UK Greenlights First Rolls-Royce SMR Project Despite US Pushback

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

• UK selects Rolls-Royce as preferred SMR developer and launches its first project at Wylfa, aiming for mid-2030s power generation.

• The decision triggers criticism from the Trump administration, which pushed for U.S. firm Westinghouse to lead the project.

• Despite diplomatic friction, the UK says SMRs will anchor a domestic nuclear revival and leave room for future collaboration with U.S. developers.

After selecting Rolls-Royce as the United Kingdom’s preferred bidder to build the country’s first small modular reactors (SMRs), the government has confirmed the start of project development in Wales. The development of SMR technology is expected to help the U.K. expand its nuclear power capacity, as well as become a competitive SMR power. However, the United States Trump administration, which recently signed an agreement with the U.K. for SMR development, does not support the choice of a British company for the development of the technology. 

In June, the U.K. government announced that Rolls-Royce SMR had been selected as the preferred bidder to partner with Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) to develop SMRs, subject to final government approvals and contract signature. The government pledged almost $3.3 billion for the SMR programme, expecting to support the creation of 3,000 new skilled jobs and power the equivalent of roughly 3 million homes with clean, domestic energy. 

The SMR project marks a major shift in the U.K.’s approach to nuclear energy, as it develops the first two major conventional nuclear plants in several decades and invests in new nuclear technologies. SMRs are smaller and faster to build than conventional nuclear reactors, and their modular nature means that more capacity can be added as required. 

In November, the government announced plans to develop a first-of-its-kind nuclear power station on the Welsh island of Anglesey. The plant at Wylfa will be home to three SMRs, although it will have space for up to eight, with works expected to commence in 2026 and first power generation in the mid-2030s.

The existing nuclear plant at Wylfa was powered down in 2015, and previous plans for a large-scale replacement were scrapped in 2021. The new project is expected to bring a much-needed boost to Anglesey’s economy, as well as provide jobs for several decades. Prime Minister Kier Starmer said, “Britain was once a world leader in nuclear power, but years of neglect and inertia have meant places like Anglesey have been let down and left behind. Today, that changes."

The First Minister of Wales, Eluned Morgan, supports the project and has been “pressing the case at every opportunity for Wylfa's incredible benefits”. Meanwhile, the U.K. energy minister, Ed Miliband, said that Britain is in the race for new reactors. Miliband said in a radio interview that the aim is to “work with local colleges to make sure that there are local skills providers, skills training opportunities, so local people get these jobs”.

The SMRs will be built in a modular format in factories before being shipped to site to be assembled. However, several challenges remain, including getting regulatory approval, building the SMR factories, and training the workforce to operate the sites. Rolls-Royce will build on its experience developing reactors for Britain’s nuclear submarines to develop the SMRs. Since promoting its SMR business, the British firm has attracted several investors, including the UAE’s sovereign wealth fund – the Qatar Investment Authority, the American utility Constellation, and CEZ, the Czech Republic’s power company.

While the new project offers high hopes for the development of the U.K.’s nuclear energy industry, U.S. President Trump is less than happy with Prime Minister Starmer’s selection of Rolls-Royce for the job. The U.S. was reportedly hoping that the U.K. government would choose American Westinghouse Electric Company to develop a conventional nuclear plant at Wylfa.

Before the Anglesey project was announced, the U.S. ambassador Warren Stephens published a statement saying that Britain should choose “a different path” in Wales. “We are extremely disappointed by this decision, not least because there are cheaper, faster and already-approved options to provide clean, safe energy at this same location,” Stephens stated. The ambassador’s response follows the signing of a nuclear partnership between the U.K. and the U.S. in September, with a potential value of $100 billion.

However, a source close to the U.K. government said, “This is the right choice for Britain. This is our flagship SMR programme, producing homegrown clean power with a British company, and we have chosen the best site for it.”

Nevertheless, the U.K. government said that developing SMRs at Wylfa “doesn’t close the door" to a U.S. manufacturer working on a future project. GBE-N is also assessing different sites in the U.K. for the potential development of another large-scale nuclear power plant, like Hinkley Point in Somerset and Sizewell C in Suffolk, which are currently being developed and are expected to power around six million homes once complete.

Despite the agreement for greater cooperation between the U.K. and the U.S. on nuclear power, the U.K. government has chosen a British company to develop its first SMR project, showing its support for the development of domestic nuclear technologies. The project is expected to make the U.K. highly competitive in the field of SMR reactor development over the coming decade, as well as diversify the country’s nuclear power industry. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 03:30

G20 In South Africa Ends With A Whimper After Trump Snubs Event

South Africa is back in the news yet again, and facing embarrassment yet again.  South Africa's far-left government was hoping that the G20 Summit held this week in Johannesburg would elevate the country's global position and garner them international attention (and funding).  It is the first time in history that the G20 has been held in South Africa.    

However, the Trump Administration has made it clear that the South African event is a nothing-burger and the real G20 will be held in the US (in Florida) in 2026.  The meeting was not only snubbed by Trump; China, Russia, Argentina, Mexico and Indonesia did not send representatives either, likely because the summit had no momentum without US participation. 

Confusion arose when SA President Cyril Ramaphosa spread rumors that the US was actually participating in the talks, leading the media to suggest Trump had flip-flopped. 

When asked about the alleged shift, Press Secretary Karoline Levit accused Ramaphosa of 'running his mouth' about the US and spreading misinformation.  No such change had occurred and the US did not attend the talks.  This is yet another example of Ramaphosa making claims which end up being easily debunked.

A primary contention over the event was the highlighting of the global warming and carbon taxation agenda, which Trump has repeatedly called out as a fraud.  For countries like South Africa, however, the climate change issue has the potential to become highly lucrative.

The UN, the WEF and many other globalist institutions have called for carbon taxation as a form of wealth redistribution from wealthy nations to third world nations.  Carbon taxes are sometimes referred to as "climate reparations" that could greatly enrich countries with less substantial industry (carbon footprint).  The carbon scheme is in fact nothing more than another cash grab by global elites, using the "plight" of the third world and unfounded fears of climate oblivion as justifications for centralized carbon taxation and worldwide socialism.

South Africa is facing deepening economic decline, with a 32% unemployment rate and imploding infrastructure (due to lack of proper maintenance over the span of decades), the country was already in dire straits when Trump entered office. 

Trump made South Africa's anti-white policies (145 race based laws that undermine the rights of white citizens) and land confiscation laws international news. He then crushed President Cyril Ramaphosa on live TV with videos of communist political groups calling for the mass murder of white farmers (Boers) after Ramaphosa denied such a problem existed. 

The end of the insidious USAID organization and cuts to foreign funding have further eroded SA's economy.  Now, their first ever G20 event is opening with a whimper of empty resolutions and missing world leaders. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 02:45

Why'd Kazakhstan Join The Abraham Accords When It Already Recognizes Israel?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Many observers were surprised after Kazakhstan joined the Abraham Accords during President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s trip to DC to attend the latest C5+1 Summit since it’s already recognized Israel since 1992.

The Presidential and Foreign Ministry websites shed more light on this decision.

The first wrote that “By joining the Abraham Accords, Kazakhstan seeks to contribute to overcoming confrontation, promoting dialogue, and supporting international law based on the principles of the UN Charter.”

It added that “The decision of Kazakhstan does not affect the country’s bilateral commitments with any state and represents a natural continuation and manifestation of its multilateral diplomacy aimed at promoting peace and security.”

The second echoed this message: “This important decision was made solely in the interests of Kazakhstan and is fully consistent with the nature of republic’s balanced, constructive, and peaceful foreign policy.”

Their statement then concluded as follows: “Joining the Abraham Accords will contribute to strengthening our country’s cooperation with all interested states and, therefore, is fully in line with Kazakhstan’s strategic goals. Kazakhstan will continue to firmly advocate for a just, comprehensive, and sustainable settlement of the Middle East conflict based on international law, relevant UN resolutions, and the principle of ‘two states for two peoples.’”

Accordingly, the official explanation is that this purely symbolic move was meant to signal support for a “two-state solution” and bolster Kazakhstan’s multi-alignment policy, but there’s actually more to it. This was indisputably intended to appeal to Trump, thus raising Tokayev’s profile in his eyes, and coincided with the raft of deals that they agreed to. This importantly includes a MoU on critical minerals that was assessed here as putting pressure, unintended by Kazakhstan but deliberate by the US, on Russia.

The above preceded Tokayev’s trip to Moscow to meet with Putin, the purpose of which was to reassure Russia that Kazakhstan isn’t siding with the US against it, but it’s now clear that Kazakhstan is more actively relying on the US for balancing Russia. It’s this trend, which isn’t new but is now taking on a qualitatively different form due to how the new TRIPP Corridor is expected to intensify US-Kazakh ties and Tokayev doing a personal favor for Trump by joining the Abraham Accords, that’s most newsworthy.

