CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

A massive explosion rocked Qatar's giant Ras Laffan energy complex. 

BREAKING: HUGE EXPLOSION AT RAS LAFFAN INDUSTRIAL CITY IN QATAR’S LARGEST GAS FACILITY

The blast was so strong it was heard in Bahrain and reportedly felt like an earthquake. pic.twitter.com/4bdCH0eeWd

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) June 21, 2026

According to Qatar's interior ?ministry, an explosion ?resulting from a "technical accident" occurred on Sunday at a factory ?in Ras Laffan, an ?industrial city north of the ?capital Doha and site of ?the country's core LNG ?processing operations. It said several injuries were reported but no leak that "threatens safety".

Unverified footage circulating on social media shows an explosion at a factory in Ras Laffan Industrial area, located in Qatar. pic.twitter.com/AiqqTxfV6l

— Joe Truzman (@JoeTruzman) June 21, 2026

The ?ministry did not give ?the exact location of the explosion, ?but ?a source with knowledge of the matter said it occurred at the Barzan gas ?plant ?in ?Ras Laffan and was due to an "operational error".

In a post on X, Qatar Energy confirmed that in the evening hours of Sunday 21 June 2026, there was an operational incident during the start-up of operations at Ras Laffan Industrial City which resulted in an explosion and fire at Barzan local gas supply facility. It added that emergency response teams were deployed immediately to contain the fire, which is now under control.

Operational Incident at Ras Laffan Industrial City

QatarEnergy confirms that there was an operational incident during the start-up of operations at Ras Laffan Industrial City which resulted in an explosion and fire at Barzan local gas supply facility in the evening hours of…

— QatarEnergy (@qatarenergy) June 21, 2026

Shortly after the start of the war, Iranian attacks on the Ras Laffan complex crippled some of the most important LNG facilities prompting Qatar to predict that it would take as much as 5 years for the country's LNG production to come back fully online. 

Authored by Armstrong Williams via The Epoch Times,

History is filled with political movements born from noble promises. Few have been more appealing in theory than socialism. At its heart, socialism promises greater equality, economic fairness, and protection for those who struggle in a competitive marketplace. It speaks to the desire for justice and the belief that no person should be left behind.

Yet history also teaches a sobering lesson: While millions have voted for socialism, millions more have ultimately fled from it.

Why?

The answer is not found in campaign slogans or academic theories. It is found in the lived experiences of ordinary people across generations and continents.

Throughout the 20th century, socialist governments emerged across Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Many came to power promising to eliminate poverty, reduce inequality, and place the needs of the people above the interests of the wealthy. In the beginning, those promises often generated enormous enthusiasm. Citizens were told that government planning would be more efficient than free markets, that collective ownership would create fairness, and that centralized control would produce prosperity for all.

The results, however, frequently fell short of the promises.

One recurring problem was the concentration of power. When governments assume responsibility for directing large portions of the economy, political leaders inevitably gain greater control over employment, investment, production, and distribution. Over time, this concentration of authority often extends beyond economics into other aspects of society.

History shows that when governments acquire greater power, citizens frequently lose a measure of independence. Economic freedom and political freedom are often more closely connected than many realize. When a person’s livelihood depends heavily upon the state, dissent becomes more difficult and individual choice becomes more limited.

Another lesson history teaches is that incentives matter.

Human beings respond to rewards, risks, and opportunities. Free-market systems are far from perfect, but they have consistently demonstrated a remarkable ability to encourage innovation, entrepreneurship, and productivity. When individuals are allowed to benefit from their hard work, creativity, and investment, economies tend to grow.

By contrast, heavily centralized systems often struggle to generate the same level of innovation and efficiency. Bureaucracies can become slow, inflexible, and disconnected from local realities. Over time, shortages, inefficiencies, and declining productivity have plagued many state-controlled economies.

This does not mean capitalism is without flaws. It clearly is not. Free markets can produce inequality, abuse, and economic dislocation. They require regulation, accountability, and moral responsibility. But history suggests that replacing markets with extensive government control often creates a different set of problems—problems that can be even more difficult to solve.

Perhaps the most powerful evidence comes from migration patterns.

Throughout modern history, people have overwhelmingly moved toward societies that offered greater economic freedom rather than away from them. From East Germans risking their lives to cross the Berlin Wall to Cubans crossing dangerous waters to Venezuelans fleeing economic collapse, countless individuals have voted with their feet.

This reality deserves careful consideration.

People rarely abandon their homes, families, language, and culture without compelling reasons. When citizens repeatedly leave countries governed by socialist systems in search of opportunity elsewhere, it raises important questions about the long-term sustainability of those systems.

The lesson is not that every policy associated with socialism is inherently wrong. Many democratic societies incorporate social safety nets, public health care programs, retirement systems, and other forms of government support while maintaining market economies and strong democratic institutions.

The real lesson is about balance.

Successful societies tend to recognize both the strengths and limitations of government. They understand that government has an important role in protecting the vulnerable, enforcing the rule of law, and providing essential public services. At the same time, they recognize that prosperity is often driven by individual initiative, private enterprise, innovation, and economic freedom.

As younger generations debate the merits of socialism, they should do so with an appreciation for history rather than romanticized visions of what might be. Good intentions alone do not guarantee good outcomes. Policies must ultimately be judged not by their promises but by their results.

History’s verdict is neither simple nor ideological. It is practical. Again and again, people have demonstrated through their actions that they value freedom, opportunity, and the ability to shape their own destinies. When those things become scarce, many eventually seek them elsewhere.

