Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Education Department on Monday said it has canceled $600 million in grants for educator training programs that promote “divisive ideologies.”

The grants had been awarded to teacher preparation programs that trained future educators in what the department said were “inappropriate and unnecessary topics,” such as critical race theory, which promotes the fundamental framework view that racism is embedded in all institutions and aspects of society; diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); and social justice activism. Some of the defunded programs also included race-based teacher recruitment and staffing strategies, according to the department.

The department provided examples of the defunded training programs, including those that required educators to acknowledge “systemic inequities” like racism and “critically reassess” their own teaching practices. Others offered professional development workshops on “Building Cultural Competence,” “Dismantling Racial Bias,” and “Centering Equity in the Classroom.”

Some initiatives guided teachers to “interrupt racial marginalization and oppression of students.” There were also programs promoting an “abolitionist pedagogy” which, according to Bettina L. Love, the professor who coined the term, applies a “critical race lens” to classrooms and encourages teachers to organize marches and boycotts against their colleagues perceived as “racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic.”

The decision to cut these grants aligns with the broader cost-cutting measures led by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an advisory body led by Elon Musk, and with President Donald Trump’s ongoing efforts to dismantle DEI initiatives across the federal government.

Trump on Jan. 21 signed an executive order directing government educational institutions to end all DEI efforts.

“Illegal DEI and DEIA policies not only violate the text and spirit of our longstanding Federal civil-rights laws, they also undermine our national unity, as they deny, discredit, and undermine the traditional American values of hard work, excellence, and individual achievement in favor of an unlawful, corrosive, and pernicious identity-based spoils system,” the order read. “The Federal Government is charged with enforcing our civil-rights laws. The purpose of this order is to ensure that it does so by ending illegal preferences and discrimination.”

A study by Parents Defending Education, an independent organization that rallies against ideological indoctrinations in K-12 schools, found that since 2021, the Education Department has spent at least $1 billion on various DEI-related initiatives. That includes approximately $490 million on DEI hiring efforts, $343 million on DEI programming, and $170 million on DEI-related mental health programs.

Over the weekend, the Education Department reaffirmed its stance that DEI initiatives conflict with federal non-discrimination laws. Its civil rights enforcement division warned that failure to ensure compliance could result in a loss of federal funding.

“The law is clear: treating students differently on the basis of race to achieve nebulous goals such as diversity, racial balancing, social justice, or equity is illegal under controlling Supreme Court precedent,” Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights, wrote in a letter sent to the education departments in all 50 states.

While emphasizing the obligations under Title VI, the federal law prohibiting discrimination based on race for institutions that receive federal dollars, the letter also referenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision, which found it unconstitutional for public and private colleges to use racial preferences in admissions.

“At its core, the test is simple: If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law,” the letter said.

The space race to connect the world to the internet is led by Elon Musk’s SpaceX’s Starlink, alongside competitors like OneWeb, Amazon, and Telesat. These players are deploying massive constellations of low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, with plans to launch tens of thousands of new units by the decade’s end, with some 7,000 LEO satellites already orbiting the planet every 90 minutes. 

With tens of thousands of new LEO satellites slated for deployment over the next five years, Goldman analysts have identified the global leader in satellite components—particularly hollow metallic waveguides. These waveguides are used in microwave or mmWave components, such as power amplifiers, filters, circulators, and isolators. Such components are integral to both LEO satellites and ground-based gateways used by Starlink and Amazon, which transmit data skyward to be relayed around the globe.

Goldman’s Allen Chang, Verena Jeng, and others informed clients Monday that they initiated a “Buy” on Universal Microwave Technology (UMT) because of its unique exposures to the mmWave/ microWave components for LEO satellites as launch plans for these satellites are accelerated. 

Chang and the team provided clients with additional insight into UMT’s current position as a global leader in LEO satellite components for mmWave/ microWave components:

We expect LEO satellites to be a standard service in the 6G era starting in 2030, driving network deployment to grow at 49% CAGR in 2025-27E. Major global satellite operators target to launch an additional 80k units (vs. 7k in the sky currently) in the coming 5 years.

The acceleration of LEO satellite launches will drive UMT’s revenues: we expect UMT’s LEO satellite revenues to grow at 40% CAGR in 2024-28E to NT$9bn in 2028E or 77% of total revenues. LEO satellites carry higher GM than UMT’s traditional telecom products, driving the blended GM to 55.5% in 2028E (vs. 51.3% in 2024E).

The analysts expect an accelerated ramp-up of satellite network deployment, such as Starlink’s Direct to Cell connection, and other companies deploying LEO satellites to greatly benefit UMT.

UMT’s projected revenues:

The company is poised to maintain a leading role for years to come, as analysts noted, due to “barriers to entry of satellite microwave components.” 

Here’s more color: 

Unlike smartphones/ consumer electronics RF (radio frequency), satellites use microwave/ mmWave with higher frequency and a more complicated structure with high-precision processing, which is difficult for consumer-grade supply chain players to enter.

Their 12-month price target is around NT$591 (implying a 51% upside) based on 25x 2027E discounted P/E. 

UMT shares trading in Taiwan…

In a separate note, the analysts provided clients with a broader overview of companies entering LEO supply chains.

What comes after the AI bubble? Potentially, it’s the space bubble. 

Authored by Rahel Acenas via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Authorities in San Francisco are looking for three men who entered San Francisco City Hall on Friday, posing as employees of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The suspects entered various offices and demanded access to records “related to alleged wasteful government spending and fraud,” according to a statement by the San Francisco Sheriff’s Office.

The three men were wearing Make America Great Again (MAGA) hats and DOGE shirts and authorities believe they were imposters.

“We do not believe the individuals requesting access to City files were representatives from DOGE,” the sheriff’s office said.

City Hall employees refused to hand over any information and alerted law enforcement. By the time authorities had arrived, however, the three suspects had left the building.

The sheriff’s office is now reviewing surveillance videos and “using other investigative tools to pursue leads,” it said.

DOGE, an advisory panel launched by Trump, has been tasked with weeding out wasteful federal government spending, fraud, and abuse.

California recently joined 18 other states in suing the federal government to stop DOGE from accessing Treasury Department records including Americans’ social security and bank information. The court granted a temporary restraining order while the states seek a preliminary injunction.

