The government will reopen soon, and the statistical agencies will post new schedules. It is likely that the October employment and CPI reports will never be released since the data wasn't gathered.

Note: Mortgage rates are from MortgageNewsDaily.com and are for top tier scenarios.

Thursday (red will Not be released);
• At 8:30 AM ET, The initial weekly unemployment claims report will be released.

• At 8:30 AM, The Consumer Price Index for October from the BLS.

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince May Provide Boost To US Nuclear Industry

Authored by Steffan Szumowski via The Nuclear Review

I recently enjoyed a conversation with an American energy industry executive who has lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for a number of years. He provided some unique insight into the US nuclear industry's potential opportunities with Saudi Arabia.

When the future King of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) visits the White House on November 18th, he will bring with him a number of major agreements and business deals. Among these may be the long-awaited US-Saudi Nuclear Energy Cooperation Agreement (referred to as a "123 Agreement", the section of the Atomic Energy Act that governs US technology transfer to international partners). That agreement, under discussion for over a decade, appears to be close to finalization and may lead to significant business for US nuclear companies.This pact would enable the transfer of US nuclear technology, materials, and expertise to Saudi Arabia, facilitating Riyadh's civil nuclear program that aims to build at least two large pressurized water reactors (PWRs) on the Arabian Gulf under a new holding company, the Duwayhin Nuclear Energy Company (DNEC).

DNEC submitted a site license application to the Saudi Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission (NRRC) in May 2022 for its flagship Duwaiheen Nuclear Power Plant on the Gulf coast, targeting an initial capacity of 2.8 GW. Observers note that 2.8 GW matches the output of two of KEPCO's AP-1400 reactors, the same built across the border in UAE, leading many to speculate that the Koreans have been in the lead for supplying the Saudi's nuclear plant technology.

The associated tender for the two Duwaiheen plants, launched in 2022, has faced multiple delays. Initially slated for bids in April 2024, the deadline shifted repeatedly and still remains pending. Analysts have understood it to be the Saudi's intention to delay selection until after a 123 Agreement is signed in order to enable US companies to bid on the project and to ensure that the Saudi program has a nod of approval from the US.

If President Trump and MBS complete a 123 Agreement, it could manifest in a multibillion-dollar windfall for US firms (similar to the recent nuclear investments announced by Japan and South Korea), positioning them as frontrunners for the first two DNEC large scale reactors and in the long term capture a large share of the nascent Saudi nuclear market. This would mark a major departure from the UAE's program where KEPCO was the big winner and US firms like Westinghouse and Holtec have only a fraction of the total market. If Riyadh, as likely desired by the Trump administration, is able to direct contracts preferentially to American partners, eschewing rivals like KEPCO, Russia's Rosatom or China's CNNC, key beneficiaries emerge.

Westinghouse, owned by Brookfield and Cameco, stands to dominate with its AP1000 design. With Trump administration nudging, Westinghouse could supplant KEPCO's apparent lead and flip the script from how the Emirati program developed (where KEPCO led and Westinghouse followed as a tech and services provider). In fact, Korean news agencies reported last month that US officials have pressured the Korean government for KEPCO to take a back-seat in the Saudi program and act in a supporting role for AP1000 deployment at Duwaiheen.

Another likely winner is Bechtel, the privately-held American construction giant that is closely tied to Westinghouse's AP1000 projects. Bechtel is one of the largest American players in the Saudi market, having been there since the 1940s and serving as a trusted construction partner in the Kingdom. Bechtel is the most likely winner of EPC contracts if the Saudis choose to buy American. Some characterize Bechtel's structure and leadership in Saudi Arabia as a "dream team" for the development of American nuclear projects in Saudi Arabia.

Other companies to watch include Holtec, who has done well in UAE and has developed a reputation as a reliable partner in spent fuel management. X-energy stands out among new nuclear companies, as well. Their Chairman, Kam Ghaffarian, is well respected in Saudi Arabia for the success of his space company, Axiom, who launched two Saudi astronauts into orbit in 2023, including the first woman Saudi astronaut. Ghaffarian could turn that goodwill into business for X-energy's Xe-100 SMR design and their TRISO-X fuel project.

Broader implications ripple outward: US exporters gain market share in a region eyeing 20 GW of nuclear by 2030, hedging oil volatility and exporting high-skill jobs. For Saudi, it means technology transfer, local content mandates (jobs and contracts for Saudis and Saudi companies) and further energy independence, reducing 30% of domestic oil burn and making that oil available for exports (and revenue).

Risks of the 123 Agreement not happening persist. Continued back-and-forth over Saudi enrichment and fuel cycle desires have long slowed progress. Some analysts believe those issues have been resolved or deferred. Additional risk could come from Congress that, although not required to approve a 123 Agreement, could take action to review or stall the agreement, derailing follow-on opportunities for US business. But, a November signing would signal thawed ties and increasing interest in how US nuclear companies can gain international market share via Saudi Arabia, the world's energy powerhouse.

With MBS's visit looming, stakeholders should watch closely: a deal struck could impact nuclear-related commodities and US nuclear order books.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 18:25

Leftists Seek To Sabotage Conservative-Run Communities Before They Start

It's an outcome that survival and preparedness experts have been predicting for years:  The engineered decline of US cities into lawlessness supported by progressive political relativism, leading to an exodus of conservatives (and anyone else with a brain) to rural America. 

The formation of separate conservative communities is a natural response to the political divisiveness of far-left controlled urban centers, as well as the disturbing revelations of pandemic lockdown hysteria in blue cities and states.  However, when dealing with any progressive movement it's important to remember that communists and their ideological cousins don't like it when the people they are trying to control walk away and start their own thing. 

This is not allowed.  You're supposed to stick around and act as their punching bag. 

The liberal hostility towards conservative-dominant communities is swift and consistent.  Survival communities are ridiculed as "doomsday prepper" paranoia.  Conservative and libertarian voting enclaves are attacked as "exclusionary" or "dangerous".  And Christian communities are slandered as "White Nationalist" and racist.  It's clear that it is the media machine's job, not just their pleasure, to undermine any attempt any conservative group makes to form tight knit neighborhoods or towns. 

Establishment journalists are usually careful to avoid direct libel.  Instead, they draw loose associations and connections between these communities and racist or authoritarian ideologies ("You know, Hitler was into those kinds of homogeneous communities.  Therefore, you might be Hitler...").

Rolling Stone (yes, they still exist) has perpetrated a similar hatchet job on a company called RidgeRunner which is setting out to finance and build a large Christian conservative "town and country" charter community in Jackson County, TN.  The far-left outlet makes it clear that they think these kinds of projects need to be stopped.

The magazine notes that a handful of business leaders in Jackson County are concerned about the project, describing their criticism as a rebuke to what they see as:

"RidgeRunner's exclusionary ethos, which they believe renders anyone not a white, Protestant man as a second-class citizen - or maybe not even a citizen at all..."

Of course, this is a second hand opinion summarized and interpreted by a magazine with obvious bias.  Rolling Stone admits that RidgeRunner's CEO, Josh Abbotoy, does not identify as Christian Nationalist, though they still try to connect him to the ideology through some of his customers.  But even if the accusations are accurate, why does it matter? 

Why is it wrong for Christians and conservatives to separate into their own communities with their own shared culture and values in a country that was founded on those same values?     

The criticisms hinge on a growing conspiracy theory within the activist left that the Trump Administration is part of a network of "overlapping Christian nationalist groups" trying to take total power in America.  Rolling Stone goes into detail, connecting dots between government figures like Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and House Speaker Mike Johnson to a variety of Christian nationalist associations.  Rolling Stone says:

"What separates RidgeRunner from previous religious or political enclaves is the scale of its ambition. RidgeRunner’s Jackson County developments are a model for what the company and others like it hope to export around the country. And with supporters and friends in and around the Trump administration, as well as among powerful conservative think tanks such as the Claremont Institute, where Abbotoy was a fellow in 2023, and the Heritage Foundation, RidgeRunner may be able to make its goals a reality..."  

