly.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 10:30

Goldman Reveals Housing "Affordability Illusion" When Factoring Other Costs

Affordability has surged into the news cycle and is almost certain to dominate the coming midterm election cycle. And when voters talk about "affordability," they're most concerned about the basic cost of living. Beyond food and healthcare, nothing hits harder than housing costs. 

Goldman analysts led by Arun Manohar have some bad news on the housing affordability front: even with lower mortgage rates and slower home-price growth, it's largely an "illusion of affordability" once other ownership costs, such as taxes, insurance, and maintenance, are factored in. 

Manohar explained more in a recent note to clients:

The most important topic of discussion in the housing market remains the challenging affordability situation. The recent decline in mortgage rates and the weak pace of HPA has resulted in housing affordability climbing to the highest level since 2022 (Exhibit 1). However, affordability remains low at the 18th percentile over the past 30 years. Although affordability has climbed, it is important to note that the standard affordability metrics do not capture all the costs of homeownership such as taxes, insurance and maintenance (collectively referred to as 'other costs'). To capture the effect of 'other costs,' we rely on estimates from Zillow for the monthly mortgage payment and total monthly payment on a new home purchased with the average interest rate of the month. The difference between the two series accounts for homeowner's insurance, property taxes, and maintenance costs. We find that metro areas that have experienced home price declines over the past year have generally witnessed greater increases in the 'other costs' over the past few years (Exhibit 2). Although falling home prices would typically make a home more affordable, prospective buyers may experience only partial relief since overall homeownership costs are not decreasing at the same rate as property values. With the median age of the US housing stock being over 40 years old, nationwide insurance premiums and maintenance expenses could increase further.

Mortgage rates are unlikely to decline enough to provide a significant boost to affordability in 2026. 

Manohar's view on President Trump's newly proposed 50-year mortgage: 

50-year mortgages: Short-term affordability boost, but with long-term consequencesRecently, the administration and the FHFA Director have explored the feasibility of introducing a 50-year mortgage product to help improve mortgage affordability. The 30-year fixed rate mortgage available in the US is already among the longest in the developed world. We see four key issues with a 50-year mortgage. First, while monthly payments decline slightly, the increase in the lifetime cost of homeownership can be prohibitive. Using the example of a $400k mortgage at 6.25% interest rates, we note that if the term were to be extended to 50-years, the monthly principal and interest payment would be about 11% lower than that if the term remained at 30-years. However, the total lifetime interest would climb 87% (Exhibit 4). Second, the above calculation assumes mortgage rates are the same for 30-year and 50-year mortgages. In reality though, the longer term will likely translate into higher mortgage rates and hence lower savings in monthly payments. It is quite likely that a 50-year mortgage would receive a rate that is at least 50bp higher than that on a 30-year mortgage (Exhibit 5). Using the same example of a $400k mortgage and the assumption that a 50-year mortgage receives a 50bp higher rate than the 30-year mortgage, the savings in monthly payment drops to just 5%, and the total lifetime interest would more than double. A mortgage rate that is 95bp higher than the prevailing 30-year mortgage rate of 6.25% would result in parity in monthly payments, completely nullifying the benefits of extending the term to 50 years. Third, with a 50-year mortgage, borrowers would build equity at an even slower pace than that with a 30-year mortgage during the initial years, which increases default risks in a housing downturn scenario. Finally, a sudden boost to affordability risks increasing home prices, as potential homebuyers would compete for the same limited inventory. Therefore, any improvement in housing affordability would be short lived.

In a recent Fox News interview, Vice President JD Vance blamed the affordability crisis on lingering effects of failed policies from the Biden-Harris years.

"A lot of young people are saying, housing is way too expensive. Why is that? Because we flooded the country with 30 million illegal immigrants who were taking houses that ought by right go to American citizens," Vance told Fox News' Sean Hannity last month. And at the same time, we weren't building enough new houses to begin with, even for the population that we had."

ZeroHedge Pro subs can read the full note in the usual place. It's packed with a lot more housing market charts.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 09:55

Climate Groups Falter, Bill Gates Recalibrates, But Al Gore Soldiers On

Authored by Gary Abernathy of The Empowerment Alliance,

It’s been an interesting few weeks on the climate hysteria front. Organizations associated with climate alarmism have recently found themselves engulfed in turmoil. Bill Gates has recanted earlier predictions of gloom and doom. But the Father of Climate Panic, former Vice President Al Gore, remains steadfast, if increasingly marginalized.

Let’s start with probably the best-known environmental organization in the world, the Sierra Club. According to a recent New York Times report, the club thrived when it seemed laser-focused on the environment. But then, during Donald Trump’s first term, “its leaders sought to expand far beyond environmentalism, embracing other progressive causes. Those included racial justice, labor rights, gay rights, immigrant rights and more.”

As a result of the effort to morph into a catch-all for a myriad of social justice causes, the Times noted that by 2022 the Sierra Club “had exhausted its finances and splintered its coalition.” By August, according to the Times, the number of Sierra Club “champions” – “a group that included dues-paying members as well as supporters who had donated, signed petitions or participated in events” – was “down about 60 percent from its high in 2019.”

Despite the upheaval, few lessons seem learned. The Times noted that “in recent weeks, supporters who clicked on the group’s website for ‘current campaigns’ were presented with 131 petitions, some out of date, like calls to support clean-energy funding that Mr. Trump has already gutted, or to support a voting-rights bill that died in 2023.”

Asked whether he had any regrets, the club’s current board president, Patrick Murphy, summoned the spirit of Kamala “not a thing comes to mind” Harris and replied, “I have a hard time pinpointing how I believe we should have made different choices.” Alrighty then.

Also falling on hard times is 350.org, which first gained notoriety for its successful efforts to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline during the Obama administration. As Politico reported this month, the group “will ‘temporarily suspend programming’ in the U.S. and other countries amid funding woes.”

Executive Director Anne Jellema said 350.org “had suffered a 25 percent drop in income for its 2025 and 2026 fiscal years, compelling it to halt operations,” and would subsequently reduce its global staff by about 30 percent.

“The group had endured economic hardship over the years, including problems of financial management and several rounds of layoffs that eroded its influence,” Politico reported. Jellema said the organization was facing its challenges “with our ambition intact.” But apparently not much else.

An implosion of a different kind is from the world of “green banking.” NBA star Kawhi Leonard’s endorsement contract with the pro-environment group Aspiration is alleged to have been a vehicle for Leonard and the Los Angelas Clippers to skirt NBA salary cap rules.

As reported by ESPN, Aspiration Partners was a company founded in 2013 to provide “socially-conscious and sustainable banking services and investment products.” Their slogan was, “Do Well. Do Good.” Catchy. Operating like an environmentally conscious digital bank, Aspiration promised to “never fund fossil fuel projects like pipelines, oil rigs and coalmines.” The company’s products included “an option to plant a tree with every purchase roundup.”

According to ESPN, Clippers owner Steve Ballmer invested $50 million in Aspiration. The subsequent allegation is that Leonard signed a $28 million endorsement deal with Aspiration “as a way to circumvent the league’s salary cap.” Ballmer has denied any knowledge of the deal, according to the report. Leonard has also denied any wrongdoing.

ESPN reported that Aspiration filed for bankruptcy in March, and co-founder Joe Sanberg pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud after “federal prosecutors said Sanberg defrauded investors and lenders out of $248 million by fraudulently obtaining loans, falsifying bank and brokerage statements and concealing that he was the source of some revenue booked by the company.”

The NBA is investigating. How many trees Aspiration planted is unknown.

To add insult to injury comes what appears to be an about-face from no less a dedicated environmentalist than Bill Gates. For decades, Gates has been a leader in the movement to reduce carbon emissions. But last month he caused a stir when he declared that climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise.”

It’s heartening when others finally catch on. Earlier this year, the climate group funded by Gates, Breakthrough Energy, laid off dozens of employees in the U.S. and Europe “as it pulls back from public policy advocacy work that was a cornerstone of its mission,” as the industry site Energy Connects reported.

Sadly, such admirable retrospection will likely never occur to Al Gore, arguably history’s leading figure in propagating climate hysteria and someone who has reportedly made a fortune from his climate alarmism. Gore’s reaction to Gates’ newfound enlightenment was a predictable temper tantrum during which he speculated that Gates had succumbed to “bullying” by President Trump.

Takes one to know one – Gore has often been accused of bullying those not on board with his climate crusade.

In an increasingly splintered movement that once marched in lockstep, it may be that someday only Al Gore will remain – the last true believer of a story he largely authored, perched atop his high horse at his solar-powered compound.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 09:20

The post Trump Crazy #54,278 and Glimmers of a Post-Trump World appeared first on CEPR.

Trump's 3 Choices In Ukraine (A Win-Win-Win For Russia)

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

With the War in Ukraine now approaching its fifth year and possibly reaching a climatic stage, it’s timely to offer an overview of the situation.

This overview has three vectors – the situation on the battlefield, the corruption scandal rocking Kyiv, and the prospects for the success of the Trump peace plan.

