Individual Economists

The Fatal Limits Of The Technocrat Class

Zero Hedge -

The Fatal Limits Of The Technocrat Class

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Goliath dies not because collapse occurs, but because scale mistakes itself for life. What survives was never his.

This guest essay by longtime correspondent 0bserver speaks to a dynamic woven into all of my work: the intrinsic impossibility of fixing what technocratic management broke with more technocratic management. Attempts to do so result in doing more of what's failed, with fatal consequences for the systems being "fixed," as the technocratic elite holds the power to impose policies but is immune to the consequences of the failure of those policies. Those fall on the system, which then veers into incoherence and Model Collapse.

I've been reading Luke Kemp's Goliath's Curse: The History and Future of Societal Collapse with care, because the book is serious, well-researched, and written from within institutions that spend their days thinking about systemic fragility. Kemp is not unserious, nor is he shallow. His diagnosis of elite failure, complexity, inequality, and institutional overreach aligns with much of what many of us have been warning about for years.

Where I think the book ultimately fails, however, is not in what it sees--but in what it cannot see from the altitude at which it operates.

Kemp's collapse framework is managerial. Collapse is treated as a system-level pathology to be prevented through coordination, governance, and institutional reform. This makes sense given his professional formation and affiliations, but it creates a blind spot that becomes more consequential the longer one reads: continuity is assumed, not explained.

The book speaks fluently about sustainability, inequality, elite capture, and long-term risk. Yet it does not seriously engage with inheritance--not inheritance as wealth alone, but inheritance as transmission: skills, trades, family structure, norms, fertility, competence, and responsibility carried forward across generations. Sustainability is framed as system stability rather than generational renewal.

This omission matters, because collapse is not the absence of order. It is the failure of particular scales of organization. When large institutions fail, life does not disappear--it reorganizes. The question is not whether systems can be stabilized indefinitely, but whether anything capable of inheritance remains when stabilization fails.

Luke Kemp is excellent at identifying fragility in centralized systems. He is far less interested in, or perhaps less equipped to examine, the base-rate reality that most societies muddle through breakdowns via informal order, households, and local competence. This is where pessimism overweights evidence. Failure is dramatic and legible; endurance is quiet and distributed.

Where this becomes decisive is in Kemp's proposed solutions.

When collapse looms, the remedies offered are more coordination, better governance, stronger institutions, improved global frameworks, and smarter management of risk. Complexity is to be handled by expertise; inequality by policy; instability by coordination. The scale that failed is asked to save itself.

This is the core problem.

The solutions operate at the same level as the failure.

Centralization is offered as the cure for overextension.

Governance is offered as the cure for institutional fragility.

Coordination is offered as the cure for complexity.

The very mechanisms meant to prevent collapse amplify its consequences when they fail.

Recent history supplies proof--not theory.

The financial collapse of 2008 rescued banks while households absorbed the loss. Large institutions were recapitalized immediately; families lost homes, savings, and years of accumulated effort. Recovery was declared long before household continuity returned.

The pandemic reinforced the same pattern. Large corporations were deemed essential, while small and local businesses were declared nonessential and shuttered. Compliance favored scale; capital consolidated upward; independent capacity quietly disappeared.

A third proof is now unfolding without crisis declarations. Large banks continue to grow while private equity consolidates trades and local services--plumbing, HVAC, electrical, veterinary clinics, small manufacturing. Businesses are bought, debt-loaded, stripped, and optimized for extraction. Ownership disappears, stewardship evaporates, and nothing is left to inherit when failure arrives.

These outcomes are not policy accidents.

They are the predictable result of scale-first solutions.

Systems are stabilized.

Households are tested.

Continuity bears the cost.

What troubles me most is that Goliath's Curse critiques elites and inequality while failing to recognize how insulated analysis itself has become. Collapse expertise that cannot be lived becomes abstract. Risk is modeled without skin in the game. Moral urgency is asserted without moral grounding. The book makes moral claims--about obligation, responsibility, and injustice--without ever naming the source of those obligations.

This creates a quiet contradiction. Moral language is necessary to motivate coordination, but moral foundations are left ambiguous to preserve managerial flexibility. In the absence of grounding, obligation eventually collapses into power.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb has a name for one failure mode here: the intellectual yet idiot--not stupid, not malicious, but insulated from consequence. I don't think Luke Kemp himself is the target. The framework is. Collapse theory that remains legible only to institutions will always propose institutional solutions, even when the problem has already migrated below that level.

The real threat is not collapse per se. Systems rise and fall. The real threat is the dissolution of the family and the erosion of inheritance.

Institutions can be recapitalized. Markets can reprice. States can fragment and re-form. Families cannot be substituted.

When families fail to reproduce competence, culture, and responsibility across generations, nothing downstream inherits. What follows is not collapse but vacancy.

Goliath dies not because collapse occurs, but because scale mistakes itself for life. What survives was never his.

That is the argument I think Goliath's Curse gestures toward but cannot complete from where it stands. The book diagnoses fragility well. It does not yet explain endurance.

And in the end, endurance--not prevention--is what decides the future.

This is a guest essay by longtime correspondent 0bserver.

CHS here: note that the global technocrat elite follows a power law distribution in where they attended university:

...and the power they wield in markets and institutions:

*  *  *

My new book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free)

Check out my updated Books and FilmsBecome a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.comSubscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 19:15

IRGC Has 'Finger On The Trigger' As US Carrier Strike Group Enters Waters Near Iran

Zero Hedge -

IRGC Has 'Finger On The Trigger' As US Carrier Strike Group Enters Waters Near Iran

The US Navy's aircraft carrier strike group USS Abraham Lincoln has arrived in the Middle East, this week entering CENTCOM waters in the Indian Ocean, and is awaiting orders

Fox correspondent Jennifer Griffin cites a senior American official who said the carrier is not yet on station for any possible future strikes against Iran, however.

via AFP

The same outlet has further reported, "U.S. officials say Washington is reinforcing its military posture in response to growing instability inside Iran, boosting its presence by air, land and sea, while closely monitoring developments in Syria."

"A squadron of F-15 fighter jets has deployed to the region, and C-17 aircraft carrying heavy equipment have arrived," Fox adds.

This all comes after President Trump's apparent climb-down after threatening military intervention against Tehran in the wake of large deadly protests which rocked the Islamic Republic early this month, amid an internet blackout.

But Trump has put Iran on notice, despite that Iranian streets have been clear of unrest for well over a week at this point. He said on Thursday he has ordered a "massive fleet" to be sent toward Iran "just in case" he wants to take action - although he underscored that "maybe we won't have to use it." 

Just in terms of the strike group, this includes the following advanced assets:

The strike group is comprised of the Lincoln, an aircraft carrier, and three guided missile destroyers: the USS Frank E. Petersen, Jr., the USS Spruance and the USS Michael Murphy. On board the Lincoln are squadrons of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, F-35C fighter jets and MH-60R/S helicopters.

The naval force was not necessarily "on station" as of Monday morning Eastern Time, meaning it was not in its intended ultimate position.

This is being taken seriously by Tehran leaders given the month kicked off with a shock US military intervention in Caracas - which was actually among Iran's few Latin American allies - to overthrow longtime socialist leader Nicolás Maduro.

State affiliated Nournews, which is close to Iran's Supreme National Security Council, reported on its Telegram channel that Gen. Mohammad Pakpour, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), warned the US and Israel "to avoid any miscalculation."

"The Islamic Revolutionary Guards and dear Iran stand more ready than ever, finger on the trigger, to execute the orders and directives of the Commander-in-Chief," Pakpour stated.

Iran's military capability is nowhere close to being on par with the US; however, it does have a feared and sophisticated ballistic missile program, and has mass quantities of drones, which could threaten a carrier group through potential 'drone swarm' attacks, aimed at overwhelming naval defenses.

Cameron Chell, CEO and co-founder of drone technology firm Draganfly, has been widely quoted in various media outlets this week as explaining, "If hundreds are launched in a short period of time, some are almost certain to get through," and added: "These drones give Iran a very credible way to threaten surface vessels."

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 18:50

Ignoring Geopolitical Risk?

Zero Hedge -

Ignoring Geopolitical Risk?

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

The increase in the global geopolitical risk index has not affected global markets.

The general tone remains bullish despite a surprising “neutral” view shown in CNN’s Fear and Greed Index.

The reality is completely different.

Investors may say they are neutral given the elevated valuations and the global uncertainty, but most asset managers’ positioning is exceedingly bullish and concentrated on very cyclical sectors like banks and technology.

The main reason for this striking contrast between explicit concerns and positioning is a clear consensus of central bank easing as the norm.

Global money supply is expected to grow much faster than nominal GDP in 2026, what I call the monetary tsunami.

Investors should not ignore geopolitical risks and the evident impoverishment of middle classes due to inflationist policies that we have commented on in this column a few times.

Inflating financial asset prices while eroding the real value of fiat currencies generates social discontent, weaker productive investment, and a dangerous sentiment of confidence.

Gold soars as government bonds lose appeal

Risk accumulates gradually but can manifest suddenly, and the current environment is characterised by a perilous sovereign debt bubble that coincides with a decrease in global central banks’ demand for bonds from developed economies.

That is why gold soars. Demand for gold is rising while appetite for government bonds declines.

Global broad money is probably going to rise well above nominal output, with overall money supply growth projected to exceed 12% in 2026 while global GDP stalls around 3–3.1%, far below pre-2008 norms.

Furthermore, global capital investment is likely to be flat relative to depreciation in 2026. This enormous difference between liquidity and real activity reflects years of aggressive monetary and fiscal policies, with out-of-control deficits and bloated public balance sheets still driving central bank behaviour.

In Europe, the challenging political and fiscal situation, particularly in countries such as France, makes it very difficult for the ECB to normalise

According to JP Morgan, US money supply (M2) rose by 1.7 trillion dollars in 2025, growing at 6.6% and above nominal GDP for a third consecutive year.

This creates a risk of persistent inflation and elevated valuations in financial assets. Even if consumer prices rise at a slower pace than in previous years, the risk of loss of purchasing power remains.

For 2026, JP Morgan expects US money creation to exceed 2 trillion dollars, approaching the 2021 pace, as new liquidity channels—especially Federal Reserve T-bill purchases—replace quantitative tightening and extend the monetary stimulus cycle.

In 2026 the Federal Reserve is likely to remain accommodative, bringing real rates down towards a neutral level and even maybe adding a potential “mini–Quantitative Easing” or hidden easing program of roughly 20 billion dollars a month in Treasury purchases and mortgage-backed securities.

In Europe, the challenging political and fiscal situation, particularly in countries such as France, makes it very difficult for the ECB to normalise, forcing it to persist with instruments such as the anti-fragmentation tools and the monetisation of EU funds as well as a larger EU budget.

Resisting the negative impact of inflation

The reason why investors remain bullish is also because recent years’ events have shown that geopolitical risk plays a diminishing role in market volatility.

However, ongoing inflation and geopolitical risk do impact economic growth, investment, and consumer spending, which results in lower forecasts for economic output, reduced earnings estimates for companies that are more sensitive to the economy and keeps valuations at uncomfortable levels.

Global inflation is expected to moderate but remain above pre-pandemic levels around 3%, with developed economies still above their 2% targets because governments refuse to cut spending or deficits, so CPI stays “artificially” high relative to where it should be and underlying growth.

This leads to social discontent and rising populist measures in developed nations, while protests may bring more unrest in countries like Iran.

The situation never ends well. Central banks stopped being independent years ago, and their main strategy is to maintain unjustified low yields in sovereign bonds at the expense of consumers, who suffer the accumulated impact of inflation and rising taxes.

Ignoring geopolitical risks may lead to more aggressive investment in financial assets than would be advisable. However, too much fear leads to real losses for investors who decide to stay in cash and therefore suffer the annual erosion of the purchasing power of the currency.

What to do then?

Active portfolio management, prudent positioning, and a focus on gold, silver, and developed economies’ equities may help investors resist the negative impact of inflation and avoid the risks accumulated due to political uncertainty.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 18:25

Appeals Court Denies DOJ's Bid To Arrest More Minnesota Church Protesters

Zero Hedge -

Appeals Court Denies DOJ's Bid To Arrest More Minnesota Church Protesters

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

Late last week, a federal appeals court denied the Justice Department’s (DOJ’s) request to arrest more individuals involved in an anti-ICE protest that occurred inside a church in Minnesota earlier this month.

Protesters disrupted a Sunday service at Cities Church in St. Paul on Jan. 18, chanting phrases such as “Justice for Renee Good,” following claims that one of the church pastors serves as the acting field office director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Minnesota. Several people were arrested on Jan. 22 for allegedly organizing the protest.

The Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Jan. 23 rejected the DOJ’s emergency petition for a writ of mandamus after Minnesota Chief District Judge Patrick Schiltz refused to issue five more arrest warrants related to the protest.

In a Jan. 23 letter to the appeals court, Schiltz said the DOJ had requested arrest warrants for eight people on Jan. 20, but Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko issued warrants for only three, finding no probable cause to arrest the remaining five.

The five individuals allegedly entered the church and yelled “horrible things at the members of the church” but committed no violence, according to the judge’s letter.

“It is important to emphasize that what the U.S. Attorney requested is unheard of in our district or, as best as I can tell, any other district in the Eighth Circuit,” Schiltz said, referring to the DOJ’s request to review Micko’s denial of arrest warrants.

“The reason why this never happens is likely that, if the government does not like the magistrate judge’s decision, it can either improve the affidavit and present it again to the same magistrate judge or it can present its case to a grand jury and seek an indictment,” the judge added.

The DOJ said that arresting the five individuals was necessary to deter potential “copycats” from disrupting churches, synagogues, and religious services. Schiltz disagreed.

“The leaders of the group have been arrested, and their arrests have received widespread publicity. There is absolutely no emergency,” Schiltz said, suggesting that the DOJ could instead take its case to a grand jury.

The Epoch Times has reached out to the DOJ for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Among the five individuals for whom the DOJ sought arrest warrants is former CNN journalist turned YouTuber Don Lemon, who livestreamed the protest on social media.

Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement on Jan. 23 that the magistrate’s actions “confirm the nature of Don’s First Amendment protected work this weekend in Minnesota as a reporter.”

“Should the Department of Justice continue with a stunning and troubling effort to silence and punish a journalist for doing his job, Don will call out their latest attack on the rule of law and fight any charges vigorously and thoroughly in court,” Lowell said.

Harmeet Dhillon, the DOJ’s assistant attorney general for civil rights, posted on X on Jan. 18 that a house of worship is not a public forum for protest.

“It is a space protected from exactly such acts by federal criminal and civil laws,” Dhillon said.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 17:40

Tehran Cheers US Unrest, Calls Minneapolis Protests 'Instant Karma'

Zero Hedge -

Tehran Cheers US Unrest, Calls Minneapolis Protests 'Instant Karma'

Iran's state media has blasted the Trump administration as hypocritical, drawing a direct comparison between the recent protests inside the Islamic Republic and the ongoing unrest ignited by the controversial ICE shootings in Minneapolis.

Iran has seized on the latest fatal shooting of Alex Prettio, arguing that President Trump has no moral standing to condemn how Iranian authorities have handled its own nationwide demonstrations, which were triggered by economic strain and a collapsing currency after years of US-imposed sanctions.

State-backed Press TV pointed to Trump's earlier public call for Iranians to rise up and take to the streets while pointing to the current Minneapolis demonstrations as "instant karma".

Getty Images/BBC

Newsweek observed several fresh broadcasts from Iranian outlets drawing on the comparison:

While these protests were largely peaceful, Iranian state news channel Press TV dedicated a segment in which it presented them as the latest iteration of the anger at the actions of ICE.

The presenter on Press TV, Roya Pour Bagher, referred to social media posts by Americans expressing outrage at the killing, and described "growing fears of an imminent civil conflict—yes a civil war in the United States."  

In a separate clip, Bagher said that footage of Pretti’s killing clearly showed he did not pose a threat to anyone, adding that more protests could help stop the killings. 

This has been the theme across pro-Tehran social media as well:

Iran’s state TV channel Press TV: "Calls on social media demanding Trump’s removal before the US is pushed into the unknown are growing louder, as crimes by ICE against civilians continue to rise." 

Iranian outlet Press TV: "Instant karma? Trump: Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING—TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!!"

There's actually some truth here in the way US officials and media portray things whenever there's a protest inside Iran, or any nation deemed a 'rogue' state for that matter: all demonstrations no matter how small or varied in terms of the protesters' actual motives tend to get treated as somehow "pro-Western democracy" in nature, or else as if the "regime" is always on the brink of collapse.

And then there are always the familiar calls by American politicians and pundits of the 'Ayatollah must go' or this or that dictator must go. Western mainstream media is also notorious for grossly oversimplifying complex dynamics behind foreign events and protest movements.

Tehran officials and state media have also of late been saying the Iranian protests that kicked off on December 27, but which last week finally ended, were quickly "hijacked" by foreign powers and interests. For example the below fresh PressTV commentary says:

In an interview with the Press TV website, Nury Vittachi, a Hong Kong-based journalist, author, and political commentator, said the deadly unrest and acts of terrorism in Iran in recent weeks bore the unmistakable signs of a coordinated campaign orchestrated by the United States and Israel.

“There is no doubt that there was heavy involvement from foreign forces during the riots. I have seen this same procedure in many locations,” he stated.

Thousands were killed, among them at least dozens or possibly even hundreds of police, security personnel, and pro-government people. But the majority of casualties were clearly on the anti-government side, as even Iran state sources have lately appeared to admit.

The West accuses Iran of often firing on unarmed protesters, while the Islamic Republic has retorted that there was an armed insurrection in tandem with those who went to the streets peacefully - creating a more murky, complex series of bloody clashes with the police and military.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 17:20

A Year After Pardons, Freed January 6 Prisoners Tell Their Stories

Zero Hedge -

A Year After Pardons, Freed January 6 Prisoners Tell Their Stories

Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A year ago, President Donald Trump pardoned nearly 1,600 people for “offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

Illustration by The Epoch Times, Bobby Sanchez for The Epoch Times, Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times, Nathaniel Smith for The Epoch Times, Natasha Holt for The Epoch Times, Leo Shi/The Epoch Times

That decision to issue the blanket pardon, in one of his first official acts as the 47th president, ignited controversy. It covered not only people who strolled through open doors of the U.S. Capitol, unaware they were trespassing, but also rioters who damaged property and assaulted police.