And this is what scares them; that the company might set a new precedent for large scale conservative community, and that this idea will spread like wildfire.  What terrifies them is that such communities will be successful, put deep blue cities to shame, and create a national standard.  Leftists prefer you to believe only their way is the right way.

The incorporation of land for use in establishing exclusive communities is not a new idea and is one of the few ways in which any group of people in the US can determine who they associate with and who gets to live next to them.  Keep in mind that liberals have supported such exclusive communities for decades, as long as they are run by non-white, non-conservative and non-Christian organizations. 

For example, you won't hear much screeching from the left about the Muslim "Sharia Law" town called Epic City (name recently changed to The Meadow) in Texas which is intended to include thousands of homes on hundreds of acres.  They don't publish attack pieces against the Madinah Lakes Muslim project in Minnesota which will include 1500 family homes.  

There a numerous ethnic exclusive communities in the US, some of them using the same arguments for their separate existence as RidgeRunner.

These projects have faced extensive opposition from local populations trying to prevent the communities from being built due to ideological incompatibility, but you won't see outlets like Rolling Stone citing these projects and linking them to Islamic authoritarianism and terrorism.  If anything, activist journalists defend these communities and attack anyone who is critical.   

The question is, why the double standard?

If the political left is adept at understanding anything, it's the value of organization.  When examined up close, the woke movement is a paper tiger, a largely astroturfed color revolution funded by NGOs with maybe 25% of Democrats operating a staunch followers.  But despite their lack of true numbers, the woke movement managed to take total control of the Democratic Party and the US government for at least 4 years. 

This is the true power of organization - 100 dedicated people can wield immense influence over their environment when they work closely together towards the same goal rather than remaining scattered and disassociated. 

Progressives understand very well that the moment conservatives and populists organize, the left is done for.  Their movements will lose all relevancy and they will fade into obscurity when people can walk away and join something better.  This helps to explain the otherwise bizarre obsession the media has with casting doubts on every single conservative community effort. 

Their primary tactic is to link conservative communities and Christian nationalism with "white supremacy", but this method is not working as well for them as it used to.  The real crux of their opposition can be found in here: 

“We have free speech, and people can say what they want,” (Says RidgeRunner supporter Mickie Davis). “Until they take away basic rights from someone, they [RidgeRunner] should be able to do whatever they want.” 

But Rolling Stone takes issue with this:

"This live-and-let-live argument is popular among RidgeRunner’s backers. But the concern is if nothing is done now, once these communities are populated, it’ll be too late. In a county where commissioners typically win with 250 to 300 total votes, and town aldermen can win with little more than 100, it doesn’t take a huge influx of new voters to flex real political muscle."    

It's about maintaining power over culture, and through this, maintaining power over government.  Even on a small scale in small towns the political left cannot allow effective conservative separation based on cultural principles. Because the moment one group does it and prevails, the model will spread across the country.   

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 18:00

Trump Admin's Move To Cut CFPB Follows Massive Data Leak Scandal

Via American Greatness,

Progressives are trumpeting a report that consumers’ financial data may be less secure following Trump administration efforts to shrink the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

But in their eagerness to attack Trump, attention is refocusing on a massive scandal that plagued the “consumer watchdog” agency under Joe Biden– one that left over 250,000 people’s data exposed.

Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters—a top MAGA foe— blasted Trump’s efforts to downsize the CFPB, claiming staffing and contractor cuts put Americans’ data at risk.

In a statement, Waters said, “Over the past year, we have witnessed an unprecedented assault on the CFPB by the Trump Administration, which has systematically weakened the agency’s abilities to protect American consumers.”

Waters added that Trump administration efforts to shrink the federal workforce and expenditure of taxpayer money on high-priced government contractors “paved the way for the alarming findings in the report.”

But critics say that in blasting current Bureau chief, MAGA favorite Russ Vought, progressives like Waters are forgetting about the biggest threat to consumer data security in recent years: A massive data leak that occurred under the previous Biden administration, under the leadership of leftist favorite, former CFPB head Rohit Chopra. And by attacking Trump now, they are merely serving to highlight the leak and the huge risks of the agency having such expansive power and authority.

Around Valentine’s Day 2023, a CFPB staffer leaked the financial information of over 250,000 Americans.

While the staffer was fired, it remains unclear to this day what other action was taken to rectify the leak by Biden administration officials, including Chopra.

No prosecution of the staffer in question appears to have occurred.

Chopra, who ran the agency when the leak occurred, was not sanctioned.

Financial institutions overseen by the CFPB indicated at the time that they were asked to notify their customers whose data had been leaked of the event, instead of CFPB doing so.

Some institutions privately criticized the plan as likely to result in their being erroneously blamed for the leak, when in fact it was a CFPB problem.

One financial services industry advocate told American Greatness that over two years later, it is still unclear whether all affected consumers ever were notified that their data had been leaked.

“Reporters covering this were told they had been, but CFPB was very cagey about providing the text of letters or emails that would have been used to notify customers. No one really knows for sure, to this day,” one consultant working on CFPB regulatory issues said.

At the time, now-retired House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry said that the “breach raises concerns with how the CFPB safeguards consumers’ personally identifiable information.”

McHenry pledged that Republicans would ensure that any bad actors were held accountable.

However, lobbyists working on financial regulation say that some Republicans on McHenry’s former committee still feel full answers were never provided by Chopra or the CFPB.

Progressive gloating over the current allegations of inadequate data security at CFPB may prompt Vought and relevant oversight committees to look again at the circumstances surrounding the leak, which remains one of the bigger, but less publicized scandals, of the Biden era.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 17:40

No Regrets: Sharaa Says Trump Didn't Bring Up His Al-Qaeda Past

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa said in an interview with Fox News that President Trump didn't bring up his past as an al-Qaeda fighter and commander during their meeting at the White House on Monday.

"I think this is a matter of the past now," Sharaa said through a translator when asked if Trump raised his al-Qaeda history. "We did not discuss this actively. We talked about the present and the future. We talked about the investment opportunities in the future, so that Syria is no longer looked at as a security threat, but it is now looked at as a geopolitical ally and a place where the United States can have great investments, especially extracting gas."

Via Associated Press

When asked if he had "regrets" that al-Qaeda carried out the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, Sharaa said he wasn’t involved with the group at the time.

"I was only 19 years old, I was a very young person, and didn’t have any decision-making power at that time, and I didn’t have anything to do with it. Al-Qaeda wasn’t present then in my area, so you’re speaking to the wrong person about this subject," he said.

"We mourn for every civilian that got killed, and we know that people suffer from the war, especially civilians who paid a price, a hefty price, for the war," Sharaa added.

The US fought the "war on terror" for more than 20 years -- it's ongoing. It not only cost trillions of dollars and more than a million lives, but radically and permanently eroded core civil liberties for Americans.

Now, someone the DOJ called an Al Qaeda terrorist less than a… https://t.co/efxKy1YqJ3

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 11, 2025

Sharaa first joined al-Qaeda after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 to fight US troops, and was imprisoned by the US military from 2006 to 2011. After that, he traveled to Syria, where he founded the al-Qaeda affiliate in the country, known as the al-Nusra Front.

At the time, he was allied with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the founder of ISIS. Sharaa rebranded in 2016, claiming he cut ties with al-Qaeda, and merged his jihadist group with other factions to form Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which took power in Damascus in December 2024.

Sorry but it’s very funny they’ve not deleted this https://t.co/tqzbTlSECF

— Congolesa Rice (@judeinlondon) November 11, 2025

Now, the US is working to build a military alliance with the HTS-led Syrian government. Syrian Information Minister Hamza al-Mustafa announced that Syria has joined the US-led anti-ISIS coalition, and Reuters reported last week that the US is planning to establish a military base in Damascus.

