Podcasts about Feds

A disturbing new lawsuit alleges that DCYF failed to protect a girl that was may have been killed by her father. Good polling numbers for Trump on immigration. Super Bowl players lost a crazy amount of money due to taxes. // Big Local: Activists in Tacoma that don’t actually have any power demand changes to ICE. Feds made a huge drug bust in Tacoma. // You Pick the Topic: People in the job market are now paying recruiters.

Except for Zorro and Batman, people who put on masks to hide their identity when going to work are rarely up to any good.And as Americans learned decades ago when Ku Klux Klanners covered themselves from head to toe, the bigger the mask, the greater the evil hiding behind it. Which brings us full circle to “Operation Metro Surge.”OMS is the muy macho PR slogan for the Republican Party's militaristic invasions of Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and other American cities they hate. Deploying ICE and other bastions of authoritarian power, thousands of massively armed federal belligerents in full assault gear have been rampaging through peaceful neighborhoods in violent and murderous mass sweeps.This is an un-American attack by America's own government on America's founding ideals of liberty and openness. The defining symbol of this government repression is that its forces are all hiding behind full-face masks.Of course, if I was doing some of the stuff ICE commandos are doing, I'd want to cover my face, too. But, like the Klan, masking up the oppressors is not merely about cloaking their personal shame — it's an added ploy by the perpetrators to terrify anyone who might dare to stand up to them.As usual, though, the authoritarian powers misunderstood America and underestimated the deeply rebellious nature of our gutsy, grassroots people. Some 30,000 volunteers in Minneapolis, for example, have become trained “constitutional observers” to police the police, and a citywide “whistle brigade” rushes like Paul Revere to alert neighbors when ICE agents invade their neighborhoods.Their ethic of neighbors-helping-neighbors recognizes their power to “do what's right.” It's the best of America standing up to confront the worst.Do something!Our friends at the Working Families Party are leading the charge to pressure Democrats to vote NO on any DHS bill that does not work to stop ICE's reckless attacks. You can text “ICE OUT” to 30403 or dial 833-636-3260 to call your Senators. Need a sample script? Here you go:When you connect, say your name and where you live to show that you're a constituent. Then, you could say something like:“ICE's reckless and illegal attacks on our communities must be stopped. But instead of ending and investigating ICE's abuses, the DHS spending bill would empower this rogue agency to terrorize and kill even more of our neighbors. As your constituent, I urge you to vote against the DHS funding bill and stand up to ICE.”Here's a whole set of actions they've compiled to help direct your energy.Jim Hightower's Lowdown is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jimhightower.substack.com/subscribe

On Chicago's Southwest and East sides, the presence of federal agents lingers long after they left town. The mental health of many communities needs attention. Businesses are still struggling to bring back customers. Chicago's journalists are processing their exhaustive coverage of people taken, and teargas deployed.On today's Block Club Chicago podcast, reporter Francia Garcia Hernandez, details the long lasting impact of Operation Midway blitz, and how the city is responding.Host - Jon HansenReporter - Francia Garcia HernandezRead More Here Want to donate to our non-profit newsroom? CLICK HEREWho we areBlock Club Chicago is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit news organization dedicated to delivering reliable, relevant and nonpartisan coverage of Chicago's diverse neighborhoods. We believe all neighborhoods deserve to be covered in a meaningful way.We amplify positive stories, cover development and local school council meetings and serve as watchdogs in neighborhoods often ostracized by traditional news media.Ground-level coverageOur neighborhood-based reporters don't parachute in once to cover a story. They are in the neighborhoods they cover every day building relationships over time with neighbors. We believe this ground-level approach not only builds community but leads to a more accurate portrayal of a neighborhood.Stories that matter to you — every daySince our launch seven years ago, we've published more than 30,000 stories from the neighborhoods, covered hundreds of community meetings and send daily and neighborhood newsletters to more than 150,000 Chicagoans. We've built this loyalty by proving to folks we are not only covering their neighborhoods, we are a part of them. Some of us have internalized the national media's narrative of a broken Chicago. We aim to change that by celebrating our neighborhoods and chronicling the resilience of the people who fight every day to make Chicago a better place for all.

Modern medicine treats symptoms. Dr. Jingduan “J.D.” Yangsays it's ignoring the whole human being.In this week's conversation, we break down how to Make America Health Again with theA.C.E.S. model— Anatomy, Chemistry, Energy, and Soul — and why America's “healthcare system” isn't designed to make you healthy at all.Is medical insurance really just “sick care”? Why are drugs and procedures covered — but nutrition, lifestyle, and prevention aren't? Are we fixing the car while ignoring the driver?Dr. Yang challenges the entire framework of Western medicine and calls for a return to personal responsibility, spiritual health, and true whole-person care.If you think the system is broken — this episode explains why.Dr. Jingduan Yang is an author, medical practitioner, neurologist, and board certified psychiatrist.

The U.S. Department of Education will investigate alleged assault of female wrestler. Meanwhile, two boys will compete against girls at state. Enumclaw police chief joins us to react to student protest turned violent. Stripper harasses sheriff's deputy. Marco Rubio shines in Munich, while Dems flail. 

The Gi crew return to talk about the February 2026 Sony State of Play, Highguard & 2XKO layoffs, PS5 rental service, the FEDS trying to control gaming and more!

On Friday's "Drivetime with DeRusha".... 3pm: More lies from the Feds are revealed - do you trust anything they say? Then, how you can get some last minute Valentine's love at Bachman's! 4pm: Jason host another exciting edition of Card DeSharks. Then he talks with Jeff Mielke from Lee County about why you should consider a vacation to Fort Myers, where the show will be next week. 5pm: On the "DeRush-Hour" Jason goes "In Depth" with attorney Rob Doar - is he surprised by the spike in gun sales during the ICE surge? Then our Gen Z movie reviewer Charlie Oakes tells you if "Wuthering Heights" is worth your money.

Adrian reports Alex to HR over the “hug quota.” The Epstein rabbit hole deepened and exposes unthinkable evil, but few people noticed because of a very convenient kidnapping and a Bad Bunny. Feds release Israeli national who ran bio labs with unknown dangerous compounds in houses owned by the Chinese.  Top AI researchers keep warning “world is in peril,” while SB ad tell you not to worry about it.

Crystal asks, how does a whole team fail upward so successfully? When you take six years to investigate a simple question, and then the answer is either wrong or "unexplained," naturally the Feds give you a promotion and a raise.

Federal authorities have opened a criminal probe into whether two immigration officers lied under oath about a shooting in Minneapolis. All charges were dropped against two Venezuelan men. The officers, whose names were not disclosed, are on administrative leave while the investigation is carried out. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send me feedback!The Constitution delegates naturalization, not immigration, to Congress, and states handled arrivals for the nation's first third of existence. This episode examines Federalist 42's narrow focus, the Commerce Clause "pivot" in 1875, and why even USCIS admits federal oversight didn't begin until 1891.SUPPORT THE SHOWGet a 10% discount by using the code LibertyDad at Black Guns Matter shop.OR, use the referral linkFIND ME ELSEWHERELinktreeSHOW NOTESUS ConstitutionChy Lung vs Freeman (1875)Henderson vs Mayor of New YorkFederalist 42USCISTenth Amendment CenterSupport the show

Federal authorities have opened a criminal probe into whether two immigration officers lied under oath about a shooting in Minneapolis. All charges were dropped against two Venezuelan men. The officers, whose names were not disclosed, are on administrative leave while the investigation is carried out. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Epstein files exposed what he gifted to powerful people; sometimes, the gift was as simple as an Apple Watch. Plus, Gov. Tim Walz wants federal dollars to repair the damage caused by Minnesota rioters.  Visit the Howie Carr Radio Network website to access columns, podcasts, and other exclusive content.

It's been an unusually warm and dry winter across the west, and that's bad news for the seven states and 40 million people that rely on water from the Colorado River. The water flowing into the river from snowmelt and rain is dwindling, partly because of climate change. The basin's two major reservoirs are at historic lows, and without a sudden influx of snowstorms, streamflow forecasts for the coming year aren't looking good. That adds stress to an already drought-stricken region where negotiations on how to share the river's water in the future are tense and stalled out.  “We're at a point where we have to make some serious long-term adjustment of expectations. In other words, people need to agree to take a lot less water than they've been counting on. And that is always really hard when water is scarce,” says Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University. The federal government has given states a deadline of Feb. 14th to reach an agreement, after which the Bureau of Reclamation commissioner could divvy up the water between states as it deems fit. It's already released its draft environmental impact statement with possible alternatives. What's led to this point of crisis? What is keeping states from reaching agreement? And what will the cities, farmers and industries that depend on the river do as climate change leads to a lower volume of water in an increasingly hotter and drier future?   Episode Guests: Sarah Porter, Director, Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/podcasts ********** Support Climate One by going ad-free! By subscribing to Climate One on Patreon, you'll receive exclusive access to all future episodes free of ads, opportunities to connect with fellow Climate One listeners, and access to the Climate One Discord. Sign up today at patreon.com/ClimateOne.  Ad sales by Multitude. Contact them for ad inquiries at multitude.productions/ads Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's been an unusually warm and dry winter across the west, and that's bad news for the seven states and 40 million people that rely on water from the Colorado River. The water flowing into the river from snowmelt and rain is dwindling, partly because of climate change. The basin's two major reservoirs are at historic lows, and without a sudden influx of snowstorms, streamflow forecasts for the coming year aren't looking good. That adds stress to an already drought-stricken region where negotiations on how to share the river's water in the future are tense and stalled out.  “We're at a point where we have to make some serious long-term adjustment of expectations. In other words, people need to agree to take a lot less water than they've been counting on. And that is always really hard when water is scarce,” says Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University. The federal government has given states a deadline of Feb. 14th to reach an agreement, after which the Bureau of Reclamation commissioner could divvy up the water between states as it deems fit. It's already released its ⁠draft environmental impact statement⁠ with possible alternatives. What's led to this point of crisis? What is keeping states from reaching agreement? And what will the cities, farmers and industries that depend on the river do as climate change leads to a lower volume of water in an increasingly hotter and drier future?   Episode Guests: Sarah Porter, Director, Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/podcasts ********** Support Climate One by going ad-free! By subscribing to Climate One on ⁠Patreon⁠, you'll receive exclusive access to all future episodes free of ads, opportunities to connect with fellow Climate One listeners, and access to the Climate One Discord. Sign up today at ⁠patreon.com/ClimateOne⁠.  Ad sales by ⁠Multitude⁠. Contact them for ad inquiries at ⁠multitude.productions/ads⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jason talks about the latest lies to come from the Feds - turns out the agents that shot a man in North Minneapolis lied under oath about being attacked with a shovel and broom. Do you believe anything they say at this point?

