Posted originally on CTH on January 20, 2026 | Sundance
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is in Davos ahead of President Trump’s visit on Wednesday and Thursday. Secretary Bessent was asked by the assembled media about current administration policy toward Greenland. WATCH:
What most people don’t understand about the strategically worded letter to Norway’s leftist Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, is how President Trump has just framed Støre as the defacto head of Brussels, representing the interests of the EU toward the framework of Greenland.
It’s not about the Nobel Peace Prize; it’s something far bigger. President Trump did not initiate contact with PM Støre; the contact was first made by Støre calling President Trump to notify him that their position was to defend Greenland against any threat from a non-NATO nation. President Trump asked how Norway was going to secure that pledge and Støre had no response.
Trump is correct; we cannot abdicate our own security to the promises of other nations. This perspective not only applies toward the USA but also applies toward the EU and is the entire reason why Trump has told NATO they need to be able to defend themselves.
Norway said it cannot defend itself from Russian threats and needs the security of the U.S. Accepting this statement Trump rightly asks: if you cannot defend yourself then how can you possibly defend Greenland. Støre had no reply. President Trump is unwilling to accept platitudes and statements in lieu of structural reality.
Prime Minister Støre previously said, “Norway’s position is firm: Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Norway fully supports the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark. There is broad agreement in NATO on the need to strengthen security in the Arctic, including in Greenland.”
In context President Trump’s position makes a great deal of pragmatic sense.
President Trump will not abdicate vital USA strategic security on the hope that NATO will defend our interests if needed. In fact, the quagmire and inability of Europe to defend a European country like Ukraine proves the pragmatic point. If Europe cannot organize strategic defense of Ukraine, then why the heck would Trump believe Europe would organize the strategic defense of Greenland.
Denmark cannot protect itself from China and/or Russia. Why would the United States believe Denmark could protect Greenland?
Posted originally on CTH on January 19, 2026 | Sundance
In a stunning and rapid strategy to keep the globalists from realizing what he is assembling, it is being reported that President Trump wants the Gaza Board of Peace constitution and remittance agreement signed in Davos. However, as the United Nations, European leaders and traditional globalists who comprise the WEF assembly begin to realize what Trump is putting together, they are getting triggered.
“Hey boss, they’re catching on. Better hurry up”
In essence, as people of self-appointed political importance are starting to realize, President Trump is assembling an entirely new structure for global partnerships that will likely end up with the functional obsolesce of the United Nations. Trump is selecting world leaders through the invite to a global board of peace; Gaza merely represents the initial venue.
One of the key aspects is the new global assembly will each pay their own way. No free riders this time. You want to sit at the big table, join the big club of sovereignty, assemble with a mutually respectful team of action, then pay the entrance fee to attend.
Surprise! [Remember the “Happy Trump” pin?]
(Bloomberg) — US President Donald Trump’s proposed Board of Peace has got off to a rough start: questioned by Europe, criticized by Israel and celebrated by friends of the Kremlin.
France’s Emmanuel Macron, for one, has come right out of the gate to decline an invitation that was also extended to strongmen such as Belarus’s autocratic leader Alexander Lukashenko. Several liberal democracies are squirming, uncertain how to respond and not wanting to offend Trump.
They don’t have long to decide.
Trump wants the full constitution and remit of the committee signed in Davos on Thursday, according to people familiar with the matter. But some elements of the small print have left invitees wondering whether to accept.
Trump is demanding that nations pay $1 billion for permanent membership of the board, Bloomberg reported, a condition since confirmed by the White House. That’s blindsided world leaders and left many bewildered, according to people familiar with the matter.
Potential members of the board — conceived last year as a Trump-headed body to oversee the redevelopment of post-war Gaza — began to filter out over the weekend. Invitees include world leaders from Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Much of the concern centers on the wording of the peace board’s charter, seen by Bloomberg, which appears to place its ultimate decision-making power with Trump. That raises many questions — not least over where the payments for long-term membership would go, the people said.
The State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
European allies are working to modify the terms and coordinate a response, people familiar with the matter said, and are seeking to persuade Arab nations to also lobby Trump for changes.
That response encapsulates much of Europe’s approach to Trump’s second term: play for time, be seen to engage, try to talk him down. The conversations are particularly challenging as they come at a sensitive moment in negotiations over Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine and with Trump threatening to take Greenland, one of the people said. (read more)
“He can’t. He, he, wouldn’t” – “Oh yes, he bloody well can, and he bloody well is.” – “In case you haven’t noticed, he’s not asking for permission.”
And….
Wait for it….
Who/Where/What is the first voice to rise against this global alliance for peace?
“So far, only Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly pushed back against the proposal. While he’s in favor of the Board of Peace as a concept, his office said the make-up of a separate Gaza committee serving under the board, was “not coordinated with Israel and runs contrary to its policy,” after officials from Qatar and Turkey were included.”
Wait, so Israel is not happy…. Not just about Gaza, but about, well, everything this new structure could possibly mean.
Meanwhile, “Argentina’s Javier Milei confirmed he’ll become a founding member, and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni has pitched herself as a mediator who is “ready to do our part.””
Can you see it now?
Leftist/Globalist United Nations imperialism is diminished. While a nationalist, respectful sovereign alliance rises.
Posted originally on CTH on January 18, 2026 | Sundance
Last week President Donald Trump officially announced the members of the Gaza Board of Peace; an organization headed by President Trump and tasked to oversee the second phase of his plan to end the Israeli conflict in Gaza, specifically the reconstruction and disarmament of Gaza and Hamas respectively. [SEE HERE]
The members of the “Board of Peace,” chaired by Trump himself, includes Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Emissary Steve Witkoff; Jared Kushner; former British Prime Minister Tony Blair; an American-Jewish billionaire named Mark Rowan; World Bank President Ajay Banga; and Deputy National Security Advisor of the United States, Robert Gabriel. President/Chairman Donald Trump has also appointed Aryeh Lightstone and Josh Gruenbaum as senior advisors to the Board of Peace.