* * *

Meanwhile, the absurdity of this scene...

US President Donald Trump applied perfume to Syria’s interim leader Ahmed al-Sharaa, known by his nom de guerre al-Julani, and his foreign minister at the White House. pic.twitter.com/g634I8IgNe

— IRNA News Agency (@IrnaEnglish) November 12, 2025

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 17:20

 

 

This week, I speak with Kristin Olson, global head of alternatives for wealth at Goldman Sachs. We discuss the alternate investing space, allocating money long-term and making alternatives more accessible to individual investors.

The self-described GS “lifer” has been there for 26 years. She started as investment banking analyst, but soon after pivoted to wealth management, focusing on alternatives. She led GS’s alt capital markets group for 23 years, overseeing 140 employees supervises about $500 billion in alt investments annually from wealth management clients.

A list of her favorite books is here.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, 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 this weekend with Bankim “Binky” Chadha, Chief US Equity & Global Strategist and Head of Asset Allocation at Deutsche Bank Securities, a role he has held since 2004.

 

 

 

Favorite Books

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Kristin Olson, Global Head of Alternatives for Wealth at Goldman Sachs appeared first on The Big Picture.

In California, Hate Won Again

Authored by Edward Ring via American Greatness,

“Stick it to Trump.”

That is the strategy of the Democratic Party in California, and it’s working.

For 28 years, the Democrats have controlled both houses of the state legislature, and apart from Schwarzenegger’s interlude from 2004 to 2010, there’s been a Democrat governor since 1999.

Nothing seems likely to change; this month, California’s voters approved a redistricting plan that is expected to reduce the number of Republican U.S. Congressmen to four out of 52. Democratic dominance in California’s cities and counties is equally absolute.

And yet they’re not accountable.

Democrats in California have perfected the art of persuasion with an electorate that for over two generations has been indoctrinated in public schools by teachers who themselves have been indoctrinated to hate capitalism, resent wealth, rebuke “whiteness,” and celebrate hedonism. All Democrat candidates have to say is “protect abortion,” “fight racism,” “climate emergency,” or “stop the Nazis,” and voter reaction is Pavlovian. Peak conditioning was achieved in the special election of 2025, when all they had to say was “stick it to Trump,” who they have turned into the biggest boogeyman since Hitler (someone who, just to be clear, really was a boogeyman).

So who are these Democrats?

Who are the elites that have locked down the largest state in America, and who aspire to extend their dominion over the rest of America?

The figurehead, of course, is the suddenly pugilistic Gavin Newsom, a gifted politician and a terrible governor.

His latest schtick is to throw out profanity and threats as if he’s the noirish reincarnation of a 1930s gangster. And in an intriguing twist, this phony act camouflages a genuine thug because the substance of Newsom and the machine he represents are crimes against the people of California, justified and sold with lies.

Newsom is the front man for a coalition of public sector unions, including the communist teachers union, radical environmentalists and their crony corporate backers, grifting “homeless advocates” and the politically connected and taxpayer subsidized developers who back them, a public sector bureaucracy that preys on law abiding people trying to run small businesses while deliberately ignoring an entire underground economy of illegal immigrants, trial attorneys and litigators who feed on private attorney general laws that empower them to exploit countless laws and regulations to extort money from honest people, addict enabling civil liberty extremists and the libertarian dupes who find common cause with them, tribal “nations” who extract billions from gambling addicts and exercise increasing veto power over anything anyone does anywhere in the “stolen” state, drug addicts, drug dealers, and drug cartels who control entire sections of California’s major cities and thousands of square miles of territory in California’s remote northern counties.

That’s who’s running California. That’s the coalition. It survives on synergy, and if not synergy, symbiosis. The political economy of California is not socialist; it’s fascist. Economic fascism whereby the largest corporations, the biggest unions, and powerful government agencies work in lockstep to eliminate competition, consolidate power and control, and maximize profits. Ideological fascism whereby the population is manipulated by continuous presentation of scapegoats and threats—Nazis and Nazism, racists and racism, sexists and sexism, climate deniers and the climate emergency. The list goes on, but you get the idea.

It’s too bad California’s voters don’t get out more. Take a drive down South Figueroa Boulevard in Central Los Angeles and have a look at the prostitutes who police can’t rescue from traffickers because it violates state laws. Drive through the Tenderloin in San Francisco and observe the blitzed-out fentanyl addicts and schizophrenics. Or to really experience an eye-opener, talk with members of law enforcement in Mendocino County in California’s remote north, and ask them how they intend to root out the illegal drug plantations and drug processing labs when they’ve got less than a dozen deputies to cover a county that spans 3,878 square miles. Ditto for Humboldt County and Siskiyou County.

In all of these hypothetical fact-finding drives and countless others, don’t stop. Don’t get out of your car. You are not in America anymore. You are traversing territory controlled by foreign gangs and their local affiliates, funded by hundreds of billions collected from addicts, at least those millions who are still alive, since over one million Americans have died from overdoses of illegal drugs just over the past decade. And while you’re at it, reflect on the fact that these foreign drug cartels receive logistical support from aspiring superpowers bent on destroying America.

California’s maladies ought to be patently obvious to its voters, but instead of recognizing that federal intervention is the only way we might have a hope of rooting international drug and human traffickers and foreign intelligence operatives out of our cities and sparsely populated areas, these voters hear a nonstop barrage of distracting propaganda from the coalition.

It is unrelenting and scientifically tested for effect. It sounds simple, but it works: “President Trump wants to be a dictator, and he’s throwing away the Constitution.” No. He doesn’t, and no, he isn’t. And every year we wait to try to reassert control of our state, the evil infiltration of the “coalition” proceeds deeper into its vacuous, grifting heart.

What ought to be perfectly clear to Californian voters is that we are losing our state. Where do California’s voters think all that money from trafficking, prostitution, gambling, and drug profits goes? Their wealth accumulates, and they hire armies. These armies aren’t just a small gang of goons. These armies have thousands of soldiers, including experienced mercenaries and assassins, sophisticated attorneys and accountants, chemists and engineers, police, and politicians.

Keep it up, California. Keep listening to the dangerous clowns who lead the ruling coalition. Let them destroy the oil industry until there are lines for gasoline and the price goes from $5/gallon to $10/gallon. Let them shut down natural gas and nuclear-fueled power plants at the same time as EVs and AI are rolling out, so there are brownouts and blackouts, and electricity rises from $.30/kWh to $.60/kWh. And while they laugh all the way to the bank as you pay four times the national average price for gasoline and electricity, remember it’s because of the “climate emergency.”

Keep it up, California. Keep pretending that “reparations” in the form of affirmative action, contract preferences, and hiring quotas weren’t enough, as if they did anything but harm the people they were intended to help anyway. Go ahead and accept that now taxpayers have to shell out additional billions of dollars to descendants of African slaves and indigenous “first peoples.” Keep on sitting still, silent, and obedient, while yet another coalition hack precedes a public meeting with a “stolen land acknowledgement.” When liberal, Democrat-appointed, paid-for judges uphold transfers of land and gifts of cash to self-proclaimed tribes that the federal government doesn’t even recognize, remember you allowed the precedent to be set every time one of your nitwit coalition politicians opened a public meeting with a stolen land acknowledgement.

More to the point, as the state races to set aside 30 percent of all land to either belong to “first peoples,” government wilderness reserves, or nature conservancies managed by NGOs, remember that 94 percent of California’s population lives on only five percent of the state’s land area. Remember that developers and investors are routinely denied permits to build homes, reservoirs, and roads or develop practical sources of energy, and remember that all of this is why the average home in California costs over $800,000. Who then, in this enlightened new century, is being herded onto reservations?

