Tag Archives: administration

general

U.S. Government Set to Reopen After Funding Vote

Leave a comment

**U.S. House Set to Vote on Stopgap Funding Bill: What It Means for Crypto Markets**

The U.S. House is expected to vote on a stopgap funding bill on Wednesday to reopen the government by Friday, November 15, 2025. Market reactions are anticipated to show short-lived optimism, with limited impact on crypto assets—mirroring typical response patterns to previous U.S. government shutdowns.

**Crypto Market Anticipates Volatility Amid Regulatory Changes**

At 8:17 UTC on November 10, 2025, Bitcoin (BTC) commands a substantial market share, accounting for 59.23% of the total market. According to CoinMarketCap data, BTC is priced at $106,281.08, with a market capitalization of approximately $2.12 trillion. Bitcoin’s trading volume changed by 43.74% over the past 24 hours. Price fluctuation is apparent, with BTC posting a 4.23% increase in the last 24 hours, contrasted by a 10.61% decline over the past 90 days.

Research from Coincu indicates that the anticipated reopening of regulatory agencies may impact digital asset product reviews and enforcement actions. This could spur temporary volatility in the crypto market, although lasting effects will likely hinge on concrete regulatory developments or resumed government initiatives.

**Government Shutdown: Context & Potential Outcomes**

Government funding expired at midnight on September 30, 2025. Responding to the situation, Rep. Stanton said, “I am ready to negotiate in good faith to end this costly and unnecessary shutdown. However, I won’t allow this Administration to force through their agenda of health care cuts and higher prices.” [Source: Stanton’s official site]

This 2025 U.S. government shutdown marks the longest in history, lasting over 41 days. Analysts note that such events have historically triggered surges in asset prices. Recent market data highlights significant fluctuations in the cryptocurrency market, with Bitcoin continuing to lead.

The reopening of regulatory agencies could spark increased scrutiny and may potentially shift market dynamics, making it crucial for investors to monitor policy developments closely.

**Market Data Overview: Key Takeaways**

– Bitcoin’s dominance stands at 59.23%, with a price of $106,281.08.
– Trading volume surged by 43.74% over 24 hours.
– BTC price increased by 4.23% in 24 hours but fell 10.61% over the past 90 days.
– The 2025 shutdown is the longest in U.S. history, lasting over 41 days.
– Regulatory agency reopenings may influence market volatility and asset reviews.

Stay tuned for further updates as lawmakers work toward reopening the government and potential regulatory changes continue to impact the crypto space.
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/tech/u-s-government-set-to-reopen-after-funding-vote/

general

ABC’s Stephanopoulos Blasted by Sec. Bessent Over His Shutdown Hypocrisy [WATCH]

Leave a comment

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent challenged ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Sunday over his past comments blaming Republicans for government shutdowns, leading to a sharp exchange during an interview on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

The discussion focused on the ongoing federal shutdown and the Senate’s repeated failure to pass a Republican-backed continuing resolution aimed at reopening the government. Over 38 days, the Senate voted 14 times on the proposal. Fifty-two Republicans and three Democrats supported the measure, leaving it five votes short of the 60 needed to end the stalemate.

Stephanopoulos asked whether the Trump administration would consider supporting the elimination of the legislative filibuster as a way to resolve the impasse. Bessent quickly rejected the idea and turned the question back on Stephanopoulos.

“No, George. The best way to do it— and look, you were involved in a lot of these in the ’90s. And, you know, you basically called the Republicans terrorists and, you know, you said that it is not the responsible party that keeps the government closed,” Bessent said.

Bessent argued that Democrats now find themselves in the same position they once criticized.

“And so, what we need is five brave, moderate Democratic senators to cross the aisle, because right now it is 52-3, 52-3. Five Democrats can cross the aisle and reopen the government. That’s the best way to do it, George,” he added.

Stephanopoulos responded, “I can disagree with you about the history there, but we don’t have a history lesson right now.”

Bessent persisted, saying, “No, no, no. George, George, George. If you want, I’ve got all your quotes here. I got all your quotes here, George.”

“I went back, read your book. So you got one purchase on Amazon this week. And that’s very much what you said.”

The on-air exchange referenced Stephanopoulos’s role during the 1995-1996 government shutdowns when he served as a senior adviser in President Bill Clinton’s White House. At the time, Stephanopoulos was instrumental in shaping the administration’s public messaging against congressional Republicans, led by then-Speaker Newt Gingrich.

In a 2000 interview with PBS’s “Frontline” for its documentary “The Clinton Years,” Stephanopoulos acknowledged the Clinton administration’s strategy.

