A Big Bet On Apprenticeships In A Frozen Labor Market

Authored by Zach Boren via RealClearEducation,

For the better part of a year, the Trump Administration said little about apprenticeships. Then, almost out of nowhere, it announced a $145 million funding forecast aimed at expanding Pay for Apprenticeship—one of the largest investments we’ve seen in years.

That move matters because it follows a long gap between rhetoric and reality. Early on, the President issued an Executive Order calling for one million apprentices and indicating apprenticeship as a central workforce strategy. But that ambition amounted to little more than lip service, as Biden-era apprenticeship contracts were either canceled or stagnated.

For decades, the federal government has underinvested in apprenticeships, relying instead on small, bespoke grant programs that helped grow apprenticeships by nearly 80 percent over a decade, but never at scale. That's real progress, but apprentices still make up just three-tenths of one percent of the labor force.

The Pay for Apprenticeship forecast is the first meaningful signal that the administration’s promises could be fulfilled—and perhaps finally move apprenticeships from the education margins to the mainstream.

Pay for Apprenticeship — also known as Pay for Success — ties public dollars to real results: apprentices hired, trained, and retained. In a frozen labor market, this policy focuses on what works, not what makes headlines. That makes it a welcome—and somewhat surprising—dose of pragmatism in a policy landscape often driven by ideology.

What’s actually different this time

Unlike traditional workforce grants that fund training without accountability for outcomes, Pay for Apprenticeship funds employment outcomes. Grantees are rewarded for hires and apprenticeship contracts signed—not paperwork, pilots, or press releases.

The forecast also acknowledges a basic truth long ignored in Washington: employers rarely build apprenticeship programs on their own. They rely on intermediaries—industry associations, unions, nonprofits, and technical experts—to design training, manage registration, recruit apprentices, and maintain standards. Without this infrastructure, apprenticeship policies remain aspirational rather than operational.

This funding approach mirrors what our international competitors already do. The UK, Germany, and Australia invest heavily in apprenticeship systems that share training costs and pay for results. Overseas, apprenticeships aren’t an alternative — they’re a competitive advantage and valued on par with the university track.

Why apprenticeships meet this moment

The U.S. faces acute labor shortages across critical sectors. We are short nearly one million electricians. AI and tech companies and their data centers and energy infrastructure projects are driving unprecedented demand for skilled workers.

Bachelor’s degrees, for the first time, are losing their earnings premium, even as the first rung of the career ladder disappears.

Registered Apprenticeships combine paid, on-the-job training with structured instruction, allowing workers to earn while they learn—and employers to train talent to real-time needs. Unlike college students taking on debt, apprentices are paid by their sweat, and the average graduate earns about $80,000 annually –exceeding entry-level bachelor’s degree wages. Employers see returns as well—apprenticeships deliver a positive ROI, with high retention and strong employer satisfaction.

For young men, these pathways matter even more. Today, there are three times as many men who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET) as there were in the 1980s. That is not a cyclical downturn. It is a slow-rolling structural failure. For boys underserved by the traditional classroom, apprenticeships offer a practical path forward. In fact, roughly 85 percent of American apprentices are men.

A step forward, not the finish line

This investment alone will not solve the nation’s workforce challenges—but it is a solid step in the right direction.

To meet the moment, Congress must go further, faster. A large-scale, national Pay for Apprenticeship initiative—designed to reach millions of young people over the next decade—is within reach. And, it does not require new debt. Apprentices pay taxes, and their availability reduces reliance on public assistance. They begin paying into the system almost immediately.

For too long, American society and federal policy have defaulted to a college-for-all approach, even as evidence mounted that the system was badly out of balance. When more than 90 percent of Congress has a bachelor’s degree, it should not surprise anyone that policy has repeatedly doubled down on college as the only answer. Washington’s groupthink has crowded out other proven educational paths to the middle class.

It’s time for a reset.

The $145 million Pay for Apprenticeship forecast is a good bet—but it’s not a silver bullet. If Congress builds on it, rather than treating it as a one-off, apprenticeships could finally become what they should have been all along: a central pillar of a working-class–building strategy.

And it doesn’t require more debt to get there—just pragmatic investments in our future, rather than borrowing against it. Few other workforce policies can claim this consistent result across workers, employers, and taxpayers. The evidence is clear: apprenticeships work.

Zach Boren is the Senior Vice President of Policy and Government Affairs at Apprenticeships for America.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 21:00

Iran's Khamenei Says US, Israel Linked To Deadly Protest Violence: 'Thousands Killed'

Iran's streets have at this point been relatively calm for the last several days, after two weeks of large-scale protests rocked the country amid an ongoing economic crisis and Washington threatened to intervene by hitting government sites.

When protests and unrest turned to riots and clashes with police, which in some locations resulted in deaths on both sides, Tehran authorities moved to impose a complete internet and messaging blackout - believing this would thwart or slow any foreign plotting seeking to exploit the protests.

After eight days of no internet access, Iran has begun easing these restrictions Saturday, restoring short messaging service (SMS) nationwide. State media describes there will be a phased plan for bringing back internet and messaging services.

via Associated Press

Al Jazeera cites state authorities who say terror cells and a foreign conspiracy had been disrupted, but now the situation is stable:

Quoting officials, the agency reported that the decision followed what it described as the stabilisation of the security situation and the detention of key figures linked to “terror organizations” behind the violence during protests over rising prices and economic hardship that erupted on December 28 in several Iranian cities.

Authorities said the internet blackout had “significantly weakened the internal connections of opposition networks abroad” and disrupted the activities of the “terror cells".

On this, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has also weighed in, claiming that actors linked to the United States and Israel were responsible for killing "several thousands" during the anti-government protests.

"Those linked to Israel and US caused massive damages and killed several thousands" he said Saturday. The US and Western allies have repeatedly rejected these Iranian claims of 'foreign plotting'. And more via Bloomberg:

Some of those were killed “brutally and inhumanely,” Khamenei said without offering detail in a public meeting broadcast on state TV.

This marks the first time any top Iranian authority described the casualties as being in the "thousands". Some US-based 'monitor' groups as well as American media earlier in the week raised eyebrows and skepticism in claiming 12,000 were killed - a huge figure.

As for the possibility of foreign plotting, the Financial Times appears to be the first mainstream outlet to describe black-clad and well-organized groups who unleashed chaos and anti-police violence amid the protests...

“There were groups of men in black clothes, agile and quick. They would set one dustbin on fire and then quickly move to the next target” They “look[ed] like commandos” ...“They were definitely organized, but I don’t know who was behind them”

FT offers one of the first acknowledgments by Western media of well organized cells wreaking havoc on Iranian cities

“There were groups of men in black clothes, agile and quick. They would set one dustbin on fire and then quickly move to the next target”

They “look[ed] like… pic.twitter.com/Fwq2ab8ZHI

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) January 17, 2026

Iran has said that hundreds of police and security personnel were killed or wounded, and has cited videos showing armed supposed 'protesters' seeking to wage an insurgency against government positions. It should come as no surprise that Israeli or Western intelligence should seek to hijack and steer the protests toward some kind of regime destabilization goal. But this scenario is always hard to prove amid the fog of war and thick propaganda coming from all sides.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 20:25

Dr. Oz Says Minnesota Fraud Coverup Reaches 'Highest Levels' Of State Government

Authored by Jack Phillips and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, revealed that health care fraud in Minnesota is more significant than previously known, according to his interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders,” premiering at 5 p.m. ET on Jan. 17.

After speaking to whistleblowers across the state, Oz said there has been a “cover-up” for years and that it reaches the “highest levels” of state government.

Oz made reference to Somalian Americans and Somalian nationals who have a significant presence in the Minneapolis-Twin Cities area, who have recently been accused by administration officials of engaging in the defrauding of federal government entitlement programs, including Medicaid.

“For example, the Somalian sub-population, who have different cultural norms than the folks who have historically been in Minnesota, might be taking advantage of systems that were built for ‘Minnesota Nice’ people,” Oz said.

“And this is what was told to me by people working in the Department of Health and Human Services there, from folks who are police, law enforcement, they were witnessing it.”

The administration has gained “evidence now that we might be seeing that in other Somalian populations” in the United States, Oz said, adding that “they talk to each other.”

“Once you figure out that no one’s watching the till, you begin to steal money in other areas,” he said. “In any case, we are aggressive on this.”

Providing an example, Oz said that investigators in the Twin Cities discovered a building with “boarded-up windows” that allegedly had “400 businesses running out of there in the last couple of years that had generated about three $80 million in bills” for the federal government and Minnesota.

“And these are all social service businesses. So as you start to probe into how this beehive of corruption arose, the question does come up, you know, who owns the building? Like, how did this even come about? The building owner would not let us go into the building,” he added.