TMZ gets 3rd ransom letter demanding $100k Bitcoin to unmask abductor's ID & location. They also accuse the Feds of trying to "discredit" him by doubling up on the reward. Jennifer Gould reports.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Bodycam footage offers more proof that Trump officials lied about border agents shooting a Chicago school teacher five times after first ramming her car. And what do the repeated lies by the federal government mean? We speak to political scientist Wilmer Leon. Plus Gerald Horne on Bad Bunny and more headlines. “On the Ground: Voices of Resistance from the Nation's Capital” gives a voice to the voiceless 99 percent at the heart of American empire. The award-winning, weekly hour, produced and hosted by Esther Iverem, covers social justice activism about local, national and international issues, with a special emphasis on militarization and war, the police state, the corporate state, environmental justice and the left edge of culture and media. The show is heard on three dozen stations across the United States, on podcast, and is archived on the world wide web at https://onthegroundshow.org/  Please support us on Patreon or Paypal. Links for all ways to support are on our website or at Esther Iverem's Linktree: https://linktr.ee/esther_iverem The show is made possible only by our volunteer energy, our resolve to keep the people's voices on the air, and by support from our listeners. In this new era of fake corporate news, we have to be and support our own media! Please click here or click on the Support-Donate tab on this website to subscribe for as little as $3 a month. We are so grateful for this small but growing amount of monthly crowdsource funding on Patreon. PATREON NOW HAS A ONE-TIME, ANNUAL DONATION FUNCTION! You can also give a one-time or recurring donation on PayPal. Thank you! Photo: screenshot of Marimar Martinez, survivor of border agent shooting, surrounded we assume by family.

Help Persecuted Christians TODAY: https://csi-usa.org/ Christian Solidarity International On today's Quick Start podcast: NEWS: A growing dispute between the FBI and the Pima County Sheriff's Office is raising questions in the Nancy Guthrie investigation. Federal sources claim key DNA evidence was kept from the FBI crime lab in Quantico, while Sheriff Chris Nanos strongly denies blocking access and says investigators agreed to keep all samples together at one lab. Meanwhile, surveillance footage of a masked suspect has been released, more than 13,000 tips have poured in, and the reward has climbed to $100,000 as the urgent search continues. FOCUS STORY: Does modern archaeology confirm the Bible — or contradict it? For years, some scholars cast doubt on whether King David even existed. But a major discovery in northern Israel reshaped the debate. CBN's Raj Nair travels to the Holy Land with Israeli tour guide Yoav Rotem to explore how archaeology is challenging skeptics and strengthening confidence in Scripture. MAIN THING: New images from Nigeria reveal the horrific reality facing Christians targeted in ongoing attacks. Advocates say the violence is systematic and underreported. Alex Barbir of Building Zion, recently back from Nigeria, explains why the persecution crisis is worse than many realize — and why believers there say they feel forgotten by the global community. LAST THING: Matthew 5:10-12 — “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” PRAY WITH US! Faithwire.substack.com SHOW LINKS WATCH: Pro or amateur? Expert examines Guthrie suspect: https://youtu.be/p_rHSDKyik0 Faith in Culture: https://cbn.com/news/faith-culture Heaven Meets Earth PODCAST: https://cbn.com/lp/heaven-meets-earth NEWSMAKERS POD: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/newsmakers/id1724061454 Navigating Trump 2.0: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/navigating-trump-2-0/id1691121630

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Nancy Guthrie search has gripped the nation. The latest revelations that local police is not coordinating key actions with the FBI, including seeking DNA info from a Florida lab instead of the FBI's world-class facilities. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. Plus, the urgent Valentine's Day warning to avoid a long, cold year. Perspective and commentary on Friday the 13th's biggest news stories for 2-13-26

Immigration operations are set to draw down in Minnesota after months of protests and the killing of two U.S. citizens. Special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro has been covering the crackdown in the Twin Cities and reports on the new developments. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

The fiat currency crash is unavoidable are you prepared for what is coming our way? BE careful where you store your precious metals for the Feds will come for them.

Your Nebraska Update headlines for today, Feb. 12, include: Secretary of State Bob Evnen plans to hand over sensitive voter data to U.S. Department of Justice, Democrat Jocelyn Brasher announces run for attorney general, Lincoln Public Schools faces backlash over LGBTQ student advocacy job posting, Shelby-Rising City Schools closes due to widespread illness, biofuel leaders eye shipping industry as potential growth market, Husker Athletics restores traditional spring football game.

The FBI is seeking doorbell footage from two January dates near Nancy Guthrie's Tucson-area home as investigators test a black glove found nearby and search for a masked suspect believed to be local. Donna Kelce says she hasn't signed an NDA for Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift's expected June wedding in Rhode Island, insisting she can keep details private and is excited for her mother-son dance. Nicole Curtis apologized after leaked footage showed her using a racial slur on “Rehab Addict,” leading HGTV to pull the show and end her 15-year run with the network. Hosts: Charlie Cotton, Deven Rall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Updates on Uber being held liable for driver misconduct, rear seat safety and Manhattan congestion pricing. Waymo gets more gaslight love, Ford gaslights itself, the Feds want to stop funding speed cameras, we get updates to the underrides act plus recent vehicle recalls impacting Toyota, Chrysler and BMW. Support the show!https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/05/business/uber-safety-rape-verdict.htmlhttps://www.npr.org/2026/02/03/nx-s1-5696544/crash-test-dummy-rear-seathttps://www.jalopnik.com/2089056/manhattan-congestion-pricing-drive-time-suburbs/https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/hands-free-driving-ford-investigation-4fc87266https://waymo.com/safety/impact#faq-how-does-waymos-perf-P0-2https://www.freightwaves.com/news/a-billion-dollar-fix-for-a-distraction-problem-disguised-as-an-underride-problemhttps://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/usdot-limits-traffic-safety-camera-funding/811191/https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2026/RCLRPT-26V049-9292.pdfhttps://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2026/RCLRPT-26V051-3975.pdfhttps://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2026/RCLRPT-26V056-6534.pdfhttps://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2026/RCLRPT-26V059-8421.pdf

The Agents encounter city contractors and work to convince them of the urgency of their mission.Support The Work at: https://ko-fi.com/sorryhoneyWant to advertise with us? See our Sponsor Kit and Rate Card.Visit Us At: https://sorryhoney.captivate.fm/Join our Discord to tell us all the things we did wrong: https://discord.gg/y6XchFnkQUFollow us on Twitter for additional content: https://twitter.com/SorryHoneyCastLikewise, Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sorryhoneycast/Published by arrangement with the Delta Green Partnership. The intellectual property known as Delta Green is a trademark and copyright owned by the Delta Green Partnership, who has licensed its use here. Illustrations by Dennis Detwiller are reproduced by permission. The contents of this podcast are © GiggleDome Productions, LLC, excepting those elements that are components of Delta Green intellectual property.

A Bombshell drop by the Feds! The FBI unleashes "previously inaccessible" images of the monster they believe snatched Nancy Guthrie, Savannah's missing mom! Any tip that leads to his ID & her return could nab you $50k! A couple sentenced for the starvation & torture death of their 8yo adopted daughter. The couple then took her corpse on a cross-country road trip in a U-Haul. Plus, Julio the Frenchie is free...and his captors caged! Jennifer Gould reports. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Nick talks about Another Aquatic Drug Strike, Trump Assisted Cops Against Epstein, DEI Sheriff, OH Showing MN How It's Done, Long Covid & Dementia, A Cracked Cold Case and a Tranny Violates Girl! The FULL SHOW is live streaming & FREE-ONLY on Rumble! Join our LIVE CHAT at 6pm ET every Mon-Thu or watch the FULL EPISODE anytime on demand after 7pm ET. Follow my Channel and get notified! https://rumble.com/c/TheNickDiPaoloShow MERCH - Grab some mugs, hats, hoodies, shirts, stickers etc… https://shop.nickdip.com/ PERSONAL VIDEO FROM ME – Send someone a personal video from me! Go to https://shoutout.us/nickdipaolo  or www.cameo.com/nickdipaolo SOCIALS/COMEDY- Follow me on Socials or Stream some of my Comedy!  https://nickdipaolo.komi.io/

A disturbing new lawsuit alleges that DCYF failed to protect a girl that was may have been killed by her father. Good polling numbers for Trump on immigration. Super Bowl players lost a crazy amount of money due to taxes. // Big Local: Activists in Tacoma that don’t actually have any power demand changes to ICE. Feds made a huge drug bust in Tacoma. // You Pick the Topic: People in the job market are now paying recruiters.

