Our ‘Great Ally’ Saudi Arabia Will Be Getting F-35s: Trump Ahead Of MbS Visit
The first US ally to typically get whatever it wants from Washington is Israel. The second is Saudi Arabia. And so in the same order…
“President Trump said Monday that he will approve the sale of F-35s to Saudi Arabia, making the kingdom the first country in the Middle East other than Israel to obtain the advanced fighter jets,” Axios reports Monday.
Trump made the following public comments to reporters in the Oval, “They want to buy. They are a great ally. We will be doing that. We will be selling them F-35s.”
A day ahead of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s (MbS) White House visit, Trump hailed the kingdom as a “great ally”.
But ironically, the Israelis aren’t thrilled about this development, as it has long sought to maintain total technological superiority over other countries in the region.
“We told the Trump administration that the supply of F-35s to Saudi Arabia needs to be subject to Saudi normalization with Israel,” one Israeli official was quoted in Axios as saying. “It takes minutes for an F-35 to fly from Saudi Arabia to Israel,” the official complained.
The Gaza War has indefinitely derailed the prospect of Saudi normalization with Israel. But it’s possible the Trump administration could be using the F-35 transfer to induce Riyadh into seeing the Abraham Accords as ‘back on’ as a real possibility.
The Saudis and Israelis do have a recent history of covert cooperation in Syria, where both sought to topple Bashar al-Assad, and disrupt the ‘pro-Iran axis’ – which eventually happened in December 2024.
According to F-35 producer Lockheed Martin, the advanced fighter represents total air dominance:
The F-35 is essential to securing air dominance and ensuring mission success across every domain. As the most lethal, survivable, and connected fighter aircraft for America and its allies, it acts as the quarterback of the skies—integrating air, land, sea, space, and cyber operations to lead the fight and deliver a decisive advantage.
More than a fighter jet, the F-35 is a force multiplier. Its unmatched ability to gather, process, and share data empowers joint forces, strengthens global partnerships, and keeps pilots ahead of emerging threats—all while helping them return home safely.
Interestingly, Israel has also of late been lobbying against Turkey ever acquiring the F-35. It’s deeply ironic that Saudi Arabia will get the fighters far ahead of NATO-member Turkey ever will.
As we featured earlier, MbS is interested in a defense deal with the United States which outshines Qatar’s: AI chips and AI-powered drones, and potentially, even American nuclear weapons stationed in his country. Probably the Saudis will eventually get many of these things, as years after the brutal murder Jamal Khashoggi, the kingdom keeps failing up.
* * *
More info on the world’s most advanced stealth fighter jet:
The concept of digital “detoxing” has entered the mainstream, with wellness experts and scientists highlighting its considerable health benefits. Research from BMC suggests that even modest reductions in daily digital engagement can help alleviate symptoms of depression, enhance sleep quality, and lower cortisol levels for many people.
Studies examining the advantages of reducing or limiting different types of digital habits have gained momentum in recent years. Promising new results published by researchers at the University of Applied Sciences consistently show a link between less screen time and improved states of wellness.
BMC’s three-week analysis of 125 students who engaged in reduced screen time showed improvements in depressive symptoms, stress, sleep quality, and overall well-being. Once the control trial ended and digital engagement reached normal levels, researchers noted that the initial values of mental health symptoms began rising in lockstep.
Too much time spent online, particularly on social media platforms, has long been linked with negative mental health outcomes. However, evidence from a study produced by researchers from three Turkish universities suggests this extends to all types of digital connections.
Research from Cureus identifies this as “technostress,” a negative byproduct that stems from screen time. Examples include anxiety, irritability, frustration, and exhaustion. This is often associated with the psychological condition known as “fear of missing out,” or FOMO. The FOMO phenomenon is also a problem within the career space, according to the Turkish study, driving excessive smartphone engagement after the workday ends.
Harmony Healthcare IT conducted a smartphone screen time survey of more than 1,000 Americans and found that 60 percent who expressed a desire to cut back on their phone usage plan to replace phone time with a different activity, while 57 percent planned to delete “time-wasting” apps. Overall, 53 percent said they wanted to cut down on their smartphone usage in 2025. This represents a 33 percent increase from 2023.
Negative effects from excessive online activity aren’t disputed, but some experts say reduced screen time only carries lasting benefits if the lifestyle changes match.
Learning to Unplug
“Digital detoxing is not a quick fix. Screen use is a deeply ingrained habit, and lasting change comes from small, consistent adjustments rather than short periods of complete abstinence,” neuroscientist and author Emma Louth Als told The Epoch Times.
Louth Als said the problem with screen time isn’t necessarily the screen itself, but what it replaces. If digital engagement takes the place of proper socializing or rest, that’s when negative impacts on mental well-being start to appear.
“Screens are highly stimulating. They’re designed to keep you engaged, as the brain craves novelty and stimulation,” Louth Als said. “Taking time away allows your brain to slow down and recover.”
