Author

admin

Browsing

Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., was in college when her father was ‘raking up thousands of dollars of debt’ while battling a crippling gambling addiction she says was brought on by medication to treat his Parkinson’s disease diagnosis.

Now, the Indiana Republican is working to make sure other American families can seek help for their loved ones before facing the same monetary problems.

‘The POINTS Act is about helping people who are struggling with gambling addiction, by utilizing existing excise tax revenue to issue grants to states and jurisdictions, including Indian tribes across the country, for the use of education and training on preventing and treating gambling addiction,’ Houchin told Fox News Digital.

Her bipartisan bill, the Providing Opportunities for Individuals in Need of Treatment and Support (POINTS) Act, is a rare bipartisan initiative in Congress being co-led with Rep. Andrea Salinas, D-Ore.

It’s an issue Houchin said she is passionate about, given her own family history — which she said is ‘not unique.’

‘Unfortunately, many families across the country have had similar experiences, if not from Parkinson’s, but from other illnesses and just suffering from addiction in general,’ she said. ‘And it can cripple families and ruin their future if it’s not treated.’

Her own father was 55 when he was diagnosed with Parkinson’s, Houchin said, and the gambling addiction set in soon after.

‘My mom would tell stories that, you know, they often would go out west if they’d take a vacation, and it would be difficult for her to get him through the airport at Las Vegas because of the casino that’s right there as you pass through,’ Houchin said.

She told Fox News Digital that her father’s doctors knew little about why the medication caused his gambling addiction, but suggested it took her family years to financially recover.

‘My mom just let me know that she just paid off a second mortgage, took her about 10 to 15 years to pay it off, around $91,000 of gambling debt that my dad had raked up over the course of his illness after being prescribed this medication,’ Houchin said. ‘So we want other families to have the support system necessary to have the resources to treat gambling addiction.’

Her legislation, which is also backed by Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, and Troy Carter, D-La., would create a first-of-its-kind federal fund dedicated to specifically addressing gambling addiction.

She also pointed out that it would not be funded by any new taxes on Americans.

‘This is existing excise taxes that are going to be distributed in the form of grants for states that adhere to the principles in the POINTS Act, which is providing resources, not just to healthcare professionals, but also for families on how to access gambling addiction treatment,’ Houchin said.

Both she and Salinas also argued the legislation was critical now, given the meteoric rise of sports betting via apps and other easily accessible means.

‘As sports betting and online gambling continue to expand across the country, we have a responsibility to ensure people struggling with addiction are not left behind. Gambling addiction can devastate individuals and families, yet too many communities still lack the resources needed to provide prevention, treatment, and recovery support,’ Salinas told Fox News Digital.

‘The POINTS Act helps close that gap by investing existing gambling excise tax revenue into programs that expand care, raise awareness, and connect people to the help they need.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

. — As Republicans aim to hold their fragile House and Senate majorities in the 2026 midterm elections, they’ve got an ally in the politically potent and deep-pocketed fiscally conservative group Club for Growth.

Framing the midterms, Club for Growth President David McIntosh emphasized in an exclusive Fox News Digital interview on the sidelines of the group’s annual economic conference ‘what’s at stake’ in the midterms.

‘It’s the difference between all the great progress, the jobs, the good economy, turning America around,’ that McIntosh said President Donald Trump and Republicans on Capitol Hill have accomplished over the past year, ‘versus letting the socialists back in, they’ll shut it all down.’ 

For a quarter-century, the club has been one of the biggest backers of Republican candidates and causes, as it pushes its pro-growth and limited-government conservative agenda.

McIntosh, in a presentation to major donors to the group, highlighted that the club spent more than $160 million in the GOP primaries and general election during the 2024 election cycle, ‘and won nearly 80%’ of its races.

In 2026, the group aims to raise and spend $175 million in the midterms, and says it’s already brought in $65 million from donors.

The club plans to spend $75 million on Senate races, $55 million on House showdowns, $20 million in ballot box battles for governors, and $20 million — mostly already spent — on issue advocacy in support of Trump’s tax cuts, school choice efforts and the push for congressional redistricting.

‘I think the House is the most vulnerable,’ McIntosh said as he pointed to the GOP’s fragile 218–214 majority. 

‘So we’ve already started raising money for the general. I’ve got a House fund, an ambitious goal of $40 million to help our guys win,’ he added as he spotlighted a fund for vulnerable House Republican incumbents.

As the party in power, Republicans are facing traditional political headwinds which usually result in the loss of congressional seats in the midterms. And Democrats are energized, thanks to a slew of ballot box victories and overperformances in off-year and special elections in the 14 months since Trump returned to the White House, as they stay laser focused on affordability amid persistent inflation.

But the GOP also is dealing with a low propensity midterms issue that it didn’t have to worry about before Trump upended the political order: MAGA voters who don’t always go to the polls when Trump’s name isn’t on the ballot.

‘We’ve got to get the folks who voted for President Trump,’ McIntosh said. ‘They don’t necessarily come out in the midterms. We have to share with them what’s at stake.’ 

‘We’re going to work with President Trump on that so they know he wants them to vote,’ he said. ‘He wants them to come out. He needs them so he can keep going.’

McIntosh said the Club will highlight that ‘Republicans have a plan that will help make things more affordable. It will keep cutting taxes. They will see the benefits.’

‘But the bigger message is going to be, you can’t let the Democrats back in, because they’ll shut everything down,’ he claimed. ‘It’ll be back to the Biden days, high inflation, higher taxes, fewer jobs. That’s what’s at stake, and our job is to tell the voters, we need you to vote because it makes all the difference.’

The economy, and specifically inflation, was a key issue that boosted Trump and Republicans to sweeping victories in 2024. But affordability boosted Democrats at the ballot box in 2025 and so far in 2026. 

And with oil and gas prices surging since the start of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran a week and a half ago, Republicans face more potential political headaches.

But McIntosh predicted that ‘by the end of the year, we’re going to be back to a robust economy because the Trump tax cuts are going to kick in. People will keep more of their money. There’s a huge incentive for companies to build factories back here in America again, and that will kick in. People will say, ‘Yeah, I like the direction we’re going. Things are turned around. We can’t let the Democrats ruin that.’’

Most Democrats obviously disagree with the political narrative coming from the club.

And the Democratic National Committee has long criticized the group for its ‘extreme positions on banning abortion and cutting Social Security and Medicare.’

While the club is ramping up for the general election showdowns, it’s already playing in this year’s GOP primaries.

In the battle for the Senate, the club recently made a major endorsement, backing Rep. Mike Collins of Georgia, who’s involved in an ugly three-way fist fight for the Republican nomination in the race to take on Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff in the southeastern swing state.

‘We’re definitely going to be there in Georgia to help Mike Collins win,’ McIntosh pledged.

The club enjoyed a major victory March 3, as the candidate it was backing, Texas state Rep. Steve Toth, toppled high-profile incumbent U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL officer, in the GOP primary for a Houston-area congressional seat.

But in this case, the club kept quiet its efforts to support Toth, as it put its funding in an aligned startup PAC.

McIntosh said he ‘knew if Club for Growth came in guns blazing, then the Washington money would come in to help Crenshaw.’

‘We don’t need the glory. We don’t need to take credit for it,’ McIntosh said. And pointing to Tosh, he added, ‘He did the job, but we were able to bring the funds in that let the voters know what their choice was.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Senate Democrats are preparing a series of war powers votes aimed at curbing President Donald Trump’s authority to continue military operations against Iran — and forcing the administration to publicly defend its actions.

Several Senate Democrats filed war powers resolutions last week meant to handcuff Trump and his continued conflict in the Middle East. It’s a power play by the group, who say the administration has not shown enough evidence that the U.S. should have struck Iran in the first place, much less continue fighting in the region.

Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., collectively filed five war powers resolutions last week, and they’re joined by Sens. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., and Tim Kaine, D-Va. Kaine has filed resolution after resolution to curb Trump’s war authority since he took office for his second term.