After the initial public backlash subsided, the pardoned—many of them newly freed from prison—began rebuilding their lives.

The Epoch Times interviewed five of those former Jan. 6 prisoners. Their consensus: Jan. 6 is one of the most-mischaracterized events in U.S. history, largely because records—and personal stories like theirs—have been ignored by most media outlets. They say the pardon was not a panacea. Some are still ostracized from friends and family. Others are still recovering from the financial setbacks.

All five believe they’ve been unjustly prosecuted and none say they regret their actions. Rather, the pardoned said they were proud to have stood up for the integrity of U.S. elections, Trump, and American values on that fateful day—despite the great cost.

Micki Witthoeft, mother of Ashli Babbitt, waits outside the DC Central Detention Facility after President Donald Trump pardoned roughly 1,500 Jan. 6 defendants, in Washington on Jan. 20, 2025. Babbitt, a Trump supporter, was the only person killed, by a police officer, during the Jan. 6 conflict. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times Twists of Fate

As Dan Leyden, 58, struggles to regroup after his wife died of cancer late last year, he remains in disbelief over the life-changing events that preceded that horrible loss.

Circumstances lined up and thrust him—a low-profile union electrician from Chicago—into the forefront of the Jan. 6 conflict in 2021.

At the last minute, he had decided to join his brother in Washington to watch “our favorite president” speak, possibly delivering his final big public speech as the 45th president.

But the brothers got separated from each other.

Then I don’t see that speech, because the man next to me says, ‘Dan, would you walk with me to the Capitol?’ So I walked to the Capitol,” Leyden said, “And, from there, my life has turned upside-down.”

While he doesn’t want pity, Leyden—who injects many of his remarks with wry humor—used the word, “heartbroken,” to describe losses he has suffered.

First, his prosecution cost him the Chicago Park District job he had worked without a single complaint for 24 years.

Also, while beginning to serve a prison sentence that would have spanned three years, Leyden missed the birth of his first grandchild—“a gorgeous baby girl” who he now enjoys visiting.

Days after an overjoyed Leyden was pardoned and freed, he plunged into sorrow over the shooting death of Matt Huttle, 42, a Jan. 6 prisoner who became his friend while they served time in prison together. Stopped for speeding in rural Indiana, Huttle threatened to kill himself rather than face life behind bars again. As Huttle resisted arrest, an officer fatally shot him.

Worst of all, Leyden lost his wife of 27 years to cancer on Dec. 29 last year. That illness, which stress has been known to trigger, hit Linda Leyden shortly after her husband was freed. His incarceration had kept them apart for 15 months.

Dan Leyden, 58, at his home in Chicago on Jan. 13, 2026. A low-profile union electrician, Leyden lost his 24-year career at the Chicago Park District due to the Jan. 6 prosecution while mourning the recent loss of his wife to cancer. Nathaniel Smith for The Epoch Times

Leyden said his wife was known for her compassion. It was her idea to adopt two daughters from a Russian orphanage; they are now grown.

A lively woman, his wife ran marathons in major cities across the United States and as far away as South Africa before she died at 62.

Despite mourning her death, Leyden jokes about their contrasting lifestyles: “I don’t run unless somebody’s chasing me—and the FBI hasn’t been chasing me lately.”

With sarcasm, he disputes a label he and other defendants were given. “I was a very poorly trained ‘domestic terrorist,’” Leyden says, noting he showed up for the wintertime protest wearing a lightweight green flannel shirt over a T-shirt, and “cheap mittens from Walmart.”

Trump was scheduled to speak at The Ellipse, a park about two miles from Capitol Hill, following a series of other presenters.

But the speeches were hard to hear above the din of the crowd, broadcast over poor-quality loudspeakers.

And Leyden was shivering. It was windy; temperatures hovered in the 30s.

Unable to find his brother, Leyden headed toward the U.S. Capitol, hoping the walk would help him feel warmer.

After arriving at the U.S. Capitol, Leyden noted insufficient security; he ended up near a bike rack that functioned as a barricade. Photos show that Leyden was “pushing the barricade,” prosecutors said in a court record.

That’s a misrepresentation, Leyden said: “Did I lean on a bicycle rack? Yeah, I’m guilty.

About 17 months later, the FBI descended upon his Illinois home. His wife was home alone with the family pets; she was terrified.

Leyden soon surrendered. He faced 29 years in prison, even though he never went inside the U.S. Capitol; neither did his brother, Joe, who was sentenced to six months.

Leyden’s wife urged him to take a plea, saying, “Can we get this nightmare over with?” His legal battle had cost $30,000, wiping out his savings, though he is not in debt.

Now after a year of freedom, he is awash in grief. He doesn’t know what direction his life will take. “I just wanna go walk my dog at the park; my best friend of 29 years is gone,” he said.

Spiritually, he has never given up. Leyden said he was “just knocked to the curb [and] got back up.” He is beginning to feel less ostracized and hopes to go back to union electrical work.

Many people’s lives have been devastated, too, he said, “all because of one day” that remains shrouded in questions.

“The American people deserve the truth,” he said. And that, he said, is worth fighting for.

Flowers and cards Dan Leyden received after his wife’s passing at his home in Chicago on Jan. 13, 2026. Nathaniel Smith for The Epoch Times Grateful, But Wants More Action

Like many former Jan. 6 defendants, Alexander Sheppard hoped that being pardoned would go a long way toward clearing his name.

It didn’t.

Many people still treat the ex-defendants “like we are totally inhuman,” Sheppard, an Ohioan, said.

Another once-maligned group has consistently shown respect. “I’ve had Vietnam veterans tell me: ‘Thank you for your service.’ It’s mind-blowing,” Sheppard said.

Also, people of faith have demonstrated compassion. “A lot of Christians have been praying for the Jan. 6 people,” Sheppard said. “I appreciate that more than anything.”

With those notable exceptions, Sheppard still feels ostracized. He blames “the mainstream media” for falsely labeling nonviolent people like him “insurrectionists.”

On Jan. 6, 2021, Sheppard was 21 and had just started his own company. His prosecution forced him to return to restaurant work; he shares living expenses with his brother. He recently quit the restaurant job in search of a better opportunity.

Sheppard made a last-minute decision to attend the Jan. 6 rally, mostly because he opposed COVID-19 restrictions and believed that the 2020 election was stolen.

He was among many who entered the U.S. Capitol through open doors—unaware that they were trespassing.

Fatefully, Sheppard happened to be nearby when a police officer fatally shot Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt—unwittingly making him far more noticeable.

Sheppard would like to put Jan. 6 behind him. But “another part of me is saying, ‘We can’t move on because the people who did this to me are the criminals,’” who should be held to account.

Alexander Sheppard in Columbus, Ohio, on Jan. 28, 2025. Sheppard said many former Jan. 6 defendants, including himself, have since struggled to find employment. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

Sheppard believes the FBI and Justice Department should apologize and pay restitution, calling for federal trials to be televised to prevent unjust tactics from being used without scrutiny.

People would be stunned to learn what really happened during trials like his, he said. Not a single Republican sat on his jury in Democrat-dominated Washington, D.C.

Prosecutors presented five witnesses against him, and “every single one of them said they didn’t know me,” except for the FBI agent who tracked him down after Jan. 6, he said.

“There’s no victim to my ‘crime’ and there’s no witnesses—and somehow, I get convicted.”

Investigators never asked him about the fatal shooting of Babbitt—which Sheppard witnessed from about 10 feet away. U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd fired the fatal shot and faced no criminal charges.

Babbitt, a stranger to Sheppard, was shot as she attempted to climb through the broken window in a doorframe.

Although the presidential pardon didn’t produce the reputational boost Sheppard had hoped for, “I’m so grateful for the pardon; I’m so grateful that President Trump included every January Sixer.”

Because of a court ruling involving Jan. 6 prosecutions, a judge reduced Sheppard’s 19-month prison term to six months. Thus, he was released in May 2024. Still, he benefited from the pardon in January 2025; it restored his unblemished criminal record and removed restrictions he had faced.

Although he was represented by a public defender, Sheppard took a financial hit after the arrest and the ensuing prosecution.

I am not completely broke because I have been working a job and keeping expenses relatively low, but I would have a lot more money if I didn’t endure four years of persecution from the federal government,” Shepard said.

He feels there is much unfinished business about Jan. 6.

“We need accountability for FBI agents and prosecutors and judges who let this go down, because, in my opinion, what they did to us January Sixers is … one of the worst human rights abuses and biggest stains on our country’s history,” Sheppard said.

A Christmas card sent to Alexander Sheppard while he was in prison in Illinois from a supporter in Poland, in Columbus, Ohio, on Jan. 28, 2025. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times Curiosity Drove Him

On an early February morning in 2021, in Tampa, Florida, Paul Hodgkins III awakened to the sound he had been dreading: an insistent, loud banging on his front door.

He knew the FBI had caught up with him for entering the Senate chamber of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, six weeks prior.

Wearing only a towel around his waist, Hodgkins opened the door. An officer yelled for him to put his hands up. Hodgkins tried to comply while also attempting to keep the towel in place with his elbows.

But he handcuffed me behind my back, and left me standing naked in my living room when they all came barreling in,” Hodgkins said, describing the humiliating circumstances of his arrest at his duplex.

At that moment, Hodgkins felt the weight of the federal government crushing him—later reinforced when he saw the words, “The United States of America vs. Paul Hodgkins” on legal paperwork.

Hodgkins, who had no prior criminal record, also gained unwanted notoriety that summer when he became “the very, very first person who was sentenced to prison” for the events of Jan. 6.

At a lawyer’s urging, he pleaded guilty to a single charge and was sentenced to eight months in prison.

Being the first-sentenced defendant “put all eyes on me,” Hodgkins said, describing “a lot of paparazzi” taking his photo at a Washington courthouse. Photographers from a publication based in the U.K. also staked out his neighborhood and snapped pictures of him.

Paul Hodgkins III returns to a Raymond James Stadium parking lot, where he had worked crowd control during a 2020 Trump rally, in Tampa, Fla., on Jan. 13, 2026. Hodgkins, who had no prior criminal record, gained notoriety as the first person sentenced to prison over the events of Jan. 6, 2021. Natasha Holt for The Epoch Times

Hodgkins made a last-minute decision to catch a chartered bus trip to Washington for Trump’s rally on Jan. 6, 2021, spurred by fellow Trump supporters.

After hearing Trump’s speech, Hodgkins followed the crowd to the U.S. Capitol.

Curiosity drove him around to the rear of the Capitol building, and before he knew what had happened, he was inside the Senate Chamber, thinking he might be able to see some of the senators and “encourage them to audit this election.” He didn’t know they had been evacuated because the U.S. Capitol was breached.

At the time, he realized he might be “crossing somewhat of a line,” but thought that, at most, he could face a minor charge such as disorderly conduct.

I didn’t think I would be getting slapped with felonies and prison time, right?” As he left the Capitol building, an uneasy feeling stalked him, especially after he learned about the shooting death of Babbitt.

Now 43, Hodgkins was among those who paid respects to Babbitt at a memorial service on the anniversary of Jan. 6 this year. He has gotten to know Babbitt’s mother, and still has a hard time watching any footage of the shooting.

Paul Hodgkins III clutches flowers honoring slain protester Ashli Babbitt on the fifth anniversary of her death in Washington on Jan. 6, 2026. Courtesy of Paul Hodgkins III

Besides losing his freedom, Hodgkins’ prosecution cost him his job, but he has been able to find another good job at a machine-motor service shop. He has “plenty of haters” online and has lost friendships over his Jan. 6 involvement.

“And, financially, yes, I was set back a lot by case, but I got back to work, recovered, and marched on. I work, and live comfortably on my own,” Hodgkins said. “I didn’t like my life being so damaged from it all, but I also take pride in how I survived and built my life back.”

Still, he says, “I do not regret that I stood up for President Trump at that time. I don’t regret standing up for my country when I know we were being wronged. I still to this day, I know for myself that the 2020 election was compromised, and I don’t regret confronting that.”

When Hodgkins briefly met Trump at a 2023 dinner, he got the notion that a pardon might follow if Trump won a second term in office. “It was a prayer answered” when the pardon came, clearing Hodgkins’ conviction. It is now framed and on display in his home alongside other Trump memorabilia.

He thinks the pardon will help his career aspirations. “And I’m hoping, you know, before I’m too old to do it, that I might find a wife and start a family. ... Whether that does happen for me or not, you know, I have a very, I have a very blessed life.”

Paul Hodgkins III stands in front of a portrait of President Donald Trump during a St. Patrick’s Day Lincoln Day Dinner at Mar-a-Lago in Florida. Ex-New York Officer Conflicted

Being pardoned delivered sweet freedom. But for Sara Carpenter, it also left a bitter aftertaste. She believes the pardon signifies that she was absolved of crimes that she didn’t commit.

My pardon looks great on paper,” Carpenter said. “And then I say, ‘Wait a minute. It should never have happened to begin with.’”

While she is grateful that the pardon led to her release about midway through a 22-month prison term, Carpenter had filed an appeal. She was hoping to have her convictions overturned, and “that’s why I didn’t want the pardon, in a sense,” she said.

She knows of other pardoned defendants who feel similarly conflicted. Like many of the pardoned, Carpenter alleges she was convicted in an unfair trial based largely on falsehoods.

“I didn’t get tried by a judge and jury,” she said. “I got tried by political activists.”

Carpenter was convicted of two felonies—civil disorder and obstruction of an official proceeding—and five misdemeanors.

As a retired New York City police officer, Carpenter was particularly offended when the Justice Department alleged she “slapped” officers’ arms.

She has publicly challenged anyone to produce a video proving that claim; none has surfaced, she said.

Carpenter, 56, admits she got riled up; she perceived police were stoking unrest, not quelling it. But she says her actions weren’t criminal.

“I don’t regret what I did,” she said. “I yelled. I raised my voice.”

As an officer who responded to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City, Carpenter suffered lingering trauma that led to her retirement. It also affected her reactions on Jan. 6, she said; a suspected provocateur inflamed her when he compared Jan. 6 to 9/11.

Sara Carpenter, an artist and retired New York City police officer, holds one of her paintings in New York City on Jan. 14, 2026. Though a presidential pardon granted her freedom, Carpenter said it came with a bitter aftertaste—being absolved of crimes she says she never committed. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

Investigators initially treated Carpenter with some deference, she said. Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants worked in law enforcement, government, or military roles.

However, professional courtesies soon evaporated, Carpenter said. In March 2021, authorities raided her New York home, with a helicopter circling above.

Post-pardon, Carpenter, a college-educated artist, is producing artwork “that brings out hope.” With encouragement from others who share “America First” beliefs, Carpenter also does public speaking about Jan. 6.

The reason I keep talking is so they won’t get away with it,” Carpenter said, alleging unjust persecution of Jan. 6 defendants and coverups of evidence. “The truth is there. People are choosing not to see it.”

She would like to see history courses teach a balanced view of Jan. 6, so children become critical thinkers and evaluate “both sides of a story, not just one.”

Carpenter said her side of the story wasn’t adequately told in court. While prosecutors showed images of her yelling, they didn’t show her praying at the U.S. Capitol, said Carpenter, who comes from a devout Irish Catholic family.

An item of religious significance was used as evidence against her: A trio of wise men figurines. “The three wise men are still being held hostage,” said Carpenter, who has made multiple requests for her personal property to be returned.

The figurines are antiques from her childhood Christmas displays, but where they are now is a mystery. Prosecutors presented them on the witness stand during her 2023 trial—an odd sight that dumbfounded her.

Carpenter says she likely took the figurines to the U.S. Capitol because Jan. 6 is the traditional date that the Vatican celebrates the Epiphany, the three kings’ adoration of the newborn Jesus.

The government’s use and retention of the figurines serve as a metaphor for many things about Jan. 6 that “make no sense,” she said.

“God was with me all the way and still is, because of my relationship with the Good Lord Jesus I have hope in the future,” Carpenter said. “My prayers are with those who did this to us and for Americans to speak up more to not accept being lied to by the past administrations, almost all of whom still hold positions in our government.”

An ornament of the Three Wise Men made by Sara Carpenter at her home in New York City on Jan. 14, 2026. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times The Lego Model

The FBI unwittingly created an internet sensation when agents seized an odd piece of evidence from the Pennsylvania home of Robert Morss: a Lego model of the U.S. Capitol.

Last June, on the four-year anniversary of his arrest, Morss received the Lego box back—empty.

I think someone has a trophy on their desk somewhere in some federal building, perhaps … but, yeah, the legend continues, you know?” Morss said.

Even though the Lego set remains missing, Morss has embraced his internet-birthed nickname, “Lego Man.” For him, it has become symbolic of his rebuilt, post-Jan. 6 life.

Authorities accused Morss of interfering with police and assisting others in doing so, among other actions on Jan. 6.

Had he not been pardoned in 2025, Morss would have spent five-and-a-half years in prison.

He chronicles his three-and-a-half years behind bars in a new, 565-page book, “Still There: A Story of Survival and Penance in Prison Through the Eyes of a J6 Political Prisoner.”

Besides writing and publishing two books, Morss quit drinking alcohol. He strengthened his Christian faith. He became a public speaker. During one speaking engagement in Florida, he met the woman he intends to marry in April, Olivia Pollock, a fellow former Jan. 6 defendant.

“We realize just how profound it is to have a connection with somebody that has also suffered in a very similar way,” Morss, 32, said. “You know, who else could I be with that could relate to what I’ve gone through?”

It’s essential for people to continue speaking out about what happened on Jan. 6, he said, because “justice dies in the quiet.”

Robert Morss, CEO of LeggoMan Productions, poses with a set of Legos and his Bible in Dallas, Texas, on Jan. 13, 2026. A Lego model of the U.S. Capitol seized from Morss’s home was used as evidence in his prosecution, later earning him the internet nickname “Lego Man.” Bobby Sanchez for The Epoch Times

Using a variant of his “Lego Man” nickname, Morss has launched his own film production company in Texas.