That is perhaps the most enduring lesson history offers: People may be attracted by promises of equality, but they are often willing to travel great distances—and endure great hardship—in pursuit of liberty.

Today, these lessons are becoming part of the American political conversation. With socialist candidates gaining influence in major cities—two examples being the rise of Councilwoman Janeese Lewis George in Washington, D.C., and the growing prominence of Mayor Zohran Mamdani in New York City—voters are once again debating the proper balance between government intervention and individual enterprise.

Supporters see these movements as a response to rising costs, housing shortages, and economic inequality. Critics see warning signs that history has presented before. Whatever one’s political perspective, the debate should not be driven by slogans or emotion alone. It should be informed by the experiences of nations that have already traveled this road.

The harsh lessons of history are not that compassion is dangerous or that government has no role to play. Rather, they remind us that concentrated power, diminished economic freedom, and excessive dependence on the state often carry consequences that emerge only over time.

America’s future will not be determined by labels such as “capitalist” or “socialist.” It will be determined by whether we preserve the freedom, opportunity, innovation, and personal responsibility that have long defined the nation’s success while ensuring that those who struggle are not left behind.

History remains our greatest teacher. The question is whether we are willing to learn from it.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Keir Starmer's premiership appears to have entered its final act. Just over a week after Andy Burnham stormed back into Parliament with a crushing by-election win, the Prime Minister is - according to senior Labour figures cited by The Observer - preparing to set out a timetable for his own departure, with a "clear statement" possible as early as Monday.

It would be a remarkable collapse. Starmer led Labour to a landslide less than two years ago. He now looks unable to command the confidence of his own benches for much longer, with cabinet ministers, union leaders and donors reportedly among those who have been involved in the conversations about his future.

Burnham, the outgoing Greater Manchester mayor, did not just win Makerfield - he buried it. Official figures show him taking 24,927 votes, 54.8% of the total, beating Reform UK's Rob Kenyon by a 9,231-vote margin in a seat where Nigel Farage's party had been threatening to turn Labour's crisis into a rout. The result gives Burnham the Commons seat he needs, clears his path to a leadership challenge, and leaves Starmer's position looking terminal.

Also, Starmer's former Chief of Staff - Morgan McSweeney - was the sacrificial lamb in the Mandelson scandal (recall that Starmer appointed Jeffery Epstein pal Peter Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US). McSweeney also targeted Zerohedge, The Federalist and Breitbart in a clandestine campaign against alternative-media outlets. He resigned in February, two weeks before Mandelson was arrested on suspicion of passing insider info to Jeffrey Epstein in 2009, when he was serving as Business Secretary.

Meanwhile - he just... tweeted it out:

BREAKING: President Trump confirms Keir Starmer is resigning as Prime Minister… before Starmer has confirmed it himself. The final humiliation. pic.twitter.com/yz33xD4rPt

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 21, 2026

Markets Eye The Monday Open

The political risk did not go unnoticed by bond traders. UK 10-year gilt yields climbed to 4.84% on Friday, up roughly 0.09 percentage points on the session, as markets weighed Burnham's victory, domestic political uncertainty, and the possible fiscal implications of a future leadership bid.

With markets shut over the weekend, the next read comes at Monday's open, and any Starmer statement setting out an exit timetable will land straight into it.

Burnham is due to be sworn in as an MP on Monday and to meet Starmer early in the week, with a cabinet meeting scheduled for Tuesday. Senior Labour figures expect a "deliberate slow march in good order" - most likely a September handover timed to the party conference - rather than an immediate vacuum.

According to the report, Burnham's supporters claim he has secured backing from more than 201 Labour MPs if Starmer refuses to step down voluntarily. The Observer framed that as a critical number because it would represent more than half the Parliamentary Labour party and would make it increasingly difficult for Starmer to argue that he still commands the confidence of his own side.

A formal challenge requires far fewer names. Under Labour's rules, any challenger needs nominations from 20% of Labour MPs - currently 81 - plus the required support from local parties and affiliates. On every count, the door is open.

Starmer Digging In?

For now, at least in public, Starmer is not going quietly. On Friday he congratulated Burnham on X - framing the result as a win for "Labour's campaign of hope and optimism over division and hate" - while insisting he would stand in any leadership contest and still had "more to do."

Congratulations, @AndyBurnhamGM, Labour's new MP for Makerfield.

Voters chose Labour's campaign of hope and optimism over division and hate.

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 19, 2026

By Saturday the mood music had shifted. The Observer reports that Starmer was spending the weekend at Chequers with his wife, Victoria, weighing his future after a round of conversations with cabinet ministers, advisers, union bosses and donors.

One Labour peer close to the Prime Minister told the paper that Starmer would not "walk away" from No. 10 creating a vacuum, but would instead "arrange a deliberate slow march in good order, as a matter of duty and dignity." Another Labour grandee said the Prime Minister now appeared "resigned" to stepping down after coming "hard against the reality that the support isn't there."

The establishment knives are out. Lord Falconer - Starmer's own former shadow attorney general - told the BBC that the Prime Minister had "absolutely no authority left because everybody assumes Andy Burnham is about to challenge for the leadership and everybody assumes he's going to win."

Former Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who remains the obvious alternative pole of opposition inside the party, publicly hailed Burnham's result even as allies insisted he still intends to stand in any contest.