The thread that connects these three vectors is the role of the Russian Federation and specter of Vladimir Putin.

Let’s look at these vectors separately and then unify them in the end.

On The Ground

The situation on the battlefield is straightforward. Russia is winning the war decisively and is now poised to take all Ukrainian territory east of the Dnipro River, the main waterway that divides east and west Ukraine.

The Donbas consists of two Russian-speaking provinces in eastern Ukraine called Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia has formally annexed the Donbas into the Russian Federation, although the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) continue to fight to retain them. Russia has scored a series of key victories in Mariupol (2022), Bakhmut (2023) and Avdiivka (2024). A major AFU counteroffensive in 2024 failed totally.

U.S. and NATO weapons have been of no benefit to Ukraine. Armored vehicles including Abrams, Challenger and Leopard tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles have been left burning on the battlefield. Precision artillery has been made useless by the Russian ability to jam the GPS guidance systems. Ukraine’s initial advantage in drones has been crushed by Russia’s war mobilization and ability to produce thousands of drones per month.

F-16 fighter jets are shot down with ease by advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems. Patriot anti-missile systems are being blown-up by Russian hypersonic missiles that the west does not even possess. Ukraine has managed some attacks on Russian energy infrastructure inside Russia, but these have been no more than pinpricks and have been easily repaired. Meanwhile, the entire Ukrainian power grid has been severely degraded by Russian drones and missiles as bitter cold winter weather approaches.

Now, Russia has taken Pokrovsk, a medium-sized city in the Eastern Donbas closer to the Dnipro River. The significance of Pokrovsk is not its size, but its role as a major logistics hub for rail and road transportation. Pokrovsk is the distribution center for almost all AFU military operations in the Donbas region. Now, pockets of Ukrainian resistance in other cities such as Kramatorsk, Slovyansk and Lyman are without supplies of food and ammunition and are gradually being surrounded.

A Prelude to Victory. Pokrovsk is considered the gateway to Donbas and the key to allowing Russia to capture the rest of the region. When it was taken, it now gives Russia a new “jumping off” point into other major cities in the Donbas.

At the same time, the Russians have surrounded another major city in the north called Kup’yansk at the head of the Oskil River, not far from the provincial capital city of Kharkiv. Once Kup’yansk falls, the way will be open to surround Kharkiv. The Ukrainians have already stated to evacuate civilians from that city. These encirclement maneuvers are in addition to a major pincer movement in central Donbas focused on Kostyantynivka, Yablunivka and Toretsk.

The result is that the Russians are making major offensive moves in the north, central and southern areas of the Donbas and AFU positions are crumbling due to lack of food, ammunition and manpower. By this winter, there will be little standing in the way of a full-on Russian race to the Dnipro.

Beyond that, the Russians would look to the eventual taking of Kharkiv, Odessa and the portion of Kherson on the western bank of the Dnipro. Russian control of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and the entire Black Sea coast of Ukraine would be complete. There would be nothing left of Ukraine except a landlocked rump state and the cities of Kyiv and Lviv.

Russian never wanted to conquer all of Ukraine. It wanted to secure the Russian-speaking areas and strategic points along the Dnipro River and the Black Sea Coast. With a much larger population, larger economy, better technology, full war mobilization, gold reserves, and the complete failure of Western economic sanctions, it is close to achieving those goals.

A Corrupt Kyiv

While Russia advances, Kyiv collapses politically. A major corruption scandal has emerged, implicating many of the top political leaders around the Ukrainian military dictator Zelensky. The accusations involve kickbacks and bribes from major Ukrainian energy companies.

This is the same racket that Hunter Biden and the Biden Crime Family conducted from 2014 to 2022, but on a larger scale. One key figure close to Zelensky has already fled to Israel (which has no extradition treaties). Zelensky’s top aide Andrii Yermak has recently resigned. All signs point to Zelensky himself being implicated in this scandal.

The only real scandal is why this current scandal wasn’t revealed earlier. This corruption has been going on in Ukraine for over thirty years. A lot of the corrupt money was being funneled back to the Democratic Party, which is why the U.S. never pursued the matter under Obama or Biden. When Trump tried raising the issue in 2019, he was impeached for just discussing it on the phone.

The implication is that the U.S. is now allowing the investigation to move forward because it’s time for Zelensky to move to one of his mansions in Miami, Dubai or Spain. The anti-corruption commission in Ukraine is controlled by U.S. appointees and funded with U.S. money. The message to Zelensky is to sign the Trump peace treaty or run for your life – perhaps both.

Three Choices for Trump

This brings us to the peace process currently underway. Top White House negotiator Steve Witkoff, aided by Jared Kushner and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have just met with Putin in Moscow after discussions with Zelensky and NATO allies including the UK, France and Germany.

The Trump peace plan began a few weeks ago with 28-points. These points were narrowed down to 19-points after discussions with Zelensky. The exact text of this plan has never been revealed to the public and it is a work in progress.

In the main, we know it would cede the Donbas, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson to Russia up to the Dnipro River. Russia would give up a small patch of Ukrainian territory in the Sumy region, which was never on Russia’s list of goals. Russia would also give up its designs on Odessa. Ukraine would agree never to join NATO and maintain a kind of neutrality between east and west.

Russia’s list of demands to end the war has scarcely changed since before the war. It includes demilitarization, de-Nazification, neutrality, no NATO membership and protections for the Russian-speaking population. As Zelensky attacked the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, Russia’s list expanded to include protections for the Church.

The biggest change in the Russian position has involved the annexation of Ukraine territory into the Russian Federation. Russia began the war with Crimea and quickly expanded its territory to include the Donbass. The longer the war lasts, the more territory Russia gains. There should be no expectation that Russia will return any of this land except Sumy. Today, Russia claims Ukrainian territory up to the Dnipro River that is has not yet occupied but expects to in the ongoing offensive.

The Russian position is very close to the original Trump 28-point plan – close enough to get a deal done. The problem is that NATO and Zelensky have changed the Trump deal in the last two weeks of negotiations. These changes include “boots on the ground” in the form of a peacekeeping force comprised of NATO troops and security guarantees that would oblige NATO members to come to the aid of Ukraine in the event the Russians engaged in future military action. Of course, Russian military action could easily be provoked by Ukrainian covert operations or drone attacks.

In short, the Ukrainian additions to the original peace plan amount to NATO status without formal NATO membership and lay the foundation for a new war. It would be the same package of lies the west has served up to Moscow in the Minsk I and Minsk II agreements, not to mention the Maidan “color revolution” in 2014 orchestrated by CIA, MI6 and Ukrainian Nazis.

Trump’s Choices. While the outcome is uncertain in the war, the timing is not. We’ll know within a week or two which way this is going. Russia wins in every scenario.

The Trump team is between a rock and a hard place. If they push the modified peace plan with the Ukrainian changes, Russia will say no. If they agree to the Russian position with slight concessions by Moscow, then Ukraine, France, Germany and the UK will say no.

Trump has three choices:

• The first is to stick with the modified plan, in which the case the war will drag on.

• The second is to agree to the Russian position and force Zelensky out of office in favor of a new leader who will agree. In that event, the war will end quickly. Western Europe doesn’t really matter in this scenario – they’re vassal states.

• The third is just to walk away; something Trump should have done last February when it was still Biden’s war. It’s not too late to do that, although Trump will be branded as a Putin Puppet by the DC warmongers.

My estimate is that the first scenario will play out.

But Trump has enormous capacity to surprise the world, so one cannot discard the second scenario. The third scenario seems unlikely because it’s a no-win for Trump politically, even though it would be the cleanest course militarily.

While the outcome is uncertain, the timing is not. We’ll know within a week or two which way this is going. Russia wins in every scenario. The only variables are the size and speed of the victory.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 08:10

Iran's Executions Reach Decade High

Iranian authorities have executed over 1,000 people between January and September 2025, the highest number of yearly death penalties conducted in Iran that Amnesty International has recorded in at least 15 years.

As Statista's Tristan Gaudiat shows in the chart below, within less than nine months, the number of people executed by the regime has already surpassed last year’s grim total of 972 executions.

You will find more infographics at Statista

These figures are likely low estimates due to the Iranian authorities not publishing such data publicly.

According to Amnesty, the Iranian regime has increased its use of the death penalty since the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" movement uprising, as a tool of state repression and to crush dissent.

In 2025, the authorities have further intensified executions in the aftermath of the escalating hostilities between Israel and Iran, under the guise of national security.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 07:35

French Government Plan To 'Label' News Outlets Backfires Spectacularly

Via Remix News,

A few weeks back, French President Emmanuel Macron announced a new “media labeling” system, while also assuring citizens that this “media accreditation” will not include any sort of state-backed labeling. 

Suffice it to say, these assurances have only stoked fears of an authoritarian creep into the media sphere. 

Back in November, Macron had told La Voix du Nord that “a labeling process carried out by professionals” was in the works to highlight those media outlets that respected certain “ethical standards,” and thus also those it deems lacking.

