Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Poland has more to lose from this than Hungary does, but it’s happy to let Hungary feel the heat for impeding Ukraine’s plans, unless Orban is ousted next spring and Poland is then compelled to replace its role.

The EU is making a renewed push to speedily grant Ukraine membership as suggested by two recent news items.

The first relates to Politico’s report about a proposal for granting countries membership without veto rights till after the bloc overhauls its functions, which Ukraine hopes will be agreed to by December, while the second involves Bloomberg’s report about the bloc’s plans to include a rapid path to membership for Ukraine a part of its 12-point peace proposal. Poland might impede all of this though.

Observers should remember that Poland and Ukraine were embroiled in a fierce grain dispute throughout most of 2023. It was caused by the bloc temporarily removing tariffs on a number of Ukrainian exports after the start of the special operation. The influx of cheap grain into the Polish market threatened to ruin the livelihoods of Polish farmers, who began blocking the border in protest. The state then imposed an embargo on Ukrainian grain in defiance of the EU that still remains in place to this day.

The dispute has abated since then, with the latest EU-Ukrainian trade agreement imposing a tariff-rate quota on the latter’s wheat exports that’s 80% lower than what the former imported last year (1.3 million metric tons vs. 6.4 million metric tons), with tariffs beyond that being prohibitively expensive. Nevertheless, just as the influx of cheap grain from Ukraine ended, there’s now an influx of cheap steel into the Polish market that Warsaw recently declared that it also wants to ban or severely regulate.

The abovementioned concerns would reach crisis proportions with far-reaching socio-economic and political consequences for Poland if Ukraine were to speedily join the EU’s single market even without veto rights. It’s due in large part to growing public awareness of the aforesaid that only 35% of Poles support Ukrainian membership in the bloc as of a credible poll conducted in their country over the summer, which is less than the 85% who were in favor of this shortly after the special operation began.

Hungary has hitherto been portrayed by Western media as the main stumbling block to Ukraine’s plans, a role that Poland’s ruling duopoly has been all too happy to let it play for self-serving political reasons even though their country is arguably a much greater stumbling block for the reasons explained above. Moreover, there’s a chance that the EU– and Ukrainian-backed efforts to meddle in Hungary’s next elections in April could finally oust Prime Minister Viktor Orban, thus removing him from the equation.

In that scenario, all eyes would then be on Poland, but neither half of its ruling duopoly wants to be blamed for the domestic consequences of Ukraine joining the EU, especially not ahead of fall 2027’s next parliamentary elections. Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s ruling liberal-globalist coalition is already facing an uphill battle and would torpedo any hope of keeping control if they supported this, while President Karol Nawrocki from the conservative-nationalist opposition would betray his base if he went along with them.

Unlike Hungary, Poland hasn’t been smeared as a Russian puppet, the claim of which would fall flat anyhow since it spent 4.9% of its GDP on Ukraine (mostly for its refugees), donated its entire stockpile to it, and spends more of its GDP on defense than any NATO member. It’s happy to let Hungary feel the heat for now when it comes to impeding Ukraine’s speedy membership in the EU, but if Orban is ousted next spring, then Poland will likely step up and replace its role since failing to do so would be disastrous.

Authored by Chris Macintosh via InternationalMan.com,

World War III is already underway, but most people don’t recognize it because they’re conditioned to expect war to look like traditional physical violence with bombs, guns, and battlefield confrontations.

This bias stems from centuries of warfare taking a particular form, similar to how people once couldn’t conceive of light without fire until electricity was invented.

Redefining War

At its core, war is conflict where parties use tools to increase their power and achieve outcomes that oppose others’ interests.

Think strategically about modern warfare: what would be the most effective weapons and tactics today? The answer is that physical violence — while still available as a tool — is no longer the smartest or most effective approach.

Modern Warfare Arsenal

Today’s war employs sophisticated, often invisible weapons including. Here is a list to consider. Think about experiences you’ve been having and consider where these have been used against you.

• Information warfare: Cyber attacks, disinformation campaigns, flooding people with conflicting information to create confusion and cognitive dissonance.

• Economic weapons: Sanctions, cryptocurrency manipulation, making populations dependent on controlled resources.

• Political subversion: Election interference, undermining government legitimacy, bribing officials and influencers.

• Psychological operations: Creating crises then positioning as the savior, exploiting social media platforms that control public discourse.

• Biological and resource warfare: Famine, deprivation disguised as natural events.

• Social manipulation: Fueling ideological divides, inflaming nationalism, targeting masculinity to prevent resistance.

Why Silent War?

Modern warfare operates covertly because war’s reputation is “ruined.” People no longer see it as noble or necessary. Public support has evaporated, in large part because politicians are now seen largely as lying scoundrels.

This is making it strategically better to gaslight populations, deny war is happening, and paint a picture that “everything’s okay.” Furthermore, leaders no longer need masses of men for physical combat, so there’s no benefit to declaring war openly.