At the same time, President Trump announced another executive body that would operate under the Peace Council to assist with the facilitation of a new Palestinian government, the “Gaza Executive Board.” This structure is intended to manage day to day events on the ground instead of a Hamas loyalist govt. The appointees to the executive board have upset the Netanyahu government of Israel.
According to the White House announcement, the Gaza Executive Board will include: Witkoff; Kushner; Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan; senior Qatari official Ali al-Thawadi; Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad; Tony Blair; billionaire Mark Rowan; UAE Minister Reem Al Hashimi; former Bulgarian Foreign and Defense Minister Nickolay Mladenov, who also served as the UN envoy for the Middle East peace process; U.N Representative Sigrid Kagg, and Israeli-Cypriot businessman Yakir Gabbay, who specializes in real estate, technology and international investments.
Additionally, to establish security, preserve peace, and establish a durable terror-free environment, Major General Jasper Jeffers has been appointed Commander of the International Stabilization Force (ISF), where he will lead security operations, support comprehensive demilitarization, and enable the safe delivery of humanitarian aid and reconstruction materials. [link]
According to Israeli media Netanyahu is not happy, and planning to protest the Turkish, Qatari and UAE appointments to Marco Rubio (not Trump):
“A very unusual statement by the prime minister against the US president, following the publication of the members of the “Executive Committee for Gaza” – which includes, among other things, the Turkish foreign minister and a senior Qatari official. “The announcement of the panel was not coordinated with Israel and is contrary to its policy,” the Prime Minister’s Office said.
“The announcement of the composition of Gaza’s Executive Committee, which is subordinate to the peace conference, was not coordinated with Israel and is contrary to its policy,” the Prime Minister’s Office said, adding that “the prime minister has instructed Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar to contact US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on this matter.” (more)
Within the appointments for the executive board, the use of Turkey, Qatar and UAE officials for the governance and reconstruction of Gaza explains the recent parsing of the Muslim Brotherhood chapters as terrorist enablers. When Secretary Rubio made the terrorist designation announcement, the Turkish and Qatari Muslim Brotherhood chapters were notably absent. With the Gaza initiative ongoing, now we see coordinated pragmatism at work.
Rubio chose to focus on Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon to target the Muslim Brotherhood. As we noted, “The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood were chased out of the country by President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi over a decade ago. The Jordanian chapter is similarly aligned and was previously targeted by King Abdullah. The Lebanese faction is not as well known, but their support for Hamas is well understood.” {Go Deep}
A few things are obvious.
First, President Trump and Secretary Rubio knew in advance they were going to need the strong influences of Qatar and Turkey if they were going to stabilize the interim Gaza reconstruction governing system. Secondly, both Trump and Rubio knew Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wouldn’t like that; however, pragmatically Trump and Rubio are doing what is in the best interest of the region as a whole, not being narrowly focused on Israel. Additionally, these appointments have upset the Israel-first influencer group in the U.S.
President Trump is restructuring mid-east stability without the need for direct U.S. intervention. Instead, under President Trump’s approach conflict resolution is the responsibility of the regional stakeholders with strong support from President Trump. It is a similar outlook conveyed to Europe about needing to be responsible for their own defense and security solutions while the USA role is supportive in nature.
In this approach the sharp tendrils of U.S. influence start to be untangled, and the national security focus returns to the USA domestically. Mutually beneficial national sovereignty replaces toxic and unending globalist intervention. This is a similar worldview that President Trump also takes toward trade agreements.
Multilateral trade agreements like the Transpacific Trade Partnership (TPP) or the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), or even the NAFTA/USMCA trade agreement are rejected in favor of direct bilateral free trade agreements with individual nations.
In Trump’s trade policy the multilateral deals are dissolved, while the bilateral deals are affirmed. The same outlook holds true for massive institutional agreements that end up with large entanglements often carrying disproportionate costs and disparate benefits. Like NATO, the USA usually ends up with the largest price tag and least benefit from the agreement.
Is NATO/Europe going to fight China over Taiwan? Of course not. If they were, Canada wouldn’t be making deals with Beijing, and Europe would not be allowing China to purchase stakeholder interests in the European car market. The same pragmatic and reasonable outlook applies right now toward how the EU has responded to the Russia/Ukraine conflict; only “willing” if the USA puts our blood and treasure on the line.
This nationalistic outlook is honestly encapsulated in this recent soundbite from President Trump when asked about Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney making a trade agreement with China. President Trump genuinely doesn’t care. WATCH:
Canada can make whatever deal they want with China; however, that doesn’t mean it will work out well for Canada when the USMCA is dissolved and a new bilateral trade deal between the USA and Canada is renegotiated. Factually, it means Canada will end up in a worse economic place, just look at the history of countries that hugged Big Panda. It is their own independent right to be blind to the risk.
Despite all the warnings from President Trump, Europe became dependent on Russia for low-cost energy; how’d that work out for them? Germany now seriously regrets their green energy approach, but there’s nothing President Trump can do to stop multinational assemblies from being collectively stupid; the only thing he can do is mitigate any collateral damage to the USA.
Instead of European leaders calling President Trump every time Turkish President Recep Erdogan does something against their interests, eventually the group will learn how to engage him individually. In a world of bilateral respect, the lessons from Trump could even have the downstream effect of training the EU to drop their obsession with Russia-bad everything.
The Ukraine conflict could end when Europe finally realizes it’s much easier to turn on a Nordstream gas valve than it is to rebuild 30 German nuclear power plants. President Trump’s refusal to commit U.S. troops to Zelenskyy’s security guarantee will hopefully hasten that conversation.
The same pragmatic realism applies to Greenland. Europe will never respond to any increase in strategic threat presented by China or Russia in the Arctic, and the U.S. will shoulder all the costs if that risk were to materialize. Strategic pragmatism combined with economic realism is why President Trump is focused on the security of the North American continent.
