Authored by Helen Partz via CoinTelegraph.com,

French authorities have reportedly lifted Telegram CEO Pavel Durov’s travel ban amid an ongoing investigation into the messaging platform.

Durov had been ordered to remain in France following his arrest in Paris in August last year, facing multiple charges related to his operation of Telegram.

Durov was previously granted temporary exemptions, and French authorities have now fully lifted restrictions on his travel, Bloomberg reported on Thursday.

As part of the latest decision, dated Monday, officials also removed the requirement for Durov to regularly check in at a local police station, the report said, citing a person familiar with the matter.

Investigation still ongoing

The report did not mention any details regarding the French investigation into Telegram, hinting that the case is still active.

According to a statement on preliminary charges by France’s Prosecutor’s Office, Durov was last year accused of facilitating a platform that enables illicit transactions. The prosecutors said the Telegram CEO is facing up to 10 years in prison, in addition to a fine of $550,000.

Pavel Durov met with Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev at the Digital Bridge 2025 forum in October. Source: Press office of the President of Kazakhstan (Aqorda)

Telegram and Durov have repeatedly denied the accusations, highlighting the messenger’s compliance with industry standards and the laws of the European Union.

While denying the accusations, Durov has consistently criticized the French government, including French President Emmanuel Macron, regarding what Durov has described as the country’s political trajectory around censorship.

“Emmanuel Macron isn’t making the right choices. I’m very disappointed. France is getting weaker and weaker,” Durov said in an interview with French outlet Le Point in June.

In October, Durov warned of the potential consequences of the EU’s Chat Control proposal, urging the world to fight against the “dystopian” measures proposed by the EU.

“Germany is persecuting anyone who dares to criticize officials on the Internet. The UK is imprisoning thousands for their tweets. France is criminally investigating tech leaders who defend freedom and privacy,” Durov wrote in an X post on Oct. 9.

The same day that Tucker Carlson told America more than the FBI has about Donald Trump’s attempted assassin, Thomas Crooks, FBI Director Kash Patel announced that Crooks ‘acted alone’ in planning and conducting the attack. 

FBI director Kash Patel (L) and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt (R) speak during a press briefing at the White House in Washington on Nov. 12, 2025. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

Patel posted to X on Friday: 

“Over 480 FBI employees were involved in the Thomas Crooks investigation. Employees conducted over 1,000 interviews, addressed over 2,000 public tips, analyzed data extracted from 13 seized digital devices, reviewed nearly 500,000 digital files, collected, processed, and synchronized hundreds of hours of video footage, analyzed financial activity from 10 different accounts, and examined data associated with 25 social media or online forum accounts.

The FBI’s investigation into Thomas Crooks identified and examined over 20 online accounts, data extracted from over a dozen electronic devices, examination of numerous financial accounts, and over 1,000 interviews and 2000 public tips.”

While Patel was seemingly responding to Tucker’s claim that the government originally said Crooks had virtually no online footprint, that’s not the point. If all of what Patel says is true, why don’t we know any of it? Why did it take an anonymous tip to Tucker Carlson to provide the public with Crooks’ public shift from Trump supporter to Trump hater to failed assassin? The public has an interest in this and a right to know.

In late September, Carlson’s team received an anonymous tip from someone who said they had gained access to some of Crooks’ online accounts, which he found using ‘tools commonly used by private investigators’ after obtaining Crooks’ phone number and gmail address from public documents. He then traced that to two encrypted foreign email accounts (bcook[at]mailfence.com and americangamer[at]gmx.com). He also had a snapchat account, a Venmo, Zelle and PayPal account among several others. 

“It turns out that Crooks was hardly an online ghost,” Carlson reports. “And yet, federal investigators lied and told us there was no trace of him online.”

The source was able to obtain all materials from Crooks’ deactivated YouTube account – which includes his search history, watch history, and 737 public comments. 

When Carlson’s team asked the FBI why they hadn’t shared this information with the public, the agency replied by asking if they could verify the authenticity of the shooter’s account. 

Who is Thomas Crooks? pic.twitter.com/WwjvPGGRwS

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 14, 2025

As the Epoch Times notes further, in the July 13, 2024, attack in Butler, Pennsylvania, Crooks fired eight shots from a rooftop, grazing Trump’s ear, killing one attendee, and wounding two others before being fatally shot by Secret Service agents. Patel’s statement aligns with earlier FBI briefings, but also provides new details on the investigation’s depth.

Little is known about Crooks, who lived in Bethel Park and was a registered Republican who donated $15 to a progressive group in 2021. Neighbors said they were shocked to learn that he was behind the assassination attempt, describing him as quiet and unassuming.

FBI officials previously revealed that Crooks searched more than 60 topics related to Trump and President Joe Biden in the month before the attack, especially as they related to rally details and explosive devices. His digital activity included encrypted overseas accounts, prompting suspicions of foreign involvement, but Patel’s social media post dismissed these concerns.

The deceased victim, Corey Comperatore, died shielding his family from gunfire, while Marine veteran David Dutch, 54, survived after being shot in the chest and liver. Another man, James Copenhaver, sustained life-altering injuries. David Dutch, 54, was also injured.

Patel’s post is the first major update on the case since he assumed leadership of the FBI, and some lawmakers and critics are demanding more information, including access to Crooks’s online posts.

In the weeks after the assassination attempt, congressional hearings criticized Secret Service protocols, resulting in the resignation of its director. A bipartisan task force is currently investigating systemic failures.

A watchdog group is suing the Secret Service and Department of Homeland Security for records regarding security lapses that allowed Crooks to climb onto the rooftop with a rifle after being seen by rallygoers and police.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

They’re fearmongering about Russia’s intentions towards those two in parallel with proposing closer US ties with them.

The Washington Post recently published a piece fearmongering that Putin’s “next stop” after Ukraine might be Armenia and/or Kazakhstan, which they released in the run-up to the C5+1 Summit in DC between the five Central Asian leaders and Trump. It was written by Seth Cropsey and Joseph Epstein, the president of the Yorktown Institute and the director of the Turan Research Center therein. Their organization focuses on “great power competition”, “military supremacy”, and “alliance-building”.

