China’s top economic-planning body, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), issued a rare warning earlier today about the emergence of bubble conditions in the country’s humanoid robotics industry. This warning comes just as Elon Musk is planning to scale production of the Tesla Optimus robot next year. 

Bloomberg cites comments from NDRC spokeswoman Li Chao, who warned that more than 150 companies and startups are developing nearly identical robots, creating the risk of a classic investment bubble that could trigger a bust cycle and stifle real innovation.

“Frontier industries have long grappled with the challenge of balancing the speed of growth against the risk of bubbles, an issue now confronting the humanoid robot sector as well,” Li warned. 

Humanoid robotics has exploded in popularity since Unitree’s robot dog with a flamethrower attachment. We’ve purchased one from an importer (minus flamethrower attachment) to see what all the excitement is about…

Taking a look at the Solactive China Humanoid Robotics Index –  a thematic equity index tracking Chinese companies involved in the commercialization of humanoid and robotics technologies –  is up 28.5% year to date and doubled from 2024 lows. 

Related: 

• Goldman Finds “Inflection Point” With Humanoid Robots; We Tested Unitree’s Robodog

• Goldman’s Chat With Top Robotics Firm Reveals Skynet Humanoid Timeline

• China Humanoid Robotics Index Jumps After Unitree Debuts “Stellar Hunter”

Latest reports:

• Humanoid Robot Roundup: Tesla Kicks Off Optimus Pilot Production As Goldman Tours China’s Supply Chain

• Humanoid Robot Roundup: Auto Industry Poised To Lead First Wave Of Adoption

Citi forecasts the humanoid robot industry could reach $7 trillion by 2050, although mass adoption remains a 2030s story. 

Authored by Richard Menger via The American Institute for Economic Research (AIER),

Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), health insurance premiums have steadily increased, as has healthcare’s proportion of the gross domestic product (GDP). In employer-sponsored insurance, escalating premiums are the primary driver for stagnant take-home wages.

The structure of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and employer-sponsored insurance conceal the true cost of healthcare. The recent government shutdown exposed this underlying flaw to public scrutiny.

Should the premium tax credits lapse as expected, the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) projects that premiums for Americans will increase by more than 75 percent. This stark price increase will now confront consumers, leaving patients worried and dissatisfied.

Both the ACA and employer-sponsored healthcare obscure actual healthcare costs, promoting moral hazard and distorting economic incentives.

Unraveling the Mechanics of ACA Premium Subsidies

The ACA in 2010 established premium tax credits (PTCs) to enhance the affordability of health insurance through Marketplace exchanges. These refundable credits, authorized under IRC Section 36B, reduce premiums for households with modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) at or above 100 percent of the federal poverty level ($15,650 for an individual in 2025). In 2021, enhancements increased credit amounts for existing eligible participants and extended eligibility to those exceeding 400 percent of the federal poverty level. The 2023 resolution of the “family glitch” enables dependents to access PTCs when family coverage is deemed unaffordable.

Absent congressional intervention, enhanced subsidies will expire in 2025, potentially doubling premiums and disenrolling millions, thus undermining the coverage gains championed by ACA advocates. Estimates suggest that without renewal, enrollees would face an average premium increase of $1,016 on the marketplace. The expiration of enhanced PTCs is projected to escalate annual premium costs for subsidized enrollees by 114 percent, rising from an average of $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026.

In essence, the collapse of this support structure threatens the stability of the ACA’s framework. The house of cards comes crashing down.

The Hidden Challenge With Employer-Based Coverage

A Kaiser Family Foundation survey revealed that the average premium for employer-sponsored family coverage increased by 26 percent from 2020 to 2025. In 2024, the average annual cost for single coverage was $8,951, with employees typically contributing $1,368, while family coverage averaged $25,572, with employees paying $6,296.

A recent Mercer survey reported that employers expect a 6.5 percent rise in employee healthcare costs for 2026, the largest increase since 2010. Likewise, a Business Group on Health poll indicated employers anticipate a 7.6 percent surge in healthcare expenses in 2026, the most significant jump in over a decade.

Employees often remain unaware of true healthcare costs, as their contributions are partially offset by tax-advantaged employer benefits. However, these costs indirectly suppress wage growth. Meanwhile, healthcare inflation consistently outpaces general wage increases.

Conversely, insurance companies are thriving.

Since the ACA’s passage, the top five health insurers’ annual profits have soared by 230 percent. In 2024, UnitedHealth’s CEO earned $26.3 million, Cigna’s CEO $23.2 million, and others followed suit.

