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.

Citadel CEO Ken Griffin raised eyebrows this week when he left the door open to future public service or even running for office, while issuing some of his sharpest criticism yet of President Donald Trump.

“I’d like to believe that at a future point in my life, I will be involved in public service,” Griffin said during an interview at the WSJ Invest Live event Tuesday. “I’ve been able to have my voice heard on important issues, and I’d like to think that I’ve nudged the country and in small ways in good directions.”

Ken Griffin, speaking at WSJ Invest Live, didn’t say no when @emmatuckerWSJ
asked if he would run for office. (Read president) pic.twitter.com/vntp9BTL4B

— Jack Otter (@JackOtter) February 3, 2026

Griffin, a prominent Republican donor who contributed more than $100 million to conservative candidates and causes in the 2024 election cycle but did not back Trump’s re-election bid directly also took aim at the administration’s approach to business, saying the business leaders are tiring of what he sees as appeasing the president.

“When the U.S. government starts to engage in corporate America in a way that tastes of favoritism, I know for most CEOs that I’m friends with, they find it incredibly distasteful,” the billionaire hedge fund manager said. “Most CEOs just don’t want to find themselves in the business of having to, in some sense, suck up to one administration after another to succeed in running their business.”

Griffin also ripped Trump and members of his inner circle for business dealings riddled with conflicts of interest, including the Trump family’s crypto company World Liberty Financial. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE national security adviser, brother of the president, and often called the “Spy Sheikh,” secretly acquired a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial for $500 million. The deal was signed by Eric Trump just days before his family’s second inauguration in January 2025. The president has denied any knowledge of the agreement.

“This administration has definitely made missteps in choosing decisions or courses that have been very, very enriching to the families of those in the administration,” Griffin said. “That calls into question, is the public interest being served?”

Griffin, who moved his hedge fund from Chicago to Palm Beach citing rising crime and high taxes in Democrat-run Illinois, teamed up with Stephen Ross this week to contribute $10 million to the “Ambition Accelerated” campaign through the Florida Council of 100, aiming to lure CEOs, founders, and investors to state’s Gold Coast.

“Where you choose to build a business determines how much time is spent driving growth versus navigating bureaucracy,” Griffin said in a statement. “Miami and the broader South Florida Gold Coast offer deep talent, regulatory clarity, and an extraordinary quality of life.”

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D., NY) is under fire this week for joining other Democratic members in reckless rhetoric to fuel the growing threats against federal law enforcement officers. Calling out the “fascism in our streets,” Nadler suggested that citizens could be justified in shooting masked agents, a chilling claim made earlier by other Democratic leaders.

The New York Post reported the comments made in a Judiciary Committee hearing. Nadler declared:

“What is really the major problem in this country today is the fascism in our streets. The attacks on American citizens, by masked hoodlums. If you were attacked by a masked person, you might think you were being kidnapped. You’d be justified in shooting the person — to protect yourself.”

The agents are wearing masks because different groups are actively publishing their identities and personal information online. The result has not only been doxxing but threats made against the families of these agents. Democratic politicians have pledged to assist in the effort to “unmask” and publish the identities of these officers as threats soar.

For many, these statements suggest that they have a license under laws like Stand Your Ground to shoot at agents and claim mistaken self-defense.

The continued use of such rhetoric in the face of soaring attacks and threats against officers is the worst form of demagoguery.

At the same time, members like Rep. Dan Goldman (D. NY) deny that there is evidence of a sharp increase in attacks despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Notably, Nadler and his colleagues pushed for the impeachment of Donald Trump for what they called his inflammatory rhetoric on January 6th despite his call for the protests to remain peaceful.

Other members are engaging in the same hyperbolic rhetoric to appeal to the growing mob on the left.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D. Conn.) seems the most unhinged:

“What is happening in Minnesota right now is a dystopia. ICE is tear gassing elementary schools. It is disappearing legal residents into cars. It is murdering American citizens.”

Aspiring Democrats are getting the message.

Total Wine billionaire David Trone — who is running to recapture his Maryland congressional district from fellow Democrat Rep. April McClain-Delaney, declared this week that the federal government is “literally executing people on the streets” in “not just Minneapolis… all over the United States.”

Ohio Democratic Attorney General candidate Elliot Forhan is running on the catchy pledge that “I will kill Donald Trump.” It is a race to the bottom as Democratic leaders try to take the lead in mob politics.

