Feed aggregator

MiB: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman 

The Big Picture -



 

 

This week, I speak with Zach Buchwald, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Russell Investments about his career in investing. We discuss the creation of the smart beta philosophy by Russell 40 years ago. The company also pioneered the idea of an outsourced CIO.

We discuss the transition from pensions to 401ks for retirees. Specifically, the onus for investing has moved to the individual. Zach also describes his proposal for a program, that is now in effect, for a $1000 to every newborn who’s parents open a count to show the importance of compounding.

Zach explains why being “a gay guy in finance” impacted his perspective on the industry, giving him a different viewpoint.

A list of his current reading is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, SpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Bob Moser, CEO and founder of Prime Group Holdings, a private investor in unique real estate holdings. They created Prime Storage, one of the largest, privately-held self-storage brands in the world, with over 19 million rentable square feet of space and 255 locations across 28 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The firm has acquired over $10 billion in real estate assets.

 

 

 

Current Reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman  appeared first on The Big Picture.

Over 2 Million Ukrainians Have Already Deserted & Or Actively Dodging The Draft

Zero Hedge -

Over 2 Million Ukrainians Have Already Deserted & Or Actively Dodging The Draft

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

The 2.2 million men that are currently on the run amounts to 6.8% of the Ukrainian population and is slightly larger than the percentage of Asians in the US.

New Ukrainian Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov shockingly revealed that 200,000 men have already deserted thus far and ten times more (2 million) are actively dodging the draft, which are probably an underestimate but are in any case still very large numbers. To put that into context, Ukraine claimed in early 2025 to have had a population of 32 million, likely an overestimate, so the 2.2 million men who either deserted or dodged the draft amounts to at least 6.8% of the population currently on the run.

Rada Deputy Dmitry Razumkov claimed during a parliamentary session last month that his country had already lost half a million troops by then with an equal number wounded, possibly also an underestimate, while Ukraine is thought to currently field around 900,000 active troops. All of this data enables observers to better understand the significance of these “voluntary losses” since it should be clear by now that 2.2 million more troops would have certainly made a major difference for Ukraine.

That’s not to imply that it would have been able to reverse the military-strategic dynamics of the conflict that have trended in Russia’s favor since the epic failure of Ukraine’s NATO-backed counteroffensive in summer 2023, but perhaps it might have been able to decelerate the pace of its losses afterwards. Ukraine could have thus also been in a comparatively better diplomatic position too going into Trump 2.0 a year ago and that might have in turn predisposed him to a relatively harder line towards Russia as well.

For that reason, while the scale of its desertions and draft-dodging can’t credibly be described as a game-changer, it can still be considered a significant variable that adversely affected Ukraine’s fortunes. By contrast, this was never a relevant factor for Russia, which hasn’t conscripted anyone unlike Ukraine. On that topic, it’s worthwhile reminding readers about Ukraine’s forcible conscription policy that’s been made infamous by viral videos showing officials snatching young and old men alike off the streets.

This footage and stories that draft-eligible males (25-60 years of age) heard through the grapevine are partly why 2 million of them decided to go on the run and dodge the draft. They’ve also seen drone footage of the conflict zone and are therefore well aware of how likely it is that they’ll be killed shortly after being deployed to the front. These men might sincerely consider themselves to be Ukrainian patriots in their hearts, however they conceptualize it, but they’re not willing to die for nothing.

This segues into the plummeting popularity of the conflict among the populace and increasing support for a quick end thereto per recent Gallup polling. Trump just blamed Zelensky for stalling peace talks, which is in direct opposition to the will of the same people in whose name he still acts despite the expire of his term in May 2024. Other than his authoritarian tendencies, corruption is likely responsible for his obstinance since he’s thought to be profiting from the conflict and might thus fear charges once it ends.

Whenever he’s asked about the conflict, Trump usually says that he wants to end it as soon as possible in order to stop the killing, which it’s now known has spooked at least 2.2 million Ukrainian men into either deserting or dodging the draft. The 6.8% of the population that’s currently on the run is slightly larger than the Asian population in the US (6.7%) per the last census. The sooner that the conflict ends, the sooner that they can re-enter the economy and help rebuild their country, unless they flee abroad first.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/24/2026 - 07:00

10 Weekend Reads

The Big Picture -

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

Netflix’s $82.7 billion rags-to-riches story: How the DVD-by-mail company swallowed Hollywood. It’s a story so good it could have been a screenplay. In 2000, Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph sat down across from John Antioco, then CEO of video rental giant Blockbuster, and pitched him on acquiring their still unprofitable DVD-by-mail startup, Netflix, which at the time had around 300,000 subscribers. But when they told him their price—$50 million and the chance to develop and run Blockbuster’s online rental business—Antioco balked. By 2010, Blockbuster had filed for bankruptcy, and Netflix had stormed Hollywood with its entertainment streaming service. (Fortune)

Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger and the Reading Unlock: One Buffett lesson I’ll share with my kid: read, read, read. (SatPost by Trung Phan)

The Multidisciplinary Approach to Thinking. Using a true multidisciplinary understanding of things, Peter identifies two often overlooked, parabolic “Big Ideas”: 1) Mirrored Reciprocation (go positive and go first) and 2) Compound Interest (being constant). A great “Life Hack” is to simply combine these two into one basic approach to living your life: “Go positive and go first, and be constant in doing it.” (Farnam Street)

The Crisis Whisperer: how Adam Tooze makes sense of our bewildering age: Whether it’s the financial crash, the climate emergency or the breakdown of the international order, historian Adam Tooze has become the go-to guide to the radical new world we’ve entered. (The Guardian)

The Shape of Time: In the 19th century, the linear idea of time became dominant, forever changing how those in the West experience the world. (Aeon)

GLP-1s And Your Brain: The Surprising Impact On Addiction, Anxiety, ADHD, And More: What started out as a medication for diabetes and weight loss is offering something unexpected—and completely life-changing—for many women. (Womens Health)

The Education of the Broligarchy: The same sources that inspired tech moguls to bend matter, minds, and markets to their will may also help explain their foray into other forms of power (Colossus)

Can Congress Still Check the Commander in Chief? Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, discusses Venezuela, NATO and the limits of congressional power as global crises multiply. (Bloomberg)

An exclusive look inside the largest effort ever mounted to keep the Great Barrier Reef alive: Australia is doing absolutely everything to protect its most iconic ecosystem — except, perhaps, the one thing that really matters. (Vox)

Mike Macdonald is a genius, but that’s not the only reason his Seahawks are Super Bowl favorites: The Seahawks are arguably the best team in football because they have elite talent. But everyone in the NFL has talent, especially in the postseason. Marrying that talent with the vision and bringing it to life, Macdonald believes, starts with intent and attitude. That’s their foundation for getting players to play fast and free. (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business this weekend with Zach Buchwald, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Russell Investments. The global investment firm was founded in 1936, and today has ~$370 billion in AUM. Previously, he had a 15-year tenure at BlackRock, where he served as the head of its $2 trillion Institutional Business, leading the company’s Financial Institutions Group and helped establish its Retirement Solutions and Financial Markets Advisory platforms.

 

January 2026 set to be a record in Geopolitics

Source: Jim Reid, Deutsche Bank

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Suicidal Empathy Is Another Front In The CCP's Hybrid War

Zero Hedge -

Suicidal Empathy Is Another Front In The CCP's Hybrid War

Authored by Stu Cvrk via The Epoch Times,

The theory of suicidal empathy is gaining increasing currency among people who are deeply concerned about the apparent fracturing of Western civilization, particularly American culture.

Suicidal empathy can be defined as excessive or misdirected compassion expressed by individuals or groups that prioritizes short-term emotional responses over cultural norms and long-term societal stability and personal well-being. Over time, the concept can lead to self-destructive outcomes for individuals (the loss of traditional values in favor of equity and other false gods) or societies (robust nationalism replaced by unchecked multiculturalism and moral decay).

A good example is the European Union’s embrace of open borders policies that led to the flood of people from the Middle East and Africa in the name of “empathy for poor people” without regard to assimilation.

Who gains from this chaos and angst?

Any distress that destabilizes Western civilization serves the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which exploits anything that undermines the United States and its allies.

Some observers believe that Beijing covertly amplifies the elements of suicidal empathy in the West—excessive compassion, cultural relativism, polarization, and over-tolerance of immigrants who refuse to assimilate—as a low-cost, asymmetric front in its hybrid war against the United States.

Let us examine the issue.

What Is Suicidal Empathy?

Lebanese–Canadian evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad coined the term in 2024 to describe excessive, misdirected, or hyperactive empathy that becomes self-destructive. As with anyone who postulates a new concept, he is considered by some to be a “controversial figure.”

Saad is the author of “The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense,” a university professor at Concordia University’s John Molson School of Business, and a frequent presence on X (@GadSaad), podcasts (such as “The Joe Rogan Experience”), and YouTube. He explains how suicidal empathy fuels open borders, cultural chaos, and self-sabotage in the United States and the West in general.

He argues that suicidal empathy leads some to prioritize the needs of illegal immigrants over those of citizens and veterans, to show leniency toward criminals and addicts in the name of compassion, to refuse to confront national threats for fear of “appearing unkind,” and to value the appearance of being kind and empathetic even when the result is harmful to individuals or society.

Saad maintains that prioritizing compassion for potential threats, outsiders, or criminals over one’s own group’s safety, security, and long-term survival has led to questionable policy choices by liberal governments in the West.

Saad is critical of “woke” culture, political correctness, Islamofascism, and what he calls the Marxist corruption of academia, which he groups as “idea pathogens”—harmful ideologies that spread like parasites and supplant traditional moral, political, and cultural values, particularly those rooted in Judeo–Christian philosophy.

Critics argue that elite-driven immigration policies, motivated by suicidal empathy, have downplayed assimilation requirements, contributing to the persistence of culturally insular communities. They often point to debates surrounding Islamist activism or illiberal norms within some immigrant-heavy areas of Minnesota, Michigan, and Texas as illustrative cases.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) confer during a hearing about fraud in Minnesota at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 7, 2026. Federal prosecutors filed charges against dozens of people in Minnesota, many from the area’s Somali community, for stealing taxpayer dollars through fraudulent social services schemes. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Perhaps even more consequential are the recent federal prosecutions uncovering large-scale fraud schemes involving Somali-American defendants, most notably the Feeding Our Future case in Minnesota, which prosecutors say siphoned roughly $250 million from a federal child-nutrition program. The scandal exposed serious failures of state and federal oversight and further eroded public trust in government institutions.

A combination of bureaucratic incompetence, risk aversion, and fear of appearing discriminatory allowed the fraud to persist longer than it should have. This reluctance to enforce rules rigorously—suicidal empathy—can weaken accountability and invite abuse, ultimately harming both taxpayers and the very communities such policies are meant to protect

These fractures in American society serve the CCP, as whatever distracts, disrupts, weakens, or causes chaos among Americans is considered good by the communists.

CCP Exploitation of Suicidal Empathy

“Unrestricted Warfare,” an important 1999 book by People’s Liberation Army Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, advocates the use of “unrestricted” or “beyond-limits” warfare, emphasizing non-military methods to weaken adversaries such as the United States without resorting to direct armed conflict.

“Beyond limits” has since been expanded to include all forms of hybrid warfare, short of kinetic warfare. While suicidal empathy was unknown in 1999, it is not a stretch to speculate that the CCP has embraced it as another important front in its ever-expanding hybrid warfare against the United States.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping would appear to recognize and champion chaos as a means to achieve Chinese global dominance, as his statement from 2021 indicates: “The world today is undergoing a great change in situation unseen in a century. Since the most recent period, the most important characteristic of the world is, in a word, ‘chaos,’ and this trend appears likely to continue.” And societal chaos is a direct result of suicidal empathy.

The CCP uses united front actions to influence Western academia and media to exploit political and societal divisions in their ongoing hybrid war. By leveraging proxies, disinformation, funding networks, and diaspora communities, the CCP amplifies polarization in the United States on issues such as race and identity politics, immigration and open borders, and the cancel culture, turning them into tools for societal upheaval and chaos.

Chinese state media, Chinese embassies, and CCP-funded nonprofit groups publicly express empathy for protected classes in America, the underprivileged, and especially illegal aliens from the Third World in a synergistic effort to amplify the suicidal empathy being pushed by American elites.

The Chinese regime routinely deploys fake social media accounts on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram to inflame public discourse and encourage street protests. For example, during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests (as a classic example of suicidal empathy in action), CCP state media and influence networks amplified narratives that portrayed the United States as racially oppressive and chaotic. Pro-CCP actors on social media posed as American activists to escalate calls for defunding police and radical reforms, aiming to prolong disorder and erode public faith in law enforcement and American institutions in general.