California’s thoroughly conditioned voters can keep up their delusions of righteousness until the entire system fails, as all systems that are built on corruption must. They can retain their smug hatred of conservative Republicans until the price of gas immobilizes millions, the state declares insolvency, and the suddenly bereft beneficiaries of free everything pour out of their state-subsidized, crime-ridden, dilapidated, and decaying “affordable housing” and loot everything in sight. Until that day, California’s progressives can indulge their anti-fascist fascist fantasies, believing in the inevitable triumph of their passions with the same fervor that animated the stormtroopers basking in Nuremberg’s Cathedrals of Light. They, too, were so sure of themselves until bombs started falling like rain.

There’s something that Californians who fervently support the state’s disenfranchising, downwardly mobile, ongoing excursion into degeneracy will have to face. Things will not get worse forever. California’s voters have rejected rational recognition of policies running amok to enrich a deceitful coalition of elites. They have instead chosen an all-consuming righteous hatred of MAGA and all the previous iterations of right-wing scapegoats for which MAGA is merely the apotheosis. For a generation, voter denial of common sense in favor of self-righteous hate has sustained an elite coalition that has nothing but contempt for the generations of hard-working Californians who built the state and even now keep it afloat.

Economic reality will dismantle this dysfunctional political consensus. The coalition could fracture explosively, with the most powerful functioning remnants also the most lawless and deadly. This is what California’s voters flirt with, as they vote for financially unsustainable, character-destroying nonsense in the name of compassion and anti-fascism. The depth of irony at work here is historic in scope. If chaos erupts in California, spreading out of the current no-go zones of the inner cities and coming down from remote mountains, armed, desperate, and ruthless, what suspension of civil liberties would then become necessary to restore order and ensure safety?

The alternative is to restore common-sense government today, if it’s not too late. But judging from the results on November 4, common sense and California’s electorate are still worlds apart.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 17:00

CIA Met With Ralph Baric In 2015 To Discuss "Coronavirus Evolution And Possible Human Adaptation": Emails

New documents released Oct. 30 by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) offer a potential smoking gun regarding American complicity in the creation of COVID-19. 

As the Daily Caller's Emily Kopp writes: 

New documents show that intelligence risked implicating ODNI’s own bioengineering advisor — University of North Carolina professor Ralph Baric.

Baric, who engineered novel coronaviruses with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), advised ODNI four times a year on biological threats, according to documents released Oct. 30 by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.

...

The professor’s ties to American intelligence may run even deeper, the documents reveal, as ODNI facilitated a meeting between the CIA and Baric about a project on coronaviruses in September 2015.

The email exchange with the subject line “Request for Your Expertise” shows an unnamed government official with a CIA-affiliated email address pitching a “possible project” to Baric relating to “[c]oronavirus evolution and possible natural human adaptation.”

The new documents add to the growing body of evidence that our own intelligence agencies knew more about the threat posed by manipulating bat COVID in a lab than they told the public.

Sen. Paul is seeking more documents from ODNI regarding potential ties between US intelligence and the Wuhan lab as part of an ongoing investigation, and will hold public hearings in the coming months. 

Of note, current DNI Tulsi Gabbard disbanded the ODNI biological threats office earlier this year following questions by the Caller regarding its suppression of COVID origins intel in August. 

In January of 2020, Baric gave a presentation to the ODNI in which he advised US intelligence that COVID-19 may have emerged from a lab, and that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had sequenced thousands of SARS-like coronaviruses - including strains that could cause an epidemic. 

Baric, who created special 'humanized mice' for the lab to test COVID on lung tissue, noted that WIV works under low biosafety levels. 

He did not tell ODNI that he had applied for a grant in 2018 to conduct research that could lead to the creation of COVID-19, 'jotting in the margins of a draft of the grant application that Americans would “freak out” if they knew about the shoddy standards.'

And in January 2021, when the State Department pushed to declassify certain US intelligence regarding the lab leak, ODNI raised concerns that it would "call out actions that we ourselves are doing."

Former ODNI National Counterproliferation and Biosecurity Center (NCBC) Director Kathryn Brinsfield, a medical doctor, also dismissed a January 2021 presentation by government officials about a plausible lab origin of COVID as “misinformation,” two sources told the DCNF. Her top aide Zach Bernstein, who possesses a master’s degree in security studies but no scientific credentials, also dismissed the presentation, according to three sources. -Daily Caller

The report notes that the precise nature of the CIA's interest in Baric's COVID work remains unknown - as the documents don't elaborate on work that the CIA and Baric may or may not have undertaken. 

Interesting, USAID funded the discovery of novel coronaviruses - and shipped samples to WIV through a 2009-2020 program called PREDICT. Kopp also notes that "USAID sometimes acted as a CIA front before Trump dismantled it earlier this year — but no evidence exists that the CIA directed PREDICT."

An unnamed FBI special agent was in communication with Baric about responding to public requests for his research and emails with the Wuhan lab through the North Carolina Freedom of Information Act, according to a 2024 congressional letter, but details about the contact between the FBI and Baric also remain uncertain.

The CIA was slow to acknowledge that a lab was the pandemic’s most likely source, an assessment that the CIA made public more than five years after the pandemic emerged and well after the FBI and the Department of Energy. -Daily Caller

Meanwhile, outlets like ZeroHedge were demonetized, censored, and treated to MSM hit pieces for suggesting that the virus came from the WIV. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 16:40

The Fed & Derivatives: How Complexity Hides Dishonesty

Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via VonGreyerz.gold,

I often close public interviews with the recommendation that investors facing an increasingly complex, distorted and landmine-rich economic setting need to focus on being informed rather than emotional.

Free Power

In other words, facts, cycles and patterns matter—in everything from the history of debt cycles and the otherwise “boring” patterns of bond marketsto an ignored template of centralizationwhich always follows bankrupt financial systems.

Being informed offers clarity; being emotional creates fear.

And clarity is both powerful and free.

One does not need millions to feel more empowered in a world otherwise usurping your power with each passing day via the invisible tax of misreported inflation—i.e., open theft through the hidden yet deliberate fiat currency debasement sovereigns employ to inflate away their own criminally negligent bar tab at your expense.

The entire premise of our enterprise of preserving wealth through real money—i.e., precious metals—is built upon such informed thinking.

Trust Your Own Judgement

This does not mean, of course, that being informed means blind conformity to other informed viewpoints—ours or anyone else’s.

I, for example, enjoy debating the dollar/DXY with folks like Brent Johnson or Henrik Zeberg precisely because they are informed disagreements.

In the end, however, we all agree on gold’s penultimate role in preserving real wealth against paper wealth. As I’ve said elsewhere: Today, the case for gold is almost too obvious…

We All See the Cracks

Even more importantly, such informed opinion makes for better strategies and conversations within an economic and geopolitical backdrop which most of us (left or right, rich or poor, black or white, BTC or gold-bugging) would agree is becoming increasingly distorted, dangerous and well, just plain corrupted.

Such corruption is the direct and objective result of the deliberate mismanagement, complexity and dishonesty that underpins a global financial system racing toward a fourth turning whose massive yet not entirely known risks and consequences are playing out with each passing headline.

What Complexity? What Dishonesty?

But what do I mean by deliberate complexity and dishonesty?

As we see below, the most obvious signals can be found within the living case studies of: 1) the not-so-federal “Federal Reserve,” and 2) that other equally grotesque monster hiding in plain sight, namely the global derivatives market.

But before we touch upon these two examples, let me also warn that becoming “informed” comes with a price, typically in the form of deep disillusionment, as the informed are typically a minority crowd.

Melting Laws, Melting Ideas

I know as many lawyer jokes as the next guy, but in truth, nothing I’ve studied (from Plato to Dalio) compares to what I learned in the first year of law school.