This dynamic does not reflect true capitalism or free-market principles but rather crony capitalism bolstered by government subsidies.

The Core Economic Problem

Imagine a pizza system mirroring healthcare. Employers subsidize 80 percent of a Supreme Pizza plan for employees, lowering the visible cost per slice to $2, though the true price is $10. Uninformed consumers add extravagant toppings—pineapple, anchovies, glitter sprinkles—perceiving them as nearly free. With numerous pizza varieties available, consumption surges. Moral hazard drives daily orders, even for breakfast pizza, escalating demand. Pizzerias, aware of this price ignorance, promote lavish new combinations. An ACA-style “PizzaCare” program caps costs at a fraction of income, encouraging excessive consumption without consideration. Prices skyrocket, benefiting pizza companies. Government subsidies intensify this distortion, further inflating costs. Employees relish their pizza; it becomes part of their daily or weekly routine. They are unaware of its true cost, but may notice and object if their pizza price component rises from $2 to $2.50 or $3.

Hayek’s Warnings and the Dependency Trap

Notably, Marketplace enrollment doubled from 11 million to 24 million following the introduction of enhanced premium tax credits in 2021.

This is Hayek’s cautionary narrative.

The critical issue lies in the vulnerability of ordinary individuals, distracted by whether Notre Dame will secure a College Football Playoff berth, the Islanders will win the Stanley Cup, or their seven-year-old will score in Saturday’s soccer game. These individuals face significant financial strain, having grown reliant on subsidies to afford healthcare. The broader healthcare system similarly depends on government support, embodying Hayek’s warning of diminishing personal autonomy and deepening entanglement with state intervention.

In “The Road to Serfdom,” Friedrich Hayek vividly depicts government overreach as a frog slowly boiling in a pot, lulled by promises of security. The ACA’s subsidies, like a siren call, have enticed 24.2 million enrollees with affordable premiums, obscuring the escalating true cost of healthcare. Once established, these subsidies become indispensable, with millions now dependent on them, as evidenced by projected premium spikes.

Should the enhanced subsidies, originally temporary, expire as planned in 2025, the resulting premium surge reveals the trap: dependence on state generosity. As Hayek cautioned, this reliance, cloaked in equity and justice, erodes freedom, empowering a bureaucracy to dictate government-directed winners and losers.

Once entrenched, dismantling programs initially deemed temporary becomes politically toxic. Individuals adapt to a subsidized reality, viewing affordable premiums as essential, mirroring Hayek’s portrayal of populations bound to state largesse. The ACA’s framework, with 24.2 million enrollees dependent on credits, fosters a cycle of deepening reliance. Any rollback, such as the looming 2025 expiration, risks economic disruption, entrenching a system where insurers profit from inflated costs while patients, shielded from true price signals, remain tethered to subsidies.

This validates Hayek’s thesis: centralized interventions breed dependency, eroding choice and fueling a gradual descent into serfdom.

A new study shows tattoo ink drains into the lymphatic system and accumulates in lymph nodes, diminishing the effects of immune cells. This accumulation of ink pigment triggers both local and systemic inflammation that persists for months.

A third of American adults, roughly 32% – or about 80 million people – have tattoos, and they should read this new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS).

“Despite safety concerns regarding the toxicity of tattoo ink, no studies have reported the consequences of tattooing on the immune response. In this work, we have characterized the transport and accumulation of different tattoo inks in the lymphatic system using a murine model,” researcher Arianna Capucetti wrote in the study.

Capucetti continued:

Upon quick lymphatic drainage, we observed that macrophages mainly capture the ink in the lymph node (LN).

An initial inflammatory reaction at local and systemic levels follows ink capture. Notably, the inflammatory process is maintained over time, as we observed clear signs of inflammation in the draining LN 2 mo following tattooing. In addition, the capture of ink by macrophages was associated with the induction of apoptosis in both human and murine models. Furthermore, the ink accumulated in the LN altered the immune response against two different types of vaccines.

On the one hand, we observed a reduced antibody response following vaccination with a messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA)-based severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine, which was associated with a decreased expression of the spike protein in macrophages in the draining LN.

In contrast, we observed an enhanced response when vaccinated with influenza vaccine inactivated by ultraviolet (UV) radiation.

Considering the unstoppable trend of tattooing in the population, our results are crucial in informing the toxicology programs, policymakers, and the general public regarding the potential risk of the tattooing practice associated with an altered immune response.

As we noted earlier this year, “Many tattoo inks contain chemicals that have been classified as carcinogenic — or cancer-causing — by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.”