Current War Symptoms

People are experiencing classic wartime symptoms without understanding the cause:

• Loss of hope and inability to plan for the future

• Widespread dread, numbness, and sense of unreality

• Increased nationalism and “us vs. them” thinking

• Fear of government and authority figures

• Financial stress from inflation

• Young people avoiding starting families

• Supply chain disruptions and stockpiling behavior

• Feeling like danger is everywhere

• Limiting news consumption due to overwhelming negativity

• Escalating protests and militarized police

• People fleeing their countries or considering it

• Fear of speaking out or losing rights

• Rapid, “temporary” legal changes justified by public safety

• Daily exposure to propaganda and radical content

• Using basic needs (food, energy, money) as weapons

• Fear that personal identity could make one an “enemy of the state”

Interconnected Global Conflict

What appear to be isolated regional conflicts are actually interconnected proxy wars within a larger global struggle. This breaks down boundaries between local and global conflict – a hallmark of world wars. Nations and alliances are being drawn into broader struggles for dominance and survival.

People must navigate constantly shifting geopolitical relationships, never knowing which countries or leaders are allies or enemies. This creates exhaustion, overwhelm, and a sense that nothing is safe or trustworthy.

Individual Experiences Vary

Wartime experiences differ dramatically based on location, identity, and circumstances.

This has been the case in previous world wars. It is what we are experiencing now.

The Reality Check

The key insight is that people are experiencing genuine wartime symptoms and stress, but because no formal war has been declared and it doesn’t look like traditional warfare, they fail to understand why they feel this way.

This leads to self-blame and thinking something is wrong with them personally.

Conclusion

Recognizing this “silent war” is crucial for understanding current global confusion and personal distress. Modern warfare is more sophisticated and potentially more abusive than traditional physical violence. The confusion and decision paralysis people feel is a normal response to an abnormal situation — a world war being fought with psychological, economic, and information weapons rather than conventional military force.

Realise that your feelings and experiences make perfect sense within this context, and it is, I believe, important to remove the self-blame that comes from not understanding why the world feels so chaotic and threatening.

Physical violence may still occur, but only as one tool among many in this new form of warfare that prioritizes psychological manipulation and systemic control over traditional battlefield tactics.

*  *  *

If you recognize the signs of this silent war and want to better understand the economic, political, and cultural forces shaping our future, we invite you to go deeper. We’ve prepared a free PDF report, Clash of the Systems: Thoughts on Investing at a Unique Point in Time, which unpacks the risks ahead and what they could mean for your money and personal freedom. Inside, contrarian money manager Chris MacIntosh shares insights on how to navigate these shifting dynamics and position yourself to stay one step ahead. You can access your free copy by clicking here.

At a moment that more and more conservative voices are calling on President Trump to drop the distraction of entangling foreign policy issues and instead work on setting domestic issues in order after a lengthy government shutdown, the Pentagon has announced yet more strikes on alleged drug boats off the coast of South America.

It’s hard to keep track at this point, but the latest action takes the number of boats blown up near Venezuela to 19, resulting in over 70 suspected traffickers killed.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth announced two more strikes which happened Sunday. He wrote on X Monday, “Yesterday, at the direction of President Trump, two lethal kinetic strikes were conducted on two vessels operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations.”

He added, “Both strikes were conducted in international waters and 3 male narco-terrorists were aboard each vessel. All 6 were killed. No US forces were harmed. Under President Trump, we are protecting the homeland and killing these cartel terrorists who wish to harm our country and its people.”

Still, Washington has yet to provide specific evidence that those targeted were involved in drug smuggling or posed any direct threat to the United States, and some critics have questioned why these boast aren’t subject to conventional interdicts by agencies like the Coast Guard or DEA.

Instead, the boast are without warning just blown out of the water, typically via drone strike.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has meanwhile accused Donald Trump of trying to overthrow his government. One driving motive of US action might be the fact that the Venezuela sits on the world’s largest proven crude reserves, but getting it out of the ground utilizing the socialist country’s derelict and broken infrastructure is another problem.

Meanwhile, The Federalist’s Sean Davis recently sounded off…

Trump needs to ditch the foreign policy crap and focus all his attention on the domestic economy, which is still not working for the majority of people. Right now he looks weak and rudderless. Be mad all you want, but it’s the truth.

Newly minted college grads can’t find work and are saddled with debt. Where is their path to the American dream right now? Who is giving them a vision of a future worth fighting for?

I don’t know who is advising congressional Republicans on strategy right now, but it is whoever it is has an IQ barely approaching room temperature.

Republicans right now have no accomplishments, no plans, and no vision. Why on earth would anyone be excited to go vote for them…

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) November 9, 2025

Davis continued, “You cannot have a viable country or future when half your country and all its young people are locked out of the economy and locked out of ever owning a home or much of anything beyond next month’s streaming subscription. Does anyone in Washington care about this? Anyone at all?“

While the market is finally starting to grapple with the most unpleasant question of who will plug the funding gap needed to build out all the data centers required to make the AI dream a reality, a gap which Morgan Stanley recently calculated would be as large as $2.9 trillion in capex funding needs, of which at least $1 trillion will come in the form of debt (and mostly private debt)…

… there is another, just as critical question: who will fund the energy buildout that powers these data centers? 