Lawyers, after all, make it easy to laugh at, well…the law.

But the very structure and mechanics of our society can be found in the beautiful ideals of a 1L (first-year) legal curriculum.

Constitutional law, for example, grants free society an institutional framework. Criminal Law, in theory at least, lauds justice while punishing those who abuse it. To make that system work, you also need the laws of Civil Procedure. No less important to free citizens is a way to govern ideals of domain, i.e., Property Law.

Finally, and of equal importance, we need to believe and know that citizens, from the governed to the governing, from Wall Street to Main Street, will keep their agreements and honor their promises. That’s Contracts Law.

But sadly, and boy do I mean sadly, we see that these bedrock principles of our core structural and societal laws are, like our fiat dollars, melting before our very closed eyes.

How so?

Well, let’s get back to today’s two case studies: The Federal Reserve and the global derivatives markets.

First: The Fed

I’ve written ad nauseum about the Fed (here, here and elsewhere), and won’t repeat all its numerous sins.

Instead, let’s just stick to the simple crazy and see how our government broke its constitutional contract with its citizens yet paid no criminal price for its clever theft/crime.

In 1913, a cabal of private bankers convinced Woodrow Wilson to make legal a Federal Reserve, which now sits on Constitution Avenue, that is objectively neither “federal,” a “reserve” nor even remotely constitutional.

Yet almost no one understands what it does, how it works or what it destroys.

How the Fed Works…

In simple yet objective terms, the Fed is a private bank which includes 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, from Richmond to Boston.

These reserve banks, managed by a board of governors, are private corporations whose shareholders are those TBTF commercial banks, which you readers helped bail out in 2008.

As Fed shareholders, these private banks and their unelected CIO’s (Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs etc.) effectively own the Fed, and they receive a 6% dividend from the Fed every year.

Again, not very “federal”, is it?

But it gets crazier.

How the Fed Steals…

If you can actually find a dollar bill, you’ll see that it says “Federal Reserve Note” across the top of its fading paper.

By “Note,” this just means that a dollar is a promise to pay—i.e., it’s credit. An IOU, a debt instrument. It’s no longer backed by anything real—it’s just a (broken) promise to be a store of value.

In 1913, President Wilson, the leader and fiduciary for all US citizens, granted this private bank the power to create as many of those dollars as it wanted. That’s what the Fed does.

But how does the Fed earn/create those dollars?

Literally out of thin air. Money is created with a mouse click out of a computer at the Eccles Building. Yes. Really.

The Fed then lends these magical dollars to the US Treasury Department (via “open market operations”) to pay for Uncle Sam’s ever-expanding deficits.

We, the taxpayers, then pay interest (i.e., a forced profit) to the Fed for those created/lent dollars.

But here’s the rub and the question which is never taught in schools—from high school civics to Wharton MBA programs: To whom does the Fed owe money?

The answer is: To no one.

The Fed, which has the power to create unlimited dollars which it then lends out for interest payments (i.e., profit) to itself, is not beholden to anyone. It’s a private cabal which profits for free while debasing your greenback.

This literally makes its immaculate 1913 conception the greatest wealth and power transfer in the history of our now legally neutered nation, for in 1913, the US gave a private bank its once constitutionally-mandated power(Article 1, Section 8) to make and control our money.

Or to misquote Dire Straits, the Fed gets its “money for nothing and its power for free.”

Meanwhile, and since 1971, that same dollar has lost 99% of its purchasing power when measured against the very gold our now insulted Constitution once (1787) promised its dollar to protect its citizens.

That’s a legislative crime for which our criminal laws have done nothing to redress…

Second: The Global Derivative Crime

Speaking of criminal acts and broken contracts, understanding the basics of derivative (i.e. futures, forward and swap) “contracts” will make you both angry and scared.

“Derivatives” literally “derive” from an underlying asset and are little more than uber-levered paper contracts, which institutions say they use to hedge risk in theory.

In actual practice, however, they are nothing more than betting instruments of massive leverage which profit banks when liquidity and markets are smooth, yet crush economies when liquidity and markets misfire.

Again, I’ve written about the absurd math, danger and crimes of these deliberately complex instruments here and here for those seeking more color and cringe.

For now, let’s keep the complex simple.

Remember 2008?

Most of us, for example, recall the Lehman Brothers’ headlines of 2008. At that time, Lehman was telling the markets in had a clean, $600B balance sheet of matched assets and liabilities.

What Lehman did not say, however, is that it also had levered bets (i.e., derivative contracts) on mostly sub-prime mortgages with over $35T in actual (what the fancy lads call “notional”) exposure in underlying bets on pooled mortgages (assets) it never owned—but just levered/gambled on.

But hey, why worry, mortgages never default? Right?

As soon as the bet on the underlying asset went sideways, Lehman was a corpse carried off the Wall Street battlefield.

Sad?

No, tragic.

Why?

Because all the other Wall Street banks and funds were guilty counterparties to the Lehman trade, which means once one domino fell, the others—from AIG to Citi fell too.

The contagion then went global, and when the dust settled, over $25T in bailout funds (from TARP, the Fed and other global central banks) was needed to prevent a global collapse of over $60T in global (and highly complex) notional derivative exposures.

Whewwww.

No Lessons Learned…

The market must have learned a hard lesson in 2008, right?

After all, the Dodd-Frank regulations kicked in to safeguard better transparency and centralized clearing to prevent such levered timebombs from ever risking the financial system again, right?

Wrong.

Fast-forward to 2025, and the notional value of the global derivatives market has skyrocketed from $60T in 2008 to over $600T today.

Read that last line again.

That $600T exposure is 6X global GDP, and if just 5% of this levered market went sideways, the bar tab would be $30T, which is more than the 2008 crisis and far more than any bailout of central banks could afford today.

The Banking Risk No One Sees

What’s even crazier is that the very banks exposed in 2008 to that derivative madness have increased their derivative bets exponentially (by 10X), and in a concentrated manner that defies belief and screams of risk, which almost no one hears or sees.

Today, only four banks (JP Morgan, Citi, BofA & Goldman) hold 90% of the global derivative exposure. JP Morgan has a $54T notional derivative exposure against only $3.7 in total assets and an equity capital of $300B.

Citi is staring at $48T in notional derivative exposure against $2.4T in total assets and $200B in equity capital. Goldman, in turn, has $47T in notional exposure against $1.6 T in total assets and $120B in equity capital, while BofA is risking $37T of derivative bets against $3.1T in total assets and $280B in equity capital.

Folks, this is madness hiding in plain sight.

Risk Has Never Been Higher

The banks, and the economically clueless in the House of Representatives, however, believe that such “sophisticated players” know how to hedge risk with these instruments.

This is what Larry Summers told Congress years before those same players and deregulated derivatives brought the world to its knees in 2008.

What is not said today is that those very same concentrated banks are all “hedged” (i.e., gambling) on the same trades, signals and “good times.”

This means if markets–from Interest rate volatility, the $600B CMBS trade, tanking European banking shares or sovereign credit defaults to geopolitical black swans–ever go from liquid and smooth to illiquid and bumpy, the risk (inevitability) of another derivative-domino nightmare is exponentially higher today than it ever was in 2008.

By the way, each of those foregoing risks/triggers for a derivative implosion are now making ignored but terrifying moves, from post-2022 rate volatility signals and defaulting commercial loans, to Credit-Suisse-like rumblings at Deutsche Bank and sovereign credit risks from Japan and China to even the USA…

Make Your Own Justice

But where’s the justice? Where’s the criminal laws and civil procedures to punish these well-dressed gamblers masquerading as bankers?

Where’s the constitutional guidance to protect the governed from the mafia-like centralization (and usurpation) of our once free markets and free society by a neo-feudalistic minority/monopoly of corporate centralization over our once idealistic and hopeful nation?

