Author

admin

Browsing

FBI Director Kash Patel vowed that the bureau would continue on a quest for transparency during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee as criticism of his handling of the Charlie Kirk assassination investigation lingers.

In his opening statement to the committee obtained by Fox News Digital, Patel listed a series of accomplishments the agency has achieved since President Donald Trump took office, including tens of thousands of arrests, a realignment of the agency and an emphasis on cracking down on illicit drugs.

Patel acknowledged the growing criticism over his direction of the FBI and challenged lawmakers on the panel to come after him. 

‘I’m not going anywhere,’ he said. ‘If you want to criticize my 16 years of service, please bring it on.’

Patel kicked off his testimony by offering an update on the FBI’s investigation into the ‘appalling assassination of Charlie Kirk.’

‘It’s important that the FBI is as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our investigation,’ Patel said.

The FBI chief listed off numerous findings in the case, including an ‘extensive review’ of suspect Tyler Robinson’s accounts and devices. He said over 100 interviews had been conducted since the shooting, and that the FBI has received over 11,000 submissions through the National Threat Operations Center and over 16,000 submissions through the Digital Media Tipline.

‘We are making a traditionally nontransparent agency the most transparent it has ever been,’ Patel said.

He lauded the public participation in the case, too, and noted that the tens of thousands of tips that poured in helped identify a suspect.

‘Tyler Robinson is in custody today because of this partnership,’ he said.

Patel’s appearance before the committee had been on the books for weeks before Kirk’s death and was initially geared as an annual oversight hearing of the FBI. However, his handling of the investigation, social media misfires and a wave of firings at the agency have generated fresh scrutiny over his leadership.

Patel came under the microscope for a post he made on X in the hours after Kirk was killed, where he wrote, ‘The subject for the horrific shooting today that took the life of Charlie Kirk is now in custody.’

However, that individual and another were caught and released before law enforcement nabbed 22-year-old Robinson, some 33 hours after the shooting.

Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, addressed Kirk briefly in his opening remarks, saying, ‘God Bless you, Charlie Kirk.’

The chair, who has advocated for whistleblowers for decades, then dove into lengthy remarks about government weaponization and praised Patel for compensating what he said were 10 FBI employees who lost their security clearances in recent years.

‘In the short amount of time you’ve been director, you’ve corrected whistleblower retaliation and increased transparency more than any other FBI director I’ve seen, and I’ve been around here more than anyone else on this committee,’ Grassley said.

But the top Democrat on the committee, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., zeroed in on the wide swath of DOJ and FBI personnel who have been fired, sometimes without explanation, a topic expected to crop up repeatedly during Democrats’ questioning.

Durbin criticized Patel’s deference to Trump, saying the director ‘installed MAGA loyalists’ to key positions and initiated internal ‘loyalty tests,’ including polygraph tests. Durbin revealed that some FBI officials failed those tests and needed waivers to continue working at the bureau.

He noted the recent lawsuit brought by three ousted top FBI officials, who have accused Patel of unconstitutionally firing them and wielding the president’s Article II powers to do so.

Durbin also noted that Patel has little experience working in law enforcement, calling his inexperience ‘staggering’ and accusing him of fast-tracking similarly unqualified recruits to fill the FBI’s open jobs.

Patel repeatedly stressed that he has made strides to transform the agency into a more transparent organization and used the ‘Epstein files’ as an example.

Earlier this year a memo from the DOJ and FBI stated that ‘it is the determination of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation that no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted,’ after investigating the tens of thousands of documents associated with Jeffrey Epstein.

That triggered a firestorm on Capitol Hill that is still roiling. Prior to becoming director, Patel had promoted the idea that the government was hiding a secret list of sexual predators affiliated with Epstein. Patel during the hearing argued that the ‘original sin’ of the Epstein case began in the early 2000s, where ‘very limited search warrants that didn’t intake as much material into the FBI possession as it should have’ were issued. 

‘If I were FBI director then, I wouldn’t have allowed such a limited search warrant to be issued for these types of atrocious offenses,’ he said.

He argued that under former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, Epstein was allowed to enter into a plea deal with non-prosecution agreements, ‘plus the courts issued protective orders and sealed large volumes of material from ever being disclosed.’

‘The non-prosecution barred any future criminal culpability for this entire time period,’ Patel said.  ‘Still, this administration has done more than any of the previous administrations to seek transparency in this case.’

‘[The] DOJ has made motions to the court to unseal grand jury records on multiple occasions, but the courts have denied these motions,’ he continued. ‘Further, it was the first Trump administration that brought the renewed case against Epstein in 2019. Under the direction of this president, we have turned over ALL credible information in conjunction with our partners in Congress.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

(TheNewswire)

Heritage Mining Ltd.

VANCOUVER, BC TheNewswire – September 16, 2025 – Heritage Mining Ltd. (CSE: HML FRA: Y66) (‘ Heritage ‘ or the ‘ Company ‘) is pleased to announce the results from its 2025 prospecting program at its Scattergood Project (‘Scattergood’) (Figure 1, 2). The Company has confirmed surface gold mineralization in close proximity (~4.5km) to Dynasty Gold’s Pelham Deposit (Figure 2).

Scattergood Exploration Program Highlights:

  • Gold occurrence in combination with historical geophysics support early indication of similar geologic setting to the bordering Dynasty Gold Pelham Gold Deposit ~182,000oz at 1.37g/t Au (0.45 g/t Cut-Off) NI 43-101 report filed Jan 4, 2022 (Figure 2)

  • Coincident Mag and IP chargeability anomalies (500m by 200m) similar to Dynasty Gold Pelham Gold Deposit, NI 43-101 report filed Jan 4, 2022 (Figure 2)

  • Heritage is planning a broad spaced geochemical orientation program for immediate follow up (Figure 2).