“Our strategy was very simple. We couldn’t buckle, and we had to say that they were blackmailing the country to get their way. In order to get their tax cut, they were willing to shut down the government, throw the country into default for the first time in its history and cut Medicare, Social Security, education and the environment just so they could get their way. And we were trying to say that they were basically terrorists, and it worked,” he said at the time.

Bessent’s comments highlighted what he characterized as a shift in the political narrative surrounding shutdowns. While Democrats previously accused Republicans of holding the government hostage to achieve policy goals, Bessent argued that the current situation reverses that dynamic, with Democrats now blocking a clean continuing resolution that would reopen the government.

The interview followed another tense moment for Stephanopoulos earlier in the month. On October 12, he abruptly ended an interview with Vice President J. D. Vance after accusing the vice president of dodging questions about Border Czar Tom Homan.

As Vance began to respond, Stephanopoulos cut the segment short mid-sentence, drawing criticism from viewers who accused the host of bias.

Bessent’s appearance on ABC further illustrated the growing tension between the Trump administration and major media outlets as negotiations continue to break the deadlock in Congress.

With only a handful of Senate Democrats needed to reach the 60-vote threshold, the administration has continued urging bipartisan cooperation to reopen the government.
https://www.lifezette.com/2025/11/abcs-stephanopoulos-blasted-by-sec-bessent-over-his-shutdown-hypocrisy-watch/

general

Crypto has to win over Democrats: Centrifuge legal expert

Leave a comment

**Why Crypto Needs Bipartisan Support: An Interview with Eli Cohen, Centrifuge’s Chief Legal Officer**

According to Eli Cohen, Centrifuge’s chief legal officer, the crypto industry should take note of Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s mayoral election. The crypto industry, after all, needs Democrats, Cohen says. The results of recent gubernatorial elections are showing a potential seismic shift in U.S. politics. On November 4, Democrats won several contested elections (for example, in New Jersey and New York), and progressives are energized. Industry lobbyists, who have mainly focused on Republicans, will now have to reach across the aisle for bipartisan support—failing to do so could mean losing everything in the long run.

### The Changing Political Climate and Its Impact on Crypto

**Crypto.news:** We’re at an interesting political moment in the U.S. With everything going on, especially after Election Day, how do you see the current climate affecting crypto regulation?

**Eli Cohen:** That’s a great question. I think it’s going to take a few weeks to fully understand the impact of the elections. But one thing is clear: the crypto industry needs bipartisan support. For some time now, there’s been a debate about whether the industry should align more closely with Republicans or work with both parties. Historically, the industry has leaned toward Republicans, but that strategy needs to change. These election results should make that obvious.

Most lawyers and lobby groups in the space understand this. To get legislation passed—and more importantly, to ensure those laws last beyond a single administration—we need to work with both sides. If we don’t, we risk a future Democratic administration reversing everything. We don’t want to go back to the Biden-Gensler era. And we certainly shouldn’t create so much antagonism with Democrats that we make that a likely outcome. Long-term stability requires broad political support.

### Government Shutdown: Impact on Crypto Legislation

**Crypto.news:** With the government shutdown happening, how is that affecting crypto-related legislation or regulatory efforts?

**Eli Cohen:** To be honest, the shutdown hasn’t really changed much for us. Nothing major is being held up by it. The Senate is still operating, and that’s where most of the action is right now. The House has already passed its version of the market structure bill—the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, often called the Clarity Act—so there’s no legislative work left for the House at the moment. The Senate, where the bill now sits, continues its process.

There have been ongoing meetings and discussions with both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. However, I’d say some reactions from the crypto industry to Democratic proposals have been unproductive. The industry needs to engage more seriously with Democratic lawmakers if we want progress. Right now, there are two competing versions of the market structure bill in the Senate, and regardless of which version moves forward, it will need Democratic support. Under current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to bring anything to the floor. So unless Republicans eliminate the filibuster—which is unlikely—they’ll need to negotiate. The problem is, the industry hasn’t really pushed Republicans to engage with Democrats. That has to change because, without bipartisan compromise, nothing will pass.

### Democratic Proposals and Industry Response

**Crypto.news:** Can you provide more specifics on the proposals from Democrats and on how the industry has responded?

**Eli Cohen:** It’s tricky because a lot of these documents haven’t been made public. There was one proposal—a Democratic draft that got leaked by Republicans. Some key Democrats, like Senator Gallego from Arizona, later clarified that it wasn’t a formal proposal but rather a set of internal views. Regardless, it caused a strong adverse reaction from the industry.

One of the most controversial elements in that document was a proposed set of insider trading rules for crypto markets—not just in the general sense, but specifically covering members of the executive and legislative branches. The background here is that members of the Trump family have reportedly made quite a bit of money in crypto, and Democrats want to include rules that would effectively block them from doing that.