She said the pressure to always be “on” means the brain never truly rests. Reducing screen time gives your mind space to relax and lower stress levels.
Psychotherapist John McGuirk has also found this to be true when working with clients on digital detoxing.
“First, the quality of digital engagement itself can produce stress, such as repeatedly consuming negative news articles or finding oneself in online conflicts. This kind of engagement produces stress, low mood, or anxiety,” McGuirk told The Epoch Times.
“Secondly, the quantity of digital engagement can end up leaving very little time for other positive activities that might help improve well-being.”
In his observations, McGuirk said this cycle prevents recovery from negative feelings.
“So, cortisol levels rise and stay high, and this negatively impacts heart rate, blood pressure, mood, and so on,” he said.
The amount of time people spend online has continued increasing since 2013, with overall screen time rising nearly 8 percent, according to an Exploding Topics analysis. On average, U.S. residents spend 7 hours, 3 minutes per day looking at digital screens.
Another Exploding Topics analysis showed U.S. teenagers spend almost half of their waking hours—7 hours, 22 minutes per day—looking at screens.
“When the brain is overloaded with notifications or content that leans on comparison, cortisol goes up in a state of hyperarousal until the nervous system gets a chance to settle,” psychologist Nick Bach told The Epoch Times.
Bach said his clients who take breaks from their devices report sleeping better, less irritation, and greater mental clarity within just a few days.
“I usually recommend that my clients try short and daily rituals such as the ‘screenless first hour’ or having an area in the home that is considered a tech-free zone. These shortcuts create a reset for someone without feeling deprived,” he said.
Jumping onto a smartphone first thing in the morning has been associated with increased stress and anxiety as well as reduced productivity, according to Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.
McGuirk said creating “digital engagement windows,” such as five minutes at the end of every hour, is a healthy way of reducing screen time without creating too extreme a change.
However, he also believes it’s important to identify positive alternatives to being perpetually plugged in.
“This is vital and often missed. Just stopping leaves a huge window for ‘what do I do now?’ This can result in the old habit of ‘I’ve nothing to do, so I’ll just go online.’ Identifying good alternatives can include exercise, creativity, journaling, meditation, socializing [in real life], and going out into nature,” McGuirk said.
Cainan Oliver, co-founder of wellness center Found Recovery, also takes this approach to digital detoxing.
“We don’t remove technology. We help people fill that space with something more real: connection, movement, art, time outside,” Oliver told The Epoch Times.
In his work with mental health and addiction, Oliver has observed a pattern.
“When clients start feeling grounded again, their relationship with screens shifts naturally,” he said.
Oliver believes that more people are starting to crave stillness over stimulation.
“We’ve spent years in overdrive, and our bodies are asking for balance,” he said. “Digital detoxing isn’t about rejecting technology. It’s about remembering how to feel connected to real life again.”
The Center for Internet & Technology Addiction reported the average smartphone user checks their phone 142 times per day—a 12 percent increase from 2024. The center also noted a 39 percent increase in ADHD diagnoses linked with “digital multitasking,” and social media users are more than three times as likely to experience depression.
Changing Habits
Louth Als says it’s difficult to change behavior patterns while in the same environment surrounded by the same cues. Eventually, people still need to check their work emails, upload homework assignments, and complete a multitude of other daily tasks that require screen time.
She emphasized that despite the benefits of a short-term digital detox, a one-off event won’t “reset the brain.”
“My husband and I have tried before but quickly fell back into old habits,” she said.
That’s because habits take time to change, according to Louth Als.
“Let’s say you eliminate digital engagement for a week or two. And then you reintroduce screens. You may keep it down for another week or so, but ultimately, you will come back to the same usage. Why? Because you have deeply ingrained neurocircuitry that finds it rewarding to interact with screens,” she explained.
Louth Als said real change comes from reshaping daily routines over weeks or months.
This is where daily digital reduction strategies come into play. Resetting the brain in a retreat setting is a great way to get rid of “mental clutter and physical tension,” according to Bach. However, small daily adjustments can help build a better mental health balance between the digital and physical world.
McGuirk gave an example, saying, “Set times when digital engagement is ruled out, like no digital engagement after 10 p.m.”
“I encourage people to think about their whole day and identify where screens take over. Once you spot those patterns, you can replace them with something more meaningful,” Louth Als said.
In the office, she suggests people turn off their email notifications and only look at emails when they’re ready to answer them.
“Otherwise, they cause stress,” she said. “When you read an email but don’t answer it, your brain uses energy thinking about it and remembering to answer it later. Too many small tasks like this cause stress.”
McGuirk said, “I regularly do digital detoxes and restrict my digital engagement. … I am much happier when my digital engagement is both quantitatively reduced and qualitatively improved.”