While black tattoo inks use carbon black, colored inks contain pigments designed for industrial applications such as plastics and paints. More troubling, tattoo inks are far less regulated than pharmaceuticals.

We have already covered two important studies:

• A 2024 Swedish study tracking nearly 12,000 people found that individuals with tattoos had a 21% higher risk of malignant lymphoma compared with those without ink.

• A Danish twin study published earlier this year reported similar trends. Tattooed participants showed higher rates of skin cancer.

Dr. Trisha Khanna, dermatologist and medical advisory board member at Codex Labs, recently told The Epoch Times, “Current regulations on tattoo ink ingredients are not sufficient,” adding, “This is a growing concern among dermatologists.”

And laser removal could make it worse.

It was one of the key debates that led to the longest government shutdown in US history:  The Trump Administration wanted to close the loopholes that allowed non-citizens access to government subsidies like ACA healthcare and free food through SNAP. 

Democrats claimed that “illegal migrants” don’t have access to such programs. 

Yet, the Democrats were willing to drag out the government shutdown for 35 days just to stop Trump from implementing cuts that would apparently affect no one. 

Why?

Because leftists are liars. 

If they are not telling a direct lie, they are lying by omission or by using semantics and carefully crafted language so that if they get caught they can say “That’s not what we meant…”  

When Republicans moved to block subsidies for migrants this included the millions of asylum seekers that entered the US illegally and then took advantage of Joe Biden’s lax policies, including “catch and release.” 

Democrats, however, categorize asylum seekers as residing in the US “legally”. 

It’s a dishonest way to bypass the debate and pretend as if Trump is living in a fantasy land.  Meanwhile, Democrats hope that the general public will not catch on to the game they are playing.  

Eventually, the truth gets out, often through self-exposure because the leftists can’t help themselves.  After months of Democrats asserting that “illegal” non-citizens don’t receive government subsidies, Oregon is suing the Trump administration over changes to the nation’s food assistance program, arguing that new federal guidance unlawfully blocks certain groups of “legal” immigrants from accessing food aid.  When Democrats mention “legal immigrants” they are referring to all asylum seekers.

JUST IN: Oregon Attorney General is suing the Trump admin because they cut SNAP benefits for noncitizens and are cracking down on fraud

But Democrats insisted for months that noncitizens weren’t getting taxpayer funded benefits…. Now they’re suing to make sure they do.

Unreal pic.twitter.com/u6VwTc6wuT

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) November 27, 2025

Twenty-one other states joined Oregon in filing the lawsuit Wednesday in federal court in Eugene, arguing that the U.S. Department of Agriculture overstepped its authority when it issued an Oct. 31 memo telling states to cut off benefits for people who have long been eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. 

The dispute centers on changes Congress made in July through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which limited SNAP eligibility for certain noncitizens in temporary immigration categories. 

In the lawsuit, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and the other Democratic attorneys general said the USDA memo goes further than what Congress approved and effectively blocks many lawful permanent residents from the SNAP program even though they qualify under the law.  Those include refugees, asylum seekers and people admitted under humanitarian programs once they obtain a green card and meet the program’s income and residency rules.

Their definition of “legal” non-citizens, however, is irrelevant.  The federal government has broad authority to determine who is here legally and who gets access to federal subsidies including SNAP.  Migrant aliens who flooded into the US during the Biden regime and took advantage of wide open asylum policies do not necessarily qualify.

Furthermore, there needs to be a national discussion about who should be allowed access to American taxpayer dollars.  Progressives exploit subsidies as a way to lure migrants to the US and buy their votes once they become naturalized.  The Democrat agenda is clearly to upend the demographics of the country in their favor.  Why would native born Americans allow their money to be used against them as a means to steal their country from them?

No migrants, legal or illegal, should ever qualify for government subsidies.  If they can’t support themselves, they should not be traveling to the US in the first place.  At the very least, there needs to be a set moratorium on immigrant applications for benefits; perhaps 5-10 years after they gain residency.  This would weed out any parasites looking to feed on the American system rather than contribute and assimilate. 

Oregon and other states are asking the court for a preliminary injunction to block the new policy while the case is heard.  AG Rayfield says the goal is “to get in front of a judge as quickly as possible to make sure that we can get this food assistance flowing again here in the near term.”

Democrats understand that they have a limited window of time – A few months without SNAP benefits and migrants will leave blue states, possibly self deporting back to their countries of origin.  The incentives to stay will be gone.  Meaning, Democrats lose their census advantage, they lose vast pool of future voters (or current voters in states without voter ID), not to mention a useful mob of thugs they can muster whenever they need to create civil unrest.   

