RECYCLING OLD LIE

Trump's new CIA chief releases old report accusing China of leaking Covid

Daniel Bellamy
Sun 26 January 2025 

Trump's new CIA chief releases old report accusing China of leaking Covid


The CIA now believes the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic most likely originated from a laboratory, according to an assessment released on Saturday. It points the finger at China, even while acknowledging that the spy agency has “low confidence” in its own conclusion.

The finding is not the result of any new intelligence, and the report was completed at the behest of the Biden administration and former CIA Director William Burns. It was declassified and released on Saturday on the orders of President Donald Trump's pick to lead the agency, John Ratcliffe, who was sworn in Thursday as director.

The nuanced finding suggests the agency believes the totality of evidence makes a lab origin more likely than a natural origin. But the agency's assessment assigns a low degree of confidence to this conclusion, suggesting the evidence is deficient, inconclusive or contradictory.

Earlier reports on the origins of COVID-19 have split over whether the coronavirus emerged from a Chinese lab, potentially by mistake, or whether it arose naturally. The new assessment is not likely to settle the debate. In fact, intelligence officials say it may never be resolved, due to a lack of cooperation from Chinese authorities.

The CIA "continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible,” the agency wrote in a statement about its new assessment.

Instead of new evidence, the conclusion was based on fresh analyses of intelligence about the spread of the virus, its scientific properties and the work and conditions of China's virology labs.

Lawmakers have pressured the US's spy agencies for more information about the origins of the virus, which led to lockdowns, economic upheaval and millions of deaths. It's a question with significant domestic and geopolitical implications as the world continues to grapple with the pandemic's legacy.

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on Saturday he was “pleased the CIA concluded in the final days of the Biden administration that the lab-leak theory is the most plausible explanation" and he commended Ratcliffe for declassifying the assessment.

“Now, the most important thing is to make China pay for unleashing a plague on the world,” Cotton said in a statement.

Chinese authorities have dismissed speculation about COVID's origins as unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China's U.S. embassy said the CIA report has no credibility.

“We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu said in a statement emailed to The Associated Press.

While the origin of the virus remains unknown, scientists think the most likely hypothesis is that it circulated in bats, like many coronaviruses, before infecting another species, probably racoon dogs, civet cats or bamboo rats. In turn, the infection spread to humans handling or butchering those animals at a market in Wuhan, where the first human cases appeared in late November 2019.

Some official investigations, however, have raised the the question of whether the virus escaped from a lab in Wuhan. Two years ago a report by the Energy Department concluded a lab leak was the most likely origin, though that report also expressed low confidence in the finding.

The same year then-FBI Director Christopher Wray said his agency believed the virus “most likely” spread after escaping from a lab.

The CIA believes COVID most likely originated from a lab but has low confidence in its own finding

DAVID KLEPPER
Sun 26 January 2025



 A view of the P4 lab inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology is seen after a visit by the World Health Organization team in Wuhan in China's Hubei province, Feb. 3, 2021. 

(AP Photo/Ng Han Guan, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The CIA now believes the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic most likely originated from a laboratory, according to an assessment that points the finger at China even while acknowledging that the spy agency has “low confidence” in its own conclusion.

The finding is not the result of any new intelligence, and the report released Saturday was completed at the behest of the Biden administration and former CIA Director William Burns. It was declassified and released Saturday on the orders of President Donald Trump's pick to lead the agency, John Ratcliffe, who was sworn in Thursday as director.

The nuanced finding suggests the agency believes the totality of evidence makes a lab origin more likely than a natural origin. But the agency's assessment assigns a low degree of confidence to this conclusion, suggesting the evidence is deficient, inconclusive or contradictory.

“I had the opportunity on my first day to make public an assessment that actually took place in the Biden administration. So it can’t be accused of being political,” Ratcliffe told Fox News' “Sunday Morning Futures.” He said the CIA "has assessed that the most likely cause of this pandemic that has wrought so much devastation around the world was because of a lab-related incident in Wuhan. And so we will continue to investigate that moving forward.''

Earlier reports on the origins of COVID-19 have split over whether the coronavirus emerged from a Chinese lab, potentially by mistake, or whether it arose naturally. The new assessment is not likely to settle the debate. In fact, intelligence officials say it may never be resolved, due to a lack of cooperation from Chinese authorities.