“Our country cannot afford to have people in the driver’s seat who move fast and break things, especially when the things they’re breaking are critical and sensitive systems that millions of Americans’ rely on,” Attorney General Bonta said in a statement. “The President does not hold the power to give Americans’ bank account and social security numbers to anyone he’d like—and as of Friday night, he must stop doing so.”

Meanwhile, a judge in Washington on Feb. 14 declined a request by unions and nonprofits for a temporary restraining order to prevent the DOGE team from gaining access to records at the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

While speaking to reporters on Thursday, Musk defended DOGE’s efforts to drastically cut spending, saying that Americans voted for major change and that the Trump administration is delivering.

President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Feb. 11 directing government agencies to consult with DOGE on slashing the federal workforce and “eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity.”

The order calls for massive cuts, including a directive “that each agency hire no more than one employee for every four employees that depart.”

The executive order provides some exemptions, including to the military and law enforcement.

With Wall Street growing more confident by the day that Trump’s tariffs are nothing but hot air, and pushing stocks to new record highs, today after the close President Donald Trump tried to reassure the market that tariffs are indeed coming and said he would likely impose tariffs on auto, semiconductor and pharmaceutical imports of around 25%, with an announcement coming as soon as April 2.

The new duties, if implemented, would widen the president’s trade war. Trump previously announced 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum that are set to take effect in March, but Tuesday’s comments are his most detailed yet in specifying other sectors that would be hit with fresh barriers.

“I probably will tell you that on April 2, but it’ll be in the neighborhood of 25%,” Trump told reporters at his Mar-a-Lago club when asked about his plan for auto tariffs.

Asked about similar levies on pharmaceutical drugs and semiconductor chips, the president said: “It’ll be 25% and higher, and it’ll go very substantially higher over a course of a year.” Trump added that he wanted to give companies “time to come in” before announcing new import taxes.

“When they come into the United States and they have their plant or factory here there is no tariff, so we want to give them a little bit of a chance,” he said.

As noted last week, Trump also threatened other streams of tariffs, all part of an effort to rebalance the US’s trading relationships across the globe. The president has long accused other countries of ripping off the US and views import duties as a way to bring industries back to America and collect more revenue. Many economists say they would raise consumer prices for Americans and stymie the fight against inflation.

The president has said he would apply “reciprocal” levies on a country-by-country basis as soon as April, though specifics are still being determined. He has also threatened duties on some of the US’s biggest trading partners, such as a 10% rate already applied to China and 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico that have been deferred until at least March 4. The measures would stack on top of one another, meaning that Mexican and Canadian producers in certain sectors could pay as many as three tariffs.

Altogether, Trump’s moves, if enacted, would remake supply chains and trade flows — and US prices. Tariffs are paid by importers and often passed onto consumers, though sometimes offset by price reductions abroad.

The direction of President Trump’s tariff strategy became clearer over the past week, shifting away from the broad, universal levies that some Wall Street analysts had anticipated. Rather than imposing universal tariffs, the administration issued an executive order last Thursday establishing a reciprocal tariff policy for all current and potential US trading partners. By the weekend, Trump doubled down on reciprocal tariffs, stating that the move would ensure “a level playing field for American workers.” 

On Monday, Goldman’s Jan Hatzius, Alec Phillips, David Mericle, Ronnie Walker, and others penned a note for clients titled “Earnings Season Takeaways: Animal Spirits Over Tariffs.” 

In the note, the analysts provided a visual for clients showing that the percentage of management teams in corporate America discussing ‘tariffs’ this earnings season has surpassed 40%, far exceeding the previous peak (of around 30%) during Trump’s first term, when he initiated the trade war with China.

More color from the analysts:

Management references to tariffs soared amid the start of a second trade war (Exhibit 3). After signing orders imposing new tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, President Trump delayed the Canada and Mexico tariffs until March 4. We think a further extension is likely, but the tariff risk for both countries is likely to remain until at least the conclusion of the USMCA review slated for mid-2026. In addition to the China tariffs that have already been implemented, we expect tariffs on imports from China to rise further, for the announced steel and aluminum tariffs to be implemented, and for new tariffs on EU autos and critical imports (i.e. oil, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and other electrical equipment) to ultimately be implemented.

Latest commentary from management teams about the ongoing tariff situation:

On tariff impacts, the analysts noted: “Analyst expectations for capex—a proxy for company guidance—similarly suggest that the escalation in tariff policy will weigh on the investment decisions of the exposed companies.” 

They added, “Similar to last quarter, companies suggested that they could mitigate the impact of tariffs by passing along the higher cost to customers and stockpiling goods before their implementation.”

After last week’s CPI and PPI—both of which printed hotter than expected—coupled with the tariff war, fears have emerged of a redux of the mid-1970s …

Last week, readers were given a roadmap for the next iteration of Trump’s trade war—reciprocal tariffs—(read: here). 

Update (1800ET): During a Tuesday press conference, President Trump rattled off some of the massive waste, fraud and abuse found by Elon Musk’s team at DOGE – including thousands of Social Security recipients listed as being more than 200 years old, to which Musk joked “Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security.”

🚨BREAKING: President Trump lists MASSIVE fraud in Social Security:

200 to 209 years old, 879 people.

210 to 219 years old, 866 people.

220 to 229 years old, 1,039 people.

240 to 249 years old, 2 people.

1 person that is 360 years old. pic.twitter.com/WM8XSaZyd0

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) February 18, 2025

Listen to Trump go into detail on other terrible things DOGE has found:

Trump highlights a list of projects funded by U.S. taxpayers, including $10 million for circumcision programs in Mozambique.pic.twitter.com/mlzHTAlVSN

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) February 18, 2025

Insane!

The @DOGE revelations are exposing the dystopian US Hunger Games system where the districts (taxpayers) confer tribute on their labor to the capital city (DC) which lives in grifter opulence.

To make matters worse some of the tribute is used to silence and persecute those who…

— Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) February 18, 2025

*  *  *

Great news! Our most popular supplement Astaxanthin – the ultimate antioxidant, is back in stock at ZH Store. Grab some today!

*  *  *

Acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Michelle King, resigned on Sunday after a standoff with Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) over access to sensitive government records.

