Russia Stands "Shoulder To Shoulder" With Venezuela, Blasts US War Footing

Russia on Sunday issued new statements voicing deep concern over the US force posture in the southern Caribbean, warning against any possible slide toward direct military action.

The fresh Kremlin statement said Moscow is standing shoulder to shoulder with Caracas, with a fresh appeal for the Trump administration to avoid exacerbating tensions which could lead to open and unnecessary conflict.

Prior file image: Kremlin.ru

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov criticized Washington's desire to establish unconditional dominance in the region, and decried that this has become the norm for the current administration. 

He warned that "tensions are not easing" and "escalation continues" off Latin America, also after the last few months stretching back to September have seen a string of nearly two dozen deadly US attacks on alleged drug smuggling boats near Venezuela. 

"This is primarily due to the desire to assert the unquestioning dominance of the United States in the region, this is a trademark of the Trump administration," Ryabkov explained.

According to more of his statement:

"We express our solidarity with Venezuela, with whom we recently signed a strategic partnership and cooperation agreement," the deputy foreign minister noted.

"We support Venezuela, as it supports us, in many areas. In this hour of trial, we stand shoulder to shoulder with Caracas and the Venezuelan leadership. We hope that the Trump administration will refrain from further escalating the situation toward a full-scale conflict. We urge it to do so."

The Kremlin in these remarks might also have in mind the just published (on Friday) US National Security Strategy and its significant refocus of America's priorities on the Western Hemisphere.

The document clearly establishes this as the top priority, saying that the US will now "assert and enforce a 'Trump Corollary' to the Monroe Doctrine."

According to this column, "In Venezuela, the Department of War is indeed playing offense, as Trump promised, but the opponent isn’t really Maduro, it's Putin" pic.twitter.com/1W0ros2WvM

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) December 7, 2025

The US national security authors write that this means "a readjustment of our global military presence to address urgent threats in our Hemisphere, and away from theaters whose relative import to American national security has declined in recent decades or years."

While Russia has been a longtime ally of President Maduro, it is unlikely to come to his defense in any direct way, also given the delicate and sensitive efforts to improve bilateral ties with Washington amid talks to de-escalate the Ukraine war. This despite Caracas having formally pleaded for more help from Moscow of late, including arms deliveries.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 16:55

Oversupply Warning Jolts India's Solar Buildout

By Julianne Geiger of OilPrice.com,

India’s solar sector has hit that awkward stage of adolescence where ambition seems to be outpacing demand. And now the adults in the room are issuing critical warnings.

A new letter from the clean-energy ministry, quietly circulated to the finance ministry, urges lenders to think twice before showering cash on yet another wave of standalone module factories. When a government that spent the last three years cheerleading capacity expansion suddenly says “maybe don’t,” you can assume the oversupply problem is no longer a theory.

The timing isn’t great for India’s manufacturers. They bulked up with a clear target in mind: the U.S. market. But U.S. tariff walls went up, as did customs scrutiny over Chinese components. This has turned Indian shipments into a slow-moving regulatory piñata. Exports faded. Domestic installations couldn't pick up the slack. And now the ministry is speaking the painful truth that module capacity could climb to 200 GW in the next few years, and cell capacity could climb to 100 GW.

Local demand won’t come close to that.

Translation: keep building like this and you’re manufacturing future bankruptcies.

The subtext here is political as much as economic. India’s decade-long quest to peel itself away from Chinese supply chains has produced a patchwork of incentives, protectionist barriers, and bold proclamations about “solar self-reliance.” But you can only sustain that narrative if the factories you’ve coaxed into existence have somewhere to sell. Right now, many don’t.

The ministry’s preferred solution is to nudge lenders toward funding fully integrated facilities — the kind that run from polysilicon to finished panels.

That would, at least in theory, give India a more defensible position in the global supply chain. But integrated plants require heavy capex, deep technical expertise, and long-term policy stability. India has not always provided the latter.

The smarter read is this: India isn’t abandoning its solar manufacturing push. It’s trying to avoid a bloodbath.

A gentle warning today is cheaper than a mass insolvency cleanup tomorrow. Whether India’s fragmented solar industry takes the hint is another matter entirely.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 16:20

Mainstream Media Jumps On Bogus Narrative That J6 Pipe Bomber Was A Trump Supporter

The arrest of Brian Cole Jr. on Thursday for planting pipe bombs near the DNC and RNC headquarters on January 5, 2021, has exposed yet another case of media malpractice. The Trump administration quickly noted that all the information needed to catch the suspect had been available to the Biden administration for four years, and yet nothing happened. 