The CIA "continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible,” the agency wrote in a statement about its new assessment.

Instead of new evidence, the conclusion was based on fresh analyses of intelligence about the spread of the virus, its scientific properties and the work and conditions of China's virology labs.

Lawmakers have pressured America's spy agencies for more information about the origins of the virus, which led to lockdowns, economic upheaval and millions of deaths. It's a question with significant domestic and geopolitical implications as the world continues to grapple with the pandemic's legacy.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told “Fox News Sunday” it was important now “to make China pay for unleashing this plague on the world.” He mentioned imposing tariffs or passing legislation that would repeal China's permanent most favored nation status.

Chinese authorities have dismissed speculation about COVID's origins as unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China's U.S. embassy said the CIA report has no credibility.

“We firmly oppose the politicization and stigmatization of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu said in a statement emailed to The Associated Press.

While the origin of the virus remains unknown, scientists think the most likely hypothesis is that it circulated in bats, like many coronaviruses, before infecting another species, probably racoon dogs, civet cats or bamboo rats. In turn, the infection spread to humans handling or butchering those animals at a market in Wuhan, where the first human cases appeared in late November 2019.

Some official investigations, however, have raised the the question of whether the virus escaped from a lab in Wuhan. Two years ago a report by the Energy Department concluded a lab leak was the most likely origin, though that report

also expressed low confidence in the finding.

The same year then-FBI Director Christopher Wray said his agency believed the virus “most likely” spread after escaping from a lab.

liffe, who served as director of national intelligence during Trump's first term, has said he favors the lab leak scenario, too.

“The lab leak is the only theory supported by science, intelligence, and common sense,” Ratcliffe said in 2023.

The CIA said it will continue to evaluate any new information that could change its assessment.

GENETIC CODE RELEASED BY CHINA JAN. 2020 

HEGEMON'S  HUBRIS

Trump says he may consider rejoining World Health Organization

Sat 25 January 2025


FILE PHOTO: Medical aid shipment from WHO and UNHCR arrives in Beirut

By Nandita Bose and Kanishka Singh

LAS VEGAS (Reuters) - President Donald Trump said on Saturday he may consider rejoining the World Health Organization, days after ordering a U.S. exit from the global health agency over what he described as a mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic and other international health crises.

"Maybe we would consider doing it again, I don't know. Maybe we would. They would have to clean it up," Trump said at a rally in Las Vegas.

The U.S. is scheduled to leave the WHO on Jan. 22, 2026. Trump announced the move on Monday after he was sworn in for a second term in the White House.
ADVERTISEMENT


The U.S. is by far the biggest financial backer of the WHO, contributing around 18% of its overall funding. The WHO's most recent two-year budget, for 2024-2025, was $6.8 billion.

Trump told the crowd in Las Vegas he was unhappy that the U.S. paid more into the WHO than China, which has a much bigger population.

He added that he will ask Saudi Arabia to make an investment of about $1 trillion in the U.S., up from the $600 billion the Saudis have pledged to invest.

Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told Trump in the past week that the kingdom wants to put $600 billion into expanded investment and trade with the U.S. over the next four years.

(Reporting by Nandita Bose in Las Vegas and Kanishka Singh in Washington; Editing by Paul Simao)

Trump Zeroes in on Country to Dump Migrants From All Over

The Daily Beast
Sun 26 January 2025

President Donald Trump seems to have finally found a country that won’t rebuff his plan to send it hordes of undocumented immigrants who don’t hail from that nation.

The Trump administration is working on a plan with El Salvador that would allow the Latin American country to accept immigrants from the U.S. even if they are not El Salvadorian, according to CBS News. The plan would designate El Salvador as a “Safe Third Country” as part of the agreement, pushing the migrants to seek asylum there instead of the U.S.

The move would reinstate an agreement the two countries brokered during Trump’s first term, which never went into effect and was terminated by President Joe Biden. It would be the first such agreement struck under Trump’s second term, coming weeks after multiple countries rebuffed his attempt to negotiate similar deals. The U.S. currently has a “Safe Third Country” agreement with Canada.