Those resolutions, barring an official slate of hearings with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, could hit the Senate next week and grind down floor time.

‘This Congress should be focused on the biggest military action since the Afghanistan war, and we’re not even holding hearings on that,’ Booker told Fox News Digital. 

Murphy said that the resolutions could hit the Senate floor as soon as next week, and warned that if hearings are set in motion, Democrats would be able to ‘call up a vote every day on war powers and force at least a short debate and vote every day.’

‘There’s no excuse to hide what the administration is doing from the public,’ Murphy said. 

While the group wouldn’t reveal exactly what their gridlock-inducing floor strategy would look like, they contended that the chairs of the Senate Armed Services and Senate Foreign Relations committees had already requested that Rubio and Hegseth testify.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Jim Risch, R-Idaho, wouldn’t say whether he had requested Rubio to appear before his panel but blamed Senate Democrats for helping the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

‘You’ll notice the Democrats are the only entity on this planet who are helping the IRGC,’ Risch told Fox News Digital, referring to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The group argued that Rubio and Hegseth should make the case for the war in Iran to the public and that closed-door, classified briefings on the matter weren’t enough to convince them that the war was necessary.

‘I was absolutely not convinced. In fact, nothing was offered to show me that we were under imminent attack,’ Baldwin said. ‘That we were under imminent attack, or that it was reasonable to believe that we were at risk — and that’s what would trigger the president’s authority to use military force without coming to Congress first.’

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., acknowledged that Democrats’ strategy would eat away at floor time but cautioned that ‘we’ll see how the next few days in the conflict go.’

‘I’m sure there’ll be some decisions made around that, but maybe that’ll affect whether or not they try to trigger all those,’ Thune said.

Thune said that ‘there always are’ hearings and noted that the Senate Armed Services Committee would be holding hearings soon on the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

‘So they’re going to have all those folks coming through on a fairly routine basis anyway, and I’m sure this will be a subject of discussion,’ Thune said.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Quebec Innovative Materials Corp. (CSE: QIMC) (OTCQB: QIMCF) (FSE: 7FJ) (‘QIMC’ or the ‘Company’) today announced the completion of Discovery Hole DDH-26-01 to a depth of 711 metres at its West-Advocate hydrogen project in Nova Scotia. Drilling intersected a persistent hydrogen-bearing system beginning at approximately 505 metres, where visible gas was observed at the drill head and well water returned headspace hydrogen concentrations that exceeded the detection limits of the Company’s GA5000 gas analyser. Hydrogen concentrations remained elevated to the end of the hole, confirming that the system remains open at depth as drilling advances, with Hole 2 targeting structural zones to the north-west.

Borehole DDH-26-01 has returned hydrogen concentrations so elevated that the Company’s field instruments were pushed beyond their maximum detectable range on multiple separate depth intervals. These readings were obtained from wellhead water samples already subject to dilution factors of 100 to 10,000 times, according to independent analysis by Prof. Marc Richer-LaFlèche of the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique (INRS), Québec. The surface headspace gas measurements, extraordinary in their own right, are a fraction of what the fractured geological formation is holding at depth.

This is not a trace detection. This is not background noise. This is a live, pressurised, hydrogen-generating system, confirmed by instrument, confirmed by water geochemistry, and confirmed visually in the field, whose true magnitude current surface instrumentation cannot fully characterise.

Why This Discovery at Depth Matters

Natural hydrogen, increasingly referred to as ‘gold hydrogen’ by the global energy community, is one of the most transformative emerging resource categories of this decade. It is carbon-free, generated naturally within the Earth’s crust, and requires no energy-intensive manufacturing process. The global race to identify and develop commercially viable natural hydrogen deposits is intensifying rapidly. QIMC’s West-Advocate results, independently validated by one of Canada’s foremost geochemical institutions, position the Company as one of the most scientifically rigorous natural hydrogen exploration programmes in North America.

Hole 2 Drilling Underway

Hole 2 of the West-Advocate 2026 drilling program is currently underway and is targeting structural zones similar to those observed in DDH-26-01 borehole and identified from geophysical and soil-gas hydrogen and radon geochemistry. The hole is oriented to the northwest in order to approach the contact zone between a gravity and magnetic high interpreted as an uplift of the bedrock sub-basement and the carboniferous sedimentary rock basin. Gas monitoring, well water sampling and core logging remain active as drilling progresses.

Sampling Methodology

Water sampling was conducted at the top of borehole DDH-26-01 casing and gas analyses were carried out using standard headspace gas measurements (2-L) at room temperature and pressure and using 1,300 mL of water and 700 mL of air. Sampling for headspace gas, ranged from depths of 368 m to 710 m, and was conducted between February 25 and March 5, 2026.

Hydrogen Results

At 638 metres, gas bubbles were physically observed rising from the drill head – direct visual confirmation of free hydrogen escaping the formation at the moment of intersection. This field observation is among the most unambiguous forms of evidence available to an exploration team: gas under sufficient pressure to physically exsolve and migrate upward through the drill column in real time.

From 505 m to 680 m, a sustained zone of significantly elevated hydrogen concentrations was identified. Within this interval, on multiple separate occasions, hydrogen concentrations exceeded the maximum detectable range of the GA5000 gas analyzer entirely, logged simply as instrument maximum exceedance. Where exceedance was recorded, samples were subsequently reanalysed using a second independent Eagle-2 H₂ gas detector, confirming concentrations of 2,150 ppmV in diluted wellhead water – itself already subject to dilution factors of 100 to 10,000 times relative to true formation concentrations at depth. The 2,150 ppmV is not the peak. It is the confirmed minimum floor of what was measured at surface. The true deep well water concentration above it remains open.

From 683 m to 711 m, the deepest section drilled in hole DDH-26-01, the hydrogen system did not fade. Sustained readings of 525, 612, 623, 633, and 962 ppmV in diluted wellhead water were recorded in successive intervals, confirming that even at the furthest extent of the borehole, the system remains active, consistent, and measurable.

Throughout the entire sampled interval from 368 m to 710 m, methane (CH₄) was recorded at concentrations below the limit of detection of the GA5000 instrument in 97.3% of all samples. The statistical correlation between H₂ and CH₄ concentrations across the full dataset is R² = 0.06, confirming that hydrogen and methane are uncorrelated and that the gas system is purely hydrogen-dominant with no thermogenic hydrocarbon association.

Hydrogen concentrations are equally uncorrelated with CO₂ (R² = 0.009), with 97.3% of samples showing CO₂ at only 0.1% by volume. The combined absence of methane, the extremely low CO₂ levels, and the dominance of H₂ across both drilling and previously conducted soil-gas surveys confirm a pure inorganic hydrogen source – not a petroleum leakage, not a biodegradation plume, and not a thermogenic system of any kind.

The Dilution Factor

Investors and analysts reviewing the surface measurements should understand the hydrodynamic context that makes them truly extraordinary. Due to the operational constraints of diamond drilling, water samples are collected at the wellhead outlet, not at depth. For example, for borehole DDH-26-01 at 725 m depth, the internal water volume is approximately 717 imperial gallons. With a surface pumping rate of 13.5 gallons per minute, the residence time of water within the borehole is on the order of 54 minutes, resulting in substantial dilution of any gases present in the formation before samples reach surface.

Furthermore, as Prof. Richer-LaFlèche’s analysis establishes, if a gas leak occurs along a porous interval within a deep fracture zone approximately 2 metres thick, the contact time between circulating water and the fractured zone is only approximately 9 seconds. Under such highly hydrodynamic conditions, hydrogen concentrations measured in headspace samples collected at the wellhead are expected to be strongly diluted compared with samples obtained directly at depth under static or near-static conditions.

The result, as independently established by INRS, is that dilution factors of 10² to 10⁴ – that is, 100 to 10,000 times – are expected at this borehole. The confirmed 2,150 ppmV in diluted headspace water measurement represents a very diluted fraction of the true hydrogen concentrations coming out of faulted zones at depth.