Those two’s mentioning of Armenia and Kazakhstan in this provocative context, as well as the timing of their article, was deliberate.

The first functions as the irreplaceable transit state along the new “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP), which was assessed here in the summer shortly after its announcement as threatening to undermine Russia’s regional position. The fear is that NATO-member Turkiye will inject Western influence into the South Caucasus and Central Asia via this route.

Accordingly, Kazakhstan figures prominently in these plans since it’s the most prosperous country in the latter region and also shares the world’s longest land border with Russia, NATO’s rival.

It was assessed earlier this month that “The West Is Posing New Challenges To Russia Along Its Entire Southern Periphery” through TRIPP’s acceleration of those two regions’ engagement with the West. Even Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned about the bloc’s plans there as well as its de facto EU twin’s.

Armenia and Kazakhstan’s crucial roles in facilitating the Turkish-led injection of Western influence into their respective interconnected regions at the increasing expense of Russian interests there explains why Cropsey and Epstein decided to fearmonger that those two might be Putin’s “next stop” after Ukraine. The timing of their provocative piece importantly coincided with the C5+1 Summit and was therefore meant to influence off-the-record conversations there and/or Western reporting about the event.

According to them, last summer’s unrest in Armenia was a failed Kremlin-backed coup while Kazakhstan is being targeted through less visible forms of pressure such as the creation of pro-Russian influence networks, which they imply could precede a Donbass-like ethno-regional conflict in the north. The first was actually a patriotic revolt over the perception that Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan sold Armenia out to its Turkic neighbors while the second is based on unverified leaked reports and attendant speculation.

The reality is that Russia accepts that the US successfully expanded its influence in the South Caucasus and respects Kazakhstan’s multi-alignment policy. The only concern that it has is that extra-regional actors like the US, EU, NATO, and Turkiye – all of whom it’s fighting by proxy in Ukraine to varying extents – could exploit those two and their regions to threaten its national security as part of their rivalry. That would risk expanding their proxy war from Eastern Europe to the South Caucasus and/or Central Asia.

Cropsey and Epstein propose more trade and investment between the US, Armenia and Kazakhstan, and their regions, which sounds innocent but could lead to or disguise closer cooperation on other issues like security that come at Russia’s expense. What they want to do is manipulate the perceptions of Russia’s partners against it and/or provoke an overreaction from Russia that ruins their relations for the same divide-and-rule ends, which is why it’s crucial that they’re aware of this so they can avoid falling for it.

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

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If you really want to counter the chaos grifters of the political left in the US, then you have to be willing to offer a coherent and consistent plan which dissolves the chaos they thrive on. Planning eases instability. Consistency defeats confusion. Clarity squashes disorder. The public needs to see a comprehensive list of standards, actions and goals and they don’t like it when their leaders suddenly derail the train.

When it comes to economics, vision is meaningless. Every idiot out there has an economic “vision”, very few people have any idea how to get from Point A to Point Z.

To be clear, Trump has limited political capacity to change the economy for the better. He has three years left on his second term and the fiscal problems he’s dealing with were created through decades of government and central bank mismanagement (or deliberate sabotage).

Even if Trump had two more terms it would be difficult, and I’m setting aside the fact that the political left DOES NOT WANT the economy to be fixed and will do everything in their power to keep instability in place. Why? Because the worse things get the greater their election chances in 2026 and 2028. And, the more the system breaks the easier it is to convince the public that socialism is the ultimate solution.

To bring our nation back to legitimate self reliance would require a total reformation of our society and the removal of the political left (including globalists) from the equation. Part of this long term reformation demands a reversal of open borders ideology and multiculturalism, which has ravaged the west. Migrants view our economy as a “global commons”, a wealth pool they are all entitled to access. They don’t see it is a privilege, they see it as a “right”.

This is something that Trump does have the capacity to fix in the three years he has left in office, but he has a tendency to get sidetracked by minutia and bad advice.

I have been warning since before Trump was re-elected that the economy was going to be his Achilles Heal. From past examples it seems that Trump delegates a lot of his policy ideas to advisers and among these advisers (he has dozens of them, official and unofficial) there are always people who give him suicidal arguments and terrible talking points.

His lack of concrete planning for economic repair is putting conservatives on edge and handing immense social influence over to Democrats and woke activists. All they have to do is point at the lack of a clear strategy and suggest that they can do better (they can’t, but it won’t matter to voters living paycheck to paycheck).

Trump has done some things right. His tariff policies are absolutely necessary to counter the wealth gap created by corporate globalism. The US has been turned into a consumer nation that continuously takes on debt in order to create ever depreciating wealth. That wealth is then siphoned from the public by international conglomerates, banks and foreign interests. We are being slowly drained of our lifeblood by a nest of vampires.

Tariffs are one of the few measures at Trump’s disposal to unilaterally stop the bleeding and force corporations to bring the wealth and jobs back to the US. This is done through new domestic manufacturing and the end of general outsourcing using third world labor. Globalism is NOT the free market, it is the opposite. It is forced interdependency of nations and economies to the benefit of a tiny handful of ultra-wealthy elites.

The tariff fight is direct and Trump’s reasons are evident. The average Joe wants more American jobs with higher salaries for the middle class instead of wallowing in low-wage retail and service sector hell. But Trump can’t say he’s fighting for this end result through tariffs and then turn around and let an army of migrants take middle class jobs.

The President stumbled into multiple forehead slapping blunders this past week. He called for 600,000 Chinese students to prop up US colleges. He called for 50-year mortgages to offset plunging home ownership, and he argued that America doesn’t have the talent pool to fill jobs taken by H1B foreigners.

I’ll focus on his flip-flop over H1B visas because it’s an obvious example of Trump trusting biased advisers when he should be following his campaign policies (The foreign student issue requires a separate article. The 50 year mortgage idea feels lazy and pro-banker, but no one is forced to take on a long term mortgage).

The H1B issue reveals Trump’s great weakness: He doesn’t have a clear economic plan with rules and goals – Making him easily changeable and vulnerable to outside influence. He’s playing the situation by ear. That might work for some problems, but not for a financial system weakened by stagflation and mass immigration. I am, of course, also operating on the assumption that Trump WANTS to fix the economy and doesn’t want to be blamed for its downfall.