Stated more simply: Where are the laws and ideals I knew as a 1L in law school, all lawyer jokes aside?

Gold, of course, can’t protect me or the rest of us from such dishonesty hiding behind intentional complexity. It can’t alas, do everything.

But at least when it comes to protecting us against paper money, which our governments no longer or even constitutionally respect, at least we can do what our now-ignored Constitution originally recommended by backing our fiat toilet paper with real gold.

In short, we can and must consider becoming our own central bankers, and do for ourselves what the Fed has failed to do for the nation—namely, gold-back our own wealth as Article 1, Section 8 warned centuries ago…

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 16:20

When To Expect The Key Economic Reports After The Govt Reopens

When previewing the week's events on Monday, we said that while September's jobs report will likely be published within days of the reopening (tentatively scheduled for this evening's House vote), question marks swirl around the October jobs and CPI prints, and may instead not be published at all and instead will be rolled into the the November reports due in about three weeks time.

Today, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed as much saying that the October jobs and consumer price index reports are unlikely to be released due to the government shutdown.

“The Democrats may have permanently damaged the federal statistical system with October CPI and jobs reports likely never being released,” Leavitt told reporters at a news briefing. She also expressed concern that the lack of data is “leaving our policymakers at the Fed flying blind at a critical period.” Federal Reserve officials next meet Dec. 9-10 to decide whether to lower interest rates for a third time this year.

Leavitt didn’t clarify whether she was referring to the entire jobs report or just part of it. The report is composed of two surveys, the Establishment survey of businesses, which produces the main payrolls number, and another of Households, which is responsible for the unemployment rate and a more granular take on the labor market. While many businesses retain their records and report the data themselves electronically, reaching workers over the phone and asking them to recall their employment status for a particular week in October will be more difficult to conduct retroactively.

The White House initially said late last month there would not be an October inflation report, noting it’d be the first time in history the figures would be skipped. At the time, the BLS said it would resume normal operations once funding is restored and would notify the public of any changes to its release schedule.

So far, the BLS has not released an updated schedule for which indicators will be released and when. According to Bloomberg, it’s possible the agency will choose to combine two months’ worth of data for a particular statistic into a singular release to get back on track. 

In the meantime, investors have been relying on alternative economic measures for both the labor market, which as we noted earlier this week signal that as many as 50,000 jobs may have been lost in October (per Goldman estimates) along with a surge in mass layoff notices, and for inflation where a similar analysis shows that CPI will likely print very soft largely as a result of the biggest plunge in rents in 15 years.

In any case, with the government set to reopen (before it partially closes again in January) here is JPMorgan's best estimate of when we can expect various reports over the coming weeks.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 15:40

Bessent: Major U.S. Moves Coming To Cut Coffee And Food Prices

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Americans can expect “substantial announcements” in the coming days aimed at cutting prices on imported products such as coffee, bananas, and other goods not produced in the United States. Speaking on Fox and Friends, he explained that these steps would bring prices down “very quickly” and predicted that “people would start feeling better about the economy in the first half of 2026.”

The comments followed a steep drop in U.S. coffee prices as markets reacted to reports that the government plans to reduce certain import tariffs, according to Reuters.

President Donald Trump recently told Fox News that the administration would lower tariffs on coffee imports, a position he first mentioned during his October trip to Asia. His remarks come as the White House faces voter frustration over the cost of living, which Democrats made a central theme in their recent election victories across New Jersey, New York, and Virginia. Economists have linked continuing inflation in part to the high import tariffs imposed by Trump earlier in his term.

Reuters reports that following those political setbacks, Trump has discussed giving households rebate checks funded by tariffs and has floated the idea of a 50-year mortgage. Bessent said the $2,000 rebate plan, targeted at individuals earning less than $100,000 annually, is “in discussion” but not yet approved. He did not address the long-term mortgage proposal, which has drawn criticism from some conservative lawmakers and business leaders.

When asked about potential tariff cuts for coffee suppliers such as Brazil and Vietnam, Bessent replied, “you’re going to see some specific announcements in coming days in terms of things we don’t grow here in the United States, coffee, coffee being one of them, bananas, other fruits, things like that.” The United States grows limited quantities of bananas in Hawaii and Florida, but most are imported due to cheaper labor and land abroad.

Bessent also pointed to other Trump administration policies expected to support household income, including lower taxes on overtime pay and tips, and efforts to attract foreign investment in domestic manufacturing. “Real wages are going to increase,” he said. “I would expect in the first quarter, second quarter of next year… Americans are going to start feeling better.”

He added that many families will receive larger tax refunds in 2026 thanks to new deductions for car loans and the elimination of taxes on some Social Security benefits. Parents of children born between the end of 2024 and the start of 2029 could receive a $1,000 initial deposit if they open a Trump account for their newborns.

Watch Bessent's full appearance here: 

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 15:20

As ordered reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary on September 10, 2025

Trump To Strengthen Wall Street Ties With Private Dinner At White House Tonight

President Trump will host a private dinner Wednesday with top Wall Street executives as he looks to strengthen ties with the business community and encourage new investment in U.S. manufacturing, according to CBS News.

Invited guests include JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, Nasdaq’s Adena Friedman, Blackstone’s Stephen Schwarzman, Morgan Stanley’s Ted Pick, BlackRock’s Larry Fink, and Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon. The dinner follows a similar White House gathering in September with major tech CEOs, part of a broader effort to align corporate leaders behind Trump’s economic agenda.

CBS writes that Trump has pointed to the stock market as evidence of his success, recently telling 60 Minutes, “We’re doing really well, and everybody knows it.” JPMorgan recently pledged $1.5 trillion over the next decade to support “industries critical to national economic security and resiliency.”

His relationship with Dimon has long fluctuated. After calling him a “Highly overrated Globalist” in 2023, Trump later said he had “a lot of respect for Jamie Dimon.” Dimon has criticized Trump’s tariffs as potentially harmful but later said they had been “greatly moderated.”

Trump’s policies have occasionally unsettled business leaders, from steep tariffs and immigration fee hikes to pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut rates. Still, many on Wall Street see renewed alignment between the administration’s pro-growth stance and their own priorities. As Dimon told 60 Minutes, “People were angry at whatever they called the state – the ‘swamp.’ Ineffective government. That people wanted kind of more pro-growth and pro-business policies, that they didn't want to be lectured to on social policies continuously.”

President Trump’s relationship with Wall Street this term has been pragmatic and opportunistic. He’s brought top executives into the White House to discuss policy and announce new investments, presenting himself as a pro-business president focused on growth through deregulation, tax breaks, and manufacturing. The outreach has strengthened his ties to the financial sector and underscored his reliance on corporate support to drive economic momentum.

Still, the partnership has its tensions. Bankers and investors back Trump’s pro-growth agenda but remain uneasy about his tariffs, trade volatility, and pressure on the Federal Reserve. Market drops after tariff announcements and disagreements over monetary policy have shown how quickly Wall Street’s confidence can waver.

Even so, many in finance see Trump as a valuable ally. His administration has created a favorable environment for business and markets, and figures like Jamie Dimon and Larry Fink remain key voices in shaping his economic plans.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 14:40

As reported by the House Committee on Financial Services on May 6, 2025

As reported by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on November 7, 2025

US Sanctions Push Indian Refiners Away From Russian Crude

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

All but two Indian refiners have skipped placing orders for Russian crude for December after the U.S. sanctioned Russia’s top oil producers, Rosneft and Lukoil, sources with knowledge of the purchases told Bloomberg on Tuesday. 

India’s refiners, which have come to rely on cheap Russian crude in the past three years, have withdrawn from the December purchasing window which typically closes by November 10.   

Five large refiners, including state-owned Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL), Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL), and Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited (MRPL), and private firms Reliance Industries Ltd and HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd, have not requested any Russian crude for December. 

