Authored by Laura Williams via TheDailyEconomy.org,

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.”

-Thomas Jefferson

Let me introduce you to Sam. Sam has obesity, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure. His diet consists mostly of refined grains and trans fats. He’s got cabinets full of dirt-cheap junk food and sky-high healthcare costs to address its effects. He takes home $27,000 a year, but spends $36,000. He’s in debt up to his jaundiced eyeballs, and he wants his niece to foot the bill for weight-loss medication.

As a real-life niece of my Uncle Sam, I’m concerned about his diet. Some 56.2 percent of the daily calories consumed by US adults come from federally subsidized food commodities: corn, soybeans, wheat, rice, sorghum, dairy, and livestock. While these calorie-dense foods once made sense for a government preparing for famine or total war, in recent decades they’ve instead helped make us fatter and sicker. 

Obesity is a top driver of healthcare costs. One study compared the health of people who eat mostly foods the federal government subsidizes to those who eat fewer. Those who follow the revealed preferences of what the government subsidizes (rather than the diet it consciously recommends) are almost 40 percent more likely to be obese and face significant diet-related health issues. Those with the highest consumption of federally subsidized foods also have significantly higher rates of belly fat, abnormal cholesterol, high levels of blood sugar, and more markers of chronic inflammation. All these are increasing contributors to the most common causes of death in the developed world.

The negative impact of subsidized crop consumption on health — while it can’t be called causal — persists even after controlling for age, sex, and socioeconomic factors. But life does not control for those factors.

The Great Grain Giveaway

The federal government recommends one diet to Americans, and subsidizes another. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans from the USDA and HHS promote eating fruits, vegetables, whole grains, protein, and moderate dairy, while limiting saturated fats, sugars, salt, and refined grains. According to data compiled for Meatonomics, American agribusiness receives about $38 billion annually in federal funding, with only 0.4 percent ($17 million) going to fruits and vegetables. Just three percent of cropland is devoted to fruits and vegetables, despite USDA guidelines’ insistence that they should cover half of your dinner plate. Just 10 percent of Americans consume the recommended amount of fresh produce, and the poor consume the least. (Fruit and vegetable producers’ exclusion from the federal direct payments program provides a valuable example of a food industry thriving without significant subsidies. They do, however, rely heavily on migrant labor to lower costs.)

Instead, the US spends tens of billions annually to subsidize seven major commodities. The three largest farm subsidy programs contribute 70 percent of funds to producers of just three crops — corn, soybeans, and wheat. Approximately 30-40 percent of US corn, over half of soybeans, and nearly all sorghum feed livestock, heavily discounting high-fat, lower-nutrition meat and dairy (especially compared to grass-fed options). The prevalence of grain-fed livestock generates demand for commodities used to feed them, completing the circle. 

Subsidies also contribute to our consumption of refined grains, sugary drinks, and processed foods. About five percent of corn becomes artificially cheap high-fructose corn syrup (which allows it to compete with tariffed natural sugars), and half of soybeans are processed into oils, which also contribute to obesity.

My Uncle Sam is sick because he eats the food the government makes artificially more affordable. Those foods are poorer in quality and more harmful to health than their unsubsidized alternatives. We are paying to make ourselves sicker.

Diet-Related Health Issues Fuel Healthcare Costs

For more than 20 years, the FDA has known that trans fats and refined grains harm health, damage metabolism, and cause disease. Diet-related illnesses like obesity, Type 2 diabetes, and high blood pressure are increasing, while heart disease remains the leading cause of death. These epidemics are intertwined at the artery level, and both contribute hugely to rising US health care costs.

In an economic order awash with subsidies and regulation, agricultural policy is health policy. Government subsidies for agricultural products have shaped the current American nutritional environment, and they are exacerbating obesity trends.

An article in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine confirms: “Current agricultural policy remains largely uninformed by public health discourse.”

Johns Hopkins physician (and current Commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration) Marty Makary called out the disconnect clearly. “Half of all federal spending is going to health care in its many hidden forms,” he told an interviewer in October, but Americans continue “getting sicker and sicker… Chronic diseases are on the rise. Cancers are on the rise. And we have the most medicated generation in human history.”

We’re getting more medicated every day — and more of it is at taxpayer expense. 

A Better Answer Than Ozempic?

Government spending on healthcare now exceeds the entire discretionary budget. Excess weight is a significant risk for older Americans, who are also the most likely to both have high healthcare costs and to rely on government health care. Forty percent of Americans over 60 are classified as having obesity, which is a contributing or complicating factor in diseases that kill older Americans: cancers, heart disease, infection, stroke, and cirrhosis.

Late last year, the Food and Drug Administration approved the weight-loss drug Wegovy as a treatment for people at risk of heart attack or stroke. Medicare is forbidden by statute from covering prescription drugs for weight loss alone, but in 2021 regulators approved Wegovy for reducing weight-related risks in patients with diabetes. Medicare Part D plans spent $2.6 billion last year on related compound Ozempic to keep 500,000 patients with diabetes stable. Wegovy’s list price is around $1,300 per month, but that’s still small compared to the $1.4 trillion Americans spend on direct and indirect costs from obesity.

It has a certain economic logic. Instead of waiting for a patient to develop a cascade of expensive comorbidities like heart failure or diabetes, we could consider asking Medicare to pay for anti-obesity meds on the front end. That wouldn’t work as well as lifestyle changes, but all our health and activity messaging over the past several years doesn’t seem to have moved that needle, and significant evidence suggests our efforts are counterproductive. 