It was earlier warned that “The West Is Posing New Challenges To Russia Along Its Entire Southern Periphery”, which Russia is aware of as proven by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s recent remarks to this effect, and that “A US Think Tank Considers Kazakhstan To Be A Key Player For Containing Russia”. Nevertheless, Kazakhstan is still a member of the Russian-led CSTO military bloc and the EAEU economic one, but it’s understandable if Putin might soon begin to wonder about Tokayev’s long-term intentions.

Azerbaijan just announced that its armed forces now conform with NATO standards, and if Kazakhstan one day tries to follow suit, then Russia’s threat assessment would spike. Tokayev hasn’t signaled any such plans, but by doing a personal favor for Trump by joining the Abraham Accords, he likely expects him and the US to have his back if he ever decides to do so and this leads to a crisis with Russia. Therein lies the real significance of what he just did, which lends credence to concerns about his intentions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 11/24/2025 - 02:00

Taiwan Minister Says 'Consensus' Reached With US To Shield Chips From Tariffs

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Taiwanese National Science and Technology Council Minister Wu Cheng-wen said that Taiwan and the United States have reached a “consensus” to keep tariffs off Taipei’s semiconductor industry.

The Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. headquarters in Hsinchu, Taiwan, on Oct. 20, 2021. AP Photo/Chiang Ying-ying, File

In a Financial Times interview published on Nov. 20, Wu said that Taiwan will support the United States in building its chip industry, and in return, the United States will offer tariff relief for the island’s semiconductor sector.

“Of course, there’s the recipes of how to make the chips, but it’s also about the science park management, attracting companies, integrating academic research with industry,” Wu told the news outlet. “No other country has done what we have done.”

Wu did not provide details about the consensus that was reached.

Taiwanese Economic Minister Kung Ming-hsin told reporters on Nov. 22 that Taiwan has not finalized any trade agreement with the United States yet, but he noted that Taiwan’s negotiators are “working hard on it,” local media reported.

Taiwan hopes to secure a deal with the Trump administration that would ease the current 20 percent U.S. tariffs on its exports. U.S. President Donald Trump in August threatened tariffs of up to 300 percent on chip imports.

Wu said that Washington is unlikely to impose such high tariffs on Taiwan’s semiconductors because the administration understands that “punishing Taiwan is not in their interests.”

Taiwan’s dominant role in global chip manufacturing, led by chipmaker Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., has been labeled as a deterrent against the Chinese regime’s military aggression, a concept known as the “silicon shield.”

Wu said in the interview that Taiwan was looking to create a “second silicon shield” in areas such as drones, robotics, and medical technology to diversify its strategic assets beyond chips.

However, Wu noted that Taiwan intends to keep its cutting-edge research and development within the island, citing potential security concerns if the sector were relocated overseas.

“If we move our [research and development] overseas, it’ll be dangerous for us,” he said. “New weapons and defense systems rely on advanced chips.”

The White House has not publicly commented on Wu’s remarks.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told NewsNation on Sept. 27 that the two sides have discussed producing equal shares of the semiconductor chips required to meet U.S. demand.

Washington wants Taiwan to move half of its semiconductor production to the United States, Lutnick said. Ultimately, the goal is for the United States to capture at least 40 percent of the semiconductor market, which would require $500 billion in domestic investment, he said.

“That has been the conversation we had with Taiwan, [telling them] that ‘you have to understand it’s vital for you to have us produce 50 percent,’” he said.

In response to Lutnick’s comments, the Office of Trade Negotiations of Taiwan’s Executive Yuan, the highest administrative organ in Taiwan, said that it would exercise prudence in trade negotiations with the United States, according to Taiwanese media outlets.

Frank Fang contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 23:55

Hamas Threatens 'Ceasefire Is Over' Amid Rising Israeli Airstrikes

Hamas is threatening the collapse the US-backed ceasefire after a series of Israeli airstrikes and a rising death toll in Gaza over much of the past week. However, Israel's military in fresh Sunday statements has said it is Hamas terrorists repeatedly violating the truce.

"The agreement is over and [Hamas] is ready to fight," Hamas sources have been cited in regional outlets as saying. Hamas has reportedly communicated its stance to US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, that it is ready to end the ceasefire.

Via Reuters

But Israeli media in follow-up stated, "Hamas later that evening stated that Israeli reports that it had told Witkoff that the ceasefire was over were not true. Senior Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook also confirmed to the Qatari outlet Al Jazeera Mubasher that the terror group had not ended the ceasefire."

The ceasefire is clearly as fragile as it has ever been since taking effect on October 10:

An American source told Walla that "Hamas has not given up yet, but has made it clear that it will not be able to accept any more Israeli attacks. Gaza will not be Lebanon for them, and I hope we can contain the situation." —Jerusalem Post

Israel's military has accused terrorists of breaching the so-called Yellow Line which demarcates a truce 'do not cross' zone; but meanwhile Hamas has asserted Israeli occupation is committing a flagrant breach by steadily moving the 'Yellow Line' westward.

Gaza officials have said that the significant and rising death toll since the ceasefire took effect shows it is Israel doing the violating:

Israel has violated the United States-brokered Gaza ceasefire at least 497 times in 44 days, killing hundreds of Palestinians since the ceasefire came into effect on 10 October, according to the Gaza Government Media Office.

Some 342 civilians have been killed in the attacks, with children, women and the elderly accounting for the majority of the victims.

But Israeli officials and media have rejected this narrative, and have instead said that "On Saturday, a Palestinian gunman crossed the ceasefire line and opened fire on Israeli troops in Gaza’s south, leading to IDF strikes in the Strip."

Gaza right now, ceasefire is a lie! #GazaUnderAttack pic.twitter.com/DWftLhe1a9

— Ahmed El-Madhoun (@madhoun95) November 22, 2025

Saturday alone saw some 24 Palestinians killed in a series of renewed Israeli airstrikes across the Strip. Washington has urged restraint and for both sides to observe the ceasefire, but Trump officials have also conceded that Israel has the right to act in specific instances where its troops in Gaza come under attack.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 22:45

Geoengineering Is No Longer Just A Theory

Authored by Mollie Engelhart via The Epoch Times,

Most people check the weather the way they check traffic or the time. Rain might mean rearranging plans or canceling a child’s T-ball game. A cold snap might simply mean pulling out a sweater or your favorite tweed jacket. Weather, for most people, is an inconvenience or a conversation starter. Because when you need water, you turn on a faucet. When you’re cold or hot, you adjust the thermostat. Weather becomes background noise rather than a force that shapes survival.

For farmers, weather is everything.

We don’t just look at the forecast. We live by it. We watch humidity, wind patterns, soil temperature, and cloud formation with the kind of attention most people reserve for financial markets or national security briefings. A few degrees of difference can determine whether a crop thrives or dies. We wait for moisture the way some people wait for medical news. Because one wrong call can erase months of work.

Earlier this year, the temperatures had been in the high 90s for weeks. Summer seemed to arrive early, and the weather service confidently projected warm, stable nights in the 50s. Based on that forecast, we continued preparing the greenhouses and tending the spring crops. Everything looked promising.

Then one Monday morning in late April, we woke up to ice. Not frost. Ice.

Our greenhouses weren’t sealed, because the forecast told us we were safe. The propane heaters inside are set to turn on automatically at 38 degrees, and they ran full force all night. By sunrise, we had burned through $5,000 in propane, and everything was still dead. Every spring tomato. Every cucumber. Tender annuals. Guavas, lemons, and young tropicals. Outside the greenhouse, brand-new kale and broccoli seedlings that had finally established themselves were frozen limp and useless.

There was no warning. Just loss.

That is what it means when a farmer mentions the weather. He isn’t complaining. He is praying that a single cold snap, drought, hailstorm, or unpredictable shift doesn’t take away his livelihood. We do everything we can, but the weather still decides what survives.

Which is why the cultural conversation around climate and weather is so interesting. We’ve been quick for years to talk about climate change. And I’ve always said: If we’re going to talk about climate change, we also have to talk about geoengineering. Because at this stage, it’s hard to know where one ends and the other begins. It’s hard to know whether the shifts we’re experiencing are natural, human-caused, manipulated, or some combination of all three. It’s even fair to ask whether climate change exists in the exact framework we’ve been presented—or whether geoengineering exists in the exact framework we’ve been told—or whether the lines have been blurred without transparency.

This was once considered wild conspiracy, the kind of thing people joked about with tinfoil hat references. Yet now it’s discussed openly. Amazon Prime hosts documentaries about it. Universities conduct research on it. Weather modification companies operate publicly in multiple states. Government agencies acknowledge it.

Today here in Kerr County, after heavy flooding, a CEO of a weather modification company made a point to assure the public that his cloud seeding was not responsible for the rainfall. I’m not claiming it was. But when someone feels compelled to explain themselves for something everyone swore didn’t exist 10 years ago, the conversation has already changed.

And that leads to a reasonable and necessary question:

What is the ripple effect?

Weather is a system. Everything in nature is interconnected. If you add rain here, does that mean less rain somewhere else? If you alter cloud structure or reflect sunlight, does that shift wind patterns, soil moisture, or storm behavior? If we inject particles into the atmosphere to cool temperatures globally, what happens to regional rainfall, food systems, ecosystems, and planting zones?