From the industry’s perspective, the issue isn’t necessarily with the insider trading rules themselves—most people aren’t against the idea. The concern is political feasibility. The argument is: if those provisions stay in the bill, Trump won’t sign it. That’s also the position Republicans have taken. It’s not that they oppose the rules in principle, but they know that including them makes it impossible to get a signature from the current White House.

### Progressive Resurgence or Center-Hold for Democrats?

**Crypto.news:** With the recent local elections, particularly in New York, there has been some talk of a resurgence of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Do you think that’s a meaningful trend?

**Eli Cohen:** I don’t see the New York results as a major bellwether for the rest of the country. Yes, there was a high-profile example with Zohran Mamdani, but I wouldn’t say he’s significantly further left than, say, Brandon Johnson in Chicago or Barbara Lee in Oakland. What I found more meaningful were the results in states like New Jersey and Virginia—those were supposed to be close races, but ended up with decisive wins for moderate Democrats like Sheryl and Spanberger. So, if anything, I think the broader signal is that the Democratic Party is holding steady in the center—not shifting dramatically left.

### What a Bipartisan Approach Might Look Like

**Crypto.news:** Regardless of whether the shift is progressive or moderate, Democrats have taken the lead. With that in mind, how would a bipartisan approach to crypto regulation look?

**Eli Cohen:** That’s a great question, and honestly, we haven’t seen it happen yet in a real way so we’re still figuring that out. But I do think there’s room for alignment. The Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party is focused on fraud prevention, investor protection, and enforceable regulation—and those are reasonable concerns. I’d argue that stronger anti-fraud protections would be good for the market overall.

The sticking point tends to be who does the regulating. Democrats favor agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which Warren helped create. Republicans, on the other hand, lean toward the SEC or CFTC. So there’s a debate over jurisdiction, but I don’t think that’s an unbridgeable divide. With real negotiation, they could find common ground.

### The Retail Disconnect

**Crypto.news:** Mamdani’s base includes a lot of young, educated, white male voters—the same demographic most likely to hold crypto. Is there a disconnect between what the industry wants and what retail investors actually care about?

**Eli Cohen:** I’m not sure there’s a full disconnect, but I do think there’s a gap in expectations. Most retail crypto users don’t want to deal with KYC. That’s a big reason they’re in crypto instead of traditional finance—they don’t want to submit personal information just to move stablecoins from one wallet to another. At the same time, nobody wants to get rugged. No one wants to lose money to a scam or fraud.

So yes, there’s this contradiction in crypto: people demand full decentralization, anonymity, and self-custody until something goes wrong. Then the first question is, “Where are the regulators?” So there’s clearly a desire for some level of investor protection—just not if it comes with friction, surveillance, or restrictions. Finding the right balance is tough.

### Reflections on the Gensler Era

**Crypto.news:** That contradiction was a big part of the criticism during the SEC’s Gensler era—focusing enforcement on large players while meme coins and influencers ran wild. What’s your take?

**Eli Cohen:** The Gensler approach was a disaster, both strategically and politically. He could have issued interpretive guidance—the SEC has the power to do that—but instead, they chose a strategy of trying to crush the industry outright. It didn’t work. You can’t “ban” crypto—that’s not how this works. What it did do was destroy trust. The industry had no reason to work with the SEC, and the SEC made no effort to work with the industry.

I don’t think even the Democratic Party fully understood what Gensler was doing. Either they weren’t paying attention, or worse, they supported it. But I’m hopeful that lessons have been learned. The bipartisan process we’re seeing now in the Clarity Act and Senate proposals is a huge improvement. It’s not Gensler’s approach, and that’s a good thing.

### The Urgent Need for Clear Crypto Regulations

**Crypto.news:** So, from your perspective, what are the most important regulations that the crypto industry is still missing today?

**Eli Cohen:** There are two major areas where regulation is still lacking. The first is stablecoin regulation. The so-called “Genius Act” has technically passed in the U.S. market, but it’s not yet usable. There’s no licensing framework in place. We need actual rules that let stablecoin issuers apply, operate, and comply. There’s a draft of those regulations circulating. I haven’t seen the full document, but people who have are giving feedback.

One of the big concerns is around yield—specifically, whether stablecoins will be allowed to earn yield, not just from issuers but from anyone. U.S. banks are lobbying hard to block this. If those banks succeed, and regulated stablecoins can’t earn yield in any form—even through DeFi—then no one will use them. It’ll end up like in Europe under MiCA, where the regulated stablecoins are barely used. People just default to unregulated options like DAI or USDT. So that’s a huge fight. And if the banks win, we’ll see very little adoption of U.S.-regulated stablecoins.