Lastly, there is a segment of MAGA that is angered by President Trump’s interim and necessary approach to removing our foreign policy entanglements in both the European and Mideast continents. Those who are short-sighted don’t see how President Trump is strategically and factually withdrawing U.S. policy from a world of enmeshed dependencies, because in reality charity –along with security– begins at home.
Thankfully, the former Lyndon LaRouche assembly from Promethean Action have begun to recalibrate their British-centric focus, and they’ve started to look at Trump policy beyond the ramifications to London and through the more accurate prism of Trump’s global pragmatism. President Donald Trump isn’t trying to unilaterally destroy British imperialism, not directly. Instead, that old, stuffy and elitist collapse is a consequence of reestablishing independent sovereignty.
Smile, live your very best life and watch it all unfold. After all, Davos is going to be a must-watch event next week.
Posted originally on CTH on January 18, 2026 | Sundance
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears on NBC to discuss the national security issues surrounding Greenland and the Trump administration’s face off against Europe and NATO. Additionally, Welker wants to protect Fed Chairman Jerome Powell against mounting evidence of his political bias and mismanagement of the Federal Reserve. Video and Transcript Below.
Joining me now is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Secretary Bessent, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Good morning, Kristen. Good to be with you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
It’s great to have you here, thank you for being here in person. Let’s start right there. President Trump threatening to impose steep tariffs against some of America’s closest European and NATO allies. The leaders of Denmark and Greenland say bluntly, “Greenland is not for sale.” What makes President Trump think it is?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Kristen, if we look for years, for over a century, American presidents have wanted to acquire Greenland. And what we can see is that Greenland is essential to the U.S. national security — we’re building the golden dome, the missile system. And look, President Trump is being strategic. He is looking beyond this year. He’s looking beyond next year to what could happen for a battle in the Arctic. We are not going to outsource our national security. We are not going to outsource our hemispheric security to other countries. In Trump 1.0, President Trump told the Europeans, “Do not build Nord Stream 2. Do not rely on Russian oil.” And guess what, Kristen? Guess what is funding Russia’s efforts against Ukraine? European purchases of Russian oil. So America has to be in control here.
KRISTEN WELKER:
I want to delve into everything that you said. But I just want to ask you big picture: Is this a negotiating tactic, Mr. Secretary? Or is President Trump serious about annexing Greenland?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
President Trump strongly believes that we cannot outsource our security. Because, Kristen, let me tell you what will happen, and it might not be next year, might not be in five years. But down the road, this fight for the Arctic is real. We would keep our NATO guarantees. And if there were an attack on Greenland from Russia, from some other area, we would get dragged in. So better now, peace through strength, make it part of the United States, and there will not be a conflict because the United States right now, we are the hottest country in the world. We are the strongest country in the world. Europeans project weakness. U.S. projects strength.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But just very quickly, is this a negotiating tactic, Mr. Secretary? Is the goal to get a deal to have enhanced security in Greenland, for example?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
The president believes that enhanced security is not possible without Greenland being part of the U.S.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Okay. Let me press you on what you have said are national security concerns, particularly as it relates to Russia and China. Senior Democrats say there are no pressing threats on Greenland’s security from Russia or China. The Danish foreign minister says there hasn’t been a Chinese warship in Greenland for a decade. What evidence do you have that this is a pressing threat?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Well, first of all, Kristen, we have asymmetric information. And again, President Trump is being strategic here. What evidence was there that the Russians were going into Crimea? Well, actually there was a lot of evidence that the Russians were going to go into Ukraine. And Joe Biden said, “Well, just take a little bit of it.” But what we know is that the U.S., that Greenland can only be defended it if is part of the U.S. And it will not need to be defended if it is part of the U.S. The president is trying to avoid a conflict.
KRISTEN WELKER:
You bring up Crimea. The president, as far as I have heard, has not taken military force off the table. If the United States were to take Greenland by force, how would that be different than Russia’s annexation of Crimea?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Look, I believe that Europeans will understand that this is best for Greenland, best for Europe, and best for the United States.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But military action is still on the table?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
I haven’t spoken with the president on that. And again, I believe that the Europeans will understand that the best outcome is for the U.S. to maintain or to receive control of Greenland.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, so far what we’ve heard and seen from the Europeans is alarm and outrage. In fact they’re, as you know, holding an emergency meeting today. And part of the issue, the president has already reached a trade deal with the EU. How can countries have confidence in trade deals moving forward if President Trump is prepared to blow them up?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Well, first of all, the trade deal hasn’t been finalized. And an emergency action can be very different from another trade deal. So we’re in a very good equilibrium right now with China. But if China did something to upset that balance, I think the president would be willing to act. You know, same thing with India. We were working on a trade deal with India. But the president, unlike the Europeans, started charging the Europeans 25% for buying Russian oil. So the president leverages his emergency powers to do this.
KRISTEN WELKER:
I hear you saying that the deal hasn’t been finalized. And yet it was moving towards finalization. Doesn’t it undercut the United States’ word by threatening these steep new tariffs?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
I think it does not. What it does is it enhances United States security. And again, we have seen that Europeans are unable to push back against Russia. The U.S. — this war that never would have started in Ukraine, Kristen, we are going to settle it. But it wouldn’t have started. And what President Trump is trying to do is prevent a taking or the Russian, Chinese action in Greenland in the future. So why not be strategic? Why? Always live in the moment.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Okay, let’s talk about being strategic. The United States has a base in Greenland. I’ve been talking to lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Denmark has given the United States a green light to beef up its security as much as is needed in Greenland. Why not take that route? Why is it necessary to take over and annex all of Greenland, something that 85% of people living in Greenland oppose?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Well, again let’s look back. Denmark has a terrible history with Greenlanders. There were forced sterilizations up until the ‘80s or the ‘90s. So all of a sudden, now that the U.S. has expressed an interest, there is, you know, this new interest. And again, the United States needs to be in control to prevent a war. And we do not want to get dragged into someone else’s war.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, but this is about the United States relationship with its allies, NATO allies, again reacting with alarm. They are warning that this move to annex Greenland could in fact destroy NATO. So let me just put this to you bluntly. Is Greenland or NATO more essential to the United States national security?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Both. Kristen, that’s obviously a false choice. You know, that’s an absolute —
KRISTEN WELKER:
Not from the perspective of European leaders.
