Welcome to Sterling Cooper, Inc.
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
LOGO
  • INCREASE YOUR REVENUES
    50%-100% - FREE EVALUATION
  • WEF 2025 GLOBAL
    RISKS REPORT
  • CAPITAL GAINS
    TAX DEFERRED
  • INCORPORATE
    NOW FOR $39
  • RESEARCH
    REPORTS
  • ENGULF &
    DEVOUR
  • Home
  • Services
    • Selling a Business
    • Buying a Business
    • Public Relation
    • Cooper consulting
    • Advertising
    • Publishing
    • Web and IT Services
    • Loans
  • Seller
  • buyer
  • Advertising
  • Publishing
  • M&A Due Diligence
  • Blog
  • Contact
LOGO

Author Archives: sterlingcooper

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →

USA DECLINING BIRTHRATES CALL FOR BOOT-CAMPS TO BOLSTER THE DECLINE

Social media users are denouncing the idea of “marriage bootcamps” as “ridiculous” and “demographic control” online after an unadopted policy plan from the conservative think tank that helped create Project 2025 proposed the camps as a way to boost birthrates.

The online report, titled “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years,” published Jan. 8 by The Heritage Foundation, lays out ways the group says the United States can “restore the family home,” including through monetarily incentivizing couples to have children and stay married, among other efforts.

The report has since drawn some criticism online, much of it aimed at the “marriage bootcamps” outlined in the plan that would end with people who participated in the program taking part in a communal wedding.

What’s in the Heritage Foundation report? Call for more marriage, babies.

In its report, the Heritage Foundation calls on the Trump administration and Congress to consider a plethora of proposed actions that they say would help reverse the declining birth rate in the United States, which they call “America’s family crisis.”

Overall population growth has slowed “significantly,” with an increase of just 1.8 million people between July 1, 2024, and July 1, 2025, according to U.S. census estimates released on Jan. 27.

There were about 519,000 more births than deaths in the United States between July 2024 and July 2025, representing similar growth as the year before, the Census Bureau said. The birth rate is higher than during the pandemic, but it still “represents a significant decline from prior decades,” according to the agency.

The report outlines The Heritage Foundation’s plan to combat this, including reforming current programs related to welfare, higher education, surrogacy and more, while placing family building and marriage at the focus of both American lives and politics.

Some of the other major suggestions in the report include:

  • Reviewing grants, policies, and regulations that the federal government is involved with to “measure how it helps or harms marriage and family.”
  • Financially incentivizing marriage and childbearing by placing $2,500 into investment accounts for newlyweds.
  • Rerouting the current $17,670 adoption tax credit to married parents for each of their own newborns, as long as one parent is employed.
  • Reforming educational curriculum to teach life skills like relationship management, parenting basics, and financial literacy.
  • Revising higher education subsidies to allow Americans to “avoid pointless debt, start their careers earlier, and form families sooner.”

‘Marriage bootcamps’ and a communal wedding

The report also floated the idea of “marriage bootcamps” that aim to cover topics like communication, money management and conflict resolution for “cohabiting couples with children.”

The successful completion of the program would conclude with couples “ready to walk down the aisle at a communal wedding,” the report states, and a potential $5,000 monetary incentive − funded by foundations or private donors − for couples to get married. Additionally, newlyweds would leave with a mentor couple to guide them through marriage following the wedding.

Delano Squires, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Human Flourishing, told USA TODAY that programs supporting marriage like this already exist, and federal funding has in the past been designated for marriage education, including by the Administration for Children & Families. Ideally, he added, the program would create and support a culture of marriage in what he called “marriage deserts,” or places where people want to get married but aren’t.

“We know that in some of these neighborhoods, particularly low-income, working-class neighborhoods, people are not getting married before having children. But you can find a critical mass of cohabiting couples, right? So, they have kids together, they live together. Oftentimes, their finances are mixed up together,” Squires said. “How about we … work with them to move them from, as old folks would say, shacking up to settling down.”

Paul Eastwick, relationship psychology expert and author of “Bonded by Evolution: The New Science of Love and Connection,” said that while he views the mentor couple idea as potentially beneficial for newlyweds, he is unsure how successful the overall bootcamps would be based on the usefulness of similar past programs, like former President George W. Bush’s Healthy Marriage Initiative.

“It’s kind of based on a broken idea about what makes for good relationships, or at least what prevents bad relationships. Because the assumption was, if we just give people the skills, they’ll like do coupledom better,” Eastwick said.

However, there’s a risk that the delivery of these skills and marriage tips, such as in a classroom format, might not resonate with people trying to manage their marriage or be beneficial in the end, he added.

“There’s good evidence that therapy can work, but a lot of ways that therapy works, it’s not like teaching skills in the abstract. It’s not like you take a class and you get an ‘A’ and now you’re ready to be married,” Eastwick said. “That’s not where most of the goodness or the badness of a relationship comes from.”

Alternatively, Eastwick said he is more concerned with loneliness than marriage when it comes to a lack of socialization and relationships in the U.S. Getting people to spend time together and form connections in person would be his first step to reduce that loneliness that could eventually result in more relationships, he added.

“We don’t want to go back to where we were stigmatizing people for wanting to be single,” Eastwick said. “But if you’re single and looking, if there are creative ways of helping these people to find each other that aren’t swiping, I think that’d be great.”

Social media users react to ‘Saving the Family’ plan

The Heritage Foundation’s plan is a recommendation to the Trump administration that has not been adopted. The camp is also designated as being for cohabiting couples with children.

But the report is still receiving mixed responses from some social media users who view the plan as a potential way for the government to control aspects of their personal lives.

“It’s every bride’s dream,” says user @wiscocowboy sarcastically in a TikTok video. “A forced communal wedding.”

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on February 12, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

COSTCO HAS FIGURED OUT HOW TO STOP RETAIL THEFT!

As rampant shoplifting across the US has forced store closures and inflicted billions of dollars in losses on retailers, one industry giant appears to have cracked the problem.

Costco has largely defied the retail theft surge that has plagued chains such as Walmart and Target – because it runs its stores differently.

S

In its most recent annual report, Costco explained how its business model keeps losses low.

‘By strictly controlling the entrances and exits and using a membership format, we believe our inventory losses are well below those of typical retail operations,’ the report for 2025 said.

Unlike Walmart or Target, Costco doesn’t let just anyone wander in off the street.

Shoppers must show a paid membership – often with photo ID – before they’re allowed through the door. Once inside, there’s usually just one way in and one way out, and every purchase is checked against a receipt before customers leave.

These all add up. Fewer entrances mean fewer blind spots. Receipt checks make it much harder to walk out with unpaid items. And because everyone inside has already paid to be there, there’s far fewer anonymous shoppers  – a key driver of retail theft.

The contrast comes as US retailers are estimated to have lost more than $47 billion to shoplifting in 2025.

A Costco worker checks a receipt at the store exit in Teterboro, New Jersey, on February 28, 2024 – a small step that makes walking out with unpaid items harder

According to the National Retail Federation, the average number of shoplifting incidents rose 93 percent in 2023 compared with 2019, while dollar losses increased by 90 percent over the same period.

Companies including Target, Walgreens, Whole Foods, and Nordstrom have previously cited retail crime as a factor behind store closures.

Costco has long said shoplifting has been a much smaller problem for them than for competitors. During an earnings call in 2023, then chief financial officer Richard Galanti told investors: ‘Thankfully, it’s not a big issue for us.’

Speaking to Daily Mail after the call, Galanti said Costco’s theft rate sat between 0.1 and 0.2 percent – roughly ten times lower than the retail industry average.

‘Our shrinkage has historically been low,’ he said. ‘And we’ve gotten better with time.’ Shrinkage is an industry term for stock losses, including theft.

While theft has never been a major problem for Costco, losses were more than twice today’s level roughly 30 years ago, showing how the company’s approach has steadily tightened.

Beyond store design, he said Costco’s bulk-buying model also helps. Large items like multi-packs of groceries or household goods are far harder to steal than small, high-value products that are often targeted in other stores.

In the US, Costco membership costs $65 per year for a standard Gold Star or Business membership, or $130 for an Executive one.

Executive members also get 2 percent cashback on most purchases- paid yearly – and can also start shopping an hour earlier.

Bulk items stacked high on both sides of a Costco aisle reflect the retailer’s simple design – fewer frills, fewer blind spots

A shopper packs a car with purchases outside Costco, whose focus on large, high-volume items reduces the risk of unpaid goods leaving the store 

Those membership fees allow Costco to operate on thin margins while keeping prices low – and investing in security without locking up everyday items.

While Costco experiences low levels of in-store theft, it has not been immune to crime altogether.

In late 2025, the company suffered a high-profile cargo theft involving a hijacked $400,000 shipment of live lobsters.

Financially, the retailer remains on solid footing. In early 2026, Costco shares are up more than 13 percent year to date, rebounding from a dip in 2025 and buoyed by strong January sales growth of 7.1 percent.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on February 11, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

BITCOIN BOMBS…HOW SAFE AND SECURE IS IT…IT HAS NO VALUE ANYWAY, ALL BASED ON GULLIBILITY OF “INVESTING PUBLIC”

OOPS: Crypto Company Accidentally Sent $40B in Bitcoin to Users PLEASE SEND ME SOME TOO!

Bithumb

South Korean exchange Bithumb just delivered a masterclass in operational disaster. On Friday, what started as a routine promotional giveaway spiraled into one of the industry’s most embarrassing mishaps: the accidental crediting of over 620,000 Bitcoins—valued at more than $40 billion—to hundreds of users. This wasn’t a generous windfall but a ledger error that triggered a flash crash on the platform, exposing the fragility of centralized exchanges and igniting debates about their true reserves.

The incident unfolded during a promotional event intended to reward users with small cash prizes of around 2,000 Korean won, roughly $1.50. Instead, due to what Bithumb described as a staff input error—mistakenly entering “BTC” instead of “KRW”—select users saw their accounts balloon with phantom balances of up to 2,000 Bitcoins each.

Reports vary on the exact number of affected users, with some sources citing 695 and others 249, but the total credited amount consistently lands at 620,000 BTC, representing nearly 3% of Bitcoin’s entire supply. These weren’t actual transfers of real coins; they were “ghost balances” created in the exchange’s internal system, allowing users to attempt trades as if the funds were legitimate.

Chaos ensued almost immediately. Recipients, spotting the massive windfalls, rushed to sell, flooding the order books and driving Bitcoin’s price on Bithumb down by as much as 17% to about 81 million won, equivalent to $55,000—well below the global market rate of around $68,000 to $70,000. The exchange acted swiftly, halting trading and withdrawals for the affected accounts within 35 minutes, and claimed to have stabilized the situation in just five minutes after the price volatility began. Bithumb emphasized that no external hack or security breach was involved, pinning the blame squarely on internal human error.

Today, Bithumb issued a public apology: “We sincerely apologise for the inconvenience caused to our customers due to the confusion that occurred during the distribution process of this (promotional) event.”

The company reported recovering 99.7% of the erroneously credited Bitcoins, pledging to cover the remaining 0.3%—likely from small sales that slipped through before the freeze—using its own assets. This quick response mitigated immediate financial losses, but the damage to user trust and market stability was already done.

Social media erupted with a mix of amusement and alarm. One X user quipped about the “dream drop” turned nightmare, noting how a staff member’s typo turned $1.50 prizes into $133 million illusions. Others highlighted the operational risks, with posts warning that such errors underscore the perils of relying on centralized platforms. The incident even prompted discussions about market liquidity and the potential for similar glitches to cause broader disruptions.

Digging deeper, this blunder raises uncomfortable questions about Bithumb’s reserves. As of the third quarter of 2024, the exchange held only 42,619 BTC—far less than the 620,000 it “allocated” in error. How could a system allow for such massive over-crediting without safeguards? Critics in the crypto community are now debating whether this exposes fractional reserve practices, where exchanges might not hold full backing for user balances, echoing concerns from past scandals like FTX. South Korean regulators have launched an investigation, which could lead to stricter oversight on exchange operations.

This comes at a precarious time for Bitcoin, which has been reeling from a recent dip that erased much of the gains following President Donald Trump’s election victory in November 2024. Trump’s pro-crypto stance had initially buoyed the market, but ongoing volatility reminds investors of the asset’s inherent risks. Bithumb’s mishap amplifies those dangers, showing how even established players can falter spectacularly.

While Bithumb insists it was a simple mistake, some observers speculate it could reveal systemic flaws. There’s no concrete evidence of foul play, but history teaches us that dismissed “conspiracies” in finance—like hidden leverage or insider manipulations—sometimes prove true. For now, the facts point to incompetence rather than malice, but the episode demands accountability.

Users affected by the freeze and volatility deserve more than apologies; they need assurances that such errors won’t recur. Bithumb’s promise to self-fund losses is a start, but rebuilding confidence will require transparency about internal controls and reserves.

In the end, this $40 billion fiasco serves as a stark reminder: In crypto, where decentralization is the ideal, centralized exchanges remain a weak link. Investors should weigh the convenience against the risks, and regulators must step up to prevent the next blunder from becoming a catastrophe.