Federal regulators say the financial sector — particularly big banks — failed to act on obvious red flags in the case of Jeffrey Epstein's financial network, and now they're pointing fingers at each other. Agencies like the U.S. Treasury Department and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency assert that banks should have detected and reported Epstein's suspicious transactions years ago and triggered law-enforcement action. Meanwhile, some banks claim they did file reports or raise internal alarms but regulators ignored or delayed follow-up investigations, essentially accusing federal agencies of failing to enforce or respond to the alerts.On the flip side, financial institutions argue they were operating under murky guidance and rely on regulators to interpret complex anti-money-laundering laws — now they say the feds didn't act promptly or clearly once files were submitted. This blame-game has escalated as lawsuits proliferate: banks claim regulators pushed responsibility back onto them, while regulators argue that banks willfully overlooked their compliance duties and expect bail-outs or leniency rather than accountability. The result is a stalemate where neither side wants to claim full fault, and victims of Epstein's crimes are still waiting for clarity and justice.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:JPMorgan Flagged Epstein Suspicions in 2002, Years Earlier Than Known

TUESDAY HR 4 Detective Barb from CrimeLine Orlando. What is like working with the Feds on a big case. P3 Campus The Wine Dive in studio with some tips on what to buy for valentine's day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

TUESDAY HR 4 Detective Barb from CrimeLine Orlando. What is like working with the Feds on a big case. P3 Campus The Wine Dive in studio with some tips on what to buy for valentine's day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

TUESDAY HR 4 Detective Barb from CrimeLine Orlando. What is like working with the Feds on a big case. P3 Campus The Wine Dive in studio with some tips on what to buy for valentine's day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The mandates may be over — but the punishment isn't.

A judge says the Trump administration can't withhold funds from five Democratic states amid claims of fraud. AP correspondent Jennifer King reports.

Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos got grilled by lawmakers in Washington over the upcoming Warner Bros. acquisition. Ted Cruz was concerned about "woke" Netflix having control over such a large portion of the entertainment industry, and Josh Hawley was bothered by all the LGBTQ cartoons for kids under 7. Meanwhile, Hollywood is quietly FREAKING OUT because they know Netflix will absolutely chop once they get ahold of Warner Bros.Watch the podcast episodes on YouTube and all major podcast hosts including Spotify.CLOWNFISH TV is an independent, opinionated news and commentary podcast that covers Entertainment and Tech from a consumer's point of view. We talk about Gaming, Comics, Anime, TV, Movies, Animation and more. Hosted by Kneon and Geeky Sparkles.Get more news, views and reviews on Clownfish TV News - https://more.clownfishtv.com/On YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/ClownfishTVOn Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/4Tu83D1NcCmh7K1zHIedvgOn Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/clownfish-tv-audio-edition/id1726838629

Host Saeed Khan talks with guests veteran attorneys Steve Fishman, Bill Seikaly, and Joel Sklar; community and labor activist Barb Ingalls; veteran journalist Nancy Derringer; and Deadline Detroit co-founder Allan Lengel.They talk about: DOJ releases a large (and last) batch of Epstein files—50% remain unreleased; Trump calls on Republicans to nationalize elections and mentions Detroit by name; former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick cuts a deal to repay restitution after fighting it for years; the decline of The Washington Post; what's next for journalism? Predictions for the Super Bowl; Schmuck of the Week.

The crackdown on leftists has begun in Minnesota  Become A Member http://youtube.com/timcastnews/join The Green Room - https://rumble.com/playlists/aa56qw_g-j0 BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO FIGHT BACK - https://castbrew.com/ Join The Discord Server - https://timcast.com/join-us/ Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL

4pm: Donald Trump Signals Shift on Deportations: Feds Will Enter Sanctuary Cities Only If Mayors “Ask” and “Invited” // President Trump Discusses Powerful Sonic Weapon Used to Take Out Venezuelan Soldiers During Maduro Capture // In forcing the Clintons to testify on Epstein, Comer sets a new precedent // Trump on Bill Clinton’s forthcoming testimony // Trump attacks, lies Massie at the Prayer Breakfast // What’s Going on with That Secret Biolab in Las Vegas Connected to China // Weird: CBS, NBC Nightly Newscasts Still Not Covering Busted Chinese Biolab // Disneyland’s Haunted Mansion can be rented for weddings, but there is a scary price 

Darrell Castle talks about what is going on in Minneapolis as well as the state of Minnesota — what is going on there, does anyone care, and what about fraud. Transcription / Notes MINNESOTA IS A STRANGE PLACE Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today's Castle Report. This is Friday the 6th day of February in the year of our Lord 2026. Although I am a little late for the party I will be talking about what is going on in Minneapolis as well as the state of Minnesota. What in the world is going on there and does anyone care about the violence and death, and also what about the fraud. Was a 37-year-old ICU nurse really a threat to the ICE agents in Minnesota? Do Americans who film such agents as they try to do their jobs belong on government lists. Should the presence of ICE agents in Minnesota be eliminated since the politicians and the people apparently are violently opposed to their presence. The answers to these questions, unfortunately, almost always depend on one's political party affiliation. Republicans back ICE in its deportation efforts while Democrats stand with Alex Pretti. Sometimes these positions require members of both parties to abandon the principles they once held dear. The struggle this time around has often centered on the real culprit, the ruling class. Everything seems like a diversion or distraction. When you see the Minnesota politicians parading around talking about the demonization of the Somali community one might wonder if they are just trying to distract attention away from the billions in fraud from which they allegedly received hefty amounts. When the administration doubles down on its hardline response by sending in more and more agents even after people have been killed one wonders if this is in reality an effort to distract us from the coming stupid pointless war against Iran. Yes the U.S. sent another carrier battle group into the Persian Gulf as an obvious threat to attack at the moment of Trump's or Netanyahu's choosing. Yes, Bibi has or soon will be coming to America for the 6th time in the Trump presidency perhaps to deliver to the president his strike options for the coming attack on Iran. A diversion for our attention is therefore a welcome side benefit thanks to the violence of the protesters in Minneapolis. I can't help but wonder why the president has made no effort to explain to the American people why an attack on Iran is in their best interest. He seems to go from one reason to another as one justification is erased, another takes its place. He first gave us the nuclear threat or weapons of mass destruction we have heard many times before. Then, we are told the nuclear enrichment sites were obliterated in a previous American attack. Then CIA, Mossad, and who knows how many others, allegedly launched a violent protest movement directed at regime change. When the Iranian regime put down the uprising with extreme violence that became another excuse for an attack. The sides are talking now about a way to avoid war but I get the impression it is simply a brief delay for some reason or another. A similar delay is going on in Minnesota as the sides are talking and Mr. Homan has agreed to withdraw 700 agents. Could the agreement be this, look Governor Waltz if you will stop inciting this violence and let us at least arrest the murderers and rapists among you then you can keep the millions you stole from the American people. I don't know if that is true but it sounds plausible to me. What about fraud? Let's talk about that for a moment. The fraud conducted by the “Somali community” escorted into the country by Barack Obama and Joe Biden and grouped together in Minnesota so they could have political power and even elect their members to congress to lecture us about racism. We are expected to concentrate on the seeming insanity of the ICE protesters and ICE agents instead of the money and where it goes. The last figures I have seen reveal that Somali welfare fraud in Minnesota is estimated at $9 billion. That is $9 billion of Medicaid and other welfare stolen from people who work and from people who need the help and shuffled off to various fraudulent enterprises run by the Somali community. That is just the amount found to have been stolen in Minnesota. It's predicted to be even worse in California, Illinois, Maine, New York, and perhaps other Democrat states. Who knows how many billions of dollars of your labor have been stolen. Well, Elon Musk says he knows the various forms of fraudulent payments given away by the federal government amount to $1.5 and $2 trillion per year which is about 25% of annual government spending and which coincides almost exactly with the deficit. In other words, if these figures are correct that $2 trillion the government spends over what it takes in is all fraud. Almost all this fraud goes to perpetuate various deep state programs and to line the pockets of Democrat voters and especially their politicians. That's why they fight so hard to make us ignore it and to detract us from investigating it. Now, let me say a few words about the killing of Alex Pretti by ICE agents in Minneapolis. Mr. Pretti apparently was killed when the agents first disarmed him of his legally possessed handgun, then threw him to the ground and shot him in the back many times. The object he was waving in his hand was a cell phone and to say they thought it was a gun made no sense because he had been disarmed by them. It does remind one a little of the bad old days of Democrat presidents when conservatives feared the Feds rather than supporting them. I'm thinking specifically of the incident in which Vicki Weaver had her head blown off by an FBI sniper named Lon Horiuchi while she stood in her cabin door holding her child. Agents also killed the Weaver's 14-year-old son by shooting him in the back. I knew Randy Weaver quite well back then as we had met at many speaking engagements and he was often at gun shows where I campaigned for office. The government today says there is no comparison with Vickie and Alex Pretti because she was unarmed. The truth is that Vickie had a .380 handgun in a holster under her dress just as Pretti had a legal gun in his possession. Once again they, the ruling elite that is, distract us from the real enemy. I've seen and heard Mr. Pretti described as a beloved ICU nurse and a peaceful man. I have no argument with the beloved description since I have no evidence to dispute that but the peaceful part I definitely dispute. To me, he appeared to be a man so fanatical in his system of beliefs that he was out of control and violently so. He was a nurse, which is a profession of the most noble among all if it is practiced correctly. Who can't tell stories of heroic nurses sitting with the dying or helping one through some of the most trying moments of life. Well, there was another nurse whose name goes unmentioned, but not for me. I say her name and I hope her parents are not offended by that but I feel compelled to speak for her because she really was peaceful. Her name was Laken Riley and she was peacefully jogging on her Georgia college campus when she was assaulted, raped, and murdered by an illegal criminal invited into this country by Joe Biden. Why, I ask, do none of the protesters care about Laken. She goes unmentioned by Democrat politicians and their protesters because I guess she just doesn't fit their political agenda. Laken's benevolence, her altruistic pursuits, her many accomplishments, her hopes and dreams count for nothing because she did not meet the Democrat politician's definition of someone they should care about. Sadly, Laken went out for a jog and she didn't come back the same fate has happened to literally dozens of women and girls at the hands of criminals whose cages were opened by Joe Biden. Just to name a few Sarah Root, Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray but there have been countless others. Jocelyn is of particular importance to me but I don't say much about her because she was a 12 year of child when she was very brutally murdered by five of Joe Biden's criminal invaders. No one speaks for her I suppose she is an embarrassment to the entire spectrum of what the ruling elite are trying to accomplish in this country and this world. That's probably enough about the women who have been murdered but there is one more and very recently. In Illinois recently a man named Joe Abraham has gained attention because he has had the audacity to speak for his 20-year-old daughter Katie, killed while stopped at a traffic light by a drunk illegal named Julio Cucol-Bol. Mr. Bol fled the scene but Katie was killed instantly. At least she didn't have to endure the torture that Jocelyn did. This case reminds me of that most appealing argument that to deport criminals would be forced separation of families. Well, the Abraham, Riley, and Nungaray families among countless others were certainly separated. None of these women are ever spoken of by Democrats and there have been no protests or demonstrations objecting to the government's policy of inviting violent criminals to walk among us. I suggest that when we see and hear the violent protests about ICE we try to remember the real victims who for Democrat politicians and their supporters remain nameless but for their families the loss is never ending. In Conclusion, I want to conclude by recommending a book that was just released and which I had to get an early copy to read. Peter Schweizer's “The Invisible Coup, How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Migration as a Weapon.” That book opens for you the war that has been prosecuted against us by people who hate us and intend to destroy us, and unfortunately that often includes our leaders. Finally, folks, what in the world does this all mean? That's a topic for another day perhaps next week, we'll see. Remember the nameless fallen ones and pray for peace here and abroad. At least that's the way I see it, Until next time folks, This is Darrell Castle, Thanks for listening.

