CMR is the leading provider
of funding and management
support for small to
medium-sized businesses and
entrepreneurs
Established 1984 C MR
is the leading venture
capital, management
support and business
services provider for
small to medium-sized
businesses - linking
excellent management
skills with the
substantial financial
resources of a global bank
of private investors.
CMR has over 450 senior
executives, operating
in the UK, USA, Europe, Asia,
Australasia and
globally,
providing both funding and
specialist help for
entrepreneurial
businesses .
For Businesses
CMR provides excellent
resources:
CMR FundEX Business Exchange - gives all companies & entrepreneurs direct access to CMR's global investor base.
CMR Catalyst Group
Programme -
transform
profitability through
merging.
CMR Company Sales Division helps owners to exit
at the best price.
CMR Corporate Recovery
Division -
experts in rescue and
turnaround.
CMR Technology Licensing
Division -
commercialising
innovation.
CMR Executive
Professionals - management support
and consultancy.
CMR Executives-on-Demandâ„¢ Fully experienced
senior executives
available quickly and
cost effectively.
We always welcome
contact with new
business clients- please get in touch
- we will do our
best to match
your needs and exceed
your expectations.
For Investors
Preferential access to new opportunities for investment and/or acquisition
P re-vets
propositions and
provides a
personalised service
to our investors
Syndication service
enabling investors to
link together as desired
Executive and
management support for
investments as needed
CMR's services to
our investors are not
only fast & efficient
but also free
W e
always appreciate new
members- you are welcome
to join as an investor
or as a CMR Executive.
When you
join us as a Senior
Executive:
CMR's strength is in the
skills and experience of
our executive members -
all senior, director level
people with years of
successfully running and
managing companies.
Because the demand for
CMR's support and services
is ever-increasing,
especially as we enter
recessionary times, we
have a growing need for
more high calibre
executives to join us from
every industry and
discipline.
You will be using your
considerable experience to
help smaller businesses
and entrepreneurs to grow
profitably.
We offer full training
and mentoring support to
help maximise potential.
We are
always keen to find more
high calibre senior
executives in all areas-
skills and location.
Make contact with us today
and maximise your
opportunities.
HEAD
OFFICE
124 City Road
London EC1 2NX
Tel: +44 (0)207-636-1744
Fax:+44 (0)207-636-5639
Email: cmr@cmruk.com
Registered Office:
124 City Road ,
London EC1 2NX
Also Glasgow,
Dublin, Switzerland, Europe, USA/Canada
Privacy Statement: CMR only
retains personal details
supplied directly by executives
joining CMR themselves either as
Full Executive Members or
Interim Management Members or
Investors. Those details are
only used within CMR and not
disclosed to any third parties
without that person’s
agreement. We will keep that
data until requested by the
person to be removed – at that
point it will be deleted.
Personal data is never sold or
used for purposes outside of
CMR’s normal operations. Any
correspondence should be
directed to the Managing
Director, CMR,
Kemp House,
152-160 City Road, London EC1V
2N
Senior Executives
CMR is a worldwide network of senior executives. Join us to expand your career and business horizons.
Business Entrepreneurs
CMR has a complete range of resources & services provided by experts to help all businesses to grow and prosper.
Investors & Venturers
CMR has a continuous stream of business and funding propositions, which are matched to investor preferences. Join us - it's FREE!
FundEX
FundEX is CMR's worldwide stock market for small to medium sized companies and entrepreneurs to raise new capital.
Interim & Permanent Management
Many of CMR's executives can be recruited on an interim, permanent or NED basis.
Login
Main CMR Intranet members only
Regional Intranets
Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:20:00 +0000 DoJ Charges Venezuelan Illegal Over Border Patrol Vehicle Ramming Attack
DoJ Charges Venezuelan Illegal Over Border Patrol Vehicle Ramming Attack
DoJ Charges Venezuelan Illegal Over Border Patrol Vehicle Ramming Attack
Fox News reporter Bill Melugin reports that the Department of Justice has charged a Venezuelan national, who was shot by Border Patrol in the Portland metro area last Thursday, with aggravated assault on a federal officer with a deadly weapon after allegedly using his red pickup truck to ram a federal vehicle. This follows the recent ICE shooting in Minneapolis that left one far-left activist dead . Additionally, attacks on federal agents are on the rise.
Melugin further explained how the DoJ arrived at the charges and provided additional color about the ramming attack carried out by the illegal, who is allegedly tied to the Tren de Aragua (FTO designation):
DOJ has just charged the Venezuelan illegal alien shot by Border Patrol in Portland on Thursday with 18 USC 111 (aggravated assault of a federal officer w/ a deadly weapon), and they've provided photos of the badly damaged BP vehicle they say he rammed several times during the targeted arrest. According to DOJ, LUIS NINO-MONCADA, allegedly affiliated with Tren de Aragua, admitted to intentionally using a red pickup truck to ram the federal vehicle, said he knew they were immigration agents, and said "fuck ICE" while having a tourniquet applied to his gunshot wound by medics. DOJ says MONCADA was ordered deported by an immigration judge in Denver, CO in November 2024.
According to the criminal complaint, the actual target of Border Patrol's operation was MONCADA's female associate, Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras, a Venezuelan illegal alien and suspected TdA associate who was caught and released at the Texas border by the Biden administration in September 2023. She was ordered to check in at an ICE officer after release, but never did, making her subject to immigration arrest. DOJ says she is also believed to be involved with a Tren de Aragua prostitution ring, and was connected to a July 2025 shooting in Washington County during a prostitution deal that went bad.
FOX is told that Zambrano-Contreras is also now in federal custody, and is being charged by DOJ in the Western District of Texas with 8 USC 1325, illegal entry by an alien (yes, crossing the border illegally is a federal crime).
Melugin posted a snippet of the DoJ federal complaint:
"He should NEVER have been in our country to begin with, and we will ensure he NEVER walks free in America again," Attorney General Pamela Bondi wrote on X.
