Neo retweeted
In Germany, there are many "ghost" apartments where large numbers of Ukrainians register for welfare payments, while having moved to another EU state, where they receive other benefits, or home.
Remarkably, Ukrainian "Refugees" are free to travel back to Ukraine at will, to "visit family" or get medical care.
No restrictions.
Neo retweeted
Dear Secretary Bessent @SecScottBessent,
My name is Everett Stern. In 2010 I was a compliance officer at @HSBC. From a back office in New Castle, Delaware, I watched billions of dollars move to drug cartels, sanctioned regimes, and terrorist organizations. The enemies of the United States. I documented it, I escalated it, and when the bank would not act, I took it to the @FBI, the @CIA, and eventually the @SECGov.
The result was a $1.92 billion settlement. At the time, it was one of the largest in American history. It was also about five weeks of the bank’s profit. Not one banker was charged. Not one went to prison.
I paid a different price. I lost my career, my savings, and my place in the industry I had trained for. I was blacklisted. Every door in American finance closed at once. I slept on a camping cot in a 300 square foot apartment because I could not afford a bed, and I waited tables at @PFChangs to eat. I tell you this not for sympathy, but so you understand that I know exactly what it costs to do the right thing in American finance, and exactly how little the system does in return.
I made that sacrifice because I believed it would change something.
Yesterday, your department fined @BankofAmerica $1.2 billion for failing to report more than $5 billion in suspicious transactions, some of it tied by your own findings to Chinese laundering networks, narcotics, and the southwest border, alongside 475 apparent sanctions violations touching Russia, Iran, and global terrorism. The bank admitted it willfully violated the Bank Secrecy Act.
Fourteen years after HSBC. A bank with “America” in its name. And once again, not one individual charged.
Secretary Bessent, I want to say plainly what I believe you already know. The fines are not working.
A fine is paid by shareholders, absorbed by the balance sheet, and forgotten by the next earnings call. Bank of America reported earnings this morning. Nobody who set the alert thresholds, nobody who decided the 2024 cease and desist could wait, nobody who chose the backlog over the law will lose a single thing they value. Their lives are untouched. That is the entire reason the behavior repeats.
This is money laundering. This is blood money. Money that reaches a cartel buys fentanyl that kills Americans. Money that reaches a terrorist organization buys the next attack. This country has fought a war on drugs and a war on terror for decades, at enormous cost in lives and treasure, and all the while we have allowed the financing to flow through institutions we charter and regulate. Cut off the money and we win. We have never seriously tried.
There is also a question of equal justice that I cannot let go.
Before I walked into the FBI building to report HSBC, I stopped in front of the Great Seal on the wall and read the words engraved beneath it: “Justice is the defense of our liberty.” I believed that. I still want to. But every day in this country, people go to prison for crimes that are nothing next to moving money for the people who want Americans dead. A suit, a title, and a corporate badge should not be a shield from the consequences that apply to everyone else. If a street dealer goes to prison for what he sells, the banker who moved the cartel’s money should be standing next to him.
I also want to raise something that is rarely said in these conversations. Why has no one inside Bank of America come forward the way I did? The answer is that everyone in American banking knows what happened to me, and to the whistleblowers who came after. The last person who spoke up is the only policy anyone believes. That is a culture problem, and it starts with leadership, in the banks and in the agencies that regulate them.
This is not a political issue. It has spanned administrations of both parties. It is a national security issue, and I am asking you to treat it as one.
Three things would change the math overnight.
Refer individuals for criminal prosecution. Not the analyst in the queue. The executives who set the thresholds and chose the risk. One banker in handcuffs would do more than every fine in Treasury’s history combined.
End “too big to jail.” An institution cannot be too big to fail and too big to jail at the same time. If it is the first, it must be held to a higher standard, not a lower one.
And if Bank of America will not act as America’s bank, review its charter. A national charter is a privilege granted on behalf of the American people. It should be conditioned on not moving money for the people trying to kill them.
Secretary Bessent, you said yesterday that these actions send a clear message that even the biggest institutions are not above the law. With respect, the institution was never the problem. The people inside it are above the law, and they know it. Until that changes, I will keep writing letters like this one, and the next bank will keep paying the next fine.
I gave up everything I had to stop this. I am asking you to use the power you have to finish it.
Respectfully,
Everett A. Stern
HSBC Whistleblower
Founder and Intelligence Director, Tactical Rabbit
Neo retweeted
Ukrainians bought €2,000,000,000 (BILLION) of real estate in Spain in 2026 (Spanish Notaries Council).
Spain gave Ukraine €2.7 BILLION in 2022-2025.
And €2 BILLION of it went straight into Spanish villas.
Not bad.
Neo retweeted
If Bitcoin accepts back below the range, then Q4 2026 could shape up to be what it historically has been.
