President Trump is planning to appoint Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey to share the #2 position at the FBI with Dan Bongino, for now, to serve as “an integral part of this important mission,” according to a statement from Director Kash Patel. 

Bailey announced his resignation on Monday in order to take on the new role. 

“My life has been defined by a call to service, and I am once again answering that call, this time at the national level,” Bailey said in a statement. 

Some have interpreted this as the beginning of the end for Bongino – who has clashed with Attorney General Pam Bondi over the release of the Epstein files – leading the former podcaster to leave work for several days in July.

According to the NY Times (so who knows), “People close to Mr. Trump were unhappy with Mr. Bongino’s display of anger, but believed that having him leave his job could undermine the president.”

Trump was expected to have announced Bailey’s move on Monday, according to Politico. 

Bailey, a former prosecutor who has been Missouri’s AG since January 2023, interviewed with Trump at Mar-a-Lago during the transition as a potential pick for US Attorney General. His tenure as AG has included several high-profile moves to help Trump and his interests, including a petition filed last year with the US Supreme Court seeking to lift a gag order against Trump and delay sentencing in his New York trial until after the Nov. 5 election. 

Former Missouri House Speaker Catherine Hanaway, meanwhile, has been appointed by Gov. Mike Kehoe to replace Bailey at the state’s next AG. After serving out Bailey’s term, which runs until the end of 2028, Hanaway told reporters on Tuesday that she plans to seek a full term of her own. 

“My game plan, for sure, is to serve the next three years,” she said, adding “and then if Missourians will vote for me and believe I earned a full term, then I’d like to serve a full term.”

Hanawway was the state’s first female speaker of the House, eventually leaving politics to focus on her law practice. 

Authored by Lau Vegys via InternationalMan.com,

Recently, I wrote to you about how Trump had found “the perfect opening” to reshape the Federal Reserve when Governor Adriana Kugler unexpectedly resigned.

What I didn’t expect was how perfectly this would confirm everything we’ve been tracking about Trump’s Reset.

Trump didn’t just fill that vacant Fed seat with any dovish voice. He appointed Stephen Miran—the mastermind behind what’s probably the most audacious economic strategy in modern history.

If you’ve been following our analysis, you already know Stephen Miran—and if you do, chances are you’ll agree this appointment is the clearest sign yet that Trump’s Reset isn’t just on the horizon. It’s already underway.

The Architect of Trump’s Reset

Stephen Miran is the author of A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System—the blueprint for what’s been dubbed the “Mar-a-Lago Accord.”

Published just days after Trump’s victory last November, it outlines a comprehensive plan to flip the U.S. dollar’s reserve status from a burden into a bargaining chip. To turn America’s towering debt from an embarrassment into leverage. And to reorient the entire global economic structure in Washington’s favor.

Now, to understand why Miran sees a reserve currency’s status as a burden in the first place, you have to dig into a little-known economic paradox.

It’s called Triffin’s Dilemma, named after Belgian economist Robert Triffin, and it describes the paradox that arises when a country’s currency also serves as the world’s reserve currency—like the U.S. dollar today.

To meet global demand for its currency, the issuing country must run persistent trade deficits—exporting more of its currency than goods and services.

This arrangement can help support global growth, but over time it wears down the issuing country’s industrial base, piles on debt, and leaves the economy more fragile.

If that country stops running deficits, the world can face a shortage of the reserve currency—slowing trade and pushing others toward alternative systems. But if it keeps running them, debt and imbalances keep growing. That’s the bind.

So if you’ve ever wondered why the U.S. economy is so financialized, so reliant on debt, and so heavily tilted toward “services”—this is why.

Triffin’s Dilemma is also why Miran refers to the U.S. dollar and Treasuries as “costly global public goods” America provides to the world—a burdensome affair he aims to address through “burden-sharing at the global level,” as he outlined in his April speech at the Hudson Institute. Here’s a snippet from that address:

“In my view, to continue providing these twin global public goods, there needs to be improved burden-sharing at the global level.

(…)

The best outcome is one in which America continues to create global peace and prosperity and remain the reserve provider, and other countries not only participate in reaping the benefits, but they also participate in bearing the costs. By improving burden sharing, we can enhance resilience, and preserve the global security and trading systems for many decades into the future.”

Now, I’ve read the whole speech, and I’m not wild about a number of things in there—like the “create global peace” line in the quote above. Nevertheless, with Miran now just steps away from becoming a Fed governor, pending Senate confirmation, it’s worth recalling what this “burden-sharing” actually looks like in his view. Here’s a quick rundown of his plan:

• Accept tariffs without retaliation — Let U.S. tariffs stand, generating revenue for Washington.