Authored by Zachary Stieber and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

Sensitive documents found in burn bags at FBI headquarters will all be made public, FBI Director Kash Patel said in a new interview with The Epoch Times.

“You’re going to see everything we found in that room in one way or another, be it through investigation, public trial, or disclosure to the Congress,” Patel told The Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek in an exclusive interview, which is set to air on EpochTV at 5 p.m. ET on Nov. 29.

Before becoming FBI director, one of Patel’s past roles was working as a congressional investigator. He was on the House Intelligence Committee team that uncovered previously unknown information about the FBI’s probe of possible links between the 2016 campaign of President Donald Trump and Russia.

The probe and fallout over the information that emerged, including the reliance on a dossier compiled on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign, has come to be known as “Russia Gate.”

Patel said on X in August that “we just uncovered burn bags/room filled with hidden Russia Gate files, including the Durham annex, and declassified them.”

The declassified annex to a report from former special counsel John Durham, whose team investigated the FBI’s actions and found that the full probe was based on unverified intelligence, was released in July by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). It showed that the FBI did not adequately review reports showing the Clinton campaign may have been promoting a false narrative connecting Trump to Russia, Grassley said at the time.

Clinton’s office has not commented on the annex. Robby Mook, Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager, has said he believed that work done by the international law firm Perkins Coie, which paid the dossier author, “was done for the purpose of providing legal services and legal advice” to the campaign.

During a hearing in September, Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.) asked Patel why somebody would place documents related to the investigation into the FBI’s probe of Donald Trump and Russia in burn bags.

Patel said he could not comment on the case because it was ongoing.

“In general terms … a burn bag is what you use to put classified documents into, generally, because that is literally how you destroy them,” he said.

Patel told The Epoch Times that “when the United States government and agency heads want things to disappear and want things to be buried and hidden, they know how to do it.”

“But what they didn’t count on was President Trump winning, him electing leadership across the United States government to say, ‘Go, find out how they corrupted and weaponized law enforcement,’ and that’s what we did—that’s what we’re doing; that’s how we found it, and we’re going to continue to expose it.”

Patel said the FBI is working with partners in Congress to release documents, including those relating to the Department of Justice investigation into Trump for alleged unlawful interference with the transfer of power after the 2020 election, which involved obtaining records from senators’ phones.

While investigations are ongoing, “we are going to have full accountability and we are going to have full transparency for the American public,” he said.

Airbus warned Friday that “intense solar radiation” may have corrupted critical flight data in an incident involving an A320 narrow-body aircraft. While the company did not disclose which flight was affected, it was likely last month’s JetBlue Flight 1230, which suddenly dropped in altitude while en route from Newark to Cancun.

Airbus issued an Alert Operators Transmission to all airlines operating A320 Family aircraft, warning that an urgent fix is required.

The company believes this is the first time this specific problem has emerged in its fleet and says it has “proactively worked with aviation authorities… keeping safety as our number one and overriding priority,” according to CNN.

“Airbus acknowledges these recommendations will lead to operational disruptions to passengers and customers,” Airbus wrote in a statement. 

Airbus told CNN on Saturday that most of the narrow-body aircraft can be repaired in a matter of hours by simply reverting to the previous software. It said about 900 older aircraft would need more complicated fixes. 

Here’s more from the report:

American Airlines has about 209 of the aircraft which need to be updated, less than the 340 it had earlier predicted, according to a statement from the airline.

. . .

Delta Air Lines said fewer than 50 of its A321neo aircraft will be impacted and the work should be complete by Saturday morning.

. . .

JetBlue, which operates a fleet mostly made up of A320 and A321 aircraft, did not say how many of their planes needed to be fixed, but told CNN in a statement it has already started repairs.

. . .

Southwest Airlines does not have any of the impacted aircraft. Meanwhile, in the Asia-Pacific, Jetstar Airways Australia, Air New Zealand, IndiGo and Air India Express have also taken precautionary measures. 

At cruising altitude, commercial jets are exposed to 100 to 300 times more solar radiation than at ground level, and a major solar storm can push that even higher.

High-energy particles can disrupt modern avionics processors, including corrupting memory or causing a logic error. While Airbus hasn’t specified which exact flight systems were affected, here are the likely candidates:

• Flight Control Primary Computers (FCPCs)

• ADIRUs (Air Data & Inertial Reference Units)

• FADEC engine control

• Autopilot & flight director

• Fly-by-wire actuator command modules

Latest space weather events:

• Blue Origin Rocket Launch Halted After Earth Slammed By “Cannibal” CME

Airbus’ warning is an unusual confirmation of space weather risk to the modern economy…

•  Solar Storms Can Devastate Entire Civilizations.

