Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The federal court system returned some landmark rulings for the American people in 2025, but many legal questions remain unanswered as judges absorb the flood of litigation challenging President Donald Trump’s policies.

In his second term, Trump has pursued an ambitious agenda on spending, diversity, gender, federal workforce reductions, and immigration, among other things.

With those moves towards change came major constitutional questions that have, or are likely to result in, landmark precedents.

Within months of Trump’s second term, hundreds of court cases led to a spike in roadblocks to executive action and a wave of emergency docket decisions that have led many to question the Supreme Court’s discretion.

So far, the justices have considered more than 20 emergency appeals and held three oral arguments over major challenges to Trump’s policies, including tariffs, firing employees, and nationwide injunctions.

Meanwhile, the ensuing court battles have prompted tense confrontations with federal judges and reinvigorated debate about how much the third branch of government can restrain the second.

Immigration

Perhaps Trump’s top policy priority, immigration, has been the focal point of these tensions—testing not only the parameters set up by Congress but how the judiciary can enforce those as well.

By June, Trump’s birthright citizenship restrictions had led the Supreme Court to weaken judges’ longstanding but controversial practice of issuing sweeping blocks—otherwise known as nationwide injunctions—on presidents’ policies.

That decision and others involving Trump amplified tensions judges had with each other and the president; each side accusing the other of overstepping their authority and disrupting the nation’s separation of powers.

A particularly tense exchange saw Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accusing Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the other conservatives of undermining the rule of law.

In a biting response, the majority said Jackson was advancing a view of injunctions that was “at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself.”

Barrett, who released a book in September, maintained that she respected Jackson.

Charged rhetoric also emerged from cases challenging Trump’s attempt to deport Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act.

After U.S. District Judge James Boasberg blocked those deportations in March, Trump called for his and other judges’ impeachment.

That appeared to prompt a rare response from Chief Justice John Roberts, who admonished impeachment over legal rulings.

The following months saw tense exchanges between federal judges and the Justice Department, which faced potential contempt from Boasberg and U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis.

Xinis was the Maryland judge who ordered the return of a deportee, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, despite the administration’s contention that she was intruding on its authority over foreign affairs.

Meanwhile, the administration has filed a formal complaint against Boasberg in the D.C. Circuit, which is also reviewing whether he overstepped his authority in the way he probed potential contempt.

Social Issues

In a February hearing, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes pressed the administration on its attempt to ban military troops with gender dysphoria.

That led the Justice Department to file a formal complaint, which was dismissed in September.

Regardless, Reyes’s conflicts with the administration appear far from over.

After she blocked the troop ban, the administration was able to win some temporary relief through a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Writing for the majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas indicated that Reyes’s block conflicted with at least two recent Supreme Court decisions.

Among Trump’s many wins on the Supreme Court’s emergency docket was a temporary stay on another judge’s decision to block his troop policy.

Although the court has been working out its approach to gender issues, that decision and another—in U.S. v. Skrmetti—cited by Katsas provided legal support for Republicans’ position.

In June, the Supreme Court delivered a win for social conservatives when it upheld Tennessee’s ban on certain gender-related medical interventions for minors.

Other decisions allowed states greater flexibility in regulating pornography and defunding Planned Parenthood.

The high court has yet to provide final rulings on Trump’s policies targeting “gender-affirming care,” Planned Parenthood funding, and diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

However, its decisions on the emergency docket have indicated Trump faces an advantage on at least some of those issues.

Executive Authority

One of the primary ways Trump has put forth socially conservative values is through attempts to defund organizations that engage in certain activities.

Those defunding efforts extended to other issues, such as National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, as well.

While lower courts questioned whether Trump is intruding on Congress’s power of the purse, the Supreme Court has indicated that many of the legal challenges weren’t even brought in the right court.

A majority of the court did allow a lower court’s order requiring the disbursal of billions in foreign assistance.

That prompted a fiery dissent from Justice Samuel Alito, who, with Justice Clarence Thomas, issued criticisms of their colleagues’ decisions to block some of Trump’s deportations.

More tension was revealed in dissents by the three liberal justices when the court halted blocks on some of Trump’s policies.

Justice Elena Kagan, for example, suggested the Supreme Court was abusing the emergency docket by disregarding precedent at a more preliminary stage of litigation.

One of those cases involved Trump’s decision to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a member of the Federal Trade Commission, without following Congressional limits that a 90-year-old Supreme Court precedent had upheld.

Slaughter’s case underwent oral argument in December when the justices appeared poised to overturn that landmark precedent, known as Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.