Huge congratulations to @AndyBurnhamGM on an astonishing victory in Makerfield, where Labour lost badly only weeks ago.

It gives us all hope that Labour can still win, but Andy's campaign is proof that to do so we need to change.

Enormous thanks to everyone involved.

— Wes Streeting (@wesstreeting) June 19, 2026

Even the money is moving. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said "obviously Starmer needs to go," calling for an orderly transition on a clear timetable and a conversation about Labour's policy priorities.

Streeting's allies, meanwhile, are still talking as though the fight is alive. The Observer reported he has taken out a contract on an office for 40 members of staff as campaign headquarters and has received two £50,000 donations from Fran Perrin, one of Labour's most generous supporters. But some senior Labour figures now believe Streeting may ultimately do a deal with Burnham rather than stand in the way of the momentum.

"A Final Chance To Change"

Burnham's victory speech left no doubt about the scale of his ambition, even if he stopped short of formally launching the challenge. "Tonight could - just could - be the turning point," he told supporters, warning Labour it had a "final chance to change" with "no second chance."

There was also some weirdness: animal-rights campaigner Robert Pownall, who ran as an independent, and Count Binface, the bin-headed "intergalactic space warrior," who took 95 votes.

"I swear I'll move to Makerfield if I win."

Count Binface talks to Sky's @joncraig at the vote count at the Makerfield by-election. https://t.co/cjPB04D pic.twitter.com/skyclip

— Sky News (@SkyNews) June 19, 2026

Mandlelson & Epstein

Burnham's win was the trigger, but the charge had been laid months earlier. The slow detonation of Starmer's authority traces back to his decision, in December 2024, to hand the plum Washington ambassadorship to Peter Mandelson despite Mandelson's long-public friendship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Mandelson was sacked as ambassador in September 2025 after released material appeared to show a closer relationship with Epstein than had been acknowledged at the time of appointment. He was later arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office over allegations that sensitive government information had been passed to Epstein during the 2008-2010 financial crisis. Mandelson has denied wrongdoing, has not been charged, and the police investigation is ongoing.

'Where does this leave the tattered reputation of our Prime Minister?'

@MartinDaubney discusses the first tranche of the Mandelson files revealing that Sir Keir Starmer was warned that the former ambassador, Lord Mandelson, brought a 'reputational risk'. pic.twitter.com/84vWC3jmhe

— GB News (@GBNEWS) March 11, 2026

Starmer claimed Mandelson had lied throughout the appointment process - however it later emerged that he knew full well of the friendship.

?? Wow.

The Mandelson files are up.

They prove Starmer WAS advised and warned about Mandelson's appalling friendship with Epstein.

Starmer appointed him anyway.

Starmer lied.

Starmer must resign. pic.twitter.com/1yjYioVJhK

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) March 11, 2026

By then the damage was structural: his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney had resigned over the affair, a top Foreign Office mandarin was on the way out, and the government had spent months bleeding credibility through document dumps, a vetting row, sleaze-inquiry pressure and a steady drip of resignations.

No. 10 is still batting the resignation talk away as "speculation," and Starmer's team insists he will fight any challenge. On Friday, the Prime Minister told staff the party had to "pull together" and "take the fight" to Reform.

But the shape of the problem is brutal: Burnham has the seat, his allies claim the numbers, cabinet ministers are turning, the unions are turning, and Reform UK remains the threat Labour MPs increasingly believe only Burnham can blunt.

If Starmer steps to a podium on Monday and sets out an exit timetable, it will cap an extraordinary fall - from landslide to forced retreat in under two years - and crack open the door for the man they call the "King of the North" to walk through it.

Maybe if Starmer had addressed unchecked migration, England's woke police, or the rape gangs his CoS tried to get us demonetized for reporting on... 

??NEW: How PM Keir Starmer's Machine Quietly Moved to Cripple Breitbart, The Federalist, ZeroHedge, and Left Independent Outlets

On Breaking Points, Ryan introduces Drop Site's latest investigation, adapted from Paul Holden's book, exposing how Keir Starmer and his chief of… pic.twitter.com/NVPDm7aWmw

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) December 4, 2025

 

In the past 70 years, the subject of the Salem Witch Trials has been hijacked by the political left as a historic example of the authoritarian nature of the "patriarchy".  Arthur Miller used the trials as an allegory for "anti-communist hysteria" in his famous 1953 play, The Crucible.  As we now know, however, Joseph McCarthy was mostly right when he warned about an insidious and organized Marxist takeover of America's social and educational institutions. 

A more nuanced historic analysis shows that witchcraft was indeed a problem in the colonies just as it was a problem in Europe.  Not so much because of "black magic" or dark curses, but because "witches" were often early representations of social malcontents causing problems in Christian communities just as they cause problems in the western world today.

There were false accusations, there's no doubt.  But the narrative that most or all witch burnings were unjustified is simply false.

The reason women (and some men) were accused of being witches and burned at the stake was because they willfully engaged in highly destructive anti-social behaviors.  The local witch was often the village abortionist, a seller of poisons, and the town prostitute or harlot plying her "trade" at a time when there was zero tolerance for this kind of behavior.

It should be noted that the practice of casting out or executing sociopaths, psychopaths and other people with destructive social tendencies (considered black magic) is common among religious groups around the world, not just in Puritan towns and Christian society.  This includes Native American tribes that feminists tend to idolize.  