• The Next Big Geomagnetic Storm Poses An Astronomical Risk To Modern Man

… something we’ve warned about for years. 

Andriy Yermak, the man who until just over 24 hours ago was Zelensky’s right hand man and the president’s top most powerful aid as chief of staff, and Ukraine’s appointed chief negotiator with the US on the peace process, is going to the front lines, apparently to “fight”.

After his home and offices were raided by Ukraine’s anti-corruption investigators Friday related to the ongoing massive energy sector kickback scandal, Yermak announced by text message to The New York Post, “I’m going to the front and am prepared for any reprisals.” He followed with, “I am an honest and decent person.”

The Post added further, “He then apologized if he no longer answers calls. He did not say when or how he intended to go to the frontlines of the war against Russia.”

He appears to still be rejecting allegations he was involved in the graft probe, centered on at least $100 million being siphoned off by corrupt Ukrainian officials amid a series of payoffs and kickbacks.

The narrative in his defense is being spun by the same NY Post report, which suggests this is all merely ‘political’ due largely to jealously and growing rivalries related to the enormous decision-making influence Yermak was coming to wield:

Despite his towering frame, you might not always have spotted him. Yet, wherever President Volodymyr Zelensky was, Yermak was often not far away.

As his chief of staff, Yermak wielded enormous power at the top of government and was even trusted to negotiate on Ukraine’s behalf at peace talks with the US.

But as his influence grew, so did public resentment of the power this unelected official held. His political career came to an abrupt end on Friday, hours after anti-corruption investigators raided his home in Kyiv.

But clearly his dramatic declaration of “going to the front lines” is meant to signal a sense of self-sacrificial patriotism and induce feelings of sympathy. 

Oleksandr Dubinskyi, a rare and controversial oppositional lawmaker in Ukraine’s parliament who has long called for Zelensky’s impeachment, has a very different take based on his sources. He detailed in an X post a series of specific claims, the chief of which is that Yermak is ‘hiding’ from anti-corruption investigators:

I have learned where exactly he is going to “serve.”

Fact: Yermak, with his security detail, was brought to the location of commander nicknamed Madjar – one of the most media-prominent Ukrainian fighters, known for harsh Telegram rhetoric and the “Drone Wall” project. Unit commanders refuse to assign Yermak to their ranks.

He is physically present but has no tasks, no role, and no assigned position. Yermak is hiding from NABU anti-corruption investigations in a zone where detectives cannot serve him a notice of suspicion or court summons.

Separate detail: Madjar accepted Yermak only after a personal request from Zelensky. For Yermak, the front is not service. The front is a hideout. And it is interesting how people will meet Yermak – the man who organized the forced rounding-up of people in the streets of Ukraine.

Interestingly, when the teams of NABU and SAP agents searched his office on Friday, this was just meters away from President Zelensky’s own office.

As a reminder, Andrew Korybko recently opined that Yermak’s removal could prompt some progress in peace talks:

He’s Zelensky’s powerbroker so his downfall could undo the already shaky alliance between the armed forces, the oligarchs, the secret police, and parliament that keeps Zelensky in power, thus pressuring him into peace, especially if his warmongering grey cardinal is no longer pushing him to keep fighting.

One geopolitical source, known on X as The Islander, agrees: this is largely the result of the Trump administration finally bringing real pressure to bear on the Zelensky regime at a moment a clear, workable peace plan is on the table – which much to Kiev’s chagrin features territorial concessions in the Donbass and Crimea.

I coined the phrase “Ukroscam”

Soros and Yermak obliged with the perfect picture. pic.twitter.com/aFyXOBWbEi

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) November 28, 2025

According to the lengthy analysis [emphasis ZH]:

The fall of Andriy Yermak – Zelensky’s fixer, enforcer, gatekeeper, and indispensable ally, isn’t a “corruption scandal.” It’s Washington slapping the table. NABU, the U.S.-trained attack dog of Ukrainian politics, didn’t raid the Presidential Office by accident.

It raided to remind Zelensky that the war isn’t his to command, the peace process isn’t his to veto, and the leash around Bankova Street is held in Washington, not Kiev and certainly not European chihuahuas. Because the real story isn’t Yermak’s resignation. The real story is the West turning on itself over how to end a war Russia has already won.

The fall of Andriy Yermak, Zelensky’s most loyal ally and the de facto power manager of Ukraine, is not a scandal. It is a strike from above. NABU, the U.S.-funded, U.S.-trained anti-corruption bureau, didn’t raid the home and office of Ukraine’s most powerful unelected official by coincidence. And in any other country, his resignation after a corruption raid would be a political scandal. In Ukraine, it’s a geopolitical detonation.