Just ahead of President Zelensky arriving in Florida where he hopes that talks with President Trump on the US-proposed Ukraine peace plan can achieve something favorable for Ukrainians, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov once again blasted European leadership as the main obstacle to peace.

“After the change of administration in the U.S., Europe and the European Union have become the main obstacle to peace,” Lavrov told TASS. “They are making no secret of their plans to prepare for war with Russia,” he continued, and underscored that the ambitions of European politicians are “literally blinding them.”

“Not only do they not care about Ukrainians, but they also don’t seem to care about their own population,” he added.

However, he did also say that Moscow plans to continue its “engagement with American negotiators” and “address the root causes of the conflict.”

Just the day prior, starting Saturday morning,  Russia carried out one of the biggest attacks on the Ukrainian capital in months, involving powerful Kinzhal missiles along with over 500 drones. Kiev was pounded, and several buildings were on fire.

Zelensky has in the meantime been seeking as much leverage from the European corner as possible, before getting face to face with Trump. Russia demands territorial concessions, but Zelensky seems only willing to talk about a temporary freeze to the war, and not necessarily the kind of full, permanent political recognition of Russia’s hold over most of the Donbass.

Ahead of the Mar-a-Lago meeting, Zelensky commented that his capital is on fire as winter temperatures freeze:

The meeting, to be hosted by Trump at his Mar-a-Lago residence at 1:00 p.m. (18:00 GMT) according to the White House, will be their first in-person encounter since October, when the U.S. president refused to grant Zelensky’s request for long-range Tomahawk missiles.

Zelensky said during a stopover in Canada on Saturday he hoped the talks would be “very constructive,” adding that Russian leader Vladimir Putin had shown his hand with the latest assault on the Ukrainian capital.

“This attack is again Russia’s answer [to] our peace efforts. And this really showed that Putin doesn’t want peace,” he said.

Things aren’t looking ideal for a finalized peace plan, also given that Zelensky during a Christmas Day message essentially wished for Putin’s death. 

Zelensky will push for NATO ‘Article 5-style’ security guarantees for Ukraine in his Sunday meeting with Trump:

Zelensky said the US has proposed 15-year security guarantees for Ukraine as part of the peace plan.

In his view, Ukraine needs guarantees for a longer period and added that he would consider it a major success if Trump agrees during their meeting at Mar-a-Lago this Sunday. pic.twitter.com/ZYI1oeYGY9

— KyivPost (@KyivPost) December 26, 2025

As the The Hill reviews of the message:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged in his Christmas Eve message that many Ukrainians want to see Russian President Vladimir Putin dead.

“‘May he perish,’ each of us may think to ourselves,” Zelensky said in the broadcast. “But when we turn to God, of course, we ask for something greater.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded soon after the message by blasting it as “uncultured, embittered, and coming from a seemingly unhinged person” – while further questioning whether “he’s capable of making any rational decisions.”

PUTIN UNPLUGGED.

Pay VERY close attention. pic.twitter.com/ExFH5V3NHP

— Pepe Escobar (@RealPepeEscobar) December 28, 2025

This latter reference to his decision-making ability is another card Moscow might play if the US and Ukrainian sides come out of the Florida meetings with a less than optimal peace deal. President Putin has long said that because Zelensky canceled elections, he has no legal mandate, and is thus ‘illegitimate’ and lacks authority to sign a binding peace settlement.

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

U.S. equity markets began the holiday‑shortened trading week on a firm footing. Broad gains in major indexes and the start of the Santa Claus rally marked this week. Following modest volatility in trading earlier in December, sentiment improved significantly as investors bet on year-end flows. As shown, the CNN Fear-Greed Index has moved materially higher from its readings earlier in the month.

Furthermore, the seasonal patterns that have historically favored stocks continued and bode well for a year-end push.

The Santa Claus rally window officially began on Christmas Eve. That rally is traditionally defined as the final five trading days of December, plus the first two of January. This seasonal effect has occurred in roughly three‑quarters of years since the 1950s, with positive average returns of 1.4%. However, that did not happen in the last two years, but there have never been three consecutive years without a positive return.

Despite a strong seasonal start, trading remained light throughout Christmas week. On Friday, markets dipped slightly in thin post-holiday trading, with the S&P 500 retreating marginally. That pullback reflected the typical lack of liquidity during this period.

