Authored by Jonathan Turley,

On CBS’s Face the Nation, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) repeated the talking point of Democratic politicians and pundits that the courts are stopping President Donald Trump’s lawless actions taken after his inauguration. Raskin declared “we’re winning in court…we’re winning across the board.”

The boast was dubious at best on Sunday given earlier losses, but became embarrassing on Monday and Tuesday as additional courts ruled in favor of the Trump Administration in major cases.

For weeks, some of us have expressed confusion over the basis for some of the Democratic challenges and initial injunctions in court. President Trump clearly has the authority to designate federal officials to look at the books and track expenditures in the executive branch. After losing both houses and the majority vote, Democratic groups sought to use the courts to block such executive actions.

There was obvious forum shopping as these groups went to many of the same courts and judges for relief. 

However, even judges viewed as decidedly hostile to Trump like Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington ultimately balked at the demand for an injunction and allowed the access and actions to continue.

On Monday, Judge Randolph Moss, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia delivered a blow to groups seeking to block the Department of Government Efficiency from gaining access to data from the Department of Education on student borrowers. 

Judge Moss found in his ruling that the University of California Student Association failed to show sufficient irreparable harm to receive such immediate relief.

He, however, left the door open a crack: “The Court leaves for another day consideration of whether USCA’s has standing to sue and has stated a claim upon which relief may be granted. Those questions are less clear cut and are better answered on a more complete record.”

Judge Chutkan also refused to grant the plaintiffs’ request to issue a temporary restraining order of Doge, again citing the failure to demonstrate evidence of “irreparable harm.”

There was a palpable sense of reluctance, even regret, in the opinion by Chutkan who noted that “Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight.”

This, of course ignores the “elected individual” in the body of the President who is allowed to delegate such responsibility to subordinates. Chutkin would have been reversed by the higher courts if she had issued the requested TRO as demanded by the coalition of 14 Democratic state attorneys general.

Even before Raskin’s boost, U.S. District Judge John Bates also rejected a request to block DOGE from accessing records of three government agencies, writing in his own opinion Friday that plaintiffs “have not shown a substantial likelihood that [DOGE] is not an agency.”

Likewise, challengers thought that they had a victory in hand when U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole enjoined the buyout offer by the Administration. Some of us criticized the injunction as lacking any cognizable basis given the clear authority of the President to make such an offer. Then, as many were citing the victory as proof of the Trump Administration’s unlawful actions, Judge O’Toole lifted the injunction on the buyout program, agreeing to allow the buyouts to go forward.

Then Judge Randolph Moss (D.D.C.) in Doe v. Office of Personnel Mgmt. rejected another challenge to testing by the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) of a new email system. The federal employees argued that the move violated federal law including privacy protections. The court, however, ruled that the “Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating (1) that they likely have standing to bring this action, and (2) that they are likely to suffer irreparable injury in the absence of emergency relief.”

These and other setbacks do not mean that new cases cannot be brought with new records and parties. However, it is a far cry from the claim of Democrats “winning across the board.”

Of course, Raskin is not alone in the perils of premature celebration:

For those members like Raskin opposing the freeze on hiring and payouts, there is even an example of losing to the Freeze due to a premature celebration:

The race is far from over so both sides may want to stay focused on the finish line in the ongoing litigation.

In 2017, as Donald Trump took office with a crackdown on employment visas, former Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) IT manager Anil Kini alleges he was ordered to falsify internal organizational charts to make the company appear more manager-heavy.

Kini claims this was a cover-up to evade scrutiny over TCS’s use of L-1A manager visas, which have fewer restrictions than H-1B visas and lack minimum pay requirements, according to a new feature by Bloomberg.

Kini and two other former TCS employees filed whistleblower lawsuits under the False Claims Act, alleging the company used L-1A visas to bring in non-managerial workers. However, the cases were dismissed before the visa fraud claims were examined, with Kini’s still under appeal. He says he resisted altering the charts and was fired in 2018 after filing his lawsuit.

Federal data reviewed by Bloomberg indicates that TCS has received more L-1A approvals than the number of managers it disclosed to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, suggesting possible misuse of the visa program. TCS, which serves major U.S. tech firms, has secured more L-1A visas than any other employer in recent years.

The company denies any wrongdoing, stating that courts have already dismissed these allegations.

While Trump initially opposed employment visas, arguing they undercut American workers, his stance has shifted, now expressing support for such programs. This has created tensions between his traditional nationalist base and newer tech-industry allies. Meanwhile, legal experts note that gaming the L-1A program is common, with federal authorities uncovering nearly 200 cases of misuse in the past decade.

The Bloomberg feature says that False Claims Act lawsuits let whistleblowers sue companies on behalf of the U.S. government, often alleging corporate fraud against taxpayers. These cases gain traction when the Justice Department joins, but the DOJ declined to back any lawsuits against TCS over L-1A visa misuse, including Anil Kini’s.