Recall, last December Morgan Stanley calculated that the US would need at least 36GW in new power to be brought online by 2028 to energize all the (yet to be built) data centers, a number which one year later is surely far higher. 

And at a cost of $50-60BN per GW of power, we can quickly add several more trillion dollar that will be needed in the next several years: money, which as this Bloomberg article makes painfully clear, are simply not available right now.

So where will this money come from? 

Why the US government of course. 

By now it should be clear to all but the most purple-haired libs that the US will need nuclear power plants – both conventional and modular – and lots of them, to have even a remote chance of ever catching up to the ever growing energy needs… and as we said recently, one can print money, but one can’t print energy. 

The money is not the problem: AI is the new global arms race, and capex will eventually be funded by governments (US and China). If you want to know why gold/silver/bitcoin is soaring, it’s the “debasement” to fund the AI arms race.

But you can’t print energy https://t.co/qwdD8QbVON

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 14, 2025

But they sure can try…. and according to Secretary Chris Wright, nuclear power will receive most of the money from the Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) as the Trump administration pushes to quickly break ground on new reactors. According to Reuters, The LPO has hundreds of billions of dollars in financing aid, including loan guarantees for projects that struggle to get bank loans.

“We have significant lending authority at the loan program office,” the Secretary of Energy said at a conference hosted by the American Nuclear Society in Washington D.C. “By far the biggest use of those dollars will be for nuclear power plants, to get those first plants built. The U.S. currently has no commercial nuclear reactors being built, though several intend to reverse their permanent shutdown status and open again, and there are other plans to build new large and small reactors.”

During Trump’s first term in the White House, the only use he made of the LPO was for financing reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia. Expect a flood of debt deals in the coming weeks and months as the clock is ticking for the US to catch up to China, which currently has 29 reactors under construction to America’s zero.

As we reported at the time, President Trump signed an executive order in May that called for the US to break ground on 10 large nuclear reactors by 2030, while Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms and Microsoft have been investing billions of dollars to restart old nuclear plants, upgrade existing ones, and deploy new reactor technology to meet the electricity demand from artificial intelligence data centers. Others are also joining the fray, but as Sam Altman made clear, everyone is expecting the US government to the be the “insurer of last resort.” 

Wright said he expects electricity demand from AI to attract billions of dollars in equity capital to build new nuclear capacity from “very creditworthy providers.” The Energy Department could match those private dollars by as much as four to one with low cost debt financing from the loan office, he said.

“When we leave office three years and three months from now, I want to see hopefully dozens of nuclear plants under construction,” Wright said. Make that all hyperscaler CEOs too because without those dozens of nuclear plants, guess what: the AI bubble is going to burst in the most spectacular fashion. 

The Trump administration tipped its cards last month when it struck a deal with the owners of Westinghouse to invest $80 billion to build nuclear plants across the US. Westinghouse is owned by uranium miner Cameco and Brookfield Asset Management (both Canadian companies). 

Westinghouse has designed a modern reactor called the AP1000 that can power more than 750,000 homes. CEO Dan Sumner said in July that Westinghouse would meet Trump’s call to build large new plants with the AP1000 design. But Westinghouse has struggled in the past to build the AP1000 on time and on budget. And as a stark indication of just how capital intensive building NPPs can be, Westinghouse went bankrupt in 2017 from cost overruns at big nuclear projects in Georgia and South Carolina.

Which, naturally, opens the door wide open to far cheaper projects from small modular reactor developers such as Oklo and Nano Nuclear.

Cameco Chief Operating Officer Grant Isaac said last week that the U.S. government has a number of options available to facilitate the financing of Westinghouse reactors, including the Energy Department’s loan office.

“We’re assured that there is a lot of interest in investing this minimum $80 billion in order to begin the process,” Isaac told investors on Cameco’s third-quarter earnings call.

Under the terms of the October deal, Westinghouse could spin out as a separate, publicly-traded company with the U.S. government as a shareholder.

Authored by Sylvia Xu and Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times,

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as SNAP, unexpectedly took center stage in debates over the federal government shutdown.

As funding for the program, formerly known as Food Stamps, ran out in October, Congress, President Donald Trump, and the federal courts have wrestled with what to do about feeding millions of Americans who depend on this benefit each month.

SNAP has grown in size and cost since its inception in 1964, as have many other social welfare programs.

Here’s a closer look at the program, what it costs, the participation rates in different states, and how it has come to top $100 billion per year.

Participation

Participation in SNAP has grown dramatically over the last 50 years.

About 2 percent of Americans received SNAP benefits in 1970, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Today, about 13 percent of Americans receive SNAP benefits—some 42 million people.