The Santa Claus Rally spilled over into gold and silver, which hit record levels, driven by expectations of lower interest rates and persistent market uncertainty. But the pace and shape of these rallies are unusual. Parabolic breakouts often occur when price momentum accelerates rapidly, driven by speculative capital and short‑term positioning, rather than by gradual accumulation based on long‑term fundamentals. Recent reports indicate that speculative traders are adding aggressive net long positions in silver futures, amplifying momentum beyond typical levels.

Fundamental support for precious metals remains. Physical demand, supply constraints, and geopolitical tensions underlie current price levels. But the intensity of the recent rally suggests speculative forces are in play alongside fundamentals. Investors should prepare for higher volatility, and understand that a speculative peak often precedes a corrective phase, not a straight continuation of the parabolic trend.

Overall, the start of the Santa Claus rally and record index levels reflect persistent confidence among investors, even as market leadership shifts and year‑end thin trading raise the potential for volatility. Strategic positioning now hinges not only on seasonal history but also on evolving monetary policy expectations and corporate earnings outlooks as the new year approaches.

📈Technical Backdrop – Market Rallies As Expected

The technical picture for U.S. equity markets remains bullish but precarious as the year draws to a close. Major indexes are trading near key highs, but momentum indicators and price structure suggest caution in the near term.

The S&P 500 continues to hover just under all‑time highs, reflecting the Santa Claus rally, as the index reached fresh record levels earlier in the week before pulling back modestly in thin post‑holiday trading. The S&P 500’s proximity to prior highs has created a critical technical inflection point. The 7,000 level remains a key target for the markets to trade toward, and with markets just 80 points away, the goal could be reached early next week.

Support for the S&P 500 is situated in a confluence zone between 6,850 and 6,880, an area that capped recent rallies and served as resistance before the brief breakout. Should price fall back below this area, the next significant cushion lies nearer the 6,760–6,780 range. A break below that zone would suggest weakening internal breadth and could signal a deeper pullback toward mid‑December support levels in the 6,600s. Updating our chart from last week, we see the minor breakout above previous all-time highs, and the triggering of a fresh momentum “buy signal,” which is also supportive heading into next week.

However, heading into next week, such a pullback seems less likely, but not impossible. As such, investors should continue to monitor and manage risk accordingly.

Momentum indicators such as RSI remain elevated but not yet extreme, implying that while the trend is intact, upside extension could fatigue without fresh catalyst. Seasonal patterns and low liquidity during holiday trading often distort technical signals, increasing the probability of false breakouts and whipsaw price action as we move further into the New Year.

From a risk management perspective, consider taking some profits and rebalancing risk toward the end of next week if the market pushes toward 7,000.

Specific Key Levels to Watch Next Week

• S&P 500 Support: 6,848, which is the running 20-day moving average.

• Next Support: 6,790 just below at the 50-day moving average

• Crucial Support: 6,671 is the 100-day moving average.

• Critical Support: 6,267 is the 200-day moving average

• S&P 500 Resistance: 6,940ish, which was Friday’s intraday high.

Technical risk remains asymmetrical. A clean breakout above resistance would justify continued positioning. At the same time, failure to hold key support zones would shift focus to deeper retracements early in 2026, especially if liquidity thins further and sentiment deteriorates.

🔑 Key Catalysts Next Week

As the markets transition continue the Santa Claus Rally next week, catalysts are concentrated around monetary policy insight and sparse macroeconomic data. Thin holiday liquidity increases the potential impact of isolated releases. Investors should prepare for volatility around Fed minutes and select housing and leading indicators that could influence early 2026 positioning.

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting minutes, scheduled for Tuesday, December 30, are the standout catalyst. The minutes will provide deeper insight into the Federal Reserve’s current thinking on inflation dynamics, labor markets, and the likelihood and timing of future rate adjustments. After the Fed’s recent series of rate cuts and Powell’s “wait and see” commentary, markets will be parsing language for shifts in tone and future guidance.

Other scheduled releases are modest but still relevant for sentiment and intermediate trends. Pending home sales on Monday, and S&P Case‑Shiller home price data on Tuesday, offer incremental insight into the housing market. Higher rates and affordability pressures continue to be the primary concerns.

Finally, global data including Chinese purchasing managers’ indexes on Wednesday, December 31, could influence risk appetite and commodity demand expectations, particularly in industrial metals and energy markets.

With the calendar light, the Santa Claus rally will depend more on narrative and positioning than data, increasing the influence of technical levels and seasonal flows on direction. Record highs in major indexes and continued seasonal strength set the stage for thin market catalysts to provoke outsized reactions.