The same day, Musk posted what he says could be the ‘biggest fraud in US history‘ in which millions of ‘people’ over the age of 100 are collecting payments.

According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!

Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security 🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/ltb06VX98Z

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 17, 2025

King – who worked at the agency for over 30 years, left her position this weekend after refusing to give DOGE staffers access to sensitive information, such as the fraudulent payments to ‘vampires’ – with at least one recipient being older than the United States itself.

Which of course is the exact reason career employees shouldn’t be holding the keys to the castle with the new sheriff in town.

According to the Washington Post, “Administration officials have also been skeptical of career employees’ efforts to guard federal data, maintaining that political appointees should also be able to access it, particularly if necessary to root out wasteful or erroneous spending.”

In the wake of King’s departure, President Donald Trump appointed Leland Dudek – a manager in charge of Social Security’s anti-fraud office, as acting commissioner, while the Senate vets Trump nominee Frank Bisignano. Dudek had previously posted positive remarks on social media over DOGE’s efforts to cut  waste, fraud and abuse throughout the US government.

Yes, there are FAR more “eligible” social security numbers than there are citizens in the USA.

This might be the biggest fraud in history.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 17, 2025

Trump picking Dudek to take over for King bypassed ‘dozens of other senior executives who sat higher in the agency’s leadership heirarchy, touching off alarm in and around the agency,’ according to WaPo.

“At this rate, they will break it. And they will break it fast, and there will be an interruption of benefits,” said former Social Security commissioner under Biden, Martin O’Malley – a former Maryland governor.

“It’s a shame the chilling effect it has to disregard 120 senior executive service people,” O’Malley continued. “To pick an acting commissioner that is not in the senior executive service sends a message that professional people should leave that beleaguered public agency.”

Yes jackass, that’s the point.

On Monday evening, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said she had been fighting “fake news reporters” trying to “fearmonger” about Social Security payments.

DOGE’s access to records across the federal government have prompted disputes with senior officials at various agencies. Perhaps most prominently, the highest-ranking civil servant at the US Treasury Department quit after similarly refusing to grant Musk’s team access to the Bureau of Fiscal Service, which manages over $5 trillion in annual payments.

On Sunday, the Post reported that DOGE is looking to access a heavily guarded IRS system that contains detailed information about every taxpayer, business and nonprofit in the country. For some reason, Democrats seem to be the only ones freaking out about this.

And again, that’s the point.

*  *  *

Our most popular supplement Astaxanthin – the ultimate antioxidant, is back in stock at ZH Store! Grab some today.

Authored by Bonner Russel Cohen via RealClearEnergy,

China is the only country in the world that can seriously challenge America’s longstanding status as the globe’s top dog. And a rejuvenated United States is the only thing standing in the way of an ambitious China ascending to the peak of the heap. The reemergence of a bipolar world in the 21st century – replicating the old U.S.-U.S.S.R. rivalry of the Cold War era – is the no-longer-to-be-ignored reality of our time.

However, unlike the late Soviet Union – sometimes referred to as “Haiti with missiles” – China is an economic powerhouse, one that puts is technological prowess in the service of its geostrategic aspirations. ”China has roughly nine times as many engineers as the U.S. and perhaps as many as 15 times as many science and technology graduates,” George Gilder recently noted in the Wall Street Journal. This gives China a decisive edge in a world where rapid advances in technology have far-reaching economic and military implications. 

There are, however, things that Trump and his team can do, and in some cases are already doing, that can turn the tables on Beijing. With the departure of the geopolitically inept Biden administration, Washington can now harness its considerable geological assets to the disadvantage of its rival in the Far East.

Beijing was quick to realize the importance of gaining control of both the mining and processing of rare earths and other critical minerals, which it had largely done by the time the U.S. and other industrialized countries embarked on their climate-driven green energy transition. Beijing was not so foolish; to meet its own energy needs, it built hundreds of coal-fired power plants. Abandoning fossil fuels, which the United States has in abundance, and embracing green energy, the supply chain for which is largely controlled by China, could benefit only one country. And for a while, China’s bet looked to be paying off. 

But China’s dominance of such sectors as electric vehicles, batteries that power EVs and serve to backup intermittent wind and solar energy, and the raw materials in wind turbines and solar panels makes the Middle Kingdom vulnerable to Trump’s renewed embrace of “American energy dominance.” One of Trump’s Jan. 20 executive orders titled “Unleashing American Energy” includes directives revoking the EV mandate, freezing unspent funds for green energy, expediting approval of liquid natural gas (LNG) export facilities, and streamlining the permitting process for oil and gas leasing, exploration, development, and production. It also speeds up the approval process for new pipelines and other critical fossil-fuel infrastructure. 

Another, less-reported section of Trump’s order focuses on the mining of critical minerals. It instructs federal agencies to identify all regulations, policies, and orders “that impose undue burdens on domestic mining and processing of non-fuel minerals and undertake steps to revise or rescind such actions.”

The geostrategic case for promoting the mining and processing of critical minerals in the U.S. is compelling. “China now produces 80-90% of the world’s rare-earth minerals, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Yet China has only about 37% of the world’s estimated reserves,” notes Greg Walcher, president of the Natural Resources Group LLC. “Relying on China for critical minerals is obviously not smart, not safe, nor necessary.” 

Known to the public for their unpronounceable names, rare earths – which are actually quite abundant – have a variety of commercial and military applications. They include smartphones, MRI equipment, satellites, jet engines, night-vision goggles, sonar on submarines and other naval vessels, and real-time imagery and targeting for surveillance and reconnaissance flights by unmanned aerial systems – just to name a few. 

Taking rare earths and other valuable minerals seriously means upgrading the nation’s hollowed-out domestic supply chain for these natural resources. This is the purpose behind Trump’s order to eliminate “undue burdens on domestic mining and processing” of these strategically important minerals. That, of course, will be easier said than done, because Trump’s initiative will be challenged by lawsuits launched by activists determined to cripple America’s industrial base.

Trump’s desire to acquire Greenland from Denmark must be seen in this light. The icy island where the North Atlantic meets the Arctic abounds in mostly untapped mineral resources. In bringing the giant island under American jurisdiction, in whatever form, Trump can deny China (and Russia) access to Greenland’s riches while solidifying the U.S. presence in the Arctic. 