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
The European leaders will come around. And they will understand that they need to be under the U.S. security umbrella. What would happen in Ukraine if the U.S. pulled its support out? The whole thing would collapse. The U.S., Kristen, to be clear, since 1980 the U.S. military spending versus NATO military spending, we have spent $22 trillion more than the Europeans have, that we are peace through strength, and the Europeans now are only trying to play catch-up. And that is only through President Trump. President Trump believes in NATO. But he does not believe in the American people being dragged in.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, in terms of the cost that has been paid, Denmark has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States including after 9/11. In fact, it lost more soldiers per capita in Afghanistan than any other NATO nation apart from the United States itself, Mr. Secretary. Does President Trump want the United States to remain a part of NATO?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Of course, we are going to remain a part of NATO. But what President Trump does not want is for a war to start and the U.S. gets dragged in. Again, we are not going to outsource our Western Hemisphere security to others.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Let me ask you, broadly speaking, about the tariff portion of this. The president, as you well know, has justified his authority to impose previous tariffs without going to Congress by declaring national emergencies. It’s an issue before the Supreme Court right now. We’re all awaiting the high court’s decision. What is the national emergency that justifies these new slate of tariffs?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
The national emergency is avoiding a national emergency. It is a strategic decision by the president. This is a geopolitical decision. And he is able to use the economic might of the U.S. to avoid a hot war. So why wouldn’t we do that? You know, same thing that what if we had a national emergency coming with these gigantic trade balances that we had with the rest of the world — I’ve been in financial markets for 30, 45 years — much better to be strategic, avoid the emergency.
KRISTEN WELKER:
You’re saying it’s a national emergency. But you’re also saying it’s a threat. It’s years away. How can both be true, Mr. Secretary?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Because you are avoiding creating the emergency, Kristen. What if during the great financial crisis, someone had raised their hand in 2005, 2006 and said, “Stop the sub-prime mortgages?” But no one did. President Trump is raising his hand. And that is preventing the emergency.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Do you think the Supreme Court will agree with that rationale, Mr. Secretary?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
I believe that it is very unlikely that the Supreme Court will overrule a president’s signature economic policy. They did not overrule Obamacare. I believe that the Supreme Court does not want to create chaos. As you said earlier, we have set these trade deals. And it is very good for the United States if we are balancing our trade deficit. If you look, Europe is being overrun with Chinese goods. There is now an emergency in Europe. There is going to be an economic emergency. The Europeans will follow us. So President Trump is pre-empting this if we go back to emergencies, he put a fentanyl tariff, Mexico, Canada, China. Guess what’s happened to fentanyl deaths? If that’s an emergency, I don’t know what is. October 8th, when the Chinese threatened to put rare Earth export controls on the entire world, President Trump threatened 100% tariff. And the Chinese came to the table. And we negotiated on behalf of the whole world.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Let me move to the Federal Reserve. I want to ask you about the revelations this week that the Department of Justice is investigating Jerome Powell and the Fed for allegedly going over budget in the Fed building renovations. Chairman Powell responded. He fired back at this. I want to play a little bit and get your reaction on the other side.
[BEGIN TAPE]
JEROME POWELL:
This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Is President Trump committed to the independence of the Federal Reserve, Mr. Secretary?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
Of course, he’s committed to the independence of the Federal Reserve. But independence does not mean no oversight.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But doesn’t this undercut the independence of the Federal Reserve if the Justice Department is investigating renovations? There are renovations at the White House.
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
The renovations at the White House are not $700 million, more than $1 billion or $1.5 billion over budget, Kristen. And the White House, that is being paid for with private funds. If I want to buy a new chair for my office at Treasury, that is an appropriation. Just to understand, the Federal Reserve has magic money. They print their own money. So when you have no oversight, why not have a little sunlight? Kristen, I have called since last summer for the Fed to do its own internal investigation. And that has not been heeded, not been heeded. And again, I don’t know about you. If I were to receive inquiries from the Justice Department, I would answer them. They went unanswered.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, let me ask you because Axios reported that you were not happy about DOJ’s investigation, that you told President Trump as much. Axios writes, “a perturbed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told President Trump late Sunday that the federal investigation into the Federal Reserve Chair made a mess and could be bad for financial markets.” That’s according to two sources familiar with the call. Is that accurate?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
You know what, Kristen? I’m not going to discuss my conversations with the president. But if I said that, I was wrong. Financial markets, stock market went up, bond yields went down. So the markets are the ultimate arbiter of over whether the Fed’s independence is being impugned. And bond yields went down. I can tell you we had two of the best bond auctions that we have had in months for U.S. treasuries. So the market is looking beyond this. And again, maybe the market wants some transparency from the Fed.
KRISTEN WELKER:
One final question for you, Mr. Secretary. Some Republican senators, as you know, are threatening to block the president’s nominees over the Justice Department’s investigation. Do you think the investigation needs to be dropped in order for the Senate to confirm the president’s next pick to run the Fed?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
I think that that will be up to the senators. I think —
KRISTEN WELKER:
But are you worried that they’ll block the president’s pick for the Fed?