Related:
The Venezuelan illegal alien with ties to TdA is exactly the type of person the Democratic Party is protecting. The party’s left wing has made it clear it puts everyone except American citizens first.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 19:20 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:55:00 +0000 South Korea To Lift Ban On Corporate Crypto Investment: Report
South Korea To Lift Ban On Corporate Crypto Investment: Report
South Korea To Lift Ban On Corporate Crypto Investment: Report
Authored by Martin Young via CoinTelegraph.com,
South Korea’s Financial Services Commission (FSC) is reportedly updating its guidelines to allow corporations to invest in digital assets after a nine-year ban.
Listed companies and professional investors will be able to invest up to 5% of their equity capital in crypto assets , reported local news outlet Seoul Economic Daily on Sunday.
According to the report, a senior FSC official familiar with the matter said the authorities will “release the final guidelines in January [or] February and allow virtual currency transactions for investment and financial purposes by legal entities.”
The move overturns a nine-year ban on corporate crypto investment dating back to 2017 , when financial authorities banned institutional participation amid concerns over money laundering.
However, investments will be limited to the top 20 crypto assets by market capitalization and can only be made on Korea’s five largest regulated exchanges.
The inclusion of dollar-pegged stablecoins such as Tether’s USDT is still being discussed, the report noted.
The FSC shared the latest guidelines with its crypto working group on Jan. 6 and first announced plans for a phased approach to easing rules for corporate crypto investments in February 2025.
Potential bullish impact on Korean markets
The move could bring tens of trillions of won into crypto markets. South Korean internet giant Naver, which has 27 trillion won ($18.4 billion) in equity capital, could theoretically buy 10,000 BTC, according to the report.
It added that the launch of a national stablecoin and spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds is also expected to be accelerated once the corporate investment capacity is secured. Support for crypto ETFs has been building across the country, but regulatory approval remains stalled .
The move could also result in an expansion of local crypto companies, blockchain startups, and digital asset treasuries (DATs) while boosting domestic investment in digital assets.
Large South Korean companies have been forced to invest overseas to avoid local restrictions, it added.
CBDC and stablecoins focus of the economic strategy
The outlet reported on Friday that the South Korean government announced an ambitious digital currency strategy with a primary goal of executing 25% of all national treasury funds through a central bank digital currency (CBDC) by 2030.
The initiative, which is part of the 2026 Economic Growth Strategy, also involves introducing a licensing system for stablecoin issuers , such as Tether, requiring 100% reserve asset backing and legally guaranteeing users’ redemption rights.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 18:55 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:30:00 +0000 Mexico Reports Positive Conversation With Trump On Security, Drug Trafficking
Mexico Reports Positive Conversation With Trump On Security, Drug Trafficking
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Jan. 12 that she had a productive dialogue with President Donald Trump on efforts to combat drug trafficking a
Read more.....
Mexico Reports Positive Conversation With Trump On Security, Drug Trafficking
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Jan. 12 that she had a productive dialogue with President Donald Trump on efforts to combat drug trafficking and other issues of mutual concern.
“We had a very good conversation with the President of the United States, Donald Trump,” Sheinbaum wrote in a post on X on Monday.
“We discussed various topics, including security, with respect for our sovereignty, reducing drug trafficking, trade, and investment. Collaboration and cooperation within a framework of mutual respect always yield results. ”
As The Epoch Times' Ryan Morgan reports, the conversation between the two heads of state comes as Trump has raised pressure on Mexico and other Latin American states to increase cooperation with the United States, particularly in efforts to curb drug trafficking.
After U.S. forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in a pre-dawn raid on Jan. 3, Trump said Mexico needs to “get its act together” when dealing with drug cartels and reiterated offers to send U.S. forces to assist in such efforts.
On Jan. 8, Trump raised the stakes further, suggesting U.S. military strikes could focus on land-based cartel targets in Mexico in the future.
Thus far, Sheinbaum has been opposed to U.S. military action in Mexico.
Speaking with reporters at a Monday press conference, Sheinbaum said she and Trump again discussed a U.S. force deployment to Mexico and said Trump was understanding as she reiterated her opposition to such a move.
“He didn’t insist either; rather, it was in the tone of, ‘If you want us to help you more with our forces in Mexico,’ I told him, ‘Well, no, I’ve already told you several times that that’s not on the table,’ but we continue to collaborate within the framework of our sovereignties,” Sheinbaum recounted of the conversation.
The Epoch Times reached out to the White House for comment on the call between Trump and Sheinbaum but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a separate call with Mexican Foreign Secretary Juan Ramón de la Fuente on Jan. 11.
State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said the two discussed “the need for stronger cooperation to dismantle Mexico’s violent narcoterrorist networks and stop the trafficking of fentanyl and weapons.”
“Secretary Rubio reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to stopping narcoterrorism and stressed the need for tangible results to protect our homeland and hemisphere.”
Colombia and Cuba also face increased pressure from a Trump administration emboldened by the Maduro raid.
Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro have traded barbs in recent weeks, with the U.S. president faulting his Colombian counterpart for not cooperating closely enough on efforts to stamp out Colombia’s cocaine production.
Last week, Trump reported a productive phone conversation with Petro and indicated plans to host him at the White House in the near future.
U.S. pressure on Cuba remains high .
Trump, in a post on Truth Social on Sunday, said he had cut Cuba off from Venezuela’s oil supply.
“There will be no more oil or money going to Cuba—zero! I strongly suggest they make a deal, before it is too late,” Trump wrote in mostly all caps.
The United States has limited its engagement with the Cuban leadership for decades, after the Caribbean island nation came under communist control following Fidel Castro’s 1959 revolution.
In a press statement following Trump’s latest comments, Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez said U.S.-Cuba relations “must be based on International Law rather than on hostility, threats, and economic coercion.”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 18:30 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:23:18 +0000 Trump Imposes 25% Tariff On Any Country Doing Business With Iran "Effective Immediately"
Trump Imposes 25% Tariff On Any Country Doing Business With Iran "Effective Immediately"
After it quietly faded away in late summer, that trade war with China is about to make a triumphal reappearance.
In a day that was alre
Read more.....