When human beings lived in small villages, broken and dangerous people were much easier to identify and remove before they did significant damage.  In the new era of metropolitan isolation within mass population centers, they easily blend into the crowd.  Sometimes they are even celebrated as "visionaries" by Hollywood and the media.       

Modern feminists proudly draw connections to the subversive world of witches because they tend toward delusional fantasies of dominance.  Women, by their biological nature, lack any real ability to project power, so they fabricate notions of magical influence in their minds.  Some of the most popular women's trends today revolve around concepts of New Age "manifestation", which is just a modern way of believing in magic.

It's not surprising that feminists in the US in 2026 are flocking to "witchcraft communes", an idea recently applauded in a expose by The Guardian.  The outlet notes:

"Witchcraft retreats...have proliferated across the US and Europe over the last decade. The practice they’re built around resists easy definition. Equal parts ancient folk magic, herbal remedies and self-soothing rituals, it encompasses everything from the spellcasting done by self-directed pagans to solitary practitioners who scatter protective salts around their homes. If you buy a crystal, that’s witchcraft. If you practice manifestation, that’s witchcraft..."

"The retreat boom was foreshadowed by an interest in witchcraft that has grown since the counterculture movement in the 1960s, says Helen Berger, a Harvard Divinity School-based sociologist of religion and one of the leading scholars of contemporary paganism. While it’s hard to really identify a single catalyst driving women to witchcraft, Berger sees a pattern: spikes in alternative spirituality tend to coincide with spikes in anti-authoritarianism. In 1968, for example, several feminist groups co-opted occult imagery, adopted the acronym Witch..."

The reason witchcraft appeals so much to women on the political left is because leftist movements operate on the same value system - Meaning, they have no values.  The problem is, Atheism leaves an emotional and spiritual void, leaving people desperate for answers to questions that scientific explanation does not satisfy.  The occult promises people answers, but without all those nasty rules and responsibilities commonly attached to Christianity.

    

In other words, witchcraft is a religion for people who think they are above moral obligation.  People who think they can revolt against the natural order.  In this way, witchcraft and feminism are fundamentally the same thing.  The Guardian continues:

"Clauré hosts at least two witchcraft retreats a year, in Savannah, Georgia and Salem, Massachusetts; prices run anywhere from $2,700 to $5,200 to attend. She says women are searching for something beyond the slumber party Ouija board rituals that loosely inspired her retreats in the first place.  “The patriarchy is not good for anybody, men or women,” Clauré says. “Women have been inherently drawn to [witchcraft spaces] after being demonized or called hysterical or stigmatized. We’re so fucking sick of it that we’re gonna do things our way, whether you call it crazy or not.”..."  

"“If you look at the larger social gestalt right now, in which power is being systematically taken away from women and queer people, the traditional witch is the opposite of ‘right’ society,” says Sabina Magliocco, a professor of anthropology and religion at the University of British Columbia and a former Guggenheim fellow. “But if ‘right’ society is depriving women of rights, is excluding women, is saying that it is perfectly fine to sexually abuse women, that there aren’t going to be any consequences, then maybe being the opposite of right society is aligning with the forces of justice.”"

It's impossible to distinguish between the political rhetoric of modern witchcraft and feminists; they are symbiotic.  Fantasies of victimhood usually coincide with societal expectations.  Liberal women see basic laws, social norms and meritocracy as "oppressive".  But really, they are narcissists who refuse to accept that the entire world does not revolve around them and their wishes.  This is who witchcraft appeals to. 

The wider implications are serious, and not because these women have any real magical powers.  Rather, feminism and similar movements are a psychological plague that spreads, rotting nations from within.  If they face backlash it's not because they are female or queer, it's because they deliberately engineer disruption and encourage degeneracy that breaks society down.  They revel in chaos. 

The witches of old were burned at the stake for such behavior; behaviors which the "Patriarchy" kept in check before they infested the greater community.  Feminists are lucky that they're only mocked or shunned in modern times.         

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Getting Ready for the Most Beautiful HUGE Long Weekend Ever

I hope you are all enjoying the Juneteenth long weekend and Father’s Day. It seems like we just had a long weekend (because we did) and that another long weekend is almost upon us (because it is). While the 4th of July is always special, this being the 250th celebration of Independence is a big deal. I think the President will do everything in his power to make it a big deal. More on that in a moment.

The Deal, or Extended Ceasefire, or MOU

Academy’s Geopolitical Intelligence Group weighed in on the Iran deal on Thursday in the Signing of the MOU. That followed up on the Academy Podcast (which can also be found on iTunes and Spotify), recorded before details of the MOU were known, but covered much of what happened. A good listen if you are driving anywhere today! I’m sure the kids in the back seat would appreciate it.         

Over the weekend, the fragility of the deal is there for everyone to see! If this seems even more like a band-aid solution to get oil flowing while deciding how serious Iran is to committing to terms we want, while we determine if we are willing to re-escalate, then that is probably what it is! Academy will be keeping a close eye on developments. 