Le Journal du Dimanche (JDD), owned by the conservative Bolloré group, denounced this development on its front page as a project for “information control,” reports France24.

Jordan Bardella, head of the right-wing National Rally, also posted on X about the news: ”The role of the State is not to “certify the truth” with an obscure label: it is to guarantee freedom of the press and freedom of expression. Let us reject Emmanuel Macron’s project, which is nothing less than to establish genuine control over information.”

Le rôle de l’État n’est pas de « certifier la vérité » avec un obscur label : il est de garantir la liberté de la presse et la liberté d’expression.

Refusons le projet d’Emmanuel Macron qui est d’instaurer, ni plus ni moins, un véritable contrôle de l’information. pic.twitter.com/ef0SnGiu1X

— Jordan Bardella (@J_Bardella) December 2, 2025

The Élysée posted itself in response to criticisms, with the message: “Pravda? Ministry of Truth? When talking about the fight against disinformation sparks disinformation…”

In response to this, Marion Marechal, president of Identity Liberty and niece of Marine Le Pen, noted, referencing Arcom, the French regulatory authority for audiovisual and digital communication.

“French people, rest assured, so it is therefore not the Élysée that will deliver the media truth label but a ‘Journalism Arcom,” held, once again, by socialists designated by the president?” she asked.

Bruno Retailleau, the leader of the Republicans, has now launched a petition entitled “Media: Yes to Freedom, No to Labeling!” which garnered over 40,000 signatures.

Éric Ciotti, now allied with the National Rally, published his own petition shortly thereafter, reaching the same number. 

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 07:00

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

• Legendary short seller James Chanos on the problem with Strategy’s business model: The noise has grown louder about Strategy being in trouble, but most experts think Strategy can weather the current bitcoin downturn, though one critic predicts this is “the beginning of the end.” (Sherwood) see also In a crisis, Strategy stacks dollars: A $1.44bn dividend reserve raises new concerns for shareholders of the bitcoin treasury company. (Financial Times)

• Americans Are Losing Their Homes to Zombie Mortgages: Private equity and debt collectors are making millions on home loans once thought canceled.  A growing number of debt collectors across the US specialize in buying a certain type of loan, often referred to as a “zombie” mortgage, which have lain dormant for years. Borrowers took them out before the Great Recession, and after home prices crashed, these loans became all but worthless. But as we show on this episode of Bloomberg Investigates, the market eventually came roaring back, and with it a cottage industry looking to bring these loans back to life. (Bloomberg)

• What will the cost of Trump’s bank deregulation be? Potentially  Catastrophic: Unfortunately, the Trump administration is tearing away every layer of protection that was designed for the next economic crash. (MS Now)

• Summers Banned for Life: The American Economic Association. has imposed a lifetime prohibition on Mr. Summers’ attending, speaking at, or otherwise participating in AEA-sponsored events or activities. (AEA) see also How Could Larry Summers Be So Stupid? The remarkable rise and fall of a domineering public figure appears complete. (Politico)

• How the dollar-store industry overcharges cash-strapped customers while promising low prices: Dollar General and Family Dollar stores often fail to honor their shelf prices – charging more at checkout for everything from frying pans to Frosted Flakes (The Guardian)

• This company charges disabled vets millions, even after VA said it’s likely illegal: NPR investigation revealed Trajector Medical, a company that started with a mission to help disabled vets, but that former workers say now is intent on aggressive debt collection and maximizing profits. Despite repeated written warnings from the VA that it may be breaking that law, the company continues to operate. (NPR)

• The U.S. Is Funding Fewer Grants in Every Area of Science and Medicine: A quiet policy change means the government is making fewer 41% bets on long-term science. (New York Times)

• Sex Crimes. State Crimes. War Crimes. We’re detecting a pattern with this administration. (The Bulwark) see also War Crime…or Murder? Killing shipwreck survivors is patently illegal and morally abhorrent. (The Contrarian)

• ‘We had six MPs and four factions’: inside Your Party’s toxic power struggles: Some say Jeremy Corbyn is too non-committal for project to work, while others blame Zarah Sultana’s combative nature. (The Guardian)

• Why One Man Is Fighting for Our Right to Control Our Garage Door Openers: If companies can modify internet-connected products and charge subscriptions after people have already purchased them, what does it mean to own anything anymore? (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.

Childhood deaths to rise for first time this millennium

Source: Semafor

 

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.

Washington's New National Security Strategy Details How Trump 2.0 Will Respond To Multipolarity

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Trump 2.0 just released its National Security Strategy (NSS).

It can be read in full here, but for those with limited time, the present piece will summarize its contents. The new NSS reconceptualizes, narrows, and reprioritizes US interests. Focus is placed on the primacy of nations over transnational organizations, preserving the balance of power through optimized burden-sharing, and the US’ reindustrialization that’ll be facilitated by securing critical supply chains. The Western Hemisphere is the top priority.

The “Trump Corrolary” to the Monroe Doctrine is the centerpiece and will seek to deny non-hemispheric competitors ownership or control of strategically vital assets in an allusion to China’s influence over the Panama Canal.

The NSS envisages enlisting regional champions and friendly forces to help ensure regional stability for preventing migrant crises, fight the cartels, and erode the aforesaid competitors’ influence. This aligns with the “Fortress America” strategy of restoring US hegemony in the hemisphere.

Asia is next on the NSS’ hierarchy of priorities. Together with its incentivized partners, the US will rebalance trade ties with China, compete more vigorously with it in the Global South in an allusion to challenging BRI, and deter China over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Trade loopholes through third countries like Mexico will be closed, the Global South will tie its currencies more closely to the dollar, and Asian allies will grant the US greater access to their ports, etc., while ramping up defense spending.

As for Europe, the US wants it “to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence, and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation” in order to avoid “civilizational erasure”.

The US will “manage European relations with Russia”, “build up the healthy nations of Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe” in an allusion to the Polish-led “Three Seas Initiative”, and ultimately “help Europe correct its current trajectory.”

A hybrid set of economic and political tools will be employed to this end.

West Asia and Africa are at the bottom of the NSS’ priorities. The US foresees the first becoming a greater source of investment and destination of such while the second’s ties with the US will transition from a foreign aid paradigm to an investment and growth one centered on select partners. Like with the rest of the world, the US wants to keep the peace through optimized burden-sharing and without overextending itself, but it’ll also still keep an eye on Islamist terrorist activity in both regions too.

The following passage sums up the NSS’ new approach:

“As the United States rejects the ill-fated concept of global domination for itself, we must prevent the global, and in some cases even regional, domination of others.”

To that end, the balance of power must be maintained through pragmatic carrot-and-stick policies in conjunction with close partners, which includes securing critical supply chains (especially those in the Western Hemisphere). This is essentially how Trump 2.0 plans to respond to multipolarity.

The grand strategic goal is to restore the US’ central role in the global system, but if that’s not possible and it loses control of the Eastern Hemisphere to China, then Plan B is to retreat to the Western Hemisphere, which will be autarkic under the US’ hegemony if it succeeds in building “Fortress America”.

Trump 2.0’s NSS is very ambitious and will be more difficult to implement than it was to promulgate, but even partial success could radically reshape the global systemic transition in the US’ favor.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 23:20

Indonesia Remains The World's Most Generous Nation

Started in 2012, Giving Tuesday, which takes place on the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, is a day which aims to encourage people to do good.

Described as "a global generosity movement unleashing the power of radical generosity", the goal of Giving Tuesday is to encourage people to donate time or money or to use their voice for a good cause.

While generosity may seem like a complicated concept to quantify, for over a decade now, the Charities Aid Foundation has been providing an overview of generosity around the world with its World Giving Index.

This international study examines populations in more than 100 countries according to three main aspects of generosity: charitable donations, volunteering and willingness to help strangers.

As in previous years, Statista's Valentine Fourreau notes that the most generous country is not one of the richest in the world.

You will find more infographics at Statista

In 2024 Indonesia again tops the ranking, with a score of 74. The volunteer rate in the country (65 percent) is nearly three times higher than the global average (24 percent), and nine out of ten Indonesians made charitable donations in 2023 (year the data was collected).

In second place among the most generous countries is Kenya, with a score of 63, while Singapore and the Gambia both obtained a score of 61.

This ranking, whose top 20 remains fairly similar from one year to the next, reflects certain religious and cultural characteristics.

Notable examples include the influence of Islamic charity in certain Muslim countries such as Indonesia (with zakât, or ‘legal alms’), and that of Theravada Buddhism in Thailand (ranked 14th) and Myanmar (ranked 19th), an ancient branch of Buddhism that values offerings and charitable donations.

Anglo-Saxon and Protestant countries, with their long tradition of philanthropy, are also well represented.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 22:45

Pro-Israel Forces Intensify Effort To Control American Discourse

Via Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities

Across the American political spectrum, support for the State of Israel is steadily eroding. With the long-running, staggeringly expensive redistribution of American wealth and weapons to one of the world’s most prosperous countries under unprecedented threat, Israel’s advocates inside the United States are growing increasingly desperate to suppress the facts, opinions, questions and imagery that are causing this sea change. 