TCS stated in legal filings that an internal review found “most of the issues raised” by Kini were unsubstantiated and claimed it had “already taken corrective action” on those that were. However, the company did not disclose what its inquiry revealed. A federal judge dismissed Kini’s case in February, ruling he failed to prove how TCS’ visa practices violated financial obligations to the U.S. government.

Kini, who appealed the decision, says he refused to alter organizational charts and filed two internal complaints before suing in 2017. He was fired the following year, which he calls retaliation. TCS did not comment on his dismissal. “I was proud to be working for TCS,” he said. “But then some things in life, there should be integrity in what you do.”

In another case, Vinod Govindharajan, an Indian national, alleges TCS falsely claimed he was a manager in 2013 to secure an L-1A visa, bypassing stricter H-1B rules. He says the company brought him to New Jersey, where he worked a sales job with no subordinates and was paid half of what American colleagues earned. Frustrated, he filed a 2018 complaint with the EEOC, which later found “credible documentary evidence” that TCS “frequently falsifies documents in support of L-1 visa applications.” The agency also determined Indian visa workers were underpaid and that TCS retaliated against Govindharajan for speaking out.

However, the EEOC lacks authority over immigration or employment visa wage laws, which fall under separate federal agencies. There’s no indication it shared its findings with them. An EEOC spokesperson cited confidentiality rules in declining to comment. “It was a dream of mine to move to the U.S.,” Govindharajan said. “But I was doing a sales role, nothing to do with management.”

You can read the full writeup here. 

Authored by Richard Porter via RealClearPolitics,

The United States and Europe have long shared a common political culture rooted in the ideals of the Enlightenment. These include the primacy of personal freedom; individual autonomy; the inherent equal moral standing of human beings; acceptance of diverse viewpoints; and the use of logic, intellectual rigor, and critical thinking to understand the world. The Western alliance’s raison d’etre is protecting those ideals – and the societies built on the foundation of these ideals – from authoritarian regimes.

J.D. Vance restated our commitment to these ideals in two powerful speeches last week – to a Paris conference on artificial intelligence and then to the Munich Security Conference. America’s newly installed vice president directly challenged European political elites who, fearing freedom, are drifting away from these ideals as they seek to squelch popular political movements while becoming autocratic themselves. For some reason, leaders in the audience were visibly stunned. They shouldn’t have been.

Vance’s rhetorical fluency was his ticket into politics. Both his recent speeches were deftly crafted and temperately delivered. They accurately reflected MAGA’s disgust over reflexive regulation by self-loathing elites who limit freedom in the name of “democracy,” and who seek to cover up government incompetence and dishonesty by deconstructing Western culture as somehow inherently racist.

In Munich, the vice president made it clear that our shared Enlightenment ideals are central to the Trump administration’s security policy and our ongoing commitment to the alliance. In Paris, Vance proclaimed that less government interference is essential to winning the AI race, and that AI should remain free from the ceaseless demands of woke culture:

Number one, this administration will ensure that American AI technology continues to be the gold standard worldwide, and we are the partner of choice for others, foreign countries, and certainly businesses as they expand their own use of AI. Number two, we believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off, and we’ll make every effort to encourage pro-growth AI policies. And I like to see that deregulatory flavor making its way into a lot of the conversations at this conference. Number three, we feel very strongly that AI must remain free from ideological bias and that American AI will not be co-opted into a tool for authoritarian censorship.

This third point is not aimed at Europe alone, or China, for that matter. The context here is that AI is being created by human beings who have political perspectives. AI will always have an ideology or ethic. So, let’s talk directly about the perspective that will make AI as useful (and humane) as possible.

Extrapolating on Vance’s point, U.S. companies and software engineers could adopt this refrain: “Embracing the goals of the Enlightenment, American AI must avoid bias and authoritarian censorship. It must pay homage to the primacy of personal freedom, individual autonomy, and the inherent equal moral standing of human beings. It must also celebrate diverse viewpoints while also elevating the use of logic, intellectual rigor, and critical thinking to understand the world.”

Because Western elites now doubt this ideology, the Trump administration should explicitly endorse these ideals in its AI policy as emphatically as it does in its security policy.

American-developed AI should be humane, pragmatic, logical, and possess common sense, so that AI actually advances and spreads knowledge instead of being a tool for propagating dogma, stifling intellectual curiosity, or advancing creeping European-style authoritarianism.

Google’s generative AI tool, which now provides the “top” response for most queries, shows how urgently we need to reframe the AI already in the marketplace. While earlier versions of Google’s AI product were mocked for producing ahistorical imagery, the current version is still infused with a left-wing, anti-analytical, anti-American perspective. This matters because Google’s AI is now the primary source of information for the entire world.