Yermak wasn’t just a chief of staff, he was the shadow architect of the regime, the man through whom every appointment, every oligarchic negotiation, every Western request, and every wartime decision had to pass. And the speed of his resignation makes clear this was less about corruption, and more about pressure — engineered, timed, and executed by the one actor that can pull such a lever, Washington.

For months, the U.S. has been split between the neocons clinging to fantasies of a battlefield reversal, and the rising bloc of realists (JD Vance et. al) who have finally accepted what the frontlines have shown for over a year, Russia has already won. Ukraine’s army is shattered, NATO’s ammunition reserves are exhausted, and American voters are done with a war that offers no victory and no strategy.

The realists now want a controlled, face-saving diplomatic exit, that locks in territorial losses quietly while Washington claims it “secured peace.” Zelensky has resisted every inch of this pivot because peace ends his power. And Yermak was the immovable pillar of that resistance, insulating Zelensky from any pressure to negotiate, the filter preventing unwanted messages from reaching the president. By purging him through a NABU raid, the U.S. has isolated Zelensky.

Meanwhile, the EU is panicking. European leaders fear peace more than war because peace forces accountability… why did they destroy their own industries, torch their energy security, plunge their economies into recession, and funnel hundreds of billions into corruption for a war Washington itself is now preparing to fold?

Brussels supported Zelensky unconditionally not out of conviction but out of sheer self-preservation. If the war ends, they must answer for the ruin they inflicted on their own populations. Europe needs perpetual conflict to postpone the political reckoning. Washington, by contrast, wants a face saving offramp. This is the real EU–US divide: Brussels wants to delay the inevitable, Washington wants to manage it, and Kiev wants to deny it. Only one of them has the power to dictate the timeline, and it isn’t Europe.

Moscow sees the Western fracture, senses the desperation, and understands its advantage. Putin’s message has been cold and consistent: either negotiations occur on terms that reflect the battlefield reality and addreses the root cause of the conflict, or Russia will continue grinding down NATO’s proxy forces until nothing remains to negotiate with.

For Russia, both paths lead to victory. Russia has no reason to rush, it is the West running out of time, weapons, unity, and credibility. And when European publics finally realize their leaders sacrificed prosperity, stability, industry, and geopolitical autonomy for a war that ended exactly where Moscow predicted it would, the political reckoning will be seismic. Yermak’s fall is not the end of an era, it marks the beginning of the collapse for the EU.

Already, President Zelensky has on Saturday announced a delegation headed by security council secretary Rustem Umerov was on its way to Washington continue talks on the Trump-proposed deal to end the war.

And how is Mr. McFaul supposed to keep working now without his co-chair Yermak in the International Working Group on Russian Sanctions? 🥺

Their ‘teamwork’ has brought Ukraine so much benefit, after all. pic.twitter.com/ltFLu54qCt

— Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) November 28, 2025

Umerov has been put in charge of the Ukrainian delegation at a moment Yermak is on the run toward the front lines. This is all happening very fast, and the White House can now more easily impose its will on an increasingly disunified and somewhat panicked Zelensky government.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) has long performed a key role for many on the left. When there is an argument barred by decency or decorum, Wasserman Schultz is happy to make it, from attacking journalists in her defense of censorship to attempting to rig an election and bar Republicans from ballots as part of her defense of democracy. However, on Friday, the Florida representative set a new low in American politics: attempting to assign some of the blame for the shooting of two National Guardsmen on President Donald Trump.

On CNN’s “News Central,” Rep. Wasserman Schultz declared that

“This is a deeply concerning situation, but, you know, it’s one that I think we have to — it begs the question, would an individual have flown across the country to target law enforcement officers in Washington, D.C.? And, I mean, the answer is likely no. So why wasn‘t the president‘s first thought, ‘Wow, you know, maybe I should reconsider deploying military troops in the nation‘s capital or in any city?’ Particularly not when they haven‘t coordinated closely with the leadership of these cities and when we have law enforcement that are quite capable of handling the criminal justice issues that are — that we need law enforcement to focus on, and not our military.”

There is a good-faith debate over the deployment of National Guard personnel in cities. However, the mayor of Washington, D.C., has worked with the Administration on that deployment, and crime has fallen in the Capitol. They have been coordinating with the city.