LeggoMan Productions aims to create “movies that reinvigorate the next generation to want to keep this Republic,” Morss said. Although the films will be “gritty,” the stories will be told from a Christian perspective, he said.

Noting that the word, “Lego,” means “I assemble” in Latin, Morss says that sums up what he wants to do: “Assemble” people into a cohesive group. His company is growing, and he expects to hire additional staff—opportunities he wants to provide first to Jan. 6 defendants and veterans.

He is a former Army Ranger who served three deployments to Afghanistan. In addition to the Lego model, authorities seized military-related items and notes, along with clothing Morss wore to the Jan. 6 protest.

In court records, prosecutors described the Lego model as “fully constructed” when the FBI seized it. The government later corrected the record, blaming a “miscommunication” for the inaccurate description.

By listing the model of the U.S. Capitol as evidence, that suggests it could have played a role in Morss’s alleged Jan. 6 planning. Morss and internet commenters savaged that notion as preposterous.

Morss explains why a former girlfriend bought him the U.S. Capitol model: “She knew I was a history buff, and she knew I wanted to be a teacher, and she also knew that I loved Legos.” He propped up the box as a “decoration” at his home, until it was seized.

At a recent fundraising gala, Morss auctioned off other Lego U.S. Capitol models to benefit his production company. “Everybody wants one,” he said; and purchasers asked him to autograph the boxes.

Yet some of the pieces of his life can’t be put back together. His father and brother turned their backs on him. His uncle worked with private investigators to help turn him in to the FBI.

And despite the book sales and speaking engagements, he is still struggling financially.

None of the positive changes in his life would have happened without his faith, he said.

“The only way that I’ve been successful at any of this stuff is because I continue to give glory to God,” Morss said. “It’s like a secret recipe: The more you want to honor God with what you’re doing, the more you incorporate God into your life ... things just seem to work out.”

He advises his Jan. 6 brethren: “Find a new mission that honors God and saves your country, and you'll be okay.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 17:00

In Secret Recordings, Ted Cruz Bashes Trump Tariffs, JD Vance, And Tucker Carlson

Zero Hedge -

In Secret Recordings, Ted Cruz Bashes Trump Tariffs, JD Vance, And Tucker Carlson

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) took aim at President Trump's tariff policy and Vice President JD Vance during closed-door donor meetings last year, according to recordings obtained by Axios. The recordings reveal deep rifts inside the GOP over trade and foreign policy. 

Credit: AP

The recordings, totaling nearly 10 minutes, were provided by a Republican source and were made during two donor sessions in early and mid-2025.

In the recordings, Cruz repeatedly singled out JD Vance and Tucker Carlson, accusing them of driving an anti-interventionist foreign policy inside the Trump administration. Cruz claimed the two were responsible for pushing out former national security adviser Mike Waltz because he supported military action against Iran, even though Trump later embraced that approach.

"Tucker created JD. JD is Tucker's protégé, and they are one and the same," Cruz told donors. He has been feuding publicly with Carlson on social media for months. 

Cruz also said Vance and Carlson played a role in briefly installing Army veteran Daniel Davis in a senior intelligence position. Cruz described Davis as fiercely hostile to Israel and said their involvement triggered backlash that ultimately led to Davis being forced out.

In the second recording, Cruz recounted a tense late-night phone call with Trump after the president rolled out his tariff plan in early April 2025. Cruz and several other senators tried to persuade Trump to back off the policy. The call stretched past midnight and "did not go well," Cruz said. Trump was "yelling" and "cursing" during the conversation.

"Trump was in a bad mood," Cruz told donors. "I've been in conversations where he was very happy. This was not one of them."

Cruz warned Trump that the tariffs could wreck the economy and imperil the GOP's political standing.

"Mr. President, if we get to November and people's 401(k)s are down 30% and prices are up 10–20% at the supermarket, we're going to go into Election Day, face a bloodbath," Cruz said he told Trump.

"You're going to lose the House, you're going to lose the Senate, you're going to spend the next two years being impeached every single week."

Trump's response, according to Cruz, was blunt: "F**k you, Ted."

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the trade deficit shrank to $29.4 billion in October. That marks the smallest gap since June 2009 and a sharp 39% decline from September’s $48.1 billion. The economy also grew at an annualized rate of 4.4% in the third quarter — the fastest pace in two years.

When a donor brought up "Liberation Day," Trump's branding for the tariff rollout, Cruz mocked the phrase. He said he told his staff that anyone using it "will be terminated on the spot." He added, "That is not language we use."

Cruz also told donors he had been "battling" the White House to secure a trade agreement with India. When asked who inside the administration opposed such deals, Cruz pointed to economic adviser Peter Navarro, Vice President Vance, and "sometimes" Trump.

A Cruz spokesperson downplayed the recordings in a statement, insisting that Cruz is "the president's greatest ally in the Senate and battles every day in the trenches to advance his agenda." 

"Those battles include fights over staffers who try to enter the administration despite disagreeing with the president and seeking to undermine his foreign policy," the statement continued. "Sen. Cruz is proud of those fights, his accomplishments, and his close relationship with the president. These attempts at sowing division are pathetic and getting boring.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 16:40

Abandon Big Tech: Ethereum Founder Buterin Calls 2026 The Year To Reclaim Self-Sovereign Computing

Zero Hedge -

Abandon Big Tech: Ethereum Founder Buterin Calls 2026 The Year To Reclaim Self-Sovereign Computing

Authored by Christina Comben via CoinTelegraph.com,

Ethereum cofounder Vitalik Buterin declared 2026 to be the “year we take back lost ground in computing self-sovereignty,” starting with his own devices. 

In a Friday post on X, he laid out the software changes he has made to reduce reliance on data-hungry, centralized platforms.

The “two major changes” to the software he used in 2025 were switching “almost fully” to Fileverse, an open-source, decentralized document platform — a kind of privacy-preserving Google Docs — and switching “decisively” to Signal as his primary messaging app.

Signal uses end-to-end encryption by default for all one-to-one and group chats, and stores minimal metadata, meaning only limited information, such as when an account was created or the last date it connected to the service.

Telegram, in contrast, only offers end-to-end encryption in optional “secret chats” and otherwise keeps messages and metadata on its own servers, a model that has drawn scrutiny as law enforcement data requests have increased in countries like France.

Becoming more self-sovereign. Source: Vitalik Buterin

Local AI and self-hosted tools

In 2026, Buterin has moved from Google Maps to OpenStreetMap via OrganicMaps and from Gmail to Proton Mail, while prioritizing decentralized social media.

Buterin also discussed his experiments with locally hosting large language models, arguing that sending all data to third-party services is “unnecessary” when users can increasingly run artificial intelligence tools on their own hardware. 

He said better user interfaces, integrations and efficiency are still needed to make local models a seamless default, but added that there has already been “huge progress” compared with a year ago. 

Privacy advocates see broader shift

His post echoes points made by privacy advocate and NBTV founder Naomi Brockwell, who described running models locally as the most private way to use AI without sending prompts or documents to external servers.

How to use AI privately. Source: Naomi Brockwell

Brockwell has spent years teaching privacy-enhancing behavior to mainstream audiences, arguing that privacy is about autonomy rather than secrecy and encouraging the use of tools like Bitcoin, encrypted messengers and self-hosted services to reduce government and corporate surveillance power.

Buterin’s post also comes amid renewed debate over how much access governments and platforms should have to users’ private communications and metadata.

The European Union’s controversial Chat Control proposal, for example, originally included pre‑encryption scanning of messages to detect abusive material, and prompted warnings from civil liberties groups and technologists that client‑side scanning could undermine trust in encrypted apps.

Progressively swapping out everyday apps for encrypted, open-source and local alternatives is, according to Buterin and other privacy advocates, one way for users to start reclaiming control over their data flows.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 15:25

Mobocracy: Democratic Politicians Compete In Race To The Bottom Over ICE Shooting

Zero Hedge -

Mobocracy: Democratic Politicians Compete In Race To The Bottom Over ICE Shooting

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

This year, there has been a race to the bottom as Democratic politicians fuel the rage in our streets against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.

That continued this last week when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz again rushed to judgment after a shooting, adding that the public should not treat Border Patrol or ICE officers as real “law enforcement” officers.

However, rock bottom was finally reached by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (D), who not only said that she does not consider ICE officers to be “real law enforcement,” but raised the possibility of citizens shooting them under state law.

First, the obvious.  

Mayes said, “I put [“officers”] in air quotes because I don’t think they are real law enforcement.” These are real law enforcement officers under federal law, enforcing federal law. Period. The effort by Walz, Mayes, and others to question their status or treat them as impostors is clearly designed to inflame citizens and encourage greater confrontations.

It is a dangerous form of demagoguery. It is sending citizens into harm’s way, encouraging them to impede federal operations involving the arrest of criminal suspects.

Mayes’s comments could justify many putting “attorney general” in air quotes since she is not only misleading citizens about the status of these officers but also enabling the very rage that is causing the injury and death of individuals.

Again, repeating Walz’s talking points, she referred to these officers as “poorly trained.” She obviously has no idea about the training of these officers. The officer involved in the Alex Pretti shooting was an experienced officer with the Border Patrol. The officer involved in the prior Renée Good shooting was also an experienced officer.

While mischaracterizing the officers, figures like Walz are sending demonstrably “untrained” citizens into highly dangerous situations. Walz specifically called out citizens into the streets to record these operations, which is precisely what Pretti was trying to do before his fatal confrontation with officers.

Mayes, however, was not looking for a tie in that race to the bottom. She told citizens that Arizona’s “Stand Your Ground” law might be cited as grounds for the use of lethal force against officers.  She declared:

“You have these masked, federal officers with very little identification — sometimes no identification — wearing plain clothes and masks and we have a ‘Stand Your Ground’ law that says if you reasonably believe your life is in danger and you’re in your house or in your car or on your property, that you can defend yourself with lethal force.”

She later added, “It’s a fact that we have a ‘Stand Your Ground’ law and, in other states, un-uniformed, masked people who can’t be identified as police officers.”

It was a reckless statement of the law.

These laws only protect “reasonable” uses of self-defense. However, they have an express exemption for using force “to resist an arrest that the person knows or should know is being made by a peace officer or by a person acting in a peace officer’s presence and at his direction, whether the arrest is lawful or unlawful, unless the physical force used by the peace officer exceeds that allowed by law.”

It is not uncommon for law enforcement to use officers in plain clothes to make initial arrests or contacts with suspects who might flee or resist.

Mayes’s comments could encourage an already enraged and irrational segment of our population to use lethal force under the false pretense of standing their ground.

Attacks on these officers have increased exponentially with the violent rhetoric of these politicians. Just last week, a rioter bit off the finger of an officer.

Mayes also vowed to prosecute any ICE agent who violates state laws in these operations. She is also mimicking Walz in spreading legal disinformation. While federal officers do not have absolute immunity in all cases, it is extremely unlikely that state officials could successfully prosecute such cases without facing a transfer to federal court and likely dismissal.

Walz made the same misleading claim in saying that Minnesota would investigate the shooting and that the federal government would not be allowed to conduct the investigation. He has no authority to dictate who or how the shooting will be investigated.

While the state can conduct its own investigation, the federal government will investigate a shooting by a federal officer. Walz further pandered to the mob by raising the debunked “bait boy” story and telling citizens that ICE was “shooting them in the face when they come out of donut shops.”

Rage is hard to maintain for months and the Pretti shooting, as described by one Democratic operative according to Fox’s Chad Pergram, is a “new wild card” in the politics on the Hill over funding.

There remain legitimate questions about this shooting. The videotapes do not show, as suggested in early accounts from the federal government, that Pretti approached the officers brandishing a weapon.

Pretti does not obey the commands of the officers in returning to the middle of the road during their operation. However, he did not appear threatening until after the officer pushed him to the side of the road. At one point, he appears to shove the officer as he tries to assist a woman who was pushed to the ground.

What happens next is hard to determine. There is a video that suggests that an officer may have removed his weapon from its holster just before another officer yells “gun.” It is hard to see Pretti’s hands and we do not know what happened in that split second. We may get a better idea as new videotapes emerge.

Law enforcement officers do not expect blind deference on shootings. However, they have a right to expect a fair chance for an investigation to hear their side of a shooting — not a governor or a mayor rushing before cameras to effectively accuse them of murder.

At this point, it may not matter. Only the mob matters.  Minneapolis Brian O’Hara explained: “even if there is an investigation that ultimately proves that at the time of the shooting it was legally justified, I don’t think that even matters at this point, because there just- there is so much outrage and concern around what is happening in the city.”

Walz has demonstrated politics of the lowest kind, stoking anger as citizens and officers alike are injured. Walz is pledging to go to court to stop further operations—a lawsuit that would be another frivolous filing. Previously, the state, including Attorney General Keith Ellison, filed to prevent the federal government from increasing forces to investigate fraud and immigration violations.

Walz, Mayes, and others are following a long line of demagogues who sought to use social unrest to advance their political careers. For Walz, sending people into the streets has the benefit of not having them at home watching and reading about the growing fraud scandal in his state.

It is not a defense of democracy, but mobocracy in Minnesota.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” which will be released on Feb. 3 as part of the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 14:45

Saudi Aramco Dismisses Oil Glut Narrative As "Seriously Exaggerated"

Zero Hedge -

Saudi Aramco Dismisses Oil Glut Narrative As "Seriously Exaggerated"

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

Forecasts of a massive oil glut are seriously exaggerated as demand keeps rising and global stocks are below the five-year average, according to Saudi Aramco’s chief executive officer, Amin Nasser. 

“Oil glut predictions are seriously exaggerated,” Nasser said on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week as carried by Reuters.

Global oil stocks are low, while the amassed barrels in floating storage on tankers are mostly sanctioned supplies, the CEO of the world’s biggest oil firm and top crude exporter said. 

Moreover, spare capacity has dwindled over the past year, also limiting potential efforts to boost output in case of major supply disruptions, according to Nasser. 

“It (spare capacity) is ‌at 2.5% and we need a minimum of 3%. If OPEC+ further unwinds cuts, spare capacity will ‌fall even further and we will need to watch this very carefully,” Aramco’s top executive said. 

The market is oversupplied, analysts say, as reflected in only brief spikes in oil prices in recent weeks driven the geopolitical developments. 

Most investment banks and the EIA forecast that average oil prices will be below $60 per barrel in 2026 due to an emerging and persistent market oversupply, especially during the first half of the year.  

But OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, insists that the market would be balanced as demand growth is robust and will remain such in 2027, too. 

The International Energy Agency (IEA) this week raised its oil demand growth estimate and expects growth at 930,000 barrels per day (bpd) in 2026, up by 70,000 bpd from last month’s assessment. 

The upgrade reflects a recovery in feedstock demand in the petrochemicals industry, on top of expectations of normalized economic conditions after the unpredictable and chaotic tariff policy of the Trump Administration last year.

But the market continues to be oversupplied, the Paris-based agency noted. 

“Indeed, benchmark crude oil prices remain $16/bbl lower than a year ago, reflecting the large global supply surplus that built up over the past 12 months, in line with our forecasts,” the IEA said.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 14:05

Egon von Greyerz On The Hidden Crisis Behind Silver's Price Surge

Zero Hedge -

Egon von Greyerz On The Hidden Crisis Behind Silver's Price Surge

In the following clip, Egon von Greyerz explains why the precious metals market has entered a fundamentally new and unprecedented phase.

One which is driven not by speculation or momentum trading, but by deep structural imbalances between physical supply and an unprecedented physical demand.

Persistent supply deficits in silver over several consecutive years, combined with rapidly rising industrial demand from sectors such as solar energy, electric vehicles, electronics and defense, have created a physical shortage in the last 5 years that paper markets can no longer mask.

At the same time, the volume of outstanding paper contracts in London and New York now vastly exceeds the amount of physical silver available for delivery.

Von Greyerz warns that this imbalance marks a critical turning point, as silver transitions away from a manipulated paper-based system into a genuinely physical market, where price is ultimately set by scarcity, not leverage. 

Watch Egon explain why manipulation fails when physical precious metals run out...

Here are some key excerpts from the full transcript: (emphasis ours)

...this is a fundamental change. Some viewers might remember the late 1970s when silver quickly climbed from a few dollars up to $50. This was primarily speculation by the Hunt Brothers.

[01:44.7] And of course, the market could quickly sell enough paper silver to crash the price. And it didn't stay long at $50. This time, any selling that is attempted by bullion banks fails ,and we've seen many times being sold in the evening and, within a few hours, it's back up again.

[02:06.0] And this has happened last week again. Friday evening was sold off and then quickly went up to $90. I think we're quickly going to see $100 and more already in the Far East and in Australia, like the Perth Mint, selling now silver at over $100.

[02:25.0] So the price in London and in New York will have to follow. So what does that mean for the ordinary investors? Well, it clearly means that silver is just starting the move, and we are going to see, as I have stressed many times, we are going to see multiples of the current price.

[02:44.8] Will it correct? Of course, silver always corrects, but this is not a normal market because it's now turned into a physical market, which is it should always be rather than the manipulation that we have seen in paper markets. [03:00.0] So physical demand has gone from 10% of production to now 50% in the last year. That is a massive increase in demand, obviously stemming from solar panels, electric cars, electrical products, electronic products and also of course from defence contracts.

[03:18.4] Every missile uses quite a lot of silver, and all other electronic products and weapons use a big amount of silver now. So the demand is there on the physical side, and the demand is there on the investment side, and the production just isn't there.

To satisfy this demand, we've had deficits for the last five years.  Those deficits are going to increase. This is why there will be constant demand for silver, and it is probable in the next year or two that there'll be failure in some markets. Whether that will be in the London market, and some bullion bank will go under. Whether that will be on Comex, we don't know.

[03:53.9] But the risk is very high.

So it is obviously absolutely important for investors to hold nothing but physical silver, buy physical and hold it outside the banking system, not within the banking system. Don't buy ETFs, don't buy any futures, hold physical silver and keep it in a safe storage, in a safe vault like we do for clients, and keep it outside the banking system.