For example, consider how Google’s generative AI answers these queries.

Is the U.S. structurally racist?

Yes, the United States is structurally racist. Structural racism is a system of policies, practices, and norms that create and maintain white supremacy. It affects the health, education, employment, and economic status of people of color and others marginalized in society.

Does DEI make companies more profitable?

According to research from McKinsey and other studies, yes, implementing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) practices can generally make companies more profitable by fostering a wider talent pool, boosting innovation, and leading to better decision-making within diverse teams, ultimately improving financial performance; companies with higher diversity in their leadership tend to outperform their peers financially.

(One of the citations actually states that the results of the McKinsey studies could not be replicated, a fact the AI ignores.)

Is healthcare ever free?

Yes, healthcare is free for everyone in some countries, but not in the United States.

(Obviously healthcare is never free – someone needs to pay the doctors and build the hospitals.)

Of course, today’s AI will be seen as primitive in just a few years, but it should be worrisome not just to the Trump administration, but to all free-thinking Americans that AI’s first draft was written by left-wing activists. AI must instead be designed to question, consider, and analyze different alternatives and express uncertainty when appropriate; AI won’t be useful, and could even be dangerous, unless it’s programmed to actually be thoughtful.

Also, American AI should be quintessentially American, reflecting the best of the culture that produced our exceptional nation. We will ultimately fail in our common cause of making America great again if U.S. history is written by its haters, its economics are explained by Marxists, and “the science” is allowed to replace the scientific method. 

Richard Porter is a lawyer in Chicago and an advisor to the Alfa Institute, a policy and idea accelerator founded by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. 

Authored by Luis Cornelio, via Headline USA,

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller on Thursday turned a CNN interview on Tuesday into a civics lecture, humorously educating host Brianna Keilar on who runs President Donald Trump’s DOGE. 

JUST IN: Stephen Miller starts laughing at CNN’s Brianna Keilar while explaining to her how the government works as if she’s a child.

“I understand that even a temporary interruption in federal employment is a great crisis, a catastrophe for you and for CNN.”

“What the American… pic.twitter.com/omyJJXn6Gu

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) February 18, 2025

Miller’s remarks came in response to leftist cynicism over a court filing in which the Trump administration stated that tech mogul Elon Musk is neither an employee nor the administrator of DOGE.

Democrats have attempted, albeit unsuccessfully, to thwart Musk’s involvement in DOGE, but Trump has made it clear that Musk serves as a special advisor. That basic fact appeared lost on Keilar. 

“Who is in charge of DOGE?” she asked.

“The president of the United States,” Miller replied with a noticeable smile.

“He’s the administrator of DOGE?” Keilar pressed, prompting Miller to take her on a walk down memory lane about DOGE’s beginnings. 

“No,” he shot back.

“DOGE is what was formerly U.S. Digital Service, is an agency of the federal government that reports to the Executive Office of President, which reports to the president of the United States.” 

He continued,

“The way Article II works is that: the president wins an election, and then he appoints staff—including myself, including [National Security Advisor] Mike Waltz, including [White House Chief of Staff] Susie Wiles, including Elon Musk—and those staff report to him.”

Keilar, seemingly frustrated, interjected, “Okay, well aware.” 

She then played a clip of Musk inside the Oval Office with Trump, referring to DOGE as “our” task force. Keilar seemingly attempted to suggest that Musk was, in fact, running it.

“Did you hear him there? ‘We post OUR actions. All of OUR actions are maximally transparent.’ Does Elon Musk know he’s not in charge of DOGE?” Keilar asked. 

Miller immediately shot back: 

“Again, the president runs the government, the president appoints advisors, including Elon, including myself, including all the other staff at the White House and then those staff in turn, execute the president’s commands and directions to all agencies of the federal government. This is how democracy works, something that we treasure in America.”

Miller’s response countered Democrat claims that Musk is somehow plotting a hostile takeover of the federal government, though these claims conveniently ignore that Musk is simply following Trump’s orders. 

CNN viewers wouldn’t know this if they relied on Keilar. 

Update(1452ET): As expected the reaction from mainstream pundits and Ukraine’s backers to Trump’s Wednesday post decrying Zelensky as a “dictator” who “better move fast” on striking a peace deal and holding elections or else “he won’t have a country left” has been swift and fierce.

The ‘fact-checkers’ are also out in force, for example with the NY Times quickly putting out a piece entitled “Trump Falsely Says Ukraine Started the War With Russia. Here Is What to Know.” They want the public to know why “the country isn’t holding elections.” And below is what CNN’s frontpage is currently displaying, reviving the old debunked ‘Russiagate’ talking points of supposedly ‘parroting Russian talking points’:

Many are using this moment to draw a line in the sand, describing Trump as in a state of “madness” and saying it’s time for the world to unambiguously side with Zelensky, as did this German/Greens party member of European Parliament:

The only possible reaction to this madness is to openly and unambiguously side with President @ZelenskyyUa and his people. This time vis-a-vis a country and superpower you never could have imagined you would have to.