• Open their markets — End unfair trade practices and buy more American goods.

• Increase defense spending — Procure more U.S.-made weapons and equipment.

• Build factories in the U.S. — Set up local production and avoid tariffs altogether.

• Write checks to the Treasury — Yes, really. Direct financial contributions to help the U.S. fund “global public goods.”

As far-fetched as some of this sounds, it’s worth keeping in mind that parts of Miran’s strategy are already playing out.

The European Union (EU), for one, recently backed off its planned €93 billion (~$102 billion) in retaliatory tariffs—agreeing to a new trade framework with Washington that keeps Trump’s duties in place while committing to buy $750 billion worth of U.S. energy and invest another $600 billion in the American economy, including U.S. military gear.

Over in the corporate world, big Indian consumer packaged goods names like Amul and ITC are looking at setting up plants in the U.S. or in third countries to keep their exports flowing.

Even Apple is now falling in line—announcing an additional $100 billion in U.S. manufacturing investments over the next four years, bringing its total U.S. investment to $600 billion.

The Takeaway

It was interesting to watch the market’s reaction to Miran’s Fed nomination…

The dollar slid, while gold, Bitcoin, and stocks all pushed higher.

Clearly, someone’s been reading the same breadcrumbs we have.

Meanwhile, JPMorgan called it an “existential threat” to Fed independence.

Sure—if we’re still pretending the Fed is truly independent, they might be right. But that’s the whole point—and exactly the bigger picture they’re missing: this is the execution phase of the most ambitious economic plan we’ve seen in generations.

This isn’t just about getting another dovish vote for rate cuts—Trump could’ve slotted in any of his yes-men for that. This is about installing the architect of America’s monetary reset directly inside the Federal Reserve.

As I noted earlier, parts of Trump’s Reset have already shown up in trade deals and investment shifts—but with Miran inside the Fed, the playbook moves from white papers and speeches into the heart of monetary policy.

Will they succeed?

We don’t know. What we do know is that the reset will present big opportunities for those who see it coming and position accordingly—and plenty of pain for those who don’t. As Matt Smith put it:

“Succeed or fail, Trump’s plan will impact all of us and our investments. I confess I’m delighted Team Trump sees the problem… has a plan to avoid the worst, and catapult the U.S. to new prosperity. But what they need to do will not come without pain. A LOT of pain.”

If you want the full picture but don’t want to slog through Miran’s dense 40-page white paper, Matt has already done the hard work—connecting the dots, including some that were barely hinted at in the original report (because stating them outright could have caused unnecessary alarm at the time).

Whatever you do, you’ll want to educate yourself on the topic—because the reality is, if you don’t understand what Trump’s Reset is about, you’re flying blind into one of the most significant monetary shifts in modern history.

*  *  *

Stephen Miran’s appointment isn’t just another Fed nomination—it’s a signal that Trump’s Reset is moving from theory to execution. The gold rush in London, the strategic accumulation in New York, and the looming overhaul of the U.S. monetary order are all part of a much bigger plan. If you don’t understand how this will impact your savings, investments, and standard of living, you could be flying blind into one of the most significant economic shifts in generations. To see how Trump’s strategy could revalue gold, restructure America’s balance sheet, and reshape the global monetary system—and how you can position yourself before the reset hits—read the full briefing here: Get Ready for Trump’s Monetary Reset.

S&P Global Ratings affirmed the United States’ sovereign credit ratings, saying tariff revenues under the Trump administration’s new trade policies should help cushion the fiscal impact of recent tax and spending legislation.

The ratings agency kept the U.S. at AA+/A-1+ with a stable outlook.

“The stable outlook indicates our expectation that although fiscal deficit outcomes won’t meaningfully improve, we don’t project a persistent deterioration over the next several years,” S&P said in its statement.

The firm pointed to broad economic resilience, policy continuity, and strong revenue streams, including what it described as “robust tariff income” – as offsets to fiscal slippage stemming from legislative changes. While acknowledging concerns that tariffs could dampen business confidence, growth, and hiring while spurring inflation, S&P said revenue gains would help balance the ledger, WSJ reports.

The agency’s decision comes against the backdrop of a $5 trillion increase in the debt ceiling and projections that net general government debt will approach 100% of gross domestic product, driven by “structurally rising non-discretionary interest and aging-related expenditure.”

S&P cited several strengths underpinning the rating, including the resilience of the U.S. economy, effective monetary policy, and a deficit trajectory that, while elevated, isn’t accelerating.