Trump Imposes 25% Tariff On Any Country Doing Business With Iran "Effective Immediately"
After it quietly faded away in late summer, that trade war with China is about to make a triumphal reappearance.
In a day that was already flooded by a relentless firehose of newsflow, Trump added to the leaning tower of chaos when said on Truth Social that he was imposing a 25% tariff on goods from countries “doing business” with Iran (most notably China which is its largest oil client), ratcheting up pressure on the government in Tehran that has been rocked by widespread protests.
Trump said that the new duty would be “effective immediately,” without providing any details about the scope or implementation of the charges, leaving traders to act first and ask questions later if at all (a big reason why there is zero liquidity in the market is because people are trading with zero conviction and unwind trades just as fast as they put them on).
The action has the potential to disrupt major US trading relationships across the globe: as Bloomberg notes, Iran’s partners include not only neighboring states, but large economies including India, Turkey and especially China.
“Any Country doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran will pay a Tariff of 25% on any and all business being done with the United States of America. This Order is final and conclusive,” he said.
Previously, Trump had imposed tariffs as high as 50% on Indian goods tied to their purchase of Russian oil, and while India initially reduced its purchases of Russian crude it has since ramped them back up; China on the other hand, never even noticed the Trumpian edict.
Needless to say, the additional 25% tariff - assuming it sticks - hitting Beijing exports risks upsetting the trade truce Trump negotiated with Chinese President Xi Jinping late last year. China is the world’s top buyer of Iranian crude and the nation’s independent refiners were increasing their intake of the oil as of last month.
While the lack of details in the Trump declaration was confusing, adding to the sheer chaos is an impending decision by the US Supreme Court on the legality of Trump’s global tariffs. If the justices rule against him, it could hamper his ability to quickly impose duties on Iran’s partners. The court’s next opinion day is Wednesday.
As for Iran, it has been experiencing weeks of mass unrest, which was initially sparked by a currency crisis and worsening economic conditions but has increasingly been aimed at the regime. It’s amounted to the biggest challenge to the Islamic Republic’s ruling system since 1979. While Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s regime has weathered protests before, the demonstrations are spreading and drew hundreds of thousands of people, by some accounts, across the country over the weekend. Iranian authorities have sought to stamp out the protests with more than 500 people killed so far and more than 10,000 arrests, according to the Human Rights Activists News Agency.
Trump has openly backed the protesters and warned Tehran against violently repressing the demonstrations. In an interview on Fox News last week, he said the US would hit Iran “very hard” if it continued to shoot at protesters.
As reported earlier, Trump president told reporters on Sunday that the Iranian leadership has reached out to seek talks and that a meeting is being set up, without offering details on timing. Still, he said that his administration is considering potential options and indicated he was coordinating with allies in response to Iran.
“We’re looking at it very seriously. The military is looking at it, and we’re looking at some very strong options,” Trump told reporters. “I’m getting an hourly report and we’re going to make a determination.”
Also over the weekend, a White House official said that Trump has been briefed on a range of options for military strikes in Iran, including nonmilitary sites. The president is seriously considering authorizing an attack, according to the official who requested anonymity to detail internal discussions.
Still, there is hope for a peaceful resolution: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has opened channels of communication with Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, a spokesman from the ministry said Monday.
Meanwhile, Iran has warned the US and Israel - which coordinated to carry out strikes on nuclear facilities in the country last year - against any attempt to intervene. Tehran and Washington have not had formal diplomatic ties for decades.
Trump’s threats to Iran have the region on edge, coming on the heels of a US strike earlier this month in Venezuela - another oil-rich country - which led to the capture of strongman Nicolas Maduro. Should the US or its ally, Israel, intervene, that threatens to draw neighboring countries into the crisis and risk access to the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway for energy exporters.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 18:23 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:20:00 +0000 Trump 'Favors' Attacking Iran, Vance Pushing Back, As President Pezeshkian In Streets For Large Counter-Protests
Trump 'Favors' Attacking Iran, Vance Pushing Back, As President Pezeshkian In Streets For Large Counter-Protests
Update(1820ET) : There are reports of a significant internal Trump administration divide over Ir
Read more.....
Trump 'Favors' Attacking Iran, Vance Pushing Back, As President Pezeshkian In Streets For Large Counter-Protests
Update(1820ET) : There are reports of a significant internal Trump administration divide over Iran policy, with Vice President Vance said to be leading the charge for the non-interventionist camp, which much of MAGA might welcome while seeing in Vance the top contender for 2028 :
President Trump currently leans toward authorizing fresh military strikes on Iran, U.S. officials say, as the White House is weighing a last-ditch Iranian offer to engage in diplomacy over curbing its nuclear program.
Some senior administration aides, led by Vice President JD Vance, are urging Trump to try diplomacy before retaliating against Iran for killing protesters . Trump hasn’t made a final decision on what he will do and will meet with senior aides Tuesday to determine his approach.
Some in the U.S. doubt that Iran is genuine about ending its nuclear program, telling Trump that Tehran may be finding a way to buy time and avoid American airstrikes. Aides have briefed Trump on the benefits and pitfalls of renewed nuclear negotiations with Iran.
Trump currently favors attacking Iran , but could change his mind depending on unfolding developments. Some officials said Trump may strike first and then seek serious talks with Tehran. “We may have to act because of what is happening before the meeting," he said Sunday.
But all of this might become moot, or else it could be said Trump will have an easy 'out' or offramp and not attack Iran, given the latest reports from inside the country show waning anti-govt protests. Instead, they've been supplanted by huge pro-government counter-demonstrations . "Millions" or at least hundreds of thousands have come out for these 'loyalist' demonstrations. And even the country's President Masoud Pezeshkian was out confidently and defiantly strolling the streets Monday...
One regional analyst and observer reacts to Monday's developments, after a weekend security crackdown unleashed at least scores of casualties :
The Islamic Republic is sending two important signals here:
1. It retains control in large cities (or at least the ones/areas we're getting footage from)
2. It can still countermobilize its base of support (and others forced to turn out) in large numbers.
He concludes, "If this is it, these anti-regime protests may well fizzle out before long, although I've noted major 'landmines' ahead for the Islamic Republic in 2026."