‘We are very pleased with the initial exploration results from our Scattergood Project. The Heritage Exploration Team has newly identified surface gold mineralization through prospecting within ~4.5km from a known gold deposit Dynasty Golds, Pelham Deposit. This new discovery is important due to its proximity to the Pelham Deposit, we plan to aggressively evaluate the potential of this area. We look forward to further developing this gold target and providing additional updates on our Ontario Project Portfolio in short order.’ Commented Peter Schloo, President, CEO and Director of Heritage


Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 1:  Heritage Mining Ltd. Ontario Project Portfolio


Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 2: Scattergood Project:  Location and Historical Geophysics and Gold Showing in Rock Chips

Scattergood Project

The Scattergood Project totaling ~6,397Ha straddles the lower segment of Wapageisi group volcanic rock and felsic intrusive bodies including the Taylor Lake Stock, Meggisi Pluton, and Scattergood Lake stock as well as numerous late stage minor intrusives. Structurally, the project is complex with the north-northeast trending Taylor Lake Fault and Trout River deformation zone running through parts of the property. Please refer to June 3, 2024 press release for further details.

Discussion of Exploration Potential

The Company undertook a prospecting sampling program over a two-week period collecting 70 rock chip samples from outcrop.

The northeastern Scattergood Project Area displays the following characteristics:

  • Primary structural control: north-south trending structural corridor; regional, crustal-scale. Interpreted primary ‘highway’ for regional fluid flow (Figure 2).

  • Secondary structural control: east west trending deformation zone; hosts gold mineralization within the n-s corridor (Figure 2).

  • Geophysical signature: magnetic and chargeability (IP) highs. Useful for targeting gold mineralization, as these geophysical anomalies can be linked to sulfide and biotite-magnetite alteration (Figure 2).

Conclusion

Initial 2025 prospecting at the Scattergood Project has identified gold mineralization associated with a strong magnetic anomaly and coincident IP chargeability anomaly. A desktop and field review has confirmed structural complexity within the project area. A broad spaced geochemical soil and till orientation program is proposed for immediate follow up.

Qualified Person

Stephen Hughes P. Geo, Strategic Advisor for the Company, serves as a qualified person as defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects and has reviewed the scientific and technical information in this news release, approving the disclosure herein.

Technical Program

Heritage Mining adheres to a strict QA/QC protocol for handling, sampling, sample transportation and analyses.  Chain-of-custody protocols are designed to ensure security of samples until their delivery at the laboratory.

Heritage Mining Ltd. surface rock chip samples were sent to the ALS assay laboratories in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada and the Company adheres to a strict QA/QC protocol for handling, sampling, sample transportation and analyses.  Chain-of-custody protocols are designed to ensure security of samples until their delivery at the laboratory.

Rock chip samples are analysed by Heritage Mining submits samples for gold determination by PhotonAssay to ALS Canada Ltd. (‘ ALS ‘). ALS operates under a commercial contract with Heritage Mining.

Rock chip samples are shipped to ALS for sample preparation at their facilities in Thunderbay Ontario. ALS is an ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accredited laboratory for the PhotonAssay method in addition to a variety of diverse metal determination methods.

Analytical Procedures

The ALS procedure for PhotonAssay involves lab applying preparation codes LOG-21 (sample logging via barcode), CRU-31 (fine crushing so that 70% passes through a 2mm screen) and SPL-32a (rotary splitting of a representative ~500g subsample)  followed by analytical code Au-PA01 which is a non-destructive gold analysis method using high-energy X-rays with a gold detection range from 0.03 ppm to 350ppm.

After gold assays are returned, Heritage then may choose to perform multi-element assays on selected samples based on the gold results. In these cases, sample preparation codes FND-05 (locate and use remaining crushed material from Au-PA01) and PUL-32m (pulverization so that >85% passes 75 µm screen) are then applied followed by analytical code ME-MS61 (multi-element ICP-MS analysis for base metals, pathfinder elements, lithophile elements and rare earth elements).

________________________________________

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)

The program design, QA/QC, and interpretation of results are performed by qualified persons employing a rigorous QA/QC program consistent with industry best practices. Standards and blanks account for a minimum of 10% of the samples, in addition to the laboratories’ internal quality assurance programs.

Quality Control data are meticulously evaluated upon receipt from the laboratories for any failures. Appropriate corrective action is taken if assay results for standards and blanks fall outside allowed tolerances. All results disclosed by Heritage Mining have successfully passed the Company’s stringent quality control protocols.

The Company does not recognize any factors of drilling, sampling, or recovery that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the assay data disclosed. The assay data disclosed in this press release have been verified by the Company’s Qualified Person against the original assay certificates.

ABOUT HERITAGE MINING LTD.

The Company is a Canadian mineral exploration company advancing its two high grade gold-silver-copper projects in Northwestern Ontario. The Drayton-Black Lake and the Contact Bay projects are located near Sioux Lookout in the underexplored Eagle-Wabigoon-Manitou Greenstone Belt. The Scattergood project is located ~40km south of Dryden . Both projects benefit from a wealth of historic data, excellent site access and logistical support from the local community.

For further information, please contact:

Heritage Mining Ltd.

Peter Schloo, CPA, CA, CFA

President, CEO and Director

Phone: (905) 505-0918

Email: peter@heritagemining.ca

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This news release contains certain statements that constitute forward looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws. These statements relate to future events of the Company. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘seek’, ‘anticipate’, ‘plan’, ‘continue’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘forecast’, ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘project’, ‘predict’, ‘potential’, ‘targeting’, ‘intend’, ‘could’, ‘might’, ‘should’, ‘believe’, ‘outlook’ and similar expressions are not statements of historical fact and may be forward looking information. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included herein are forward-looking statements.

Forward looking information involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Such risks include, among others, the inherent risk of the mining industry; adverse economic and market developments; the risk that the Company will not be successful in completing additional acquisitions; risks relating to the estimation of mineral resources; the possibility that the Company’s estimated burn rate may be higher than anticipated; risks of unexpected cost increases; risks of labour shortages; risks relating to exploration and development activities; risks relating to future prices of mineral resources; risks related to work site accidents, risks related to geological uncertainties and variations; risks related to government and community support of the Company’s projects; risks related to global pandemics and other risks related to the mining industry. The Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, but no assurance can be given that these expectations will prove to be correct and such forward‐looking information should not be unduly relied upon. These statements speak only as of the date of this news release. The Company does not intend, and does not assume any obligation, to update any forward‐looking information except as required by law.