Another Trump executive order temporarily halts offshore wind leases in federal waters and pauses approvals, permits, and loans for offshore and onshore wind projects. Aside from signaling to investors that putting their money into capital-intensive wind projects may not be a good idea, the order undercuts Beijing’s investment in raw materials used in wind energy. 

“Wind farms require 10 times the amount of critical minerals as natural gas power plants and 1.6 times as much as nuclear power plants,” writes the Heritage Foundation’s Austin Gae. 

China is the world’s leading supplier of raw materials that go into wind turbines, including in the U.S. Trump is deliberately shrinking the U.S. market for wind turbines and for the predominately Chinese-supplied raw materials that go into them. The goal is to play to America’s strengths, which lie in fossil fuels and a rejuvenated nuclear-power industry, while lowering our dependence on China by turning away from wind and solar power.

This is a winning strategy.

Bonner Russell Cohen, Ph. D., is a senior policy analyst with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT).

Update(1735ET): President Trump in an afternoon press Q&A from Mar-a-Lago went off on those attacking his Ukraine peace initiative, which saw Secretary of State Rubio and national security advisor Walz lead a delegation in 4+ hours of talks with FM Lavrov and the Russians in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia earlier in the day.

“I want to see peace. Look, you know why I want it? Because I don’t want all these people killed anymore. I’m looking at people that are being killed — and they’re Russian and Ukrainian people, but they’re people,” Trump emphasized.

His tone on Zelensky was decidedly negative, and he defended his administration’s stance on holding Kiev to new elections, saying this is necessary if the Ukrainians want a seat at the table. Watch:

FOX: We’re hearing that Russia wants to force Ukraine to hold new elections in order to sign a sign a peace deal. Is that something that the US would ever support?

TRUMP: 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.

FOX: We’re hearing that Russia wants to force Ukraine as a condition for a peace deal. Is that something the US would support?

TRUMP: 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… pic.twitter.com/BE2gRdmopB

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 18, 2025

On a similar theme, at one point he was asked what his message is to Ukrainians who feel betrayed by his administration, again as the US pursues negotiations with Russia while sidelining both Zelensky and EU officials. Trump responded bluntly:

“I hear they’re upset about not having a seat. Well, they’ve had a seat for three years.”

Trump was further asked about how he would prevent Russia from installing a puppet government in Ukraine. He remarked that none of this is about personalities, but about getting the job done, saying he likes Zelensky “personally” but that’s not what this is all about.

Trump’s message to Ukrainians who feel betrayed by his administration: “I hear they’re upset about not having a seat. Well, they’ve had a seat for three years.” pic.twitter.com/MvQUdzSYIt

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 18, 2025

“You have leadership now that’s allowed a war to go on that should’ve never ever happened, even without the United States,” Trump said, underscoring that the conflict and slaughter started under Biden.

“Look we had a president who was grossly incompetent, he had no idea what he was doing – he said some very stupid things, like going in for portions,” Trump continued.

“This is something that would have never happened. And I used to discuss it with Putin. President Putin and I used to talk about Ukraine – it was the apple of his eye… I used to tell him ‘don’t go in’ – and he understand that, he understood it fully… I want to see if I can save maybe millions of lives.” You might “end up in World War 3,” Trump warned, if the conflict keeps escalating and with no efforts to make peace.

And more:

🚨President Trump: “I want to see peace. Look, you know why I want it? Because I don’t want all these people killed anymore. I’m looking at people that are being killed — and they’re Russian and Ukrainian people, but they’re people.”
pic.twitter.com/RmHMsLjVjy

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) February 18, 2025

Importantly, Trump also asked where the billions upon billions given to Ukraine went.

“We gave them I think $350 BILLION… where is all the money that’s been given? Where is it going? I don’t see any accounting!”

“…so I want to see peace… I don’t want to see all these people killed anymore.” He noted that Europe has “only given a small percentage of that” – even though this most directly impacts the security of Europe.

🚨 PRESIDENT TRUMP: Where is all the money we’ve given to Ukraine??!

“We gave them I think $350 BILLION… where is all the money that’s been given? Where is it going? I don’t see any accounting!”

DOGE must dig DEEP into the endless flow of tax dollars given to Ukraine! pic.twitter.com/M7GGWqWZt4

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 18, 2025

“I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land and no people would have been killed and no cities would have been demolished… President Biden in all fairness doesn’t have a clue”.

lol, Russian troops brazenly attacked Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities in a live broadcast, but Trump thinks it was Zelensky who started the war.

Putin is surely popping a bottle of champagne every night.

pic.twitter.com/YCSifKEHOS

— Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) February 18, 2025

* * *

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced Tuesday he is cancelling his scheduled state visit to Saudi Arabia following the conclusion of US-Russia talks there.

He’s been on a Middle East diplomatic tour to gain support for his country now three years in to the Russia-Ukraine war, which took him to the UAE, Turkey, and Wednesday he was supposed to be in Saudi Arabia to meet with the kingdom’s leadership. The Saudi trip had been planned before it was known that the US-Russia talks would take place.

“Zelensky CANCELLING trip to Saudi Arabia following US/Russia talks. Zelensky will now return to Kyiv from Ankara, Turkey,” Fox News has reported. He now says he plans to visit in March. Zelensky is clearly trying to lash out at Washington.

Without doubt this is to signal his anger about being cut out of talks toward ending the Ukraine war. The Kremlin hailed Tuesday’s four-and-half hour meeting in Riyadh, with Rubio leading the US side and Lavrov leading the Moscow delegation, as “successful”. European officials were also noticeably absent from the meeting, which was hosted and mediated by the Saudi government.

Zelensky had issued a prior warning while in the UAE: “Ukraine will not accept. Ukraine knew nothing about this. And Ukraine regards any negotiations about Ukraine without Ukraine as having no results,” he had said.

“Ukraine will not take part in the negotiations. Ukraine did not know they were planned. And the visit to the region was planned long before the US decided to meet Russia there,” he continued.

The fact that a high-level peace meeting was taking place without Zelensky or any Ukrainian representation, at the very moment he was in the region, is being felt as adding insult to injury from the Trump administration.