USA sovereign credit risk, meanwhile… 

Yet the firm also noted risks…

“Bipartisan cooperation to strengthen the U.S. fiscal profile – namely to meaningfully lower deficits and tackle budgetary rigidities – remains elusive,” S&P said.

The agency warned that the outlook could turn negative if deficits widen further due to political stalemates or if revenue losses from tax policy changes aren’t contained. It also flagged the independence of the Federal Reserve as a critical factor.

“We could lower the rating over the next two to three years if already high deficits increase, reflecting political inability to contain rising spending or to manage revenue implications from changes in the tax code,” S&P said. “The ratings could also come under pressure if political developments weigh on the strength of American institutions and the effectiveness of long-term policymaking or independence of the Federal Reserve.”

Any erosion in institutional credibility, the agency added, could eventually imperil the dollar’s status as the world’s leading reserve currency—a key pillar of U.S. credit strength.

Update(1450ET): White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in a Tuesday afternoon press briefing confirmed that the US has ruled out sending American troops to uphold a future potential peace deal to end the Ukraine war based on ‘security guarantees’. However other military options haven’t been ruled out. For example, she told reporters that US air support in Ukraine could be part of security assurances amid peace talks with Russia. 

The US administration…

has “definitively ruled out” sending US troops to Ukraine as part of any security guarantees to bring about a peace deal with Russia, but she did not rule out other military options, including in the skies.

“It is an option and a possibility. I won’t certainly rule out anything as far as military options that the president has at his disposal. I’ll let him do that. I can tell you he’s definitively ruled out boots on the ground,” Leavitt said at the White House press briefing, when asked about the US providing “air” options as a form of security for Ukraine.

“The president understands security guarantees are crucially important to ensure a lasting peace, and he has directed his national security team to coordinate with our friends in Europe and also to continue to cooperate and discuss these matters with Ukraine and Russia as well,” Leavitt said.

It’s hard to imagine that the Kremlin – after long making it clear it would never accept NATO boots on the ground in Ukraine as part of some peacekeeping force – would therefore be OK with NATO airpower. This is an obvious non-starter.

The White House also confirmed in the Tuesday briefing that planning and accommodations for a meeting between President Zelensky and President Putin are underway. Switzerland has offered to host such talks, and Hungary’s capital Budapest is also reportedly being eyed.

There’s also this additional breaking development, via RT:

US President Donald Trump has received a formal invitation to visit Moscow, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has confirmed. During last week’s summit in Alaska, Russian President Vladimir Putin extended the invitation to Trump in person.

In an interview with the television channel Rossiya 24 on Tuesday, Lavrov stated that Trump “has an invitation” and recalled that during the summit, the US president had indicated that the idea of him visiting Russia is “interesting.”

During their joint press conference with Putin last week, Trump admitted, however, that he could “get a little heat” for traveling to Moscow. Nevertheless, he said he can “see it possibly happening.”

* * *

Former Russian President and top Kremlin national security official Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday that European leaders had failed to outplay Donald Trump, and that it remains unclear just how Ukraine’s Zelensky will prevent the issue of territorial concessions.

White House officials, including Trump himself in prior statements, have made it known that compromise regarding territory is indeed on the table. “The anti-Russian warmongering Coalition of the Willing failed to outplay @POTUS on his turf,” Medvedev said on X. “Europe thanked & sucked up to him.” The below optics certainly don’t contradict Medvedev. One commenter observes that Trump had likely “been waiting for a moment like this his whole life”…

I suppose Trump had been waiting for a moment like this his whole life…

If you truly represent a sovereign nation, you don’t just go along. You tell the host that this spectacle is humiliating, that he can play those games with others – but you don’t allow yourself to be… pic.twitter.com/t87UOaKgH8

— Zlatti71 (@Zlatti_71) August 19, 2025

Medvedev said the question remains “what tune” Zelenskyy would play “about guarantees & territories back home, once he’s put on his green military uniform again.”

It is true that far-right elements within his own military and political establishment would react fiercely to any acts of territorial concessions – which would likely result in acts of violence, and possibly even threats on Zelensky’s life.

At the same time, coming off his Alaska summit with Trump, Russia’s President Putin remains firmly in the driver’s seat, amid steady ground advances on the battlefield.

During a break in Monday’s meeting among seven EU officials and Zelensky, German Chancellor Merz revealed during a break in talks, “the American president spoke with the Russian president on the phone and agreed that there would be a meeting between the Russian president and the Ukrainian president within the next two weeks.”

But whether this happens or not will largely depend of what happens in the interim, and Kiev’s attitude and statements on what it’s willing to concede.