That’s a 650 percent increase in the number of Americans who are unable to provide adequate food for themselves.

Participation spiked by 69 percent between 2008 and 2013, reaching a high of more than 45 million monthly recipients, largely due to the nationwide recession, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Between 2007 and 2009, national unemployment averaged 9.3 percent, and nearly 15 percent of Americans lived in poverty.

Participation rates vary between New Mexico, the highest at 21.2 percent of the population, and Utah, the lowest at 4.8 percent.

The participation rate for many states mirrors their poverty rate. Some states have exceptionally high or low rates of SNAP participation compared to the rate of poverty.

Outliers on the high side are: Arkansas, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Wyoming.

On the low side, Georgia’s SNAP participation rate is 12.5 percent, while its poverty rate is 12.6 percent.

Spending

SNAP spending has undergone two surges, reaching annual costs of more than $100 billion in 2024.

Spending shot up 112 percent between 2008 and 2013, coinciding with the surge in enrollment. SNAP costs went up another 98 percent during the COVID-19 pandemic era, when personal benefit amounts increased by 77 percent, according to The Epoch Times’ analysis of Agriculture Department data.

That’s a 300 percent increase in 20 years compared to an overall 50 percent increase in enrollment.

States with higher populations generally receive a larger share of SNAP benefits. California tops the list, receiving more than $1 billion per month, followed by New York at $647 million, Texas at $614 million, and Florida at $535 million.

Alaska and Hawaii both receive nearly double the average SNAP benefit per person, at $364 and $361 per month, respectively. Beneficiaries in New York ($218), Massachusetts ($216), and Tennessee ($203) receive the highest monthly average among the contiguous states.

Incorrect Payments

As benefits have grown more generous, the error rate for payments increased, according to an October report from Alliance for Opportunity, a conservative public policy organisation.

The error rate—which measures how often states make mistakes in determining who gets SNAP benefits and how much they receive—hit 11 percent in 2022 and remained close to that level through 2024. That’s three times higher than the rate in 2013.

That spike in payment errors reversed 15 years of continuous improvement, according to Alliance for Opportunity.

SNAP incorrectly disbursed nearly $11 billion in 2024. This figure breaks down into $9 billion in overpayments and $2 billion in underpayments for a net overpayment of $7 billion.

Before the pandemic, annual SNAP erroneous payments never exceeded $4.2 billion.

The increase was due to increased flexibility granted to states in administering the program, according to Alliance for Opportunity. As states were allowed to let individuals self-attest income, simplify reporting, and take longer certification periods.

California led in the total amount of improper payments, with an estimated $1.4 billion–approximately one in every nine dollars was sent out incorrectly.

New York followed closely, tallying $1 billion in improper disbursements, with roughly one in every seven dollars being sent wrong.

Florida reported improper payments totaling $990.8 million, with an error rate of 15 percent.

Only payment errors greater than $56 per household were included in the error rate. However, all errors will be tallied in 2026 thanks to a provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Since the program’s establishment in 1964, the federal government has fully funded SNAP benefits. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, states with payment error rates above 6 percent will pay a cost share that covers 5 percent to 15 percent of benefits.

Most states will begin paying a state match if their error rates remain the same.

Fraud

SNAP has a significant amount of fraud, according to Robert Rector, senior researcher at The Heritage Foundation. “The [reported] error rates are false and ridiculously low,” he said.

In some cases, recipients don’t accurately report their income. There is an incentive to do so because the benefit is keyed to income level. Those who earn less receive higher amounts of aid.

Inaccurate counting of household members also contributes to fraudulent payments, according to Rector, who notes that the number of single mothers receiving SNAP benefits is about 35 percent higher than the number of single mothers in the country, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Work Requirements

“There are about 4 million people on food stamps that are called able-bodied adults without dependents,” Rector told The Epoch Times.

Congress changed the program’s work requirement rule in July. States are now implementing new guidelines to comply with the changes.

Able-bodied adults without dependents are required to work, volunteer, or take part in training at least 20 hours a week, or 80 hours per month, to maintain their SNAP benefits.

Older people are granted an exemption from this requirement, but the age limit for the exemption is increasing from 54 to 64.

Generally, people ages 18 through 64 must meet this requirement to receive SNAP benefits for more than three months in any 36-month period.

Work can be something done in exchange for money, goods, or services.

Growth of Social Programs

President Lyndon Johnson introduced his vision to build a Great Society for the American people in 1963.

Over the next several years, Congress passed landmark legislation to social welfare programs that are still in place, including Medicare, Medicaid, and Food Stamps.

Those programs have been expanded over the years, and others have been added, including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Low Income Energy Assistance Program, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, federal housing assistance, student loans and grants, and many others.

Federal spending on all social welfare programs, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product, rose from 0.27 percent in 1962 to 3.8 percent in 2024. That’s an increase of more than 1,250 percent.