Applying the lower bound of Prof. Richer-LaFlèche’s dilution range alone, true in-situ deep well concentrations in the fault zone could exceed 215,000 ppmV which is near 21.5%V H2 (headspace gas measurements). At dilution ratios approaching 465×, the theoretical formation concentration would approach hydrogen saturation (~100% by volume). This modelling illustrates the magnitude of dilution occurring during circulation drilling and why surface measurements represent only a fraction of the hydrogen present at depth.

Why the Dilution Model Matters

Surface hydrogen measurements collected during active drilling represent only a diluted fraction of the hydrogen entering the borehole from hydrogen-bearing fracture zones at depth. During diamond drilling, circulating drilling fluids and subsurface fluids move continuously through the borehole before reaching surface sampling points. This process introduces significant hydrodynamic mixing and dilution within a large water column prior to measurement.

For borehole DDH-26-01, the internal borehole water volume and circulation rates indicate that hydrogen measured at the wellhead is subject to dilution factors estimated by INRS to range from approximately 10² to 10⁴ (100× to 10,000×). As a result, surface headspace measurements represent only a small portion of the hydrogen actually entering the borehole from fractured zones at depth.

Applying the lower bound of this dilution range to the confirmed 2,150 ppmV surface measurement implies potential in-situ formation concentrations exceeding approximately 215,000 ppmV (≈21.5% hydrogen by volume). Higher dilution ratios would imply proportionally higher formation concentrations. These calculations illustrate the scale of dilution occurring within the circulating borehole system and demonstrate why surface measurements cannot directly represent the full hydrogen concentration present in the subsurface.

Equally important, hydrogen remained repeatedly measurable at surface despite this dilution, borehole circulation, and transport to surface. The persistence of hydrogen readings across a broad depth interval therefore supports the interpretation that DDH-26-01 intersected an active hydrogen-bearing fracture system rather than a small isolated gas occurrence.

‘I want to be precise with the market about what we have found and what the instruments told us,’ stated John Karagiannidis, CEO of QIMC. ‘On multiple separate depth intervals, our GA5000 field instruments were pushed past their maximum detection ceiling entirely – the instruments had no higher reading to give us. When we reanalysed those samples with a second independent Eagle-2 detector, we confirmed concentrations exceeding instrument detection thresholds in diluted wellhead water – water that Prof. Richer-LaFlèche has established carries a dilution factor of 100 to 10,000 times relative to what the formation holds at depth. Every single methane reading across the entire hole came back zero. This is a hydrogen system whose true magnitude our instruments could not fully measure at surface. The data from DDH-26-01 has not set a ceiling for this project. It has set a floor. Hole 2 is underway and we are going deeper.’

INRS Analysis by Prof. Marc Richer-LaFlèche

The complete gas geochemistry dataset (headspace analysis of well water samples) and drill core from DDH-26-01 have been submitted to and independently analysed by Prof. Marc Richer-LaFlèche of the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique (INRS), Québec. Prof. Richer-LaFlèche worked on the Reactivated Rift and Graben Geostructure (R2G2) exploration model that underpins QIMC’s targeting methodology, and is serving as independent third-party scientific analyst for the West-Advocate 2026 programme.

In his assessment, Prof. Richer-LaFlèche states:

*’Drilling DDH-26-01 represents a major milestone for natural hydrogen exploration in Nova Scotia, and particularly for the greater Advocate (Cumberland) area. Analytical results from this borehole clearly demonstrate that secondary faults act as conduits for natural hydrogen circulation and its transfer toward the subsurface. These findings validate the exploration model applied by QIMC and its collaborators for targeting natural hydrogen along the Cobequid-Minas Fault Zone (CMFZ) deformation corridor.’*

Prof. Richer-LaFlèche further notes that the near-absence of methane across all sampled intervals:

*’…is a pattern consistent with our working hypothesis that hydrogen production in the area is primarily related to radiolytic processes and/or water-rock reactions involving iron-rich geological materials. This observation is significant because methane was also absent from the soil-gas surveys conducted in the West-Advocate area. The convergence of these two independent datasets reinforces the interpretation that hydrogen circulating within the local rock mass may accumulate locally, offering the potential for clean hydrogen resources without the co-production of methane or other greenhouse gases.’*

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://insiderlegacysecret.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/287951_4f6b9922a4bb5a1b_001.jpg

Figure 1. Diagrams illustrating the variations in measured hydrogen concentrations (ppmV) in head-space gas samples obtained from water exiting the DDH-26-01 borehole casing. A) Vertical distribution of hydrogen concentrations as a function of depth along the 55°-inclined borehole. B) Statistical variability of the dataset and identification of background noise, anomalous samples, and strongly anomalous samples based on a normal probability plot derived from the head-space gas analyses performed on water samples from DDH-26-01.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7968/287951_4f6b9922a4bb5a1b_001full.jpg

Technical Interpretation – What These Results Suggest

The persistence of hydrogen concentrations toward the bottom of the borehole, combined with visible gas observations and instrument exceedances, suggests the drill hole intersected an active hydrogen migration corridor rather than an isolated gas occurrence.

The Data – Interval by Interval

Multiple intervals between approximately 500 m and 680 m returned hydrogen readings exceeding the GA5000 instrument detection limits. Independent verification using an Eagle-2 detector confirmed hydrogen concentrations exceeding 2,150 ppmV in diluted wellhead samples. Sustained hydrogen readings continued from 683 m to 711 m depth.

Geology Confirms the System

Drill cores recovered from approximately 570 m to 680 m depth present a lithological character that is both visually compelling and geologically coherent with the gas data. Dark carbonaceous and graphitic black rock alternates with lighter siltstones. The abundant fracturing and veining observed throughout the core indicates active structural pathways through which hydrogen-bearing fluids migrate and accumulate.

The geology did not change. The drill did not stop. The system did not weaken.

Next Steps

Drilling continues with Hole 2 targeting deeper portions of the interpreted structural system. Additional borehole sampling, gas geochemistry analysis and isotopic studies are ongoing in collaboration with researchers from INRS.

For More Information, Please Contact:

REGULATORY DISCLAIMER

Neither the Canadian Securities Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. This press release contains forward-looking statements based on current expectations, field observations, and preliminary data. Actual results may differ materially. All gas readings and geological interpretations are preliminary and subject to further independent verification and analysis. Instrument maximum exceedance readings indicate hydrogen concentrations beyond the GA5000’s upper detection threshold; the confirmed surface measurement of 2,150 ppmV was independently verified using an Eagle-2 H₂ gas detector from diluted wellhead water samples. Dilution factor estimates of 10² to 10⁴ are based on borehole hydrodynamic modelling by Prof. Richer-Lafleche of INRS and represent a range of expected values; true in-situ formation concentrations are undetermined pending further analysis. Projected in-situ concentration ranges derived from dilution factor modelling are illustrative estimates only and do not represent confirmed or measured formation concentrations. This release does not constitute an offer of securities or investment advice. Investors are urged to conduct their own due diligence.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains ‘forward-looking statements’ and ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. These statements are based on expectations, estimates, and projections as of the date of this press release and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results, performance, or achievements of the Company to differ materially from those expressed or implied.

Forward-looking statements are generally identified by words such as ‘expects,’ ‘anticipates,’ ‘believes,’ ‘intends,’ ‘estimates,’ ‘projects,’ ‘potential,’ and similar expressions, or by statements that events or conditions ‘will,’ ‘may,’ ‘could,’ or ‘should’ occur.

Although the Company believes that the forward-looking information contained herein is reasonable as of the date of this press release, such information is subject to change and no assurance can be given that future results will be achieved. The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements except as required by applicable law.

Source

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

A week and a half into the U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran, the latest national public opinion poll indicates that more than half of American voters oppose U.S. military action.

But the survey from Quinnipiac University in Connecticut is the latest to indicate a wide partisan divide when it comes to support for the U.S. military operation, known as Epic Fury, which has resulted in the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the decimation of the country’s military.