SEC. SCOTT BESSENT:
I am not. I think we have four great candidates. I think that they will be quite happy with either of the four. I think we will move forward. I believe that we will probably be hearing from the banking committee soon on what they would like to see. And again, the supervision and bringing in some sunlight does not mean coercion.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Thank you so much, Secretary Bessent, for being here to respond to all of the breaking
Posted originally on CTH on January 17, 2026 | Sundance
President Trump has announced a new tariff regime against Germany, the UK, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands and Finland. The two-stage tariffs are in response to European leadership undermining U.S. strategic security discussions with Greenland.
PRESIDENT TRUMP – “We have subsidized Denmark, and all of the Countries of the European Union, and others, for many years by not charging them Tariffs, or any other forms of remuneration. Now, after Centuries, it is time for Denmark to give back — World Peace is at stake! China and Russia want Greenland, and there is not a thing that Denmark can do about it. They currently have two dogsleds as protection, one added recently.
Only the United States of America, under PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP, can play in this game, and very successfully, at that! Nobody will touch this sacred piece of Land, especially since the National Security of the United States, and the World at large, is at stake.
On top of everything else, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Finland have journeyed to Greenland, for purposes unknown. This is a very dangerous situation for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Planet. These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable.”
“Therefore, it is imperative that, in order to protect Global Peace and Security, strong measures be taken so that this potentially perilous situation end quickly, and without question. Starting on February 1st, 2026, all of the above-mentioned Countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Finland), will be charged a 10% Tariff on any and all goods sent to the United States of America.
On June 1st, 2026, the Tariff will be increased to 25%. This Tariff will be due and payable until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland. The United States has been trying to do this transaction for over 150 years. Many Presidents have tried, and for good reason, but Denmark has always refused. Now, because of The Golden Dome, and Modern-Day Weapons Systems, both Offensive and Defensive, the need to ACQUIRE is especially important.
Hundreds of Billions of Dollars are currently being spent on Security Programs having to do with “The Dome,” including for the possible protection of Canada, and this very brilliant, but highly complex system can only work at its maximum potential and efficiency, because of angles, metes, and bounds, if this Land is included in it.
The United States of America is immediately open to negotiation with Denmark and/or any of these Countries that have put so much at risk, despite all that we have done for them, including maximum protection, over so many decades. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
My message to those who worry about President Trump committing us to something protracted that will eventually end in our being pulled into a European theater of conflict vis-a-vis Ukraine, is to quit worrying.
Trump is telling the EU to quit talking and start actively being responsible for their own security. In the background Trump has bigger plans.
“The notion that America wants Greenland for its raw materials is either insanely ignorant or just engagement bait. Extracting anything in the Arctic is prohibitively expensive, and often physically impossible, with extreme cold, thick ice, equipment that won’t function, and no roads, rail or ports to move anything once you have it.
The real reason America needs Greenland is its immense geostrategic military value, which should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain, especially anyone who has ever looked at a map from above, with the North Pole at the center.
Sure, some tasks could be outsourced to NATO, but that alliance is on its last legs, burdened by too many countries with conflicting priorities, and has mainly served as a way for Europe to freeload on US security guarantees. Relying on it for American national security is reckless. It’s far smarter to cut out the endless middlemen and take direct control.” (source)
Mahncke is correct. On one side of the ice, you have North America. On the other side of the ice you have, well, the reason for President Trump to order dozens of icebreakers.
The position of Denmark and Greenland is pathetic. Denmark demands the USA protect the “territories of their kingdom” (their words) including Greenland, which they admit they “cannot do without the USA military.” However, they outright reject the notion the United States should gain something, anything, for providing that protection.
Stephen Miller just said the quiet part out loud about Greenland.
Denmark may claim ownership — but America is footing the bill, defending the territory, and staring down the next global battlefield.
MILLER: “Greenland is essential for America’s national security.”
As also noted by Jim Ferguson: “Ursula von der Leyen just went on camera and declared that Greenland “belongs to Denmark and NATO” — directly rebuking President Trump.
Let’s translate that. This isn’t about the Greenlandic people. This is about Brussels panicking because Trump is exposing the Arctic power game.
Greenland controls:
• the northern missile corridor • Arctic shipping lanes • and the gateway to North America
That makes it one of the most important strategic territories on Earth.
And Trump said the quiet part out loud: If the U.S. doesn’t secure it, China or Russia will.
Von der Leyen’s response wasn’t to protect the West, it was to protect EU control.
She wrapped it in pretty words about “NATO unity” — but what she really meant was: Brussels gets a veto over American security.
That’s what this is about.
Trump isn’t breaking the alliance. he’s breaking the illusion that unelected EU bureaucrats get to decide the future of the Arctic.
Greenland is not a Brussels bargaining chip; it is the northern shield of the United States, and for the first time in decades, America has a president willing to say it.
Ursula doesn’t hate Trump because he’s reckless, she hates him because he won’t let Europe freeload on American security while selling the future to Beijing.”
October, 2025:Finland is slightly smaller than Montana and wedged between Sweden and Russia. Finland, a nation of approximately 5 million people, has a security outlook shaped by its geography, a strategic position within the new NATO/Arctic strategy.
President Trump holds a bilateral discussion with Finnish President Alexander Stubb, as the two leaders’ complete terms for eleven icebreaker ships valued at $6.1 billion. Under terms of the deal, three of the ships will be built by Davie in Galveston, Texas, and four by Bollinger Shipyards in Houma, Louisiana.
Finland is the world leader in icebreaker ship building and will help teach U.S. ship building companies the latest advances in the technology. [SOURCE]
Stay Elevated:
December, 2025: Appearing on Fox News to discuss the Ukraine v Russia conflict, Finland President Alexander Stubb is questioned about the conflicting U.S. intelligence reports pushed by Reuters saying Russia will invade Europe, versus DNI Tulsi Gabbard saying Russia has no capability or intent to invade Europe.
President Stubb notes his agencies work closely with U.S. intelligence and in his view, Tulsi Gabbard is correct regarding President Vladimir Putin’s intention. [SOURCE]
President Trump is dancing through a geopolitical minefield, deconstructing numerous long-standing manipulative institutions along the way, while simultaneously keeping 100 domestic agenda plates spinning on sticks.
