The Trump administration is currently formulating a sanctions strategy for Russia which might be better able to foster a peace deal in the Ukraine war.

“Advisers to President-elect Donald Trump are crafting a wide-ranging sanctions strategy to facilitate a Russia-Ukraine diplomatic accord in the coming months while at the same time squeezing Iran and Venezuela, people familiar with the matter said,” Bloomberg reports.

Ironically the three countries named happen to be among the world’s top oil producers – Russia, Iran, and Venezuela – and Trump’s team will want to carefully avoid major supply and price disruptions. Iranian and Venezuelan exports actually increased during the period of the Biden administration, a trend that Trump will try and thwart, given talk of returning to ‘maximum pressure’ toward political change in these so-called ‘rogue’ states.

Biden’s last Friday move to expand sanctions on Russia’s energy sector has without doubt thrown some extra complications into Trump’s plans to rapidly negotiate an end to the Ukraine war.

The Bloomberg report indicates two main paths or options Trump’s team is mulling: 1) if there are indicators that a truce deal is close, then softening and rolling back restrictions for Russian energy producers could be an extra incentive; or 2) building on existing sanctions could be used as additional leverage to induce Putin to agree to a deal.

But as to this latter option, Putin has not backed down even in the face of ratcheting, historic, and far-reaching punitive economic measures by the West.

Hungary’s EU minister Janos Boka seems to have acknowledge these ‘options’ in Thursday remarks: “I think it is only natural that before we decide on the rollover for another six months, we ask the incoming U.S. administration how they see the future of the sanctions regime,” he said in Brussels.

But Washington has hopefully perceived by now that its anti-Russian sanctions have by and large not worked, or backfired. In many ways they have only strengthened Moscow’s relations and trade with leading BRICS nations like China and India, as well as Iran.

Despite the prior Trump campaign rhetoric of a speedy negotiation track which will reach a permanent truce soon after he enters office, Trump’s team has since acknowledge that talks are likely to take much longer.

A Wednesday Reuters report said, “Advisers to President-elect Donald Trump now concede that the Ukraine war will take months or even longer to resolve, a sharp reality check on his biggest foreign policy promise – to strike a peace deal on his first day in the White House.”

Advisers to President-elect Donald Trump are crafting a sanctions strategy to facilitate a Russia-Ukraine diplomatic accord in the coming months while also squeezing Iran and Venezuela.

🔗🚢🛢️🇷🇺: https://t.co/tq0yi8iMS0 pic.twitter.com/4tjOqruOlP

— Bloomberg Graphics (@BBGVisualData) January 16, 2025

“Two Trump associates, who have discussed the war in Ukraine with the president-elect, told Reuters they were looking at a timeline of months to resolve the conflict, describing the Day One promises as a combination of campaign bluster and a lack of appreciation of the intractability of the conflict and the time it takes to staff up a new administration,” the report continued.

Both EU and Biden administration officials have long sought to ‘Trump-proof’ certain pro-Ukraine policies. But this has had the side effect of making the chance for peace in Ukraine much more complex and difficult. Sanctions remain a key part of this complexity.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The leftist Labour government in Britain has proposed radical reforms to the rights of workers that could include classing ‘sensitive’ topics of conversation in the workplace such as religion, women’s rights, or transgenderism as ‘harassment’.

The proposed legislation would force employers to prevent workers from being subjected to such subjects by third parties, such as customers. 

If they are found to have failed to do so, they could face lawsuits under the legislation.

Watchdog The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has warned that if it comes into the force next year, the proposed law could significantly impact freedom of expression and even be applied to “overheard conversations” such as those between two or more people in a pub.

Labour’s controversial law ‘threatens Brits’ ability to speak freely at the PUB’ – whether they’re discussing trans rights or religion https://t.co/Cd3XuEOt5L pic.twitter.com/LN6H3y1mER

— Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) January 14, 2025

The EHRC has noted that applying the harassment law in cases involving a “philosophical belief” could lead to problems owing to the fact that many employers do not understand such topics are protected by equality law.