Fifty-three percent of voters questioned in the poll, which was conducted Friday through Sunday, said they oppose the U.S. military action against Iran, which was ordered by President Donald Trump, with 40% supporting the operation.

The Quinnipiac poll joins other recent surveys from NPR/PBS/Marist (44%–55%), CBS News (44%–56%), NBC News (41%–54%), Washington Post (39%–52%), CNN (41%–59%), and Reuters/Ipsos (27%–43%), in indicating minority support for U.S. military action.

But the latest Fox News poll, conducted Feb. 28–March 2, showed Americans split at 50% in their support or opposition to the fighting.

And three other national polls conducted over the past week and a half indicated majority or plurality support for the operation.

The surveys highlight the divergence between Democrats and Republicans over the fighting.

More than 8 in 10 Republicans surveyed by Fox News said they approved of the U.S. use of force against Iran, with 6 in 10 saying the president’s actions on Iran are making the U.S. safer. 

But nearly 8 in 10 Democrats and 6 in 10 independents disapproved of the U.S. strikes and said things are less safe because of Trump’s performance.

The vast majority of Democrats surveyed by Quinnipiac University, as well as 6-in-10 independents, said they opposed the strikes on Iran, with 85% of Republicans supporting the military action.

A majority (55%) questioned by Quinnipiac said they didn’t think Iran posed an imminent military threat to the U.S. before the attacks, with nearly four in ten disagreeing. 

Again, there was a partisan divide, with 83% of Democrats and 63% of independents saying Iran didn’t pose an imminent threat, while nearly three quarters of Republicans said Tehran did pose an imminent threat.

But there was no partisan gap when it came to the possibility of sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.

Nearly three quarters of voters opposed sending U.S. ground troops into Iran, including 95% of Democrats, 75% of independents and 52% of Republicans.

Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have repeatedly not ruled out using ground troops in Iran.

Asked how long the fighting between the U.S. and Iran, which has retaliated with strikes against Israel and other nations in the volatile Middle East, will last, just 3% of Quinnipiac pollees said days, 18% offered weeks, 32% guessed months, 13% thought the attacks could last a year, and just over a quarter said more than a year.

‘Very soon,’ Trump said at a news conference Monday, when asked when the strikes would end. ‘Look, everything they have is gone, including their leadership.’

And the president described the operation as an ‘excursion.’

Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Peter Malloy noted that ‘perhaps compelled by memories of long wars, Americans see no early end to the enormous upheaval in the Middle East.’

Trump recently dismissed the polling on Iran, telling the New York Post March 2: ‘I don’t care about polling. I have to do the right thing. I have to do the right thing. This should have been done a long time ago.’

Trump’s overall approval rating stood at 37% in the Quinnipiac poll, with 57% giving the president a thumbs down on the job he’s doing in the White House.

The president stood at 43% approval in the Fox News poll, and at 44% in the NBC News survey. An average of the latest national surveys that gauged the president’s performance put Trump at 43% approval and 54% disapproval.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

War Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that Russia ‘should not be involved’ in the escalating conflict between the United States, Israel and Iran, even as analysts point to Russian military activity that aligns with reports Moscow may be aiding Tehran.

‘The president maintains strong relationships with world leaders, which creates opportunities and options for us in very dynamic ways,’ Hegseth said when asked about President Donald Trump’s recent call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

But as it relates to the Middle East conflict, he added, Russia ‘should not be involved.’

The administration’s messaging comes amid reports that Russia has provided information that could help Iran identify U.S. military assets in the Middle East. Moscow has not publicly confirmed the claims. 

Intelligence assessments have reportedly said Russia provided Iran with information that could help identify the locations of American warships, aircraft and other military assets. Officials reportedly stressed there is no public evidence that Moscow is directing Iranian strikes, but said the information could assist Tehran’s targeting efforts.

The scope, timing and operational impact of that information have not been publicly detailed.

While there is no public evidence definitively proving Russia is providing real-time targeting data, George Barros, a Russia expert at the Institute for the Study of War, said open-source indicators are consistent with the type of support described in the reports.

Barros pointed to Russian military reconnaissance satellites, including Cosmos-2550, a radar and electronic signature spacecraft that recently passed over the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea — areas where U.S. forces have been operating.

‘They’re specialized for naval reconnaissance and detecting ships, because the radar signature off the water really pings it quite well,’ Barros said. ‘These are known capabilities of the Russians.’

Such radar systems can detect maritime targets and electronic emissions that reveal force positioning. Barros said those capabilities align with known gaps in Iran’s own space-based intelligence collection.

Although he cautioned that he does not have dispositive proof of real-time targeting support, Barros said the convergence of Russian reconnaissance capabilities, satellite positioning and reported cooperation ‘makes total sense.’

Trump on Monday described his recent conversation with Putin as ‘very good’ and ‘constructive,’ saying the Russian leader ‘wants to be very constructive.’ Trump suggested Moscow could be more helpful by helping bring the war in Ukraine to an end.

Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, acknowledged over the weekend that Russia is assisting Iran ‘in many different directions’ in its war with the United States and Israel. Pressed on whether that includes intelligence sharing, Araghchi said, ‘They are helping us in many different directions,’ but added, ‘I don’t have any detailed information.’

Beyond intelligence collection, analysts say battlefield patterns suggest tactical cross-pollination between Russia and Iran. 

During the war in Ukraine, Iran supplied Russia with Shahed one-way attack drones, which Moscow deployed extensively against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure. Over time, Russian forces refined strike packages combining drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles to overwhelm integrated Western air defense systems.

‘The Russians got really, really good at learning how to launch drones against integrated Western air defense systems,’ Barros said.

Those lessons, he said, appear to have informed Iranian strike tactics in the Middle East, where Tehran has launched large-scale combined missile and drone attacks against U.S. and allied targets.

If confirmed, Barros argued, intelligence sharing that materially supports Iranian targeting would amount to Moscow acting as a ‘co-belligerent.’

‘The Russians are coming out with Iran as a co-belligerent,’ he said, adding that the Kremlin has long viewed the United States as a geopolitical adversary.

At the same time, Russia remains constrained in how far it can go. 

Russian ground forces are tied down in Ukraine and are not in a position to deploy to assist Iran. Analysts say any Russian support is far more likely to come in the form of intelligence sharing, technology transfers or drone production rather than boots on the ground.

One potential avenue involves drone manufacturing.

Russia operates large-scale Shahed-derived drone production facilities that were initially enabled by Iranian technology transfers. If Iran’s domestic drone factories are degraded by strikes, Russian production could theoretically help sustain Tehran’s aerial campaign, though there is no confirmed evidence that such transfers are occurring.

Defense officials have publicly downplayed the operational impact of any reported Russian assistance, saying U.S. commanders are tracking foreign intelligence activity and factoring it into planning.

The contrast between Trump’s characterization of Putin as ‘constructive’ and Hegseth’s warning that Russia should stay out of the conflict underscores the delicate balance the administration is attempting to strike — pursuing diplomacy in Ukraine while confronting the possibility of deeper cooperation between Moscow and Tehran in the Middle East.

For now, analysts say the evidence stops short of conclusive proof. But the alignment of Russian reconnaissance capabilities, battlefield tactics refined in Ukraine and Tehran’s own acknowledgment of assistance has intensified scrutiny of Moscow’s role as the regional war unfolds.

Russia has not publicly responded to the allegation of intelligence sharing with Iran, but has broadly called for de-escalation of the conflict. 

The Russian embassy could not immediately be reached for comment.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

After-tax NPV(8%) of $473M (USD $346.6M) and 2.2-year payback from start of production with IRR of 48.8% at USD $1,000/mtu WO3

Key Highlights:

  • Additional Payback Metrics: Payback[1] of approximately 2.2 years from commencement of commercial production corresponding to approximately 4.2 years from start of construction under the medium case of USD $1,000/mtu WO₃. [2]

  • Capital Efficient Development: Initial capital cost[3] at the Borralha Project of approximately $125.0 million (USD $91.5 million), with a compact infrastructure layout designed to support efficient underground mining and processing operations.