The markets always have a way of convincing us that "this time is different."
A lot of people interpreted this post in many different ways. I did not realize it would be viewed almost 4M times and that it would end up being one of my most liked posts on this platform, so I wanted to expand on it a bit. If you watched any of my recent videos, all of what I'm about to say are things you have already heard.
I think admitting when we are wrong about something is important, as it helps us grow as investors and hopefully allows us to make fewer mistakes in the future.
It also communicates to those who choose to listen to our views that we recognize we are fallible. Pretending to be right about everything is silly, and gaslighting an audience by saying "exactly as predicted" about everything is exhausting and not representative of the truth.
I also really appreciate all the support many of you showed. It genuinely means a lot. My goal in being on here has always been to help people navigate markets, so when I get something wrong, I think it is important to acknowledge it rather than pretend it did not happen.
Since many people took the original post to mean different things, I wanted to clarify what I was actually admitting I was wrong about.
Specifically, my post was about Bitcoin taking out the May high, which I had repeatedly said I did not think would happen.
If I spend two months saying something is unlikely to happen, and then it happens, I cannot sit here and pretend like I was calling for it when I wasn't.
Because of that, I felt I needed to acknowledge that I was wrong. I wish I had not been as deterministic, and that I had been more open-minded to the possibility of a higher high. I should hold myself accountable for my views by admitting when I get things wrong.
But that is all my post was meant to convey.
Some of the narratives that have developed from that post are not fully representative of my views.
Bitcoin is still operating under a difficult macro backdrop that has caused it to underperform other markets for years. Until liquidity conditions improve, I think that relative underperformance could remain an issue. That does not mean Bitcoin cannot have rallies or bull markets, but it could mean that the gains are not as significant as they were during periods when liquidity was more free-flowing.
Being wrong about the May high also does not automatically mean that I relinquish every other view I have expressed.
I have discussed the possibility of Q4 2026 weakness since Q4 2025. With one week left before Q4 begins, I do not think Bitcoin making a higher high means I should suddenly pretend that view never existed. What it does mean is that I should be less deterministic about it and more willing to change my view as new information comes in.
As long as Bitcoin remains above the May high, I have to respect the breakout. Continued acceptance above the range highs would increasingly challenge my broader bear market thesis, which I have honestly had a hard time letting go of.
If Bitcoin instead closes a weekly candle back below the May high, then I think weakness into Q4 remains possible. Even then, the fact that Bitcoin already made a higher high could change what that weakness ultimately looks like. Q4 weakness would not necessarily require a new low.
And importantly, if Bitcoin does show weakness in Q4, it does not change the fact that I was wrong about what Bitcoin already accomplished in Q3. I would rather use that experience to hopefully become a better investor than pretend it did not happen.
The part I am still struggling to reconcile is the macro backdrop.
Long-end yields have continued to rise, alongside the dollar and energy. I would normally expect that combination to eventually pressure long-duration assets like crypto.
I do not fully understand Bitcoin's move to $87K from a macro perspective, but I can understand it from a technical analysis perspective (golden cross, RSI, etc.)
That disconnect is part of why I have taken a step back and decided to be less deterministic. Continued acceptance above the range highs will force me to reconsider parts of my framework. A move back below them would make me more interested in the Q4 weakness thesis again.
It is difficult for me to reconcile rising yields, DXY and energy with a sustained bullish Bitcoin move, especially going into Q4 of a midterm year, when Bitcoin has historically experienced significant weakness.
But the market does not have to conform to my expectations.
My goal going forward is to be more open to different outcomes, more critical of myself when communicating strongly held views, and more humble in my approach to markets.
I am a student of the market, and I do not have a crystal ball.
It's about time to see what Q4 has in store!