This document does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, securities of the Company in Canada, the United States, or any other jurisdiction. Any such offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy the securities described herein will be made only pursuant to subscription documentation between the Company and prospective purchasers. Any such offering will be made in reliance upon exemptions from the prospectus and registration requirements under applicable securities laws, pursuant to a subscription agreement to be entered into by the Company and prospective investors.

NOT INTENDED FOR DISTRIBUTION TO UNITED STATES NEWS WIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Homerun Resources Inc. (TSXV: HMR,OTC:HMRFF) (OTCQB: HMRFF) (‘Homerun’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that the Company has updated and signed a non-binding offtake agreement with Brasil Fotovoltaico Ltda. (‘BRFV’). Under the offtake agreement, Homerun will supply BRFV with a minimum annual volume of 180 thousand tonnes of solar glass manufactured by the Company in Belmonte, Bahia, Brazil. The initial price for the solar glass is set at USD 750 per tonne, Free on Board (FOB) the Homerun facility.

‘This updated offtake agreement aligns with the plan to have the full initial capacity of the Homerun solar glass plant covered by offtake agreements with Brazilian operators. Homerun has now announced 300 thousand tonnes of solar glass offtake and based on current ongoing discussions for increased and new offtakes, that number is expected to grow to 450 thousand tonnes which will exceed the modeled 1000 tonne per day plant capacity. This offtake process continues to confirm Homerun’s position as the go-to supplier for solar glass in Brazil. Homerun has drawn the attention of both existing and future solar module manufacturers in Brazil and upon the completion of the BFS, the Company will formalize these offtake agreements to remove market risk and to facilitate further CAPEX streams to finance the building of the facility,’ stated Armando Farhate, COO of Homerun.

This Agreement is currently non-binding and aims to outline the basic terms for the supply arrangements between the Parties. It does not create any legal obligations or liabilities for either Party. The Parties agree that binding agreements shall supersede this agreement, based on the development of the BRFV solar module facility and once the solar glass plant reaches a Bankable Feasibility Study (BFS).

The BFS process is progressing on an expedited basis:

  • Abundant silica resources are proximal to the solar glass plant location and permitted for extraction and processing.
  • Discussions to utilize current processing plant capacity in the Santa Maria Eterna Silica Sand District are ongoing with a current supply partner.
  • Location, production plant engineering and equipment suppliers, market metrics and input cost calculations for the BFS have been completed internally by Homerun management.
  • Utility suppliers and ties into the plant have been identified with infrastructure costs allocated to those utilities. Other raw materials supply has been identified and priced into the internal economic model.
  • Public and private finance discussions to build the syndicate for the CAPEX (to be determined by the BFS) are ongoing including discussions with the industrial development bank of the Brazilian Government (BNDES).

Brian Leeners, CEO of Homerun stated, ‘Last year, Brazil passed Germany to move into third place for global annual installed capacity of solar modules. The vast majority of these modules came into Brazil as imports. The domestic manufacturers have worked with the Brazilian Government to support the growth of the domestic industry through the newly implemented increase in tariffs on solar module imports. That plan is working to fuel both expansion and new solar module production capacity as Brazil moves toward the Government’s goal of transitioning solar module manufacturing to a new major Brazilian vertically integrated industrial base.’

About Brasil Fotovoltaico Ltda (www.brasilfotovoltaico.com.br)

Brasil Fotovoltaico (BRFV) is a greenfield project, idealized by Si&MEx Solutions GmbH, which aims to implement the first vertically integrated industrial complex in Brazil based on Silicon 5.0 ®, from Polysilicon to Solar Modules.

About Homerun (www.homerunresources.com)

Homerun (TSXV: HMR,OTC:HMRFF) is a vertically integrated materials leader revolutionizing green energy solutions through advanced silica technologies. As an emerging force outside of China for high-purity quartz (HPQ) silica innovation, the Company controls the full industrial vertical from raw material extraction to cutting-edge solar, battery and energy storage solutions. Our dual-engine vertical integration strategy combines:

Homerun Advanced Materials

  • Utilizing Homerun’s robust supply of high purity silica sand and quartz silica materials to facilitate domestic and international sales of processed silica through the development of a 120,000 tpy processing plant.
  • Pioneering zero-waste thermoelectric purification and advanced materials processing technologies with University of California – Davis.

Homerun Energy Solutions

  • Building Latin America’s first dedicated high-efficiency, 365,000 tpy solar glass manufacturing facility and pioneering new solar technologies based on years of experience as an industry leader in developing photovoltaic technologies with a specialization in perovskite photovoltaics.
  • European leader in the marketing, distribution and sales of alternative energy solutions into the commercial and industrial segments (B2B).
  • Commercializing Artificial Intelligence (AI) Energy Management and Control System Solutions (hardware and software) for energy capture, energy storage and efficient energy use.
  • Partnering with U.S. Dept. of Energy/NREL on the development of the Enduring long-duration energy storage system utilizing the Company’s high-purity silica sand for industrial heat and electricity arbitrage and complementary silica purification.

With multiple profit centers built within the vertical strategy and all gaining economic advantage utilizing the Company’s HPQ silica, across, solar, battery and energy storage solutions, Homerun is positioned to capitalize on high-growth global energy transition markets. The 3-phase development plan has achieved all key milestones in a timely manner, including government partnerships, scalable logistical market access, and breakthrough IP in advanced materials processing and energy solutions.

Homerun maintains an uncompromising commitment to ESG principles, deploying the cleanest and most sustainable production technologies across all operations while benefiting the people in the communities where the Company operates. As we advance revenue generation and vertical integration in 2025, the Company continues to deliver shareholder value through strategic execution within the unstoppable global energy transition.