The deal stems from a close relationship between Trump and Salvadorian President Nayib Bukele, who spoke last week about their quest to “stop together to stop illegal immigration and crack down on transnational gangs like Tren de Aragua,” a group Trump moved to declare a terrorist organization last week.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is also set to visit El Salvador next month as part of a trip through Latin America. The Trump administration has vowed to deport millions of undocumented immigrants across the U.S., and Trump signed multiple executive orders to that effect last week.

NBC News reported last month that Mexico and the Bahamas had rejected Trump’s request for the nations to accept migrants who didn’t come from there. “The Bahamas simply does not have the resources to accommodate such a request,” a spokesperson for its prime minister told NBC News. Mexico rejected a U.S. deportation flight last week.

The report said the Trump transition team had also reached out to Panama, Grenada, and Turks and Caicos to gauge their interests.

During the first Trump administration, the government instituted a policy where migrants would be deported to Guatemala without knowing where they were going. Multiple pro-immigrant rights groups sued the administration over the policy, though the lawsuits have not progressed.

PETTY

Milley portrait taken down from Pentagon

Brad Dress
Mon, January 20, 2025 


A portrait of retired Gen. Mark Milley, the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who has feuded in highly public spats with President Trump, was taken down in the Pentagon on Monday.

A spokesperson for the Pentagon confirmed the portrait was taken down but deferred comment to the White House.

A spokesperson for the White House national security council declined to comment on why the portrait was taken down.

The portrait, which had just been unveiled Jan. 10, hung in the Joint Chiefs hallway next to those of other former chairs.

The news of the portraits being taken down was first reported by several journalists who posted photographs on the social platform X.

Former President Biden, in his last few hours in the Oval Office on Monday, issued preemptive pardons to Milley and several other people. Biden said the pardons were not an admittance of guilt but were issued for their service.

The pardons come as Trump vowed on the campaign trail to take revenge against his enemies, with Milley being one of his most high-profile foes.

Milley was tapped to lead the Joint Chiefs by Trump in 2019 but the two clashed over several national security issues. And reports of Milley’s resistance that aired in the media after Trump left office in 2021 have escalated the public feud.

Trump once suggested that Milley, who retired from service in 2023, deserved to be executed, and Milley has called Trump a fascist.

Trump in a Monday speech following his swearing in as the 47th president spoke in the Emancipation Hall and decried the Biden pardons, calling out Milley by name.

Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

ROFLMAO

Trump says we don't need Canadian-built cars. A new report says that could be a mistake.

Pras Subramanian · Senior Reporter

Yahoo Finance
Updated Sat, January 25, 2025


At the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday, President Donald Trump boomed, “Canada has been very tough to deal with over the years. We don't need them to make our cars, and they make a lot of them.”

But Trump’s tough talk and proposed tariffs on Canada would not only hurt one of America’s top trade partners but would also hurt US automakers and regular Americans shopping for a new car, a new report said.

In “Setting the Record Straight on Canada-US Trade,” Toronto-based TD Economics outlined some of the pain points a 25% tariff on Canadian-made autos and other goods would have on both sides of the border.

“High integration” of the auto sector, with car parts and finished goods crossing both the Canadian and Mexican borders, means tariffs would exact a high cost and the industry would suffer the “deepest negative impacts” from the tariffs, the report stated.

Read more: What are tariffs, and how do they affect you?

People follow a virtual speech of U.S. president Donald Trump at the Annual Meeting of World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Thursday, Jan. 23, 2025. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber) · 

Currently, Canada produces around 10% of cars sold in the US (approximately 225,000 units), with Mexico supplying close to 20%. Interestingly, the US actually produces more cars for Canadian buyers than the other way around, with Canada’s trade administration estimating that 1.34 million US-built cars were bought by Canadians in 2023.

TD also noted that Canada has the second-smallest trade deficit with the US, behind only France, highlighting the flow of products between the countries.

However, in order to onshore that 10% of cars made in Canada to US factories, as Trump would like, TD projects that US auto plants would need to add production of around 225,000 units to existing plants, meaning roughly six new plants would be required on US soil. Conservative estimates for building a single auto factory in the US would be in the billions, not including the variable costs of operating the factory itself once online.

And this portion of the tariff impact doesn’t include the financial pain on Main Street and the consumer.