Another hugely important development Monday, ultimately aimed at China ...
And still "on the table"...
* * *
Update(10:15ET) : Iran's Supreme Leader is really playing with fire here in posting the below image on X. While the message didn't appear on his English language account, it is on his Persian account, and thus mainly directed at the Ayatollah's own domestic population.
According to a machine translation, the message says: "That father figure who sits there with arrogance and pride, passing judgment on the entire world, he too should know that usually the tyrants and oppressors of the world, such as Pharaoh and Nimrod and Reza Khan and Mohammad Reza and the likes of them, when they were at the peak of their pride, were overthrown, This one too will be overthrown ."
Khamenei perhaps suddenly feels more embolden to poke and mock Trump like this perhaps given the emerging widespread reports that the protests are losing steam , after weekend clashes with policy reportedly resulted in many deaths. There was definitely a major and deadly security crackdown, but this also as the government asserts that dozens of police and military have been attacked and killed, and buildings set on fire by 'rioters' and 'saboteurs'.
There are also very large pro-government 'counter protests' taking over whole areas of cities Monday, including in the capital:
The Trump administration was quite out front with saying it would "stand" with the Iranian people, and even protect them if they come under assault from government forces. This allowed Iranian leadership to tell people in the streets that they are doing the bidding of foreign powers like the US and Israel .
This also amid more tough talk from Iran's parliament on Monday :
Iran’s parliament speaker has described the response to the protests as a fight with “terrorists” while addressing a large rally in the capital.
Iran is fighting a “four-front war”, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said, listing economic, psychological and military engagement with the United States and Israel, and “today [is] a war against terrorists”.
“The great Iranian nation has never allowed the enemy to achieve its goals,” Ghalibaf said as supporters chanted, “Death to Israel, death to America.”
He pledged Iran’s military would teach Trump “an unforgettable lesson” in case of a new US attack, adding: “Come and see all your facilities in the region destroyed.”
Trump on Sunday did raise the question of direct help to the protesters (who may not actually be interested in Washington's help). Trump said he will speak to Elon Musk about sending Starlink to protesters in Iran, following the government-imposed outage which has remained in place since Thursday.
"We may get the internet going if that's possible," the president told reporters. Elon "is very good at that kind of thing . I'm going to call him as soon as I'm finished with you."
Is the rhetoric between Washington in Tehran softening as it becomes clear the regime is not under threat by the protests?
Iran says it is “prepared for war” but ready to negotiate with the US based on “mutual respect and interests,” after US President Donald Trump said Tehran called to negotiate as his administration weighs possible military intervention during widespread anti-government protests.
* * *
The NY Times and others are confirming that President Trump has recently been briefed on a series of new military strike options targeting Iran as he weighs whether to act on his threat to attack the country over its crackdown on protesters, which have also clearly themselves engaged in violent acts in some locales at times.
In some of among the well over 100 cities or towns where protests have raged since the end of December, buildings and even mosques have been burned , cars torched , and police officials reportedly shot and stabbed . Amid an internet blackout across the country, which has made accurate information hard to come by and/or verirfy, there is a battle of narratives and 'infowar' happening .
AFP/Getty Images
Starlink terminals were said to be smuggled into the country during the 2022 wave of protests, and so there has been some limited information and videos emerging even amid the several consecutive days of internet shutdown by the government.
President Trump during Friday's meeting of oil executives again warned Iranian leadership not to kill protesters: "I've made the statement very strongly that if they start killing people like they have in the past, we will get involved," he said. "We’ll be hitting them very hard where it hurts. And that doesn’t mean boots on the ground, but it means hitting them very, very hard where it hurts ."
Trump later narrowed the warning, "I tell the Iranian leaders: You better not start shooting, because we’ll start shooting, too."
Secretary of State Marco Rubio on top of that issued on X that "The United States supports the brave people of Iran" - something much vaguer and coupled with no specific threat.
From there, unverified reports throughout the weekend said that body bags from protest deaths were piling up . By last week, around 30 people were reported killed, including several or more among police and security officials. But by Sunday into Monday that figure ballooned .
Reuters and CNN have relied on a US-based group to claim, "More than 544 people have been killed over the past 15 days during anti-government demonstrations , including eight children, according to the Human Rights Activist New Agency (HRANA)."
This new, high death count, is unverifiable but is still being widely circulated on Monday . It has been issued at a very sensitive and dangerous moment that the anti-Ayatollah opposition which largely lives in Europe and the United States is lobbying hard to get Trump's ear and attention.
All the usual other enemies of Tehran are being very active in this regard too, such as the powerful Israel lobby in the United States.
On the 'options' briefings, the NY Times has described that briefings President Trump has already received included a variety of potential actions such as strikes against nonmilitary locations in Tehran .
When reporters asked about preparations for possible military action, the White House pointed instead to the president’s recent public statements and posts on social media. "Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before," Trump had additionally stated on Truth Social on Saturday. "The USA stands ready to help!!!"
If Trump were to actually kick off yet more US military action in the Middle East, this time against a large nation like Iran which would hold the serious potential for escalating into a full-blown conflict, it would likely prove deeply unpopular among his base. Broadly, the American public would likely not be on board.
A Goldman Sachs note highlights that the build-up rhetoric threatening US intervention in and of itself will have an impact on oil, gold, and across markets:
Attention shifts to Iran as we speak. Unlike the 2022 protests centered around social liberties, this episode looks to be triggered by economic paralysis with inflation spiking and the sudden collapse of the Iranian rial in late Dec. The protests have now turned violent with death toll rising to the hundreds. What can potentially add oil to fire is if foreign interference continues to get talked up with the US signaling the threat of a potential intervention. Oil and Gold creeping up as the Iranian unrests unfold. This illustrates our view of the insurance value of commodities . We see a strong role for broader commodity length in strategic portfolio allocations with increasing geopolitical, trade and AI competition has led to more frequent use of commodity dominance as leverage.