Combined, these five firms have imported two-thirds of all Russian crude oil into India year to date, according to Kpler data cited by Bloomberg. 

Only India’s biggest state-held refiner, Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), and Nayara Energy, in which Rosneft holds 49%, have purchased crude from Russia for December, per Bloomberg’s sources. 

At the end of October, following the U.S. sanctions on Russia, IOC acquired five December-arriving cargoes of Russian crude from non-sanctioned sellers. 

IOC has bought about 3.5 million barrels of Russia’s ESPO crude at about the same price as the Dubai quotes for delivery at an eastern Indian port in December, a trade sources told Reuters, without naming the sellers of the Russian oil. 

IOC has vowed that it would fully comply with international sanctions related to crude oil imports from Russia.  

IOC is also looking to buy 24 million barrels of crude oil from the Americas in the first quarter of next year to replace lost Russian supply. 

Indian refiners are pivoting away from Russian crude and are buying additional barrels from the Middle East and the Americas to offset what is expected to be a steep decline in Russian loadings in December and January. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 14:20

Mathieu Dion of Bloomberg News reports Quebec premier pushes Caisse to invest at home:

Quebec Premier Francois Legault said he wants the province’s pension fund to invest more locally, including making bets in the manufacturing sector, as Canada adjusts to a new reality of U.S. trade barriers.

The Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec, Canada’s second-largest pension manager, is planning to have $100 billion of its funds invested in the French-speaking province by next year — about 20 per cent of its current net assets and a similar proportion to the previous year. But it’s not enough for Legault, who has been running the province since 2018.

A new “ambition target” will be set for 2030, according to a document entitled “Quebec Power: Answer to a New World Context” that describes his economic vision.

“The Caisse de depot is doing more than it did seven years ago, but they need to do even more,” Legault said during a presentation Monday, adding that the government is discussing the issue with the institution’s management.

In an interview with Montreal-based news outlet La Presse, he went further, saying La Caisse must take “calculated risks” in sectors such as manufacturing and critical minerals.

La Caisse, which had $496 billion under management as of June, has a dual mandate to produce returns and contribute to Quebec’s economic development, but the law establishing it states that it must act independently.

“We clearly have a competitive edge here — we know the market, we know our companies and we can deploy capital across the full spectrum of financing solutions,” a spokesperson for La Caisse said in an emailed statement.

“That said, investing the hard-earned money of Quebecers means we must keep responsibility front of mind. We need businesses to launch projects that benefit the economy and at the same time help protect and grow Quebecers’ retirement savings.”

Legault’s nationalist party, the Coalition Avenir Quebec, has collapsed in public opinion polls about a year before a likely provincial election. The premier is now attempting a series of policy moves to try to boost the party’s popularity, including a controversial battle to make doctors more productive and now a broad vision for economic growth. 

What a lovely topic to discuss on hump day.

What are my thoughts on Legault's idea to push La Caisse to invest more in our province to bolster "Quebec Power"?

To be blunt, just like his party's new health care initiative headed by current health minister and former La Caisse senior executive Christian Dubé, c'est de la bullshit tabernac!  (it's bullshit goddamn it!).  

Why in God's name is Quebec's government forcing La Caisse which already invests more than any other large Canadian and global pension fund right in its own backyard to invest more in Quebec?

Because we are going to counter Donald J. Trump's stupid tariffs and win? Are you kidding me? 

This is precisely the reason why I hate when politicians interfere with pension funds, they have no clue whatsoever and they typically make a bad situation much worse with their asinine policies.

Let the experts at La Caisse decide how much to invest in Quebec and how much to invest globally. 

No doubt, their Quebec portfolio headed by Kim Thomassin has done well over the last 5 years but if we head into a global recession, watch out, that portfolio is going to get dinged hard! 

I 100% guarantee a bad outcome if La Caisse invests more in Quebec than it has already pledged.

I have no problem with La Caisse's dual mandate but let's not lie to Quebec's population contributing their hard earned money to this organization, there's an opportunity cost investing more in Quebec.

More investments in Quebec means less investments globally at a time when great opportunities will arise at the global level. 

In other words, if there are better opportunities in the US, Europe and Asia, why invest more in Quebec? To make Quebec's billionaires a lot wealthier? (most of whom got huge help from La Caisse)

Yes, we ave good businesses in Quebec, I don't have a problem investing in companies we know and understand, but give me a break with this "Quebec Power" nonsense, we are nothing compared to the global economy and the sooner we realize this, the better off we will be over the long run.

In short, when it comes to investing in Quebec or co-investing alongside strategic partners like KKR, Blackstone and many others in incredible global deals, hands down I would choose the latter.

And La Caisse does both well, so let them do their job and stop interfering with their investment policy, you are going to bungle it up just like "la loi 2" is going to bungle up Quebec's healthcare.

The optics of this is terrible, makes La Caisse look like an extension of the Quebec government.

La Caisse is not Investissements Quebec or Hydro Quebec, it has to have independent governance or else you will weaken the organization and make it the laughingstock on the Maple 8 funds. 

But Legault and Dubé don't get it, they will learn the hard way when voters kick them out of office.

My message to politicians is simple: "stay in your lane and let experts decide where to invest hard earned pension contributions."

Lastly, to our dear health minister, you might have had a great reputation at La Caisse but you sir will go down in history as the worst health minister Quebec has ever known. Point final. (watch, I predict Legault will eventually throw Dubé under the bus)

Dems Dump New 'Epstein Files' With Trump - Redact Witness Who Already Exonerated Him

New Epstein files have dropped - this time from House Democrats, and Trump is mentioned. But while they're taking victory laps on X, it didn't take long for sleuths to uncover that the dems redacted the name of a witness who already exonerated Trump in testimony, and revealed a weird relationship between Epstein and a 'famous' journalist. 

In an email exchange between Epstein and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein notes that an alleged victim had "spent hours at my house" with Trump.

"I want you to realize that that dog that hasn't barked is trump," Epstein wrote in an April 2011 message to Maxwell.

"[Victim] spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned," he continues.

"I have been thinking about that ..." Maxwell replied. 

In another email between Epstein and journalist Michael Wolff from 2019, Epstein writes that [Victim] mara lago ... [redacted] ... trump said he asked me to resign, never a member  ever. .  of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.'

This of course supports Trump's assertion that he was pissed that Epstein was recruiting at Mar-a-Lago and asked him (Ghislaine) to stop. 

And in a 2015 reply to Epstein, months after Trump declared his candidacy for president, Wolff says: "I think you should let him hang himself."

"If he says he hasn't been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency," Wolff continues. "You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win [the election], you could save him, generating a debt." 

Which of course begs the question as to why anti-Trump journalist Michael Wolff (who wrote 'Fire and Fury') was advising Epstein on political strategy re: Trump in the first place. 

BUT WAIT?

As attorney and researcher 'Technofog' points out, the emails reference Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre - who explicitly denied Trump did anything wrong. 

Via The Reactionary (go subscribe if you haven't already): 

Of course, context is necessary. Epstein’s email contains serious allegations - allegations that were denied by Virginia Giuffre, the redacted “Victim” named in the email.

Giuffre was deposed in November 2016 as part of her lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell. You can read excerpts from her deposition here (starts on page 12).

Giuffre was asked specific questions about Donald Trump - his familiarity with Epstein, whether Trump committed any wrongdoing, etc. And Giuffre cleared Trump. Here are the relevant excerpts from a discussion about Giuffre’s previous interview with a reporter:

Q. All right. What’s inaccurate about the last statement on that page?

Giuffre: “Donald Trump was also a good friend of Jeffrey’s.” That part is true.” “He didn’t partake in any” of — “any sex with any of us but he flirted with me.” It’s true that he didn’t partake in any sex with us, and but it’s not true that he flirted with me. Donald Trump never flirted with me.