It is amazing to watch his navigation skills. Smile and enjoy this.
Posted originally on CTH on January 16, 2026 | Sundance |
My dear Canadian conservative friends, things look very troubling. You have my deepest sympathies for the events of the next few years that are about to unfold.
We have researched, tracked, measured and followed each detail.
Having travelled to regions of the world in discussions with people who factually determine economic outcomes, it is clear that every single policy shift undertaken by the Canadian government of Mark Carney is exactly the opposite of what is needed. In the next 24 months, the lifestyle of every Canadian will forever change.
Prime Minister Mark Carney bows to Big Panda. The most alarming words spoken during the formal welcome ceremony are prompted below. WATCH: “The New World Order”
Too many words; too small a man.
President Trump is reestablishing an entirely new economic, trade and finance system. The era of the Marshal Plan is over; it has been factually deconstructed in the past 12 months.
Canadians and Europeans are desperately trying to offset the ramifications, hold on to their economic benefits and find a new mechanism to afford the domestic indulgences now eliminated by President Trump and the absence of money.
Both the EU and Canada are looking to China and ASEAN partnerships as a financial offset. However, the ASEAN group has no domestic wealth and can only provide one-way benefits.
Despite the reality of things, denial is rampant. Here are three facts that will not change.
Fact #1: Asia is not a purchaser; they are producers. There are no customers in Southeast Asia, only workers. ASEAN nations are not customers. Any ASEAN trade agreement does not materially gain the EU or Canada any exports.
Fact #2: China is a closed economic system. China does what is in China’s best interests. When negotiating with China, Chairman Xi wears a panda mask to cover the dragon face. China now sees the EU/Canada refusal to adapt as an opportunity to exploit.
Fact #3: The EU and Canada have chased ‘climate change’ and ‘green energy’ schemes into a dead end of economic crisis. The direct and collateral damage is generational, and only just now beginning to surface. When combined with their intransigent resistance to adapt to President Trump’s global economic and trade reset, core issue “reciprocity”, this reality takes both economies down a path that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Choosing to embrace China in lieu of modifying bilateral trade agreements with the USA is a short-sighted fool’s errand. Unfortunately, with political calculations each entity, Canada and/or the EU collective, are pandering to their base out of an unwillingness to change trade behavior as demanded by Trump.
Yes, Canada may end up exporting more very specific goods to China; an offset for some of the USA losses, but at what cost long-term.
Think about the EU auto-sector as an example.
To avoid paying their own climate change fines, the EU automakers are purchasing carbon credits from Chinese EV automakers. In the short term, that trick may diminish the auto company fines to Brussels but think about the longer-term problem.
China takes the revenue from the EU companies and uses it to subsidize their EV exports making their EVs cost substantially less than EU electric vehicles in the EU.
Geely, BYD, etc. can lower the price of an EV in Europe because EU car companies are giving them money. The EU is paying China to destroy the EU auto industry. You cannot make this stuff up.
As a consequence, BYD is now building a factory in Hungary. Additionally, Geely owns 10% of Mercedes. You might have noticed that Mercedes recently announced they are shifting production of their Model-A to Hungary. 20,000 jobs shifted from Germany to Hungary. Victor Orban is good friends with Donald Trump. These are not coincidences.
In the Canadian model, Mark Carney may end up selling slightly more stuff to China but he’s going to end up selling less to the USA because Chinese components are subject to ever-enlarging USA trade tariffs. The USMCA is on the cusp of being cancelled, it will happen this year.
Canada is betting they can export more $$ to Beijing than they will lose in diminished export $$ to the USA. Fine, that’s the bet (a political calculation). However, the reality of the end result is increased dependency on China. That never ends well.
Beijing keeps the panda mask on while the dependency is created, see belt and road; however, as soon as it is in Beijing’s interest to drop the panda mask, Canada will see the dragon face behind it.
From Ottawa to London, to Paris, Berlin and Brussels the geopolitical landscape is changing permanently as President Donald Trump resets their global trade relationship to the United States.
NOTE: despite the claims of the Lyndon LaRouche group (Promethean Action), President Trump doesn’t sit around thinking about how to destroy British imperialism or the multinational financial system. That result comes as an outcome of his reset, a consequence; it is not however, the intent of it.
Instead, President Trump is leveraging the largest consumer market in the world to the benefit of the customer; that’s America. Trump’s direct and specific intent is transactional, to rebuild an industrial and self-sufficient nation that is the envy of the world.
For several generations, Canada and the EU have exploited their biggest customer and taken the U.S. for granted.
In the end, the customer always controls the success of the business.
Posted originally on CTH on January 15, 2026 | Sundance
In an interview with Reuters, President Trump was asked why the Russia/Ukraine negotiations appear to have stalled. President Trump responded with one word, “Zelenskyy.”
WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump told Reuters that Ukraine – not Russia – is holding up a potential peace deal, rhetoric that stands in marked contrast to that of European allies, who have consistently argued Moscow has little interest in ending its war in Ukraine.
In an exclusive interview in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump said Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to wrap up his nearly four-year-old invasion of Ukraine. Zelenskiy, the U.S. president said, was more reticent.
“I think he’s ready to make a deal,” Trump said of the Russian president. “I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal.”
Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe’s largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: “Zelenskiy.”
[…] Trump told Reuters he was not aware of a potential upcoming trip to Moscow by Witkoff and Kushner, which Bloomberg reported earlier on Wednesday.
Asked if he would meet Zelenskiy at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, next week, Trump said he would but implied no plans were set. “I would – if he’s there,” Trump said. “I’m going to be there.”