The geopolitics source Moon of Alabama highlights the perspective of former MI6 official and diplomat Alastair Crooke in the following:

Alastair Crooke suggests (video) that the peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine will follow the outline of the Istanbul Agreement negotiated in March 2022 between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine, under pressure from the West, had at that time refrained from signing it.

The Istanbul Agreement did include security guarantees (emphasis added):

The agreement assumes:
…
2. Possible guarantor states: Great Britain, China, Russia, the United States, France, Turkey, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, Israel. The free accession of other states to the treaty is proposed, in particular the Russian Federation proposes Belarus.
…
4. Ukraine does not join any military alliances, does not deploy foreign military bases and contingents, and conducts international military exercises only with the consent of the guarantor states. For their part, the guarantor states confirm their intention to promote Ukraine’s membership in the European Union.

5. The guarantor states and Ukraine agree that in the event of aggression, any armed attack on Ukraine or any military operation against Ukraine, each of the Guarantor States, after urgent and immediate consultations between them (which shall be held within no more than three days), in the exercise of the right to individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will provide (in response to and on the basis of an official request from Ukraine) assistance to Ukraine, as a permanently neutral state under attack, by immediately taking such individual or joint action as may be necessary, including closing airspace over Ukraine, providing necessary weapons, using armed force in order to restore and subsequently maintain the security of Ukraine as a permanently neutral state.

Any such armed attack (any military operation) and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall cease when the Security Council takes the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

The mechanism for implementing security guarantees for Ukraine, based on the results of additional consultations between Ukraine and the Guarantor States, will be regulated in the Treaty, taking into account protection from possible provocations.

Again:

… such guarantee will of course come with conditions attached to it. Either Ukraine will accept those or it will never be secure from outer interference.

So yes, the Ukraine can have ‘security guarantees’. But the conditions of those will be set by the main guarantor – which has to be Russia.

Trump seems to have understood that. How long will it take those European ‘leaders’ to get it?

Alastair Crooke speaks to Judge Andrew Napolitano:

Some of the awkward moments, optics, and tensions on display in the White House on Monday are consistent with the above take…

Ups! 🇮🇹 Meloni verdreht die Augen, während 🇩🇪Kanzler Merz Trump belehrt, mit Putin erst ein Waffenstillstand zu vereinbaren. Nach Motto: ‚Ist doch schon lääängst vom Putin-Tisch, Friedrich!‘ – das war von Merz keine Stärke, wie viele in Berlin es gerne interpretieren wollen, er… pic.twitter.com/qo3gIYUPV5

— Zara Riffler (@ZaraRiffler) August 18, 2025

Below are some more Tuesday geopolitical headlines and developments via Newsquawk….