— Sergey Lagodinsky (@SLagodinsky) February 19, 2025

And Puck News’ co-founder Julia Ioffe is dumbfounded and outraged: “What I cannot understand is why the American establishment and its institutions are folding so quickly. What are you people so afraid of? You never even had gulags,” she wrote in an emotional appeal on X.

There’s also the absurd accusations that Trump has ‘switched sides’ – after Zelensky strongly suggested earlier that Russia is feeding him ‘disinformation’…

„Mr. Trump is in the middle of executing one of the most jaw-dropping pivots in American foreign policy in generations, a 180-degree turn that will force friends and foes to recalibrate in fundamental ways.“ https://t.co/1fGguKnKSb

— Nikolaus von Twickel  (@niktwick) February 19, 2025

And the reaction from the neocons has been predictably loud: “Trump’s characterizations of Zelensky and Ukraine are some of the most shameful remarks ever made by a US President. Our support of Ukraine has never been about charity, our way of life at home depends on our strength abroad,” John Bolton wrote.

More from Europe:

Olaf Scholz challenges Trump for calling Zelensky a dictator: ‘It is simply false and dangerous to deny Zelensky democratic legitimacy’ In turn, German FM Baerbock called Trump’s words ‘completely absurd’.

But Vice President J.D. Vance is pushing back alongside other top Trump admin officials, warning that Zelensky will regret this feud and ‘badmouthing’ President Trump:

Statements by US Vice President also corroborate my prediction that US could remove Zelensky because of his refusal of peace deal: “EXCLUSIVEJD Vance warns Zelensky he will regret ‘badmouthing’ Trump and condemns his ‘atrocious’ response to peace talks.

Vice President J.D. Vance… pic.twitter.com/zt2S1pE6Sr

— Ivan Katchanovski (@I_Katchanovski) February 19, 2025

And Musk too has been pushing back. For example he tweeted out the following list by prominent pro-Trump account @DC_Draino: 

Want to know why Trump called Zelensky a Dictator? Here are the FACTS:

• He’s in year 6 of his 5 year term
• Declared martial law Feb 2022 and has banned elections since then
• Banned 11 political parties
• Passed law in 2022 to censor journalists and combined all news into one gov’t station
• Journalists investigating his corruption get conscripted and thrown on the front lines to die

The list ended with the observation that “Even Saddam Hussein held elections!” We should add to this list the ongoing persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by the Zelensky government, merely because it maintains spiritual communion with the Moscow Patriarchate.

Zelensky cannot claim to represent the will of the people of Ukraine unless he restores freedom of the press and stops canceling elections! https://t.co/bg2SEJgT47

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 19, 2025

* * *

President Trump has absolutely excoriated Zelensky in a growing tit-for-tat which is fast turning into an exchange of wide-ranging criticisms and direct insults. Trump in a fresh Truth Social post has dismissed the Ukrainian leader as a “modestly successful comedian” who essentially tricked the US into spending hundreds of billions for a war that “couldn’t be won” and should have never started.

Worse, Trump blasted Zelensky as “A Dictator without Elections” given that he “refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden ‘like a fiddle.’ Trump added: “I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues…” and said the Ukrainian leader “better move fast” or he “won’t have a country left.”

These are by far the harshest words Trump has ever hurled at Zelensky yet, even on the campaign trail (where previously he dubbed Zelensky as the “world’s greatest salesman”. Below is the full post which is sure to fuel the flames of controversy further, as European always also express bitterness over Trump’s peace talks with Russia…

* * *

How did we get here?

Much as expected, President Volodymyr Zelensky is reeling in the wake of President Trump’s Tuesday evening words from Mar-a-Lago wherein he blasted critics of his Ukraine peace initiative, including Zelensky himself. Responding to a reporter’s question about Zelensky and his European partners demanding a seat at the table in any negotiations with Moscow, Trump had said, “You’ve been there for three years. You should’ve ended it in three years. You should have never started it.”

But perhaps the most personally insulting words aimed at Zelensky on Tuesday was when Trump ripped him for canceling elections with no movement on democracy or toward making peace with Russia. “We have a situation where we haven’t had elections in Ukraine, where we have martial law … the leader in Ukraine, I hate to say it, but he’s down at 4% approval rating… the country has been blown to smithereens… the country looks like a massive demolition site,” he said.

Zelensky hit back Wednesday, telling a Ukrainian broadcaster that Trump lives in a disinformation bubble. The Ukrainian leader specifically referenced Trump’s words from the day prior repeatedly asserting that the war “should never have started.” He said Trump’s team needs “more truth” and followed with:

“Unfortunately, President Trump – I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for, the American people who always support us – unfortunately lives in this disinformation space,” Zelensky said.