Conclusion for Investors

Seasonal strength remains supportive, and broad indexes are near key technical thresholds. However, with catalysts light, and positioning and sentiment skewed, these will be the dominant drivers of risk assets. Investors should watch for volatility around the release windows, maintain risk discipline, and ensure risk exposures align with both technical signals and evolving macro expectations as markets transition into 2026.

2025 became a record year for restaurant closures in D.C., according to the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington (RAMW): 92 closures, up from 73 in 2024 and 48 in 2022, according to Fox 5 DC.

Owners cite multiple pressures — federal layoffs, the August federal takeover, a fall government shutdown, higher wages under Initiative 82, rising rents, and food costs — but uncertainty has been the biggest drag.

Diane Gross, RAMW Chair and co-owner of Cork Wine Bar, said business has slowed and customers are cutting back.“They’re spending less per person, whether it’s one less drink or ordering less food. They’re just spending less,” she said.

She added that the federal takeover discouraged dining out: “People were less likely to come out… maybe. And I think people either stayed home or went out to our neighbors in Maryland, in Virginia…”

Fox 5 DC writes that many closures — from Haikan to Sticky Rice and dozens more — have been blamed on Initiative 82’s tipped-wage increase. RAMW says mid-priced, mid-sized restaurants ($20–$40 per person) were hit hardest.

Phil Coppage, owner of Cynthia’s Bar and Bistro, said survival depends on community ties: “We feel like little survivors… Really ingratiate yourself to the people who live around you… Hospitality is our differentiator.”

Immigration enforcement also hurt staffing: one-third of restaurants saw workers detained, and nearly 60% reported employees staying away out of fear.

Despite closures, 109 restaurants opened by November — more than closed — though still 30% fewer openings than last year. Cork plans a smaller new location in Cleveland Park, and Gross remains optimistic: “I think we always have hope because we love what we do…”

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The Washington Post shocked many of its Democratic readers this week by telling the truth about the growing disaster in the UK’s National Health Service — a cautionary tale as a few Republicans plan to join Democrats to extend the failed Obamacare subsidies rather than reform our own broken health care system.

Socialism is in vogue in America. Various socialists are assuming greater power in the Democratic Party and mayors such as Zohran Mamdani (New York) and  Katie Wilson (Seattle) are taking over the leadership of major cities.

I discuss the rising class of American socialists in my new book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution. The young voters fueling this shift have never experienced life under socialism and have no memories of the meltdowns in prior such systems. As former socialist and communist countries move toward capitalism, many Americans are embracing socialism, according to polls.

The Washington Post editorial board exposed the myth of nationalized systems in its scathing column on the UK’s National Health Service, which is asking sick people to stay away from hospitals as the system struggles to offer basic care.

The NHS has existed for years in a perpetual state of emergency. This was the case before the pandemic hit, and it has only gotten worse. Hospital corridors overflow and routine procedures get canceled due to a catastrophic event commonly known as “winter.” It comes around every year, yet the system, despite annual funding increases, still somehow remains unable to cope.

A campaign to keep people away from hospitals during the holidays is underway, which includes begging the public to seek out other forms of treatment for “less serious” injuries and ailments. The British press compares the messaging to “Covid-era stay-at-home pleas,” which included asking patients who needed care to avoid medical facilities in order to “protect the NHS.”

With strikes and shortages, UK hospitals have turned into a nightmare:

In November, some 50,468 people waited 12 hours or more in emergency departments, often on trolleys in corridors. This is the highest on record for that time of year. Some 2.35 million people went to A&E in November, the highest on record for that month.

What is troubling in the debate over Obamacare is that some Democrats admit that it has failed. Democrats touted the law with an enabling class of academic experts as promising lower health care costs in a system that would pay for itself. Obama himself spread the false claim that you could keep your doctor under Obamacare. (later called the “lie of the year.”)

It proved to be a disaster. Health care costs soared under Obamacare and Democrats stepped in to pass massive subsidies that pay a fortune to insurance companies without doing anything to correct the underlying problems.

The shocking increase in costs under Obamacare should galvanize a nation in seeking a major overhaul without delay.

Health care is now unaffordable for many. Yet, that desperation is political gold for many in dangling subsidies before voters as an inducement to return them to power.

With the midterm elections approaching, Congress is about to repeat the same pay-now-worry-later approach.

For some, the directions may even be reassuring. As Obamacare craters, it will become increasingly difficult to return to a market-driven system. Instead, many Democratic members want a single national health care system or a Medicaid-like system for all.