Farmers think this way because we live in the reality of consequences. We don’t work in theory. We work in soil, water, frost, and risk. Every decision has an outcome.

So if geoengineering and cloud seeding are now part of public policy, private industry, and scientific pursuit, then the people whose lives depend most on natural systems deserve transparency. We deserve honesty. We deserve oversight. And we deserve a voice before—not after—changes are made.

We can choose what we eat and what we put on our bodies. But we cannot choose what falls from the sky.

Weather is not a casual headline or a political slogan. It’s the difference between feeding our community or losing everything. If climate change is real in the way we’ve been told, then geoengineering absolutely matters. If geoengineering is now a reality, then the climate narrative cannot be discussed without it.

The sky is not a laboratory. It is a life support system.

And the question that remains is not whether these experiments are helpful, harmful, necessary, or misguided.

The real question is much simpler.

Did the people beneath the sky ever consent?

Because I don’t remember being asked. And I doubt most people do.

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

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 21:00

MTA Hunts For $675 Million Worth Of Loose Change In Subway Seat Cushions

Because the universe is nothing if not predictable, we’re back with yet another episode of “New York’s transit agency attempts first grade math.”

The MTA has once again found itself rummaging through the sofa cushions of the nation’s largest transit network, searching for spare millions, according to Bloomberg. If it feels like we’re constantly writing about their chronic cash-management drama, that’s because… we are. 

New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority is now targeting $675 million in additional cuts over the next four years, aiming to trim anything that can reasonably be declared unnecessary. This comes from its latest budget presentation, which also outlines multiple cost-saving initiatives already in motion.

Bloomberg writes that the agency is finally phasing out the yellow MetroCard, swapping in OMNY as the full-time fare system to eliminate a slew of legacy maintenance costs. It’s also replacing older commuter-rail train cars and deploying artificial intelligence to streamline supply needs. Those efforts come alongside hopes for a rebound in real estate tax revenue, expected to return to roughly $1.1 billion annually by 2027 after dropping to $719 million in 2024.

All this belt-tightening is unfolding against the backdrop of fewer riders than before the pandemic, rising labor and supply expenses, and an estimated $1 billion annual hit from fare evasion. Despite that, MTA leadership insists they’re holding things together. As Janno Lieber said during a board meeting, “Figuring out how to do more with less has been the daily priority of the MTA these last few years. And I think we’re doing it pretty well.”

The agency estimates the combined cuts and revenue gains will narrow deficits by $418 million over the next three years. Officials now anticipate a $160 million gap in 2027 — under 1% of that year’s operating budget — before deficits climb again, to $243 million in 2028 and $306 million in 2029.

Much of the long-term savings are tied to the OMNY rollout, which eliminates MetroCard-related costs like machine upkeep and coin handling. New Long Island Rail Road cars should reduce maintenance needs, and improved scheduling technology is set to make train and crew deployment more efficient.

Still, even with additional state funding replacing expired federal pandemic aid, the MTA faces some significant uncertainties. Future budgets rely on fare and toll hikes planned for 2027 and 2029, assume $500 million in casino revenue that depends on yet-to-be-finalized developments, and hinge on a long-delayed $600 million FEMA reimbursement for pandemic cleaning expenses.

Lieber noted the holdup bluntly: “Money was promised under the first Trump administration to fund that, but it hasn’t yet come from Washington. That application’s been sitting for awhile.”

And so the MTA’s eternal budget circus continues...

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 21:00

US State Department Designates "DEI" As A Violation Of Human Rights

There is no way for a government to enforce Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies without also discriminating against certain groups of people.  DEI, by its very nature, is anti-merit, anti-success and pro-privilege.  Of course, the groups that are most commonly discriminated against under DEI quotas are mostly white, male and straight.  The assumption being that white dudes are widely considered "fair game" by the rest of society. 

This dynamic creates a never-ending cycle of people clamoring for oppression status rather than personal integrity and accomplishment.  To win in life, you must figure out a way to catch the government's favor and attain that coveted prize; to rise to the top of the diversity totem pole.

This ideology has infected societies throughout most first world countries and even some developing nations.  Woke activism seems rampant in the US, but that's because DEI faces American opposition.  The color revolution is louder because their power is failing.  For the rest of the west, however, DEI in government is an absolute.  This is a problem because it requires Americans to reconsider which countries they view as "allies." 

The Trump Administration is adjusting to this ideological conflict quickly, and part of this change requires that the US starts openly calling out far-left governments for their destructive behaviors.

Countries enforcing DEI policies will now be at risk of the Trump Administration deeming them as human rights abusers, which upends the status quo when it comes to diplomatic relations.  The State Department is issuing new rules to all US embassies and consulates involved in compiling its annual report on global human rights violations.  

Other policies by foreign governments which US embassies will be told to categorize as human rights infringements include:     

Subsidising abortions, "as well as the total estimated number of annual abortions"     

Gender-transition surgery for children, defined by the state department as "operations involving chemical or surgical mutilation... to modify their sex."     

Facilitating mass or illegal migration "across a country's territory into other countries."     

Arrests or "official investigations or warnings for speech" - a reference to the Trump administration's opposition to internet safety laws adopted by some European countries to deter online "hate speech" (any speech which is critical of woke ideology no matter rational).  

A senior State Department official says, rather blatantly, that the new rules are "a tool to change the behavior of governments".  That is to say, the sooner foreign governments abandon woke cultism, the easier it will be for them to engage with the US in terms of relations and trade.  

State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the new instructions are intended to stop "new destructive ideologies [that] have given safe harbor to human rights violations". 

"The Trump administration will not allow these human rights violations, such as the mutilation of children, laws that infringe on free speech, and racially discriminatory employment practices, to go unchecked." 

Leftist officials are calling the new policy an "attack on marginalized groups" and a "new low for Trump."  But once again, there is a substantial disconnect between what leftists see as a human right versus what normal people see as a human right.

The rights that the Trump Administration is referring to include the right to free speech, the right to secure borders, the right to cultural integrity without fear of engineered cultural replacement, the protection of children from manufactured consent, the right to equal opportunities (not equal outcomes), the right to life, etc.  Many of these ideals are taken for granted in the US as the norm, but the Biden Administration revealed how fragile such standards can be.

Leftists see human rights as contingent on identity.  In other words, some people have more rights than others depending on their genetic history and gender orientation.  Bureaucrats and progressive gatekeepers have conveniently made themselves the decision makers for which groups deserve the most rights.

They see speech rights as conditional; it all depends on the ethnicity and sexual identity of the person who is talking. 

They treat national borders and national identity as a social construct that needs to be torn down (if the country is rooted in western civilization).  They see the west as a global commons, an economic zone to be pillaged, not protected.

They view morality as relative, childhood as circumstantial and parental rights as an obstacle.  The grooming of children is a political imperative for leftist survival.  Questions of right and wrong never enter their minds.    

Millions of Americans have been united in solidarity against DEI and other mechanisms of progressive authoritarianism, turning back from the edge of utter disaster.  It makes little sense, then, to reward woke foreign governments with alliances and economic benefits after spending years struggling to defeat those same cancerous notions in the US.    

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 20:25

Restraint Technique That Supposedly Killed George Floyd Was Part Of Officer Training?

Derek Chauvin's defense attorneys have filed a new petition that challenges the 2021 murder conviction that sent Chauvin to prison over George Floyd's death. The petition includes over 50 former and current MPD officers who made sworn declarations that the technique Chauvin used to restrain George Floyd was part of the official training they received.

The 71-page petition was sent to Hennepin County District Court, where Attorney Greg Joseph stated that “this case simply never made sense."  The petition asserts that the case involves two key issues: intent and causation. Did the restraint of Floyd follow policies and procedures of the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD); and, did the restraint cause Floyd's death

In each case, the evidence is thin.  Yet, prosecutors achieved a conviction which many critics argue was pure theater - The human sacrifice of Derek Chauvin on the altar of race politics as a means to justify the mob violence of Black Lives Matter groups.  The protests (and the hysteria over the pandemic), paid for with hundreds of millions of dollars in NGO funds, brought chaos in the middle of the US election process and Democrats took full advantage of. 

The benefits behind throwing Chauvin to the wolves were many. 

During the trial, the Minneapolis Police Department denied that the specific restraint used by Derek Chauvin.  This denial came directly from MPD leadership.  If Chauvin was simply applying restraint techniques that he was trained by the MPD to use then he cannot be held accountable for any potential ill effects that the technique causes.   

The point is of course moot if the restraint had nothing to do with George Floyd's death. 

In seeking to vacate Chauvin’s conviction, or obtain a new trial, the petition argues that Chauvin “was deprived of his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the Minnesota Constitution.” 

In speaking about the prosecution - and what he believes was the false testimony of MPD Inspector Katie Blackwell, Chief Medaria Arradondo, and others during Chauvin’s trial - Joseph told Alpha News, “you can only run from the truth for so long.” 

