As the latest Epstein Files release continues to provide premium toilet reading and no arrests, tech billionaires Bill Gates and Linkedin founder Reid Hoffman are in full damage control mode, while President Donald Trump – whose name is all over the files as well, is back to asking if we can just move on. Other notables mentioned in the release are Steve Tisch, Richard Branson, Elon Musk, Harvey Weinstein, Leon Black, Peter Mandelson (who just imploded), Sergey Brin, Jason Calacanis, Howard Lutnick and the Nobel Prize committee (more on that later, it’s a fun one), and of course Ehud Barak. 

To review – Gates, whose ex-wife Melinda says he ‘needs to answer to those things‘ in the Epstein files – was featured in a 2013 email Epstein sent to himself – three months after the disgraced financier appears to have brought top Gates ‘assistant’ Boris Nikolic and ‘two Russian girls’ to Richard Branson’s island for a crypto summit. According to Epstein, Gates – who apparently severed ties with Epstein after some incident involving Boris, ‘implored’ Epstein to ‘delete the emails regarding your std, your request that I provide you with antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis.’

Gates Denies

Gates responded to the latest email, claiming it was ‘never sent’ (incorrect) and that it’s ‘false,’ (though he did offer $100k to anyone that can make a ‘next generation’ condom earlier that year).

Bill Gates responds after Epstein files suggest he got an STD from “Russian girls” and planned to secretly medicate his then-wife, Melinda.

REPORTER: “You’ve no doubt seen the allegations… Are they true?”

GATES: “No. Apparently, Jeffrey wrote an email to himself. That email… pic.twitter.com/TpwRmuISCK

— Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 4, 2026

Hoffman vs. Musk

Meanwhile, LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman – who went to Epstein’s island, was invited to his weird fertility ranch, and apparently left his passport in a ‘gift bag’ for Epstein – has been trading Epstein ‘gotchas’ with Elon Musk, who asked Epstein if he could bring his ex-wife to the island for a ‘wild’ party. Hoffman claims he was only on Epstein’s island to fundraise with former MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito, while Musk claims Epstein used the fact that Hoffman was on the island to try to get him to go. 

Feb 1: Musk drops ‘reid was on the island last weekend,’ email Epstein sent him, and notes that Hoffman brought ‘gifts’ to Epstein. 

Hoffman, who says he deeply regrets associating with Epstein post-conviction, defended his visit, replying to ZeroHedge after we asked to clarify that he went to Epstein island to raise money for MIT. 

Yes, with Joi Ito, the Director of the MIT Media Lab, who had asked me to help MIT fundraise from Epstein. I regret ever interacting with Epstein.

Trump’s own FBI looked into me and found “no hits.”

We should focus on prosecuting those who committed crimes and finally getting… pic.twitter.com/kc7yy4gGJp

— Reid Hoffman (@reidhoffman) February 4, 2026

He also posted an email from Musk to Epstein asking what day “will be the wildest party on your island?” for Musk and ex-wife Talulah to visit. Musk replied; “The big difference between you and me, Reid, is that you went and I did not.”

And, as the email shows, I obviously didn’t anticipate anything actually shady, as I was bringing my wife at the time (Talulah).

Nonetheless, UNLIKE YOU, I came to my senses and declined to go. Epstein tried to get me to go to his island so many times that eventually I just…

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 4, 2026

When asked if President Trump deserves the same ‘assumption of innocence’ that you are claiming, Hoffman pivots, saying he’s “been calling for an investigation,” adding “No one will need to assume anything if Trump releases all of the files, and we conduct a transparent investigation into those implicated in crimes.”

Shockingly, not everyone is buying Hoffman’s story…

🎯

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 4, 2026

TL;DR – Hoffman went to the island, he says, to raise money for MIT, brought gifts, and left his passport in a gift bag, and now regrets it. Musk was invited, and/or asked, to visit Epstein’s island with his ex-wife, which never happened. 

Weird Shit and Other Novelties

Aside from all that BS, there are some very odd things that also appear in the files…

• Epstein was living with the Pope, in the Vatican?

• An extremely disturbing diary entry or entries from a victim allegedly held at Epstein’s New Mexico ranch, where she was an ‘incubator’ for bearing children. 

Jeffrey Epstein’s 10,000 acre ranch in New Mexico, known as Zorro, was miles from civilization and featured a massive underground lair that an IT contractor compared to a dungeon outfitted with cameras.

It also had an airstrip, a helicopter pad, and much more—including,… pic.twitter.com/Q1KsrY53Oh

— Frankie Stockes (@realStockes) February 3, 2026

•  Is the DOJ protecting someone here here, when we were reliably told that only victims would be redacted? Or is this a woman referring to herself as ‘your littlest girl?’

• Sultan Bin Sulayim, CEO of DP World, to Epstein: “I am off to sample a fresh 100% female Russian on my yacht.” 