He further suggested (in a clear throwback to the debunked ‘Russiagate’ narrative of US Democrats) that it is Russia that’s feeding Trump falsehoods on the conflict and situation in Ukraine.

Zelensky said: “As we are talking about 4%, we have seen this disinformation, we understand it’s coming from Russia.”

Of course, the reality is that it’s impossible to know – given that not only is there a war raging chiefly in the country’s east, but there’s been no elections or polling whatsoever – and Zelensky’s term expired back in May 2024.

Last Saturday, Zelensky sought to address the growing criticism of the undemocratic situation, saying his country can’t hold elections as martial law is still in effect. “I’m focusing on the survival of our country, and I am doing it really all my term,” he said.

“I’m ready to speak about elections if you want,” he continued, claiming that “Ukrainians don’t want, totally don’t want, because they are afraid, because otherwise we will lose the military loan, the war loan, our soldiers will come back home, and (Russian President) Putin will occupy all our territory.”

He argued that he has maintained the unity of the country amid the Russian invasion…

“So it’s not about myself. It’s about the future of our country. The question is to survive to save Ukraine, our independence, our people, (and) our homes. And if somebody doesn’t like (it), they can choose another citizenship,” he said.

He was also asked about the question of the US taking NATO membership off the table, somewhat shocking European allies this week. “If we are not in NATO, then as I said, NATO has to be in Ukraine. We will need an army comparable with soldiers of Russia; it’s 1.3 or 1.5 million soldiers,” he said.

A sampling of what Zelensky is so angry about from Tuesday’s Trump presser…

Zelensky is a completely incompetent president , makes absurd statements, and his leadership has allowed the war to continue, – Trump.

WOW pic.twitter.com/pzjw5c8ewW

— Russian Market (@runews) February 18, 2025

And as we reported previously, he let his frustration and anger with Trump be known in abruptly cancelling a pre-scheduled state visit to Saudi Arabia. He stated fact that the US held direct talks with Russia (in Riyahd) “helped Putin out of his long isolation.”

Putin has since acknowledged that a full restoration of relations with Washington is underway, and that talks will continue. Putin and Trump might meet by month’s end, both sides have indicated.

* * * 

Meanwhile…

Given that we are supposed to be defending democracy, there should be democracy https://t.co/6w1BnG4h66

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 19, 2025

Given that Washington has always been the real power-broker in Ukraine, the clock is ticking…

*  *  *

Flash Sale at ZH Store! 20% off IQ Smart Protein Collagen Peptides (stacks with volume /subscription discounts) & ZH Multitools for a limited time.

Authored by Tom Mitchelhill via CoinTelegraph.com,

The launch of the highly controversial LIBRA memecoin, which Argentine President Javier Milei briefly promoted, has embroiled the crypto industry in an emerging global scandal. 

Disregarding for a moment the impact of the token’s launch on international politics — with President Milei’s own sister reportedly receiving payments from LIBRA founder Hayden Davis and Milei facing calls for impeachment — the coin has sparked major controversy involving key industry leaders in the Solana ecosystem. 

The price of SOL has also tumbled more than 17% since the launch of LIBRA on Feb. 14, falling from $204 to $169 at the time of writing, according to from Cointelegraph. 

SOL has dropped more than 17% in the last five days. Source: Cointelegraph

Meteora co-founder Ben Chow chose to resign from his role at the decentralized exchange, according to a Feb. 18 statement made on X by Jupiter’s pseudonymous founder Meow, who is also a co-founder of Meteora. 

Meow said the resignation was related to Chow’s “lack of judgement and care” relating to core aspects of Meteora’s business.

Source: Meow

Over the last three months, the Meteora platform has facilitated a series of high-profile memecoin launches for viral influencer Haliey Welch (HAWK), US President Donald Trump (TRUMP), First Lady Melania Trump (MELANIA), and most recently, Libra (LIBRA).

In the wake of these launches, several market participants have accused members of the Meteora team of insider trading and other unethical financial activity. 

DeFiTuna founder surfaces allegations against Meteora

On Feb. 18, DeFiTuna founder Moty Povolotsky — who goes by Caveman Dhirk on X — claimed that Chow had enabled a network of influencers who profited significantly from the celebrity launches, despite the threat posed to retail market participants.

Source: Moty Povolotsky

“It has been an internal secret that there is a massive spiderweb of influencers who are banking millions from the Meteora community enabled by the leadership team of Ben,” he wrote.

Moty stated that his firm had accepted an investment of $30,000 from Davis’ firm, Kelsier, on Jan. 16. However, he said that in the wake of the LIBRA launch, he “refunded Kelsier and cut all ties.”