This entry was posted in CRYPO SCEMES on February 7, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

YOUR SHAW AND MOHAWK CARPETING MAY BE POISONING YOUR HOME AND FAMILY LIFE! BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SUBSIDIARY COULD FACE BILLIONS IN FUTURE CLAIMS

Inside America’s carpet capital: an empire and its toxic legacy

Covering the world in carpet came with a cost no one wants to pay

By DYLAN JACKSON/THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JASON DEAREN/AP and JUSTIN PRICE/THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION

Bob Shaw glared at the executives from the chemical giant 3M across the table from him. He held up a carpet sample and pointed at the logo for Scotchgard on the back.

“That’s not a logo,” fumed Shaw, CEO of the world’s largest carpet company, one attendee later recalled. “That’s a target.”

SHAW IS A BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC., WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY.

gGREG ABEL, CEO BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

GREG ABEL, CEO OF BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

Weeks earlier, 3M Company announced it would reformulate its signature stain-resistance brand under pressure from the Environmental Protection Agency because of human health and environmental concerns.

Mills like Shaw’s had been using Scotchgard in carpet production, releasing its chemical ingredients into the environment for decades. And on a massive scale: The shrewd CEO built Shaw Industries from a family firm in Dalton, Georgia, into a globally dominant carpet maker worth billions.

“I got 15 million of these out in the marketplace,” Shaw told his 3M visitors. “What am I supposed to do about that?”

AGING CHAIRMAN WARREN BUFFETT OF BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

Shaw Industries is indeed facing major PFAS‑related litigation tied to land and water contamination around Dalton, Georgia — but whether liabilities reach “billions” is not yet established in court. The city of Dalton has already filed a federal lawsuit directly against Shaw Industries over PFAS contamination.

Below is a clear, structured breakdown of what is known from current reporting and litigation.

 

What We Know About Shaw Industries’ Potential Liability

1. Shaw Industries is directly named in PFAS contamination lawsuits

  • The City of Dalton, Georgia filed a federal lawsuit against Shaw Industries on December 10, 2024, alleging widespread PFAS contamination in municipal wastewater systems.
  • PFAS (“forever chemicals”) were used for decades in the carpet industry for stain‑resistant treatments (e.g., Scotchgard).

2. The contamination is well‑documented across Northwest Georgia

Investigations by AP, PBS Frontline, and Georgia Public Broadcasting show:

  • PFAS from carpet manufacturing wastewater entered the Conasauga River, soil, and drinking water systems downstream of Dalton.
  • University of Georgia testing found some of the highest PFAS levels in surface water in the region.
  • PFAS contamination has been ongoing since the 1970s, tied to carpet mills including Shaw.

3. Are the potential liabilities “in the billions”?

There is no public court finding yet assigning a dollar figure to Shaw’s liability. However:

  • PFAS litigation nationwide (e.g., 3M, DuPont) has resulted in multi‑billion‑dollar settlements.
  • Dalton’s lawsuit is still in early stages, but the scope of contamination (municipal systems, rivers, soil, and potentially human exposure) suggests theoretical exposure could be very large.
  • Reporting describes the region’s PFAS legacy as “decades of contamination,” which often leads to long‑tail health and environmental claims.

Conclusion:
While no court has yet determined that Shaw owes “billions,” the scale of contamination and the precedent from other PFAS cases make major financial exposure plausible, depending on how litigation evolves.

 

4. Is Berkshire Hathaway (as parent) responsible?

Shaw Industries is a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway.
Parent‑company liability depends on:

  • Corporate structure
  • Degree of operational control
  • Whether plaintiffs attempt to pierce the corporate veil
  • Environmental statutes that may impose direct or derivative liability

As of now, lawsuits target Shaw Industries directly, not Berkshire Hathaway. No public filings indicate Berkshire itself has been named as a defendant.

 

5. Health Claims: What’s Alleged?

PFAS exposure is associated with:

  • Increased cancer risk
  • Thyroid disease
  • Immune system effects
  • Developmental issues

The lawsuits and investigations allege:

  • PFAS from carpet manufacturing entered drinking water systems
  • Residents and workers may have elevated PFAS levels in blood

These claims are still being litigated and not yet adjudicated.

A 3M executive replied that he didn’t know. Shaw threw the sample at him and left the room.

The answer to Shaw’s Scotchgard question from that moment in 2000 would be the same as that of the broader industry. Carpet makers kept using closely related chemical alternatives for years, even after scientific studies and regulators warned of their accumulation in human blood and possible health effects. Customers expected stain resistance; nothing worked better than the family of chemicals known as PFAS.

A lack of state and federal regulations allowed carpet companies and their suppliers to legally switch among different versions of these stain-and-soil resistant products. Meanwhile, the local public utility in Dalton responsible for ensuring safe drinking water coordinated with carpet executives in private meetings that would effectively shield their companies from oversight.

Year after year, the chemicals traveled in water discarded during manufacturing from mills across northwest Georgia, eventually reaching a river system that provides drinking water to hundreds of thousands of people in Georgia and eastern Alabama.

The pollution is so bad some researchers have identified the region as one of the nation’s PFAS hot spots. Today, the consequences can be found everywhere. PFAS, often called forever chemicals because they can take decades or more to break down, are in the water and the soil.

They’re in the dust on floors where children crawl, the local fish and wildlife, and as ongoing research has shown, the people.

Doctors have few answers for those like Dolly Baker who live downriver from Dalton’s carpet plants. She recently learned her blood has extraordinarily high PFAS levels.

“I feel like, I don’t know, almost like there’s a blanket over me, smothering me that I can’t get out from under,” she said. “It’s just, you’re trapped.”

An investigation by newsrooms including The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Associated Press and FRONTLINE (PBS) has revealed how the economic engine that sustained northwest Georgia contaminated the area and neighboring states, too. Downriver from Dalton, AL.com found cities in Alabama are struggling to remove PFAS from drinking water. And in South Carolina, The Post and Courier traced a local watchdog’s discovery of forever chemicals to a river by a Shaw factory.

The full story of Georgia’s power structures prioritizing a prized industry over public health is only now emerging through dozens of interviews and thousands of pages of court records from lawsuits against the industry and its chemical suppliers. Those records, including testimony from key executives, emails and other internal documents, detail how carpet companies benefited from chemistry and regulatory inaction to keep using forever chemicals.

All the while, the mills still hummed.

Pointing fingers in a company town

A sign welcomes Dalton’s visitors to the “Carpet Capital of the World.”

Fleets of semitrucks stamped with company logos rumble out of behemoth warehouses. Textiles have employed generations here, propelling the city from 19th-century cotton mills into a manufacturing hub — and the region into a supplier of carpet to the globe.

The durability that makes PFAS so good at protecting carpets from spilled tomato sauce and muddy boots lets them survive in the environment. It also makes them dangerous for humans. Because they bind to a protein in human blood and absorb into some organs, PFAS linger.

A welcome sign reading “Carpet Capital of the World” is displayed in Dalton, Ga., about 80 miles northwest of Atlanta, on Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025. (Hyosub Shin/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

The blood of nearly all Americans has some amount of the chemicals, which have been used in a variety of consumer products: nonstick cookware, waterproof sunscreen, dental floss, microwave popcorn bags.

Few industries used them as much as carpet did in northwest Georgia. While huge amounts were needed for stain resistance on an industrial scale, minuscule amounts — the equivalent of less than a drop in an Olympic-sized swimming pool — can make drinking water a health risk. For certain PFAS, U.S. regulators now say no level is safe to drink.

More than a year before the Scotchgard announcement in 2000, 3M informed Shaw Industries and its biggest competitor, Mohawk Industries Inc., that it was finding Scotchgard’s chemical in human blood and that it stayed in the environment, 3M records show.

Carpet executives have long insisted they are not to blame. They point out that 3M and fellow chemical manufacturer DuPont assured them their products were safe, for decades hiding internal studies that were finding harm to the environment, animals and people.

Shaw and Mohawk both said they relied on and complied with regulators and stopped using PFAS in U.S. carpet production in 2019.

In an interview, a Shaw executive said the company acted in good faith as it worked hard to exit PFAS as quickly as suitable substitutes could be found.

“Hindsight is 20/20,” said Kellie Ballew, Shaw’s vice president of environmental affairs. “I don’t think that we can call into question our intentions. I think Shaw had every good intention along the way.”

Shaw in a follow-up statement said it complied with its wastewater permits and took guidance from chemical companies, some of which “instructed Shaw to put spills of product into the public sewer system.”

Mohawk declined an interview request, instead referring to a 2024 filing in its lawsuit against chemical companies: “For decades, DuPont and 3M sold their carpet treatment products to Mohawk without disclosing the actual or potential presence of PFAS in their products.”

Later, in response to detailed questions, Mohawk attorney Jason Rottner wrote that, “Any PFAS contamination issues in northwest Georgia are a problem of the chemical manufacturers’ making.”

Shaw Industries, based in Dalton, and Mohawk Industries Inc., based in Calhoun, dominate the carpet manufacturing business in northwest Georgia. (Hyosub Shin/AJC)

Now, uncertainty and feelings of betrayal are boiling across the region. Communities fear their drinking water is unsafe and local governments say the problem is too vast for them to fix alone.

In Washington, Republicans and Democrats alike have been slow to act. Under President Joe Biden, the Environmental Protection Agency in 2024 established the first PFAS drinking water protections. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back some and delay enforcement of others.

The agency declined interview requests but in a statement said it is committed to combating PFAS contamination to protect human health and the environment, without causing undue burden to industry.

Georgia’s regulatory system has done little to scrutinize PFAS and depends mostly on industry to self-report chemical spills, imposing modest penalties when companies do. The Georgia Environmental Protection Division, which declined an interview request, said it “relies on the expertise of” the EPA.

Meanwhile, carpet makers still can’t seem to shake PFAS. Just last year, EPA concluded “PFAS have been and continue to be used” by the industry, based on wastewater testing. The agency did not name companies and said it’s unclear whether the chemicals were from current or prior use.

The mess in northwest Georgia has led to a series of lawsuits over the past decade with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake.

Buried in this avalanche of litigation, finger-pointing and politics are the people who live here. They have been forced to navigate a public health and economic crisis of a magnitude still not fully understood.

“They ought to have to clean this land up,” Faye Jackson said, referring to carpet companies. A former industry worker, she raised her family in a house next to a polluted river and has elevated PFAS levels in her blood. “They ought to have to pay for it.”

The creek ran blood red

Lisa Martin watched the creek beside the Mohawk Industries mill run red with carpet dye.

It was one of her first days as a planning manager at Mohawk in 2005, and she tried to hide her unease as the dye runoff turned the water into what looked like blood.

The red she saw in Drowning Bear Creek had come from the nearby dyehouse, where carpets got their colors. There, machines whirred as workers sloshed around in rubber boots in ankle-deep dyewater, reminding Martin of fishermen. The acrid odor made her eyes tear up.

A recent California transplant at the time, Martin recalled her initial culture shock.

“At a gut level, you know it’s not right. And unfortunately, when you try to raise the flag and everybody’s like, ‘Well, that’s just the way it is,’” Martin said in an interview.

“I became complacent.”

Like Shaw, Mohawk is based in northwest Georgia and is among the largest carpet companies in the world. The industry supported the entire community, employing someone in what seems like every family. Martin realized carpet was in the region’s DNA.

Martin said the chemical runoff was routine during her 20 years at Mohawk, which ended with her 2024 retirement. Sometimes, when the company dyed carpets blue, the water in the creek would be blue, too. One spill that turned the creek purple for a mile downstream killed thousands of fish, records show.

Mohawk’s attorney called such spills “rare instances” that were promptly reported and said there is no evidence any spills directly discharged PFAS.

In the dyehouse, what neither Martin nor the workers could detect were the colorless, odorless compounds also included in the wastewater: forever chemicals. Machines bathed the carpets in these soil-and-stain blockers, and what didn’t stick washed away.

For decades, Mohawk’s and Shaw’s mills sent PFAS-polluted wastewater through sewer pipes to the local Dalton Utilities plants for treatment that did not remove the chemicals. Much of the tainted water ended up in the Conasauga River.

Both Shaw and Mohawk said they operated in accordance with permits issued by Dalton Utilities. The utility said it takes direction from federal and state regulators, who have not prohibited PFAS in industrial wastewater.

The Conasauga watershed is filled with lush green pastures, creeks and tributaries that help fuel the water-hungry industry. The river’s waters emerge out of Georgia’s Blue Ridge Mountains and eventually flow southwest, past Dalton, Calhoun and Rome, and then into Alabama.

his northwest Georgia city is known as the Carpet Capital of the World.

Carpet industry facilities like these are prominent fixtures here.

After decades of PFAS being disposed in wastewater, the chemicals have made their way into the Conasauga River.

Which transports PFAS into the environment and other communities downstream.

Residents downriver from the mills didn’t know about the chemicals running through their towns. But the industry’s top leaders did.

PFAS is a catchall term for a group of thousands of related synthetic compounds also known as fluorochemicals. They have been fundamental to the carpet business since the 1970s, as market demand for stain resistance transformed the industry, and carpet makers began buying millions of pounds. In the mid-1980s, the introduction of DuPont’s Stainmaster, accompanied by a successful marketing blitz, further established these products as essential.