The federal poverty level fell by about 50 percent between 1962 and 2000, but remains about 11 percent today.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s sweeping reforms to secure “drone domain dominance” by 2027 are accelerating, following a Reuters report last week that the U.S. Army plans to acquire at least one million drones in the coming years.

The initiative, driven by the Pentagon’s DOGE modernization team, marks a major shift toward a new generation of lean, agile defense firms, breaking from the legacy industrial-military complex plagued by chronic cost overruns, schedule delays, and ballooning backlogs. Wall Street analysts are calling the pivot a watershed moment for the Pentagon’s procurement system, signaling the most significant overhaul of U.S. defense acquisition strategy in decades.

According to a memo obtained by Bloomberg News, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is preparing to launch a new “economic defense unit” to issue updated contracting guidelines and a “playbook of modern commercial contract and agreement structures.”

“These large defense primes need to change to focus on speed and volume, and invest their own capital to get there,” Hegseth said in a recent speech, adding, “If they do not, those big ones will fade away.”

Here’s a roundup of the latest commentary from Wall Street analysts (courtesy of Bloomberg) offering their take on the Pentagon’s sweeping procurement pivot:

Bernstein (Douglas S. Harned):

• Called the speech “the most aggressive yet” on defense-acquisition reform, warning that large, established primes may face challenges after years of tailoring their operations to legacy processes. Harned expects newer, commercially oriented defense firms to be near-term winners, given the department’s bias toward off-the-shelf, agile solutions.

Melius Research (Scott Mikus):

• Said Hegseth’s memo and remarks should serve as a wake-up call for both primes and suppliers. The planned drive to heighten competition threatens to erode the value of proprietary intellectual property that major contractors have long relied on for pricing power.

Truist Securities (Michael Ciarmoli):

• Observed that this time “feels different,” citing urgency to field next-generation technology and avoid lagging adversaries. Legacy contractors are “in the crosshairs,” while nimble entrants “sit in the catbird seat.” The effort will dismantle rigid Pentagon bureaucracy and force the industry to overhaul its own business models.

TD Cowen (Roman Schweizer):

• Noted that Hegseth criticized big primes for cost overruns, schedule slips, and bloated backlogs, urging them to assume more risk and boost internal R&D and capital spending. He concluded that the remarks signal “significant and sweeping changes” to weapons development, procurement, and the broader defense-industrial landscape.

All the talk about modernizing the Pentagon’s procurement system is very encouraging, but it won’t mean much without a major reshoring or friendshoring of supply chains for critical semiconductors and rare earth minerals, the lifeblood of next-generation drones, fifth-generation attack aircraft, night vision, and the list goes on and on. Without securing these inputs, America’s odds of achieving true battlefield dominance in the 2030s remain up in the air. Time to put reshoring into hyperdrive. 

Authored by Victoria Friedman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has threatened legal action against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) for its editing of the president’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, which was presented in a documentary aired one week before the 2024 presidential election.

The documentary for “Panorama,” the BBC’s flagship news program, spliced together quotations from different sections of a 2021 speech delivered nearly an hour apart, making it appear to be one continuous quotation in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.”

Among the parts cut out was a section in which Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully.

A letter from Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, demands that the BBC immediately retract “the false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements,” apologize, and “appropriately compensate President Trump for the harm caused,” or face legal action for $1 billion in damages.

“If the BBC does not comply with the above by November 14, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. EST, President Trump will be left with no alternative but to enforce his legal and equitable rights, all of which are expressly reserved and are not waived, including by filing legal action for no less than $1,000,000,000 (One Billion Dollars) in damages,” the letter, obtained by The Epoch Times, states.

A spokesman for Trump’s legal team told The Epoch Times by email: “The BBC defamed President Trump by intentionally and deceitfully editing its documentary in order to try and interfere in the Presidential Election. President Trump will continue to hold accountable those who traffic in lies, deception, and fake news.”

A BBC spokesperson told The Epoch Times by email, “We will review the letter and respond directly in due course.”

Concerns over the editing of the footage were raised in a leaked memo, initially reviewed by the UK newspaper the Daily Telegraph and published last week. The memo was written by Michael Prescott, a former journalist who is now on a committee giving editorial advice to the BBC.

Earlier on Nov. 10, BBC Chairman Samir Shah sent a letter to the UK’s Culture, Media, and Sport Committee (CMSC) apologizing for an “error of judgement” regarding the editing of the speech.

In his letter to CMSC Committee Chairwoman Dame Caroline Dinenage, Shah wrote: “We accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologise for that error of judgement.”

Shah said that the issue of the way the footage was edited was discussed at the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee in January 2025 and in May 2025.

He said the issue was discussed as part of a wider review of the BBC’s U.S. election coverage commissioned by the committee, not because of a specific program complaint.

“The points raised in the review were relayed to the Panorama team, including the decision-making on this edit. With hindsight, it would have been better to take more formal action,” he said.

