America Has a Lot of Untapped Copper. Can Bacteria Help Extract It?

 By Staff Writer

As the world races to electrify everything from cars to cities, copper, the metal that keeps electrons flowing has become one of the most sought-after resources on Earth. But unlocking enough of it, cheaply and cleanly, may require help from an unexpected ally: bacteria.

The United States is rich in untapped copper reserves, particularly in Arizona, Montana, New Mexico, and Michigan, yet much of it lies in ore so poor in concentration that traditional mining deems it unprofitable.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, demand for copper is expected to double by 2035, driven by electric vehicle growth, expanded power grids, and data‑center construction. But with domestic mining producing barely half of the nation’s needs, the U.S. faces a looming shortage that could constrain every major energy transition initiative.

Enter bioleaching a technique that uses specialized bacteria to digest rock and release the copper trapped inside.

Species like Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans and Leptospirillum ferrooxidans thrive in acidic, oxygen‑rich environments. Instead of heat or chemicals, these microbes rely on biochemical oxidation to dissolve metal sulfides, leaving behind water‑soluble copper ions that can be recovered from solution.

It’s slow measured in weeks or months, not days but it’s far less destructive.

No giant smelters. No plumes of sulfur dioxide. Far less freshwater consumed.

And crucially, bacteria can recover copper from waste rock piles and tailings, the billions of tons of leftover slurry modern mining generates.

From Mine Waste to Resource Recovery

Across former mining regions, huge tailings ponds still hold low levels of copper and other valuable elements. Researchers believe up to 15% of America’s unrecovered copper resides in these waste dumps.

Small pilot projects in Butte, Montana, and Grant County, New Mexico, have shown that microbial extraction can reclaim considerable amounts of metals while simultaneously neutralizing acidic drainage, a long‑term toxic legacy of older mines.

“This isn’t just about new production it’s about responsible reclamation,” said Dr. Maria González, a metallurgical microbiologist at the University of Arizona. “We can treat old mines as bio‑reactors instead of environmental disasters.”

However, the sudden interest from major resource conglomerates has raised concerns among independent researchers and environmental advocates.

Companies like Freeport‑McMoRan, Rio Tinto, and BHP have all quietly filed patents on microbial extraction systems, promising “green mining” innovations that could boost efficiency and lower carbon footprints.

Critics warn that such promises may conceal greenwashing.

“These companies are recycling language, not metals,” said an independent mining consultant familiar with ongoing deals in Arizona. “They want to control the tech, lock up the intellectual property, and continue large‑scale extraction with minimal oversight. If the data from bioreactors isn’t open, there’s no way to verify the environmental impact claims.”

The issue mirrors broader industrial tensions: energy efficiency versus security, innovation versus monopoly, and sustainability versus transparency.

A different path is emerging.

Several smaller, independent groups are pushing open‑source biometallurgy.

BioMin Tech (Montana) a university spin‑off developing open microbial cultures for small‑scale, community‑licensed recovery projects.

CopperLeaf Labs (Utah) a cooperative experimenting with consortium microbiota that can recover nickel, zinc, and rare earth elements from e‑waste as well as ore.

The Environmental Working Group’s BioMet Initiative calling for mandatory data disclosure of microbial genomes used in mining operations and their downstream ecological effects.

These efforts reflect a larger movement to decentralize mineral recovery, transforming waste sites into local economic assets rather than export hubs for global firms.

If bioleaching becomes dominated by megacorporations, it could replicate the problems of traditional mining secrecy, land degradation, and community exclusion now simply branded as “biotech.”

But if it remains open, transparent, and community‑driven, it might reshape American resource independence and offer a cleaner model of industrial recovery.

Dr. González puts it plainly:

“We’re at a crossroads. Either bacteria become another tool of corporate control or they become the foundation of a truly regenerative industrial system.”

Bacteria can help America unlock its hidden copper reserves. The remaining question is whether they’ll be allowed to do so freely, or whether the usual gatekeepers of progress will capture them too.

TIME FOR A TESTOSTERONE SHOT ON CAPITOL HILL

 By Staff Writer

America doesn’t need another bipartisan task force, slick campaign ad, or empty promise. What it needs desperately is a national testosterone injection for the political class.

Our founders stared down muskets and monarchs. Today’s politicians panic over mean tweets. They clutch their talking points like emotional support animals, terrified of saying anything that hasn’t been pre‑approved by a consultant in a navy suit.