Neither DuPont nor its related chemical companies that supplied PFAS provided comment for this story.

The carpet industry used so much PFAS that Dalton’s mills became the largest combined emitters of the chemicals among 3M’s U.S. customers, according to a 1999 internal 3M study that looked at 38 industrial locations.

Before 3M had pulled Scotchgard, leading to Bob Shaw’s showdown in the spring of 2000, both Shaw Industries and Mohawk had been privy to inside information that PFAS were accumulating in human blood. Bob Shaw did not respond to requests for comment.

In late 1998 and early 1999, 3M held a series of meetings with carpet executives to disclose its blood-study research, according to 3M’s internal meeting notes from court records.

“When we started finding the chemical in everybody’s blood, one of the biggest worries was Dalton, because we knew how sloppy they were,” Rich Purdy, a 3M toxicologist who alerted the EPA to his company’s hiding of PFAS’ dangers, said in an interview.

Notes by a 3M employee from a January 1999 meeting said Mohawk executives did not express grave concerns about the revelations. “No real sense of Mohawk problem/responsibility,” 3M noted. “If it’s good enough for 3M, it’s good enough for Mohawk.” Mohawk’s attorney said of the meetings over two decades ago that 3M assured the company its chemicals were safe.

At another meeting that January, Shaw executives were “concerned but quiet,” with one executive expressing he “felt plaintiffs’ attorneys would be involved immediately,” according to 3M’s notes. Shaw Industries maintains it learned of the concerns about Scotchgard at the same time everyone else did.

In follow-up letters to top executives with Shaw and Mohawk later that month, 3M noted the company’s efforts were guided by the idea that reducing exposure “to a persistent chemical is the prudent and responsible thing to do” while emphasizing current evidence did not show human health effects.

“We trust that you appreciate the delicate nature of this information and its potential for misuse,” the letters said. “We ask that you treat it accordingly.”

3M then asked for access to Shaw and Mohawk mills to see if they were handling the chemicals safely, records show. Those internal reports, produced in 1999, would fault how carpet companies handled PFAS products, exposing workers and the environment, according to court records.

The next year, 3M and EPA announced concerns about Scotchgard.

The day of the announcement, the director of EPA’s Chemical Control Division sent an email to his colleagues and counterparts in other countries calling the key ingredient in Scotchgard an “unacceptable technology” and a “toxic chemical.” The email said the compound should be eliminated “to protect human health and the environment from potentially severe long-term consequences.”

3M declined an interview request. In a statement, the company said it has stopped all PFAS manufacturing and has invested $1 billion in water treatment at its facilities. “3M has taken, and will continue to take, actions to address PFAS manufactured prior to the phase out,” the company said.

In 2000, the year 3M announced it was pulling Scotchgard, Mohawk logged more than $3.4 billion in net sales. Shaw Industries reported $4.2 billion.

EPA would not issue its first provisional health advisories for nearly another decade. Absent federal guidance, the carpet industry could legally continue to use these products.

Despite accumulating health and environmental concerns, federal law at the time did not let EPA ban any chemical without “enormous evidence” of harm, said Betsy Southerland, a former director of the agency’s water protection division who spent over three decades there.

“So we were really hamstrung at the time,” said Southerland, who has become a critic of EPA.

At Mohawk, Lisa Martin was not an executive making decisions about PFAS, she said, but her time at the company weighs on her still.

“Unfortunately, I later learned that there are more people that I worked with that were aware of it,” she said. “They were aware of it and didn’t do the things they should have done.”

Years into her tenure, the athletic and inquisitive Martin began getting sick and feeling lethargic. Her doctor said she’d grown nodules on her thyroid, a gland that is a key part of the immune system and which studies have shown forever chemicals can harm.

She had no family history of thyroid issues. It was a mystery to her.

Cozy relationship

Inside the Dalton headquarters of the Carpet and Rug Institute, industry executives and the local water utility conferred in 2004 about EPA’s growing scrutiny.

For several months, EPA representatives had negotiated with Dalton Utilities and the carpet industry through the institute, its influential trade group, over gaining access to their facilities to test the water. Mohawk and Shaw were using DuPont’s Stainmaster and other products, which also contained forever chemicals akin to Scotchgard’s older formulation.

Still, federal regulators worried these compounds were exhibiting similar harmful properties. Dalton Utilities and the carpet industry were uneasy about welcoming in government officials. Companies could not be guaranteed confidentiality and feared test results could lead to “inaccurate public perceptions and inappropriate media coverage,” records show.

The public utility and the carpet industry chose to resist.

Their close ties went back years. Carpet executives have long sat on Dalton Utilities’ board, appointed by the city’s mayor and city council. Fueled by the growth of the carpet industry, Dalton Utilities’ fortunes rose with the industry’s success.

At the carpet institute’s 2004 annual meeting, officials with carpet and chemical companies convened to discuss the EPA’s increasingly aggressive posture. Shaw’s director of technical services, Carey Mitchell, addressed his colleagues. He was blunt. No company would allow testing.

“Dalton Utilities has said not no, but hell no,” Mitchell said, according to notes made by a 3M attendee. Mitchell did not respond to requests for comment.

In response to questions for this story, Dalton Utilities declined an interview request but said it and the carpet industry “have always operated independently of one another” and that the EPA testing request was informal.

The carpet institute declined an interview request, sending a written statement instead.

“The CRI’s conduct was and continues to be appropriate, lawful, and focused on our customers, communities, and the millions of people who rely on our products every day,” institute President Russ DeLozier said, adding: “Today’s carpet products reflect decades of progress, and The CRI members remain committed to moving forward responsibly.”

The EPA stiff-arm was the latest run-in between Dalton Utilities and federal regulators.

A public water utility’s obligation, above all else, is to ensure clean drinking water. Dalton’s utility had previously gone to criminal lengths to deceive regulators.

In the early 1990s, Dalton Utilities’ staff traced a drop in oxygen levels in its wastewater treatment to stain-resistant chemicals from carpet mills, the utility’s top engineer at the time, Richard Belanger, said in an interview. While the utility didn’t know about PFAS then, something in these chemicals was impacting its ability to process the wastewater, he said. Rather than clamping down on industry, according to Belanger, his bosses ordered him to manipulate pollution figures the utility reported to government regulators.

“I was told, OK, make this work,” Belanger, now retired, said.

In June 1995, EPA investigators interviewed Belanger. He told them Dalton Utilities’ program to clean industrial pollutants was “a sham.” The treatment was so poor, the smell of carpet chemicals carried throughout the utility’s plant, and local creeks were often “purple and foamy,” according to investigators’ notes from the interview.

Two months later, agents with the FBI and EPA raided Dalton Utilities’ offices.

Federal prosecutors charged the utility with violating the Clean Water Act by falsifying wastewater reports, which concealed the full extent of the carpet industry’s pollution. The case did not address PFAS specifically, which was not yet a pollutant of concern for EPA. Dalton Utilities pleaded guilty in 1999 and was fined $1 million. Its CEO was removed.

The utility was also put under federal monitoring in 2001 to ensure it was making key changes to protect the water supply and agreed to pay a $6 million penalty.

The era of legal troubles with the federal government was pivotal, the utility said, adding it “has remained committed to avoiding the issues that led to those proceedings” and is transparent with regulators.

Around the same time, emerging data showed the fluorochemicals used in carpets caused cancer in rats.

The carpet institute’s then-president, Werner Braun, forwarded the rat study to several carpet and chemical executives in a 2002 email, calling the findings a “troubling issue,” records show. Braun, now in his 90s, was unable to comment for this story due to his health, his wife said.

In preparing to respond to Braun, a 2002 email shows DuPont officials planned to explain that Stainmaster didn’t contain the type of PFAS that was then EPA’s focus. The next year, DuPont would tell carpet companies the opposite, acknowledging the chemical was indeed in Stainmaster. DuPont maintained in later legal proceedings it wasn’t aware until 2003 that Stainmaster contained the chemical.

Despite its success in fending off EPA testing, the industry faced a mounting challenge, and the carpet institute focused on shoring up its influence and image.

At a meeting in the spring of 2004 attended by top executives, the carpet institute decided to solicit donations from company employees for its political action committee “in an effort to submit friendships, gain access, and say thank you to legislators,” according to meeting notes.

Later that year, PFAS made news in a high-profile legal case involving DuPont. The class-action lawsuit brought by residents in West Virginia claimed their water had been contaminated by a nearby chemical plant that used PFAS. Although DuPont said the settlement did not imply legal liability, it agreed to pay $70 million and to establish a health monitoring panel. Some two decades later, Braun was shown the rat study email during a legal deposition.

“I wouldn’t necessarily call it a red flag but a flag, you know, that you might want to be aware of,” he said.

Only years later did people downstream begin to learn the toll.

The river brought the poison

When Marie Jackson’s goats started dying about a year ago, nobody could explain why. Jackson saw it as just another sign something was wrong with her land.

Marie and her mother, Faye Jackson, have lived on their 12 acres near Calhoun for decades. Today they keep mostly to themselves, inseparable, equal parts bickering and loving.

Most days, Marie makes the short drive down a gravel road, Jackson Drive, to her mother’s house to check on her. She tends to Faye’s chickens, mows her grass and drives her to doctor’s appointments. Behind their homes is a rolling stretch of grassy pasture where their cattle graze — and the goats did as well, she said, until they all died.

Past a curtain of trees on the far end of the pasture lies the Conasauga.

Marie, 50, spent her childhood playing and swimming in the muddy river with rocks on the banks that made a good fishing spot. The Jacksons now know the water that sustains their homestead, about 15 miles downstream from Dalton, is contaminated.

Tests of the river by the AJC found levels of what was once a key ingredient in Scotchgard at more than 30 times the proposed EPA limits for drinking water. Tests of Faye’s drinking water well by the AJC and the city of Calhoun found PFAS just under these federal health limits.

Calhoun city officials used that health standard to guide a program designed to address contaminated wells. A 2024 legal settlement between the city and the Southern Environmental Law Center included a condition to test local water. As of August, 30% of private wells tested had levels above the health limit.

Because Faye’s test was just below the cutoff, she does not qualify to receive a filtration system.

Uncertainty about the chemicals continues to permeate every aspect of the Jacksons’ lives. They fear PFAS are behind their declining health. They fear their drinking water. They fear for the health of the cattle and chickens they raise; and for the health of those who may eat them.

“I know they’ve got it in their systems,” Faye said.

Even Marie’s memories are filled with second-guessing. Idyllic scenes of her childhood are now overshadowed by recollections of foam on the river and dead fish. She blames the mills.

The Jacksons, like generations of northwest Georgians, relied on the carpet industry. Both of Marie’s parents worked in the mills: Faye with yarn machines and her dad in the dyehouse. Marie would end up working in carpet, too.

Everyone suspected the work was dangerous. Faye said she’d get headaches from the strong chemical smells. The hours were long. But with the risk came a steady wage.

“Around here, you have to understand the people, that’s all we know, right? That’s all we’ve ever been around,” Marie said, fidgeting with her plastic water bottle. “It’s like you don’t think. It’s routine. You go in, you know your job, you do your job, you go home.”

Faye’s failing health eventually forced her to stop working. Today she drinks water she buys from the store.

In 2022, Faye’s husband, Robert, died after struggling with several illnesses. She now wonders whether decades of PFAS exposure was to blame. And Marie has nodules growing on her thyroid.

The Jacksons long suspected they had forever chemicals in their blood. With their consent, the AJC commissioned testing last fall and the mother and daughter finally learned the truth. Their PFAS levels were above the safety threshold outlined by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

“They’ve poisoned us,” Faye said.

The forever chemicals found in their blood

PFAS blood levels higher than 2 ng/mL have a potential for adverse health effects, according to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.  Studies have connected PFAS exposure to increased risks of thyroid  disease, immune system disorders and certain cancers.

Marie Jackson

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

6 ng/mL

Faye Jackson

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

6.5 ng/mL

Lisa Martin

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

19.6 ng/mL

Dolly Baker

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

1336.5 ng/mL

Among the highest ever recorded

In 2006, the carpet industry and Dalton Utilities faced a new dilemma.

University of Georgia researchers were testing the Conasauga for PFAS, and early results seen by carpet companies showed high levels. Shaw Industries began conducting its own tests, which confirmed UGA’s results: PFAS coursed through the river.

As Georgia’s scientists worked on their PFAS study, the majority of outside experts on an EPA advisory panel determined the PFAS associated with DuPont’s Stainmaster was “likely to be carcinogenic.” In 2005, the year prior, EPA and DuPont settled a claim that the chemical company failed to report for decades what it knew about the risks. At $10.25 million, it was then the largest penalty ever obtained under a federal environmental law. DuPont did not admit liability.

The university’s study, eventually published in 2008, made headlines. The UGA researchers reported PFAS levels in the Conasauga were “among the highest ever recorded in surface water” like a river or a lake. Not just in the United States, but worldwide.

Journalists from a local newspaper also began asking questions about the study and the earlier decision by the utility and the industry to deny regulators access for testing.