“By some estimates, average US retail car prices could rise by roughly $3,000, though that would depend on retaliation by both trading partners [Canada and Mexico],” the report said. “In the event of strong counteractions, severe trade dislocations and significant economic consequences would occur, leading to collapsing demand in all three countries.”

To bring a “full-onshoring” of North American production to the US would likely be cost-prohibitive. “Full-onshoring of all non-U.S. production would require a 75% boost in U.S. production and more than $50 billion in new investment,” the report said.

Windsor, ONT - July, 12 2024: Stellantis Windsor assembly plant. Built in 1928, Stellantis builds plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV), AWD and ICE models here

. · jetcityimage via Getty Images

The report didn't mention another important factor: the impact of tariffs on auto parts and components that flow from Canada and Mexico to the US and back.

TD said this would result in US automakers having to onshore the production of components and import parts from other countries, both of which would entail higher costs.

Aluminum producer Alcoa said on Wednesday that tariffs on imports of Canadian aluminum would create a “massive tariff dislocation,” leading to higher aluminum prices, which would ultimately trickle down to consumers. Alcoa produces 900,000 metric tons of aluminum in Canada, with a majority going to the US.

Aluminum is an important component in auto parts such as suspension and engine castings, as well as in the aerospace sector.

Pras Subramanian is a reporter for Yahoo Finance. 

 PUTIN MINI ME

Trump says he could send US special operators after Mexican drug cartels. It could make things a lot worse.

Kelsey Baker
Sat, January 25, 2025 


Trump and others have floated sending US special operations forces to Mexico to combat cartels.


Experts told Business Insider that intervention in Mexico could create instability.


SOF missions like foreign internal defense could be prudent, but only to augment nonmilitary approaches.

Trump world is kicking around the idea of sending special operations forces into Mexico to combat drug cartels. There's a risk these operations could make things worse, experts said.

While designating Mexican cartels as "foreign terrorist organizations" on Monday, President Donald Trump was asked by reporters whether he would consider sending US special operations personnel to Mexico.

"Could happen," the president said, noting that "stranger things have happened."

Experts on the cartels and warfare said that sending any military troops into Mexico risks stirring instability, which could then spill over the border into US territory.

"I don't think that the American people have the stomach for what's going to happen if we start messing around down there," a senior active-duty special operator told Business Insider, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to the media.

"Just throwing any military mechanism at this problem for the purpose of just killing cartel leaders is not going to change anything," he said. "It's only going to make things worse."

US Army Green Berets prepare to breach and enter a building as part of Close Quarter Battle training.US Army/Staff Sgt. Thomas Mort

Trump floated the idea of military intervention in Mexico in his first term, but his team now appears to be considering the idea more seriously.

"How much should we invade Mexico?" a transition team member told Rolling Stone in November 2024 for a report on Trump's musings about combating cartels in Mexico. "That is the question."

Trump's new national security advisor, Mike Waltz, a former Green Beret, has pushed the idea of using special operators. And Trump's "border czar," Tom Homan, has said that special operations forces could be used to take the cartels out, or "take them off the face of the Earth."

Direct action raids — hard-hitting missions US special operations is known for and which Trump appears inclined to pursue — on Mexican soil would bring disastrous consequences, especially if conducted without an invitation from Mexico, the operator and other experts BI spoke with warned. But other, less kinetic missions, like training foreign troops or improving foreign internal defense, could prove worthwhile, they said.

Such missions have long been the bread and butter of forces like the Army's Green Berets. With Trump's formal designation of cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, those kinds of missions could augment other government efforts to more effectively stem the flow of drugs into the US, sources told BI.
An idea that keeps coming up

The idea of using special operators to combat cartels in Mexico has gained traction among leading Republicans, particularly military veterans. Before Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a former naval officer, ended his bid for the White House, he told CNN that if elected president, he would deploy US special operations forces into Mexico "on day one."

In 2023, Waltz, then a congressional representative from Florida, and Dan Crenshaw, a Texas congressman and former Navy SEAL, introduced new Authorization of Military Force legislation aimed at Mexican cartels. Such legislation is notably not often quickly reversed — both of the AUMFs that allowed the Global War on Terror to balloon in scope are still in place.