Rather than examine why it took so long to crack the case, the legacy media immediately pivoted to protect the Biden administration. The following morning, legacy media outlets were pushing the narrative, based entirely on anonymous sources, that the suspect told the FBI under questioning that he is a Trump supporter who was radicalized by claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

According to NBC News, "The man charged with planting two pipe bombs near the Democratic and Republican party headquarters on the eve of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol told the FBI he believed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, according to two people familiar with the matter.”

Other networks promptly followed.

“During interviews with the FBI, the suspect arrested in the pipe bomb probe told investigators that he believed the 2020 election was stolen, providing perhaps the first indication of a possible motive for the bombs placed near the DNC and RNC headquarters, people briefed on the matter told CNN,” CNN reported. 

CNN’s own reporting, however, thoroughly debunked this storyline. Hours prior to the story suggesting the 2020 election was a motivating factor for Cole, a separate CNN report detailed the criminal affidavit against him, which relied on purchase records of bomb-making materials, cell phone location data, and vehicle license plate reader information to identify him.

The criminal affidavit against Cole primarily relies on purchase history of alleged bomb-making materials, cell phone location data and a vehicle license plate reader.

In 2019 and 2020, Cole purchased multiple items consistent with the components used to make the bombs at Home Depot, Walmart, Lowe’s and Micro Center stores, according to the affidavit.

Investigators then went through Cole’s purchase history and determined he bought all of those supplies over 2019 and 2020, the affidavit states. He also purchased equipment to help assemble the bombs, including safety glasses and a wire-stripping tool, the document states.

If Cole was buying bomb parts in 2019 and 2020 before the election, the notion that post-election grievances drove him to plant the bombs falls apart. The Trump supporter angle collapses even further when you look at Cole's background.

According to a Daily Wire report, he worked at his family’s bail-bond business, which sued the Trump administration over immigration policy in a case decided in November 2020. The family operation, which included helping illegal immigrants get out of ICE facilities, doesn't exactly scream MAGA activism. Public records show the business entangled itself in left-leaning causes, with Cole's father even teaming up with attorney Benjamin Crump—who previously represented the family of Trayvon Martin—to demand the Biden Justice Department investigate a Tennessee prosecutor who raised questions about the bail bond company. This family profile is wildly inconsistent with the image of a die-hard Trump supporter.

But even Cole’s family says he wasn’t a Trump supporter.

Cole's grandmother, Loretta, told the Daily Mail that Cole "has no party affiliation, never votes," and "don't like either party.” She described her grandson as socially withdrawn, "borderline autistic," with "the mind of a 16-year-old," living in his mother's basement and grieving the death of his pet chihuahua. She also emphasized that Cole has no social media presence and never engages in political discussions online. All of this information was readily available to reporters, yet they went ahead with the Trump-supporter storyline anyway.

CNN’s Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst John Miller appeared on Anderson Cooper 360° to discuss the accused bomber's purported statements to the FBI about his election beliefs.

CNN Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst John Miller on the accused DC pipe bomber telling the FBI he believed the 2020 election was stolen, according to sources. pic.twitter.com/RbYarZUxoJ

— Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) December 6, 2025

Throughout the day on Friday, mainstream outlets reported Cole as a Trump supporter motivated by stolen election claims, despite their own reporting revealing he purchased bomb materials well before the 2020 election even happened. The media had all the contradictory evidence in front of them and chose to ignore it in favor of a narrative that fit their political agenda. They knew the radicalized Trump supporter angle was false all along, but they ran with it anyway. But why? Was it to protect the Biden administration for failing to capture him sooner?

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 15:45

Zelenskyy Says He Had 'Long And Substantive' Phone Call With Witkoff, Kushner As Peace Talks Continue

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Saturday that he had a “long and substantive phone call” with his national security secretary Rustem Umerov, Ukrainian negotiator Andrii Hnatov, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who were gathered in South Florida.

“I am grateful for a very focused, constructive discussion,” Zelenskyy said on X.

“We covered many aspects and went through key points that could ensure an end to the bloodshed and eliminate the threat of a new Russian full-scale invasion, as well as the risk of Russia failing to honor its promises, as has happened repeatedly in the past.”

“Ukraine is determined to keep working in good faith with the American side to genuinely achieve peace,” he added.

”We agreed on the next steps and formats for talks with the United States.”