“The legal definition of what amounts to philosophical belief is complex and not well understood by employers. It is arguable that these difficulties may lead to disproportionate restriction of the right to freedom of expression,” the watchdog warned.

Wow. You gotta listen to this.

“It really is 1984, we are living it now”

In the UK, they are looking to curb speech in Pubs by “banning customers from discussing controversial topics” in case the conversation you are talking about offends someone.

This is absolutely mad.

🎥… pic.twitter.com/LP4OshDHB0

— Kosher🎗🧡 (@koshercockney) January 14, 2025

A spokesman for the British Beer and Pub Association said in comments to The Times “Any legalisation must be carefully drafted to make sure it does not have unintended consequences, such as pub workers expected to decide whether private conversations between customers constitute a violation of law.”

Julia Hartley-Brewer slams a potential Labour law that may ban pub-goers from speaking freely about controversial issues such as the trans debate.

“Labour view everyone in the pub as horrible, racist, xenophobic bigots… part of the crackdown on freedom of speech!”@JuliaHB1 pic.twitter.com/kdRpWr8BUE

— Talk (@TalkTV) January 14, 2025

Sir Tim Martin, founder and chairman of the pub chain Wetherspoons urged that the proposal “sounds like Big Brother thought control which would be a bureaucratic nightmare to enforce.”

Martin added, “All beliefs which challenge the status quo are contentious. Newton’s law of gravity and Einstein’s theory of relativity were contentious at one point. Or Alexander Fleming creating the biggest-ever advance in medicine from mould.”

“Humanity has progressed through these challenges and their subsequent debate,” he further emphasised, adding that “The cancellation of ideas is, in effect, a new religious commandment by those who think they’re not religious.”

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK remarked “Every pub is a parliament. It is where we discuss the world. If that is restricted they might as well all close.”

If we can’t go to the pub for a pint to talk nonsense, there’s almost no point in going.

Labour’s war on pubs and free speech continues. pic.twitter.com/wD2pcaN3xl

— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) January 14, 2025

More from GB News below:

*  *  *

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.

Vice President Kamala Harris has not extended an invitation to JD Vance and his wife Usha for a customary tour of the naval Observatory residence, meaning that when the VP-elect and family move into the Observatory on Jan. 20, it will be their first time inside the white Queen Anne-style mansion that has housed Vice Presidents since the 1970s.

According to CBS News, in November, Usha Vance’s staff reached out to staff for Harris and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff to seek details on what was needed to childproof it – as the Vance’s children are all under the age of eight.

The questions were initially rebuffed by a Harris political appointee, however there has since been communication between the Navy aides in charge of the residence and the Vance team.

Before Christmas, Navy officials provided an overview of the house to discuss the layout of the residence, logistics and practicalities of the move-in, and to help answer any questions the Vances had, a person familiar with the call said.

Usha Vance spoke with Emhoff for about 40 minutes last week, sources said. Harris sources said that arrangements are underway to accommodate the Vance children. –CBS News

People ‘close to Harris’ (so yikes) say she was never allowed to visit the home before she was sworn in in 2021 during the pandemic, however advisers to Mike Pence say that’s pure malarkey – anad that Harris and Emhoff were ‘quietly’ given an opportunity to visit in the last days of the Trump administration. 

That said, there was no formal sit-down between Pence and Harris, according to both Democrat and Republican sources.

Harris’s ‘people’ defended her decision not to invite Vance for a tour – claiming that the tradition was broken during the Trump-Pence administration, and the fact that Harris has been focusing on an overseas trip that was canceled, as well as the California wildfires. Surely she’s not just a seething bitch who’s still reeling from her November loss to Trump.

In 2016, the Bidens hosted the Pences at the Northwest Washington residence.

“We’re just very grateful for the hospitality today of the vice president and second lady,” Pence said at the time.