Giuffre: Then the next sentence is, “He’d laugh and tell Jeffrey, ‘you’ve got the life.’” I never said that to her.

Q. When you say, “he didn’t partake in any sex with any of us,” who is “us”?

Giuffre: Girls. Just —

Q. How do you know who Donald Trump — Trump had sex with?

Giuffre: Oh, I didn’t physically see him have sex with any of the girls, so I can’t say who he had sex with in his whole life or not, but I just know it wasn’t with me when I was with other girls.

Q. And who were the other girls that you were with in Donald Trump’s presence?

Giuffre: None. There — I worked for Donald Trump, and I’ve met him probably a few times.

Q. When have you met him?

Giuffre: At Mar-a-Lago. My dad and him, I wouldn’t say they were friends, but my dad knew him and they would talk all the time — well, not all the time but when they saw each other.

Q. Have you ever been in Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein’s presence with one another?

Giuffre: No.

Q. What is your basis for your statement that Donald Trump is a good friend of Jeffrey’s?

Giuffre: Jeffrey told me that Donald Trump is a good friend of his.

Q. But you never observed them together?

Giuffre: No, that that I can actually remember. I mean, not off the top of my head, no.

Q. When did Donald Trump flirt with you?

Giuffre: He didn’t. That’s what’s inaccurate.

Q. Did you ever see Donald Trump at Jeffrey’s home?

Giuffre: Not that I can remember.

There you have it. Trump never flirted with or had relations with Virginia Giuffre. She never saw Trump in Epstein’s presence or at his residence. She never saw Trump or met with Trump outside of Mar-a-Lago - certainly not at Epstein’s home.

But the fabrications don’t stop there. From another email released today, in 2019, Epstein would spin a different story about Trump: that Epstein was never asked to resign because he was not a member, that “of course he [Trump] knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.”

But that’s false - Epstein was a member. And as we know from Trump’s own statements and from reporting from anti-Trump authors of “The Grifter’s Club: Trump, Mar-a-Lago, and the Selling of the Presidency”, Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after Epstein was hitting on the teenage daughter of a club member.

And as to asking Ghislaine “to stop”? It is public knowledge that Epstein/Maxwell were recruiting spa workers from Mar-a-Lago - Trump last discussed that issue this past summer. That was part of the dispute between Trump and Esptein. There is no allegation that Trump or anyone else at Mar-a-Lago knew of Epstein’s true motives.

Finally, there are these emails between Epstein and Wolff, where Wolff tips Epstein off to CNN’s planned questions to Trump about Epstein. When asked by Epstein what Trump’s answer should be, Wolff suggests: “I think you should let him hang himself.” Wolff further explains how Trump could potentially blackmail Trump, depending on Trump’s answers.

It should be noted that Wolff does not mention scandalous ties between Epstein and Trump that could be used as leverage. Instead, Wolff references Trump and Epstein’s connection (by way of a home or plane) that predated the disclose of Epstein’s crimes. It was a plan of guilt by association, not guilt from any of Trump’s conduct.

Add to that the fact that Wolff is assisting Epstein with public relations advice against Trump. A real upstanding member of the media.

Here’s a different slant: this is not a Trump scandal but a Democrat scandal.

Virginia Giuffre was a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. She cleared Trump of all wrongdoing under penalty of perjury. And in April 2025 she committed suicide. Giuffre is no longer here to defend her statements - but Democrats, through Epstein, are saying she lied under oath.

*  *  *

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 13:25

Mediocre, Tailing 10Y Auction Sees Subdued Foreign Demand

With the bond market closed on Tuesday for Veterans Day, the week's staggered Treasury auction schedule caught up with where it should be at 1pm ET today when the Treasury sold $42BN in 10Y notes as part of the quarterly refunding exercise, in what was a mediocre auction.

The auction priced at a high yield of 4.074% down from 4.117% last month, and the second lowest since last October; it also tailed the When Issued 4.068% by 0.6bps, the second straight tail (followed a 0.3bps tail in October).

The bid to cover also disappointed, dropping from 2.478 to 2.433, which was the second lowest since August 2024. 

The internals were mediocre at best, with Indirects taking down 67.0%, up from 66.8% but well below the 70.2% recent average. And with Directs awarded 22.55%, Dealers were left holding 10.5%, the most since August.

While the tailing 10Y auction was on the weak side, and the market reacted with pushing yields out modestly across the curve, they were already at session lows so there was certainly space for the move in a day that has another midday swoon across the tech space, with bitcoin plunged all morning (again).

 

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 13:21

Trump Says He Has Obligation To Sue BBC For 'Defrauding The Public' With Jan. 6 Speech Edits

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump said Nov. 10 that he has an obligation to pursue legal action against the BBC over edits made to his speech on Jan. 6, 2021, that was shown in the UK broadcaster’s documentary.

In a Fox News interview that aired on Nov. 10, Trump said he may sue the BBC for editing his speech in a way that “defrauded the public” and made him “sound radical.”

“They defrauded the public, and they’ve admitted it,” the president said. “This is within one of our great allies, you know, this is supposedly our great ally.”

The BBC’s “Panorama” documentary spliced together quotations from different parts of Trump’s Jan. 6, 2021, speech, making it seem as though he delivered a continuous statement encouraging supporters to march with him to the U.S. Capitol and “fight like hell.” The documentary was aired one week before the 2024 presidential election.

“That’s a pretty sad event. They actually changed my January 6 speech, which was a beautiful speech, which was a very calming speech, and they made it sound radical,” Trump said in the interview.

“They showed me the results later on, the results of what they did, how they butchered it up, but it was very dishonest, and the head man quit and a lot of other people quit.”

When asked whether he would file a defamation lawsuit against the British broadcaster, Trump replied, “Well, I think I have an obligation to do it, because you can’t allow people to do that.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the BBC for comment.

A letter from Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito has demanded that the BBC immediately retract “the false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements,” apologize, and “appropriately compensate President Trump for the harm caused,” or face legal action for $1 billion in damages.

President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

“If the BBC does not comply with the above by November 14, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. EST, President Trump will be left with no alternative but to enforce his legal and equitable rights, all of which are expressly reserved and are not waived, including by filing legal action for no less than $1,000,000,000 (One Billion Dollars) in damages,” the letter, obtained by The Epoch Times, states.

A BBC spokesperson told The Epoch Times by email on Nov. 11 that it will review the letter and “respond directly in due course.”

The broadcaster issued an apology after the resignations of its director-general, Tim Davie, and its CEO of news, Deborah Turness, on Nov. 9.

(Left) BBC News CEO Deborah Turness at an event in London on Oct. 13, 2022. (Right) BBC Director-General Tim Davie at the BBC World Service in London on April 28, 2022. Leon Neal/Getty Images, Hannah McKay/AFP via Getty Images

Established by a Royal Charter, the BBC is a public service broadcaster principally funded through an annual license fee paid by UK households, according to its website.

The news corporation was accused of selectively editing the speech Trump made on the day of the 2021 U.S. Capitol breach in its broadcast on Oct. 28, 2024, titled “Trump: A Second Chance?”

The “Panorama” episode spliced together clips from the speech, creating the impression that Trump said, “We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you / and we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not gonna have a country anymore.”

In the original remark, the first part of the spliced footage, when he said, “We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you,” came 15 minutes into the speech, and the “We fight like hell” line came a full 54 minutes later.

Supporters of President Donald Trump protest at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File

The program also made it appear that members of the group known as the Proud Boys were spurred to march on the Capitol by the president’s words.

BBC Chairman Samir Shah sent a letter to the UK’s Culture, Media, and Sport Committee on Nov. 10 apologizing for an “error of judgement” regarding the editing of the speech.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 13:05