The Epoch Times' T.J.Muscaro reports that Zelenskyy also thanked Trump for his “intensive approach to negotiations,” and said he was now awaiting the return of Umerov and Hnatov to Ukraine, at which time he would receive their report.

“Not everything can be discussed over the phone, so we need to work closely with our teams on ideas and proposals,” he said.

”Our approach is that everything must be workable—every crucial measure for peace, security, and reconstruction.”

The call follows multiple days of in-person talks between Umerov and Hnatov with Witkoff and Kushner, and six meetings between the two negotiating parties in two weeks.

Those talks were ongoing during Russia’s attack on Dec. 6, which saw the launch of more than 50 missiles and more than 620 drone strikes on energy facilities, railways, and residential buildings in 29 locations.

While Ukraine was able to shoot down 30 of those missiles and neutralize 585 of those drones, the day still saw at least eight people wounded, including three in the Kyiv region, according to Ukrainian Minister of Internal Affairs Ihor Klymenko.

“Both parties agreed that real progress toward any agreement depends on Russia’s readiness to show serious commitment to long-term peace, including steps toward de-escalation and cessation of killings,” according to a summary of Friday’s meeting shared by Witkoff on X.

“Parties also separately reviewed the future prosperity agenda, which aims to support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, joint U.S.-Ukraine economic initiatives, and long-term recovery projects.”

The day after the attack, Zelenskyy gave a speech congratulating the “warriors” who are “holding back the occupiers on all fronts.”

“I thank our servicemembers who, on the battlefield, do their utmost so that Ukraine has confidence at the negotiating table,” he said.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 14:35

'Twas The Night Before Fed Day...

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Maybe it was being in Europe, with a particular shout-out to Zurich for putting me in a holiday mood. Academy also has our holiday party this week, which I’m looking forward to, though I’m not sure why I thought guest hosting Bloomberg TV at 6am the next morning would be a good idea. Or maybe it was the daunting task of needing to write about something that I didn’t feel passionate writing about (knowing that it would be about one out of a thousand Fed write-ups hitting your inbox in the next 48 hours didn’t help the motivation level). Or maybe, I was just jet lagged, lazy, and felt that we covered some of the groundwork in last weekend’s The Santa Rally Recipe.

If I was to do a serious report, in as few words as possible, I’d go with:

• Market is pricing in a 95% probability – the Fed won’t disappoint.

• Powell is as close to being a lame duck chair as we’ve seen, so nothing he says will carry much weight into the new year.

• I think the market is still underpricing:

  • The level of coordination we will see between the Treasury, the Fed, and the admin.

  • The “out of the box” thinking we will see in terms of tools implemented and even the shaping of the Fed to try to achieve my interpretation of the stated goal of 3-3-3 (3% growth, 3% front-end yields, and 10-year bond yields with a 3 handle).

If I was to do something for fun, maybe a bit aggressive and tongue in cheek, I’d go with:

'Twas the night before Fed Day, when all through the bourse,
Rate cutters were stirring, ready to open the purse.
The voters in revamped Eccles were afraid of a stock market bear,
But, had high hopes that the Santa Rally soon would be there.

The vigilantes were nestled all smug in anger with the Fed,
While visions of much steeper curves danced in their heads.

With Powell at the podium, about ready to rap,
Reporters were left wondering if markets would give a crap.
When out on the South Lawn there arose such a clatter,
The media sprang up to see what was the matter.
Away to the window they flew like a flash,
Clicked on their phone camera shutters, to witness a great clash.

The spotlight fell on the newly named chair,
Who argued that the hawks didn’t have a prayer.
When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But a shadow chair, with a team of new voices to hear.
With the new driver, sent from crypto heaven,
We knew in a moment it must be Kevin.
More rapid than hawks his doves they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name.

"Now QE! Now Operation Twist! No time to waste!
On Yield Curve Control! Get ready as markets might get a taste.
To the top of the chart! Up Main Street along with Wall!
Now buy every day! Buy away! Buy away all!"

The vigilantes did grumble, the “new” Fed basking in their cries,
When the admin meets an obstacle, they send markets to new highs.
So up to the White House - the doves, they flew,
With the sleigh full of tools, willing to use them too.
And then in a twinkling, I heard on the roof,
The prancing and speaking and even a little woof.
The bond markets were strong, especially in the belly,
Vigilantes shook with rage, arguing that this was all very smelly.

Bessent, with a wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon let us know we had nothing to dread.
He spoke a lot of words, and went straight to his work,
And filled all the bulls stockings, giving the economy a newly found perk.
But I heard him exclaim, even as they never left our sight,
Happy Santa Rally to all, and to all a good night.

