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
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 18:25:00 +0000 They're "Playing A Very Dangerous Game": Trump Slaps 10% Tariff On 8 European Countries Opposing Greenland Deal
They're "Playing A Very Dangerous Game": Trump Slaps 10% Tariff On 8 European Countries Opposing Greenland Deal
"These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not ten
Read more.....
They're "Playing A Very Dangerous Game": Trump Slaps 10% Tariff On 8 European Countries Opposing Greenland Deal
"These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable," warned President Trump as he escalated his quest to acquire Greenland, threatening multiple European nations with tariffs of up to 25 percent until his purchase of the Danish territory is achieved.
A 10% tariff "on any and all goods sent to the United States of America" will impact Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland starting Feb. 1, according to a Truth Social post on Jan. 17. .
On June 1st, 2026, the Tariff will be increased to 25% .
The countries are all NATO members.
“This Tariff will be due and payable until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland,” Trump wrote.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that the United States needs Greenland for US "national security."
"We have subsidized Denmark, and all of the Countries of the European Union, and others, for many years by not charging them Tariffs, or any other forms of remuneration.
Now, after Centuries, it is time for Denmark to give back — World Peace is at stake!
China and Russia want Greenland, and there is not a thing that Denmark can do about it. They currently have two dogsleds as protection, one added recently. Only the United States of America, under PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP, can play in this game, and very successfully, at that! Nobody will touch this sacred piece of Land, especially since the National Security of the United States, and the World at large, is at stake . "
Trump warned the NATO members that they are playing "a very dangerous game":
"On top of everything else, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Finland have journeyed to Greenland, for purposes unknown.
This is a very dangerous situation for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Planet. These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable.
Therefore, it is imperative that, in order to protect Global Peace and Security, strong measures be taken so that this potentially perilous situation end quickly, and without question. "
Meanwhile in Nuuk , the capital of Greenland, thousands of people, including the territory's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, waved Greenlandic flags, chanted slogans and sang traditional Inuit songs under light rain.
Many wore caps with the words "Make America Go Away" - a riff on Trump's "Make America Great Again" slogan.
President Trump is unmoved by the small protests, noting the timeliness of getting a deal done now:
"The United States has been trying to do this transaction for over 150 years . Many Presidents have tried, and for good reason, but Denmark has always refused.
Now, because of The Golden Dome, and Modern Day Weapons Systems, both Offensive and Defensive, the need to ACQUIRE is especially important ."
He went on to reiterate the specifics of why Greenland is so crucial for national security:
"Hundreds of Billions of Dollars are currently being spent on Security Programs having to do with "The Dome,” including for the possible protection of Canada, and this very brilliant, but highly complex system can only work at its maximum potential and efficiency, because of angles, metes, and bounds, if this Land is included in it.
The United States of America is immediately open to negotiation with Denmark and/or any of these Countries that have put so much at risk, despite all that we have done for them, including maximum protection, over so many decades."
The remarks came as a bipartisan Congressional delegation (led by Chris Coons, a Democratic senator from Delaware) arrived in Denmark to try and de-escalate the situation.
Stephen Miller, an influential presidential adviser, said the president had been “clear” he wanted America to control the island and rejected suggestions it should simply increase its military presence there in response to what Trump claims is a growing military threat from Russia and China.
“They want us to spend hundreds of billions of dollars defending a territory for them that is 25 per cent bigger than Alaska at 100 per cent American expense, but they say while we do this, it belongs 100 per cent to Denmark,” Miller said on Fox News.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 13:25 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 17:50:00 +0000 Dems Need A Serious, Grown-Up Approach To The Border
Dems Need A Serious, Grown-Up Approach To The Border
Dems Need A Serious, Grown-Up Approach To The Border
Authored by Ruy Teixeira via The Liberal Patriot ,
Back in 1956, Elvis Presley recorded his massive hit “Don’t Be Cruel .” With all due respect to the King, this great song has many virtues but providing a guide to policy isn’t one of them. Yet it appears to be dictating Democrats’ current approach to the red-hot immigration issue despite its profound inadequacy in the policy realm.
Consider that Democrats have been unremittingly hostile to Trump’s immigration policy since he began his second term, despite its undisputed success in completely shutting down the southern border to illegal immigration. Instead, Democrats have focused relentlessly on the question of interior enforcement —that is, the activities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) aimed at detaining and deporting illegal immigrants currently living within the United States. The general approach has been to portray all ICE actions as essentially illegitimate, arbitrary and, well, cruel .
Conspicuously lacking has been any recognition that, in fact, interior enforcement against illegal immigration is an entirely legitimate law enforcement operation and that ICE is the government agency charged with these legitimate activities. Therefore, what ICE does is presumptively legitimate not illegitimate.