When combined with the rationalization for the use of lethal force against officers, this rhetoric is not just inflammatory but dangerous. We have heard these voices before in our history.

As discussed in Rage and the Republic, we have a rising class of new Jacobins, politicians and pundits who are pandering to the mob. History does not bode well for these politicians seeking to ride the wave of rage when the mob turns against them.

Authored by Chris Summers via The Epoch Times,

Three U.S. warships have been sent to Haiti as part of Operation Southern Spear, a military operation in the Caribbean to counter narcotics trafficking.

“At the direction of the Secretary of War [Pete Hegseth], the ships USS Stockdale, USCGC Stone, and USCGC Diligence have arrived in the Bay of Port-au-Prince as part of Operation Southern Spear,” the U.S. Embassy in Haiti posted on X on Feb. 3.

The embassy said the presence of the warships reflects the United States’ “unwavering commitment to Haiti’s security, stability, and brighter future.”

The USS Stockdale is an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer based in San Diego, while USCGC Stone and USCGC Diligence are Coast Guard cutters based in North Charleston, South Carolina, and Pensacola, Florida, respectively.

“The U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard reaffirm their partnership and support to ensure a safer and more prosperous Haiti,” the U.S. Embassy posted on X.

Operation Southern Spear is targeting narco-trafficking and has led to strikes on several drug smuggling boats since September 2025. On Jan. 3, Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro was captured and indicted on drug trafficking and other charges.

Another boat strike was carried out on Jan. 23, at an undisclosed location, according to U.S. Southern Command.

Unrest in Haiti

Haiti has been mired in political and economic turmoil since July 2021, when President Jovenel Moïse was assassinated at his home in the Haitian capital, Port-au-Prince, by a group of mercenaries, most of whom were Colombian nationals.

Gangs have proliferated and begun to dominate large parts of Haiti, and in May 2025, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated two of the largest gangs, Viv Ansanm and Gran Grif, as foreign terrorist organizations.

In November 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump published a new National Security Strategy, which calls for expanded naval and Coast Guard operations and aggressive targeting of drug cartels.

“We want to ensure that the Western Hemisphere remains reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the United States,” the strategy document states. “We want a Hemisphere whose governments cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organizations.”

Haiti has not had elections since 2016. A nine-member Transitional Presidential Council was appointed in April 2024, but has been marked by allegations of corruption and a declining security situation in Haiti.

On Jan. 23, Haitian Prime Minister Alix Didier Fils-Aimé, who was appointed by the Transitional Presidential Council, spoke to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said the call “reaffirmed U.S. support for Haiti’s stability and security.”

“The current violence caused by gangs can only be stopped with consistent, strong leadership, with the full support of the Haitian people,” the State Department said. Rubio said the Transitional Presidential Council ”must be dissolved by February 7 without corrupt actors seeking to interfere in Haiti’s path to elected governance for their own gains.”

Last month the State Department took steps to revoke the visas of two unidentified members of Haiti’s Transitional Presidential ‍Council (TPC) and their immediate families because of their alleged involvement in gangs.

“These actions are being taken due to the TPC members’ involvement in the operation of gangs and other criminal organizations in Haiti, including through interference with the Government of Haiti’s efforts to counter gangs designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) by the United States,” the State Department said in a Jan. 25 statement.

In September 2025 the United Nations Security Council authorized the conversion of a Multinational Security Support mission—which had been deployed in Haiti in June 2024—into a 5,500-strong Gang Suppression Force.

China, Russia, and Pakistan abstained in the vote.

In December 2025, the United States and Canada said 18 entities had offered personnel, resources, and technical support for the Gang Suppression Force.

“We were looking for 5,500 forces,” Rubio said on Dec. 19, 2025. “We already have pledges of up to 7,500 forces from a variety of countries. We’ve seen donors step up to fund that effort.”

The Washington Post on Wednesday told employees that it was launching a widespread round of layoffs, which will amount to roughly 30% of all employees.

Most affected will be the Sports, Local News, and International sections, according to the NY Times, citing two people with knowledge of the decision. Of the outlet’s roughly 800 journalists, more than 300 are getting the axe.

And of course, the left-wing media complex is firmly blaming owner Jeff Bezos – who decided not to endorse a candidate in the 2024 election before vowing to be less biased as an organization. 