2-6 Adam and Jordana 9a hour

In breaking news, Fulton County, Georgia, is fighting back against Trump's attempt to federalize elections and seize all of their 2020 voter data in 656 boxes of material, in a new federal court lawsuit and filing to stop the Feds from searching through any of their data. Popok reports that Fulton County sees this as a struggle to protect the Constitution, and he connects the dots between Ed Martin, Sydney Powell, Tulsi Gabbard, and the investigation being run out of the Missouri US Attorney's Office and not Georgia. PDS Debt: You're 30 seconds away from being debt-free with PDS Debt. Get your free assessment and find the best option for you at https://PDSDebt.com/LEGALAF Subscribe:  @LegalAFMTN  Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

4pm: Feds to 'draw down' 700 agents, but 2,000 remain after collaboration from Minnesota, Homan says // Mike Johnson says Democratic judicial warrant reform proposal ‘unworkable’ // Trump doubles down on suggesting federal government 'get involved' in state elections // 83% of favor photo voter id to vote per Pew // ASPS urges delay on sex-change surgeries for kids: Childhood gender dysphoria often resolves naturally // Mary Bridge leaders cite 2 federal threats behind gender clinic closure // Have we seen the last of the name Jeffrey? // Bill Gates says he regrets every minute he spent with Jeffrey Epstein, denies STD cover up allegation. 

6pm:  Feds to 'draw down' 700 agents, but 2,000 remain after collaboration from Minnesota, Homan says // Mike Johnson says Democratic judicial warrant reform proposal ‘unworkable’ // Trump doubles down on suggesting federal government 'get involved' in state elections // 83% of favor photo voter id to vote per Pew // ASPS urges delay on sex-change surgeries for kids: Childhood gender dysphoria often resolves naturally // Mary Bridge leaders cite 2 federal threats behind gender clinic closure // Have we seen the last of the name Jeffrey? // Bill Gates says he regrets every minute he spent with Jeffrey Epstein, denies STD cover up allegation. 

Feds considered limiting men to ONE drink per day — and quietly removed all clear alcohol limits from new dietary guidelines. Is this about health… or control?

This is the episode we've been waiting fifteen years to make. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has reportedly issued subpoenas to the Philadelphia Police Department, the Medical Examiner's Office, and other agencies—including the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office that Josh Shapiro ran when the case sat on his desk for four years.Sources tell the Philadelphia Inquirer this isn't about how Ellen Greenberg died. It's about whether the people who handled her case committed federal crimes.Ellen was found with twenty stab wounds, ten to the back of her neck, a knife lodged four inches into her chest. The medical examiner ruled it homicide. Then police objected. Then the ruling changed to suicide. Then the crime scene was cleaned—with police permission—before detectives could process it. Then James Schwartzman, Samuel Goldberg's uncle and Chairman of the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board, removed laptops and phones from the apartment. Those devices later became the basis for the official suicide narrative—even though the original report said no suicidal searches were found.Now federal prosecutors want to know what happened. The statutes they're working with carry penalties up to life in prison. Deprivation of rights under color of law. Evidence tampering. Obstruction. Conspiracy.Governor Shapiro has presidential ambitions. His former spokesperson now works for Philadelphia's mayor. Schwartzman sits on the bench as a Pennsylvania judge. None of them have been charged—but all of them may have to answer uncomfortable questions to people who can compel the truth.The Greenbergs waited fifteen years for someone outside Philadelphia to take this seriously. Someone finally is.#EllenGreenberg #FederalInvestigation #JoshShapiro #JamesSchwartzman #PhiladelphiaCorruption #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers #CoverUp #ObstructionOfJustice #JusticeForEllenJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspodInstagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/tonybpodListen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Monday, February 2, 2026. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: Bill argues the media isn't interested in the Neville Roy Singham story because it doesn't fit their goal of attacking Donald Trump. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is looking for a new “top cop” to go after nonprofits that use their charity status to dodge taxes. What took so long? Retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Chris Hinkle joins the No Spin News to discuss the latest on the Neville Roy Singham investigation and why the federal government isn't sharing information. Why former CNN host Don Lemon was arrested. The latest on Iran as White House envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi are expected to meet Friday. Final Thought: A look at the far left's reaction to the movie, 'Melania.' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