• Epstein said he wants ‘nothing to do with India, hot ,smells like shit, filthy…’ (eh, I mean…)

• British biotech investor, Nicole Junkermann, asked Epstein if he wanted to have a baby almost exactly 2 years after his 2008 conviction for child sex trafficking. 

NEW:

🇺🇸 🇬🇧 British biotech investor, Nicole Junkermann asked Epstein if he wanted to have a baby with her:

“Will you have a baby with me?
Where is the best place to do so?” pic.twitter.com/2gfb3uoYO7

— Megatron (@Megatron_ron) February 4, 2026

The Rothschilds are being deleted from the files… (among other reported ‘prunings’ since the latest release). Epstein notably told Peter Thiel “I represent the Rothschilds.” 

So we started at 12073 results for the term “Rothschild”

Later yesterday it was 11912

And a couple of hours ago we’re down 11860

Has anyone saved the entire batch immediately after release lol? https://t.co/nMwjJ9PuAn pic.twitter.com/2shU99VMp5

— dart (@poordart) February 3, 2026

• Was Epstein a “multinational covert operation” belonging “to both U.S. and allied intelligence services”?

• Epstein and Ghislaine were involved in Bitcoin and Ripple from the earliest days, directly corresponding with Satoshi (who told him to fuck off).

Check back for more! 

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

The US’ new National Security and Defense Strategies, which collectively articulate the “Trump Doctrine”, make clear that the US’ grand strategic goal is to restore its predominant position (unipolarity) over the world.

Unlike during the short-lived unipolar era that followed the end of the Old Cold War, this time the US is explicitly reluctant to embroil itself in overseas conflicts that risk overextending itself, and it’ll also now rely more on its regional partners to share the burden of advancing their shared interests.

China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are identified as the US’ adversaries, the first of them being described as “the most powerful state relative to us since the 19th century” in the National Defense Strategy, and each must now decide whether to challenge the US, balance it, or bandwagon with it.

To a lesser extent, the same also applies to rising powers like India that have complicated ties with the US.

In reverse order…

India won’t ever challenge the US, but it’s likely to balance and bandwagon instead. The balancing aspect relies principally on Russia for preemptively averting potentially disproportionate economic and military-technical dependence on the US that could be weaponized for coercive purposes.

As for the bandwagoning aspect, this concerns India’s sincere interest in complying with its new trade deal with the US and reaching more defense ones with it too, though conditional on the first not being exploited by the US to flood its market and the second not requiring basing US troops on its soil.

By contrast, North Korea is unlikely to ever bandwagon with the US.

It would instead prefer to balance it by triangulating between China and Russia (to avoid disproportionate dependence on either) while at times challenging it through military tests in response to the US’ regional moves.

Iran’s approach will probably continue to apply all three policies:

1. challenging the US in West Asia;

2. balancing it by triangulating between China and Russia;

3. and negotiating a new nuclear deal for bandwagoning with it one day.

Russia has been pursuing the same under Trump 2.0: its development of strategic arms challenges the US’ restoration of unipolarity; triangulating between China and India (to avoid disproportionate dependence on either) balances the US; and ongoing talks seek to reach an accommodation with it. China is no different: its own military build-up also challenges the restoration of unipolarity; its BRI partners help it to balance the US; and ongoing trade talks seek to reach an accommodation with it too.

From the US’ grand strategic perspective due to how it views China as “the most powerful state relative to us since the 19th century”, it’s expected to offer comparatively better partnership terms to India and Russia for incentivizing them to relatively distance themselves from China.

Iran will be subordinated one way or another in order for the US to control its resource flows to China, North Korea will remain contained, and China will be coerced into a lopsided trade deal for derailing its superpower trajectory.

As the saying goes, “the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry”, so the aforesaid approach might not be implemented in full.

In fact, it could also backfire if China feels like it’s being pressured into an Imperial Japanese-like 1941 zero-sum dilemma of subordinating itself to the US or initiating a war out of desperation to avert that worst-case scenario, which is precisely what the US wants to avoid.

The US’ restoration of unipolarity therefore risks sparking the next World War if cooler heads don’t prevail.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Hong Kong’s graduate job market reached its weakest level in five years in 2025, as hiring dropped sharply and wages showed almost no growth, according to SCMP. University data revealed that job openings fell by 55 per cent from the previous year, declining to just over 30,000 positions, even lower than during the pandemic period. This marked a major shift from earlier years, when more than 80,000 graduate jobs were available annually. The steady decline since 2023 suggests that opportunities for young people have been shrinking for some time, rather than collapsing suddenly.

At the same time, salary growth has slowed to a near standstill. The average monthly pay for new graduates rose by only 0.5 per cent to HK$20,961, the smallest increase in recent years. This was a sharp contrast to the stronger wage growth seen between 2022 and 2024. Management trainee positions, which are often viewed as a gateway to leadership roles, were also badly affected. Their numbers fell to the lowest level in five years, and average pay in this category even declined slightly.

