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

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.