A Chattanooga Times Free Press reporter was “hot on the trail” of a story, wrote Denise Wood, at the time a Mohawk environmental executive and Dalton City Council member, in a February 2008 email to Dalton Utilities CEO Don Cope.

One of the university researchers told the paper that UGA’s test results were “staggeringly high.” Cope did not respond to requests by the AJC and AP for an interview, and Wood declined to comment.

At the carpet institute, officials rushed to create a crisis management team, internal records and emails show. The industry downplayed the UGA study and broader concerns about PFAS.

“In our society today, it is absolutely known that you report the presence of some chemical and everybody gets all up and arms,” the institute’s head, Braun, told reporters.

UGA’s study had an impact. The EPA returned in 2009. Unlike before, the agency now had provisional health advisory limits for certain PFAS compounds, offering regulators some enforcement authority.

This new scrutiny would uncover a major source of pollution along the Conasauga.

On the edge of Dalton, the Loopers Bend “land application system” occupies more than 9,600 acres on the river’s banks. The public utility had long hosted hunts for wildlife at the forested site, which is crisscrossed by a network of 19,000 sprinklers that sprayed PFAS-laden wastewater for decades.

The Dalton Utilities’ land application system in Chatsworth, Ga., on the banks of the Conasauga River, is used to dispose of industrial wastewater from the carpet industry, seen on Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2022. (Hyosub Shin/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

For years, the site’s design allowed runoff to leak into the river, according to EPA’s former water programs enforcement chief. The wastewater was so poorly filtered the ground felt like walking on “shag carpet” due to all the fibers, the EPA official, Scott Gordon, said in an interview. He noted gullies cut by wastewater led directly to creeks and the river.

Because Dalton Utilities distributed the treated wastewater over land instead of discharging it into the river directly, it didn’t need a federal Clean Water Act permit. After EPA inspected and saw the conditions, the agency ordered the local utility to apply for one. The state, however, had approval power in Georgia and rejected the application, saying the permit wasn’t necessary.

For 40 years, Dalton Utilities has operated a massive land application system in a forested area outside the city.

Most PFAS discarded by the carpet industry wound up here, sprayed onto the land via a vast sprinkler system.

Millions of gallons of PFAS-laden wastewater were sprayed on the site. The pollutants seeped into the soil and spread to the Conasuaga River.

Upstream from the sprayfields, federal testing in 2019 found that levels of PFAS were safe or nonexistant (below 4 parts per trillion).

Downstream, levels were measured above 200 parts per trillion, well above what the EPA considers safe.

Over decades, the industry’s forever chemicals have kept flowing further downstream, threatening drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people.

Today, Loopers Bend remains a significant source of PFAS in the Conasauga.

The EPA worked with Dalton Utilities to upgrade the site starting in 1999, but it would be years before the agency would require testing of the Conasauga’s water.

In 2009, testing reports submitted by Dalton Utilities to EPA confirmed what the UGA research had already shown: Forever chemicals had infiltrated the region. In addition to river and well water, deer and turkey taken from Loopers Bend had PFAS in their muscles and organs.

Dalton Utilities said that levels of PFAS in its wastewater and the compost it provided to enrich soil for farmers and homeowners were not a health risk. PFAS were everywhere and a “societal problem,” and not one Dalton Utilities could solve, the utility’s lawyer wrote the EPA in 2010.

Nonetheless, the utility agreed to restrict its compost distribution and test wastewater from a quarter of its industrial customers annually.

As later testing showed, the chemicals would persist for years.

A health reckoning

Why is the doctor calling? Dolly Baker wondered as she rinsed the hair of a client at her salon “Dolled Up” in Calhoun. Dr. Dana Barr’s number had popped up on her cellphone.

Baker had taken part in a 2025 Emory University study of northwest Georgia, where she was one of 177 people who had their blood tested. Now one of the study’s lead scientists was on the phone.

Barr, an analytical chemist with epidemiological experience, had been mailing study participants about the results. When she saw Baker’s test data, she dialed her phone.

Baker, a lifelong Calhoun resident now in her 40s, had PFAS levels hundreds of times above the U.S. average.

“I don’t want to alarm you, but we’re just trying to figure out what can be causing this,” Barr told her, Baker later recalled. “I suggest you talk to your doctor and let them know that there are certain cancers that can come into play later.”

Baker was speechless.

She walked back to her wash station and slowly started rinsing her client’s hair again, quietly processing what this all meant. How did she have such high levels? Her mind raced.

What was she supposed to do about the forever chemicals in her body?

unfortunately, there is no easy answer,” Baker said Barr told her.

Emory tested Baker’s water and hair products, but the tests came back low. Almost a year after learning her blood test results, Baker is no closer to knowing why her levels are so high.

She said she’s frustrated by the lack of action and leadership, especially after years of testing and community meetings to discuss the problem.

“You know, people go in other countries to help them get clean water,” Baker said, “and do we have clean water?”

Barr, who spent years at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studying environmental toxicants, realized there was too little data to grasp the problem in northwest Georgia. She helped launch Emory’s study to understand the extent of contamination in human blood.

Three out of four residents tested by Emory had PFAS levels that warrant medical screening, according to clinical guidelines from the National Academy of Sciences.

“People in Rome and in Calhoun tended to have higher levels of PFAS than most of the people in the U.S. population,” Barr said.

Mohawk and Shaw say they stopped using older fluorochemicals around 2008. These were known by chemists as “long-chain” or C8 because each had eight or more carbon atoms on their molecular chains. Scotchgard, Stainmaster and Daikin’s Unidyne have since been reformulated without these C8 compounds.

Chemical manufacturers made new “short-chain” or C6 versions with six carbon atoms. Daikin U.S. Corp. said in a statement it “is committed, as it always has been, to regulatory compliance, evolving PFAS science, and global standards.”

Despite the chemical variations, short-chain PFAS had the stain-busting and water-repellant traits of the older chemicals. Scientists in the 2010s also expressed concerns that the newer formulations might carry similar environmental and health risks. Some began calling them “regrettable substitutes.”

After saying it got out of PFAS completely in 2019, Shaw has struggled to remove the chemicals from its facilities. The company said the compounds have so many applications they appear elsewhere in the machines and processes it takes to produce carpet.

“You can’t just say you stopped using them and you’re done,” said Ballew, Shaw’s vice president for environmental affairs.

She said the company installed filters at some mills and sleuthed out PFAS sources from its supply chain to remove them. Shaw developed a testing technology and shared it with suppliers so they could do the same, offering it as an example of strong corporate citizenry from a company with roots in the region.

“Shaw didn’t quit looking, and that’s what I’m really proud of,” Ballew said. “That’s the story. It’s not how long it took us to get here.”

Worries, but few answers

Down the road from Baker’s hair salon, Dr. Katherine Naymick operates a private medical practice. She’s practiced in Calhoun since moving there in 1996.

Naymick’s office sits in a small strip mall off Calhoun’s main road — a tidy, white-walled office decorated with retro medical equipment. She’s been mystified that many of her young patients’ thyroid glands had just “quit on them.” Similarly, she said her patients also had higher rates of endocrine cancers than the national average.

Doctors have few tools to address patient concerns, as the understanding of these chemicals’ links to health effects is still evolving. One resource is guidance the National Academy published in 2022 for physicians, which cites the “alarming” pervasiveness of PFAS contamination.

That guidance recommended doctors offer blood testing to patients who live in high exposure areas. The panel also cautioned the results could raise questions about links to possible health effects that cannot be easily answered.

People like Dolly Baker are at higher risk of kidney or other cancers, and thyroid problems, research shows.

When Naymick started in Calhoun, chemical manufacturers knew about the potential dangers of forever chemicals, but the public did not. The doctor said she did her best to treat her patients while feeling powerless to understand why they were so sick.

Then studies began to emerge in the 2000s showing high levels of forever chemicals in the Conasauga. In the 2010s, the first large health studies tied PFAS to issues with childhood development and the immune system.

Naymick enrolled in environmental medicine training, which focuses on patients’ exposure to contaminants, among other factors. Through study, Naymick gained tools to investigate the area’s heavy industrial footprint she long suspected. She started looking for clues, including blood tests, that might help explain her patients’ problems. Soon she zeroed in on forever chemicals.

In 2025, Dr. Barr’s group at Emory used Dr. Naymick’s clinic to draw blood. Naymick now thinks all her patients should get tested because of their high chance of exposure. But insurers rarely cover PFAS tests, and many of her clients can’t afford the hundreds of dollars they cost.

As they wait, the full extent of the human toll in northwest Georgia remains unknown.

This entry was posted in Warren Buffett.... on February 6, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

CRYPTO CURRENCIES HAVE NO VALUE, AND FINALLY DUMMY INVESTORS ARE FINDING OUT THE HARD WAY

Bitcoin drops below $67,000 as sell-off intensifies and pessimism grows about crypto’s function

WE WERE INTRIGUED HOW MANY “INVESTORS” thought that buying and paying for AIR was a great deal!
  • It’s the first time bitcoin has fallen below $67,000 since November 2024.
  • Some analysts said $70,000 was the key level to watch and a convincing break below there could lead the token to suffer even greater losses.
  • The latest downturn comes as investor confidence in bitcoin’s utility as a store of value, inflation hedge and digital currency falters.
  • “If we fail to hold it, a move toward” the $60,000 to $65,000 range “becomes quite likely,” said James Butterfill, head of research at Coinshares.
CHONGQING, CHINA  NOVEMBER 21: In this photo illustration, two gold-colored Bitcoin tokens are placed on a screen displaying a declining cryptocurrency price chart on November 21, 2025, in Chongqing, China. Bitcoin has recently dropped below the mid-US$80,000 level, extending a multi-day sell-off driven by rising interest-rate expectations, weakening market structure, and renewed movement of long-dormant supply. (Photo illustration by Cheng Xin/Getty Images)
Cheng Xin | Getty Images

Bitcoin sank below $67,000 on Thursday as investor confidence continued to falter in the asset once hailed as “digital gold” and a unique store of value. —

Digital assets, including bitcoin, have fallen deeper into the red as investors re-assess the practical utility of a token that has been championed not only as a hedge against inflation and macroeconomic uncertainties but also as an alternative to fiat currencies and traditional safe-havens such as gold.

That hasn’t panned out lately, since bitcoin peaked just north of $126,000 in early October.

On Thursday, bitcoin was last down to $67,675, its lowest since since November 2024. The cryptocurrency broke below $70,000 earlier in the session Thursday and then the selling increased. The cryptocurrency is down 20% this week alone.

This steady selling in our view signals that traditional investors are losing interest, and overall pessimism about crypto is growing,” Deutsche Bank analyst Marion Laboure said Wednesday in a note to clients.

Growing investor caution comes as many of the sensationalized claims about bitcoin have failed to materialize. The token has largely traded in the same direction as other risk-on assets, such as stocks, particularly during recent geopolitical and macroeconomic flare ups in Venezuela, the Middle East and Europe, and its adoption as a form of payment for goods and services has been minimal.

Bitcoin underperforming gold

Bitcoin is down nearly 30% over the past year, while gold has surged 68% in the same period..WHY IS IT NOW DOWN TO ZERO!!!?????

Other cryptocurrencies are cratering too. Ether has pulled back 23% this week, on track for its worst week since November 2022, when it slumped 24%. Solana hit $88.42 on Thursday, about a two-year low and off 24% on the week.

Some traders have suggested $70,000 is a key level to watch and a break below that could trigger further declines for bitcoin.

James Butterfill, head of research at Coinshares, said $70,000 is shaping up as a “key psychological level,” adding that “if we fail to hold it, a move toward” the $60,000 to $65,000 range “becomes quite likely.”

The price of bitcoin over the last year.

The latest move in bitcoin comes amid a worsening sell-off in U.S. tech stocks. The State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF dropped 2.8% Wednesday, one day after losing 2.2%.

Meanwhile, precious metals continue to be volatile too, with silver plunging again on Thursday and gold under pressure.

Forced liquidations — when traders’ positions are automatically sold as bitcoin hits a set price — continue to weigh on markets. As of Thursday, more than $2 billion in long and short positions in cryptocurrencies have been liquidated this week, according to data from Coinglass.

Bitcoin has been on a steady decline for more than three months, and is now more than 45% below its October high. Other cryptocurrencies, including ether and XRP, have fallen even more.

”[The] straight line bull run that a lot of people expected hasn’t really materialized yet. Bitcoin isn’t trading on hype anymore, the story has lost a bit of that plot, it is trading on pure liquidity and capital flows,” Maja Vujinovic, CEO of digital assets at FG Nexus, told CNBC’s “Worldwide Exchange.”

Downside crypto volatility will persist as liquidations, falling equities hit sector: Citi's Saunders

watch now
VIDEO03:22
Downside crypto volatility will persist as liquidations, falling equities hit sector: Citi’s Saunders

Institutional demand reverses

While many in the crypto market have previously credited large institutional investors with supporting the price of bitcoin, now it is those same participants who appear to be selling.

“Institutional demand has reversed materially,” CryptoQuant said in a report on Wednesday.