Pro-Israel forces have long worked to limit and shape US discourse to Israel’s advantage. However, the intensity and novelty of what’s taking place in 2025 — from the government-coerced transfer of a social media platform to pro-Israel billionaires, to the jailing and attempted deportation of a student for writing an opinion piece, and more — deserves the attention of every American who values free expression, an enlightened electorate, and independence from foreign influence.

Many Americans know that Congress and President Biden teamed up in 2024 to force the Chinese company ByteDance to divest its US operation of the popular video-sharing app TikTok, yet few realize this unusual intervention was motivated in large part by a desire to serve the interests of Israel. 

Though politicians pointed to the supposed Chinese menace lurking inside the app — while revealing their lack of sincerity by continuing to use it themselves — the catalyst for the extraordinary TikTok ban's passage was a sea of viral content illuminating Israel’s rampage in Gaza, casting Palestinians in empathetic light, and questioning the legitimacy of the political philosophy that is Zionism. 

The idea that passage of the ban was largely about Israel is no conspiracy theory. American politicians who supported the compelled divestiture of TikTok have candidly said so themselves. Sharing a stage with Biden Secretary of State Antony Blinken in 2024, then-Senator Mitt Romney said: 

“Some wonder why there was such overwhelming support for us to shut down, potentially, TikTok or other entities of that nature. You look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians relative to other social media sites — it’s overwhelmingly so among TikTok broadcasts, so I’d note that’s of real interest to the president, who will get the chance to take action in that regard.” 

Similarly, Rep. Mike Lawler of New York told a webinar that pro-Palestinian student protests were “exactly why we included the TikTok bill…because you’re seeing how these kids are being manipulated by certain groups or entities or countries to foment hate on their behalf and really create a hostile environment here in the US.”

Of course, mere divestiture wouldn’t guarantee that TikTok would start suppressing anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian content in the United States. To have the desired effect, the buyer — who required White House approval — would have to be an ardent supporter of Israel. That’s just how things played out. In September, President Trump approved the sale of TikTok’s US operations to a joint venture led by Larry Ellison, the founder of tech-titan Oracle and the fourth-richest man in the world. 

Larry Ellison led the takeover of TikTok and set his son up to run Paramount Skydance, parent of CBS (Alex J. Berliner / AB Images/ AP via Washington Post)

Ellison has expressed his “deep emotional connection to the State of Israel” and has been a major benefactor of the Israeli Defense Forces, via donations to IDF-supporting organizations. He spent at least $3 million on Marco Rubio’s failed 2016 presidential campaign, after being assured by Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations that Rubio would “be a great friend to Israel.” There are other Israel-favoring billionaires in the consortium now controlling TikTok’s American presence, among them NewsCorp head Rupert Murdoch and investment trader Jeff Yass. 

Americans were propagandized into fearing Chinese control of TikTok users’ data. Now that data will be controlled by Oracle, a firm whose founder has described Israel as his own nation, said “there is no greater honor” than supporting the IDF, and invited Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take a seat on the board. It’s also a firm with strong business ties to the Israel government, and a firm whose Israel-born executive vice chair and former CEO last year declared, “For [Oracle] employees, it’s clear: If you’re not for America or Israel, don’t work here.”

A few months before the TikTok divestiture was finalized, the company installed former IDF soldier and self-described “passionate” Zionist Erica Mindel as TikTok’s hate speech manager in July. Weeks later, and just days before the transfer of TikTok’s US operation was approved, the platform posted new guidelines on Sept 13 about what’s allowed on the platform. 

Soon after the change, users and content creators began sharing examples of content being deleted by TikTok, with the platform exploiting its vague new rules about “conspiracy theories” and “protected groups” to reject negative content about Israel — wielding the threat of demonetization of repeat offenders. In a recent appearance on the Breaking Points podcast, Guy Christensen, who has 3.4 million TikTok followers, shared his experience: 

“What all these videos have in common that have been removed since Sept 13 are that I am talking about Israel, I’m talking about AIPAC’s influence, I’m talking about Larry Ellison and the attempt to put TikTok under Zionist control — I’m criticizing Israel in some way. It’s the same thing I’ve heard from my audience, my friends who are creators. Ever since Sept 13, they’ve had the same exact experience. Videos that are more informational and critical of Israel get removed.” 

In a late-September meeting with pro-Israel social media “influencers,” Netanyahu hailed the transfer of TikTok’s US ownership. “We have to fight with the weapons that apply to the battlefield with which we’re engaged, and the most important ones are in social media. And the most important purchase that is going on right now is TikTok. Number one.” Expressing hope that, by “talking” with Elon Musk, his X platform could be reshaped to be more Israel-protective too, Netanyahu added, “If we can get those two things, we can get a lot.”

NEW - Netanyahu mission-briefed American influencers today, stating TikTok is the "most important" weapon in securing Israel's right-wing support: "Weapons change over time... the most important ones are the social media," he said. "The most important purchase that is going on… pic.twitter.com/EeszHlcZmN

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) September 27, 2025

Ellison’s TikTok takeover is troubling enough, but that wasn’t his only media move this year. He also financed his son David’s takeover of Paramount Skydance, the media company that controls many movie and television properties, including CBS. David Ellison quickly installed as head of CBS News Bari Weiss — a self-described “Zionist fanatic” who took a gap year before college to live on an Israeli kibbutz. 

Weiss’s history of wrangling over the bounds of acceptable speech vis-a-vis Israel goes back to her sophomore year at Columbia University, when she was part of a group of students who claimed they were subjected to intimidation by Middle East Studies professors over the students’ Zionist views. A university panel found only one of the supposed incidents represented unacceptable conduct. 

Both outside observers and network insiders are braced for Weiss to nudge the outlet’s reporting to Israel’s benefit, and there are early indications validating worries about her bias. Citing executive sources inside CBS, the Wall Street Journal reported that foreign correspondent Chris Livesay, who was set to be laid off as part of a downsizing move that preceded Weiss’s arrival, sent Weiss an email expressing his affinity for Israel and claiming he was “bullied” for his beliefs. Weiss intervened and saved Livesay from the layoff. Other correspondents told the Journal that Livesay’s claim about bullying was bogus. 

Compounding the expectations that CBS News is about to become a de facto Israel PR outlet, the network’s new ombudsman — the arbiter of editorial concerns — also has strong Zionist credentials. The New York Times describes Kenneth Weinstein as a “firm and vocal champion of Israel.” On X, Grayzone editor-in-chief Max Blumenthal notedthat, “during a 2021…event with Mike Pence, Weinstein touted his Israel lobbyist creds, describing how he’d been groomed by the Tikvah Fund, the Likudnik training network which will award Bari Weiss its Herzl Award this November.” (The Likud Party is the Israeli party led by Netanyahu.)

Here's how Glenn Greenwald summed up the TikTok and CBS moves:

The minute the American public starts turning against Israel and the US financing of that country, the world's richest and most fanatical pro-Israel billionaires start buying up large media outlets and TikTok, then install Bari Weiss and an ex-IDF soldier to control content: https://t.co/wjJbliKRmO

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 20, 2025

The transfer of TikTok into Israel-friendly hands isn’t the only example of intensified US government intervention in America’s public square on behalf of the tiny Middle Eastern country. Much of the Trump administration’s war against anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian speech has focused on college campuses. In the most alarming such move in 2025, the Trump administration has arrested, jailed and attempted to deport foreign students for merely voicing their support for Palestinians or opposition to the Israeli government. 

The most atrocious example — which Stark Realities examined in depth earlier this year — centers on a 30-year-old, Turkish Tufts University PhD candidate who was arrested on a Boston street and whisked away to a dismal Louisiana prison, just for co-authoring a calmly-written Tufts Daily op-ed urging the university to formally characterize Israel’s conduct in Gaza as genocide, and to sell the school’s Israel-associated investments. 

This cruelly despotic tactic is the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation. In a policy paper, the think tank urged pro-Israel groups and the US government to characterize pro-Palestinian activists as “effectively members of a terrorist support network,” and then use that characterization to target activists for deportations, expulsions from colleges, lawsuits, terminations by employers, and exclusion from “open society.”

Supporters of Israel have long attempted to stifle critics of the Israeli government by smearing them as antisemites. In 2016, that kind of mislabelling was codified in a definition of antisemitism that’s now being embraced by governments, universities and other institutions in the United States and around the world: the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s “working definition of antisemitism.”

Some elements of the IHRA definition are reasonable, but others irrationally conflate criticism of the State of Israel with hatred of all Jews. For example, the IHRA definition says it’s antisemitic to “claim that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” or to merely “draw comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” 

Images of the complete obliteration of much of Gaza have contributed to an historic, bipartisan dip in Americans' affinity for Israel (AP Photo/ Abed Hajjar) 

Other, vague elements of the definition are open to creative interpretations, facilitating bogus accusations of bigotry against Israel’s critics. For example, the IHRA says it’s antisemitic to “apply double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.” The IHRA also says it’s antisemitic to make statements about the “power of Jews as [a] collective,” which can put someone who talks about the enormous influence of the pro-Israel lobby squarely in the crosshairs. 