There are approximately 730,000 foreign workers operating in the US today on H1B visas. Most of these workers come from third-world economies, 70% of them come from India. I’ve written about this in the past, but there is a hidden dynamic in play when it comes to third world countries and remittances.

Remittances are cash transfers from illegal migrants and visa holders back to their home countries. These transfers represent a massive dollar-based wealth transfer to certain nations. India is the largest recipient of remittances from the US (Mexico is the second largest). Over $129 billion is transferred from foreign workers into India every year.

To put this in perspective, this is nearly three times the amount that India spends annually on public welfare programs. It’s also almost twice the amount of the dollar value in goods that India exports to US markets. That is to say, remittances are far more important for cash flowing into India’s economy than manufacturing and agricultural exports to US consumers.

It is possible that in order to cut deals with India on tariffs Trump is compelled to back off of his opposition to H1B. That said, I think that more pressure is coming from his associates at home than political leaders in India.

Trump’s recent argument is, essentially, that America isn’t able to function without H1B workers and that Americans are not able to fill the jobs that these migrant do. This is utter nonsense.

There are advisers from the corporate sector that are keen to keep the caravan of cheap labor marching forward (Elon Musk has not hidden his views on this, though I think he wrongly downplays the wage factor). Then, there are also Indian-American conservative politicians and academics like Vivek Ramaswamy and Dinesh D’Souza who make rather impassioned declarations about American workers who are not up to snuff.

Even conservatives with migrant backgrounds often don’t view America as a culture they need to adapt to and support, they view it as an economic zone for their countrymen to freely access and exploit. This is their definition of the “American Dream”, and this is why immigration is a problem. Illegal immigration certainly, but H1B is also a concern. These people are quick to trash on Americans as “too uneducated” or “too lazy” to take on certain jobs.

First and foremost, H1B holders are not working integral jobs. The vast majority (65%) work in IT and software development, largely for Silicon Valley. Only 9% are architects and engineers and 1% are doctors. These are not key workers keeping America afloat with their skills, though they might be keeping Silicon Valley companies afloat with their cheap labor.

Second, H1B workers are not hired for their expertise, they are hired because they work for less money on average. Over 80% of visa applicants are hired for entry level positions or “junior/qualified” roles.

Analysis from 2020 to 2025 shows that H1B employees are consistently paid less than their American counterparts (10% to 30% less depending on the sector and job). The H1B program legally allows companies to pay foreign workers less. The White House’s own documentation outlines this problem.

The biggest lie about H1B is that foreign workers are hired because they have the training. Many do not. In fact, companies run training centers in the US, bring workers over on visas, then teach them how to do the jobs they’re being hired for. Even worse, American employees are often forced under contract to train their third world replacements before they are laid off.

One could argue that H1B applicants are usually required to have a degree for the job they want to work. Not surprisingly, there are numerous programs for foreigners to gain admission to US colleges. Around 60% of Indian H1B holders got their degrees in US colleges, not Indian colleges. Over 300,000 Indian students go to college in the US every year. There are over 1,100 different college scholarship programs in the US specifically catering to Indian students.

Again, why aren’t these classroom seats and jobs being filled with American citizens first? Are foreign workers more talented, or are they just being offered more opportunities because they are cheaper to hire?

This is about US companies taking advantage and saving money on labor, it has nothing to do with skill or education.

Trump ran on a campaign platform of America for Americans and America first. The H1B program was originally designed as a way to bring foreign workers with niche skills to the US to fill desperately needed roles. Instead, they are used by conglomerates to supplant American workers for less pay. They are also used by foreigners as the primary stepping stone to quick US citizenship, and by foreign governments as a way to drain wealth from the US economy.

If a foreign worker really has something to offer that’s valuable to our country, then by all means, let’s bring them here. However, no foreign worker should be given a visa until companies at least attempt to hire and train Americans for these roles. If they can’t find enough people, only then should those jobs be outsourced.

When Trump ignores these factors, it makes it seem as though he is abandoning the America First mantra that got him elected. It runs contrary to his efforts to keep jobs in America for Americans. Furthermore, blindly defending H1Bs from the third world undermines his goal of reducing immigration to only the best and brightest. Yes, there are many educated workers coming from countries like India – Because we educated them and trained them to replace us.

The point is, if we can educate and train third worlders, then we can easily educate and train Americans. Therefore, there’s little reason for H1B to exist.

If the economic plan is to make America stronger by retaining our jobs and resources, then stick to the plan, Donald. Stop acting like the US is an open economic zone. Establish education programs that favor American citizens that want to train for these jobs. Close the low wage loophole for foreigners. Remove the incentives that encourage corporations to hire outside the US and watch how many middle class jobs (and dollars) boost the US economy instead of feeding bank accounts in India. This is within your power as president.

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

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

As the cost of electricity continues to skyrocket, Georgia voters delivered a political surprise on Election Day – elevating Democrat Peter Hubbard to the state’s Public Service Commission. Hubbard notably ran on rising utility costs and the spread of data centers, and his victory, along with another Democratic win in a separate statewide race, marks the first time in nearly twenty years the party has captured statewide office in Georgia.

Democrat Peter Hubbard speaks at a candidate forum for the Georgia Public Service Commission runoff in Fayetteville, Ga., on Thursday, July 10, 2025. (AP Photo/Jeff Amy)

Hubbard – who will join the body that regulates the state’s electric utility, ran on a pair of related concerns: rising utility costs and the rapid spread of data centers across the state.

“The number one issue was affordability,” Hubbard said. “But a very close second was data centers and the concern around them just sucking up the water, the electricity, the land – and not really paying any taxes.”

Georgia has become a magnet for data-center investment in recent years, aided by generous tax incentives and a growing footprint of large-scale digital infrastructure. But it is also emerging as an early indicator of a broader national pushback – one that is increasingly bipartisan and increasingly organized, WIRED notes. 

A new report released this week by Data Center Watch, a project of AI-security firm 10a Labs, suggests that people are rapidly getting pissed about data centers. The project catalogs community-level opposition across the country using public sources such as news reports, legal filings, and social media. Its latest findings show that between March and June of 2025, local resistance either blocked or delayed $98 billion in data-center projects – surpassing the $64 billion tracked in the project’s first report, which covered May 2024 through March 2025.