Democratic treatment of ICE has turned this on its head ; their activities are presumptively viewed as illegitimate and if there are any legitimate ICE actions, Democrats are being mighty quiet about it. Instead, characterizations of ICE as a modern-day Gestapo, Nazis, an occupying force, etc have become so common as to be unremarkable. This attitude has led Democrats down a path where their policy on interior enforcement against illegal immigration seems to amount to: “Don’t do it! Don’t be cruel! ”
Of course, there is much not to like about how ICE has gone about their business, all of which has been copiously documented . This has been red meat to those sectors of blue America and their political representatives whose revealed preference is not to deport anyone . Think about those ubiquitous “In This House, We Believe” signs in liberal professional-class neighborhoods.
The ICE/interior enforcement issue hits the Daily Double for the “In This House, We Believe” crowd. No human is illegal. Check. Kindness is everything. Check. These may be utterly useless as guides to effective, sustainable immigration policy but they sure do get the juices flowing.
That’s why, from Los Angles to Minneapolis, Democratic activists have felt completely justified in interfering with ICE activities and Democratic politicians in refusing to cooperate with a duly constituted federal law enforcement agency. And that’s why, especially with the tragic recent death of Renee Good , calls of “Abolish ICE!” are beginning to ring out across wide sectors of the Democratic Party. There is no good ICE, only bad ICE. There is no legitimate ICE, only illegitimate ICE.
This is the logical terminus of an attitude that starts with no human being is illegal and kindness is everything. Since ICE’s remit is that illegal immigrants are, in fact, illegal and that the law must be followed, even if the outcome is not particularly kind, it only makes sense to get rid of the agency.
This is a terrible idea in so many different ways. As a very useful new memo from the reform Democratic group Searchlight points out:
[S]aying you want to “Abolish ICE”…means that you support getting rid of the agency responsible for enforcing immigration and customs laws, creating a lawless system where people who enter the country illegally can stay here indefinitely, leaving no agency charged with finding and removing them. This will, inevitably, incentivize others to come to the United States illegally. “Abolish ICE” is not some proxy for more humane immigration enforcement, or to change ICE’s culture to adhere to due process, or to impose accountability on rogue officers. It’s advocating for an extreme.
Unless you truly believe that the United States should not have an agency that enforces immigration and customs laws within our borders, and you want to increase illegal immigration, you should not say you want to abolish ICE…[W]e will always need a federal agency charged with deporting people who are in the United States illegally.
That’s clearly correct as a matter of policy. Democrats need to reflect that in how they talk about ICE or the momentum will continue to shift toward those in the party who simply want to get rid of the agency entirely.
And that would be a disaster. The reasonable—and popular —desire to reform ICE practices would inevitably be subsumed in a contentious debate about abolishing the agency. This is not likely to turn out well for the Democrats despite the solid basis in public opinion for some reform and pullback of ICE activities. Abolishing ICE will likely never be generally popular, despite its sky-high popularity with Democrats where there has been a recent spike in support .
Instead, as the Searchlight memo points out, Democrats will be setting themselves up for a rerun of the “Defund the Police” debacle , also driven by a viral incident (and also in Minneapolis!). A maximalist demand like “Abolish ICE” will serve only to signal a lack of Democratic commitment to immigration enforcement, just as defund the police signaled a lack of Democratic commitment to public safety. This is highly undesirable both for the Democrats politically and for the general cause of reforming ICE practices.
A further lesson from the recent past is provided by the Democratic reaction to Trump’s border crackdowns in his first administration. Seizing on some well-publicized excesses, Democrats pilloried Trump for being cruel and inhumane and promised to be different. And they were! They were kind and humane—and also completely ineffective at controlling the border and preventing abuse of the asylum system once they got back in power, producing the huge wave of illegal and irregular immigration that discredited the Democrats and helped Trump win the 2024 election. “Don’t be cruel” didn’t work out so well then and it won’t work out so well now, either in or out of power.
Democrats instead need to get beyond mindless slogans like “Abolish ICE” and blanket opposition to everything ICE does and embrace what I have termed immigration realism . That approach means taking on board the following realities of immigration into this rich country of ours:
Many more people want to come to a rich country like the United States than an orderly immigration system can allow.
Therefore, many people are willing to break the laws of our country to gain entry.
If you do not enforce the law, you will get more law-breakers and therefore more illegal immigrants.
If you provide procedural loopholes to gain entry into the country (e.g., by claiming asylum), many people will abuse these loopholes.
Once these illegal and irregular immigrants gain entry to the country, they will seek to stay indefinitely regardless of their immigration status.
If interior immigration enforcement is lax, such that these illegal and irregular immigrants do mostly get to stay forever, that provides a tremendous incentive for others to try to gain entry to the country via the same means.
If you provide benefits and dispensations to all immigrants in the country, regardless of their immigration status, this further incentivizes aspiring immigrants to gain entry to the country by any means necessary.
Tolerance of flagrant law-breaking on a mass scale contributes to a sense of social disorder and loss of control among a country’s citizens, who believe a nation’s borders are meaningful and that the welfare of a nation’s citizens should come first.