Similarly, the IHRA says it’s antisemitic to “deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination,” a definition that could ensnare people who — right or wrong — advocate for the State of Israel to be replaced by a new governing arrangement for the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Indeed, those who want speech to be policed on Israel’s behalf frequently point to the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” as inherently antisemitic. 

As I wrote in an earlier article (“No Country Has a Right To Exist”): 

Those who support the State of Israel are free to present a case that it’s a just arrangement for the 7.5 million Jews and 7.5 million Palestinians “between the river and the sea.” However, painting those who demand a new arrangement as inherently immoral, genocidal or antisemitic is ignorant at best and maliciously misleading at worst. 

Doing its part to vilify Israel’s critics and mislead the public and policymakers, the Anti-Defamation League has employed expansive definitions in its numerical tracking of antisemitic incidents — statistics that are unquestioningly quoted by journalists and cited by pro-Israel politicians. 

For example, in early 2024, the ADL claimed that, in the first three months after the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion of Israel and the IDF’s brutal assault on Gaza, antisemitic incidents skyrocketed 360%. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said Jews faced a threat “unprecedented in modern history.” However, the ADL admitted that it was counting as antisemitic incidents all protests that included “anti-Zionist chants and slogans.” 

A single sign with this slogan is all the ADL needs to count a protest as an "antisemitic incident" (Mark Kerrison/In Pictures via Getty)

Of course, exaggerating the scale of antisemitism does more than facilitate efforts to suppress criticism of Israel: It also helps the ADL justify its existence and boost its fundraising. The ADL’s over-counting is nothing new. In 2017, the ADL claimed antisemitic incidents in the United States had soared by 86% in the first quarter of the year, and major media outlets ran with the story. However, much of the increase springs from the ADL’s decision to include a huge number of bomb threats phoned into US synagogues and schools by a Jew living in Israel.

The IHRA definition is at the forefront of a broad campaign to suppress candid discourse about Israel and Palestine on college campuses, with multiple state governments ordering public schools to use it to determine what can and can’t be said. 

Bard College’s Kenneth Stern, a lead drafter of a 2004 antisemitism definition that was subsequently adopted by the IHRA, has spoken out against the weaponization of the definition to stifle discourse at universities. “The history of the abuse of the IHRA definition demonstrates the desire is largely political—it is not so much a desire to identify antisemitism, but rather to label certain speech about Israel as antisemitic,” Stern wrote at the Knight First Amendment Institute. 

Even at schools that haven’t adopted the IHRA definition, activists and scholars who are critical of Israel and empathetic to the Palestinians are being subjected to countless false accusations of antisemitism, and universities are being sued by pro-Israel students who claim the schools tolerate antisemitism. 

A Stark Realities analysis of an 84-page complaint filed against the University of Pennsylvania found nearly every alleged “antisemitic incident” was merely an instance in which Penn students, professors and guest speakers engaged in political expression that proponents of the State of Israel strongly disagree with. Eighteen months later, a federal judge agreed. “At worst, Plaintiffs accuse Penn of tolerating and permitting the expression of viewpoints which differ from their own,” Judge Mitchell Goldberg wroteas he dismissed the case. 

Courtroom victories, however, can only do so much to counter the chilling effect of campaigns that vilify students, professors and institutions as antisemitic. That’s especially true when university cash flows are threatened. 

Major pro-Israel donors have withdrawn or threatened to suspend donations to various schools, and those threats have been credited with forcing out university presidents like Penn’s Liz Magill. Donor pressure has also led schools to adopt the problematic IHRA antisemitism definition, shut down chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine, and strip Israel-critical professors of chair positions. 

President Trump embraces US-Israeli billionaire Miriam Adelson, who’s donated upwards of $200 million to his campaigns (Haiyun Jiang / New York Times)

The greatest financial pressure being exerted on universities, however, is coming from the Trump administration, which has not only suspended billions of dollars in funding from various universities that are supposed hives of antisemitism, but has also filed lawsuits and hammered schools with fines. Many of them are surrendering, paying the government large sums and making policy and staffing changes. Last week, Northwestern agreed to pay $75 million to the federal government for its alleged failure to fight “antisemitism.” Earlier, Columbia agreed to a $200 million fine payable over three years, and Brown will surrender $50 million.

There are other avenues by which government force is being tapped to squelch criticism of Israel and advocacy for Palestinians. Dozens of states have passed legislation that bar individuals and businesses from contracting with the state if they boycott or divest from Israel. That led to a bizarre spectacle in which hurricane-battered Texans applying for emergency benefits were asked to verify that they do not and will not boycott Israel. Comparable federal measures have been introduced, but not yet enacted. 

Another proposed federal bill is the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would require the Department of Education to use the IHRA definition when evaluating accusations that colleges tolerate antisemitism — essentially codifying a Trump executive order. It sailed through the House in 2024 by a 320-91 vote, but stalled in the Senate this year amid bipartisan concerns about the definition. Seven amendments had been attached in committee, including one clarifying that criticism of the Israeli government isn’t antisemitism. 

Tellingly, champions of the bill said amendments like that were poison pills that would render it un-passable.

Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Join thousands who benefit from ad-free, monthly insights at starkrealities.substack.com

* * *

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 22:10

Americans Worry Most Among Developed Nations About Food Security

Concerning nations surveyed in Statista’s Consumer Insights, Americans were among those most worried about food and water security.

Indeed, as Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, while for most European nations, worry about the topic peaked during the coronavirus pandemic and the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war, concern has remained elevated in the United States into 2025.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Food and water supplies were not considered a particular issue among developed countries for a long time. But the data illustrates how that is starting to change.

As many as 1 in 5 respondents in France said that food and water security was one of the biggest challenges their country faced in 2025.

The proportion was similarly high in the United Kingdom and Italy (23 percent), while it had fallen a little lower again in Spain (16 percent) and Germany (13 percent).

As wars (trade and kinetic) continue to disrupt international trade and affairs in recent years, the constant chatter about climate change shifting droughts and destructive fires more top of people's minds, and inflation (groceries becoming more expensive), more people are seeing how these and other issues can affect the security of their food and water supply even in richer countries.

In the United States, shifts in government benefit programs by the Trump administration might also add to peoples' feeling around food security.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 21:35

Out Of Sight: Following The Money Trail Of Missing Child Border Crossers

Authored by James Varney via RealClearInvestigations,

On the campaign trail, Vice President JD Vance repeatedly chastised the Biden administration for allegedly losing track of some 320,000 minors who had crossed the border unaccompanied. “Our government, under the policies of Kamala Harris, has lost thousands of innocent children to sex trafficking, to drug trafficking, to human trafficking,” Vance said.

One year later, the fate of most of those children remains unknown. While the Trump administration has all but stopped the crush of migrants that occurred during Biden’s term, neither the government nor the nonprofits that were largely responsible for resettling this vulnerable population of unaccompanied minors have been able to tell RealClearInvestigations where they are living.

Experts say it’s likely that the overwhelming majority of unaccompanied minors remain off the grid because their parents, guardians, and caregivers do not want to draw the attention of immigration authorities. But they also acknowledge the likelihood that some of the migrant minors have been picked up by human traffickers and forced into exploitative labor and sexual roles – a criminal trend that’s on the rise in the U.S. 

This story has been forgotten as politicians and the media have turned their attention away from immigration after Trump virtually closed the southern border. But the recent shooting of two members of the National Guard in Washington, D.C., by an Afghan refugee who had collaborated with the U.S. special forces has brought the issue of a broken immigration system back to the forefront. 

Nearly half a million unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 were apprehended at the border between 2021 and 2024, overwhelming the immigration system. Taxpayers spent more than $23 billion on a network of government agencies, construction companies, and nonprofits charged with finding them a safe place to live while sponsors were sought. 

Now the entities that took the money are unwilling to address the whereabouts of the minors. Nor are they forthcoming about how they spent – or misspent – the funding that was supposed to avoid the very problem the nation faces of missing migrant children.

“They don’t want to talk about it,” said Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies. “Those groups are the very ones that were pressing to release the unaccompanied kids faster.” 

The Biden Migrant Surge

The problem of unaccompanied minors began when Joe Biden took office and embraced more lax policies at the border.  During Trump’s first term, an average of 43,707 minors annually crossed the border alone; the figure dropped to 15,381 when the pandemic emerged in 2020. In 2021, however, that figure skyrocketed to 122,731, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In 2022, the number hit an all-time high of 128,904 before tapering off to 98,356 in 2024. These numbers represent the unaccompanied minors that were encountered by U.S. officials and do not include “gotaways,” so the actual total is significantly higher.

All told, the average annual number of unaccompanied children coming to the U.S. under Biden was nearly double the highest single prior year of 2019, ICE figures show. More than half of those who came each year since 2019 were 16 years old or younger, with nearly a quarter aged 12 or younger. 

