US Senator Rand Paul has called for the immediate withdrawal of American forces from Syria in a statement on X earlier this week, with just over a month ago before the Trump administration enters the White House.

President-elect Trump and his team will have a lot of major and key decisions to make on conflict zones in various parts of the globe. Syria will be a crucial focus, given it is now essentially a failed state and is poised to further become a terrorist hotbed, and given US-designated terror group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham now controls Damascus and much of the country.

Bring our troops home! The war pits Islamists against socialist Kurds against Iranian proxies. Not our fight. 900 US troops scattered about Syria are a target not a deterrent. https://t.co/PuQqLLlCzX

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) December 9, 2024

“Bring our troops home! The war pits Islamists against socialist Kurds against Iranian proxies. Not our fight. 900 US troops scattered about Syria are a target, not a deterrent,” Sen. Paul posted on X in reference to the ongoing ‘mini-civil war’ still raging in Deir Ezzor area and the north.

While the Pentagon recently claimed there are no plans to expand the US military presence in northeast Syria, there’s no hint of bringing any troops home either.

US forces are there propping up the Syrian Kurds (SDF/YPG), who also control Syria’s oil and gas fields, but the US proxies are now locked in a battle for survival with the larger and better armed Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA). The SDF has just been kicked out of Manbij, and fighting is still happening.

These US proxies are now bogged down enough to have to give up any pretense at a ‘counter-ISIS’ mission, which is the “official” reason the Pentagon is supposed to be there in the first place.

All of this is a huge flaming mess to say the least, and Trump will inherit it from day one, including the likelihood of a greatly resurgent ISIS, which can now have free reign in many parts of Syria…

The CIA just respawned ISIS 2.0 https://t.co/QiPkROoPUx

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 12, 2024

Pentagon chief spokesman Air Force Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder has meanwhile confirmed US forces have come under sporadic attack amid the chaos, and that there have been a few troop injureis: “As you know, those numbers can fluctuate. I’m not aware of any other injuries at this time,” the said.

“Again, we’ll not hesitate to take appropriate action and protect our forces if they are threatened,” he added. Days ago, as the shock of the HTS advance against Assad forces was happening elsewhere in Syria, the US launched major airstrikes against alleged ISIS locations across the east of Syria.

Meanwhile… Rand Paul is RIGHT:

1. US said Assad needs to go because he fired on protesters.

2. US backs “syrian democratic forces” east of the Euphrates.

3. Syrian democratic forces fire on protesters. pic.twitter.com/jLPseUEhNs

— Syrian Girl 🇸🇾 (@Partisangirl) December 12, 2024

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

The FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responded to reports about drone sightings over the New Jersey area in the past several weeks, a phenomena that has raised alarm among local elected officials.

In a statement to The Epoch Times on Thursday evening, the FBI and DHS said the agencies “have no evidence at this time that the reported drone sightings pose a national security or public safety threat or have a foreign nexus.”

“The FBI, DHS and our federal partners, in close coordination with the New Jersey State Police, continue to deploy personnel and technology to investigate this situation and confirm whether the reported drone flights are actually drones or are instead manned aircraft or otherwise inaccurate sightings,” the statement reads.

Their statement did not go into more detail about the sightings in recent days. Several state and U.S. lawmakers in both New Jersey and New York have called on the federal government to release more information or take action regarding the drone sightings.

In several interviews this week, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) warned that the drones may be Iranian in origin, which was denied by a Pentagon spokeswoman. White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Thursday that the drones do not pose a national security risk to the United States.

On Thursday, Van Drew disputed the Pentagon’s statement about Iran being unconnected to the drone sightings, doubling down on his previous claim. He said “high-level” anonymous U.S. officials provided him with that information, which is why he is going public with it.

That same day, Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) sent a joint letter to DHS, the FBI, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to brief them on drone activity over New Jersey and New York.

“The potential safety and security risks posed by these drones in civilian areas is especially pertinent considering recent drone incursions at sensitive military sites in and outside of the continental United States over the past year,” they warned.