There is, in fact, such a thing as too much immigration, particularly low-skill immigration, and negative effects on communities and workers are real, not just in the imaginations of xenophobes.
If more immigration is desired by parties or policymakers, from whichever countries and at whatever skill levels, then immigration should be regular, legal immigration and approved by the American people through the democratic process. Backdooring mass immigration over the wishes of voters because it is “kind” or “reflects our values” or is deemed “economically necessary” leads inevitably to backlash. Wheelbarrows full of econometric studies on immigration’s aggregate benefits will not save you.
Obviously, the current Democratic vogue for treating all ICE activities as illegitimate and susceptibility to dumb maximalist slogans like “Abolish ICE” points them in precisely the wrong direction for dealing with the thorny and complex realities of the immigration issue. They’re just setting themselves up for future failure.
In short, it’s time to stop coddling the “In This House, We Believe” crowd and adopt a serious, grown-up approach to immigration and immigrants. “Don’t Be Cruel” isn’t gonna cut it.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 12:50 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 17:15:00 +0000 DOJ Probes Gov. Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Over Alleged Effort To Obstruct ICE
DOJ Probes Gov. Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Over Alleged Effort To Obstruct ICE
The Justice Department is investigating leftist Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey over an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agen
Read more.....
DOJ Probes Gov. Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Over Alleged Effort To Obstruct ICE
The Justice Department is investigating leftist Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey over an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agents during deportation operations, sources familiar with the matter told CBS News .
Sources say the probe centers on statements Walz and Frey have made about ICE and Border Patrol agents deployed to the sanctuary city in recent weeks. Subpoenas have not yet been issued, but sources said that could be nearing.
Details remain scant about the specific comments by Walz and Frey that DOJ investigators have focused on, but there is a recent interview in which the mayor acknowledges the existence of a network of left-wing nonprofits organizing pressure campaigns in the city. He stopped just short of identifying which nonprofits were involved.
The focus of DOJ investigators and the White House should be the rapid-response efforts of militant left-wing groups and rogue nonprofits that were quick to activate their foot soldiers to unleash a pressure campaign against ICE agents. It was not just Minneapolis; this dark-money-funded NGO network was activated in other sanctuary cities, like New York City, within hours.
New York City councilwoman Vickie Paladino said it best on X:
ICE is doing what should be very mundane work of deporting people who aren't allowed to be in the country anymore, by law. Just as they have for years.
However, a bunch of lunatics, encouraged by the media and reckless democrat officials, have decided that basic immigration enforcement is 'literally fascism' and declared war, turning routine enforcement activity into dangerous civil war cosplay. And people are getting hurt because of it.
The federal government has every right to enforce immigration law, in every jurisdiction of the country. The legal fiction of the 'sanctuary city' is completely irrelevant.
Municipalities don't get to set their own immigration policy, and they don't get to obstruct federal law enforcement.
And they certainly don't get to foment and deploy an army of dangerous foot soldiers to physically attack federal agents, for no other reason than a political disagreement over immigration law. It's actually insane that this even needs to be said.
These people are coming dangerously close to committing insurrection, and the consequences of that will be monumental. This is not the fight they want, and everyone with even half a brain should be urging these Democrats to seriously back off immediately.
If Democrats believe our immigration laws are wrong, we have an election coming up in November and they can run on an explicit platform of repealing these laws, ending immigration enforcement, and re-opening the border.
But they won't, because they know that platform is a loser outside of a very few very far-left districts. So they'll continue to pretend that routine immigration enforcement is actually a replay of 1939 Germany, and continue to send mentally unwell liberal women and antifa activists out to risk injury and legal peril in order to win a few news cycles.
Very very sad. And it needs to stop.
The manufactured chaos in Minneapolis is part of the Democratic Party’s dark-money-funded NGO network that has spent years sparking riots and chaos nationwide - remember the nation-killing days of BLM riots. This network was also part of the Los Angeles riots last summer, where Marxist protesters burned Waymo vehicles.
President Trump has finally received the memo.
And so has Scott Bessent at Treasury .
It is time for the Trump administration, as General Flynn has said , to address the American people about the Democratic Party’s ongoing color revolution operation that uses the protest-industrial complex to spark riots and chaos .
This is manufactured chaos at its best and really shows Democrats do not actually have a pro-America platform or any economic plan for the working class; they only have protests, riots, and chaos, with an end goal of their Marxist militant faction to loot and destroy.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 12:15 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 16:40:00 +0000 West Virginia Lawmakers Propose Bitcoin Investments With State Funds
West Virginia Lawmakers Propose Bitcoin Investments With State Funds
West Virginia Lawmakers Propose Bitcoin Investments With State Funds
Authored by Micah Zimmerman via Bitcoin Magazine,
West Virginia lawmakers introduced legislation this week that would authorize the state treasurer to invest a portion of public funds in bitcoin, precious metals, and regulated stablecoins, marking a significant step toward integrating digital assets into state-level finance.