The Tangled Web of Farm Subsidies

To understand the insanity of American agricultural and health policy, it’s hard to do better than comedian-illusionists Penn & Teller, who in characteristically salty style explained it this way 15 years ago: 

High fructose corn syrup is a dirt-cheap way to add sweetener and extend shelf life. And why is it so cheap? Because we subsidize corn farmers! Our government gives about 10 billion of our tax dollars to corn farmers every year so they can produce more corn than we need. They then sell the corn at artificially low prices. They spend our money to make corn syrup cheap, and now the same government that uses our tax money to keep soft drinks cheap wants more of our tax money to make soft drinks more expensive. Does anyone else think this is incredibly f—d up?

Yes, Penn. We do. And since that clip aired, obesity rates have worsened 50 percent, and rose 78 percent in children. Medical spending on the consequences of obesity doubled. Over the same period, subsidies to corn growers (which includes disaster aid and insurance) have tripled. 

Rather than cut back on his terrible diet, Uncle Sam wants us to pony up for weight loss drugs — to undo what our food policy has done.

There are just nine days left in the year, and this year has flown by.

We’ve delivered readers a steady stream of 2026 outlooks over the past few days and weeks, and next up is a year-ahead catalyst list from Goldman Sachs’ small-cap biotech stock coverage.

Goldman analysts, led by Corinne Johnson, held their third “Year-Ahead” Catalyst Clinic, highlighting significant clinical catalysts for small-cap biotech companies (market caps under $3 billion) in their stock coverage universe.

Featured companies in the Catalyst Clinic included AbCellera Biologics, Allogene Therapeutics, Apogee Therapeutics, BioAge Labs, Entrada Therapeutics, Gossamer Bio, Gubra, Lyell Immunopharma, Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Sana Biotechnology, Sionna Therapeutics, Sera Prognostics, Tyra Biosciences, Viralgen, and Viridian Therapeutics.

Johnson said the sentiment from the event was mostly positive, with several names showing clearer paths to value-creating data in 2026.

Here are the key catalysts across Goldman’s small-cap biotech coverage, spanning immunology, oncology, metabolic disease, rare disease, and cell and gene therapy. Across the group, management teams highlighted upcoming Phase 1 and Phase 2 readouts, pivotal trial starts, and regulatory milestones:

• AbCellera (ABCL): Ahead of proof of concept data from the Ph1 study (expected in mid-26), management underscored the vast opportunity for ABCL635, the company’s most advanced wholly-owned asset under development for moderate-to-severe VMS associated with menopause. In particular, management discussed the benefits of an antibody approach (vs. small molecules) to targeting neurokinin 3 receptor (NK3R, which has been implicated in its role in neuroendocrine regulation and reproductive function), confidence in the ability of an antibody to cross the BBB and reach the receptor which sits on KNDy neurons in the hypothalamus (a key question for investors), and its expectations for a potentially differentiated profile per improved efficacy, safety/tolerability, and more attractive dosing regimen.

• Allogene Therapeutics Inc. (ALLO): The discussion centered on the interim analysis of the pivotal ALPHA3 study of CD19- targeted cema-cel in frontline consolidated large B-cell lymphoma, and initial clinical data from the Ph1 RESOLUTION study of CD19/CD70 dual-targeted ALLO-329 in autoimmune indications. On the former, management views the ~30% bar for the delta in minimal-residual disease (MRD) conversion rate vs. the observation arm as achievable and de-risking to the primary endpoint of event-free survival. Further, management highlighted the potential ~$5bn opportunity, aided by increasing utilization of CAR-T therapies in the community setting and awareness of MRD testing. On the Ph1 RESOLUTION study, management discussed the goal of establishing proof-of-concept and providing insights on the ability to eliminate lymphodepletion preconditioning.

• Apogee Therapeutics Inc. (APGE): We hosted APGE, where a catalyst-rich 2026 could potentially validate the product-in-a-pipeline potential for lead asset APG777 (anti-IL13). Management highlighted: 1) Ph1b data in mild-to-moderate asthma in 1Q26, where APGE seeks to demonstrate a Dupixent (anti-IL4Ra)-like profile, to support expansion into respiratory indications in combination with anti-TSLP (APG273); 2) Ph2 readouts in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, where management expects to validate 3QM/6QM dosing in the Part A maintenance study (data in 1Q26), and further interrogate exposure-response and inform dose selection for Ph3 (initiation in 2H26) in Part B (data in 2Q26); and 3) Ph1b proof-of-concept data evaluating the OX40L combination APG279 against Dupixent in 2H26, where management expects to demonstrate deeper and broader responses in a more heterogeneous patient population.

• BioAge Labs (BIOA): The discussion was focused on: (1) key 2026 catalysts, including additional Ph1 MAD data in 1H26 and Ph2a 12 week proof-of-concept data by YE26 in obese and inflamed patients to validate BGE-102’s (oral CNS-penetrant, NLRP3 inhibitor) impact on hsCRP reduction, although management views weight loss benefit as pure upside; (2) BGE-102’s potential in cardiovascular (CV) risk, where BIOA expects the NLRP3 class to be positioned as oral IL6 inhibitors, given the robust hsCRP reduction (~80%) seen with VTYX’s asset earlier this year and in three patients with elevated baseline hsCRP treated with BGE-102 in Ph1 – albeit, BIOA seeks partnership to advance BGE-102 in CV risk; and (3) other prioritized indications for BGE-102 to be disclosed in the near-term, with feasible development pathways for a small biotech, where BIOA looks to establish differentiation leveraging BGE-102’s strong penetration into the brain and retina.