On behalf of the Board of Directors of
Homerun Resources Inc.

‘Brian Leeners’

Brian Leeners, CEO & Director
brianleeners@gmail.com / +1 604-862-4184 (WhatsApp)

Tyler Muir, Investor Relations
info@homerunresources.com / +1 306-690-8886 (WhatsApp)

FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE

The information contained herein contains ‘forward-looking statements’ within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Forward-looking statements relate to information that is based on assumptions of management, forecasts of future results, and estimates of amounts not yet determinable. Any statements that express predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not statements of historical fact and may be ‘forward-looking statements’.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/266614

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Sranan Gold Corp. (CSE: SRAN) (FSE: P84) (Tradegate: P84) (‘Sranan’ or the ‘Company’) announces results from a saprolite interval of the initial drill hole, 25RADD-001, at the Randy’s Pit target located on a 4.5-kilometre mineralized trend at the Tapanahony Project in Suriname. The hole intersected 11.5 metres (m) of 3.64 grams per tonne (gt) gold* in weathered mineralized saprolite from a quartz and gossan (oxidizedsulfide relicts-rich) ore zone.

The hole is 300 m north of Randy’s Pit and 280 m north of the high-grade grab samples of up to 76.6 g/t gold reported in Sranan’s new release dated July 31, 2025, where shafts were being excavated. Hole AP12-14 drilled by Iamgold in 2012 is nearby and also reported similar high-grade gold values and similar thicknesses in the saprolite, including an intersection of 13.5 m of 4.17 g/t gold1.

Table 1: Mineralized zone in hole 25RADD-001 drilled by Sranan Gold.

Hole ID Easting Northing Z Azimuth Dip From (m) To (m) Interval (m) Au (g/t)
25RADD-001 766418 455438 159 230 -50 23 34.5 11.5 3.64
Including 29.1 30.5 1.4 21.1

 

*Above 0.3 g/t gold with max 3 m of internal dilution

Dr. Dennis LaPoint, EVP of Exploration and Corporate Development, commented: ‘These initial drill results are key for testing the gold potential of the Randy’s Pit target. The results in saprolite, where no prior mining has been conducted by small-scale miners, in addition to the trench results reported on September 9, 2025, define a gold-bearing corridor of 500 metres with gold present in the near-surface weathered rock. We expect continued drilling to define the grade, orientation and structural controls on the Randy’s trend in unweathered rock.

‘Trenching will be used to extend the Randy’s Pit trend further south and diamond core drilling will test beneath Randy’s Pit and the area to the north. Continued drilling will determine how the Randy’s Pit trend and Poeketi mines to the north are linked structurally.’

Samples were prepared and assayed by Filab in Paramaribo, Suriname. All samples >2 g/t were re-assayed with 50-gram re-assay and gravimetric assay. Standard QA/QC procedures were followed which showed a satisfactory level of reproducibility. Reject samples will be sent to an independent lab for confirmation of assay results following standard procedures. Channel sampling, trenching and drilling are used to determine average grade and thickness. The Company notes that the core sample intervals may not represent true thickness of mineralization.

1 Technical Report titled ‘TECHNICAL REPORT-TAPANAHONY PROJECT SIPALIWINI DISTRICT, EASTERN SURINAME’ with effective date of May 15, 2025, filed on Sedar+ under Sranan Gold’s profile. The Iamgold results reported have been validated by Dr. Criss Capps and Dr. Dennis LaPoint as part of the Technical Report.

About Sranan Gold

Sranan Gold Corp. is engaged in the business of mineral exploration and the acquisition of mineral property assets in Suriname. The highly prospective Tapanahony Project is located in the heart of Suriname’s modern-day gold rush. Tapanahony covers 29,000 hectares in one of the oldest and largest small-scale mining areas of Suriname.

Sranan Gold also owns the Aida Property consisting of five mineral claims within the Kamloops Mining Division in British Columbia, Canada.

For more information, visit sranangold.com.

Qualified Person

Dr. Dennis J. LaPoint, Ph.D., P.Geo. a ‘qualified person’ as defined under National Instrument 43‐101, has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information in this release. Dr. LaPoint is not independent of Sranan Gold, as he is the Company’s EVP of Exploration and Corporate Development.

Information contact
Oscar Louzada, CEO
+31 6 25438975

THE CANADIAN SECURITIES EXCHANGE HAS NOT APPROVED NOR DISAPPROVED THE CONTENT OF THIS PRESS RELEASE.

Forward-looking statements

Certain statements in this release constitute ‘forward-looking statements’ or ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of applicable securities laws including, without limitation, the timing, nature, scope and details regarding the Company’s exploration plans and results at its projects. Such statements and information involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company, its projects, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements or information. Such statements can be identified by the use of words such as ‘may’, ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘will’, ‘intend’, ‘expect’, ‘believe’, ‘plan’, ‘anticipate’, ‘estimate’, ‘scheduled’, ‘forecast’, ‘predict’ and other similar terminology, or state that certain actions, events or results ‘may’, ‘could’, ‘would’, ‘might’ or ‘will’ be taken, occur or be achieved. These statements reflect the Company’s current expectations regarding future events, performance and results and speak only as of the date of this release. Further details about the risks applicable to the Company are contained in the Company’s public filings available on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca), under the Company’s profile.

Forward-looking statements and information contained herein are based on certain factors and assumptions regarding, among other things, the estimation of mineral resources and reserves, the realization of resource and reserve estimates, metal prices, taxation, the estimation, timing and amount of future exploration and development, capital and operating costs, the availability of financing, the receipt of regulatory approvals, environmental risks, title disputes and other matters. While the Company considers its assumptions to be reasonable as of the date hereof, forward-looking statements and information are not guarantees of future performance and readers should not place undue importance on such statements as actual events and results may differ materially from those described herein. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements or information except as may be required by applicable securities laws.