Authored by Travis Gillmore via The Epoch Times,

California’s Air Resources Board sent a letter on Jan. 14 to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, withdrawing its prior waiver request that would have forced a transition from diesel to zero-emission trucks in the state.

The federal environmental agency responded to the board’s withdrawal request on Jan. 14 with notice that no further action will be taken, and the matter is considered closed.

Regulators had previously requested in November 2023 that the agency approve a waiver to allow the state to enforce stricter rules for automobiles and diesel trucks.

Federal authorities agreed to some of the requests, but such related to the diesel truck rules were not yet decided.

“California has withdrawn its pending waiver and authorization requests that U.S. EPA has not yet acted on,” Liane Randolph, chair of the air resources board, said in a statement emailed to The Epoch Times.

“While we are disappointed that U.S. EPA was unable to act on all the requests in time, the withdrawal is an important step given the uncertainty presented by the incoming administration that previously attacked California’s programs to protect public health and the climate and has said will continue to oppose those programs.”

She suggested that President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming administration could challenge the clean air regulations implemented by President Joe Biden.

With federal government approval of more stringent regulations uncertain, the board could pursue other methods of achieving clean air goals by partnering with private industry, as was done in the first Trump administration.

“The California Air Resources Board is assessing its option to continue its progress as part of its commitment to move forward the important work of improving the state’s air quality and reducing harmful pollutants that contribute to poor health outcomes and worsen climate change,” Randolph said.

“The waivers and authorizations recently approved, along with other existing programs, will advance essential emissions reductions in key sectors as we assess next steps.”

Some industry representatives applauded the decision and said the regulations were practically impossible and too costly to comply with.

“The California Trucking Association has consistently stated the Advanced Clean Fleets Rule was unachievable,” Eric Sauer, CEO of the California Trucking Association, told The Epoch Times by email.

 “We look forward to engaging all stakeholders, including CARB and EPA, to continue the trucking industry’s efforts to further reduce emissions in a technologically feasible and cost-effective manner that preserves our state and the nation’s critical supply chain.”

One state lawmaker said the decision to rescind the waiver request would benefit the state’s economy and noted the decision could be one of the other policy shifts seen soon as state agencies respond to a change of power at the federal level.

“I think it’s great news. This is good for everyone,” Republican Leader Assemblyman James Gallagher told The Epoch Times on Jan. 15.

“They’re waving the white flag because they couldn’t get the waiver approved before the Trump administration came in.”

Highlighting the integral role trucks play in delivering many of the goods Californians rely on, he expressed concern that if only electric vehicles were allowed, costs would inevitably increase.

The assemblyman suggested the new decision would help mitigate concerns trucking companies had about navigating mandates that some said were “literally impossible” to comply with.

“From the very beginning, I’ve denounced this policy,” Gallagher said.

“It makes no sense to force everybody to go electric when we don’t have the infrastructure to support it.”

The existing charging network statewide is inadequate for current demand levels if fleets were switched to electric, according to industry experts.

Acquiring heavy-duty electric trucks for sale presents its own challenges, as the prices are much higher, and maintenance and operational costs are yet to be well understood.

“Nobody has real numbers when we ask for details about maintenance and replacement costs,” Nelson Sibrian, owner of Sibrian Trucking based in Wilmington, California, told The Epoch Times.

“With diesel, we know our cost per day to maintain the vehicle.”

Maintenance costs make up most of a trucking company’s operating expenses, he said, and uncertainty about expenditures is problematic.

How far electric semi-trucks can travel before they need another charge is another area of concern. Traditional diesel 18-wheelers can drive more than 1,000 miles before they need to refuel, while industry estimates show similar-sized electric vehicles topping out at about 300 miles before they need charging.

“We need to know all of these things in order to plan,” Sibrian said. “If we don’t know the actual range, it makes it impossible to schedule, and they can’t give me a straight answer on how long [the trucks] will take to charge.”