The Fed and Rates 

As discussed in our post-FOMC report The Warsh Task Forces, I think he did an excellent job at his first meeting. Rather than coming across as dovish and risking losing control of the long end of the yield curve, he not only hammered home on inflation (squarely placing the blame on prior decisions by the Fed, amongst other things), but he also created task forces, that by and large made sense. If I could get picked to go on any task force, I would beg and plead to be allowed to be part of the Data Sources task force. As anyone who has read the T-Report for a long time (it has to be approaching 15 years) knows, we consistently argue about Garbage In, Garbage Out. That we make so many important decisions on data that seems jumbled together at best, and outright wrong at worst. My favorite targets are: 

• The entire collection process for the NFP data. Surveys? Really? Can’t we offer some reduction on payroll tax in return for providing timely payroll information? It wouldn’t be perfect, but would create a lot less noise around a large percentage of the work force. 
  • The Household Survey is deemed so wildly inaccurate that they don’t even highlight the job changes in that survey, but they use it for calculating the Unemployment Rate?
  • The birth/death model. We have argued again and again that this is a source of so many revisions because it does not capture what EIN (Employment Identification Number) requests mean in a “gig” or “side hustle” economy! 
• CPI, starting with Owners’ Equivalent Rent. It has built in lags that only sample a fraction each month. It is still based on single family homes, rather than apartments. It is an estimate of what a homeowner could get if they rented. With so many indices out there showing real-time rent (including one the Cleveland Fed developed) it is time to ditch this. Though, since it is in CPI, it requires an act of Congress to change, since it impacts Social Security. Seems like a no-brainer to me, but wouldn’t bet on this no-brainer being fixed any time soon.
  • According to the CPI data Urban Medical Health Insurance costs the same today as it did back in 2019. I couldn’t say that with a straight face, yet it is part of CPI. If you wonder why many argue that the inflation numbers don’t match the real world, this would be pretty high on my list. My gut feel is that for most people (and corporations) health insurance premiums have gone up at least 25% (according to Grok) and that still seems low.
  • While Truflation has its own set of potential flaws, it does offer some useful insights and seems like just one of many alternative sources the government should look at.

At the risk of burying the lede, as we published on Wednesday after the meeting, we are moving to neutral on rates, rather than being bearish. Warsh removed some near-term tail risk to the long end.

Reducing the tail risk is significant and the MOVE index (a measure of implied volatility in the bond market) dropped to pre-Iran levels (the MOU helped as well, but the steep drop Thursday can likely be more attributed to Warsh than Iran).

Space and AI

If you missed last weekend’s report on the AI Revolution and Space – The NOW Frontier, it is a great time to catch up.

The topic generated a lot of discussion, with a good mix of people hating on the AI Revolution assessment – almost equal numbers of those who argued I was too pessimistic mixed with those arguing I was too optimistic

The 250th 4th of July Celebration

Why did we use “beautiful” and “HUGE” in the title? Because those are words the President likes to use when pumping something up. Whether we are talking about the ball room, or the reflecting pool, the President has been doing and saying things to spruce up D.C. We can argue (or choose not to argue) about hosting a “sporting” event on the White House Lawn. But this President is a showman, who likes a spectacle and the 250th anniversary is real, important, and is highly likely something that the President wants to go down in history for.

The reality is that the President by almost every poll is near or at the bottom of his approval ratings. I tried to use some of the Nate Silver polling info, but it was not conducive to cut and paste so I went with the Real Clear Politics one (not because I know much about it, but it was readily available on Bloomberg).

What do we know, with a high degree of certainty, about President Trump?

• He likes winning! We all like winning, but he revels in it! He still wins club championship after club championship with a swing no one would try to mimic. He loves winning! The bigger and more beautiful the win, the better!
  • Current polls don’t show him as “winning.”
• His attention and focus have been on Iran, but he can now shift his attention elsewhere.
  • Trump 2.0 delegates better than Trump 1.0, but nothing gets done as quickly as when he shifts his attention and focus to it. With the Iran war more or less behind us (or behind him, for now), look for him to focus on the Domestic Economy and things he can do to get his numbers higher!
  • I am going to mention Intel. From ProSec 2026 we published an entire paragraph on INTC (which is unusual for the T-Report, but was important enough that we did it). Here is the line that I want to highlight on why we were so bullish on this stock:
    • I find it difficult to see a world where the government doesn’t try to support the taxpayers’ investment in this company.
  • My thesis went well beyond that, but that is the part that we wanted to highlight! I strongly believed that the admin would support the taxpayers’ investment. On Thursday, the President put out a Truth Social post linking Apple to using Intel more. I am not sure either company confirmed it, but with only 2 weeks to go before the 250th anniversary, maybe this sort of “pump” by the President is going to be the norm?
  • We mention other companies and industries in that report (far more tickers than usual). I think we should revisit all of those tickers and a renewed focus and emphasis from D.C. on ProSec.

ProSec is going global. Europe is nearing a “Whatever it Takes” moment. Initially they started that march to the precipice kicking and screaming, while being pushed by the President and geopolitical risk. Europe is still by and large being pushed in this direction, with less kicking and screaming. There is increasing evidence that there are finally elements of leadership pulling them in that direction! (This applies to Canada too).

Bottom Line

The outlook for rates is more benign than at any time in the past few months. I’m not yet bullish, but certainly not bearish here. Look for the President to make announcements and pronouncements (I think there is a subtle difference) in the coming days as he almost certainly wants stocks to be at an all-time high and his ratings to be higher, as we celebrate America’s 250th anniversary of winning Independence!

Hope you are enjoying this long weekend and Father’s Day and now the U.S. just needs to figure out a way to wedge in a long weekend in August! We could get used to monthly long weekends.