French police raid X's Paris offices. The Feds take over $400 million from a dark web cryptocurrency mixer. The NSA says zero-trust goes beyond authentication. Researchers warn of a multi-stage phishing campaign targeting Dropbox credentials. A new GlassWorn campaign targets macOS developers. Critical zero-day vulnerabilities in Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile are under active exploitation. Researchers disclose a major data exposure on Moltbook, a social network built for AI agents. States bridge the gaps in election security. Nitrogen ransomware has a fatal flaw that permanently destroys data. Supersize your passwords — you want fries with that? Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Miss an episode? Sign-up for our daily intelligence roundup, Daily Briefing, and you'll never miss a beat. And be sure to follow CyberWire Daily on LinkedIn. Threat Vector Aaron Isaksen leads AI Research and Engineering at Palo Alto Networks, where he advances state-of-the-art AI in cybersecurity while overseeing Cortex Xpanse's teams automating attack surface management across some of the world's largest networks. In this episode of Threat Vector, host David Moulton sits down with Dr. Aaron Isaksen to explore why engineering excellence must precede ethical AI debates, how adversarial AI is reshaping cybersecurity, and what it actually takes to build AI systems resilient enough to operate in hostile environments. Selected Reading French cops raid X's Paris office in algorithmic bias probe (The Register) US seizes over $400 million in assets from dark web money laundering operation Helix (SC Media) NSA Tells Feds: Zero Trust Must Go Beyond Login (GovInfo Security) New Password-Stealing Phishing Campaign Targets Corporate Dropbox Credentials (Infosecurity Magazine) New GlassWorm attack targets macOS via compromised OpenVSX extensions (Bleeping Computer) Ivanti Issues Urgent Fix for Critical Zero-Day Flaws Under Active Attack (Hackread) Vibe-Coded Moltbook Exposes User Data, API Keys and More (Infosecurity Magazine) As feds pull back, states look inward for election security support (CyberScoop) Nitrogen Ransomware: ESXi malware has a bug! (Coveware) McDonald's is not lovin' your bigmac, happymeal, and mcnuggets passwords (The Register) Share your feedback. What do you think about CyberWire Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show. Want to hear your company in the show? N2K CyberWire helps you reach the industry's most influential leaders and operators, while building visibility, authority, and connectivity across the cybersecurity community. Learn more at sponsor.thecyberwire.com. The CyberWire is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week's episode of Wealth Formula features an interview with Claudia Sahm, and I want to share a quick takeaway before you listen — because she's often misunderstood in the headlines. First, a quick explanation of the Sahm Rule, in plain English. The rule looks at unemployment and asks a very simple question:Has the unemployment rate started rising meaningfully from its recent low? Specifically, if the three-month average unemployment rate rises by 0.5% or more above its lowest level over the past year, the Sahm Rule is triggered. Historically, that has happened early in every U.S. recession since World War II. That's why it gets cited so much. And to be clear — it's cited a lot. The Sahm Rule is tracked by the Federal Reserve, Treasury economists, Wall Street banks, macro funds, and economic research shops globally. When it triggers, it shows up everywhere. That's not by accident. Claudia built one of the cleanest early-warning indicators we have. But here's the part that often gets lost. The Sahm Rule is not a market-timing tool and it's not a prediction machine. Claudia emphasized this repeatedly. It was designed as a policy signal — a way to say, “Hey, if unemployment is rising this fast, waiting too long to respond makes things worse.” In other words, it's a call to action for policymakers, not a command for investors to panic. What makes this cycle unusual — and why talking to Claudia directly was so helpful — is what's actually driving the data. We're not seeing mass layoffs. Layoffs remain low by historical standards. What we're seeing instead is very weak hiring. Companies aren't firing people — they're just not expanding. That distinction matters. And this is where I think the big picture comes in — not just for understanding the economy, but for investing in general. When you step back, the big picture includes a government with massive debt loads that needs interest rates to come down over time. It includes fiscal pressures that make prolonged high rates politically and economically painful. And it includes the reality that if the current Fed leadership won't ease fast enough, future leadership will. History tells us that governments eventually get the monetary conditions they need — even if it takes time, even if it takes new appointments, and even if it takes a shift toward a more dovish Federal Reserve. That doesn't mean reckless money printing tomorrow. But it does mean that structurally high rates are unlikely to be permanent. And when you combine that with investing, the question becomes less about this month's headline and more about what's positioned to benefit when the environment normalizes. That's why I continue to focus on real assets that are already deeply discounted — things like multifamily real estate — assets that were repriced brutally during the rate shock, but still sit at the center of a growing, rent-dependent economy. This conversation with Claudia reinforced something I've been talking about for a long time:The biggest investing mistakes usually happen when people zoom in too far and forget to zoom back out. I've made this mistake myself. If you want a thoughtful, non-sensational, data-driven discussion about where we actually are in this cycle — and what the indicators really mean — I think you'll get a lot out of this episode. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Well Formula Podcast coming to you from Montecito, California. Before we begin today, I wanna remind you, uh, listen, we’re back in, uh, back in the saddle in here in, uh, 2026. I know it’s takes some time to get used to it, but we’re, gosh, we’re at the end of the month actually by the time this plays. I think we’re in February. It’s time again to start thinking about investing. And so if you are interested in potentially using this year, which I believe and which many believe to potentially be the last year, uh, big discounts, uh, in real estate and, uh, various other types of offerings. Make sure. To sign up for the Accredit Investor group, our investor club, as we call it wealthformula.com. You do need to be an accredit investor and then you get onboarded. An accredit investor is just defined by who you are. If you make over $300,000 per year filing jointly, or 200 by yourself, every reasonable expectation to do so in the future. Or you have a net worth of a million dollars outta your personal, outside of your personal residence, you’re an accredit investor. Congratulations. Join the club wealthformula.com. Interesting podcast. Today we have, uh, Claudia Sahm She’s a Big Deal, Claudia Sahm. You may recognize that last name som, for this som rule. And what is a som rule in plain English. You actually have heard of the som rule multiple times from other economists who’ve been on the show. The som rule looks at unemployment. And asks a very simple question. Now, has the unemployment rate started rising meaningfully from its recent low? So specifically, if the three month average unemployment rate rises 0.5% or more above its lowest level, over the past year, this som rule is triggered. Now, historically, that has happened early in every US recession since the World War ii. That’s why it gets cited so much. It gets cited a lot. By the way, the sum rule is tracked by the Fed treasury economists, wall Street Banks, macro funds, economic research shops globally, and when it triggers, it shows up everywhere, and that’s not by accident. Uh, Claudia has built one of the cleanest early warning indicators we have, but here’s the part that often gets lost. The som rule is not a market timing tool, and it’s not a prediction machine. Claudia, uh, emphasized that repeatedly. It was designed as a policy signal, a way to say, Hey, if unemployment’s rising this fast, wait, waiting too long to respond makes things worse. In other words, it’s call to action for policy makers, not a command for investors to panic per se. So what makes this cycle unusual and why talking to Claudia directly was so helpful? Well, it’s what’s actually driving the data. We’re not seeing mass layoffs. Layoffs remain low by historical standards. Um, what we’re seeing instead is very weak. Hiring companies aren’t firing people, they’re just not expanding, and that distinction matters. This is where the big picture comes in, not just for understanding the economy. For investing in general and when you step back, the big picture includes a government with massive debt loads that need interest rates to come down over time. It includes fiscal pressures that make prolonged high rates politically and economically painful. I’ve mentioned this before and it includes the reality that have to fed, fed, uh, if the current Fed leadership won’t ease fast enough. I am likely the case that future leadership appointed by. Donald Trump himself, uh, will, so history tells us that governments eventually get the monetary conditions they need, even if it takes time, even if it takes new appointments. And even if it takes a shift towards a more dovish federal reserve. Uh, that doesn’t mean, uh, reckless money printing tomorrow, but it does mean that structurally. High interest rates are unlikely to be permanent. Okay? And when you combine that with investing, the question becomes less about this month’s headline and more about what’s positioned to benefit when the environment normalizes. Okay? That’s really, really important, and that’s why I continue to focus on things like real estate, right? Real estate is currently. Not for long, in my opinion, but deeply discounted things like multifamily real estate, um, that were repriced brutally during the rate shot, uh, but are still at the center of a growing and, and rent dependent economy. And again, uh, this conversation with Claudia reinforced something that I’ve been talking about a long time, which is the biggest investing mistakes usually happen when people zoom in too far and forget to zoom back out. I’ve made that mistake myself. I am not immune. I have made lots of mistakes, and that’s one of them. So this is a great conversation. Hopefully you’ll enjoy it, especially if you want a thoughtful, nons sensational data-driven discussion. Where we are actually at in this cycle and what these indicators really mean. I think you’ll get a lot of this episode and we will have this conversation for you right after these messages. Wealth formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net. The strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps. Paying you compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it at result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique. It’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealthformulabanking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show, everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Dr. Claudia Sahm. Uh, she’s an American, uh, macroeconomic expert, uh, known for her work, uh, on monetary and fiscal policy and real-time economic indicators. She developed this som rule, which I think, uh, people have mentioned on this show before, so this is a great opportunity to talk to her about that. Uh, it’s a widely, uh, followed recession signal based on unemployment. She’s also a former Federal Reserve economist and senior policy advisor in government. Um, so welcome, uh, Dr. Sahm. Great. Happy to be here. Thank you. Well, let’s, let’s kind of start out with this som rule because, uh, you know, it’s funny, we, we have had a few different people, uh, at various times bring up the SOM rule, and I think one had actually said that it was triggered, but I don’t don’t think it was at any rate, let’s, let’s start with that. What is the som rule? Lemme start with why is there a som rule, and then we’ll then we’ll get to specifically what the, what the rule is itself. So when I started out on the project, it wasn’t so much about. Calling a recession, like there are some really fancy technical ways that economists like look at the tea leaves and the data and either try to forecast a recession, which is incredibly hard, or even just say we’re in a recession in real time. So like that’s a useful endeavor. But what actually was behind the development of my recession indicator was more of a call to action. How do we develop policies that, that the Congress can put into place very quickly if a recession comes? So these kind of what are referred to as automatic stabilizers, so they’re decided upon ahead of time, but then you do need a trigger that says a recession is here. So now that enhance the unemployment benefits, send out the stimulus checks, whatever it is that we kind of have as our typical tools that are used in recessions, we could have those