The Atlantic, owned by Epstein pal Laurene Jobs, was very dramatic:

The NY Times also framed it as Bezos’ fault, writing;

The cuts are a sign that Jeff Bezos, who became one of the world’s richest people by selling things on the internet, has not yet figured out how to build and maintain a profitable publication on the internet. The paper expanded during the first several years of his ownership, but the company has sputtered more recently.

In a Wednesday call, executive editor Matt Murray told employees that the company had been losing too much money for too long, and had not been meeting readers’ needs. As a result, all sections will be affected in some way, and what rises from the ashes would be a publication more focused on national news and politics, business, and health, and less on other things.

“If anything, today is about positioning ourselves to become more essential to people’s lives in what is becoming a more crowded, competitive and complicated media landscape,” Murray said. “And after some years when, candidly, The Post has had struggles.”

Murray also said that search traffic has plummeted nearly in half over the last three years, partly due to the rise of generative AI – and that the Post’s “daily story output has substantially fallen in the last five years.”

“Even as we produce much excellent work, we too often write from one perspective, for one slice of the audience,” he said. 

Learn to Vibecode

[pause for a second, open this, hit play, continue reading]

In memoriam: 

I have been laid off today from the @washingtonpost, along with most of the International staff and so many other wonderful colleagues. I’m heartbroken for our newsroom and especially for the peerless journalists who served the Post internationally — editors and correspondents…

— Ishaan Tharoor (@ishaantharoor) February 4, 2026

I have been laid off today from the @washingtonpost, along with most of the International staff and so many other wonderful colleagues. I’m heartbroken for our newsroom and especially for the peerless journalists who served the Post internationally — editors and correspondents…

— Ishaan Tharoor (@ishaantharoor) February 4, 2026

I was just laid off by The Washington Post in the middle of a warzone. I have no words. I’m devastated. https://t.co/dVCLF39YV1

— lizzie johnson (@lizziejohnsonnn) February 4, 2026

Some personal news: I’m among today’s @washingtonpost layoffs. It was a dream 11-year run as an investigative reporter focused on sports—making billionaires tremble (or at least mildly annoying them and their lawyers.)

A few highlights from the ride: 🧵

— Will Hobson (@TheWillHobson) February 4, 2026

Some personal news: I’m among today’s @washingtonpost layoffs. It was a dream 11-year run as an investigative reporter focused on sports—making billionaires tremble (or at least mildly annoying them and their lawyers.)

A few highlights from the ride: 🧵

— Will Hobson (@TheWillHobson) February 4, 2026

Average WaPo journalist today after spending a decade trying to help cancel ZeroHedge and advising laid off coal workers to learn to code:

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times,

The Trump administration has taken a sharp turn from its predecessor regarding wind and solar energy, curtailing many of the loans, grants, and permitting that the Biden administration had put in place.

Without government subsidies and regulatory support, energy analysts are questioning whether these industries can stand on their own merits.

“We’ve reached the end of the hype phase, and the beginning of the reality phase,” Sam Romain, chairman of Americans for Energy Dominance, told The Epoch Times.

“Technologies that lower costs, improve reliability, and strengthen the grid will grow.

“Those that don’t will fade.”

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump suspended new leases and permits for wind and solar on public lands and waters and raised fees for existing projects. Subsequently, his One Big Beautiful Bill Act set tighter deadlines to cut off subsidies to wind and solar energy projects, putting more than $300 billion in planned wind and solar investments at risk of cancellation.

In August 2025, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy canceled $679 million in federal funding for 12 offshore wind projects across the United States, stating that the administration is “prioritizing real infrastructure improvements over fantasy wind projects that cost much and offer little.”

And in December 2025, the Interior Department halted leases for five large-scale offshore wind projects under construction in the United States, citing security risks.

Calling the wind installations “expensive, unreliable [and] heavily subsidized,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum posted on X that “ONE natural gas pipeline supplies as much energy as these 5 projects COMBINED.”

Without these subsidies, many analysts say wind and solar power will struggle to survive, at least on the scale that was envisioned under the Biden administration.

“Wind and solar won’t be able to credibly compete with affordable, reliable baseload sources like gas, coal, and nuclear at the utility scale,” Sarah Montalbano, energy policy analyst at Always On Energy Research, told The Epoch Times. “Intermittent wind and solar depend on tax credits and state mandates that require their construction.”

Today, some analysts say, developers are putting many renewable projects on hold, waiting until another Democratic administration takes the White House.