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/266514

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

As questions swirl about FBI Director Kash Patel’s leadership of the agency, particularly in the immediate hours after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Senate Republicans appear ready to back him.

Patel is due before the Senate Judiciary Committee for an annual oversight hearing of the FBI on Tuesday morning, but the timing comes at a crucial moment for him as scrutiny mounts over a wave of firings at the agency and his handling of the investigation into Kirk’s alleged killer.

There is also a new face in FBI management — former Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who was sworn in on Monday in a power-sharing role with FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino.

But Senate Republicans on the Judiciary Committee intend to look at Patel’s track record as a whole over the last nine months, and they signaled that they still have confidence in him.

Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News Digital that he just planned to talk about oversight of the FBI during the hearing.

When asked if he felt there should be increased scrutiny of Patel, Grassley said, ‘Well, that’s why we have an oversight hearing, we do it once a year.’

The top Democrat on the panel, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., however, signaled that he would be going after Patel, particularly in the wake of a lawsuit from three former senior FBI officials last week, who alleged they were fired from the agency for political reasons, and Patel’s firing of former Salt Lake City FBI field office head Mehtab Syed.

Durbin said it was unclear what kind of impact Syed would have had on the investigation, but he noted her lengthy career and specialty in counterterrorism.

‘We do know that the person who pushed her out, Director Patel, quickly took to social media and falsely announced that the suspect was in custody,’ Durbin said on the Senate floor. ‘Remember that? Only to be forced to walk back those claims shortly after.’

Patel has again come under the microscope for a post he made on X in the hours after Kirk was killed where he wrote, ‘The subject for the horrific shooting today that took the life of Charlie Kirk is now in custody.’

However, that individual and another were caught and released before law enforcement nabbed 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, some 33 hours after the shooting.

Patel pushed back on criticism of his performance during an appearance on ‘Fox & Friends’ on Monday, where he argued that his post was made in a push for transparency.

‘I was being transparent with working with the public on our findings as I had them,’ he said. ‘Could I have worded it a little better in the heat of the moment? Sure. But do I regret putting it out? Absolutely not.’

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a member of the committee, told Fox News Digital that there would be ‘a lot of things to learn’ during the hearing, but appeared to still back Patel as director.

‘You know, my view is, listen, he serves at the pleasure of the president,’ Hawley said. ‘If the president has confidence in him, then I think that, you know, that’s good enough for me.’

To Hawley’s point, President Donald Trump appears to still support his embattled FBI director.

‘I am very proud of the FBI,’ Trump said Saturday. ‘Kash — and everyone else — they have done a great job.’

And Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and a member of the panel, said that he was sure that ‘a lot of people are going to be looking at the shooting,’ but argued his focus was on the whole of Patel’s tenure at the FBI — one that he supported during his nomination and one he still supports now.

When asked about Patel’s performance during the investigation in Utah, Tillis contended, ‘Those things are fluid.’

‘I’ve seen a lot of armchair quarterbacks in my day, and I saw a lot of armchair quarterbacks, or Monday morning quarterbacks,’ Tillis said. ‘Could they have been tighter? People are demanding updates.’

‘I mean, if the only thing that they’re criticizing you for is talking about the potential suspects or persons of interest too soon, that’s kind of weak. Go after some more foundational things.’

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said that he believed it would be a ‘very important hearing tomorrow’ in light of Patel’s social media post and direction of the agency.

‘[It’s] something that even the lowest level comms director knows,’ Booker told Fox News Digital. ‘You don’t push out information that’s wrong in an investigation, you stick to the facts, and it’s very disappointing. I think, indicative of the kind of leader that he is.’

‘I’m also more concerned right now with how many of the FBI officials he’s fired for no cause. He’s politicized this department and weaponized the department in a partisan way that’s disappointing,’ he continued. ‘And then, finally, him actually undermining investigations that are ongoing that keep Americans safe is very troubling.’ 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Secretary of State Marco Rubio early Tuesday said that the U.S. and Qatar were on the verge of finalizing a defense cooperation agreement as he framed the Middle Eastern ally as the ‘only country in the world’ positioned to mediate between Israel and Hamas. 

The secretary’s comments came as he was leaving Jerusalem, where he had met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The meeting took place against the backdrop of Israel’s airstrikes on Hamas leaders in Qatar last week, as well as its intensifying bombardment of Gaza City. 

Rubio, who is now heading to Qatar for a quick visit, acknowledged Doha’s anger over the Israeli airstrikes, telling Fox News during an exclusive interview in Jerusalem: ‘We understand they’re not happy about what happened.’ 

Speaking to reporters, Rubio reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to Qatar as an ally, saying Doha can play a ‘key role’ in ensuring the terrorist group Hamas is ‘disarmed as a threat.’ 

‘We think Qatar can play a very key role in that. So, we’re going there. We have a close partnership with the Qataris,’ Rubio said before adding, ‘In fact, we have an enhanced defense cooperation agreement, which we’ve been working on and we’re on the verge of finalizing.’ 

Rubio said that if any country in the world could mediate an agreement between Israel and Hamas, ‘Qatar is the one.’ 

‘They’re the ones that can do it. Now, I don’t know if they can after what happened, but I think they could. If anyone can, they can. There’s no other country in the world that can play that role. And we hope they can,’ Rubio said. 

The secretary warned that the window for diplomacy with Hamas was narrowing, saying, ‘We don’t have months anymore … We probably have days, maybe a few weeks.’ 

‘So, it’s a key moment – an important moment,’ Rubio said. ‘And again, our preference, our number one choice, is that this ends through a negotiated summit where Hamas says, ‘We’re going to demilitarize. We’re no longer going to pose this threat. We’re going to disband. We’re going to release every single hostage.’’ 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Are President Trump’s tariffs proving that two and a half centuries of economic analysis exaggerated the virtues of free trade? Have economists been wrong all these years to insist that consumers should be free to buy imports even when the prices of imports are quite low and their purchase takes business away from particular American firms and workers?