Wanting to send special operations forces into Mexico is understandable, said Bruce Hoffman, a senior fellow for counterterrorism and homeland security at the Council on Foreign Relations. Other measures have failed to curb the flow of drugs into the US, though some of the efforts at home appear to be working, as deaths from fentanyl overdoses are finally on the decline.

A member of US Naval Special Warfare Task Unit Europe (NSWTU-E) provides cover during a raid with foreign special operations forces.U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. Patrik Orcutt

But special operations is much smaller than conventional military forces, he said, and isn't designed to solve every problem that might warrant military intervention.

"Despite the public imagination, SOF is not on a regular basis engaged in the kinds of operations that people often imagine, that are depicted in Hollywood," Hoffman said.

"They're engaged in less glamorous things like training indigenous forces, gathering intelligence, psychological operations, [and] civil affairs," he said.

Bolstering Mexico's internal defenses could be a worthwhile endeavor, the active-duty special operator told BI, but prioritizing military intervention over non-violent approaches, like empowering the State and Treasury departments to apply pressure on the financial institutions used by cartels, would be foolhardy.
The dangers of getting it wrong

Violence against cartels could trigger a humanitarian crisis and spur more immigration to the US, said Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera, a professor at George Mason University who has extensively studied cartels.

Mexican civilians caught in the crossfire would likely flee communities, which could create a refugee crisis, she said. "They are going to apply for asylum in a desperate situation," she said, calling the idea of immediate military intervention illogical.

It's not as simple as killing top leaders either. Complicating the grip cartels have on Mexican society is their seemingly infinite complexity, she said.

"We're not talking about businesses that operate vertically, like El Chapo and El Mayo, and all these guys that provide orders to everyone," she said, referring to two infamous drug kingpins. Most cartels operate with less centralized command structures and are splintered into smaller cells. Some of these focus on drug movements and production, while others focus on kidnapping, extortion, and human smuggling.

If the goal is to limit the reach of the cartels and the violence and the destruction that comes with them, "you are going to get the exact opposite effect" if you start killing leaders, said Carolyn Gallaher, a professor at American University who studies cartels, in an interview with BI.

Top leaders can be easily replaced by others zealously vying for power, creating an even more complex battlefield for American troops and Mexican civilians.

"When you start fighting an army that is not behaving like a regular military, you are basically in the middle of civilian life," Gallaher said. "And you don't have an accurate way to differentiate between civilian and soldier."

Coalition and Anti-Terror Forces fire mortar rounds on an overseas live-fire range.US Army/Sgt. Brandon White

Doug Livermore, vice president of the Special Operations Association of America and a senior Green Beret officer in the National Guard who has written about narcoterrorism, said special operations is just one tool in the vast US government toolbox, and can't be the main effort.

"A military approach by itself will not be sufficient. It will not solve the problem," Livermore told BI.

He suggested a broader approach involving US special operations-provided intelligence or efforts to bolster internal security. However, Livermore said rampant corruption in Mexico's government agencies could complicate these efforts.

He also recommended a closer examination and targeting of China's role in the US drug crisis, pointing to the supply of chemical and financial support to cartels.

It's unclear what endstates the Trump administration desires to achieve to define success, said the SOF operator. Lacking such parameters could lead to another quagmire. It seems likely, however, that any effective operation to dismantle them will take years, he said.

"It's not done in a short amount of time; it takes consistent effort and partnership," the operator said. "It's going to take a generation or two; it's not going to be done in four years."

 Business Insider

FAKE CLAIM

Putin echoes Trump's claim that conflict in Ukraine could have been avoided had he been in office

VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV
Updated Fri, January 24, 2025 

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Lomonosov Moscow State University in Moscow, Russia, Friday, Jan. 24, 2025. 

(Ramil Sitdikov, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

MOSCOW (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday echoed U.S. President Donald Trump's claim the conflict in Ukraine could have been prevented had he been in the White House in 2022. He also said Moscow is ready for talks with the U.S. on a broad range of issues.

In an interview with Russian state television, Putin praised Trump as a “clever and pragmatic man” who is focused on U.S. interests.

“We always had a business-like, pragmatic but also trusting relationship with the current U.S. president,” Putin said. “I couldn't disagree with him that if he had been president, if they hadn't stolen victory from him in 2020, the crisis that emerged in Ukraine in 2022 could have been avoided."