“This was a sharp escalation,” the report concludes, with eight projects fully blocked and nine delayed in just three months. Two of the blocked projects were located in Indiana and Kentucky. One of the largest halted developments – a $17 billion proposal in suburban Atlanta – was put on hold after county officials approved a 180-day moratorium in May following extensive public pressure.

between exploding electricity bills and lack of jobs for grads, a new luddite revolution is coming – they will be burning down data centers within a year

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 25, 2025

Miquel Vila, the report’s author, said the data suggests a significant shift in public sentiment. While he noted methodological caveats, including the possibility that more total construction simply yields more opportunities for opposition, other indicators point to what he described as “a turning point.” Nearly 50,000 signatures opposing specific data centers were submitted in the March–June window alone.

“Before, [resistance] was something that could happen,” Vila said. “Now it seems that it’s very likely that when you are developing [a data center], potentially someone is going to organize.”

Energy Costs Become a Political Catalyst

As we’ve been noting all year, rising electricity use is a unifying theme in the backlash. Hubbard’s victory in Georgia underscores that point, but similar dynamics are unfolding in other states with concentrated data-center activity.

In Virginia, the country’s largest data-center hub, Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger said during her campaign that she wanted data centers to “pay their own way” for power amid a serious homeowner and consumer advocate backlash – linking the rapid build-out to higher utility bills.

Josh Thomas, a Democratic state delegate representing Loudoun County, said data-center sprawl dominated his most recent campaign. Loudoun County markets itself as having the highest concentration of data centers in the world. Thomas introduced several bills to rein in data-center development during the last legislative session, and he faced a Republican opponent who argued he had not gone far enough.

Thomas’s district includes the proposed Prince William Digital Gateway, a contentious project that would add more than 30 data centers near a national reserve in northern Virginia. A homeowner group challenged the project in court, and a judge voided zoning approvals in August, halting construction. The ruling was subsequently stayed in October, allowing work to resume pending trial next year.

“The little guy finally won, which rarely happens in any industry, let alone where the Magnificent Ten play,” Thomas said, referring to major U.S. technology companies. The case, he added, galvanized voters.

Thomas said residents are increasingly focused on how data centers affect electricity costs. “People are just a lot more cost-conscious,” he said. After years in which energy bills rose only modestly, he argued, the load from data centers has become a factor in driving up utility rates.

A Bipartisan Movement Takes Shape

Resistance to data centers is not confined to Democratic constituencies. According to the Data Center Watch report, pushback has grown across red, blue, and purple states alike. Some national Republicans – including Sen. Josh Hawley and Reps. Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene – have become vocal critics (while Trump pushes for rapid development). 

Greene, who has highlighted the issue for months, wrote on X on Nov. 7: “People you have got to pay close attention to your local city, county, and state approvals of data centers and demand your water and energy bills be protected!!!”

I have been saying this for months now, they are going to make AI data centers critical infrastructure and I oppose it along with a federal government insuring it. That means you will never be able to get rid of the AI data centers built near you that causes your energy prices to… https://t.co/PIqhTzat1b

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) November 7, 2025

In Indiana and Kentucky, two of the projects blocked earlier this year occurred in heavily Republican areas. The report notes that the cross-party nature of the backlash is one reason it has expanded so quickly.

Separately, reporting by climate publication Heatmap last week profiled John McAuliff, a former Biden climate adviser whose successful campaign leaned heavily on opposition to data centers. Heatmap also released polling showing that fewer than half of Americans across political persuasions would support a data center in their community.

Industry Stays Quiet as Investments Accelerate

Major technology companies, which are driving an unprecedented wave of infrastructure spending to support artificial intelligence, have issued few public responses to the mounting opposition. Many projects are shielded by nondisclosure agreements during the siting and construction phases, leaving communities with limited insight into which firms are involved.

In a statement, Dan Diorio, vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, a leading industry group, said the sector continues to see “significant interest” from communities nationwide. He added that members remain committed to “continued community engagement and stakeholder education,” as well as to being “responsible and responsive neighbors.”

Diorio said data centers generated substantial economic benefits in 2023, supporting 4.7 million jobs and contributing $162 billion in federal, state, and local taxes that help fund “schools, transportation, public safety, and other community priorities.”

The industry’s capital deployment, however, dwarfs even the billions now tied up in stalled or blocked projects. Meta announced last week that it plans to invest $600 billion over the next three years in AI infrastructure, including data centers – an amount far larger than the $93 billion in investments that, according to Data Center Watch, were disrupted this year.

Policy Reforms Loom as Legislatures Prepare for 2026

While coordinated opposition has slowed or halted some projects, it remains unclear whether community pressure can alter the broader economic trajectory driving the build-out.

Even where residents have secured temporary wins, such as in the Prince William case, judicial stays or revised proposals have allowed construction to continue. Industry analysts note that as long as AI-driven demand remains high, large tech firms are likely to continue seeking new sites – and states will continue competing to host them.

Still, the politics have changed enough that lawmakers in both parties are preparing new proposals. Thomas, whose reform bill passed Virginia’s legislature earlier this year before being vetoed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin, said he plans to reintroduce it in the upcoming session.

“I have Republicans and Democrats coming to me saying, ‘How can we help with this issue? My constituents are talking about it like they never have before,’” he said. “Our coalition of data center reform-minded legislators has just grown to a very large number.”

Authored by Roger D. Harris via AntiWar.com,

The US, under Trump, is unapologetically an empire operating without pretense. International law is for losers. A newly minted War Department, deploying the most lethal killing machine in world history, need not hide behind the sham of promoting democracy. Recall that in 2023 Trump boasted: “When I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse. We would have taken it over, we would have gotten all that oil.” As CEO of the capitalist bloc, Trump’s mission is not about to be restrained by respect for sovereignty. There is only one inviolate global sovereign; all others are subalterns.

Venezuela – with our oil under its soil – is now in the crosshairs of the empire. Not only does Venezuela possess the largest petroleum reserves, but it also has major gold, coltan, bauxite, and nickel deposits. Of course, the world’s hegemon would like to get its hands all that mineral wealth.