Most economists, including myself, believe not. But if we’re mistaken, our professional duty demands that we point out that Trump’s protectionism is insufficiently ambitious; it should go much further. Trump’s protectionism overlooks a source of low-priced goods that poses a far worse threat than do foreign producers to American producers and workers. That source of low-priced goods is the past.

Goods sold in resale markets cost nothing to manufacture today. If, as Trump and other protectionists argue, it is necessary to tariff goods imported from abroad to protect US manufacturers from low-cost foreign competitors, then it is equally necessary to tariff goods imported from the past. The past exports to us at much lower costs than even the cheapest foreign producers.

Someone in Boston who buys a used Buick from his neighbor withholds demand from US-based automobile producers no less than does someone in Houston who buys a new Hyundai from Korea. Were it true that taxing Americans’ purchases of imported cars is a just means of stimulating US automobile production, it must also be true that taxing Americans’ purchases of used cars is an equally just means of achieving this same goal.

The gains from such a tax could be huge. Last year, Americans spent $217 billion buying 7.7 million imported vehicles. That seems like a lot. But these figures pale beside the $1 trillion that we spent buying 37.4 million used vehicles.[1] By tariffing only cars imported from abroad, the government leaves US automakers vulnerable to a source of competition far larger and more potent than foreign automakers: the past. Not only do used cars cost nothing today to produce, the life expectancy of automobiles is rising. 

A new car today lasts twice as long as one did fifty years ago and 43 percent longer than 30 years ago. Cars’ rising durability means that the past is dumping ever-larger numbers of cheap vehicles on our market.

Even bigger gains for American workers would come from tariffs imposed on sales of used homes – sales that obviously provide far less employment for carpenters, electricians, masons, and other construction workers than do sales of new homes. In 2024, Americans bought 4.06 million used homes at a total cost of $1.65 trillion.[2] That’s nearly five times more than the $350 billion we spent to buy 683,000 new homes.[3] If ordinary Americans are enriched when the government protects workers from imports that can be produced at a fraction of the cost of producing new American-made outputs, there’s no reason not to impose high tariffs on homes imported from the past.

And as with automobiles, as houses become sturdier, the market will be flooded with larger and larger numbers of homes imported from the past. The president and other protectionists surely cannot ponder this reality without wanting to protect America’s construction industry from that low-cost competitor.

Automobiles and housing are far from the only goods whose increased longevity results in more of them being imported into the present from the past. Between 1980 and 2000, the expected mileage of automobile tires rose by 38 percent, and since 2000 by another 50 percent; in 1980, we Americans could expect tires to last 29,000 miles while today we can expect 60,000 miles. In consequence, today’s demand for new automobile tires is lower than it would be if we Americans were prevented from keeping our tires for as long as we now do.

Or consider lightbulbs. Today’s LED bulbs last an amazing 20 to 25 times longer than their incandescent ancestors from just a few years ago. Similarly, the greater abundance of rechargeable batteries reduces the demand for newly made ones.

We’re also importing more clothing from the past to compete with today’s producers and retailers of new clothing. Consumer demand for used – “vintage” – clothing is rising. And this demand is significant: In 2023, eight percent of Americans’ spending on clothing was for pre-owned apparel. That’s spending that high tariffs on sales of vintage clothing could shift to the market for new clothing, thus helping to restore employment in US textile mills.

Among other goods that we are importing in increasing quantities from the past are restaurant equipment, furniture, and consumer appliances. Spending on the last of these second-hand items is projected to grow by about 25 percent by 2032.

And what is recycling if not a concerted effort to import glass, plastics, paper, and metals from the past so that they can compete in the present against new outputs? Even used motor oil is recycled into lubricants that compete with newly produced varieties. Although recycling isn’t costless, it nevertheless supplies the market today with outputs that depress new production.

If protectionist logic is correct, the past is guilty of unfair competition that harms workers in factories making automobiles, batteries, lightbulbs, and other goods that are increasingly imported from the past.

President Trump and his advisors, along with protectionist pundits such as Oren Cass, assure us that one key to making the American economy great is protecting American workers from low-priced imports. 

We economists are convinced that they’re deeply mistaken. But if we are wrong and they are right, they have so far failed to protect American workers from a source of imports much larger and more formidable than foreign countries: the past and the many goods that it routinely exports to us at low prices.

[1] The average price of a used car sold in the US in 2024 was $27,177. Multiplying this figure by 37.4 million units sold yields total expenditure on used cars in the US in 2024 of $1,016,419,800,000.

[2] The median (I can’t find the average) price of an existing home that sold in the US in 2024 was $407,500. Multiplying this number by the number of such homes sold in 2024 – 4.06 million – yields $1.165 trillion.[

3] The average price of a new home sold in 2024 was $512,200. Multiplying this number by the number of such homes sold in 2024 – 683,000 – yields a figure of $349.8 billion.


In a stunning shift, China — longtime recipient of US economic and political aid, and one of the largest beneficiaries of the postwar liberal order that Washington led in building — has turned against the United States over the past twelve years. This reversal is striking not only for its speed but for its paradox: a nation that rose on the back of American markets, investment, and a security environment maintained by the US now casts America as its primary adversary. 

Over the past decade, observers have witnessed what can only be described as a process of disenchantment with America. Once, the Chinese spoke of the United States with a mixture of admiration and longing. For college students dreaming of Ivy League campuses to urban professionals fascinated by American culture and entrepreneurship, America served as both an aspiration and a mirror of possibility. 

But today, in Chinese media and casual talk on the street, America is more often ridiculed or reviled than admired. The irony is glaring. Despite dominant narratives and public opinion increasingly steeped in mockery and hostility, China’s commercial elites continue to move assets and family members to the United States, hedging against an uncertain future. 

Countless officials, too, quietly secure their “exit options” by transferring wealth and children abroad, often to the very country they are trained to call a rival in official discourse. This contradiction — of hostility on the surface and dependence beneath — captures the paradoxical state of China’s relationship with America. 