U.S. exchange-traded funds, which purchased 46,000 bitcoin this time last year, are net sellers in 2026, CryptoQuant said.

The report notes other worrying signs. “Bitcoin has broken below its 365-day moving average for the first time since March 2022 and has declined 23% in the 83 days since the breakdown — worse than the early 2022 bear phase,” CryptoQuant analysts said.

A moving average tracks the price of an asset over a set number of periods, smoothing out short-term price fluctuations to identify trends.

The latest leg lower in bitcoin suggests “potential downside toward the $70K–$60K range,” CryptoQuant said.

This entry was posted in CRYPO SCEMES on February 5, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

AUTOMAKERS LOSE OVER $100 BILLION ON EV’s DUE TO CRAZY GOVERNMENT MANDATES TO MANUFACTURE ELECTRIC CARS

EV Bloodbath: Carmakers Suffer Face-Melting Losses as Buyers Flee, Credits End

Thomas Edison

(Zero Hedge)—The push into electric vehicles was always bullshit, sold by the left as the move that would future-proof America’s and Europe’s legacy automakers and save the planet – and anyone not buying it was subject to a guilt trip from smug, private-jet-owning elitists. Instead, EVs are now looking like one of the costliest strategic blunders in modern automotive history. Major U.S. and European brands – including Ford, General Motors, Stellantis, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen – have collectively burned through nearly a staggering $114 billion on EV ventures between 2022 and late 2025, according to an analysis by Robert Bryce in the The New York Post.

Ford, Lucid, and Rivian report EV losses directly in their SEC filings, while GM, Stellantis, Mercedes, and Volkswagen do not break out EV performance, forcing analysts to rely on conservative estimates drawn from earnings results, write-downs, and public guidance. Among traditional automakers, Ford stands alone in providing clear EV-specific financial reporting, Bryce reports.

Between 2022 and the third quarter of 2025, legacy automakers alone are estimated to have lost roughly $83.6 billion on EV programs, including major write-downs at Ford and GM. EV-only startups Lucid and Rivian account for another $30.2 billion in red ink, with total losses across seven automakers approach $114 billion. The newspaper said it excluded Tesla from their analysis because a significant portion of its profits comes from regulatory credit sales and non-auto businesses.

Legacy automakers poured tens of billions into new factories, battery deals, and all-electric lineups, often under intense regulatory pressure and incentive schemes under the Biden administration that were premised on rapid, mass adoption that never fully materialized.

From 2015 through early 2024, automakers announced more than $188 billion in U.S. EV and battery investments, with spending accelerating after passage of the so-called Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, according to an Environmental Defense Fund report. GM pledged $35 billion through 2025, Ford committed $50 billion through 2026, and Volkswagen launched a $131 billion global electrification and digital push over five years.

But consumers didn’t follow Washington’s timetable.

In the U.S., EV sales briefly spiked in Q3 2025 as buyers rushed to capture the $7,500 federal tax credit before it expired on September 30. That incentive-driven surge pushed quarterly sales above 437,000 units and lifted EV market share to 10.5%, according to Cox Automotive. Once the subsidy disappeared, demand collapsed. Q4 sales fell to roughly 234,000 vehicles—a 46% drop from Q3—cutting market share nearly in half. Full-year EV sales for 2025 slipped to about 1.28 million units, marking the first year-over-year decline since 2019, Kelley Blue Book reported at the time.

Meanwhile, high-priced EVs piled up on dealer lots as average transaction prices hovered around $59,000, far above gas-powered alternatives. Range anxiety, uneven charging infrastructure, and cheaper gasoline pushed buyers back toward hybrids, trucks, and SUVs.

European automakers faced a similar reckoning.

Aggressive emissions mandates rammed through by climate-obsessed eurocrats collided with weakening demand and an onslaught of lower-cost Chinese competitors. In 2025, China’s BYD overtook Tesla as the world’s largest EV seller, underscoring how state-backed Chinese firms now dominate global EV volume, BBC reports. As pressure mounted, Volkswagen canceled or delayed multiple EV projects, Mercedes paused or scrapped several U.S.-bound EQ models, and others quietly extended the life of internal-combustion and hybrid platforms while lobbying for regulatory relief.

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's on February 4, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

CHINESE STUDENTS INFILTRATED USA UNIVERSITIES AND POSE SECURITY ISSUES

Chinese students with CCP membership, military links ‘infiltrate’ U.S. universities, watchdog says

Students, or spies? New report warns of “infiltration” of America’s colleges and universities by Chinese students with links to the CCP and blacklisted Chinese companies.

Chinese students and scientists who are members of the Chinese Communist Party, attended schools tied to the Chinese military or worked with companies connected to Beijing’s theft of U.S. technology have “infiltrated” several top American universities, according to a watchdog group report that raises fresh concerns about America’s vulnerabilities to its most fierce adversary.

A conservative non-profit oversight group, the American Accountability Foundation, reported that it found nearly two dozen Chinese academics working at elite U.S. schools and labs “who because of the dual-use threat of their research, close ties to the military research sector in China, and/or clear ties to the Chinese Communist Party should be expelled from the United States or never be re-admitted.”

The research document — titled “Chinese Scientist Infiltration Threat Assessments ” — says that Chinese students working at some of America’s top colleges, often receiving U.S. federal funding (some of it from the Pentagon) to conduct research into advanced technologies have troubling backgrounds which could pose a risk to U.S. national security.

Many Chinese scientists at U.S. institutions have CCP connections

The concerns raised by AAF’s new report include the fact that some of the Chinese scientists ensconced inside American academia and at cutting-edge U.S. labs appear to be members of the CCP and are affiliated with the CCP’s projects aimed at stealing U.S. technological know-how or military secrets, and worked with or for companies which serve the Chinese defense industry.

Some of these Chinese academics have clear links to problematic Chinese firms like Huawei or to China’s notorious Thousand Talents program, of which the FBI said “American businesses, universities, and laboratories should understand the potential risks and illegal conduct incentivized by Chinese talent plans and take steps to safeguard their trade secrets and intellectual property.” At least one of the Chinese scientists appeared to have been employed by the Chinese government while in the U.S.

The schools employing the Chinese scientists named in the AAF report include Harvard University, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell University, Brown University, Purdue University, the University of Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, the University of Florida, the University of Michigan, University of Florida, Penn State University, the Stevens Institute of Technology, Michigan State University, Indiana University, and the University of Southern California, as well as Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

The research areas focused on by these Chinese students — many of whom are receiving U.S. government funding for the lab research they are doing in the U.S. — include unmanned aerial drones, robotics, exoskeletons, artificial intelligence, large language models, viral research into highly-infectious pathogens, advanced materials research, next-gen semiconductors, advanced laser welding, quantum sensing, nuclear materials research, thermal-resilient electronics, electrical grid technologies, pharmaceuticals, applied mathematics, condensed matter physics, and other key areas which could have dual-use military applications.

U.S. is funding research by Chinese students with questionable histories

Funding for many of these Chinese students has come from varied sources such as the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the U.S. Army Research Lab, the Office of Naval Research, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, National Laboratories, and other U.S. federal agencies.

The House Select Committee on the CCP had assessed just last year that “the CCP does not treat overseas study as an apolitical or purely academic exercise” but rather that “under its state-directed technology acquisition strategy, international education is viewed as a key vector for accessing cutting-edge science, engineering, and defense-related knowledge.”

The same House committee also warned about “a pervasive and deeply troubling pattern of U.S. taxpayer-funded research being conducted in collaboration with Chinese entities that are directly tied to China’s defense research and industrial base.”

Thomas Jones, the president of AAF, said in his research firm’s new report that he was warning about the “infiltration of the United States research enterprise by scientists and engineers from the People’s Republic of China.”

Jones argued that “the results are sobering; there are numerous examples of active members of the Chinese Communist Party being appointed to sensitive positions at U.S. universities and Chinese researchers being placed in positions that will allow them to transfer technology and research to the People’s Liberation Army and cultivate relationships with critical defense researchers in the U.S.”

Just the News requested comment from all 21 of the Chinese students named in the AAF report as being potential “threats” to the U.S., with none of the academics responding.

Just the News also requested comment from all the U.S. universities which had most recently employed or currently employ the Chinese scientists.

USC said it would provide a comment, but did not. The University of Florida confirmed one of the Chinese students in question had been at the school but “left UF in 2025 in good standing” without answering further questions. Michigan State said that “any inquiries regarding the employment status of a particular individual at the university must be made through the Freedom of Information Act.” The Stevens Institute said that the Chinese academic in question “was a visiting scholar at Stevens from January 2024 through September 2025” and that “visiting scholars are unpaid and spend their time observing and assisting existing university faculty.”

No other schools responded to a request for comment.

Multiple Chinese students are or have been members of the CCP

The new AAF report revealed that multiple Chinese students now at U.S. universities had been members of the Chinese Communist Party, including holding leadership positions inside the local CCP branches of their Chinese universities. The CCP, a Marxist-Leninist party, won the Chinese civil war under the leadership of Mao Zedong, who ruled the country after establishing the People’s Republic of China in 1949. Some reports say an estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China.

Also named in the AAF report was a Chinese scientist who had worked at an American university and who had been a leader within the CCP-controlled China Democratic League (CDL).

The CIA assessed as far back as 1957 that the CDL has “played a leading role under the CCP” in the Chinese government, and argued that “there is little if anything to distinguish between the doctrines of the CDL and CCP.” The CIA said that the CDL “is believed to serve clandestinely the interests of the Chinese Communists in some areas where diplomatic representation is not established and where Communist activities as such would meet with local government opposition.”

The U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission in 2018 assessed that the CDL was a “United Front-Affiliated Organization.” The House Select Committee on the CCP said that “United Front work is a unique blend of engagement, influence activities, and intelligence operations that the CCP uses to shape its political environment, including to influence other countries’ policy toward the PRC and to gain access to advanced foreign technology.”

The CCP State Council in 2021 praised the CDL, with top CCP officials congratulating the CDL and the State Council, saying that “the CDL has made important contributions to the great cause of China’s revolution, development, and reform, as well as the development of the united front work and the cause of multiparty cooperation.”

The AAF report also highlighted one of the Chinese student’s praise for former CCP leader Deng Xiaoping and current CCP leader Xi Jinping, and pointed out that another Chinese scientist now at a U.S. university underwent a Marxist training program prior to coming to the United States.

Links to the Thousand Talents program aimed at stealing U.S. research

Multiple Chinese students with links to the CCP’s Thousand Talents program also appeared in the AAF report. The DOJ in 2020 stated that “China’s Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruitment plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of China’s scientific development, economic prosperity and national security.”

The DOJ also said that “these talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information.”

The White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing said in 2018 that “China’s talent recruitment strategically complements China’s efforts to target emerging high technology industries” and that the CCP programs “include the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Hundred Talents Plan.”

The AAF report also showed that a Chinese scientist had links to the CCP’s Hundred Talents program.

The Justice Department in 2020 charged Zhengdong Cheng, a Chinese national, for allegedly seeking to defraud NASA and “leverage NASA grant resources to further the research of Chinese institutions.” The DOJ specifically said the Chinese defendant “participated in the PRC’s Hundred Talents Plan.” Cheng eventually pleaded guilty to lying to Texas A&M University after revealing his working relationship with a Chinese university and at least one business in China. Guangdong, one of the confirmed businesses Cheng was working with, is managed by the People’s Republic of China.

Local outlet KBTX reported that Cheng will not serve any more jail time, as he has already spent 13 months in jail. Cheng was ordered to pay restitution to NASA, in addition to a criminal fine.

The DOJ added: “The Chinese Talent Plans are programs established by the Chinese government to recruit individuals with access to or knowledge of foreign technology or intellectual property. Through these plans, the Chinese government has created a significant financial incentive for foreign, talented individuals to transfer international technology and intellectual property to China, licitly or otherwise.”

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission said in 2020 that “China’s government runs myriad programs to bring Chinese students and scholars living in the United States back to China temporarily to engage in scientific activities relevant to its economic and military modernization” and that “one prominent program” — the Chunhui Program — “targets high-profile Chinese scholars appointed to teaching positions at prominent universities.”

Yet another Chinese scientist working at an American university had been mentored by the now-former director of the Chinese National Office of the Recruitment Program of Global Experts, the AAF report showed.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee assessed in 2019 that “the Chinese government has refined its centrally organized foreign talent recruitment plans into a strategy to ‘use talent to strengthen the country’ by targeting the specific technology sectors” and said that the “Recruitment Program of Global Experts” was another name for the Thousand Talents program.

“Deep roots in the military and defense industry,” House committee says

The new AAF report also highlighted that numerous Chinese scientists placed in American schools had previously attended Chinese universities with troubling histories, including multiple Chinese schools closely tied to the Chinese military and China’s defense sector.

Some of the Chinese students now in the U.S. had even previously attended Northwestern Polytechnical University and Beihang University — considered to be among the CCP’s so-called “Seven Sons of National Defense.”

The House Select Committee on China assessed in 2024 that the Seven Sons are “leading universities with deep roots in the military and defense industry, subordinate to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.” The House committee said the Chinese ministry “drives the Party’s Military-Civil Fusion strategy and the integration of civilian industries and cutting-edge technologies into the PRC’s military and security ecosystems.”