These trends have had a direct impact on youth unemployment. The jobless rate among people aged 20 to 24 climbed to 12.3 per cent, one of the highest levels recorded in decades. More than 17,000 young people were without work during the final months of 2025. For many graduates, this means longer job searches, repeated rejections, and growing uncertainty about their future.

SCMP writes that frustration and anxiety have become common among jobseekers, especially on social media platforms. One graduate wrote, “I am also a graduate from a professional discipline and have been looking for a job since May, but I still have no offer.” Another shared her emotional struggle, saying, “Being unable to secure a job makes me feel very nervous, and my emotions have become difficult to control. When will I get a suitable job?” Some users also complained that available positions often came with low pay and limited prospects, making it difficult to build a stable career.

Experts point to rapid technological change as one of the main causes of the decline in entry-level jobs. Human resources consultant Alexa Chow explained, “The speed and penetration of AI have been so fast that it has created many challenges for jobseekers,” adding that “Jobs like general customer service and translation are quite easily replaced by AI.” As companies adopt automated systems, fewer junior staff are needed to handle routine tasks that once served as training grounds for graduates.

Economic uncertainty has also played a major role. Weak consumer spending, especially in retail, catering, and entertainment, has forced many businesses to cut costs. As a result, employers are more reluctant to invest in fresh graduates who require training and supervision. Management trainee programmes, which demand long-term commitment and resources, have been among the first to be reduced.

Recruiters say companies are now far more selective in their hiring. Jobsdb’s Bill Lee observed, “In the current environment, we observe that employers are more selective in their hiring criteria.” Many firms prefer candidates who can contribute immediately, rather than those who need time to develop. This puts fresh graduates at a disadvantage, particularly those without internship or part-time work experience.

Despite the gloomy outlook, experts stress that graduates are not without options. Developing practical skills, gaining real-world experience, and learning to use digital and AI tools can help improve employability. Some professions that rely heavily on human interaction, such as counselling and psychology, remain less affected by automation. In a tougher job market, adaptability, continuous learning, and resilience may be key to helping young people navigate an increasingly competitive employment landscape.

Via The Libertarian Institute

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told US envoy Steve Witkoff during a meeting in Jerusalem on Tuesday that Iran cannot be trusted, as Witkoff prepares for potential talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

“Ahead of Envoy Witkoff’s departure to meet with a representative of Iran, the Prime Minister clarified his position that Iran has proven time and again that its promises cannot be relied upon,” Netanyahu’s office said in a statement after the talks.

According to Haaretz, President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, also attended the meeting. While holding no official position in the Trump administration, Kushner has been deeply involved in US engagement with Israel and negotiations on Gaza.

Initial reports said Witkoff and Araghchi were expected to meet in Turkey, but the venue may now be changed to Oman. Axios reported on Tuesday that Iran was making new demands related to the talks, but the claim was contradicted by Ali Vaez of the Crisis Group.

“A senior Iranian official just told me that this report is not accurate: ‘Both sides are deciding together on the best format and venue,’ he noted,” Vaez wrote on X in response to the Axios report. The White House also said that talks are still planned for this Friday.

It’s unlikely that a deal between the US and Iran can be reached as the Trump administration is demanding that any agreement must include limits on Tehran’s missile program, a condition Iranian officials have said is a non-starter.

President Trump has been threatening to bomb Iran for weeks and has ordered a major US military buildup in the region, which has involved the deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and its strike group and additional air defenses.

The president is now pushing the idea of some sort of deal with Iran, but before the launch of the 12-Day War, he was also calling for diplomacy as part of a deception campaign to keep Tehran offguard.

U.S. official to Axios:

It’s really the Israelis who want a strike on Iran.

The President is just not there. pic.twitter.com/dTpkxeHNAI

— Clash Report (@clashreport) February 3, 2026

Israel launched the war on June 13, a few days before the US and Iran were scheduled to hold another round of nuclear talks. Hours before the first Israeli airstrikes hit, President Trump said he was committed to diplomacy with Iran.

On the heels of today’s momentum collapse in the US, Silver prices have puked almost 20% in a matter of hours after Asian markets opened…

…erasing the rebound gains of the last three days…

The overall decline from when Trump’s announcement of Warsh’s nomination as the next Fed Chair is now back up to 40%.

“Sentiment seems to have turned soggy across most asset classes, including regional equities and metals,” said Christopher Wong, a strategist at Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd.

“This underscores fragile sentiment” and has created “a feedback loop amid thin market liquidity,” he said.

Spot Gold prices are also down (around 4-5%), with $5000 seemingly acting as serious resistance…

There’s no obvious specific catalysts for the decline in precious metals for now but Goldman Sachs does note that data suggested that Chinese speculators may have played a minor role in the recent volatility (until now).

The timing suggests that Western flows rather than Chinese speculative activity drove late January’s volatility.

Most of the buildup and unwind in gold prices occurred while SHFE–the venue for Chinese speculative futures trading–was closed.