My apologies to anyone whose sensibilities I offended (it was meant to be fun) and even greater apologies to those who realize I got bored and eliminated a few stanzas.

In any case, while a bit “over the top,” it more or less fits with my “serious” take, and leaves me with the following bond market outlook:

• 3% or below on Fed Funds by the June 2026 meeting at the latest.

• Steeper yields curves (2s vs 10s are currently at 57) but not so steep that the 10-year doesn’t manage to trade sub 4% (thinking 3.6% to 3.8% seems reasonable).

  • There could be some periods where longer bond yields go higher, but I expect quick and decisive action to try to fight those moves.

War and Peace

Ukraine and Russia keep agreeing to peace deals with the U.S. Unfortunately, the deals that Ukraine agrees to and the deals that Russia agrees to don’t look much alike.

The road to an actual peace deal seems to end in one of two ways:

One side gains ground in the war in the coming months (most likely Russia) causing the deal to look more like what they have agreed to in principle.

Europe does something aggressive:

• Sanctions (including aggressively enforcing the sanctions in place and stopping the loopholes being used, many quite blatantly).

• Military support like we haven’t seen (seems highly unlikely, if not impossible).

• Making a grab at Russia’s frozen reserves (this is what I would do).

In Venezuela, we expect actions to continue to ramp up. While there isn’t an “expiration date” on the USS Ford, there is a sense of urgency to use its capabilities sooner rather than later (it is due for dock time and is very expensive to maintain, especially in a body of water that is relatively small for a carrier group to operate in).

We continue to see three main reasons why the U.S. is so focused on Venezuela:

• It sends a statement to our adversaries. Putin and Mexican Drug Cartels are high on that list.

• A serious effort to “fight the war on drugs” while also refocusing our policy on a North/South alignment.

• Oil. From what we’ve seen in the Middle East and in various proposals for Russia and Ukraine, the admin is likely eyeing access for America and American companies to Venezuela’s oil riches.

What does China make of all of this?

China has been very quiet on the Russia/Ukraine front. How quickly will they embrace a solution where the U.S. is granted vast access and potentially special treatment in Russia? Xi and Putin have had more photo ops than the Kardashians – so they may have a say in what Russia does in the event of peace.

While China has not created any new, far reaching pacts with Venezuela (the way they have with Russia), they have been very involved in the oil production there. Will they readily hand over all further development and control to the U.S.? (Assuming we are correct that this is one of the conditions the President will push for).

Bottom Line

The list of issues that the market needs to deal with have not abated:

• Valuations and the direction of AI tech and spending.

• Electricity generation bottle necks.

• Supply chain risks, especially as the trade agreement with China remains nebulous.

• How markets will react to potential changes at the Fed (you know my thoughts).

• Will rising bond yields in Japan impact bond markets globally? Especially, as recently, we are seeing a strong yen along with higher bond yields – not great for the “carry” trade. In addition to the outright yield being a question mark for global bond markets, the spread between the Japanese 10-year and the U.S. 10-year yield is down to 4.2%, the lowest since early 2022. That too could impact markets.

• The shape of the consumer. The health of the consumer. Whether the market is K, k, or i-shaped is a discussion that is occurring with greater frequency – please see What Shape is the Economy from late September.

Having said that, at the risk of being “complacent,” I don’t think real fear creeps back into the market until later this year, or early next year – seasonality is real and the easing of financial conditions seems real as well.

Looking forward to a potentially interesting week, and my view on the Fed’s likely decision is that it isn’t necessarily what I would do, but it is what I think will happen.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 14:00

Barclays Asks: Netflix-Warner Bros Deal - Holy Grail... Or Poisoned Chalice?

Senators, including Mike Lee, quickly flagged antitrust concerns after Netflix unveiled its $72 billion bid for Warner Bros. (film and TV studios, HBO, and HBO Max), signaling a high likelihood of congressional hearings in the near future. Hollywood insiders were sharply divided, while Wall Street analysts questioned the marriage of a digital disruptor with one of legacy media's most prominent studios. 

Shortly after the Netflix-WBD deal was announced, Hollywood quickly descended into full-blown panic mode, as we noted:

Already, filmmakers are coming out anonymously saying that the streaming giant, if the deal goes through, would "Hold a Noose Around the Theatrical Marketplace." Just the fact that creative powerful storytellers are afraid of opposing this deal publicly should tell us something. The deal looks illegal and is likely to face a merger challenge, which I'm going to go into. It may ultimately even prompt a monopolization case against Netflix.