BBC Resignations

The apology came after the BBC’s director-general, Tim Davie, and the broadcaster’s CEO of news, Deborah Turness, resigned on Nov. 9.

Trump reacted to the resignations in a Truth Social post on the afternoon of Nov. 9.

“The TOP people in the BBC, including TIM DAVIE, the BOSS, are all quitting/FIRED, because they were caught ‘doctoring’ my very good (PERFECT!) speech of January 6th,” he wrote.

“Thank you to The Telegraph for exposing these Corrupt ‘Journalists.’ These are very dishonest people who tried to step on the scales of a Presidential Election. On top of everything else, they are from a Foreign Country, one that many consider our Number One Ally. What a terrible thing for Democracy!”

Editing Controversy

The episode under scrutiny, broadcast on Oct. 28, 2024, titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” is not currently available to view on BBC iPlayer, but the excerpts demonstrating the cutting and splicing can be viewed on YouTube.

“Panorama” spliced together two clips from different sections of Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, to make it seem as though he told supporters he was going to walk to the Capitol Building with them to “fight like hell.”

The spliced together version is: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and I’ll be with you, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

In the original remarks, the first part of the spliced footage, “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you,” came 15 minutes into the speech, and the “We fight like hell” line came 54 minutes later.

The program also made it appear that members of the group known as the Proud Boys were spurred to march on the Capitol by the president’s words.

The Associated Press, Rachel Roberts, and Jacki Thrapp contributed to this report.

The color-revolution playbook used by Deep State elites, some of whom are inside the Capital Beltway, has targeted President Trump and the populist movement for nearly a decade. If the White House and its staff fail to figure out how to dismantle these radical left networks, the same dark-money NGOs they declared war on earlier this fall, they risk a MAGA agenda being derailed.

A series of X posts by Jennica Pounds, also known as “DataRepublican,” has captured the attention of Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and peeled back new layers of what appears to be the interworkings of at least one color-revolution-style operation orchestrated by Democrats, nonprofit groups, ex-USAID employees, and billionaires to undermine and destabilize President Trump’s MAGA from within. 

Pounds wrote on X:

This is not speculation; it’s straight from a recorded call. Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into encrypted Signal chats, then quickly linked with foreign partners and NGOs after the inauguration. This attempt at creating a color revolution isn’t new news; this part was already reported in NOTUS earlier this year. But what’s not reported is the international aspect. One participant explicitly frames it as “a global anti-authoritarian movement,” connecting U.S. officials with “colleagues from around the world who have dealt with this directly.” They reference coordination with Johns Hopkins, “international democracy and conflict mitigation spaces,” and efforts to mobilize across borders against what they perceive as domestic authoritarianism

She continued: 

At what point does this become treason?

🧵🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: International actors are involved in the State Department led color revolution 🚨🚨

This is not speculation; it’s straight from a recorded call.

Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into… pic.twitter.com/XtinGt306o

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 9, 2025

Pounds went on to reveal how those former rogue USAID officials “organized” large-scale protest movements – a classic tactic of any color revolution operation – before adding:

Note at the end of the video, the “we” in reference to organizing the February 5th protests – that was organized by Soros-backed groups 50501 and Indivisible. This is the first solid link I’ve found connecting the No Kings movement, State Department, and Soros together.

Note at the end of the video, the “we” in reference to organizing the February 5th protests – that was organized by Soros-backed groups 50501 and Indivisible. This is the first solid link I’ve found connecting the No Kings movement, State Department, and Soros together.

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 9, 2025

Ro Tucci, former director of the USAID Center for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance and current co-lead of DemocracyAID, said in her own words earlier this year that there was an urgent need to bring in international NGOs to assist with the color revolution.

Ro Tucci herself goes onto talk about bringing in international actors to assist with the color revolution. Their role is going to be “mobilizing around corruption” … what does that mean? pic.twitter.com/IyciS8BhJH

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 9, 2025

“They justify the international aspect by claiming that the authoritarians are already globally networked,” Pounds said. 

They justify the international aspect by claiming that the authoritarians are already globally networked. pic.twitter.com/mW81ybn6rI

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 9, 2025

Pounds said the origin of this color revolution starts here. 

🧵🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: Inside The New Pluralists: how billionaires weaponized the Biden Administration, targeted Charlie Kirk, and are quietly financing America’s color revolution 🚨🚨

In 2017, a quiet meeting brought representatives of Soros, Koch, Rockefeller, and Ford… pic.twitter.com/sC49WqzNHT

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) November 6, 2025

Just last week, the Americans for Public Trust dropped this bombshell report:

• European Billionaires Funneled $2 Billion Via Transatlantic NGO Network To Erode U.S. Democracy, Finance Anti-Trump Protest Machine

Democrats will continue their color revolution operations in 2026. The latest ones fell flat…

• “Coup d’Flat”: Billionaire-Funded ‘No Kings’ Color-Revolution Turns Into White Liberal Boomer Parade As Dems Become National Laughingstock

• Democrat Election Victories Fail To Spark Mass Mobilization Around White House

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has put the lawless NGO world into a tough spot:

• “Panic Unfolds”: Nonprofit Sector Battered By 419% Surge In Job Losses And Grantmaking Freeze

Remember, last summer, the color revolution operation by Democrats and their dark-money billionaire-funded NGOs turned hot and erupted into open unrest.