Bach also takes a quarterly 48 hour break from all devices, which allows him to come back feeling “grounded and ready to deeply connect with others and myself.”
Oliver said, “When I take time off my phone, I notice how quiet life actually is. My thoughts clear, and I start paying attention to the world again.”
Man Stabbed In Broad Daylight In Times Square Collapses While Yelling “Save The Children”
Zohran Mamdani’s election is already making Manhattan safer…and more sane. A man believed to be homeless was stabbed twice in Times Square in broad daylight on Saturday, then staggered around shouting “save the children” as he bled heavily, according to the NY Post.
The 30-year-old was attacked around 11:40 a.m. outside 1501 Broadway near West 44th Street, where a suspect stabbed him in the left ribs and arm.
A nearby vendor said the victim, shirtless and bleeding from the chest, kept yelling after being wounded.
He was taken to Bellevue Hospital in stable condition but was described as “highly uncooperative,” leaving police unsure of the motive. The attacker fled and was last seen wearing a black jacket and dark pants. Blood was left pooled on the sidewalk outside the Raising Cane’s restaurant in the middle of Times Square.
The Post writes that according to NYPD data, felony assaults in the 14th Precinct are up 1% this year, rising to 476 from 471.
Felony assaults are down 0.2% citywide, and major crime has fallen 3% compared with this time last year, according to NYPD data.
But with new Mayor-elect Mamdani’s well-known anti-police stance, the stability of that trend is far from guaranteed — and who knows how long any decline will last. Our guess: probably not long.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) launched an initiative aimed at protecting 450,000 unaccompanied children (UAC) who were illegally smuggled into the United States, and then placed with unvetted sponsors during the Biden administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a statement on Nov. 14.
ICE is carrying out the UAC Safety Verification Initiative in partnership with state and local law enforcement agencies under the 287(g) program, DHS said. The 287(g) program allows local and state law enforcement to enforce certain aspects of federal immigration law.
The primary focus of the initiative will be to carry out welfare checks on nearly half a million children to ensure they are living safely and are not subject to any exploitation, DHS said.
The department blamed the Biden administration’s open border policies for having “empowered” human and sex traffickers and stated that the Trump administration is taking a “sledgehammer” to such trafficking rings.
Between Jan. 21 and Oct. 31 this year, there were 106,134 total enforcement encounters along the southwest border compared to the monthly average of 155,485 encounters under President Joe Biden, according to a DHS statement on Nov. 5.
The UAC Safety Verification initiative kicked off on Nov. 10 in Florida and will soon roll out to other parts of the country, DHS said in its recent statement.
Among the many sponsors already arrested by ICE for criminal activity are a Honduran immigrant sponsor from Florida who has been convicted by state authorities for assault, a Guatemalan sponsor from Georgia convicted of domestic violence by authorities, and an El Salvadoran sponsor from Michigan who was convicted of drug trafficking.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem is “leading efforts to rescue and stop the exploitation of the 450,000 unaccompanied children the Biden administration lost or placed with unvetted sponsors. Many of the children who came across the border unaccompanied were allowed to be placed with sponsors who were smugglers and sex traffickers,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said.
McLaughlin said that the Trump administration has so far located over 24,400 of these children across the country.
“We’ve jumpstarted our efforts to rescue children who were victims of sex and labor trafficking by working with our state and local law enforcement partners to locate these children,” McLaughlin said.
An August 2024 report from the DHS Office of Inspector General found that 323,000 illegal immigrant children were unaccounted for in the country.
As of May 2024, this included more than 32,000 children who were served notices to appear in court but failed to do so. In addition, the safety of an additional 291,000 children could not be verified, according to the report.
The Trump administration has faced legal challenges regarding illegal unaccompanied minors.
In October, advocacy groups American Immigration Council and the National Immigrant Justice Center filed an emergency motion in court, seeking to enforce a 2021 ruling that prohibits ICE from transferring unaccompanied immigrant children to adult detention centers once they hit the age of 18, according to an Oct. 4 statement from the council.
When unaccompanied children enter the country, they are initially placed in shelters operated by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and later released to family members or vetted sponsors and not ICE’s detention centers, the council said, adding that “these policies recognize that children need care and support, not punishment.”
“Locking up these young people in ICE jails rife with overcrowding and hazardous conditions, and far from their support systems, does nothing to make our communities safer; it only inflicts more harm on vulnerable youth,” Michelle Lapointe, legal director at the council, said. The emergency request was granted by the court.
According to ICE, its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) is tasked with managing the civil immigration detention system. ICE clarified that it does not detain unaccompanied children except in certain rare instances.
The responsibilities regarding the care and custody of these minors lie with the ORR, an agency under the Department of Health and Human Services, it said.
“In accordance with the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2008, ERO coordinates closely with inter-departmental partners to ensure the timely and safe transfer of unaccompanied alien children from DHS to HHS ORR custody,” the agency said.