  • Strong Annual Cash Flow Generation: Average annual revenue of approximately $252.52 million (USD $184.89 million), average annual EBITDA of approximately $142.18 million (USD $104.10 million), and average annual free cash flow of approximately $96.28 million (USD $70.49 million) over the initial mine plan at USD $1,000/mtu WO₃.[4]

  • Integrated Infrastructure Design: Project infrastructure includes planned hydro electric power connection, water supply and recycling systems, road access, and paste backfill integration to support operations while minimizing environmental footprint.

  • Significant Upside Leverage: After-tax IRR of 78.4% and NPV(8%) of $963.8 million (USD $706.4 million) at USD $1,500/mtu WO₃.

  • Resource Growth Underway: Fully funded 20,000-metre drill program continues to target resource expansion, confidence conversion and potential mine life extension beyond the initial 11-year production plan, targeting resource expansion and confidence conversion.

All figures in North American decimal nomenclature.
All amounts in Canadian dollars unless stated otherwise.4

Vancouver, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – March 10, 2026) – Allied Critical Metals Inc. (CSE: ACM,OTC:ACMIF) (OTCQB: ACMIF) (FSE: 0VJ0) (‘Allied’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to provide additional economic and technical detail from the recently announced Preliminary Economic Assessment (‘PEA’) for its 100%-owned Borralha Tungsten Project (the ‘Borralha Project’) in northern Portugal. The Borralha Project’s previously announced PEA economics remain unchanged.

This news release is an amending and restating news release clarifying and correcting the immediately preceding news release dated March 9, 2026 to present figures consistently using North American decimal nomenclature rather than European comma nomenclature. In addition, Table 3 was updated to address rounding errors, translation errors and currency conversion using $1.3658 CAD/USD and Table 5 was updated to clarify use of USD $M.

Roy Bonnell, CEO & Director of Allied, commented: ‘Following the release of our initial PEA for the Borralha Project, we received strong investor interest in additional project-level detail. This supplementary disclosure highlights the Project’s capital efficiency, strong annual cash generation and well-developed infrastructure platform. Importantly, the underlying economics of the PEA remain unchanged, while the additional payback presentation provides another useful reference point for investors evaluating project returns and the strong leverage the Borralha Project has to tungsten prices.’

This additional disclosure provides greater clarity on Borralha Project’s capital efficiency, expected cash flow generation and rapid capital recovery profile. The PEA outlines a capital-efficient underground tungsten development project within the European Union, demonstrating strong economic returns across a range of tungsten price assumptions and significant leverage to current market prices. The estimated capital expenditures for the build out of the Borralha Project are the result of advanced project infrastructure that a planned hydro-electric power connection, water supply and recycling systems, road access, and paste backfill integration to support operations while minimizing environmental footprint.

The PEA continues to demonstrate a technically robust and capital-efficient underground tungsten development project within the European Union. As previously announced, the PEA was evaluated under three pricing frameworks: the Base case of $962/mtu WO₃ (USD $704/mtu WO₃), $1,365/mtu WO₃ (USD $1,000/mtu WO₃), and $2,049/mtu WO₃ (USD $1,500/mtu WO₃), while mine design and cut-off grade selection were developed using a conservative tungsten price assumption of $900/mtu WO₃ (USD $659/mtu WO₃). The Company is providing the additional metrics below to facilitate investor understanding of project capital intensity, cash flow generation and payback presentation. For additional information, please see the news release dated March 2, 2026.

For additional reference, the Company is presenting payback under two different measurement bases. The previously disclosed payback metrics were measured from the start of construction (SC), consistent with standard technical study practice. To facilitate comparison with industry benchmarks, the Company is also providing indicative payback measured from the commencement of commercial production (CCP).

Table 1 — Economic Results (After-Tax)

Scenario Price1 NPV (8%)2 IRR3 Payback SC4 Payback CCP4
Medium $1,365/mtu
(USD $1,000/mtu)
$473.4M
(USD $346.6M)
48.8% 2.2 years 4.2 years
Base $962/mtu
(USD $704/mtu)
$182.7M
(USD $134.0M)
27.2% 3.8 years 5.8 years
High $2,049/mtu
(USD $1,500/mtu)
$963.8M
(USD $706.4M)
78.4% 1.2 years 3.2 years

 

Notes:

  1. NPV is a Non-GAAP measure; see notes below for additional information regarding NPV. M = million.
  2. IRR is a Non-GAAP measure; see notes below for additional information regarding IRR.
  3. Payback is a Non-GAAP measure. see notes below for additional information regarding payback.

Payback measured from the start of construction reflects recovery of initial capital over the full development and operating timeline, while payback measured from the start of commercial production excludes the construction phase and is presented for comparative reference only.

The results highlight significant sensitivity to tungsten price while maintaining positive economics under conservative long-term assumptions.

In the Base Case scenario, tungsten (WO₃) represents approximately 96% of project NPV, with minor contributions from copper (~3%) and tin (<1%), based on NSR contribution. This highlights that the Borralha Project economics are overwhelmingly driven by tungsten.

For reference, current reported tungsten market prices remain materially above the USD $1,000 per mtu sensitivity case presented in the PEA, reaching approximately $2,998 per mtu (USD $2,195 per mtu) as of March 6, 2026 (Source: Fastmarkets).

Mineral Resource Estimate

This initial PEA is based on the updated Mineral Resource Estimate (‘MRE’ or ‘2025 MRE’) for the Santa Helena Breccia at the Borralha Project, which were presented in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’) in the Company’s current technical report on Borralha (the ‘Technical Report’) entitled ‘Technical Report on the Borralha Property, Parish of Salto, District of Vila Real, Portugal’, dated effective December 30, 2025, which is published on the Company’s website at www.alliedcritical.com and under its profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

Under the 2025 MRE, the Santa Helena Breccia has been tested by 41 drill holes and surface trenching over approximately 400 meters of strike length and to depths exceeding 350 meters below surface. Mineralization remains open along strike and at depth. The cut-off grade of 0.09% WO3was selected based on reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction under conceptual underground mining and gravity-dominant processing assumptions, including a very conservative tungsten price of USD $ 550/mtu WO₃ and assumed recovery of approximately 80% (for MRE cut-off determination only).

Table 2 —2025 MRE for Borralha (see also Technical Report for further details)

Clasification Tonnes (Mt)* Grade (% WO3)
Measured + Indicated 13.0 0.21
Inferred 7.7 0.18

 

*Mt denotes millions of tonnes (t).

Initial Capital Allocation and Operational Costs

The Borralha PEA estimates initial capital[7] of approximately USD $91.5 million, with sustaining capital[8] of approximately USD $87 million and total life-of-mine capital[9] of approximately USD $178 million. The initial capital requirement reflects a compact project design integrating underground mine development, process plant construction and site infrastructure.

Table 3 — Initial Capital Costs

Category CAD$M* USD $M*
Underground development $52.93 $38.755
Processing plant $26.54 $19.435
Paste backfill plant $5.34 $3.910
Surface infrastructure $6.13 $4.485
Power connection $8.95 $6.555
EPCM / indirect costs** $19.16 $14.03
Contingency $5.97 $4.356
Initial Capital Costs $125.0 $91.5
Tax incentives $34.3 $25.1

 

*Canadian dollar (CAD) equivalents calculated used a foreign exchange rate of CAD $1.3658/USD.
M denotes million.
**EPCM = Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Management.

Certain development expenditures may also qualify for applicable Portuguese investment tax incentives, which could partially offset initial capital expenditures.