The petition argues that the methods used to examine video footage of George Floyd's restraint and arrest by "expert" witness for the prosecution are at odds with the methods used by the medical examiner, Dr. Andrew Baker, the only doctor who conducted an actual autopsy of Floyd.  It should be noted that Baker did in fact blame the subduing of Floyd as the ultimate cause of death, even though no damage was found to Floyd that would explain the death as a homicide. 

The official autopsy performed by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner found no physical trauma, fractures, or damage to George Floyd's trachea, larynx, hyoid bone, or surrounding throat structures. This included no bruising, lacerations, or other visible injuries in the neck area. The report explicitly noted "no life-threatening injuries identified" to the neck muscles, cartilage, bones, or soft tissues.

The autopsy, instead, said that Floyd died of severe heart disease that was "complicated" by the arrest.  Baker had told the jury "that he had certified deaths due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease under similar conditions." 

Furthermore, Baker found 11 ng/mL of fentanyl in Floyd's toxicology; this is at least twice the amount required for a common deadly dose. He was described by witnesses as erratic and 'extremely impaired', throwing himself around the back of the police vehicle to escape arrest. Even if Floyd was a chronic user, fentanyl is known to exacerbate heart disease. 

It should be noted that no other officer in modern history has been convicted of murder charges for a death that took place during prone restraint.  At most, Chauvin should have faced involuntary manslaughter charges. 

In other words, Derek Chauvin was convicted for the second-degree murder of Floyd because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong suspect. He just happened to be arresting the man (who resisted arrest while he had a heart condition and poison in his veins) using a technique which MPD officers say was a part of Chauvin's training.  The jury was reportedly lied to, and apparently coached to ignore the obvious contradictions.

If this is the case, then it confirms everyone's suspicions:  The trial was a complete clown show - a political farce.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 19:15

Weekend:
• Schedule for Week of November 23, 2025

Monday:
• At 8:30 AM ET, Chicago Fed National Activity Index for October. This is a composite index of other data.

• At 10:30 AM, Dallas Fed Survey of Manufacturing Activity for November.

From CNBC: Pre-Market Data and Bloomberg futures S&P 500 are up 41 and DOW futures are up 215 (fair value).

Oil prices were down over the last week with WTI futures at $58.06 per barrel and Brent at $62.56 per barrel. A year ago, WTI was at $72, and Brent was at $76 - so WTI oil prices are down about 19% year-over-year.

Here is a graph from Gasbuddy.com for nationwide gasoline prices. Nationally prices are at $3.07 per gallon. A year ago, prices were at $3.04 per gallon, so gasoline prices are up $0.03 year-over-year.

Judge Blocks Trump Admin From Placing Conditions On Federal Disaster Funds

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge on Nov. 21 temporarily blocked the Trump administration from conditioning and withholding federal disaster preparedness funds that were allocated to local governments.

The city landscape of Los Angeles, on Oct. 9, 2025. Mike Blake /Reuters

U.S. District Judge William Orrick in the Northern District of California issued a preliminary injunction in response to a lawsuit filed by a coalition of 29 local governments, which alleged that the conditions tied to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FEMA funds were unconstitutional.

The administration required local governments to end programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and support federal immigration enforcement, or they could risk losing the funds, according to court documents.

In a 76-page ruling, Orrick said the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their claims that the administration’s conditions were “ambiguous” and violated fundamental principles of constitutional law.

“In short, the EO [executive order] Condition, as it is currently written and applied to the DHS Conditions, is ambiguous. To find otherwise would defy the power of Congress to confer upon agencies the authority to grant funding in the first place,” the judge stated.

Orrick also noted that the plaintiffs’ interests in obtaining the funding to support critical infrastructure and emergency response programs for their communities far outweigh the administration’s interests.

“As indicated above, plaintiffs represent over thirty million individuals, and their DHS and FEMA grants provide funding to support these disaster and public safety initiatives. Many of the plaintiffs would be unable to otherwise fund these programs without grants,” the judge said.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, and San Diego were among the plaintiffs that filed suit on Sept. 30 to prevent the administration from imposing what they called “unlawful conditions” on more than $350 million in emergency and disaster preparedness funds.

In a joint statement, San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu welcomed the ruling, saying that withholding emergency and disaster preparedness funds would put public safety at risk.

“This funding means faster emergency response times, stronger regional coordination, and better protection for our residents during disasters and terrorist attacks,” Chiu stated. “We appreciate the Court ruled in our favor and blocked this unlawful overreach.”

Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti, part of the plaintiffs, praised the judge for recognizing that the administration’s “political agenda” should not influence the funding.

“As local governments, we take our responsibility seriously to protect all members of the community from the ravages of disaster, no matter their politics,” LoPresti said in the statement. “Governments shouldn’t have to pass a political litmus test to be able to care for their communities, especially in the face of a disaster.”

DHS and FEMA did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 15:10

House Votes To Denounce Socialism Despite Widespread Dem Opposition

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bipartisan resolution condemning socialism on Friday. The resolution, introduced about a month ago by Rep. Maria Salazar (R-FL), explicitly denounces socialism in all its forms and rejects the implementation of socialist policies in America. The bill cites "more than 100 million deaths at the hands of socialist governments." Republicans hailed the vote as an easy moral stand against a system that “crushes the human soul.”

While 86 Democrats broke ranks to support the condemnation, 98 Democrats opposed the resolution, which passed 285-98. 

In a 2023 vote, 109 Democrats voted to condemn while 86 voted against it and 14 Democrats voted present. 

This vote came hours before New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, a self-proclaimed democratic socialist, arrived in Washington, D.C., to meet with President Donald Trump for the first time. 

Among the 86 Democrats who supported the measure were 14 congressmembers from New York and New Jersey, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who only endorsed Mamdani in the 11th hour of the mayoral race.

Other New Yorkers who also supported the measure included Rep. Ritchie Torres of the Bronx, Reps. Greg Meeks and Grace Meng of Queens, and Reps. Laura Gillen and Tom Suozzi of Long Island. Suozzi made a special point of distancing himself from Mamdani during the mayoral campaign.

The measure was also supported by Republican Staten Island Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, whose mother fled Cuba in 1959. She said her mother left Cuba to avoid what she called "the very things that our new socialist mayor in New York City says he wants." -CBS News

Democrats voting against the resolution included Rep. Maxine Waters of California, who denounced it as a distraction. "I wish we were here on the House floor this morning debating solutions that would reduce grocery bills, lower housing costs, end Trump's tariffs strangling American small businesses and manufacturers, solve the Republican health care crisis, or any legislation that allows Americans to afford [to] live through the catastrophic economic policies of Trump and the Republicans," she said, even though symbolic resolutions are common in the House.

Republicans weren’t buying it.

“100 Democrats just refused to condemn the horrors of socialism,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) said in a post on X. “There were no poison pills in this resolution. There are 100+ socialism sympathizers in the United States House of Representatives. Despicable.”

100 Democrats just refused to condemn the horrors of socialism.

There were no poison pills in this resolution.

There are 100+ socialism sympathizers in the United States House of Representatives.

Despicable. pic.twitter.com/v62W5ZcCtD

— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) November 21, 2025

“If you needed proof that the left has gone completely insane, here it is,” Congressman Russell Fry (R-S.C) said. 

Of note, across five votes to denounce socialism since 2009, two were unanimous and three were not - including the aforementioned 2023 vote in which 86 Democrats voted against it.

Mamdani dismissed the resolution as irrelevant when asked about it in the Oval Office.

"I have to be honest with you, I focused very little on resolutions. Frankly, I've been focusing ... on the work at hand," he claimed. "I can tell you, I am someone who is a democratic socialist. I've been very open about that. And I know there might be differences about ideology, but the place of agreement is the work that needs to be done to make New York City affordable. That's what I look forward to."

While some may consider this to be nothing more than an ideological purity test, Mamdani's election - and the results of this vote, clearly indicate the direction of the pendulum.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 14:35

Is The pAIn Over? The End Of "Free" Money?

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Last weekend we published Rotation, pAIn, or Smooth Sailing? following up on the prior week’s report: pAIn Ahead??? The pAIn did in fact continue with the Nasdaq 100 leading the way down over 3%. There was some further “rotation” as the S&P 500 dropped only 2% and our favorite way of expressing rotation, the S&P 500 Equal Weight, dropped “only” 0.9%.

Academy also had the pleasure of doing back-to-back segments to kick off Bloomberg Surveillance on Tuesday, covering a wide range of topics, with a particularly interesting discussion on Venezuela and Mexico (talking about frying an egg with a blowtorch, believe it or not, made sense in the context).

While many of the topics discussed over the last two weeks (Bitcoin, Retail Dip Buying, Volatility, Sentiment/Inflation, Jobs, and the Fed/Bond Yields) are relevant, we are going to start somewhere else with “Free” Money.

"Free" Money

Apologies to readers who will be flagged for opening a report with “Free” Money in the title (that and “guarantee” are probably two of the quickest ways to get flagged by compliance, without using profanity).