### The Stakes of the Market Structure Bill

**Crypto.news:** And what about the market structure legislation you mentioned earlier? What’s at stake there?

**Eli Cohen:** The market structure bill in the Senate is crucial—particularly the provision that would clearly define which tokens are not securities. That one clause could change everything for the crypto industry. Right now, the SEC has been operating in a gray area. They’ve claimed that almost every token besides Bitcoin could be a security—including Ethereum—without ever proving it in court. That ambiguity is what allowed the Gensler administration to pursue its aggressive enforcement agenda.

If the market structure bill passes with bipartisan support and explicitly states that certain tokens are not securities, it would finally give the industry a safe, legal framework to operate within. It wouldn’t just clarify the law—it would also prevent future administrations from trying to roll back that clarity. That kind of legal certainty is foundational; it’s what would allow real innovation and compliance to coexist.

### Investor Protection and Token Transparency

**Crypto.news:** If Ethereum and similar tokens are no longer treated as securities, what happens to investor protection? Securities law requires disclosures from issuers. Is anyone thinking about how to build comparable transparency into crypto?

**Eli Cohen:** That’s certainly something that Elizabeth Warren wants. She’s argued that even if these tokens aren’t securities, there should still be some disclosure requirement to protect investors. But here’s the problem: in DeFi, who would do the disclosing? Take Ethereum. Sure, there’s the Ethereum Foundation, but do they have access to all the relevant information? Should they be legally liable for it? I don’t think they want that role, and I’m not sure it fits the ethos of decentralization.

In Bitcoin’s case, no entity could even hypothetically take on that responsibility. And that’s part of the philosophical divide: if you truly believe in permissionless networks, then there might not be a central party to hold accountable—or to require disclosures from.

### Balancing Transparency and Risk

**Crypto.news:** Some people argue that blockchains provide transparency by default—the code is open, the transactions are on-chain. But there’s also off-chain activity, insider info, and market manipulation. How do we balance transparency with risk in permissionless markets?

**Eli Cohen:** That’s the core trade-off. If you want a truly permissionless system, you have to accept that there will be more risk—including market manipulation and insider trading. I think people should be able to choose. If you want to participate in a market that doesn’t require KYC, doesn’t enforce disclosures, and embraces full decentralization, then you should be free to do that—but you should also understand the risks. At the same time, if you want investor protections, you can participate in other markets that offer those. Nobody is forcing you to buy Bitcoin or Ethereum. There are other options. But we shouldn’t try to force traditional regulatory models onto decentralized systems where they just don’t fit. So yes, blockchains offer a degree of transparency, but they don’t eliminate the need for trust—especially when off-chain actions can affect markets. We need to be honest about that and structure markets accordingly.

### The Lawyer’s Perspective: Where to Draw the Line

**Crypto.news:** You’re a lawyer, and I’m sure you heard that your profession’s role in any meeting is to say, “No, you can’t do that.” What are some of the questions you’re most often asked where you have to draw a hard line?

**Eli Cohen:** For what we do at Centrifuge—tokenizing real-world assets—we operate in a pretty heavily permissioned part of the crypto market. Everything on our platform is actually a security, regardless of what the market structure bill eventually says. So we follow securities laws and take compliance seriously. That’s a different environment from something like a DeFi protocol. If you were general counsel at Aave, for example, you’d take a very different approach. We also work with TradFi partners like Janus Henderson and S&P, and they have their own compliance requirements. So we operate with a different risk profile than many other crypto companies.

That said, the biggest non-negotiable red line for me, and for most lawyers in this space, is anything touching sanctions. If you’re moving stablecoins in or out without checking for sanctions compliance, that’s a hard no. That gets you into real trouble.

—

*This interview has been edited for clarity and length.*
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/crypto/crypto-has-to-win-over-democrats-centrifuge-legal-expert/

general

Michelle Obama’s confession about former life inside the ‘heart’ of the White House

Leave a comment

**Michelle Obama Reflects on Life in the White House and the Significance of the East Wing**

Former First Lady Michelle Obama recently shared her reflections on living in the White House during her husband Barack Obama’s presidency from 2009 to 2017. In an interview with *The Late Show with Stephen Colbert*, the author and activist opened up about her experiences, particularly her fondness for the East Wing where her office was located.

During the interview, Michelle described the East Wing as a place filled with light and positivity—a refuge from the often intense environment of the West Wing. She explained, “That’s where life happened.” While the West Wing was the center of work, challenges, and hard decisions, the East Wing was where everyone could recharge. “That’s where children came, we had puppies and literally apples,” she said, emphasizing how important it was for the staff to have a space that reminded them of the reasons behind their efforts.