[04:19.7] Now, there are of course many other factors that influence the price of the metals. Gold is also going up, but as I have made clear for quite a while, silver will go twice as fast as gold in the coming years. Now the gold-silver ratio has gone from over 100 to about 50.

[04:36.4] Now the long-term ratio is probably going to be around the 15 level initially, but I wouldn't be surprised to see even lower than that, that being a natural level. But now I think the demand is of such magnitude and the supply so minuscule.

...

Now I'm absolutely convinced we'll see $10,000 for gold. What does that mean for silver? If you take the gold-silver ratio at 15, which is an historical quite important level, then you divide 10,000 by 15, you get 666.

[05:38.3] So, a minimum we would see with silver, in my view, is $666. 

...

But remember, you are not buying silver or gold for speculative purposes or to make money.

[08:16.2] You are buying it to protect your wealth against the total destruction of wealth that we're going to see in the next few years. That is a destruction of paper wealth that is now, at levels which are unprecedented in history, because money printing has been unprecedented, and lending has been unprecedented.

[08:35.2] Countries will go bust, banks will go bust in America, in Europe. Whether it's due to property market, whether it's commercial markets, or people not being able to pay their loans, it doesn't matter. Many banks will go under. Governments and central banks are going to print unlimited amounts of money, and therefore, the value of your dollar, your euro or your pound is going to collapse.

[08:58.6] And that would be reflected in a much higher gold price...

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 13:45

Stellar 2Y Trasury Auction: Surge In Indirects & Bid-To-Cover; Second Lowest Dealers On Record

Zero Hedge -

Stellar 2Y Trasury Auction: Surge In Indirects & Bid-To-Cover; Second Lowest Dealers On Record

The first coupon auction of the week just took place, and it could not have gone any better. 

According to the US Treasury, $69BN of 2 Year paper was just sold at a high yield of 3.580%, up from the 3.499% in December, and stopped through the When Issued 3.594% by 1.4bps, the biggest stop through since August.

The bid to cover jumped to 2.750, up from 2.543 and the highest since Nov 2024 (the six-auction average was 2.61). 

The internals were even stronger: Indirects took down 64.4%, a big jump from 53.2% in December and the highest since March 2025. And with Directs awarded 28.3%, Dealers were left with just 7.3%, the second lowest on record (only Feb 2025 was lower).

Overall, this was a stellar auction and clearly there were no jitters head of Wednesday's FOMC decision, where prevailing consensus is that the Fed will be more hawkish.

Ahead of the auction, the UBS desk thought 2s looked to be locally cheap on outright terms and that the recent flattening had also introduced some value, albeit marginal, on the curve. The market is rallying on the follow. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 13:35

What We Are Experiencing Is Not De-Dollarisation But De-Fiatization

Zero Hedge -

What We Are Experiencing Is Not De-Dollarisation But De-Fiatization

By Benjamin Picton, Senior Market Strategist At Rabobank

J.P. Morgan once famously remarked that “gold is money, everything else is credit.” That dictum was apparently forgotten during the 1980s & 1990s as gold’s share of central bank reserves steadily declined and gold prices – for most of that period – did the same.

That period was the most recent era of high financialization, where Hollywood movies like Wall Street, Trading Places, Barbarians at the Gate and even Pretty Woman glorified the swashbuckling lifestyle of financiers. It was also the era of the leveraged buyout, the rise of the MBA, the retail day-trader speculating in the dotcom boom and the germination of the idea (in the Anglosphere, at least) that you too can get rich through landlording – effectively transforming housing from a consumption good to a financial asset. This was also the era of the imperialism of the US Treasury Bond.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is reasonably clear from the data that this period ended with the popping of the dotcom bubble, but the final eulogy was not read until the financial crisis of 2008 when the excesses of high financialization were truly laid bare. This imbued the arguments of non-market economies like China that American system was decadent and sclerotic – and that the their system was superior – with apparent credibility. Along with military misadventure in the Middle East this constituted a heavy blow for the soft power and prestige of the United States.

While it is typical to think of the financial crisis is an epochal ending, gold’s share of central bank reserves hit its nadir around the year 2000. That was also the approximate highwater mark for US Treasury bonds’ share of global reserve assets. Many Western central banks – the last sellers of scale – had recently offloaded their holdings at low, low prices in the late 1990s having been taken in by fashionable ideas that gold was a “barbarous relic” and that the creation of the fiat monetary system and floating exchange rates in 1971 made holding gold a quaint anachronism.

Fast forward to today and gold is now trading well above $5000/oz. Silver is trading well above $100/oz. The financial has given way to the material and the fashionable narrative is now ‘sell America’ and de-Dollarisation. Dollar assets’ share of total central bank reserves has been in slow decline for years, but some commentators are now pronouncing the death of the Dollar system as Donald Trump’s abrasive style of foreign policy offends traditional allies. In seeming support of the sell America narrative, the Bloomberg Dollar spot index is down 1.14% year to date.

However, on the other side of the ledger we continue to see strong demand at US Treasury auctions and SWIFT data shows that the use of the US Dollar in international payments is actually increasing, mostly at the expense of the Euro. The Chinese Renminbi has seen a modest rise in its use in payments, but small declines in its already low share of central bank reserves. Even the increased use in payments is exaggerated somewhat by transactions between mainland China and Hong Kong. At only 3-4% of total payments versus more than 50% for the Dollar, it would seem to us that the demise of the Dollar in favor of other currencies is much exaggerated.

Speaking to the media at Davos, hedge fund manager Ray Dalio argued that what we are experiencing is not de-Dollarisation, but de-fiatization. That is, flight from fiat currencies in favor of real assets or – as J.P. Morgan might have advised – real money in the form of gold and silver. Ray pointed out that “in a war-like environment” countries don’t want to hold each other’s debt for fear of sanctions (Russia presents a cautionary example), while other investors don’t want to hold financial claims for fear of debasement through deficit spending by national governments and debt monetization – quantitative easing – by central banks. Under this scenario, it is rational to hold neutral money with no counterparty risk, no risk of debasement and less scope for the imposition of capital controls. The last sellers of scale (central banks) became the first buyers of scale in 2024 and 2025, but the trade has broadened out to other buyers.

The debasement of fiat currencies is now easy to spot. Aside from gold and silver regularly re-setting all-time highs the Bloomberg commodity index has surged to sit at its highest level since mid-2022. Brent crude prices have risen for the last five weeks straight and Henry Hub natural gas prices have surged more than 65% year-to-date. These types of moves signal a scarcity of the material relative to the financial. Consequently, long yields have remained elevated (or surged, in the case of Japan) and the Reserve Bank of Australia – who took the ‘gently, gently’ approach on fighting inflation – may soon become the first G10 currency-issuing central bank (aside from Japan) forced to hike rates. The AUD has recently been surging in anticipation.

As Dalio explained to Bloomberg, the flipside of a trade imbalance is a capital imbalance. This is because the capital account is – by definition – the inverse of the current account (which includes the trade balance) in the balance of payments. With the USA running record current account deficits in early 2025, it’s a matter of mathematics that foreign investors have to buy US Treasuries for that deficit to be financed. For the US to make progress on reducing its trade deficit (as it has recently), it must also make progress on reducing its capital account surplus. That means fewer Dollars for the rest of the world who – as detailed above – rely on Dollars to conduct trade.

This is the Triffin Dilemma, which also describes why China – with its immense and growing trade surplus – cannot supplant the Dollar’s global role with the CNY. How are you going to get CNY into the hands of other countries unless China runs a trade deficit? Logically – though its appeal as a store of value may be diminishing – the Dollar must remain the global reserve currency because there is no viable alternative. Central governments will not return to a gold standard for the same reason the last vestiges of the gold standard were abandoned in the first place: it would constrain governments’ freedom to engage in deficit spending and create inflation.

Very clearly the world is erecting new barriers to the free movement of goods. With the US embracing a re-invigorated Monroe Doctrine under its new National Security Strategy, it now views the economic affairs of its neighbours in the Western Hemisphere as issues of interest for the United States. This is obvious in the case of Venezuela, and also in the case of the Panama Canal, and was again highlighted over the weekend when President Trump threatened to impose 100% tariffs on all Canadian goods if Canada were to do a trade deal with China.

Canadian PM Carney became the darling of Davos by delivering a speech articulating the changes in the world order and attempting to rally middle powers to band together and stand against great power coercion. Carney was delivering jabs at the United States, but the credibility of his message may have been diminished somewhat by his actions in signing an agreement with China to reduce Canada’s 100% tariff on Chinese EVs in exchange for a reduction in Chinese tariffs on Canadian canola and seafood products.

Speaking to ABC’s This Week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained the tariff threat by making it clear that Canada’s deal was not acceptable from the perspective of the USA. “We have a highly integrated market with Canada... Goods can cross the border six times during the manufacturing process. And we can’t let Canada become an opening that the Chinese pour their cheap goods into the U.S.”

For now, the geostrategic competition between China and the United States continues to be prosecuted as a trade war but investors may do well to heed Dalio’s warning that punishment in the form of a global capital war is on the horizon. For details on how one part of that might look, see our thoughts on US Dollar stablecoins here.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 12:10

Trump Hails "Very Good Call" With Walz As He Sends "Tough But Fair" Tom Homan To Minnesota

Zero Hedge -

Trump Hails "Very Good Call" With Walz As He Sends "Tough But Fair" Tom Homan To Minnesota

President Trump announced on Jan. 26 that he is sending border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota in the wake of the shooting of an anti-immigration enforcement protester by a federal agent.

The president said in a morning Truth Social post that Homan would be going to Minnesota on Monday evening, noting that though Homan hasn’t been involved in operations there, he knows many officials in the state.

“Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me,” Trump wrote.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed in a post on Monday that Homan would be investigating fraud in Minnesota, building on a multi-agency effort that was launched several weeks ago amid reports of fraudulent activity targeting federal and state entitlement programs.

The border czar, she added, would also be managing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Minnesota to target illegal immigrants.

“In addition, Tom will coordinate with those leading investigations into the massive, widespread fraud that has resulted in billions of taxpayer dollars being stolen from law-abiding citizens in Minnesota,” Leavitt wrote on X.

As Jack Phillips reports for The Epoch Times, the Trump administration has launched its most ambitious immigration operation to date in Minneapolis, sparking weeks of protests by residents and resulting in two shooting deaths.

A Border Patrol agent on Saturday fired in self-defense after a man, identified later as Alex Pretti, approached with a handgun and violently resisted attempts to disarm him, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

It followed the Jan. 7 fatal shooting of U.S citizen Renee Good during a separate immigration operation.

Democratic congressional lawmakers have warned that in the wake of the Pretti shooting, they could shut down the federal government at the end of January if Republicans do not pass a package without DHS funding.

“Senate Democrats will not allow the current DHS funding bill to move forward,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement on Sunday before he criticized the Trump administration.

“People should be safe from abuse by their own government. Senate Republicans must work with Democrats to advance the other five funding bills while we work to rewrite the DHS bill.”

In posts over the weekend and in his Truth Social comment Monday, Trump has shown no sign of backing down amid the protests. On Monday, he suggested that the operation was critical.

Trump wrote that “a major investigation is going on with respect to the massive 20 Billion Dollar. ... Welfare Fraud that has taken place in Minnesota, and is at least partially responsible for the violent organized protests going on in the streets.”

Trump said Sunday that the operation in Minnesota was a key part of why he won in 2024 and signaled that Democratic politicians were to blame.

“Tragically, two American Citizens have lost their lives as a result of this Democrat ensued chaos,” the president said.

This morning, 'diplomacy' appears to be taking place as President Trump said in a Truth Social post (in a dramatic shift in tone) that Governor Tim Walz called him with the request to work together with respect to Minnesota.

"It was a very good call, and we, actually, seemed to be on a similar wavelength," Trump said.

"I told Governor Walz that I would have Tom Homan call him, and that what we are looking for are any and all Criminals that they have in their possession. The Governor, very respectfully, understood that, and I will be speaking to him in the near future.

He was happy that Tom Homan was going to Minnesota, and so am I! We have had such tremendous SUCCESS in Washington, D.C., Memphis, Tennessee, and New Orleans, Louisiana, and virtually every other place that we have “touched” and, even in Minnesota, Crime is way down, but both Governor Walz and I want to make it better!"

We will just have to see if the manufacture crisis ebbs after this... and just how Walz will respond to Trump's statement.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 11:55

Booz Allen Shares Hammered After Treasury Cancels Consulting Contracts

Zero Hedge -

Booz Allen Shares Hammered After Treasury Cancels Consulting Contracts

Shares of Booz Allen Hamilton tumbled the most in months during late Monday morning trading after U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent canceled dozens of contracts tied to the consulting firm.

Secretary Bessent said 31 contracts with Booz Allen were terminated, representing $4.8 million in annual spending and $21 million in total obligations.

"President Trump has entrusted his cabinet to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and canceling these contracts is an essential step to increasing Americans' trust in government," he said, adding, "Booz Allen failed to implement adequate safeguards to protect sensitive data, including the confidential taxpayer information it had access to through its contracts with the Internal Revenue Service."

Treasury pointed to an incident with Booz Allen in recent years:

Most notably, between 2018 and 2020, Charles Edward Littlejohn — an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton — stole and leaked the confidential tax returns and return information of hundreds of thousands of taxpayers.

Last spring, Booz Allen said it was undergoing a major restructuring and planned to cut roughly 2,500 jobs, about 7% of its workforce, as President Trump's DOGE efforts reduced government spending by discontinuing federal contracts.

Later in the year, CEO Horacio Rozanski told investors the company was "making the difficult decision to reduce layers and numbers in our senior ranks" due to federal contract reductions and a broader slowdown in government funding.

Shares of Booz Allen are down 7.5% in the cash session this morning, marking the worst single-day decline since October 24, when the stock fell about 9%. Shares have been cut roughly in half since President Trump's November 2024 election victory, as Elon Musk's DOGE initiative began aggressively targeting waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal bureaucracy in early 2025.

In May 2025, Goldman analyst Noah Poponak downgraded Booz Allen from "Neutral" to "Sell," noting medium-term revenue growth is expected to be flat as federal civilian spending comes under pressure and priorities shift within many federal agencies.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 11:40

USAR's New CEO Executing On Strategy

Zero Hedge -

USAR's New CEO Executing On Strategy

Submitted by Tight Spreads

USA Rare Earth’s (USAR) strategy is characterized by its comprehensive “mine-to-magnet” vertical integration, a significant geographic footprint across North America and Europe. While competitors often focus on specific segments of the value chain, USAR is the only company outside of China positioned to offer a true end-to-end solution. In this note we’ll go over the business, key differentiators, and what the company has as remaining gaps in their operations to execute their strategy. A valuation note will follow soon.

Key notes include how on September 29, 2025, USAR announced the appointment of Barbara Humpton as the company's Chief Executive Officer, effective October 1, 2025. Barbara Humpton had a distinguished 14-year tenure at Siemens before joining USAR.

For those of you who saw the Bloomberg and Reuters headlines:

Today, January 26th, it was confirmed true.

Business Overview and Segments

The company operates as a single reportable operating segment focused on the vertically integrated production of rare earth element magnets. Its business model encompasses the entire value chain through the following core components:

  • Upstream (Mining): Development of the Round Top deposit in Sierra Blanca, Texas, which is the richest known domestic source of heavy rare earth elements, gallium, beryllium, and yttrium.

    • Gallium: Round Top is one of the largest known deposits of gallium, a mineral where China currently accounts for approximately 98% of primary production. It is essential for semiconductors, compound semiconductors, and defense technologies, and was recently subject to export bans by China.

    • Beryllium: This element is used in specialized applications including military radar, nuclear power, X-rays, and MRIs. Its presence at Round Top was identified as early as the 1970s associated with fluorite deposits.

    • Yttrium: Classified as a heavy rare earth, yttrium is critical for radiation therapy for certain cancers and is a foundational material for chemical vapor deposition in semiconductor manufacturing.

  • Midstream (Processing & Metal-Making): Ownership of Less Common Metals (LCM), a leading producer of rare earth metals and alloys based in the UK, and development of a processing lab in Wheat Ridge, Colorado.

    • LCM is the only proven scaled producer of rare earth metals, alloys, and strip casting outside of China.

    • Feedstock Security: The acquisition ensures a reliable supply of NdFeB strip cast alloy, which is a mandatory input for the Stillwater, Oklahoma magnet facility.

    • Specialized Materials: LCM provides leadership in Samarium and Samarium Cobalt metals, which are critical for defense and medical sectors and identified as high-risk for supply vulnerabilities.

    • Circular Manufacturing: LCM brings the ability to process recycled rare earth oxides from end-of-life magnets and production swarf, creating a more sustainable supply chain.

    • Hafnium Extraction: During piloting of its separation methods, the company successfully isolated hafnium, a material used in advanced semiconductors and nuclear reactors.

  • Downstream (Magnet Manufacturing): A 310,000 sq. ft. manufacturing facility in Stillwater, Oklahoma, designed for large-scale production of sintered Neodymium Iron Boron (NdFeB) magnets.

  • Circular Economy: Integration of recycling capabilities to recover materials from end-of-life magnets and production swarf, creating a sustainable closed-loop system.

Remaining Steps for Full Vertical Integration

While the LCM acquisition closes a major gap, several components are still required to fully realize the end-to-end domestic strategy.

1) Mining and Processing Development
  • Technical Milestones: The company must still complete the Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) and a Definitve Feasibility Study (DFS) for the Round Top project. Commercial production at the Texas mine is not expected to begin until late 2028.

  • Separation Scaling: While separation has been proven at the Wheat Ridge lab, USAR needs to scale these technologies to handle 8,000 metric tons per annum of concentrates.

2) Manufacturing and Infrastructure
  • Domestic Metal-Making: While LCM provides metal-making in the UK, USAR still needs to “return this capability home” by establishing rare earth metal-making facilities within the United States.

  • Capacity Expansion: Full commissioning of the Stillwater magnet facility is scheduled for Q1 2026. The company plans to scale magnet production from an initial 1,200 tpa to a target of 5,000 tpa, which requires additional capital and equipment installation.

  • European Expansion: Plans to build a 3,750 mtpa metal and alloy plant in France are underway but require further development and construction.