But I want to focus on “Free” Money for a moment because it is highly relevant.

What do we even mean by “Free” Money?

• When you announce that you are going to spend X and your stock price goes up by more than X, you have generated “free” money.

If you say you are going to spend $10 billion and your stock goes up $15 billion, it seems logical that your next move would be to announce even more spending.

There are two main areas where we saw this playing out:

• AI, Data Centers, Hyperscalers, etc. Commitment to building it out (the build it, they will come adage) is no longer being rewarded. Simply announcing more spending is not translating into increases in share price. Is the next step companies scaling back their spending? Will their stocks be rewarded if they do? Something we will think out loud about in a bit.
• Crypto and specifically Digital Asset Treasury Companies. When companies like MSTR were trading at a significant premium to their crypto holdings, it was relatively straightforward (still complex, but relatively straightforward) to raise X, buy X amount of crypto, and see your share price rise by more than X. That was incredibly supportive for not just the stocks, but also for the underlying crypto markets. Why would you stop creating “free” money, or more accurately, more shareholder wealth, based on spending, while you could? The answer is, you wouldn’t, but that has become more difficult as many DATCo’s (Digital Asset Treasury Companies) trade closer to their NAV than they have recently.
• Crypto mining companies fall somewhere in between, as to some degree they act like DATs (crypto is a large percentage of their balance sheet) and many have been adding AI/Data Center elements to their business model.

We will explore each of these in more detail, but it suffices to say that during the pAIn trade, the end of “free” money has been a major factor in the downturn, and could weigh on the economy and markets going forward.

"Passive" Investing and Digital Asset Treasury Companies

As any reader knows, we’ve been annoyed about the concept of “passive” investing, when passive is bigger than so-called “active” investing. With actual indexers and closet indexers, one of the keys to success is just to get into the indices. Even more important is to make it to the top of the market weightings and generate immense inflows into your stock.

Is “passive” really “passive” when, with the Nasdaq 100 for example, you are making a conscious decision to invest 55% of every dollar in QQQ that is focused on 11 companies? When passive flows are so large, they can distort valuations, etc.

But what does this have to do with DATs? That is a great question.

The most interesting and successful DATs have (and will continue) to win investors over because they provide some combination of the following:

• Access to something difficult to get access to. That has become less relevant in the U.S. when large public companies like COIN make it easier to get that access. The growth in crypto-focused ETFs has also made this less valuable domestically, but that is not true internationally. So, access remains a compelling part of the DAT space.
• Returns otherwise not available. With crypto-like SOL and ETH, there is money made from simply “staking” the coins. With some recent legislative changes, it will be easier for ETFs to potentially offer this, but it is still an obvious and easy value for DATs to create.
• Truly unique return profiles, based on skills or technology not readily available to investors. This is ultimately the “sweet” spot of DATs. Companies that are able to use tools to generate risk profiles that are truly unique. Whether it is from capital structure, flexibility to move investments around, or being part of shaping the crypto landscape (from a technology standpoint), it allow investors access to something they could not achieve on their own.

Clearly of the “reasons” listed, the last one is the broadest, most interesting, and the one I am excited about.

On October 10th, we saw crypto take what seemed like a “surprising” hit (certainly relative to stocks, which it had been tracking reasonably well with). This graph barely does it justice, as it doesn’t seem to like including weekend price action, which is important to defi, if not tradfi.

Bitcoin struggled all day on the 10th, sliding from $122k to $112k as U.S. stocks closed. Then, sometime after 4pm, it dropped to $105k. It seemed inexplicable and had recovered most of that by the time stocks opened on the following Monday, but something appeared “broken” and crypto (and DATs) have struggled since then.

I’m being told, and it actually makes sense to me, that this performance can be tied (at least partially) to the risk that MSCI may no longer include DATs in their equity indices (the decision is not expected until January 15th).

Using GROK, the best link I could come up with was this. You can get a list of what MSCI potentially considers DATs by clicking the link embedded in that page (search Digital Asset Companies).

We’ve included this chart because it highlights how positive these types of announcements can be. Bitcoin and MSTR traded extremely well as speculation grew that MSTR would be included in the Nasdaq 100. It was announced on December 13th, 2024 and went into effect on December 23rd, 2024.

The decision by MSTR does not impact Nasdaq 100 inclusion, nor should it impact potential inclusion in the S&P 500.

But let’s not underestimate the importance of being included in these indices.

According to Bloomberg, with the most recent filings, Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street are 3 of the top 5 holders of MSTR – fund groups that are known for their passive investments.

QQQ alone holds 5.56 million shares, or just under $1 billion of MSTR. These are not small numbers, and it demonstrates what is at stake based on the inclusion in various indices.

I expect there to be a lot of comments during MSCI’s comment period (which ends December 31st). Any decision that keeps some or all of the DATs in the indices would be “huge” for crypto since:

• It would not cause forced selling of the stocks based on inclusion.
• It would probably re-invigorate speculation that Standard and Poor’s could include some DATs in their major indices.

Anyways, I felt it was important to discuss this, because crypto is increasingly tied to equities.

Correlations and Volatility

Crypto has the potential to influence other markets in a variety of ways:

• Bitcoin had a market cap of almost $2.5 trillion as recently as early October, and it is now down to $1.85 trillion. Still hefty, but a loss of $650 billion may leave a mark on the global economy.
• At one time, it was easy (in fact necessary) to separate your crypto holdings from your other holdings. You could mentally (and physically) allocate say 10% to crypto and 90% to stocks. You could pull up your crypto holdings and see their performance, and pull up your equities and track them. With ETFs (and to some extent the DATs) you could “mentally” separate your allocations, but increasingly, when you pull up your equity holdings, it is all mixed in. I think, for many, it was easier to HODL when it was very separate. For many investors, especially in the ETF, they might find it more difficult to HODL (not sell) as they see it shrinking their entire portfolio, rather than just the portion of the portfolio that they had felt comfortable with. Might seem like a silly view on my part, but I think it is human nature.

• If I had the time and energy I would look at all Bitcoin ETFs and would try to account for the fact that GBTC, as a trust, had a huge impact on the flows in and around ETFs, once it converted to ETF form. But for now, this seems reasonable to me.
• From IBIT’s inception, on January 10th, 2024 (it seems longer than that), it reached 760 million shares by November 2024. It got to over 1.4 billion shares outstanding by April 2024. It peaked at over 1.4 billion shares. Almost every purchase since then is down. About half of the shares outstanding were issued to buyers above today’s prices. That could cause some selling pressure.
• As many of you know, I often look at ARKK as a “proxy” for disruption. It too is down around 20% in the past month or so. That correlation, at least to me, seems “rational.” We have clearly seen a connection to “momentum” trades, including those “lottery tickets” that can play a role in your ProSec™ portfolio.
• What also caught our eye, and supports our view, was a tweet by an acclaimed investor who was surprised by how correlated a couple of his investments had become with bitcoin, despite no logical linkage. Presumably just a “similar” investor group that was selling other holdings to create liquidity?

Until crypto stabilizes, we could see an impact in all markets.

The money that has been lost is material and is likely leading to liquidity-raising trades in other markets, particularly those that have not fallen as much or are easier to execute. Remember this is also my one small concern about “public” credit, where fear in “private” credit might be causing some desire to reduce exposure to credit and it is generally easier to reduce exposure in public credit funds than in private credit ones.

Realized vol for the Nasdaq 100, for 10 and 30-day horizons, fell, but VIX remains above 20.

The MOVE Index (a measure of bond market volatility) fell, and is “reasonable” around 80, but I think the combination of higher correlations between asset classes (stocks, crypto, even commodities) and higher vol may cause some selling in the “risk parity” world – which would weigh on all markets.

WIRP Volatility – Whether to Laugh or Cry?

I don’t remember a time when I’ve seen predictions for the next Fed meeting swing so wildly. We are back to a 63% chance of a cut at the December meeting, up from 34% (checks notes) the day before! It is still slightly lower than the 67% on November 11.

With a lack of data, the Fed has to decide – do they want to give some insurance against stocks falling further? The minutes would indicate otherwise, but Williams’s comments give credence to that view. There really isn’t enough on the jobs front – the old NFP was released with better jobs, but a worse unemployment rate, though primarily due to more worker participation.

Is the economy cooling enough that inflation should not be viewed as a risk?

If the end of the “free money” trade starts to slow the data center AI spend, then we don’t need to worry about inflation.

I’d cut, but I’m not convinced the Fed will. My expectation remains that we will see 3% before next summer.

The 10-year yield rallied this week, primarily as a “safe haven” or “traditional” risk off hedge (which will help risk parity strategies avoid de-grossing in a meaningful way).

I am keeping an eye on Japanese bond yields, with the 30-year yield at 3.3% (probably the highest since shorting the JGB market was nicknamed the “widow maker”).

Over time, that yield in their home currency should create demand for JGBs at the expense of Treasuries. The strength of the dollar, versus yen, will mitigate that pressure, but something to keep an eye on.