• US and Europe to work immediately on Ukraine security guarantees, via Bloomberg.
• Poland PM Tusk will take part in meeting of the Coalition of the Willing at 11:00BST/06:00EDT, according to a spokesperson.
• Ukraine Foreign Minister says future trilateral leaders meeting can bring a breakthrough on the path to peace.
• US President Trump posted that he had a very good meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky and European leaders, which ended in a further meeting in the Oval Office and during the meeting, they discussed security guarantees for Ukraine, which would be provided by the various European countries with coordination with the US. Trump added everyone is very happy about the possibility of peace for Russia and Ukraine, and at the conclusion of the meetings, he called Russian President Putin and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelensky. Furthermore, Trump said after that meeting takes place, they will have a trilateral between Trump, Putin and Zelensky, as well as noted that this was a very good, early step for a war that has been going on for almost four years and that VP Vance, Secretary of State Rubio, and Special Envoy Witkoff are coordinating with Russia and Ukraine.
• Russia’s Kremlin said US President Trump and Russian President Putin held a phone call which lasted 40 minutes and they discussed the idea of exploring the possibility of raising the level of Russian and Ukrainian representatives in the negotiations, while Putin warmly thanked Trump for the hospitality and well-organized meeting in Alaska, as well as for progress achieved at the summit. Furthermore, Putin and Trump spoke in favour of the continuation of direct talks between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations, while they agreed to continue close contact with each other on the Ukrainian crisis and other issues.
• Ukrainian President Zelensky said we need not a pause in the war, but real peace and territorial issues will be decided between Russia and Ukraine. Zelensky said he discussed security guarantees with Trump and European leaders, and received an important signal from the US on being part of security guarantees and help in coordinating it. Furthermore, he said the US offers to have a trilateral meeting as soon as possible and that Ukraine is ready for any format to meet with Putin.
• Ukraine reportedly offered a USD 100bln weapons deal to US President Trump in an effort to win security guarantees, according to the Financial Times citing documents laying out Kyiv’s proposal to Trump at the White House meeting.
• US Secretary of State Rubio told Fox News that they will work with European allies and non-European countries to build security guarantees for Ukraine. Rubio said he was in the room when Trump and Putin spoke, while he added that Trump suggested to Putin that he meet with Zelensky.
• NATO Secretary General Rutte said it was a very successful day in Washington where security guarantees were discussed and more details on security guarantees will be discussed in the coming days, while he added it is a breakthrough that the US will get involved and they are discussing some Article 5-type arrangement.
• European Commission President Von der Leyen said after the White House meeting that they are here as allies and friends for peace in Ukraine and in Europe, while she added this is an important moment as they continue to work on strong security guarantees for Ukraine.
• German Chancellor Merz that he feels these are decisive days for Ukraine and is not sure if Russian President Putin will have the courage to come to a summit with Zelensky present, while he added that expectations were not only met but were exceeded from this meeting. Merz also stated that US President Trump spoke with Russian President Putin and agreed that a Putin-Zelenskiy meeting will happen within two weeks, while the location is yet undecided, and that will be followed by a three-way meeting involving Trump.
• Finland’s President Stubb said they agreed on security guarantees and steps forward, as well as noted that talks were constructive and the Coalition of the Willing has already worked on security guarantees which they will build upon. Stubb also stated there is nothing concrete about US participation in security guarantees and that US President will inform them, with details of security guarantees to be ironed out in the next week or so.
• Debris from a destroyed Ukrainian drone sparked a fire at an oil refinery and hospital in Russia’s Volgograd, according to the regional administration.
• North Korea leader Kim said joint US-South Korea military drills show willingness for war provocation, while he also stated that the security environment requires North Korea to expand its nuclear armament rapidly.
• “Israeli media: The Chief of Staff will present today to the Minister of Defense the plan to occupy Gaza City”, according to Al Arabiya.

* * *

The next big question and milestone will be whether this series of high-level peace meetings will continue, leading to the big trilateral Putin-Trump-Zelensky meeting that the White House is hoping for.

Goldman Sachs’ view in recent months has been that the market could probably continue to climb the “wall of worry”.

However, their baseline forecast is still quite benign – with growth recovering in 2026 and the Fed pushing the policy rate steadily lower in the coming months.

There are pockets of frothiness across assets and the spot VIX is close to the lowest levels of the year.

But, as Goldman’s Dominic Wilson highlights below, 3-month VIX futures remain above 20 and the high spread to spot VIX suggests that there may still be risk premium to squeeze out in places if we simply avoid new problems.

The VIX is approaching the year’s lows, but VIX futures have been stickier, implying lingering risk premium

Source: Goldman Sachs

As the market has taken more credit for good news, however, it is getting harder to identify clear new macro tailwinds.

We think growth pricing has largely taken credit for the nearly 2% GDP growth we see through 2026 and beyond.

And while we thought the more likely macro tailwind for US equities would come from a dovish policy shift, the market has now moved in that direction too.

The big macro risk is if there is a challenge to the process of looking through spot weakness that makes the market worry more about recession risk.

Markets were quick to move from worrying about growth to welcoming Fed easing on the back of payrolls weakness.

But clearer upward pressure on the unemployment rate would likely pose a bigger challenge to equities, particularly given current pricing.

If that move coincides with higher-than-expected inflation outcomes, concerns about a constrained Fed would be an even bigger challenge.

The good news is that short-dated equity hedges and downside in front-end rates are cheaper than they have been for some time, so we continue to think hedging that recession risk into key events makes sens

Professional subscribers can read Dominic Wilson’s full detailed note here…

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Some of us have expressed frustration with the ridiculous delay in the appellate court review of the absurd civil judgment against Donald Trump.

It appears to have entered some judicial black hole where neither light nor an opinion can escape.

Now, the Wall Street Journal claims that it is due to a deeply divided panel in a column titled “Court Split Leaves Trump’s Civil Fraud Appeal Stuck in Slow Lane.”

This should not be a close case and certainly should not take this long.

The case against Trump was raw lawfare, and the entire trial by Justice Arthur Engoron made a mockery of the court system, particularly his ridiculous half-a-billion-dollar judgment. 

Yet, weeks turned into months and then into years as the appellate court seemed lost in navel-gazing. There was also a concern over passive-aggressive delays; the long appeal is not only preventing Trump from moving this case toward the Supreme Court but keeps him trapped in an appellate amber.