ready to go as kind of guardrails. Then like you, you turn the policy on. So that was really my emphasis was on how do we do better policy and recessions, get the support out quickly. ’cause that’s the best chance of kind of stabilizing the situation. And then it’s like, well it was in a, it was in a policy volume that they asked for, like a really concrete proposal. So if I’m gonna say an automatic stabilizer, I need to have a proposal for what a trigger could be. So that’s really where the som rule came. So I think it is important. It’s definitely important to me to, I always remember like what the kind of reason for it’s sure. Now that also guided what the indicator itself looks like. So again, it was gonna be in, in fiscal policy. It needs to be simple, it needs to be something that we track it and it needs to, I felt it was important that it capture the reason that we. Fight recessions, why there’s such a bad, uh, you know, outcome. And so it looks at the, the unemployment rate. I use the national unemployment rate, take a three month average. ’cause we wanna smooth out, like there’s bumps and wiggles in the data from month to month. So you kind of, you know, three month average. One way to smooth it out. So you take that series of three month averages, you look at the current value, you compare to the lowest value over the prior 12 months, if you’ve seen an increase of a half, a percentage point or more. Which is really pretty modest, but half a percentage point or more. Historically, we have been in the early months of a recession, so it’s not a forecast. It’s supposed to be like we’re in it. Let’s go. It’s an empirical pattern. It’s one that’s worked in the United States. It reflects kind of our labor market institutions, the way unemployment rate moves and recessions. It historically is the case that once you get past a certain threshold of increased unemployment rate, it tends to build on itself. And in a typical recession, we see increases of. Two, three or more percentage points in the unemployment rate. Uh, so that’s, that’s what the summer rule is. And in fact, it did trigger in the summer of 2024. At that time I had said like, look around, we are not in a recession. GP is still expanding. Job creation is still happening. We don’t see the other hallmarks of a recession. And pointed to the fact that we’d had a very disrupted labor market after the pandemic in particular. You know, there had been a lot of immigration at that point. The unemployment rate is the total number of unemployed. So people who don’t have a job but are actively looking for one out of the labor force, right? And so these people that have to either be employed or looking for jobs, and so we actually saw from the pandemic. Both with the pandemic and then later with the surge and now the reversal in immigration. We’ve seen a lot of movement in the, in the labor force, which makes unemployment rate a little tricky to interpret. And then I’d also argue, we saw early in the pandemic, the unemployment rate dropped very rapidly. We even had labor shortages. So in some ways unemployment rate rising and it has risen over. I mean, it continued to rise last year in 2025. A lot of that’s also normalization. We’d had a very low unemployment rate. So I think the, the pandemic recession has a lot of features that were very unusual. We’ll talk probably more about the labor market continued to be kind of unusual. So the, you know, the somal was not the only recession indicator to fall flat on its face in the cycle. Um, but I think it’s still a useful, useful guide and I, and. You know, even if it’s not a recession, the, the unemployment rate is a full percentage point above, its low in 2023. So, I mean, that, that could, that could be a reason for policymakers to respond, even if it’s not responding to a recession. Right. That was the first time that it, that triggered and, and actually didn’t. End up in a recession, right? There’s some back in the 1950s, earlier, but it’s, it’s the first time where there’ve been some false positives in the past or, or near false positives. Like in 2003. It was kind of close, uh, is like the unemployment rate rises a little bit and then it falls back down. What we saw after it triggered in 2024 is it stabilized. Then last year it continued to rise. So this the pattern that we’ve seen since the pandemic of rapid recovery dropping unemployment rate and then it’s like gradually rising and yet has risen a full percentage point that you go all the way back in the post World War II period. We don’t see anything that looks like that. So that is a very unusual. Paris. So something’s more is going on in the labor market than just our typical business cycle, boom, bust, recession type dynamics. So what is that? What is the thing that’s happening that’s unusual right now in the labor market? Right? So the thing that is driving the unemployment rate up, I think this is a good lesson, a reminder to all of us. It’s not about layoffs. The rate of layoffs in the United States is really quite low. You look at unemployment insurance claims, they’re also quite low. What’s been pushing the unemployment rate up over the last two and a half years has been a very low rate of hiring and, and it’s, and it is something that over time will at least gradually put upward pressure on the unemployment rate and frankly. Until hiring picks up and we really don’t have many signs of it. Even as we enter 2026 unemployment rate’s gonna probably keep drifting up ’cause we’re not keeping job creation’s, not keeping up with, you know, people coming into the, into the labor market and, and that what’s, I think the puzzle right now is that hiring has been very low. But what we’ve seen in terms of consumer spending, business investment, so the kind of the big pieces of GDP, they’ve really held up pretty well, so. Business. It’s not, again, not that recession of the customers have disappeared. And so we’re not hiring, or we may even be firing workers. The customers are there for the businesses, but they’re choosing in this environment not to add, uh, to their payrolls. And that’s slowly pushing up down point rate. Yeah. Um, you know, it, it’s interesting what you’re, you’re talking about, but essentially you’re, people aren’t getting fired. They’re just, when they retire or leave, they’re just not replacing those. Individuals, you know, makes me think a little bit about what’s going on in the big, you know, in the tech push with artificial intelligence and that kind of thing, and increased in efficiency. Certainly you see that in the larger companies like Amazon and all that, where they’re just becoming massively more productive and cutting expenses essentially by, you know, using tech. Do you think that this is sort of an early indication, potentially of that kind of movement? So it. It’s possible, but I think we’re at the very front end of AI disrupting the labor market. This low hiring rate that we’ve talked about. You see this across all kinds of industries, including ones that don’t show high levels of AI adoption, and frankly, a AI adoption is pretty low. I mean, there are some sectors like tech and increasingly finance and some professional services have higher adoption rates. Uh, but in terms of it being able to explain the low hiring. I think it’s pretty tough ’cause the low hiring is such a, such a broad based, um, phenomenon. Now, AI might be, I think, indirectly contributing in that one of, one of the hypotheses about why, um, businesses have been, uh, not hiring despite, you know, economic activity. Continuing to push ahead could be that there’s a lot of uncertainty. Now there is a long list that we could draw of, of factors that might be causing businesses to be uncertain and hesitant to add to their payrolls. Uh, a lot of times you talk about things with tariffs or, you know, economic policy, regulations changing, you know, so there’s a lot going on there. But it could also be, there’s a lot of uncertainty about what this technology means for the future. Maybe you don’t need to bring on more workers because your ability to kind of use and adapt this technologies coming online. And so like that could be part of it. I think there’s another piece, you know, we have a lot of discussion about ai, but I do think that there’s, there could be a, a technology angle to this that’s, that is. Not in the AI technologies, but maybe just some of the more basic kind of automation is again, right after, you know, the, the pandemic recession as we came out of a, you know, very rapid recovery, uh, there was, there was a lot of hiring or that, ’cause businesses had done a lot of firing and they needed to bring back workers really rapidly and we actually had a period of labor shortages. There were workers moving around a lot and there were, that also put a lot of pressure on some employers, particularly in service sector, to automate more ’cause they just couldn’t get the workers, so they needed to bring technology. Online to help, you know, fill the gap. And over time, you know, businesses though, they haven’t done as much hiring, they have been firing. So the workers, they have longer tenures, have more experience, they’re probably more productive. So maybe businesses can kind of, you know, get away with not doing more hiring. ’cause the people they have there can kind of keep up with it. Um, and they’ve done some more automation. I don’t think those are sustainable. I think we’re going to need to see hiring pickup in terms of, of staying with, um, you know, as expanding, uh, demand from customers. But I won’t pretend to know what AI means for the future of the labor force. Right. So like there could be, I think that’s a big conversation about we’re headed, where we’re headed. I think it’s probably a pretty small slice of explaining. Where we’re at right now. You know, it’s interesting because obviously there was a lot of concerns about rising inflation, and particularly in the context of, you know, tariffs and, and among those types of things that were, were, um, coming down the pipe. And as it turns out, inflation seems to be coming down. How do you explain that from where you sit? Because it, it, it seems sort of to contradict a lot of what, you know, many economists believe to be likely. So when thinking about the effects of tariffs on inflation and this, this idea that it didn’t end up being as much of a factors we had really feared, uh, you know, a year ago. I think there’s a few things to keep in mind. One, the announced tariffs, uh. Didn’t come to pass fully. Right? So there’s a big difference between some of the, the, the initial announcements, whether it was on Liberation Day, April 2nd, or the initial kind of retaliation tit for tat with China, where we ended up with some triple digit, uh, tariff numbers. Those didn’t end up being where we, we ended now tariff, the effect of tariff rate. Is much higher than it was before. Right. Uh, president Trump came into office for the second time, so like, I don’t wanna minimize the, the, the increase in tariffs and the US government collected about $200 billion last year in, in additional tariffs. But there is a, there’s a good bit of daylight between what was announced and where we actually ended up. Businesses also proved very capable of trying to avoid those tariffs and not in like a. Illegal kind of way of avoiding them, but, but using inventories like trying to get ahead of them. We know the tariffs are tariffs. There’s been some evidence that, that it’s businesses are gonna start passing on the tariff cost increase when it’s actually tied to the inventories that they’re putting out in front of customers. And for some of our goods, like say apparel or things that have long seasons or come from, you know, all across the world, it actually takes quite a bit of time from the inventories being what actually shows up in front of customers. So there’s been the ability to. Kind of get around the tariffs ’cause they were rolling in. And so do be smart in terms of your inventories. And then it just takes time for those inventories to be, you know, um, to come down. Mm-hmm. By, there’s been several studies at this place, at this point that, that demonstrate that the, the tariffs, the cost of the tariffs is coming into the us. So the, it’s always the importer that pays the tariff, like literally writes the check to the US government. But it’s possible that the foreign producer could say, reduce their prices on what they’re, you know, paying or what they’re asking to be paid for that, uh, imported good. And then that would be a way of the foreign producer sharing the cost of the tariff. But everything that we see from the M Court data suggests that a very small fraction, probably less than 10%. Of the total tariff burden is being born by, at least at this point, born by the foreign producers. So it’s coming into the us. It’s sitting with either US businesses that are importing the goods or have the goods at some point in their, you know, in their supply chains and, and with us customers, the consumers we have, we’ve seen. I think you can really look at the inflation data. You can see the goods prices, which often are kind of a drag on inflation that they did turn around. They’re, they’re putting upward pressure on inflation. It’s not massive. It doesn’t explain all of these, you know, 200 billion