How the company is addressing the premier bottlenecks identified:

USAR is scaling its operations through a combination of proprietary technological development at its Wheat Ridge facility and a massive $1.6 billion government-backed investment to establish domestic metal-making capabilities.

Scaling Separation Processes to 8,000 Metric TPA

To transition from bench-scale testing to a commercial capacity of 8,000 metric tons per annum (tpa) of concentrates, the company is implementing the following steps and technologies:

Continuous Demonstration and Digital Twin Technology
  • USAR is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy to leverage digital twin technology and process modeling to advance separation at the Wheat Ridge lab.

  • The company plans to operate a Hydromet demonstration facility in Colorado for 2,000 to 4,000 continuous hours starting in early 2026.

  • This demonstration plant will run five parallel solvent-extraction (SX) circuits to generate the operational data required for commercial plant design.

  • The scaling strategy involves moving from batch testing to continuous testing by significantly increasing the volume of rock processed to create enough bulk leach solution.

Process Optimization and Engineering Partners
  • The company has selected Fluor Corp. and WSP Global Inc. as EPCM partners to advance the Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) and manage large-scale infrastructure delivery.

  • Research at the Colorado Facility is specifically focused on refining separation processes that minimize the use of organic solvents, aiming for a lower waste profile than traditional methods.

  • Engineering work is currently focused on “fine-tuning” the separation of bulk gallium, as well as heavy and light rare earths, into distinct concentrate streams.

Establishing Domestic Metal-Making

USAR is addressing the lack of domestic rare earth metal-making by integrating the expertise of its Less Common Metals (LCM) acquisition directly into its U.S. operations.

Integration at Stillwater, Oklahoma
  • USAR intends to return metal making to the United States by integrating LCM’s capabilities into its Stillwater, Oklahoma facility.

  • The Stillwater site is being developed to house the largest metal-and-alloy-making and strip-casting capability outside of China.

  • The facility will produce essential feedstocks for magnets, including NdPr, dysprosium, terbium, and samarium cobalt metals.

  • The company aims to reshore approximately 10,000 tonnes per year of heavy rare earth metal and alloy production capacity to the U.S.

Strategic Support and Workforce Development
  • A $1.6 billion Letter of Intent with the U.S. government and $1.5 billion in private investment are earmarked to accelerate the build-out of these domestic capabilities.

  • To address the shortage of skilled labor in the U.S., USAR is launching an apprenticeship program to train domestic metal makers and transfer expertise from the UK-based LCM team.

  • The domestic metal-making operations will utilize a “circular” approach, incorporating both mined feedstock from Round Top and recycled materials (such as magnet swarf).

Important Notes on Management

New CEO: Barbara Humpton had a distinguished 14-year tenure at Siemens before joining USAR last October.

  • She served as President and CEO of Siemens USA starting in 2018, overseeing the company’s largest market with more than $20 billion in annual revenues.

  • Siemens Government Technologies: Prior to her role as U.S. CEO, she was the President and CEO of Siemens Government Technologies, where she focused on implementing products and services for federal government agencies.

  • Previous Executive Roles: She served as a Vice President at Booz Allen Hamilton and held the position of Vice President and Director at Lockheed Martin Corporation.

  • Board Memberships: She serves on the Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and is the Chair of the Board for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA).

  • Industry Influence: She has held board seats at the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the Economic Club of Washington, D.C.

Rob Steele (CFO): Appointed in March 2025, Steele brings over 30 years of experience in investment banking and has led over $28 billion in capital raises.

Dr. Alex Moyes (VP of Mining): Appointed in October 2025, Moyes holds a PhD in Mining and Minerals Engineering and previously led critical minerals planning at Ramaco Resources.

Board Composition: The board includes experienced figures such as Michael Blitzer (Chairman and SPAC veteran) and General Paul Kern (Ret.), who formerly served as Commanding General of the Army Materiel Command.

More in the Tight Spreads substack.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 11:25

Son Of US Govt Crypto Custodian Allegedly Steals $40 Million

Zero Hedge -

Son Of US Govt Crypto Custodian Allegedly Steals $40 Million

Well known blockchain sleuth, ZachXBT, alleges a custody CEO's son stole tens of millions in crypto from US government‑linked wallets tied to Bitfinex funds, exposing systemic custody risks.

As Andrew Folkler reports for Crypto.news, the case revives scrutiny of contractor CMDSS and wider federal crypto‑custody controls, even as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana prices trade mostly on macro drivers.

Core allegation

In a detailed thread “documenting [his] findings,” ZachXBT claimed that an online figure known as “Lick,” identified as John Daghita, “siphoned tens of millions of dollars in crypto from wallets linked to the US government.”​

He further alleged that Daghita is the son of Dean Daghita, president and chief executive of Command Services & Support (CMDSS), a Virginia‑based firm contracted by the U.S. Marshals Service to safeguard seized digital assets classified as “Class 2–4” tokens that require bespoke custody solutions.​

Trace from Bitfinex‑linked wallets

According to on‑chain traces cited by ZachXBT, the allegedly compromised funds were linked to assets seized in the 2016 Bitfinex hack, with one wallet receiving “$24.9 million from a US government‑controlled wallet in March 2024.”

The probe builds on an earlier investigation, published January 23, that tied the “Lick” persona to “more than $90 million in suspected illicit crypto activity” routed through a network of addresses associated with government‑linked wallets.​

As Hannah Collymore reports for Cryptopolitan.com, that up until two days ago, John Lick had avoided detection.

John 'Lick' Daghita’s flamboyant lifestyle outed him

He had over $20 million in crypto wallets.

However, things started to unravel when he got into a heated argument with another threat actor known as Dritan Kapplani Jr. in a group chat to see who had more funds in crypto wallets.

By the time the showoff session wrapped up, John had flaunted $23 million in total, moving the funds between wallets ZachXBT claims he clearly controls. 

After that, Zach began tracing backwards to verify the source of funds and found that one of the wallets, the 0xc7a2 wallet, had previously received $24.9 million from a U.S. government wallet back in March 2024. 

That transaction was linked to funds the government seized in the Bitfinex hack, and Zach had already flagged that same address in a post from October 2024. Another wallet was linked, the 0xd8bc wallet, which goes back to $63 million obtained from sketchy wallets during Q4 2025. 

John just enjoys showing off

According to reports, it was only a matter of time before this happened, given how much John loves to show off. The Telegram account linked to him reportedly has a long history of bragging about his riches and brokeshaming people.

His username is tied to TG ID 8269661864. After he was outed by Zach, he allegedly wiped out his NFT usernames and quickly changed his screen name, but the damage was already done. 

Zach later revealed that there are rumors circulating in cybercrime Telegram circles indicating John could be John Daghitia, who had previously been arrested in September 2025. He did concede that more research was needed to fully confirm it. 

Since he made the link between John and his father, Zach claims the CMDSS company X account, website, & LinkedIn were all deactivated, and John Daghita (Lick) began trolling again on Telegram shortly after.

As Andrew Folkler reports for Crypto.news concludes, this is not the first issue faced by CMDSS.

Prior CMDSS scrutiny and systemic risk

CMDSS’s appointment already faced challenges when rival Wave Digital Assets filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office, arguing the firm lacked key registrations and warning of potential conflicts involving a former Marshals Service official, though the GAO later denied the protest.

Separately, a 2025 CoinDesk report found the Marshals Service struggled to reconcile its digital asset holdings, underscoring broader concerns around federal crypto custody as illicit addresses received a record “$154 billion in 2025,” up sharply year‑on‑year.

For now, there have been no public arrests or DOJ confirmations, but the onchain evidence has been making rounds across the Internet. Law enforcement could eventually intervene.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 11:10

Elon's X Overhaul: Muting Political Posts And Banishing 'Rage Bait'

Zero Hedge -

Elon's X Overhaul: Muting Political Posts And Banishing 'Rage Bait'

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

While Elon Musk is rightly credited for transforming X into a battleground for unfiltered truth, he dropped two bombshells this week that could significantly reshape the platform.

In a move that promises cleaner feeds but sparks fears of shadowy content policing, Musk revealed plans for topic-specific “For You” tabs free from “political rage bait” and an outright mute tool for all political posts. Critics are already sounding alarms over potential censorship creep.

Musk’s move comes as a direct response to some user gripes about X turning into a rage-fueled echo chamber. With immigration debates, election fallout, and globalist agendas dominating timelines, Musk’s tweaks aim to let users opt out of the frenzy. But in an era where Big Tech has a history of silencing conservative voices, the big question looms: who defines “rage bait,” and does this undermine the free speech haven Musk vowed to build?

Musk first teased the changes in a post on Saturday, explaining that his xAI team is crafting specialized “For You” tabs. “The @xAI team is working on providing For You tabs that are specific to topics,” he wrote. As an example, he pointed to a “For You AI” tab “focused only on artificial intelligence with no political rage bait.” He likened it to “automatically generated follow lists with content ranked by quality.”

Then, on Sunday, Musk doubled down in response to a frustrated user complaining about the app’s political overload. The user lamented, “bro how do i mute all political posts on this app holy hell it has turned into reddit.”

Musk’s reply was straightforward: “I agree. Working on it.” This suggests a broader tool to blanket-mute political content across the platform, not just in curated tabs.

Replies to Musk’s announcements highlight the divide.

Supporters cheered the move, with one user saying it would help “normal posts that never get seen” rise above the din.

Others, however, blasted it as a step toward echo chambers. “Yes let’s put people into echo chambers and make sure they can’t see what’s going on so it can continue….silence is complicity,” fired back one critic in the thread.

Skeptics point to Musk’s own feed, often laced with pointed commentary on issues like unchecked immigration and government overreach.

“You literally post political rage bait all day and night,” quipped another responder. If the boss sets the tone, how fair will the filtering be?

These updates may aim to “enhance content quality” by shifting from a one-size-fits-all algorithm to personalized, high-signal feeds. The move aligns with Musk’s push against legacy media’s stranglehold, but it echoes past Big Tech controversies where “quality” often meant suppressing dissenting views on topics like election integrity or vaccine mandates.

At its core, X under Musk has been a win for free speech and truth—exposing media hypocrisy, amplifying anti-globalist narratives, and giving a platform to those shut out by Silicon Valley elites. Yet this new direction raises red flags. If algorithms decide what’s “political” or “rage bait,” could conservative takes on border crises or woke indoctrination get flagged and blocked?

Musk has repeatedly championed free speech, vowing to make X a town square for all ideas. But tools like these could inadvertently—or intentionally—tilt the scales. Who programs the AI to spot “rage bait”?

True freedom means no gatekeepers, even well-intentioned ones. Muting and blocking posts of any nature risks creating just another filtered bubble, stifling the voices that need to be heard most.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 10:55

Key Events This Week: Fed, Central Banks Galore, Earnings Avalanche

Zero Hedge -

Key Events This Week: Fed, Central Banks Galore, Earnings Avalanche

With the year still not yet four weeks old, it’s already been a constant firehose of news volatility, even as market volatility has remained relatively contained, DB's Jim Reid writes this morning. Consider: we’ve moved from Venezuela to Japan, via Iran and Greenland, with a range of other themes running in the background. These now include President Trump on Saturday threatening 100% tariffs on Canada if China strikes a trade deal with them, and the odds of another US government shutdown after January 30th (Friday) jumping on Polymarket from 8% on Friday to 78% this morning. This followed Senate Democratic leader Schumer warning that they will block the spending package unless Republicans defund Homeland Security after a Border Patrol shooting at a protest in Minnesota on Saturday linked to the immigration crackdown.

If that weren’t enough, Rick Rieder’s odds of becoming the next Fed Chair surged from around 33% as Europe closed on Friday to over 60% at one point over the weekend, before settling at 47% this morning. The perception in markets is that he would be more market friendly than the previous front runner, Kevin Warsh, who is now trading at 29% on Polymarket. He was at 65% last Monday. Finally in the UK, Andy Burnham was yesterday blocked by the ruling Labour Party from contesting an imminent by-election. Burnham is seen as a potential challenger to PM Starmer with lots of party support. Gilts may see some relative relief this morning as Burnham had said last September that the UK needs to "get beyond being in hock to the bond markets". 

With all this going on it's perhaps no wonder that Gold (+8.52%) was within two-tenths of a percent of its best week since 2008, marginally behind one week in 2020. It's up another +1.7% this morning and has flown past $5000 for the first time. However the Dollar has just had its worst week for 8 months, falling against all its peers, and has continued to weaken this morning.

So there are plenty of balls in the air right now, but the one perhaps most urgently needing careful handling is Japan. On Friday afternoon in Europe, ZeroHedge broke news that the New York Fed had conducted a “rate check” on USD/JPY on behalf of the US Treasury. This morning, the Japanese yen is around +1%, trading at ~154 against the dollar, marking its strongest position since November. Various official have refused to confirm or deny overnight any intervention so far. 2yr JGBs are around +3bps higher with 10yr and 30yr yields -1bps and flat respectively while the Nikkei is -1.90% due to the strong Yen since Friday.

With all that in mind, let's take a look at the coming week. 

The main event this week will be the Fed’s decision on Wednesday with the main focus not on the likely unchanged Fed Funds rate but on what Powell says about a variety of things in the presser (more below). The Bank of Canada meet the same day with Sweden’s Riksbank meeting on Thursday, with both also expected to be on hold. Finally, the ECB will publish its monthly consumer expectations survey on Friday.

In terms of data, the US sees durable goods (today), consumer confidence (tomorrow) and PPI (Friday).

In Europe preliminary January CPI for countries including German and Spain are released, alongside Q4 GDP for the main economies all on Friday. The German Ifo is out today.

Over in Asia, a likely busy week of news flow for Japan is bookended with a big data dump on Friday featuring the Tokyo CPI, consumer confidence, retail sales and industrial production. The Lower House election campaign begins tomorrow ahead of the 8 February vote. Other notable indicators due in the region include December industrial profits in China tomorrow and Q4 CPI in Australia on Wednesday.

Rounding out with corporate earnings, an important week is ahead featuring results from four Magnificent 7 stocks – Microsoft, Meta and Tesla on Wednesday and Apple on Thursday. The four make up 16% of the S&P 500 by market cap, with the overall list of firms reporting this week totaling 32% of aggregate capitalization. Other tech highlights include ASML, Samsung, IBM and SAP. The focus will also be on defense firms RTX, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. On Friday, big oil firms Exxon and Chevron will also report. In Europe, highlights also include LVMH, Roche and Sanofi.

Source: Earnings Whispers

Previewing Wednesday’s FOMC meeting, DB economists expect the Federal Reserve to leave policy unchanged while striking a slightly firmer tone on the underlying economic backdrop. Although the usual focus would be on the policy outlook, circumstances this time mean that Chair Powell’s press conference is likely to dwell heavily on non-economic matters. Questions will inevitably surface around the recent DoJ subpoena, the situation involving Governor Cook, and the broader issue of future Fed leadership. Powell will probably lean on the themes of his recorded statement from 11 January, emphasizing the importance of institutional independence and resisting political pressure — a message he is unlikely to dilute given the current environment.

On the policy statement itself, expect the Fed to upgrade its description of growth from the previous “moderate pace” to something closer to a “solid pace,” consistent with Vice Chair Jefferson’s comments on 16 January. They also expect the Committee to acknowledge a somewhat steadier labor market, reflecting the more recent data flow available since the November meeting. Inflation is trickier: with core PCE still running at 2.8% year on year into November, progress has been limited, and the Committee may simply reiterate that inflation remains “somewhat elevated,” echoing Jefferson’s framing of recent developments.

Where the statement may shift most meaningfully is the second paragraph. Over the past several meetings, the Fed has justified its easing bias by pointing to rising labor market risks. Given the more balanced labor picture and the lack of discernible improvement on inflation, DB economists believe the Committee may drop its explicit reference to labor market deterioration and revert to the more neutral line that it remains attentive to risks on both sides of the mandate — while stopping short of last year’s language that risks were “roughly balanced.”

Taken together, Wednesday’s decision and press conference should reinforce the idea that policy is now within the Fed’s estimated range of neutral and that the Committee is well placed to respond in either direction if incoming data justify a move. Nearly all voters are likely to endorse that message, though Governor Miran will likely dissent in favour of additional easing. 

Day-by-day calendar of events:

Monday January 26

  • Data: US November and October Chicago Fed national activity index, November durable goods orders, January Dallas Fed manufacturing activity, Japan December PPI services, Germany January Ifo survey
  • Central banks: ECB’s Nagel and Kocher speak
  • Earnings: FANUC, Ryanair, Epiroc
  • Auctions: US 2-yr Notes ($69bn)

Tuesday January 27

  • Data: US January Conference Board consumer confidence index, Dallas Fed services activity, Richmond Fed manufacturing index, business conditions, November FHFA house price index, China December industrial profits, France January consumer confidence, EU27 December new car registrations
  • Central banks: ECB’s Nagel speaks
  • Earnings: LVMH, UnitedHealth, RTX, Boeing, Texas Instruments, NextEra Energy, Union Pacific, HCA Healthcare, Atlas Copco, Northrop Grumman, UPS, General Motors, Sandvik AB, Kimberly-Clark
  • Auctions: US 5-yr Notes ($70bn)
  • Other: the EU-India summit

Wednesday January 28

  • Data: Germany February GfK consumer confidence, Italy January economic sentiment, Australia Q4 CPI
  • Central banks: Fed’s decision, BoC’s decision, BoJ’s minutes of the December monetary policy meeting, ECB’s Elderson and Schnabel speak
  • Earnings: Microsoft, Meta, Tesla, ASML, Lam Research, IBM, Amphenol, GE Vernova, Danaher, AT&T, ServiceNow, Starbucks, Advantest, General Dynamics, Corning, Volvo AB , Lonza, Kia, MSCI
  • Auctions: US 2-yr FRN ($30bn)

Thursday January 29

  • Data: US November trade balance, factory orders, wholesale trade sales, initial jobless claims, Japan January consumer confidence index, France Q4 total jobseekers, Italy November industrial sales, December hourly wages, Eurozone January economic confidence, December M3, Canada November international merchandise trade, Sweden Q4 GDP indicator
  • Central banks: Riksbank decision, ECB’s Cipollone speaks
  • Earnings: Apple, Visa, Samsung Electronics, Mastercard, SK hynix, Roche, Caterpillar, SAP, Thermo Fisher Scientific, KLA, Blackstone, Hitachi, Honeywell, ABB Ltd, Stryker, Lockheed Martin, Parker-Hannifin, Sanofi, Comcast, Altria, Keyence, ING, Lloyds Banking, Hyundai Motor, Sandisk, L3Harris Technologies, Norfolk Southern, Swedbank, Nokia, Givaudan
  • Auctions: US 7-yr Notes ($44bn)

Friday January 30

  • Data: Tokyo CPI, December jobless rate, job-to-applicant ratio, retail sales, industrial production, US December PPI, January MNI Chicago PMI, UK January Lloyds Business Barometer, December net consumer credit, M4, Japan December housing starts, Germany January CPI, unemployment claims rate, Q4 GDP, December import price index, France Q4 GDP, private sector payrolls, December consumer spending, PPI, Italy Q4 GDP, December unemployment rate, PPI, Eurozone Q4 GDP, December unemployment rate, Canada November GDP
  • Central banks: Fed’s Musalem speaks, ECB December consumer expectations survey
  • Earnings: Exxon Mobil, Chevron, American Express, Verizon, Sumitomo Mitsui, Regeneron, Colgate-Palmolive

Finally, looking at just the US, the key economic data releases this week are the durable goods report on Monday and the producer price index on Friday. The January FOMC meeting is on Wednesday. The post-meeting statement will be released at 2:00 PM ET, followed by Chair Powell’s press conference at 2:30 PM.