Now the Wall Street Journal is reporting:

A five-justice panel has yet to render a decision nearly a year after taking up the case, leaving him and his business in limbo. Behind the scenes, members of the panel have been divided, and three of them have been writing opinions, according to people familiar with the matter. It couldn’t be determined how they are split. Justices do occasionally shift their positions, and the number of opinions could change, the people said.

…

The panel hearing the Trump appeal includes four judges appointed by Democratic governors and one Republican appointee, David Friedman, who is regarded as among the most conservative of the court’s 21 members. The court’s presiding justice, Renwick, also on the panel, is viewed as a stalwart liberal who has an institutional interest in seeking consensus and guarding the court’s reputation.

It is not a good thing to see a leak of this kind from any court. The United States Supreme Court was rocked by the leaking of a draft opinion of the Dobbs decision just a few years ago. No one was ever prosecuted for the leak.

It is distressing to hear that some of these judges may be striving to preserve this nonsensical opinion where Trump was hit with half a billion dollars in a case where no one lost money and the banks wanted renewed business with his company. Affirming the decision would be the final nail in the coffin for the New York legal system, which was turned into a farce by New York Attorney General Letitia James and Judge Engoron. 

Even if it is true that the judges have hopelessly fractured, they could do us all a favor and allow the case to proceed toward more competent jurists and final resolution. 

There is certainly no rush by these appellate judges to right any wrong done to Trump, who appears, again, to fall into a special category of persona non grata in the New York legal system. This appellate panel appears content to leave Trump twisting in the wind as it contemplates what to do with a defendant who garners little sympathy from its members. 

Most appeals are measured in months; this seems measured in millennia. Even with the notoriously slow New York legal system, the pendency of this appeal is becoming itself a controversy.

It is often said that justice delayed is justice denied.

However, delayed and denied justice for Trump appears to be a bedrock principle of the New York justice system.

Via Headline USA,

The Justice Department has agreed to provide to Congress documents from the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation, a key House lawmaker said Monday in announcing a move that appears to avert, at least temporarily, a potential separation of powers clash.

The records are to be turned over starting Friday to the House Oversight Committee, which earlier this month issued a broad subpoena to the Justice Department about a criminal case that has long captivated public attention, recently roiled the top rungs of President Donald Trump’s administration and been a consistent magnet for conspiracy theories.

“There are many records in DOJ’s custody, and it will take the Department time to produce all the records and ensure the identification of victims and any child sexual abuse material are redacted,” Kentucky Rep. James Comer, the Republican committee chair, said in a statement.

“I appreciate the Trump Administration’s commitment to transparency and efforts to provide the American people with information about this matter.”

A wealthy and well-connected financier, Epstein was found dead in his New York jail cell weeks after his 2019 arrest in what investigators ruled a suicide. His accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, was convicted in 2021 of helping lure teenage girls to be sexually abused by Epstein and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

The House committee’s subpoena sought all documents and communications from the case files of Epstein and Maxwell.

It also demanded records about communications between Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration and the Justice Department regarding Epstein, as well as documents related to an earlier federal investigation into Epstein in Florida that resulted in a non-prosecution agreement.

It was not clear exactly which or how many documents might be produced or whether the cooperation with Congress reflected a broader change in posture since last month, when the FBI and Justice Department abruptly announced that they would not be releasing any additional records from the Epstein investigation after determining that no “further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”

That announcement put the Trump administration on the defensive, with officials since then scrambling both to tamp down angry questions from the president’s base and also laboring to appear transparent.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell at a Florida courthouse over two days last month — though no records from those conversations have been made public — and the Justice Department has also sought to unseal grand jury transcripts in the Epstein and Maxwell cases, though so far those requests have been denied.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment Monday.

The House Oversight panel separately issued subpoenas to eight former law enforcement leaders as well as former Democratic President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Bill Clinton was among a number of luminaries acquainted with Epstein before the criminal investigation against him in Florida became public two decades ago.

President Trump weighed in on the Mid-Atlantic power crisis on Truth Social early Tuesday, echoing our warnings last week about the fallout from Democrats’ multi-year “green” crusade to replace reliable, low-cost fossil fuel power plants with unreliable solar and wind amid power demand surges from AI data centers and other electrification trends. The result has been financially crushing for some residents across the Mid-Atlantic. In Maryland, Democrats’ approval ratings are already tanking.

“STUPID AND UGLY WINDMILLS ARE KILLING NEW JERSEY,” President Trump wrote on Truth Social moments ago. 