The state has been under the spotlight for years for Medicaid fraud, including a $300 million COVID-19-related fraud case involving the Feeding Our Future nonprofit.

Federal prosecutors said it was the largest COVID-19-related fraud scheme in the United States, and that the defendants exploited a state-run, federally funded program meant to provide food for children.

Since 2022, 57 people have been convicted, either by pleading guilty or by losing at trial. The majority of the defendants who were charged in the case are of Somali origin. Numerous other fraud cases are under investigation, including new allegations involving child care centers.

Aside from the Medicare and Medicaid agencies, the Treasury Department also announced last week that it will investigate financial transactions between Minnesota residents and businesses in Somalia, as the government ramps up an operation targeting illegal immigration in the state.

The Department of Homeland Security, too, has deployed thousands of agents to Minnesota as part of that broader federal effort, although protests have erupted in recent days over the shooting of a protester.

The Trump administration said late last month it would freeze child care funds in Minnesota unless officials there provide more data about the programs, and in a January statement said it would freeze a program that allows states to pay child care providers without attendance requirements.

A video that went viral on social media in December featured influencer Nick Shirley, who alleged significant daycare fraud involving the theft of state government funds. The clip was amplified and referenced by Vice President JD Vance and tech billionaire Elon Musk on X.

Responding to the claims, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has been critical of the Trump administration’s efforts in his state while arguing that his office has already taken steps to reduce fraud.

Meanwhile, the ongoing federal operations in Minneapolis are “a direct threat against the people of this state, who dared to vote against him three times, and who continue to stand up for freedom with courage and empathy and profound grace,” Walz said earlier this week.

The Epoch Times contacted the governor’s office for comment on Jan. 16.

Fraud Investigation Expanding

The administration’s ongoing investigations into entitlement fraud are being expanded, namely in California, Oz told “American Thought Leaders.”

“What we’re seeing in Minnesota is the tip of the iceberg, because it is dwarfed by what I saw in California, which is whole-scale cultural malfeasance around health care,” Oz said.

“There is an acceptance that you need to be in the fraud business, especially in Los Angeles, and the magnitude of fraud there, we believe, is approximating $4 billion just in hospice and home health care.”

Oz described Southern California’s situation as a pervasive “tolerance and acceptance of fraud” and that “it’s so rampant that you don’t even know how to get your arms around it.”

“We have the unions being involved in some of these endeavors and lobbying as well” to get certain individuals elected, he added.

U.S. Attorney's Office officials speak at a news conference inside the U.S. Courthouse in Minneapolis, detailing fraud in Minnesota, on Dec. 18, 2025. Kerem Yücel/Minnesota Public Radio via AP

Oz said he believed foreign-based gangs were perpetrating fraud in hospice and home health care programs, but he did not provide detailed examples.

The alleged fraud “might be part of a much larger scheme to change how we elect our officials, and that is very chilling for us to think that you might be using social programs designed to help all Americans who are struggling or who have vulnerabilities, using that as a tool to change who gets elected,” he said.

Last week, Oz, along with First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, said at a news conference that federal officials will investigate allegations of fraud involving hospice centers in the state, describing the crimes as pervasive.

Both Oz and Essayli suggested that foreign-based gangs were behind the fraud targeting hospice centers and home health care programs, while Oz elaborated on those claims on Friday by saying that a “Russian Armenian ... mafia” was targeting California’s health care systems.

“These hospice programs are created when the most common reason that you enter it is cancer. But these days, not everyone with cancer dies, but also you put a lot of people with Alzheimer’s, other conditions, in there ... so it became a little harder to police whether people were going into hospice,” he said.

A post from California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s press office account on X on Jan. 6 said that the state had stopped tens of billions of dollars in fraud, specifically unemployment fraud, and also criticized the Trump administration.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 19:50

FAA Warns Airlines Of Military Activities In Central America, Eastern Pacific

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) urged airlines on Jan. 16 to exercise caution when flying over Central America and the eastern Pacific due to military activities and potential navigation interference.

The FAA said it issued notices covering the airspace in Mexico, Central America, Panama, Bogotá, Guayaquil, and Mazatlán Oceanic Flight Regions, as well as parts of the eastern Pacific Ocean.

The notices will remain effective for 60 days, according to its statement.

“Potential risks exist for aircraft at all altitudes, including during overflight and the arrival and departure phases of flight,” the aviation regulator said in its notices to airmen (NOTAMs).

As Aldgra Fredly reports below for The Epoch Times, the notices came just weeks after U.S. forces carried out airstrikes on Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, on Jan. 3 and captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, from their residence to face drug and arms-related charges in the United States.

Tensions have intensified in the region as the U.S. military stepped up counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. Last month, a JetBlue flight departing from the Caribbean nation of Curacao, just off the coast of Venezuela, halted its ascent to avoid a collision with a U.S. Air Force refueling tanker.

FAA issued an advisory on Dec. 16, 2025, warning airlines of the security situation in Venezuela and urging pilots to exercise caution when operating in the Maiquetia flight information region, which covers Venezuelan airspace.

The advisory was set to remain in effect until Feb. 19, and marked the regulator’s second warning last year on security risks in Venezuelan airspace amid the U.S. military’s counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean.

Following Maduro’s ouster, President Donald Trump warned drug traffickers in Colombia and Mexico that they could face action by the U.S. military.

Trump told Fox News on Jan. 8 that the U.S. military will begin ground operations targeting drug cartels in Mexico.

“We knocked out 97 percent of the drugs coming in by water, and we are going to start now hitting land with regard with the cartels,” Trump said.

“The cartels are running Mexico. It’s very sad to watch and see what’s happened to that country.”

Trump told reporters on Jan. 4 that he had spoken to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and offered U.S. troops to help combat drug trafficking in Mexico.

He said that despite her concern, Sheinbaum was “just not willing” and “a little afraid.”

Mexico has strongly denounced the U.S. airstrikes on Venezuela. The Mexican Foreign Ministry issued a statement on Jan. 3 calling for dialogue between the two nations and urging the United Nations to help de-escalate tensions.

“Latin America and the Caribbean is a zone of peace, built on the basis of mutual respect, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prohibition of the use and threat of force, so any military action seriously jeopardizes regional stability,” the ministry stated.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 19:15

Michael Cohen Turns Against Letitia James And Alvin Bragg

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Michael Cohen is back.

The disbarred lawyer has spent a lifetime marketing his curious skill set: a moral and ethical flexibility that allows him to do things that others would find revolting.  A legal thug who threatened students, journalists, and others on behalf of his former client. He then turned against Trump to cut a deal for himself after being criminally charged for fraudulent conduct. He has now turned against the New York prosecutors who sought to rehabilitate him to prosecute Trump.

For full disclosure, I have been a critic of Cohen for years, dating back to his time as a thug for Donald Trump, when I chastised the New York bar for failing to act against him. While the media once despised Cohen, he became a darling of the press when he turned against Trump.

Cohen’s North Star has always been pure, unadulterated self-interest. Neither loyalty nor decency has deterred Cohen from making false statements or serving the interests of his changing patrons.

His conduct as an attorney was a disgrace to the bar for years, as he gamed the system for his own benefit. Michael Cohen was long known as the “fixer” for former President Trump — a legal thug who threatened students, journalists, and others on behalf of his former client.

His signature has been to threaten lawsuits against critics. He even sued Trump and failed.

When his fraudulent business conduct led to criminal charges, it was clear that he was again entertaining best offers. Cohen reinvented himself as a redemptive sinner and received financial support from Trump critics.

Throughout this process and after his conviction, he continued to be accused of lying.

He claimed urgent medical needs for release from prison. Of course, he previously claimed health problems for failing to appear to testify, only to be spotted out on the town for a fancy dinner.

During the Trump trial, Cohen was again accused of lying. He spent two days insisting that he had been a liar but had lied to help former President Donald Trump.

Cohen has lied to Congress, courts, special counsels, the IRS, the banks, and virtually every creature that walks or crawls on the face of the Earth.

Notably, his past convictions for business and tax fraud were not taken in Trump’s interest but in his own.

When he admitted on the stand that he lied during his prior plea agreement, it was to advance his own interests.

Cohen has now continued this pattern of shifting loyalties and turned on New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, accusing them of pressuring him to frame his testimony to guarantee Trump’s conviction.

After Trump’s recent court victories and the remanding of his federal case, Cohen is claiming that the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and the New York Attorney General’s Office “pressured and coerced” him into tailoring testimony:

“I felt pressured and coerced only to provide information and testimony that would satisfy the government’s desire to build the cases against and secure a judgment and convictions against President Trump.”

The posting led some to speculate that Cohen is again marketing his availability to the highest bidder.

Whatever the reason, his statement clearly undermines his former allies as they struggle to preserve what remains of their prior prosecutions.