West Virginia Senate Bill 143, introduced by Sen. Chris Rose during the 2026 regular legislative session, would create a new section of state law titled the “Inflation Protection Act of 2026.” The measure permits the Board of Treasury Investments to allocate up to 10% of funds it oversees into gold, silver, platinum, and certain digital assets, subject to existing investment rules.
Under the bill, the West Virginia could invest in digital assets that maintained an average market capitalization above $750 billion over the prior calendar year.
That threshold currently limits eligibility to only bitcoin, without naming the asset directly in statute.
At the end of the digital bill, there is text that says “The purpose of this bill is to empower the Treasurer to invest in gold, silver, and bitcoin.”
The bill also allows investments in stablecoins that have received regulatory approval at either the federal or state level.
The proposed 10% cap would apply at the time an investment is made. If asset prices rise and push the allocation above that threshold, the board would not be required to sell holdings, though it would be barred from making additional purchases until the allocation falls back below the limit.
The legislation includes detailed custody requirements for digital assets. Holdings would need to be secured either directly by the West Virginia treasurer through a defined secure custody system, by a qualified third-party custodian, or through a registered exchange-traded product.
The bill outlines standards for key control, geographic redundancy, access controls, audits, and disaster recovery.
In addition to holding digital assets, the bill would allow the treasurer to pursue yield-generating activities. Digital assets could be staked using third-party providers if legal ownership remains with West Virginia. The treasurer could also loan digital assets under rules designed to avoid added financial risk.
Precious metals investments could be held through exchange-traded products, by qualified custodians, or directly by West Virginia in physical form. The bill allows for cooperative custody arrangements with other states, subject to rules established by the treasurer.
West Virginia retirement funds would face tighter limits. Under the proposal, retirement systems could invest only in exchange-traded products registered with federal or state regulators, rather than holding digital assets directly.
The bill grants the treasurer authority to propose implementing rules, which would require legislative approval.
The proposal reflects a growing interest among U.S. states in using bitcoin and hard assets as long-term stores of value for public funds.
West Virginia and other states exploring bitcoin
Several states have explored or enacted similar measures allowing limited exposure to digital assets, though most have relied on exchange-traded products rather than direct custody.
Most recently, Rhode Island lawmakers reintroduced Senate Bill S2021, which would temporarily exempt small Bitcoin transactions from state income and capital gains taxes, allowing up to $5,000 per month and $20,000 annually to be tax-free.
Introduced January 9 by Senator Peter A. Appollonio, the bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee and is framed as a pilot program to reduce tax friction for everyday Bitcoin use.
This marks the second consecutive year Rhode Island legislators have proposed a targeted Bitcoin tax exemption.
West Virginia Senate Bill 143 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Banking and Insurance, with a subsequent referral to the Committee on Finance.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 11:40 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 16:05:00 +0000 Rieder Meets With Trump As Fed Chair Decision Looms, Hassett Now Out Of Contention
Rieder Meets With Trump As Fed Chair Decision Looms, Hassett Now Out Of Contention
Rick Rieder, senior investment executive at BlackRock, met with President Donald Trump yesterday, according to Bloomberg, a development that
Read more.....
Rieder Meets With Trump As Fed Chair Decision Looms, Hassett Now Out Of Contention
Rick Rieder, senior investment executive at BlackRock, met with President Donald Trump yesterday, according to Bloomberg, a development that has intensified speculation around who Trump will choose as his next chair of the Federal Reserve.
The meeting immediately elevated Rieder’s standing in what is now a narrowing field of candidates. Rieder is best known as BlackRock’s chief investment officer for global fixed income, a role that has made him one of the most influential voices in bond markets over the past decade. While he has never served inside the Federal Reserve or in a government policy role, his public views on monetary policy are closely followed by investors and policymakers alike.
Rieder has consistently argued that interest rates remain higher than necessary given how the economy is evolving. He has said the Federal Reserve should be open to cutting rates toward what he views as a more neutral level, often pointing to something closer to 3 percent over time. His thinking reflects concern that keeping policy too restrictive for too long could strain credit markets and slow growth more than intended, particularly as inflation pressures cool unevenly across sectors.
Rather than focusing narrowly on inflation, Rieder tends to emphasize overall financial conditions and market plumbing, a perspective shaped by decades spent navigating bond markets through crises.
He has suggested the Federal Reserve has leaned too heavily on backward-looking inflation metrics and risks overtightening by keeping rates restrictive for too long, even as growth cools and financial conditions do some of the work for policymakers.
Rieder has also raised eyebrows by downplaying fears around large government deficits, arguing that strong demand for U.S. assets and structural forces like aging demographics and high global savings make those deficits more manageable than critics claim. At times, he has gone further, questioning whether inflation slightly above target is necessarily harmful if it helps stabilize debt dynamics and sustain employment, a view that runs counter to the Fed’s traditional emphasis on price stability above all else.