Iranian businesses have in many cased been forced to suspend all activity because of Iran's internet shutdown, especially those companies which are dealings or staff based abroad. The shutdown is said to be so severe that even the banking system isn't operating, and something as simple as removing money from an ATM can't be done.
Leadership in Tehran might have made things much worse for itself with the decision to block internet access, given the protesting and rioting crowds hadn't dispersed, but instead clashes with police may have grown more intense and violent. Iran's foreign ministry has been cited in Bloomberg Monday as follows:
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says police and security forces brought protests "under control" from Saturday , according to statement to state TV. Araghchi: we have huge amount of evidence pointing direct Israeli and US interference in protests Says internet will be restored "soon after full control of security situation"
"Israel is directly responsible, and also Americans through their remarks by promoting violence," Araghchi says.
As for what's next, President Donald Trump will be briefed on Tuesday on "some kinetic and many non-kinetic" options in Iran, according to a couple of unnamed administration officials to Politico. But there have indeed been signs that the protests have begun to abate or in some places been halted completely .
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 18:20 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:05:00 +0000 The ICE Elephant: Why The Law Requires All The Facts
The ICE Elephant: Why The Law Requires All The Facts
The ICE Elephant: Why The Law Requires All The Facts
Authored by Jonathan Turley,
In a famous Indian parable, five blind men are brought to an elephant. Each feels a different part of the animal, and they come to radically different views of what an elephant is. It depended on which parts they touched, from tusk to tail.
The controversy over the shooting of Renee Nicole Good, 37, is a type of political elephant parable.
People focus on only certain parts of the story to support what they want the case to mean.
Critics and supporters of the responsible officer have slowed down videotapes that last, in critical part, for only a few seconds.
The only difference is that, in this modern parable, many are just willfully blind, choosing not to see beyond their own rage.
This week, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) became the personification of rage, spewing profanities about ICE while declaring, shortly after the shooting, that the ICE officer was a murderer.
After immediately declaring the officer’s guilt, Frey spent day two lambasting the federal government for rushing to conclusions and demanding that his people play a role in the investigation.
As for his unhinged, profane diatribe, Frey mocked critics if he “offended their Disney princess ears.”
Frey fulfilled the parable most clearly in his use of statistics. He declared that fifty percent of shootings in the city this year were committed by ICE. He then later admitted that, since it was only Jan. 9, there had been only two shootings. Indeed, he could have argued that ICE was responsible for 100 percent of the shootings in the city on Jan. 7.
Again, the trick is to examine the smallest part of the animal and extrapolate to draw sweeping conclusions.
The recently released videotape from the responsible officer also shows how people will focus on insular elements rather than the “totality of the circumstances,” the standard for such cases established by the Supreme Court.
For example, many supporters of the officer are citing the obstruction and taunting by Good and her wife, who were reportedly working with an anti-ICE group. At one point, Becca Good dares the officer to do something as they blocked the road, telling the officer “Do you want to come at us? I say go and get yourself some lunch, big boy.”
For critics, they have focused on Renee Good’s last words: “That’s fine dude, I’m not mad at you, I’m not mad at any of you.” Whether Good was being peaceful or passive-aggressive, others are clearly very, very mad. They are using her statement to push protesters to the brink of violence.
Democratic leaders declared ICE to be “terrorists ” and called for mass protests in the very same city that burned in 2020 after the George Floyd riots. Right on cue, one Black Lives Matter leader suggested that the prosecution of officers in the George Floyd case only occurred because protesters burned down the city. She told protesters to ignore pleas not to do it again. “Let me tell you this. We need justice and we need it now.”
Protesters in other cities chanted “ Kristi Noem will hang” and “Save a Life, Kill an ICE.”
In the same presser where he condemned federal officials for jumping to conclusions, Frey not only reaffirmed that Good had been murdered but added that the officer was not actually injured as claimed. “The ICE agent walked away with a hip injury that he might as well have gotten from closing a refrigerator door with his hips,” he said. “He was not injured. Give me a break. No, he was not ran over. He walked out of there with a hop in his step.”
Few of us have been in Frey’s kitchen, but the latest videotape seems to show something more intense than an encounter with his fridge. The video shows the agent being hit by the vehicle as Good ignores orders to get out of the car, as Becca Good is screaming, “drive, drive, drive.”
Reasonable people can disagree on whether the officer should have discharged his weapon. Flight alone is not grounds for the use of lethal force. However, Good’s actions could also be interpreted as an intentional endangerment of the officer.
At a minimum, it was clearly reckless, as another officer was trying to reach into the vehicle and Good refused to yield to the effort to place her into custody. The Goods forced the confrontation, and Renee Good then escalated the level of danger by speeding toward an officer.
This is why the legal standard requires you to take in the entire elephant, not just insular parts.
While there may still be countervailing facts emerging from the investigation, the governing legal standard clearly favors the officer. It is Good’s actions, not her motivations, that are critical to determining whether excessive force was used. The officer’s cellphone video shows he had a fraction of a second to decide and fired after being struck by the car. (The same officer had been seriously hurt previously after being dragged by a car.)
The Justice Department’s guidances incorporate the standards outlined in past Supreme Court decisions, such as Graham v. Connor (1989). Again, individual elements can be viewed in isolation as favoring or disfavoring the use of force, including the severity of the crime at issue (in this case likely a misdemeanor) and whether the suspect was “attempting to evade arrest by flight.” The guidelines stress that “[t]he ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”
This tragedy shows that people watching the same videotapes can come to diametrically opposed conclusions. Take the speed of the vehicle. Some have noted that the car was traveling less than 10 miles per hour before it collided with another vehicle. However, the speed after the shooting of Good is immaterial. The relevant question is the distance and speed with reference to the officer. It was clearly speeding up and immediately struck the officer before Good was shot.
The same is true of those who note how the wheels appear to be turning toward or away from the officer. The fact is, Good struck the officer. That does not mean she intended to do so, but that does not matter. From the officer’s perspective, Good was ignoring orders while speeding toward him from just feet away.