Table 4 — Operating Cost[10] Breakdown

Cost Category USD $/t Processed*
Mining $41.2
Processing $13.2
G&A $5.0
Transport $0.02
TC/RC** $0.51
Total Operating Cost*** $59.3

 

*USD $/t denotes USD $/tonne.
**TC/RC = Treatment Changes and Refining Charges. These are fees paid by mining companies to smelters to process raw material concentrate into refined metal.
***Operating costs for life-of-mine used for mine design average approximately US$49/t processed, based on the Sub-Level Long Hole Stoping (SLOS) mining method. Limited areas may utilize Drift & Fill mining, which carries higher unit costs. In the economic model, operating costs are expressed in nominal US dollars and escalated annually for inflation, resulting in an average life of mine operating cost of approximately US$59/t processed, including transportation and treatment/refining charges.

Concentrate Marketing Assumptions

The PEA assumes production of a marketable tungsten concentrate grading approximately 65% WO₃ using a gravity-dominant flowsheet. Concentrate pricing assumptions are based on industry-standard tungsten concentrate marketing structures, incorporating typical 80% payability terms and treatment charges applicable to the tungsten market.

The Borralha Project benefits from relatively clean mineralogy dominated by wolframite, which generally reduces impurity-related penalties relative to more complex tungsten concentrates.

Capital Efficiency

The relatively modest initial capital requirement reflects several favourable project characteristics, including but not limited to:

  • compact underground mining footprint
  • gravity-dominant processing flowsheet
  • access to regional infrastructure including electrical grid power
  • limited earthworks due to site topography
  • moderate plant throughput of 1.4 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) of mineralized material
  • potential Portuguese investment incentives

These factors contribute to a capital-efficient development scenario compared with many global tungsten projects.

Simplified Annual Cash Flow Metrics

The initial Borralha Project mine plan is expected to generate strong annual cash flow[11] supported by life-of-mine average production of approximately 1,708 tonnes WO₃ per annum, a nominal processing rate of 1.4 Mtpa, and an average mill feed grade of approximately 0.20% WO₃.

Table 5 — Cash-Flow11 Table

Cash Flow Metric Base Case
(USD $M)

USD $704/mtu WO₃
Medium Case
(USD $M)
USD $1,000/mtu WO₃
High Case
(USD $M)
USD $1,500/mtu WO₃
Average annual revenue $131.75 $184.89 $274.69
Average annual EBITDA $53.37 $104.10 $189.86
Average annual pre-tax operating cash flow $40.41 $91.13 $176.89
Average annual free cash flow $35.82 $70.49 $128.79
Life-of-mine revenue $1,449.23 $2,033.75 $3,021.55
Life-of-mine free cash flow $393.97 $775.43 $1,416.64

 

*All figures presented in USD $M, which denotes USD $ million.

Infrastructure and Site Requirements

The Borralha Project benefits from favourable site conditions and access to existing regional infrastructure, supporting a capital-efficient development.

Surface infrastructure has been designed to concentrate industrial and administrative facilities within a compact footprint, minimizing environmental disturbance while ensuring operational efficiency. The process plant, paste backfill facility, workshops, administrative buildings and support infrastructure will be located on a centralized platform adjacent to the orebody.

Access to the site will utilize existing regional roads connected to the municipal road CM1025-2. Dedicated routes for light and heavy vehicles have been designed to ensure safe operations while minimizing earthworks and environmental impact.

A comprehensive water management system has been designed to support mining and processing operations. Water supply is expected to be sourced from local groundwater and surface water resources, with water recycling integrated into the process flowsheet. Three retention basins will provide operational water storage, sedimentation and environmental control.

Electrical power will be supplied through connection to the Portuguese national grid via a planned 60 kV overhead line linking the Borralha substation to the SE Frades (REN) substation over approximately 6.5 km. The design complies with applicable national standards and incorporates environmental protection measures.

The project infrastructure design integrates processing, backfill, water management and power supply systems to support efficient underground mining operations while minimizing environmental impact.

Key Infrastructure Advantages

  • Grid power connection (60 kV line – 6.5 km)
  • Local groundwater and surface water available for operations
  • Existing regional road access to site
  • Compact site layout minimizing environmental footprint
  • Paste backfill and water recycling integrated into plant design

Ongoing Growth Strategy

The current initial PEA is based only on the Santa Helena Breccia deposit and an initial 11-year production plan. The Company’s fully funded 20,000-metre drill program is underway and is targeting:

  • expansion of the current Mineral Resource;
  • conversion of Inferred Mineral Resources into higher-confidence categories;
  • potential extension of mine life beyond the initial plan; and
  • evaluation of throughput optimization and future project scale growth.

The Company intends to continue advancing Borralha through additional drilling, engineering optimization, metallurgical refinement, geotechnical and hydrogeological studies, and progression toward the next stage of technical study.

Qualified Persons

The scientific and technical information contained in this news release has been reviewed and approved by the following Qualified Persons, as defined under NI 43-101:

J. Douglas Blanchflower, P.Geo.

Mr. Blanchflower is an independent Qualified Person under NI 43-101 and was retained by Allied Critical Metals Inc. to prepare the NI 43-101 Technical Report dated effective December 30, 2025. He has overall responsibility for the 2025 MRE and the Technical Report. Mr. Blanchflower is a Registered Professional Geoscientist in good standing with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (No. 19086) and has more than five decades of experience in mineral exploration, resource estimation, and technical reporting. Mr. Blanchflower has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information in this news release relating to the mineral resource estimate.

David Castro López, BSc, MIMMM, QMR

Mr. Castro López is a Mining Engineer and a Professional Member (MIMMM #685484) and Qualified for Minerals Reporting (QMR) of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (IOM3). He is independent of the Company and the Borralha Project. Mr. Castro López contributed to the metallurgical review and process design considerations supporting the PEA and takes responsibility for the metallurgical and mineral processing information contained herein. Mr. López has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information in this news release relating to the metallurgical and mineral processing information contained herein.

Miguel Cabal, EurGeol, Licensed Geologist

Mr. Cabal is a licensed geologist with the European Federation of Geologists (EuroGeol #1439) with over 28 years of experience in mineral exploration, resource evaluation and mine development. He is Managing Director of Geomates (Spain) and has contributed to multiple NI 43-101 and JORC-compliant technical reports, including PEA, PFS and feasibility studies. Mr. Cabal is independent of Allied Critical Metals Inc. and the Borralha Project and has reviewed and approved the mining and economic components of the PEA. Mr. Cabal has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information in this news release relating to the mining and economic components of this news release.

Vítor Arezes, BSc, MIMMM, QMR

Mr. Arezes is Vice President Exploration of Allied Critical Metals Inc. and a Qualified Person under NI 43-101. He is not independent of the Company due to his role as an officer. Mr. Arezes has extensive experience in tungsten and polymetallic mineral systems and has conducted multiple site visits to the Borralha Project, including during the 2025 drilling campaign. He contributed to geological interpretation, exploration oversight, and technical review supporting the PEA. He is a member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (MIMMM #703197) and a Qualified Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves Professional (QMR), and by reason of education, professional experience, and accreditation, meets the definition of a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101. Mr. Arezes has reviewed and approved all of the scientific and technical information in this news release.

About Allied Critical Metals Inc.

Allied Critical Metals Inc. is a Canadian-based mining company focused on the advancement and revitalization of its 100%-owned Borralha Tungsten Project and the Vila Verde Tungsten Project in northern Portugal.

The Borralha Project is one of the largest undeveloped tungsten resources within the European Union and benefits from a favourable Environmental Impact Declaration (DIA), positioning the Project for advancement toward feasibility and development. Vila Verde represents additional exploration upside within the same strategic jurisdiction.

Tungsten has been designated a critical raw material by the United States and the European Union due to its strategic importance in defense, aerospace, manufacturing, automotive, electronics and energy applications. Currently, China, Russia and North Korea account for approximately 87% of global tungsten supply and reserves, highlighting the importance of secure western sources.