Michelle also shared insights into what it felt like moving into the iconic presidential residence with her family. “What I will remind people is that house is not our house. We never viewed it as our house. We were there for a time; we had a job to do,” she noted. “We always felt it was the people’s house.” She spoke about the responsibility each administration has to maintain and improve the historic building, respecting its legacy. “There was a whole standard of norms and rules that we followed to a tee, that we painstakingly tried to uphold because it was bigger than us,” Michelle added.

She emphasized the shared ownership of the space, saying, “That East Wing, that’s not my feelings about that, it’s not mine. It is ours.”

### When Did Michelle Obama Live in the White House?

Michelle Obama and her family moved into the White House in January 2009 after Barack Obama made history as the first African American president of the United States. The Obamas lived there throughout Barack Obama’s two terms as president, finally moving out on January 20, 2017. He was succeeded by Donald Trump, who won the 2016 presidential election against Hillary Clinton.

### Where Do the Obamas Live Now?

[Note: The original content does not specify the current residence of the Obamas. You may wish to update this section with current information.]

—

Michelle Obama’s reflections offer a unique glimpse into the human side of life in one of the world’s most famous residences, highlighting the balance between the weighty responsibilities of leadership and the importance of lightness and family within the White House walls.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/866465/michelle-obama-confessions-former-life-inside-heart-white-house/

general

UPS Grounds Planes After Deadly Crash

Leave a comment

**UPS Temporarily Grounds Part of Its Air Fleet Following Deadly Cargo Plane Crash in Kentucky**

UPS has temporarily grounded a portion of its air fleet after a tragic crash involving one of its cargo planes resulted in the deaths of at least 14 people in Kentucky. The decision impacts approximately 9 percent of the company’s aircraft.

“Out of an abundance of caution and in the interest of safety, we have made the decision to temporarily ground our MD-11 fleet. MD-11s are approximately 9% of the UPS Airlines fleet,” the company said in an official statement.

The grounding is effective immediately. UPS added, “We made this decision proactively at the recommendation of the aircraft manufacturer. Nothing is more important to us than the safety of our employees and the communities we serve. Contingency plans are in place to ensure we can continue to deliver the reliable service our customers around the world count on.”

### Why It Matters

This grounding highlights the fragility of the U.S. supply chain as the country heads into the busy holiday season. UPS is one of the nation’s largest air cargo carriers, and any disruption to its operations could delay deliveries and impact businesses that depend on rapid shipping.

### Crash Details

On Tuesday, UPS Airlines Flight 2976, an MD-11 aircraft, crashed shortly after takeoff from Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport in Kentucky. The flight was bound for Daniel K. Inouye International Airport in Honolulu, Hawaii.

At least 14 people lost their lives in the crash, including pilots Captain Richard Wartenberg, First Officer Lee Truitt, and International Relief Officer Captain Dana Diamond.

The incident occurred around 3 a.m. local time with three crew members onboard. Moments after takeoff, the plane’s left wing reportedly caught fire and an engine detached, causing the wide-body freighter to crash to the ground and erupt into a massive fireball.

### Industry Response and Investigation

In response to the accident, rival FedEx also grounded its fleet of 28 MD-11 planes as a precautionary measure.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has launched an investigation into the aircraft’s maintenance history. Notably, the jet had recently undergone repairs in Texas. Early NTSB findings suggest that the engine—not the wing—detached mid-flight, though the exact cause of the crash remains under review.

### Legal Actions Filed

The day following the crash, a class-action lawsuit was filed against UPS, Boeing, and General Electric. The lawsuit alleges that the companies’ “recklessness” led to the tragedy.

According to the complaint, filed by local resident Shakeara Ware, auto shop Triple D, Inc., and property owner Ensey LLC, the defendants’ actions have caused “trauma, fear and uncertainty” among plaintiffs and many Kentuckians. The suit seeks damages for emotional distress, business interruption, revenue losses, lost wages, and property damage.

The lawsuit also criticizes the MD-11 aircraft model and its CF-6 engines, citing a troubling safety history. It alleges that the plane has been linked to multiple catastrophic failures and ranks among the least reliable commercial aircraft still in service.

The complaint references previous MD-11 crashes, including a 2009 FedEx disaster in Tokyo, along with several CF-6 engine-related accidents over the decades. It suggests that similar mechanical defects “caused or contributed” to the Louisville crash.

### Ongoing Investigations

No definitive conclusions have been reached regarding the cause of the crash. Investigations and analysis by the NTSB and other authorities are ongoing.