Cohen remains the personification of the old fable of the scorpion and frog. In the fable,  a scorpion convinced a leery frog to carry him across a river, noting that he could not sting him since they would both drown. Halfway across, the scorpion struck, and the frog asked why he would doom them both. The scorpion replied, “I am sorry, but I couldn’t resist the urge. It’s in my nature.”

James and Bragg just felt that all-too-familiar sting from Michael Cohen.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 16:20

Trump Admin Was In 'Discussions' With Venezuelan Minister Months Before Raid

The White House was conducting back-channel communications with Venezuela's hardline interior minister Diosdado Cabello months before the US operation to seize President Nicolas Maduro, and has been in communication with him since then, according to Reuters, citing multiple government officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. 

Cabello, who was Maduro's right hand and seen as Venezuela's second most powerful figure (and close aide of the late former President Hugo Chavez), was key to a 'smooth' regime change - as the 62-year-old had (and has) the power to turn the country's security services or militant ruling-party supporters he oversees to target the country's opposition. That security apparatus he controls has remained largely intact since the Jan. 3 US raid. 

Cabello is named in the same U.S. drug-trafficking indictment that the Trump administration used as justification to arrest Maduro, but was not taken as part of the operation.

The communication with Cabello, which has also touched on sanctions the U.S. has imposed on him and the indictment he faces, dates back to the early days of the current Trump administration and continued in the weeks just prior to the U.S. ouster of Maduro, two sources familiar with the discussions said. The administration has also been in touch with Cabello since Maduro's ouster, four of the people said.

The communications, which have not been previously reported, are critical to the Trump administration's efforts to control the situation inside Venezuela. If Cabello decides to unleash the forces that he controls, it could foment the kind of chaos that Trump wants to avoid and threaten interim President Delcy Rodriguez's grip on power, according to a source briefed on U.S. concerns. -Reuters

Cabello has publicly pledged unity with interim president Rodriguez - who is seen as central to the Trump admin's post-Maduro plans for Venezuela, while Cabello has the power to do things 'the easy way, or the hard way' as they say. 

A former military officer, Cabello has great influence over Venezuela's military and civilian counterintelligence agencies - which conduct widespread domestic espionage. He's also been very close with pro-government militias, particularly the colectivos - a motorcycle gang of armed civilians who have allegedly been deployed to attack protesters. 

The Trump administration has relied on Cabello to keep the situation under control while it accesses the OPEC nation's oil reserves. 

In the hours after Maduro's ouster, some analysts and politicians in Washington questioned why the U.S. didn't also grab Cabello - listed second in the Department of Justice indictment of Maduro.

"I know that just Diosdado is probably worse than Maduro and worse than Delcy," Republican U.S. Representative Maria Elvira Salazar said in an interview with CBS's "Face the Nation" on January 11.
In the days following, Cabello denounced American intervention in the country, saying in a speech that "Venezuela will not surrender."

But media reports of residents being searched at checkpoints - sometimes by uniformed members of the security forces and sometimes by people in plain clothes - have become less frequent in recent days. -Reuters

Meanwhile, Rodriguez has been working to surround herself with loyalists - installing them in key positions to protect herself against internal threats while boosting oil production at the request of Washington, according to Reuters interviews with Venezuelan insiders.

That said, Trump special representative on Venezuela (1st term) Elliot Abrams, expects Cabello to be removed at some point.

"If and when he goes, Venezuelans will know that the regime has really begun to change," said Abrams, who's now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Cabello has been sanctioned by the US for several years on charges of alleged drug trafficking. In 2020, the US government issued a $10 million bounty for Cabello, who they indicted as a key figure in the "Cartel de Soles," a group that the US has said is a Venezuelan drug-trafficking network - yet which President Trump admitted wasn't an actual organization. As we noted earlier this month, this isn't semantics: Both the Treasury and State Departments had officially designated the non-existent group as a terrorist organization. The latest development seems to at least partially confirm doubts raised by outside observers and lend credence to denials by the Venezuelan government. In November, the country's foreign minister said he "absolutely rejects the new and ridiculous fabrication" by which Secretary of State Marco Rubio had "designated the non-existent Cartel de los Soles as a terrorist organization."

Since the initial bounty on Cabello, the US has raised it to $25 million. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 14:35

The Dam Has Burst In Silver And Gold...So Now What?

Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

Silver was up another 6% Wednesday morning this past week and traded at $91 an ounce. Whether or not we’re seeing a short squeeze or a blow-off top at this point is moot and irrelevant. To quote the dorky guy from 10 Things I Hate About You, “the sh*t hath hitteth the faneth”.

As I said about a week ago on a Twitter Spaces that I did with my friend Peter Schiff, I just had the feeling that the run-up in silver and gold was not over yet. I echoed these sentiments while talking to Larry Lepard last week, where we covered all things sound money and markets: Larry Lepard: 2026 Predictions For Bitcoin, Gold, Silver and Stocks

For years, most of you have been reading my blog and watching my podcast, where I have constantly talked about the fact that there would be a “blow-off valve” once too much pressure from money printing built up inside the monetary system. In May 2023 I first memorialized this prediction in this article:

The most likely candidates to “blowoff” are precious metals, in my opinion (and maybe even bitcoin).

I often predicted that this “blow-off valve” would be the consequences of money printing showing up in the prices of gold and silver. After all, the consequences of the dirty deed of money printing have to go somewhere, and other than the precious metals, the only other place it shows up nefariously is through rising consumer prices and a lower quality of life for low- and middle-class Americans.

That valve has blown off. So what do I do now, take profit? Here’s my take.

Let’s run quickly through what I see as the bull and bear case for silver and gold, although I’m long-term bullish on both of them for many years to come, so keep that in mind. Right now, the bull case for silver can be made in a couple of ways.

The first is that something unprecedented is obviously happening, and we may be in the midst of, or heading toward, a historic short squeeze that has often been speculated about by us “conspiracy theorists.” There are so many more ounces of paper silver out there than there are physical that wild whipsaws and distortions can definitely occur in the market. We’re seeing one of those. Who knows where the ceiling is?

That bull case is laid out here in this incredible interview with Andy Schectman: Is Silver At $200 Possible?. Andy argued that forced selling can look like a top, but in his framing it’s more like a circuit breaker that temporarily interrupts a squeeze dynamic by flushing out late, leveraged participants. The key, he says, is that this doesn’t address the underlying physical tightness; it just changes who holds the exposure, transferring it from weak hands to deep pockets.

That could be the bridge to a potential $200 silver case. If you believe silver’s move was starting to express a squeeze—whether from positioning, constrained supply, or demand urgency—then margin hikes can delay the “snap,” but they don’t necessarily eliminate it. They can interrupt momentum, reset positioning, and scare speculators away, but if the structural forces remain (physical off-take, restricted supply, institutional accumulation, industrial demand), the pressure can reassert itself once the market digests the margin reset and new capital replaces liquidated positions. In other words: the squeeze can be paused by policy, not solved by it.

Another interesting point that I brought up last week during my Spaces call was that from breakout to peak, silver’s moves have been closer to 10x in the past. This current breakout occurred at around $30 an ounce, so we’re only at about 3x at this point. If that historical trend holds, it would be how one could potentially construct a case for $150 or $200 silver down the road. Also silver’s inflation adjusted all time high is closer to $140/oz., so that’s something to keep an eye on.

For the bear case on the metals, what red flags I'm seeing, and my full analysis of what I'm doing with my metals position, read my full note here.

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 14:00

They're "Playing A Very Dangerous Game": Trump Slaps 10% Tariff On 8 European Countries Opposing Greenland Deal

"These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable," warned President Trump as he escalated his quest to acquire Greenland, threatening multiple European nations with tariffs of up to 25 percent until his purchase of the Danish territory is achieved.

A 10% tariff "on any and all goods sent to the United States of America" will impact Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland starting Feb. 1, according to a Truth Social post on Jan. 17. .

On June 1st, 2026, the Tariff will be increased to 25%.

The countries are all NATO members.

“This Tariff will be due and payable until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland,” Trump wrote.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the United States needs Greenland for US "national security."

"We have subsidized Denmark, and all of the Countries of the European Union, and others, for many years by not charging them Tariffs, or any other forms of remuneration.

Now, after Centuries, it is time for Denmark to give back — World Peace is at stake!

China and Russia want Greenland, and there is not a thing that Denmark can do about it. They currently have two dogsleds as protection, one added recently. Only the United States of America, under PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP, can play in this game, and very successfully, at that! Nobody will touch this sacred piece of Land, especially since the National Security of the United States, and the World at large, is at stake. "

Trump warned the NATO members that they are playing "a very dangerous game":

"On top of everything else, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Finland have journeyed to Greenland, for purposes unknown.

This is a very dangerous situation for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Planet. These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable.