Additionally, China’s strong tradition of physical precious metals ownership and easy access to physical keep it as the dominant form of demand, with the speculative paper market in China — including SHFE futures market and ETF market — being relatively small. 

But, given the magnitude and timing of tonight’s collapse, it would appear the speculative Chinese investor has pulled the rug (although gold-backed ETFs are gaining traction in China, their market size remains tiny compared to Western counterparts).

Silver’s relative underperformance has smashed the Gold/Silver ratio back above 65x (6 week highs)…

Bitcoin is also accelerating its losses during the US day session, back below $72,000…

The collapse of these ‘alt’ currencies is coming as the US dollar’s recent gains accelerate…

“Price action is likely to remain volatile until there is greater certainty on the monetary policy outlook,” Standard Chartered Plc analysts including Sudakshina Unnikrishnan said in a note.

Some of this near-term volatility is resulting from investors redeeming their holdings in exchange-traded products, they said, but “structural drivers remain intact and we continue to expect a rebuild to the upside.”

Authored by Andrews Korybko,

Its members might be told by the Bureau of African Affairs’ chief to let the US replace or at least “balance” Russia’s role as their top security partner under implied pain of US-backed Nigerian military pressure on anti-terrorist pretexts, French-backed terrorist advances, and/or US anti-terrorist strikes.

The US’ Bureau of African Affairs announced over the weekend that its chief will travel to Bamako “to convey the United States’ respect for Mali’s sovereignty and desire to chart a new course in the bilateral relationship and move past policy missteps.”

They added that “The United States looks forward to discussing next steps for enhancing U.S.-Mali cooperation and consulting with other governments in the region, including Burkina Faso and Niger, on shared security and economic interests.”

The rapidly evolving geostrategic context is very relevant.

It follows the US bombing ISIS in Nigeria on Christmas, which was assessed here as possibly signaling the start of a more robust anti-terrorist partnership that could eventually serve as the pretext for the US-backed Nigerian destabilization of the Sahelian Alliance (AES per its French acronym) on such pretexts.

The AES comprises neighboring Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali, the latter of which experienced the first patriotic military coup in the region.

The bloc is also transforming into a confederation and is militarily allied with Russia, which aids them with their “Democratic Security” tasks of ensuring political stability and countering terrorist threats.

On that topic, reported coup attempts aren’t uncommon (especially in Burkina Faso) and terrorists have been advancing since the AES expelled France, which they accuse of being behind all of this as revenge. France’s strategic setbacks in the Sahel over the past few years damaged its image as a Great Power.

If the US can get the AES to let it to replace or at least “balance” Russia’s role as their top security partner, which forms the basis of their strategic ties that have evolved in socio-cultural, mining, energy, and other directions, then the US could damage Russia’s image as a Great Power too. Since the special operation began, Russia has experienced its own strategic setbacks in Armenia-Azerbaijan and to a lesser extent Kazakhstan, Venezuela, and Syria, which the US has an interest in replicating in the AES.

This could be achieved the “easy way” by those countries voluntarily complying with the US’ abovementioned speculative demand, with the deal perhaps sweetened by large-scale aid and/or reduced tariffs for accessing to the US market, or the “hard way” through indirect military coercion. The second approach could be advanced through a combination of US-backed Nigerian military pressure on anti-terrorist pretexts, French-backed terrorist advances, and/or US anti-terrorist strikes.

About the last possibility, its bombing of ISIS in Nigeria set a precedent that could justify doing the same in the AES, albeit without their approval unlike that which Abuja gave Washington. The US is also reportedly considering deploying spy planes in the Ivory Coast, which borders Mali and Burkina Faso, for facilitating cross-border anti-terrorist operations. Armed drones could foreseeably accompany them if the decision is made. All of this might coerce the AES into agreeing to the US’ speculative demand.

It can therefore be assessed that Trump 2.0’s attempted diplomatic re-engagement with the AES is almost certainly meant to make them an offer that they can’t refuse. All three of its members are already struggling to stem terrorist advances despite Russia’s help, which is understandably prioritizing the special operation, and it’s unclear what they’d do if they lost more ground while coming under more pressure from US-backed Nigeria, US-backed France, and/or the US itself. It’d be very hard to still refuse.

Russia is the most trustworthy partner that they could have since it has enough resource wealth to not need any other country’s, unlike France and the US, but its military’s hands are tied due to the special operation so it can’t rush to their rescue like the USSR saved Ethiopia from Somalia in the late 1970s. France and the US keenly understand that, which is why the first has been backing terrorist groups against the AES while the second is now likely preparing to make them an offer that they can’t refuse.

The best-case scenario is that the AES’ armed forces achieve a breakthrough in their members’ respective but nevertheless interconnected anti-terrorist campaigns with Russia’s help, which thwarts what are arguably France’s, Nigeria’s, and their shared US patron’s plans. That can’t be taken for granted due to how difficult everything has become for them in recent years as proven by their recent setbacks, however, so the worst-case scenarios of them capitulating to the US or collapsing can’t be ruled out.