But it would be simplistic to think that it is driven only by narrow economic motives. Leverage over energy flows is central to maintaining global influence. Washington requires control of strategic resources to preserve its position as the global hegemon, guided by its official policy of “full spectrum dominance.”

Via Associated Press

For Venezuela, revenues derived from these resources enable it to act with some degree of sovereign independence. Most gallingly, Venezuela nationalized its oil, instead of gifting it to private entrepreneurs – and then used it to fund social programs and to assist allies abroad like Cuba. All this is anathema to the hegemon.

Further pushing the envelope is Venezuela’s “all-weather strategic partnership” with China. With Russia, its most consequential defense ally, Venezuela ratified a strategic partnership agreement. Similarly, Venezuela has a strong anti-imperialist alliance with Iran. All three partners have come to Caracas’s defense, along with regional allies such a Colombia, Brazil, and Mexico.

The US has subjected Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution to incessant regime-change aggression for its entire quarter-century of existence. In 2015, Barack Obama codified what economist Jeffrey Sachs calls a remarkable “legal fiction.”  His executive order designated Venezuela as an “extraordinary threat” to US national security. Renewed by each succeeding president, the executive order is really an implicit recognition of Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution as a counter hegemonic alternative, challenging Washington’s world order.

The latest US belligerence testifies to the success of the Venezuelan resistance. The effects of asphyxiating US-led sanctions, which had crashed the economy, have been partly reversed with a return to positive economic growth, leaving the empire with little alternative but to escalate antagonism using its military option.

The AFP reports “tensions between Washington and Caracas have dramatically risen” as if the one-sided aggression were a tit-for-tat. Venezuela seeks peace, but has a gun held to its head.

Reuters, blames the victim, claiming that the Venezuelan government “is planning to…sow chaos in the event of a US air or ground attack.” In fact, President Nicolás Maduro has pledged “prolonged resistance” to Washington’s unprovoked assaults rather than meekly conceding defeat.

The death toll from US strikes on alleged small drug boats off Venezuela, in the Pacific off Colombia and Ecuador, and as far north as Mexico now exceeds 75 and continues to rise. But not an ounce of narcotics has been confiscated. In contrast, Venezuela has seized 64 tons of drugs this year without killing anyone, as the Orinoco Tribune observes.

Russian Foreign Ministry’s María Zakharova quipped: “now that the US has suddenly remembered, at this historic moment, that drugs are an evil, perhaps it is worth it for the US to go after the criminals within its own elite.”

On November 11, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, and its accompanying warships arrived in the Caribbean. They join an armada of US destroyers, fighter jets, drones, and troops that have been building since August.

In a breathtaking understatement, the Washington Post allowed: “The breadth of firepower… would seem excessive” for drug interdiction in what it glowingly describes as a “stunning military presence.”

Venezuela is now on maximum military alert with a threatening flotilla off its coast and some 15,000 US troops standing by.  Millions of Venezuelans have joined the militia, and international brigades have been welcomed to join the defense. President Maduro issued a decree of “external commotion,” granting special powers if invaded.

The populace has united around its Chavista leadership. The far-right opposition – which has called for a military invasion of its own country – are more isolated than ever. Only 3% support such a call.

Their US-designated leader María Corina Machado has gone bonkers, saying “no doubt” that Maduro rigged the 2020 US election against Trump. According to the rabidly anti-Chavista Caracas Chronicles, the so-called Iron Lady “is not simply betting Venezuela’s future on Trump, she is betting her existence.”

The legal eagles at The Washington Post now find that “the Trump administration’s approach is illegal.” United Nations experts warn that these unprovoked lethal strikes against vessels at sea “amount to international crimes.”

Even high-ranking Democrats “remain unconvinced” by the administration’s legal arguments. They’re miffed about being left out of the administration’s briefings and not getting to see full videos of the extrajudicial murders.

The Democrats unite with the Republicans in demonizing Maduro to achieve regime change in Venezuela, but wish it could be done by legal means. The so-call opposition party unanimously voted to confirm Marco Rubio as secretary of state, fully aware of the program that he now spearheads.

The corporate press has been complicit in regime change in its endless demonization of Maduro. They report that Trump authorized covert CIA operations as if that was a scoop rather than business as usual. What is new is a US administration overtly flaunting supposedly covert machinations. This is part of Washington’s full-press psychological pressure campaign on Venezuela, in which the follow-the-flag media have been its eager handmaiden.

The US regime is buzzing drones over the airspace of Trinidad’s north coast, just miles from Venezuela

T&T Pres. Kamla Persad Bissessar has endorsed the show of force, and is now backing up Rubio’s claim that reports of an imminent US assault are “fake news” https://t.co/lysqkLHhEA

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) November 14, 2025

The AP reports that Jack Keane, when he served as a US Army general, instructed staff to “see reporters as a conduit” for the Pentagon. This was cited as a criticism of Trump after a few dozen embedded reporters turned in their Pentagon badges. Trump has called out the Washington press corps as “very disruptive in terms of world peace,” proving the adage that even a blind dog can sometimes find a bone.

The Wall Street Journal opines: “Nobody in the [Trump] administration seems prepared to ask the hard questions about what happens if they do destabilize the [Venezuelan] regime but fail to topple it.” Political analysts Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies suggest the answer is carnage and chaos  – based on the Washington’s past performances in Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan, Haiti, Libya, Syria, and Yemen, to mention a few.

Foreign Policy’s perspective – aligned with the Washington establishment – is that the level of regional fragmentation is the greatest in the last half century. Regional organizations have become dysfunctional –  UNASUR has been “destroyed,” CELAC is “useless,” and the OAS canceled its summit. The factionalism, Responsible Statecraft agrees, “marks one of the lowest moments for regional relations in decades.” Bilateral “deals” with the US are replacing regional cohesion.

This is Latin America under the beneficence of Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine.” The alternative vision, represented by Venezuela, is CELAC’s Zone of Peace and ALBA-TCP’s development for mutual benefit.