Separately, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) told reporters that the drones should be “shot down, if necessary” and that the United States “should be doing some very urgent intelligence analysis and take them out of the skies, especially if they’re flying over airports or military bases.”

“The lack of information is absolutely unacceptable,” the senator said Thursday.

In their statement Thursday, FBI and DHS also cautioned that there have been “cases of mistaken identity” and that the drones might be “manned aircraft or facilities.”

In the meantime, DHS and the FBI are supporting New Jersey state and local law enforcement with detection capabilities “but have not corroborated any of the reported visual sightings with electronic detection.”

“To the contrary, upon review of available imagery, it appears that many of the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft, operating lawfully,” they said.

“There are no reported or confirmed drone sightings in any restricted air space.”

The FBI and DHS asserted that the two agencies “take seriously” any threats that could be posed by drones but stressed that officials “have uncovered no such malicious activity or intent at this stage” so far.

“While there is no known malicious activity occurring in New Jersey,” the agencies said, “the reported sightings there do, however, highlight the insufficiency of current authorities.”

Reports of drone sightings over the Garden State began in November, Van Drew and other New Jersey officials have said.

In early 2023, a high-altitude balloon that originated from China flew hundreds of miles across North America, passing near sensitive military sites, U.S. officials said at the time.

The U.S. Air Force ultimately shot down the balloon off the coast of South Carolina in early February of that year.

Multiple other balloon sightings were reported since then, with the U.S. military shooting down a balloon over Lake Huron near Michigan in February 2023.

Bill Ackman is crushing the competition in the Robin Hood Foundation’s Pick-A-Ticker contest, where prominent figures in finance and donors to the organization have picked one long and one short to track from October 28, 2024 to April 30, 2025. 

And he’s doing it by shorting his arch nemesis, Carl Icahn. 

Ackman, whose picks have returned 112.5% in less than 2 months, is beating out names like Stan Drunkenmiller, David Einhorn Mike Novogratz, Carson Block and many other well known investors. 

And he’s doing it with some old familiar favorites – he’s long Fannie Mae, which he has long been a fan of, and disclosed on X on Friday that his short was the empire of his arch nemisis, Carl Icahn, Icahn Enterprises, which is down about 20% over the last month alone. 

Ackman and Icahn’s feud dates back more than a decade now, with the billionaires’ most prominent public tussle coming over shares of Herbalife, which Ackman was short and Icahn was long. Ackman was forced out of the trade and Icahn won the battle, but Herbalife shares have since collapsed about -84% over the last 5 years, lending credence to Ackman’s once massive short position in the company, which he alleged was a pyramid scheme. 

Participants in the Robin Hood contest were required to reveal their long pick but had the option of keeping their short pick confidential, which it appears Ackman had done until Friday. 

Fannie Mae shares have nearly doubled since the contest started, with hopes of the Trump administration considering the ‘recap and release’ scenario for the GSEs that investors have fantasized about for more than a decade now, since the entities were put into conservatorship. 

Icahn Enterprises shares have been clobbered about 20% since the beginning of the contest and are down almost 40% over the last 6 months. Recall, research firm Hindenburg Research questioned whether or not Carl Icahn’s namesake entity had taken on too much leverage in a critical report issued in early 2023.

Here are some of the best performing long and short ideas from the contest thus far:

Bloomberg has a running tally of who is winning and who is losing, as well as various charts and graphs to compare picks among contestants. 

The Robin Hood Foundation is a nonprofit dedicated to combating poverty in New York City. 

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

In the aftermath of the contentious Supreme Court arguments in United States v. Skrmetti over state bans on puberty blockers and gender-altering surgeries, the United Kingdom reaffirmed that it finds the risks far outweigh the benefits of such treatments for minors under the currently available scientific evidence.

The move by the leftist Labour Party stands in sharp contrast with the portrayal of the Biden Administration and the treatment of the subject by the liberal justices.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was widely criticized for analogizing puberty-blocking drugs to taking aspirin.

It appears that doctors in the UK are not ready to tell minors to just “take two puberty blockers and call me in the morning.”

UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting said last week:

“Children’s health care must always be evidence-led. The independent expert Commission on Human Medicines found that the current prescribing and care pathway for gender dysphoria and incongruence presents an unacceptable safety risk for children and young people.”