This year, monthly data indicates the problem of newly arriving unaccompanied minors has virtually disappeared. In October, the average number of “children in care” was 2,244.

“Sealing the border had made a huge difference,” said Laura Lederer, a former senior advisor on trafficking in persons for the State Department. “Stopping illegal immigration is essentially a human trafficking prevention program.”

Rise in Human Trafficking

For undocumented minors already in the U.S., they are at risk of falling victim to predators who can take advantage of their separation from family and caregivers. Recent press accounts have described horror stories, with minors allegedly exploited from North Carolina to Los Angeles. Precise figures on victims of sexual trafficking or forced labor are impossible to find because the illegal operations are underground.

“For everyone we know about, there could be two, three, or even four times more,” said Lederer, a leading American researcher on human trafficking. 

The process of illegal immigration, which has been a cash cow for smuggling organizations, also claims victims. Minors may fall prey to groomers or recruiters and be forced to function as lookouts, guides, or spies, according to the Department of Defense’s Combating Trafficking in Persons unit.

Even federal agencies involved in finding minors are tight-lipped about their operations. In recent weeks, a Memphis Safe Task Force, led by the U.S. Marshals Service and including teams from ICE and Customs and Border Protection, has rescued 116 juveniles. How many of those were unaccompanied minor border crossers is unclear. The U.S. Marshals Service did not respond to questions.

Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley has been following the issue for years. Federal whistleblowers at his hearings have described a haphazard system for caring for unaccompanied minors, in which information is not shared among federal agencies, contractors, and law enforcement. Last year, Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) whistleblowers said that contractors would release minors to sketchy, unverified partners, suspicious strip-mall businesses, and, in one Michigan case, in an open field.

Prompted by those reports, Grassley sent referrals to the FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regarding potentially criminal behavior by more than “100 suspicious sponsors” last year. But the Biden-Harris administration failed to fully respond to two-thirds of the subpoenas issued by law enforcement. In the last four years, there were more than 65,000 reports of possible illegal acts ignored or dismissed, of which roughly 7,300, or 13%, involved human trafficking, according to an Inspector General’s report.

The Trump administration claims it has processed some 28% of the backlog, leading to 36 investigations accepted for prosecution, seven indictments, 25 arrest warrants, 11 arrests, and three convictions.

Blaming the Problem on Paperwork

When Vance spoke about the exploitation of unaccompanied minors in the October 2024 vice-presidential debate, he took his 300,000 figure from a recent report from the DHS’s Inspector General. Within hours, left-wing groups and press outlets sprang to the Biden administration’s defense, downplaying the severity of the situation and insisting the huge number “lacked context.”

Some pro-immigration groups said it was merely “a missing paperwork problem,” according to the Acacia Center for Justice’s Unaccompanied Children Program. It was a “premature” conclusion that they were lost, said the American Immigration Council, while the Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights said they were not “effectively lost.”

RCI reached out to all three of those groups repeatedly, asking how they assessed the current situation with unaccompanied minors and whether it has improved under Trump. Only the Acacia Center responded, and then only to repeat its point about paperwork.

“This figure stems from gaps in ICE paperwork, not actual disappearances,” the center’s Deputy Chief of Programs Michael Corradini said. “Many children were never issued Notices to Appear in immigration court, so their absence from court records does not mean they are missing.”

But Vance’s total was not inaccurate, according to the inspector general’s report. It found that, in addition to the 32,000 cases in which no address was given for where the minor went, there were another 43,000 cases where the minor failed to respond to a summons to immigration court, and 233,000 cases where neither addresses nor phone numbers received a response. In other words, more than 300,000.

The $23 Billion Network that Flopped

Since the DHS was created, most of the unaccompanied minors have been handled by the ORR. That agency, in turn, will release the minor to a sponsor, and it is at this point that the government often loses touch with the immigrant, several experts told RCI.

Neither ORR nor those agencies above it – the Administration for Children and Families and the Department of Health & Human Services – responded to multiple requests for comment.

Through ORR, taxpayers spent $23.1 billion on unaccompanied minor-related grants and contracts during Biden’s term, according to usaspending.gov. The office relies on a sprawling network to house the migrant minors and put them together with sponsors. Contracts and grants related to unaccompanied minors comprise the biggest chunk of the office’s spending each year, accounting for more than 91% in FY2021. 

Construction companies like Rapid Deployment Inc., of Mobile, Ala., were paid at least $3.5 billion, and nearly $200 million went to the defense contractor General Dynamics of Connecticut. Much of the funding went to nonprofits, religious charities, and non-governmental organizations that operate foster homes and release the minors to sponsors. Consulting companies, lawyers, and universities also benefited.

Despite the big outlays of money, it seems no group of officials kept tabs on the minors. 

Congress has identified some misspending in the program. North Carolina Republican Rep. Dan Bishop said last November that more than $100 million was obligated, and nearly $40 million spent, for an unaccompanied minor home in Greensboro, N.C., that never housed anyone.

At least one major vendor, Southwest Key Programs Inc. in Texas, has been sued for mistreatment of minors. As the largest housing provider for unaccompanied children, the group received at least $2 billion over just three years, from FY2021 to FY2023, according to government records. Last summer, the Justice Department sued Southwest Key, alleging that for years “multiple Southwest Key employees subjected unaccompanied children in their care to repeated and unwelcome sexual abuse, harassment, and misconduct and a hostile housing environment, including severe sexual abuse and rape.”

Federal tax returns for some of these nonprofits show that the ORR contracts and grants proved very lucrative. Southwest Key, for example, went from reporting revenues of $417.8 million in 2020 to more than $900 million in 2023 and 2024. In those last two years, the Austin-based nonprofit’s CEO, Anselmo Villarreal, was paid more than $1.1 million, while dozens of top executives received annual pay packages ranging from $250,000 to $700,000. In those same two years, Southwest Key spent 76% of its nearly $1 billion in revenue on “salaries, other compensation and benefits,” according to tax returns collected by ProPublica.

Endeavors, a San Antonio-based nonprofit, was paid more than $2 billion, including a $1.3 billion contract in FY2022, and at least $720 million in the other three years of Biden’s term. According to an audit, the nonprofit had minuscule revenues from 2011 to 2020. In 2020, when the nonprofit reported $52.5 million in revenue, it had 10 executives making six figures, topped by CEO Jon Allman at $317,301. In 2023, those in the Endeavors’ C-suite fared even better, with CEO Charles H. Fulghum pulling down $638,472 and three other executives making between $390,000 and $493,000, tax records show.

Another San Antonio nonprofit, Compass Connections, grew exponentially through unaccompanied minor-related government deals worth nearly $700 million. Compass reported less than $300,000 in revenue for the years 2019 to 2021. Then Compass caught fire, reporting $192 million in revenue in 2023 and $434 million the following year. In 2023, its Chairman Kevin Dinnin received more than $1.3 million in compensation from Compass and related organizations, tax records show.

Southwest Key, Endeavors, and Compass didn’t respond to requests for comment on the services they provided. Other groups that received much smaller sums, such as the Vera Institute for Justice and the Los Angeles County Fair Association, also declined to reveal anything about how they helped the undocumented minors. 

This prodigious spending appears to have come to a halt in FY2025, which ended last month. In that year, the ORR spent $51.9 million.

Sen. Grassley has also been stonewalled by these same groups when he sought information on their services, according to his office. Concerned about possible waste and fraud, Grassley wrote to two dozen contractors twice in 2024, and while some did not respond at all, those that did “provided incomplete and obstructive responses.”

“It really is horrific, what’s been going on,” said Lederer, the former government advisor. “Unfortunately, we usually only learn about it when a child is rescued or is hurt badly. The people that facilitated all this have circled the wagons about what went very, very wrong.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 21:00

Embarrassing: Canada Very Belatedly Removes Syria's Ruling HTS From Terror List

The fact that Syria's head of state got his start working for ISIS, and was a founding member of Syrian al-Qaeda, continues to produce embarrassing headlines. 

One full year after former president Bashar al-Assad was overthrown and fled to Moscow, Canada has very belatedly removed President Ahmed al-Sharaa's militia group Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, according to a Friday statement from the country’s Foreign Ministry. As part of the new action, Syria has also been removed from its list of state sponsors of terrorism (a list the country had been on over many years of the Assad government).

The precursor to Jolani's Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham was the Syrian AQ group Al-Nusrah Front, via CBC

Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, founded and for years headed up the terror group HTS in Idlib province. HTS is the group that took control of Damascus after the collapse of the Syrian army in December 2024.

"Following extensive review, the Government of Canada has removed Syria from Canada's List of Foreign State Supporters of Terrorism under the State Immunity Act, as well as removed Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) from the List of Terrorist Entities under the Canadian Criminal Code," the ministry said.

The US was the first to act, having lifted a $10 million bounty on Sharaa within the months after he seized power, followed by a full US delisting.