Why Don’t I Read Other Research?

There are a lot of reasons why I don’t read much research from other sources. Sure, part of it is probably laziness. Part of it is also that I enjoy exploring and at Academy, we are in a unique position to form our own opinions as:

• We have a pretty broad-based macro understanding, with credit (one of the more difficult asset classes to understand) as the backdrop.
• The Geopolitical Intelligence Group has a lot of insights into the inner workings of what is going on domestically and globally.
• We also spend so much time virtually and in person visiting and talking to such a range of clients (including corporations, private equity, hedge funds, traditional asset managers, and some of the largest and most important states and municipal bond issuers in the country) that we have a lot of information coming to us from sources we understand.

Then, there are the other reasons:

If I know someone has written a piece on something I agree with, I become unmotivated to peck away at the keyboard, even if my rationale is different – so not knowing helps.

Then, and this is by far the biggest reason, if I see something I really disagree with, I want to write about it, even if I know I shouldn’t. Here is a case in point.

A Hedge Against AI Crash Emerges…

I know there is a cottage industry around predicting the “next big short.” I rail against it periodically. I may even be able to understand not liking the credit profile of the company in question, but thinking it is a “hedge” against an AI Crash is ludicrous

• The equity valuations of many companies in the space can go down significantly before credit risk becomes even a minor concern (again, think about how long companies that were struggling took to default – Toys R Us and Radio Shack as two examples).
• The BBB tranches, composed of BBB tranches of mortgages (the infamous ABX trade of big short fame) were unique in that they were inexpensive to short, and due to a variety of factors, were likely to have no recovery if triggered – not true of corporate debt.
• We have seen time and again and we have written about it on GE (the $100 Billion Credit in the Room) and credit more generally (2019 – The Year of the Debt Diet) - that companies will respond to pressure on their credit, and reduce that pressure.

While not completely relevant, I think people forget that:

1. It costs money, even at 100 bps, to be short.
2. 2. To keep the duration on a spread widening you constantly need to roll to the new 5- year CDS, which is costly over time.
3. 3. Credit in general, CDS in particular, is susceptible to being pushed, so timing the turn is difficult, but the corollary is that sometimes spreads that don’t make sense occur, because they can, not because it is a realistic assessment of risk.

Needless to say, you can probably tell what CDS I would be selling (i.e., taking credit risk on) right now, if I was in position to do so. Take into account this is coming from someone who still thinks there might be more pAIn ahead (stock weakness due to AI/Data Centers) and thinks credit spreads as a whole could leak a little, from a combination of factors.

Bottom Line

We didn’t talk much about ProSec though I could fill a page with links to reports I’ve received pointing out actions that all support the importance of Production for Security and why it will gain in importance for markets and the economy. We will do a deeper dive into ProSec later this week.

I think the economy is at a greater risk than we’ve seen in some time.

The AI/Data Center build-out could possibly slow, and that seems plausible given how the stocks have been reacting to spending (given how important that spending has been to the economy). The end of “free” money is probably worth more than the small pullback we’ve seen, but again, not an alarming turn of events.

The wealth effect of some of the high-flying names and asset classes is potentially an issue for the economy. The crypto/disruption wealth effect is clearly top of mind for me.

I’d cut, but I’m not sure the Fed will, but in any case, I think the risk-reward at the long end of the curve remains biased to higher yields, unless stocks decline by more than I expect – I still think this is more about rotation than a real, across the board, need to sell (QQQ vs RSP).

Safe travels and have a great Thanksgiving, though I hope to get one more T-Report out before you sit down for your Thanksgiving meal!

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 14:00

Rubio Confirms Ukraine Peace Plan Authored By US As Leaders Meet In Geneva

Officials from the United States, Europe, and Ukraine met in Geneva on Nov. 23 to discuss Washington’s draft plan to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.

President Trump said on Nov. 21 that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had until Thursday to approve the 28-point plan, which would compel Ukraine to renounce ambitions to join NATO, accept limits on its military, and cede territory.

European allies said they were not consulted while Washington was drafting the plan, leading to some confusion as to which parties were involved in formulating it.

Rep. Eugene Vindman (D-Va.) told MSNBC that he believed the plan was “basically drafted by Putin.”

As Ryan Morgan reports for The Epoch Times, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on Nov. 22, disputed claims that President Donald Trump’s latest plan to end the fighting in Ukraine amounts to a wish list for Russia.

“The peace proposal was authored by the U.S.,” Rubio wrote in a post on X on Saturday evening.

Rubio added that the proposal incorporated input from both the Russian and Ukrainian sides in the conflict, but his choice of words was careful:

“It is based on input from the Russian side. But it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”

Earlier on Saturday, PBS NewsHour correspondent Nick Schifrin reported that Rubio had made indications to Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and Angus King (I-Maine) that a leaked version of the 28-point proposal was not produced by the Trump administration.

“MORE from [King]: ‘The leaked 28-point plan, which, according to [Rubio], is not of the administration’s position--it is essentially the wish list of the Russians,” Schifrin wrote in a post on X on Saturday night.

Even before Rubio responded, State Department deputy spokesman Tommy Pigott said the allegations Schifrin was raising were “blatantly false.”

“As Secretary Rubio and the entire Administration has consistently maintained, this plan was authored by the United States, with input from both the Russians and Ukrainians,” Pigott wrote in an X post.

While the White House has yet to formally release the proposal, The Associated Press and other publications have published draft versions of the 28-point plan.

As we detailed previously, among other items, the published draft points indicated the United States would recognize Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk as de facto territories of Russia, and freeze the conflict along the current battle lines in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, effectively locking in Russian territorial gains throughout the course of the nearly four-year conflict.

The plan also appears to rule out Ukrainian entry into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and NATO will agree not to expand any further, while Russia will agree not to invade any more countries. Further, the plan states Ukraine will receive security guarantees, but will also have to cap the size of its military force.

Zelenskyy celebrated Sunday’s meeting in Geneva and said, “It is good that diplomacy has been reinvigorated and that the conversation can be constructive.”

“The Ukrainian and American teams, as well as the teams of our European partners, are in close contact, and I do hope that there will be a result. The bloodshed must be stopped, and we must ensure that the war is never reignited,” he wrote on social media.

“I am awaiting the results of today’s talks and hope that all participants will be constructive. We all need a positive outcome.”

The Ukrainian president had individually thanked all of Kyiv’s allies present at the meeting in Geneva in various posts on X late Saturday and early on Sunday.

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said he would have a phone call with Putin on Monday to discuss efforts to end the war in Ukraine, adding that he would also request the resumption of a deal for safe passage of grains in the Black Sea. Turkey, a NATO member, has kept up cordial relations with both Ukraine and Russia during the nearly four-year-long war, offering military assistance to Ukraine but not joining the West in sanctioning Moscow. Turkey has hosted three rounds of peace negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv in Istanbul and has offered to also host a leaders meeting. During a press conference at the G20 summit in South Africa on Sunday, Erdogan said the 2022 Black Sea grain deal that was negotiated between Turkey and the United Nations could demonstrate a path forward for a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine.

“We were able to succeed in this up to a certain point and it did not continue after. Now, during the discussions we will have tomorrow, I will again ask Mr. Putin about this. I think it would be very beneficial if we can start this process,” he said.

Faced with a Thanksgiving holiday deadline, European officials are racing to buy Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy more time with their own counter-proposal.

@DD_Geopolitics has posted the full text of Europe’s 24-point counter-proposal for a “peace plan.”

1. End the war and create arrangements meant to prevent any repeat, establishing a permanent framework for “lasting peace and security.”

2. Both sides commit to a full, unconditional ceasefire — in the air, on land, and at sea.

3. Immediate talks begin on the technical setup for monitoring the ceasefire, with U.S. and European participation.

4. A U.S.-led international monitoring mission is introduced, relying mainly on satellites, drones, and remote tools, with an on-the-ground component to investigate alleged violations.

5. A mechanism is created for filing and investigating ceasefire violations and discussing “corrective measures.”

6. Russia must “unconditionally” return all deported or “illegally displaced” Ukrainian children, under international supervision.

7. Full prisoner exchange under the “all for all” principle. Russia must also release all civilian detainees.

8. After the ceasefire stabilizes, both sides take humanitarian steps, including allowing family visits across the line of contact.

9. Ukraine’s sovereignty is reaffirmed; Ukraine cannot be forced into neutrality.

10. Ukraine receives legally binding security guarantees from the U.S. and others — effectively an Article 5-style arrangement.

11. No restrictions are placed on Ukraine’s armed forces or its defense industry, including foreign military cooperation.

12. Security guarantors form an ad-hoc group of European and willing non-European states. Ukraine decides which foreign forces, weapons, and missions it allows on its territory.

13. Ukraine’s NATO membership depends only on internal Alliance consensus.

14. Ukraine becomes an EU member.

15. Ukraine remains a non-nuclear state under the NPT.

16. Territorial issues are addressed only after a full unconditional ceasefire.

17. Territorial negotiations start from the current line of control.

18. Once agreed, neither Russia nor Ukraine may alter territorial arrangements by force.

19. Ukraine regains control of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (with U.S. involvement) and the Kakhovka Dam, under a special transfer mechanism.