He continued, “Energy prices up 28% this year, and not enough electricity to take care of state. STOP THE WINDMILLS!“

Trump’s use of Truth Social to address the unfolding power bill crisis in the Mid-Atlantic comes after our year-long reporting (read) on the emerging crisis, which has been amplified nationally in recent weeks…

The Trump administration needs to address the power bill crisis by showing voters in both states that a common denominator of destructive policies is driving the crisis: A disastrous green energy agenda, pushed by radical leftist lawmakers, is dismantling reliable and affordable fossil fuel power generation in favor of unstable solar and wind. This has unleashed a power bill armageddon on working-class and middle-class households, as well as mom-and-pop businesses, all while baseload power demand surges in the era of AI data centers.

Fox News jumped on the power bill crisis story last week…

You don’t say… https://t.co/iX4l8J6otj pic.twitter.com/M620Jd7Pog

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 14, 2025

Perhaps New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s decision to shutter the state’s nuclear and coal plants, without a one-to-one replacement for lost capacity on the grid, was a catastrophic error. His administration’s prioritization of offshore wind farms and other green energy projects has left the grid more fragile than ever. 

Murphy took six power plants offline and invested a billion dollars in chasing his offshore wind dream. Mikie enabled the obsessions of climate activists by voting in favor of the trillion dollar green new scam (aka, inflation reduction act). Instead of investing in existing… https://t.co/6MXgSHbT60 pic.twitter.com/ka2EfhB9W6

— Protect Our Coast NJ (@njcoast_protect) July 29, 2025

In Maryland, the power bill crisis seems much more severe than in New Jersey!

Failed green policies are crushing the very working poor and middle class that Democrats have promised to protect. Yet the green utopia that was pitched was always a lie.  

According to Change Annapolis, a bipartisan group of taxpayers, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore’s ratings plunged over a multitude of issues, including power bills: “Marylanders are tired of his presidential vanity tour, crushing tax hikes, and an energy crisis of his own making,” adding, “He’s polling worse than O’Malley and Glendening at this point in their terms.”

The power bill crisis is still in its early stages. Goldman analyst Hongcen Wei wrote an alarming note to clients last week, warning that a majority of U.S. power grids “have already reached dangerously low spare capacity levels that are at or below the critical reliability threshold. This raises blackout threats and results in power price spikes during high-demand usage hours.”

In other words, the power crisis has arrived, and it’s only going to get worse from here. The Trump administration needs to effectively communicate to voters that skyrocketing power bills are the direct result of failed green policies in the age of AI data centers.

We’ve got bad news… read this. 

By Benjamin Picton of Rabobank

European leaders, including Volodymyr Zelenskyy, convened at the White House yesterday to discuss plans for peace in Ukraine. In defiance of the European position, President Trump reiterated that he is not interested in temporary ceasefires and will instead push for a lasting settlement. That will likely include “exchanges of territory” whereby Ukraine will presumably be forced to accept that Donbas will become part of Russia (and that Crimea already is) in exchange for freezing the frontline elsewhere and security guarantees being extended by Europe and the United States.

Vladimir Putin would likely see this as a significant victory because Russia does not currently control the entirety of the industrialised Donbas region where the need to ‘protect’ the Russian speaking population had been one of Putin’s professed cassus belli at the outbreak of the war.

For Ukraine’s part, Zelenskyy said that no “unacceptable decisions” were made yesterday. That could be interpreted as the Ukrainian leader grudgingly accepting that ceding territory to Russia is now an unfortunate fait accompli, or that Zelenskyy is still clinging to the more hairy-chested idea of “not one inch” of territory to be given up, because no formal agreement has been reached. I suspect it might be the former.

Of course, if security guarantees are to be provided the devil will be in the detail about who does the providing, with what, and paid for how. As our Global Strategist Michael Every implied in this note yesterday, Europe would like it to “still be the 1990s, please” with the USA shouldering the burden for all of the above. The Trump Administration – having won a sweeping electoral mandate by promising to end US military adventurism – will say it is Europe’s job to protect Europe, but that the USA would be happy to sell it the weapons required to do so. This is an argument that the US is winning and probably will win in the end.

The where to from here is a push by Trump to secure a bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy sometime in the next fortnight, to be followed by a trilateral meeting between Trump and the two other leaders after that. The EU, presumably, is set to be sidelined at that trilateral meeting despite the expectation that they will be writing the cheques for US arms and supplying the boots on the ground to enforce any security guarantees. As he pursues his ambition for a Nobel Peace Prize, Trump is playing poker with the house’s money and Ukraine’s land. EU pretentions to ‘strategic autonomy’ are once again exposed as an Emperor who has no clothes.