• Entrada Therapeutics Inc. (TRDA): Management discussed: 1) potentially best-in-class efficacy with 40% dystrophin production after a single injection versus del zota’s ~10-11%, 2) preferential safety given efficient excretion of the oligonucleotide components, thereby circumventing hypomagnesemia, and 3) greater drug efficiency at lower dosing levels supported by a smaller carrier size.

• Gossamer Bio Inc. (GOSS): Management discussed: 1) differentiation of its TKI seralutinib versus historical comparators given improved tolerability from systemic drug elimination and potential for disease remodeling, 2) the company’s focus on an enriched population and statistical plan following learnings from the Phase 2 TORREY study, and 3) continued confidence in the regulatory outlook given consistency/alignment in interactions with the FDA.

• Gubra A/S (GUBRA.CO): Key takeaways from the discussion: 1) Gubra see potential for ABBV-295 (long-acting amylin) to perform in line with eloralintide in terms of efficacy, safety and tolerability, 2) management see ABBV-295’s c.11 day half life and extended Cmax as supportive of a monthly dosing regimen, and 3) Gubra see ABBV-295 being used as both a monotherapy and in combination with a partner.

• Lyell Immunopharma (LYEL): The discussion focused on ronde-cel (autologous CD19/20-targeting CAR T-cell therapy) in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), including: (1) the longer-term Ph1/2 update at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) annual meeting, where the data continues to track competitively vs. approved CD19-targeted CAR T-cell therapies; and (2) pivotal trial strategy, where LYEL aims to demonstrate superiority vs. approved assets in the H2H study in 2L patients (enrollment initiation in early-2026), albeit approval is first expected in the 3L+ setting basis the PiNACLE study (final data in mid-2027, 2028 launch). Separately, LYEL also touched upon LYL273 in 3L+ metastatic colorectal cancer, where they expect further derisking per Ph1 updates in 2026 to support a pivotal start in 2027.

• Sana Biotechnology (SANA): Management and discussed the company’s key programs, where, post the recent pipeline re-prioritization, the focus is on: (1) SC451, its HIP-modified stem cell-derived pancreatic islet cell therapy for type 1 diabetes (T1D) – where SANA highlighted alignment with regulators regarding the GMP master cell bank and the path to an Investigational New Drug Application (IND) and Ph1 start as early as 2026 (noting the potential for initial data in 2026), and (2) SG293, an in vivo CAR T with CD8-targeted fusogen delivery of a CD19-directed CAR for a range of B-cell mediated cancers and autoimmune diseases – where SANA highlighted deep B-cell depletion and immune reset achieved in non-human primates with no off-target toxicity (supporting a potentially best-in-class profile), and management expects an IND/Ph1 start for SG293 in B-cell cancers and B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases by 2027 (but noted the potential for an accelerated timeline with initial data in 2026).

• Sionna Therapeutics (SION): Ahead of Ph2a proof-of-concept data from NBD1 stabilizer SION-719 in cystic fibrosis as an add-on to VRTX’s standard-of-care Trikafta in mid-2026, the discussion focused on: (1) the study’s goal of establishing the synergistic and additive benefit of targeting NBD1 and confirming the translatability of SION’s preclinical CFHBE assay, which is key to de-risking SION’s dual combination approach (Ph1 healthy volunteer data in mid-2026); (2) the bar for success, which managements views as a ≥10mmol/L improvement in sweat chloride given its historical translation to a clinically meaningful lung function benefit; and (3) the forward development strategy — while a dual combination is the prioritized path, management sees the potential to progress SION-719 into later-stage development.

• Spyre Therapeutics Inc. (SYRE): Management discussed: 1) SYRE’s relationship with Fairmount Funds, and related sister companies, 2) expectations for results from Part A of the SKYLINE study of 15-20% placebo-adjusted remission rates with comparator drugs annualizing at ~$5bn-10bn longer term, and 3) continued clinical progress for the SKYWAY study, with expectations heightened following the expansion of Roche’s and Merck’s TL1A programs, which SYRE views as validation of its approach.

• Recursion Pharmaceuticals (RXRX): RXRX’s incoming CEO Najat Khan and CFO Ben Taylor discussed their key priorities: (1) translating insights from the AI-levered Recursion OS platform to differentiated clinical data – most recently, with the positive Ph1/2 REC-4881 data in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), where aligning with the FDA on pivotal design/endpoints is the key next step; (2) focused platform investments in high-value areas; and (3) financial discipline, including a high bar for advancement. Management also touched on the oncology programs, noting: REC-617 (CDK7) combination data in ovarian cancer in 1H27; first Ph1 data for REC-1245 (RBM39) in biomarker-enriched solid tumors/lymphoma in 1H26 and REC-3565 (MALT1) in B-cell malignancies in 1H27; and preclinical PI3Kα H1047R inhibitor REC-7735. Overall, we see the narrative changing for RXRX as it enters into late-stage development in FAP, and remain focused on execution on the prioritized programs.