20. Ukraine receives unhindered access on the Dnieper River and control of the Kinburn Spit.

21. Ukraine and its partners conduct unrestricted economic cooperation.

22. Ukraine is fully rebuilt and financially compensated — including through frozen Russian sovereign assets, which remain blocked until Russia pays compensation.

23. Sanctions imposed on Russia since 2014 may be partially and gradually eased only after a “sustainable peace,” with automatic snap-back if the deal is violated.

24. Separate talks begin on European security architecture with all OSCE states.

@DD_Geopolitics editorial seemed to sum thinsg up well:

"As delusional as you’d expect from Delulu Land. They still haven’t grasped that the side losing the war isn’t the one that gets to make demands."

Meanwhile, Zelenskiy is battling a corruption scandal that threatens to engulf his powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak. So he’s feeling the heat, too, back home.

Finally, while speaking with reporters earlier in the day, Trump said the current plan doesn’t represent his final offer.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 13:25

Cracker Barrel Marketing 'Expert' Resigns From Board After Failed Rebrand

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times,

A board member who was part of Cracker Barrel’s controversial and short-lived rebrand has resigned.

Multicultural marketing expert Gilbert Dávila stepped down from his seat on the board of directors for Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc. on Nov. 20 as shareholders voted to shrink the governing body from 10 to nine directors.

“We thank our shareholders for their strong show of support today, electing 9 of 10 of the Company’s recommended director nominees, including the Company’s CEO, Julie Masino,” according to a statement issued on Nov. 20.

The Tennessee-based company’s 2025 Annual Meeting on Nov. 20 passed “every” proposal submitted to shareholders, including its incentive plan and executive compensation practices.

However, when the plan was made public, it was revealed that Dávila no longer had a seat at the table. Investors criticized Dávila for being part of a rebranding attempt that backfired over the summer, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The board of directors thanked Dávila for being a part of the team since 2020.

“We also thank outgoing independent director, Gilbert Dávila, who has been a valued member of the Board through his five years of service to Cracker Barrel,” the Cracker Barrel board wrote in the Nov. 20 statement.

“Over that time, Gilbert helped oversee the formation of our strategic plan and led our Compensation Committee with skill and dedication. We are grateful for his many contributions.”

The statement did not explain exactly why Dávila is stepping down.

“We are more focused than ever on delivering high-quality food and experiences to our guests while staying true to the heritage that makes Cracker Barrel so special, ensuring we are here to welcome families around our table for generations to come,” the company added.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Dávila for comment.

Dávila’s departure from the company is a partial win for Cracker Barrel investor Sardar Biglari, who criticized the former board member and CEO Julie Felss Masino for what he called a “rebranding and remodeling fiasco.”

The rebranding outraged consumers beginning on Aug. 19 when Cracker Barrel announced it would remove the farmer leaning on a barrel from its logo.

The company’s market capitalization crashed by almost $100 million in 24 hours, prompting it to reverse its announcement and keep the original logo.

“The board has failed in every acquisition and in the opening of new stores, hired the wrong CEO, and approved a ‘Strategic Transformation Plan’ that has not only failed but has subjected the company to market ridicule and set the company back years in terms of its financial and stock price performance,” Biglari alleged in a letter filed with the SEC on Nov. 6.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 12:50

Trump Reportedly Preparing To Designate Muslim Brotherhood As Foreign Terrorist Org

John Solomon's Just The News reports, in an exclusive interview with President Trump on Sunday morning, that the president will formally designate the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) as a foreign terrorist organization.

Trump explained that the MB's FTO designation will be imminent and drafted "in the strongest and most powerful terms," adding, "Final documents are being drawn."

MB was founded in Egypt nearly a century ago with branches across the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and the U.S. The org has been outlawed or labeled a terrorist group by several governments, including Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain. 

Trump has weighed the FTO designation since his first term, and his comments come days after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton designated the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as an FTO and transnational criminal organization.

This tells you everything you need to know about the true allegiance of CAIR.

“Connected via the Turkey App Store.”@CAIRAction pic.twitter.com/cnu4F5nS1G

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) November 23, 2025

Abbott's proclamation authorized "heightened penalties" against CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood and prohibited both entities from acquiring land in Texas, alleging that CAIR had "repeatedly employed, affiliated with, and supported individuals promoting terrorism-related activities."

GOP officials, including Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), have requested that the Treasury Department probe CAIR's financial networks.

In August, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that the FTO designation was being prepared, though the process is complex because of MB's sprawling network of affiliates.

We introduced the Muslim Brotherhood Is a T*rrorist Organization Act because it’s time to call it what it is, a jihadist network fueling t*rrorism.

While radicals like Zohran Mamdani cozy up to extremists tied to Islamic t*rrorists and Hamas, we’re putting AMERICA FIRST and… pic.twitter.com/5atqKgRqkX

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) October 27, 2025

Bipartisan lawmakers in both chambers have urged Rubio and the State Department to move forward with the FTO designations. Sen. Ted Cruz has warned that MB supports terrorist orgs such as Hamas.

As we've previously reported:

• The Shadow Of Terror: Zohran Mamdani's Radical Islam Problem

• Report Warns "Woke Army" & Dark-Money Funded NGOs Could Take Iran's War "To America's Streets"

"To this day, the IRS hasn't stripped Muslim Brotherhood 501 (c) (3) s of their tax-deductible status. Jihadi is getting a tax deduction on U.S. soil," Laura Loomer wrote on X while responding to Solomon's exclusive interview earlier today.

Oh boy... 

According to Linda Sarsour, the MAJORITY of Zohran Mamdani’s campaign money came from CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. AKA the unindicted co-conspirator named in the FBI’s 2007 terrorism finance case. 'Turn the volume up' on THIS. pic.twitter.com/lE8U4NEAxk

— Glenn Beck (@glennbeck) November 5, 2025

Things are about to get very interesting. 

Muslim Brotherhood Leader Says They Will Push Sharia Law in America “By Ballot or Bullet.”

The organization openly states they will change U.S. law by elections or violence.

Elections or violence. Their words.
We either take this seriously, or we regret it later. pic.twitter.com/fxRqKCT2vL

— David J Harris Jr (@DavidJHarrisJr) November 5, 2025

Muslim Brotherhood Leader: Will Push Sharia Law in America "By Ballot or Bullet" ... 

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 12:15

Federal Agents Seize 20 Pounds Of Meth Stuffed In Frozen Meat At Arizona Border Stop

Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents intercepted methamphetamine hidden inside packages of meat at an Arizona checkpoint just days ago. 

A U.S. Customs and Border Protection patch on the arm of a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Mission, Texas, on July 1, 2019. Loren Elliott/Reuters

According to a Nov. 19 CBP statement, agents found the drugs on Nov. 14 at an Interstate 19 checkpoint near Amado, Arizona when an X-ray scan caused agents to investigate a vehicle moving through the checkpoint. 

Four packages of methamphetamine, totaling more than 20 pounds, were found in frozen meat. An unnamed 32-year-old male Mexican national, who was driving the vehicle, was arrested and will face prosecution for narcotic smuggling.

“As much as smugglers try to get creative, our agents never let their guard down,” Tucson Sector Acting Chief Patrol Agent Henry Laxdal said. “Their hard work and dedication have prevented an extraordinary amount of drugs from ever reaching United States streets, and I couldn’t be prouder of them.”

CPB reported the finding the same day federal authorities announced the seizure of more than half a ton of methamphetamine in Colorado following an investigation into a Mexican drug trafficking organization in the state.

The investigation, which lasted two years, garnered evidence for the indictment of 15 people, 11 of whom have been arrested. The other four, including the group’s leader, are believed to be in Mexico. 

Most of the 1,115 pounds of methamphetamine, which equated to millions of doses of the drug, was found hidden in boxes of pear squash imported from Mexico.

Drug Enforcement Administration special agent in charge David Olesky said that the investigation shows ties “to elements in Mexico involving the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels.”

Both of those cartels are among the eight Latin American crime groups recently designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the Trump administration. 

CBP reported that October encounters with illegal immigrants were at a record low, and the month was the sixth in a row with zero releases into the interior of the United States. [our report]

Preliminary Department of Homeland Security (DHS) data showed that there were 30,561 total encounters nationwide, a 29 percent decrease from the previous October record low of 43,010 in 2012, and a 79 percent decrease from October 2024.

September of this year saw border crossings at levels 93 percent below the peak of illegal border crossings under the previous administration.

A crackdown on illegal immigration was one of the issues that President Donald Trump made central to his campaign. 

The immigration enforcement includes operations in cities in the interior of the United States. The Department of Homeland Security also announced on Nov. 19 that more than 250 arrests of illegal immigrants were made as part of Operation Charlotte’s Web.