The progressive left never admits they are wrong and they always double down on failure.  This is the mindset that continues to lead Democrats down a path of self destruction along with the cities they inhabit. One cannot separate the ongoing decline of US cities from far-left policies; one precipitates the other. 

The implosion of Joe Biden’s faux presidency and the defeat of the Kamala Harris campaign left Democrats reeling and searching for answers, but it didn’t take long for them to dismiss the idea of self reflection and come to the predictably insane conclusion they are right and everyone else is the enemy.

The answer, they argue, is not to abandon their radical ideology and find their way back to common sense.  Rather, they believe that they lost the elections because their candidates were “not extreme enough.”

But what could possibly be more extreme than Biden’s mass online censorship campaign?  His calls for pandemic vaccine passports for Americans to keep their jobs?  His implementation of DEI and CRT programs across the federal government and the US military?  His consistent denials over the stagflation crisis?  When he declared Easter Sunday as “Transgender Day of Visibility?”  What about the topless LGBT parties on the White House Lawn?    

How much worse can a political leader get?  Well, we’re about to find out.

Democrats in cities like Chicago, New York and now Seattle have decided to replace their bumbling leftist mayors with more openly socialist mayors and the trend is likely to grow.  This seems to be a calculated reformation of the Democrat base around increasingly more militant Marxist policies, using blue cities as a “proving ground.” 

It makes sense when one considers how freely groups like Antifa and anti-ICE are able to operate, with clear coordination between radicals and the local government.  These are places where activists feel most safe and comfortable because they are protected by resident politicians and police.  Blue cities are becoming experimental playgrounds for color revolution and socialist policies that would never be allowed anywhere else. 

They see these cities as toys to be played with.  The problem is, their initiatives are falling apart before they get into office and conservatives haven’t had to lift a finger.

For example, Zohran Mamdani’s campaign promises are drying up on the vine like grapes in the desert sun.  His supporters are now realizing that his 4-year rent freeze policy faces serious obstacles, with the new mayor relying on full support from the Rent Guidelines Board (RGB) appointed by Mayor Adams (which he is unlikely to get until a new board is appointed).  The reality is, a rent freeze would result in an immediate selloff of rental properties and landlord flight from NYC, meaning, there will be an even worse housing shortage.

Mamdani also got word from Governor Kathy Hochul that she will not be backing his fare free bus service concept, nor will she support his universal childcare program.  In other words, Mamdani doesn’t have the authority to fulfill his campaign promises. 

Mamdani is confronted by the fact Gov. Hochul said she won’t fund the free buses proposal part of his socialist agenda.

He responds by saying he’ll find the money.

Mamdani’s supporters have been duped.

He can’t pay for his socialism.

(nbcnewyork on TT) pic.twitter.com/UCPfoo7s2t

— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) November 13, 2025

Furthermore, if the “Democratic socialist” gets approval from all parties involved he still has to deal with Trump’s inevitable cuts to to federal dollars.  NYC gets around $10 billion in direct federal aid and over $100 billion in federal funding through a variety of avenues.  Even with all that cash, the city is still in the hole and desperate for relief after the Democrats disastrous migrant housing programs which crippled their subsidies for the homeless. 

The loss of a mere $10 billion could cause chaos for NYC’s budget concerns and all of Mamdani’s projects require an increasing budget, not a falling budget. 

Recently elected mayor of Seattle, Katie Wilson, is causing a stir as well with her socialist rhetoric.  Her notions come off as unpracticed or poorly thought-out and one wonders if Democrats will feel any buyers remorse.  Seattle was already in steep decline due to wealth taxation, which has driven numerous companies out of the area along with thousands of jobs and revenues. 

SOCIALISM: Seattle mayor-elect Katie Wilson promises a full socialist smorgasbord, calling for guaranteed housing, universal child care, free K-8 summer care, social housing, and shifting land and wealth from corporations to community control. pic.twitter.com/GvmqFn8Yn2

— @amuse (@amuse) November 14, 2025

Wilson’s utopian wish list is facing a hard reality check and she hasn’t clocked in on the job yet. For example, she believes she has the power to prevent grocery chains from leaving the city and creating “food deserts”.  It’s a problem that has been accelerating in blue cities across he country largely due to lax law enforcement policies and low criminal prosecution.  Property theft continues to explode and businesses in leftist towns cannot survive, so they do the smart thing and leave.

Seattle’s new mayor Katie Wilson: “We will not allow grocery chains to close stores at will” pic.twitter.com/YQUpJyWy0H

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 13, 2025

Critics have lambasted Wilson as a child-brained imbecile, citing basic private property rights and her lack of authority to issue an exit tax without considerable state and local support.  Again, socialist candidate make promises they cannot keep.  This might get them elected, but their time in office immediately becomes a clown show, proving conservatives were right all along.      

By Robert Walton of UtilityDive

Summary:

The United States needs additional natural gas pipeline infrastructure and storage opportunities to reliably meet the growing demand for energy, a National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners task force report concluded on Wednesday.

NARUC’s Gas-Electric Alignment for Reliability task force, or GEAR, was formed in 2023 in an effort to improve coordination between the two interwoven energy sectors, with an ultimate goal of bolstering grid reliability.

The report includes nine recommendations but stopped short of advocating for a Gas Reliability Organization akin to electric grid efforts, and concluded changes to the gas-electric market day and force majeure contract provisions were unnecessary.

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners on Nov. 12, 2025, published a report concluding greater harmonization between the gas and power sectors is needed “to ensure reliable and affordable electricity service.” More gas pipeline infrastructure will be key to the effort, the report said.

Rising electricity demand and a reliance on gas-fired generation has at times left the power sector scrambling when necessary fuel was not available.

During Winter Storm Uri in February 2021, some Texas electric companies cut power to gas production and transportation facilities as part of their emergency conservation response. That reduced fuel supplies to gas-fired power plants, contributing to energy shortages and blackouts. Almost 250 people in Texas died in the storm.

And in 2022, unplanned generator outages reached 90,500 MW during Winter Storm Elliott, with gas fuel supply issues accounting for 20% of unplanned generating unit outages, derates and failures to start, according to the North American Electric Reliability Corp.