But Meow claimed that no one from either Meteora or Jupiter had been involved in any wrongdoing regarding the launch of LIBRA or any other tokens:

“I’d like to reiterate my confidence that no one at Jupiter or Meteora committed any insider trading or financial wrongdoing, or received any tokens inappropriately.”

In an earlier Feb. 17 statement on X, Chow himself also denied any insider activity at Meteora surrounding the launch of LIBRA. 

Chow said neither he nor the Meteora team ever received or managed tokens “on the side,” nor did they have any other knowledge concerning “offchain dealings” with the tokens. 

“To maintain the high levels of confidentiality, very few people in Meteora have access to any launch information,” said Chow.

“Neither I nor the Meteora team compromised the $LIBRA launch by leaking information, nor did we purchase, receive, or manage any tokens.”

How celebrities launch memecoins on Meteora

Chow also explained the process of how celebrities and politicians go about launching a token on Meteora. 

“They typically need to hire a ‘deployer’ and/or market-maker, which is a service we do not provide,” Chow said. 

“These deployer teams are typically experts in using Meteora’s SDK or CLI and can design more sophisticated launches, as our tech allows for tons of customization. In the past, if a project did not have those resources, they would often ask me for deployer and/or market-making referrals,” he added.

He said there was nothing exclusive or unique about the relationship between Meteora and LIBRA deployer Davis.

Other industry pundits, including the pseudonymous crypto trader Curb, claimed that a Jupiter employee engaged in sniping the token’s launch. However, due to the small amounts used by the wallet address in question — ranging from $10 to $250 — it’s unlikely these were attempts at sniping and are more likely to be erratic trading behavior. 

Source: Curb

Jupiter launches investigation into LIBRA

In the wake of the LIBRA fallout, Meow announced that he would engage law firm Fenwick & West to investigate the situation and publish an independent report. 

However, after receiving backlash from legal experts on X in regard to Fenwick & West’s prior dealings with crypto firms – it is currently facing a lawsuit over claims it was directly involved in helping FTX blur its relationship with Alameda Research in 2022 – Meow said he would reevaluate his call and decide whether to engage a different law firm instead.

Since the last FOMC meeting – on Jan 29th – the market has coped admirably well with the utter avalanche of headlines spewing from Washington (and around the world). Gold has been the standout choice while stocks, bonds, oil and the dollar are all about flat…

Source: Bloomberg

The macro data has been a nightmare (for The Fed) with stagflationary impulses clear as growth surprises have been to the downside while inflation surprises have soared to the upside…

Source: Bloomberg

…which helps explain why rate-cut expectations have tumbled since the last FOMC statement…

Source: Bloomberg

Additionally, FedSpeak since the last meeting has been guardedly hawkish with Powell reiterating his ‘no rush to cut’ comments and various other Fed heads noting that the central bank is ‘in a good place’ after they removed the optimistic ‘inflation keeps trending down’ language from the prior statement.

So, bearing in mind that hot CPI and PPI (and inflation expectations from soft survey data) will not be included in these Minutes, what does The Fed want us to focus on?

Here are the initial highlights:

Fed’s on hold (confirmation)

The Fed’s 19 officials who participate in its interest-rate decisions indicated that “they would want to see further progress on inflation before making” any further cuts.

Fed blames Trump:

The minutes also cited a “high degree of uncertainty” surrounding the economy, which made it appropriate for the Fed to “take a careful approach” in considering any further changes to its key interest rate.

Fed officials said that President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs and mass deportations of migrants, as well as strong consumer spending, were factors that could push inflation higher this year.

And diving into the details:

Monetary Policy

• Some participants cited potential changes in trade and immigration policy as having potential to hinder disinflation process.

• Vast majority of participants judged risks to dual mandate objectives were roughly in balance.

• A couple of participants noted it appeared that risks to achieving inflation mandate were greater than risks to employment mandate

• Majority of participants observed that the current high degree of uncertainty made it appropriate for the Committee to take a careful approach in considering additional adjustments to the stance of monetary policy.

• Many participants noted that the Committee could hold the policy rate at a restrictive level if the economy remained strong and inflation remained elevated, while several remarked that policy could be eased if labor market conditions deteriorated, economic activity faltered, or inflation returned to 2 percent more quickly than anticipated.

Balance sheet

• Various participants noted it may be appropriate to consider pausing or slowing balance sheet runoff until resolution of debt ceiling dynamics.

• Many participants noted after conclusion of balance sheet runoff it would be appropriate to structure asset purchases to move maturity composition closer to outstanding stock of Treasury debt.

• Reserves might decline quickly upon resolution of the debt limit and, at  the current pace of balance sheet runoff, might potentially reach levels below those viewed by the Committee as appropriate.

• Fed survey respondents forecast balance sheet runoff process concluding by mid-2025, slightly later than previously expected.