Asked why he believed Zelenskiy was holding back on negotiations, Trump did not elaborate, saying only: “I just think he’s, you know, having a hard time getting there.” (read more)
The U.K, Germany, France and European Union have established their zero-sum position against Russia using the proxy that Zelenskyy represents. At the same time these same EU leaders are demanding that President Trump guarantee the security structures the EU is putting together. It is a ridiculous situation. {GO DEEP}
The economic development recovery and reinvestment plan for Ukraine was in the portfolio of Jared Kushner. Kushner was also a big part of the USMCA negotiations with Mexico. Chrystia Freeland was a major antagonist in the USMCA trade deal. Both Donald Trump and Jared Kushner know the globalist and corrupt Freeland very well.
The U.K, France and Germany support Zelenskyy’s position that he is not going to concede any territory to the Russian Federation, specifically the 30% of the Donbas area in Eastern Ukraine currently at the heart of the physical conflict.
The 30% issue surrounds the Donetsk region in Ukraine, which includes the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. Russia is currently pushing deep into fortified Ukraine resistance in this region with a population of around 100,000. Zelenskyy claims losing this area would allow Putin to invade the Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kharkiv regions.
Historically, this Donbas area was part of a brutal long-term Ukraine civil war between the pro-Russia eastern Ukrainian citizens and the pro-EU western aligned Ukrainian army. Russia’s current position is for Ukraine to cede the entire Donbas to Russia as part of the ceasefire agreement, or Russia will continue forward conflict military operations until successful.
Seeing things through the pragmatic prism of inevitability, President Trump’s view appears to be that this Donbas area will be lost to Russia one way or the other. So, the best scenario to stop the killing is for Ukraine to give up this territory as part of the ceasefire terms. Zelenskyy, with support of the EU, France, Germany and U.K says a firm “no.”
Posted originally on CTH on January 15, 2026 | Sundance |
Representative from Denmark, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, and his Greenland counterpart, Vivian Motzfeldt, hold a press conference following a meeting with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Their collective position essentially boils down to, ‘the United States is required to defend and protect our Danish kingdom territory – but the United States will not be allowed to control our Danish kingdom territory.’
“We didn’t manage to change the American position,” Rasmussen told reporters. “It’s clear that the president has this wish of conquering over Greenland. We made it very, very clear that this is not in the interest of the Kingdom.” Both Rasmussen and Motzfeldt noted the discussions were respectful and friendly; however, there remains major concerns that Greenland is vulnerable to the strategic long-term plans of both China and Russia.
Denmark, a NATO member, is apoplectic at the possibility of the U.S. taking control of Greenland and has repeatedly said that Denmark would defend Greenland if any threat materialized. However, the only way for Denmark to defend Greenland would be to rely on the U.S. military, thus the Trump administration underlines this point in the discussions of Greenland security. WATCH:
.
There is a particular irony here embedded in the nuance. Greenland wants to hide behind the security guarantees of the United States; but Denmark wants to retain sovereign control of the protectorate that couldn’t exist without the United States security guarantee.
You can overlay the prior Crimea referendum, or the view of the Eastern Donbas residents in Ukraine and look at this Greenland situation through a similar prism.
Posted originally on CTH on January 11, 2026 | Sundance
Seriously folks, you would think that after all this time the Europeans would finally understand how President Trump manipulates the media cycle and gets them to do exactly what he wants – while they and the majority of their constituents think it’s exactly the opposite. This stuff is just too funny now.
According to European media outlets, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is in discussions with Germany and France to send a NATO alliance to Greenland to establish a stronger NATO military footprint. {LINK}
The media present this, hilariously, as if European NATO is going to defend Greenland against President Trump and the USA military. {{INSERT SEVERAL LAUGHING EMOJIS HERE}} I mean, think about it rationally.
The U.K, France and Germany are unwilling to send troops into Ukraine without the protection of the U.S. military. But somehow, for some reason, the U.K, France and Germany are going to send troops to Greenland to defend against the U.S. military.
The narrative sounds silly when put into context, right?
The reality is, for several years President Trump has been telling NATO they need to take the Arctic (Greenland) seriously and position more strongly against encroachment by China and Russia. European NATO has not responded with urgency to the requests of President Trump… because orange man bad.
So, President Trump starts talking about the U.S. taking aggressive unilateral action to secure Greenland as a strategic national security matter. Suddenly, ‘Voila!’ European NATO, under the auspices of defending their Denmark democracy, wakes up and says, ‘No, wait, you can’t just take Greenland, that’s bad.’ Then they assemble urgent talks to send EU NATO military resources to Greenland. Exactly what President Trump has been requesting to formerly deaf ears.
See how that works?
The entire dynamic is so funny, it is difficult not to laugh. It’s like being the only observer in a Candid Camera scenario when you know the entire group is being spoofed.
The former Dutch Chief of Defense, General Berlijn, even warns annexation of Greenland will cost the US its military bases in Europe. “Forget about Ramstein, Lakenheath, Mildenhall, Aviano, Alconbury, Lajes, Móron and Zaragoza,” he said.
As if forcing U.S. troops out of Germany is a threat.
Oh dear, you mean U.S. military can pull back from German bases? Cool. And the EU will step up their own military to defend their own continent? Again, super cool. Punish us with a good time, General Berlijn; please!
President Trump has pulled off the impossible
The current EU plan, and keep in mind – this is NOW the EU plan, is to increase NATO defense forces in/around Greenland and then expand their own military in Europe so they can kick out the USA.
Perfect.
Now, we all know that Europe will never do the last part of that; especially when these same voices are demanding that President Trump protect and defend their troops in Ukraine. However, just reading about how they are talking about it is beyond funny.
Only President Donald J. Trump could achieve this masterstroke of geopolitical maneuvering, ending with him getting exactly what he wants and exactly what the EU previously didn’t want, while the EU proclaim it is their intention to give Trump what he wants by fighting against him.
You couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried.
EUROPE – […] In a joint statement, the leaders of the European nations stressed that it was for Denmark and Greenland to decide on the future of the vast, frozen territory. and that they would defend its borders.