“These universities are ‘defense science, technology, and industry work units’ and play a crucial role in defense research and development,” the House committee added. “As many as half of the PhD graduates from the Seven Sons go on to work in the PRC’s defense sector, and they spend about half of their research budgets on projects with clear military applications.”

A host of the schools previously attended by the Chinese students are also “co-supervised” by China’s State Administration for Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND). The SASTIND schools attended by the Chinese scientists in the AAF report include Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan University, Xidian University, Dalian University of Technology, Tsinghua University, Peking University, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Sichuan University, and the South China University of Technology.

The House committee said in 2024 that SASTIND is “an arm of the Chinese government whose stated purposes include ‘strengthen[ing] military forces with additional personnel and more advanced equipment’ and which seeks to leverage these universities for defense purposes.”

The Chinese students employed at American universities and highlighted in the AAf report had also attended the Ocean University of China, the Beijing Institute of Nanoenergy and Nanosystems, Nankai University, and the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. The Ocean University is also on the Pentagon’s blacklist as being among “foreign institutions engaging in problematic activity.”

The House Select Committee on the CCP in 2024 also said the Beijing Institute is a “problematic Chinese institution.”

Nature Magazine assessed that Nankai University was among “the leading collaborators with the People’s Liberation Army” and among the “top five domestic collaborators” with the PLA, with the Chinese Academy of Sciences ranking number one, Peking University as number two, and Nankai coming in at number three.

The University of Chinese Academy of Sciences was added to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security’s “Unverified List” (UVL) in 2022. The bureau said that “these foreign persons” — including the Chinese university — “are added to the UVL because BIS or federal officials acting on BIS’s behalf were unable to verify their bona fides ( i.e., legitimacy and reliability relating to the end use and end user of items subject to the Export Administration Regulations) through the completion of an end-use check.”

The CCP-led Chinese Academy of Sciences “directly manages” the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, according to Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology. The Bureau of Industry and Security has designated a number of institutes within the Chinese Academy of Sciences, including the Center for Excellence in Quantum Information and Quantum Physics, the Institute of Physics, the Key Laboratory for Quantum Information, the Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, the Institute of Microelectronics, the National Time Service Center, and the Aerospace Information Research Institute.

Blacklisted Huawei operations “contrary to U.S. national security,” Commerce Dep’t says

The new AAF report also pointed out that multiple Chinese students working at American universities had previously collaborated on projects with researchers at the Chinese tech giant Huawei, including working with researchers at the Internal Cybersecurity Lab at Huawei.

The Commerce Department concluded in 2019 that “Huawei is engaged in activities that are contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests and its non-U.S. affiliates pose a significant risk of involvement in activities contrary to the national security of the United States.” The FCC added Huawei to its blacklist as well.

Meng Wanzhou, Huawei’s CFO and daughter of the company’s co-founder, was arrested by Canadian authorities in December 2018 at the request of the U.S., indicted in the Eastern District of New York in January 2019, and charged with bank fraud and wire fraud as well as conspiracy to commit both. She was allowed to walk free by the Biden Administration in 2021.

More students have links to blacklisted Chinese military companies

The AAF report also pointed out that a Chinese scientist now working at an American university had previously worked at the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), a CCP defense conglomerate blacklisted by the U.S. government. The Chinese state-owned military company is considered to be among the largest defense companies in the world.

A key AVIC subsidiary known as the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation, or CATIC, has also been considered a U.S. national security threat since 1990. Then-President George H.W. Bush issued an order in January 1990 that concluded CATIC “might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States of America.”

The House select committee on China warned in 1998 about AVIC and its subsidiary CATIC, and the Government Accountability Office in 1996 detailed a scheme by CATIC to get U.S.-based McDonnell Douglas to “co-produce 40 MD-80 and MD-90 aircraft in China for the country’s domestic ‘trunk’ routes.”

CATIC was charged by the Justice Department in 1999 with violating the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “regarding details of a 1994 sale of American machining equipment, some of which was diverted to a Chinese military site.”

The Commerce Department said in 2001 that TAL Industries was allegedly part of the “conspiracy” to export machine tools from the U.S. to CATIC.

The State Department said in 2002 that most of the charges related to CATIC were dismissed, but that “TAL Industries Inc., however, was convicted of violating the EAA and was sentenced on May 11, 2001, to five years of corporate probation” and “payment of a $1 million fine.”

Relationships include atomic weapons research

The AVIC website in 2015 made it clear that its business units included “defense” as well as aviation. The “AVIC Evolution” section said the company was the successor to the Chinese government’s Ministry of Aerospace Industry. AVIC has supported Russia during its war with Ukraine. Now-former Chinese defense minister Li Shangfu had previously been a board member of AVIC Avionics Equipment.

AVIC and its subsidiaries were blacklisted by the Pentagon in 2020 for being “Chinese Military Companies Operating in the United States.” AVIC Avionics was also sanctioned by the Treasury Department in 2021 and placed on the “Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List.”

The Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security assessed in 2020 that the Chinese center had been “determined by the U.S. Government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States […] on the basis of their procurement of U.S.-origin items for activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.”

The blacklist added that the Chinese center is “operated by, or directly affiliated with, the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics, which is the technology complex responsible for the research, development and testing of China’s nuclear weapons.”

“AAF’s goal in this research is to take America’s discussion of the threat posed by China academics from somewhat academic macro-level discussions — of which there are plenty — and crystalize it into specific actionable examples of men and women who have infiltrated sensitive parts of the military research infrastructure in the United States and spur policymakers to address the problem,” the AAF report said.

This entry was posted in CHINA on February 4, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

TRUMP FAMILY MAKING BILLIONS ON NEW BUSINESS VENTURES…

Trump’s Profiteering Hits $4 Billion

In August, I reported that the President and his family had made $3.4 billion by leveraging his position. After his first year back in office, the number has ballooned.
By David D. Kirkpatrick