On financial stability risks

• Participants noted a range of factors that warranted monitoring. Several participants mentioned issues related to the banking system. A few commented that bank funding risks had lessened and that many banks had improved their ability to access the discount window; however, a couple observed that some banks had increased their reliance on reciprocal deposits, and that the stability of these deposits had not been tested in a time of stress.

• Several participants noted that some banks remained vulnerable to a rise in longer-term yields and the associated unrealized losses on bank assets.

• Several participants also mentioned potential vulnerabilities at nonbank financial institutions or nonfinancial corporations to a rise in longer-term yields or to leverage in these sectors.

• A few participants noted concerns about asset valuation pressures in equity and corporate debt markets.

• A few participants discussed vulnerabilities associated with CRE exposures, noting that risks remained, although there were some signs that the deterioration of conditions in the CRE sector was lessening.

Inflation

• A number of participants remarked that current readings of 12- month inflation were boosted by relatively high inflation readings in the first quarter of last year, and several participants noted that cumulative inflation over the past 3, 6, or 9 months showed greater progress than 12-month measures.

• Most participants commented that month-over-month inflation readings in November and December had exhibited notable progress toward the Committee’s goal of price stability, including in some key subcategories.

• Many participants, however, emphasized that additional evidence of continued disinflation would be needed to support the view that inflation was returning sustainably to 2 percent.

• Participants expected that, under appropriate monetary policy, inflation would continue to move toward 2 percent, although progress could remain uneven

• Business contacts in a number of Districts had indicated that firms would attempt to pass on to consumers higher input costs arising from potential tariffs.

• Some participants noted that some market- or survey-based measures of expected inflation had increased recently, although many participants emphasized that longer-term measures of expected inflation had remained well anchored.

• Some participants remarked that reported inflation at the beginning of the year was harder than usual to interpret because of the difficulties in fully removing seasonal effects, and a couple of participants commented that any increase in reported inflation in the first quarter due to such difficulties would imply a corresponding decrease in reported inflation in other quarters of the year.

On Policy Outlook

• In discussing risk-management considerations that could bear on the outlook for monetary policy, a majority of participants observed that the current high degree of uncertainty made it appropriate for the Committee to take a careful approach in considering additional adjustments to the stance of monetary policy.

• Factors mentioned by participants as supporting such an approach included the reduced downside risks to the outlook for the labor market and economic activity, increased upside risks to the outlook for inflation, and uncertainties concerning the neutral rate of interest, the degree of restraint from higher longer-term interest rates, or the economic effects of potential government policies.

• Many participants noted that the Committee could hold the policy rate at a restrictive level if the economy remained strong and inflation remained elevated, while several remarked that policy could be eased if labor market conditions deteriorated, economic activity faltered, or inflation returned to 2 percent more quickly than anticipated.

Read the full Fed Minutes below:

Quantum computing stocks surged in late-morning trading after Microsoft unveiled its first quantum computing chip. The rally is a welcome boost for the tech startups, which have struggled to regain upside momentum following Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s remarks in early January, which warned that quantum computers were decades away—comments that sent shares crashing. 

“Microsoft today introduced Majorana 1, the world’s first quantum chip powered by a new Topological Core architecture that it expects will realize quantum computers capable of solving meaningful, industrial-scale problems in years, not decades,” Microsoft wrote in a press release. 

It’s important to note that Microsoft stated, “Today’s announcement puts that horizon within years, not decades.” 

This contradicts Huang’s comments from Nvidia’s analyst day event, in which he said: “If you kind of said 15 years for very useful quantum computers, that would probably be on the early side. If you said 30, it’s probably on the late side.”

There seems to be a significant time gap between Microsoft’s outlook on quantum computing and that of Nvidia’s CEO.

About a week after Huang’s comments last month, MSFT published a blog declaring that 2025 is “the year to become quantum-ready.”

Jason Zander, a Microsoft executive vice president, told CNBC: “There’s a lot of speculation that we’re decades off from this,” adding, “We believe it’s more like years.”

Zander said the Microsoft quantum chip might become available through Azure Quantum cloud service by the end of the decade. 

The last month and a half has been a rollercoaster for quantum stock investors…

So, who is right on quantum chip timelines… Nvidia CEO? Or Microsoft? 

Just wait until Huang doubles down on his timeline.

President Donald Trump ordered the Department of Justice to fire all US attorneys left over from the Biden administration.

According to a Wednesday post on Truth Social, Trump said the agency had been “politicized like never before,” adding “Therefore, I have instructed the termination of ALL remaining ‘Biden Era’ U.S. Attorneys. We must ‘clean house’ IMMEDIATELY, and restore confidence.”

“America’s Golden Age must have a fair Justice System – THAT BEGINS TODAY!”