UPS and related parties have vowed full cooperation with investigators as efforts continue to uncover what led to this devastating event.
https://www.newsweek.com/ups-grounds-planes-after-deadly-crash-11014977

general

The Data Fog Envelopes Jobs, Prices And Tariffs

Leave a comment

MV Financial
*1.03K Followers*

**Weekly Summary: Politics, Economy, and the Impact of Absences**

This week has been full of news spanning politics, the economy, and much more. However, it has also been a week where notable absences have loomed large. The ongoing data fog has already begun to affect the central bank’s traditionally smooth decision-making process, evidenced by dissenting votes in each of the last three FOMC sessions.

Additionally, the Supreme Court weighed in with what appeared to be a rather caustic critique of the Trump administration’s legal authority regarding the barrage of tariffs imposed since taking office. Over this period, the average tariff on goods entering the US has risen sharply—from 2.4 percent to 17.9 percent.

Typically, this week would have marked Jobs Friday, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases employment data, but the theme of absences remains prevalent as this important report was notably delayed.

—

**About MV Financial**
MV Financial is a Washington, DC-area asset manager offering investment advisory services through MV Capital Management, a Registered Investment Advisor. We specialize in deep research across a wide range of asset classes and investment vehicles, aiming to transform knowledge into actionable investment solutions tailored for individual, family, and institutional clients.

—

**Comments**
*Recommended For You*
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4840816-data-fog-envelopes-jobs-prices-tariffs?source=feed_all_articles

general

Hegseth: U.S. Strike in Caribbean Kills 3, Warns Narco-Traffickers ‘We Will Kill You’ [WATCH]

Leave a comment

The U.S. military conducted a strike on a vessel in the Caribbean on Thursday, resulting in the deaths of three men aboard the boat, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced. He described the vessel as operated by a “Designated Terrorist Organization,” according to Fox News.

Hegseth shared the news in a post on X, accompanied by a short unclassified video clip showing the vessel being struck. He confirmed that the strike occurred in international waters and that no U.S. forces were harmed during the operation.

“Today, at the direction of President Trump, the Department of War carried out a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization,” Hegseth wrote. “The vessel was trafficking narcotics in the Caribbean and was struck in international waters. No U.S. forces were harmed in the strike, and three male narco-terrorists who were aboard the vessel were killed.”

The video footage of the strike was included in the announcement, marking the latest in a series of U.S. maritime strikes targeting suspected drug-trafficking vessels. This campaign began in September and has involved multiple strikes across the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. According to Hegseth’s statement and various reporting outlets tracking the operations, approximately 69 to 70 people have been killed cumulatively in these strikes.

Hegseth framed the operation as part of an intensified U.S. effort under the Trump administration to disrupt maritime narcotics routes. In his post, he issued a blunt warning to traffickers:

“To all narco-terrorists who threaten our homeland: if you want to stay alive, stop trafficking drugs. If you keep trafficking deadly drugs—we will kill you.”

He also reiterated the administration’s messaging that equates drug cartels to extremist threats. President Donald Trump has previously referred to “the cartels as the ISIS of the Western Hemisphere.”

These operations have raised questions from lawmakers and oversight officials, who are seeking more details about the legal basis for the strikes, the identities of the groups designated as terrorist organizations, and the evidence linking specific vessels to narcotics trafficking. Some senators and watchdog groups have pressed the administration for the underlying legal opinions and intelligence supporting the use of lethal force in international waters.

Pentagon officials maintain that the strikes aim to stem the flow of drugs into the United States and to target organizations labeled by the administration as threats to U.S. security. Hegseth’s release of video footage from the latest strike follows a pattern of the Defense Department posting short clips on public platforms to document these operations.

Critics argue that the footage and official statements are insufficient substitutes for transparent and verifiable disclosures about targets and the legal authorities involved.

The Trump administration has reaffirmed its commitment to continuing maritime actions against trafficking networks until what officials describe as the “poisoning of the American people” ends. Hegseth’s warning and the announcement of another lethal strike highlight the administration’s willingness to use military force at sea as a key component of its anti-drug strategy.
https://www.lifezette.com/2025/11/hegseth-u-s-strike-in-caribbean-kills-3-warns-narco-traffickers-we-will-kill-you-watch/

general

Trump administration asks appeals court to immediately halt ruling on SNAP funding

Leave a comment

The Trump administration has asked the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to issue an emergency stay of a judge’s ruling Thursday ordering the administration to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by today.

Lawyers for the Department of Justice argue that the district court ruling makes a “mockery of the separation of powers.” In their filing, the DOJ stated, “This unprecedented injunction makes a mockery of the separation of powers. Courts hold neither the power to appropriate nor the power to spend. Courts are charged with enforcing the law, but the law is explicit that SNAP benefits are subject to available appropriations.”

U.S. District Judge John McConnell, in his ruling Thursday, ordered the Trump administration to fully fund SNAP for the month of November by Friday.