The decision follows the release of the Cass Review, which was raised by the conservative justices as contradicting the factual representations of the Biden Administration, even leading Justice Samuel Alito to suggest that Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar and the government might not have fulfilled their duty of candor to the tribunal.

He noted that the Cass study found scant evidence that the benefits of transgender treatment are greater than the risks.

He then delivered the haymaker:

“I wonder if you would like to stand by the statement in your position or if you think it would now be appropriate to modify that and withdraw your statement.”

🔥🔥🔥Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito presses Elizabeth Prelogar on the experimental nature of “gender-affirming care.”

He’s exposing the massive scandal of gender experiments on children.https://t.co/btX8lAG0LM pic.twitter.com/kQJsBT06Ud

— Tyler O’Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) December 4, 2024

Streeting cited significant doubts about the benefits of puberty blockers while noting the “significant risks” to children.

The government will allow puberty blockers to be administered to children in clinical trials.

It is not clear if the Supreme Court will take “judicial notice” of the new decision, but it can.

In fairness to Sotomayor, she was trying to argue that all treatments have risks in making her aspirin analogy. Yet, the comment was taken as trivializing the alleged harm and trauma raised by many in this debate. These studies clearly show greater risks than those associated with aspirin.

However, what the Biden Administration was arguing (and the liberal justices were seemingly supporting) is that states would be barred by the Court from reaching the same conclusion as the UK and other countries.

Indeed, Streeting echoed what the states argued to the Supreme Court that the government must  “act with caution and care when it comes to this vulnerable group of young people, and follow the expert advice.”

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Authored by Turner Wright via CoinTelegraph.com,

A lawmaker in the Texas House of Representatives has drafted legislation to create a Bitcoin reserve as part of the state’s treasury.

In a bill tentatively named the “Texas Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act” filed with the state government on Dec. 12, Representative Giovanni Capriglione proposed the comptroller hold Bitcoin as a reserve asset for “at least five years.”

The legislation suggested that Texas residents or “governmental entities” could voluntarily donate their BTC to the reserve, but, in contrast to proposals about national Bitcoin reserves, did not mention any crypto potentially seized by authorities.

Draft of strategic Bitcoin reserve bill. Source: Texas legislature

“No taxpayer funds will be spent on buying Bitcoin in order to maximize the chances of the bill passing,” said the crypto advocacy group Texas Blockchain Council.

“The Bitcoin will come from donations from Texans, US-based companies, and other sources of existing state resources.”

According to the text of the draft HB 1598, it would require a two-thirds majority in the Texas Senate and House to pass.

The state legislature is not scheduled to return until the start of its 89th regular session on Jan. 14. 

Similar proposals for BTC reserves in Alabama and Pennsylvania

The Texas legislation followed bills proposed or introduced in different US states after the 2024 United States elections, which resulted in Republicans winning the presidency and a majority in the House and Senate.

Donald Trump promised to explore establishing a “strategic national Bitcoin stockpile” during his presidential campaign.

A Republican lawmaker in Pennsylvania was one of the first to introduce a bill for a BTC reserve modeled after a proposal from the advocacy group Satoshi Action Fund.

The group’s co-founder, Dennis Porter, suggested the same framework was used in the Texas legislation. 

Bill Ackman, CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, appeared Thursday morning on Squawk on the Street to talk about President-elect Donald Trump’s high-profile visit to the New York Stock Exchange and his economic agenda, saying that the United States was set to usher in the most pro-growth, pro-business administration in his adult life. 

.@BillAckman on @CNBC: America is stepping into the most pro-growth, pro-business administration in my adult lifetime pic.twitter.com/8CTxs5Vly6

— CAPITAL (@capitalnewshq) December 12, 2024

CARL QUINTANILLA: What do you make of today?

BILL ACKMAN: It is a great day. The president is in great spirits and we are stepping into the most progrowth, pro-business, pro-American administration that I have seen in my adult lifetime, certainly.

CARL QUINTANILLA: The President mentioned the word incentive. Upstairs, downstairs. How would you characterize corporate America’s appetite for responding to those?