In 2024, the U.S. government eclipsed $36 trillion in national debt. It is, afterall, the price we pay to live in a civilized society… and to destroy Iraq, Libya, Somalia… but tonight on ZeroHedge we will not be discussing how the money was spent but the nature of the expenditure itself.

Is the debt a “ticking time bomb” or do we “owe it to ourselves”? Are deficits little more than ledger entries between the Fed and the Treasury or do they have the power to make civilizations rise and fall?

Questions like these form the rift between the Austrian School of economics — Hayek, Mises, Rothbard — and the Modern Monetary Theorists — Mosler, Wray, Kelton — and are the focus of this evening’s ZH Debate.

Representing the Austrian School will be Bob Murphy, senior fellow at the Mises Institute. His counterpart, Fields Institute researcher Nathan Tankus, will make the case for MMT. Moderating the discussion will be Jack Farley, a macro aficionado who founded the Real Vision Daily Briefing and now runs his own show Monetary Matters.

Tune into the ZeroHedge homepage or X channel at 7pm ET tonight to watch LIVE. Premium and professional users may submit questions in the comment section below to be asked to the debate participants.

Below are brief summaries of each debater’s positions to help you prime for the debate.

Tankus’s (MMT) View:

• A monetarily sovereign country like the United States with debts denominated in its own currency and a floating exchange rate cannot “go broke”. (source)

• The only limit on government spending is inflation. (ibid)

• Major role of taxes is to help offset demand rather than generate revenue. (ibid)

• Government policy with a “focus on balancing the federal budget” has misguidedly “handicapped fiscal policy [Treasury spending]”. (source)

• The Federal Government already finances itself through money creation… it is erroneous to not consolidate The Federal Reserve System with the Federal Government. (source).

Tankus is offering a special discount (73%) for ZeroHedge readers to his econ newsletter Crisis Notes. The discount may be accessed here: http://crisesnotes.com/zerohedge.

Murphy’s (Austrian) View:

• MMT’s view that “Government Budget Deficit = Net Private Saving” is misleading at best, and downright false at worst…. You don’t need the government in order to save. (source)

  • To demonstrate this, Murphy provides an analogy: If a castaway stranded on an island collects 10 coconuts per day, only eats 8 (consumption) and keeps 2 (savings). Then, while subsisting on his saved coconuts, takes time away from collecting to create a tool for faster collection (investment), we see the basic concepts of economic activity without any government needing to exist.

• The MMTers concentrate on accounting tautologies that do not mean what they think. (ibid)

• The common MMT claim that “US Treasury doesn’t need to have money before spending it” is false. This view is demonstrated in this quote by Stephanie Kelton explaining defense spending: “The US Treasury instructs its bank, the Federal Reserve, to carry out the payment on its behalf. The Fed does this by marking up the numbers in Lockheed’s bank account. Congress doesn’t need to ‘find the money’.” (source)

  • Murphy demonstrates with another analogy: When I write a personal check for $100 to Jim Smith who also uses my bank, we could explain what happens like this: “Murphy instructed Bank of America to simply add 100 digital dollars to the account of Jim Smith.” Notice that this description is exactly the same thing that Kelton said about the Treasury buying military hardware in the block quotation above

Bob – a committed analogy generator – summed up his views on the entirety of MMT with a rather humorous analogy below during his debate with Warren Mosler, the man largely credited as MMT’s founder:

pic.twitter.com/8XraMP33Xh

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) January 15, 2025

Tune in tonight at 7pm ET for the economist showdown. Sign up for professional or premium now to submit a question below.
 

The U.S. Senate will continue its slate of high-stakes hearings to consider President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominations days before his inauguration.

Billionaire financier Scott Bessent, whom Trump tapped to head the Treasury Department, will headline today’s schedule and appear before the Senate Finance Committee starting at 1030ET:

As Andrew Moran and Nathan Worcester report for The Epoch Times, Wall Street will pay close attention to Bessent’s comments on tariffs.