Last week, McConnell ordered the government to use emergency funds to pay for SNAP in time for the November 1 payments to be made. However, the administration committed to only partially funding the program, stating they needed to reserve additional funds for child nutrition programs.

In his Thursday ruling, McConnell described the government’s argument—that it did not want to tap into emergency funds in order to protect child nutrition programs—as implausible. He accused the Trump administration of “erroneously and intentionally” conflating the funding.

“People have gone without for too long. Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable,” the judge said.

The government has asked the circuit court to allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which operates SNAP, to continue with the partial payment of benefits and to “not compel the agency to transfer billions of dollars from another safety net program with no certainty of their replenishment.”

Judge McConnell himself denied a request from the government to stay his own decision, stating, “The request for a stay of this decision, either a stay or an administrative stay, is denied. People have gone without for too long. Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable.”
https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-administration-asks-appeals-court-immediately-halt-ruling/story?id=127294307

business, international, politics

The expert conversation: What’s Trump’s endgame in Venezuela?

Leave a comment

If there is a strategy behind recent U.S. actions regarding Venezuela, it is not entirely clear. Perhaps there is one, but it has yet to be fully articulated. A good strategy always begins with clear goals. So, what exactly is the U.S. trying to achieve?

There seem to be at least two possibilities — and of course, it could be both.

One potential goal is removing Nicolás Maduro from power. Maduro has long been an anti-American dictator, detrimental both to Venezuela and the United States. The second possibility focuses on border security and stopping narco-trafficking.

### What Are the Major Steps?

The most prominent recent military development has been the buildup of forces. Is this solely about striking drug-carrying vessels? It appears to be more than that.

If the objective is to remove Maduro, is the expectation that he might self-deport? Senators Rick Scott and Lindsey Graham have floated similar ideas publicly, suggesting Maduro should go to Russia or China.

Alternatively, could this buildup be a preparation for strikes on Venezuelan mainland targets, possibly even Maduro himself? The U.S. has traditionally maintained a policy against assassinating foreign leaders, but President Trump seems willing to break norms.

The President has stated his top priority is stopping the flow of illicit drugs into the United States. In the Caribbean, countries like Trinidad and Tobago have been supportive of strikes on vessels suspected of drug trafficking.

### Signaling to the Region and Beyond

This posture is also a signal to other countries in the region and globally, demonstrating how serious this administration is about security and drug interdiction. The U.S. has increased pressure on other countries in the hemisphere, such as Colombia, which faced sanctions and was decertified as cooperative with the U.S. on drug-control efforts due to policy disagreements with President Gustavo Petro.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, from his Senate days, has been very clear: he wants to see Maduro removed. For Rubio, given his Cuban heritage, this is deeply personal—the rise of dictators and the erosion of civil liberties in Venezuela resonates strongly.

### Maduro’s Days May Be Numbered

As the President mentioned on *60 Minutes*, he wants Maduro gone and sees his days as numbered. However, the question remains: to what extent is the U.S. willing to go to advance Maduro’s removal?

It is expected there will be limited strikes on Venezuelan territory linked to illicit drug activities.

Across the region, Maduro is widely seen as a destabilizing force. Venezuela’s economic collapse, political repression, and erosion of rights have created the largest mass migration crisis the Western Hemisphere has seen. The crisis impacts not only the U.S. southern border but also countries like Chile, which are experiencing unprecedented migrant influxes.

### Focus on the Western Hemisphere in the National Defense Strategy

There are indications that the Western Hemisphere will receive more emphasis in the Trump administration’s forthcoming National Defense Strategy (NDS) than in previous versions. Security and stability in the hemisphere arguably require Maduro’s removal, as his regime contributes to regional instability.

Every national defense strategy underscores the importance of homeland defense, and for this administration, the Western Hemisphere is priority number one, with the Indo-Pacific and China following.

This increased focus is evident in the unique military buildup in the region, unlike anything seen in years.

### Differing Views Within the Administration

Within the administration, there appear to be different camps with varying views on Venezuela.

Secretary Rubio and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan represent voices seeking Maduro’s removal. Conversely, members of the “MAGA restraint” camp prioritize border security and drug interdiction, and are wary of direct military conflict with Venezuela. This camp is wary of costly, protracted military interventions, having criticized past U.S. involvements in Iraq and Afghanistan.

For now, these camps agree on applying increased pressure against Venezuela, but there is no clear, coherent strategy that everyone supports.

### Peace Through Strength: The Administration’s Approach

President Trump has often used the phrase “peace through strength,” emphasizing deterrence over extended military campaigns. He is skeptical of drawn-out wars like those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Ukraine, but open to short, sharp, and decisive actions.