The Canadian foreign ministry further said that the decision was "not taken lightly." It stated, "These measures are in line with recent decisions taken by our allies, including the United Kingdom and the United States, and follow the efforts by the Syrian transitional government to advance Syria's stability, build an inclusive and secure future for its citizens, and work alongside global partners to reinforce regional stability and counter terrorism."

So Canada seems to be admitting that HTS is indeed linked to al-Qaeda, and was properly designated in years past as a terror group, but that now it is merely going along with its allies the UK and US which removed the legal designation earlier.

The ministry still sought to stress that Canada "remains committed … to counter global security threats, such as those posed by Al-Qaeda" and ISIS (Daesh).

President Sharaa and his HTS fighters - many which now fill up top government positions - have lately been trying to make a show of 'counter ISIS missions'. However, it is Alawite, Christian, and Druze communities which have suffered repeat attacks by Sharaa's Islamist forces in recent months. 

Western countries have moved to normalize HTS, but nothing fundamentally has changed in their hardline Islamist ideology...

Video footage shows journalist James Longman advising rebels in Damascus, Syria, about the ISIS logo on their uniforms.

One of the rebels attempts to explain that the emblem does not represent ISIS, while the man wearing it is seen quickly removing the symbol. pic.twitter.com/qhZpkJiozJ

— MintPress News (@MintPressNews) December 16, 2024

Various reports have also noted that in some cases HTS members sport ISIS patches, and do little to try and hide it. Still, mainstream outlets like CNN haven't covered this much, and have by and large 'moved on' from coverage of Syria, now with Assad out of the way - as the Western powers had long sought in fueling the proxy war for regime change.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 20:25

Zelensky 'Systematically Sabotaged' Ukraine Anti-Corruption Efforts, NYT Concludes 

Via The Cradle

Over the past four years, the Ukrainian government "systematically sabotaged" oversight of the country's state-owned companies and weapons procurement processes, "allowing graft to flourish," a freshly published New York Times investigation has revealed.

The investigation details how the government of Volodymyr Zelensky sidelined outside experts from the US and EU serving on advisory boards responsible for monitoring spending, appointing executives, and preventing corruption.

EPA/Shutterstock

"President Volodymyr Zelensky's administration has stacked boards with loyalists, left seats empty, or stalled them from being set up at all. Leaders in Kiev even rewrote company charters to limit oversight, keeping the government in control and allowing hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent without outsiders poking around," the NYT report says.

The investigation was published amid a corruption scandal centering on close associates of the Ukrainian president. Anti-corruption authorities have accused members of Zelensky's inner circle of embezzling $100 million from the state-owned nuclear power company, Energoatom.

"Mr. Zelensky's administration has blamed Energoatom's supervisory board for failing to stop the corruption. But it was Mr. Zelensky's government itself that neutered Energoatom's supervisory board," the NYT writes.

The investigation also found that Zelensky sidelined the supervisory boards of the state-owned electricity company Ukrenergo and Ukraine's Defense Procurement Agency.

European leaders have justified funneling billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to Ukraine despite knowledge of the systematic corruption and theft plaguing the country. "We do care about good governance, but we have to accept that risk," said Christian Syse, the special envoy to Ukraine from Norway.

Detective Ruslan Magamedrasulov from the NABU, who was jailed in July due to accusations by the SBU of attempting to sell technical info to Russia, has been released.

Today, during the appeal hearing, the judge ruled to free the NABU detective from custody without any preventive… pic.twitter.com/9LOCV8NqKy

— Clash Report (@clashreport) December 3, 2025

"Because it's war. Because it's in our own interest to help Ukraine financially. Because Ukraine is defending Europe from Russian attacks," he added.

Zelensky's chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, resigned late last month amid the Energoatom corruption scandal and just hours after police raided his home. Ukrainska Pravda reported that he had left for Israel, of which he is a citizen, just hours before the raid.

Yermak is widely considered the second-most-powerful official in the country, with influence over domestic politics, military issues, and foreign policy, Axios noted.

For everyone who still believes the bedtime stories that Zelensky and Yermak have nothing to do with top-level corruption in the energy and defense sectors — you might want to read the latest interview with NABU detective Ruslan Magamedrasulov.

Zelensky’s loyal attack dogs… pic.twitter.com/oZvNMSjpyy

— Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) November 19, 2025

Businessman Timur Mindich, who co-founded the entertainment company Kvartal 95 with Zelensky, allegedly led the embezzlement scheme. Mindich also escaped to Israel, where he enjoys citizenship, hours before a separate raid on his luxury apartment by police from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU).

"Timur had an apartment with golden toilets that was in the same building as Zelensky's," a former Ukrainian government official told Fox News.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 19:50

Where Are America's Dry Counties?

While the U.S. ended federal Prohibition in 1933, local restrictions on alcohol still persist across the country to this day.

As Visual Capitalist shows in the map below, based on work by Wikipedia user Mr. Matté, many counties remain “dry,” banning the sale of alcohol entirely, or “moist,” allowing only limited sales.

Where Alcohol is Still Restricted

The data, crowdsourced from local government sites and media reports, reveals that alcohol restrictions are concentrated in the South, particularly in states like Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee.

Arkansas stands out the most in the map above, with a patchwork of red and orange counties indicating either total bans or partial restrictions on alcohol sales. In fact, the state has long struggled with outdated liquor laws, where even grocery stores in “moist” counties may be prohibited from selling wine or spirits.

Alcohol Status: It’s Complicated

Here’s what the terminology means:

• Dry county: No alcohol sales allowed by law

• Moist county: Alcohol sales are partially restricted (e.g. allowed in restaurants but not in stores)

• Wet county: Alcohol can be sold without county-level restriction

Even within “wet” counties, individual towns may choose to remain dry, and in “dry” counties, specific towns or establishments can apply for exemptions, creating a legal maze for consumers and businesses alike.

Declining Dryness Over Time

According to the National Alcohol Beverage Control Association, the number of dry counties has dropped significantly since the mid-20th century. In Texas, for example, only three dry counties remain.

Nonetheless, the persistence of these regulations reflects longstanding cultural attitudes and the influence of local referenda. While national consumption of spirits is rising, especially in certain states, the map shows that alcohol availability is still very much a local matter.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Americans are spending less on spirits…besides tequila on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 19:15

21 States Are At Risk Of Losing SNAP Funding Amid Fraud Investigation

Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

The federal government said it would withhold Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program (SNAP) funds for states that do not report user data. 

The news came from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins earlier this week, following months of requests and investigations into instances of fraud within the program. 

Here’s what to know about the change to the nutrition program.

The Announcement 

Rollins made the announcement on Dec. 2 during a White House cabinet meeting, saying that states that have not complied with the federal request have only a few days to fix the issue.

The USDA secretary said the administration “has begun and will begin to stop moving federal funds into those states” next week ”until they comply.“

According to Rollins, 29 Republican-leaning states have already provided SNAP data to her department. However, 21 ”blue states continue to say no” to the federal request. 

The federal response to the lack of cooperation comes months after an early May request by the administering department, calling on states to hand over data detailing how and to whom the taxpayer funds are distributed.

The USDA noted that the intent behind the request was to ensure that no fraud or abuse existed in the program, frequently referenced as food stamps. 

“President Trump is rightfully requiring the federal government to have access to all programs it funds,” said Rollins, “and SNAP is no exception. For years, this program has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data. The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today’s request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible.”

Of the 28 states that have sent the data, all except for North Carolina have Republican governors.

Billions at Stake 

SNAP costs federal taxpayers around $100 billion per year, $94 billion of which goes to actual food benefits, and the rest is spent on administrative costs.

Administrative costs are currently shared by federal and state governments, with states covering roughly half of SNAP’s administrative expenses. That share is set to shrink soon, as the federal government plans to reduce the state contribution to 25 percent.

How much each state receives varies, as does the portion of the fund that goes to administrative costs. The state of California alone received more than $1.2 billion for SNAP administration fees, which was around 10 percent of it’s total SNAP funding allocation. 

Florida received $84 million for administration alone, which was just over 1 percent of it’s total SNAP funding. However, Wyoming received less than $9 million for administration fees, which was 12 percent of its SNAP dollars received. 

This means that in addition to the loss of nutrition support funding, billions that go to state administration fees will be lost for those states that refuse transparency requests from the Trump administration. 

The administration will likely face legal hiccups, as the attorneys general from 21 states have already been the subject of a lawsuit over concerns that the states allegedly illegally blocked the authorized food aid to certain legal immigrants.

Current Fraud 

Since the beginning of the USDA information gathering in May, there have been more than 120 individuals arrested for food stamp fraud, according to the agency’s report last month.

The USDA worked with the Office of the Inspector General, which has resulted in 63 convictions and fines and fees exceeding $16.5 million.

This is due to data from 29 states alone, which found that more than 180,000 deceased individuals were receiving food stamps, and another 500,000 people were getting twice as much as they should have been.

“We believe there’s even more fraud and abuse,” Rollins said following news of the fraud discovery.

She later added that “we have to make sure for those who really need this benefit that we are able to make sure that it’s going to the right people,” and promised “structural changes” to the program. 