Putin's statement was his bluntest endorsement yet of Trump's refusal to accept his defeat in the 2020 election.

Trump also has said repeatedly he wouldn't have allowed the conflict to start if he had been in office, even though he was president as fighting grew in the east of the country between Kyiv's forces and separatists aligned with Moscow, ahead of Putin sending in tens of thousands of troops in 2022.

On Thursday, Trump told Fox News that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should have made a deal with Putin to avoid the conflict.

Putin emphasized Friday that he's open to talks but pointed to Zelenskyy's 2022 decision to rule out negotiations with Moscow.

“How is it possible to conduct talks if they are banned?” Putin said. “If the talks start in the existing legal framework, they would be illegitimate and the results of those talks could also be declared illegitimate.”

He also said the U.S. and Russia have many other items on their agenda, including nuclear arms control and economic issues.

“We can have quite a lot of points of contact with the current administration and search for solutions to key issues of today,” Putin said.

He said the sanctions against Russia introduced during Trump's first term and under Joe Biden's administration had hurt U.S. interests, undermining the dollar's role in global financial system.

Putin described Trump as "not only clever, but a pragmatic man," adding. “I find it hard to imagine that he would make decisions that would hurt the American economy.”

“We'd better meet and have a calm conversation on all issues of interest to both the United States and Russia based on today's realities,” Putin said.

He noted that as top oil producers and major industrial powers, Russia and the U.S. aren't interested in global oil prices being either too low or too high. “We have things to talk about,” Putin said.

Speaking by video from the White House to the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Thursday, Trump said the OPEC+ alliance of oil exporting countries shares responsibility for the nearly 3-year-old conflict in Ukraine because it has kept oil prices too high.

“If the price came down, the Russia-Ukraine war would end immediately,” he said. Energy sales form a large part of Russia's earnings.

Asked about Trump's comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov affirmed Moscow's view that the conflict was triggered by the West's refusal to take into account Russian security interests.

“The conflict doesn't depend on oil prices,” Peskov said in a call with reporters. “The conflict is ongoing because of the threat to Russia’s national security, the threat to Russians living on those territories and the refusal by the Americans and the Europeans to listen to Russia’s security concerns. It’s not linked to oil prices.”

Peskov's comments echoed Putin’s statements that he had to send troops into Ukraine to fend off a threat to Russia’s security resulting from plans for Ukraine to join NATO and to protect Russian speakers living there. Ukraine and the West have denounced Moscow’s action as an unprovoked act of aggression.

On Wednesday, Trump threatened to impose stiff tariffs and sanctions on Russia if an agreement isn’t reached to end the fighting in Ukraine.

Peskov said the Kremlin was closely following Trump's statements and noted he imposed a slew of sanctions in his first term. He said Moscow “remains ready for an equal dialogue, for a mutually respectful dialogue.”

“This dialogue took place between the two presidents during Trump’s first presidency. And we are waiting for signals that we have not received yet,” Peskov said.

UK Approves Europe's Largest AI Data Centre

By City A.M - Jan 24, 2025

Hertsmere Borough Council has approved the construction of a £3.75 billion AI data centre near the M25, which will be one of the largest in Europe.

The data centre is expected to create thousands of jobs and boost the UK's digital economy, aligning with the government's AI action plan.

Despite being located on green belt land, the project was approved due to its limited impact on the environment and significant economic benefits.


Plans for Europe’s largest cloud and artificial intelligence (AI) centre near the M25 in Hertfordshire have been approved, in wake of the UK launching its so-called ‘action plan’.

The state of art facility will be built near the Elstree substation, 30 minutes from central London, and will span up to two million square feet, carrying a projected £3.75bn in construction costs.

Once completed, it will be one of the largest data centres in Europe, with the potential to serve major tech giants like Google, Amazon or Microsoft.

The approval was granted by the Hertsmere borough council on Thursday evening, just a week after the government launched its AI opportunities action plan.

The newly approved centre will play a key role in meting the growing demand for cloud capacity and AI technologies, aligning with Starmer’s plans for robust AI infrastructure in the UK.

Last Monday, Starmer said: “The AI industry needs a Government that is on their side, one that won’t slip back and let opportunities slip through its fingers.