I think Zelensky is pissed off.

Zelensky: I will not travel to Saudi Arabia tomorrow; we have postponed the visit to March 10, and we expect U.S. representatives in Kyiv

I care about what our partners think of us. We are absolutely honest and open. That is why I will not go… pic.twitter.com/uQoK94jMLB

— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) February 18, 2025

Top Russian diplomat Sergey Lavrov has explained the need for Zelensky’s absence from talks as follows: “I don’t know what they [Kiev officals] could do at the negotiating table. If their aim is to cunningly extract a deceptive truce while secretly preparing for continued war—true to their habits and nature—then why invite them at all?” according to TASS.

The US and Russian sides have vowed to continue the peace negotiations going, hopefully leading to a face-to-face meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio after the Riyadh meeting issued a statement revealing an agreement for election to be held in Ukraine, which Zelensky certainly isn’t going to like (and probably won’t agree to), given also he just recently argued that martial law prevents this. 

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov:

Zelensky’s entire team needs to be brought to reason, and he himself needs to be slapped on the wrist.

Russia has never endangered Ukraine’s energy supply system. pic.twitter.com/Kl8RHgjgGW

— Clash Report (@clashreport) February 18, 2025

But Putin has said negotiations with Ukraine remain a non-starter so long as Zelensky refuses to hold elections. The Russian leader has said this makes him ‘illegitimate’ and thus he can’t legally sign any peace terms.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Summit… and nothin’?

Monday’s US Presidents Day was also European Presidents and Prime Ministers Day, the latter at an emergency summit to discuss defence. Absent were Ukraine — ironic as Europe complains of being left out by the US — and Turkey, with the second-largest army in NATO.

EU Commission President von der Leyen was rhetorical: “Today in Paris we reaffirmed that Ukraine deserves peace through strength. Peace respectful of its independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, with strong security guarantees. Europe carries its full share of the military assistance to Ukraine. At the same time, we need a surge in defence in Europe.” The EU Council president said Europe should negotiate with Russia and design new European security architecture.

Then, as the FT put it, ‘European leaders clash over sending troops to Ukraine’: sadly, this is the only kind of clash EU leaders excel at. Almost everyone rejected sending their own troops to support Ukraine, except the UK, who can’t do much physically or financially. Even Poland won’t, as it looks to spend 6% of GDP on defence, because it might need them at home – or in the Baltics, if EU officials fearing President Trump might pull back US troops stationed there are right.

This might seem “a quarrel in a faraway land between people of which we know nothing” to Western Europeans in markets thinking they *are* Europe, but the topic is a potential existential threat to fellow EU and Eurozone members. That used to require ‘Whatever It Takes’: but because that doesn’t now (directly) involve rate cuts and QE, it’s not as interesting(?)   

The lack of action at Monday’s summit means markets may think Europe won’t change. However, the idea of Eurobonds has been floated again; let’s see what happens after the German election; and what Europe doing nothing as the US makes clear it won’t do anything, and Russia makes clear it will do something, does for the European economy and markets over time. In short, things are going to change. It’s just when and how.

To put things in perspective, the Telegraph reports Weimar-esque terms being set for Ukraine by the US, with a huge claim on its economy as quid pro quo for aid. There is also more musing if President Trump is serious about annexing Canada, with comments from his chief economic advisor suggest he may be. Moreover, Trump just reiterated:

“On Trade, I have decided, for purposes of Fairness, that I will charge a RECIPROCAL Tariff meaning, whatever Countries charge the USA, we will charge them – No more, no less!

For purposes of this US Policy, we will consider Countries that use the VAT System, which is far more punitive than a Tariff, to be similar to that of a Tariff. Sending merchandise, product, or anything by any other name through another Country, for purposes of unfairly harming America, will not be accepted. In addition, we will make provision for subsidies provided by Countries in order to take Economic advantage of the US. Likewise, provisions will be made for Nonmonetary Tariffs and Trade Barriers that some Countries charge in order to keep our product out of their domain or, if they do not even let US businesses operate. We are able to accurately determine the cost of these Nonmonetary Trade Barriers. It is fair to all, no other Country can complain and, in some cases, if a Country feels that the US would be getting too high a Tariff, all they have to do is reduce or terminate their Tariff against us. There are no Tariffs if you manufacture or build your product in the US.”

What is described above is complex in application but simple in conception: “A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR AMERICAN WORKERS,” and “RECIPROCITY.” Of course, a level tariff playing field won’t remove the structural US trade deficit given it’s caused by broader deliberate economic statecraft choices by others which force up their net savings and net exports vs the US: that structural conclusion is likely to be drawn on 1 April by other Trump trade investigations.

‘Just’ reciprocal tariffs will be hugely disruptive to the global trading system and financial flows. Not seeing that risk shows as little understanding of how that system works as of its history and how it was only built by force of arms in the first place. And, yes, there is an obvious link back to events in Europe and Ukraine there.

Which are about to be discussed, absent European and Ukrainian representation, in Saudi Arabia by the US and Russia. What else will be on the table at these talks? Who else might be on the menu?

Some note that the US, Russia, and Saudi are also the world’s three largest energy producers – and that Europe lacks domestic energy sources; and that gold continues to flow to the US and from other Western economies. That’s as market discussions continue about what a new, ideal US-dictated global trading and financial structure would look like; and some talk of ‘debt for defence’; even Fed governors like Waller underline they favour the creation of new crypto assets to cement the dollar’s global role; I’ve pointed out the strategic logic of financialized ‘Fartcraft’ to help shift the US towards a ‘Warcraft’ economy; and some reports suggest Russia is trying to create a centralised trading platform for Global South commodity trade. Simply, we are talking about historic, paradigm-shifting events that directly impact the shape, currency, and geography in which markets operate.

This is not like the post-9/11 Afghanistan and Iraq Wars and the War on Terror, which, after initial geopolitical shock, wreaked havoc on the Middle East but were hardly felt by everyone in Western economies and trading floors beyond changes in airport security. I can recall when Saddam’s statue fell in Baghdad and the TV news was immediately changed back to Bloomberg on the trading floor I was on. I was flabbergasted, “What about the effects on Iraq and the region? Doesn’t that matter?!” There was a collective shrug, and everyone went back to looking at tiny movements in lines on screens. And they were ‘right’.