What happened to the men and women who built this nation through risk, grit, and conviction? When Jefferson put pen to parchment or Washington rode into battle, they weren’t calculating poll numbers; they were staking their lives and legacies on principle. That’s leadership. That’s real testosterone.

Congress today resembles a kennel of over‑groomed lapdogs fighting over who gets to please the master. These people don’t legislate they posture. They conform. They flinch. Every time the public demands backbone, we get a choreographed shrug and a press release filled with strongly worded statements.

We are living under a regime of hormonal bankruptcy. Testosterone, biologically and metaphorically, fuels courage, decisiveness, and duty the qualities that once defined statesmen. Strip it away, and you get exactly what we have: safety‑obsessed bureaucrats terrified of responsibility.

They hide behind committees. They outsource conviction to think tanks. They fund raise off outrage they never intend to fix. And the American people are left governed by men whose strongest muscle is their Twitter thumb.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t just a call for biological fortitude it’s a moral one. Moral testosterone is the courage to defy the herd; to risk reputation, career, even safety for truth. Real leadership means standing tall when the mob hisses, not bending at the first sign of discomfort.

If today’s politicians had any vitality left in their veins, they’d:

Cut government bloat instead of expanding it.

Defend privacy instead of spying on the citizens who pay their salaries.

Protect the Bill of Rights instead of selling liberty for convenience.

Lead boldly, even when corporate media howls.

Instead, they shuffle papers while the Constitution gathers dust.

A constitutional republic cannot be led by timid caretakers. It needs warriors of conscience people who embrace conflict because freedom demands it. Every amendment in the Bill of Rights was written in sweat and blood, not consulting‑firm jargon.

The essence of America is risk. Freedom is fragile because courage is rare. And our political system has chemically castrated itself figuratively and perhaps literally. We have too many politicians with focus groups and not enough with fortitude.

The cure is simple: inject courage, decisiveness, and integrity right back into Washington’s bloodstream. We need candidates who show more fight than finesse, who care more about truth than tenure. The kind of people who, when told “you’ll lose everything if you take that stand,” reply, “Then at least I’ll lose with honor.”

To every timid lawmaker hiding behind procedure and PR:

If you can’t stomach confrontation, resign. America doesn’t need your seat warmer routine.

If you can’t speak truth without asking permission, step aside for someone who can.

Our Republic is gasping for oxygen. And no, the answer isn’t another stimulus package it’s a testosterone shot right into the moral veins of the body politic.

Because the problem isn’t toxic masculinity.

It’s toxic cowardice.

Until courage, not cowardice, sets the agenda again, this country will keep circling the drain while its so‑called leaders sip lattes and issue statements about bipartisan dialogue.

Enough. It’s time for real men and women driven by honor, fueled by duty to take their country back.

New memos show how corruption probe into Clinton Foundation was killed: ‘We were told NO by FBI HQ’

 A newly released timeline from FBI investigators highlights the political obstacles faced by agents probing potential corruption involving Hillary Clinton and her family foundation during the 2016 election. This timeline, provided by a Republican senator, reveals how interventions from senior officials and the Justice Department hindered investigations aimed at uncovering wrongdoing related to the Clinton Foundation.

• Obstruction by DOJ and FBI Leadership: The timeline shows that FBI agents were consistently obstructed by higher-ups in the FBI and the Justice Department, who did not allow investigations into the Clinton Foundation to proceed. In one excerpt, field agents expressed frustration, stating they had been told by FBI Headquarters not to move forward with their inquiries.

• Prior Investigations and Findings: Previous records indicate that investigations into the Clinton Foundation’s activities, especially regarding foreign donations, were initiated as early as 2010. Key figures, including Clinton allies such as Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, were mentioned yet never thoroughly investigated.

• Political Interference: The timeline details how various officials, including former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, actively hampered investigations. Yates was quoted directing teams to “shut it down,” reflecting the favoritism displayed towards Clinton's political standing.

• Consistent Delays: Despite the submission of evidence and leads indicating possible misconduct, the DOJ frequently blocked any progress on investigations. Reports from field offices in New York, Little Rock, and Washington documented instances where requests for investigative actions were denied or delayed.

• Comparison to Trump Investigations: Senator Chuck Grassley criticized how the DOJ handled the Clinton investigations compared to the thorough inquiries into Donald Trump’s campaign. He emphasized that the DOJ should not engage in picking "winners and losers" when enforcing the law.