Elsewhere, Hamas has reportedly told Egyptian and Qatari mediators that it is willing to accept terms for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza that would secure the release of half of the remaining Israeli hostages and include a surge of aid into the strip and Brazilian officials say that they are at an impasse with the United States over negotiations to reduce the punitive 50% tariff ostensibly applied in protest of the prosecution of former Brazilian President Bolsonaro.

The strategy by the Trump administration to employ carrots (in the case of Russia) and sticks (in the case of Russia, India, Brazil and Iran) against countries tempted to undermine US efforts to isolate China by deepening their own ties with the Middle Kingdom has been conspicuous. Consequently, the impasse with Brazil over the Bolsonaro prosecution perhaps only exists because the tariffs aren’t really related to Bolsonaro at all, but related to President Lula’s courting of closer ties with China. Similarly, the spurious fentanyl tariffs levied against Canada and Mexico probably have more to do with closing US land borders to transhipped Chinese goods than they do with the fentanyl figleaf, explaining why all of Mark Carney’s attempts to negotiate a better deal have mostly come to nought.

Speaking of figleafs, in Australia today a three-day productivity roundtable kicks off where the great and the good of Australian industry, bureaucracy and labor unions will gather to thrash out points of consensus on overdue economic reform. The day started with an address from Reserve Bank Governor Bullock – who recently told journalists in Sydney that productivity isn’t actually the RBA’s bailiwick – and the attendees will consider reform recommendations from Australia’s Productivity Commission – who the unions campaigned to abolish at the last election.

Meanwhile, the country’s largest steelmaker has said that energy-rich Australia’s gas is too expensive and a domestic reservation scheme needs to be implemented to protect manufacturing while the Prime Minister – whose party opposed a domestic gas reservation scheme at the recent election – continued to talk up the transition away from fossil fuels and towards renewables.

The Prime Minister used his own opening comments at the roundtable to suggest that GDP growth is not actually the be all and end all. That is just as well, because the central bank Governor also told journalists in Sydney that Australia’s productivity growth is sufficiently poor to ensure that there won’t actually be much GDP growth, unless something changes.

If all of this gives the impression that achieving reform consensus will be a bit like herding cats, it’s because it is. That is probably why Canberra has achieved little of substance on economic reform for the last 25 years.

Authored by Debra Heine via American Greatness,

Hamas has agreed to a new proposal for a ceasefire-hostage release deal with Israel.

The “comprehensive two-stage plan” was based on a framework advanced by US envoy Steve Witkoff and presented to Hamas by Qatari and Egyptian mediators, according to the BBC.

It would see Hamas free around half of the 50 remaining Israeli hostages – 20 of whom are believed to be alive – in two stages during a 60-day temporary truce.

During that time, there would be negotiations on a permanent ceasefire and an Israeli troop withdrawal.

The Egyptian and Qatari mediators reportedly met with Hamas representatives Sunday in Cairo, and presented them with the plan.

In a post on Facebook Monday, Hamas leader Basem Naim said Hamas and other Palestinian terror groups had agreed to the deal:

“The movement has submitted its response 💚 approving the new mediators’ proposal,” Naim wrote in Arabic.

“We pray to God to extinguish the fire of this war against our people.”

The deal was reached ahead of a major Israeli offensive to occupy Gaza City and just hours after President Donald Trump said Hamas needed to be “confronted and destroyed,” Axios noted.

“We will only see the return of the remaining hostages when Hamas is confronted and destroyed!!!,” Trump posted on Truth Social Monday morning.

“The sooner this takes place, the better the chances of success will be. Remember, I was the one who negotiated and got hundreds of hostages freed and released into Israel (and America!). I was the one who ended 6 wars, in just 6 months. I was the one who OBLITERATED Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Play to WIN, or don’t play at all!”

The plan is reportedly “98 percent similar” to the last U.S.-backed proposal, but the deal fell though when Hamas refused to sign on.

Hamas said at the time that it would only free the remaining hostages if Israel agreed to end the 22-month war. But Netanyahu said that would only happen once Hamas was disarmed and released all the hostages.

On Sunday, more than 200,000 Israelis took to the streets to demand Netanyahu not launch the new offensive in Gaza, and instead sign a deal to bring back the hostages. It was the biggest anti-war protest since the beginning of the war, according to Axios.

The Gaza War began in response to Hamas’ surprise attack in southern Israel on 7 October 2023.

The terrorists killed about 1,200 people—mostly civilians—in the attack, and took another 251 hostage.