America as a Model of the Free Society 

For much of China’s reform era, America functioned not just as a geopolitical competitor but as an archetype of modern prosperity. The principles of a free society formed its foundations: open markets, secure property rights, freedom of speech, and the rule of law. These tenets of classical liberalism fascinated late-developing nations, China included. 

Despite official propaganda that cast the US as an adversary, China’s development trajectory has been deeply intertwined with American support. Washington opened access to technology, capital, and education. Its human rights diplomacy, though often resented, pressured Beijing into incremental reforms that tangibly improved Chinese lives. Multilateral frameworks such as the World Trade Organization accelerated China’s integration into the global economy. 

US policy, though often self-interested, played a catalytic role. Technology transfers, foreign direct investment, and academic exchanges created channels of learning. Between 1980 and 2000, American firms invested more than $60 billion in China. By 2019, 370,000 Chinese students studied in US universities, the largest group of foreign students worldwide. After China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, exports to the US rose from $100 billion in 2000 to more than $500 billion by 2021. 

Chinese elites could not resist the pull. Political leaders and business tycoons alike sent their children (including Xi Jinping’s daughter) to American schools, moved assets overseas, and allowed artifacts of American lifestyles — from Hollywood movies to consumer brands — to circulate widely at home. 

So many Chinese officials and their beloved children graduate from Harvard, in particular, that some wryly call it “the Party school.” In this sense, China’s modernization was never a purely national story; its global rise was inextricably tied to the tolerance, openness, and even indulgence of the United States.

The Turning Point After 2013 

This symbiotic fascination — Chimerica as termed by historian Niall Ferguson — began to fracture around 2013. Many commentators attribute the change to American decline — financial conflict, foreign policy fatigue, and social polarization. But the deeper cause lay within China itself: the leadership grew increasingly self-assured and forgetful of how much reform-era achievements had depended on American accommodation. 

As urbanization accelerated and the middle class expanded, the liberal values once admired from afar began to materialize as domestic demands — for greater rights, accountability, and political participation. 

In 2012, journalist Max Fisher wrote an article for The Atlantic that detailed the significant number of protests in China. The Guardian covered a grassroots movement of environmental protests that dealt a blow to the Chinese government’s grasp on its people. Lacking the institutional capacity of a modern party system to absorb such pressures, the Chinese Communist Party chose suppression over reform. The result was the rise of technological authoritarianism: advanced surveillance, curated information bubbles, and “cognitive warfare” directed inward. The limited consensus within the Party on the rule of law and institutional norms came to a halt after the removal of term limits; meanwhile, as high-tech methods penetrated daily life and built an all-encompassing system of surveillance, the public’s demand for the rule of law has all but withered away. 

Nationalism and digital populism are actively encouraged. Criticizing the Chinese government was interpreted as hating one’s own country. Social media platforms amplified xenophobic tropes, and state-sponsored mockery of the West became a celebrated mode of expression. The space for genuine admiration of America contracted, replaced by a distorted picture filtered through censorship and propaganda. American social media apps were banned, leaving citizens with only heavily monitored Chinese alternatives. The authoritarian State offers its citizens the illusion of a market economy, while keeping a watchful eye on any potential dissidents. 

The outbreak of COVID-19 offered the government yet another opportunity to tighten its grip on society and exert further control over its citizens. 

America’s Own Cracks and China’s Disillusionment 

Still, the story cannot be told as if China changed in isolation. America’s own liberal order has shown fissures that complicate its role as a beacon of freedom and opportunity. On the left, woke agendas and extreme interpretations of diversity and inclusion have struck many Chinese observers as evidence of cultural decadence and moral confusion. On the right, the resurgence of Trumpism — with its populist ethno-nationalism and hostility to institutions (as well as some anti-Asian racism) — has raised doubts about America’s commitment to the universalist values it once championed.  

For many Chinese people, this has produced a dual sense of betrayal. On one side are the educated and the awakened — intellectuals, business elites, and the aspiring urban middle class — who once looked to America as the symbol of liberal democracy, the rule of law, and an open society. For them, the disenchantment has been sharp: few expected that the United States itself would drift into cultural and political extremes, eroding the very universal ideals that once inspired the world. 

On the other side are these same groups, together with the vast majority of ordinary Chinese citizens — the ninety percent of the population with little political participation or public voice — who must live under an ever-tightening domestic regime. Their daily environment is one of pervasive surveillance and repression, where every opinion can be monitored and every choice filtered through the lens of state power. What makes the suffocation worse is the constant flood of propaganda, delivered not only through traditional media but through algorithm-driven digital platforms. This propaganda does not merely glorify the Party; it actively diminishes all Western capitalist democracies and fosters particular hostility toward the United States and Japan, countries whose political and institutional resilience expose the vulnerabilities of China’s system. 

Between a West that no longer shines as the guiding light it once was, and a domestic order that seeks to choke off even the possibility of free thought, Chinese citizens find themselves trapped in a narrowing space, disillusioned abroad and disempowered at home. 

Two Countries Apart, Two Countries Alike 

Despite their many transgressions, China and the US are quite similar in how they view foreign encroachments. China’s ‘Century of Humiliation’ plays a significant part in the current foreign policy framework, while also serving as a stark reminder of how countries can wield power over China. In a similar light, the US government employed the Monroe Doctrine to protect against aggressive European interests and to assert its autonomy as a newly formed nation. Despite this commendable philosophy, modern American foreign policy has largely aimed toward acquiring more territory, influence, and control.

While the Chinese and US governments view each other as adversaries, the opening of markets will benefit both countries simultaneously. In his book, Foundations of a Free Society (PDF), Eamonn Butler makes a noteworthy observation concerning free trade. He argues that through a desire to trade, countries will better understand each other or, at a minimum, foster respect. Projecting a superior attitude will not bode well for future international business. International trade is often mistakenly discussed as if countries are exchanging with each other, but it is rather individuals. Both parties involved can learn and appreciate the fascinating things of this world and its vast array of people. 