It does not matter that the UK is struggling with its own system to provide basic care, and NBC is describing the UK system as “broken.”

With the threat of the Democrats taking over the House in the midterms and producing gridlock in Washington, it is unlikely that the GOP can remain firm and unified on creating an alternative. Some will join Democratic members admitting that Obamacare failed, but this is not the time to correct the problem. Instead, we will pour more money into a broken system and kick the can down the road.

China continues to signal, through overt public-facing propaganda, its readiness to challenge the U.S directly.

Recent state media have published footage showing simulated naval conflict operations in the Caribbean, followed by the release of a video showcasing a hypersonic anti-ship missile capability.

On Sunday, Chinese media outlet Global Times published a video on X featuring the YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile.

“An official Chinese media account, China Military Bugle, on Sunday unveiled the moment when a YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile was launched from a Type 055 large destroyer of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy,” Global Times said.

The outlet added, “It shows the finalization test of a ship-to-ship missile aboard the 10,000-ton-class large destroyer Wuxi. This is the first time an official media report has shown a live YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile being fired from a warship.”

An official Chinese media account China Military Bugle on Sunday unveiled the moment when a YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile was launched from a Type 055 large destroyer of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy. It shows the finalization test of a ship-to-ship missile… pic.twitter.com/Iq00Ek1kS3

— Global Times (@globaltimesnews) December 28, 2025

The YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile (“carrier killer“) can travel at speeds exceeding Mach 5, complicating the world’s most advanced missile defense systems and posing a direct threat to U.S. carrier strike groups. The weapon’s flight profile combines a high-speed boost phase with a maneuvering terminal phase designed to evade interceptor missiles, such as those from the U.S.’ Patriot Missile System.

Our assessment is that the public release of YJ-20 footage serves as further signaling, reinforcing Beijing’s message that U.S. naval power in the Pacific is increasingly contested. 

Earlier this month, we noted that China could be on the verge of a “DeepSeek moment” in hypersonic weapons, following a report claiming that a Mach 7 hypersonic glide weapon could be produced for as little as $100,000.

With both China and Russia deploying hypersonic missiles, the U.S., as far as is publicly known, does not currently have these next-generation weapons operational. That could change with President Trump’s new warships.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

In a chilling display of ideological censorship, a veteran teacher in Britain has been referred to the government’s Prevent counter-terrorism program simply for showing videos of President Trump to his A-level students during a lesson on U.S. politics.

The incident unfolded at Henley College in Oxfordshire, where the teacher—a qualified educator since the mid-1990s and —introduced clips from Trump’s inauguration and campaign to illustrate the recent U.S. election.

Just days after Trump’s victory, two students complained, claiming the material was “biased” and left them “emotionally disturbed,” with one even alleging nightmares. The college swiftly escalated the matter to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO), who prioritized a Prevent referral, warning that the teacher’s views “could be perceived as radical,” potentially amounting to a hate crime or radicalisation.

Imagine showing students the U.S. President in a class about U.S. politics. https://t.co/3spGX1xuM5 Pure terrorism.

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) December 25, 2025

The teacher, speaking out against this farce, described the ordeal as “completely jarring. It’s dystopian, like something from a George Orwell novel.”

He added, “It was just terrifying; just mind-boggling. We were discussing the US election, Trump had just won and I showed a couple of videos from the Trump campaign. Next thing, I was accused of bias. One of the students said they were emotionally disturbed and claimed to have had nightmares.”

Firmly rejecting the extremist label, the teacher, a self described “mainstream Republican,” stated “I am not an extremist,” and accused the college of “complete Left-wing bias,” noting, “They don’t tolerate anything about Donald Trump.”

The college’s official communication hammered the point, alleging the teacher had “shown your students videos of Donald Trump, his campaign, propaganda and other videos which are unrelated to what is being taught.”

Meanwhile, the LADO’s report escalated the hysteria: “There is concern that this behaviour could cause harm to a child, there could be a criminal offence from the views which could constitute a hate crime and it’s possible that his promoting of views could be radicalisation.”

In the end, the teacher settled for a modest £2,000 payoff and resigned from his role, effectively driven out for daring to present balanced political discourse.

This case exposes a grotesque reality in British education. How is it that showing footage of the duly elected U.S. President in a class explicitly about American politics gets you flagged as a potential terrorist?

There is also a horrible double standard where schools freely indoctrinate kids with outright fabrications, such as pushing “non-fiction” books claiming Black people built Stonehenge, and were integral in other historical developments, part of a “decolonizing” push that insists Britain was “a black country for more than 7,000 years before white people came.”