Republican Senator Mike Lee raised the alarm with former WBD CEO Jason Kilar, noting that if the deal went through, it would effectively reduce competition in Hollywood.

Beyond lawmakers and Hollywood insiders, Wall Street analysts commented on the deal, including ones at Barclays that framed a note for clients titled "Poisoned Chalice or Holy Grail?" 

A team of analysts led by Kannan Venkateshwar questioned why Netflix is spending more than $80 billion for a legacy studio company it already disrupted, especially with only $2 to $3 billion in expected synergies and a slow integration due to existing WBD distribution and content-licensing agreements. 

Here are Venkateshwar's five thoughts about the deal that provide more clarity:

1. We are surprised that Netflix felt the need to spend $80bn+ and pay a premium for something Netflix disrupted, and it is not clear what problem or opportunity Netflix is solving for that couldn't have been achieved organically. The deal appears to be largely a bet on Netflix being able to execute better than WBD to monetize Warner's content slate rather than any immediate sources of upside. Expected synergies at $2–3bn are lower than we anticipated, which is likely in part because of Netflix wanting to run the WBD business as is for the most part. The transition path post acquisition will also be drawn out because of WBD's content and wholesale deals around the world, which will take some time to unwind, and overlapping subs at HBO and Netflix which will have to be supported separately for a while to avoid revenue synergies.

2. We also believe the approval process could be tortuous as was seen in AT&T/TWX under the prior Trump administration. While contentious assets such as CNN are not part of the deal, we would still expect the process to be drawn out. In the interim, Netflix valuation will have to factor in deal risks and post combination transition risks, as a result of which we would expect valuation to keep drifting lower and to be a bit more uncorrelated to underlying fundamental performance. Netflix thus far has been seen as a defensive stock with low leverage, low tariff exposure, low macro risk, etc, but the setup now in many ways will be different with new regulatory and integration considerations. More importantly, the stock would now have more legacy media elements sch as box office performance and licensing, which would need to factor into valuation. As seen in Figure 1 below, even assuming present multiples, Netflix stock could still have downside, but if multiples were to drift lower, the risk reward would skew significantly lower.

3. Longer term, we have highlighted multiple reasons why investors are likely to be skeptical about the prospects of the combination (please see Why a Netflix acquisition of Warner Bros would be a mistake, 31 Oct 2025).  In our opinion, the main issue will be cultural differences in everything from how projects are greenlighted to box office windows, licensing relationships, wholesale distribution deals, and prioritization of budgets across the Netflix and Warner portfolios. While Netflix management team is best in class, this is a large integration to digest even for seasoned management teams and the culture gap between the two organizations is wider than other past media mergers (maybe with the exception of AOL/Time Warner).

4. From a content perspective, now that Netflix has committed to $80bn+ to buy a franchise factory, it has to ensure that it monetizes DC Comics, Harry Potter, etc, to extract proportionate value.  This in turn will likely result in a more Disney-like focus on scaling up franchises, which is unlikely to be costless. As seen in the case of Disney, too much focus on a franchise strategy tends to limit content breadth, which has long-term organizational costs in terms of creative pipeline stagnation. Netflix does have a different content creation workflow vs traditional studios (more bottom-up vs top-down in Hollywood studios) which may protect against this. However, with management committing to one of the biggest deals in media history, the bar to execute is also higher. Therefore, Netflix will likely have to expand its revenue breath to monetize these assets, which may require a more Disney-like approach. This is not necessarily a negative but will mean a very different investment cycle going forward and the acquisition more being a vehicle for a strategy pivot rather than an accelerant to existing growth drivers.

5. Laterally, PSKY likely has no path to get in on the deal anymore with WBD's board approving the deal. Fundamentally, PSKY valuation is tough to justify without the deal and could have significant downside. We also think PSKY will have to raise significant capital just to fund some of the existing strategic priorities (scaling studio output, UFC, streaming, etc). There is a possibility that there are further deals involving cable networks, given spinoffs from other companies, and PSKY could potentially be involved with some of these possible permutations, but again, this is something that would likely require more capital.

Conclusion: Overall, the asset quality across Netflix and Warner is undeniably formidable and this will in essence have no parallel globally. However, success of the deal will take a long time to manifest and in the interim, Netflix's investment narrative will likely be weighed down by short-term considerations associated with the deal.