BILL ACKMAN: We just had a nice little ceremony. The CEOs, a broad array of big American companies. I would say everyone is incredibly enthusiastic. Really about a new administration on efficiency, removing the impediments to growth and deregulation. A lot of the confidence that comes from that.

DAVID FABER: I hear that as well, of course. The things that seem to concern some people are the unknown. Tariffs and deportation. Do you share that concern? What is your sense as to how that will go and the impact on inflation is obviously a key component. Potentially both are quite deep and severe.

BILL ACKMAN: With respect to immigration, the President is very focused on the safety of the American people and having an open border and not vetting people coming not, not having criminals in the country, that’s a pro-economy move—to get rid of people causing harm.

DAVID FABER: That’s 100,000 people, not 11 million, potentially.

BILL ACKMAN: Unfortunately, I think it’s more than that. The overarching thing is President Trump will do nothing that interferes with the success of the country, the success of the economy. Other than national defense, that’s his number one issue. I think he’s being very thoughts about tariffs. It is a very powerful tool that can be used to level the playing field. He wants a level playing field.

JIM CRAMER: What do we say to someone like Janet Yellen, the Secretary of Treasury, who says, we have to be very careful. Many things can go wrong with what he is talking about. I’m not hearing that from you, obviously.

BILL ACKMAN: I would say I’m more optimistic about the economy and the country than I have been in a long time.

JIM CRAMER: And you were very early on the bandwagon. Others were not. It seems to be a change of tune.

BILL ACKMAN: I don’t know anyone opposed to the business plan of this next administration. And it is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. At the backdrop is that you have a Fed lowering rates and inflation under control. You have the FTC, which will be more thoughtful about allowing transactions to happen. That is very bullish for markets. We talk about it all the time. We have the wealth effect. The biggest investment for most people today is the pension or the stock market-related portfolio. Housing prices going up. So, meaningful increases in asset values in a short period of time. That has a pro-economy effect. A lot of these are pro-secular in a positive way for the economy.

I think it makes sense that he chose the spot to accept his Time Magazine cover.

CARL QUINTANILLA: You can imagine one of the negative things to get written will be that this is optically about Wall Street and not Main Street. Although the president talked about that these are the companies that employ people and he wants people that want to go to work in the morning.

BILL ACKMAN: I think most of the country understands that the more successful businesses are, the more the stock market goes up. And the more wages rise, the more job growth, and the more opportunity, and the more businesses that come to the country. It lifts all. I think the President got elected because of a large, wide base that includes low-income people in the country. That is what he feels a responsibility to.

DAVID FABER: You are an investor. I’m curious, given your outlook broadly speaking, are there any sectors that you think will benefit in particular from the incoming administration?

BILL ACKMAN: I think it is good for the economy. It is good for moderating inflation. It is good for the U.S. I had the chance to talk to Doug Burgum, the Secretary of the Interior. There are a lot of things we can do geopolitically. Being able to offer LNG to the Koreans, for example, something we haven’t been able to do. Very important for that small country that feels very vulnerable. These are things that we can do to improve relations and help us on trade. Howard Lutnick will be a strong advocate for promoting the United States and trade in a thoughtful way.

CARL QUINTANILLA: The ECB cut 25 today. Lagarde said growth is slowing. Do you think Europe responds in a conciliatory way or is there a retaliatory way to their response?

BILL ACKMAN: I think Europe is in a very vulnerable position. I think the economy generally, the United States, they need to have important, strong relationships with the United States. They have no choice. I think they will operate that way. I’m very bullish on America. I’m kind of bearish on Europe. And I think they need to make some fairly dramatic changes politically and otherwise. One of the more powerful charts, look at the market cap of companies, the number of companies above $500 billion or whatever here versus Europe.

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

Renowned legal scholar and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley sounded the alarm about the DOJ’s failure to disclose to Jan. 6 defendants that FBI informants were present in the U.S. Capitol that day in 2021, as detailed in a DOJ Inspector General report.