“And in a world of fierce competition, we cannot stand by. We must move fast and take action to win the global race.”

Despite being located within the green belt, the site, which is currently agricultural land, has been considered suitable for development due to its limited contribution to green belt purposes.
From green belt to grey belt?

Officers recommended that it be reclassified as a “grey belt” for the project, according to Harrow Online.

Once operational, the data centre is expected to generate significant economic benefits, including £21.4m in annual business rates, and an estimated £1.1bn in gross value added per year.

It will also reportedly created 500 construction jobs, 200 permanent site roles, and over 13,000 indirect positions, with a significant portion of those based in the South East.M25 corridor set to host Europe’s largest cloud and AI data centre

The council announced that there will be additional benefits to local infrastructure, such as £2m worth of improvements to bus routes, expanded cycle schemes, and better road crossings and footpaths.

The project is also committed to maintaining 54 per cent of its 85 acres as green space, to achieve a 10 per cent net biodiversity gain.

It will include a power reservation from national grid, positioning it close to key fibre optic routes and zones of regional availability.

A spokesperson for the project said: “This approval is a huge step forward, both for Hertsmere and the UK’s digital economy. The data centre will bring significant benefits, included skilled jobs, economix growth, and enhanced transport links.”

The project was widely discussed last September when the government reclassified data centres as critical national infrastructure.

Minister for telecoms Sir Chris Bryant praised the approval, adding: “Data centres are the backbone of our digital infrastructure. This project aligns perfectly with the Government’s AI opportunities action plan, supporting economic growth and skilled job creation across the South East”.

Councillor Jeremy Newmark, leader of the borough council, also hailed the project as “momentous”.

He said: “This development reinforces Hertsmere’s reputation as a prime location for business and technology. The economic and technological benefits will serve the community for generations, while also complementing our thriving local film and TV industry”.

By City AM

Canada’s economic backdrop is ‘improving’ even as tariffs loom: economist

By Jordan Fleguel

January 23, 2025

'Cautious optimism': RBC economist on Canada's outlook ahead of BoC decision

Following a positively received tax holiday and lowering inflation rate, RBC economist Claire Fan explains why she sees Canada's financial outlook as 'cautious

As Canada prepares for a potential trade war with its southern neighbour over the threat of sweeping tariffs by U.S. President Donald Trump, an economist with RBC says Canada’s domestic economic backdrop is improving.

Claire Fan told BNN Bloomberg in a Thursday interview that as of the fourth quarter of last year, Canadian businesses have been feeling a sense of “cautious optimism” due in large part to recent interest rate cuts.

“Rate cuts from the Bank of Canada, larger ones towards the end of last year, continue to trickle through to support economic activity, making it easier for Canadian households to pay their mortgages… (and) for Canadian businesses to borrow and to invest,” she said.

“That easing on monetary policy is going to continue – and that’s what we’re expecting the Bank of Canada to do next week as well: to continue to cut rates to support the economy. So, as that starts to happen a bit more in 2025, the domestic backdrop is really improving.”

Fan’s comments came after Statistics Canada released retail sales data from the fourth quarter of 2024 on Thursday.

The agency said Canadians spent about the same at stores in November as they did in October, but a flash estimate of December retail sales suggests a significant rebound during that month.

Fan said that while the flat reading in November may look underwhelming at first glance, it’s likely that many Canadians opted to push back their holiday spending until after the federal GST holiday came into effect in December.

“There was some amount of nudging holiday shopping towards later in December because of (the GST holiday) announced on Nov. 21, and that was kind of the day that we actually did see, very interestingly, spending starting to tail off a little bit more,” she said.

“But then the bounce-back was pretty substantial actually in December… so it kind of just tells us consumers were just waiting for the tax holiday as opposed to just softening spending trends that are persisting.”

StatCan said retail sales totalled $67.6 billion in November, and its preliminary estimate suggests spending grew by 1.6 per cent in December, which would be the largest monthly gain in two years.

Fan said that while these numbers support the view that the economic outlook for Canada looks “brighter” in 2025, it’s being offset somewhat by Trump’s threat to place 25 per cent across-the-board tariffs on Canadian goods entering the U.S. as soon as next week.

“The top concern these days remains the tariff uncertainties. It did seem like we got a very brief reprieve on the day of Trump’s inauguration but there’s obviously more threats that are floating around,” she said.