Monday, January 26 

  • 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, November preliminary (GS +5.0%, consensus +4.0%, last -2.2%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, November preliminary (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.1%); Core capital goods orders, November preliminary (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.5%); Core capital goods shipments, November preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.8%): We estimate that durable goods orders rebounded 5% in the preliminary November report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted), reflecting an increase in commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.3% increase in core capital goods orders and a 0.4% increase in core capital goods shipments—the latter reflecting the increase in orders in the prior month.

Tuesday, January 27 

  • 09:00 AM S&P Case-Shiller home price index, November (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.3%) 
  • 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, January (GS 90.5, consensus 90.0, last 89.1)

Wednesday, January 28 

  • There are no major data releases scheduled. 
  • 02:00 PM FOMC statement, January 27-28 meeting: As discussed in our FOMC preview, this January meeting is likely to be uneventful, with no change to the fed funds rate, only minor changes to the statement, and few hints about the future policy path. Chair Powell is likely to emphasize that the FOMC has just delivered three cuts that should help to stabilize the labor market and is well positioned for now while it assesses their impact.

Thursday, January 29 

  • 08:30 AM Nonfarm productivity, Q3 final (GS +4.9%, consensus +4.9%, last +4.9%); Unit labor costs, Q3 final (GS -1.9%, consensus -1.9%, last -1.9%)
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended January 24 (GS 200k, consensus 205k, last 200k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended January 17 (consensus 1,850k, last 1,849k)
  • 08:30 AM Trade balance, November (GS -$37.0bn, consensus -$44.2bn, last -$29.4bn); We forecast that the US trade deficit widened by $7.6bn to $37.0bn in November, reflecting a decline in gold exports and an increase in imports of computers and electronic products from Taiwan.
  • 10:00 AM Factory orders, November (GS +2.4%, consensus +1.6%, last -1.3%)

Friday, January 30 

  • 08:30 AM PPI final demand, December (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%); PPI ex-food and energy, December (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.3%, last flat); PPI ex-food, energy, and trade, December (GS +0.3%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%)

Source: DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 01/26/2026 - 10:45

Transcript: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman 

The Big Picture -

 

 

The transcript from this week’s MiB: Zach Buchwald, Russell Investments CEO and Chairman, is below.