This time, however, what is happening involves the West – and certainly Eastern Europe, which will matter for Western European trading floors if they don’t want to see things around them topple. Ironically, however, that may still involve a lot of market conventions, and even markets’ present key role, being toppled.

Going back to my concept of US ‘Grand Macro Strategy’, the framework of Trump’s second-term economic statecraft is emerging: at best, it is the toughest of tough love to force the West to change vs. what the US sees as its rivals; at worst, it is an echo of early-20th, 19th, and 18th century US history in its neo-Hamiltonian, mercantilist, and even neo-imperialist “manifest destiny” approach.

Lines on maps are moving; lines on screens certainly will.

At a tense diplomatic moment where Russia is trying to negotiate with Syria’s new rulers in order to keep a military presence at Moscow’s two longtime Russian bases on Syria’s coast, Hmeimim airbase reportedly came under drone attack overnight.

“Unidentified drones attacked a Russian-controlled air base in Syria overnight, Iran-linked media reported early Tuesday, as Moscow seeks to maintain its military presence following the ouster of its closest ally in the region,” The Moscow Times writes.

The publication cites regional publication Sabereen News: “Anti-aircraft guns inside the Russian-controlled Hmeimim air base in Syria are intercepting unidentified drones flying over the Russian base,” details the report.

The drone attack reportedly lasted for up to an hour. It was unlikely to have been the ruling Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) militants under Jolani behind the attack, but could have been any of the hundreds of jihadist groups still running around Syria.

This has included thousands of foreign fighters, such as Chechens, which would have clear motives to continue attacking the Russian presence.

There have been no reports of damage or casualties from the Russian side, or much in the way of details given.

Russian forces throughout the country had rapidly pulled back to the two bases in the wake of Bashar al-Assad’s December 8 ouster. Since then the naval base at Tartus and the Khmeimim Air Base near Latakia have seen a scramble of personnel packing up equipment, with the fate of the bases uncertain.

Below is unverified video purporting to show the attack as it was in progress:

A circulating video of the attack on the Hmeimim base in Latakia with drones at dawn today

Reports of a drone attack to be taking place on the Russian Khmeimim Airbase, near Jableh, northwestern Syria. Air defense systems are active and are trying to intercept incoming drones… pic.twitter.com/wG1AMkATj2

— Report Syrian (@reportsyrian) February 18, 2025

The Washington Post reported last week, “Syria is open to letting Russia keep its air and naval bases along the Mediterranean coast as long as any agreement with the Kremlin serves the country’s interests, Syrian Defense Minister Murhaf Abu Qasra said in an interview this week, underscoring the pragmatic approach taken by his government as it charts new alliances and reassesses old ones forged under the previous regime.”

*  *  *

ZeroHedge is largely reader supported. Please consider subscribing or buying something from our store. Thanks for your support.

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

A Million Things to Parse?

Given the nonstop barrage of headlines, it might seem like there are a million things to parse? But maybe there is a subset of things that we can focus on to try to determine the direction of the market? It won’t make the task of coming up with answers easier, but it might make it manageable. Messy, but manageable remains a theme.

Academy was on Bloomberg TV on Friday, and I don’t think we could have scripted a set of issues this important to markets that are in Academy’s wheelhouse any better. The Full Clip starts at the 1:39:45 mark, but they also produced this smaller segment Tchir is Bullish on China, U.S. Chipmakers, and European Stocks.

Getting out of DOGE

Not a day goes by without a slew of DOGE-related headlines. I’m not sure if this is true, but it was so interesting that I figured I’d pass it along. Apparently, internet searches for “criminal lawyers” is “off the charts” in the D.C. area and a massive inventory of homes for sale has come on the market in recent weeks. Honestly, I’m not sure if those rumors are true, but the fact that the stories are circulating so widely is telling. I did find one “source” but the “source” for that “source” was GROK, which somehow seems fitting with everything going on.

On DOGE:

• Headline after headline of waste that is being reduced. Even if a fraction of the headlines are accurate, the ability to cut spending seems high. That is without focusing their attention, yet, on some of the big-ticket items in the budget. DOGE alone seems able to help with the goal of reducing the deficit.

• Accountability and Transparency. Or, simply, audits. There seems to be overwhelming support for accountability and transparency. As deficits have skyrocketed, in good and bad economic times, more people are left wondering where their tax dollars are going. Initial indications are that they are not being treated as carefully as we, the taxpayer, might like.

• Mistakes as well. The “other side” of the story is also emerging. What if certain things being cut as “fat and waste” are actually useful and important? What happened to the cryptic tweet about “discrepancies in Treasuries?” That one seemed unlikely to be true and has quickly disappeared from the ether. Chatter about paying lots of people who are 150 years old seems to be getting debunked as it may be an issue with COBOL dates. Not sure whether the root of the issue has been figured out, but it seems insane to me that systems run on COBOL, which was already falling out of favor when I was programming, last century.

So far, I think DOGE has been helping support Treasuries. DOGE provides some element of hope that bigger chunks of the deficit can be trimmed, without major repercussions to the economy or markets, than previously thought. The excitement about what DOGE can do to the bigger line items is real. The risk that the approach is too simplistic (with too many mistakes) is there as well, but so far, there seems to be enough low hanging fruit to feed an army.

The fact that Secretary Bessent and others seem focused on longer term yields (and not just the front end of the yield curve) is also encouraging. Their task of slowing the steepening may be Herculean, but it is helping, and something, as a Treasury bear, that I’m watching closely.

Enemies Close, Friends Less So

The adage of “keep your friends close and your enemies closer” seems to be getting turned upside down.

• China got hit with “only” a 10% “fentanyl” round of tariffs. TikTok remains under Chinese ownership. The administration seems to be reaching out to Xi, as much, or more, than Xi seems to be reaching out to us.

  • Tossing out the idea of China, the U.S., and Russia cutting their defense spending in half seems a bit dubious. We mentioned transparency earlier, and that is never a word I would use to describe China’s official data. Of all the things that have been “tossed out there” as ideas, this one seems, uhm, not so great? If I’m China, I sign on the dotted line instantly and then spend more than ever. Probably the same for Russia, though not sure what they have to spend, though that could change on the back of any agreement to end the fighting in Ukraine.