In a Thursday interview with Fox News host Martha MacCallum, Turley said the report raised “more questions than answers” about the FBI’s rumored role in inciting violence at the Capitol.  

The law professor specifically such information would have been critical to defendants of the Jan. 6 protests who fell victim to the Biden DOJ’s aggressive prosecutions.

“In some ways, it raises more questions than answers. It does support Wray’s testimony that there were no undercover agents in the crowd,” Turley said, referring to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

“I think that for others, there is going to be a lot of concern as to what the sources were doing there,” he said, as reported first by the Daily Caller. 

DOJ Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz revealed that at least 26 FBI confidential human sources (CHSs) were present among the crowd protesting the contentious 2020 presidential election results. 

“Our review determined that none of these FBI CHSs was authorized by the FBI to enter the Capitol or a restricted area or to otherwise break the law on January 6, nor was any CHS directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit illegal acts on January 6,” Horowitz found. 

Of the 26 agents, only three were summoned to the U.S. Capitol that day, Turley noted, before highlighting that FBI informants had previously been accused of inciting crimes. 

“We’ve had cases in the past where the defense has argued that sources and agents have been extremely active in pushing people towards criminal conduct,” Turley said. “We saw those allegations raised in the Michigan case involving the governor there.” 

…Moreover, there is a question of why the three sources who entered the Capitol were not charged as part of an operation that the Justice Department described as an effort to “shock and awe” targeting everyone involved on that day…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) December 12, 2024

The FBI’s potential role in inciting violence was highlighted in the “kidnapping” plot of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Two men indicted in the alleged plot were acquitted by a jury, while two others faced hung juries. The latter two were convicted in a retrial. 

Turley argued that Jan. 6 defense attorneys would have used the FBI informants’ presence during the protests if they had known about it. 

“I think that some defense attorneys may raise the question as [to] why they weren’t told, if they weren’t told about the confidential sources that might have been involved tangentially with their own cases, because usually defense counsel says we want to know what asset, what personnel the government had there. So there is going to be questions of that kind, that arise,” Turley said.

When Christmas comes and every analyst breaks out their 2025 predictions, what good is it if you can’t challenge the thesis? Rather than letting someone talk their book, we are bringing a new format.

Tune in to the ZeroHedge homepage tonight at 7pm ET for an exclusive end-of-year debate with Lance Roberts (the bull) of RIA Advisors and Michael Pento (the bear) of Pento Portfolio Strategies who will give their 2025 market outlooks. Moderating will be Real Vision’s Ash Bennington.

At the center of the debate will be Pento’s call for a major 50%+ crash in the near future, as he told Thoughtful Money’s Adam Taggart last week. According to Pento, “buy-and-hold” investors’ days are numbered:

“We have an artificial construct for the economy and the market, and it is extremely dangerous,” Pento told Taggart. “It is going to be disastrous for those that buy and hold in perpetuity — the 60-40 portfolio, target date funds, closet indexing forever — they are going to get wiped out.”

pic.twitter.com/onWNVjG3f2

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) December 13, 2024

Meanwhile Roberts — a self-described buy-and-hold investor “while markets are rising” — remains concerned about pre-tax portfolio rebalancing. He’s cautiously bullish for 2025 and is no fan of doomer crash predictions, arguing they harm investors more than they help them.

“When? They’ll never tell you when.”

Ever feel frustrated with vague forecasts? 📉 Don’t worry, you’re not alone! Timing is key when it comes to predicting the stock market crash! ⏰💼 #StockMarket #TimingIsEverything

Watch the entire show here: https://t.co/iedEwMG6jm

YouTube channel = @ TheRealInvestmentShow pic.twitter.com/yTmfJr2xqz

— Lance Roberts (@LanceRoberts) December 12, 2024
 

We’ll dive into what factors lead Pento to his dramatic call, how the new Trump Admin is likely to affect markets (also how the Deep State could f*** things up), Fed policy/interest rates, and more.

The debate will be stream exclusively to premium and professional subscribers, embedded right at the top of the ZH homepage at 7pm ET. If you are not already a subscriber, sign up here to catch tonight’s debate.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on Dec. 11 demanded a settlement from Elon Musk to avoid charges related to his purchase of Twitter, now known as X, according to a letter from Musk’s lawyer to the agency.