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.

~~~

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio News. This is Masters in business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg Radio.

Barry Ritholtz: This week on the podcast, I have yet another extra special guest. Zach Buckwald is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Russell Investments. They run about $370 billion. I found this to be a fascinating conversation. Russell has been at the forefront of a number of really interesting innovations, indexing and outsource, CIO and smart beta. They were way ahead of the rest of the investment world. Now they’re putting together really interesting active portfolios, including private investments. They work with both wealth clients as well as institutions. You may not know Zach’s name, but he’s got an absolutely fascinating background at BlackRock, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers. I thought this conversation was fascinating, and I think you will also, with no further ado, my conversation with Russell Investments. Zach Buckwald. Zach Buchwald, welcome to Bloomberg.

Zach Buchwald: Delighted to be here, Barry. Thanks for having me.

Barry Ritholtz: Thank you so much for joining us. I spoke to your predecessor about three years ago, right after the pandemic, but let’s start talking a little bit about your background. Undergraduate bachelor’s degree at Harvard. What were you studying there?

Zach Buchwald: I Studied English, so this was not on the, on the docket that I was gonna have a career in finance.

Barry Ritholtz: Not, not the plan, huh? So, so you come outta school in 96. What was your first gig?

Zach Buchwald:  So outta school, I applied to law, law school, not sort of knowing where I was going. And I, and I decided to have a little break before I, before I went back to school. And I got recruited by, by Lehman Brothers. So I spent two years working in structured finance at, at Lehman Brothers, and it became apparent to me right away, I didn’t wanna become a, a corporate lawyer ’cause I worked with lawyers. And that was, that was not the job for me, but I had a knack for it. I enjoyed it. I always liked math, even though I was an English major. And, you know, you can find other ways to put your writing and your reading acumen to, to work as well.

Barry Ritholtz: And I’m gonna say late 1990s, nobody had any clue what was coming a decade later.

Zach Buchwald:  Not at all. No. Lehman Brothers was a great place to, to start my career, but after two years, I went to Morgan Stanley and that, that’s how I think at the beginning of my career. ’cause I spent 10 years at Morgan Stanley, I was very invested in the firm, and the firm was, was invested in me. I learned about, you know, the capital markets top to bottom. And I, I had a, a career there that took me from, you know, from a starting associate role to running a business that became the CLO business, which now is like a real, you know, really important part of capital markets. What,

Barry Ritholtz: What were your titles there? What’d you do there?

Zach Buchwald:  Yeah, well I started as an associate within, within fixed income. I, you know, I was in sales, I was in trading, I was in structuring. I always worked within the credit derivative space. And then ultimately credit derivatives started getting wrapped up in different ways. And I, and I worked on the CLO platform and Morgan Stanley had a leading CLO platform that by the end of my my time there, i, I ran. And that was about, you know, I think about the role that CLOs play in the, you know, in the, in the markets today. It’s a, an enormous origination function that helps, you know, finance a lot of corporate America.

Barry Ritholtz: John Mack was CEO at the time, is that right?

Zach Buchwald: I was there for Phil Purcell and I was there for John Mack.

Barry Ritholtz: Wow. Those are two legends in, in the industry. What inspired you to head over to BlackRock?

Zach Buchwald:  I went to BlackRock with the guy that I was working for at Morgan Stanley. And we created a business that was essentially an advisory practice. This was 2008. And BlackRock was hired to work on a lot of these situations that were, you know, at the, at the start of the crisis. So we worked with the Federal Reserve, we worked with the treasury, a lot of the big financial institutions that had, you know, problematic portfolios. And BlackRock was very well positioned as a buy-side firm, as a company that sort of had an underwritten a lot of like the problematic derivative products.

Barry Ritholtz: I mean, did they, they, did they even have an investing banking division back then?

Zach Buchwald: No, we, I mean, we called it advisory, but essentially it was like an investment banking function. I mean, it was really consultative providing advice, running portfolio analytics, thinking about, you know, if you can separate like the liquidity crisis from the actual credit risk and, and, and the, you know, sort of the expected cash flows on these securities, what could you expect to get back? And we, you know, we created a roadmap for, for the government on how to invest in these securities that they took away. You know, that they essentially backstopped from these big organizations and tried to create a roadmap to bring them back to par to repay all the taxpayers with interest. And, and in almost every respect over, over time, the government was successful in doing that. And BlackRock really played a very special role in, in creating those roadmaps. And, you know, it wasn’t what I would think of as like a highly profitable business, but in terms of like the aura that was created around BlackRock as being like a solutions provider, you know, sort of a force for good in the world. That’s, that’s what we did. And it was a, it was a, it was a great role for me.

Barry Ritholtz: I recall that era that BlackRock essentially had become the street’s bond desk. Like every brokerage firm used to have a fairly substantial bond desk. And it seemed like BlackRock has just sucked up all that paper and, and all those traders.

Zach Buchwald: Well, that sounds like an HR strategy and I don’t, I don’t know that I had any, anything, any part of that, but, but there was a lot of talent for, for sure. And there continues to be a lot of talent. You know, some of those, you know, some of the folks that worked on those, you know, on those assignments are, are essentially running BlackRock now. And it was, you know, it was the consultative nature of thinking about, you know, thinking about the challenges, how we can create solutions to those challenges, thinking about the aspirations and the ambitions and, you know, that doesn’t just apply to workout situations. That applies to all, you know, kind of all the clients. And it’s something that I’ve tried to import, you know, into my current role at, at Russell.

Barry Ritholtz: So you’re there for 15 years, eventually you become head of their institutional business. Yep. That’s, that’s a $2 trillion silo. And you also helped establish BlackRock Retirement Solutions. Explain what these groups do. Yeah,

Zach Buchwald: Barry Ritholtz: So after, after the consulting practice, I, I went on to run the insurance business at BlackRock. That was a $200 billion business at the time. A little sleepy, not, you know, what I would say is like a growth center. And, and it was housed with the, the business itself was housed with true insurance experts, asset liability experts, people who really understood like the nuts and bolts of, of insurance companies. And I, I did not have an insurance background and, you know, for the first year, I had an insurance guy sort of stapled to me every time I went to a client, make sure I didn’t get out over my skis. But, you know, but you know, this, being an outsider sometimes can actually really, you know, help you think, think externally about some of the things that might be impacting the, the, the, the clients, the industry, the sector, the business itself.

And early on when I was in that role, we ran an analysis of the whole US insurance industry. Every company that was bigger than a billion dollars of general account assets. And we asked ourselves the question, what are some of the external factors that could impact these companies that they might not be expecting or prepared for? And, and where could BlackRock play a role in helping them deal with those kinds of challenges? And we came up with seven situations, Barry, that we thought were gonna have like seismic type impacts on the companies. And four of them happened. And in three of those cases, BlackRock went on to, to play a really big role and, and run the general accounts. And that was more than a hundred billion dollars of assets. And we put on another a hundred billion dollars along the way. So that was the case where the business started growing like very meaningfully. And I think BlackRock sort of paid a lot of attention to that and realized, gee, we could play a bigger role with these insurance companies. They’re gonna do a lot more interesting things than just invest in, you know, sort of high quality fixed income over time. You also had some interesting stuff happening with Apollo and Athene. They were kind of remaking the model a little bit. And, and BlackRock, you know, pays a lot of attention to what’s going on in the, in the outside world. And we, we, we grew the business

Barry Ritholtz: To say the very least, what are they, 12, $13 trillion now in assets.

Zach Buchwald: It’s a good business. Yeah.

Barry Ritholtz:  So 10 years at Morgan Stanley, 15 years at BlackRock, what lessons did you take from those experiences to Russell Investments? Yeah,

Zach Buchwald: Well, first and foremost, it’s all about the client. And if you lose sight of that understanding the, what the client is dealing with, their challenges, their ambitions, their aspirations, being a consultative provider, if you start from a push out, like, here are the products that I have, here are the things that I’ve done before, it almost never works. And it also, that’s not the, the age that we’re living in today. The age that we’re living in is how can I, how can I help you achieve the outcomes that you’re trying to get to? How can I anticipate some of the challenges that you’re gonna experience? How can I help you learn from some of the things that I’ve, you know, I’ve seen in the sector or the industry? And you start from there and it builds a foundation with the client that is just ir sort of irreplaceable. So that’s, I mean, that was one really important learning. Now, I, I, I came into Russell because Russell had like, first of all, it’s a 90 year legacy. Thank you for starting with that 1936.

Barry Ritholtz: that’s a, that’s a, you’re coming up on a century soon.

Zach Buchwald: Yeah, exactly. I’m really proud to, to run, I’m the eighth CEOO by the way of, of in 90 years of Russell Investments. I mean, that’s, so for a US asset manager that’s old. And I think about the things that Russell has done in that time, Barry, I mean, it’s been a real innovator and category creator. Everybody knows the Russell indexes, which were, you know, sort of cultivated and innovated in all sorts of cool ways. And we all have it in our pensions and our 4 0 1 Ks. You know, Russell was the original pension investment consultant. We created that category. Rus Russell was the original OCIO and we’re still a, a leader in, in OCIO. These are, these are really, you know, sort of important categories that have a big impact on, on the investment ecosystem. And what was, what was special to me about Russell, and the reason I wanted to join is Russell’s approach to doing all of these solutions is it’s entirely open architecture.

So the view is we build and implement portfolios at Russell, which is, you know, something I worked on at BlackRock and to some extent in Morgan Stanley too. But the idea is we use best of breed managers and strategies from around the whole investment universe. So if I put together an OCIO portfolio at Russell, I’m building, you know, fixed income manager, you know, the best quality fixed income managers, the best private assets managers, the best cash and, and so on, and best index products. You know, we can kind of, it’s, it’s, we can kind of go everywhere within the ecosystem. And that was a model that I was very excited about because it became more about, like, thinking through the lens of what the client is looking to achieve and how can I use all of the tools and the ingredients available as opposed to sort of a set, you know, set of tools that I, that I had at, at hand from the company that I worked for.

Barry Ritholtz: We’re gonna talk about pensions. OCI we’re gonna talk about a little later. I didn’t realize this till I started doing my homework. Russell is effectively credited with inventing smart beta. I mean, who, who knew that? I think of a, a couple of other firms as taking the leadership in that recently. But 40 years ago you guys were on the, on the cutting edge of that. What is it like running a firm that has a near century long legacy? How does that affect how you think about risks and opportunities?

Zach Buchwald: Yeah, it, I mean, the legacy is a, is a wonderful thing. But you know, you can’t rest. Like we all know we can’t rest on our laurels. It’s, you know, the, the, the job for me is to make sure that I’m taking sort of the best parts of the history and the legacy, the innovative spirit, all these cool things that we’ve done, and then evolving them for the world that we’re in today, our, our, our mainline business, we have, we have sort of two central businesses. It’s OCIO and it’s model portfolios that we do on the retail side, which is essentially same kind of ideas of the institutional business, building great portfolios and implementing them. 90% of our business is those, is falls into those two categories. What I need to do today is make sure that I’m using all of the tools available. So as the market moves from, you know, active products to passive products, as the market starts integrating private assets with public assets, all of that is part of our portfolio today. And, and so the goal, you know, as the leader is to make sure that the strategy is incorporating, we’re open architecture. It’s, it’s truly incorporating the entire ecosystem into the, into what we build for our clients.

Barry Ritholtz: I want to get your feedback on a quote of yours. I found in my, in my homework quote, financial security is a central challenge for this industry. How did your experiences at BlackRock, at Morgan Stanley and way back when at Lehman Brothers, how did it affect your, your concept of financial security,

Zach Buchwald: Financial security and retirement security especially? Took me a little bit of time to hone in on Barry. I mean, I think back to my years at Morgan Stanley, and, you know, the job there was very much about sort of like finding the arbitrage and the markets. It’s where can we make money on as a sales and trading function? And we help clients along the way, you know, by delivering the products and services that they want. But first and foremost, it was about the investment bank. And, and that changed for me. I had a, I had a review with my boss at the time, and she said to me something that she meant as a compliment. She said to me, Zach, you can really smell the money. And I went away. And that was not the legacy that I wanted from my career. And, you know, I moved to BlackRock shortly after that where I was helping, you know, the, the government, the taxpayers deal with like, really critical issues, like really big thorny problems that were gonna have an impact on, you know, on the quality of life of the people in this, in this country.

And it, it was a complete reset of my perspective. You know, now we build portfolios at Russell, but you know, if I’m working for a pension or a 401k or an insurance company, at the end of the day, I’m serving individuals. I’m helping them. And we don’t lose sight of that. I’m helping them have a secure retirement. Now, by the way, they have to do their part too, because it’s also about, you know, saving, early, contributing, making sure that you’re, you know, learning about the, the plan and making the right decisions. But the role that we play within the industry is a make or break in terms of whether they’re able to, whether they’re able to achieve that. Now you also have something going on in the background that’s, that’s gonna have a very big impact in the next couple of decades with retirees in America. And, and that is that really the risk has shifted. Now, the retirement security risk has shifted from, you know, organizations like the companies and the government

Barry Ritholtz:  Companies in defined benefits, correct. To defined contributions to defined contribution.

Zach Buchwald: So the standard model, the standard pension model is shifting to the 401k and today still about half of retirees have access to a pension. And that plus, plus social security, more or less gets the job done. But in another decade it’s gonna be less than a third. And in another two decades it’s gonna be very little at all. So that means that now the 401k is the staple that’s gonna, you know, result in a, a secure comfortable retirement or, or not. And you know, the, the, the big challenge with a 401k is that the risk of saving, investing and also decumulation, taking that pot of money and knowing how long, you know, the longevity risk, knowing how, thinking about how long you’re gonna live and how to allotted over time, all of that risk will now be borne by the individual. And we have not fully processed that in the, you know, within, within the country that this is a crisis that’s coming, that people aren’t prepared to, to own that responsibility. And the system today isn’t set up in such a way that sort of, the decisions are very easy to, you know, to make at the, the onus is really still on the individual.

Barry Ritholtz: So that’s really fascinating. H how does that affect what you see within your role as CEO at Russell Investments? Yeah,

Zach Buchwald: Well thanks Barry. Our whole mission is built around helping people achieve financial security. And we do that on the institutional side by partnering with corporate sponsors and helping to, you know, ensure that the plans that they’re, you know, putting in place and the role that they play through matching through, you know, providing lifetime income, whatever the set of benefits are is gonna be, is gonna serve the participants in the way that we think is gonna help them have, you know, retire with confidence and with with security. But as the, you know, as the machine shifts and it moves more toward a, a 401k and then, you know, a lot of folks end up with a nest egg that they have to manage on their own. The goal is to make sure that on the wealth side, we also have sort of the right kinds of products and services and solutions that help them, you know, understand the income, help them understand decumulation, help them get the right diversification, help them get fair fees. I mean, the goal is to make sure that we’re, we’re really delivering sort of a set of products and services that’s gonna allow them to live the kind of retirement that they all they’ll hope for.

00:16:12 [Speaker Changed] Hmm, really, really interesting. So whenever I talk to people about Russell, everybody knows the Russell 2000. The question is, what does Russell do? How do they make money on they, they must do something more than the Russell 2000. Tell us a little bit about the different business lines at, at Russell Investments. Sure.

00:16:31 [Speaker Changed] So the index business is now owned by London Stock Exchange, and they, they do a magnificent job with it. And we still have a little bit of the, you know, the aura. Every time I’m in the elevator I see the advertisements for Russell and I think I didn’t have to pay for that ad. We get, we get the benefit. The business is predominantly an a, it’s an active asset management business. And, and we really have one main function, Barry. It’s about building and implementing great portfolios. And we do it for institutional clients and we do it for retail clients. So building the portfolios is really about sort of, you know, it’s portfolio construction, it’s strategies and managers. For 90 years we’ve done manager research at, at Russell we have, you know, a huge team of people. Now it’s augmented by AI and technology helping us look at 16,000 different managers and figuring out, we invest with about 225 of them, you know, figuring out which managers and strategies we think make sense in the different portfolios we create. And then the implementation is one of the coolest parts. ’cause that’s, we actually do the investing on behalf of the managers. They, they typically give us model portfolios and, and then all the things around the portfolio that can, you know, be very incremental. It’s the, the transitions, it’s the, the hedging completion exercise, completion mandates, overlays, and, you know, those things can be alpha generative, they can be very important for risk management. You can add a values overlay for for clients. And so it’s a, it’s a full portfolio delivery at the end of the day.

00:17:54 [Speaker Changed] Coming up, we continue our conversation with Zach Buckwald, chairman and CEO of Russell Investments discussing exactly what Russell Investments does for its clients. I’m Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest this week is Zach Buckwald, he’s chairman and chief executive officer of Russell Investments. The firm was founded in 1936 and runs about $370 billion. Zach joined Russell in 2023 coming from his previous career at BlackRock. So you mentioned you’re researching 16,000 different managers and internally you’re generating just a fire hose of data. How do you analyze that? What value is that data to the firm?

00:18:59 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I mean, the data is everything and we, we have, we do have a, you know, historical trove of, of data, but it changes quickly. You think about how quickly the, you know, the investment ecosystem e evolves and, you know, managers have strategies that make sense on one day and then things change and, and those strategies don’t make sense. So it’s, it really has to stay current even though we, you know, we certainly value the, the historical data and, and performance and use it. We start with 16,000 and the first layer is largely technology driven. So it’s, you know, we have huge feeds that take into, you know, that, that take in and analyze all of the available information that’s provided to us by managers directly. And also that we can find out there in the, in the public domain.

00:19:44 [Speaker Changed] When you say managers, are these mutual fund managers, ETF managers, private managers, or all the above?

00:19:50 [Speaker Changed] It’s, it’s all of the above. I mean, typically because of our size and scale, we don’t, we don’t invest in a ton of direct like shared products. We do much more sep sort of separate accounts and, but we do invest in mutual funds. We do invest in ETFs or index products where, where that makes sense and that can help, you know, drive down cost or, you know, help with the diversification. But, but the managers is for the act, the active strategies and active represents, I’m gonna guess probably 85% of the assets in that that we manage overall. Remember we’re using different active strategies as the building blocks to create these portfolios. So predominantly it’s not Russell managed, although, you know, we can talk about the smart beta that you, you, you brought up predominantly. These are externally managed strategies that we bring together and then we collapse the whole thing together in one portfolio. And we look enterprise wide because you might have, you know, three active equity managers and they’re not paying attention to what the other ones are doing. And so you can end up with outsized positions or underweights, you can end up with, you know, people on opposite sides of trades and we look to, you know, to correct or make adjustments where it makes sense.

00:20:57 [Speaker Changed] So you guys were very innovative and helped create the concept of outsource chief investment Officer o CIOs. Tell us a little bit about that business line. Who are the clients and, and h how much assets are, does that run?

00:21:13 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, so OCIO represents the lion’s share of the 370 billion that that we manage. And it’s a fast growing segment, not just at Russell, but it’s growing because a lot of companies are, are outsourcing their pensions or their 4 0 1 ks to, you know, folks that live and breathe the markets and that think about retirement security like we do all, all day long. So, you know, a typical day at Bloomberg might have one top story about a big corp, you know, big US corporate that’s chosen to outsource their retirement portfolio. Now we work with a lot of in-house teams as well. We help by bringing in, you know, any of those implementation services like transitions and hedging. We do that for a lot of, a lot of companies that have internal teams. But sometimes sponsors decide to, you know, to hire retirement experts to, to run their, to run their retirement portfolio and that’s when they would bring in an outsourced chief investment officer. We’re a top five provider and it’s some of the big, you know, the other big asset managers that, that also provide that we’re the ones who do it with an open architecture framework. So the goal is not to, you know, have Russell run the whole portfolio. It’s to bring in best of breed managers and to bring those together.

00:22:16 [Speaker Changed] Huh, really, really kind of interesting. When you talk about hedging, are you hedging equity, hedging fixed income? What, what is the hedging business like?

00:22:25 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, it can be all of the above. Also a foreign, you know, foreign currency, you know, it can be hedging individual sectors. You might have a sponsor that’s in the technology sector and they feel like they already have enough exposure to technology. And so you can, you know, make some adjustments to the portfolio. That way you can also build in a values orientation for, you know, organizations that have a particular, you know, view of the world that they wanna express in their investment portfolios.

00:22:50 [Speaker Changed] So let’s talk a little bit about smart beta, which Russell helped pioneer in 1985 way before your time or my time for that matter. Is this still something that’s a key part of what you’re doing?

00:23:03 [Speaker Changed] So we still have a strong footprint within systematic Barry and you know, Russell manages on average between 10 and 20% of the portfolios that, that we look after. And systematic typically is within that, that 10 to 20% we use it not to make, you know, credit decisions or stock picking decisions. Like that’s not, that’s not our game. That’s why we hire external managers who are, you know, true experts in that we use it to like round out the portfolio to make adjustments to make sure that the portfolio is complying with why the client hired us or whatever their investment, you know, their stated investment strategy says. But smart beta is, you know, one of the many places where Russell was an innovator and you know, these things can sort of take on a, a life of their own as the, as the industry adopts those practices.

00:23:46 [Speaker Changed] We mentioned artificial intelligence earlier. Tell us how you’re using AI and either risk management portfolio construction or just data analytics.

00:23:55 [Speaker Changed] So Barry, we have a list this long of sort of, you know, desired use cases that we’re working on for, for ai. And I, I think we’re still in, in early innings here, but the kinds of things that we use AI for today very effectively are more task oriented. You know, we have it fill out our RFPs, we have it build pitch decks. We have actually, we use AI to, you know, read 500 page filings, you know, which we used to have a human being do back in the day. And it’s very effective at that. The real goal for, you know, for this company is that I want AI to actually help us with investment insights, with manager research insights that’s gonna actually drive performance at the end of the day. And I think we still have a fair amount of, we’re making progress, but I think we still have a fair amount of work before, before that happens. But, you know, that’s the view where having, you know, having a, a portfolio where we look after 16,000 different strategies and, and managers, we’re starting from a place where we, like, as you said, we have troves of, of information, of historical information that we’re relying on and that we’re using AI to sort of help build out that framework.

00:24:59 [Speaker Changed] So I’m, I’m always fascinated by, you know, the old joke is no one’s ever seen a bad back test and AI and those sort of things are o only capable of looking at what’s already occurred and built into all, all of those back tests and to some, some degree built in to AI is that the future is gonna resemble the past. How do you navigate around that? Because sometimes the future doesn’t resemble the past, just look at AI and how it’s changing so many aspects of, of various businesses. Yeah,

00:25:34 [Speaker Changed] Well that’s a place where, you know, I’m still pretty optimistic that there’s an enormous amount of value creation to come Barry, because the, you know, what we’ve seen from AI so far, at least how it’s, how it’s shown up in terms of, you know, in the, in the market performance has been almost entirely Harvard in the technology sector. It’s where, you know, sort of where ai, EEE exists. What we haven’t seen yet is all of the other sectors that we know are gonna be sort of enormously impacted by the proper use of ai, the creative and innovative use of ai. So, you know, you see a little bit of it in like healthcare and life sciences, but you know, logistics and shipping and consumer goods and in investments, asset management, they’re all gonna get transformed by AI because it’s changing things. And you know, this is where I’m, I’m really optimistic that we have a lot more room to run in, in, in the markets today is because you’re still not seeing like all the, you know, the potential and the benefits of, of AI showing up in some of these, you know, what we think of as sectors that are peripheral to technology.

00:26:37 But you know, in truth technology is like critical to how we, you know, how we all exist.

00:26:42 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Makes makes a lot of sense. Let’s talk about private markets. How can Russell Investments help their clients access private markets between AI and privates? Those are probably the two hottest topics we’ve been talking about this year.

00:26:57 [Speaker Changed] So privates represents about 7% of the portfolios that we manage. It’s heavier in, in the institutional portfolios. It’s lighter right now within wealth portfolios. There’s a lot more growth that’s, that’s gonna happen, especially in wealth. I think the average wealth client has something like one or 2% of their portfolio outside of their real estate holdings about one or 2% in private. And that number is going to grow and, and should grow, right? Because this is a really important source of, you know, re return and risk diversification. And if you rely on the historical precedence, it’s been an enormous outperformer writ large. And so, you know, kind of delivering, you know, access is a, it’s a very important, you know, function that we do at Russell, but also that we work with our financial advisor partners to, to figure out the best ways. ’cause it’s, you know, how you deliver privates to to, to institutional investors is, is different, right?

00:27:48 There’s tax considerations and reporting considerations, liquidity considerations that all need to be considered with, with individuals. So we’re trying to do this, you know, really judiciously within wealth portfolios, wealthy people, wealthy families, there’s a lot of room to run here. You know, I’m being extra cautious when I think about, you know, sort of 4 0 1 ks or you know, 401k graduates, you know, middle class people nest eggs. ’cause that’s where, you know, I think about are these appropriate investments? Do they help with financial security? Can you get your money back when you need it? Are the fees, you know, fair and appropriate? And, and so I think you need to be extra careful with, with, you know, sort of true working people, working families and their, their retirement nest eggs. But wealth at large, there’s a, there’s a ton of room for, for private markets.