Haunted by a domineering socialist past, China remains reluctant to embrace Western liberal ideals. Yet the experiences of its neighbors — Japan and South Korea — offer a counterpoint: societies that chose constitutional order and open markets have found not only prosperity but also legitimacy and resilience. 

Conclusion 

China no longer “digs” America. This is not because China has outgrown the need for models, nor because America has lost all influence. Rather, it is the product of two converging processes: the self-satisfaction and repression of a Chinese ruling elite unwilling to share power, and the erosion of America’s image as the unrivaled guardian of liberal pluralism. 

As citizens of each respective country maneuver this diplomatic debacle, they are unfortunately caught between competing values. Self-interested countries are prone to falling prey to what Graham Allison called the “Thucydides Trap.” According to Allison, this phenomenon occurs when an emerging country confronts a historically dominant country, and war becomes likely. In our current situation, it is still unclear if this is the inevitable path, but both governments seem determined to foment tension among their citizens.  

The paradox persists: China’s elites continue to seek refuge in the very country they denounce, while ordinary citizens are left to navigate a world where both America and China appear diminished. The disenchantment is real, but it may prove unstable. Without freedom, prosperity cannot endure; and without credible institutions, societies risk losing their sense of direction and identity altogether. 

In 2022, I described what Congress could do with the $2.04 billion Powerball jackpot. The result, which should surprise no one, was “not much.” But just how “not much” turned out to be staggering. At the time, the nation was still plagued by COVID-related stimulus and spending packages, and we were being led by the Biden/Harris Administration, which was no stranger to increased government spending.

With the recent $1.8 billion Powerball jackpot, it’s time for an update. Has a new Administration obsessively determined to root out “waste, fraud, and abuse” and to improve “government efficiency,” succeeded in turning back the tide of government spending? 

Based on budget figures for FY2025, Powerball bucks could cover the Pentagon’s $859 billion spending for 18 hours and 36 minutes. Social Security (annual price tag $1.57 trillion) burns through the Powerball winnings in barely 10 hours. The $1.75 trillion Congress is slated to spend on healthcare, including Medicare and Medicaid, would swallow the jackpot in just nine hours. 

The federal government’s $7.03 trillion budget means that Congress spends the equivalent of the Powerball winnings every 2 hours and 15 minutes — 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year. One day’s worth of federal spending is equivalent to ten jackpots.

Even more sobering to consider is the federal deficit for this year. With Congress scheduled to spend $1.9 trillion it does not have, America would have to win the Powerball over 1,000 times just to balance the federal budget. With three drawings per week, our Congressional leaders would have to win a $1.8 billion jackpot for the next six and a half years just to pay for this year’s excess spending. All this, and they still would not even begin to touch the $37.4 trillion national debt. 

These simple facts highlight a sobering reality: we cannot tax our way out of what is clearly a spending crisis. When winning one of the largest lottery jackpots every single day still would not fill the gaping hole in our federal budget, the problem is not the shovel, but the size of the hole we keep digging. We need real solutions, not cheap political promises to root out “waste, fraud, and abuse” while spending continues to climb. Plenty of politicians, from both the Left and the Right, have promised to fix the problem of our national debt. None have succeeded. The reason for this is simple: Congress is set up to spend money. 

With the passage of the Second Liberty Bond Act in 1917, Congress effectively gave itself a credit card. Initially, this credit card was intended to be used only in case of emergencies. However, like any kid given a credit card for “emergency use only,” Congress kept finding new “emergencies.” 

Today, this borrowed money is used for everything from pet projects (political largesse benefiting a small number of politically connected people), to core functions, to infrastructure expansions and everything in between. Consider the Pentagon’s $640 toilet seats, the Air Force’s $1,300 coffee mugs, or the lavish spending promoted by “use it or lose it” budget rules, such as a $9,341 leather chair. This is not fiscal responsibility. It is lunacy. 

Worse yet: Congress has the power to raise the debt ceiling whenever it wishes. This would be like a credit card company letting a teenager decide what the spending limit on their “emergency use only” credit card should be, while sticking mom and dad with the bill and the credit score ramifications. 

Prior to the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917, Congress could still issue debt. But instead of having a pre-approved debt limit, Congress had to authorize each and every debt issuance on a project-specific basis. Major spending projects, such as the Panama Canal and the Louisiana Purchase, were decided in this way. 

With project-specific debt authorization, policymakers were required to go on the record as supporting borrowing for identifiable purchases. Voters, then, could evaluate policymakers’ votes, seeing exactly where any debts were holding them accountable at the ballot box for any fiscal malfeasance. With the passage of the Second Liberty Bond Act, the national debt jumped from $5 billion in 1917 to $15 billion in 1918. It would never be that low again. 

Today, voters are presented with omnibus appropriations packages; bills scored against baseline projections that give the impression of saving money while really just increasing spending more slowly; and continuing resolutions to adjust spending growth, instead of actual spending. 

Our fiscal reality is clearly unsustainable. With the passage of the “Big Beautiful” budget reconciliation bill, Congress has already given itself permission to grow the national debt to $41 trillion. Interest payments on the national debt are already the second-most-expensive item on the federal budget, behind only Social Security (and ahead of defense spending). As the national debt continues to grow, debt service will become our number one spending obligation. History suggests it’s only a matter of time until we hit that limit and, unless things change, once again raise the debt ceiling. This cannot continue indefinitely.

The truth is that we cannot tax our way out of a spending crisis. When the second-largest lottery jackpot in US history represents little more than a drop in the bucket to our political leaders, the solution is no longer cheap political talk, but real reform. This will require real limits on federal spending, automatic triggers that force real spending cuts instead of hollow debates that ultimately lead to raising our debt ceiling and worsening our credit rating, and entitlement reforms that acknowledge both demographic and fiscal realities. Until that happens, Congress continues to spend lottery-jackpot sums every two hours and fifteen minutes, and it’s taxpayers who keep losing in the gamble.