The Trump Tariffs

Bessent has expressed support for the president-elect’s trade pursuits. In a Fox News op-ed shortly after the November 2024 election, Bessent endorsed the tactic as a negotiating tool, revenue generator, and shield for U.S. industries.

The hedge fund manager has signaled over the past few months that Trump’s tariff policies could be watered down.

In a Nov. 6, 2024, interview with CNBC, Bessent said that tariffs should be “layered in gradually” to ensure that higher prices appear over time and are then offset by the incoming administration’s disinflationary efforts, such as cutting red tape.

In October 2024, he also told the Financial Times that Trump’s universal tariffs were “maximalist” stances that could be chipped away.

“My general view is that at the end of the day, he’s a free trader,” Bessent said.

“It’s escalate to de-escalate.”

Trump has proposed across-the-board 10 percent to 20 percent levies on all imports, with 60 percent to 100 percent tariffs on Chinese goods arriving in the United States. He has also threatened 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico.

Media reports, including one from The Washington Post, suggested that Trump could scale back his tariffs. The president-elect recently denied these reports on his Truth Social social media platform.

“The story in the Washington Post, quoting so-called anonymous sources, which don’t exist, incorrectly states that my tariff policy will be pared back. That is wrong. The Washington Post knows it’s wrong. It’s just another example of Fake News,” Trump posted.

The 3-3-3 Strategy

Lawmakers will likely explore the Key Square Group founder’s “three arrows” growth strategy, also known as his 3-3-3 initiative.

Last summer, speaking at a Manhattan Institute event, Bessent recommended three different economic strategies that the Trump administration could use to stimulate the national economy and improve the federal government’s finances.

This would involve aiming for 3 percent real economic growth, boosting domestic crude oil production by 3 million more barrels per day, and reducing the budget deficit to 3 percent of GDP by the end of Trump’s second term.

“How do you get that?” Bessent asked during the conference.

“Through deregulation, more U.S. energy production, slaying inflation, and forward guidance on competence for people to make investments so that the private sector can take over from this bloated government spending.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) authored a 31-page letter to Bessent on Jan. 12, featuring dozens of questions. In it, she requested further information on his economic strategy and positions on other issues and urged him to be prepared to answer her questions at the confirmation hearing.

When examining Bessent’s 3-3-3 proposal, Warren asked why the first Trump administration’s tax cuts and deregulatory efforts failed to spur 3 percent growth.

“There is no comprehensive record of your positions relating to various Treasury-related duties and key policy areas within the Secretary’s orbit,” Warren wrote.

“The Treasury Secretary must safeguard our financial system, ensure the fairness of our tax system, and expand economic opportunities for the middle class, not just help rich investors make more money.”

A ‘Shadow Fed Chair’

While Bessent dismissed this idea, senators could learn more about his proposal to select a “shadow Fed Chair.”

In October 2024, Bessent recommended that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s successor be chosen before his second term ends in 2026.

“You could do the earliest Fed nomination and create a shadow Fed chair,” Bessent told Barron’s.

“And based on the concept of forward guidance, no one is really going to care what Powell has to say anymore.”

After a meeting with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) last month, Bessent walked back the comments.

“As the president said on Sunday, and I’m in complete agreement with him, that Jay Powell will serve out his term,” Bessent told CNBC.

Trump has repeatedly stated that Powell can serve the remainder of his term. The central bank chief has also confirmed that he would not step down if asked to, and said his termination would “not be permitted under the law.”

The president-elect and Powell have had a strained relationship since Trump’s first term. However, the Fed chairman has stated that he expects to maintain a cordial working partnership with the incoming administration.

Shares of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSMC) trading in New York climbed as much as 7.5% in premarket trading after the chipmaker, the leading supplier for Apple and Nvidia, issued 2025 sales and capital expenditure forecasts that topped Bloomberg Consensus estimates. 