Nevertheless, Wasserman Schultz pressed on:

“I just think, you know, the president looks everywhere except inward to blame his own policies. We need to make sure that we don‘t have our military deployed in our cities, doing — handling law enforcement responsibilities. And we need to make sure that we address gun violence. We certainly need to make sure we always have the proper and appropriate and tight, tight vetting processes, and those should be reviewed. But it‘s never the president‘s fault or his policies when it comes to his reaction, and it’s pretty disgusting.”

D.C. has some of the strongest gun control measures in the nation. Moreover, this is a crime committed with a handgun brought from another area with strong gun control, Washington State.

Wasserman Schultz is also assuming that it was the deployment that motivated the shooter, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national. Lakanwal entered the U.S. on September 8, 2021, under Operation Allies Welcome, a program established by former Democratic President Joe Biden after the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021.

The father of slain Guardsman Staff Sgt. Darin “Taylor” Hoover blamed the “feckless Biden Administration” for the death of his daughter the day of Wasserman Schultz’s statement.

Wasserman Schultz, however, does not blame former President Biden for Lakanwal’s presence in the United States. (Lakanwal, a former member of a CIA unit in Afghanistan, was reportedly granted asylum under the Trump Administration in April).

Investigators are still working to discover the motive of Lakanwal for murdering one soldier and critically wounding another. However, Wasserman Schultz feels entirely comfortable in suggesting that it was the deployment of the Guard in cities over Democratic objections. Of course, a few other possibilities come to mind. First, it could be an act of religious-based terrorism. Second, it could be an act of mental illness. Third, it could be a personal grievance with the U.S. government.

Killing soldiers in the nation’s Capitol can be appealing for any of these motivations or a combination of motivations. It is not obvious that someone travels across the country because this is where you can find personnel on the streets. After all, there are also troops deployed in other states closer to Washington state. There are also large bases in Washington state where military personnel are present in large numbers in public areas.

A shooter with any of these motivations could view the location as amplifying his grievances against the government. Wasserman Schultz seems to suggest that Trump is responsible for making troops targets due to the controversial use of the Guard and supplying targets for a terrorist.

The most important point for Wasserman Schultz is a familiar one: Trump did it.

Yet, blaming the deployment is like blaming the Republican members for the mass shooting at the 2017 softball field. After all, if they had not made themselves targets, James T. Hodgkinson would not have gone there. Hodgkinson, a former Bernie Sanders supporter, hated Republicans and would have found another gathering to carry out his murderous plan. In the same way, Lakanwal may have been on the hunt for any soldiers as a symbol of the United States in the Capitol.

The point is that we do not know. The effort to use this tragedy for political purposes is to dishonor the victims and capitalize on their deaths. Few would feel comfortable getting into the head of a homicidal madman without any evidence or support. However, that appears to be a unique skill set for Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

President Trump said on Saturday on X that the airspace above and surrounding Venezuela will “be closed in its entirety.” 

“To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP,” Trump wrote on X. 

To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 29, 2025

Earlier this month, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned pilots to “exercise caution” near Venezuela’s airspace due to the “worsening security situation and heightened military activity.

The Pentagon has been deploying warships and other military assets in the Caribbean this year. The deployment centers around bolstering Hemispheric Defense, and the Trump administration has formally characterized Nicolás Maduro as the head of a terrorist organization and considers his government illegitimate. 

Joint Special Operations Command has ordered numerous airstrikes on speed boats carrying narcoterrorists. The intent is to stop drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narcoterrorists that are part of a sophisticated network pumping drugs into America, resulting in the drug death overdose crisis that kills 100,000 Americans per year – one that the Biden-Harris regime ignored by opening borders to the third world. 

On Friday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth dismissed fake news from corporate media about recent lethal kinetic strikes. 

Hegseth explained:

As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.

As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be “lethal, kinetic strikes.” The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narcoterrorists who are poisoning the American people. Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.

The Biden administration preferred the kid gloves approach, allowing millions of people — including dangerous cartels and unvetted Afghans — to flood our communities with drugs and violence. The Trump administration has sealed the border and gone on offense against narcoterrorists. Biden coddled terrorists, we kill them.

Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command.

Our warriors in SOUTHCOM put their lives on the line every day to protect the Homeland from narcoterrorists — and I will ALWAYS have their back.

As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.

As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically…

— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) November 28, 2025

Hegseth followed the post with, “We have only just begun to kill narcoterrorists.”

We have only just begun to kill narco-terrorists.

— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) November 28, 2025

What the U.S. airspace shutdown over Venezuela signals:

• Pressure Maduro into stepping down

• Or intent to collapse the Maduro regime

• Expectation of Russian/Iranian pushback

• Readiness to escalate militarily

Maduro and his circle would treat this as both an existential threat, and it remains to be seen how he would respond. We guess Trump’s airspace announcement only suggests talks aren’t going well.