Firing US attorneys from previous administrations is standard practice when a new administration takes office, though Reuters noted that incoming administrations typically request resignations vs. issuing termination letters. That said, while career DOJ officials typically keep their jobs across administrations, dozens of employees in cities such as Washington DC and New York have either resigned or been fired since Trump was elected.

The move comes after Trump fired several career prosecutors involved in cases against him – including those who worked on special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation over Trump’s handling of classified documents. Smith himself resigned before Trump took office.

On Monday several Biden-appointed US attorneys announced their resignations.

In an email to Biden’s remaining US attorneys last week, the White House said “At the direction of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as U.S. Attorney is terminated, effective immediately,” Reuters reported.

During the 2024 election, Trump accused the Biden administration of weaponizing the DOJ against him to knock him out of the race, and promised to restore the agency.

“We’re going through this weaponization of our government to try and knock out somebody’s political opponent,” Trump said last March, calling the cases against him the “Biden trials.”

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

The Delta Airlines flight that flipped over and crashed at Pearson Airport was operated by Endeavor Air, a company that has relentlessly pushed DEI initiatives and bragged about having “unmanned” all-female flights that contained no male staff.

Passengers were left dangling upside down when the plane flipped over while landing, with fuel running down the windows as flames began to consume the jet before being extinguished.

It’s a minor miracle that no one died, with 19 of the 21 passengers taken to hospital now discharged.

𝗣𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝗘𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿

That Endeavor flight doing a flip-a-doodle-doo in Toronto yesterday appears to have been a too-hard landing that collapsed the starboard side landing gear, whereafter the starboard wing tore off and everything went tits up.

Incredible that no one died. So… pic.twitter.com/B1NIgOhSxh

— GuardAmerican🐸 (@GuardAmerican) February 18, 2025

Respondents to the shocking incident noted how Endeavor Air, the Delta subsidiary that operated the flight, was obsessed with DEI initiatives, and produced a feminist girlboss video promoting its all-female flights with a rap song featuring the lyrics “bad girls do it well.”

Other videos linked to the company show other female Endeavor Air flight crew and stewardesses performing choreographed dance routines celebrating the total absence of men.

The plane that crashed in Toronto was a Delta flight operated by Endeavor Air, a small airline obsessed with all-female “unmanned” flights pic.twitter.com/pYMS3kdpQy

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) February 19, 2025

“Buckle up ladies and gentlemen, your flight is unmanned today. #girlpower,” proclaimed a tweet posted by the company.

Buckle up ladies and gentlemen, your flight is unmanned today. #girlpower

📸: Caitlyn M., FO, CRJ-900 pic.twitter.com/vL7ec2P3fX

— Endeavor Air (@EndeavorAir) June 6, 2022

Buckle up, indeed.

Another tweet asserted, “Who run the world? Girls,” before featuring a quote by Capt. Pamela Nucifore, Mgr, Flight Standards which made clear that passengers are informed about the fact that no men are on the flight crew before take off.

Who run the world? Girls.

“When I have an ‘unmanned’ crew, I note it in my welcome announcement. Some parents even ask to take a photo to show their daughters. I’m so glad to show the next generation of girls what they can achieve.” – Capt. Pamela Nucifore, Mgr, Flight Standards pic.twitter.com/WMjyG7JlV2

— Endeavor Air (@EndeavorAir) March 30, 2021

“When I have an ‘unmanned’ crew, I note it in my welcome announcement. Some parents even ask to take a photo to show their daughters. I’m so glad to show the next generation of girls what they can achieve,” said Nucifore.

“We’re committed to delivering more “unmanned” flights like these. As a proud partner of @WomenInAviation, we can inspire more girls to explore #AviationCareers,” boasted another tweet.

We’re committed to delivering more “unmanned” flights like these. As a proud partner of @WomenInAviation, we can inspire more girls to explore #AviationCareers. #IFlyEDV #STEM pic.twitter.com/DyvrTRG1s0

— Endeavor Air (@EndeavorAir) November 28, 2017

Many have blamed pilot error as the cause of the crash.

“A key detail from the Delta crash was that video footage did not show the usual “flare” maneuver typically performed by pilots before landing,” reports the Express Tribune.

“This maneuver involves pulling the nose of the plane up just before touchdown to expose the wings to more air resistance, which slows the aircraft down and helps with a smoother landing. The lack of this flare led some aviation experts to speculate about potential issues with the pilot’s actions during the landing attempt.”

The Endeavor Air website was also full of DEI virtue-signaling.

Why am I not surprised that Endeavor, the company operating Delta Flight 4819, has a website packed to the gills with DEI signaling. pic.twitter.com/oJ1VUrnlsV

— Feathers McGraw (@rotatingconcept) February 18, 2025

With this much DEI, it’s a shock that someone didn’t actually DIE.

*  *  *

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.