🚨#BREAKING: Multiple self-driving Waymo cars, collectively worth upwards of $600,000 each have been destroyed and light on fire by rioters

📌#LosAngeles | #California

At this time, Los Angeles police are urgently requesting Waymo to shut down its self-driving car app as… pic.twitter.com/eU4ANqPfyt

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) June 9, 2025

Instead of the Trump administration wasting time with decentralized Antifa, X user Cynical Publius has three suggestions for Trump: 

The Democrat Party as we know it today would cease to exist if the following three measures were implemented:

1. Nationwide voter ID with in-person, same-day voting except for true absentee situations.

2. End tax exempt status for ALL 501(c)(X)s (even religious, because if we leave that they will abuse it).

3. Continue Trump’s enforcement of existing immigration laws until we have rolled back all damage done over the last ten years.

Seriously, literally all we need to do is these three things, and America will be transformed back into the Constitutional Republic it was always intended to be.

It’s just that easy.

The Democrat Party as we know it today would cease to exist if the following three measures were implemented:

1. Nation-wide voter ID with in-person, same-day voting except for true absentee situations.

2. End tax exempt status for ALL 501(c)(X)s (even religious, because if… pic.twitter.com/tnxyETJh5t

— Cynical Publius (@CynicalPublius) November 9, 2025

Perhaps it’s time for the Trump administration to get serious about cleaning up the nonprofit world. Seamus Bruner publicly gave the president a clear starting point on national television:

Way more than $100M of US taxpayer money

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 8, 2025

To the White House staffers… See Cynical Publius’s post above.

Also cheat sheet:

• New Report Reveals Soros’ Open Society Funneled $80 Million To Pro-Terror Groups

• Cheat Sheet: Here Are The Radical Leftist Orgs “Setting America On Fire”

And this:

📊We traced $294,487,641 to the official No Kings 2.0 partners & organizers…all funneled through the same “Riot Inc.” dark-money networks:
💰 Arabella network $79.7M+
💰 Soros network $72.1M+
💰 Ford network $51.7M+
💰Tides $45.5M+
💰 Rockefeller $28.6M+
💰 Buffett $16.6M+ pic.twitter.com/b6zFla79UP

— Seamus Bruner (@seamusbruner) October 16, 2025

“Marxism hates liberty and loves misery,” Sen. Mike Lee noted. 

When Coreweave IPOed at the end of March, many wondered just how successful this former cryptocurrency miner turned GPU renter, would be in the long-term. Those questions were magnified after the close, when the stock of Coreweave slumped after the company slashed its annual revenue forecast after suffering a delay fulfilling a customer contract, marking a setback for a company that is racing to keep up with the artificial intelligence boom.

The company’s Q3 earnings were solid enough, generating $1.37 billion in revenue, above the median consensus of $1.28 billion, translating in a 22c per share loss (better than the 39c loss expected). But it was its guidance announced during a post-earnings conference call on Monday that slammed the stock 6% lower and back under $100: Coreweave now sees sales in 2025 between $5.05 billion and $5.15 billion, a drop from a range which had previously been as high as $5.35 billion.

The company said that its revenue backlog stood at $55.6 billion at the close of the quarter, almost twice the level of the previous period, although as Oracle’s recent slide demonstrated, such pie in the sky numbers are increasingly ignored by investors who are starting to demand results today, not in the years to come. 

“We are affected by temporary delays related to a third-party data center developer who is behind schedule,” CEO Michael Intrator said during the call. Though the fourth-quarter results will reflect the snag, the client affected by the delay has agreed to adjust delivery schedules so “we maintain the total value of the original contract,” he said.

According to Bloomberg, the disappointing guidance “underscores the challenges of meeting the insatiable demand for AI.” Delays getting more AI computing capacity online are persistent across the industry, Intrator said in a BBG interview. And while CoreWeave was able to preserve the value of the contract, no one was happy about it.

“Everybody is frustrated — the data center provider is frustrated, we’re frustrated, the client is frustrated,” he said, while declining to name the parties involved. “For that matter, people who are waiting for the next iteration of AI are frustrated.”

The company is trying to make sure it has the right staff on site at various projects to catch issues early, Intrator said. “We’re doing all the right things. It’s just a challenging environment.”

Part of a group of companies known as neoclouds, CoreWeave rents out access to powerful AI chips. High demand for its services has pushed CoreWeave to rapidly expand its data centers and equip them with the latest gear. It’s also sought to diversify its customer base after years of depending heavily on Microsoft.