Those views align with Trump’s long-standing criticism of the Fed for maintaining overly tight policy. Trump has made no secret of his desire for a central bank leader who is more willing to lower rates and less inclined to err on the side of restraint. Still, a Rieder nomination would be unconventional, putting a Wall Street asset manager in charge of the institution that sets the benchmark for global interest rates.
At the same time, Trump has begun to publicly rule people out. Last week he signaled that Kevin Hassett will not be his pick, despite months of speculation that the current economic adviser was a leading contender. Trump suggested he wants Hassett to remain in his current role, implying that moving him to the Fed would leave a gap inside the White House. That statement effectively removed one of the most familiar names from consideration.
Source: Polymarket
With Hassett sidelined, the race appears to be tightening around a smaller group. Alongside Rieder, the remaining names most often mentioned include former Fed governor Kevin Warsh and current Fed governor Christopher Waller. Both bring deep experience inside the central bank and would represent a more traditional choice, in contrast to Rieder’s market-driven background.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the decision is coming soon. He has indicated that Trump plans to announce his Fed pick before, or right after Davos, signaling an effort to provide clarity well ahead of the end of Jerome Powell’s term.
With the field narrowing and Trump actively meeting candidates, Rieder’s appearance at the White House underscores that the president could be weighing both conventional and unconventional paths for the future of U.S. monetary policy.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 11:05 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 15:30:00 +0000 Maine Officials Say They're Expecting ICE Operations In Coming Days
Maine Officials Say They're Expecting ICE Operations In Coming Days
Maine Officials Say They're Expecting ICE Operations In Coming Days
Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Top officials in Maine said they are expecting the Trump administration to send Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to the state for enforcement operations soon.
Democratic Gov. Janet Mills on Wednesday in a video uploaded on X said operations may be conducted in the state “in the coming days.”
Mills and other local Democratic officials appeared to make references to protests in Minneapolis that arose after an ICE officer fatally shot driver Renee Good after she drove her vehicle toward the agent. The ICE agent was struck by the vehicle and suffered internal bleeding in the incident, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE.
“If they come here, I want any federal agents—and the president of the United States—to know what this state stands for, ” Mills said, referring to the operation. “We stand for the rule of law. We oppose violence. We stand for peaceful protest. We stand for compassion, for integrity and justice.”
Aside from Mills, Lewiston Mayor Carl Sheline, a Democrat, wrote in a social media post that it was his understanding “that there will be ICE enforcement in ... Lewiston, Maine soon. I urge residents and businesses to know their rights and have a plan of action if ICE stops them in the street, visits their home, or visits their business.”
The mayor of Portland, Maine, also suggested that operations may be coming to his city.
“Portland rejects the need for the deployment of ICE agents into our neighborhoods, ” Portland Mayor Mark Dion, also a Democrat, told local media outlet News Center Maine.
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, Maine in a statement about potential ICE operations that he wants “to encourage everyone to look out a little closer for one another and be mindful of the rights that our Constitution gives to every man, woman, and child in this nation.”
DHS has conducted operations in a number of major U.S. cities since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, targeting illegal immigrants with an emphasis on violent criminal offenders. On Thursday, Trump warned he may invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy troops to quell protests and violence against the federal officers sent to Minneapolis amid an ICE push in the city.
“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State,” Trump wrote in social media post.
Homeland Security also said in a statement that federal law enforcement officers on Wednesday were attacked in Minneapolis by three illegal immigrants with a shovel and broom handle in a bid to evade arrest.
The claims made by local Maine officials did not include details about the expected ICE operations, and DHS has not commented on their statements.
The Epoch Times contacted DHS for comment Thursday but did not hear back by time of publication.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 10:30 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 14:55:00 +0000 The $134 Billion Betrayal: Inside Elon Musk’s Explosive Lawsuit With OpenAI
The $134 Billion Betrayal: Inside Elon Musk’s Explosive Lawsuit With OpenAI
Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft has evolved into a high-stakes dispute over whether OpenAI stayed true to the
Read more.....
The $134 Billion Betrayal: Inside Elon Musk’s Explosive Lawsuit With OpenAI
Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft has evolved into a high-stakes dispute over whether OpenAI stayed true to the mission it was founded on or quietly outgrew it while relying on that original promise.
Musk is seeking between $79 billion and $134 billion in damages, a figure derived from an expert valuation that treats his early funding and contributions as foundational to what OpenAI later became. While the number is enormous, the heart of the case is simpler: Musk argues he helped create and fund a nonprofit dedicated to AI for the public good, and that OpenAI later abandoned that commitment in a way that amounted to fraud.
According to Musk’s filings, his roughly $38 million in early funding was not just a donation but the financial backbone of OpenAI’s formative years, supplemented by recruiting help, strategic guidance, and credibility. His damages theory, prepared by financial economist C. Paul Wazzan, ties those early inputs to OpenAI’s current valuation of around $500 billion.