January 31, 2026

Donald Trump opening a bank safe.
Illustration by Erik Carter
At the start of Donald Trump’s first term, he promised that he and his family would never do anything that might even be “perceived to be exploitive of office of the Presidency.” By contrast, his second term looks rapacious. He and members of his family have signed a blitz of foreign mega-deals shadowed by conflicts of interest, and they’ve launched at least five different cryptocurrency enterprises, all of which leverage Trump’s status as President to lure buyers or investors. Ethics watchdogs say that no other President has ever so nakedly exploited his position, or on such a scale. Trump recently explained to the Times why he cast aside his former restraint: “I found out that nobody cared.”
Is Trump right about the public’s nonchalance? Last summer, I tallied how much money he and his immediate family had made off his high office. My method was conservative. It seemed unfair to begrudge Trump the profits from the many businesses he owned before entering the White House. So I excluded from my calculation preëxisting hotels, condos, and golf courses, along with plausible extensions of those long-standing businesses. Likewise, Trump is hardly the first President to trade access or potential influence for political fund-raising, and he generally cannot spend such money on personal expenses, so I set that aside, too. Lastly, I left out funny-money assets he couldn’t readily cash out without setting off a fire sale that would eviscerate their value, such as his shares in the company behind Truth Social, his social-media platform.
Even excluding all that, by August, the Presidential profiteering reached $3.4 billion. (You can review my judgments in the article, “The Number.”) And since then the First Family has kept busy. The end of Trump’s first year in office seemed an opportune time for an update. Did the family business slow down or speed up for the Trumps?
AMERICAN BITCOIN REDUX
Many investors and consumers understandably distrust cryptocurrency and digital finance. Crypto heists are alarmingly common, and the best-known uses of digital currency are money laundering and casino-like financial speculation. President Trump himself, before his most recent campaign, maintained that Bitcoin “seems like a scam” and that crypto “can facilitate unlawful behavior.” But an association with a sitting President can furnish a valuable credibility boost. Think of the premium that investors will pay for U.S. Treasury bonds compared to notes from some little-known bank. That appears, in a nutshell, to be the Trump family’s strategy with crypto.
The Trumps’ first windfall since my August tally occurred through American Bitcoin, a company that mines new bitcoin with the intent to hoard it. (Under the algorithm that created bitcoin, miners get paid in new tokens for the computer work of tracking digital transactions.) Last spring, Eric and Donald Trump, Jr., contributed their family name—and nothing else of obvious value—to a complicated series of transactions that yielded them approximately a thirteen-per-cent stake in American Bitcoin. Eric, who is now listed as its co-founder and chief strategy officer, has become the company’s public face. If Eric and Donald, Jr.,’s father had lost the 2024 election, surely no one would have handed them such a large stake in a business that they had virtually no experience in and to which they had contributed so little—so their stake should be categorized as Presidential profit. In August, I calculated that the brothers’ thirteen-per-cent stake in the company’s computer hardware alone added at least thirteen million dollars to the family’s profiteering tally.
In September, the company floated shares on the stock market, capitalizing in another way on the cachet of the Trump name. American Bitcoin merged with a penny-stock bitcoin miner as a way of going public without the cost—or scrutiny—of an initial public offering. And the stock market, as expected, has put a far higher price on the company, in part because it owns a stockpile of bitcoin. The brothers’ stake now appears to be worth around two hundred million dollars. A caveat: Eric Trump, as a large and active investor in American Bitcoin, must report any sale of shares, and that might trigger a selloff. So it seems excessive to add it all to the Presidential-profit ledger. I will add only the approximate value of Donald Trump, Jr.,’s stake: about a hundred million dollars.
The number in August: $3.4 billion
Additional profit: $100 million
New total: $3.5 billion
WORLD LIBERTY FINANCIAL, BINANCE, AND PAKISTAN
The Trumps have made even more money since August through World Liberty Financial, a digital-finance startup heavily linked to the family. Its website lists the President as a “co-founder emeritus” and displays his photograph prominently; Eric, Donald, Jr., and Barron Trump are all listed as co-founders. Steven Witkoff, the President’s old friend and diplomatic envoy, is also listed as a co-founder emeritus, and his son Zach is C.E.O.
In May, World Liberty began selling a form of crypto known as a stablecoin. Unlike digital currencies such as bitcoin, which rise and fall in price, a stablecoin is supposed to hold a fixed value in dollars. Before July, when President Trump signed the first legislation regulating stablecoin, some of the best-known examples, such as TerraUSD, had turned out to be Ponzi schemes. (In December, a New York court sentenced TerraUSD’s co-founder to fifteen years in prison.) But World Liberty promised that its stablecoin, USD1, will always be worth exactly one dollar. Buyers can transfer USD1 to move money or make payments, and any holder can redeem USD1 for dollars. In between, while USD1s are circulating, World Liberty invests the cash that it is holding in U.S. Treasury bonds, in much the same way a savings bank might invest deposits. At current interest rates, World Liberty can expect to earn more than four per cent annually on the volume of USD1 in circulation.
Last spring, a company owned by the rulers of the United Arab Emirates bought two billion dollars’ worth of USD1. The transaction raised alarms about the appearance of a payoff—because the U.A.E. was simultaneously seeking approval from the Trump Administration to acquire sensitive American artificial-intelligence technology. (President Trump soon granted that approval.) The Emiratis immediately used the stablecoin to invest in Binance, the largest crypto exchange, which has its own interest in influencing Trump. In 2023, Binance’s founder, Changpeng Zhao, known as C.Z., pleaded guilty to violating anti-money-laundering laws, served a brief prison sentence, and agreed to stop running the company. At the time of the two-billion-dollar stablecoin payment from the U.A.E., he was petitioning Trump for a pardon. Binance, as the holder of the stablecoin, can determine how long World Liberty continues earning four per cent a year on that two billion dollars. In other words, Binance controls how much profit the Trumps will make from the two-billion-dollar stablecoin sale. In October, Trump granted C.Z.’s request for a pardon. (David Wachsman, a spokesman for World Liberty, told me that Binance cannot “exert control or influence over World Liberty Financial.”)
Binance is currently seeking to end federal monitoring that had been imposed when he was convicted for violating anti-money-laundering laws. Now the company is goosing the Trumps’ stablecoin profits in another way. On December 11th, Binance dropped its fees for certain crypto trades if they were conducted in USD1. Then, on December 23rd, Binance began paying users of its platform to hold USD1: Binance announced that, for the next month, it would give users a bonus equal to about 1.7 per cent on up to fifty thousand dollars’ worth of USD1 holdings. If this return rate were annualized, it would yield an eye-popping twenty per cent. And, on January 23rd, Binance announced a combination of new giveaways to USD1 holders which roughly extended that offer. Many users leapt at these opportunities. In the months preceding Binance’s maneuvers, the total volume of USD1 in circulation had held steady at about two billion dollars. On December 25th, shortly after Binance announced its first giveaway, World Liberty announced that USD1’s volume had crossed three billion dollars. It has now climbed to roughly five billion, and most of that expansion appears to have taken place on the Binance platform.
Representatives of Binance and World Liberty both denied any wrongdoing. They told me that Binance and its competitors have often paid holders of other stablecoins in order to attract traders, and that several smaller exchanges also provide benefits to holders of USD1. A Binance spokeswoman said in a statement that the services it provided to World Liberty “are available to other projects on equal terms.” A spokesman for World Liberty said that USD1’s growth “reflects genuine market adoption.” But Molly White, a computer programmer who is a prominent critic of the crypto industry and tracks such offers, told me that crypto exchanges have seldom, if ever, paid stablecoin holders as high a return rate as Binance is providing for USD1, or offered bonus returns on such large quantities. She said that Binance “seems like they are just giving away free money,” and that the company’s enrichment of the Trumps, through World Liberty, looked like “a very blatant quid pro quo” for the President’s pardoning of C.Z. (In response to detailed questions about my reporting for this article, Taylor Rogers, a White House spokeswoman, told me, in an e-mail, that “the failing liberal media is only pushing the same old garbage narratives” and that “President Trump has always put—and will always put—the best interests of the American people first.”)
Last spring, the government of Pakistan reportedly enlisted C.Z. as an adviser on the use of crypto. And, on January 14th, Pakistan—which has its own interests in influencing the Trump Administration—signed an agreement to incorporate USD1 into an officially regulated digital-payment system. A spokesman for World Liberty told me that, at the moment, Pakistan is only exploring the potential use of USD1 in handling “international remittances,” and that the country’s interest in USD1 “has nothing to do” with its relations with the Trump Administration. Still, it is hard to imagine that, without the imprimatur of the U.S. President, such a novel stablecoin would be embraced so quickly at the highest levels of the Pakistani government. So this deal, too, depends on Trump’s Presidency.
Now that World Liberty has seen an increase of three billion dollars in the value of its stablecoin in circulation, it can reasonably expect to earn four per cent a year on that extra sum—three hundred and sixty million dollars, if that circulation holds up in the three years Trump has left in office. According to the fine print on World Liberty’s website, a company affiliated with the Trumps is entitled to about thirty-eight per cent of that interest, which would come out to about a hundred and thirty-six million dollars in additional Presidential profit.
Running total: $3.5 billion
Additional profit: $136 million
New total: $3.64 billion
FROM APPLIANCE REPAIR TO CRYPTOCURRENCY
The Trumps have also received a windfall from World Liberty through a different form of crypto that it has sold: digital “governance” tokens, which provide buyers a loosely defined right to vote on the company’s future. Unlike stablecoin, these tokens carry no promise of redemption for any fixed amount of dollars; you can sell one for a price that rises or falls like a stock. Yet, unlike a stock, these digital tokens do not entitle a buyer to any equity in World Liberty; nor to any share of its profits, raising many questions about why an investor might want to own them—other than for World Liberty’s connection to the Trumps. Some purchasers may hope that, if the Trump Administration further loosens security rules, the tokens will eventually become a form of ownership. Others may be seeking to buy influence.
After my August tally, World Liberty found an improbable new taker for its tokens: a company that had gone public, in 1991, as Appliance Recycling Centers of America. In 2019, it made a radical transition into biotechnology, declaring that it would attempt to develop a nonaddictive alternative to opioids. In 2024, it transformed again, adopting the name Alt5 Sigma Corporation and shifting its focus to processing digital payments.
In August, Alt5 Sigma refocussed yet again—to buying World Liberty’s digital tokens. It agreed to trade the leadership of its board (and a substantial minority of its stock) to World Liberty in exchange for a pile of digital tokens, then said to be worth about seven hundred and fifty million dollars. Zach Witkoff became Alt5 Sigma’s chairman, and the company announced that it would appoint Eric Trump as a director.
As part of the same convoluted transaction, the new Alt5 Sigma—cashing in on the Trump name and the broader crypto boom—also sold about seven hundred and fifty million dollars’ worth of new shares to outside investors expressly for the purpose of buying even more World Liberty tokens. Alt5 Sigma didn’t name the buyers; a securities filing said only that the investors included “a select number of the world’s largest institutional investors and prominent crypto venture-capital firms.” After this transaction, Alt5 Sigma’s stockpile of World Liberty tokens rose to about 7.5 per cent of all the tokens in circulation, and its share had a nominal value of about $1.5 billion. Alt5 Sigma is pitching its stock as an easy way for ordinary investors to indirectly own World Liberty tokens—essentially turning its common stock into a bet on the Trump family’s future endeavors in crypto. White, the crypto critic, noted that top executives of World Liberty were now running a second company whose mission appeared to be buying World Liberty’s own governance token. These sales enrich the Trump and Witkoff families. She called the arrangement “a mind-boggling conflict of interest.” (Wachsman, the World Liberty spokesman, told me that Alt5 Sigma’s original board had independently decided to stockpile the governance token before Witkoff became chairman; Wachsman added that World Liberty’s USD1 business “aligns with” Alt5 Sigma’s payment processing “roadmap.”)
It’s unclear what kind of due diligence the Trumps or Witkoff had done. Alt5 Sigma failed to file its required third-quarter financial report on time. In October, the company, also without explanation, announced that its C.E.O. had been “removed of his duties.” A month later, Alt5 Sigma said that it had “determined to conclude” the employment of its chief financial officer, who had acted as interim C.E.O. Then, in December, the company switched to a new auditor, and—following questions from the Financial Times about that firm’s checkered record—replaced it, too. Recently, it emerged that in May—months before the deal with World Liberty—a Rwandan court found a subsidiary of Alt5 Sigma criminally liable for money laundering, among other violations. Stock-market regulators, for unspecified reasons, also forced the company to replace Eric Trump with another World Liberty executive as a director on its board—although Eric remains a board observer and a strategic adviser. Alt5 Sigma’s stock, after rising to more than eight dollars on the news of the deal with World Liberty, has now tumbled to about two dollars a share. In an e-mailed statement, Alt5 Sigma said that it remains “excited about our future and our ongoing partnership with World Liberty Financial.”
For the Trumps, though, the Alt5 Sigma deal has already paid off. According to the fine print of World Liberty’s website, after deducting certain expenses, seventy-five per cent of token sales go to a company affiliated with the Trump family, and seventy-five per cent of seven hundred and fifty million dollars comes out to five hundred and sixty-two million.
Running total: $3.64 billion
Additional profit: $562 million
New total: $4.2 billion
A BAD BET ON BITCOIN
In fairness, I will note that the decline in the price of bitcoin since August may have lowered my previous calculation of the Trumps’ Presidential profits at Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company behind Truth Social. Although the social-media platform has yet to demonstrate any profit, it has capitalized on its anomalously high share price by quietly selling large sums of stock to institutional investors (who could flip it after a jump in its volatile price). By August, the company had used the proceeds to stockpile about $3.1 billion in cash and bitcoin. Since the President then owned about forty-two per cent of Trump Media, I previously estimated that his interest in those assets added $1.3 billion to his Presidential profits. Judging from the amount of bitcoin and cash on Trump Media’s balance sheet in its most recent quarterly report, that number may have fallen by about a hundred and fifty million dollars, to $1.15 billion.
Even with that setback, though, the Trumps have made a net total of about six hundred and fifty million dollars from crypto since August. That pushes his total gain since he first sought the Presidency to more than $4 billion.
Running total: $4.2 billion
Fluctuation in bitcoin value: -$150 million
Over-all gain from crypto: $646 million
New total: $4.05 billion
NUCLEAR FUSION, BANK SHAKEDOWNS, AND A MALDIVES RESORT
The Trumps have also continued to cash in on the Presidency in other ways—often while engaging in stark conflicts of interest. But it is premature to quantify those profits.
On December 18th, for example, Trump Media used its bags of cash and bitcoin for a stunning new gamble on, of all things, nuclear fusion. Trump Media agreed to merge with TAE Technologies, a privately owned company, founded in 1998, that is one of several firms attempting to develop the first economically viable power plant using nuclear fusion. When the deal closes, Trump Media shareholders will own half of the joint company. The President will be the largest shareholder, with more than twenty per cent of the stock. Devin Nunes, the chief executive of Trump Media and a former Republican congressman, is expected to become one of two co-chief executives.
For TAE, the merger provides badly needed capital. The company has already raised and spent $1.3 billion in its quest to make fusion work, and, in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Trump Media said that it has agreed to pay TAE up to three hundred million dollars before the merger is finalized. The conflict of interest here is glaring: the President himself will be deeply invested in a company that is competing for federal-government permits and funding.
For the Trump family, this could be the most profitable deal of his Presidency, if TAE turns out to be the outfit that solves the daunting challenges of supplying energy from fusion. At the very least, reducing the company’s identification with Truth Social could make it easier for Trump to cash out some of his shares. On the other hand, if fusion does not become viable for decades, Trump Media may end up squandering that pile of cash and bitcoin.
After squeezing tens of millions of dollars out of several major media companies last year to settle legally tenuous lawsuits, President Trump this month filed a new suit—against JPMorgan Chase. He is demanding five billion dollars, alleging that the bank acted out of political bias when it closed his accounts after the January 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol. Last year, the Trump Organization filed a smaller suit making similar allegations against Capital One. Both banks have called the claims meritless. But, like the media companies, both banks are regulated by his Administration, creating an incentive to settle.
In real estate, the Trumps continue to profit from a partnership with Dar Al Arkan, a major Saudi developer with a history of close ties to the royal family. On November 17th, the Trump Organization announced an agreement to license its name to Dar Al Arkan for a planned Trump International Hotel Maldives, which is to include about eighty “ultra-luxury beach and overwater villas.” Emanuel Schreiner, the chief executive of RVS Hospitality, a consulting company, told me that the demand for privacy in the luxury market often drives the rental rates for such villas in the archipelago above ten thousand dollars a night during the peak season, and the Trump Organization’s fees might range from two to ten per cent of revenue—a hefty sum, although the specifics remain to be seen. The Trump Organization added that it planned to finance the project by selling digital tokens that would allow buyers to participate in the profits—an idea that would appear to violate U.S. securities laws.
The next day, Trump welcomed Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s ruler, to the White House. It was the prince’s first visit since his agents killed and dismembered Jamal Khashoggi—the Saudi dissident, Washington Post columnist, and Virginia resident—inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, in 2018. At a press conference, an American journalist asked about the murder. Trump berated the questioner for daring to “embarrass our guest.” As the prince stared down at his hands, Trump, contradicting U.S. intelligence agencies, declared that bin Salman “knew nothing about it.” The President deprecated Khashoggi as someone “a lot of people didn’t like.” Trump also announced that he intended to sell advanced F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, that he intended to approve export licenses to sell advanced computer chips for artificial intelligence to the kingdom, and that the U.S. had even taken a step toward providing nuclear technology.
More Saudi deals followed. Earlier this month, the Trump Organization said that it was licensing its name to Dar Al Arkan for a new golf club, a luxury hotel, and a number of mansions in Diriyah, near Riyadh. The Trump Organization also sold the use of the President’s name for a Trump Plaza development in Jeddah which will include townhouses, condos, office space, retail stores, a Trump Grill, an artisanal bakery, and a health club (featuring a cigar bar). Ziad El Chaar, the chief executive of Dar Al Arkan’s international arm, DarGlobal, told Reuters that the two Trump projects would have a combined value of ten billion dollars. Extrapolating from the President’s disclosures about similar deals, the Trumps stand to make tens of millions from each of these projects.
Before the 2024 election, Donald, Jr., who has little business experience outside of the family’s real-estate holdings, sat on the board of directors of only one company: Trump Media & Technology Group, where his father was chairman. Since the election, however, about half a dozen other companies have rushed to enlist him as an adviser or director. Some are startups at which his compensation has not been made public, such as BlinkRx, an online pharmaceutical retailer. He is also an adviser to two competing prediction markets, Polymarket and Kalshi. (He has invested in Polymarket, but the company has said that it does not pay him any additional compensation.)
At other companies he has joined, Donald, Jr., already appears to be making millions. GrabAGun, an online weapons retailer, gave him stock that is currently worth nearly a million dollars, if he still holds it. (At the time of my calculations in August, the stock was worth about two million, and he has been under no obligation to disclose any sale.) A penny-stock brokerage called Dominari Securities granted Donald, Jr., and Eric shares with a current market value of more than six million dollars. PublicSquare, an online marketplace often described as “anti-woke,” gave Donald, Jr., shares with a current value of about a hundred and thirty thousand dollars. A company called Mixed Martial Arts Group Limited named him a strategic adviser and paid him options with a current value of about $1.3 million. Unusual Machines, a startup drone manufacturer, named Donald, Jr., to its advisory board shortly after the 2024 Presidential election; factoring in a steep discount on a private placement of shares, the company gave him stock with a total current value of more than five million dollars.
Arthur Schwartz, a spokesman for the President’s son, told me that “the premise that Donald Trump, Jr., would not be financially successful if not for his father’s political success is dumb and does not pass the smell test.” Still, the financial health of several of these ventures—including the prediction markets, the pharmaceutical retailer, the online weapons seller, and the drone manufacturer—will depend, in no small part, on decisions made by the federal government. This past October, for example, Unusual Machines announced that its drone parts were included in a major order from the U.S. Army, and critics have asked whether the family connection to the Commander-in-Chief played a role in the contract. Donald, Jr., and all of the companies he works with have repeatedly said that he does not advise about regulatory matters or lobby his father’s Administration. But he may not need to do so. Allan Evans, the chief executive of Unusual Machines, recently likened Donald, Jr.,’s advisory role to Oprah Winfrey’s former position on the board of Weight Watchers. “What does Oprah need to do? Not a lot,” Evans told Bloomberg News. The Trump name alone, he said, provides “credibility to rise above the noise.”
THE LOSERS
The drone contract made Unusual Machines a rare bright spot for investors who bought what the Trumps have been selling during the President’s first year back in office. Unusual Machine’s stock briefly tripled to eighteen dollars a share in late 2024, on the news of Donald, Jr.,’s affiliation, and then fell back down to below five dollars a share. But after the Army announced its drone order Unusual Machines eventually regained that peak for a short time, vindicating bets on the value of the Trump family connection.
The other five publicly traded companies that made Donald, Jr., an adviser or director have so far disappointed investors. Shares in the parent company of PublicSquare have fallen to about a dollar from a peak of above seven dollars when it signed up Donald, Jr. GrabAGun has tumbled to around three dollars a share from more than thirteen. Dominari Holdings soared from around three dollars a share to eleven dollars last February on news of its affiliation with the Trump brothers. Those shares currently trade for less than four dollars a share. Shares of Mixed Martial Arts Group soared to $1.80 a share when he signed on in September; they now trade for less than half that.
Last July, excitement about Dar Al Arkan’s partnership with the Trumps helped propel shares of the Saudi developer’s stock—which trades in London under the name of its international subsidiary, DarGlobal—to a peak of more than ten dollars a share. But concerns that overbuilding in Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf markets may create a glut of luxury hotels and residences have now dragged DarGlobal’s shares back below eight dollars.
The share price of Trump Media & Technology Group has fallen by more than sixty per cent since Trump’s Inauguration. Trump non-fungible tokens, the digital cartoons that were his first dabble in crypto, have fallen in value by eighty per cent, and the $TRUMP meme coin—the kind of crypto he hyped last spring by offering its biggest holders an exclusive dinner and a tour of the White House—has lost about about ninety per cent of its value. World Liberty’s digital tokens, which started trading this past September, have fallen in price by about a third, and shares in American Bitcoin have plummeted in price by about eighty per cent since their début, also in September.
Indeed, for most Trump investors, the year has been brutal. But, if you’re someone who can trade your family name for an interest in a business, you still come out ahead—no matter how it fares. For the President and his family, the money-making shows no sign of slowing.
THE NEW NUMBER: $4.05 billion ♦
This entry was posted in Uncategorized on February 1, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