Separate commentary from Benny Johnson may reveal a more sinister plot: Netflix's plan to "own a monopoly on children's entertainment." 

Johnson continued:

This is the most dangerous media consolidation in American history. Netflix is trying to acquire Warner Bros. and HBO in an $82 Billion deal. This means Barack and Michelle Obama and the Democrat super-donors that run Netflix will now own a monopoly on children's entertainment. - The Obamas already have a nine-figure Netflix production deal - They've released 17 propaganda titles focused on children, fatherhood, BLM, and trans ideology. - Obama insider Susan Rice sits on Netflix's board With this deal, they will now control: Batman, Superman, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Looney Tunes, Scooby-Doo, and many other children's classics. If it closes, the most powerful propaganda machine in history will be owned by the same people who weaponized the IRS, the FBI, and the DOJ against American citizens. They will rewrite the scripts, reboot the heroes, and algorithm-push trans ideology, race guilt, and anti-family messaging straight into your living room. Your daughter will be told girls can be boys before she can read. Your son will be told America was built on evil. Antitrust laws exist for this exact moment. They prohibits mergers that create monopolies. This is textbook illegal.

This is the most dangerous media consolidation in American history.

Netflix is trying to acquire Warner Bros. and HBO in an $82 Billion deal.

This means Barack and Michelle Obama and the Democrat super-donors that run Netflix will now own a monopoly on children’s… pic.twitter.com/Xr75gSiEaQ

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 5, 2025

Johnson's view may carry weight given that the globalist Rockefeller Foundation recently partnered with YouTube creator MrBeast to launch "next-gen storytelling that inspires action" - essentially a propaganda machine - aimed at the tens of millions of children who watch his videos.

Rockefeller Foundation Partners With MrBeast To Target Youth With "Next-Gen" Propaganda https://t.co/SUUPJHSdPm

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 29, 2025

Some on Wall Street remain perplexed because, judged strictly on financial metrics, the Netflix-WBD deal is hard to justify. But viewed through a strategic lens, particularly the race to expand a propaganda machine that influences nation-killing woke into more ​​​​​​youth-focused media franchises, the move becomes very clear.

Control over top-tier children's shows and movie IP effectively allows Democrats and their globalist allies to influence the next generation with toxic wokeim and transform youth into unhinged far-left activists.

The race to shape children's media consumption is underway. The next battlefield is a war for children's minds.

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 13:25

Biden, Who Swore He Was Fit For Another Term, Butchers America's Name

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

Former President Joe Biden resurfaced on Friday and stumbled through his remarks once again, months after insisting he was fit to serve another term and not too long after announcing he had stage IV cancer. 

The 83-year-old former president mangled the country’s name as “Amerigotit” while delivering a 20-minute speech at a conference hosted by the LGBTQ+ Victory Institute. 

The gaffe occurred specifically as Biden claimed that the Democrats could emerge from the “many crises caused by this administration.” 

He said, “But we just have to get up. As long as we keep the faith, some hope and get back up and remember who in the hell we are — we are the United States of Amerigotit.”  

“That’s who we are. We are the US,” he added. 

JOE BIDEN: "We are the United States of Amerigotit”
pic.twitter.com/x4YraMRIAT

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 5, 2025

Biden appeared at the event to receive the Chris Abele Impact Award, which praised his purported record on “inclusivity” during his four years in the White House. 

In addition to the gaffes, Biden resorted to familiar smears against the Republican Party, accusing them of using “people’s basic identity” as a “political football.” 

“They’re trying to turn it into something scary, something sinister,” Biden claimed without offering evidence.  

“But folks, it’s not really about anything that’s all that complicated. 

At its core, it’s about giving every American an opportunity to be treated with the basic decency, dignity and respect they all deserve,” he added. 

Nowhere in his speech did Biden acknowledge the openly gay men serving in the Trump administration, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions Richard Grenell. 

Trump has also appointed several other gay men to high-level posts. Charles Moran serves as a senior Energy Department official, Jacob Helberg is undersecretary of state, Bill White was appointed ambassador to Belgium and Art Fisher was named ambassador to Austria. 

In addition, Trump has long embraced support from “Gays for Trump” groups and affiliated movements throughout his presidential campaigns. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 12:50

Russian Forces Advance As Ukraine Hit By More Than 600 Drone Strikes Overnight

Russian forces made advances in Ukraine as U.S. and Ukrainian officials prepared for a third day of peace talks in Miami.

Russia unleashed 51 missiles and 623 drone strikes on Dec. 6, which was observed as Armed Forces Day in Ukraine.