• Tyra Biosciences Inc. (TYRA): Management discussed: 1) upcoming Ph2 readouts for dabogratinib (“dabo”; FGFR3 inhibitor) in intermediate risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (IR NMIBC; 1H26) and achondroplasia (2H26), 2) for IR NMIBC, expectations for >70% complete responses (CRs) for an oral therapy, with meaningful readthrough from 3-month data and potential for a Ph3 study, and 3) for achondroplasia, the goal to exceed average height velocity (AHV) of approved therapies (e.g., BMRN’s Voxzogo) with at least 7cm/year AHV, supporting a multibrand strategy.

• Viridian Therapeutics (VRDN): Management discussed: 1) Veli’s BLA status, anticipated decision on priority review by YE25, and potential launch as early as mid-2026, 2) VRDN is planning to launch veli in the US on its own and has been working toward an accelerated review timeline, 3) veli’s differentiated profile can potentially expand the current market size of Tepezza by ~30%, 4) VRDN’s Ph. 3 chronic trial enrolled all CAS scores and expects these results to be included in the label (vs. Tepezza’s that lacks chronic results), 5) the bar for VRDN-003 is Tepezza-like efficacy, 6) VRDN believes the market can potentially grow ~2-3x at peak due to veli’s and ‘003’s potential to expand use in chronic TED.

• Valneva SE (VLS.PA): Key takeaways from our discussion: 1) Phase 3 readout from VALOR trial of VLA15 in Lyme is still expected in 1H26, 2) Valneva reiterated that the aim has always been for VLA15 to deliver more favourable efficacy to that achieved by LYMErix, and 3) management highlighted the importance of an ACIP for VLA15 in the commercial rollout.

Overall, the Catalyst Clinic indicates 2026 will be a data-heavy year for Goldman’s small-cap biotech stock universe.

More broadly, the iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB), the largest and most widely used ETF for broad exposure to U.S. biotechnology companies, has reached new record highs after trading largely sideways since 2021.

For Johnson’s stock ratings on each of the companies above, along with detailed 12-month price targets, ZeroHedge Pro subscribers can access the full note in the usual place.

Authored by Sundance via The Last Refuge,

Lawfare lawyer Kenneth Wainstein representing former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed in a proactive litigation letter to Chief Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga of the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, their client is a “target” of a grand jury investigation.

The word “target” is important here, because the letter specifically outlines how Brennan has received subpoenas for documents and information surrounding his construct of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment.

The letter notes that prosecutors from the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason Reding Quiñones, have advised Mr. Brennan that he is “a target” of a grand jury investigation.

The letter by is by Mr. Kenneth Wainstein, a partner in Mayer/Brown law firm, Washington DC, who served in the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush and Joseph R. Biden Jr., and he describes a “concocted case” and “politically motivated and fact-free criminal investigation.”

Wainstein is seeking proactive intervention by Chief Judge Altonaga to block U.S. Attorney Quinones from seeking jurisdiction in the Fort Pierce Division, the court with jurisdiction over the Mar-a-Lago raid, led by Judge Aileen Cannon.

I strongly urge everyone interested to READ THE ENTIRE LETTER to understand why I shared prior warnings about the nonsense ramblings of perhaps well-intentioned voices who will create problems for this case against Brennan if it is to continue.

Pay attention to the footnotes being cited by Brennan’s lawyers as they begin to pull in some of the commentary by voices who have publicly given opinion about the overall Trump targeting operation.  Mike Davis name appears frequently in this letter, as the Brennan defense team begins to frame the conspiratorial nature of some claims against their client.

In essence, the Brennan legal team are attempting to refute the evidence by pointing to the blanket of some crazy commentary that covers it. This is exactly what I have been cautioning about {SEE HERE}.

U.S Attorney Quinones already faces an uphill battle, because John Durham already reviewed the ICA origination as part of his investigation – but Durham never prosecuted anyone inside government.

This year, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a tranche of background information, [114 pages of information], showing how the Obama administration intentionally and with great purpose fabricated the Russia election interference story. DNI Tulsi Gabbard Press Release Here – Files Containing Evidence Here

What the evidence shows is a focused targeting operation intended to fabricate a false premise by the United States Intelligence Community, centered around a fraudulent CIA analysis (ICA) led by John Brennan, and organized through the Office of former DNI James Clapper.  The op was green-lighted by Barack Obama as a way to impede the agenda of incoming President Donald Trump.  All three branches of government eventually collaborated on the scheme.

Lawyers for John Brennan are now seeking to proactively undermine the grand jury proceedings and influence the venue where any investigation and review might be taking place.  [pdf, Page 9] 

In addition to sending the letter to the Southern District of Florida, John Brennan also sent the letter to the New York Times to help him frame a media defense.

[…] Pursuing the case in Fort Pierce, Fla., would draw jurors from a more conservative area than the District of Columbia and put it under Judge Cannon, who showed Mr. Trump unusual favor during the documents investigation. In particular, Mike Davis, an influential former Republican Senate staff aide and friend of Mr. Reding Quiñones, has pushed the idea of a Fort Pierce grand jury, warning Mr. Trump’s adversaries to “lawyer up.” (read more)

Again, get familiar with this letter, because you will find me citing it quite a bit in the next few weeks.

Wainstein and Brennan have made a significant strategic mistake by detailing their defenses, specifically by framing the background context of prior investigative authorities in their positions.  What they have inadvertently done for Jason Quiñones is to give a potential expanded witness list for a conspiracy review.