MOST AIRLINE CRASHES CAUSED BY DEI HIRES!

Former White House lawyer says female and minority pilots caused 66% of pilot-error crashes since 2000, despite being less than 10% of workforce 😬

Image for article: Former White House lawyer says female and minority pilots caused 66% of pilot-error crashes since 2000, despite being less than 10% of workforce 😬

arambe Harambe

Jan 26, 2026

According to a new op-ed from former White House lawyer Daniel Huff, DEI in the airline industry is still putting thousands of people in danger.

His analysis of every plane crash caused by pilot error since the year 2000 revealed something insane:

President Trump ordered the DOT to end its DEI practices early in his presidency, but that has not stopped airlines from continuing to engage in the practice. According to Huff’s report:

Delta CLO Peter Carter declared in January 2025 that the airline is ‘steadfast’ in its DEI commitments, calling them ‘critical to our business.’

United’s training academy maintains its goal of ensuring 50% of graduates are women or minorities.

Southwest still pledges to ‘recruit, hire, and retain a diverse and inclusive workforce.’

American agreed not to impose illegal quotas, but that leaves plenty of wiggle room.

 

 

Just a few examples cited:

Atlas Air Flight 3591

 

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)

 

According to the NTSB, this crash was caused by Conrad Aska, a black pilot who had a reputation for getting “extremely flustered and could not respond appropriately” when faced with unexpected situations in the simulator.

Experts reporting on the NTSB investigation described Aska’s “piloting performance as among the worst he had ever seen.”

The entire crew perished in the crash.

The 2025 Potomac River midair collision

 

 

Remember this one? 67 people died in this tragedy after a female helicopter pilot ignored repeated air-traffic-control instructions and collided with an American Airlines jet.

Huff is a senior advisor for The Heritage Foundation’s infamous “Project 2025,” former counsel to the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, former general deputy assistant secretary for enforcement at HUD, and a senior legal advisor to the first Trump admin.

That means you’re either going to think he’s got a point, or he’s a racist/sexist Nazi, depending on your political views!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on January 26, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

JP MORGAN CHASE SUED FOR $5 BILLION FOR DE-BANKING TRUMP AND HIS COMPANIES!

Trump sues JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon for $5B over alleged ‘political’ debanking

The lawsuit claims JPMorgan’s decision ‘came about as a result of political and social motivations’ to ‘distance itself’ Trump and his ‘conservative political views’

President Donald Trump joins Maria Bartiromo to discuss ongoing negotiations that would give the U.S. total access to Greenland, citing national and global security concerns.

FIRST ON FOX: President Donald Trump is suing JPMorgan Chase and its CEO Jamie Dimon in a $5 billion lawsuit filed Thursday, accusing the financial institution of debanking him for political reasons.

The president’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, filed the lawsuit Thursday morning in Florida state court in Miami on behalf of the president and several of his hospitality companies.

Brito quotes JPMorgan’s code of conduct, which states that the bank operates “with the highest level of integrity and ethical conduct.”

JP Morgan Chase HQ

The JPMorgan Chase & Co. headquarters in Park Avenue, Midtown, Manhattan, New York.  (Tim Clayton/Corbis via Getty Images / Getty Images)

TRUMP SAYS HE WILL SUE JPMORGAN CHASE OVER ‘INCORRECT’ POST-JAN 6 DEBANKING

“We set high expectations and hold ourselves accountable. We do the right thing—not necessarily the easy or expedient thing. We abide by the letter and spirit of the laws and regulations everywhere we do business and have zero tolerance for unethical behavior,” the lawsuit states, citing the bank’s code of conduct.

“Despite claiming to hold these principles dear, JPMC violated them by unilaterally—and without warning or remedy—terminating several of Plaintiff’s bank accounts,” the lawsuit claims.

A JPMorgan Chase spokesperson told Fox News Digital Thursday, “While we regret President Trump has sued us, we believe the suit has no merit. We respect the President’s right to sue us and our right to defend ourselves – that’s what courts are for.

“JPMC does not close accounts for political or religious reasons,” she continued, “We do close accounts because they create legal or regulatory risk for the company. We regret having to do so but often rules and regulatory expectations lead us to do so.  We have been asking both this administration and prior administrations to change the rules and regulations that put us in this position, and we support the Administration’s efforts to prevent the weaponization of the banking sector.”

Trump had been a customer of JPMorgan for decades, and he and his affiliated entities “have transacted hundreds of millions of dollars” through JPMorgan Chase, according to the lawsuit.

Trump’s lawyer said Feb. 19, 2021, was the day that “forever altered the dynamic of the parties’ relationship,” when the bank, allegedly “without warning or provocation,” notified Trump and his entities that several bank accounts they controlled, were beneficiaries of, and actively used to transact “would be closed just two months later, on April 19, 2021.”

Bank executive speaks to an audience during a conference focused on business and innovation.

Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase & Co., speaks during the America Business Forum in Miami, Nov. 6, 2025. (Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images / Getty Images)

“JPMC did not provide plaintiffs with any recourse, remedy, or alternative—its decision was final and unequivocal,” the lawsuit claims.

Trump’s attorney said they are “confident that JPMC’s unilateral decision came about as a result of political and social motivations, and JPMC’s unsubstantiated, ‘woke’ beliefs that it needed to distance itself from President Trump and his conservative political views.”

“In essence, JPMC debanked plaintiff’s accounts because it believed that the political tide at the moment favored doing so,” the lawsuit states. “In addition to the considerable financial and reputational harm that Plaintiffs and their affiliated entities suffered, JPMC’s reckless decision is leading a growing trend by financial institutions in the United States of America to cut off a consumer’s access to banking services if their political views contradict with those of the financial institution.”

Trump and JP Morgan Chase logo split

President Donald Trump had been a customer of JPMorgan for decades, according to the lawsuit.  (Krisztian Bocsi/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s attorney alleged that, “JPMC’s conduct, in violation of its code of conduct and Dimon’s lofty assertions, is a key indicator of a systemic, subversive industry practice that aims to coerce the public to shift and re-align their political views.”

The lawsuit goes on to allege that JPMorgan Chase and Dimon have “unlawfully and unjustifiably published some or all of their names, including the names of President Trump, the Trump Organization with its affiliated entities, and the Trump family, on a

blacklist.”

The blacklist, according to the lawsuit, allegedly is accessible by federally regulated banks and is comprised of individuals and entities that have a history of malfeasant acts and are otherwise noncompliant with applicable banking rules and regulations.

“Given that Plaintiffs have always complied with all applicable banking rules and regulations and their wealth management accounts were in good standing, JPMC’s publication of President Trump, the other Plaintiffs, the Trump Organization and its affiliated entities, and/or the Trump family’s names on this blacklist, is an intentional and malicious falsehood,” the lawsuit states, alleging that JPMorgan Chase engaged in “an unfair and deceptive trade practice” by directing the publication of the names to the list, noting that the bank “had no legitimate basis to do so and knew that doing so would induce, and did in fact induce, other banking institutions not to deal with them.”

Trump is accusing JPMorgan Chase and Dimon of trade libel, violating Florida’s unfair and deceptive trade practices act, declaratory relief, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Trump’s team is demanding a jury trial.

President Donald Trump

President Donald Trump’s team is demanding a jury trial. (Getty Images)

The president teased the lawsuit in a Truth Social post over the weekend.

“I’ll be suing JPMorgan Chase over the next two weeks for incorrectly and inappropriately DEBANKING me after the January 6th Protest, a protest that turned out to be correct for those doing the protesting,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “The Election was RIGGED!”

Trump has publicly said in interviews that JPMorgan Chase gave him a deadline, reportedly 20 days, to move hundreds of millions of dollars and effectively severed his accounts after Jan. 6, 2021. He also said Bank of America later refused to accept large deposits when he attempted to bank elsewhere.

In a previous statement to Fox, JPMorgan Chase spokesperson Trish Wexler said, “Serving more than 80 million Americans is our privilege, and we agree that no one’s account should ever be closed because of political or religious beliefs. We appreciate that this administration has moved to address political debanking, and we support those efforts.”

Dimon in 2025 denied that the bank debanks conservatives or customers based on political views.

“We don’t debank people because of political or religious affiliations,” Dimon said on Capitol Hill Feb. 13, 2025. “But there are a lot of things that can be fixed. We should fix them. The rules and requirements are so onerous, and it does cause people to be debanked in my opinion, should not be debated.”

When asked whether banking regulators were primarily to blame for debanking concerns, Dimon replied, “Pretty much, yeah.”

Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, who also has faced scrutiny from the White House over debanking allegations, offered a similar response in a separate interview that day.

“We have 70 million customers, and we’re happy to serve anyone,” Moynihan said.

Trump Tower

In 2025, the Trump Organization sued Capital One after it allegedly “unjustifiably” terminated more than 300 of the company’s bank accounts and accounts belonging to numerous Trump family members in 2021.  (Leonardo Munoz/VIEWpress / Getty Images)

When pressed on Trump’s allegations, Moynihan declined to elaborate in 2025, saying, “You’d have to talk to him about that, thanks.”

In 2025, the Trump Organization sued Capital One after it allegedly “unjustifiably” terminated more than 300 of the company’s bank accounts and accounts belonging to numerous Trump family members in 2021.

On March 8, 2021, Capital One allegedly notified Trump and the plaintiffs that hundreds of bank accounts that they controlled, were beneficiaries of and actively used would be closed June 7, 2021. According to the lawsuit, Capital One did not provide Trump and the plaintiffs with any “recourse, remedy, or alternative — its decision was final.”

The accounts affiliated with the Trump Organization held millions of dollars belonging to them and their affiliated entities.

At the time, a Capital One spokesperson told Fox News Digital that: “Capital One has not and does not close customer accounts for political reasons.”

This entry was posted in TRUMP on January 22, 2026 by sterlingcooper.

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • THE TESLA TWO STORY DINER EXPERIMENT IS DEAD!
  • DUBAI IS FINISHED AS A SAFE TAX HAVEN AND WORLD LUXURY ENCLAVE!
  • CANADA IS NOW UNAFFORDABLE FOR HOME BUYERS AND CANADA’S SUPREME COURT HAS THROWN OPEN THE GATES TO EVERY ILLEGAL ALIEN TO QUALIFY FOR MEDICAL AND OTHER BENEFITS! LET’S SEND OUR ILLEGALS TO CANADA!
  • CURE FOR CANCER HIDDEN BY CIA FOR 60 YEARS….
  • MORGAN STANLEY LAYOFFS NOT TRIGGERED BY AI INTEGRATION…SO THEY SAY!

Sterling Cooper, Inc. © 2023,  Privacy Policy