• Timeline of Events: The timeline chronicles events from 2010 through 2020, showcasing a pattern of investigations being initiated but never advancing, often due to directives from FBI Headquarters. For instance, agents expressed disappointment as leads were ignored, and investigations were prematurely closed or stalled indefinitely.

• Internal Struggles: Reports reveal an ongoing struggle within the FBI, where agents felt pressure from the top down to abandon legitimate leads. This culminated in several agents feeling that their careers were jeopardized as they tried to pursue corruption allegations against the Clinton Foundation.

Overall, the new timeline provides a comprehensive view of the challenges faced by the FBI in their attempts to investigate the Clinton Foundation. It raises significant concerns about political interference in justice processes and how such obstacles can influence accountability and transparency at high governmental levels. The evidence indicates a clear disparity in how investigations were conducted depending on the political affiliation of the individuals involved. 

https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/we-were-told-no-fbi-hq-how-investigation-clinton-foundation-was-allowed

Republicans are Facing an Extinction Event

 A warning is presented regarding the potential for a political crisis, likened to an "extinction event," that could threaten the Republican Party (GOP). This situation arises from unfavorable historical trends, demographic issues, poor performance by Congress, and public dissatisfaction.

1. Fragile Position:

• The GOP currently holds narrow majorities in the House and Senate.

• Key members in Congress are elderly, raising concerns about continuity and strength.

2. Historical Trends:

• Historically, the party of the sitting president tends to lose seats in midterm elections.

• This trend creates a precarious situation for Republicans heading into upcoming elections.

3. Ineffective Governance:

• Congress's performance has been lackluster, evidenced by the low number of enacted executive orders and Senate confirmations.

• Public approval of Congress stands at a concerning 15%, highlighting voter discontent.

4. Public Sentiment:

• The electorate's feeling of being ignored by Congress could lead to increased backlash against the GOP.

• Voters may choose to reject both parties if dissatisfaction persists.

5. Consequences of Loss:

• If Democrats regain control, there are fears of intensified impeachment proceedings and a halt on judicial confirmations of Trump nominees.

• A Democrat-controlled Congress could undermine Trump’s programs and further liberalize judicial appointments.

6. Potential for Skewed Elections:

• Concerns about election integrity are prominent among voters, yet Republicans have made little progress on reform in this area.

• Democrat plans could lead to increased political power through new states and changes in the Electoral College system.

7. Effects on the MAGA Movement:

• The GOP faces internal divisions within the MAGA movement, which could demoralize voters and affect turnout.

• As infighting occurs among influential figures in the movement, the lack of unity may lead to reduced enthusiasm for Republican candidates.

8. Urgency for Change:

• Republicans risk becoming a powerless minority if complacency continues in the face of these challenges.

• Without a strategic shift, the next midterm may severely diminish their political influence.

The current state of the Republican Party is precariously balanced. Slow congressional action, historical trends, and increasing public dissatisfaction suggest that without immediate and decisive changes, the GOP may face devastating losses in upcoming elections. This could trigger a significant shift in the political landscape, much like an extinction event, rendering the party ineffective and sidelined. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/12/republicans_are_facing_an_extinction_event.html

Removing the Sword of the Federal Judiciary

 William J. Watkins Jr. discusses the original purpose of the Bill of Rights and how its role has changed over time. It emphasizes that the first ten amendments were designed to limit federal government power rather than to empower it.

1. Original Intent of the Bill of Rights:

• The Bill of Rights was created to protect individuals and states from an overreaching federal government.

• The intent was to ensure federal restrictions, as states already had their own protections.

2. Historical Context:

• In the late 1780s, there was widespread fear about federal power overriding local governance.

• The Supreme Court in the case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833) confirmed that the Bill of Rights applied only to federal actions, not state actions.

3. Shift in Interpretation:

• Beginning in the 1920s, the Supreme Court began to reinterpret the Bill of Rights as applying to state laws through the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

• This marked the start of judicial activism, where the Court began to nullify state legislation based on the revised interpretation of due process.

4. Impact on Legislative Power:

• The Court's decisions shifted focus from economic regulations to social issues, ultimately leading to a broadening of its influence.

• Judiciary power grew as the Court began deciding on matters traditionally left to state and local governance.