• Russia back in the G-7? Not sure Europe wants that at all (see the title of this section). Not sure if calling it the G-7 was a slip, as it should be the G-8 if Russia is back, or it is a veiled threat that one member might get kicked out? This could be like quantum physics – with both answers being true at the same time!

• “Friends” sometimes need to be reminded that they too need to act in certain ways to remain friends. From trade practices to defense issues, relationships need to benefit both sides. Friends that are only “take, take, take” don’t make for good friends for the longer term. Having said that, most relationships are rarely that one sided.

  • Canada and Mexico are dealing with the “third round” of tariffs. See Reciprocal Tariffs from Thursday for more thoughts on the subject as a whole. Two countries, which could be a big part of shifting supply chains back to one heavily dominated by the U.S., seem to be absorbing the brunt of the president’s ire so far. Not sure if that is the best strategy. So far, so good, but it does seem to go against the adage of what to do with friends.

  • Hegseth and Europe. The Munich speech was aggressive and presumably designed to motivate Europe to do more, so the U.S. can step its spending and efforts back. Reasonable, to some degree, but not without longer term risks.

My simplistic world view, which has served us well, has been:

• On one side you have China. China is “circled” by their “bad actor” relations – Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Beyond that, China has wrapped their tentacles around many autocratic, resource-rich nations. China is a large importer of raw resources from certain nations, and in many cases, their Belt and Road Initiative is very involved in the infrastructure of those nations. I’m less worried about the BRICS as any sort of organization, than I am about their ability to act as an effective barter system for Chinese brands. There are openings into parts of Europe where current weak economic conditions, coupled with more reliance on China, make them susceptible to growing trade with China, potentially at the expense of the U.S.

• On the other side you have Europe, Canada, Mexico, Central America, and South America as opportunities. Africa could be a bonanza for the U.S., as China’s behavior has not endeared it to some of the countries that they are involved with. Plenty of opportunities, but an interesting start on this front.

An interesting start to relationship building. So far, it seems to be working, but these things take time to play out. There may yet come a time when the U.S., in its efforts to “nudge” countries to do more, pushes too far. Not even close to being there yet, but I expect some pushback rather than “ring kissing” in the coming weeks, which should upset markets.

What Did You Think the End of Russian Hostilities Would Look Like?

The level of global confusion, if not outrage, about a possible deal to stop the fighting between Russia and Ukraine is surprising. It is, for better or worse, following the path that Academy has been laying out. Our assessment wasn’t based on what people would “like” to happen, but what their experiences with the individuals involved and the current state of the battlefield led them to conclude would happen.

Two things that finally seem to be getting the attention they deserve with respect to the talks:

1. Russia’s frozen dollar reserves are a big bargaining chip. The U.S. is trying to determine how much can be legally kept. The more the better. But the reality is that any agreement will likely include Russia getting some back, with some being used to pay off Ukraine’s debts and to fund the rebuilding.

2. Zelensky isn’t that popular within Ukraine any longer. Now, it appears, out of nowhere, we are seeing articles about his inability to win an election and that is why he is choosing not to hold one. That has been part of our take on the situation for months, which is why he is likely going to take a deal that goes against a lot of what he publicly claimed he needed to do a deal.

There is one twist, which I’m still trying to make sense of:

• Getting access to Ukraine’s resources as payment for services already rendered. While fully on board with the idea that the U.S. will benefit from supporting the rebuilding efforts, “re-trading” something always rubs me the wrong way. The U.S. and U.S. companies should do well in the rebuilding. But do we change the terms of what was already done? Maybe, I guess, framing it as the way we want them to repay their debt makes it ok, but I cannot help but wonder if other nations will view it quite that cleanly? If they don’t, probably not a big deal in the here and now, but in the future?

Simple and Transactional

When asked about the president’s two greatest strengths, I pounce on the phrase:

• Simple and Transactional. He is quick to cut to the chase. To see through a lot of the messiness and get to the point. Deals are good. They don’t need to be all-encompassing deals. Each deal can be struck on its own merit, and we can move along by keeping things simple and transactional.

Wow, I feel like we are back to quantum physics, but when thinking about the president’s two greatest weaknesses, I get right back to:

• Simple and Transactional. As great as KISS is, there are things that are complex. The devil can be in the details. While everyone likes a good deal, there is a tendency to do more deals with those you trust over time (where you build a rapport). The need to “win” every deal may not lead to optimal outcomes down the road.

As we examine everything this administration is trying to accomplish, and think about how it will affect businesses, the economy, and markets, it is the balance of the simple and transactional that we will be forced to weigh. What are we getting today? What are we getting set up for down the road?

Mar-a-Lago Accord

Is all of this setting up for some push towards a “Mar-a-Lago Accord?” There has been an increasing amount of chatter about a so-called Mar-a-Lago Accord.

Most of what we’ve written about today, and in the past, fits well.

Talk of an External Revenue Service, which would focus on generating income from “foreign” sources, primarily trade. We haven’t discussed this specifically, but it fits well within our view (and concern) that the administration could decide that they like the revenue from tariffs so much that it becomes an increasingly important part of our budget process. My concern is that the benefits are felt immediately (more income), but the shifts in supply chains and relationships might be damaging longer term.

Discussions about moving more assets to the Sovereign Wealth Fund and valuing them at market prices. Our expectation is that we would look to move gold, some land, and other assets into a sovereign wealth fund.

• For gold and some other assets, it might be a way to mark them to market. We’ve always tried to point out that for every corporation, people discuss the asset and liability side of the balance sheet, but for the government, we are only fixated on the liability side. I’m not a proponent for selling off national parks to the highest bidder, but trying to better account for U.S. assets would be good.

• It may open the way for the government to strike deals with the private sector that ensure that the rights and privileges granted are not overturned by the next administration, or the one after that. My biggest concern about “refine baby refine” or now “National Security = National Production” has been whether corporations will be convinced that a favorable regulatory environment will remain in place for the duration of their project. I could see the sovereign wealth fund being a vehicle that could be used to structure deals with more regulatory certainty which would be good for my National Security = National Production view.