The GEAR report parses diverse policy perspectives around the future of gas and gas infrastructure expansion, NARUC said. However, task force participants found common ground “on the need for harmonization between the electric and natural gas sectors to ensure reliable and affordable electricity service,” the report said.

“The need for harmonization is crucial, regardless of one’s long-term perspective about future energy policy in various regions of the country,” it said.

Recommendations include: creation of a natural gas “readiness forum”; development of additional gas pipeline infrastructure and gas storage opportunities; new and enhanced market tools to improve supplier performance in extreme weather; demand response initiatives for gas utilities; and market changes to incentivize gas pipeline capacity releases.

Regulators and grid operators “should apply a strategic approach to expand opportunities for increased or new storage investment consistent with empowering end-users to exert greater control over supply needs,” the report found.

There was some support for the formation of a Gas Reliability Organization, similar to the North American Electric Reliability Corp., but not enough to advance the recommendation, the GEAR report noted. “A majority of members [concluded] that such an option (on a national, regional or state basis) is unnecessary or not the best means to efficiently enhance gas-electric reliability,” it said.

Similarly, discussions around aligning the timing of gas or electric days were not advanced. Gas and electric market schedules are typically several hours apart, though the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has historically tried to better align them.

“While it is obvious that the current bifurcated system is not how anyone would design the combined system from scratch, we are unaware of any systemwide outage that has occurred due to scheduling issues or mismatches,” the report said.

And possible changes to standard force majeure contract provisions, which cover supply disruptions, were found to be “neither viable nor productive,” the report said.

The task force noted that the primary driver for changes to the force majeure provisions “is aimed at expanded winterization of the production system,” and noted there are two recommendations that “facilitate a better understanding of force majeure and provide greater opportunities to mitigate its use.”

The recommendations provide an “ideal starting point for state regulators to ponder future steps to enhance reliability,” Dwight Keen, vice chair of the GEAR working group, said in a statement. Keen is also a regulator with the Kansas Corporation Commission.

A coalition of gas-electric groups supported the report’s findings. “The biggest challenge affecting interoperability across the systems is not operational; it is economic,” the Reliability Alliance said in a statement,

The group consists of the Electric Power Supply Association, Interstate Natural Gas Association of America and Natural Gas Supply Association.

“Competitive power suppliers have invested significantly to strengthen winter readiness, but we need continued alignment between gas and electric systems,” EPSA President and CEO Todd Snitchler said in a statement. “That’s the measure of success we’re all working toward, and GEAR’s work has been an important step to bridge that gap.”

What a week in Epstein news… 

After Democrats dumped a new trove of emails to try and show that President Trump was much better friends with the dead sex offender than he let on, we’ve learned a few things. 

1. Trump was clearly pals with Epstein for a while. We’ve seen endless pictures of them hanging out. 

2. They had a serious falling out, as evidence (in the new emails) by… 

3. Epstein was helping Democrats with their efforts to hurt Trump with dirt, which we now learn extended to…

4. Texting with Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-Virgin Islands) during a 2019 congressional hearing with Michael Cohen…

Plaskett, for those who didn’t know, previously served in the Virgin Islands government – helping to give Epstein tax benefits, and worked for Epstein’s fixer on the island before she was elected to Congress.

Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-Virgin Islands) attends a March 2019 House hearing. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Getty Images)

As the Washington Post notes:  

In the texts, Epstein appeared to be watching the February 2019 hearing in real time and at one point informed Plaskett — whose name is redacted from the documents — that Cohen had brought up former Trump executive assistant Rhona Graff in his testimony. At the time, Cohen was testifying before the House Oversight Committee against his former boss, alleging that Trump was racist, manipulated financial records and directed hush money payments to cover up his extramarital affairs — allegations Trump denied. The president said on social media that Cohen was “lying” before testimony began.

“Cohen brought up RONA – keeper of the secrets,” Epstein texted, misspelling Graff’s first name.

“RONA??” Plaskett responded. “Quick I’m up next is that an acronym,” she added, suggesting she would question Cohen soon.

In response, Plaskett’s office said: “During the hearing, Congresswoman Plaskett received texts from staff, constituents and the public at large offering advice, support and in some cases partisan vitriol, including from Epstein,” adding “As a former prosecutor she welcomes information that helps her get at the truth and took on the GOP that was trying to bury the truth. The congresswoman has previously made clear her long record combating sexual assault and human trafficking, her disgust over Epstein’s deviant behavior and her support for his victims.”

lol… lmao even. 

BREAKING – Newly uncovered video reveals the moment House Oversight Democrat Stacey Plaskett was being coached by Epstein via text, being told what to ask, in the middle of a 2019 hearing. pic.twitter.com/j1e84oX96W

— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) November 15, 2025

The emails reveal that Plaskett texted Epstein first before the meeting started that day…

The messages show that Plaskett texted Epstein before the hearing started that day, at 7:55 a.m. Eastern time, to tell him: “He’ll talk about his grades”

Epstein replied a minute later: “what privilege stands behind the none release of college transcripts?”

And that he may have influenced her questions: 

Hes opened the door to questions re who are the other henchmen at trump org,” Epstein texted Plaskett at 12:25 p.m.

“Yup. Very aware and waiting my turn,” she responded.

When Plaskett questioned Cohen during the hearing, she asked about Trump associates that he had mentioned previously.

“Are there other people that we should be meeting with?” Plaskett asked.

“So Allen Weisselberg is the chief financial officer in The Trump Organization,” Cohen began to reply.

“You’ve got to quickly give us as many names as you can so we can get to them,” Plaskett interjected. “Is Ms. Rhona, what is Ms. Rhona’s— …?”

“Rhona Graff is the — Mr. Trump’s executive assistant … She was — her office is directly next to his, and she’s involved in a lot that went on,” Cohen replied.

So Jeffrey Epstein was live-texting a Democrat lawmaker during a ‘get Trump’ hearing. Right…

All Trump has to do at this point, after apologizing to MTG and Thomas Massie (WTF) of course, is admit he was buddies with Epstein, say he didn’t bang underage girls, and point to all the evidence Democrats just dropped that’s blowing up in their faces. 