And once again, thanks for all of your support and thoughtful feedback as the world is evolving rapidly and Academy, with its Geopolitical Intelligence Group, is positioned to help navigate that evolution sectors and focus again on what areas will do well with

The Financial Times appears eager to frame MSCI's decision to assign SpaceX the "lowest possible ESG rating" as a major reputational blow. However, the real story is that the entire ESG movement on Wall Street has imploded, and anyone grounded in reality and common sense has increasingly viewed the whole woke era as counterproductive.

"The triple C assessment means SpaceX has the same score as that awarded to the Russian state on MSCI's ESG government rating scale in the wake of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine," FT journalist Ramsay Hodgson wrote. 

This same ESG ratings regime gives triple-A ratings to oil majors and major defense companies, while giving one of America's most important rocket and space companies a bottom-tier grade. That only suggests there are major flaws in the ESG scoring model.

Here are the publicly visible MSCI ESG ratings: 

Oil/Gas

Defense

"Exxon is rated top ten best in world for environment, social & governance (ESG) by S&P 500, while Tesla didn't make the list!" Musk wrote on X several years ago. 

Musk is right... 

• Companies With Good ESG Scores Pollute Just As Much As Those With Low Ones, New Analysis Finds

Here's what X users are saying:

Just checked. MSCI has handed Lockheed Martin the exemplary AA rating. They want you to believe the arms manufacturer has a more ethical and sustainable business model than a space exploration venture. Twisted.

— Ejder Memis (@_sHx_) June 21, 2026

None gives a flying fuck about ESG except people who want the west to fail.

— Packet (@PacketGroove) June 21, 2026

Elon Musk will never again be in the cool kids club and this is just another example of that. ESG is just another clique with its set of rules designed to welcome those firms that shackle themselves with silly rules.

It is great that Musk and Luckey as well, refuse to bend…

— Ken Hannig (@FlushingKenny) June 21, 2026

Its Time to permanently excise the term ESG from polite conversation, and ridicule those who use it.

— JayBlake (@punishedMTL) June 21, 2026

Right back at you MSCI pic.twitter.com/8tDnWjcmXt

— boog (@steevwithv) June 21, 2026

Proves to me that ESG is a f-ing joke.

— Matt (@grghost) June 21, 2026

Musk added, "ESG is a scam. It has been weaponized by phone social justice warriors."

Donald Trump does not like the word "no." He likes it even less when it comes from John Thune, the Senate majority leader whose job description apparently does not include telling the president what he wants to hear. That dynamic has now spilled into public view, and the fallout says as much about the state of the Republican Party as it does about any single piece of legislation.

The flashpoint is the SAVE America Act. The House passed it back in February, but it remains stalled in the Senate due to the Democrats’ filibuster.

The SAVE America Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, mandate voter ID at polling places, and sharply curtail mail-in voting. For Trump and a sizable chunk of the conservative base, this is common-sense election integrity; polls show tremendous bipartisan support for it.

Trump has grown tired of waiting. Last week, he tied the SAVE America Act to FISA Section 702 reauthorization, the surveillance authority that lets intelligence agencies monitor foreign nationals without a warrant. Congress let that authority lapse for the first time since 2008, and Trump made clear he intends to use it as leverage. "I will not approve FISA without THE SAVE AMERICA ACT going along with it," he posted on Truth Social. That is not a man asking nicely.

Thune was unmoved.

"The president has his own mind, makes his own decisions," he said. "So do we."

Read that as you like, but it does not sound like a man rushing to fall in line.

According to a person close to Trump who spoke with The Wall Street Journal, the president's frustration stems from being told “no” rather than "no, let me try." 

A Thune ally pushed back on the Journal's reporting, arguing the majority leader is not the real obstacle here. Trump simply does not have the votes. That is a fair point, and it gets at something deeper than personal chemistry: the SAVE America Act faces a math problem before it faces a Thune problem.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told the Journal that Thune is "telling the president the truth" and that "the problem is the president doesn't like hearing that when it frustrates what he wants to do." Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) offered a gentler diagnosis, describing the clash as one of temperament rather than substance. Trump's "skill set is to vocalize everything," she said, while Thune's is "more quietly engaging." She added, "I don't think they're mutually exclusive." Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) never one to pass up a colorful comparison, likened Trump to the ruthless sales trainer from Glengarry Glen Ross during a closed-door GOP lunch, according to Punchbowl News. On the Senate math itself, Kennedy was characteristically blunt with the Journal: "I mean, I want a Porsche for my birthday. I'm not going to get it."

Trump has not limited himself to public jabs, either. He summoned House Speaker Mike Johnson to the White House to discuss personnel disputes and the lapsed FISA law, conspicuously leaving Thune out of the conversation. He has also been quietly polling Republican senators on their views of Thune's leadership, a clear signal that his patience with the majority leader is running thin.

Sources also told The Daily Caller that Thune privately admitted to GOP senators during a closed-door lunch on Wednesday that some Republicans simply will not back the SAVE Act because they cannot stand Trump, regardless of the bill's merits.

The admission reportedly set off a heated exchange between Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), the bill's chief sponsor, and colleagues, including Cornyn, who challenged Lee's push alongside Thune.

"Yeah, that totally happened," one source familiar with the meeting told The Daily Caller. Thune's office denied the account outright, calling it "a baseless claim" that is "unequivocally untrue."

A president quietly canvassing his own party and questioning the Senate majority leader’s leadership is a power struggle over who actually runs the Republican agenda. Trump clearly sees Thune as a roadblock he's preparing to remove.