TSMC projected revenue of $25 billion to $25.8 billion in the first quarter, exceeding the Bloomberg Consensus estimate of $24.3 billion estimate. Management expects capital expenditure between $38 billion and $42 billion for the year, far surpassing the $35.2 billion estimate. 

TSMC’s Year Forecast

• Sees capital expenditure $38 billion to $42 billion, estimate $35.15 billion (Bloomberg Consensus)

TSMC’s First Quarter Forecast 

• Sees sales $25 billion to $25.8 billion, estimate $24.43 billion

• Sees gross margin 57% to 59%, estimate 56.9% * Sees operating margin 46.5% to 48.5%, estimate 46.4%

The world’s biggest chipmaker also reported fourth-quarter sales that beat estimates despite TSMC’s largest customer, Apple, having a rather uninspiring AI iPhone launch over the fall into winter months for the West and China. 

TSMC’s Fourth Quarter Earnings: 

• Net income NT$374.7 billion, +57% y/y, estimate NT$369.84 billion

• Gross margin 59% vs. 57.8% q/q, estimate 58.5%

• Operating profit NT$425.71 billion, +64% y/y, estimate NT$411.42 billion

• Operating margin 49% vs. 47.5% q/q, estimate 48.1%

• Sales NT$868.46 billion, +39% y/y, estimate NT$855.34 billion

TSMC’s 2024 Results: 

• Sales NT$2.89 trillion, +34% y/y, estimate NT$2.88 trillion

• R&D expenses NT$204.18 billion, +12% y/y, estimate NT$205.98 billion

For more color on TSMC’s solid fourth-quarter results and its forecast, which underscores continued optimism about the AI spending cycle that propelled TSMC and Nvidia to new highs, Goldman’s Nelson Armbrust shared the following with clients this morning:

Stock + 5%, TSMC guides above for Q1 & FY capex above = positive Semicap (see Asian names reaction Tokyo Electron + 3.7% and Advantest +1.5%) On capex its guiding – 2025 to US$38-42bn, inline with GS estimate of US$40bn but better than cons of US$35.1bn. For Europe would expect positive for asm, asml, besi (they raised the advanced packaging guide); and vacn. The continued driver is Fits with the theme of Alex note overnight – for 2025 he prefers semicaps given strong AI demand (TSMC on call saying AI will remain strong and other areas will see a mild recovery); is selective on Analog/CommTech; and cuts Nokia to Sell (now sell on both Nokia & Ericsson). (TY Sean Johnstone)

William Chan from our Asia team finds it interesting that the cost of TSMC puts is at 8 month lows and that the local Taiwan line’s implied vol is trading at 15 vols discount vs US ADR line (chart 1 & 2). For investors who want to protect their TSMC long holdings for potential de-gross sell-off risk in Q1, I think spending a few % premium to buy insurance makes sense here, especially given the stock gained 81% last year and back in July the stock sold-off 20%+ in two weeks when the AI momentum cooled off.

In 2024, TSMC shares in New York jumped nearly 90%, the largest annual percentage gain since the Dot Com frenzy of 1999.

Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Charles Shum summed up in a note about the 2025 revenue outlook: “For the driver, besides the ongoing robust AI chip demand, there will be support from new smartphone chips and AI PCs, possibly more outsourcing orders from Intel, and WiFi 7 chips.” 

As previously noted, the whole AI smartphone launch with iPhones has been a dud. 

On a non-seasonally-adjusted basis, jobless claims exploded higher in the second week of January to 351k – the highest since the second week of 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

Adjusted claims also rose from 203k to 217k.

Continuing claims dipped from 1.877mm Americans to 1.859mm…

Source: Bloomberg

Interesting that amid the record surge in small business optimism post-election, that unadjusted claims would soar so high?

Source: Bloomberg

We’re sure it’s just a coincidence and nothing to do with Trump.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Westminster City council in London has advertised a job opportunity and admitted that while it is open to everyone, white British people will not be favoured over people from a “Global Majority (GM)” background.

The position, which has a starting salary of £54,684, is for an “Executive Assistant.” 