They spoke out after Trump said he wants to gain control of the autonomous Danish territory now.
[…] They emphasised that security in the Arctic must be achieved “collectively”, in conjunction with Nato allies including the US, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, “including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders”.
They added: “These are universal principles, and we will not stop defending them.
“The United States is an essential partner in this endeavor, as a Nato ally and through the defense agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States of 1951.”
The statement was signed by Sir Keir Starmer, French president Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of Italy, Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez of Spain, and Prime Minister Frederiksen of Denmark. (Source)
Posted originally on CTH on January 10, 2026 | Sundance
President Trump, President Zelenskyy and the CIA continue to deny any involvement on the drone attack against Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin’s state residence. However, Russia has released evidence from the drones that were shot down including the guidance and targeting systems.
Someone launched the drones from Ukraine and targeted them at Putin’s residence to send a message. There is considerable debate online about it, but if President Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy are speaking truthfully, the most likely suspect who launched the drones was British intelligence inside Ukraine. Then again, if the CIA was factually involved, everyone would have to deny it.
In retaliation for the December 29th attack, yesterday Russia fired a hypersonic Oreshnik missile and counterattack drones directly into the heart of Kiev, Ukraine.
The use of the Oreshnik missile comes just hours after Russian President Putin asserted publicly that Ukraine, Europe and NATO have no defenses against the hypersonics.
President Zelenskyy said the Russian attack involved 242 drones, 13 ballistic missiles, one Oreshnik missile and 22 cruise missiles. However, as with all things Zelenskyy, this dramatic claim seems to be slightly exaggerated.
Russia claims they targeted key electricity infrastructure as well as the production facilities for building drones in Kiev which are collocated in residential areas.
The Russian Defense Ministry said, “in response to the terrorist attack by the Kiev regime on the residence of the President of the Russian Federation in Novgorod region, launched on the night of 29 December 2025, the Russian Armed Forces launched a massive strike with high-precision long-range ground- and sea-based weapons including the Oreshnik mobile ground-based medium-range missile system as well as attack unmanned aerial vehicles at critically important facilities on the territory of Ukraine. All the assigned targets have been hit. Production facilities of unmanned aerial vehicles that were used during the terrorist attack as well as power infrastructure enterprises that supported the defense industry of Ukraine have been damaged.”
Moscow appears ambivalent to the demands of the EU/NATO as they pertain to a ceasefire, and it appears the Kremlin has comprehensively rejected the European 20-point peace plan solution based on President Putin’s rejection of the ‘security guarantees’ as outlined by EU leadership.
Statement from Russia: “The document turned out to be extremely far from a peace settlement. The declaration is not aimed at achieving a lasting peace and security but rather at continuing the militarisation, escalation and further conflict aggravation.
Its core element is the deployment of “a multinational force” on Ukrainian territory that the coalition will have to form to contribute to the “rebuilding” of the Ukrainian armed forces and “support deterrence” [against Russia] following the cessation of the hostilities.
The document also includes clauses on further consolidation of Ukraine’s and NATO’s military industrial sectors.
As clarified by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron, who signed the corresponding trilateral statement along with Zelensky, London and Paris plan to establish their own military bases in Ukraine post-ceasefire and build weapon and military equipment storage facilities.
The Russian Foreign Ministry warns that the deployment of military units and the setting-up of military facilities, storages and other Western infrastructure on Ukrainian territory will be qualified as foreign intervention that directly threatens the security of Russia and other European countries.
All such units and facilities will be considered as legitimate military targets for the Russian Armed Forces.
Warnings to this effect have been repeatedly made at the highest level and remain relevant.
We also reaffirm that a peaceful resolution of the conflict is solely possible through the elimination of its root causes, the re-establishment of Ukraine’s neutral non-aligned status, its demilitarisation and denazification, and Kiev’s observance of the language, cultural and religious rights and freedoms, including those of ethnic Russians, Russian-speaking people, and members of ethnic minorities, and through the recognition of the current territorial realities that emerged as a result of the peoples’ exercised right to self-determination.
All these goals will, undoubtedly, be achieved either by political and diplomatic means or in the course of the special military operation, in which the Russian Armed Forces are maintaining full initiative on the battlefield.
The new militarist declarations of the so-called Coalition of the Willing and the Kiev regime are forming a true Axis of war.
Its participants’ plans are becoming increasingly more dangerous and destructive for the future of the European continent and its residents, who are also forced by Western politicians to pay for such ambitions out of their own pockets.” {SOURCE}
President Trump was asked about the current status during his meeting with oil executives on Friday:
On the positive side, it is good to remember the U.S. has now established strong diplomatic ties for deconfliction between the U.S. and Russia. The Europeans and many within the U.S. congress want and demand escalated conflict with Russia, President Trump does not.
The “coalition of the willing” (Brussels, Great Britian, Canada, France, Germany and Australia) cannot reasonably go to war with Russia without the assistance of the United States. President Trump does not want to involve us in the growing quagmire either in Ukraine or any of the various ancillary venues the EU are promoting.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has recently joined with French President Emmanuel Macron to say perhaps it is time for the EU to engage directly with Vladimir Putin. The EU has a position, a 20-point plan, that is not supported by President Trump because it is contingent upon American involvement.
Perhaps it is time for the EU to take responsibility for their own diplomatic efforts and figure out a solution. In the interim, President Putin continues taking apart Ukraine bit by bit.
No, this is not a nuclear explosion. The rest of the world can still sleep and live in peace. This is just another night in Ukraine, the view from the window of an ordinary Kyiv resident.
You watch this through your phone screens, while we watch it from the windows of our own… pic.twitter.com/3jS0r0xsLg
The Russians are exploiting the cold snap – trying to hit as many of our energy facilities as possible. So much for their respect for America and all diplomacy. The main Russian tactic is to try to completely shut cities down.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 