in tariff costs, but then it is, it’s sitting with businesses. The effects still, it’s still just not that long enough to really understand. You know what, what the implications. It’s possible. I, I think that’s true with any, with any big policy change. Like it doesn’t happen overnight. I think that’s one thing that a lot of, a lot of economic models that, like, they’re, they’re very sensitive, right? Like as soon as a policy change happens, the models will kind of tell us something pretty dramatic in terms of adjustments. But this last year was a reminder, like when there’s, when there’s a big cost, there’s gonna be a lot of attempts to adjust around it to try to minimize that cost and then. It takes time, like in the real world, like the interactions are much more complex. You know, inventory lags all of the, like, it takes time to move its way through. So I think we’re not done with the pass through. I think we’ll probably still see more come to consumers, but businesses could decide to bear that cost. They, they could, you know, with profit margins. I mean some of, some of the inflationary environment in the pandemic did allow. There were very broad base increases in prices. You did see some companies be profitable from that because it was, there was a, you know, some of the costs were more targeted, but the, you know, the, the price increases were broad. So it could be a time where businesses see that, you know, consumers are more price sensitive now than they were in 21, 20 21, 20 22, so they’re not passing as much on it. Could be that that’s part of where. Like the cost businesses are dealing with that cost by maybe doing less hiring as opposed to passing it on to consumers. Uh, you know, they could be taking a hit with their profits. They, you know, so like, it doesn’t have to go all the way through to consumers. There are different levers that can be pulled. I do think we’ll still see some pass through in the, in probably the first half of this year, and that’s assuming that our whole tariff regime. Sit still, right? It looks like once again we might be, uh, increasing those tariffs, but, um, so yeah, I think it’s just tracing, you know, the tariffs through the system is really complicated. And one last thing I’ll say about the tariffs is they’re not just tariffs on goods that go to consumers. These tariffs have been broad enough that we’re also taring imported goods that are used by our manufacturers used for our, by our businesses in their production. So then it can take a really long time for that to end up with the, you know, the end customer could be a business to start with, and then it moves its way down. So I think these are just, you know, the costs are real. We can see the tariffs have been collected, the costs are there. We can see in the import data, there haven’t been import price data, there haven’t been a lot of adjustments by the foreign suppliers. So then it’s just a question of, we have these costs. Where did the cost go? I believe the last GEP was 4.3% and, uh, inflation was around 2.6, 2.7, or at least core. You’ve obviously, uh, worked at the Fed. Um, give us a sense of the situation that the Fed is trying to figure out here. Like what do they do with these numbers and, you know, all of the issues that surround them. The work at the Fed, I mean, it, it’s laser focused on the, the response, the mandates that the Fed has. So with maximum employment and price stability and with maximum employment, that’s not something that can be easily defined. It’s not like it’s a particular unemployment rate, it’s not a particular payroll number. But I mean, broadly speaking, it’s, you know, do, are, you know, the people who wanna work, are they working? In such a way that it’s not putting pressure on inflation, right? Like labor shortages that end up with wage increases that just, you know, end up with inflation. Like that would be a situation where the Fed would actually want to kind of help restrain some of the. Uh, employment growth. And we, we saw that in this cycle. I mean, the Fed raised rates a lot in 2022 and 2023. Uh, so that’s the maximum employment on the stable prices. The Fed has set a target of the 2%, uh, year over year PCE inflation. So a little different than the CPI inflation, but very much related. And, and it’s one, I mean, that’s, that’s the goal, right? And it, uh. So it starts with those two pieces and, and what’s been, I think what’s been challenging in say the last year as the Fed was, you know, trying to figure out what it was gonna do with interest rates was the fact that it, there was pressure on both sides of the mandate. Mm-hmm. Um, and not necessarily the, well, I mean, inflation itself has, was above the 2%. It continues to be above the 2%. Target has been. Since 2021. Now the Fed’s policy doesn’t have a look back, but I mean, they do worry that the longer inflation stays closer to three than two businesses. Consumers are gonna start to kind of embed three into their actions, their expectations. Then you kind of get stuck there. So like that, that both, you know, they were missing on the inflation mandate and there were, there were concerns that the, that we might see inflation get stuck above the mandate and the way you dislodge it if it gets stuck. Could end up risking a recession, right? So the Fed doesn’t want that to happen. So that’s a real concern. But then on the employment side, you know, we started out talking about the small rule, the rising unemployment rate. We’ve seen the unemployment rate rising. And then last year in particular, it wasn’t just the unemployment rate rising, we saw job creation just really take a leg down. Um. Some of that probably is less immigration population aging, so less supply of workers, which isn’t something the Fed would react to. ’cause that, I mean, if you don’t have as many people that wanna work, you don’t need to create as many jobs. But the unemployment rate was rising, so it’s clear, like there just wasn’t, there wasn’t enough job creation to keep up with, um, the workers who were there, uh, to work. And, and there was a concern that this could, could spiral out. Those small increased unemployment rate that, that very low level of job creation. And frankly, if you look at, I mean the, I mean, we have multiple months and probably more after revisions of declines in payroll employment. Mm-hmm. Like if you looked at the labor market data, you’d be like, aren’t we in a recession or like on the edge of one? Again, that’s not where we’re at, but it, it certainly gave that, that risk. Things could be slowing down. And, and the, the last piece that was really important in the Fed’s decisions was where, where’s the federal funds rate? Where are the interest rate, the policy interest rate they control? And it was still relatively high. For, for recent history, right. Not in the long history of the Fed, but mm-hmm. And so, like the Fed had raised, they’d raised interest rates quite aggressively to fight the inflation in 2022. They’d very gradually lowered it. Some was taken out in 2023 because made some pro, made quite a bit of progress on inflation in, or in 2024, they lowered the rates in 2025, the 75 basis points of cuts that the Fed did. It was out of concern. Of the labor market unraveling a risk, not a, not saying, hey, the labor market is unraveling, but saying the risk that the downside risk to employment are larger and more worrisome than the upside risk to inflation. So this inflation getting stuck, is that still the case as a going into 2026 here? So, you know, even, even last year we saw, we listened to Fed officials, there’s quite a bit of disagreement. Because it was a tough situation to read. There are some Fed officials that were more focused on inflation, some that were more focused on the employment side. Uh, and it really was just a matter of kind of reading the economy and trying to figure out this, a very unusual situation, like where, where was this headed? What did the Fed need to do? In the end, the consensus on the Fed was to do the rate cuts, kind of front load them. They talked a lot about it as insurance. They’re taking out insurance against the labor market deteriorating. And I think with that approach, in all likelihood, and there’s been certainly signaling of this, that when they meet at the end of January, it’ll, they’re unlikely to move again. That this is, this will be an opportunity to hold steady, be patient the Fed has, has taken out their restriction. So they don’t have the higher rates, so they’ve pulled rates down. We also know that early this year there’s various kinds of fiscal support that are coming online or tax cuts to households and to businesses that should give a little extra lift, uh, to the economy. So I think it’s a period of the Fed waiting to see what the effects of their policy changes are, seeing what the effects of the fiscal policy with the expectation this will be enough to stabilize the labor market. Even help get it back on track and really what the Fed would like. I mean, we’ll see what they get, but they’d really like the next cut to be a good news cut. Like inflation. Oh look, it’s moving back down again. We’re making clear progress back to 2%. I think that’s probably gonna take maybe even till the middle of this year to build that case. A strong case for the disinflation. Mm-hmm. But that’s, that’s what they would, would like to do. But they’re gonna keep an eye on the labor market. But nothing we’ve seen in the most recent data suggests that they gotta get moving like that. There’s some, you know, real pressure building. Um, in fact, the labor market looks a little bit better probably than when they met in December and inflation. Showing some signs of progress, but it, it’s pretty bumpy in terms of, there’s a lot of noise in the data at the moment. You mentioned, um, the Fed’s mandate and you know, certainly that’s something, um, that, uh, you know, that, that we know the Fed looks at these unemployment numbers that look at inflation. I’m curious though, that there’s, you know, there is this push and pull with the treasury. In particular, you know, looking at the amount of, of, of, of bonds that need to be refinanced, that kind of thing. I mean, presumably that’s one of the reasons why the Trump administration is pushing so hard, uh, on the Fed to reduce, um, you know, to reduce rates so that you know, this sovereign debt can be refinanced at a, something a little bit more palatable. How much of that actually. I know it’s not supposed to play a part in the Federal Reserve’s actions, but in reality is there, is there that kind of, you know, thinking that, you know, they have to, they, they may try to play ball a little bit with the, with the situation, with the debt. Yeah. There, the, the Fed is not playing ball right now with the administration. Uh, but, but there have been, there have been times in our past. So during World War II, there was an explicit cooperation between the Fed and the Treasury. The Fed kept interest rates low. Both the federal funds rates, so the short term interest rates, they also did, uh, some purchases of longer term to help keep longer term rates down. Right. So I mean, the, the Fed really, they, their policy was oriented exactly on this objective, keeping the borrowing cost of the US government low because it was financing the war effort. So, so there have been times where the Fed has cooperated with treasury. Now, when they came out of World War ii. What happened is, you know, treasury wants to keep interest rates low. This is good for, you know, the economy, good for growth, but it was, it really was creating a lot of inflationary pressures and it took until the early 1950s for the Fed to kind of regain its kind of operational independence from treasury and then go back to pursuing, you know, inflation as a key goal. And then also in the late seventies and maximum employment was added as an explicit goal. So we’re in a place now where. It’s employment, it’s inflation, it, there was quite, um, I mean, president Trump and some other officials have been, you know, very open about saying rates should be low to help with the deficit, with funding the gov. So like, it’s, it’s been in the discussion in the air. But that’s not, that’s not a mandate that Congress has given the Fed. That’s not what they’re pursuing. It does, you know, but things can change at the Fed. We’re gonna see a change in leadership this year with a new Fed chair. Um, the Fed always, I mean, Congress created the Federal Reserve. It’s changed its abilities, its responsibilities over time. I don’t wanna say that we’ll never get back to a place where the Fed thinks about. Its effect on the deficit. I mean, they’re watching it, they know, right? They’re tracking all these aspects of the economy. But in terms of what’s driving the Fed’s decisions about what the, the federal funds rate should be, that’s not part of the calculus right now. Yeah. Um, you know, another, just another question is for clarity. You know, the, the, um, officially right now there’s, there’s no quantitative easing. However, there is. Uh, you know, I’ve been reading, uh, about even, I think even today, there was a, a fair amount of liquidity, uh, being injected in by the Fed. Can you, for people who don’t understand the mechanics of this and what the difference in terminology is, can