5. Concerns About Judicial Overreach:

• Justice Hugo Black noted the inappropriate nature of judges using their beliefs to assess the constitutionality of laws, as this power belongs to lawmakers.

• The increasing influence of the judiciary results in a disconnect between the people and their elected representatives, as federal judges are not accountable through elections.

As Americans observe Bill of Rights Day, the article urges reflection on how the Bill of Rights has evolved from a shield against federal encroachment into a tool that allows federal courts to dictate public policy. The author calls for a return to its original purpose—to restrain federal power rather than enhance it.

https://spectator.org/removing-the-sword-of-the-federal-judiciary/

US Intelligence Warns: More Than 2,000 Afghan Residents May Have Terrorist Links

 On December 14, 2025, U. S. Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, signaled concerns regarding over 2,000 Afghan nationals living in the U. S. who may have connections to terrorist groups. This announcement comes amid a comprehensive review of about 190,000 Afghans who entered the country since the U. S. troop withdrawal in 2021.

• Security Review: Intelligence agencies are conducting a thorough vetting of Afghan evacuees to assess potential threats to national security.

• Radical Ideologies: Gabbard noted fears that some Afghans might promote radical Islamist ideas, which could jeopardize American safety and constitutional freedoms.

• Recent Violence: The warning is intensified by a recent violent incident in Washington, D. C., where an Afghan national fatally shot a member of the National Guard. This incident has raised questions about the vetting processes used for Afghan refugees.

• Ongoing Investigations: The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI have reopened numerous investigations into Afghans allowed into the U. S., stopping visa and asylum processes while these evaluations occur.

• Complex Dilemma: Critics argue that many Afghans were former collaborators with U. S. forces and fled due to threats from the Taliban. This situation presents a challenging balance between ensuring security and upholding humanitarian commitments to those seeking refuge.

• Need for Balanced Approach: Authorities must navigate how to enhance immigration control without infringing on the civil rights of groups based on the misdeeds of a few individuals while still addressing legitimate security concerns.

As investigations continue, the U. S. faces the task of reinforcing immigration safeguards without compromising its legacy of providing shelter for those at risk. The situation calls for careful deliberation to ensure that vulnerable populations are not unfairly targeted while maintaining the nation's safety from potential threats. 

https://gatewayhispanic.com/2025/12/u-s-intelligence-warns-more-than-2000-afghan/

A Collapse In Germany's Chemical Sector Is A Bad Omen

 The current state of Germany's chemical industry is seen as a significant warning for the economy. Historical patterns suggest that declines in this sector often precede broader economic downturns. Recent observations indicate a worrying trend that could signify the early stages of a recession, exacerbated by ongoing structural changes and political decisions.

1. Chemical Industry as an Economic Indicator:

The performance of the chemical sector is a reliable early warning sign for the overall economy. A decline in this sector often mirrors struggles in key industrial areas like machinery, automotive, and construction.

2. Historical Context:

• In 2000, a drop in Germany's chemical production foreshadowed an economic recession that followed a tech boom. This downturn affected investment and led to significant losses for investors.

• Again in the early 1990s, a downturn in the chemical sector preceded a recession that cost 1.5 million jobs and contributed to a noticeable GDP decline.

3. Current Economic Conditions:

Since 2018, the chemical industry has seen a continuous decline, with production down 20% from that year, signaling potential structural issues beyond typical business cycles. Government interventions and stimulus efforts have not reversed this trend.

4. Impact of Political Decisions:

Germany's reliance on green policies, tied to substantial government subsidies, has caused deindustrialization. Critics argue that this shift has significantly weakened industrial production capacity, leading to massive investment losses and declining societal wealth.

5. Economic Challenges and Political Climate:

The German political landscape is grappling with rising debt and an ongoing crisis in industry, which could lead to turbulent market conditions. Political leaders are seen as resistant to necessary changes, opting for superficial adjustments rather than addressing fundamental issues.

6. Future Outlook:

The ongoing decline in the chemical sector, coupled with a lack of political will to shift away from ineffective policies, suggests that Germany may face a continued spiral of economic decline, increasing poverty, and potential social unrest.

The current condition of Germany's chemical sector serves as a critical indicator of underlying economic challenges, highlighting the risks of overly centralized political approaches in managing industry. If this trend continues, the resultant economic fallout could disproportionately impact the German populace, signaling urgent needs for structural reform and reevaluation of current policies. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/collapse-germanys-chemical-sector-bad-omen