Vice President JD Vance is poised to chair a new White House task force aimed at rooting out potential fraud and abuse in government programs in California, according to CBS News.

Andrew Ferguson, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, is expected to serve as the task force’s vice chairman and handle day-to-day operations, CBS News reports. President Donald Trump is anticipated to issue an executive order in the coming days to formally establish the group, the news outlet said.

The White House task force would operate separately from a related Justice Department effort led by Colin McDonald, a Trump nominee for a new fraud-investigation role at the department. McDonald is expected to also probe fraud in Minnesota uncovered by YouTuber Nick Shirley and other independent journalists.

President Trump is taking decisive action on widespread fraud and abuse of government programs.

Think he should look at New Jersey, too?

👉🏼Full story: https://t.co/5wBfQZM70O pic.twitter.com/9VaynRZQi6

— New Jersey GOP (@NJGOP) January 31, 2026

California has long grappled with documented issues of waste, fraud, and weak oversight in state and federally funded programs. State auditors have for more than a decade flagged problems including persistent cost overruns, inadequate internal controls, and unimplemented reform recommendations across various initiatives, CBS News reported last month.

California’s Employment Development Department faced acute criticism during the pandemic, when unemployment-insurance fraud resulted in an estimated $20 billion or more in improper payments, while many eligible claimants endured lengthy delays in receiving benefits, according to NPR News.

Separately, federal officials have recently scrutinized fraud risks in hospice and home-health services, particularly in Los Angeles County. Last week, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz visited the area to draw attention to the issue, citing the rapid proliferation of hospice providers and potential billions in improper billings.

One physician in California reportedly billed the government $120 million in a single year while claiming oversight of 1,900 patients -an volume that has raised questions about feasibility and potential abuse.

President Trump is taking decisive action on widespread fraud and abuse of government programs.

Think he should look at New Jersey, too?

👉🏼Full story: https://t.co/5wBfQZM70O pic.twitter.com/9VaynRZQi6

— New Jersey GOP (@NJGOP) January 31, 2026

The county is home to nearly 2,000 licensed hospice agencies, a number exceeding the combined total in more than 36 states and roughly 30 times the count in states such as Florida or New York.
“Hospice is crazy here,” Dr. Oz said. “You’ve got hospice that’s grown seven-fold in the last five years. They represent about three and a half billion dollars of fraud, we believe, just in LA County.”

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

The choice of Kevin Warsh as the new chairman of the Federal Reserve has received mixed reviews, as can be expected. His professional connections lean establishment in every way, which is perhaps not what Trump’s base expected.

More interesting is that Warsh is on record as an inflation hawk, a critic of zero-interest rate policies, and a critic of the war on cryptocurrency. All of this strikes me as a good sign, even if he has since hinted in the direction of favoring lower rates.

In 2023, he wrote the following:

“History will give a full accounting of the grave errors committed in recent years in economic policy. A central lesson is already clear: Nothing is as expensive as free money. The costs of the Federal Reserve’s zero-interest policy are multiplying: The misallocation of capital—goosing the price of the riskiest and least-productive of assets—set the conditions for boom and bust. The financing of the ‘big state’ set the country on an unsustainable fiscal trajectory. The extraordinarily loose financial conditions created herd behavior among market participants and firms and complacency among policy makers, including regulators. The surge in inflation substantially raised the cost of living for citizens and undermined business planning.”

Every word of that is true. Having someone at the Fed who believes that way should come as a great relief.

The surprising part is that Trump himself has spent years denouncing the Fed for having raised interest rates faster than ever before in Fed history. He has also called for a dramatic lowering of rates to make the United States more competitive, thoughts that have people like me worried that such a policy would kick off a second wave of inflation.

Former Federal Reserve board member Kevin Warsh speaks during a monetary policy conference at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution in Palo Alto, Calif., on May 9, 2025. Ann Saphir/Reuters

Warsh seems to have his doubts about such a policy:

“The Fed seeks to fix interest rates and control foreign-exchange rates simultaneously—an impossible task with the free flow of capital. Its ‘forward guidance,’ promising low interest rates well into the future, offers ambiguity in the name of clarity. It licenses a cacophony of communications in the name of transparency. And it expresses grave concern about income inequality while refusing to acknowledge that its policies unfairly increased asset inequality.”

In the backdrop of all of this is what has been a disastrous policy at the Fed from 2020 onward, creating some $6 trillion in new money in service of a congressional plan to shower the country with money directly into people’s bank accounts. That this would lead to a devastating inflation is hardly a surprise. No student of money and finance could possibly doubt that this would be the result.

Why did this not happen with a similar quantitative easing back in 2008? Because in those days, the policy of then-Chairman Ben Bernanke was to pay more than the market rate for bank deposits, thus keeping hot money off the streets and safely in the bank vaults.