The claim is framed as disgorgement rather than repayment, with Musk arguing that the vast gains realized by OpenAI and Microsoft flowed from a nonprofit story that attracted support and trust, only to be discarded once the company reached scale, according to TechCrunch .
Much of the public attention has centered on internal documents uncovered during discovery, particularly private notes from OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman in 2017.
One line has become central to Musk’s argument: “I cannot believe that we committed to non-profit if three months later we’re doing b-corp then it was a lie.”
Musk’s legal team treats this as evidence that OpenAI’s leadership understood the nonprofit commitment was being undermined and worried about how that would look to Musk, the organization’s biggest early backer. In Musk’s telling, OpenAI used the nonprofit identity to get off the ground, then pivoted toward for-profit structures and a deep partnership with Microsoft that fundamentally changed who the company served.
The scale of the damages also feeds Musk’s narrative. Given his immense personal wealth, OpenAI has argued that the lawsuit is about money. Musk counters, implicitly, that the size of the claim reflects the size of what was built on the original promise, not personal need. OpenAI, for its part, has characterized the case as part of an “ongoing pattern of harassment” and a tactic to slow a competitor while Musk builds his own AI company.
OpenAI’s response disputes both the facts and the framing. In a blog post responding to Musk’s filings, the company said, “In his latest court filing, Elon cherry-picks and publishes snippets from Greg Brockman’s private journal entries … which, when read with the surrounding context, tell a very different story from what Elon claims.” OpenAI argues that as early as 2017, it was openly discussed that developing advanced AI would require far more capital than a nonprofit could realistically raise, and that Musk was involved in those conversations.
According to OpenAI, Musk agreed that some form of for-profit structure would be necessary, as long as the nonprofit mission continued in some form, OpenAI said in a blog post responding to the lawsuit.
OpenAI also says the relationship unraveled over control, not deception. As the company puts it, “The truth is that we and Elon agreed in 2017 that a for-profit structure would be the next phase for OpenAI; negotiations ended when we refused to give him full control; we rejected his offer to merge OpenAI into Tesla; we tried to find another path to achieve the mission together; and then he quit OpenAI.” From this perspective, Musk left because he could not dictate OpenAI’s future, not because he was misled about it. OpenAI has gone further, calling the lawsuit Musk’s “fourth attempt” at similar claims and “part of a broader strategy of harassment.”
At trial, the fight will hinge on how a jury interprets those internal notes and conversations. Musk says they reveal leaders who knew the nonprofit promise could not survive and worried about admitting it. OpenAI says they show a team struggling honestly with how to fund an ambitious mission without surrendering it, while resisting Musk’s demand for dominance.
The outcome will shape not just who wins or loses billions, but how far Silicon Valley founders can stretch lofty missions before courts decide they crossed the line from evolution into deception.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 09:55 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 14:20:00 +0000 Trump Appoints Rubio, Witkoff, Kushner, And Blair To Gaza 'Board Of Peace'
Trump Appoints Rubio, Witkoff, Kushner, And Blair To Gaza 'Board Of Peace'
Trump Appoints Rubio, Witkoff, Kushner, And Blair To Gaza 'Board Of Peace'
Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,
The White House announced on Jan. 16 the names of members appointed to the Gaza Board of Peace, which President Donald Trump created as part of phase two of a U.S.-backed plan to end the war in Gaza.
Among the “founding executive board” members are U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, presidential special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The board also includes private equity executive Marc Rowan, World Bank President Ajay Banga, and U.S. national security adviser Robert Gabriel, according to a White House statement .
The board, to be chaired by Trump , will oversee the Palestinian technocratic committee—also known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG)—which will be led by former Palestinian Authority official Ali Abdel Hamid Shaath.
The White House said each of the members will be tasked with managing Gaza’s “governance capacity-building, regional relations, reconstruction, investment attraction, large-scale funding, and capital mobilization,” which it said are vital to the enclave’s stability and long-term success.
The administration also named Aryeh Lightstone and Josh Gruenbaum as senior advisers to manage the board’s daily strategy and operations, and appointed Nickolay Mladenov, a Bulgarian diplomat and former United Nations envoy to the Middle East, as the high representative for Gaza.
Trump also tapped Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers to lead the International Stabilization Force, which will oversee security operations and the safe delivery of humanitarian aid and reconstruction materials to Gaza.
The administration also announced a separate 11-member executive board, comprising some of the founding members, which will support both the technocratic committee and Mladenov’s office.
The executive board includes Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Qatari diplomat Ali Al-Thawadi, Major General Hassan Rashad - head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Service, UAE minister for international cooperation Reem Al-Hashimy, Israeli-Cypriot billionaire Yakir Gabay, and Dutch diplomat and U.N. envoy Sigrid Kaag.