The hypocrisy deepens with radical gender ideology flooding classrooms. Trans lobbyists from Stonewall are demanding over 300 schools scrap terms like “boys and girls,” opting for neutral language, gender-neutral bathrooms, and identical uniforms—all under the guise of “inclusion.” Schools paying into Stonewall’s scheme must embed LGBTQ+ propaganda across the curriculum, ignoring government guidance against promoting “gender identity ideology.”

This teacher-shaming fits into a broader, sinister trend: the UK government’s push to teach children how to “spot extremist content and misinformation” in schools, embedding “critical thinking” that suspiciously aligns with establishment narratives.

Under the Labour government, kids are being indoctrinated to analyse articles and websites and weed out “putrid conspiracy theories,” grooming the next generation to police thought.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has warned: “If the parameters that are set are to say to every kid, if you read a post that questions net zero and global warming, it will be extreme content, and a lie, if you read a post that even dares to question levels of immigration, legal or illegal into Britain, that that’s extremist, then you start to set a narrative for a future generation that is fundamentally undemocratic.” He labeled Prime Minister Keir Starmer the “biggest threat to free speech” in British history.

The Free Speech Union charges that child safeguarding is being twisted to muzzle “unfashionable opinions,” especially those leaning right. In an era where globalist agendas prioritise control over truth, this episode serves as a stark warning. If discussing a world leader like Trump lands you in the crosshairs of counter-terror watchdogs, what’s next for parents, educators, or anyone challenging the narrative?

True freedom demands we dismantle this censorship machine before it silences us all—starting with reclaiming our schools for honest, unbiased education.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

With a two-month “quarantine” placed on Venezuelan oil by the Trump administration in a foreign policy move called “gunboat diplomacy,” new data estimate that roughly $900 million worth of crude is currently loaded on tankers, unable to depart Venezuela due to the U.S. blockade.

“Based on our visual analysis from both shore and space, we estimate that there are around 17.5 million barrels of crude oil floating onboard tankers in Venezuela which are unable to depart due to the ongoing US blockade,” independent research Tanker Trackers wrote on X. “That’s around $900M of oil.”

Based on our visual analysis from both shore and space, we estimate that there are around 17.5 million barrels of crude oil floating onboard tankers in Venezuela which are unable to depart due to the ongoing US blockade.

That’s around $900M of oil.#OOTT #Tankers #Venezuela pic.twitter.com/MpTYsU3xKi

— TankerTrackers.com, Inc. (@TankerTrackers) December 27, 2025

Tanker Trackers responded to a question on X about how long it would take for land-based oil and gas operations in Venezuela to become “clogged” due to the blockade. The research firm noted, “Chevron is still importing from Venezuela, and it doesn’t appear that will stop anytime soon, given they are granted a waiver.”

Here’s the conversation:

Current tankers sailing in the Caribbean with destinations to the U.S. and/or China.

Last week, the Trump administration directed U.S. military forces to enforce a two-month “quarantine” on Venezuelan oil exports, signaling ramped-up sanctions enforcement.

According to a U.S. military official cited by Reuters, while military options remain available, the near-term strategy prioritizes economic pressure through strict enforcement of sanctions to pressure Venezuela.

Operationally, the U.S. Coast Guard has intercepted two Venezuelan dark fleet tankers and forced a third to retreat into the Atlantic Basin.

Our assessment: The gunboat diplomacy posture is designed to disrupt Venezuela-Cuba-China oil flows, tighten financial pressure, and accelerate regime instability in both Caracas and Havana.

China is furious and has wargamed a potential conflict with the U.S. in the Caribbean. Okay Beijing …

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has said that recent anti-war rallies in Hungary serve to explain to the public what he described as decisions being taken behind closed doors as Europe prepares for war.

Speaking on TV2’s Tények program, he said European leaders at a summit over the weekend had effectively convened a “war council,” with speeches focused on defeating Russia, and argued that a growing divide has emerged between the United States and Europe since the inauguration of Donald Trump in January.

“Previously, it was unthinkable within NATO that the United States would say no to something and European states would still go ahead and do it,” the prime minister said.

Orbán warned Europe is much closer to war than most Hungarians realize, noting what he described as a German war plan to seize Russian currency reserves held in Western Europe, a move he claimed that would openly turn Europe into Russia’s enemy.