“For the remainder of Trump’s term, wind and solar will be in decline,” H. Sterling Burnett, director of climate and environmental policy at The Heartland Institute, told The Epoch Times. “Whether that sticks depends upon who is the next president.

Climate change activists hold signs during a news conference with members of the House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition on Capitol Hill in Washington on Nov. 13, 2025. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has slashed subsidies and canceled permits on federal lands for wind and solar energy—an industry that has long thrived on government subsidies. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

“Some wind and solar will be built due to state support and mandates, especially those already contracted for and under construction, but the money spigot is ending and that will doom new developments,” Burnett said.

As of January, there are 4,202 planned solar projects and 802 planned wind projects in development in the United States, according to Cleanview, an energy analytics firm.

State Support for Wind, Solar

While renewable energy has lost some of its strongest advocates in Washington, experts say that the industry will survive, even if scaled back, because regulation of power generation was reserved to the states in the 1920 Federal Power Act, within their borders.

And many states, particularly those run by Democrats, have regulations in place that require or incentivize utilities to buy wind and solar power over gas, coal, and nuclear.

However, even in those states that favor them, wind and solar energy are running up against two major hurdles: reliability and cost.

When comparing wind or solar to alternatives such as nuclear, “you’re comparing two very unlike things,” said Bill Glahn, policy fellow at the Center of the American Experiment and former deputy commerce commissioner for the state of Minnesota.

One is “an intermittent resource that may last 10 to 20 years before the equipment breaks down and has to be replaced, versus a 24/7 dispatchable plant that could be around 50 to 70 years,” Glahn told The Epoch Times.

He said the nuclear plants currently operating in Minnesota were built in the 1970s and will likely operate until 2040 or beyond.

“Wind and solar can’t compete on that basis,” he said.

Oilfield pump jacks in Williston, N.D., on Dec. 21, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

Hidden Costs

Renewable energy was supposed to be a cheaper energy source, advocates claimed, because wind and sunshine are free. However, the true aggregate cost of these technologies has been obscured in several ways.

First, weather-dependent energy requires backup systems, typically gas-fired plants, to generate electricity when the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing. However, the cost of building and running these backup systems is generally not attributed to the wind and solar plants that required them.

There are also additional costs to build new distribution lines to transmit electricity from the often remote locations where wind and solar power are generated to end users in cities and towns.

“With so many of these projects, be they wind or solar, you have to either upgrade a transmission line or upgrade the local distribution system to put those assets on the grid, and those costs are never assigned to wind and solar,” Glahn said. “The wind and solar projects cause the transmission projects to be needed—and these are multi-billion dollar projects—but that cost all gets assigned, in this extremely bizarre twist, to resources that are running and that are useful.”

In Minnesota, the source that is running is usually nuclear power and natural gas, so the additional transmission costs are attributed to them, Glahn said.

“We put the thumb on the scale to make sure wind and solar pass some rudimentary cost-benefit analysis by just out and out cheating, and it’s super frustrating,” he said.

Another hidden cost is that wind and solar plants typically have shorter lifespans than gas, coal, and nuclear plants, and the expense of decommissioning them is often also not taken into account in the way that it is with traditional power plants.

An October 2025 study by Curtis Schube and Mark Mills for the National Center for Energy Analytics found that, while 30 U.S. states made little or no provisions for decommissioning wind and solar plants, the vast majority of states did so for coal, gas, and nuclear plants. In many cases, this could leave local residents with the bill for cleanup, once wind and solar facilities reach the end of their relatively short lives.

Discarded wind turbine blades are seen in a field next to the Sweetwater Cemetery in Sweetwater, Texas, on Oct. 4, 2023. Brandon Bell/Getty Images

There are currently more than 75,000 wind turbines operating across 45 U.S. states, and more than 5,700 large-scale solar installations across 49 states, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. In both cases, the first installations were built prior to 1990, putting many of them close to their decommissioning date.

Consumers often bear all of these additional costs through higher utility bills and higher taxes.

Environmental organizations that advocate net-zero policies and wind and solar construction often have strong lobbying support in state legislatures, as do public utilities that simply pass on their costs to consumers, Glahn said.

“Utilities make sure that they’re going to come out of this neutral, but the consumers are the ones who get screwed, and there’s really nobody to speak for them at the capitol,” he said.

Struggle to Pay Electric Bills

This more sober assessment of the costs and benefits of wind and solar is happening at a time when Americans increasingly are struggling to pay their electric bills.