Building on Tucker Carlson’s reporting about President Donald Trump’s would-be assassin, Thomas Crooks, and what increasingly appears to be a major FBI cover-up of Crooks’ political leanings and far-left radicalization, a new New York Post investigation reveals even more disturbing details, including a strange “furry” obsession strikingly similar to that of Charlie Kirk’s suspected shooter.
Sixteen months after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, Carlson dropped bombshells of Crook’s online history, including dozens of social media posts that show the young man was radicalized in just a few short years to a radical leftist who apparently had a weird obsession with furry culture.
Here’s more color on NYPost’s reporting of Crooks’ furry fetish:
When told of Crooks’ online threats, he said there was no way the FBI would not be aware of the teenager.
Among the 17 accounts uncovered by our source, only one, on PayPal, was operated under an alias: “Rod Swanson.”
Rod Swanson is a former senior FBI agent who was the chief of investigations for the state of Nevada during the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting.
. . .
“No matter how ridiculous the allegation, no matter if it’s COVID or not, somebody is going to knock on somebody’s door,” Swanson said. “If they investigated that kid there’s a record of it and there’s an assessment that some leader made that this was not a threat or it rose to a level and they did something else.”
He also said that “if the FBI had that information [about his name on the PayPal account], I can’t even imagine they would not have reached out to me right away.”
. . .
He described himself with the pronouns “they/them” on the platform DeviantArt, which is one of the biggest online hubs for “furry” art and the “furry” community. (A furry is someone who has an interest in anthropomorphized animal characters, often as a sexual fetish.)
. . .
Two accounts linked to Crooks’ primary email were found on DeviantArt, under usernames “epicmicrowave” and “theepicmicrowave.” The account suggests he had an obsession with scantily clad cartoon characters sporting muscle-bound male bodies and female heads.
What’s especially troubling is that Crooks’ radicalization, along with his embrace of furry culture and gender-identity experimentation, reflects the same pattern of behavior seen in Charlie Kirk’s accused shooter, Tyler Robinson.
On Friday, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) made a bold claim during an interview with Benny Johnson, saying, “Crooks was groomed by the CIA through MKUltra-style mind-control programs and dark intelligence operations for the sole purpose of taking out President Trump in Butler, PA.“
Rep. Tim Burchett says Trump assassin Thomas Crooks was groomed by CIA and MKUltra style mind control programs and dark intelligence ops for the sole purpose of taking out President Trump in Butler, PA.
Google LLC is accused in a civil lawsuit of using its artificial intelligence program Gemini to collect data on users’ private communications in Gmail as well as Google’s instant messaging and video conference programs.
Until around Oct. 10, the Gemini AI assistant required the user to deliberately opt into its feature. After that date, the feature was allegedly “secretly” turned on by Google for all its users’ Gmail, Chat, and Meet accounts by default, enabling AI to track its users’ private data in those platforms “without the users’ knowledge or consent,” according to the complaint filed Nov. 11 in federal court in San Jose.
The class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that Google is violating the California Invasion of Privacy Act, a 1967 law that prohibits surreptitious wiretapping and recording of confidential communications without the consent of all parties involved.
Although Google provides a way for users to turn off the feature, it requires users to look for it in the privacy settings to deactivate it, despite never having agreed to it in the first place, the complaint said.
The AI feature is categorized in “Google Workspace smart features” in Google settings. Once turned on, it means the user consents to the program using “Workspace content and activity” across Workspace or in other Google products.
When the feature is turned on, Gemini can “scan, read, and analyze every email (and email attachment), message, and conversation on those services,” according to the complaint.
Technology writer Ruben Circelli wrote in a PCMag article that Gemini is “downright creepy” in diving deep into his personal history, analyzing 16 years’ worth of emails after he signed up for a more advanced pro feature.
In a series of tests by Circelli, Gemini told him one of his character flaws and even knew who his first crush was in elementary school.
“This invasion of privacy wasn’t just disconcerting, though; it was unexpected,” Circelli wrote.
“Google didn’t explain what this integration would do before I signed up for its AI Pro plan, nor did it give me a way to opt out at the start.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Google for comment, but did not receive an immediate response.
“We do not use your Workspace data to train or improve the underlying generative AI and large language models that power Gemini, Search, and other systems outside of Workspace without permission,” the company has stated.
Thomas Thele, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, stated in the complaint that he suspected his private information, such as medical records, employment records, religious and political affiliations and activities, and more has already been exposed to Gemini.
“The data from these communications enables Google to cross-reference and conduct unlimited analysis toward unmerited, improper, and monetizable insights into users’ private lives, including their social, professional, and other relationships,” the court file states.
In late October, Google agreed to pay $1.37 billion to settle multiple lawsuits with the state of Texas. The lawsuits alleged that the company violated residents’ privacy rights through location tracking, biometric identifiers, and other means.