With information from a mountain of previous research, Quiñones can now call ancillary actors to testify as to the nature of their participation based on the storyline of Brennan.  Wainstein even cited the Robert Mueller investigation as part of his defense for his client.

Example, people like the SSCI chair Rubio, and/or Vice-Chair Warner, along with Feinstein’s lead staff Dan Jones, and/or the SSCI Security Director James Wolfe, can be called to answer questions within a grand jury proceeding based on the claims of Brennan’s defense team in this letter.

Former DNI James Clapper, former NSA Director Mike Rogers, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice and former counterintelligence officers could all be questioned based on Brennan’s defense.

All of the Brennan defense citations in the letter open up pathways for Quinones questioning.

In what could be the start of a major geopolitical crisis, moments ago Turkish Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya said in a post on X that contact was lost with the private jet which was carrying Libya’s Army Chief of ⁠Staff, Mohammed Ali Ahmed al-Haddad, and four other passengers. 

The Falcon-50 private jet had just taken off from the Turkish capital of Ankara in direction of Tripoli, Libya.

An emergency landing notification was received from the aircraft, at which point contact with the jet was lost, the Turkish minister added. 

Contact was lost as of 8:52pm local time over the Turkish capital Ankara, broadcaster NTV reported as flight ‍tracking data showed flights being diverted ‍away from ‍Ankara’s ⁠Esenboga airport.

As the following flight map from Flightradar24 shows, the plane was in the air for just a few minutes after take off, having reached an altitude of 32,400 feet when it disappeared from radar. The airplane of Yevgeny Prigozhin, once “Putin’s chef” before his fall out with the Russian president, suffered a similar fate when allegedly the plane exploded near cruising altitude after a bomb went off inside of it. 

Turkey’s Hurriyet newspaper reports that the country shut down airspace over Ankara after the private jet incident. 

Turkey’s ‌defense ministry had ⁠announced ‍the Libyan chief of staff’s ⁠visit to Ankara earlier this ‌week, saying he had met his Turkish counterpart and other ‍military commanders.

Bloomberg reports that the Dassault Falcon 50 was 37 years old and was operated by Harmony Jets, according to data from FlightRadar24. The aircraft had recently flown into Ankara from Tripoli on Dec. 22.

Haddad as Libya’s army “chief of staff” is a reference only to the Tripoli-based GNA (Government of National Accord, or sometimes GNU) – one among several rival governments controlling Libya, but which is backed by the UN and especially Turkey.

However, what can be seen as the most powerful military is the Eastern government, based in Benghazi, led by warlord and general Khalifa Haftar, backed by Russia. Haftar soon after the war to overthrow Gaddafi returned from decades in exile in Virginia, where he lived with his family within a mere miles from CIA headquarters in Langley. Turkey has long been supporting a proxy war in Libya, against Haftar’s forces, and against Russian interests.

Developing

Ukraine is desperately hitting back at Russia’s energy sector at a moment it remains under immense pressure from Washington to make serious concessions which might lead to achieving a peace deal.

Overnight drone attacks attempted to inflict damage on the Stavrolen petrochemical plant in southwestern Russia. The operation appeared at least somewhat successful amid reports of fires at the site, and as Russia confirmed attempts to intercept inbound drones.

Ukrainian drones attempted to attack the energy targets in the town of Budyonnovsk, triggering air defenses, with the regional governor confirming “There are fires in the industrial zone” and that “Emergency services are on site” – however thankfully that there were no casualties or damage to surrounding homes. Unverified videos widely circulating online do show large flames in the sky from the direction of the plant.

These Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil and energy sites have slowed compared to their high tempo of a month ago and prior.

This could in part be because every time Ukraine hits Russian territory with a significant or damaging attack, Russia’s military comes back harder with large-scale retaliation on Ukraine’s own critical infrastructure. 

Ukrainian strikes hit the “Stavrolen” petro-chemical plant located Budyonnovsk, Stavropol Krai, southern Russia.

A significant fire broke out at the facility following the attack. pic.twitter.com/y7uVIQ3jOf

— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (@Archer83Able) December 23, 2025

Early Tuesday witnessed another huge Russian aerial attack across Ukraine which reportedly killed three people and plunged who regions into darkness. Local media details, “Explosions were reported across multiple regions, including Rivne and the Ivano-Frankivsk region in the far west, with hits recorded in the towns of Burshtyn and Rohatyn. The blasts were also heard near Cherkasy, as well as in Odesa, Khmelnytskyi, Ternopil, and Zhytomyr regions.”

BBC related President Zelensky’s description of the fresh attack as follows:

Russia carried out a “massive” overnight attack on several Ukrainian cities, President Volodymyr Zelensky has said, a day after he warned of strikes over the Christmas period.

At least three people were killed, according to Ukrainian officials, including a four-year-old child, while energy infrastructure was also targeted, leaving several regions without power.

Russia launched 635 drones and 38 missiles, Ukraine’s air force said, adding that 621 of them were downed.

Zelensky said “people simply want to be with their families, at home, and safe” in the run-up to Christmas, and said the strikes sent “an extremely clear signal about Russia’s priorities” despite ongoing peace talks.

Damaged home from Russia’s fresh assault which spanned several cities and regions of Ukraine:

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) warned that President Donald Trump could face another House impeachment inquiry if Republicans don’t win the 2026 midterm elections.