Warsh identifies the underlying problems with such a policy:

“The misallocation of capital—goosing the price of the riskiest and least-productive of assets—set the conditions for boom and bust.”

What he has identified here is a pattern known since the 1930s. John Maynard Keynes imagined that the central bank could drive rates to zero and generate prosperity as if by magic. The American and Austrian critics of that policy drew attention to deeper complexities. Interest rates serve a crucial role as a signaling system for investment. Artificially low rates essentially send false signals that set up conditions for a subsequent bust.

In other words, the policy of discretion designed to blow countervailing winds toward business cycle trends actually ends up creating and worsening the thing it was designed to fix. When that happens, the only possible way out is to let the recession happen, rebalance the capital structure, and clear the table to enable a new round of prosperity and growth.

To be sure, it’s been 40 years since the Fed has permitted a recession to happen without wild interventions designed to prevent them.

The layers upon layers of interventions keep piling up higher and higher, all built on a false foundation of debt. This is not only a national problem; the entire world economy is now addicted to debt finance, with no end in sight.

Let’s please take a step back and understand how this whole system is supposed to work in a genuine free market with sound money and no central bank.

In a state of nature, you consume what you produce: You catch a fish and eat it. If you want to grow more prosperous, you have to spend your time making a capital good such as a net that enables you to catch more fish. That little story illustrates the central point: All prosperity grows out of deferred consumption.

What about loan markets? When capital grows and the funds become available for lending, the price at which they are lent is called the interest rate. It is a measure of risk that the loan won’t be paid back and also a sign of time horizons. Longer time horizons would typically involve paying a higher rate rather than a lower rate of interest. This is what creates the yield curve, which is typically upward-sloping.

What about a base interest rate? It should be exactly what the market of supply and demand determine it should be, no higher and no lower. For example, if there is a vast amount of saved capital in the banking system—because people are really socking away funds for the future—there is a great quantity available for borrowers. This higher savings will lead to a lower rate of interest.

That’s the supply side of the equation. On the demand side, lower interest rates will intensify the desire for loaned funds from businesses and consumers. In effect, loan markets make it possible for savers to profit from lending to borrowers and be rewarded for doing so. All told, this is a beautiful system from which everyone benefits—provided it is not abused or manipulated for political purposes.

When interest rates are suppressed by the central bank or when government issues debt instruments below market rates, they are effectively gaming the system. It sends a signal that there are more savings, more capital, more loanable funds available in the loan markets than really exist. This affects capital investment in particular, as the most enterprising sector takes on liabilities with the intention of servicing them from future revenue streams.

When the plans flip in the other direction is when consumers lack the savings to justify the level of investment. That’s essentially what recession is: a reset toward reality. But if the central bank tries to ride through the recession with more and more cheap money, it risks more inflation unless there is a market for the funds. This is when the debt contagion spreads to more enterprises, more consumers, and more financial companies looking for a sure return. So long as the increase in financial outpaces the burden of debt obligations, this crazy system can create the appearance of something that works.

In case you haven’t guessed, that’s where we are right now, not just in the first stages but in very advanced stages. This is the world that the new Fed chair inherits. It makes his job even harder that the Fed’s own balance sheet is still out of whack from the 2008 rescue that saddled the Fed with mispriced debt assets that it still has not off-loaded.

People ask whether I’m optimistic or pessimistic about the new Fed chair. I’m neither. My prediction is that he will do a competent job at what he is supposed to do, which is keep the whole system of banking and finance afloat and out of crisis. All of Warsh’s editorializing at this point becomes mere theory as compared with the burdens of actually performing this job.

The Fed is not really a stabilizer of macroeconomic policy. It is a banking cartel designed to protect the financial system and government against the consequences of mismanagement.

In general, my sense is that Trump could have done better or he could have done worse. The real problem is that the job exists at all. Ideally, we would move back toward an honest system of enterprise, with a correctly priced loan market, sound money, competitive banks, and honest economic structures that are not so debt addicted. On that score, there is no reason for very high expectations.

The eruption of “Signal-Gate” revealed the organizational structure and command-and-control nodes of left-wing activists operating within encrypted messaging apps to unleash pressure campaigns against federal agents in Minneapolis. This structure is very revealing and, according to some security experts, is deeply rooted in revolutionary tradition.

Anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement checkpoints have sprung up across the sanctuary city of Minneapolis in recent weeks. These makeshift checkpoints on city streets are operated by left-wing activists who track traffic in and out of specific areas, searching for ICE vehicles, and there are reports from Fox News that some agitators even have the ability to check license plates.

INSURRECTION: ICE Watch, with the support of MPD, is expanding their checkpoints in Minneapolis. Masked men without warrants detain American drivers with out-of-state plates or rental cars to determine if they work for the federal government. pic.twitter.com/TUUa5PZA5G

— @amuse (@amuse) February 3, 2026

Far-left extremists in Minneapolis are again setting up street blockades and check points, with the city’s blessing, to slow down and check vehicles they suspect are driven by DHS agents and officers.