US Designates Venezuela’s “Cartel Of The Suns” As Terrorists, But Its Existence Is Dubious
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Sunday that the State Department would be designating the so-called Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” – though many analysts and reporters have questioned whether the group actually exists.
“Based in Venezuela, the Cartel de los Soles is headed by Nicolás Maduro and other high-ranking individuals of the illegitimate Maduro regime who have corrupted Venezuela’s military, intelligence, legislature, and judiciary,” the official US statement said. “Neither Maduro nor his cronies represent Venezuela’s legitimate government.”
At a moment of unprecedented US military build-up off Venezuela, including the presence of the USS Ford carrier strike group, Rubio’s statement laid out, “Cartel de los Soles by and with other designated FTOs including Tren de Aragua and the Sinaloa Cartel are responsible for terrorist violence throughout our hemisphere as well as for trafficking drugs into the United States and Europe.”
But AntiWar.com’s Dave DeCamp outlines the case for skepticism:
The term “Cartel of the Suns” was first used in the 1990s, before Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, came to power, to describe two Venezuelan military generals with sun insignias on their uniforms who were involved in the drug trade. One of the generals was working with the CIA at the time, according to a 1993 60 Minutes report.
Today, the term is used to describe Venezuelan military and government officials who allegedly profit from drug trafficking, but the Cartel of the Suns doesn’t exist as a structured organization.
And according to the investigative source, InSight Crime, quoted in AFP: “Rather than a hierarchical organization with Maduro directing drug trafficking strategies, the Cartel of the Suns is more accurately described as a system of corruption wherein military and political officials profit by working with drug traffickers.” Further:
Yet in March, the latest US State Department report on global anti-drug operations made no mention of the “Cartel de los Soles” or any connection between Maduro and narco trafficking.
Typically mainstream media parrots whatever US national security officials say when it comes to Venezuela or any other ‘official enemy’; however, there’s lately been a surprising degree of MSM pushback on the “Cartel of the Suns” moniker…
The so-called “Cartel de los Soles” or “Suns Cartel” does NOT exist. This was admitted by many mainstream media outlets.
Trump & Marco Rubio are trying to justify their neocolonial war of aggression on Venezuela by falsely claiming Maduro is a “narco-terrorist”.
Trump admin officials spent the weekend in media interviews also resurrecting the “Hezbollah in Latin America” threat, a talking point which hearkens back to when Mike Pompeo was Secretary of State during Trump’s first term.
Currently Hezbollah and Iran are alleged to be colluding with alleged Venezuelan narco-trafficking in a vast global plot, but which as usual comes without much or any in the way of concrete evidence. While Hezbollah and Iran may have at one time been active in establishing working relationships in this region, the current reality is that Hezbollah’s leadership was decimated starting last year in the war with Israel, and Iran too finds itself on a backfoot facing multiple crises at home.
Neither entity is likely capable of currently projecting power in the Caribbean region or stands to gain much by provoking Washington’s wrath, especially with such a large American force presence.
This weekend also saw a second round of US military exercises based out of American regional ally Trinidad and Tobago. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro blasted the drills as “irresponsible.”
“The government of Trinidad and Tobago has once again announced irresponsible exercises, lending its waters off the coast of Sucre state for military exercises that are intended to be threatening to a republic like Venezuela, which does not allow itself to be threatened by anyone,” Maduro said from Caracas.
The so-called Cartel de los Soles is a concept that is so loose that it simply encompasses the Venezuelan state leadership itself..
His government has further announce a “massive” retaliatory deployment as the US carrier group arrived. This involves a large civilian militia force being put on high alert, though these are mostly unarmed and untrained local citizens.
As for the “Cartel of the Suns” designation, it is scheduled to go into effect on November 24. “Once the designation takes effect, all property and interests in property belonging to the named individuals or entities that fall under US jurisdiction will be blocked and must be reported to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC),” one international media source explains. “Entities owned 50% or more — directly or indirectly — by one or more blocked persons will also be subject to the same restrictions.”
Judge Says ‘Government Misconduct’ By DOJ Prosecutor May Have Tainted Comey Case
A federal magistrate judge on Monday said that “government misconduct” may have tainted the DOJ’s case against former FBI Director James Comey, and has ordered prosecutors to turn over records of secret grand jury proceedings to Comey’s defense counsel as they seek to dismiss the false-statement and obstruction-of-Congress charges pending against him in a federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.
“The Court recognizes this is an extraordinary remedy,” wrote judge William Fitzpatrick in a 24-page opinion. “but given the factually based challenges the defense has raised to the government’s conduct and the prospect that government misconduct may have tainted the grand jury proceedings, disclosure of grand jury materials under these unique circumstances is necessary.”