Therefore, it is imperative that, in order to protect Global Peace and Security, strong measures be taken so that this potentially perilous situation end quickly, and without question. "

Meanwhile in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, thousands of people, including the territory's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, waved Greenlandic flags, chanted slogans and sang traditional Inuit songs under light rain.

Many wore caps with the words "Make America Go Away" - a riff on Trump's "Make America Great Again" slogan.

President Trump is unmoved by the small protests, noting the timeliness of getting a deal done now:

"The United States has been trying to do this transaction for over 150 years. Many Presidents have tried, and for good reason, but Denmark has always refused. 

Now, because of The Golden Dome, and Modern Day Weapons Systems, both Offensive and Defensive, the need to ACQUIRE is especially important."

He went on to reiterate the specifics of why Greenland is so crucial for national security:

"Hundreds of Billions of Dollars are currently being spent on Security Programs having to do with "The Dome,” including for the possible protection of Canada, and this very brilliant, but highly complex system can only work at its maximum potential and efficiency, because of angles, metes, and bounds, if this Land is included in it.

The United States of America is immediately open to negotiation with Denmark and/or any of these Countries that have put so much at risk, despite all that we have done for them, including maximum protection, over so many decades."

The remarks came as a bipartisan Congressional delegation (led by Chris Coons, a Democratic senator from Delaware) arrived in Denmark to try and de-escalate the situation.

Stephen Miller, an influential presidential adviser, said the president had been “clear” he wanted America to control the island and rejected suggestions it should simply increase its military presence there in response to what Trump claims is a growing military threat from Russia and China.

“They want us to spend hundreds of billions of dollars defending a territory for them that is 25 per cent bigger than Alaska at 100 per cent American expense, but they say while we do this, it belongs 100 per cent to Denmark,” Miller said on Fox News.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 13:25

Dems Need A Serious, Grown-Up Approach To The Border

Authored by Ruy Teixeira via The Liberal Patriot,

Back in 1956, Elvis Presley recorded his massive hit “Don’t Be Cruel.” With all due respect to the King, this great song has many virtues but providing a guide to policy isn’t one of them. Yet it appears to be dictating Democrats’ current approach to the red-hot immigration issue despite its profound inadequacy in the policy realm.

Consider that Democrats have been unremittingly hostile to Trump’s immigration policy since he began his second term, despite its undisputed success in completely shutting down the southern border to illegal immigration. Instead, Democrats have focused relentlessly on the question of interior enforcement—that is, the activities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) aimed at detaining and deporting illegal immigrants currently living within the United States. The general approach has been to portray all ICE actions as essentially illegitimate, arbitrary and, well, cruel.

Conspicuously lacking has been any recognition that, in fact, interior enforcement against illegal immigration is an entirely legitimate law enforcement operation and that ICE is the government agency charged with these legitimate activities. Therefore, what ICE does is presumptively legitimate not illegitimate.

Democratic treatment of ICE has turned this on its head; their activities are presumptively viewed as illegitimate and if there are any legitimate ICE actions, Democrats are being mighty quiet about it. Instead, characterizations of ICE as a modern-day Gestapo, Nazis, an occupying force, etc have become so common as to be unremarkable. This attitude has led Democrats down a path where their policy on interior enforcement against illegal immigration seems to amount to: “Don’t do it! Don’t be cruel!”

Of course, there is much not to like about how ICE has gone about their business, all of which has been copiously documented. This has been red meat to those sectors of blue America and their political representatives whose revealed preference is not to deport anyone. Think about those ubiquitous “In This House, We Believe” signs in liberal professional-class neighborhoods.

The ICE/interior enforcement issue hits the Daily Double for the “In This House, We Believe” crowd. No human is illegal. Check. Kindness is everything. Check. These may be utterly useless as guides to effective, sustainable immigration policy but they sure do get the juices flowing.

That’s why, from Los Angles to Minneapolis, Democratic activists have felt completely justified in interfering with ICE activities and Democratic politicians in refusing to cooperate with a duly constituted federal law enforcement agency. And that’s why, especially with the tragic recent death of Renee Good, calls of “Abolish ICE!” are beginning to ring out across wide sectors of the Democratic Party. There is no good ICE, only bad ICE. There is no legitimate ICE, only illegitimate ICE.

This is the logical terminus of an attitude that starts with no human being is illegal and kindness is everything. Since ICE’s remit is that illegal immigrants are, in fact, illegal and that the law must be followed, even if the outcome is not particularly kind, it only makes sense to get rid of the agency.

This is a terrible idea in so many different ways. As a very useful new memo from the reform Democratic group Searchlight points out:

[S]aying you want to “Abolish ICE”…means that you support getting rid of the agency responsible for enforcing immigration and customs laws, creating a lawless system where people who enter the country illegally can stay here indefinitely, leaving no agency charged with finding and removing them. This will, inevitably, incentivize others to come to the United States illegally. “Abolish ICE” is not some proxy for more humane immigration enforcement, or to change ICE’s culture to adhere to due process, or to impose accountability on rogue officers. It’s advocating for an extreme.

Unless you truly believe that the United States should not have an agency that enforces immigration and customs laws within our borders, and you want to increase illegal immigration, you should not say you want to abolish ICE…[W]e will always need a federal agency charged with deporting people who are in the United States illegally.

That’s clearly correct as a matter of policy. Democrats need to reflect that in how they talk about ICE or the momentum will continue to shift toward those in the party who simply want to get rid of the agency entirely.

And that would be a disaster. The reasonable—and popular—desire to reform ICE practices would inevitably be subsumed in a contentious debate about abolishing the agency. This is not likely to turn out well for the Democrats despite the solid basis in public opinion for some reform and pullback of ICE activities. Abolishing ICE will likely never be generally popular, despite its sky-high popularity with Democrats where there has been a recent spike in support.

Instead, as the Searchlight memo points out, Democrats will be setting themselves up for a rerun of the “Defund the Police” debacle, also driven by a viral incident (and also in Minneapolis!). A maximalist demand like “Abolish ICE” will serve only to signal a lack of Democratic commitment to immigration enforcement, just as defund the police signaled a lack of Democratic commitment to public safety. This is highly undesirable both for the Democrats politically and for the general cause of reforming ICE practices.

A further lesson from the recent past is provided by the Democratic reaction to Trump’s border crackdowns in his first administration. Seizing on some well-publicized excesses, Democrats pilloried Trump for being cruel and inhumane and promised to be different. And they were! They were kind and humane—and also completely ineffective at controlling the border and preventing abuse of the asylum system once they got back in power, producing the huge wave of illegal and irregular immigration that discredited the Democrats and helped Trump win the 2024 election. “Don’t be cruel” didn’t work out so well then and it won’t work out so well now, either in or out of power.

Democrats instead need to get beyond mindless slogans like “Abolish ICE” and blanket opposition to everything ICE does and embrace what I have termed immigration realism. That approach means taking on board the following realities of immigration into this rich country of ours:

1. Many more people want to come to a rich country like the United States than an orderly immigration system can allow.

2. Therefore, many people are willing to break the laws of our country to gain entry.

3. If you do not enforce the law, you will get more law-breakers and therefore more illegal immigrants.

4. If you provide procedural loopholes to gain entry into the country (e.g., by claiming asylum), many people will abuse these loopholes.

5. Once these illegal and irregular immigrants gain entry to the country, they will seek to stay indefinitely regardless of their immigration status.

6. If interior immigration enforcement is lax, such that these illegal and irregular immigrants do mostly get to stay forever, that provides a tremendous incentive for others to try to gain entry to the country via the same means.

7. If you provide benefits and dispensations to all immigrants in the country, regardless of their immigration status, this further incentivizes aspiring immigrants to gain entry to the country by any means necessary.

8. Tolerance of flagrant law-breaking on a mass scale contributes to a sense of social disorder and loss of control among a country’s citizens, who believe a nation’s borders are meaningful and that the welfare of a nation’s citizens should come first.

9. There is, in fact, such a thing as too much immigration, particularly low-skill immigration, and negative effects on communities and workers are real, not just in the imaginations of xenophobes.

10. If more immigration is desired by parties or policymakers, from whichever countries and at whatever skill levels, then immigration should be regular, legal immigration and approved by the American people through the democratic process. Backdooring mass immigration over the wishes of voters because it is “kind” or “reflects our values” or is deemed “economically necessary” leads inevitably to backlash. Wheelbarrows full of econometric studies on immigration’s aggregate benefits will not save you.

Obviously, the current Democratic vogue for treating all ICE activities as illegitimate and susceptibility to dumb maximalist slogans like “Abolish ICE” points them in precisely the wrong direction for dealing with the thorny and complex realities of the immigration issue. They’re just setting themselves up for future failure.

In short, it’s time to stop coddling the “In This House, We Believe” crowd and adopt a serious, grown-up approach to immigration and immigrants. “Don’t Be Cruel” isn’t gonna cut it.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 12:50

DOJ Probes Gov. Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Over Alleged Effort To Obstruct ICE

The Justice Department is investigating leftist Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey over an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agents during deportation operations, sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.

Sources say the probe centers on statements Walz and Frey have made about ICE and Border Patrol agents deployed to the sanctuary city in recent weeks. Subpoenas have not yet been issued, but sources said that could be nearing.

Details remain scant about the specific comments by Walz and Frey that DOJ investigators have focused on, but there is a recent interview in which the mayor acknowledges the existence of a network of left-wing nonprofits organizing pressure campaigns in the city. He stopped just short of identifying which nonprofits were involved.

POLITICAL VIOLENCE: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey refuses to reveal the identities of the NGOs he's working with to organize protests in his city. The DOJ is investigating the groups with funding and directives from Soros and CCP-linked NGOs. pic.twitter.com/C9cWgIZ5VN

— @amuse (@amuse) January 8, 2026

The focus of DOJ investigators and the White House should be the rapid-response efforts of militant left-wing groups and rogue nonprofits that were quick to activate their foot soldiers to unleash a pressure campaign against ICE agents. It was not just Minneapolis; this dark-money-funded NGO network was activated in other sanctuary cities, like New York City, within hours.

New York City councilwoman Vickie Paladino said it best on X:

ICE is doing what should be very mundane work of deporting people who aren't allowed to be in the country anymore, by law. Just as they have for years.

However, a bunch of lunatics, encouraged by the media and reckless democrat officials, have decided that basic immigration enforcement is 'literally fascism' and declared war, turning routine enforcement activity into dangerous civil war cosplay. And people are getting hurt because of it.

The federal government has every right to enforce immigration law, in every jurisdiction of the country. The legal fiction of the 'sanctuary city' is completely irrelevant.

Municipalities don't get to set their own immigration policy, and they don't get to obstruct federal law enforcement.

And they certainly don't get to foment and deploy an army of dangerous foot soldiers to physically attack federal agents, for no other reason than a political disagreement over immigration law. It's actually insane that this even needs to be said.

These people are coming dangerously close to committing insurrection, and the consequences of that will be monumental. This is not the fight they want, and everyone with even half a brain should be urging these Democrats to seriously back off immediately.

If Democrats believe our immigration laws are wrong, we have an election coming up in November and they can run on an explicit platform of repealing these laws, ending immigration enforcement, and re-opening the border.

But they won't, because they know that platform is a loser outside of a very few very far-left districts. So they'll continue to pretend that routine immigration enforcement is actually a replay of 1939 Germany, and continue to send mentally unwell liberal women and antifa activists out to risk injury and legal peril in order to win a few news cycles.

Very very sad. And it needs to stop.

ICE is doing what should be very mundane work of deporting people who aren't allowed to be in the country anymore, by law. Just as they have for years.

However, a bunch of lunatics, encouraged by the media and reckless democrat officials, have decided that basic immigration… https://t.co/GRNTwTZ1hs

— Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (@VickieforNYC) January 16, 2026

The manufactured chaos in Minneapolis is part of the Democratic Party’s dark-money-funded NGO network that has spent years sparking riots and chaos nationwide - remember the nation-killing days of BLM riots. This network was also part of the Los Angeles riots last summer, where Marxist protesters burned Waymo vehicles.

President Trump has finally received the memo.

And so has Scott Bessent at Treasury.

EXCLUSIVE: Treasury ⁦@SecScottBessent⁩ tells me that the Trump Administration will launch investigations into left-wing nonprofits that serve as a front for violent protests and criminal obstruction of ICE operations. It’s time to stop left-wing terrorism in America. pic.twitter.com/roorsk4XLA

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@christopherrufo) January 9, 2026

It is time for the Trump administration, as General Flynn has said, to address the American people about the Democratic Party’s ongoing color revolution operation that uses the protest-industrial complex to spark riots and chaos.

This is manufactured chaos at its best and really shows Democrats do not actually have a pro-America platform or any economic plan for the working class; they only have protests, riots, and chaos, with an end goal of their Marxist militant faction to loot and destroy.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 12:15

West Virginia Lawmakers Propose Bitcoin Investments With State Funds

Authored by Micah Zimmerman via Bitcoin Magazine,

West Virginia lawmakers introduced legislation this week that would authorize the state treasurer to invest a portion of public funds in bitcoin, precious metals, and regulated stablecoins, marking a significant step toward integrating digital assets into state-level finance.

West Virginia Senate Bill 143, introduced by Sen. Chris Rose during the 2026 regular legislative session, would create a new section of state law titled the “Inflation Protection Act of 2026.” The measure permits the Board of Treasury Investments to allocate up to 10% of funds it oversees into gold, silver, platinum, and certain digital assets, subject to existing investment rules.

Under the bill, the West Virginia could invest in digital assets that maintained an average market capitalization above $750 billion over the prior calendar year.

That threshold currently limits eligibility to only bitcoin, without naming the asset directly in statute. 

At the end of the digital bill, there is text that says “The purpose of this bill is to empower the Treasurer to invest in gold, silver, and bitcoin.” 

The bill also allows investments in stablecoins that have received regulatory approval at either the federal or state level.

The proposed 10% cap would apply at the time an investment is made. If asset prices rise and push the allocation above that threshold, the board would not be required to sell holdings, though it would be barred from making additional purchases until the allocation falls back below the limit.

The legislation includes detailed custody requirements for digital assets. Holdings would need to be secured either directly by the West Virginia treasurer through a defined secure custody system, by a qualified third-party custodian, or through a registered exchange-traded product. 

The bill outlines standards for key control, geographic redundancy, access controls, audits, and disaster recovery.

In addition to holding digital assets, the bill would allow the treasurer to pursue yield-generating activities. Digital assets could be staked using third-party providers if legal ownership remains with West Virginia. The treasurer could also loan digital assets under rules designed to avoid added financial risk.

Precious metals investments could be held through exchange-traded products, by qualified custodians, or directly by West Virginia in physical form. The bill allows for cooperative custody arrangements with other states, subject to rules established by the treasurer.

West Virginia retirement funds would face tighter limits. Under the proposal, retirement systems could invest only in exchange-traded products registered with federal or state regulators, rather than holding digital assets directly.

The bill grants the treasurer authority to propose implementing rules, which would require legislative approval.

The proposal reflects a growing interest among U.S. states in using bitcoin and hard assets as long-term stores of value for public funds. 

West Virginia and other states exploring bitcoin

Several states have explored or enacted similar measures allowing limited exposure to digital assets, though most have relied on exchange-traded products rather than direct custody.

Most recently, Rhode Island lawmakers reintroduced Senate Bill S2021, which would temporarily exempt small Bitcoin transactions from state income and capital gains taxes, allowing up to $5,000 per month and $20,000 annually to be tax-free.

Introduced January 9 by Senator Peter A. Appollonio, the bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee and is framed as a pilot program to reduce tax friction for everyday Bitcoin use. 

This marks the second consecutive year Rhode Island legislators have proposed a targeted Bitcoin tax exemption.

West Virginia Senate Bill 143 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Banking and Insurance, with a subsequent referral to the Committee on Finance. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 11:40

Rieder Meets With Trump As Fed Chair Decision Looms, Hassett Now Out Of Contention

Rick Rieder, senior investment executive at BlackRock, met with President Donald Trump yesterday, according to Bloomberg, a development that has intensified speculation around who Trump will choose as his next chair of the Federal Reserve.

The meeting immediately elevated Rieder’s standing in what is now a narrowing field of candidates. Rieder is best known as BlackRock’s chief investment officer for global fixed income, a role that has made him one of the most influential voices in bond markets over the past decade. While he has never served inside the Federal Reserve or in a government policy role, his public views on monetary policy are closely followed by investors and policymakers alike.

Rieder has consistently argued that interest rates remain higher than necessary given how the economy is evolving. He has said the Federal Reserve should be open to cutting rates toward what he views as a more neutral level, often pointing to something closer to 3 percent over time. His thinking reflects concern that keeping policy too restrictive for too long could strain credit markets and slow growth more than intended, particularly as inflation pressures cool unevenly across sectors.

Rather than focusing narrowly on inflation, Rieder tends to emphasize overall financial conditions and market plumbing, a perspective shaped by decades spent navigating bond markets through crises.

He has suggested the Federal Reserve has leaned too heavily on backward-looking inflation metrics and risks overtightening by keeping rates restrictive for too long, even as growth cools and financial conditions do some of the work for policymakers.

Rieder has also raised eyebrows by downplaying fears around large government deficits, arguing that strong demand for U.S. assets and structural forces like aging demographics and high global savings make those deficits more manageable than critics claim. At times, he has gone further, questioning whether inflation slightly above target is necessarily harmful if it helps stabilize debt dynamics and sustain employment, a view that runs counter to the Fed’s traditional emphasis on price stability above all else.

Those views align with Trump’s long-standing criticism of the Fed for maintaining overly tight policy. Trump has made no secret of his desire for a central bank leader who is more willing to lower rates and less inclined to err on the side of restraint. Still, a Rieder nomination would be unconventional, putting a Wall Street asset manager in charge of the institution that sets the benchmark for global interest rates.

At the same time, Trump has begun to publicly rule people out. Last week he signaled that Kevin Hassett will not be his pick, despite months of speculation that the current economic adviser was a leading contender. Trump suggested he wants Hassett to remain in his current role, implying that moving him to the Fed would leave a gap inside the White House. That statement effectively removed one of the most familiar names from consideration.

Source: Polymarket

With Hassett sidelined, the race appears to be tightening around a smaller group. Alongside Rieder, the remaining names most often mentioned include former Fed governor Kevin Warsh and current Fed governor Christopher Waller. Both bring deep experience inside the central bank and would represent a more traditional choice, in contrast to Rieder’s market-driven background.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the decision is coming soon. He has indicated that Trump plans to announce his Fed pick before, or right after Davos, signaling an effort to provide clarity well ahead of the end of Jerome Powell’s term.

With the field narrowing and Trump actively meeting candidates, Rieder’s appearance at the White House underscores that the president could be weighing both conventional and unconventional paths for the future of U.S. monetary policy.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 11:05

Maine Officials Say They're Expecting ICE Operations In Coming Days

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

Top officials in Maine said they are expecting the Trump administration to send Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to the state for enforcement operations soon.

Democratic Gov. Janet Mills on Wednesday in a video uploaded on X said operations may be conducted in the state “in the coming days.”

Mills and other local Democratic officials appeared to make references to protests in Minneapolis that arose after an ICE officer fatally shot driver Renee Good after she drove her vehicle toward the agent. The ICE agent was struck by the vehicle and suffered internal bleeding in the incident, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE.

“If they come here, I want any federal agents—and the president of the United States—to know what this state stands for,” Mills said, referring to the operation. “We stand for the rule of law. We oppose violence. We stand for peaceful protest. We stand for compassion, for integrity and justice.”

My statement on speculation that the Federal government may conduct Federal law enforcement operations in Maine in the coming days pic.twitter.com/aNriEQv7aI

— Governor Janet Mills (@GovJanetMills) January 14, 2026

Aside from Mills, Lewiston Mayor Carl Sheline, a Democrat, wrote in a social media post that it was his understanding “that there will be ICE enforcement in ... Lewiston, Maine soon. I urge residents and businesses to know their rights and have a plan of action if ICE stops them in the street, visits their home, or visits their business.”

The mayor of Portland, Maine, also suggested that operations may be coming to his city.

“Portland rejects the need for the deployment of ICE agents into our neighborhoods,” Portland Mayor Mark Dion, also a Democrat, told local media outlet News Center Maine.

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, Maine in a statement about potential ICE operations that he wants “to encourage everyone to look out a little closer for one another and be mindful of the rights that our Constitution gives to every man, woman, and child in this nation.”

DHS has conducted operations in a number of major U.S. cities since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, targeting illegal immigrants with an emphasis on violent criminal offenders. On Thursday, Trump warned he may invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy troops to quell protests and violence against the federal officers sent to Minneapolis amid an ICE push in the city.

“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State,” Trump wrote in social media post.

Homeland Security also said in a statement that federal law enforcement officers on Wednesday were attacked in Minneapolis by three illegal immigrants with a shovel and broom handle in a bid to evade arrest.

The claims made by local Maine officials did not include details about the expected ICE operations, and DHS has not commented on their statements.

The Epoch Times contacted DHS for comment Thursday but did not hear back by time of publication.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 10:30

How The EU Is Messing Up The AI Boom

Authored by Thomas Kolbe via American Thinker,

Economic prosperity is created in free markets by innovative companies. Over 50 percent of globally operating AI unicorns are located in the U.S., while Europe plays virtually no role. The race for the next future technology is already decided.

It seems that economic history is repeating itself. On the stock markets, companies in the artificial intelligence and data center sectors are being traded feverishly. Massive capital flows into this technology. Much of it resembles the dot-com boom 25 years ago.

Structurally and regionally, little has changed since then: The U.S. and China are fighting for pole position, while the European Union’s economy remains largely on the sidelines, pushed into a spectator role by EU regulators.

Unicorns as a Measure of Innovation

An interesting measure of the EU’s lag in artificial intelligence is the number of so-called unicorns -- private startups valued at at least one billion U.S. dollars before going public. This metric is considered a valid indicator of a region’s innovative capacity -- and for the EU, the comparison with the U.S. is catastrophic.

About 1,700 such innovative companies currently operate in the U.S., while the EU has only around 280. The U.S. dominates this market with over 50 percent share, whereas the European economy lags far behind with less than ten percent of the global market.

This economic gap is also reflected in investment volume. Hyperscalers such as Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta invested over $320 billion in AI and corresponding data center infrastructure this year alone. More than 550 new projects -- with a focus in Virginia, Texas, and Arizona—are forming the backbone of a new economy.

Data center capacity in the U.S. grew by around 160 percent this year, while Europe’s capacity increased by only about 75 percent, equaling an investment volume of just under €100 billion.

With investments of around $125 billion, China’s economy also lags far behind the U.S. An interesting context -- especially from the perspective of European, and particularly German, policymakers -- is that nuclear power is gaining noticeable momentum in these regions.

Even if green-minded Germany refuses to acknowledge it due to its ideological stance against nuclear energy, the enormous energy demand of new technologies will in the future be covered to a significant extent by the expansion of nuclear power.

Among the few major projects in the European Union are the Brookfield project in Sweden, with an investment volume of around $10 billion, and the Start Campus in Portugal, which could also activate nearly $10 billion in investments.

Crash of Ideologies

Especially in AI, the ideological clash between the U.S. and the EU can be observed in practice and in all its consequences. While the U.S. relies on deregulation and private solutions, removing barriers for intense competition, EU Europe still adheres to the mantra of political global control. Nothing may happen unless Brussels officials have schemed it at their green table in all their wisdom.

The Draghi motto still applies here: Only massive public investments -- credit-financed and centrally planned -- will, in the view of EU statist planners, help overcome the enormous gap between Europe and the U.S.

In the simulations of the EU Commission’s master plan, now stretched over seven years under Ursula von der Leyen, everything seems surprisingly simple, almost simplified. The EU’s Invest-AI plan intends to borrow around €50 billion in loans and invest them in selected projects in the coming years. This is supposed to trigger private investments of €150 billion, ultimately creating four AI gigafactories.

Welcome to the socialist textbook world of “Habeckonomics”: a system in which state projects like Northvolt repeatedly fail. Yet as long as public guarantees, subsidies, and state-guaranteed purchase prices are in prospect, the small flame of political hope continues flickering in Europe’s lukewarm wind.

As usual, we also observe the typical European jungle of funding programs, subsidies, and steering projects. These include “Horizon Europe,” which is meant to strengthen computing power in science, the RAISE pilot, and the Gen-AI-4-EU initiative, together investing another billion euros in the EU’s digital infrastructure.

The Power of Competition

The ideological clash between the two major economic blocks, the U.S. and the EU, is producing strange effects. While the open capital market in the U.S. lets startups sprout like mushrooms from fertile soil, EU regulation -- especially under the Digital Markets Act -- has fostered a predatory mentality. That this was likely the Eurocrats’ goal from the start comes as no surprise.

Brussels imposed more than €3.2 billion in competition fines this year, mainly targeting U.S. corporations. Brussels has degenerated into a bureaucratic leviathan -- a parasitic glutton absorbing economic energy and generating ossified structures and economic vacuum.

In EU Europe, the motto is: the regulatory framework matters most -- and the state takes its cut. That private industry prefers other locations and withdraws capital matters little to Brussels’ extraction experts.

Against the backdrop of Europe’s massive descent into a climate-socialist dystopia, it is surprising that the roots of libertarian economic thinking originate precisely on this continent. Consider the great economist Ludwig von Mises, who repeatedly pointed out that it is the entrepreneur who drives the engine of the market economy through profit-seeking, and that without exception, decentralized processes create prosperity -- while state interventions regularly derail it.

Civilization-superior models like the free market sink in the waves of ideological EU infantilism. Its repressive climate socialism promotes the growth of corporatist structures in which politics and subsidized parts of the economy carry out the extraction, eliminating competition.

The rigid adherence to centrally planned control of the new tech industry tragically mirrors the timeline of the dot-com era. What Europe fails to understand is that groundbreaking innovation inevitably triggers an investment boom, often resulting in overinvestment and a stock market crash -- but ultimately leaving economically profitable structures permanently woven into the existing economy.