Examples include the strikes against Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and operations targeting Iran’s nuclear program.

In this context, limited strikes against drug infrastructure in Venezuela or possibly regime targets align with this approach. However, a full-scale, boots-on-the-ground regime-change operation—akin to Panama or Grenada—is unlikely under this administration.

### Maduro’s Grip on Power

Historically, attempts to overthrow Maduro have been quickly suppressed. Cuban agents embedded within the Venezuelan military provide early warnings, and the regime has fractured military communications to prevent mass uprisings.

Maduro maintains control partly through illicit activities—drug trafficking, illegal gold mining, arms dealing, and human smuggling—which enrich the regime and key military figures.

If U.S. efforts can significantly degrade these illicit enterprises, Maduro’s financial resources to maintain loyalty among generals may diminish, potentially encouraging military leaders to consider alternative futures.

### Unique Context and Democratic Alternatives

Unlike other countries targeted for U.S. intervention without clear democratic successors, Venezuela has established opposition leaders waiting in the wings.

A presidential election a year ago reportedly elected Edmundo González (according to publicly available vote data), who currently lives in exile. María Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, remains active within Venezuela, fighting for the democratic government elected last year.

Venezuela’s vast natural resources and oil reserves also offer key economic potential that could support stability.

### Offers to Leave and the Importance of Democratic Transition

Maduro has reportedly offered to leave power, but those offers have been rejected by the U.S. administration. If Maduro does step down, it is crucial to prevent a henchman from simply taking over.

Robust support exists for Venezuela’s democratic opposition, but it is equally important to make clear to the Venezuelan military that their future depends on supporting a transition grounded in democratic principles.

—

In summary, while the U.S. objectives regarding Venezuela seem focused on both removing Maduro and combating narcotics trafficking, a fully-fledged, unified strategy remains elusive. What is clear is an increased emphasis on security in the Western Hemisphere and willingness to apply pressure through military and diplomatic means short of full-scale intervention. The future course will likely balance these elements while remaining mindful of regional dynamics and the complexities of Venezuelan politics.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/the-expert-conversation-whats-trumps-endgame-in-venezuela/

general

Sam Altman says OpenAI will top $20 billion in annualized revenue this year, hundreds of billions by 2030

Leave a comment

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced on Thursday that the artificial intelligence startup is on track to generate more than $20 billion in annualized revenue run rate this year. He also revealed ambitious plans to grow the company’s sales to hundreds of billions by 2030.

In recent months, OpenAI has secured infrastructure deals totaling more than $1.4 trillion to build the data centers needed to meet growing demand. This staggering sum has raised questions among investors and industry experts about how OpenAI will finance these massive investments.

“We are trying to build the infrastructure for a future economy powered by AI,” Altman wrote in a post on X. “Given everything we see on the horizon in our research program, this is the time to invest and really scale up our technology. Massive infrastructure projects take quite a while to build, so we have to start now.”

Founded as a nonprofit research lab in 2015, OpenAI has transformed into one of the fastest-growing commercial entities worldwide following the launch of its chatbot, ChatGPT, in 2022. The startup is currently valued at $500 billion, though it has yet to turn a profit.

In September, OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar told CNBC that the company was on track to generate $13 billion in revenue this year. However, Friar recently faced scrutiny from the Trump administration after remarks at an event where she mentioned OpenAI’s intent to create an ecosystem involving banks, private equity, and a federal “backstop” or “guarantee” to help finance investments in cutting-edge chips.

She later clarified her comments in a LinkedIn post on Wednesday, stating that OpenAI is not seeking a government backstop for its infrastructure commitments. “I used the word ‘backstop’ and it muddied the point,” Friar explained. “As the full clip of my answer shows, I was making the point that American strength in technology will come from building real industrial capacity, which requires the private sector and government playing their part.”

Adding to the debate, venture capitalist David Sacks, who serves as President Donald Trump’s AI and crypto czar, declared on Thursday that there will be “no federal bailout for AI.” He wrote on X that if one frontier model company fails in the U.S., another will take its place.

Altman echoed this sentiment, stating that OpenAI “does not have or want government guarantees for OpenAI datacenters.” He emphasized that taxpayers should not be responsible for bailing out companies that make poor decisions. “If we get it wrong, that’s on us. This is the bet we are making, and given our vantage point, we feel good about it,” Altman wrote. “But we of course could be wrong, and the market — not the government — will deal with it if we are.”

As OpenAI continues to invest heavily in scaling its technology and infrastructure, the company remains confident in its strategies amid ongoing discussions about the role of government and private investment in the AI industry’s future.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/06/sam-altman-says-openai-will-top-20-billion-annual-revenue-this-year.html