Authored by Richard Lyons via American Greatness,

The new Democrat Party’s appeal to the public these days is that the failure of a free enterprise system has made America unaffordable and that all Americans need government help! This sort of emergency plea to the public has been made before.

In order to make housing more affordable in the early 2000s, Fannie and Freddie Mac, US government mortgage guarantor companies, began pressuring mortgage lenders to widen their rules for mortgage lending, even to include NINJA loans—No Income, No Job, No Problem—for purchasing real estate properties; then Fannie and Freddie married that expansion with marketing Adjustable Rate Mortgages, which would float according to Federal Reserve rates.

The outcome was the real estate and stock market crash of 2008. Since then, between 2009 and 2016, the fed rate was kept arbitrarily low at .75%, which inflated real estate prices; from 2020 to 2022, the fed rate was pushed down again to .25%, with the result of further increasing the average home price from $220,900 in 2010 to $420,000 in 2024. At the same time, the Federal Reserve has pushed up interest rates to 5.5%, so the average American has to pay more and borrow at higher rates for real estate, thanks to the government’s interventions to make housing more affordable.

During the Obama presidency, there was a grand push to make a university education more affordable; that is when the whole student loan industry was taken over by the federal government. In 2010, the total US student loan debt was $772 billion; today, the total debt is $1.750 trillion.

The average student graduating today carries $30,000.00 in debt. The average price of a university education has risen from $20,000 in 2010 to $31,000 per year today, or 59% higher since the Democrat Party took over the US university financing system. The average college education costs $120,000 these days; that does not sound affordable. It sounds like every single student needs a loan…

In the mid-1960s, the Democrat Party dominated Washington, D.C., and as part of the Great Society, decided to make healthcare (you got it!) more affordable.

With that, Medicare was created at an initial cost of $3 billion in 1967. Since 1967, the cost of Medicare has increased 370X, to an annual cost to the taxpayers of $1.12 trillion per year. Medicaid began as a $1 billion program and has since increased to $909 billion per year today. Even with this government control and expenditure, the average cost per capita is $13,432 per year, compared to the average cost per capita of other developed nations of $7,393. Aren’t costs supposed to go down or remain stable when the government creates affordability?

Even with the government’s control and expenditure, by 2010, healthcare in America was still deemed “unaffordable” to the Democrat Party. In answer to the problem, the Obama administration created the Affordable Care Act, which went into effect in 2014. In 2013, the average consumer paid $232 for their monthly premium, with an average deductible of $2,425. Today, that same consumer must pay $621/month or $7,452/year while having $6,000 in deductibles. Premiums and deductibles are expected to increase by 25% again in 2026. The Affordable Care Act is becoming more unaffordable by the day.

In 2020, the Biden administration decided the Earth could not afford the use of fossil fuels any longer, so it began an all-out effort to strangle the fossil fuel industry through regulations and executive orders that made land leases and drilling unaffordable, giving rise to a 38% inflation spike in the costs of energy products.

Inflating the costs of energy affects literally everything in an economy that is produced, warehoused, or delivered: think of the factories and machines that do the manufacturing, the warehouse heating or cooling needed to store product, and the ships, trains, and trucks needed to get product to the stores, then what about the light, heat, and refrigeration… Strangling the energy sector of an economy creates a gusher of inflation affecting every single product from fruits and vegetables to meats and dairy. During Biden’s administration, inflation rose 20%.

An inflation rate of 20% also means that every person who had put away savings of $100,000 by 2020 was worth $80,000 by 2024.

Midway through Biden’s term, the administration passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which pushed trillions of dollars into green energy “investments” and expansions of healthcare payouts, none of which helped to reduce inflation.

It turned out to be just another Democrat act that neither the taxpayer nor the consumer could afford.

Now we have the new mayor of New York, claiming that socialist policies will make life more “affordable” by taking over rental properties, grocery stores, transportation lines, and utility companies.

The fact is, the Democrats create our nation’s unaffordability problems by advancing (quasi-socialist) government control of energy, healthcare, education, finance, and housing sectors. And then Democrats propose to solve the problems their policies create with the solution of the government taking the same sectors over entirely through socialism.

What has proven to be unaffordable for over half a century in this country is pseudo-socialism. Apparently, the Democrat Party believes in the aspiration of advancement through failure. We, as voters, need to let the Democrats know we understand and reject their policy failures.

What is no longer affordable are Democrat policies that pervert the virtuous American free enterprise system, which has been the cornerstone of this nation’s prosperity since its founding.