“Everything is on the line in the midterms of 2026, and we have much more to do. But if we lose the House majority, the radical left, as you’ve already heard, is going to impeach President Trump. They’re going to create absolute chaos; we cannot let that happen, and I know you won’t,” Johnson told the audience at the AmericaFest event in Phoenix on Sunday.

The House speaker added that the audience should emulate Charlie Kirk, the conservative podcaster who was assassinated in September, saying that they should “fight like happy warriors, advance his principles, and adopt his approach.” AmericaFest is an annual event hosted by Turning Point USA, which Kirk had founded.

“We will win next year, and we will save the greatest nation in the history of the world,” Johnson said.

House Democrats impeached Trump twice during his first term. In late 2019, they charged him with abuse of power centered around a phone call that he had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over military aid. The second occurred in 2021 after the breach at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 of that year. The Senate acquitted him both times.

Earlier this year, Johnson told the Shreveport Times, “Democrats would vote to impeach [Trump] on their first day” in office if they won in the 2026 midterm elections. In October, he offered a similar message to Fox News’ Laura Ingraham and predicted that the GOP would win those elections.

It takes a simple House majority to impeach a sitting president. However, the bar is set much higher in the Senate, where a two-thirds majority is needed to convict.

Several Democratic lawmakers, including Reps. Al Green (D-Texas) and Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.), have said they will try to impeach Trump.

The House in June voted overwhelmingly to set aside an effort to impeach Trump on a sole charge of abuse of power after he launched military strikes on Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities without first seeking authorization from Congress. The measure was sponsored by Green. Most Democrats joined the Republican majority to table it.

Earlier this month, the House voted 237–140 to shelve another Green impeachment resolution, with 47 Democratic lawmakers voting present. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and his deputies said in a statement before the vote that impeachment “requires a comprehensive investigative process” that had not been undertaken by the Republican majority.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

After missing a Friday deadline to release ‘all’ of the ‘Epstein Files,’ nuking several files containing images of President Donald Trump (before restoring them!), and heavily redacting most of what came out (which can apparently be un-redacted to reveal salacious claims against Trump), the DOJ on Tuesday morning released nearly 30,000 additional pages according to a statement posted on X, which also warned that some of the claims made in the documents against Trump are ‘untrue and sensationalist.’

“Some of these documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election,” reads the post. “To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already.

“Nevertheless, out of our commitment to the law and transparency, the DOJ is releasing these documents with the legally required protections for Epstein’s victims.” 

The Department of Justice has officially released nearly 30,000 more pages of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Some of these documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be…

— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) December 23, 2025

For example:

“He raped me.”

“Donald J Trump had raped her along with Jeffrey Epstein.”

“She was found with her head ‘blown off’… there was no way it was a suicide.”

Now we’re starting to see why Trump was hiding the Epstein files, and it probably gets much worse. pic.twitter.com/QJ8T0FzjSn

— Melanie D’Arrigo (@DarrigoMelanie) December 23, 2025

The releases were mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency act, which was passed in Congress and signed into law by Trump. It requires the DOJ to produce all records related to Epstein, accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, and any other possible co-conspirators by Dec. 19. 

Over the weekend, Deputy AG Todd Blanche said that the DOJ is working to make redactions to files to protect possible Epstein victims, telling NBC‘s “Meet the Press” on Sunday “The reason why we are still reviewing documents and still continuing our process is simply that to protect victims,” adding that the DOJ is “going through a very methodical process with hundreds of lawyers looking at every single document and making sure that victims’ names and any of the information from victims is protected and redacted, which is exactly what the [Epstein Files] Transparency Act expects.”

Except, apparently it’s amateur hour at the DOJ…

many of the “redacted” PDFs from the epstein files aren’t actually redacted, they just have black boxes drawn over text. the underlying data is fully extractable.

this is an example. in this case it’s just photo processing paperwork from a palm beach camera shop pic.twitter.com/kjFVMHJuF9

— celeste (@vmfunc) December 23, 2025

 In a Saturday evening statement, the DOJ wrote that it had re-released 119 pages of materials that had been entirely redacted.

“Documents and photos will continue to be reviewed consistent with the law and with an abundance of caution for victims and their families,” the department posted to X. 

Maxwell is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence stemming from her 2021 conviction for sex trafficking crimes, while Epstein was found dead in a New York City jail cell in Aug. 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. 

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Silver’s parabolic rise has been remarkable. Its price has more than doubled this year and is nearly three times higher than in 2023. The current surge closely mirrors two previous price jumps shown below. 

In this article, we examine the two similar price surges shown below to provide context for what may be occurring today and, importantly, for what might cause this bubble to pop tomorrow.

The Post Financial Crisis Silver Surge

As the turmoil of the Financial Crisis of 2008 began to ease in 2009, the price of silver embarked on a 500% rally, rising from $8.50 to $50.00 over two years. The Fed’s excessive monetary responses to the crisis, alongside heavy speculation, created a perfect storm for silver.

During the crisis, the Fed cut interest rates to zero, introduced QE, and implemented a host of monetary bailouts. As a result, real interest rates (adjusted for inflation) collapsed into negative territory. The graph below shows that 2-year UST real yields fell sharply in 2009 and continued lower until mid-2011. The increase in silver prices coincided with the decline in real yields.  Such distortions in monetary policy, as evidenced by real yields, benefit silver as it is considered a high-beta monetary hedge against extreme monetary policy actions.  