you explain to us maybe what the difference is between quantitative easing and what’s being done right now? So just as for context, where quantitative easing even came from. So if we go back to the global financial crisis in 2008, the Federal Reserve, in response to that recession, pulled the federal funds rate all the way to zero. Cut rates to zero And as sure many of us remember that that recession was a very deep and long recession. So, and the unemployment rate was, you know, 10% and inflation was not a problem. So the, the Fed would want in that environment to do more to support the economy. But when the federal funds rate is at zero, that’s, its, that has been its primary tool. Well, that’s, that’s. Stepped out. So then as a question of, well, what else could we do to help support the economy? And, and there, there were. Different possibilities. Uh, some European central banks looked at, you know, they actually did negative interest rates or tried to pull their policy rates, and that’s not what the US did. What was done was to do purchases of, uh, treasuries. Uh, there’s also been purchases of mortgage backed securities, and this is where the Fed is. I mean, and, and they’re creating reserves. So the fed, I guess, secretary, uh. Treasury doesn’t refer to it as magic money. Um, you know, they create reserves and then they’re going out and they’re buying tr so they’re pushing that liquidity, that demand into markets. And if you’re, if there’s a lot more demand for treasuries, well, the price of the treasuries will go up. The yield comes down. Interest rates go down. Yep. Interest rates go down. So they. They were, the Fed wanted to support the economy more. That was the tool that they used to do it. So when, when the Fed talks about quantitative easing, it’s not just the tool, the asset purchases, it’s also the intent, right? They wouldn’t do quantitative easing right now. ’cause if the Fed thought they really need to stimulate the economy more, they’ve still got like. More than three percentage points they could cut from the federal funds rate. Like if the issue were right now, we need to like get the economy going, they’re gonna like cut the funds rate and do it that way. They wouldn’t be pur like purchasing assets, purchasing treasuries to do that. But what what happened is between the global financial crisis, the Great recession, so all the asset purchases done then. There was some, some runoff of the balance sheet, but then again, in the pandemic there were a lot of asset purchases. Uh, the Fed has a really big balance sheet, and it has, uh, it, it kind of changes the way that the Fed can even just move around the federal funds rate. Like, I don’t wanna get too much into the, the technicals, but it’s, it’s just, you know, when the Fed says, well, we wanna lower the, the funds rate to 3.5%. In the old days, they could kind of do, you know, with the bank reserves and they could like, make these small purchases and it would, it would make that stick. Now with, there’s, uh, banks have a lot of reserves, so they’re not as responsive. And so just to kind of, there’s like the, the technical, the tools, the Fed has to just make it happen. In terms of operationally, it means that they have to do some purchases now and then they call their, I mean the new name they have for these are reserve management. Purchases. So it’s really about operations. It’s not about, but it does mean they’re purchasing assets. So if you’re just focused on like the Fed’s purchasing assets, they’re putting liquidity into the system. Yes, they are doing that, but it’s not with the intent to kind of push the economy to run harder. It’s just enough liquidity to keep. The federal funds rate stable at the level that they wanted to be at, to just make sure that all these operations are short in the very short term lending markets amongst banks, that it’s all kind of working as mm-hmm. As it should be. So it’s more about operations and it’s about stimulus policy. Right. A lot of our, um, a lot of our listeners are real estate owners, investors, and they’re, you know, they think about, um. Mortgage rates and that kind of thing. There was recently a, a pretty significant, well, I don’t know how significant it really was. I think it was about, was it maybe $250 billion worth of mortgage backed securities purchased by Fannie Mae. Um, that ca can you talk about the purpose of that and really the, you know, what kind of effect that would actually, we could actually expect from that. It’s certainly been, I mean it’s, it is clear. You know, we talked about one reason that the administration would want interest rates down. It’d be like financing the deficit. Right. Another reason that very much pulls into kind of the affordability debate is we want interest rates lower, one of them lower for consumers. Now the White House has put a lot of pressure on the Fed for them to lower rates even faster than they have. Has not played ball with that. But then the Fed has lowered its rates. The Feds rates are very short term rates, and the federal funds rate is like an overnight rate with between banks. Right. So it, and it has an effect on, you know. Credit card rates, short term rates, but it’s not one, it, it has an effect, but it’s really not like driving necessarily 30 year mortgage rates or you know, some of the longer term rates. There’s a lot of other factors that go into that, and so in this kind of, you know, push for lower mortgage rates. Pushing on the Fed is not the only lever to pull, right? The administration has other levers that they could potentially pull, um, in trying to influence mortgage rates. Now, there, I’d argue the administration’s tools here, like the, the $200 billion, Fannie and Freddie purchase that you mentioned. That really is about trying to reduce the spread. Between mortgages and treasuries. So in some ways it sounds similar, like, oh, fed and Franny, which are, you know, GSEs. So part, part of the, you know, government right now, at least they were privatized during the global financial crisis. You think, oh, they’re going out and purchasing this Sounds a lot like the Fed going out and purchasing. There are there, there’s some parallels, but we need to remember, Fannie and Freddie don’t create money. The Fed, when they start, when they start the process of their quantitative easing, they’re creating reserves like they’re actually creating liquidity and money supply. Fannie and Freddie have authorization to be able to make these purchases, but they’re not like the fed. They’re not creating reserves, but they can, so I don’t wanna think about them like bringing down the whole set of interest rates, but they can affect this spread between mortgages and say treasuries. Right? And so, because again, if you’re, if the. If the GSEs are going out, they’re purchasing mortgage backed securities, well that’s increasing demand for those, and that can push down the rates, that can like squeeze that spread. And, and while the announcement has been made, you know, I mean they’re, they’re in the early stages of putting that in place, but we even on the announcements, saw a response in financial markets and you’re seeing some movement down, uh, in mortgage rates now. It was. Pretty modest, right? And, and 200 billion while, you know, not nothing, uh, really pales in comparison to like the scale of say, the quantitative easing that the Fed did. Um, and there are probably other, but the, you know, the administration’s not done. It doesn’t necessarily have to be that Fannie and Freddie do more purchases. The the spread between mortgage rates and treasuries is pretty substantial. There’s other places where, you know, the fees that go into getting a mortgage are quite a bit larger than they were before the, the global financial crisis. So maybe they go in and try to chip away at the fees and, you know, so there’s, there’s different levers. And I fully expect, and I think we’re gonna get some announcements here again soon on the White Houses. Housing affordability agenda. So there may be other, other ways that they’re trying to, uh, influence, uh, the mortgage spreads. But that’s, that’s what that is all about. And it, it should have, and it looks like, you know, it’s having some effect in terms of bringing rates down, but it likely, it’d be modest, like in the 10 basis points, maybe 20 if they ramp up the program some. But like, it, you know, it’s, it, it, you know, every, every bit counts. But this is not a. Uh, this won’t be enough to, you know, move rates down, dramatic mortgage rates down dramatically, uh, when you, when you look at the economy. Um, and I, I, I think just, you know, one last question. I mean, I just in terms of, you know, the people listening to this are. They’re, they’re people, you know, with jobs and who are trying to invest their money, and they’re trying to, you know, build long-term wealth, but they’re, you know, everybody’s worried about what’s happening with the economy. What, what, what do you think, like, just as, um, um, you know, perspective for people to understand or try to have some framework for how to look at what’s going on in the economy. How they should judge it. Like what would you suggest, like just for mom and pop investors trying to, what is happening with the economy? I’m not an economist. What, what are the, what are the things that you think they should consider studying up on, looking into a little bit? One challenge for a lot of investors, I mean, frankly, it’s, it’s been a challenge that I try to deal with too. Uh, we’re, we’re in an environment where there’s just. There’s so much news coming out of DC uh, with the White House and policies and the Fed, and you know, I mean, like, there’s just, there’s a lot. The headlines are big. And like I talked about with the tariffs, we had like really big tariff announcements. The really scary numbers were, and then it like dialed back and then we pushed through it and it’s like, and it’s this remembering that, um. There’s always a tendency to have this idea that the, the president really runs the economy. I mean, that’s not just about this administration. That’s like a longstanding, you know, the president gets, uh, blame or credit for the economy when really, right. Like we have a over 33, $30 trillion economy, hundreds of millions of workers, tens of millions of businesses. Like this is not about one administration. And so we always need to be careful about. Putting too much weight on the policies coming out of dc. Uh, and you know, last year if you really just listened to all the, you know, we’re cutting immigration, we’re raising tariffs, we’re doing, you know, all, there’s a lot of uncertainty in Doge. Well then you might have missed, like, there’s a bunch of AI investment happening and we’ve got a lot of growth in the economy and while consumers are still pretty resilient, so you, it’s kind of like. Tuning down the volume, some coming out of Washington, especially the like every twist and turn. Uh, and then kind of focusing in on the fundamentals. I will say, you know, you don’t wanna turn down DC too far because we, we do have some like big picture events that could play out over many years. Right. So kind of keeping an eye on it, but for the long game. As opposed to reacting to every twist and turn, every policy announcement, because a lot of this clearly is more of a negotiation than it is like, we’re gonna actually do this. So, you know, as investors, you don’t wanna get whipped around by the latest headline, but you also can’t put your head in the sand. Like you gotta kind of try and find a way to pull the signal out of the noise. And it is really. It’s really hard. Yeah. Like this has been a challenging time and the, the US economy’s been doing things that are not typical. We talked about some of the things with the labor market and we are running some policy experiments that haven’t been run in a long time, so things could change pretty dramatically. But I think it’s just trying to absorb the information, not get too wound up about it, but like also keep an eye on like what’s good for long-term growth. Yeah. Because it’s good for long-term productivity. Thank you so much Dr. Sahm. It’s uh, it’s been a pleasure talking to you on, uh, wealth Formula Podcast today. Great. Thank you so much. You make a lot of money but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concept. Here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. It was Claudia Sahm. She is, uh, she’s a very, very smart lady. And, uh, just a reminder, if you have not done so, uh, I, I don’t frequently ask to do, do this, but, uh, make sure you give the show. Five stars and a positive review because that’s how we’re getting, you know, really high quality people like Claudia on the show, I’ve been around for a long time. It helps that the show is, you know, like over a decade old and all that stuff too. But, uh, anything you can do to support would be very helpful. And also one more reminder, uh, if you have not done so and you weren’t a credit investor, make sure you sign up for that investor club. At Wealth formula.com. That’s it for me. This week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is about Joffrey signing out. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheelwright and Ken m. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.