Neo retweeted
CHARLOTTE RESIDENTS, BEWARE
Diquan Shafar Hunt (14 prior arrests) is on the loose, filming himself attacking white women
Please spread this info
Neo retweeted
Call the Democrat Senators
Tell them
If they vote against Clarity Act
You will vote against them at midterms
Angela Alsobrooks (MD) — (202) 224-4524
Tammy Baldwin (WI) — (202) 224-5653
Michael Bennet (CO) — (202) 224-5852
Richard Blumenthal (CT) — (202) 224-2823
Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE) — (202) 224-2441
Cory Booker (NJ) — (202) 224-3224
Maria Cantwell (WA) — (202) 224-3441
Ben Cardin (MD) — (202) 224-4524
Tom Carper (DE) — (202) 224-2441
Chris Coons (DE) — (202) 224-5042
Catherine Cortez Masto (NV) — (202) 224-3542
Tammy Duckworth (IL) — (202) 224-2854
Dick Durbin (IL) — (202) 224-2152
John Fetterman (PA) — (202) 224-4254
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) — (202) 224-4451
Maggie Hassan (NH) — (202) 224-3324
Martin Heinrich (NM) — (202) 224-5521
John Hickenlooper (CO) — (202) 224-5941
Mazie Hirono (HI) — (202) 224-6361
Tim Kaine (VA) — (202) 224-4024
Andy Kim (NJ) — (202) 224-4744
Amy Klobuchar (MN) — (202) 224-3244
Ben Ray Luján (NM) — (202) 224-6621
Ed Markey (MA) — (202) 224-2742
Jeff Merkley (OR) — (202) 224-3753
Chris Murphy (CT) — (202) 224-4041
Patty Murray (WA) — (202) 224-2621
Alex Padilla (CA) — (202) 224-3553
Gary Peters (MI) — (202) 224-6221
Jack Reed (RI) — (202) 224-4642
Jacky Rosen (NV) — (202) 224-6244
Brian Schatz (HI) — (202) 224-3934
Chuck Schumer (NY) — (202) 224-6542
Jeanne Shaheen (NH) — (202) 224-2841
Elissa Slotkin (MI) — (202) 224-4822
Tina Smith (MN) — (202) 224-5641
Adam Schiff (CA) — (202) 224-3841
Raphael Warnock (GA) — (202) 224-3643
Mark Warner (VA) — (202) 224-2023
Elizabeth Warren (MA) — (202) 224-4543
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) — (202) 224-2921
Ron Wyden (OR) — (202) 224-5244
Jon Ossoff (GA) — (202) 224-3521
Ruben Gallego (AZ) — (202) 224-4521
Ruben? (45th seat varies with current membership updates)
Let’s help the Senate to make this happen
Please contact your Senator’s office and voice your support for this vote
Neo retweeted
Antalyaya Rus belasını saran da bu adam.
Replying to @burada_1283
mevlüt çavuşoğlunun hırtları
alanyaya el koymuş durumdalar.. torosların tepelerine kadar ormanları üzerlerine geçirdiler..
Neo retweeted
Antalya'da bir Rus turistin 80 daire satın aldığı ve aldığı daireleri yalnıza yurttaşlarına kiraladığı ortaya çıktı.
Neo retweeted
WE WILL HOLD ALL US SENATORS ACCOUNTABLE FOR NOT PASSING THE CLARITY ACT IN THE MID-TERM ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.. 🇺🇸 🗳
YOU SAY NO TO CLARITY ACT..
WE SAY NO TO YOU.. ✅️
FAIR?
WE, THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS.. 🇺🇸
@SenateGOP @SenateDems @LeaderJohnThune 🇺🇸
Neo retweeted
IF WE CAN PUT YOU IN OFFICE..
WE COULD REMOVE YOU.. 🗳 🚪
Just a reminder to all the US Senators who are anti-crypto and clarity act.. 📃 🇺🇸
@SenateGOP @SenateDems @LeaderJohnThune @SenWarren @Sen_Alsobrooks @SenRubenGallego @SenAdamSchiff @SenAlexPadilla 🇺🇸
Neo retweeted
🚨UPDATE: These Senators OPPOSE the CLARITY ACT.
They are blocking America’s chance to lead the future of crypto. While China and Russia push ahead, these senators stall, delay, and weaken U.S. innovation.
Enough is enough.
PASS THE CLARITY ACT NOW! 🇺🇸
Neo retweeted
Here is the list of all US Senators who are up for re-election in this November.. 🇺🇸 🗳
If any of these Senators say no to Clarity Act, we SAY NO to them.. 🚪
Neo retweeted
🇺🇸 LIST OF SENATORS OPPOSING THE CLARITY ACT:
WITHOUT THE CLARITY ACT, AMERICA WON’T BECOME THE CRYPTO CAPITAL OF THE WORLD ❌
WE NEED CLARITY! 🚀
Neo retweeted
These are the Senators who aren’t interested in being reelected @Sen_Alsobrooks @CoryBooker @SenCortezMasto @RubenGallego @Hickenlooper @MarkWarner @ReverendWarnock we welcome you all back into the private sector if you don’t pass the Clarity Act. Welcome to the real world. It’s a jungle out here. I can assure you it’s not worth it. We actually have to work. Pass it and continue to enjoy the government dole.
Neo retweeted
Career suicide for Dems who vote ‘no’ on the Clarity Act.
🇺🇸JUST IN: Senator Cynthia Lummis says Democrats are blocking the CLARITY Act to get "a pound of flesh from President Trump".
"They want State Attorneys General from another state to sue elected officials. Senators said we don't want that."
Trump agreed to divest or use a blind trust, "somehow that's not enough."









