The ad states “The council is committed to achieving diverse shortlists to support our desire to increase the number of staff from underrepresented groups in our workforce.”

That’s a lot of words to say ‘A DEI hire is preferable.’

It continues, “We especially encourage applications from a Global Majority (GM), people who are Black, Asian, Brown, dual-heritage, indigenous to the global south, and or have been racialised as ‘ethnic minorities (formally known as Bame, Black, Asian and Multiple ethnic) background.”

The listing then admits that white people shouldn’t expect to be selected if they’re up against candidates from such backgrounds.

“Whilst the role is open to all applicants, we will utilise the positive action provisions of the Equality Act 2010 to appoint a candidate from a global majority background where there is a choice between two candidates of equal merit,” the ad asserts.

“Positive action.” 

Let that sink in.

London — The Westminster City Council @CityWestminster has posted a DEI job recruitment ad that says whites will be discriminated against. The council is seeking someone from the “Global Majority (GM)” and says it will use “positive” discrimination against white applicants. pic.twitter.com/RmAf5tBLAK

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) January 14, 2025

Respondents on X had some thoughts.

The City of Westminster is guilty of racist discrimination.

How hideous that in this day and age, 2025, that a Government Department is quite literally telling people because of the colour of their skin, they can’t apply for a job.

This is quite literally the definition of…

— Lulu Bowen (@IntuitiveLulu) January 15, 2025

Basically a lot of words to say browns only, no whites need apply.

In our homeland.
From our councils.
With our money.

And not one of them will see the jail cell they deserve… or will they…

— Mister Ree (@MisterRee321) January 14, 2025

The reason they say ‘Global Majority’ instead of ‘Minority Ethnics’ is because native Brits are the ‘Minority Ethnics’ in London.

It’s not about ‘representation’, it’s about your replacement in your own homeland.

— Jonathan Wong (@WGthink) January 14, 2025

@RupertLowe10 yet another council discriminating against white individuals. When did diversity turn into out and out racism.

Would they post a job advert for white only candidates if they were underrepresented in a department?

— Britain for Reform (@Britain4Reform) January 14, 2025

Unbelievable. This is the fruit of woke ideology—outright racial discrimination, disguised as ‘equity.’ When did it become acceptable for governments to openly discriminate based on race? This is not progress; it’s reverse racism, and it’s a direct attack on merit and fairness.…

— N.L.R. (@NaturalWay_NLR) January 14, 2025

They’ll only stop when they’re sued. Only direct and personal consequences will stop them from using their power to promote a racist agenda.

— Call Me Undertow (@callmeundertow) January 15, 2025

Westminster City Council:

-49% of employees are white.

-60% of residents are white.

i.e. white people are already underrepresented. How can this scheme possibly be legal?

— thad (@gumbelcopula) January 15, 2025

Blatant racism

— Constitutionalist (@RightVet23) January 14, 2025

*  *  *

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.

Five days before leaving office, President Joe Biden delivered a live primetime farewell address to the nation, highlighting his accomplishments and warning of emerging threats, including oligarchs and a “tech-industrial complex.”

His speech, delivered from the Oval Office on Wednesday evening, not only marked the end of his presidency but also the conclusion of his five-decade political career.

“After 50 years of public service, I give you my word, I still believe in the idea for which this nation stands, a nation where the strengths of our institutions and the character of our people matter and must endure,” Biden said before ending his speech.

“Now, it’s your turn to stand guard.”

As Emel Akan reports for The Epoch Times, Biden’s political career, which spanned decades and included serving as a senator from Delaware and as vice president under President Barack Obama, will come to an end on Jan. 20 when he hands the reins to Republican President-elect Donald Trump.

“In the past four years, our democracy has held strong, and every day, I’ve kept my commitment to be president for all Americans through one of the toughest periods in our nation’s history,” Biden said.

Ahead of Biden’s farewell speech, the White House released a fact sheet outlining his administration’s record, highlighting a long list of actions, starting with the efforts to combat the pandemic.