 

Summary

• Round 1 ends: Vance cites "great progress" and says talks will continue.
• Iran defiant, sees itself in strong position: Ghalibaf rejects US threats and links talks to a Lebanon ceasefire.
• Trump raises stakes via some typical Truth Social lashing out: Warns on Hormuz, Lebanon, and keeps military options on the table.
• Nuclear progress?: Some reports say not addressed, others suggest framework already being worked on.

*  *  *

First Round Switzerland Talks Concluded, But with Some Ending Fireworks

Al Jazeera is reporting that talks have 'concluded' - but is this in actuality a premature conclusion given all the tension and heated issues of disagreement which came to the forefront?

• GHALIBAF: THEY'D BE BETTER OFF BEING CAREFUL W/ THEIR REMARKS
• IRAN'S GHALIBAF: WE DON'T ATTACH ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO US THREATS
• IRAN PARLIAMENT SPEAKER GHALIBAF COMMENTS ON X
• IRAN WILL END TALKS W/ US IF ISRAEL WON'T LEAVE LEBANON: TASNIM
• IRAN SAYS TRUMP'S THREAT IS A 'BLATANT VIOLATION' OF MOU

Below is a machine translation of what Iran's lead negotiator just issued on X as the day in Switzerland came to an end (also, another translation)...

"Do they not realize that if their threats actually worked, they wouldn't find themselves in today's position of desperation? We don't take American threats seriously.

They should be careful about what they say. Our armed forces stand ready to answer them in other ways. They can keep talking—it's we who take action."

This is immediately on the heels of Trump playing 'bad cop' to Vance's good cop, who has expressed some cautious optimism on Sunday from Switzerland. Bloomberg is reporting that the nuclear file was not dealt with in today's engagement.

The fact that the Swiss event happened at all can be called advancement on some level at least...

This is historic!

Not because US and Iranian diplomats haven't met face to face before. Or that they haven't been on camera before (they were regularly during the JCPOA talks)

But never at the Vice President level!

You can see both Aragchi and JD Vance in this clip. pic.twitter.com/jeNBPeQmgr

— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) June 21, 2026

Rumors of Iranians already calling it quits are false, reports Axios:

A diplomat attending the talks in Switzerland claims the Iranian delegation hasn't left and talks between the U.S. and Iran are still ongoing https://t.co/oQ1UkXwqYv

— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) June 21, 2026

 

Trump Reminds Iran Of 'Harder' Military Options On Table

With Vance and Witkoff in Switzerland, President Trump is still issuing some US redlines via Truth Social, and via apparent 'official leaks' - and quite quickly - through the press.

Trump is warning the Iranians on the sticking points of Hormuz closure and the Lebanon crisis. He has newly threatened on Sunday to hit Iran again if it can't constrain its proxies, namely Hezbollah, in Lebanon. In parallel, Tehran is demanding that Washington reign in Israel. A fresh Sunday Truth Social... brief but firm:

And more on some fresh reported warnings and pressure coming from Trump:

"You close it and you won't have a country." President Trump said he told Iranian officials about the Strait of Hormuz. "You won't even make it back to your fu*king country."

"We may take over the Strait, if we have to," Trump said. "If they don't make a deal, we'll collect… pic.twitter.com/cErvdjCJmK

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) June 21, 2026

As the American delegation continues the high-stakes negotiations in Switzerland aimed at de-escalating, the White House is projecting cautious optimism while simultaneously reminding Tehran that military options remain firmly on the table.

Speaking as talks entered a critical phase, Vice President JD Vance said Sunday from Switzerland Washington has "made great progress over the last few hours" and expects "additional progress in the coming hours," describing the negotiations as an opportunity to "turn over a new leaf" in US-Iran relations. Vance emphasized that the administration's preference is not to return to the cycle of confrontation, adding that the US is willing to fundamentally transform ties with Iran if Tehran permanently abandons its nuclear ambitions.

"The question is how much more we can achieve in the Middle East," Vance said, while expressing confidence regarding the Lebanon front and signaling satisfaction with ongoing efforts to contain broader regional escalation.

"Better Watch His Mouth": Trump to Iran President via Media

Yet Trump has just delivered a stark reminder of the consequences should negotiations fail. According to Fox News, Trump warned Iranian officials that closing the Strait of Hormuz would be an existential mistake, reportedly telling Tehran that it "won't have a country" if it attempts to choke off global energy flows, in the segment above. Trump also issued a personal warning to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, saying he "better watch his mouth," while reports indicated the president used unusually blunt language during discussions with Iranian intermediaries over the strategic waterway.

President Trump spoke with the Iranians overnight warning them not to close the Strait.

"You close it and you won't have a country," Trump said he told Iranian officials. "You won't even make it back to your fu*king country."

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) June 21, 2026

Perhaps most notably, Trump reiterated that he retains a "60-day option" and can "do whatever" he deems necessary after that period expires, a statement widely interpreted as preserving the possibility of renewed military action. The president also reportedly threatened additional strikes against Iran should Tehran's regional proxies in Lebanon resume attacks or undermine the emerging diplomatic framework.

The result is a familiar carrot-and-stick approach as talks are unfolding under the shadow of explicit US military threats and a rapidly approaching deadline that could determine whether the region moves toward détente or another round of escalation. But Iran has also made known that it is ready of a long war, but will Trump be willing to risk enduring the political and economic fallout?