Further details regarding the Borralha Project are available in the Company’s NI 43-101 Technical Report dated December 30, 2025, filed on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca and on the Company’s website at www.alliedcritical.com.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

‘Roy Bonnell’
CEO and Director

Additional information is also available by contacting the Company:

Dave Burwell
Vice President, Corporate Development
daveb@alliedcritical.com
Tel: 403-410-7907
Toll Free: 1-800-221-0915

Please also visit our website at www.alliedcritical.com.

Also visit us at:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/allied-critical-metals-inc/
X: https://x.com/@alliedcritical/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/alliedcriticalmetals/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alliedcriticalmetals/

The Canadian Securities Exchange does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This news release contains ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws (‘FLI‘). FLI in this release includes, without limitation, statements regarding: (A) the PEA results and economic indicators (e.g., NPV, IRR, payback and related sensitivities); (B) the conceptual mine plan and operating framework (mining approach, processing rates, production profiles, cost ranges and schedules); (C) the technical basis and process assumptions (cut-off approach, flowsheet concept and anticipated concentrate specifications); (D) the status and trajectory of permitting and approvals, infrastructure access and other site requirements; (E) market-related assumptions and the Project’s sensitivity and leverage to commodity pricing; (F) growth, conversion and expansion opportunities, including planned drilling and other technical programs; (G) the anticipated sequence of future studies, potential financing pathways and indicative timelines; and (H) the Project’s strategic positioning relative to regional and policy objectives. Such FLI is identified by, among other things, words such as ‘plans’, ‘expects’, ‘is expected’, ‘aims’, ‘budget’, ‘scheduled’, ‘estimates’, ‘forecasts’, ‘intends’, ‘anticipates’, ‘potential’, ‘target’, ‘opportunity’, ‘may’, ‘could’, ‘would’, ‘might’, ‘will’ and similar terminology, as well as statements regarding outcomes that ‘will’, ‘should’ or ‘would’ occur.

Material assumptions underlying the FLI include, but are not limited to: the accuracy of the 2025 MRE; geological continuity; the PEA-level capital/operating cost estimates (with typical PEA accuracy ranges); metallurgical recoveries and process performance consistent with test results to date; availability of labour, equipment and consumables at quoted/priced levels; access to grid power and water on contemplated terms; the ability to obtain land access, permits and approvals (including RECAPE) in a timely manner; tungsten pricing consistent with Argus long-term forecasts or stated sensitivity cases; foreign exchange and inflation consistent with study inputs; and availability of financing on acceptable terms. The Company believes these assumptions are reasonable as of the date hereof, but no assurance can be given that they will prove correct.

The PEA is preliminary in nature and includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the PEA results will be realized. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. Any reference to potential production, mine life, NPV, IRR, payback, costs, recoveries, or other economic or technical parameters is preliminary and conceptual.

Key risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the FLI include, but are not limited to: (i) exploration, geological, modelling and grade-continuity risks, including the risk that further work does not confirm Inferred material or resource extensions; (ii) risks that metallurgical performance, WO₃ recoveries, concentrate quality or processing costs differ from test work and assumptions; (iii) capital cost escalation, schedule delays, contractor availability and supply-chain constraints; (iv) operating cost inflation (power, reagents, labour, transportation); (v) commodity price and FX volatility (including sustained periods below the Argus long-term or sensitivity prices assumed); (vi) permitting, environmental, social, community, land access and regulatory risks in Portugal (including RECAPE outcomes and permit conditions); (vii) water, tailings and geotechnical/hydrogeological risks inherent in underground operations; (viii) offtake, marketing and market-access risks for tungsten concentrates; (ix) availability and cost of equity, debt or project finance on acceptable terms; (x) changes in laws, regulations, taxes, royalties, or government policies; and (xi) other risks described under ‘Business Risks’ in the Company’s most recent MD&A and in other continuous disclosure filings available on SEDAR+. Readers are urged to carefully review those risk factors, which are expressly incorporated by reference into this cautionary note.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

The Company has included certain non-GAAP financial measures in this press release. These financial measures are not defined under International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS‘) and should not be considered in isolation. The Company believes that these financial measures, together with financial measures determined in accordance with IFRS, provide investors with an improved ability to evaluate the underlying performance of the Company. The inclusion of these financial measures is meant to provide additional information and should not be used as a substitute for performance measures prepared in accordance with IFRS. These financial measures are not necessarily standard and therefore may not be comparable to other issuers.

Net Present Value (NPV) – is the present value calculation of net profit from operations determined using a particular discount rate. All NPV values stated herein are on an after tax basis.

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) – is a financial metric used to assess an investment’s profitability by calculating the annual rate of return that makes the NPV of all cash flows (both positive and negative) equal to zero.

Payback – is calculated in years as the length of time that it takes to pay off the capital costs from annual net profit expected from operations at the Borralha Project.

Initial capital – is the initial capital cost amount required to be expended to construct the mine and tungsten concentrator process equipment and buildings to begin processing mineralized material into saleable tungsten concentrate at commercial quantities according to the life of mine plan at the Borralha Project. Table 3 above provides a breakdown of the initial capital costs. This is an estimate accurate to +/-35%.

Sustaining capital – is a supplementary financial measure which reflects cash basis expenditures which are expected to maintain operations and sustain production levels at the Borralha Project.

Capital costs or Total life of mine capital costs – include the Initial capital and the sustaining capital.

Operating costs – are the costs required to process mineralized material into saleable tungsten concentrate at the Borralha Project. This includes: underground mining; processing and plant operations; general and administrative costs; and site services and infrastructure support (see Table 4 above for a breakdown of the operating costs). This can be calculated on the unit basis per mtu WO3 produced.

Cash flow – includes average annual revenue, average annual EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), average annual pre-tax cash flow, average annual free cash flow, life of mine revenue, life of mine free cash flow. Average annual revenue is the average annual gross revenue over the life of mine. Average annual EBITDA is the average annual EBITDA over the life of mine. Average annual pre-tax cash flow is the average over the life of mine of the annual free cash flow prior to deduction of taxes. Life of mine revenue is the total gross revenue over the life of mine. Life of mine free cash flow is the total free cash flow over the life of mine. Free cash flows are revenues net of operating costs, royalties, working capital adjustments, capital expenditures and cash taxes. The Company believes that this measure is useful to readers in assessing the Company’s ability to generate cash flows from Borralha.

All-In Sustaining Costs (AISC) – are comprised of sustaining capital expenditures and site level costs to support ongoing operations and closure costs. All-in sustaining costs per mtu WO3 is calculated as AISC divided by the amount of mtu WO3 produced during the period that the costs are incurred. All-in sustaining costs capture the important components of the Company’s production and related costs and are used by the Company and investors to understand projected cost performance at the Borralha Project. Adoption of the all-in sustaining cost metric is voluntary and not necessarily standard, and therefore, this measure presented by the Company may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. The Company believes that the all-in sustaining cost measure complements existing measures and ratios reported by the Company. All-in sustaining cost includes both operating and capital costs required to sustain WO3 production on an ongoing basis. Sustaining operating costs represents expenditures expected to be incurred at the Project that are considered necessary to maintain production. Sustaining capital represents expected capital expenditures comprising mine development costs, including capitalized waste, and ongoing replacement of mine equipment and other capital facilities, and does not include expected capital expenditures for major growth projects or enhancement capital for significant infrastructure improvements.