Authored by Stephen Soukup via American Greatness,

Just over 15 years ago, when the Democrat-controlled House and the Democrat-controlled Senate were debating the healthcare proposals offered by the Democrat president, nearly everyone on the political right was unified in opposition. It may well have been the last time the right was united on anything, but it was indeed unified and resolute.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (MN) warned that “This monstrosity of a bill will not only destroy the private healthcare market, it will lead to massive increases in premiums and rationed care.” Congressman (and eventual vice-presidential nominee and Speaker of the House) Paul Ryan (WI) complained that “This bill is a fiscal Frankenstein. It’s a government takeover that will explode costs and kill jobs.” Senator (and Republican Leader) Mitch McConnell (KY) insisted that Americans “want reforms that lower costs, not a trillion-dollar government experiment.”

Right-leaning commentators like George Will and Charles Krauthammer agreed, not only with each other but with Republicans in Congress as well. Krauthammer, in particular, argued that President Obama’s promise to “bend the cost curve” down was pure, unadulterated, and extensively documented fantasy. National Review, much maligned among Trump supporters these days, dedicated most of an issue to exposing and forecasting Obamacare’s fiscal absurdities and the likelihood that it would result in lower quality of care, increased taxes, and exploding insurance premiums. Even the Heritage Foundation—in the news lately for purportedly exacerbating rifts in the conservative coalition—likewise agreed with everyone in the movement, insisting that Obamacare was a disaster waiting to happen and would keep none of the promises that it made, all while destroying what was good and valuable in the private insurance market.

More than a decade later, when it was clear that the system was in trouble and that only greater government intervention and spending could save it, Heritage (in the form of Robert Moffit, Edmund Haislmaier, and Nina Owcharenko Schaefer) took something of a victory lap, detailing Obamacare’s manifest failures and arguing that it was long past time to scrap the whole experiment.

“The facts,” the Heritage analysts noted, “are in.”

The ACA dramatically increased health insurance premiums and cost-sharing in the individual market….

The ACA collapsed insurer competition in the nation’s individual markets….

The ACA failed to meet official enrollment targets in the individual markets….

The ACA is pricing middle-class Americans out of individual market coverage….

The ACA expanded government coverage while wrecking the private individual health insurance market….

The ACA compromised access to care for persons—including those with preexisting medical conditions—enrolled in the nation’s individual markets….

The ACA failed—and failed miserably—to attract young people into the exchange insurance pools….

The ACA Medicaid expansion prioritizes able-bodied adults, many of whom are working, over the elderly, the disabled, and poor women and children….

The ACA did not, as predicted, “bend the curve” of America’s healthcare spending….

The ACA’s vaunted delivery reforms did not yield the anticipated savings.

Everything Republicans warned would happen did happen. And the Democrats’ response was to offer a massive “temporary” increase in subsidies to help paper over the failures. Again, every sentient person in the country insisted that doing so would be a disaster, that the subsidies would only increase costs, and that they would not be temporary.

The Democrats didn’t listen, however. They didn’t listen in 2009 and 2010 when Congress initially debated and then passed Obamacare—without a single Republican vote in either house. They didn’t listen in 2020, when they insisted they needed expanded subsidies to address the financial hardships created by COVID-19. They didn’t listen in 2023, when they extended the COVID-era subsidies as part of the inaptly named Inflation Reduction Act, at a cost of $64 billion. And they’re still not listening now. Indeed, they just engineered the longest shutdown in American government history because they have no intention of ever listening or ever admitting that perhaps the right was absolutely spot-on in its predictions about Obamacare.

Worse still, in addition to sticking their fingers in their ears and ignoring the experiences of the last decade and a half, the Democrats are actually blaming the Republicans for all of the healthcare system’s problems, insisting that the GOP is somehow responsible for their delusions. As Senator Bernie Sanders, the ideological spirit animal of today’s Democrats, put it, “This government shutdown is all about whether Republicans will get away with raising healthcare premiums by 75% for 20 million Americans and throwing 15 million people off their healthcare.”

Over the years, countless conservative commentators have played upon the famous line in the movie “Love Story,” arguing that “being a liberal means never having to say you’re sorry.” More accurately, they would note that being a liberal/leftist/statist means never having to say you were wrong or admit that your utopian dreams were, in reality, nightmares. This is a feature, not a bug, of leftism. Just as today’s young leftists insist that communism can work, despite its many high-profile and bloody failures, because “real communism has never been tried,” so the Democrats insist that Obamacare can work if it’s tweaked and adjusted in just the right ways.

Although Jean-Jacques Rousseau shares the title “father of the modern left” with many of his Enlightenment contemporaries, he clearly did more than most to undermine and destroy the existing social and political orders and to discombobulate the West. As Nietzsche argued, Rousseau was “the greatest revolutionizing force of the modern era.”

Rousseau did not believe in the concept of Original Sin and insisted that the very idea was invented to keep man oppressed, silenced, and miserable under the thumb of society’s imperfect institutions. “Everything is good as it comes from the hands of the creator,” he wrote in the opening pages of Emile, but “everything degenerates in the hands of man.”

As a result, Rousseau and his followers saw society’s institutions as the foremost threat to man’s freedom and happiness. If man is good by nature, yet he behaves poorly under the direction and guidance of specific institutions, then the institutions, by definition, must be corrupt. They are clearly the cause of the aberrant behavior and must, therefore, be reformed—as thoroughly and as frequently as necessary to enable man to live as he should in a collective society. As the historian Paul Johnson noted in his Intellectuals, to Rousseau, society or “culture” was an “evolving, artificial construct….” But it nevertheless “dictated man’s behavior,” meaning that “you could improve, indeed totally transform, his behavior by changing the culture and the competitive forces, which produced it…” In short, according to Rousseau, one can change the world by successfully changing its institutions—over and over and over again, until you get it right, without ever having to say you’re sorry for getting it wrong.

Normal people, of course, think that the institutions created by Obamacare are destructive, costly, and ultimately ineffective. And we know they believe this because so many of them said so before the system was ever put in place. The Democrats disagree, and they will not be dissuaded from their course by any appeals to theory or experience. They want to keep the institutions and keep reforming them until they inevitably find the right formula.

They’ll get it right next time. Trust them. Oh, and in the meantime, pony up.