DHS said on Nov. 15, when it announced the increased enforcement in Charlotte, “Sanctuary policies prevented nearly 1,400 detainers from being honored, putting criminal illegal aliens back on Charlotte’s streets.” 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 11:40

Trump Era Sparks Biggest U.S. Gas Pipeline Boom Since 2008

A massive pipeline buildout is sweeping across Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, marking the largest expansion of Gulf Coast natural-gas capacity since the 2008 shale boom, according to Bloomberg.

As many as a dozen projects are slated for completion next year, enough to boost the region's gas-shipping capacity by 13%, or about the equivalent of Canada's total consumption, according to US Energy Information Administration data.

"This is the most activity I've seen in my 20 years in the industry," said Jack Weixel of East Daley Analytics.

Though most projects long predate Donald Trump's second term, the timing aligns neatly with his push to expand US LNG exports and strengthen US dominance in global energy markets. New LNG terminals scheduled for service in 2027 and beyond will rely heavily on these pipelines. As one analyst put it, "Pipeline development tends to respond to LNG export capacity - not so much drive it."

The surge is powered by rising global LNG demand and by the US, the world's largest exporter, sinking tens of billions into new terminals from Sempra, NextDecade, Venture Global, and others. Texas and Louisiana regulators, typically friendlier to fossil-fuel infrastructure, have also sped up approvals.

Bloomberg writes that environmental groups warn the boom locks in decades of gas use, but industry insists LNG helps countries transition away from dirtier fuels.

Among the major lines underway are Enbridge's 137-mile Rio Bravo line and the 366-mile Blackcomb Pipeline, along with new or expanded systems from Kinder Morgan, Williams and Energy Transfer. The Permian Basin, awash in associated gas, badly needs the relief; prices there routinely fall below zero because pipelines are maxed out. "The general rule of thumb is the Permian needs a mega pipeline every 16 to 18 months," said Amol Wayangankar of Enkon Energy Advisors.

Energy Transfer says its 442-mile Hugh Brinson Pipeline will be its most profitable asset yet, helped by rising demand from AI-driven data centers. More capacity is also planned for 2027, suggesting the boom is far from over.

As Caitlin Tessin of Enbridge summed it up: "Natural gas is definitely on. The country is thirsty."

This note builds on our recent premium note about the "largest-ever LNG supply wave" set to hit global markets in the coming years. This surge will likely trigger a bust before setting the stage for a structural rebound in the 2030s.

Read the full report here.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 11:05

In Charts: The Rise And Fall Of The Thanksgiving Turkey

Authored by Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Americans will eat nearly 30 million turkeys this Thanksgiving, the National Turkey Federation estimates.

A flock of white turkeys in a shelter as part of an effort to prevent exposure to avian influenza on a farm in Townsend, Del., on Nov. 14, 2022. Nathan Howard/Getty Images

That’s almost as many turkeys as there are people in Texas, the country’s second most populous state.

Although turkey continues to take center stage on the Thanksgiving table, American turkey farmers are challenged this holiday season by a drop in demand, accompanied by ongoing outbreaks of bird flu, which disrupts supplies, drives up prices, and threatens farm livelihoods.

Rise and Fall of Turkey in America

Turkey consumption in the United States has followed an arc over the past century, driven by agricultural, technological and health trends.

According to the USDA Economic Research Service, the average person in the United States ate less than three pounds of turkey a year in the 1930s and 1940s. By 1960, that number had doubled, as producers introduced specialized bird breeds that yielded more meat.

Advances in production and the introduction of processed products such as luncheon meats, ground turkey, and deli items drove turkey’s popularity in the 1980s. Marketing campaigns promoted the bird as a healthy, low-fat meat.

Annual turkey consumption rose from an average of about 10 pounds per person in 1980, to a peak of 18 pounds per person in 1996.

Since that time, however, consumers have been steadily eating less turkey. In 2025, average turkey consumption is projected to be just over 13 pounds per person, a nearly 40 year low.

In total, the USDA projects 4.5 billion pounds of turkey will be eaten in 2025—the lowest amount since 1990, according to the latest World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report.

The USDA estimates 195 million turkeys were raised in 2025, the lowest number in 40 years. This is the second consecutive annual decline, with production falling about 3 percent from 2024 and around 11 percent from 2023.

The 30 million turkeys Americans will eat this Thanksgiving  represents 15 percent of the total number of turkeys raised in the United States this year. It also represents a 35 percent drop from the 46 million turkeys consumed during the Thanksgiving holiday in 2016, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

While health-conscious consumers and dieters propelled turkey’s rise, health concerns about processed foods are now one factor causing turkey consumption to drop.

Consumers are “steering a bit away from highly processed meat,” Heidi Diestel told The Epoch Times. Diestel’s family has raised turkeys in Sonora, California, for four generations.

Bird Flu

Since February 2022, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)—also known as bird flu—has resulted in the death of almost 21 million turkeys, or about one-tenth of the current U.S. turkey flock.

The wave of infections continued in November; the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service confirmed eight turkey operations were affected in Michigan, North Dakota, and South Dakota, impacting 431,300 birds.

Farmers are also taking a hit from Avian respiratory virus, or aMPV—an upper respiratory tract viral infection that affects all types of poultry but is most harmful to turkeys.

HPAI is nearly 100 percent fatal to exposed birds, according to former National Turkey Federation chairman John Zimmerman. Although its symptoms are generally milder, aMPV is equally devastating.

Packages of turkey under Amazon’s private-label Amazon Saver brand are displayed at an Amazon Fresh grocery store in Federal Way, Wash., on Dec. 12, 2024. The National Turkey Federation estimates that Americans will eat nearly 30 million turkeys this Thanksgiving. David Ryder/Getty Images

In addition to the flocks impacted by HPAI, an estimated 60 percent to 80 percent of turkey flocks were affected by aMPV in 2024, according to Zimmerman, a Minnesota turkey farmer, who testified before the House Agriculture Committee in March.

The highly contagious respiratory illness is also known as turkey rhinotracheitis, or swollen head syndrome. It’s responsible for high death rates in commercial flocks and reduces egg production in breeder stock.

“Together, these two respiratory viruses have exponentially increased volatility, supply shortages and market uncertainty,” Zimmerman said.

The H5N1 strain of bird flu, present in wild birds worldwide and primarily responsible for HPAI outbreaks in U.S. domestic birds and dairy cattle, originated in Guangdong, China.

From its first outbreak in 1996, it spread across Asia to Africa, Europe, and then to the United States. The first U.S. case was detected in early 2022, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Known for infecting cattle and ravaging poultry flocks, the virus is also feared for its potential to infect humans. Worldwide, since 2003, more than 890 human H5N1 infections have been reported in 23 countries, according to the CDC’s September update.

In the United States, the CDC has reported 71 cases of human H5N1 infection since 2024, including one death in Louisiana in January.

On Nov. 14,  Washington state’s health department confirmed the nation’s first human case of the H5N5 strain of HPAI.

Milk samples await testing at the Cornell Teaching Dairy Barn at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., on Dec. 11, 2024. U.S. turkey farmers face falling demand amid ongoing bird flu outbreaks that disrupt supply, raise prices, and threaten livelihoods. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images Turkey Prices

The USDA recently projected that wholesale prices for frozen whole turkey hens will reach $1.32 per pound in 2025. That’s a 40 percent increase from 2024’s price of 94 cents per pound.

“The 2025 rise in price is a response to lower production with HPAI pressures combined with steady demand,” according to a report from the American Farm Bureau Federation.

Despite this year’s jump in turkey wholesale prices, economist Bernt Nelson noted in the report that “prices are still 32 percent lower than just three years ago.”

The most recent USDA Agricultural Marketing Service data show the average per-pound feature price for whole frozen turkeys decreased during the second week of November.

“It’s encouraging to see some relief in the price of turkeys, as it is typically the most expensive part of the meal,” Farm Bureau economist Faith Parum said in a Nov. 19 news release.

Total cash receipts from turkeys in 2025 are forecast at $4.8 billion in the USDA’s September projection. This represents a 30.6 percent increase over turkey receipts of $3.7 billion in 2024, yet it remains 33.3 percent lower than the peak of $7.12 billion in 2022, when the current HPAI outbreak began.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/23/2025 - 10:30

This is something I check occasionally.

The Department of Transportation (DOT) reported:

Travel on all roads and streets changed by +2.0% (+5.4 billion vehicle miles) for September 2025 as compared with September 2024. Travel for the month is estimated to be 278.3 billion vehicle miles.

The seasonally adjusted vehicle miles traveled for September 2025 is 277.1 billion miles, a +1.9% ( 5.0 billion vehicle miles) change over September 2024. It also represents a 0.2% change (0.6 billion vehicle miles) compared with August 2025.

Cumulative Travel for 2025 changed by +1.0% (+25.1 billion vehicle miles). The cumulative estimate for the year is 2,492.0 billion vehicle miles of travel.
emphasis added

Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows the monthly total vehicle miles driven, seasonally adjusted.

Miles driven declined sharply in March 2020 and really collapsed in April 2020.  
Miles driven are now at pre-pandemic levels.