The CCP also directly or indirectly funds certain activist groups that promote “woke” ideology and street protests against ICE agents and law enforcement personnel in general, while using state-backed media such as CGTN or TikTok algorithms to further amplify social discord and division among Americans.

For example, Neville Roy Singham, an American tech millionaire living in Shanghai, is allegedly the “main backer” of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (to the tune of $20 million) through nonprofits such as the Justice and Education Fund and the United Community Fund. PSL has organized nationwide protests against ICE, including the 2025 Los Angeles riots, where they were implicated in violence in the streets and civil unrest.

Singham’s pro-CCP network of radical organizations also allegedly funds the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) and The People’s Forum, which promote Marxist education and progressive causes on campuses, such as immigrant rights and anti-racism, and also support anti-ICE campus protests while promoting “woke” themes like social justice and anti-oppression.

Concluding Thoughts

Did Gad Saad hit paydirt by theorizing that the practical results of decades of putting Marxist critical theory into practice in America are—as he puts it—a “tsunami of unmodulated kindness,” “parasitized suicidal empathy,” or an “orgiastic, hyperactive form of empathy” that are undermining Western civilization?

The CCP has certainly figured that out, as its actions to spread and exacerbate chaos in America, as described above, elucidate. Whatever undermines the United States from within advances its hybrid warfare objectives and world domination goals.

What is the surest sign that the CCP understands the effectiveness—and threats of—suicidal empathy?

It is the communists who stamp out all vestiges of it in China. The CCP has historically viewed universal empathy, compassion, or spiritual beliefs among individuals as potential threats to its authority, often labeling them as “superstitions” to justify eradication, persecution, and suppression—with Falun Gong adherents and minorities (such as Tibetans, Uyghurs) as among the victims. The CCP prioritizes atheism, nationalism, and Party loyalty over individual or humanitarian concerns, subordinating empathy for individuals to collective goals.

Meanwhile, the CCP is working behind the scenes to promote suicidal empathy in America.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

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

Vegas Casino To Accept Canadian Dollars At Par In Bid To Lure Northerners Back To Sin City

Zero Hedge -

Vegas Casino To Accept Canadian Dollars At Par In Bid To Lure Northerners Back To Sin City

Las Vegas casino owner Derek Stevens is offering Canadian visitors a major incentive by accepting Canadian dollars at par with U.S. currency at his three downtown properties—Circa, D Las Vegas, and Golden Gate—through August 31, according to Bloomberg.

Because the Canadian dollar currently trades at about 1.38 to the U.S. dollar, the promotion gives Canadians an effective discount of more than 30 percent. The deal applies to hotel stays, bar tabs, and up to $500 in casino play.

The move comes as Las Vegas continues to struggle with declining tourism. Visitor numbers have fallen for 11 consecutive months, leaving the city heading into 2026 with weakened momentum. High travel costs, economic uncertainty, and strained U.S.-Canada relations have all contributed to softer demand. Local tourism officials say fewer Canadian travelers—traditionally a key market—have been a major factor.

Recent political and trade tensions have fueled calls in Canada to avoid American goods and travel, further reducing cross-border tourism. Under normal exchange rates, a Canadian bringing C$1,000 to Las Vegas would have only about $725 to spend, making trips significantly more expensive.

Stevens said the promotion is meant to rebuild those ties. In an online video, he recalled growing up near the Canadian border and seeing similar offers in the past. “I want to invite Canada back to Las Vegas,” he said.

The campaign reflects growing concern among casino operators and tourism leaders that Las Vegas must become more aggressive in attracting international visitors as it works to recover from a prolonged slowdown.

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

Russia's Planned Revival Of RIC Is Unlikely For Three Reasons

Zero Hedge -

Russia's Planned Revival Of RIC Is Unlikely For Three Reasons

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

The Sino-Indo rapprochement is still in its infancy, their territorial disputes remain unresolved, and India is under lots of pressure from the US nowadays.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared during his first press conference of the year that Moscow wants to revive the Russia-India-China (RIC) format. 

In his words, “[RIC] still exists – though it has not convened in some time – but has not been disbanded. We are working to revive its activities.”

For as well-intentioned as Russia’s plans are, and they make sense since those three are the engines of the global systemic transition to multipolarity, they’re unlikely to be fulfilled for three reasons.

  • First off, the incipient Sino-Indo rapprochement, which began with their leaders meeting at fall 2024’s BRICS Summit in Kazan and then again at last summer’s SCO Summit in Tianjin, is still in its infancy, revolving mostly around restrained rhetoric towards their unresolved territorial disputes and increased trade. Bilateral ties are moving in the right direction but they’re nowhere near resuming anything resembling the strategic cooperation that their leaders’ participation in another RIC Summit would imply.

  • The next point is that their unresolved territorial disputes place domestic pressure upon Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to eschew the aforesaid cooperation until they’re settled, ideally in India’s favor with China rescinding its claims and withdrawing from Indian-claimed territory. Meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping twice in as many years was already a bold move in this domestic political context, but resuming strategic cooperation absent a resolution of their disputes might be a bridge too far.

  • And finally, India is also under lots of pressure from the US nowadays, which is due to Trump’s punitive tariffs on the pretext of India’s continued import of Russian oil and the US’ rapid rapprochement with its Pakistani nemesis. Participating in newly revived RIC talks with Putin and Xi amidst the ongoing Indo-US talks at this very sensitive moment could potentially provoke Trump and might thus lead to a further worsening of their ties. It would therefore be very surprising if Modi were to agree to this anytime soon.

Having explained the three reasons why Russia’s planned revival of the RIC format is unlikely, it nevertheless shouldn’t be ruled out that their respective leaders might meet on the sidelines of this year’s BRICS Summit in India and/or the SCO Summit in Kyrgyzstan. Something as superficial as them being photographed chatting with one another there could suffice as alleged proof that Russia is making progress on this goal even if their small talk has no significance beyond positive optics.

Such was the case on the sidelines of last year’s SCO Summit in Tianjin, which was interpreted by some as an “informal RIC meet” despite nothing of substance being discussed. Russia and the Alt-Media Community, both in general but especially the “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” therein, have an interest in presenting such talks as proof of RIC’s revival for ideological reasons. Premature declarations of this can lead to unrealistic expectations, however, which risk deep disappointment if this never actually happens.

All in all, multipolar processes would further accelerate to the benefit of the World Majority if RIC were revived, but this is unlikely to happen due to the complexity of Sino-Indo relations and US pressure upon India right now. Given the reasonable limits of Russian diplomacy, namely its representatives’ respectful unwillingness to share unsolicited solutions for resolving the Sino-Indo border disputes and inability to influence Indo-US ties, Lavrov’s goal of reviving RIC will probably remain unfulfilled for the time being.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 22:35

Obama's Fingerprints All Over Investigations Of Trump And Clinton

Zero Hedge -

Obama's Fingerprints All Over Investigations Of Trump And Clinton

Authored by Paul Sperry via American Greatness,

In the run-up to the 2016 Democratic Party convention, FBI Director James Comey gained access to at least eight thumb drives containing large volumes of former Secretary Hillary Clinton’s sensitive State Department emails—as well as some from President Obama—that appeared to have been compromised by foreign hackers.

Instead of investigating the explosive new batch of evidence revealed in recently declassified documents, Comey rushed ahead to close an investigation into whether Clinton improperly transmitted and received classified material from a private, unsecured server she kept in her basement. Comey also took the extraordinary step of bypassing the attorney general and personally exonerating Clinton of wrongdoing during an unusual press conference on July 5, 2016.

Just hours later, Obama invited Clinton—who would be formally nominated as the Democrats’ standard bearer three weeks later—aboard Air Force One to help launch her multicity campaign tour, during which he officially endorsed Clinton as his preferred White House successor. “I’m ready to pass the baton,” Obama declared, as he stumped for her for the first time.

Comey’s decision to remove the cloud of scandal over Clinton’s campaign, allowing the president to get on with the business of campaigning for her, is just one avenue of investigation the Justice Department is pursuing in wide-ranging probes whose targets include a figure largely unscathed by his era’s scandals: former President Barack Obama.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said prosecutors are investigating, among other things, “possible coordination between the Clinton campaign and the Obama administration to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.”

Jason Reding Quiñones, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, has impaneled a grand jury to hear evidence related to an alleged “grand criminal conspiracy” by Obama and Biden officials to enlist law enforcement and intelligence agencies in rigging elections and carrying out political espionage against Donald Trump.

The fate of these investigations is still unclear. Actions against former presidents—especially for conduct in office—have been exceedingly rare, with the exception of President Trump. And the courts have pushed back on the Trump administration’s recent efforts to indict other Obama-era figures, including Comey.

Nevertheless, a RealClearInvestigations look at the evidence Trump administration prosecutors are presenting to the grand jury, which includes a raft of recently declassified CIA and FBI documents, shows Obama’s deep involvement in both protecting Clinton and advancing the conspiracy theory that Trump conspired with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Drawing from thousands of pages of documents and exclusive interviews with law enforcement and intelligence officials, RCI’s analysis shows the former president was repeatedly at the center of events surrounding both the closing of the Clinton investigation and the subsequent opening of several investigations targeting the Trump campaign. Post-election, Obama also ordered the manufacturing of anti-Trump intelligence, which set Trump’s presidency up for continued investigations.

On the Tarmac

Airports played an outsized role in the 2016 election. It was former President Bill Clinton’s June 27 meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on his parked plane at a Phoenix airport that reportedly convinced Comey that Lynch might appear compromised and that he should go around the proper charging officer for federal crimes to clear his wife.

About a week later, Obama signaled the all-clear after Comey’s press conference by inviting Hillary Clinton to fly to campaign rallies on Air Force One.

“I’m here today because I believe in Hillary Clinton,” Obama said during their July 5, 2016, rally in Charlotte, N.C. “I have had a front-row seat to her judgment and her commitment.”

Some presidential security experts and Secret Service sources contacted by RCI said the timing of the trip was suspicious.

They point out that the president authorizing Clinton to fly aboard Air Force One on the same day his hand-picked FBI director absolved her of crimes was almost certainly not a last-minute decision because it would have required extensive pre-planning.

The security involved in setting up that tour took weeks of advance work, which means Obama knew she was going to be cleared and not charged,” said a veteran Secret Service official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. “Obama wasn’t going to risk endorsing her and joining her on the campaign trail without her first being cleared of federal crimes,” he added. “He knew about the end of the investigation well ahead of time.”

Although the FBI did not interview Clinton about her emails until July 2, 2016, Comey had been circulating drafts of his exoneration statement at FBI headquarters for months and conveying to agents there was an “extraordinary sense of urgency” to complete the investigation, according to the declassified documents released recently by the Justice Department. Critics note that the reasoning he offered for clearing Clinton in his July 5 statement was rife with contradictions. “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” Comey said, “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

It is not known if any of the drafts were shared with the White House. Secret Service entry logs show Comey visited with Obama at least three times in 2016. “The timing and presumption that Clinton would eventually be the Democratic Party nominee for President was part of the defendant’s decision-making process,” according to court papers the DOJ filed in November detailing why it alleges Comey predetermined Clinton’s innocence.

Pulling Punches

The new evidence suggests that Comey wasn’t acting alone. It indicates that Obama was more involved in the Clinton probe than previously reported and that Comey, whose entire family supported Clinton, may have pulled his punches to placate the incumbent president and avoid getting on the wrong side of the woman he assumed would be Obama’s successor.

The recently declassified appendix of a 2018 report from the DOJ’s inspector general reviewing the integrity of the FBI’s investigation of Clinton found that the FBI never searched the eight thumb drives containing thousands of unexamined Clinton emails that were “exfiltrated” by foreign actors. Comey was first briefed about the cache of new evidence in May 2016 when he had begun drafting his exoneration statement, and then again a week before he unilaterally exonerated Clinton.

FBI lawyers admitted in internal written memos, also recently declassified, that the information was necessary to conduct a “thorough and complete investigation” and “assess the national security risks” associated with the breaches from Clinton’s use of a private email server, which cyber-forensic analysts had already found contained at least 2,063 classified emails, some at the “Top Secret/Special Access Program” level. They also thought it was necessary to divine “the full scope of unauthorized disclosure of classified emails found on the former Secretary’s server and to identify any potential cyber intrusions of the server.”

They got some thumb drives that dealt with all these issues, [and] they didn’t even bother to go through [them],” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley. “It was a complete cover-up.”

The appendix also reveals Democratic National Committee communications suggesting that Obama’s attorney general, Lynch, was secretly in communication with the Clinton campaign during the probe of her emails and had assured campaign officials that the FBI would go easy on her.

According to the communications, which U.S. intelligence analysts determined were “not fabrications,” Obama was putting “pressure” on Comey through Lynch to get rid of Clinton’s email scandal as early as January 2016. Not long after, Comey began drafting his statement exonerating Clinton—months before FBI agents had ended their investigation.

In her 2018 congressional deposition, Lynch testified that she never obstructed the probe or exerted any influence over it. But she has acknowledged that she had spoken to Comey about diminishing the probe’s significance by referring to the email investigation in the press as a “matter,” not an investigation. Lynch did not respond to requests for comment sent to her law firm.

DNC communications from March 2016 revealed that Obama also “sanctioned the use of administrative levers” to scuttle the FBI’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation. Recently declassified FBI documents show that around the same time, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe had ordered field agents to back off their investigation of Clinton Foundation donors and former Secretary of State Clinton as part of a possible pay-for-play scheme. McCabe did not respond to requests for comment sent to his attorney and to George Mason University, where he is a visiting professor.

(Just months earlier, McCabe and his wife Jill met with Virginia’s then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton ally, was at the governor’s mansion in Richmond to discuss raising money for Mrs. McCabe’s state senate race. The Clinton machine ended up pumping more than $675,000 into Jill McCabe’s Democratic campaign. McAuliffe had long maintained a seat on the Clinton Foundation board. RCI has learned, furthermore, that before moving to the D.C. area, the McCabes were 15-year neighbors of the Clintons in the hamlet of Chappaqua, N.Y., according to property records.)

Then, on July 20, just five days before the start of the Democratic National Convention, FBI headquarters shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation. “Based on the [political] sensitivities surrounding the Clinton Foundation,” a just-declassified internal FBI document reveals, agents were suddenly barred from issuing subpoenas, conducting interviews, or sharing bank information related to the case with other offices. HQ warned field offices to avoid creating “any impression we are investigating the Clinton Foundation or the Clintons.”

RCI made several requests for comment to Comey and Obama. Comey declined comment through his attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, who successfully defended him against federal perjury and obstruction charges. The DOJ is appealing the case, which was dismissed by a Clinton-appointed judge, not on the merits, but on the grounds that the federal prosecutor who indicted him had not been appointed properly. Obama’s Washington office declined comment.

At the time, the White House insisted it had no prior knowledge of Comey’s decisions.

Trump, who was on the verge of accepting the Republican Party’s presidential nomination, did not buy it. He accused Obama and Comey of running a “rigged” investigation of his Democratic opponent.

“It was no accident that charges were not recommended against Hillary the exact same day as President Obama campaigns with her for the first time,” Trump said on July 5, 2016.

Unbeknownst to Trump, July 5 would loom large for another reason: On the very day Obama’s FBI cleared Clinton, it set its sights on him.

Using the FBI To Smear Trump

That day, the bureau received the first in a series of false reports alleging Trump conspired with Russia. The reports, authored by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, then working as an FBI informant, were funded by Clinton’s campaign.

Weeks later, President Obama was personally warned by the CIA that the Clinton campaign was planning to create a foreign espionage scandal falsely tying Trump to Russia to distract attention from her own espionage investigation involving her use of a private server to transmit classified emails.

A declassified memo revealed that Clinton had personally approved a plan to “smear” and “demonize” Trump as a Putin stooge,  which was proposed by one of her foreign policy advisers, Julianne Smith, who had previously served as Vice President Joe Biden’s deputy security adviser. Clinton’s campaign manager, Robbie Mook, later testified in Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation that Clinton personally approved a plan to claim Trump had a back-channel to Putin through a Russian bank—an assertion that proved utterly baseless. “We discussed it with Hillary,” Mook told a D.C. court in 2022. “She agreed with the decision.”

According to the document, Smith said that the FBI, where Clinton had “supporters,” would help pour fuel on “the fire,” suggesting foreknowledge of the coming Russiagate investigation, which had not yet been formally opened. She added that they would also get help from the “IC,” or intelligence community, where Clinton had a lot of “sympathizers.”

Strikingly, there appeared to be an understanding among Clinton campaign aides that the FBI and CIA would get involved in an effort to kneecap Trump well before such an effort manifested in an official capacity.

In addition, the campaign solicited help directly from the White House.

In a July 25 text-message exchange with another Clinton adviser, Smith reached out to a special assistant to the president and National Security Council member for information about an “investigation” into Russia and Trump. “She went as far as she could” in divulging sensitive information, Smith told the other adviser. Sources say the Obama aide is believed to be Celeste Wallander, who at the time was also senior director for Russia and Eurasia on the National Security Council. Smith indicated she also contacted the “OVP,” or office of the vice president.

Smith told Durham she did not “specifically remember any such idea” to spread dirt on Trump. Wallander did not reply to requests for comment when contacted at her new position as executive director of the University of Pennsylvania’s office in Washington.

Grassley said that the new evidence, which he has fought for years to declassify, provides additional proof that “the Clinton campaign believed elements of the Obama administration would help them achieve their political ends against Trump.”

The plan to tie Trump to Russia went prime time during the DNC convention, held from July 25 to July 28.

During his nationally televised convention speech on July 27, Biden warned, “We cannot elect a man who belittles our closest allies, while embracing dictators like Vladimir Putin.” Obama pitched in during his own speech the following night, claiming that Trump “cozies up to Putin.”

Comey also knew about Clinton’s plan to manufacture a smear campaign against Trump, according to Durham. Yet on July 31, 2016, he approved the opening of the code-named “Crossfire Hurricane” espionage investigation of the Trump campaign for alleged—and since-disproven—collusion with Russia. Three months later, Comey even obtained a wiretap to spy on one of Trump’s campaign advisers, Carter Page, based almost entirely on the false allegations in the Clinton-funded Steele dossier.

The Russia probe was headed by Peter Strzok, the same FBI counterintelligence official who led the Clinton email probe. Internal FBI communications strongly suggest Strzok plotted to take a hard line against Trump.

On July 31, Strzok texted FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked directly under Comey’s deputy, Andrew McCabe, to discuss the difference in the two investigations. He emphasized that the Trump case mattered more than the Clinton case, and suggested that the FBI merely checked the boxes in its investigation of Clinton.

“[D]amn this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure we didn’t F something up. This matters because this MATTERS,” Strzok said. “So super glad to be on this voyage with you.”

“White House Is Running This”

Strzok would soon learn he was the nominal head of the investigation. On. Aug. 3, Obama met with Biden, Comey, and several other officials inside the White House to discuss the Clinton plan to link Trump and Putin, according to declassified records.

The next day, Strzok attended a meeting with CIA officials as part of an interagency group on Russia and Trump created by then-CIA Director John Brennan. Known as the “fusion cell,” the group was quarterbacked by CIA official Elizabeth “Liz” Vogt.

The following day, Strzok texted his FBI partner Page about the meeting. “Went well, best we could have expected,” he said, though he seemed annoyed to hear his investigation was under the control of the president. “Other than Liz’s quote, ‘the White House is running this,’” he added.

Nonetheless, their goals were aligned: Help Hillary Clinton, hurt Donald Trump.

Strzok and Page had earlier agreed to aggressively probe Trump to “stop” him from being president, in contrast to the softball approach they endeavored to take investigating Clinton. “One more thing: [Clinton] may be our next president,” Page wrote Strzok. “The last thing you need [is] going in there loaded for bear.”

“Agreed,” Strzok replied, before interviewing Clinton.

Both Strzok and Page have been subpoenaed by the recently impaneled federal grand jury hearing conspiracy evidence.

Instead of alerting the Trump campaign about the bureau’s concerns, Strzok dusted off the rarely used law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, to open additional espionage cases targeting Trump campaign officials Paul Manafort (code-named “Crossfire Fury”), George Papadopoulos (“Crossfire Typhoon”), and Carter Page (“Crossfire Dragon”).

The following week, he used FARA to open another counterintelligence case on Trump national security adviser, Michael Flynn, under the code name “Crossfire Razor.”

In a Sept. 2, 2016, text exchange, Page wrote Strzok that she was preparing talking points for Comey to brief Obama on their progress because “Potus [President of the United States] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

Also, Obama appeared to be directing political strategy for the Democratic ticket from the White House.

In October 2016, Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine was caught on video saying Obama had called him the prior night to warn him Trump was in bed with “fascist” Putin. In a conversation captured in the 2020 documentary “Hillary,” Kaine said the president demanded he and Clinton go hard on Trump: “Tim, remember, this is no time to be a purist. You’ve got to keep a fascist out of the White House.” Clinton is overheard saying, “I echo that sentiment,” and hints at a nefarious relationship between Trump and Russia.

A little more than a week before the election, Comey reluctantly reopened Clinton’s email case—a controversial decision he made only after New York FBI agent John Robertson blew the whistle on headquarters trying to “bury” the discovery a month earlier of more than 300,000 new Clinton State Department emails he found on a laptop Clinton confidante Huma Abedin shared with her then-husband, Anthony Weiner, a former Democratic lawmaker from New York, as RCI first reported.

“The only reason Comey reopened the investigation is that the New York office threatened to bypass FBI headquarters and go straight to the Department of Justice regarding the additional emails that were discovered as a result of the Weiner [sex crimes] investigations,” former prosecutor and assistant FBI Director Chris Swecker said in an RCI interview.

Around the same time, McCabe denied field agents potentially valuable evidence from the Weiner laptop that could have justified reopening their Clinton Foundation probes, recently declassified FBI records also reveal.

Obama Doubles Down

After Trump defeated Clinton the following month, Obama doubled down, ordering U.S. intelligence agencies to revisit their prior assessments that found no evidence the Russian government tried to hack the election for Trump.

Within just three weeks of Obama’s Dec. 9 order, the CIA came up with new evidence to conclude Putin personally launched an influence operation to help swing the race to Trump. The publicly released version of the assessment, which helped Obama and Clinton explain her shocking defeat, hid the fact that the CIA relied in part on the Clinton-funded dossier to reach its new conclusion.

Intelligence contradicting the “key judgment” that Putin helped Trump win was omitted from the assessment, known as the ICA. Career analysts objected to using the dossier, but Obama’s CIA chief Brennan overruled them. At least one senior intelligence analyst, now a whistleblower cooperating with the DOJ in its ongoing investigation of the entire scandal, said he was “threatened” by superiors to change his pre-election assessment to suggest Putin stole the election for Trump.

The Obama White House even prevented analysts preparing the new assessment from seeing the incriminating so-called Clinton Plan intelligence that exposed the plot to frame Trump as a Russian conspirator. In denying ICA drafters access to the intel, the White House spuriously claimed it was withholding the material “on grounds of executive privilege,” according to a secret congressional report that debunked the intelligence behind the ICA. (The explosive 2018 report had been locked in a safe at CIA headquarters until its declassification and release in July.)

On Dec. 15, 2016, weeks before the assessment had been finalized, Obama let it slip out in an NPR “exit interview” at the White House that his intelligence team had essentially predetermined the conclusion of the Trump-Russia assessment.

He said that no one should be “surprised by the CIA assessment that this [Russian meddling in the election] was done purposely to improve Trump’s chances [of winning].” Obama even suggested that Putin “was helping the Trump campaign.”

“So what the CIA is now assessing—which was, it was done purposefully to tilt the election in the direction of a particular candidate—shouldn’t be a surprise to anybody,” Obama added.

Standing in the wings, Susan Rice, the president’s national security adviser, sent Obama back into the room following the interview to reassert that the assessment was still under review.

You had something to add?” asked NPR’s Steve Inskeep.

“It is worth noting that when it comes to the motivations of the Russians, there are still a whole range of assessments taking place among the agencies,” a clearly chagrined Obama said, his voice cracking. “And so when I receive a final report, you know, we’ll be able to, I think, give us a comprehensive and best guess as to those motivations.”

He stressed that “different agencies are still looking at all that stuff, gathering it together and hopefully putting [it] into a single package.” In fact, only three of the 17 intelligence agencies were involved in the process—the CIA, FBI, and NSA—and only five analysts drafted the final intel report, all of whom were handpicked by Obama’s CIA Director Brennan, who previously worked for Obama in the White House.

Obama’s intelligence czar, James Clapper, later revealed in a 2018 interview that the Obama-ordered assessment set off a chain of investigations targeting Trump and his administration over Russia.

“If it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, Special Counsel [Robert] Mueller’s investigation,” Clapper told CNN. “President Obama is responsible for that.”

Recently declassified emails reveal that after taking his marching orders from Obama, Clapper pressured the NSA, which had partially dissented from the key judgment that Putin personally intervened in the election to help Trump, to get “on the same page” and be “supportive” of the conclusion. He suggested they would all have to “compromise” their normal standards for intelligence-gathering to rush out the report to meet Obama’s deadline.

Sen. Grassley was even more emphatic: “There’s no doubt the new intelligence assessment was a political hit that had been ordered by President Obama.

Both Clapper and Brennan have been told by federal prosecutors they are “targets” of investigation and have been subpoenaed by the grand jury looking at conspiracy charges. In a letter from his attorney, Brennan said he has cooperated with the probe, turning over documents requested for the period July 2016 to February 2017. Brennan said he stands by the ICA and complained he is the target of a “manufactured criminal investigation.” Attempts to reach Clapper for comment were unsuccessful.

Oval Office Planning Session

The first week in January 2017 was a busy time at the Obama White House.

On Jan. 5, Obama and Biden held an Oval Office meeting with Comey and other officials during which they discussed using the Logan Act, a little-used 18th-century law that criminalizes efforts by private citizens to conduct American foreign policy, against Trump’s incoming national security adviser, Michael Flynn. Later that month, Comey dispatched Strzok to the West Wing to ambush Flynn in an interview that would set a perjury trap leading to Flynn’s ouster and indictment on charges that were later dropped.

More significantly, they also discussed a plan to confront President-elect Trump with false allegations from the Steele dossier, which Comey presented as “intelligence.” On Jan. 6, Comey briefed Trump on Russia-related allegations, including those in the now-debunked Steele dossier—the same day the administration released an unclassified version of the ICA to the public.

Comey’s private briefing with Trump was later leaked to the press, lending credence to the dossier and giving Washington journalists official cover to publicize its transparently bogus rumors, starting with Buzzfeed, which published the entire Steele Dossier on Jan. 10.

On Jan. 12, still under the direction of the Obama administration, Comey also sought the renewal of a wiretap warrant to continue spying on Trump adviser Carter Page as a suspected “Russian agent”—the same day the bureau received an intelligence report warning of false information in the dossier that had put Page under suspicion. And Comey knew by that point the dossier was based on fabrications by Steele’s paid “primary subsource.”

Later that month, Comey’s investigators learned while interviewing Igor Danchenko, a former Brookings Institution analyst who worked as Steele’s primary researcher, that key allegations in the dossier were nothing more than “bar talk.” Comey nonetheless approved the affidavit—underpinned by those same dossier lies—to electronically eavesdrop on Page for another 90 days.

“With all these red lights flashing STOP, the Obama administration went full speed ahead,” Grassley said.

Some former prosecutors see a conspiracy in the unequal investigative treatment of Clinton and Trump, and they place Obama at the center of it.

“There are reasonable grounds for an investigation to determine if this was part of a broader conspiracy to protect Hillary Clinton and influence the election by smearing Trump at the same time,” said Swecker, a former prosecutor and top FBI official.

“I don’t think there’s any doubt Obama was the mastermind behind the whole conspiracy,” he told RCI. “The problem is proving it.”

Trump leveled similar allegations last year, even going so far as to accuse the 44th president of “treason.” Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush dismissed the accusations as “bizarre” and “ridiculous.”

Hannah Hankins, now acting spokesperson for Obama’s post-presidency office, told RCI, “I won’t have anything new to add for this story.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 21:45

China Has Officially Overtaken Tesla In The Global EV Race

Zero Hedge -

China Has Officially Overtaken Tesla In The Global EV Race

Chinese automakers, led by BYD, are rapidly reshaping the global electric-vehicle market and challenging long-established brands such as Volkswagen, Toyota, BMW—and even Tesla, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Once dismissed by Western buyers, Chinese EVs are now gaining wide acceptance. “These Chinese cars look fantastic,” one shopper said while browsing a BYD model in London, reflecting a broader shift in perception.

BYD has emerged as the most powerful symbol of China’s rise in electric vehicles. The company replaced Tesla as the world’s biggest EV seller and delivered more than one million vehicles outside China in 2025—more than double the previous year. China, meanwhile, surpassed Japan in 2023 to become the world’s largest auto exporter, shipping more than seven million vehicles last year.

“BYD wants to become one of the most relevant players in Europe, and in a very short period,” said Alfredo Altavilla, an industry veteran advising the company.

Chinese brands now hold about 7% of Western Europe’s auto market, selling more than 500,000 vehicles in the first three quarters of 2025. Their growing presence is putting pressure on European leaders such as Volkswagen, which has already lost ground to Chinese competitors in China and now faces them on its home turf. VW said it had “confidence in our products and our ability to innovate.”

China’s dominance is fueled by massive manufacturing capacity. The country can produce more than 46 million vehicles annually, far more than domestic demand. “You need to go global,” said Klaus Zyciora. “If you are not a manufacturer that is able to bring five million units annually to the market, you will have a hard time.”

The WSJ writes that exports have become essential to absorbing this overcapacity. BYD is expanding aggressively, aiming for 2,000 European dealerships by 2026 and opening or planning factories in countries including Hungary, Turkey, Brazil, Thailand, and Indonesia. The company raised $5.6 billion to support its global push.

Political barriers remain one of the biggest obstacles. Chinese EVs face steep tariffs in the U.S., the European Union, and Mexico. In Europe, BYD vehicles are subject to duties of up to 27%. In the U.S., restrictions on Chinese software and national security concerns have effectively blocked imports.

Still, some governments are easing resistance. In Canada, officials recently reduced tariffs on Chinese EVs as part of a broader partnership with Beijing. In the U.S., President Trump signaled openness to Chinese automakers that produce locally, saying, “Let China come in.”

To bypass trade barriers, Chinese companies are increasingly building vehicles abroad. This strategy allows them to preserve access to major markets while maintaining cost advantages.

BYD’s rise has been driven not only by scale but also by strategy. After a slow start in Europe, the company shifted from premium pricing to more affordable models and recruited experienced Western executives. Local hiring and market-specific products helped accelerate growth.

“If we focus our strategy on EVs only, we will become another Tesla, with all the bumps, the ups and downs,” Altavilla said.

Chinese manufacturers are also moving upmarket. “They will learn to upgrade, and then they will come in there as well,” said Volvo CEO Håkan Samuelsson, warning that premium brands may soon face intensified competition.

In emerging markets such as Mexico, Chinese automakers have become major players by offering feature-rich, low-cost vehicles. Analysts say they are expanding demand for electric cars in regions where affordable EVs barely existed before. “They are creating a market for affordable EVs that didn’t exist,” said Justin Fischer.

BYD’s overseas growth has helped offset intense competition at home, even as profit margins fluctuate. Despite selling more than 4.6 million vehicles globally last year, the company faces pressure from rivals inside China and slowing domestic demand.

Yet the broader trend remains clear: Chinese automakers are no longer niche exporters. With scale, cost advantages, government backing, and improving technology, they are positioning themselves as global leaders.

As Altavilla put it, BYD aims to become “a real European automaker.” More broadly, China is positioning itself to dominate the next phase of the global auto industry—putting Tesla and traditional Western manufacturers under sustained pressure.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 21:20

'Saving The Family' Should Start With Sound Money

Zero Hedge -

'Saving The Family' Should Start With Sound Money

Authored by Jeffery L. Degner and Thomas Savidge via TheDailyEconomy.org,

In the opening week of 2026, several scholars at the Heritage Foundation published a special report titled “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years.” This 168-page document covers myriad policies that negatively impact the American family and proposes solutions to those problems. Some, largely the solutions that propose repealing and reforming existing systems, can help families. But the calls to subsidize traditional family life will come with a host of unintended consequences.

The nation is indeed facing a demographic crisis, and some of Heritage’s proposals deserve praise, while others deserve criticism. One proposed reform is mentioned but given barely any attention: a return to sound money.

Helping the American family (broadly understood) is a laudable goal, but the patterns of later and fewer marriages, later and less-frequent reproduction, and a host of other family pathologies are themselves the result of a mountain of interventions.

The American family must be saved from government, not by government.

America’s Demographic Squeeze: Fewer Births, More Dependents

The demographic decline facing the US is less sudden than often claimed, but no less consequential. As the Heritage report notes, fertility has remained below replacement rates for years, ensuring that natural population growth is weak. In the absence of sustained immigration, population growth is likely to become population contraction.

Simultaneously, the retirement of the Baby Boomer generation is steadily increasing the share of the population outside of the labor force, raising the dependency burden borne by working-age Americans and taxpayers.

These trends are already becoming visible. Slower growth or even shrinkage in the working-age population, absent significant immigration, constrains labor supply and limit economic growth potential. Meanwhile, Social Security and Medicare (the two largest expenditures in the federal budget) face rising expenditures precisely as the tax base supporting them grows more slowly. Additionally, the rise of the welfare state has greatly hampered family formation, especially among low-income families.

These changes underscore the need to remove institutional barriers to family formation and reform policies that underlie present challenges.

Remove Barriers Before Adding Benefits

Several laudable elements in the Heritage report shouldn’t be overlooked. First, it acknowledges that many policies favor traditional families. While there are indeed over 1,000 forms of federal privilege granted to married couples, these have been in place throughout the period when both marriage and fertility rates are falling. This raises the question: Why are these so-called “pro-family” or “pro-natal” policies failing to achieve their stated goals? Perhaps it’s because other measures on the books outweigh them, and actually short-circuit family formation.

The report’s authors call for a repeal of multiple policies that have been shown to deter and delay marriage, alter planned fertility, and even divorce patterns. Among them are “credits designed specifically to benefit poor single mothers,” and the structure and incentives from the Earned Income Tax Credit, which “strongly favors single parenthood over marriage.” The report also demands the elimination of “needless occupational licensure laws” that block young and lower-income earners from the labor force, undermining the early wealth-building that encourages marriage. Further, it seeks the easing of local zoning and construction regulations that make home affordability more difficult for younger, poorer households.

Heritage’s report frames the Israeli case as a model for what must be done to increase marriage and fertility rates. But the main reasons cited for (slightly) above-replacement fertility rates in Israel are religiosity, nationalism, and “Jewish communal life in exile,” all of which are summarized later as “culture, faith, and national purpose to family formation.” These specific pressures can’t, and shouldn’t, be replicated in modern, pluralistic societies. Further, the report rightfully admits, “While other nations have tried to reverse declining birthrates through financially generous family policies, none has succeeded in restoring fertility to replacement levels. This demonstrates that government spending alone does not ensure demographic success.”

Turning to Eastern Europe, the report looks to Hungary for policy solutions, interventions, and expenditures that have a more positive track record in increasing marriage and fertility. Indeed, Budapest began offering eligible brides interest-free loans, equating to over $30,000 for saying “I do” back in 2019. Moreover, the debt may be forgiven if the couple had three or more children. The report belies an important fact, however: the increase in the marriage rate is largely due to formerly cohabiting couples tying the knot. One would expect that once this initial wave of marriages has passed, the impact would be negated by other factors. In fact, just four years after the policy was introduced, the marriage rate began to fall back toward EU norms. The high cost of taxpayer-subsidized loans for cohabiting couples to make it official has had only temporary effects, and may prove, in the long run, to have produced marriages that are more apt to divorce, especially when the money runs out.

The Heritage Report correctly marks some of the causes of family disintegration: marriage penalties embedded in both welfare and fiscal interventions, especially for low-income households. The authors rightly call for their repeal. At the same time, the models they point to as ideal national cases for cultural and policy reform either can’t be replicated or are short on results. Worse still, the report’s greatest shortcoming is found in a drive-by mention of the single, foundational intervention that may actually be undermining all of traditional family life.

The Best “Pro-Family” Policy Is Price Stability

Buried within the report is a brief aside discussing the pressure a fiat monetary system and the resulting inflation has placed on families. The authors state:

High inflation can not only devastate the economy but also make it harder for families to form and grow. The US abandoned the gold standard in 1971, and the lack of convertibility of dollars to gold since then has facilitated reckless money printing and irresponsible federal spending, leading to bouts of high inflation in the 1970s, early 1980s, and the 2020s. Families rely on the dollar as a store of wealth, so the Federal Reserve must restore sound money and price stability. While many monetary rules have been proposed, the system with a proven record track record of success and stable prices is full convertibility to gold.

This passage, and its recommendation to return to full convertibility, are worth their weight in gold.

A few economists have pointed to the connection between increasing real prices in healthcareeducation, and housing as key contributors to delays in marriage and lowered fertility rates.

Outside factors like regulatory pressure and geopolitical forces have doubtless contributed to rising real prices in these categories. But among these, the ongoing loss of purchasing power due to the loose money policies of the Federal Reserve and its member banks has received too little attention.  

Even less attention is paid to the rise of what some have called the inflation culture. The Heritage report hints at this reality, but chalks it up to a loss of religiosity. But the decay of religious and civic life in the West has an undetected, underlying culprit. Because of the redistributive and impoverishing effects of easy money, a once-entrepreneurial and optimistic American culture has given way to a litany of social pathologies:

All are impacting family formation and family cohesion. All have their roots in the demoralization of persistent, slow-burning inflation, eating away the value of money. Younger generations hoping to live comfortably can reasonably ask: ‘Who has time for marriage and family?’ The answer: a lot fewer people than in generations past.

The damage done to the American family is likely reversible, but the Heritage Foundation’s report misses the root cause: inflation may be the most corrosive anti-family force of all. Policymakers who want to revive marriage rates and fertility should examine existing, counterproductive incentives, including new money creation and Congressional overspending. What they shouldn’t do is continue layering new interventions onto old ones, creating more bureaucracy and higher costs — but fewer weddings and babies.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:55

The EU-US $800BN Postwar Ukraine 'Prosperity' Plan Which Should Outrage MAGA

Zero Hedge -

The EU-US $800BN Postwar Ukraine 'Prosperity' Plan Which Should Outrage MAGA

Ukraine is now begging the EU and US for $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years at a moment its prospects on the battlefield look no better than a year ago. This reportedly includes an ask of $800 billion for "reconstruction" and $700 billion for "military purposes".

Politico is reporting Friday that EU leadership has circulated a confidential document to European heads of state outlining Ukraine's financial needs for the initial $800 billion for rebuilding the country - a figure which Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said would be comparable to "the detonation of an atomic bomb." Orbán made the remarks Friday following an emergency EU summit in Brussels.

"The 18-page document outlines a 10-year plan to guarantee Ukraine's recovery with a fast-tracked path toward EU membership," Politico writes after obtaining the document. "The European Commission circulated the plans with EU capitals ahead of the leaders’ summit Thursday evening where the document, dated Jan. 22, was addressed, according to three EU officials and diplomats who were granted anonymity to talk about the sensitive topic."

According to further details, "The funding strategy stretches until 2040 alongside an immediate 100-day operational plan to get the project off the ground. But the prosperity plan will struggle to attract outside investment if the conflict rumbles on, according to the world’s largest money manager, BlackRock, which is advising on the reconstruction plan in a pro-bono capacity."

via BBC

Various institutions alongside the US and EU government plan to contribute according to these broad milestones envisioned in the document:

  • Over the next ten, the EU, US, and major international lenders — including the IMF and World Bank — are lining up roughly $500 billion in combined public and private funding for Ukraine, according to the document.

  • The European Commission plans to commit another €100 billion in taxpayer-backed funds via budget support and investment guarantees under the EU’s next seven-year budget starting in 2028.

  • Brussels claims that this €100 billion outlay would "unlock" as much as €207 billion in additional investment 

  • Washington, for its part, says it will mobilize capital through a bespoke US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, notably without attaching a price tag.

  • The US also signaled plans to funnel investment into Ukraine's critical minerals, infrastructure, energy, and technology sectors, aligning reconstruction with long-term strategic and resource interests - an earlier theme sounded by the Trump administration.

Naturally, neither Politico nor much of the mainstream media have commented on how deeply unpopular all this will be for domestic populations, and especially MAGA in the US will likely greet this as merely setting up for another theft of taxpayer funds for corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs

And ironically this document for long-term funding is being revealed less than 24 hours after President Zelensky got up before the WEF audience in Davos and positively scolded EU governments for supposed 'inaction' and for being 'fragmented' and weak...

Biting the hand that feeds you... or also humiliating the EU while the bloc shovels billions in cash your way.

And: this speech is not gonna go down well. Europeans just approved a 90 billion euro package - fresh cash, not Russian assets - certainly not insignificant.

But Politico does inject a little realism at least, in quoting a BlackRock executive at Davos:

"Think about it. If you're a pension fund, you're fiduciary towards your clients, your pensioners. It's nearly impossible to invest into a war zone," BlackRock’s vice chairman, Philipp Hildebrand, said Wednesday in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos. "I think it has to be sequenced and that's going to take some time."

In the meantime, over in Moscow President Putin just made clear to the US delegation led by Steve Witkoff that the question of territory remains a red line. Russia has further signaled Ukraine is not going to look the same in any post-conflict scenario, especially in terms of geographic boundaries.

This unprecedented proposed long-term funding plan should infuriate American taxpayers...

Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov made clear Friday that the military will continue to consistently pursue the objectives ... on the battlefield, where the Russian armed forces hold the strategic initiative." This means, as BlackRock's Hildebrand acknowledged, the conflict which is about to enter its fifth year is going to drag on.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:30

AI-Induced Cultural Stagnation Is No Longer Speculation − It's Already Happening

Zero Hedge -

AI-Induced Cultural Stagnation Is No Longer Speculation − It's Already Happening

Authored by Ahmed Elgammal, via The Conversation

Generative AI was trained on centuries of art and writing produced by humans.

But scientists and critics have wondered what would happen once AI became widely adopted and started training on its outputs.

A new study points to some answers.

In January 2026, artificial intelligence researchers Arend Hintze, Frida Proschinger Åström and Jory Schossau published a study showing what happens when generative AI systems are allowed to run autonomously – generating and interpreting their own outputs without human intervention.

The researchers linked a text-to-image system with an image-to-text system and let them iterate – image, caption, image, caption – over and over and over.

Regardless of how diverse the starting prompts were – and regardless of how much randomness the systems were allowed – the outputs quickly converged onto a narrow set of generic, familiar visual themes: atmospheric cityscapes, grandiose buildings and pastoral landscapes. Even more striking, the system quickly “forgot” its starting prompt.

The researchers called the outcomes “visual elevator music” – pleasant and polished, yet devoid of any real meaning.

For example, they started with the image prompt, “The Prime Minister pored over strategy documents, trying to sell the public on a fragile peace deal while juggling the weight of his job amidst impending military action.” The resulting image was then captioned by AI. This caption was used as a prompt to generate the next image.

After repeating this loop, the researchers ended up with a bland image of a formal interior space – no people, no drama, no real sense of time and place.

A prompt that begins with a prime minister under stress ends with an image of an empty room with fancy furnishings. Arend Hintze, Frida Proschinger Åström and Jory SchossauCC BY

As a computer scientist who studies generative models and creativity, I see the findings from this study as an important piece of the debate over whether AI will lead to cultural stagnation.

The results show that generative AI systems themselves tend toward homogenization when used autonomously and repeatedly. They even suggest that AI systems are currently operating in this way by default.

The Familiar Is the Default

This experiment may appear beside the point: Most people don’t ask AI systems to endlessly describe and regenerate their own images. The convergence to a set of bland, stock images happened without retraining. No new data was added. Nothing was learned. The collapse emerged purely from repeated use.

But I think the setup of the experiment can be thought of as a diagnostic tool. It reveals what generative systems preserve when no one intervenes.

Pretty … boring. Chris McLoughlin/Moment via Getty Images

This has broader implications, because modern culture is increasingly influenced by exactly these kinds of pipelines. Images are summarized into text. Text is turned into images. Content is ranked, filtered and regenerated as it moves between words, images and videos. New articles on the web are now more likely to be written by AI than humans. Even when humans remain in the loop, they are often choosing from AI-generated options rather than starting from scratch.

The findings of this recent study show that the default behavior of these systems is to compress meaning toward what is most familiar, recognizable and easy to regenerate.

Cultural Stagnation or Acceleration?

For the past few years, skeptics have warned that generative AI could lead to cultural stagnation by flooding the web with synthetic content that future AI systems then train on. Over time, the argument goes, this recursive loop would narrow diversity and innovation.

Champions of the technology have pushed back, pointing out that fears of cultural decline accompany every new technology. Humans, they argue, will always be the final arbiter of creative decisions.

What has been missing from this debate is empirical evidence showing where homogenization actually begins.

The new study does not test retraining on AI-generated data. Instead, it shows something more fundamental: Homogenization happens before retraining even enters the picture. The content that generative AI systems naturally produce – when used autonomously and repeatedly – is already compressed and generic.

This reframes the stagnation argument. The risk is not only that future models might train on AI-generated content, but that AI-mediated culture is already being filtered in ways that favor the familiar, the describable and the conventional.

Retraining would amplify this effect. But it is not its source.

This Is No Moral Panic

Skeptics are right about one thing: Culture has always adapted to new technologies. Photography did not kill painting. Film did not kill theater. Digital tools have enabled new forms of expression.

But those earlier technologies never forced culture to be endlessly reshaped across various mediums at a global scale. They did not summarize, regenerate and rank cultural products – news stories, songs, memes, academic papers, photographs or social media posts – millions of times per day, guided by the same built-in assumptions about what is “typical.”

The study shows that when meaning is forced through such pipelines repeatedly, diversity collapses not because of bad intentions, malicious design or corporate negligence, but because only certain kinds of meaning survive the text-to-image-to-text repeated conversions.

This does not mean cultural stagnation is inevitable. Human creativity is resilient. Institutions, subcultures and artists have always found ways to resist homogenization. But in my view, the findings of the study show that stagnation is a real risk – not a speculative fear – if generative systems are left to operate in their current iteration.

They also help clarify a common misconception about AI creativity: Producing endless variations is not the same as producing innovation. A system can generate millions of images while exploring only a tiny corner of cultural space.

In my own research on creative AI, I found that novelty requires designing AI systems with incentives to deviate from the norms. Without it, systems optimize for familiarity because familiarity is what they have learned best. The study reinforces this point empirically. Autonomy alone does not guarantee exploration. In some cases, it accelerates convergence.

This pattern already emerged in the real world: One study found that AI-generated lesson plans featured the same drifttoward conventional, uninspiring content, underscoring that AI systems converge toward what’s typical rather than what’s unique or creative.

AI’s outputs are familiar because they revert to average displays of human creativity. Bulgac/iStock via Getty Images

Lost in Translation

Whenever you write a caption for an image, details will be lost. Likewise for generating an image from text. And this happens whether it’s being performed by a human or a machine.

In that sense, the convergence that took place is not a failure that’s unique to AI. It reflects a deeper property of bouncing from one medium to another. When meaning passes repeatedly through two different formats, only the most stable elements persist.

But by highlighting what survives during repeated translations between text and images, the authors are able to show that meaning is processed inside generative systems with a quiet pull toward the generic.

The implication is sobering: Even with human guidance – whether that means writing prompts, selecting outputs or refining results – these systems are still stripping away some details and amplifying others in ways that are oriented toward what’s “average.”

If generative AI is to enrich culture rather than flatten it, I think systems need to be designed in ways that resist convergence toward statistically average outputs. There can be rewards for deviation and support for less common and less mainstream forms of expression.

The study makes one thing clear: Absent these interventions, generative AI will continue to drift toward mediocre and uninspired content.

Cultural stagnation is no longer speculation. It’s already happening.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 20:05

Silver and Gold Take Off as Davos Highlights Geopolitical Tensions

Pension Pulse -

Rian Howlett , Karen Friar and Laura Bratton of Yahoo Finance report the Dow, S&P 500 cap volatile week with back-to-back weekly losses:

US stocks were mixed on Friday, as Wall Street capped a turbulent week stoked by President Trump's heated pursuit of Greenland, while chipmaker Intel (INTC) sank after its earnings disappointment.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) retreated roughly 0.6%. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) rose slightly, and the Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) gained 0.2%.

All three major indexes posted back-to-back weekly losses.

Intel posted worse-than-expected first quarter guidance late Thursday, raising concerns about its turnaround. The chip giant swung to a quarterly loss as it struggled to meet demand for its server chips used in AI data centers. Shares sank over 16% Friday.t

Stocks recorded weekly losses for the second week in a row as the relief that lifted stocks for two straight days of gains wore off. After a rough start to a holiday-shortened trading week, investors took heart from Trump cooling his Greenland rhetoric and backtracking on proposed tariffs on NATO allies. Trump argued that his moves worked out, as the market was "just about even" for the week.

That said, a shift out of US assets is gaining traction as US-EU tensions weigh on the dollar (DX-Y.NYB). And gold (GC=F) headed toward its best week since 2020, while silver (SI=F) topped $100 per ounce.

Elsewhere, there were signs of progress on the China-US front, as TikTok and ByteDance finally closed a deal with Oracle (ORCL) and others to let it operate in the US. Meanwhile, Beijing has reportedly told China's big techs they can start preparations to order Nvidia's (NVDA) H200 chips, whose imports are currently curbed.

Investors are bracing for a blockbuster earnings week next week, along with the Federal Reserve's meeting and interest rate decision. Trump said Thursday he has a pick for the next Fed chair in mind after wrapping up interviews, and he will name the replacement for Jerome Powell "soon."

Sean Conlon and Pia Singh of CNBC also report the S&P 500 ends Friday little changed, but posts second straight losing week amid wild trading: 

U.S. equities were mixed on Friday, as the Nasdaq Composite extended its gains amid easing geopolitical fears and the Dow Jones Industrial Average underperformed.

The tech-heavy Nasdaq advanced 0.28% and settled at 23,501.24, while the blue-chip Dow lost 285.30 points, or 0.58%, closing at 49,098.71. A nearly 4% slide in Goldman Sachs weighed on the 30-stock index. The broad market S&P 500 eked out a marginal gain of 0.03% to end at 6,915.61.

Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices were among those supporting the Nasdaq and the S&P 500, climbing 1.5% and more than 2%, respectively. The moves come as people familiar with the matter told CNBC that Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is planning to visit China in the coming days. Other tech names like Microsoft saw a boost as well.

Intel shares, in contrast, tumbled around 17% after the chipmaker reported a disappointing first-quarter outlook.

The three major averages rallied for a second session on Thursday as investors were appeased by news of easing trade tensions and geopolitical risk.

The indexes began their rebound on Wednesday after President Donald Trump called off his threatened tariffs on the imports of eight European nations — which were set to start Feb.1 — and announced that he and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reached a “framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland.” The tariff threat briefly spurred a flight from U.S. assets as investors turned to the “sell America” trade at the start of the holiday-shortened trading week.

Trump had also told CNBC Wednesday that “we have a concept of a deal” with the Arctic island.

“Investors this week welcomed a term that kind of started around Liberation Day or shortly thereafter — the ‘TACO’ trade,’” said Scott Ellis, managing director, corporate credit at Penn Mutual Asset Management. “Maybe investors will look to that in the future as Trump kind of walks back and this administration walks back some of the rhetoric in order to get deals done.”

To be sure, Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said on Thursday he doesn’t know what’s in the “framework” deal that Trump announced, stressing that any such deal must respect Greenland’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

While the combined gains on Wednesday and Thursday had erased the Dow’s losses from earlier in the week, Friday’s move put it back in the red. The 30-stock Dow fell 0.5% on the week. The S&P 500 lost about 0.4%, while the Nasdaq slipped less than 0.1% in the period — both posted back-to-back losing weeks.

It was another volatile week on Wall Street dominated by President Trump's remarks prior, during and following his visit to the World Economic Forum at Davos.

The only good news is NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte who seems to have Trump's attention managed to strike some sort of deal with respect to Greenland but all sides have yet to formally approve and details remain vague. 

Looking at S&P sectors, Energy and Materials benefited from the geopolitical tensions, gaining 3.3% and 2.1% respectively this week:

Worth noting the iShares Silver Trust (SLV) and SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) had another exceptional week, hitting fresh new record levels on geopolitical turmoil:


 

If you ever needed proof that parabolic charts can get more overbought, there it is, short sellers are getting steamrolled trying to short silver and gold.

Still, there will be a pullback back to the 10-week exponential moving average, that I guarantee you.

Here are the best performing large, mid and small cap US stocks this week (full list for each is here, you need to change exchange):

Once again, micro cap stocks took off the most:

Next week is a big earnings week as the tech powerhouses report, keep an eye on post-earnings reaction because that tells you a lot.

And be careful with stocks that run up too much, too fast headed into earnings, Intel being the perfect example today as it got clobbered 17% following weak earnings:

It will likely pull back some more but the weekly chart remains bullish so don't be surprised if it heads back up at some point and resumes an uptrend.

Alright, let me wrap it up there, been a long week.

Below, Tom Lee, Fundstrat, joins 'Closing Bell' to discuss the week for stock markets, the earnings reports next week and much more.

Next, Jeff deGraaf, Renaissance Macro, joins 'Closing Bell' to discuss the recent breakout in regional banks, how small caps can perform going forward and much more.

Third, Dan Niles, Niles Investment Management, joins 'Fast Money' to talk whats ahead for big tech earnings next week including Apple and Microsoft.

Fourth, 'Fast Money' traders talk precious metal prices continuing to climb.

Lastly, CBC's Power & Politics' Political Pulse Panel breaks down duelling speeches at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this week.

With Control Of Virginia, Democrats Go Into A Tax And Regulatory Frenzy

Zero Hedge -

With Control Of Virginia, Democrats Go Into A Tax And Regulatory Frenzy

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

In the last election, Democrats again campaigned as moderates, including Abigail Spanberger.

Once in control of the Governor’s mansion and the legislature, however, Virginia Democrats have moved quickly to fulfill the worst stereotype of a tax-hungry, economy-crushing party.

The Democrats introduced an array of new taxes on every aspect of life.

At the same time, Spanberger moved to take control of Virginia universities and colleges after years of trying to move those schools to the center.

Now, members are pushing rent control legislation and defining landlords as “gougers” if they raise rents by as little as 3%.

The tax frenzy immediately began after the Democrats took control.

Spanberger has also announced that the state will rejoin the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a regional cap-and-trade program that imposes a de facto carbon tax.

Virginia Democrats appear to be replicating California’s disastrous tax policies that have chased high earners and companies from the state. Here are a few of the new taxes being pushed:

HB 378 – Imposes a 3.8% net investment income tax on individuals, trusts, and estates beginning in taxable year 2027. This would raise the state’s top marginal income tax rate on portfolio and passive income to 9.55% in addition to federal taxes.

HB 900 – Imposes sales tax hikes on transportation districts as well as a new tax on every retail delivery in Northern Virginia (Amazon, Uber Eats, FedEx, UPS, etc.). This appears modeled on a Minnesota law.

HB 919 – Imposes a firearm and ammunition tax equal to 11% percent of the gross receipts from the retail sale of any firearm or ammunition by a dealer in firearms, firearms manufacturer, or ammunition vendor.

HB 978 – Extends the retail sales and use tax to dry cleaning, landscaping, and other previously exempt services.

Now, the Democrats are pushing rent control legislation despite a long history of failure in such programs to discourage new construction and property improvements. At the same time, it has been shown actually to increase rents overall.

Democrats have introduced two bills under the guise of fighting “rent gouging.” However, they define gouging as rent increases of just over 3%. That does not cover inflation in past years. Under these laws, restrictions could kick in for increases even below 3%.

In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I discuss the challenges for the American Republic in the 21st Century. That includes a predicted move by the left to introduce guaranteed incomes and rent controls. That appears to be unfolding sooner than anticipated.

In New York, Zohran Mamdani is seeking rent freezes and enhanced rent controls.

He has surrounded himself with radicals who have called for the elimination or sharp curtailment of private property.

The most noteworthy is Cea Weaver who has called for the elimination of private property.

The American left has cited South Africa and Cuba as models for the United States despite their economic meltdowns.

As they seek to impose an array of new taxes and regulations, Democrats are also pushing a bill that would make it more difficult to find federal fraud by nonprofits.

As billions have been lost to fraud in other states, the Democrats want to make it harder for the federal government to investigation such fraud in Virginia.

Virginia Democrats are taking a prosperous and moderate state into the same failed direction as states like California. The desire to spend “someone else’s money” is irresistible when you want to increase spending. For many wealthy families, West Virginia or Florida are likely looking more and more appealing.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 19:15

New Gig Economy Job: Train AI That Replaces You

Zero Hedge -

New Gig Economy Job: Train AI That Replaces You

A Bay Area startup called Mercor has hired tens of thousands of white-collar contractors for temporary work, training artificial intelligence to perform the very jobs many of them once held, according to a new Wall Street Journal report.

In effect, these white-collar workers are being paid to accelerate their own obsolescence by feeding and perfecting models for chatbot makers, such as OpenAI and Anthropic.

What is marketed as short-term income increasingly looks like participation in a system that is not on "team humanity," but instead is perfecting AI's ability to hollow out even more white-collar work.

"Welcome to the next gig economy. Instead of driving for Uber or delivering Postmates, a new wave of workers is signing up to school AI. These white-collar contractors review and critique the output of the large language models that power chatbots and other AI tools," the WSJ story read.

Mercor recruits experts across fields such as medicine, law, finance, engineering, writing, and the arts, with pay ranging from $45 per hour to $250 per hour. These contractors spend weeks or months reviewing and critiquing AI model outputs.

WSJ said that 30,000 contractors were hired in 2025 to work on AI models for some of the largest tech companies, furthering chatbot development.

"Many of the people we work with already see AI as inevitable in their field, but that doesn't mean humans will run out of meaningful work," a Mercor spokeswoman told the outlet. "Many of our experts see it as their responsibility to infuse their knowledge and expertise into the models to ensure accurate and thoughtful outcomes."

WSJ spoke with one of the contractors, Katie Williams, 30, who has been working for Mercor for 6 months ...

Williams is now about six months into various projects that have involved watching video clips and writing out captions of everything that's happening in them, and rating the quality of videos generated by prompts. She has mixed feelings about the work.

"I joked with my friends I'm training AI to take my job someday," she says.

Co-workers in her Slack channel express similar sentiments, she adds. They don't feel great about training AI but they feel their job prospects are limited.

And another contractor...

After more than 20 years at the same job as an automotive journalist, Peter Valdes-Dapena was laid off in 2024. He spent months sending out résumés for full-time jobs to no avail. He finds freelance work inconsistent and it doesn't make up for his past salary. Though he saved for his retirement, he'd rather not start dipping in yet.

One day, Mercor popped up in his LinkedIn feed.

The 61-year-old now spends 20 to 30 hours a week critiquing AI's attempts at writing news articles. He finds the work challenging and says it's had the pleasant side effect of improving his own writing.

The nature of the work does produce some internal conflict. Valdes-Dapena says journalists will always exist—he thinks people appreciate ideas and writing from humans—but he worries AI could lead to more job losses.

"I didn't invent AI and I'm not going to uninvent it," he says. "If I were to stop doing this, would that stop it? The answer is no."

Our most recent reporting shows that AI-driven workforce disruptions are rising as AI adoption in corporate America continues to rise.

Latest from Goldman on AI adoption by firms:

AI adoption by firms now stands at 17.4% among US establishments according to the Census Bureau's Business Trends and Outlook Survey. This reflects a significant increase from the 10% adoption rate last reported in late September, but the sharp increase likely mostly reflects a change in the BTOS AI adoption survey question wording from use of AI for "the production of goods and services" to use of AI for "any business function." Within industries, information, professional, and education firms continue to lead adoption. Publishing and computing firms reported the largest expected increase in AI adoption over the next six months. We continue to see higher adoption rates among subsectors with greater exposure of work tasks to AI automation. Adoption remains the highest among large firms with 250+ employees, 40% of which expect to be using AI in six months. Recent industry surveys suggest that many adopters are already starting to see positive returns on investment from AI business initiatives.

Labor market impacts (via Goldman):

AI's impact on the overall labor market still remains limited, although AI employment headwinds are visible in specific occupations like marketing, graphic design, customer service, and especially tech (where the share of overall employment has fallen below its long-run trend). Early signs of headwinds are also emerging among younger workers aged 20-30 in industries with higher AI adoption. Since the last update, AI was mentioned in corporate layoffs affecting 44,319 employees (we expect that AI-driven job displacement will eventually affect 6-7% of all workers following full adoption). At the same time, AI-related job openings now account for 28% of all IT job openings and nearly 5% of Indeed.com job postings contain AI-related keywords in the UK, Canada, and Australia.

We wonder which side these contractors are on: team humanity or the robots?

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 18:50

Crypto Takeaways From Davos: Politics And Money Collide

Zero Hedge -

Crypto Takeaways From Davos: Politics And Money Collide

Authored by Yohan Yun via CoinTelegraph.com,

While geopolitical tensions and the Greenland standoff set the tone at Davos 2026, crypto resurfaced as a secondary but consequential theme.

US President Donald Trump used a few minutes of his Davos speech to double down on his ambition to turn the US into the world’s crypto capital and voice support for crypto-friendly legislation.

His tone was different from central banks. In a panel with crypto bigwigs, the governor of the Bank of France criticized private money and yield-bearing stablecoins while promoting central bank digital currencies (CBDC).

Crypto executives debated money sovereignty with France’s central bank governor at Davos 2026. Source: World Economic Forum

Crypto consensus did not emerge in Davos, but a visible point of disagreement did. US political messaging framed crypto as a geopolitical asset, while at least one major European central banker warned that private money threatens financial stability and sovereignty.

Here are the crypto takeaways from Davos 2026.

Trump frames crypto regulation as a geopolitical race

Donald Trump said in his Davos speech on Wednesday that he hopes to sign a crypto market structure bill “very soon.”

Also known as the CLARITY Act, the bill was due for a US Senate markup last week but was delayed after crypto giants like Coinbase pulled support.

Trump treated the US crypto regulation as a matter of geopolitical urgency.

“It is politically popular but much more importantly, we have to make it so that China doesn’t have a hold of it, and once they get that hold, we won’t be able to get it back. So I’m honored to have done it,” Trump said, referring to his signing of the GENIUS Act. He linked the bill to the importance of the pending market structure legislation.

The White House wants the US to be the crypto capital of the world and sees regulation as a competitive weapon. Trump acknowledged that the bill remains in Congress but spoke as if its passing were a matter of timing.

The US president’s special address was introduced by BlackRock’s Larry Fink, the CEO of the world’s largest asset manager. Trump spoke for more than an hour; crypto accounted for only a small section of his speech.

Trump’s soliloquy took up most of his time on stage, even though he was scheduled for a fireside chat with WEF CEO Børge Brende. Source: World Economic Forum

Coinbase CEO and French central banker clash over money sovereignty

One of the most widely shared crypto moments at Davos came when France’s top central banker pushed back against crypto, even as he praised tokenization in a Wednesday panel discussion.

Banque de France Governor François Villeroy de Galhau said tokenization and stablecoins are likely to be “the name of the game” in 2026, stating that they can modernize financial infrastructure. He acknowledged tokenization as a meaningful financial advance, particularly for wholesale markets, and cited Europe’s CBDC efforts as a global frontrunner.

Real-world asset token value is closing in on $23 billion. Source: RWA.xyz

That enthusiasm faded as the discussion turned to monetary sovereignty. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong described Bitcoin as a modern successor to the gold standard and a check on democratic deficit spending.

Villeroy de Galhau clapped back by saying that money is inseparable from sovereignty. Handing monetary control to private systems would amount to surrendering a function of democracy, he said.

Armstrong responded by pointing to Bitcoin’s decentralized structure to claim that it is even more independent than fiat systems and called the tension a “healthy competition,” which got a chuckle from Villeroy de Galhau.

Villeroy de Galhau also drew a line against interest-bearing stablecoins, which he said could destabilize the existing financial system. US crypto executives argued that rewards are necessary to keep stablecoins competitive with China’s CBDC.

Binance leaves door open to US return

Binance co-CEO Richard Teng did not rule out a return to the US. He said the company is taking a “wait-and-see” approach in an interview with CNBC on the sidelines of the Davos forum.

Teng avoided commitments while leaving the door open, but Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse was more explicit in a separate interview with the outlet. Garlinghouse predicted that Binance would eventually return to the “very large” market.

Binance launched Binance.US in 2019 as a separate entity to serve US customers. But according to US regulators, Binance continued to service “VIP” customers through its offshore platform, leading to a 2023 Department of Justice settlement. Founder Changpeng Zhao pleaded guilty to failing to maintain an effective Anti-Money Laundering program, served a jail sentence and was later pardoned by President Trump.

Zhao was also present at Davos and took part in a panel discussion on Thursday, where he claimed that crypto has proven that it is not going away.

Zhao claimed to be in talks with about a dozen governments about tokenizing assets. Source: World Economic Forum

Though they were in separate panels, Zhao aligned with Bank of France’s Villeroy de Galhau on tokenization, calling it the next phase of the industry, along with artificial intelligence and payments.

He said he is in discussions with multiple governments about tokenizing state-owned assets as a way to unlock value and reinvest it into economic development.

Circle’s Allaire calls bank run fears absurd

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire dismissed fears that interest-paying stablecoins could destabilize the banking system in a Thursday panel in Davos.

Allaire called bank run concerns “totally absurd,” arguing that the incentives involved are too small to threaten monetary policy or drain deposits.

He added that interest payments function primarily as customer retention tools rather than systemic disruptors.

Stablecoins have an estimated market capitalization of over $300 billion. Source: DefiLlama

Allaire then cited government money market funds as a historical comparison. Despite repeated warnings over the years, roughly $11 trillion has flowed into money market funds without collapsing bank lending, he said.

Lending, he argued, is already shifting away from banks toward private credit and capital markets, independent of stablecoins.

What Davos revealed about crypto priorities

Public image for stablecoins was badly tarnished in 2022, when the Terra ecosystem suffered a multibillion-dollar collapse. The failure began with TerraUSD (UST), an algorithmic stablecoin backed by the network’s native token, LUNA.

Stablecoins have since flipped the narrative. It’s now an important topic in the annual meeting of the world’s most powerful voices in geopolitics and economy. Even central bankers who are generally critical of the crypto industry acknowledge them as core themes to watch alongside tokenization.

Davos 2026 reinforced stablecoins and tokenization as part of the year’s policy conversation. The US executive branch and Europe’s banking sector remain philosophically divided on approach, and regulatory developments are still constrained by domestic politics.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 18:25

Davos Is Dead: Western Civ Has Suffered Enough...

Zero Hedge -

Davos Is Dead: Western Civ Has Suffered Enough...

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Up In Smoke

“This is how tyranny looks in the modern world. It arrives dressed as dialogue, consensus, and expertise. It is imposed by people who sincerely believe they are doing nothing at all.”

- DataRepublican

Davos — The World Economic Forum (WEF)— is toast. Trump, Bessent, and Lutnick exposed the wretched org of overcompensated squishes to too much light and heat and it flared into such a pathetic little smoldering cinder that its spoxpersons said the meeting might get moved out of Davos altogether next year to Dublin or Detroit. Closer to the people, you understand (except there are hardly any people left in Detroit, thanks to the fifty years of WEF influence on manufacturing policy and the people of Dublin are now Nigerians, Somalis, and Congolese, thanks to the WEF’s retarded migration doctrine).

All of which means that its trademark, WEF Globalism, is dead, too. No more aspirations of One World Government (as if Earth was the Planet Krypton). . . no more You will have nothing, be happy, and eat bugs. . . no more green energy gaslight. . . no more all women are women, including men pretending to be women. . . no more wide-open borders. . . no more of their preposterous elitist armchair totalitarianism. In fact, if anything, the WEF had terminal boundary problems, much like the Cluster-B personalities that infest the upper echelons of the NGO alternative universe that carried out the WEF’s dastardly programming for them. They didn’t know when to stop.

Before he got washed-up in a slop of sexual accusation and embezzlement, WEF-Fuhrer Klaus Schwab used to brag about plugging his Young Global Leaders into top government jobs all over the place (e.g., the disastrous Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland in Canada). That’s over. Western Civ has suffered enough. One by one, the Big Dawgs of the EU are quietly backing-off of their insane migrant importation policies.

Border control is nature’s way of fixing boundary problems of-the-mind.

No one personifies the problem more than Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen, the archetypal Cluster-B “devouring mother” costumed as a harmless finishing school headmistress. She is the unelected (appointed by committee) President of the European Commission who has been telling the elected squish leaders of France, Germany and elsewhere what to do — and, remarkably, they did exactly what they were told! Invite the Third World for an overnight and see what happens. . . ditch your nuclear power plants. . . ruin your farmers. . . laugh and clap when the Nord Stream pipeline blows up and your citizens must freeze in the dark.

“Europe stood firm and united in full solidarity with Greenland & the Kingdom of Denmark,” Ursula tweeted the other day.

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission

That’s rich. (And fake.)

What really happened at Davos this week is uproariously simple.

Mr. Trump just notified the parties involved that an agreement dating from 1951 gives the USA “unrestricted access” to Greenland, for the excellent reason that the US military prevented the Nazis from seizing it during World War Two, with all that implies. Fait accompli. The USA will now do what it requires in Greenland — with all that implies about updated geo-realpolitik of 2026.

The dirty secret about political reality in Europe now is that the masterplan to bankrupt, ruin, and break up Russia has completely backfired.

Europe is now ruined. Voila!

Ironically, it has been the UK (a.k.a. Great Britain) that led the way in this quixotic fiasco — you might recall that they actually voted to quit the EU in 2016. And yet, the UK has managed to engineer NATO’s idiotic program to keep the War in Ukraine going as long as possible. Recall, also, PM Boris Johnson’s 2022 mission to scuttle the Istanbul Communiqué involving Ukrainian neutrality that might have prevented the war from getting out-of-hand.

The payoff for Great Britain: Keir Starmer becomes the actual Big Brother depicted by George Orwell with all the trappings of despotism and economic decline that goes with that. Britain is left destitute, cultureless, and raped at will by its own houseguests. Meanwhile, France is dissolving in an acid bath of Islamic turbo-birthrates, and Germany under the feckless Olaf Scholz and now Friedrich Merz gets a one-way ticket to the Palookaville of neo-medievalism. Good show, boys!

And meanwhile, as I have informed you previously, Mr. Putin is methodically rolling up the unfortunate business in Ukraine as Mr. Zelenskyy’s long-running NATO-subsidized misadventure dwindles to its ignominious close. Yes, you are seeing boundaries reestablished. Mr. Putin is not one of your junior high school mean-girls or a deluded finishing school headmistress. He’s an able, masculine manager of his own sovereign polity and he is reestablishing Russia’s age-old sphere of influence in the ambiguous frontier region of Ukraine. The world will be better off when this is settled.

And Mr. Trump emerges from the Davos miasma with a geopolitical plan to defend Western Civ and to re-prioritize business in the USA so that Americans can once again make a living and lead purposeful lives. The Cluster-B mean-girls hate this. They want the men of America to fail better, as they had been failing until Mr. Trump came back on the scene.

Anyway, it was minus-20 degrees in Minneapolis this morning — not very good weather for blowing your whistle at US immigration agents — so don’t expect a whole lot of excitement out of that place for at least another week.

Do keep an eye on Virginia, where new Governor Abigail Spanberger, meanest of all mean-girls, is fixing to wreck the state.

Prediction: Harmeet Dhillon of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division will shortly be all over that deranged bitch like white on rice. Wait for it.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 16:20

Trump Says US 'Armada' Moving Towards Iran

Zero Hedge -

Trump Says US 'Armada' Moving Towards Iran

Via Middle East Eye

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he is sending an "armada" towards Iran, threatening Tehran against resuming its nuclear program.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One after returning from meetings with world leaders in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said Washington was closely monitoring Iran as US naval assets moved into the region. "We have a lot of ships going that direction, just in case," Trump said. "I'd rather not see anything happen, but we’re watching them very closely."

Source: @CopernicusEU satellite imagery

He added: "We have an armada heading in that direction, and maybe we won’t have to use it."

US officials, speaking anonymously to Reuters, said the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and several guided-missile destroyers were expected to arrive in the Middle East in the coming days.

One official said Washington was also considering deploying additional air defense systems to protect US bases from potential Iranian retaliation in the event of an American strike.

The deployments expand Trump’s military options and follow a US attack on Iranian nuclear facilities in June. The summer strikes were widely seen as a violation of international law.

The warships began moving from the Asia-Pacific last week as tensions rose following a crackdown on protests across Iran. Tehran has accused Washington of encouraging the unrest.

Trump has repeatedly threatened intervention warning Iran against killing protesters, but in the end US strikes were called off. Demonstrations appeared to ease last week.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said “"several thousand" people were killed during weeks of nationwide protests.

Trump claimed on Thursday that Iran had cancelled nearly 840 executions after US warnings. "I said, ‘If you hang those people, you’re going to be hit harder than you’ve ever been hit,’" Trump said. "It’ll make what we did to your nuclear program look like peanuts."

He said the executions were cancelled an hour before they were due to take place, calling it "a good sign".

Iran’s top prosecutor Mohammad Movahedi, however on Friday dismissed Trump's claim suggesting the judiciary had authorised mass executions, calling the allegations baseless.

Speaking in comments carried by the judiciary’s Mizan News Agency, Movahedi said "this claim is completely false; no such number exists, nor has the judiciary made any such decision".

Trump also repeated his warning that the US would strike again if Iran restarted its nuclear program. "If they try to do it again, they have to go to another area. We'll hit them there too, just as easily," he said.

Protests in Iran began on December 28 with demonstrations over economic hardship in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar before spreading nationwide. An Iranian official told Reuters that the confirmed death toll had exceeded 5,000, including 500 members of the security forces.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 15:40

Here Come Humanoid Robots: Industry Makes Clear Pivot Toward "Dedicated-Purpose" Commercial Deployments

Zero Hedge -

Here Come Humanoid Robots: Industry Makes Clear Pivot Toward "Dedicated-Purpose" Commercial Deployments

Goldman analyst Jacqueline Du published her field trip notes after speaking with six C-level management teams at robotics companies across Hangzhou, Shanghai, and Shenzhen in recent days. The companies she met with include Unitree, Mechmind, Fourier, LimX Dynamics, UBTech, EngineAI, Paxini, and Orbbec.

"Overall, we see the humanoid robot industry is experiencing a clear pivot towards 'dedicated-purpose' commercial deployments," Du told clients on Thursday morning.

She continued: "This strategic focus leverages current, achievable task planning, mobility and interaction capabilities, leading to more reliable and immediate deployment in specific vertical applications. Examples include security patrolling, guiding/guest services in public venues, and logistics tasks such as pick-and-place and sorting simple items in factories."

Du said humanoid robot shipments are set to accelerate from estimated 2025 global volumes of around 15,000 to 20,000 units to "multi-fold increases in shipment volumes into 2026-2027E."

Here are more of Du's key takeaways from the AI robotics field trip in China:

Targeting a multi-fold increase in shipment volumes into 2026-2027E

Based on the collective feedback from the major humanoid robot players and key supply chain companies we met on this trip, we believe global humanoid robot shipments in 2025 might have reached around 15,000-20,000 units vs. GSe of 20,000 (report link) and third-party data of 13,000-16,000 (see link and link), with Chinese players contributing to the bulk of these volumes at the moment, which came from scientific study, robotics AI training, education, entertainment/stage performance, and data factory demand last year. At such an early and nascent stage of the humanoid robot market, the exact shipment figures are less critical than the overall growth trajectory and the rapid pace of technological development in our view. For the 2026-2027 outlook, these leading humanoid robot manufacturers anticipate multi-fold increases in shipments. Following the 2025 figures, which range from several hundreds to thousands of units, their targets for 2026 and 2027 are set in the thousands to tens of thousands. This projected acceleration is underpinned by an increasingly mature supply chain, optimized cost curves, and expanding application opportunities. However, achieving these targets is anticipated to be challenged by the imperative for robust production consistency and the implementation of novel, multi-stage testing protocols inherent to this nascent industry.

Encouraging progress in motion control with rapid iterations

We watched the live demos of the published products of these humanoid robot makers, which in our view revealed significant advancements in motion control, exhibiting enhanced robustness and flexibility across both wheeled upper-body platforms and full bipedal systems. This represents a substantial improvement compared to their performance in the preceding year. One manufacturer asserted the achievement of 'cerebellum-level' whole-body control, substantiated by two practical evaluation criteria: the robot's ability to navigate previously unmapped terrains and its capacity for comprehensive remote control of the entire body, rather than segmented upper or lower body control. Furthermore, insights from multiple companies indicate an accelerated product iteration cycle for humanoid platforms, now reaching approximately 6-8 months per generation. This rapid iteration is largely attributed to an 80-90% in-house component design capability, which is crucial for ensuring seamless hardware-software integration and optimizing their respective performance' upper limits' within condensed R&D and testing cycles.

Clear pivot towards "dedicated-purpose" commercial deployments

The current reliance on simulated and synthetic data for pre-training with a significant 'sim-to-real' gap remains a challenge, with simulated accuracies of 80-90% often collapsing to below 50% in real-world scenarios. As both large-scale high quality real-world data collection and world model approach requires time, leading Chinese humanoid robot developers are increasingly prioritizing "dedicated-purpose" commercial deployments. These applications, such as security patrolling and guest services in public venues (e.g., hotels, banks, museums, exhibition centers, auto dealerships, and supermarkets), effectively utilize existing task planning, mobility and interaction capabilities while circumventing the complexities of highly dexterous manipulation. Within industrial applications, the utility of humanoid robots requiring dexterous hands or grippers is presently confined to logistics tasks like box movement and simple item sorting, primarily due to AI limitations in addressing unpredictable corner cases in factory environments.

Advancing robot intelligence through hybrid AI and data strategies

In the near term, humanoid robot manufacturers are increasingly standardizing their approach by integrating with established Large Language Model (LLM) and Vision-Language Model (VLM) stacks, such as those offered by Alibaba (Qwen), Doubao, and Tencent. This strategic alignment positions proprietary data engines as the critical differentiator for developing deployable robotic intelligence. High-quality real-world data is identified as the primary constraint bridging the gap between mature hardware technologies and scalable, practical applications. Consequently, companies are engaged in a 'data recipe' arms race, with differentiation driven by their target end-applications. While all robot OEMs are pursuing data collection strategies, they converge on varying mixes of three primary data inputs: (1) teleoperated human or expert demonstrations, which offer high control but are typically expensive for imitation learning; (2) simulation, which is cost-effective per additional sample but suffers from imperfect realism; and (3) real-world video datasets, which provide the highest data availability but may exhibit poor translation to real-world accuracy. From this trip, increasingly we heard more mentions of the world model approach which may potentially empower robots with a form of common sense about their environment, moving them beyond reactive behaviors to proactive, intelligent agents capable of complex planning and adaptation.

Differentiated profit models for 2C and 2B markets

A range of profit models has emerged, broadly categorized by their target markets: 2C (business-to-consumer) and 2B (business-to-business) applications.

For companies targeting 2C applications, the primary focus is on delivering differentiated functionality and enhanced user experience. This often involves emphasizing "emotional value" and capturing specialized vertical niches where unique features or interactions can command a premium. The goal is to create a product that stands out through its capabilities and the user's engagement with it.

In contrast, companies targeting 2B applications anchor their pricing strategies to the customer's Return on Investment (ROI). This typically involves demonstrating how the robot can improve throughput, enhance efficiency, or reduce labor costs. For instance, UBTech has indicated that in sorting and logistics applications, customers are willing to invest in robots once they achieve approximately 50% of a human worker's throughput. This level of performance can lead to a payback period of around two years, assuming a run-time of about 10 hours per day. Even a three-year payback period is considered acceptable by customers operating in particularly labor-constrained environments, highlighting the value proposition of automation in addressing critical operational challenges.

Investment implications: We recommend being selective; Buy Sanhua H and Sell Moon's Electric

2026 overall may shape up to be a critical "proof-of-volume and expectation-reset" year, as we believe investors likely will continue to value key supply chain stocks on (i) whether milestone volume expectations (e.g., the "one million robots" narrative) get revised up or not, which is likely driven by the evolution pace of AI generalization capability or effective data/model strategies; and (ii) evolving market share and content per robot for individual supply chain companies. Given high market optimisms and long run expectations have been baked into the current share price per our tests (see Sanhua Intelligent Controls (002050.SZ): Downgrade Sanhua A to Neutral on recent outperformance; expectations for humanoid robots are too high, too soon and Moons' Electric (603728.SS): D/G to Sell on continuously evolving dexterous hand technology roadmap and narrowed opportunity for coreless motor), we recommend staying selective. Among our coverage, we are Buy-rated on Sanhua H, Inovance and Shuanghuan, Neutral-rated on Sanhua A, LeaderDrive and Best Precision. We are Sell-rated on Moon's Electric.

Separately, in the U.S., Tesla said it is on track to begin volume production of the Cybercab in 2026, with Optimus humanoid robot output "hopefully" starting toward the end of the year.

Next week, we are expected to conduct our own field trip of AI robotics and counter-AUS companies at undisclosed locations. We'll see how that turns out - watching the rise of Skynet in real-time.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 15:00

Trump Touts "Total And Permanent" Access To Greenland, While Nobody Has Any Clue What's In The Deal

Zero Hedge -

Trump Touts "Total And Permanent" Access To Greenland, While Nobody Has Any Clue What's In The Deal

Trump said on Thursday he had secured "total and permanent" US access to Greenland in a deal with NATO, whose head said allies would have to step up their commitment to Arctic security to ward off threats from Russia and China. 

News of a framework deal came as Trump backed off tariff threats against Europe and ruled out taking Greenland by force, bringing to an end what was brewing to be the biggest rupture in transatlantic ties in decades. Yet despite the optimism, details of any agreement were unclear and Denmark insisted its sovereignty over the island was not up for discussion. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said the bloc's U.S. relations had "taken a big blow" in the past week, as EU leaders met for an emergency summit.

Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed Trump's comments but said he was still in the dark on many aspects.

"I don't know what there is in the agreement, or the deal, about my country," Nielsen told reporters in the capital Nuuk. 

"We are ready to discuss a lot of things and we are ready to negotiate a better partnership and so on. But sovereignty is a red line," he said, when asked about reports that Trump was seeking control of areas around U.S. military bases in Greenland as part of a wider deal.

"We cannot cross the red lines. We have to respect our territorial integrity. We have to respect international law and sovereignty."

Meanwhile, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on his return from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said a new deal was being negotiated that would be "much more generous to the United States, so much more generous." And while he skirted questions on sovereignty, Trump said: "We have to have the ability to do exactly what we want to do."

Earlier Trump told Fox Business Network the deal would essentially bring "total access" for the United States. "There's no end, there's no time limit."

A source familiar with the matter told Reuters that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and Trump had agreed in Davos on further talks between the U.S., Denmark and Greenland on updating a 1951 agreement that governs U.S. military access and presence on the Arctic island. The framework they discussed also calls for prohibiting Chinese and Russian investments in Greenland, the person said.

Another source familiar with the matter said what had been agreed was "a frame on which to build," adding that "anything being reported on specific details is speculative."

Rutte told Reuters in Davos it was now up to NATO's senior commanders to work through the details of extra security requirements.

"I have no doubt we can do this quite fast. Certainly, I would hope for 2026, I hope even early in 2026," he said.

Meanwhile, the country that Greenland (semi-autonomously) belongs to, remains fully in the dark: Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said no negotiations had been held with NATO regarding the sovereignty of Greenland.

"It is still a difficult and serious situation, but progress has also been made in the sense that we have now got things where they need to be. Namely that we can discuss how we promote common security in the Arctic region," she said.

Speaking later ahead of the emergency summit of EU leaders, Frederiksen called for a "permanent presence of NATO in the Arctic region, including around Greenland."

Kallas said "disagreements that allies have between them, like Europe and America, are just benefiting our adversaries who are looking and enjoying the view."

Finnish President Alexander Stubb said he hoped allies could put together a plan to boost Arctic security by a NATO summit in Ankara in July. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told Rutte on Thursday that the UK stood ready to play its full part in ensuring security in the Arctic.

After meeting with Rutte, Trump said there could be a deal that satisfies his desire for a "Golden Dome" missile-defence system and access to critical minerals while blocking what he says are Russia and China's ambitions in the Arctic. 

Adding to the confusion, Rutte said minerals exploitation was not discussed in his meeting with Trump, even though Trump said that it has been.Specific negotiations over the Arctic island would continue between the United States, Denmark and Greenland itself, he said.

The 1951 agreement established the U.S. right to construct military bases in Greenland and move around freely in Greenlandic territory. This is still the case as long as Denmark and Greenland are informed of its actions. Washington has a base at Pituffik in northern Greenland.

"It is important to clarify that the U.S. had 17 bases during the Cold War and much greater activity. So that is already possible now under the current agreement," said Marc Jacobsen, a professor at the Royal Danish Defence College.

"I think there will be concrete discussions about Golden Dome, and I think there will be concrete discussions about Russia and China not being welcome in Greenland."

Separately, China's Foreign Ministry told Reuters on Friday that claims China is a threat are "baseless", when asked to respond to the Arctic comments. At the same time, the ministry said that China opposes other countries using it as "an excuse" to push their own agenda.

China has repeatedly said its scientific expeditions in the Arctic and commercial shipping operations in the region followed international treaties and laws, accusing the West of distorting facts and hyping up its activities as clues to military intent. Last week, the state-backed Global Times newspaper said in an editorial that it " firmly opposed attempts by the United States and Europe to label China with terms such as 'military threat,' 'resource grabber' or 'rule breaker' in Arctic affairs."

Eslewhere, the president of the European Parliament said the European Union will likely resume work on a trade deal with the United States after Trump took back his tariff threats. The parliament decided this week to suspend work on the deal because of Trump's threats. However, diplomats told Reuters EU leaders will rethink U.S. relations as the Greenland episode has badly shaken confidence in the transatlantic ties. Governments remain wary of another change of mind by Trump, who is increasingly seen as a bully whom Europe will have to stand up to, they said.

Residents in the Greenland capital, Nuuk, are also wary.

"It's all very confusing," said pensioner Jesper Muller. "One hour we are, well, almost at war. Next hour everything is fine and beautiful, and I think it's very hard to imagine that you can build anything on it."

Nobody asked Muller if he would rather have gotten $10 million and agree, together with the other 57,000 residents, to cede Greenland to the US.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/23/2026 - 14:20

Pages