Ukraine shot down 30 missiles and neutralized 585 drones in the attack, which targeted residential buildings, energy facilities, and railways in 29 locations.

At least eight people were wounded in Saturday’s strikes, including three in the Kyiv region, according to Ukrainian Minister of Internal Affairs Ihor Klymenko.

“The night was tough,” Klymenko wrote in a translation of an X post on Dec. 6.

“Russia again struck civilian infrastructure with drones and missiles.”

As Jacki Thrapp details below for The Epoch Times, the barrage occurred after Russian forces advanced north and southeast of Myrnohrad and infiltrated positions in northwestern Pokrovsk, the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) confirmed in its Dec. 5 report.

Myrnohrad and Pokrovsk are located in the southeastern part of the country, nearly 200 miles from the Russian border town of Kamensk-Shakhtinsky.

Data reviewed by the nonprofit research organization found that even though Russian forces advanced on Myrnohrad, they have not encircled Ukrainian forces in the city as of Dec. 5. However, Russian forces are attempting to complete the isolation of the Pokrovsk-Myrnohrad pocket, the ISW stated.

As Moscow continued escalations in Ukraine, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and Ukrainian negotiators Rustem Umerov and Andriy Hnatov discussed a security framework for postwar Ukraine in Florida on Friday.

Charred electric trains are seen in a damaged depot in the town of Fastiv, Kyiv region, after an air attack, on Dec. 6, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Serhii Okunev/AFP via Getty Images

It was the sixth meeting the parties have had over the course of two weeks.

“Both parties agreed that real progress toward any agreement depends on Russia’s readiness to show serious commitment to long-term peace, including steps toward de-escalation and cessation of killings,” according to a summary of Friday’s meeting shared by Witkoff on X.

"Parties also separately reviewed the future prosperity agenda, which aims to support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, joint U.S.-Ukraine economic initiatives, and long-term recovery projects.”

Another round of discussions is scheduled for Dec. 6.

During a speech on Dec. 6, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy congratulated the “warriors” who are “holding back the occupiers on all fronts.”

“I thank our servicemembers who, on the battlefield, do their utmost so that Ukraine has confidence at the negotiating table,” Zelenskyy said.

Zelenskyy thanked everybody who defended Ukraine and said, “Eternal memory to those who gave their lives for Ukraine. Glory to Ukraine!”

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 12:15

Most analysts expect the FOMC to reduce the Fed Funds rate by 25bps at the meeting this week to a target range of 3-1/2 to 3-3/4 percent.    Market participants currently expect two additional rate cuts in 2026.
Analysis suggests rates are currently slightly restrictive (Cleveland Fed) or even already accommodative (even before this rate cut).  So, to cut rates in this environment, FOMC members are clearly expecting either inflation to decline quickly or an employment recession, or both.  This outlook should show up in the projections (lower inflation, higher unemployment rate).
From Goldman Sachs:

The FOMC is widely expected to deliver a third consecutive 25bp interest rate cut to 3.5-3.75% at what will likely be a contentious December meeting next week. ... The case for a cut is solid, in our view. Job growth remains too low to keep up with labor supply growth, the unemployment rate has risen for three months in a row to 4.4%, other measures of labor market tightness have weakened more on average, and some alternative data measures of layoffs have begun to rise recently, presenting a new and potentially more serious downside risk.

From BofA:

The Fed has signaled that it will cut rates by 25bp to 3.5-3.75% at its Dec meeting. We look for two or three substantive changes in the FOMC statement. The description of labor market conditions is likely to omit the language that the u-rate “remained low”, to reflect the 32bp uptick over the last three months.
...
The SEP is likely to show upgrades to growth in 2025 and 2026. ... However, as a mark-to-market based on the latest data, we think the u-rate for 4Q 2025 will be taken up by a tenth to 4.6%. ... These changes would provide some cover for cutting rates despite the expected upgrades to the growth outlook.
emphasis added

Projections will be released at this meeting. Here are the September projections.  
The BEA's estimate for first half 2025 GDP showed real growth at 1.6% annualized. Most estimates for Q3 GDP are around 3.5%.  That would put the real growth for the first three quarters at 2.2% annualized - well above the top end of the September projections.   So GDP for 2025 will likely be increased.
GDP projections of Federal Reserve Governors and Reserve Bank presidents, Change in Real GDP1 Projection Date202520262027 Sept 20251.4 to 1.71.7 to 2.11.8 to 2.0Jun 20251.2 to 1.51.5 to 1.81.7 to 2.0 1 Projections of change in real GDP and inflation are from the fourth quarter of the previous year to the fourth quarter of the year indicated.