Photos published by revolutionary group, Minneapolis Spring: pic.twitter.com/4vzRVhOvvD

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) February 1, 2026

Antifa in Minneapolis is literally building checkpoints and stopping vehicles on the road to run their license plates to see if they are affiliated with ICE before they let them through.

See the caption of this video in the reply. pic.twitter.com/Otkn44NQe4

— Karlyn Borysenko, anti-communist cult leader (@DrKarlynB) February 1, 2026

Crazy! Anti-ICE blockade check points in Minneapolis. Stopping cars to check if anyone in the car is a federal agent. Remind me again who the Nazi’s are? pic.twitter.com/oiF05bztFA

— Andie (@AndieTruthRules) February 3, 2026

J. Michael Waller, senior analyst for Strategy at the Center for Security Policy, provided important color on the emergence of “illegal checkpoints” in Minneapolis.

Waller explained:

Illegal checkpoints on public streets have a long history in Marxist and anarchist tradition.

They symbolize organized self-defense against “oppressors,” an empowerment of “the people” to seize urban space to confront the class enemy.

When organized as barricades to block passage, they become instruments of insurrection, dating back to the 1848 revolutions of Europe and the 1871 Paris Commune.

Marxists treat barricades as symbols of transition from civil protest to armed struggle.

Barricades mark the point when Marxists stop appealing to constitutional authority, and build structures for alternative power.

For anarchists, the barricade represents “direct action” and “horizontal self-organization” – the building of defenses without formal hierarchies or central leaders.

Anarchists view barricades as a reclaimed public space. Checkpoints and barricades turn the streets from channels of commerce and state control into zones of collective autonomy and mutual aid during insurrections or insurgencies.

Illegal checkpoints on public streets have a long history in Marxist and anarchist tradition.

They symbolize organized self-defense against “oppressors,” an empowerment of “the people” to seize urban space to confront the class enemy.

When organized as barricades to block… pic.twitter.com/BD1JvzBBe9

— J Michael Waller (@JMichaelWaller) February 3, 2026

We have profiled the rise of left-wing chaos, warning last year that billionaire-funded NGOs were funneling money into the protest industrial complex seeking revolution. In other words, a color revolution …

Last week, Joe Rogan and guest Andrew Wilson, a conservative podcaster, framed the chaos emanating from Minneapolis as a “color revolution.”

There is good news on multiple fronts. Tom Homan announced early Wednesday that an unprecedented number of counties in Minnesota are now cooperating with the federal government on the deportation of illegal aliens. That coordination has allowed Homan to authorize an immediate reduction in the federal agents across the metro area, a move viewed by us as a deliberate effort by the administration to de-escalate tensions and defuse the chaotic situation.

The second piece of good news came last month when Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent sat down with journalist Christopher Rufo and discussed plans to investigate dark-money-funded NGOs sowing chaos nationwide.

What the Trump administration has shown, and effectively forced into the open by surging federal agents into Minneapolis, is that the Democratic Party’s left-wing militant arm, such as Antifa, operates within an organizational structure pushing a revolutionary agenda.

Returning to Waller’s comments above about barricades and Marxist movements, the revolutionary picture should now be clearer than ever for the American public and for the White House about what’s really going on.

It may also be time for the White House to take seriously the remarks made by retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in late November:

• General Flynn Calls For National Address From Trump On Color Revolution Threat

From our view, elements within the Democratic Party are encouraging a rolling cycle of mass mobilization through the nonprofit world aimed at revolution against Trump and all-things ‘America First’. The focus of agitation appears to rotate by topic, moving from the George Floyd riots earlier this decade to more recent pro-Palestinian protests, and now to anti-ICE actions, while relying on the same activist network of nonprofits, propaganda channels, and street-level tactics. The deeper understanding here is that there’s a left-wing revolution brewing.

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

The Trump administration has made no secret of its desire to push the monetary easing pedal to the metal, even as the engine is already near the red line. They intend to push the system as hard as possible today and worry about the consequences later. One reason may be to inflate the stock market ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

There are several indicators that the Trump administration intends to run it hot in 2026.

The first — and most important — is that Trump will likely succeed in consolidating control over the Federal Reserve.

Jerome Powell’s term as Chair of the Federal Reserve is scheduled to expire in May 2026, allowing Trump to appoint his replacement. Powell attempted — largely unsuccessfully — to resist Trump’s pressure for easier monetary conditions.

I expect Trump will get his way with the Fed in 2026, and that the central bank will bend to his demands. By replacing Powell, Trump will further stack the Fed with loyalists. The result will be money printing on a scale we’ve never seen before.

Further, Stephen Miran — another of Trump’s recent successful nominees to the Federal Reserve Board — has been pushing the idea of what he calls the Fed’s “third mandate.”