00:28:36 [Speaker Changed] So, so you mentioned 7%. Where could this possibly go? Is this 10%, 15%, 20%? I, I’ve heard people say 60 40 is out, it’s now 50, 30, 20 or whatever the numbers add up to.

00:28:52 [Speaker Changed] I don’t know where it gets to. It’s certainly gonna be north of, of 7%. You know, I think it’s, I think you have to think not only about what’s appropriate for the portfolios. Listen, if you do a backward looking analysis of private equity and private credit, you know, which I, outside of, you know, specific real estate investments that people choose themselves. Those are like the two biggest food groups. If you run an analysis of what those investments looked like over the last 20 years, Barry, it’s gonna be different than what you’re gonna get in the next 20 years for a lot of reasons. But, you know, I’ll tell you from my personal perspective right now, you know, in the last two years my vet’s office has been bought by private equity. Wow. My landscaper, my garbage collection, my dentist, they’re all owned by private equity now.

00:29:36 And you know, they’re doing these rollups and there’s lots of efficiencies to be created on bringing these, you know, these practices together. But, you know, that’s a pretty different investment than buying a company, right? And making a company better and selling that company, which historically is, you know, where, where private equity made its name and its reputation and the, and the return stream that we’ve seen. So, you know, another thing I think about is how am I gonna make sure that the, you know, risk and return profiles I’m putting into these portfolios that we can, you know, reasonably predict what they’re gonna look like and that we can manage them, you know, sort of appropriately given that the asset pools might look a little different than what we were, you know, what we were investing in 10 years ago.

00:30:16 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Really, really interesting. So let’s talk a little bit about some of the things that are going on in the market today. Fee compression has been a giant factor really since the financial crisis. You recently decided to reduce some of the fees on your flagship fixed income products. Tell us a little bit about what drove your decision and what are you thinking about in terms of fees generally?

00:30:44 [Speaker Changed] I mean, the governing precept Barry is always to make sure we’re providing value to the clients. And, you know, we do that by charging a fair and appropriate fee for what it is we’re doing. If, if I’m gonna focus on anything, it’s less about what’s the fee that I can charge and more about making sure that I’m invaluable to these clients and that we’re really, you know, helping them achieve their goals. When you, the truth is, when you do a great job for the client, the fee almost becomes not an issue. Now having said that, we have some businesses that are scaled businesses and that I compete with, you know, with other good providers and I have to make sure that we’re staying competitive. So we’re not in any way immune to fee compression. But, you know, but if you can provide a really good value proposition, it’s not such a big deal.

00:31:28 [Speaker Changed] So this has been an ongoing factor in, in the industry, particularly for active managers. And, and Russell is primarily an active manager. Are you seeing any changes in this trend globally? I mean it started very much in the United States with, with entities like BlackRock and, and especially Vanguard, your global firm. What does this look like overseas?

00:31:53 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, fee compression in our space is, you know, it is, comes through in different ways globally. O-O-C-I-O is the place where we’ve been sort of most susceptible to, you know, to fee compression Barry. And, you know, if I think about who we compete against, the landscape has changed for us over the last 10 years. You know, 10 years ago I competed largely against like the consult the traditional consultants. And we had a very different offering. We actually implemented the portfolio. We weren’t just doing manager research sort of on paper. We were actually trading the portfolio and, you know, doing the risk management and the overlays and the completions things that were a very big value add. And we were unique in that respect. And then along came the really big asset managers that saw OCIO in, in part as sort of a distribution function. You know, if I can deliver the entire portfolio, I can put a lot of my own underlying products into that portfolio. And by the way, that can be a great business for you if you have. But

00:32:45 [Speaker Changed] That, that’s a closed architecture. You guys run a very open architecture.

00:32:48 [Speaker Changed] We run a completely open architecture and we’re unique in that it’s true open architecture, 80 plus percent and sometimes a hundred percent of the assets come from third party managers. But we still have to compete against organizations that are running their own version, which might be closed or semi, semi closed. And you know, if you have a whole lot of underlying products you’re putting into the portfolio, it gives you a lot of leeway to change the fee or to compress the fee at the OCIO level because you’re making money in all sorts of other ways. Russell doesn’t do that. So it does mean that we were susceptible to some of the fee compression and our fees have narrowed. But the way I see the solution here is just to make sure that the value proposition that we’re offering, the way we go about building an OCIO, the costs that it, you know, it takes the, the, the, the human capital that’s required. You know, we put over a hundred million dollars into our technology system that allows us to build these open architecture portfolios. When clients understand what it is that they get from us. Paying a slightly higher fee doesn’t seem to be a big deal.

00:33:47 [Speaker Changed] What about the private markets that we’re looking at? We were talking about private equity, private credit. Yep. First, is it possible that those sort of things can be indexed and then second, they’ve always been pricier than public markets? Are we started to see any fee compression along those lines?

00:34:06 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, so we haven’t seen a ton of fee compression. I mean, those are cases where I think the value proposition is crystal clear and, you know, the high performing managers can charge higher fees or, you know, substantial fees because they’ve really delivered. And you know, in general, they continue to deliver. I think if they stop delivering and the, or, you know, and, and we start seeing what look more like public markets performance or even weak public markets performance, it’s gonna be much harder for them to charge those, those fees. But that hasn’t happened yet. You know, especially within private credit and, and private equity. There’s been, you know, real outperformance, especially at the top of the heap versus the public markets. So it becomes easier to, to justify those fees.

00:34:47 [Speaker Changed] Makes a lot of sense. So let’s, let’s venture into the world of public policy a little bit. You’ve proposed national account programs to help young people start investing early. The most recent big bill that passed in this administration has these accounts for babies e every kid that’s gonna be born is gonna get, what is it, 1500 or $3,000? I don’t know what number?

00:35:11 [Speaker Changed] Thousand

00:35:11 [Speaker Changed] Dollars. A thousand dollars. All right. Better than nothing. But where do you see these sort of programs going? And if you start investing at age one day, what potential compounding can we see 50, 75, a hundred years later?

00:35:28 [Speaker Changed] Now you’re really talking my language. When Trump was elected, I wrote a piece that we put into Barron’s that Barron’s published saying that we should give a thousand dollars to every kid in America and open an investment account and let them actually learn about the power of compounding. Because it’s different when you actually own the assets. And you know, when, when you give people an investment account, you can find lots of ways to create some education, you know, investment education that goes along with it. And

00:35:51 [Speaker Changed] Lemme just interrupt you ’cause it sounds like a lot of money. There are 3 million kids born a year. It’s $3 billion. Yeah. Which to a $31 trillion economy and a six or $7 trillion government spend is, is a rounding error.

00:36:07 [Speaker Changed] It it, it’s nothing in the grand scheme of things. And you know, the, you know, you’re onto something because it got actually got criticized by both the right and the left and the right said, oh, this is another entitlement program. Oh. Anyway, we put this thing into Barron’s and to my surprise and delight, it ended up in, in the big beautiful bill. And it actually got, it actually passed. It

00:36:24 [Speaker Changed] Became passed and funded, right?

00:36:26 [Speaker Changed] It became legislation and, you know, treasury is working hard now thinking through, you know, the implementation and we’re, we’re helping along the way. It’s, it’s an awesome program because fundamentally what it does is it makes investing universal. You know, all of these families in the United States that think that investing is not for them or they never had any exposure to it. And that’s, by the way, most of America right now, to the extent they have a a, you know, have a kid, they’re going to have an investment account that that’s, you know, there is a, there is a thousand dollars to, to kick kickstart it from the government. But there’s gonna be lots of avenues for families to make continued contributions for employers to make contributions for philanthropies to make contributions over time on, on hopefully a tax advantaged basis. And folks are gonna see the way compounding really works.

00:37:17 So it’s not the $1,000 contribution, which as you said is kind of a drop in the bucket, at least as a, you know, as a, as a burden on, on society. It’s the, it’s, you know, what can you pull together from all of the different constituents that are gonna wanna contribute to a program like this. So we’re, we’re really excited. And you know, I think that ultimately, I hope this will dovetail with retirement security. You know, you, you said it when, when you asked what can happen in 50 or 75 years, I think initially, you know, the thought is these might help fund college education. And by the way, with a little bit of contributions on an ongoing basis, it will fund a college education with, with the compounding. But over time there’s six or seven of these programs and eventually, you know, maybe we can pull them all together and create a, a national program that actually funds people’s retirement

00:38:06 [Speaker Changed] Coming up. We continue our conversation with Zach Buckwald, he’s chairman and chief executive officer of Russell Investments discussing the state of markets today. I’m Barry Riol, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

00:38:35 I am Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest this week is Zach Buckwald, he’s chairman and chief executive officer of Russell Investments. The firm was founded in 1936 and runs about $370 billion. Zach joined Russell in 2023 coming from his previous career at BlackRock. I, I’m a fan of using milestones as an excuse to give some sort of a gift. You can see sweet sixteens or kid turns 13 or whatever it is. Yep. Grandma and grandpa write a check and put it right into their account. Here’s some Eli Lilly or here’s some whatever s and p 500. Knock yourself out. And that’s gonna just appreciate over the next, you know, x number of decades. It, it could really make a substantial difference in, in the retirement of environment people who have yet to even be born.

00:39:33 [Speaker Changed] It’s absolutely true. And, and by the way, it’s investing in, in the US stock market, right? And

00:39:38 [Speaker Changed] Yes, so I’m assuming the s and p 500 would count and any of the Microsoft or Lilly or whatever, apple, Amazon, whatever big tech company you’re enthusiastic about, I would recommend a broader, more diversified approach than a single stock. Right? I mentioned Lily ’cause I just know a friend just put a bunch of Lily stock in his nephew’s account and I’m like, oh, what are you doing that for? He is like just doing a transfer. It’s tax free and I don’t have to worry about it.

00:40:06 [Speaker Changed] Well, I’m, I’m not a stock picker, but, but Lilly’s a great company. Having diversified exposure in these, in these accounts is, is, is is the way to go. And, you know, listen, a, a generation ago Barry, the version of that was not so much Lilly stock, it was very typically a, a US treasury bond. Right? That’s what you got when you turned 13 or 16 or had that milestone birthday and a treasury bond in the long term. You know, you, you, you’d rather be in the stock market, you get,

00:40:32 [Speaker Changed] You don’t want two, two and a half percent ahead of a above inflation That doesn’t excite you.

00:40:37 [Speaker Changed] I’d rather, I’d rather have the long-term return of the, the s and p for sure.

00:40:41 [Speaker Changed] Especially if it’s a newborn or even a teenager. Their investment window is 60, 70 years.

00:40:48 [Speaker Changed] That’s, that’s exactly right. And and the trick here is you have to get people to actually understand because that 16-year-old, when they’re 22, they’re gonna get a job that’s gonna have a 401k and they have to understand why am I taking 6% out of my, you know, out of my paycheck when, you know, my starting salary might not even be enough to get, you know, to pay my rent and my other bills. Why would I wanna do that? And and they really, if they understand the power of compounding and the long-term implications of that, they’re gonna, they’re gonna buy into it.

00:41:17 [Speaker Changed] I I really didn’t think about my 401k until I was in my thirties. Right. But if I actually had money put in account when I was born, by the time you’re 25, you’re gonna see some impact from compounding.

00:41:31 [Speaker Changed] A hundred percent. Well, I, I’m not too worried about you Barry.

00:41:34 [Speaker Changed] I, I’ll, I’ll be all right. You’ll

00:41:35 [Speaker Changed] Be, you’ll be all right. But you know, but think about all those folks that don’t, you know, the average income in America is still $70,000. Right. All those folks that don’t have access to, to in investments and they’re not thinking about am I gonna be able to make my contribution at age 22? Right. ’cause they’re thinking about can I, can I pay my rent, afford to pay my rent? Right.

00:41:54 [Speaker Changed] That’s right. The bottom half of the economic strata in this country, and we’re having this conversation on election day right. In New York where it looks like at least the leader up until up until today has been someone who describes themselves as a socialist and has made affordability their, their key campaign theme. This is gonna be an ongoing issue, especially for the bottom half of, of earners and savers.

00:42:19 [Speaker Changed] That’s right. We’re, we’re not a political organization at Russell, but I do concur affordability is the issue. And I think it’s not a left issue. I think it’s an issue for, for everybody, almost everybody in this country. And we’re gonna be hearing a lot about it from, from all sides. You know, I wrote a piece after, after the, the, the baby accounts, which they call the Trump accounts, by the way, after that became part of the legislation, I wrote a piece that the Washington Post published that essentially described what these accounts are and the impact that it can have in terms of helping to educate our population about the power of investing and compounding. And it was very interesting to see the commentary, you know, when you publish something in the journal or the post, sure. You get a lot of, you get a lot of comments and by and large, the, the, the vast majority of the comments said, why wouldn’t you just write us a refund check? Which is what we got during COVID, by the way. Right? Like stimulus type checks. Right. And it was the opposite of the point that I was trying to make.

00:43:15 [Speaker Changed] Right? Right. We don’t want you to spend this. Correct. We want you to save this. That’s

00:43:17 [Speaker Changed] The want you to save it and to understand what the difference is from a savings account or a treasury bond and versus investing it into the markets and getting to see long-term, long-term compounding. So it, it, it was honestly, it was a little bit of a, a refresher for me that we have a lot of work to do to help people understand why a program like this can actually help them.

00:43:35 [Speaker Changed] So as someone who’s been writing in public for nearly 30 years, my best advice to you is, is simply never read the comments. There, there was a golden era of blogs in like the early to mid two thousands where the comments were these like fantastic communities. All of that is kind of migrated to Reddit. If you wanna see lightly moderated intelligent debates with some nonsense thrown in along the way, that’s, that’s what’s left of that sort of issue. I, I think even YouTube used to do a better job at moderating the comments, the, the spam and the bots still slip in every now and then. It

00:44:17 [Speaker Changed] Does give you a perspective on what’s on people’s minds though, even though some of the comments are like unhinged, right? You can tell like the what’s coming through, what, what are people’s, you know, fears and worries and concerns. If you can, if you can read it through the, you know, the craziness Yeah.

00:44:31 [Speaker Changed] You have to, you have to fight your way through it. It’s kind of fascinating because I’m gonna just digress for a moment. We all are subject to these cognitive errors and these behavioral biases and, and it very much shows up in, in people’s portfolios and the decisions they, they make. I, I wake up on a day like today where Nasdaq is down 1.5%, I know I’m gonna see a bunch of emails, ah, you told us to stay long and look, we’re down one point a half percent today. I know I should have gotten out of the market. What are you talking about? We’re up 17% for the year and the NASDAQ’s up 23%. This is the price of admission. That’s right. Have to deal with some volatility.

00:45:15 [Speaker Changed] I mean, this is a place, by the way, where technology has not actually served people in their retirement portfolios. Because if you can pull up your phone and in three seconds, you know, you, you work as a teacher or a nurse or, or whatever, and you pull up your phone and in three seconds you see your portfolio is down 1.5% and, and at some level it flips a switch and you think my portfolio is, is, is is in trouble or I should sell. Like, that’s how you get to really bad decisions because we all, you know, we all know long term, like if you’re man, if you’re, do

00:45:42 [Speaker Changed] We all know that? ’cause I’m not sure everybody does. And that’s right, there’s such an inherent bias towards action. Don’t just sit there, do something, right? That, that just seems to be human nature.

00:45:55 [Speaker Changed] It’s anathema to how you’re supposed to manage a retirement portfolio though. You, you, you by the way, you can make adjustments over, over time, but the goal is not to pull out when you think the market is gonna be down. We all know that the bounce backs, by the way, happen faster and stronger than ever. I mean, you’ve, you, you think about like what the bounce back looked like during the financial crisis or during the.com bus, it took years to bounce back. And then you think about COVID or, or

00:46:19 [Speaker Changed] Even April Liberation

00:46:21 [Speaker Changed] Day, right? The bounce back happens. It’s a weak Yeah. Almost instantly and stronger than before. So, you know, this is a case where the phone really does not help you, right? If you’re gonna make a decision to pull out, because you see something going on in the markets on, on an off, on an off day. And, you know, as we’re, as we’re thinking through how to implement new programs like the, the Trump accounts, you know, my goal is you wanna have like lots of transparency, but you don’t wanna make it easy for people to make bad decisions. You have to help them make good long-term decisions.

00:46:47 [Speaker Changed] A a a little bit of choice architecture that prevents those sort of things. Last question before I get to the standard questions. We ask all of our guests, what do you think investors are not talking about, but perhaps should be? What, what are the important overlooked topics, assets, geography, policy, whatever, that, that should be getting a little more following? Yeah.

00:47:08 [Speaker Changed] Well, Barry, I’m still really positive on, on AI and how much more room to run we have, you know, there’s been so much to talk about, about how we haven’t seen a broadening in the markets. You know, most of the value capture has happened within the, the technology industry. But, you know, but I think every sector is gonna be transformed. Almost every sector transformed by AI as much as it was by, by the internet. And we just haven’t seen that come through yet. But I can tell you every company that we invest in is thinking about this and working on it behind the scenes, even if it’s not showing up yet in their, in their quarterly earnings reports. But it’s all happening and you’re gonna start seeing, by the way, you’ll see winners and losers, both, you know, sort of specific companies and sectors, but there’s gonna be enormous amounts of efficiency gains and enormous amounts of, you know, sort of value creation that happens as a result of that. Now, I don’t think it’s gonna be a straight line, but I do think it’s coming shorter term rather than, rather than just longer term.

00:48:04 [Speaker Changed] Back in 2019, I interviewed Joe Davis, who’s the chief economist at Vanguard. Yep. And they had this fascinating research report. Eventually it became a book that all technological innovations take place in two phases. The first phase is kind of what we’re experiencing right now in ai, which is wild prices. Couple of hand, everybody knows a handful of companies, very boom, boom. Like some people have been too many, a lot of people have been calling it a bubble. The second phase is where the value creation spreads out. That’s right. To the rest of, rest of, rest of the market, rest of the industry, rest of the economy. I see it the same way you do. Right? This is just gonna make all of us more efficient, more productive, more profitable.

00:48:50 [Speaker Changed] Right. That’s exactly how I see this playing out. And you still have to pay attention because, you know, we all remember during the, the first, the first.com phase before every company started incorporating, you know, the internet into its business strategy and, and its operations. There were winners and they were losers and, and the winners are still around and they’re, you know, they essentially, you know, run global commerce today and, and the losers went away. We’re gonna see some of that across sectors and you know, that’s something that investors need to pay close attention to. But, you know, writ large, I see a lot of value creation, huh?

00:49:20 [Speaker Changed] I I, I’m, I’m always like to hear that sort of stuff. So let’s jump into our favorite questions that we ask all of our guests, starting with, tell us about your mentors who helped shape your career.

00:49:32 [Speaker Changed] Sure. I had a great mentor at BlackRock, a guy called Mark McComb, who’s a, a vice chairman of the company. And he put me into a, a couple of jobs and he nurtured me and supported me, but he also, he encouraged me to, you know, think like the outsider that I am, you know, when he put me into the insurance job without having an insurance background, he sort of said, bring, you know, bring all the capabilities and the perspective that you have from all the other things that you’ve done, and that, you know, really helped us, you know, think like an external provider and, and, and grow that business. By the way, I’m a, I’m, I’m a, a gay guy in finance, so I, I, I come at it from a, from an outsider’s point of view, kinda looking in and, and that has informed just about everything that I do at, you know, at Russell. And, and, and before that is thinking about what’s working, what isn’t working, what do I think we might be able to do better, what have we not, you know, the question that you asked, what are people not talking about? What have we not asked about? And that’s, you know, often my, my starting point. And I think if I had come in with the insider status, it would’ve been harder for me to take that perspective.

00:50:36 [Speaker Changed] Huh. That’s really interesting. It, it’s affected your perspective. You, you see the world both as a participant but also an outsider. Yeah,

00:50:45 [Speaker Changed] That’s right. And, you know, this is the first time I’ve been to Bloomberg in a, in a couple of years, but when I, when I took the job at, at Russell, even before I’d started Bloomberg invited me to come speak at a conference, and I was, you know, flattered and, and excited. And then I learned it was their diversity conference, and I, I was the, the KCEO and, and I said, invite me back five times to talk about investing in retirement. And on the sixth time, I’ll come talk about diversity.

00:51:08 [Speaker Changed] Huh. That’s interesting. You know, in all the research we we do that did not come up in anything. It’s not, it’s not anything that bubbles up to the top of search. Although the old joke is, if you, if you wanna hide something, disclose it at the end of an hour long podcast, no one will hear it. But you know what it’s like with all the YouTube, there’s a, there’s a drop off, but I always find that, that amusing. Let’s talk about books. What are some of your favorites? What are you reading right now? Yeah,

00:51:37 [Speaker Changed] So I read a lot of fiction, like, you know, Cormack McCarthy and Tyler. I’m reading a book called The Inheritance right now, which is like a family drama. It’s a escapist for me to get away from. I don’t read a lot of finance books.

00:51:50 [Speaker Changed] I’m the same way every now and then, something will, you know, come across that I have to read that’s finance related. I have a big stack of fiction waiting to go on vacation with me next month. Let’s talk about streaming. What are you watching or listening to you? What’s keeping you entertained? It’s either on Netflix or Amazon or whatever. Yeah,

00:52:09 [Speaker Changed] It’s all toddler fair right now. I’ve got two, three year olds in the house. So we’ve got twins. Twins, yeah. It’s, you know, all full-time. Moana and Frozen and Right. Daniel Tiger Bubble Guppies, that sort of stuff.

00:52:21 [Speaker Changed] Huh. So, so a lot of Moana. That’s, that’s my idea of a nightmare. Just

00:52:27 [Speaker Changed] Moana’s pretty awesome actually

00:52:28 [Speaker Changed] The first three times you see it, the

00:52:30 [Speaker Changed] First three times and frozen about twice

00:52:33 [Speaker Changed] Our So our final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interest in a career in either finance or investing? What would you tell them?

00:52:45 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. First, like, you know, be yourself. Like, we look for people at Russell from all different kinds of backgrounds, not just economics or finance backgrounds. Study what you wanna study, do well, and, you know, be committed. But, you know, if you come at it from an outsider’s, you know, station or point of view, em, embrace that. That’s, you know, this is a, a world where we, we want folks that have different kinds of backgrounds and, and approaches. You know, I studied English Barry, and one advantage that that actually gave me early on in my career was that I knew how to write. And, you know, you think about how much of our, of our business is done through writing, through email and, and, and other ways. Everything you write, this is the advice now. Everything you write is a reflection of you. And it can come up in, you know, something you put down on paper can come up again and again in all sorts of different ways. We all know that when, when you put something on the internet, it lives forever, truly. And you know, your careers are long. You wanna make sure that you’re, you’re, that you’re properly reflecting the image that you want to create. Hmm.

00:53:43 [Speaker Changed] Good advice. And our final question, by the way, that advice applies not only to writing. Yes. But my wife is a recently retired teacher, and she used to always warn the kids all the stuff you’re putting on Facebook and Instagram and TikTok, be aware the colleges you’re applying to are looking at that and the jobs you’re gonna apply to, they’re gonna find that. That’s right. Especially as you work your way up the, up the corporate ladder, that stuff never goes away.

00:54:12 [Speaker Changed] That’s right. And now I’ll give you a counterpoint. You know, we, we do 360 reviews at, at Russell, and sometimes, you know, people that are relatively new in their careers, 25 or 28-year-old will write a review on somebody that they work for, or a couple levels up that I, that I read. And when I read a review that somebody has put a lot of thought into, and there’s some, you know, praise and constructive criticism, how to make things better, I say to myself, this person would make a good manager. And I, and I think about how can we use them in other places in the company. So it’s not just about like, when you’re writing about avoiding the things that you don’t want out there in the world that can harm you. It’s also making sure that you’re putting the time and the effort into writing things that are really gonna help you.

00:54:51 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Really, really interesting observation and, and, and good advice for people just entering the workforce. Final question. What do you know about the world of investing today that would’ve been useful 30 years ago when you were first getting started?

00:55:07 [Speaker Changed] I wish that 30 years ago I had the confidence to know that, you know, that as an outsider, as a gay person, as an English major, someone coming at it from a different background that, that I could make it in, in, in this business that I didn’t have to constantly think about how am I gonna prove myself, but just by being a good productive contributor by raising my hand, you know, and, and, and, and showing a little bit of ambition by finding ways to help that, that can be enough. And sometimes that being an outsider can actually be a good thing. You know, that it can help you re-underwrite situations and come at it from a different angle. And if you know that and you’re confident in it and you use it to your advantage, it can really help you in your career. I figured that out along the way. It would’ve been helpful to know when I first started. Huh.

00:55:56 [Speaker Changed] Really, really fascinating stuff. Thank you, Zach, for being so generous with your time. We have been speaking with Zach Buckwald, he’s chairman and Chief Executive officer of Russell Investments. If you enjoy this conversation, check out any of the 589 we’ve done over the previous 11 years. You can find those at iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, Bloomberg, wherever you find your favorite podcasts. And be sure and check out my new book, how Not to Invest the ideas, numbers, and behaviors that destroy wealth and how to avoid them at your favorite bookstore. I would be remiss if I did not thank the crack team that helps put these conversations together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video producer. Sean Russo is my researcher. Anna Luke is my producer. I’m Barry Riol. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

~~~

 

 

 

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

Pages