While the monetary environment was conducive to such a rally, there was also a supply-demand mismatch benefiting prices. The supply of silver is relatively inelastic, meaning that mining operations can’t promptly increase output to meet rapid changes in demand. The advent of ETFs makes the asset class far more accessible to a much larger class of investors, adding to the supply-demand imbalance. Maybe most impactful, speculative investors, using futures, options, and other forms of leverage, significantly boosted demand.

The boom ended in 2011 when the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) raised margin requirements five separate times in nine days. The graph below, courtesy of Business Insider, shows the doubling of silver margin requirements and the destructive impact on prices.  The CME’s action forced deleveraging in the futures markets, resulting in silver falling by nearly 30% over a few weeks. Demand for physical silver didn’t necessarily vanish, but leverage and the extra buying power it created did. Additionally, QE2 ended in June 2011; real interest rates began to rise, and the U.S. dollar appreciated.

The Fed’s unprecedented monetary policy actions and speculative leverage drove up silver prices. As those factors reversed, and the CME made leverage costlier, silver prices crashed.

The 1970s Hunt Brothers Squeeze

The Hunt brothers, Nelson, Lamar, and William, had extensive holdings in oil, real estate, cattle, and sugar. Concerned about the effects of what they believed were careless monetary and fiscal policies, as well as the risks posed by the newly formed oil cartel (OPEC), they sought to hedge their businesses and assets. Since it was still illegal for individual investors to own gold, they chose physical silver.

The Hunts began buying silver in 1973, when the price per ounce was $1.50. Over the next six years, the Hunts increased their holdings to more than 200 million ounces, valued at more than $4.5 billion.

Silver Rule 7

In late 1979, their massive holdings and the impact they were having on silver prices prompted action by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the CME. Both entities sought to restrict their purchases and compel the liquidation of the brothers’ silver assets. In January 1980, the CME enacted Silver Rule 7, which imposed stringent restrictions on the purchase of silver futures on margin. This rule significantly increased the amount of collateral required of traders, thereby curbing leveraged speculative buying. It also included restrictions on the number of contracts one could hold and effectively halted new margin buying.

These changes meant that if a trader wanted to continue buying, they would have needed to put up nearly 100% cash for their positions instead of borrowing on margin — effectively eliminating leverage.

Silver nearly hit $50 per ounce in mid-January 1980 and then, due to the abrupt changes in margin requirements, fell to $10 per ounce by the end of March. At that point, margin calls on futures contracts and borrowings against existing silver holdings depleted the Hunts’ cash, forcing them to liquidate their holding to cover margin debts.

Leverage Builds and Leverage Kills

The Hunts initially took physical delivery of silver and did not use leverage. Over time, though, they understood the power of using their silver as collateral to buy more. Buying silver futures on margin enabled them to positively influence the price at a fraction of the cost. Such leverage allowed them to multiply their purchasing power and drive silver prices higher. The only requirement for the Hunts scheme was to maintain sufficient cash to adequately fund their futures margin account.

In addition to the CFTC and CME efforts, the Federal Reserve also played a role in breaking the Hunt brothers. Fed Chairman Paul Volcker sharply raised interest rates in January 1980, from 11.75% to 20.0%, making margin borrowing for the Hunts and other speculators much more expensive. One week after the Hunts ceased market activity, Volcker began lowering interest rates.

Leverage allowed the Hunts to distort the price of silver, but it also killed their legendary squeeze. They incurred over $1.1 billion in losses on the trade. They also lost civil lawsuit claims, which, in part, led them to declare bankruptcy.

The Tiffany advertisement below describes the economic effect the Hunts had on various industries. 

Current Silver Situation

Today, there are many sound, fundamental reasons for the recent rise in silver prices, as there were in the 1970s and in the post-financial-crisis years. For example:

Monetary & Fiscal Tailwinds: Like in the post-Financial Crisis era, the post-pandemic environment has certainly provided those with a reason to hedge against monetary tomfoolery with precious metals. The monetary debasement narrative certainly adds to the conversation. Moreover, with QE resuming and a few signs that DOGE hasn’t reduced fiscal spending, there does not appear to be an end in sight to the monetary and fiscal problems we face. 

Supply Deficit: Silver has been in a multi-year supply deficit, with demand exceeding newly mined supply and silver from recycling.

Surging Industrial Demand: Silver is essential for solar panels, electric vehicles, power electronics, semiconductors, and data-center infrastructure. Given the rapid growth in these sectors globally, silver demand is increasing.

Limited Supply: Roughly 70% of silver production is a by-product of mining for other metals. This means that higher silver prices alone do not incentivize new supply, thereby slowing the market’s ability to rebalance. Moreover, reserve depletion, declining ore grades, mine closures, and underinvestment in exploration and development constrain supply.

Valuations

Silver investors often use ratios to assess silver value. Among the most widely used are the silver-to-gold and silver-to-oil ratios. The chart below shows both ratios. The silver-to-oil ratio (green) is at record highs going back to at least 1990. As the graph shows, there have been numerous spikes in the past. Assuming this too is a spike, either oil prices are ready to ramp higher, or silver is due for a mighty correction.