There will likely be civil litigation. Democrats have also called for criminal charges. The arguments on both sides of this controversy show, at most, that the issue is debatable. The officer could be viewed as wrong and still be found to have acted within the scope of his discretion in responding to a threat. Any state effort to charge the officer will be removed to federal court, where he will likely have immunity based on this evidence.
The public would be wise to ignore conclusions reached blindly by either side. In an “Age of Rage, ” we live in the land of the blind, where the one-eyed man is king. The public must remain clear-eyed and calm as the investigation proceeds in Minneapolis.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic : The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 18:05 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 22:40:00 +0000 Australia Joins The Rare Earth Reserve Rush
Australia Joins The Rare Earth Reserve Rush
Australia Joins The Rare Earth Reserve Rush
Australia will begin purchasing and storing key minerals for defense and high-tech industries from local miners as part of a A$1.2 billion ($802 million) national reserve aimed at strengthening global supply chains, according to a new report from Bloomberg .
Bloomberg reports that the initial stockpile will target rare earths, antimony and gallium, according to Treasurer Jim Chalmers, Resources Minister Madeleine King and Trade Minister Don Farrell. As one of the largest rare-earth producers outside China, Australia hopes the move will reduce Beijing’s leverage over critical resources.
Critical minerals have become a flashpoint in global trade disputes, particularly after China used its market dominance during trade tensions with the US. That has driven other nations to see local production and reserves as strategic priorities.
“Developing the Strategic Reserve is another important step in Australia leading on critical minerals globally,” Chalmers said. The stockpile will ensure “Australia is at the center of efforts to build stable and reliable supply chains for our international partners.”
Mining stocks rose on the news, with Lynas Rare Earths climbing up to 6.5% and Larvotto Resources jumping 8.8%. Larvotto, which is developing one of the world’s largest antimony projects, welcomed the move.
“The federal government is leading from the front on this, and we’re extremely happy antimony is one of the focuses,” said CEO Ron Meeks. “We will produce 7% of the world’s antimony, so we will be one of the largest suppliers. We’ll start production in August.”
The strategy follows China’s recent rare-earth export restrictions on Japan and builds on last year’s US-Australia agreement to expand American access to critical minerals, a deal covering roughly A$13 billion in projects. Officials also say the reserve could help stabilize prices and shield producers from future market downturns driven by cheap Chinese supply.
Rare earths are vital for permanent magnets used in defense and medical systems, while antimony supports electronics and flame retardants, and gallium is essential for advanced semiconductors in radar and communications.
Of course, we have been documenting the "rare earth revolution" since summer of last year , when we wrote that China’s export controls on key rare earth elements—especially the “heavy” ones used in high-performance permanent magnets—were creating shortages and price distortions outside China, exposing how dependent the world is on China for mined, refined, and magnet-ready material.
We noted that this mattered because rare earth magnets are foundational to today’s EVs, electronics, wind power, and defense systems, and they’re expected to be even more important for future robotics/humanoids.
With supply security viewed as a national-security issue, we correctly noted that governments and customers were prioritizing “ex-China” supply chains even if costs rise, and that shift is likely to support higher rare earth pricing and premium economics for the limited number of existing non-China players.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 17:40 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 22:15:00 +0000 States Poised To Win Supreme Court Battle Over Men In Women's Sports, Legal Experts Predict
States Poised To Win Supreme Court Battle Over Men In Women's Sports, Legal Experts Predict
States Poised To Win Supreme Court Battle Over Men In Women's Sports, Legal Experts Predict
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The U.S. Supreme Court will uphold two state laws that ban male athletes who don’t identify with their sex from competing on school sports teams intended for females , legal experts say.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Jan. 5, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times
Their comments come as the nation’s highest court prepares to hear back-to-back oral arguments on Jan. 13 in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.
Idaho and West Virginia argue their respective laws comply with the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Its equal protection clause says no state “shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws .”
The states also say their laws do not violate Title IX, a federal civil rights law that forbids sex-based discrimination at any school that receives federal funding.
Currently, 27 states have bans preventing males who identify as transgender from participating in girls’ and women’s sports , according to a report by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law.
Advocates for transgender participation on female sports teams say these state bans are discriminatory and divisive.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is representing the transgender-identifying athletes in both cases, said in September 2025 that such athletes have been “the focus of a relentless media campaign designed to make their participation seem like a threat to girls who are not transgender.”
The group said those on the other side want “a sweeping legal precedent that endangers transgender people (and other people, including gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, and all women) across our lives, not just in sports.”
Idaho Case
Little v. Hecox is about Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, “which ensures that women and girls do not have to compete against men and boys, no matter how those men and boys identify,” according to the petition filed in the case.
Lindsay Hecox [seriously?], a male who identifies as female, wanted to compete on a university’s women’s track and cross-country teams. Hecox sued, arguing the law violates the equal protection clause and Title IX.
A federal district court issued a preliminary injunction blocking the act so Hecox could try out for the teams. The court ruled the act discriminates against transgender-identifying athletes.
“The physiological differences,” between females and males, “do not overcome the inescapable conclusion that the Act discriminates on the basis of transgender status,” the petition said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the injunction, holding that laws making sex-based distinctions in schools serve as “proxy discrimination” against transgender-identifying athletes.
West Virginia Case
West Virginia v. B.P.J. is about that state’s Save Women’s Sports Act, which stipulates that female teams based on “competitive skill” or involving “a contact sport” must exclude males.
State lawmakers voted to keep the sexes separate in sports because of the “inherent physical differences between biological males and biological females,” according to the petition filed in the case.
B.P.J., a young male high school student who identifies as female, sued, arguing the law’s “biology-based distinction” violates Title IX and the equal protection clause. A district court initially blocked the law, then reversed itself, finding there was “no genuine dispute that biological males have physiological advantages over biological females.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reinstated the block, finding the district court was wrong to rule for the state because “there is a genuine dispute of material fact” over whether those born male “enjoy a meaningful competitive athletic advantage over” young women born female.
The circuit court also held that the district court should have granted summary judgment to B.P.J. on his Title IX claim because the state law unlawfully excluded him from participating in sports.
What the Lawyers Say
Jim Burling, senior counsel at Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm, said he is predicting the Supreme Court “is going to find that men are men and women are women.”