In September, CoreWeave announced an agreement to sell as much as $14.2 billion in computing power to Meta Platforms. Microsoft had accounted for 71% of CoreWeave’s revenue in the quarter that ended in June.

CoreWeave also made a recent attempt to acquire Core Scientific (another crypto miner), a partner and fellow data center operator. That bid was rejected by Core Scientific shareholders last month over concerns that the offer undervalued the business. 

CoreWeave said it would move forward without making the purchase and even announced a different, smaller acquisition within minutes of the deal failing.

While JPMorgan didn’t debank Jeffrey Epstein despite a mountain of evidence he was engaged in sex-trafficking, the bank is now under fire from Florida officials over its cooperation with the Biden DOJ’s anti-Trump investigation known as “Arctic Frost,” – providing sensitive banking information to Biden prosecutor Jack Smith. 

On Monday, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier notified JPMorgan Chase that his office has opened an inquiry into the bank’s actions involving Trump Media & Technology Group, the Florida-based operator of Truth Social. The Daily Wire first reported the development.

In a letter sent to JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon, Uthmeier said the state has “grave concerns” about the bank’s conduct and its handling of sensitive customer information. The move follows disclosures from the Senate Judiciary Committee indicating that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Arctic Frost probe issued subpoenas to hundreds of Republican individuals and entities.

“I write to express grave concerns about the explosive revelations regarding the Biden Administration’s pursuit of its political adversaries, and [JPMorgan Chase’s] ensuing actions in the shadow of this operation, codenamed ‘Arctic Frost,’” Uthmeier said in the letter.

According to Uthmeier, the Biden Justice Department subpoenaed JPMorgan on March 28, 2023, requesting any and all records involving Trump Media – including documents predating the company’s existence. The letter alleges the administration sought sensitive banking information from Florida-based individuals and entities, including Trump Media & Technology Group Corp.

Uthmeier told The Daily Wire he suspects JPMorgan provided the Justice Department with information connected to what he described as “malicious prosecutions,” and also questioned whether the bank had asked Trump Media for information unrelated to normal business practices.

JPMorgan told shareholders last week it was responding to requests from “government authorities and other external parties regarding, among other things, the firm’s policies and processes and the provision of services to customers and potential customers,” language Uthmeier views as an apparent reference to debanking. Former President Donald Trump signed an executive order in August directing regulators to examine whether financial institutions have engaged in “politicized or unlawful debanking.”

Uthmeier’s letter says that after the Justice Department’s actions began, JPMorgan pressed Trump Media for details on years-old transactions, claiming the requests were part of due diligence. The attorney general said those inquiries “appear to be pretextual and unrelated to their stated purpose.”

The attorney general also noted that immediately after Trump Media completed a merger in March 2024, JPMorgan notified the company that its accounts were being closed. Uthmeier said the timing raises “obvious, troubling questions.”

“This activity may implicate numerous Florida criminal and civil anti-fraud laws and de-banking prohibitions, as well as a breach of the basic, fundamental duties owed to your banking customers,” he wrote. The attorney general ordered the Office of Statewide Prosecution and Enforcement Division to begin investigating and directed JPMorgan to initiate a litigation hold to preserve documents.

Uthmeier told The Daily Wire he views the matter as part of a broader pattern. “We think it’s wrong that companies were just coughing things up to the Department of Justice when there was not real probable cause, and we think it’s wrong that companies are debanked, especially at such important times,” he said. “We protect Florida-based companies like Trump Media Group. We protect our consumers and where there’s discriminatory banking practices taking place, especially those with intent to harm, we will fight back and hold wrongdoers accountable.”

He also suggested the matter may intersect with Smith’s January 6 investigation. Truth Social launched in February 2022, more than a year after the events of January 6, 2021. “Any notion that this company was somehow involved in whatever criminal activity that the Department of Justice alleged, wrongfully alleged, surrounded the J6 events,” he said. “Clearly, Truth Social would not have been a part of that.”

“It shows the full scope of the weaponization and the efforts to go after anybody related to Trump or the conservative cause.”

Devin Nunes, CEO of Trump Media and a former congressman, raised similar concerns on Fox News on Sunday. “One would think that Trump Media would not have been caught up into Arctic Frost at all, largely because…we just became a public company in 2024 and we were nowhere around in 2021,” he said. “So why would Trump Media be subpoenaed at that time during this investigation? It doesn’t make any sense.”

Nunes also questioned the bank’s cooperation. “Should [JPMorgan Chase] have complied with this, knowing that we weren’t around? They had to know that our company wasn’t around on January 6. We were never notified…did this break laws in the state of Florida?”

He argued the bank “inexplicably” closed Trump Media’s accounts “right at the time we were going public,” and “right at the height of the campaign,” calling the move political and increasingly suspicious in light of the Arctic Frost revelations.

Amazing…

J.P. Morgan de-banked Trump Media (Truth Social), but not Jeffrey Epstein, despite evidence of sex trafficking

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 9, 2025