The unemployment rate was at 4.4% in September.  The unemployment rate will likely increase further this year. There was no data for October due to the government shutdown, and the November report will be released on December 16th - the week after the FOMC meeting - so the FOMC is flying blind this week on the unemployment rate.  However, they will probably increase the 2025 projection (and possibly 2026) as justification for the rate cut.  An unemployment rate of 4.6% over the next few months might be recessionary (according to the Sahm rule).
Unemployment projections of Federal Reserve Governors and Reserve Bank presidents, Unemployment Rate2 Projection Date202520262027 Sept 20254.4 to 4.54.4 to 4.54.2 to 4.4Jun 20254.4 to 4.54.3 to 4.64.2 to 4.6 2 Projections for the unemployment rate are for the average civilian unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of the year indicated.

As of September 2025, PCE inflation increased 2.8 percent year-over-year (YoY), up from 2.7 percent YoY in August.  Projections for PCE inflation will probably remain unchanged or lowered slightly.
Inflation projections of Federal Reserve Governors and Reserve Bank presidents, PCE Inflation1 Projection Date202520262027 Sept 20252.9 to 3.02.4-2.72.0 to 2.2Jun 20252.8 to 3.22.3-2.62.0 to 2.2
PCE core inflation increased 2.8 percent YoY, down from 2.9 percent in August.   Projections for 2025 core PCE inflation will likely be decreased.
Core Inflation projections of Federal Reserve Governors and Reserve Bank presidents, Core Inflation1 Projection Date202520262027 Sept 20253.0 to 3.22.5-2.72.0 to 2.2Jun 20252.9 to 3.42.3-2.62.0 to 2.2

California Agency Approves Water Management Plan Increasing Output

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has approved a revised plan for managing California’s Central Valley Project (CVP), with the goal of sending more water to farmers in the state

An aerial view shows Friant Dam, which holds back Millerton Lake in Friant, Calif., on March 7, 2025. Jae C. Hong/AP Photo

The revised operation, called Action 5, aligns with directives from Executive Order 14181, signed on Jan. 24 by President Donald Trump, which orders federal agencies to maximize water output from the CVP while complying with legal standards.

“With the signing of this Record of Decision, we are delivering on the promise of Executive Order 14181 to strengthen California’s water resilience,” Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in a statement on Thursday.

Burgum also said the updated operations plan employs the state-of-the-art science to increase water deliveries while safeguarding the environment.

Assistant Secretary for Water and Science Andrea Travnicek said that Action 5 represents a forward-looking approach to water management that balances the needs of the state’s communities, agriculture, and ecosystems.

“By refining real-time governance and operational flexibility, we are ensuring that every drop of water is managed with precision, accountability, and purpose,” she said.

The change could increase yearly CVP distributions by 130,000 to 180,000 acre-feet, with the State Water Project gaining 120,000 to 220,000 acre-feet, depending on weather and California’s implementation of Action 5.

The new strategy overrides the December 2024 framework and incorporates advanced scientific tools for decision-making. The adjustments stay within the 2024 environmental impact study’s scope and are in line with biological assessments from NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Notable shifts include minor changes to Delta pumping, ending the Delta Summer and Fall Habitat Action, and removal of export-reduction ideas from California’s Healthy Rivers and Landscapes initiative.

The announcement occurs at the same time as the 90th anniversary of the CVP’s 1935 authorization, which created an expansive system of dams, reservoirs, and canals spanning 400 miles from Redding to Bakersfield, and serving up to 30 million people.

In December 2024, federal and state officials agreed to regulate CVP flows to protect against floods and droughts.

“The new framework supercharges our adaptive management and enables project operators to work with water users and the broader public to better manage the system to benefit millions of Californians and endangered fish species,” state water director Karla Nemeth said at the time. “Extreme storms and extended droughts mean we need to be as nimble as possible in operating our water infrastructure.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom celebrated federal collaboration between the state and the then-Biden administration, claiming the future would be hotter and drier.

“That means we have to do everything we can now to prepare and ensure our water infrastructure can handle these extremes,” Newsom said at the time.

Deputy Assistant Secretary Mike Brain said the Central Valley Project “is critical to the state’s water supply future.”

Funding help came in September, with $1 billion for storage expansions, Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) announced.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 12/07/2025 - 11:40

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