The court won’t find that gender identity is protected under Title IX, enacted in 1972, or the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, because the concept was unknown when they took effect, Burling told The Epoch Times.
Title IX was adopted to make sure that girls and women could participate in school sports on an equal basis with boys and men, he said. No one believes that transgender identity was part of what was being protected under the law, he added.
The text of the equal protection clause “doesn’t talk about transgenderism—it doesn’t even anticipate it being an issue,” he noted.
“You cannot graft a modern-day concern onto the language of a constitutional provision that’s over a century old,” he said.
Burling said the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last year in United States v. Skrmetti offers a clue as to how the court will rule.
The Tennessee law in Skrmetti forbids all medical treatments intended to allow “a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex” or to treat “purported discomfort or distress from a [disagreement] between the minor’s sex and asserted identity.”
The high court rejected the argument that Tennessee’s ban on transgender procedures for children, such as the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on minors, was an example of discrimination, he said.
The ban was “an exercise of the state’s police power and power to regulate medical practice,” he added.
The conservative-leaning Supreme Court, which embraces “a text-based, originalist understanding of the Constitution,” will not find that state laws prohibiting males from competing in women’s sports are unconstitutional, he said.
“I think the statutes are going to be upheld at least by 5–4 or maybe 6–3,” Burling said.
Steven J. Allen, a senior fellow at the National Legal and Policy Center, said he expects the Supreme Court will uphold the state laws by a 6–3 or 8–1 vote.
The Supreme Court is not going to say you can’t segregate sports teams by sex because that would eliminate most women’s sports, Allen said.
Then there is the privacy issue, he said. In our society, people in public facilities shower with others of the same sex and use dressing rooms that are sex-segregated, “and there’s no way that could be unconstitutional,” he added.
Supreme Court ‘Can’t Invent New Constitutional Rights’
Carrie Severino, president of JCN (formerly the Judicial Crisis Network), predicted the Supreme Court “will clarify that transgender status is not a suspect or quasi-suspect class, as it doesn’t fit into the types of classes that have been recognized historically as suspect or quasi-suspect classes.”
“The court cannot simply invent categories of constitutional protection,” she told The Epoch Times.
In constitutional law, a suspect classification is a class or group of individuals meeting criteria that suggest they are likely the subject of discrimination.
A quasi-suspect classification refers to groups such as those based on gender or legitimacy of birth. When a law involves a suspect or quasi-suspect classification, courts apply strict scrutiny, meaning they look at whether the law at issue serves a compelling government interest and uses the least restrictive means to achieve that interest.
“For the Supreme Court to step in and invent new constitutional rights that would have been absolutely shocking to those people who ratified the 14th Amendment, for them to jump in and cut off the right of citizens to pass the laws that they feel are appropriate to protect women in their states, that would be inappropriate,” she added.
Kristen Waggoner, president of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a public interest law firm that is part of Idaho’s legal team in the Supreme Court case, said the statutes in Idaho and West Virginia serve the interests of women.
“Women deserve equal opportunity, fairness, and privacy, and states have the right to recognize biological distinctions when those distinctions matter, and they matter greatly on the athletic field,” she said at a Jan. 8 press conference.
When state laws protecting women’s sports aren’t allowed to be enforced, women and girls are “losing the opportunity to be on the field in terms of fairness,” but their safety and privacy in private spaces are placed in jeopardy, Waggoner said.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 17:15 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 21:50:00 +0000 House Republicans Coalesce Around Stock-Trading Ban For Lawmakers
House Republicans Coalesce Around Stock-Trading Ban For Lawmakers
House Republicans are lining up behind a long-sought effort to curb stock trading by members of Congress, signaling what party leaders say may be the
Read more.....
House Republicans Coalesce Around Stock-Trading Ban For Lawmakers
House Republicans are lining up behind a long-sought effort to curb stock trading by members of Congress, signaling what party leaders say may be their strongest opportunity yet to address concerns that lawmakers can profit from insider information.
(Image credit: Illustrated | Getty Images)
The proposal, drafted by Rep. Bryan Steil (R-WI), chairman of the Committee on House Administration, would prohibit House and Senate members from purchasing individual stocks while in office . The measure, titled the Stop Insider Trading Act , has secured backing from House GOP leadership and support from Republicans across ideological factions. Steil plans to formally introduce the bill Monday.
Lawmakers first attempted to rein in congressional trading with the 2012 Stock Act , which expanded disclosure requirements and explicitly banned trading on nonpublic information. But repeated efforts to go further - by restricting trading outright - have stalled despite broad public support and bipartisan interest.
“I think we have an opportunity to improve upon the Stock Act, in particular to remove a lot of concerns Americans have that members of Congress are profiting off of insider information by engaging in stock trading,” Steil said in an interview ahead of the bill’s release. “Not only do I think this is the best chance, I think we will ultimately prove ourselves to be successful .”
Under the proposal, lawmakers would be barred from making new purchases of individual stocks but could continue to buy and sell diversified investment funds . Members would not be required to divest existing stock holdings. Instead, the bill would create a mandatory presale disclosure system requiring lawmakers to file a public notice between seven and 14 days before selling an individual stock, with the option to withdraw the notice if they decide not to proceed.
The legislation would also increase penalties for violations. Lawmakers who fail to comply would face fines equal to $2,000 or 10% of the value of the covered investment - whichever is greater - and could be required to forfeit any profits from the transaction. The bill does not address other asset classes such as bonds or commodities.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and his leadership team are backing the effort, along with several Republicans who previously advanced separate proposals to restrict trading.
“No member of Congress should be allowed to profit from insider information , and this legislation represents an important step in our efforts to restore the people’s faith and trust in Congress,” Johnson said. “Both Republicans and Democrats will have an opportunity to make their voices heard and affirm their support.”
Steil said he intends to move quickly, with committee debate and amendments expected as soon as this week. GOP leaders have pledged to bring the bill to the House floor once it clears committee.