The decision came after Fitzpatrick personally reviewed records of the grand jury proceedings that led up to Comey’s Sept. 25 indictment on charges that he lied to Congress in 2020. The indictment was signed by lead prosecutor Lindsey Halligan – who Trump picked for the job, and who was installed by AG Pam Bondi after other prosecutors resisted pursuing the Comey case.
Fitzpatrick accused the DOJ of flouting attorney-client privilege and potential “fundamental misstatements of law” – and also noted unexplained irregularities in the grand jury transcript.
Specifically, the judge laid out a timeline of the day the two-count indictment of Comey was handed up, noting that Halligan claimed to the court that she last had contact with the grand jury at 4:28 p.m., while the panelists were deliberating.
However, the grand jury rejected one additional count against the former top lawman, necessitating prosecutors to draw up a second indictment for Halligan to sign.
The interim US attorney’s declaration stated that she learned that one count had been rejected at 6:40 p.m. and the hearing on the return of the indictment began seven minutes later. –NY Post
Based on timing evidence, Fitzpatrick finds it nearly impossible that the prosecution team:
Learned of the grand jury’s vote,
Drafted a new indictment,
Presented it to the grand jury, and
Received a vote in the 7–12 minute window before it was filed in court.
“The short time span between the moment the prosecutor learned that the grand jury rejected one count in the original indictment and the time the prosecutor appeared in court to return the second indictment could not have been sufficient to draft the second indictment, sign the second indictment, present it to the grand jury, provide legal instructions to the grand jury, and give them an opportunity to deliberate and render a decision on the new indictment,” Fitzpatrick wrote.
“If the prosecutor is mistaken about the time she received notification of the grand jury’s vote on the original indictment, and this procedure did take place, then the transcript and audio recording provided to the Court are incomplete,” he added. “If this procedure did not take place, then the Court is in uncharted legal territory in that the indictment returned in open court was not the same charging document presented to and deliberated upon by the grand jury … and provides another genuine issue the defense may raise to challenge the manner in which the government obtained the indictment.”
Warrants Under Scruitny
Fitzpatrick also criticized prosecutors’ handling of four search warrants executed by the FBI in 2019 and 2020 as part of the bureau’s Arctic Haze probe into how classified information was leaked from Comey’s FBI to news outlets.
The warrants targeted Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and friend of Comey – and sought information from Richman’s iPhone, iPad, iCloud account and hard drive.
According to Fitzpatrick, while the government allowed Columbia, Richman and his attorney to identify privileged content among those devices and iCloud account, they “never engaged Mr. Comey in this process even though it knew that Mr. Richman represented Mr. Comey as his attorney as of May 9, 2017, and three of the four Richman Warrants authorized the government to search Mr. Richman’s devices through May 30, 2017, 21 days after an attorney-client relationship had been formed.”
“People Love It”: Trump Talking To Dems About ‘Direct Payment’ Health Care Plans
President Donald Trump on Sunday said that he’s spoken with congressional Democrats about a plan to hand people cash that they can use to purchase their own health insurance.
“I’ve had personal talks with some Democrats,” Trump told reporters in West Palm Beach, FL before returning to DC, adding that he talked to the dems “about paying large amounts of dollars back to the people.“
Trump appears to be talking about a plan floated by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) – chairman of the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), who want to overhaul Obamacare by creating individual accounts that would direct money to people rather than insurance companies. Last week Trump told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham that he supports the idea.
“People love it,” Trump said of the idea. “The insurance companies are making a fortune. Their stock is up over a thousand percent over a short period of time. They are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars, and they’re not really putting it back, certainly not like they should.”
When asked about the idea, Trump told Ingraham that he wants “the money to go into an account for people where the people buy their own health insurance.”
“The insurance will be better. It’ll cost less. Everybody’s going to be happy. They’re going to feel like entrepreneurs,” he told the host, adding that the plan could be called “Trumpcare,” while slamming Obamacare over skyrocketing premiums in recent years.
Democrats made extending an enhanced ACA (Obamacare) credit central to their refusal to reopen the government earlier this month – refusing to go along with a short-term spending bill that didn’t include that priority until they ultimately caved after Senate Majority Leader John Thune promised them a December vote on the matter.
A group of eight Democrats then cut a deal with Republicans to reopen the government without winning a concession from the GOP to extend the subsidies.
Retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), one of the eight, has led negotiations between a group of 10-12 Republicans and Democrats, but many GOP senators say they are opposed to the premium subsidies. A Senate aide familiar with the negotiations told The Hill that roughly 20 Democratic offices have put out feelers on a potential deal to extend the subsidies. -The Hill
This past week, Greg Feirman wrote an interesting article about “The Perils Of Adjusted EBITDA.” Before we get into his discussion, let’s discuss what EBITDA is.