The silver-to-gold ratio remains cheap despite silver’s recent outperformance versus gold. If the ratio were to return to its late-2011 highs, silver prices would have to rise significantly more than gold prices. While a continued increase in the ratio is undoubtedly possible, note that the trend has been downward for most of the 55 years shown.

When Will The CME Raid The Party?

The problem with traditional valuation and fundamental analysis, as discussed above, is the precedent the CME has set when the price of silver goes parabolic. Accordingly, we think it’s only a matter of price before the CME and/or governmental action pulls the rug out from silver speculators.

If you disagree, consider that on December 12th, the CME raised silver margins by 10%, as shown below. In 2011, the first margin increase also had no impact. It was the subsequent actions that were the problem.

Silver investors should carefully read the sections above detailing the post-financial-crisis period and the Hunt Brothers boom-bust cycles. Changes in margin requirements and rules triggered mass liquidations of silver, resulting in an abrupt reversal of fortunes. Such actions are unpredictable and happen extremely fast.

Summary

At its core, this article provides yet another lesson on the high price that leverage can inflict on investors. When the market for an asset becomes highly leveraged, the risks increase markedly. We are reasonably confident that this bullish charge in silver will end poorly, as it has in the other two instances. What we don’t know is when the shift will occur. Complicating the timing is that the CME could, on any day, terminate the leverage.

Fool me once, shame on you. Twice, then shame on me. But fool me three times….

Earlier Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said for the first time that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro “needs to be gone” – but significantly President Donald Trump followed later Monday with his own message again calling for the socialist strongman to step aside. He laid out it would be “smart” for him to leave power.

Trump was asked at Mar-a-Lago whether all the current US pressure, including tanker interdictions, was intended to push Maduro out of power. “That’s his decision,” Trump responded. “But I think it would be smart for him to do that.”

But on the question of the Venezuelan military fighting back in the case of any potential US action, Trump followed with: “If he plays tough, it’ll be the last time he’s able to do so.”

Trump again confirmed the US assembled a naval force that’s “by far the biggest we ever had in South America” off Venezuela’s coast, in part to enforce a blockade on its oil tanker traffic, and now it is being made crystal clear to pressure the Maduro government out of power.

Russia has remained one of the few international powers sticking by Caracas’ side, this week reiterating “full support” for Maduro’s government, also saying Moscow stands “shoulder to shoulder”.

The are reports, however, that the Russian embassy has begun to evacuate its diplomats and their families from Venezuela, faring large-scale US military actions. According to the Times:

Moscow is said to have begun evacuating the families of Russian diplomats from Venezuela as Washington increases military pressure on President Maduro.

An unnamed European intelligence official said Russia was viewing the situation in Caracas in “very grim terms”, the Associated Press reported.

The Russian foreign ministry denied the report, calling it “a lie” and “a western provocation”. Although it said the embassy was not being evacuated, it did not address the issue of whether the spouses and children of diplomats were being flown out.

Likely if it was happening, the Russians would want this done in secret so as to not add pressure to its Venezuelan ally. If Russia is perceived as ‘abandoning’ Venezuela to its fate, this will be perceived as further weakening Maduro’s position.

Russia’s foreign ministry is slamming these reports as a “provocation” in the below:

❗️Reports by Associated Press regarding alleged ‘evacuation’ of the Russian Embassy in Venezuela @EmbajadaRusaVen are simply put — A LIE.

Be careful and don’t fall for Western provocations! pic.twitter.com/bZVfFrQBT8

— MFA Russia 🇷🇺 (@mfa_russia) December 22, 2025

Moscow’s ‘tough’ talk is widely seen as just that – talk only which is very unlikely to be coupled with any concrete action:

Russia warned Trump last week that any military intervention by the US in Venezuela would be a “fatal mistake” that could have “unpredictable consequences for the entire western hemisphere”. 

The Times notes too, “Despite strong rhetoric from pro-Kremlin hardliners, there is no indication that President Putin is prepared to take robust action to defend Maduro.”

Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

U.S. gasoline prices are set to fall to the lowest level since 2020, thanks to increasing supplies, despite some ongoing refinery maintenance, GasBuddy has predicted.

GasBuddy has predicted that U.S. motorists will pay an average of $2.79 per gallon on Christmas Day, down from $2.95 per gallon a year ago.

That will mark the cheapest gas since prices averaged $2.26 per gallon in the Christmas of 2020.

“Christmas is often when gas prices settle near the lowest levels of the year, and 2025 is no exception,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy.

“Refinery maintenance has wrapped up, supplies are rising, and winter demand is much lower than in summer — all of which help keep a lid on prices.

Provided there are no surprises; holiday travelers should see pump prices that come in a bit lower than last Christmas.

We’re also seeing encouraging early trends as we prepare to release our 2026 Fuel Outlook in January, with signs that lower prices could continue into next year,” he added.

The national average price of gasoline has continued on a downward trend after dropping below $3 a gallon two weeks ago, sinking to their lowest level since 2021.

The average U.S. gas price is now $2.905 per gallon, down from $3.030 a year ago.

However, prices vary widely by state, with motorists in Oklahoma paying $2.339 per gallon compared to $4.343 in California.

Diesel prices have seen an even steeper decline, with the national average price of diesel currently standing at $3.642 per gallon, down from $3.765 a month ago.

Crude oil prices are currently falling due to a significant global oversupply, weaker-than-expected demand growth, and easing of geopolitical risk premiums.