Paying for U.S. “trade protection” (the Navy in particular, but all branches of the armed forces) by “forcing” countries to buy Treasuries at off-market prices. Chatter of paying par for 100-year bonds with a 0% coupon. Lots of chatter on this, but this seems like it could hit a number of roadblocks, especially as it seems like the view is that countries may have to pay for protection that was already afforded to them. I assume this would have the “benefit” of reducing our spending (others now are paying for it) and lowering the cost of funding the debt (off-market prices would do that). Both might backfire, especially on the off-market pricing. We already “broke” one “covenant” when we froze Russia’s dollar reserves. It sent a clear signal that if you are a bad actor, your dollars are not necessarily yours. This would breach another covenant along the same lines. The debt we owe you is subject to our needs at some point in time. It won’t overwhelm markets on day one if something like this is implemented, but I’d bet against it helping yields in the longer run and it would likely hasten deglobalization.

Things do seem to be funneling in this direction, but I don’t think we’ve missed much by addressing the various topics individually rather than under the banner of the Mar-a-Lago Accord.

How Much More Good News Can Bitcoin Handle?

I’m not sure I’ve ever been this confused about Bitcoin. I’ve lost count of how many states, countries, and companies are “discussing” Bitcoin or crypto reserves (I really wanted to write “spouting off” but restrained myself). Yet, here we are still below $100k on Bitcoin.

Maybe the average investor has figured out that crypto enthusiasts can pay people to pump crypto and some of the most vocal pundits are paid and heavily conflicted (I really wanted to use “shills,” but restrained myself, again). Maybe it was that in Argentina, which has been in the headlines, in a good way, of late, there was a “rug pull” of a meme coin that seemed to have President Milei’s endorsement. At least during the few moments when the meme coin (LIBRA) did well, though social media seems to have been scrubbed of those endorsements. Or maybe, and this seems weird, so many big institutions are showing up with Bitcoin ETFs rather than “physical” (an oxymoron for a bunch of 1s and 0s), then having to explain how it is easier to own in ETF form rather than in their own wallets. That does seem a bit strange.

With all the headlines, I’d expect crypto to be soaring. It isn’t.

Crypto seems much more correlated with the market of late. Partly because of real world links (the ETFs and crypto-focused firms in major indices) and partly because it’s all part of the same sentiment/trade. I’m keeping an eye on this closely, as crypto can lead the way, particularly to the downside, for U.S. risk assets.

The Gold Arbitrage

Arbitrage is a term thrown around loosely. It should only be used when you can buy and/or sell things where the up-front cost/fee of putting the trades on converges to a point where you are guaranteed a profit. I warn you not to Google “Bitcoin arbitrage” / ”Bitcoin yield” as they are currently being used because it might make your head explode.

There is a “real” arbitrage between the price of gold in New York and London. Gold is fungible. There are storage and delivery costs that need to be accounted for, but the potential for arbitrage exists.

The relationship between New York and London gold prices has generally been stable. Of late, the price of gold in the U.S. is now significantly more than the price in London, relative to history.

Presumably, it is largely because of concerns about tariffs. When going through my notes on tariffs, thoughts and concerns on gold were, ummm, nowhere on my list. Or at least far enough down, that I hadn’t thought about it.
Yet, here it is, being influenced by tariffs.

There is only one reason why I bring this up – it is the first sign of tariffs affecting liquidity.

When we gets shifts in relationships (arbitrage conditions, volatility, cross-asset correlation) there is increased risk that one or more dealers get caught “offsides.”

That can tend to reduce the liquidity, obviously in the market in question, but it can also reduce liquidity more broadly.
If liquidity in precious metals breaks down, could it hit other commodities? As it hits other commodities, it leaks into the stocks (and bonds) of those companies that are related.

So on and so forth.

At the moment, what is going on in gold is registering as “mildly intriguing,” but given my view of market structure (the faux liquidity of algo-driven market making), it is yet another thing to keep an eye on.

National Security = National Production

I’ve given up on getting “Refine Baby Refine” to resonate. But, I have not given up on my belief that everything that is considered necessary for national security will generate a lot of attention from this administration. With the goal of being as independent as possible (and certainly independent of China, Russia, etc.) for those items.

Those items include commodities, the processed (or refined) versions of the commodities, chips, and some medical/pharma/biopharma items as well. Energy production certainly falls into this camp as well, since if we want to dominate AI and chips, we will need energy and power to do that.

If you position your portfolio around National Security = National Production, you should fare well under this administration. Maybe that will resonate better than “Refine Baby Refine.” In any case, “Drill Baby Drill” barely scratches the surface of what national security is pushing for and what seems to be getting a very positive reception from this administration.

Over time, this will keep a lid on inflation, but I don’t see how we get to extracting, processing, or producing anything in scale, without first experiencing some inflation.

Bottom Line

Millions of things are going on, but using terms like “simple” and “transactional” can help us focus on what is most important. However, we need to be aware of the failings of simple and transactional, at the same time, to avoid getting blindsided.

Credit still seems boring.

Yields are lower than my targets, but I do understand why. I’m not buying into the bullish arguments as much as the market is, but I am considering them, and wondering if I’ve underestimated the positives for bond yields? I don’t think so, but I have to keep it in mind.

Equities have plenty of opportunities, but I’m focused on the most shorted, least loved assets right now. We haven’t had a really good (meaning vicious) rotation lately, and I’m betting that we see that coming soon. Look for foreign markets to outperform. Look to own companies that will benefit from the National Security = National Production view of this administration.

Bitcoin has so many positives, but it keeps muddling along, so I’d be very tempted to dump it or short it here. This probably means that by Tuesday morning we will be at new all-time highs, but something is rotten in the state of Denmark (separate from Greenland – yeah, I had to go there!).

Good luck, and I am hoping for a Canada/U.S. rematch in the 4 nations series, as Saturday night’s game embodied the old joke, “I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out” with 3 fights in the first 9 seconds! Old school hockey! Both sides will be putting on the foil if we get to that rematch!

This is the same kind of preparation we need for dealing with these markets and the slew of headlines (for those who think we have a few weeks of no tariff-related headlines after last week’s vague announcements, I wouldn’t bet on that!).