EBITDA is an acronym that stands for “Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization.” Over the years, EBITDA has become a go-to metric for evaluating corporate performance as it offers a simple way to assess a company’s profitability by removing non-cash charges and financing effects. However, the problem with EBITDA is that simplicity often comes at the cost of accuracy. Why do I say that? Because EBITDA ignores critical costs, such as depreciation,which can distort a company’s true economic picture in capital-intensive industries. When companies extend the lives of their assets to reduce depreciation expenses, EBITDA increases, even though the underlying cash outflows remain unchanged.
Read that last part again, because this is where Greg’s commentary hits home. Historically, capital expenditures tend to surge following recessions and economic downturns. This makes sense as companies expend capital to ramp up production as economic growth returns. You will notice a high correlation between economic and capital expenditures (CapEx) growth rates. Notably, this is particularly relevant in the AI sector, where firms are investing billions into chips, servers, and data centers, which will likely coincide with an increase in economic activity.
This is also where Greg’s comments are most relevant.
“On Monday morning, Michael Burry tweeted out more details about his AI Bubble thesis. He claims that the AI hyperscalers are “understating depreciation” by extending the period over which they are depreciating the Nvidia chips and all the other capital equipment they are buying to build out AI. This morning Jim Chanos applied the same logic to CoreWeave (CRWV). The first thing to understand is that Net Income is an accounting number. It is not the amount of cash that the company actually earns because it reflects certain approximations – one of the most important of which is depreciation.“
As Greg notes, a good example is CoreWeave (CRWV), which reported earnings this past week.
“Adjusted EBITDA more than doubled to $838 million from $379 million a year ago. On the surface, then, they are a profitable company – at least on this metric. But they backed out $630 billion in Depreciation and Amortization from their GAAP Net Loss of $110 million to arrive at that number. It’s only when we turn to the Cash Flow statement that we understand the how CoreWeave is financing their operations. Cash Flow from Operations in the first 9 months of 2025 was $1.5 billion. CapEx was $6.25 billion. Those are cash figures, not accounting ones. In other words, Free Cash Flow for the first nine months of the year was -$4.75 billion. That’s right: CRWV has burned up nearly $5 billion so far this year. How are they financing this? By selling debt. Essentially the whole difference is made up by their net debt issuance of ~$4.5 billion.”
This reveals the disconnect: EBITDA suggests “operating profitability looks good,” but the cash flow dynamics tell a very different story. If you rely only on EBITDA, you may miss the fact that the business is burning cash, depending on borrowing, or stretching asset lives unrealistically.
As Greg concluded:
“Clearly, the hyperscalers are spending an enormous amount of money on Nvidia chips and the other capital equipment required to build out AI. Their thesis is that the ROI on these investments over the long term will be excellent. If AI is truly the game changer many say it is, the returns may well outweigh any current concerns about the accounting. If not, a lot of this CapEx may be malinvestment and have to be written down in the future.
The overall point is that we are operating in the dark here because we don’t know the future returns on investment and we don’t know the appropriate rate to depreciate these huge Capital Expenditures to get the right Net Income numbers in the present.”
This is why investors need to be more realistic about understanding earnings reports and be cautious of the metrics they use to invest in companies. There are several pitfalls associated with EBITDA that you should be aware of. For example:
It ignores capital expenditures (CapEx) and replacement needs.
It omits changes in working capital—such as inventory, receivables, and payables—which can erode cash even when EBITDA is positive.
It may mask interest and debt burdens—two very real cash drains. Since interest is excluded, two companies with similar EBITDA may have vastly different risk profiles.
It allows for subjective “adjustments” (adjusted EBITDA) that reduce comparability across companies and time periods.
It may mislead in asset‑intensive sectors where hidden replacement or upgrade costs are large.
However, it isn’t just EBITDA, but earnings in general, that require closer inspection.
Earnings Aren’t What You Think
Just like the hit series “House of Cards,” Wall Street earnings season has become rife with manipulation, deceit, and obfuscation that could rival the dark corners of Washington, D.C. What is most fascinating is that so many individuals invest hard-earned capital based on these manipulated numbers. The failure to understand the “quality” of earnings, rather than the “quantity,” has always led to disappointing outcomes at some point in the future.
“Non-GAAP financials are not audited and are most often disclosed through earnings press releases and investor presentations, rather than in the company’s annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Once upon a time, non-GAAP financials were used to isolate the impact of significant one-time events like a major restructuring or sizable acquisition. In recent years, they have become increasingly prevalent and prominent, used by both the shiniest new-economy IPO companies and the old-economy stalwarts.”
In the 1980s and early 1990s, companies typically reported GAAP earnings in their quarterly releases. If an investor dug through the report, they would find “adjusted” and “pro forma” earnings buried in the back. Today, GAAP earnings are buried in the back, hoping investors will miss the ugly truth.
These “adjusted or pro forma earnings” exclude items that a company deems “special, one-time, or extraordinary.” The problem is that these “special, one-time” items appear “every” quarter,leaving investors with a muddier picture of what companies are really making. This growing divergence between the earnings calculated according to accepted accounting principles and the “earnings” touted in press releases and analyst research reports has put investors at a disadvantage in understanding precisely what they are paying for.