Traditionally, the Fed has two mandates: price stability and maximum employment. Miran’s proposed third mandate would be for the Fed to “moderate long-term interest rates.”

What that really means is that the Fed would openly finance the federal government by creating new dollars to buy long-term debt, keeping yields artificially low. In other words, the so-called third mandate is an explicit admission that the Fed is no longer independent. It would become a political tool used to fund government spending.

Without this support, massive federal spending would flood the market with Treasuries, pushing interest rates much higher. But with the Fed stepping in, Washington can keep borrowing while holding rates down — at least for a while. The catch is that this comes at the cost of debasing the dollar. Eventually, that debasement will force investors to demand higher yields anyway, only worsening the problem.

Remember, after Nixon severed the dollar’s last link to gold in 1971, the unspoken promise was that Washington would act as a responsible steward of its fiat currency. Central to that promise was the illusion that the Federal Reserve would remain independent of political pressure.

The idea was simple: without at least the appearance of independence, investors would see the Fed for what it is — a funding arm for spendthrift politicians — and confidence in the dollar would collapse.

That illusion is now shattering.

Let’s be clear: central banks were never truly independent. That’s why it was always an illusion — a societal myth. They exist to siphon wealth from the public through inflation and funnel it to the politically connected. The Fed’s independence was always a mirage — and now it’s disappearing fast.

Further, late last year, the Fed embarked on a new interest rate cutting cycle, even though, according to their own rigged CPI metrics, prices are rising at 2.7%, well above their 2% target.

The Fed has already cut rates by around 50 basis points in 2025 and signaled that more rate cuts are coming in 2026.

The Fed recently announced that it has ended the shrinking of its balance sheet and will now begin expanding it again, starting with the purchase of $40 billion in Treasuries in December.

The Fed insists this isn’t quantitative easing, calling it “reserve management” and pointing out that it isn’t explicitly targeting long-term Treasuries. That’s just wordplay. Buying Treasuries with newly created money is money printing, regardless of what label they attach to it. The Fed’s balance sheet is expanding again. A new printing cycle has begun.

We’ve seen this pattern repeatedly. The Fed expands its balance sheet, then tries to shrink it. Something eventually breaks in the financial system, and the Fed pivots right back to easing and money creation. Each time this happens, the balance sheet never returns to its prior level. It ratchets permanently higher with every cycle of debasement.

What makes the current situation especially telling is that the Fed is entering another balance-sheet expansion phase even though the balance sheet is still more than 50% larger than it was before the Covid mass psychosis. Before 2020, the Fed’s balance sheet was roughly $4 trillion. It exploded to nearly $9 trillion during the Covid response. Even after so-called “quantitative tightening,” it remains around $6.5 trillion — nowhere near its pre-Covid level.

This completely contradicts the Fed’s long-standing claim that programs like QE are temporary.

Remember when former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke promised the balance sheet would eventually normalize after the 2008 financial crisis? That promise was made nearly 15 years ago, when the Fed’s balance sheet was around $2.5 trillion and was supposed to shrink back toward pre-crisis levels below $1 trillion. Instead, today the balance sheet is more than double what it was when Bernanke made that pledge — and now the Fed is entering yet another expansion cycle that threatens to push it even higher.

The long-term trend is obvious. The balance sheet only goes one direction: up. And the implication is unavoidable. Every time the Fed expands its balance sheet, it debases the currency. This isn’t an accident or a temporary policy error — it’s the core feature of the system.

If you’re wondering what comes next, look at the red circle on the chart below—and note what followed the last time the Fed shifted from shrinking its balance sheet to expanding it.

We are now in the top of the first inning of what may become the most aggressive balance sheet expansion cycle in the Fed’s history.

So let’s put it all together.

The midterms are coming in 2026, and Trump wants to boost the stock market.

Trump will get to replace Fed Chair Powell with a loyalist, consolidating control over the central bank.

The Fed has embarked on a new rate-cutting cycle, despite inflation still running well above its stated targets.

The Fed has ended the shrinking of its balance sheet and has begun expanding it again, buying tens of billions of dollars’ worth of Treasuries each month.

All signs point to a continued nominal melt-up in the stock market in 2026 — and ever-accelerating currency debasement.

The trajectory is clear. When monetary policy becomes a political tool and money printing turns permanent, the risks aren’t abstract — they’re personal. Currency debasement doesn’t just distort markets; it quietly erodes savings, purchasing power, and individual freedom.

The real question isn’t whether this process continues — it’s how prepared you are when it accelerates.

That’s why I’ve put together a free PDF report: The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years… the Top 3 Strategies You Need Right Now. Inside, you’ll learn: How the economic, political, and cultural forces now in motion are converging into a single systemic crisis, what the coming risks really mean for your money, your security, and your personal freedom, and the three concrete strategies you can use right now to position yourself ahead of what’s coming. This isn’t about fear. It’s about clarity — and taking action before the consequences become unavoidable. Click here to download the free PDF report and get prepared while you still can.