“There’s a huge amount of uncertainty as to what shape or form these tariffs can really take on, but it’s probably already to a certain degree dampening business investment decisions just because of, again, the uncertainties.”

With that uncertainty in mind, Fan said her team at RBC has a “plain and simple” forecast for the Bank of Canada ahead of its next scheduled interest rate decision on Wednesday.

“We expect the Bank of Canada will keep supporting the economy essentially by cutting interest rates very steadily at a 25-basis-point per rate cut, per meeting pace for the first five meetings of this year,” she said.


Fan explained that if that forecast proves accurate, the central bank’s overnight rate would reach two per cent by the end of July, just below the bank’s neutral range of 2.25 per cent to 3.25 per cent.

“So, it would be technically in the stimulative territory,” she said, “meaning that at that level, interest rates are supposed to be stimulating economic activities, and that’s just what we think the current backdrop is needing.”

With files from The Canadian Press

Canadian CEOs lag global peers in AI adoption, climate action: survey

By Jordan Fleguel

January 24, 2025

As an increasing number of businesses across the globe integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into their operations, a recent survey found Canadian executives are lagging their global peers in embracing the new technology.

International professional services firm PwC Ltd. released its annual Global CEO Survey on Wednesday, which polled thousands of chief executives globally last year, including 167 from Canada.

It found that 79 per cent of Canadian CEOs are planning to adopt AI in the next 12 months, compared to 87 per cent of global CEOs.

“Canadian CEOs also lag in integrating AI into strategies, operations, and workforce development,” PwC said in a report released Wednesday, adding that Canadian companies are seeing a gap in AI outcomes.

“While 54 per cent of CEOs last year expected improved employee efficiency from generative AI, only 45 per cent saw it. Similarly, anticipated profitability increases materialized for only 20 per cent versus a projected 29 per cent.”

Nicolas Marcoux, CEO of PwC Canada, said in the report that while many Canadian companies recognize the potential of AI, “they have yet to see the impact of it on the bottom line.”

“Integrating AI organization-wide, prioritizing upskilling and transparently addressing job evolution are crucial for building trust, maximizing AI’s potential and boosting productivity,” he said.

CEOs ‘optimistic’ about growth

In the survey, PwC also asked Canadian CEOs about their economic outlook for the coming year, finding that 55 per cent expect global economic growth to improve, up from 31 per cent in the previous year’s study.

Domestic growth expectations were also higher at 42 per cent compared to 25 per cent the previous year.

“While Canadian CEOs are more optimistic about economic growth than they were last year, they recognize the need to embrace AI and new technologies, invest in new sectors and reinvent their businesses,” Marcoux said in the report.

“Despite the uncertainty around potential economic measures that could come into effect with the new U.S. administration, Canadian CEOs remain remarkably resilient and are preparing to take on the challenges ahead.”

U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to impose 25 per cent tariffs on all Canadian exports entering the U.S. as soon as next week.

Business reinvention

The study also found that a growing number of Canadian CEOs – 35 per cent compared to 32 per cent in last year’s study – believe their business, as currently constructed, may not be viable in 10 years.


“The good news is that Canadian CEOs are taking action to reinvent their business. 60 per cent of Canadian CEOs (64 per cent globally) have taken at least one significant action to change how their organization creates, delivers, and captures value,” the report said.

“More Canadian CEOs than those surveyed globally (58 per cent versus 54 per cent) are planning acquisitions in the next three years to access new capabilities and talent.”

PwC said the study also found that the majority of Canadian CEOs have recently taken climate action to create more value for their businesses, but they still lag their global peers.

“Canadian CEOs are harnessing emerging opportunities from decarbonization to create value. Almost three quarters (72 per cent) have initiated climate-related investments in the last 12 months,” the report said.

“This is less than global CEOs (81 per cent), which may reflect how some Canadian CEOs aren’t seeing the upside of climate action.”
Methodology

PwC surveyed 4,701 CEOs across 105 countries and territories from Oct. 1, 2024, through Nov. 8, 2024.

The global and regional figures are weighted proportionally to country nominal GDP. The industry and country-level figures are based on unweighted data from the full sample of 4,701 CEOs.