“I’ve worked closely with Chairman Steil, who has been tirelessly putting together a bill that bans stock trading by Members of Congress, and would like to move this bill for a full House vote soon after it gets out of committee,” said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA).
The push follows a series of earlier efforts to force action on the issue. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) recently advanced a stock-trading ban through a discharge petition , a procedural move that allows lawmakers to bypass leadership if sufficient support exists.
Republicans from across the party’s ideological spectrum have signed on as original co-sponsors of Steil’s bill, including Luna; Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), a member of the House Freedom Caucus; and Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), a centrist member of the Problem Solvers Caucus.
“The people should be able to trust the motives of their representatives in Congress - yet active stock trading that enriches certain members has broken that trust ,” Roy said. “This bill is a collaborative product that takes a giant step forward to restore trust by ending stock purchases and forging presale disclosure.”
Lawler argued that the proposal could help rebuild public confidence in Congress. “If you’re getting rich in Congress, you should get the hell out or be thrown out,” he said.
The restrictions would also apply to spouses and dependent children of lawmakers, barring them from purchasing securities of publicly traded companies. The bill includes exceptions for certain circumstances, such as ownership in small businesses, some trust-held investments, employment-related compensation, and cases in which a spouse or child’s primary occupation involves managing investments for others.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 16:50 Close
Mon, 12 Jan 2026 21:25:00 +0000 On The Lefty-Left's Largely Female Hysteria
On The Lefty-Left's Largely Female Hysteria
On The Lefty-Left's Largely Female Hysteria
Authored by Jam es Howard Kunstler,
Permission Granted: Go Kill Yourself
“A mascrosocial cluster B crisis is ripping this nation apart because Leftism has hijacked the minds of progressive females who then LARP out dangerous Gnostic heroic delusions. ”
- JD Haltigan
Historians of the future, grilling beaver-tail paninis over their campfires, will look back in wonder and nausea at the madness of America — and other regions of Western Civ — in the raging 2020s. It will be clear by then that it was largely a female hysteria, like other departures from social sanity in the annals of the Homo sapiens , such as the outbreak of witchery in the Massachusetts Colony, 1692, the Dancing Plague of Strasbourg, 1518, and the lunacy of Meowing and Biting Nuns that spread through the convents of Europe in the 1400s.
Renee Nicole Good moments before she was shot to death
The Lefty-left has devised what’s called a “permission structure” for women to take the lead in acting-out the concocted grievances of their show-runners in the Democratic Party who, in times gone by, once had a coherent political program, but are now chiefly concerned with staying out of jail. I speak of those two orbiting moons, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and their many subalterns, such as John Podesta, Lisa Monaco, Norm Eisen, Adam Schiff. . . you know the huge cast of characters.
In 2020, they put their African-American clients in the vanguard, hoping to provoke Mr. Trump into a bloody suppression of the George Floyd riots. Didn’t really work, though the riots were a grand distraction from Marc Elias’s behind-the-scenes nefarious setup to queer the balloting process in that year’s election — a thumping success! All that mischief propelled brain-dead “Joe Biden” into the Oval Office, the perfect stooge to front for Hillary and Obama in their campaign to disorder the US body politic.
None of that worked for them in 2024, though, and only, apparently, because Elon Musk got wind of some election-hacking signals from a bunker in Serbia, and somehow managed to put the kibosh on its functionality. . . but that’s another story not quite yet spun for the public. Anyway, Mr. Trump got back into the Oval Office and now there is — forgive the cliché – hell to pay. Folks looking at jail time, famous folks, folks previously inoculated against such a fate. And it’s driving them batshit crazy. What on earth to do?
As it happens, enough Americans are sick and tired of the race hustle that its antics no longer avail the Democratic Party in stirring up animus against order, so now the party sends its women out onto the front lines to bang on police car windows, scream at the officers to perform sex acts on themselves, and impede their duties. In the course of all that action, one of them, Renee Nicole Good, got shot last week gunning her Honda Pilot at officer Jonathan Ross.
Ms. Good’s female wife, Becca Good, wailed in the aftermath, “I made her come down here, it’s my fault.” Come down to do what? To play a part in the show. To use Renee’s Honda Pilot to block the street so that ICE agents couldn’t do their job (which is removing illegal immigrants for processing and deportation). Who told Becca that was a good idea? The Lefty-left’s permission structure told her. So, Becca played her part in the show, ostentatiously recording a video of the scene, yelling taunts at the officers, telling her wife, Renee, to disobey the officer’s command to “get out of the car” and instead to drive away. Becca will have that on her conscience forever, alas. Bet you wouldn’t want to be her.
What is it in American women these days that makes them susceptible to such a demonic permission structure that the Lefty-left uses to make them pawns in this game? Most obviously, American women are less and less inclined to enter healthy relations with men. Why is that? Probably several reasons. American men are less and less good husband material — except at society’s tippy-top where they make obscene amounts of money in activities that are, frankly, pretty antisocial when you look hard — like, running monopolies, inducing the entire population into ill health, and selling out their country. The great wad of men in the classes below the tippy-top face ever-reduced opportunities to make a living, let alone support a wife and children.
Both American men and women are working pretty hard to make themselves sexually unappealing. Obesity is epidemic now that the national diet consists almost entirely of pizza and soda pop. You have to wonder how the idea of facial piercings, nose-rings, and massive tattoos caught on. Half the women in this country look like they could be harpooneers on the whaler Pequod. Meanwhile, the tubby men with no prospects can occupy themselves with free porn on their phones — which, you might admit, kind of cuts down on their motivation to even try to meet real women, let alone protect and care for them.
The result of all this dysfunction is a society with deeply disrupted relations between men and women, people who can’t produce children — or, by happenstance, as in the case of Renee Nicole Good, two children who did not live with her — people of both sexes who can’t enact the basic roles of human adulthood, people of both sexes who can hardly find gainful employment, and you end up with a land of broken people, broken families, and behavior that verges into madness.
And these broken people are egged on to self-destruction by the cynical managers of a criminal political party desperate to hide its crimes and avoid prosecution . When the arraignments begin, the derangements will ebb. Just watch and see.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/12/2026 - 16:25 Close