A 2025 report by the Century Foundation states that average electricity prices have climbed by 32 percent since 2022 and as a result, 14 million Americans—or about one in 20 households—are on track to have unpaid utility bills sent to collection agencies.

“If a policy drives up bills and increases blackout risk, it’s not sustainable,” Romain said. “These ‘net zero’ mandates are often written by elites who never worry about paying their power bill.”

A December 2025 study by the Institute for Energy Research found that 86 percent of the states with electricity prices above the national average were Democrat-led, or “reliably blue.” All of the five states with the highest electric bills had mandates requiring that 100 percent of their power must come from carbon-free sources.

By contrast, 20 of the 25 states with the lowest electricity prices were red states, and seven of the 10 states with the cheapest electricity did not have 100 percent carbon-free mandates.

Energy analyst Robert Bryce cited the case of New York in a recent op-ed published in the New York Post. The state just approved a $615 per year rate hike in gas and electricity bills for the average New York City resident by 2028. The state’s political leaders have not only incentivized utilities to build wind and solar capacity, but also shuttered the Indian Point nuclear plant, which produced one-quarter of New York City’s electricity.

Closing Indian Point will cost between $1.5 billion and $2.2 billion by 2030, Bryce said, and as a result of such policies, New York’s electricity prices are now 58 percent above the national average.

The Indian Point nuclear power plant on the Hudson River in Buchanan, N.Y., on March 22, 2011. Bill Glahn, a policy fellow at the Center of the American Experiment, said nuclear plants have longer life spans than wind and solar and are “24/7 dispatchable,” making them more reliable. Don Emmert/AFP via Getty Images

Renewable Rejection

And while Americans may not have control over their electric bills, they are increasingly fighting back against the installations of large wind and solar projects in their neighborhoods.

“It was clear before the end of subsidies that Big Wind was facing more and more friction from local communities fighting back against their projects,” Bryce told The Epoch Times, citing the most recent example of the California Energy Commission rejecting the Fountain Wind project in Shasta County.

According to Bryce’s database, Renewable Rejection, there have been 1,148 cases to date of local communities working to halt the installation of wind, solar, or battery projects.

Wind turbines obstruct views and injure wildlife, and both wind and solar facilities consume significantly more acreage than traditional energy plants, according to a 2024 report by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“When it comes to land use, nuclear plants take up as little as 10 hectares per terawatt-hour of electricity produced per year, while wind uses about 100 hectares, measuring just the area taken up by turbines,” the report found.

“This rises to an astounding 10,000 hectares if you include all the land covered by a wind farm, but most of this space is open land and can be used for ranching or farming.”

In January, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to revoke permits for five offshore wind projects, allowing several of them to resume construction. According to Burnett, however, even if these wind projects move through to completion, there will likely be delays and cost overruns.

“Dozens of offshore wind projects approved and permitted by the Biden administration have already ceased construction and withdrawn from the projects simply due to economics,” Burnett said. “Materials costs keep rising and supply chain problems have hampered construction.”

Wind turbines operate in a field in Beulah, N.D., on Dec. 22, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

Because much of the material for wind turbines and solar panels originates in China, construction costs are being driven even higher by tariffs imposed on Chinese imports.

As their costs rise, many wind developers have repeatedly gone back to states to renegotiate terms, “and still they’ve pulled out,” Burnett said. “The remaining five projects still under construction will cost ratepayers billions of dollars, pollute the oceans, kill protected species, compromise national security, and provide relatively little reliable power.”

An aerial view shows the Kayenta Solar Plant in Kayenta, Ariz., on June 23, 2024. Observers said that the true aggregate cost of renewable energy is often understated because existing utilities must build the new lines to carry power from remote wind and solar sites to cities and towns. Brandon Bell/Getty Images

However, the prospects for solar energy are likely brighter than for wind.

“It is important to distinguish between massive wind and solar farms that stretch for miles and the solar panels that homeowners install on their rooftops,” Romain said.

“The economics of home batteries and rooftop solar work for a lot of Americans, which is why they privately installed 4.7 gigawatts of rooftop solar in 2024 alone—roughly the output of five nuclear plants.”

Bryce concurs.

“Solar will continue to grow for several reasons: It is politically popular, in many cases the economics work without subsidies, and solar land-use requirements are about one-tenth those of wind,” he said.

“The only thing dumber than onshore wind energy is offshore wind energy.”