The audit has led to the removal of 700,000 individuals from the SNAP program already.

According to research from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, overpayment rates climbed from 2 percent in 2012 to more than 10 percent in 2023.

“The levels of waste, fraud, and abuse in federal programs have never been higher,” the report reads. “Although these types of avoidable inefficiencies have always been too high, they have recently surged with the unusual degree of federal spending brought on by the global pandemic.”

That upward trend appears to have continued, as a June 2024 report from the USDA found that almost 12 percent, or around $10.5 billion, of SNAP payments were found to be improper.

During a recent interview with Fox News, Rollins mentioned one individual who was found to be receiving benefits in six different states. 

“It is time to drastically reform this program, so that we can make sure those who are truly needy, truly vulnerable, are getting what they need, and the rest of the corruption goes away, and we can serve the American taxpayer,” she said.

What SNAP Does

On average,  SNAP recipients receive around $177 a month in benefits that are delivered on an electronic card. About 42 million Americans spend that money on food items in participating stores.

President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed this summer,  imposed new requirements for SNAP eligibility, including removing the eligibility for certain groups of immigrants.

In November, Rollins announced that app recipients of the program would need to meet reapplication requirements in efforts to “clean up” the food assistance program.

SNAP’s purpose is to raise the nutritional intake of low-income individuals by increasing their ability to purchase healthy food. Participants in the SNAP program have been found to have improved health outcomes, including reduced food insecurity and lower risk of heart disease and obesity.

“We really want to make sure those who are receiving this supplemental nutrition benefit—it was never meant for the long term—are really those who need it,” Rollins said in a recent interview.

“Whatever that reapplication looks like again, we’re working on that right now, but it won’t be too onerous. And for the families that really need it, we'll make sure that they’re going to get it.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 17:30

Newsom Pleads With Dems To Be More "Culturally Normal"

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

California Governor Gavin Newsom is dishing out advice to his fellow Democrats: pretend to be normal while he plots a White House run.

Newsom, who’s been eyeing a 2028 presidential bid after loser Kamala Harris’ electoral wipeout, took to the stage at The New York Times DealBook Summit in New York City, urging his party to ditch the judgmental elitism that’s alienated everyday Americans.

“I think there’s a broader narrative that [Democrats] ought to address, that is, we have to be more culturally normal,” Newsom said, adding “We have to be a little less judgmental.”

Gavin Newsom: Democrats need to be more "culturally normal."

Maybe start by not sitting like that ever again. pic.twitter.com/sWVZtap94Q

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) December 4, 2025

The only time I've ever seen a man's ankle bent that way is during a football game and they usually don't show the replay in a gruesome situation like that.

— Scott Lame (@dimeday128) December 4, 2025

He went on to stress the need for Democrats to grasp “the importance and power of the border, substantively and politically,” acknowledging how open borders and lax enforcement have fueled voter backlash.

In the same breath, Newsom unleashed on Fox News, comparing it to Soviet-era propaganda, saying “You got Pravda, the primetime lineup at Fox, just going on and on [in defense of Trump].”

He then slammed Trump as a “man-child,” declaring that the the President “called someone the ‘R word’ or piggy, and somehow it’s just ‘Trump being Trump.’ Nothing normal about this… It’s unbecoming to the president of the United States.”

Newsom then explained his own Trump-mimicking social media account antics were “approved” by him to “wake everybody up” to the “normalization of deviancy.” He accused Fox of criticizing his posts but never uttering a “damn word” about Trump’s rants.

The comments come as Newsom warns that Trump is “trying to wreck this country,” a claim that rings hollow given California’s ongoing crises under his watch, from rampant homelessness and crime to devastating wildfires that have scorched communities like the Pacific Palisades.

A Berkeley poll earlier this year found 54% of registered voters believe Newsom prioritizes his presidential ambitions over fixing the state’s problems, with only 26% saying he’s focused on governance.

X users mocked Newsom’s call for Democrats to feign “normalcy,” highlighting the irony of a governor whose policies have driven businesses and residents out of California in droves.

He doesn’t really believe it. He just wants certain voters to believe it.

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) December 4, 2025

Newsom lectures on being “culturally normal” while his policies wreck California’s economy and border security. Trump’s America doesn’t need lectures, we deliver results and put citizens first.

— Dangerous Thoughts (@DangerousThinkg) December 4, 2025

"We have to be a little more culturally normal.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to throw open the California border and pump 8 year old boys full of estrogen."

— Unimpressed Buffalo (@unimpressedbufl) December 4, 2025

“we should be more culturally normal" pic.twitter.com/8SndadJ3BN

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) December 4, 2025

This isn’t the first time Newsom’s slimy posturing has drawn fire. Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna recently blasted the governor for his online antics during an appearance on the PBD Podcast.

Host Patrick Bet-David noted, “You’re either a great troll or you’re trying to be. Like Newsom is dying to be Trump, but he’s not. Newsom is trying to be Trump. Newsom’s not Trump, right? Nowhere near him. But everything he does, he’s trying to be — the Trump of the left.”

Luna recounted a joke she made on a Comedy Central show: “I was on a show recently. I think it was on Comedy Central, it was like an evening talk show. And they’re talking about the ‘No Kings’ protests and I made a joke and I was like, ‘Well if you’re talking about Gavin Newsom it would be the ‘No Queens’ protest.’”

When asked if it was homophobic, she replied, “No he [Newsom] just has feminine tendencies, and it’s totally true. I don’t know, like — he bitches on the internet all the time. It’s like what are you doing, Gavin? You know, you have fires in the Palisades — what’s going on?”

Bet-David agreed, calling Newsom’s vibe “metro.”

Adding fuel to the fire, actress Halle Berry stunned the DealBook crowd earlier that day by slamming Newsom for vetoing a menopause care bill twice, questioning his fitness for higher office.

“Back in my great state of California, my very own governor, Gavin Newsom, has vetoed our menopause bill, not one, but 2 years in a row! But that’s OK, because he’s not GOING to be governor forever!” Berry urged.

She continued, “With the way he’s overlooked women, half the population, by devaluing us in midlife, he probably should not be our next president either! Just saying!”

Berry rallied the audience, stressing “I need every woman in this country to fight with me. But the truth is, the fight isn’t just for us women. We need men too. We need all of the leaders, every single one of you in this room. This fight needs you.”

? HOLY CRAP! Actress Halle Berry went OFF on Gavin Newsom to the NYT crowd, the whole room was shocked

"With the way he's overlooked women, half the population, by devaluing us in midlife, he probably should not be our next president either! Just saying!" ?

"My own Gov. Gavin… pic.twitter.com/SqJqDBjX8p

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) December 4, 2025

The Menopause Care Equity Act aimed to boost research and education on women’s health, but Newsom vetoed it citing potential cost hikes for working women. Berry’s raw callout drew gasps, underscoring how even Hollywood elites are turning on him amid whispers of his 2028 aspirations.

Newsom’s “normalcy” sermon exposes the Democrats’ desperation after years of pushing radical agendas on gender ideology, unchecked immigration, and climate hysteria that have alienated the heartland. 

If this is their comeback strategy—masking extremism while California burns—good luck selling that to voters who’ve had enough of the chaos. Trump’s policies are winning because they’re grounded in reality, not performative tweaks.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 16:20

Ken Griffin Dumps Last Penthouse In Crime-Ridden Chicago

Hedge fund manager Ken Griffin is on the verge of dumping his final piece of real estate in crime-ridden, far-left–controlled Chicago, and he hasn't looked back since moving Citadel's global headquarters to Miami.

Bloomberg reports that Griffin's penthouse at 800 N. Michigan Avenue, located in Park Tower, one of the premier luxury residential buildings along Chicago's Magnificent Mile, is under contract for $12.5 million. The price reflects a $3.25 million cut from July, yet remains well above the $6.9 million he paid during the Dot-Com bubble.

The sale of the penthouse marks the end of Griffin's holdings in a city plagued by crime, failed progressive policies, high taxes, and a political environment unfriendly to thriving businesses.

BBG added more color:

At another building, Griffin sold two condos to his longtime political rival, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who bought them for a combined $19 million in late 2024. Griffin has a net worth of more than $48 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

Citadel maintains a downsized office in Chicago after moving from its namesake tower at 131 S. Dearborn that once served as the firm's headquarters.

"We've gone from probably 1,300 people in Chicago to a few hundred. From being the primary tenant of one of the largest skyscrapers to I think we'll be down to 2 floors in a year," Griffin recently said.

WOW: Citadel CEO Ken Griffin reveals one of America’s largest hedge funds has fled Chicago over crime, even though Democratic leaders claim everything is under control.

“We’ve gone from probably 1,300 people in Chicago to a few hundred. From being the primary tenant of one of… pic.twitter.com/g1tkBCUlMN

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) October 10, 2025

In 2021, Griffin compared Chicago to Afghanistan "on a good day."

Meanwhile, Citadel is thriving in South Florida and is set to build a $2.5 billion tower for its Miami headquarters.

Tyler Durden Sat, 12/06/2025 - 15:45