“Millions of Americans now have the dignity of work. Millions of entrepreneurs and companies creating new businesses and industries, hiring American workers, using American products,” Biden said.

“Together, we’ve launched a new era of American possibilities.”

Biden is leaving office with his approval rating at the lowest point of his term, according to a recent CNN poll. Only 36 percent of U.S. adults say they approve of how Biden handled the presidency, with particularly low marks on issues like immigration, foreign affairs, and the economy.

Biden stated that although a positive impact of his policies and spending priorities may not be felt right away, he believes they will produce lasting benefits in the years ahead.

“You know, it will take time to feel the full impact of all we’ve done together but the seeds are planted. And they‘ll grow and they’ll bloom for decades to come,” he said.

In his nearly 17-minute speech, Biden did not mention his successor by name but wished success to the incoming administration.

“I’m so proud of how much we’ve accomplished together for the American people. And I wish the incoming administration success because I want America to succeed,” Biden said.

Biden Issues Warning

Presidential farewell addresses are a longstanding tradition in American politics, offering presidents a final chance to reflect on their time in office, list their accomplishments, and provide parting advice to the nation.

As Ronald Reagan famously remarked in his 1989 farewell address, “There is a great tradition of warnings in Presidential farewells.” This tradition is a key feature of farewell addresses, where outgoing leaders look to the future and warn of potential dangers facing the nation.

Biden’s farewell address followed the same pattern.

“I want to warn the country of some things that give me great concern,” Biden said.

“Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead.”

Biden referred to Dwight Eisenhower’s iconic 1961 farewell address where he warned the nation about the dangers of the “military-industrial complex.”

“The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist,” Eisenhower said during his speech.

“Six decades later, I’m equally concerned about the potential rise of a tech-industrial complex that could pose real dangers for our country,” Biden said.

“Americans are being buried under an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation, enabling the abuse of power. The free press is crumbling. Errors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact-checking.”

Biden recently expressed disapproval of Meta’s decision to do away with its current social media fact-checking program, calling it “really shameful.”

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg justified the decision last week in a video statement by saying that fact-checking has become “too politically biased,” resulting in censorship and a loss of trust.

He also warned of dangers of AI, saying that it’s crucial for people to govern this new technology.

“As the land of liberty, America, not China, must lead the world in the development of AI,” Biden said.

Biden also hinted in his speech at charges his Department of Justice made against Trump.

“We need to amend the Constitution to make clear that no president, no president, is immune from crimes that he or she commits while in office,” Biden said.

(L-R) Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, Vice-President Kamala Harris, First Lady Jill Biden, and Hunter Biden listen to President Joe Biden (off frame) as he delivers his farewell address to the nation from the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on Jan. 15, 2025. Mandel Ngan – Pool/Getty Images

This marked the president’s fifth and final address from the Oval Office since taking office.

The president last spoke from behind the Resolute Desk on July 24, when he addressed the nation to explain his decision to withdraw from the 2024 presidential race.

Farewell addresses are a key opportunity for presidents to shape the narrative of their time in office, according to Tom McArdle, former White House speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

“Presidents use farewell addresses primarily to try to write history before the historians do, and they rarely succeed,” he told The Epoch Times.

Their efforts often fail because the true measure of a presidency is shaped more by actions than words, McArdle said.

It’s inevitably Biden’s performance that will define his legacy, he said.

The president’s farewell speech comes on the heels of a breakthrough in the Middle East, as Israel and Hamas reached a deal for a hostage and prisoner swap, along with a six-week ceasefire, set to take effect on Jan. 19.

Before he began his farewell speech, Biden took credit for his work in brokering the deal in the Middle East.

“After eight months of non-stop negotiation by my administration, a cease-fire and hostage deal has been reached by Israel and Hamas,” Biden said.

“This plan was developed and negotiated by my team, and it will be largely implemented by the incoming administration.”