According to the prime minister, Hungary will now have a war-free Christmas, but the danger has not passed. He said the European Union wants to provide Ukraine with €90 billion over two years, despite having no funds of its own, and is therefore seeking loans from banks that he claimed would never be repaid.

Orbán said Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary refused to provide guarantees for the borrowing. “This would have cost Hungarian families 400 billion forints. We will not pay that — full stop,” he said.

⚠️ Even supporters of the €9️⃣0️⃣bn Ukraine loan concede it will not be repaid. The result is budget cuts and permanent debt for Europe. ➡️ This is not economic policy, but financing the continuation of war. 🇭🇺 Hungary will not take part. We stand with peace. https://t.co/r9zmB3yBQD

— Balázs Orbán (@BalazsOrban_HU) December 21, 2025

Orbán argued that Europe has more private-sector assets in Russia than the value of the funds it would have seized, adding that Hungary also holds significant corporate assets there. He expressed hope that U.S.-Russian negotiations would succeed despite what he called counter-campaigning by Europe’s political elite. He claimed that anti-war views now dominate Western public opinion as the economic costs of the conflict rise.

Hungary knows what war means. Two lost world wars, millions dead, decades of progress erased. War does not build nations, it devours their future. This memory of loss lives in our very core, in our instincts. Others seem to remember only vaguely, falling into speculation and… pic.twitter.com/u8AanMiHFu

— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) December 23, 2025

“From a Hungarian perspective, war is the most horrific thing that can happen,” he said. “We know how a war consumes a nation’s future and decades of hard work.”

The prime minister also argued that financial interests are pushing politicians toward conflict. He said bankers were driving Europe toward war, as they did before World War I, and claimed that within months the divide between Hungarian and European politics would become even clearer. Germany, he said, is pro-war, as is the European People’s Party, while his administration in Budapest represents what he called the party of peace.

“We will not allow ourselves to be dragged into war,” Orbán said, adding that Europe’s stated aim of being ready for war with Russia by 2030 turns Hungary’s upcoming elections into a choice between peace and war. “We — and I personally — will succeed in keeping Hungary out of the war,” he said.

Turning to domestic policy, Orbán spoke of what he described as a “tax revolution,” saying the government had launched fixed-rate home-ownership and business loan programs, restored the fourteenth-month pension, and introduced lifetime tax exemptions for mothers with two or three children. “By the end of the year, every program was launched. Only we are doing this in an era preparing for war,” he said.

On the opposition Tisza Party, Orbán said, “The Tisza Party’s program is Brussels’ program. But Hungary must not take the Brussels path — we must stay on the Hungarian path.” He added that Hungary’s low household energy prices could only be maintained through agreements with Russia, the United States, and Turkey, warning that EU plans to scrap the policy would amount to “brutal austerity” for families.

Read more here…

Authored by Alastair Crooke via The Ron Paul Institute 

In these last days, the Trump Administration has boarded or seized three tankers either loaded with Venezuelan oil or destined for Venezuela (such as the Bella1). The most egregious seizure – in terms of illegality – being a Chinese-owned, Panama-flagged vessel reportedly destined for China – and on no one’s sanctions list.

In a different zone of conflict, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) last Friday claimed that it had struck a Russian so-called “shadow fleet” tanker, the Qendil, with aerial drones in waters of the Mediterranean Sea off Morocco. The SBU did not give further details of the attack, including how the SBU deployed a drone in the Mediterranean (2,000 Km from Ukraine), or the site from which it was launched. The SBU source said the cargo ship was empty at the time of the attack. President Putin, in midst of his annual question and answer marathon, vowed that Russia would retaliate.

“Blockades,” seizures and attacks, very plainly, are acts of war (despite the US claim that America owns all oil produced by Venezuela – until all historical US legal claims against Venezuela are satisfied). This tanker-episode is yet another ratchet to the drift to lawlessness in US foreign policy.

These acts pre-eminently are aimed at China (which has large equities in the Venezuelan oil industry) and Russia, which has longstanding ties to both Venezuela and Cuba (now under Trump “blockade” too). Add to that the $11bn in weapons being sent to Taiwan — with a significant amount of medium to long-range missile systems being part of the planned transfer, including 82 HIMARS launchers with Army ATACMS missiles, allowing Taipei forces to hit targets across the Taiwan Strait.

This latter transfer has infuriated China.

What this suggests is that the National Strategy Statement (NSS) in respect to China (it states that Washington views China as no longer constituting a “prime threat,” but only as an economic competitor) is meaningless rhetoric. China is being treated as an adversarial threat and will respond as such.