Qatari, Pakistani Top Leaders Present, Optimistic Initial Statements

Qatar's Foreign Ministry has formally confirmed the launch of the talks between the United States and Iran with the mediation of Qatar and Pakistan in Switzerland, with the Iranian delegation headed by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

US Vice President JD Vance is leading the American side along with envoy Steve Witkoff. Also gathered at the Buergenstock Resort Lake Lucerne, near Stansstad, are Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

Qatar has expressed "its aspiration that these meetings will lead to the conclusion of a comprehensive and permanent agreement addressing all aspects covered in the Memorandum of Understanding." Iran has reiterated it wants a comprehensive settlement and final end to the war. But it also demands a final Lebanon-Israel peace settlement be linked in. Already there could be an inkling of progress on the nuclear front:

• PAKISTAN:US, IRAN AGREED ON REDUCTION OF ENRICHED URANIUM LEVEL
• PAKISTAN:IRAN'S ENRICHED URANIUM TO BE REDUCED FROM 60% TO 0.7%
• IRAN PRESIDENT SAYS QATAR TO RELEASE $6B AS TALKS START: IRNA

The last time Vance sat physically across from Iran's lead negotiator Ghalibaf was a full ten weeks ago, in mid-April. Interactions appear to initially be only through intermediaries, which will build up to face-to-face meetings, as happened in prior failed rounds. 

What to Expect in 1st Round Format

Qatar's foreign ministry has previewed the following planned format to the opening of the talks as follows:

• The ministry statement says “specialized technical and expert groups have been formed to negotiate the terms of the final agreement, which will cover all aspects of the Memorandum of Understanding” between the US and Iran.
• “Additionally, follow-up groups have been established to oversee the implementation of the Memorandum, monitor progress achieved, and work toward the conclusion of the final agreement,” it added.
• “This reflects the commitment of all parties to moving forward in the negotiation process in good faith, with the aim of reaching a comprehensive and sustainable agreement.”

Of course, in terms of "implementation" of just the MoU itself, things are not quite there yet, as sporadic fighting and Israeli aerial attacks continue in Lebanon, which could serve to derail the Switzerland process at any moment.

After roughly 45 min, the bilateral meeting between FM @araghchi and his Swiss counterpart @ignaziocassis came to a close at Bürgenstock Hotel. Quadrilateral talks between Iran, the US, Pakistan, and Qatar are expected to commence shortly at another venue on the same premises. pic.twitter.com/hOmovguWFs

— IRNA News Agency ? (@IrnaEnglish) June 21, 2026

Additionally, Iran has declared it has 'closed' the Strait of Hormuz just this weekend, but which the US military has been denying is a reality. VP Vance in media appearances has also been downplaying it.

The Lebanon situation seems the bigger, more pressing threat to the peace process - at least from Tehran's point of view. Dozens of people in Lebanon have been killed while at least six Israeli soldiers have been slain, with 20 wounded over past days of Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks.

Trump Between a Rock & A Hard Place Where Escalation is Concerned

As a reminder, President Trump doesn't want to oversee an economic catastrophe driven by a worldwide energy crisis. It seems he's ready to anything to not let it happen under his watch:

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he was motivated to finalize the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran to prevent “economic catastrophe” if the war was not resolved soon.

“So rather than possibly going into a depression, rather than having your favorite president be Herbert Hoover, he was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump said of the 31st president whose policies are often blamed for starting the Great Depression.

“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe. If you kept this going, that could have happened. But all I know is, every time we talked about the possibility of peace, the stock market shot up like a rocket ship,” Trump said during a press conference Wednesday on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Évian, France.

And so judging by this and other of recent Trump admissions, Iran clearly enters Switzerland in very strong negotiation position. Its current rhetoric regarding the Strait of Hormuz also reveals this.

JD Vance met with Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Asim Munir in Switzerland.pic.twitter.com/5bteI1Vtyu

— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 21, 2026

Tehran has accused the US of a "clear breach of its commitments" and announced Saturday that "the Strait of Hormuz will be closed to the passage of vessels," according to state broadcaster IRIB.

More Details on Format

For more on the details of the format, CNN has reported some further information in the following:

• When and where do the talks start? US and Iranian negotiators will begin their meeting at around 1 p.m local time (7 a.m. ET) at the Swiss mountain resort of Bürgenstock, an Iranian source told CNN.
• Who will be there? Both the United States and Iran have sent high-level officials to Switzerland. Vice President JD Vance is heading up the US side, while Iran’s lead negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, will lead Tehran’s delegation, Iranian media outlet Saberin News reported Saturday.
• What format will they take? Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, who is part of the Iranian team, earlier told state media “the Iran-US talks will be held in a quadrilateral format, with the presence of Pakistani and Qatari delegations.”
• What will be discussed? Lebanon is likely set to top the agenda after clashes between Israel and Hezbollah threatened the nascent agreement between the US and Iran. Vance says he hoped he would make advancements on negotiations surrounding the handling of Iran’s nuclear materials.

Long Road Ahead

To put things in perspective about the long road ahead, analyst and reporter James Bayes - who is on the ground for the talks in Switzerland, has offered the following: "This is a very different deal from the Iran nuclear deal that was done by [former US] President Barack Obama … things have changed completely. But I think it’s worth looking at that deal for one reason, which is the timeline – how long these things take."

"Because when they did an interim deal then, in November 2013 until the final deal in 2015, it took 597 days," the correspondent added. "So, even though the circumstances have changed – it’s a very different deal and they’ve got the knowledge of that deal as well which is helpful – it’s a lot to do in just 60 days."