Musk bought Twitter in 2022 for $44 billion. That year, the SEC launched an investigation into whether he violated federal securities laws through his purchase, statements, and SEC filings.

“Yesterday the Commission Staff issued a settlement demand that required Mr. Musk agree within 48 hours to either accept a monetary payment or face charges on numerous counts,” Alex Spiro, the lawyer, wrote in the letter to the chairman of the SEC, Gary Gensler, on Thursday. “They indicated that this demand was the result of a directive from their superiors and that charges would be brought imminently unless Mr. Musk acquiesced.”

The SEC did not respond to a request for comment by publication time, however on Friday it gave him until Monday to respond.

Spiro said that the SEC also subpoenaed him in its investigation but that he refused to cooperate, and that the agency also reopened a probe into Neuralink, another company owned by Musk.

“This series of events makes clear that the Commission is not motivated to seek the truth but instead is engaged in an improperly motivated campaign against Mr. Musk and the individuals and companies associated with him,” Spiro wrote. “We demand to know who directed these actions—whether it was you or the White House.”

President Joe Biden has in the past called for an investigation into Musk. The White House did not immediately return an inquiry.

Musk posted a copy of the letter from Spiro on X.

“Oh Gary, how could you do this to me?” he wrote.

Oh Gary, how could you do this to me? 🥹 pic.twitter.com/OoooQI77ZS

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 12, 2024

In one of the latest developments in the case, the SEC tried to convince a federal judge to sanction Musk for earlier failing to appear for a deposition, but the judge turned down the request on the grounds Musk showed up at a later date.

The SEC also brought a case against Musk in 2018 over his social media posts related to taking Tesla private. Musk settled that case by resigning as Tesla’s chairman and agreeing to pay $20 million.

Earlier in the day, Musk stated in a post that the SEC is “just another weaponized institution doing political dirty work” after a federal appeals court struck down an SEC policy that required companies listed on the stock exchange to have “diverse representation” on their boards.

Paul Atkins, who was appointed by President-elect Donald Trump, is set to take over from Gensler after Trump is sworn in on Jan. 20, 2025.

Musk, who helped get Trump elected, is co-chair of the Department of Government Efficiency, a group that will look at ways to reduce government spending.

In a new note out from Deutsche Bank, analyst Edison Yu argues that the pivot from Cruise opens the door for more buybacks and a renewed focus on end to end AI in its vehicles. 

Yu highlighted GM’s announcement to integrate Cruise with its core operations, projecting annual cost savings exceeding $1 billion, on top of its prior guidance for steady EBIT in 2025.

While it remains unclear if the 2025 outlook has shifted, Yu believes the move will be welcomed by investors as GM can reallocate resources to its aggressive share buyback plan, aiming to reduce share count below 1 billion by early 2025, and prioritize investments in Level 3+ and Level 4 autonomy, which have quicker monetization potential.

Yu also noted GM’s pivot in Cruise’s technology strategy, with the company now leveraging end-to-end AI models rather than its earlier rules-based approach, signaling a significant evolution in its autonomous vehicle efforts.

Yu commented on GM’s decision to acquire the remaining 10% of Cruise and integrate its development under GM’s operations.

The move shifts focus from costly robotaxi commercialization to advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS), like Level 3 autonomy for consumer vehicles. GM cited the high cost of scaling robotaxis, potentially in the tens of billions, as a key reason for the pivot, deeming it a poor risk/reward investment.

GM aims to complete the restructuring by early 2025, leading to annual savings of over $1 billion, reducing Cruise’s current $2 billion spend.

Yu noted that while GM’s 2025 guidance for flat EBIT hinges on reducing EV losses by $2–$4 billion, the additional savings provide a significant cushion for potential shortfalls. From a valuation perspective, Cruise’s optionality was already discounted by most investors. The lower cash burn enables GM to enhance its aggressive share buyback strategy, with plans to complete its $6 billion authorization by early 2025, reducing its share count below 1 billion.

The note can be found in the usual place for premium subscribers.