The White House said more members of both boards will be announced in the coming weeks.
“The United States remains fully committed to supporting this transitional framework, working in close partnership with Israel, key Arab nations, and the international community to achieve the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan,” it said.
In announcing the board’s formation on Jan. 15, Trump said the United States will work with Egypt, Turkey, and Qatar to secure an agreement that will require Hamas to surrender all weapons and dismantle its tunnel network.
“Hamas must immediately honor its commitments, including the return of the final body to Israel, and proceed without delay to full Demilitarization,” the president said.
“As I have said before, they can do this the easy way, or the hard way. The people of Gaza have suffered long enough. The time is now.”
The Gaza peace plan, which began in October 2025, is expected to unfold in three phases to achieve the 20-point plan Trump laid out in September last year to end the war in Gaza.
Witkoff said on Jan. 14 that phase two of Trump’s peace plan has started , which involves the complete demilitarization and reconstruction of Gaza.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 09:20 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 13:45:00 +0000 Border Czar Tom Homan Has Plan To Target Anti-Ice Agitators
Border Czar Tom Homan Has Plan To Target Anti-Ice Agitators
Minneapolis has erupted into chaos as anti-ICE mobs rampage through the city. On Wednesday, an ICE agent fired in self-defense after being attacked by three illegal immigra
Read more.....
Border Czar Tom Homan Has Plan To Target Anti-Ice Agitators
Minneapolis has erupted into chaos as anti-ICE mobs rampage through the city. On Wednesday, an ICE agent fired in self-defense after being attacked by three illegal immigrants from Venezuela armed with shovels. Governor Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey have fanned the flames straight out of the 'defund the police' playbook - turning a law enforcement operation into a political flashpoint. The violence has spiraled so far out of control that President Trump has threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807, which would allow him to deploy U.S. troops to Minneapolis to restore order since local leaders won’t.
“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State,” Trump promised in a post on Truth Social on Thursday morning .
Trump has yet to do so - telling reporters on Friday that he doesn't think "there's any reason right now to use it,"
That said, Border Czar Tom Homan offered a strategy that could hit those stirring the chaos hard , and of course may set a dangerous slippery-slope precedent for civil rights when the shoe is on the other foot. Appearing on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle Thursday, Homan made clear that while protesters have the right to demonstrate, crossing the line by interfering with enforcement will carry consequences far beyond a court date.
“This job,” Homan told host Laura Ingraham, “and these people who wanna — you know, follow ICE, film ICE — you know what? You can protest; they have that right. ” But, he added, “when you cross a line, and we’ve proven it, if you interfere or impede or assault an ICE officer, you will be prosecuted. ”
Homan didn’t stop at the threat of prosecution. He said he is urging the Trump administration to take the next step, which is to “make them famous.”
“One thing I’m pushing for right now, Laura,” he said, “we’re gonna create a database, where those people that are arrested for interference, impediment, assault — we’re gonna make ’em famous. We’re gonna put their face on TV. ”
The strategy, he explained, is simple: let employers, neighbors, and schools see who is disrupting federal law enforcement.
“We’re gonna let their employers and their neighborhoods and their schools know who these people are ,” Homan said. “’Cause as you said, a lot of these people, they say they’re taking time off work to protest. I bet you a lot of them are calling in sick. I bet you a lot of their employers don’t know what they’re doing. But we’re going — we’re gonna make sure everybody knows who they are.”
Homan framed the policy as a response to activists who have used social media and livestreaming to amplify confrontations with ICE officers. “They wanna broadcast the ICE officer that was nearly killed all over the internet ,” he said. “We’re gonna broadcast every one of these people we arrest. ”
Homan also revealed that the ICE agent who was ambushed and attacked with shovels is healing and under medical care in a secure location.
“He’s in a secure location not because he's afraid, because of the death threats against his family,” he told Ingraham. “I’m glad he's in a secure location 'cause I myself have seen plenty of intelligence reports that a lot of people want him dead. They want his family dead. So, he's in a safe place right now, healing up, getting the medical attention.”
Full interview below:
VIDEO
According to Homan, neither Mayor Frey nor Gov. Tim Walz has contacted the agent’s family.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 08:45 Close
Sat, 17 Jan 2026 13:10:00 +0000 How The EU Is Messing Up The AI Boom
How The EU Is Messing Up The AI Boom
How The EU Is Messing Up The AI Boom
Authored by Thomas Kolbe via American Thinker ,
Economic prosperity is created in free markets by innovative companies. Over 50 percent of globally operating AI unicorns are located in the U.S., while Europe plays virtually no role. The race for the next future technology is already decided.
It seems that economic history is repeating itself. On the stock markets, companies in the artificial intelligence and data center sectors are being traded feverishly. Massive capital flows into this technology. Much of it resembles the dot-com boom 25 years ago.