China and Russia will “read” the Trump Administration by its actions, rather than its NSS rhetoric. And the signals speak plainly to escalatory steps.

Put all this into the context of “leaks” by senior Trump officials which Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says are “lies and propaganda.” She says the claims that “the ‘US intelligence community’ agrees to, and supports the EU/NATO viewpoint, that Russia’s aim is to invade/conquer Europe (in order to ‘gin up support’ for their pro-war policies)” — that these are lies being pushed by what she terms “Deep State warmongers and their Propaganda Media … to undermine Trump’s efforts to bring peace to Ukraine.”

“The truth,” Gabbard writes on Twitter, is the opposite:

‘[That] the US intelligence community has briefed policymakers, including the Democrat HPSCI member quoted by Reuters, that US Intelligence assesses that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with NATO. It also assesses that, as the last few years have shown, Russia … does not have the capability to invade and occupy Europe’ — and that ‘US Intelligence assesses that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with NATO.’

So, what Gabbard is telling us is that there is open intra-warfare at the top of the Trump Administration. On one side, there is the CIA, the hawks and their European collaborators, and on the other, Gabbard’s Intelligence analysts and a larger US constituency.

Where is Trump in this brew? Why is he positioning himself at the cusp of another round of conflict with China? Why would he do that when US economic structures are so fragile, and when China has shown that it has economic leverage with which to fight? Is the explanation the simplistic response that it is a diversion from the release of further Epstein images?

Why too did Trump dispatch Messrs Witkoff and Kushner to Berlin when the intent of Europeans to wreck the negotiating process with Russia was quite evident aforehand? The two American “Envoys” did not sign the Euro-proposal. They sat silently; yet neither did they enter a dissent, not even when (NATO-like) Article 5 security guarantees were mooted?

Also who was it who provided the targeting data by which Ukraine (apparently) was able to attack the Qendil off the North African coast 2,000 kms from Ukraine? What conclusion was intended for Putin to draw from the two incidents? Certainly, Russians will have made their own surmise.

And why draw-in Iran too, by seizing the Iranian Bella 1, ostensibly flagged to Guyana heading toward Venezuela? Does this represent the start to another round to the Iranian tanker war originally pursued by Israel? Does it suit Netanyahu’s and certain constituencies in Israel’s purposes to heat up the situation in respect to Iran?

It is worth asking because Netanyahu is scheduled to leave for Palm Beach, Miami, on December 28 with a view to have one or perhaps two meetings with Trump at Mar-a-Lago during the following days (though the meetings with Trump have yet to be confirmed at time of writing).

It seems that it is neither Hamas, nor Gaza Phase Two, that lies predominantly behind Netanyahu’s summit intent – but rather Iran.

The Gaza and Hamas issues therefore are likely to play second fiddle to the “new” narrative being framed by the Israeli PM’s office: Iran will not be presented to Trump as rushing toward “a nuclear breakthrough” as per the old cliché.

That is the “old narrative.” The new one is, as leading Israeli commentator Anna Barsky writes in (Hebrew) in Ma’ariv:

The more immediate threat here: [more] than the nuclear itself … [is] the systematic [Iranian] reconstruction of the middle layer: the ballistic missile industry, its production lines and the ability to restore the functionality to damaged air defence systems.

Not because the nuclear issue has fallen off the agenda … but because missiles are the key that allows Iran to protect everything else – and also to attack. Without missile and air defense shields, nuclear facilities are a vulnerable target. With a shield [by contrast] they become a much more complex strategic problem … And here is a point that often escapes public discourse: Iran is not ‘rehabilitating’ just to return to what it was, but to return differently.

In other words: ‘missile restoration’ and ‘nuclear restoration’ are not two separate axes, but one system – and it is of great concern to Israel. The missile builds a shell, the shell enables a nuclear power, and the nuclear power – even if rejected – remains the ultimate [Iranian] goal.

The message that Netanyahu will take to Mar-a-Lago is that “Israel will not allow Iran to rebuild a missile and defense umbrella that will close the skies over sensitive sites.“

Trump may be more preoccupied with creating a new regional order without being dragged into a war with no clear end. Netanyahu likely will claim nonetheless (as he has been doing for over 25 years) that the “window” in which Iran can rebuild its defense umbrella is fast closing, and will likely gently remind the President that Trump was placed in power, not just to promote Israel’s image, but for the Realpolitik purpose of expanding Israel’s real-world power in the region and control over territory.

Happy Christmas, Donald!