As with companies like Amazon, Google, or Microsoft, Europeans will look back in a few years at these months and examine this intercontinental economic bifurcation through the examples of OpenAI, Gemini, or Perplexity. The energy needed will come from French nuclear reactors and soon also from Polish nuclear power.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 08:10

Biden-Appointed Minnesota Judge Limits Federal Immigration Enforcement Actions At Protests

A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday ruled that federal immigration agents can’t detain or use nonlethal munitions and crowd dispersal tools on peaceful protesters who aren’t obstructing authorities, including when these people are observing the agents.

The decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Kate Menendez - appointed by President Biden in 2021, stems from a lawsuit brought last month by six local activists.

These individuals, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota, said that Homeland Security (DHS)  personnel were infringing on their First Amendment rights when they observed federal agents performing their duties.

As Joseph Lord reports for The Epoch Times, after the ruling, Tricia McLaughlin, DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, issued a statement saying her agency was taking “appropriate and constitutional measures to uphold the rule of law and protect our officers and the public from dangerous rioters.”

She said people have assaulted officers, vandalized their vehicles and federal property, and attempted to impede officers from doing their work.

“We remind the public that rioting is dangerous—obstructing law enforcement is a federal crime and assaulting law enforcement is a felony,” McLaughlin said.

Protestors and federal agents have clashed during enforcement operations in recent months but intensified after an Immigrations and Custom Enforcement (ICE) agent fatally shot Renee Nicole Good during an encounter on Jan. 7 that was captured on video from several angles.

The incident has met with clashing interpretations, with some defending the ICE agent’s shooting as self defense and others alleging that he used excessive force.

Video shows that in the moments before the shooting, four ICE agents stopped their vehicle in the middle of the street, exited, and approached Good’s vehicle which was blocking their path. The footage also shows Good’s female partner, Becca Good, heckling immigration law enforcement.

As one agent attempted to reach into Good’s car and open her door from the inside, Good turned the wheel to the right, away from Ross, and accelerated her car, allegedly striking the agent, who fired his weapon, according to video and audio. The footage also records Good’s wife, who was outside the vehicle, telling her to “drive, baby, drive.”

Protestors took to the streets of Minneapolis on Jan. 10 following the shooting.

Attorneys for the federal side argued that agents operate under established guidelines to uphold immigration statutes and ensure personal safety.

They said officers have been attacked, harassed, and doxxed nationwide and in Minnesota, and that their responses have been appropriate and justified.

Under the new mandate, agents are barred from detaining drivers or their passengers  unless they are obstructing or interfering with agents. The judge said that trailing vehicles at a safe distance does not inherently warrant a traffic stop.

Safely following agents “at an appropriate distance does not, by itself, create reasonable suspicion to justify a vehicle stop,” the ruling said.

Menendez added that agents must have reasonable suspicion supported by solid evidence of a crime or active disruption to officers duties.

Peaceful assembly and oversight, without direct meddling, fall outside permissible reasons for intervention.

The Epoch Times reached out to DHS and the ACLU but did not hear back before publication.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 07:35

If Britain Bans X, How Far Will It Go To Block Free Speech?

Authored by Ted Newson via RealClearPolitics,

In what appears to be a rolling back on free speech and citizen journalism, Britain is fast-tracking a law that will ban non-consensual intimate deepfake images. This is likely aimed at the social media site X.com after its AI assistant Grok allegedly generated inappropriate images. In the scope of the global news cycle and a further ban potentially on the table, the move couldn’t be more poorly timed. It coincides with social media bans in socialist Tanzania and a sweeping Internet blackout by the Ayatollah of Iran. While Britain is not Iran, the direction of travel – using information control to manage dissent – bears uncomfortable similarities. Brits are justifiably worried: Is this the nail in the coffin of Britain’s free speech?

Keir Starmer, UK prime minister, has already come under an avalanche of scrutiny for his hand in other undemocratic activities. For example, many of the local elections in Britain will not go ahead this year, having also been canceled last year under the pretext of local government reorganization. Additionally, arrests over speech and social media posts have increased in recent years, with the arrests of over 10,000 people per year under various Orwellian laws.

To make matters worse, Starmer’s online censorship has gone even further under the new Online Safety Act. This new law is intended to protect young people from “harmful” speech but gives regulators sweeping powers to silence lawful but unpopular speech in the name of safety. An example of the British government’s new stance on what is acceptable to discuss is a new taxpayer-funded online game. This game vilifies concerns over mass migration by giving the player a red extremism score, branding them as likely to be referred to the Prevent program, the UK anti-terror watchdog.

The fact that victims of a foreign grooming gang investigation can be dismissed as “white trash” is a disgrace – made all the more striking as senior ministers simultaneously talk about banning the most pro-free-speech social media platform, where stories like this gain greater public consciousness.

Just as the UK government has brought in these speech laws, the people have become aware that they are less free. Self-censorship and caution when speaking one’s mind are common, as individuals do not know the potential consequences of expressing their opinions. An opinion expressed by the Conservative Party or Reform Party could potentially create trouble or unnecessary harm if voiced by a civilian. Examples of this are easy to find, from Graham Linehan, who was arrested by armed police upon arriving in the UK from Arizona, to Deborah Anderson, an American cancer patient harassed by police in her own home in Britain over a post on X.

Though we aren’t locked in the jaws of state tyranny yet, Britain’s parallels with the current situation in Iran are unmistakable. Just as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps crack down on protest and switch off the Internet, Starmer is doing something similar for comparable reasons. It is a bad look to be constantly plagued by protest, which, as a fundamental right in a liberal society, serves to hold the government to account. While protests for a ban on X swirl online only so far, if the government were to do it, we would see freedom of speech advocates take to the streets too.

Although Britain’s governing Labour Party swept to victory in 2024 with confident rhetoric, it is keenly aware that the result reflected voter fatigue with the previous Conservative government rather than a wholehearted endorsement of its own agenda. Platforms like X have since become essential democratic pressure valves – spaces where peaceful protest is organized, government failures are documented, and information ignored by legacy media circulates freely. That very openness makes X unsettling to any administration instinctively drawn to control. When a government seeks to tax what it can and regulate what it cannot direct, attempts to constrain such platforms should be read not as benign governance, but as an early warning sign. Efforts to suppress open digital discourse, whether in Britain or elsewhere, signal a deeper discomfort with accountability itself.

A former human rights lawyer, the prime minister constantly points to international law as a beacon of what must prevail around the world. Meanwhile, at home, he simply cannot resist infringing on individual rights, replacing autonomy with bureaucracy. His demeanor now highlights the growing liberal class in Britain, which believes that the views of most hardworking British people are contemptible and that they know better. Just like Hillary Clinton and her infamous “basket of deplorables” comment, Starmer and the intolerant left he represents no longer believe in the democratic principles that built Britain.

What Britain needs is total, not selective freedoms. America is far from perfect, but it has a public consciousness aware of its citizens’ right to liberty. Many in Britain remain unaware of the country’s sleepwalk toward authoritarianism, and voices across the West must resist the mainstreaming of government tyranny.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/17/2026 - 07:00

CIA Releases New Video To Encourage Chinese To Divulge 'Truth About China'

Authored by Michael Zhung via The Epoch Times,

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has released a new video for Chinese citizens outlining nine step-by-step methods for establishing secure contact with the agency, according to a Jan. 16 post on X.

此视频提供安全联系中央情报局的全套步骤。以下有几个在进行安全联系之前及在过程中务必考量的事项。中情局想知道中国的真相，我们正在寻找知道并能告知真相的人。 pic.twitter.com/LlLLdfA2Q4

— CIA (@CIA) January 15, 2026

In the video, the CIA says it is seeking individuals inside China who have access to information about the country’s political system and are willing to share it safely.

“The CIA wants to know the truth about China,” the agency wrote in Chinese in the post.

“We are looking for people who know the truth and can share it.”

The latest post marks the CIA’s third video specifically targeting audiences in China.

It follows two Chinese-language videos released in May, which openly encouraged Chinese Communist Party officials to provide intelligence to the United States—an unprecedented move that drew widespread attention.

The new video focuses on operational security and offers nine practical steps for Chinese informants to minimize digital surveillance risks when contacting the agency.

According to the CIA, the first step is to purchase a new or secondhand communication device with cash or gift cards, without providing personal identification.

For used devices, the agency advises performing a full factory reset. All pre-installed software, applications, antivirus programs, browser extensions, and other programs should be removed.

The second step involves connecting to public Wi-Fi at a public location to maintain anonymity. The CIA cautions informants to ensure their screens are not visible to security cameras or passersby and suggests using privacy screen protectors.

The agency then advises downloading a web browser and a virtual private network (VPN) from an American or Western company and stresses that these tools should be used consistently throughout the process.

In the fourth step, informants are instructed to create a new anonymous email address using an email service from a Western company, without entering any information that could be traced back to them. The email should be used for this purpose only.

Once these steps are completed, the CIA advises users to directly enter the agency’s official website address rather than searching for it through a search engine. The video also provides instructions for contacting the CIA through its dark web portal using the Tor browser, offering both an onion address and a standard CIA website link.

After accessing the site, informants are told to navigate to the “contact” page and submit their anonymous email address and message. The CIA says messages may be written in any language but warns against using any applications, software, or artificial intelligence tools to write or translate the content. Individuals are encouraged to clearly describe the information they wish to share.

In the final steps, informants are instructed to delete all browser history and any traces of the CIA website after submitting their message. The agency advises against making repeated contact attempts and recommends storing the device in a secure location. The CIA says it will review all messages received.

After making contact, the agency advises informants to continue their normal daily routines while the information is being reviewed.

The agency concludes by advising that, if circumstances allow, individuals should consider traveling abroad before purchasing a device and initiating contact.

When submitting information, the CIA says users should provide their temporary location at the time and contact details. If leaving the country is not possible, some or all of the steps may be carried out by trusted relatives or close friends.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 23:25

Seattle Ranks Second As Most Stressed And Burned Out U.S. City For Workers

A new study ranks Seattle as the second most stressed and burned-out city in the U.S. for workers, behind only Atlanta, according to KIRO7.

In a city full of professional "activists", who could have guessed?

The report by Compare the Market analyzed online searches related to job stress, including terms such as “work burnout,” “work depression,” “work stress,” and “how to deal with work stress,” and converted the results into a point-based score.

“Seattle comes in at No. 2 for the USA, but despite having a much lower score than Atlanta, its higher population of 780,995 and 2,498 searches per 100,000 people around anxiety-related searches still make it a very anxious city, with a score of 76.06,” the study wrote.

The KIRO report says that over the past year, people in Seattle searched for “stress relief” more than 4,990 times.

Other U.S. cities in the top 10 include San Francisco, Denver, Boston, Las Vegas, Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Kansas City and Portland. Three Canadian cities — Victoria, London, Ontario, and Ottawa — ranked higher than Seattle for work-related stress and anxiety.

Compare the Market General Manager Steven Spicer said, “Reducing work stress starts with creating a healthier work environment, where balance and support are prioritised. Simple steps like regular breaks, open communication, and mindfulness can go a long way in easing anxiety.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 23:00

Human Evolution: 'Our Ultimate Fate Comes Down To... Three Possibilities'

Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClearScience,

Everything around us seems to be changing at breakneck speed. Twenty years ago, smartphones were niche products. Twenty years before that, computers were clunky behemoths. Forty years before that, far more Americans traveled by train than by plane. Forty years before that, cars were just starting to supplant horses.

Over the past couple millennia, a mere blip of Earth's history, humans have manifestly reshaped the planet – from the physical to the biological. The ground, the oceans, the air, the flora, the fauna – nothing is as it was. And yet, despite this radical transformation, it can seem like we ourselves haven't changed much at all... 

But that's an illusion.

"Humans are still evolving," Dr. Scott Solomon, an Associate Teaching Professor at Rice University specializing in ecology, evolutionary biology, and scientific communication, wrote in his forthcoming book Becoming Martian: How Living in Space Will Change Our Bodies and Minds.

Sure, over the last 10,000 or so years, our physical alterations have been relatively muted compared to the changes seen in society and on our planet. Essentially, we've shrunk a bit, and our jaws have weakened. But even a little change is still change, and it begs a question: "In the far-flung future, what will happen to us, evolutionarily speaking?"

It's a question that Solomon considered in his 2016 book, Future Humans: Inside the Science of Our Continuing Evolution. He surmised that our ultimate evolutionary fate could follow one of three basic trajectories.

The first is a standstill – our species will remain roughly as it currently is. But Solomon thinks this is unlikely.

"So far, in the 3.7-­billion-­year history of life on Earth this has not happened to a single species... All species change, some faster than others, but there is no species alive today that has not undergone changes throughout its existence."

Our second possible fate is extinction. Though the chances of this may seem remote to our brains biased to optimism, the odds are far higher than any of us would like to admit. Extinction, after all, is the norm on Earth – 99 percent of all the species that have ever lived ultimately died out.

"There are an uncomfortably high number of plausible ways this could happen," Solomon wrote, "including another giant asteroid impact, a super-volcano eruption, nuclear war, catastrophic climate change, the spread of a devastating pandemic, or our sun exploding in a supernova."

The third possible fate for humanity, which Solomon explored in depth in Becoming Martian, is that at least part of humanity will evolve into a different species. A decade ago, Solomon deemed this path improbable. Humans today are so interconnected that no population could be siloed enough to speciate.

But now, he thinks the chances have risen considerably. Why? Because the world's richest men are plowing their hefty fortunes into making humans interplanetary. What once seemed science fiction is growing closer to reality with the launch of every large rocket. If a group of humans could colonize another world – Mars, for example – and cease to breed with Earthlings altogether, it may take only ten generations before they grow genetically distinct enough to no longer be considered humans, but rather Martians.

"If we do manage to spread out and survive on planets scattered across our solar system and others, we should expect to evolve, adapt, and speciate everywhere we go," Solomon wrote.

Like the cornucopia of different creatures inhabiting Charles Darwin's beloved Galapagos Islands, humans dwelling on different bodies within the solar system could similarly evolve "endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful."

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 22:35

FDA Removes Web Content Saying Cellphones Are Harmless - HHS Launches Study

Without fanfare, the Food and Drug Administration has deleted multiple web pages asserting that cellphones are not dangerous. First reported by the Wall Street Journal, the move comes as the Department of Health and Human Services has begun a new investigation into potential health effects of cellphone radiation.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr has previously declared that cellphones are causing harms that are not yet fully acknowledged. "There's cellphone tumors. I'm representing hundreds of people who have cellphone tumors behind the ear. It's always on the ear that you favor with your cellphone...We have the science," Kennedy said in a 2023 appearance on the Joe Rogan Experience. "You should never put one next to your head... I put it on speakerphone or use earphones." 

Marty Makary's FDA has deleted web content declaring that cellphones don't pose any health risks. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr (right) has previously suggested there are unknown dangers. (Saul Loeb AFP)

Responding to a Journal inquiry about the change to the FDA website, HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said, “The FDA removed webpages with old conclusions about cellphone radiation while HHS undertakes a study on electromagnetic radiation and health research to identify gaps in knowledge, including on new technologies, to ensure safety and efficacy." 

One of the deleted pages included a passage declaring that “the weight of scientific evidence has not linked exposure to radio frequency energy from cellphone use with any health problems.” There may be more scrubbing of the site to come: The Journal notes that the FDA's site still has summaries of the deleted pages, but the links redirect to other generalized content about the agency's regulatory mission. 

Kennedy, who had a career as an environmental litigator, has long engaged on this issue. Kennedy represented people suing phone companies for allegedly causing brain tumors, and won a 2020 case that compelled the Federal Communications Commission to reassess its wireless-radiation regulations. He was also chairman of Children's Health Defense, which has been involved in litigation over 5G technology, and a case blaming an Idaho man's cardiac issues on a cellphone tower. He has also pointed to radiation as a prime suspect in the mystery of widespread chronic illnesses among America's children, “Our children are swimming around in a toxic soup, the Wi-Fi radiation is a lot worse than people think it is...yeah, from your cellphone,” Kennedy told Rogan in 2023.  

"Never put one next to your head...you should not let your kids carry their cellphones on their breast," Kennedy told Joe Rogan in 2023

In 2025, Kennedy celebrated a large wave of cellphone restrictions that swept across the nation's schools. In addition to pointing to links between social media use and depression, Kennedy told Fox News that "[cellphones] produce electromagnetic radiation, which has been shown to do neurological damage to kids when it’s around them all day, and to cause cellular damage and even cancer.” 

Both the FDA and FCC have a hand in regulating cellphones, with the FDA providing scientific assessments to the FCC, which imposes caps on radio-frequency emissions. For now, the FCC website still has content declaring there's no evidence linking wireless electronics to cancer. 

The National Cancer Institute, a component of the National Institutes of Health, says, "evidence to date suggests that cellphone use does not cause brain or other kinds of cancer in humans." Johns Hopkins epidemiologist Elizabeth Platz told the Journal that cellphones don't emit the variety of radiation that is known to cause cancer. She also pointed to large studies failing to find any connection between cellphones and cancer.

However, scientific consensus about health has a long history of infamous fallibility. Confidently-wrong conclusions have caused incalculable harms, from creating a peanut-allergy epidemic to opening a Pandora's box of harms during the Covid-19 pandemic. Given that, we don't mind seeing RFK Jr's revamped HHS put a new set of skeptical eyes on the cellphone-radiation consensus. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/16/2026 - 22:10