As BofAML stated:
“We are increasingly concerned with the number of companies (non-commodity) reporting earnings on an adjusted basis versus those that are stressing GAAP accounting, and find the divergence a consequence of less earnings power.
Consider that when US GDP growth was averaging 3% (the 5 quarters September 2013 through September 2014) on average 80% of US HY companies reported earnings on an adjusted basis. Since September 2014, however, with US GDP averaging just 1.9%, over 87% of companies have reported on an adjusted basis. Perhaps even more telling, between the end of 2010 and 2013, the percentage of companies reporting adjusted EBITDA was relatively constant, and since 2013, the number has been on a steady rise.
So, why do companies regularly report these Non-GAAP earnings? Drew has the answer:
“When management is asked why they resort to non-GAAP reporting, the most common response is that these measures are requested by the analysts and are commonly used in earnings models employed to value the company. Indeed, sell-side analysts and funds with a long position in the stock may have incentives to encourage a more favorable alternative presentation of earnings results.”
How much of a difference are we talking about? About $3.59/share in earnings, where revenue comprises only about 25% of the result.
But here is the real question:
“If non-GAAP reporting is used as a supplemental means to help investors identify underlying trends in the business, one might reasonably expect that both favorable and unfavorable events would be “adjusted” in equal measure.”
Wall Street is an insider system where the practice of legally manipulating earnings to create the best possible outcome and increase executive compensation has run amok. The adults in the room, a.k.a. the Securities & Exchange Commission, have “left the children in charge,”but will most assuredly leap into action to pass new regulations to rectify reckless misbehavior AFTER the next crash.
For investors, the manipulation of EBITDA and earnings not only skews valuation analysis but also specifically impacts any analysis involving earnings, such as P/E ratios, EV/EBITDA, and PEG.
“One of the things that I thought that I knew well was the importance of income-based metrics such as EBITDA, and that cash flow information is not as important. It turned out that common garden variety metrics, such as EBITDA, could be hazardous to your health.”
The article is worth reading and chock-full of good information; however, here are the four crucial points:
EBITDA is not a good surrogate for cash flow analysis because it assumes that all revenues are collected immediately and all expenses are paid immediately, leading to a false sense of liquidity.
Superficial common garden-variety accounting ratios will fail to detect signs of liquidity problems.
Direct cash flow statements provide a more detailed insight into the operating cash flows than indirect cash flow statements. Note that the vast majority (well over 90%) of public companies use the indirect format.
EBITDA, just like net income, is very sensitive to accounting manipulations.
The last point is the most critical. As Charlie Munger once stated:
“I think there are lots of troubles coming. There’s too much wretched excess.I don’t like when investment bankers talk about EBITDA, which I call bulls*** earnings.It’s ridiculous. EBITDA does not accurately reflect how much money a company makes, unlike traditional earnings. Think of the basic intellectual dishonesty that comes when you start talking about adjusted EBITDA. You’re almost announcing you’re a flake.”
In a world of adjusted earnings, where every company consistently outperforms its peers, investors often lose sight of what truly matters in investing.
“This unfortunate cycle will only be broken when the end-users of financial reporting — institutional investors, analysts, lenders, and the media — agree that we are on the verge of systemic failure in financial reporting. In the history of financial markets, such moments of mental clarity most often occur following the loss of vast sums of capital.” – American Accounting Association
Imaginary worlds are nice, but it’s just impossible to live there.
Where To Look Instead
So, if “operating earnings” and EBITDA are enough, where should you look? The answer is to focus on metrics that reflect real cash generation and sustainable operations. Free cash flow, which is operating cash flow minus capital expenditures, is one of the most important. It shows what’s left over after a business funds its maintenance and growth needs. A positive free cash flow tells you the company is generating more cash than it needs to sustain itself. A negative one warns that it’s living on borrowed money.
You should also examine trends in working capital, specifically, changes in receivables, payables, and inventory, to determine if the company is overextending itself to maintain operations. Asset lives and depreciation schedules should be realistic, not inflated to improve margins. Debt levels and interest costs matter too. EBITDA ignores both, but if a company’s cash flow can’t cover its debt service, that’s a red flag.
Here are the key metrics to prioritize over EBITDA:
Free Cash Flow (operating cash flow minus CapEx)
CapEx trends and whether they are delivering returns
Depreciation policy and asset life assumptions
Working capital changes in inventory, receivables, and payables
Debt and interest obligations
Reconciliation of EBITDA to net income and cash flow
When companies show a large gap between EBITDA and these real-world numbers, investors should be skeptical. In a capital-intensive sector like AI, where the future remains uncertain, the risks of relying on EBITDA are amplified. It may look clean on paper, but it can leave you blind to the business’s real financial health.