Structurally and regionally, little has changed since then: The U.S. and China are fighting for pole position, while the European Union’s economy remains largely on the sidelines, pushed into a spectator role by EU regulators.
Unicorns as a Measure of Innovation
An interesting measure of the EU’s lag in artificial intelligence is the number of so-called unicorns -- private startups valued at at least one billion U.S. dollars before going public . This metric is considered a valid indicator of a region’s innovative capacity -- and for the EU, the comparison with the U.S. is catastrophic.
About 1,700 such innovative companies currently operate in the U.S., while the EU has only around 280. The U.S. dominates this market with over 50 percent share, whereas the European economy lags far behind with less than ten percent of the global market.
This economic gap is also reflected in investment volume. Hyperscalers such as Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta invested over $320 billion in AI and corresponding data center infrastructure this year alone. More than 550 new projects -- with a focus in Virginia, Texas, and Arizona—are forming the backbone of a new economy .
Data center capacity in the U.S. grew by around 160 percent this year, while Europe’s capacity increased by only about 75 percent, equaling an investment volume of just under €100 billion.
With investments of around $125 billion, China’s economy also lags far behind the U.S. An interesting context -- especially from the perspective of European, and particularly German, policymakers -- is that nuclear power is gaining noticeable momentum in these regions.
Even if green-minded Germany refuses to acknowledge it due to its ideological stance against nuclear energy, the enormous energy demand of new technologies will in the future be covered to a significant extent by the expansion of nuclear power.
Among the few major projects in the European Union are the Brookfield project in Sweden, with an investment volume of around $10 billion, and the Start Campus in Portugal, which could also activate nearly $10 billion in investments.
Crash of Ideologies
Especially in AI, the ideological clash between the U.S. and the EU can be observed in practice and in all its consequences. While the U.S. relies on deregulation and private solutions, removing barriers for intense competition, EU Europe still adheres to the mantra of political global control. Nothing may happen unless Brussels officials have schemed it at their green table in all their wisdom.
The Draghi motto still applies here: Only massive public investments -- credit-financed and centrally planned -- will, in the view of EU statist planners, help overcome the enormous gap between Europe and the U.S.
In the simulations of the EU Commission’s master plan, now stretched over seven years under Ursula von der Leyen, everything seems surprisingly simple, almost simplified. The EU’s Invest-AI plan intends to borrow around €50 billion in loans and invest them in selected projects in the coming years. This is supposed to trigger private investments of €150 billion, ultimately creating four AI gigafactories.
Welcome to the socialist textbook world of “Habeckonomics”: a system in which state projects like Northvolt repeatedly fail. Yet as long as public guarantees, subsidies, and state-guaranteed purchase prices are in prospect, the small flame of political hope continues flickering in Europe’s lukewarm wind.
As usual, we also observe the typical European jungle of funding programs , subsidies, and steering projects. These include “Horizon Europe,” which is meant to strengthen computing power in science, the RAISE pilot, and the Gen-AI-4-EU initiative, together investing another billion euros in the EU’s digital infrastructure.
The Power of Competition
The ideological clash between the two major economic blocks, the U.S. and the EU, is producing strange effects. While the open capital market in the U.S. lets startups sprout like mushrooms from fertile soil, EU regulation -- especially under the Digital Markets Act -- has fostered a predatory mentality. That this was likely the Eurocrats’ goal from the start comes as no surprise.
Brussels imposed more than €3.2 billion in competition fines this year, mainly targeting U.S. corporations . Brussels has degenerated into a bureaucratic leviathan -- a parasitic glutton absorbing economic energy and generating ossified structures and economic vacuum.
In EU Europe, the motto is: the regulatory framework matters most -- and the state takes its cut. That private industry prefers other locations and withdraws capital matters little to Brussels’ extraction experts.
Against the backdrop of Europe’s massive descent into a climate-socialist dystopia, it is surprising that the roots of libertarian economic thinking originate precisely on this continent. Consider the great economist Ludwig von Mises, who repeatedly pointed out that it is the entrepreneur who drives the engine of the market economy through profit-seeking, and that without exception, decentralized processes create prosperity -- while state interventions regularly derail it.
Civilization-superior models like the free market sink in the waves of ideological EU infantilism. Its repressive climate socialism promotes the growth of corporatist structures in which politics and subsidized parts of the economy carry out the extraction, eliminating competition.
The rigid adherence to centrally planned control of the new tech industry tragically mirrors the timeline of the dot-com era. What Europe fails to understand is that groundbreaking innovation inevitably triggers an investment boom, often resulting in overinvestment and a stock market crash -- but ultimately leaving economically profitable structures permanently woven into the existing economy.
As with companies like Amazon, Google, or Microsoft, Europeans will look back in a few years at these months and examine this intercontinental economic bifurcation through the examples of OpenAI, Gemini, or Perplexity. The energy needed will come from French nuclear reactors and soon also from Polish nuclear power.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 01/17/2026 - 08:10 Close