[1] Payback is a Non-GAAP measure. See notes below for additional information regarding payback.
[2] mtu/WO3 = metric tonne unit of tungsten; WO3 is tungsten trioxide.
[3] Initial capital cost is a Non-GAAP measure. See Table 3 below for a breakdown of the costs and the notes below for additional information regarding initial capital cost.
[4] Average annual revenue, average annual EBITDA, and average annual free cash flow are Non-GAAP measures. See notes below for additional information.
[5] NPV(8%) = net present value at a 8% discount rate. NPV is a Non-GAAP measure; see notes below for additional information regarding NPV. USD = United States dollars. Canadian dollar (CAD) equivalents calculated used a foreign exchange rate of CAD $1.3658/USD.
[6] IRR = internal rate of return. IRR is a Non-GAAP measure; see notes below for additional information regarding IRR.
[7] Initial capital cost is a Non-GAAP measure. See Table 3 above for a breakdown of the costs and the notes below for additional information regarding initial capital cost.
[8] Sustaining capital is a Non-GAAP measure. See notes below for additional information regarding sustaining capital.
[9] Total life of mine capital cost is a Non-GAAP measure. See notes below for additional information regarding total life of mine capital cost.
[10] Operating cost is a Non-GAAP measure. See Table 4 for a breakdown of the Operating Costs and the notes below for additional information regarding Operating Cost.
[11] Cash flow is a Non-GAAP measure. See Table 5 for a breakdown of the cash flow and the notes below for additional information regarding cash flow.

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/287936

News Provided by TMX Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

President Donald Trump, who rode promises of affordability back to the White House, is now confronting Iran-driven volatility that’s undermining that message as fuel costs rise nationwide — and putting fresh pressure on Republicans heading into the midterms.

With the Iran conflict rattling oil markets and raising fears of supply disruptions, gas prices are climbing again, squeezing Americans already worn down by inflation.

This week, oil prices surged past $100 a barrel for the first time since 2022 as fallout from the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran continued to roil global markets and investors priced in the risk of tighter supply. 

With oil higher, gasoline and diesel prices are rising fast.

The national average gas price climbed to $3.53 per gallon, up 59 cents over the past week, according to GasBuddy. Diesel prices also jumped, with the national average up 97 cents to $4.72 per gallon.

With control of Congress at stake, uneven gas price spikes are becoming a new midterm flashpoint, especially in hard-hit battleground states. 

The steepest week-over-week increases were in Indiana (up 58 cents), Florida (up 57 cents), Michigan (up 55 cents), Ohio (up 54 cents), and California (up 51 cents).

The lowest average prices were in Kansas ($2.90), Oklahoma ($2.95) and Arkansas ($2.98), while the highest were in California ($5.14), Washington ($4.58), and Hawaii ($4.33) — a regional divide that could sharpen midterm attacks over energy costs and inflation.

That kind of pocketbook pressure is exactly what Democrats have been eager to exploit. Last fall, Democrats leaned heavily on affordability themes in state and local elections, and it paid off.

In places like Virginia, New York and New Jersey, where voters have been squeezed by high housing costs and utility bills, Democratic candidates seized on Trump’s early economic moves, including his trade policy, to argue that his policies were worsening the affordability crisis rather than easing it.

They promised to rein in energy costs, expand affordable housing and protect middle-class wages, a message that resonated with voters.

With the ongoing conflict driving gasoline prices higher, the White House is weighing steps to protect shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz and keep prices from climbing further. That waterway is critical to global energy supply.

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow passage between Iran and Oman, carries roughly 20 million barrels of oil a day and about one-fifth of the global supply of liquefied natural gas (LNG). 

When conflict flares in the region, even the threat of disruption can rattle markets because so much of the world’s energy moves through that single corridor.

Asked about the risk of disruptions, Trump said Monday evening he would keep the route open and threatened retaliation if Iran tried to interfere.

‘I will not allow a terrorist regime to hold the world hostage and attempt to stop the globe’s oil supply. And if Iran does anything to do that, they’ll get hit at a much, much harder level,’ Trump said during a press conference in Florida.

‘In the long run, oil supplies will be dramatically more secure without the threat of Iranian ships, drones, missiles,’ he added.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Supreme Court Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Brett Kavanaugh had a dispute over the high court’s approach to its emergency docket in a rare, candid discussion during an event Monday night.

Jackson, a Biden appointee, signaled that the high court’s willingness to side with President Donald Trump most of the time when it comes to the emergency docket, sometimes known as the ‘shadow docket,’ was a ‘problem.’ The liberal justice is one of three, and all have frequently sided against Trump in emergency decisions, which have often broken 6-3 in favor of the president.

‘The administration is making new policy … and then insisting the new policy take effect immediately, before the challenge is decided,’ Jackson said, according to reports from The Associated Press and NBC News. ‘This uptick in the court’s willingness to get involved in cases on the emergency docket is a real unfortunate problem.’

Jackson said: ‘It’s not serving the court or this country well.’

Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, countered that the Supreme Court’s approach to emergency requests was not unique to the Trump administration and that the high court handled the Biden administration the same way despite there being fewer interim requests under the former president.

Kavanaugh said presidents ‘push the envelope’ more with executive orders because Congress is passing less legislation.

‘Some are lawful, some are not,’ Kavanaugh said, later adding, ‘None of us enjoy this.’

The pair spoke in a courtroom during an annual lecture honoring the late Judge Thomas Flannery of the U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C., while several federal judges, including high-profile ones like Judge James Boasberg, looked on.

Jackson’s criticism is not new; she has been perhaps the most vocal dissenter in emergency docket cases.

In August, she lambasted the Supreme Court majority for ‘lawmaking’ from the bench in a dissent to an emergency decision to temporarily allow the National Institutes of Health’s cancellation of about $738 million in grant money.

‘This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this Administration always wins,’ Jackson wrote.

The Trump administration has faced hundreds of lawsuits and adverse rulings in the lower courts, and the Department of Justice’s solicitor general’s office, which represents the government before the Supreme Court, often does not elevate cases to that level.

Such emergency requests allow the government to bypass the lengthy court process, involving extensive briefings and oral arguments, to seek immediate relief in the face of restraining orders and injunctions in the lower courts.

The Trump administration has brought about 30 emergency applications to the Supreme Court and secured victories about 80% of the time, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Through the emergency docket, the Supreme Court has greenlit Trump’s mass firings and curtailed nationwide injunctions. The high court has also cleared the way for deportations and immigration stops viewed as controversial by critics of the administration. The justices have also found that the government can, for now, discharge transgender service members from the military.

But Trump has not won out all the time by taking this route. The justices required the administration to give more notice to alleged illegal immigrants being deported under the Alien Enemies Act and agreed with a lower court that the president improperly federalized the National Guard as part of his immigration crackdown in Chicago.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has a confirmation hearing ready to go, and he will have to reckon with an intraparty feud in the process.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., will soon undergo the rigorous confirmation process in the Senate after being tapped by Trump to replace embattled DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.

He will first go through the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee before heading to a full confirmation vote in the Senate.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who chairs the Homeland Security panel, wants to hold Mullin’s hearing next week. The White House formally sent over Mullin’s nomination to the Senate on Monday, according to the congressional record.

‘We’re shooting for a week from Wednesday if all the paperwork comes in,’ Paul said.

But Mullin and Paul have a personal rift that could spill out into the confirmation hearing.

In February, Mullin slammed Paul during an event with voters for his perennial votes against Republican priorities, like spending bills or other elements of Trump’s agenda, such as the ‘big, beautiful bill’ last year.

Oklahoma reporter David Arnett reported in a lengthy profile of Mullin that, during the event, the lawmaker was asked about an amendment to a spending package from Paul that he voted against.

Mullin warned that Paul was ‘trying to kill the farm bill because he’s trying to legalize hemp for drinks in Kentucky because of tobacco industry shifts,’ and then went after Paul’s voting history before taking a jab at the 2017 incident in which the Kentucky Republican was attacked by his neighbor over a lawn dispute.

‘I respect Bernie Sanders because he’s an open socialist, and you know that he’s a communist, so you know what you’re getting,’ Mullin said. ‘Rand Paul’s a freaking snake. And I understand completely why his neighbor did what he did. And I told him that to his face.’

That slight at Paul may come to bear during his confirmation hearing, but Mullin is expected to easily move through that first hurdle, given that most Republicans on the panel will back him, and he has the support of Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa.

Paul shrugged off the incident on Monday when he told reporters, ‘I’m going to reserve judgment now, and we’ll probably find out a lot more.’

‘I would suggest coming to the hearing, though,’ Paul said. ‘I think it’ll be interesting.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS