admin

(TheNewswire)

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

VANCOUVER, BC TheNewswire – July 22, 2025 Heritage Mining Ltd. (CSE: HML FRA: Y66) (‘ Heritage ‘ or the ‘ Company ‘) is pleased to announce a non-brokered offering of up to 18,187,725 units (the ‘ LIFE Offering ‘) for gross proceeds of up to C$636,570 with a lead order from a strategic investor of ~C$450,000. The Company is also pleased to announce it has entered into an asset purchase agreement with Advanced Gold Exploration Inc. to acquire a 75% interest in the Melba Mine (a former past producer from early-mid 1900’s) which, subject to the satisfaction of conditions precedent and due diligence, will facilitate the Company’s entrance into the Kirkland Lake Gold District. The Company also provides an exploration update on its Drayton-Black Lake and Contact Bay projects.

July 2025 Corporate Update Highlights

LIFE Offering announced with a lead order from a strategic investor totaling ~C$450,000.

July 2025 Exploration Update Highlights

Drilling at Drayton-Black Lake (‘ DBL ‘) – Zone 3 Extension confirms gold mineralization in a broad quartz vein structure as initially reported in Heritage’s press release dated May 15, 2025.
- DBL – Zone 3 Extension drilling intersected multiple zones of locally anomalous gold mineralization in drill hole HML25-011 associated with a 46m wide quartz zone, including 0.95 g/t Au over 1m from 237.00m; and
- Zone 3 Extension drill hole HML25-012 tested a different magnetic lineament at the periphery at the Lake of the Bays Batholith and the contact zone of this batholithic body. Two n arrow zones of up to 0.43 g/t Au over 1m were intersected.

Drilling at Contact Bay is completed. A total of 10 holes for 2,726m were drilled with assays pending.
- Drill holes locally intersected narrow quartz sulfide veins and visible gold was observed on one drill hole RGN25-004 (Figure 4).

‘We are pleased to welcome a new strategic shareholder, who aligns with Heritage’s view that systematic active exploration across all properties is the key driver. We look forward to generating value to all stakeholders.

The proposed Melba Mine acquisition (pending due diligence) offers the Company exposure to the well-known mining camp (Kirkland Lake and Timmins). We look forward to applying our active systemic exploration approach to this area in short order post-acquisition.

Although assays remain pending from Zone 3 Extension at DBL and Contact Bay we appreciate the technical success and confirmation of anomalous gold in a new area never before prospected in the Sioux Lookout Area. This is the broadest quartz vein ever intersected within the Sioux Lookout District and warrants further drilling and evaluation along strike.’ Commented Peter Schloo, President CEO, and Director of Heritage

2025 Corporate Update

The Company has concurrently filed an offering document in respect of the LIFE Offering (the ‘ Offering Document ‘) on its profile on SEDAR+. The following is a brief summary of the terms of the LIFE Offering but investors should review the Offering Document in detail prior to making an investment decision:

Offering:

A non- brokered ‘best-efforts basis’ private placement financing of up to 18,187,725 units (the ‘ LIFE Offering ‘) for gross proceeds of up to $635,570 for units of the Company (each, a ‘ Unit ‘) at a price of $0.035 per Unit, with each Unit being comprised of one (1) common share of the Company (each a ‘ Common Share ‘) and one (1) common share purchase warrant (a ‘ Warrant ‘) granting the holder the right to purchase one (1) additional Common Share of the Company (a ‘ Warrant Share ‘) at a price of $0.05 at any time on or before 36 months from the Closing Date (as defined herein), which securities shall be offered pursuant to the listed issuer financing exemption under Part 5A of National Instrument 45-106 – Prospectus Exemptions (‘ NI 45-106 ‘).

Offering Price:

The Offered Securities shall be offered at the price of $0.035 per Unit.

Offering Amount:

The maximum offering amount under the LIFE Offering shall be for aggregate proceeds of $636,570, assuming full subscription pursuant to the LIFE Offering and the full exercise of the Broker’s Units (as defined below). There is no minimum offering amount pursuant to the LIFE Offering .

The maximum number of securities issuable under the LIFE Offering consists of an aggregate of up to 18,187,725 Units for gross proceeds of up to $636,570.

Closing Date: The closing of the LIFE Offering (the ‘ Closing Date ‘) is expected to take place on or about July 31, 2025.

Fees and Commissions

Cash fee and broker warrants, as detailed below.

Cash Fee: The Company will pay cash fees equal to 7.0% of gross proceeds raised in respect of the Offering.

Broker Units: The Company will issue broker units (each a ‘ Broker Unit ‘) equal to 7% of the Units sold under the Offering at an exercise price equal to $0.035 per Broker Unit, with each Broker Unit consisting of one (1) Common Share and one (1) Broker Warrant, with each Broker Warrant granting the holder the right to purchase one (1) additional Common Share of the Company (each, a ‘ Warrant Share ‘).

Melba Asset Purchase Agreement Summary:

Purchase Price

Heritage shall issue the Vendor Common Shares having a deemed value of C$350,000 Consideration Shares ‘) at a price per Consideration Share equal to the closing price of the Common Shares in the capital of Heritage on the trading day preceding the Closing Date and subject to the following release schedule (which the Vendor hereby agrees will be reflected in restrictive legends applied to the certificates representing the Consideration Shares):

(a) 25% of the Consideration Shares released on Closing Date;

(b) 25% of the Consideration Shares released on the date that is 90 days after the Closing Date;

(d) 25% of the Consideration Shares released on the date that is 270 days after the Closing Date.

Closing of the acquisition is subject to customary conditions precedent for a transaction of this nature, including the approval of the Canadian Securities Exchange.

Melba Mine Property Description

The Melba Mine is located in Northwestern, Ontario, Canada Southwest of Matheson Ontario (Figure One) approximately seven kilometres west off the King’s Highway 11, on the section of highway travelling from Kirkland Lake to Cochrane. The Melba Mine is located on the west central part of Ontario close to the Ontario and Quebec border. It’s fortunate the location of the Melba Property lies within the central hub of over 100 years of mining activities, including active mining operations within the Abitibi Greenstone Belt.

The claim package includes single cell mining claims spanning 1,522.70 hectares and one mining lease.

Property Geology

The governing element of structure appears to be a contact between dioritic greenstone to the south and argillaceous greywacke to the north. The contact trends north 50-60 degrees west and dips northward. Whether the greywacke is part of a synclinal trough of sediments that are younger than the greenstone or whether it is part of a sedimentary band belonging to the greenstone series is an unknown factor at present. The greywacke is cut by dikes of porphyry that run parallel to the contact. The main gold bearing vein, usually described as the ‘Blue Vein’, also runs parallel to the contact but lies within the sediments. It strikes north 55 degrees west and dips northward 55 degrees. It is accompanied by shearing and alteration, also by a pattern of cross fracturing that has produced faulting in the main vein and has led to the development of irregular veins in the adjacent rocks. The main vein is displaced 60 feet (18.2 metres) northward near the shaft and other displacements have been found underground. The picture resembles that of the sedimentary belt in the Beatty-Munro area. Numerous feldspar porphyry, diorite and basic syenite dikes were intersected by the drilling. Overall, a significant amount of the drill core showed alteration, some highly, while carbonate stringers were numerous and visible gold was noted in drill core.

Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 1: Property Map – Melba Mine

2025 Exploration Update

Assays were delayed due to operational issues at the lab and core shack facilities; corrective measures have been implemented, and normal operations are expected to resume shortly.

Discussion of Results

DBL – Zone 3 Extension

The 2025 drill program at Zone 3 Extension targeted granite-hosted mineralised quartz-vein structures that were first observed in the HML Zone 3 drilling program of August 2024 (Figure 3). The recently completed program comprised 4 holes for a total 1105.5m targeting a northeast-southwest trending magnetic lineament. Drilling is considered a technical success with two ( HML25-011 and 013 ) of the four holes intersecting a well-developed quartz vein structure, including drill hole HML25-013 that intersected a 74m wide vein structure (true width unknown). Assays received for HML25-010, 011 and 012, with assays pending for HML25-013 & 014.

Assays for HML25-010 & 011 confirm locally elevated gold values in the vein structure, with the best intersection of 0.95g/t gold over 1 meter in drill hole HML25-011 (Figure 2). Although gold mineralization is low grade, significant exploration potential remains along strike of this well-defined linear mag feature, and further drilling is proposed to test this ‘mega-quartz vein structure’.

HML25-011 Highlights:

0.07 g/t Au over 5.5m from 212.50m to 217.00m
- Including 0.27g/t Au from 213.47m

0.95 g/t Au over 1m from 237.00m (within Quartz Vein Zone)

Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 2: HML25-011 Box 56 – Yellow Box indicates from 237.00m to 238.00m

Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 3: Showing the completed and proposed holes testing the northeast-southwest trending magnetic lineament

Contact Bay Rognon Mine Area

The 2025 drill program at Contact Bay is completed, targeting a mineralised quartz-vein structure that was historically mined in the early 1900’s. The recently completed program comprised 10 holes for a total 2726.0m. The geology comprises metavolcanic rocks cut by granitoid batholiths and gabbroic sills and stocks. The metavolcanic rocks are locally cut by cm-scale quartz-sulphide veins and drill hole RGN25-004 intersected visible gold in a quartz-pyrite vein (Figure 4). Assays are pending for all holes.

Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 4: Showing the magnetic map for the Contact Bay Rognon Mine area and an image of the visible gold intersected in RGN25-004.

Conclusion

Although some assays remain pending, the Company believes additional drilling is warranted to test along this major quartz vein structure along strike. The Company has proposed an additional 10 holes to test along a 2km strike length of the magnetic lineament (Figure 3).

Qualified Person

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

Technical Program

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

Sampling, Sub-sampling, and Laboratory Analysis for Heritage Mining Drayton Black Lake Project All drilling at the Drayton Black Lake project recovers NQ core. Drill core is systematically split in half using a diamond saw. A qualified geologist examines the drill core, marking intervals for sampling and indicating the cutting line. Sample lengths are typically 1.0 metre, adjusted to a minimum length of 0.5 metre as necessary to respect lithological and/or mineralogical contacts and to isolate narrow veins or structures that may contain higher-grade mineralization.

Technicians saw the core along the cutting lines determined by the geologist. One half of the core is retained as a witness sample, while the other half is submitted for analysis. Individual sample bags are securely sealed and placed into sealed bags, which are then clearly marked with their contents.

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

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

Analytical Procedures

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

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

________________________________________

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)

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

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

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

Heritage Mining notes that it has not completed any economic evaluations of its Drayton-Black Lake Project, and the project does not currently have any resources or reserves.

ABOUT HERITAGE MINING LTD.

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

For further information, please contact:

Heritage Mining Ltd.

Peter Schloo, CPA, CA, CFA

President, CEO and Director

Phone: (905) 505-0918

Email: peter@heritagemining.ca

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

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

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

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

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Investing

Sarama Resources Completes Mt Venn Gold Project Acquisition

Sarama Resources Ltd. (“Sarama” or the “Company”) (ASX:SRR, TSX- V:SWA) is pleased to advise that it has completed the previously announced acquisition (the “Transaction”) of a majority interest⁽¹⁾ in the under-explored, belt-scale 420km² Mt Venn Project (the “Project”)⁽²⁾, located in the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia.

This follows Sarama’s acquisition of a majority interest⁽³⁾ in the nearby Cosmo Gold Project in December 2024. Together, these acquisitions create a 1,000km² landholding covering two well-positioned and underexplored greenstone belts in the Laverton Gold District, an area which is known for prolific gold endowment and significant recent discoveries (refer Figure 1).

Highlights

Completion of Transaction for Sarama to acquire a majority interest⁽¹⁾ in, and control of, the Mt Venn Gold Project in Western Australia
Located in the prolific Laverton Gold District, 35km from the producing Gruyere Gold Mine and less than 20km
from Gold Road’s Golden Highway Deposit
Project covers 420km² and features a favourable litho-structural setting, primarily in greenstone rocks
Includes regional shear zone of ~50km strike length and 1-3km width extending full length of greenstone belt
Advanced gold targets generated through historical exploration, including broad drill-defined gold mineralisation
Creates 1,000km² exploration position in the Laverton Gold District, capturing 100km of strike length
Mt Venn is 40km from Sarama’s Cosmo Project⁽³⁾ that is target-rich and hosts approximately 45km strike of gold trends up to 1.8km in width⁽⁶⁾.
Initial exploration to be advanced by the recent equity raise of A$2.7M

Sarama’s Executive Chairman, Andrew Dinning commented:

“We are very pleased to have completed the acquisition of a majority interest in the Mt Venn Project, significantly expanding our footprint in the Laverton Gold District and consolidating a 1,000km² landholding with strong discovery potential, in a region that has delivered multiple high-quality gold deposits, including the nearby Gruyere Deposit.

Mt Venn lies just 40km from our Cosmo Gold Project(3), with both showing strong gold anomalism. Cosmo hosts approximately 45km of mineralised gold trends up to 1.8km wide(6), while Mt Venn’s soil sampling, historic workings, early drilling, and polymetallic nature highlight potential for a large-scale mineralized system. We see considerable exploration upside across both projects and with compelling targets already identified, we look forward to unlocking their value through focused and systematic exploration.”

Click here for the full ASX Release

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Investing

10 Biggest Cannabis Stocks in the US and Canada

The cannabis market has faced unexpected challenges in 2025, despite initial optimism for rescheduling in the US.

While US federal regulatory uncertainty and banking remain persistent, companies are shifting focus to match changes in consumer behavior. The growing popularity of edibles and rising interest in cannabis-infused beverages reflect evolving demand in a persevering industry.

Cannabis companies in the sector continue to move forward and develop their offerings, and with potential catalysts ahead, some investors are interested in getting involved. Looking at the key players is often a good place to get started, so this list of US and Canadian cannabis stocks covers the companies with the largest presence in two major cannabis ETFs.

This list of the biggest publicly traded cannabis companies was put together based on the top-weighted cannabis stocks included in the AdvisorShares Pure US Cannabis ETF (ARCA:MSOS) and the Horizons Marijuana Life Sciences Index ETF (TSX:HMMJ) as of July 16, 2025. Share price information for the companies was accurate as of that time.

US cannabis market

Cannabis is federally illegal in the US, but state market openings have allowed some operators to thrive. Typically these firms set up vertically integrated businesses with a focus on branded products, retail networks and licenses.

While these companies have adapted to regulatory challenges, they have much to gain from country-level reform in the US, and are eager to see more welcoming federal laws that will allow their businesses to develop further.

Top cannabis stocks in the AdvisorShares Pure US Cannabis ETF

The AdvisorShares Pure US Cannabis ETF provides exposure to public companies exclusively operating within the US cannabis industry. By investing in companies that are working in states with clear guidelines, MSOS gives investors a way to be more selective about the types of cannabis companies they’re investing in.

1. Green Thumb Industries (CSE:GTII,OTCQX:GTBIF)

ETF weight: 32.06 percent
Market cap: US$1.36 billion
Share price: US$5.72

Green Thumb Industries is a multi-state operator (MSO) with headquarters in Chicago, Illinois.

The company is involved in the entire process of the industry, from cultivating and producing cannabis products to selling them in its own retail stores, of which there are many across the United States. Green Thumb Industries owns a portfolio of well-known cannabis brands like Rythm, Beboe, Dogwalkers, Incredibles and Doctor Solomon’s.

2. Trulieve Cannabis (CSE:TRUL,OTCQX:TCNNF)

ETF weight: 22.59 percent
Market cap: US$781.51 million
Share price: US$4.09

Trulieve is another major player in the cannabis industry, with a strong focus on medical cannabis. The company offers a diverse selection of cannabis products, including flower, pre-rolls, concentrates, edibles, topicals and more.

Vertically integrated, Trulieve Cannabis has a dominant market share in its home state of Florida, as well as in Arizona and Pennsylvania. In June 2024, the company opened its 200th dispensary in the United States.

3. Curaleaf Holdings (TSX:CURA,OTCQX:CURLF)

ETF weight: 15.37 percent
Market cap: US$764.16 million
Share price: US$1.00

Curaleaf Holdings has a significant presence in the US cannabis market, with around 150 dispensaries and several cultivation centers across 17 states. The company is also continuing its expansion into the European cannabis sector, where it already has a strong presence. Curaleaf has a wide range of brands covering a variety of cannabis product types, including flower, vapes, edibles and hemp-derived THC beverages.

4. Glass House Brands (CBOE:GLAS.A.U,OTC Pink:GHBWF)

ETF weight: 7.32 percent
Market cap: US$269.57 million
Share price: US$5.40

Glass House Brands is a vertically integrated cannabis company with a focus on the California market. The company is has placed an emphasis on sustainable practices at its large-scale cultivation facility in Camarillo, California. Glass House Brands is also a major producer and wholesaler of cannabis biomass and cannabis oil to other manufacturers and extractors in the industry.

Glass House offers a diverse range of cannabis products through its various brands and retail operations, including edibles and wellness products under its Mama Sue Wellness brand.

5. Cresco Labs (CSE:CL,OTCQX:CRLBF)

ETF weight: 5.53 percent
Market cap: US$235.9 million
Share price: US$0.53

Cresco Labs is a vertically integrated multi-state cannabis operator in the United States. A leading US cannabis company, it is known for its strong brands like Cresco, High Supply and Good News.

Cresco Labs controls its supply chain from cultivation to retail, offering a wide range of products. While it has its own stores, it focuses heavily on wholesale, getting its products into dispensaries across the country.

Canadian cannabis market

In 2018, Canada became the first G7 nation to legalize adult-use cannabis and create its own streamlined program regulated by both federal and provincial powers. Since then, companies working in the country have faced ups and downs in dealing with tight marketing rules, high tax rates and ongoing competition with the unregulated market.

Top cannabis stocks in the Global X Marijuana Life Sciences Index ETF

The Global X Marijuana Life Sciences Index ETF was the first cannabis ETF available in Canada, and it holds a variety of publicly traded companies involved in cannabis, along with several non-flower companies.

While HMMJ does not invest in US-based multi-state operators, it does have exposure to the US market through Canadian companies that have interests in the US cannabis industry. Overall, HMMJ is designed to give investors broad exposure to the cannabis industry, with a particular focus on North American companies.

1. Jazz Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:JAZZ)

ETF weight: 16.47 percent
Market cap: US$7.02 billion
Share price: US$116.08

Jazz Pharmaceuticals is a global biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing medicines for people with serious diseases, often with limited or no other options. They have a diverse portfolio of products in areas like sleep disorders, cancer and epilepsy.

Jazz Pharmaceuticals’ cannabis business stems from their 2021 acquisition of GW Pharmaceuticals and its epilepsy medicine Epidiolex for a whopping US$7.2 billion. This made big waves as it was one of the largest moves by a traditional pharmaceutical company into the cannabis space.

2. Cronos Group (NASDAQ:CRON,TSX:CRON)

ETF weight: 13.14 percent
Market cap: US$774.69 million
Share price: US$2.01

Cronos Group is the Canada-based company behind the Spinach, Peace Naturals and Lord Jones cannabis brands. In Canada, Cronos’ Spinach brand is in the top three for retail sales in the flower and edible categories.

The company also has a presence in Israel and Germany with its brand Peace Naturals. In late 2023, the company re-entered the German medical cannabis market through its partnership with a German medical cannabis company called Cansativa Group. Cronos serves the Israeli market through its subsidiary Cronos Israel.

3. Innovative Industrial Properties (NYSE:IIPR)

ETF weight: 11.28 percent
Market cap: US$1.51 billion
Share price: US$53.99

Innovative Industrial Properties is a real estate investment trust that provides specialized real estate opportunities for cannabis companies in 19 states. Its properties mostly consist of processing plants, greenhouses and warehouses, with retail spaces making up a small percentage of its portfolio.

The firm has provided long-term absolute net lease agreements to some of the cannabis industry’s biggest names, including Green Thumb, TILT Holdings (NEO:TILT,OTCQB:TLLTF), Ascend Wellness (CSE:AAWH.U,OTCQX:AAWH) and Curaleaf. The company’s sale-leaseback program has helped cannabis companies access a source of capital, a much-needed workaround in the US where there are fewer traditional financing options.

4. Scotts Miracle-Gro Co (NYSE:SMG)

ETF weight: 10.74 percent
Market cap: US$3.92 billion
Share price: US$67.92

Scotts Miracle-Gro is a leader in lawn and garden products, but its involvement in the cannabis industry comes through its Hawthorne Gardening Company subsidiary. Hawthorne is an ancillary provider, supplying essential hydroponic and indoor growing equipment, nutrients, lighting and environmental control systems for large-scale cannabis production.

5. SNDL (NASDAQ:SNDL)

ETF weight: 7.8 percent
Market cap: US$383.4 million
Share price: US$1.49

SNDL, formerly known as Sundial Growers, is the largest private-sector liquor and cannabis retailer on the Canadian market. They cultivate and sell cannabis products under various brands, including Top Leaf, Sundial Cannabis, Palmetto and more. They focus on premium indoor cultivation and have a strong presence in the Canadian market.

SNDL has faced financial challenges in the past, but in Q1 2025 the company’s cannabis business revenue grew year-over-year for the 13th consecutive quarter. The company has continued to make strategic investments in 2025.

FAQs for investing in cannabis

Are cannabis stocks worth investing in?

Each investor will have to think and act for themselves to manage their own risk exposure, but it’s no secret that cannabis stocks have taken a beating for some time now. While financial experts point to the long-term upside of US operators as more state markets expand, the stock market has not been kind to these names lately.

Are cannabis stocks considered a high- or low-risk investment?

Cannabis investments are extremely young in the grand scheme of the investment universe. There is an exciting and refreshing element to these stocks, but the market has always been characterized by volatility and unpredictability.

While wild, spontaneous swings in the open market have become less common, cannabis stocks are often moved — both positively and negatively — by big pieces of market news or legalization updates.

Why do people buy cannabis stocks?

Investors may choose to get exposure to the cannabis market as a way to participate in the development of a new drug market with consumer packaged goods capabilities. Some participants are bullish on the industry’s long-term outlook and expect more welcoming laws in the US and across the world to provide upward momentum.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Investing

Altech Batteries LtdCerenergy Battery Project Funding Progressing Well

Perth, Australia (ABN Newswire) – Altech Batteries Limited (ASX:ATC,OTC:ALTHF) (FRA:A3Y) (OTCMKTS:ALTHF) is pleased to announce an update on funding of the CERENERGY(R) sodium-chloride solid-state battery project in Saxony, Germany.

DEBT PROCESS

As previously mentioned, Altech has engaged ten commercial banks and two venture debt funds in the first round of financing discussions, receiving largely positive initial feedback. Based on this feedback, the Company has selected a preferred financial institution- a European bank with a proven track record in providing debt funding for technology-driven projects, particularly those within the innovation sector.

Although the mandate has not yet been formally executed, Altech intends to make an official announcement once this step is complete.

Meanwhile, the bank’s commercial and technical teams have been diligently conducting a comprehensive review of the Cerenergy projects and its technology. The technical due diligence process is critical for ensuring that the project meets the bank’s financing and risk criteria. As part of this process the onsite Altech experts are in detailed discussions with the bank’s representative. The banks have visited Dresden and the Fraunhofer testing facilities and visit Hermsdorf, Germany where the prototype production is located in the coming weeks, which will be a key step in concluding the technical evaluation.

In parallel with these efforts, Altech is progressing discussions for securing a federal government guarantee, which would further strengthen its ability to secure the necessary debt funding for the project. Officials from the Ministry of Finance have already been briefed on the initiative, and the due diligence process for the application is actively underway. This federal guarantee will serve as an underwriter and therewith derisk any debt funding for the project substantially.

EQUITY FUNDING

In parallel with ongoing debt financing efforts, the Group has engaged several equity advisers to assist in securing the equity component of the project’s funding package. As part of this strategy, Altech plans to divest a minority interest in the project to one or two strategic investors. This partial divestment is intended to attract investors who can contribute not only capital, but also strategic value, aligning with the CERENERGY(R) project’s long-term goals of growth and sustainability.

The Group on one hand is specifically targeting large utility companies, data centre operators, investment funds, and corporations that are deeply committed to the green energy transition and on the other hand industrial partners with access and know-how and resources relevant to Cerenergy battery production, implementation or market access. These potential partners are seen as ideal due to their strong alignment with the project’s sustainable energy focus and their ability to provide significant financial support. Progress in equity discussions has been promising, with several Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) signed, enabling deeper engagement with prospective investors. Additionally, draft term sheets have been circulated to interested parties, outlining the key terms and conditions for investment. These documents provide a foundation for negotiations and facilitate more detailed discussions around the equity stake and partnership structure.

The decision to divest part of the project is strategically aimed at easing the Company’s financial burden while bringing in experienced partners who can contribute to the project’s success. By securing both equity and debt financing, Altech aims to finalize the full funding package, ensuring the timely construction and commissioning of the CERENERGY(R) battery plant. Moving forward, the focus will be on advancing these discussions and converting interest into formal commitments, which are critical for the project’s progression.

GRANT APPLICATIONS

Altech has been actively applying for various grants offered by the State of Saxony, Federal Government of Germany, and the European Union. The State of Saxony and Brandenburg, along with the European Union, offer substantial support for renewable energy projects, including grants aimed at converting lignite coal to renewable energy sources. These grants are part of broader efforts to transition regions dependent on fossil fuels toward sustainable energy solutions. Altech’s site, located in these areas, stands to benefit from various funding programs designed to support clean energy projects, including EU grants for energy transformation and innovation. Altech has applied for several of these grants to advance its CERENERGY(R) project, securing essential financial backing for technology development, high-tech industries, expert employment and infrastructure upgrades.

OFFTAKE ARRANGEMENTS

Altech has secured three key Offtake Letters of Intent (LOIs) for 100% of its CERENERGY(R) production.

1. Zweckverband Industriepark Schwarze Pumpe (ZISP): An agreement was signed on 13 September 2024 for ZISP to purchase 30 MWh of energy storage capacity annually, consisting of 1MWh GridPacks, for the first five years of production. The purchase is contingent on performance tests and battery specifications meeting customer requirements.

2. Referenzkraftwerk Lausitz GmbH (RefLau): A second LOI was executed with RefLau, a joint venture between Enertrag SE and Energiequelle GmbH. RefLau will buy 30 MWh of CERENERGY(R) storage n the first year, increasing to 32 MWh annually for the next four years. Additionally, Altech will purchase green electricity for its planned production plant.

3. Axsol GmbH: A third LOI was signed with Axsol, a leading renewable energy solutions provider. Axsol will exclusively distribute CERENERGY(R) batteries to the Western defense industry, facilitating early market entry and sales. These agreements are crucial for financing and advancing the CERENERGY(R) project.

About Altech Batteries Ltd:

Altech Batteries Limited (ASX:ATC,OTC:ALTHF) (FRA:A3Y) is a specialty battery technology company that has a joint venture agreement with world leading German battery institute Fraunhofer IKTS (‘Fraunhofer’) to commercialise the revolutionary CERENERGY(R) Sodium Alumina Solid State (SAS) Battery. CERENERGY(R) batteries are the game-changing alternative to lithium-ion batteries. CERENERGY(R) batteries are fire and explosion-proof; have a life span of more than 15 years and operate in extreme cold and desert climates. The battery technology uses table salt and is lithium-free; cobalt-free; graphite-free; and copper-free, eliminating exposure to critical metal price rises and supply chain concerns.

The joint venture is commercialising its CERENERGY(R) battery, with plans to construct a 100MWh production facility on Altech’s land in Saxony, Germany. The facility intends to produce CERENERGY(R) battery modules to provide grid storage solutions to the market.

Source:
Altech Batteries Ltd

Contact:
Corporate
Iggy Tan
Managing Director
Altech Batteries Limited
Tel: +61-8-6168-1555
Email: info@altechgroup.com

Martin Stein
Chief Financial Officer
Altech Batteries Limited
Tel: +61-8-6168-1555
Email: info@altechgroup.com

News Provided by ABN Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Business

Orange juice importer says Brazil tariffs will squeeze American consumers

Orange juice prices could rise by 20% to 25%, according to Johanna Foods, a small U.S. business suing the White House over tariffs threatened against Brazil.

President Donald Trump said in a July 9 letter to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva that he would apply a 50% tariff to all imports from Brazil starting Aug. 1.

Trump said the high tariff rate was necessary because of ‘the way Brazil has treated former President Bolsonaro.’

Prosecutors in Brazil have alleged that Bolsonaro was part of a scheme that included a plan to assassinate the country’s current president, who defeated him in the last election, and Supreme Federal Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. Bolsonaro has denied any wrongdoing.

Trump also said Brazil was censoring U.S.-based social media platforms and was running “unsustainable Trade Deficits” with the United States.

However, the United States has a goods trade surplus with Brazil — more than $7 billion last year, according to data from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Johanna Foods, which says it supplies nearly 75% of all private label “not from concentrate” orange juice to customers in the U.S., says those arguments do not constitute an economic emergency and therefore the president does not have the power to levy this tariff.

“The Brazil Letter does not refer to any legal or statutory authority under which the Brazil Tariff can be imposed by the President,” the company’s attorney Marc Kaplin writes in a filing.

“The Brazil Letter does not constitute a proper executive action, is not an Executive Order, does not reference or incorporate any Executive Orders or modify or amend any existing Executive Order,” the attorney continued.

The company said some of its customers include Walmart, Aldi, Wegman’s, Safeway and Albertsons.

Johanna Foods CEO Robert Facchina said the duty would result in an estimated $68 million hit, exceeding any single year of profits since the company was created in 1995.

“The Brazil Tariff will result in a significant, and perhaps prohibitive, price increase in a staple American breakfast food,” the lawsuit reads.

“The not from concentrate orange juice ingredients imported from Brazil are not reasonably available from any supplier in the United States in sufficient quantity or quality to meet the Plaintiffs’ production needs.”

Orange juice prices have already been rising across the country. Over the last year, the average price of a 16-ounce container rose 23 cents, or more than 5%, to $4.49, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Orange juice futures, the global benchmark that tracks the commodity, have also jumped recently. During the last month, they are up nearly 40%, with most of that increase coming on the heels of Trump’s threat.

Brazil’s Supreme Court ruled last month that social media companies can be held accountable for the content posted on their platforms. Elon Musk’s social media site, X, was also briefly banned last year in Brazil after Musk refused to comply with a court request to ban some accounts.

Facchina says layoffs of union manufacturing employees, administrative staff and a reduced production capacity at the company’s Flemington, New Jersey, and Spokane, Washington, facilities are near-certain should these tariffs go into effect. Johanna Foods employs almost 700 people across Washington state and New Jersey.

Brazil was the 18th-largest source of U.S. goods imports last year, with more than $42 billion worth of imports entering the country, according to U.S. International Trade Commission data.

In its legal filing, the company asks the Court of International Trade to declare that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not grant Trump the statutory authority to impose the tariffs against Brazil, and that the president has not identified a national emergency or “unusual and extraordinary threat” as required by the IEEPA law to impose the tariffs.

In response to the lawsuit, a White House spokesperson said the administration is ‘legally and fairly using tariff powers that have been granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to level the playing field for American workers and safeguard our national security.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Politics

Harvard, Trump battle for billions in federal funds as judge weighs next steps

Lawyers for Harvard University and the Trump administration sparred in federal court in Boston on Monday over the administration’s decision to slash roughly $2.6 billion in federal research funding for the university – the latest in a series of high-stakes court clashes that have pitted the Trump administration against the nation’s oldest university.

Harvard sued the Trump administration in April over the funding freeze, which it described in its lawsuit as an unlawful and unconstitutional effort to assert federal ‘control’ over elite academic institutions, according to a filing submitted to U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs.

The Trump administration, for its part, has accused Harvard of ‘fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus,’ and refusing to comply with demands from a federal antisemitism task force sent to the university earlier this year.

Both sides have asked Burroughs, an Obama appointee, to issue a summary judgment by early September, which could allow them to avoid a lengthy trial before the start of the new school year.

In court on Monday, Harvard lawyer Steven Lehotsky argued that the funding cuts are an illegal attempt by the Trump administration to coerce the university into complying with the administration’s policies and violate the First Amendment and Title VI protections.

Lawyers for Harvard have argued that the Trump administration’s actions amount to an unconstitutional ‘pressure campaign’ to influence and exert control over its academic programs, which Lehotsky echoed on Monday.

He told Burroughs the funding freeze is an attempt by the Trump administration to control the ‘inner workings’ of the university, and one he argued could cause lasting damage.

He pointed to earlier claims from Harvard that the administration ‘fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism.’

‘By accepting federal funds, Harvard agreed to abide by the provisions in Title VI and the relevant agencies’ corresponding regulations,’ lawyers for the university said in filing the lawsuit earlier this year.

But Harvard’s agreement, they said, does not constitute a ‘blank check for agencies to impose the government’s recent, unrelated demands as a condition of continued funding.’

Meanwhile, Michael Velchik, a lawyer for the Justice Department, countered that the administration has ‘every right’ to cancel the funding, which they sought to frame as a mere contract issue and one that should be heard in a different court.

The Justice Department also reiterated that they see Harvard’s actions as violating the administration’s order combating antisemitism.

‘Harvard claims the government is anti-Harvard. I reject that,’ Velchik said on Monday. ‘The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard. The government is pro-Jewish faculty at Harvard.’

President Donald Trump signaled dissatisfaction with the hearing on Monday – vowing on social media to appeal any ruling against the administration to a higher court.

He also took aim at Burroughs. ‘How did this Trump-hating Judge get these cases?’ he said on Truth Social, ‘When she rules against us, we will IMMEDIATELY appeal, and WIN,’

Trump further took aim at Harvard, accusing the university of being ‘anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-America,’ despite having ‘$52 billion’ sitting in the bank.

‘Much of this money comes from the U.S.A., all to the detriment of other schools, colleges, and institutions, and we are not going to allow this unfair situation to happen any longer,’ Trump said.

Burroughs ended Monday’s hearing by saying she would take the case under advisement, and would issue a ruling after she had sufficient time to weigh the matters presented by the administration and the university.

She did not offer a timeframe for when she planned to rule on the matter.

Still, the judge appeared skeptical during the hearing of some Trump administration claims, including how it could make such wanton cuts to university funding.

At one point, Burroughs noted to Velchik that she had doubts about the government’s so-called ‘ad hoc’ decisions to cut billions in grant money without providing further evidence, documentation or procedure to ‘suss out’ whether the university or its administrators had taken sufficient steps to combat antisemItism or comply with the guidance handed down by the Trump administration.

‘The consequences of that in terms of constitutional law are staggering,’ she told Velchik at one point during the hearing.

‘I don’t think you can justify a contract action based on impermissible suppression of speech.’

Since Trump took office in January, the administration has targeted the university with investigations from six separate federal agencies.

It has also sought to ban Harvard’s ability to host international students by attempting to revoke its certification status under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) – a program led by the Department of Homeland Security that allows universities to sponsor international students for U.S. visas.

Burroughs in June issued a temporary restraining order blocking the administration from immediately revoking its SEVP credentials, siding with Harvard in ruling that the university would likely suffer ‘immediate and irreparable harm’ if the action was enforced.

Harvard, meanwhile, has signaled no plans to stand down in its fight with the Trump administration.

‘Ultimately, this is about Trump trying to impose his view of the world on everybody else,’ Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman said in a radio interview earlier this summer discussing the administration’s actions.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Politics

Congressional Republicans face bruising battle to avoid government shutdown

Congressional Republicans are facing an uphill battle over the next two months to deliver on their promises to cut spending in the next fiscal year – while avoiding a partial government shutdown if no deal is struck.

‘When’s the last time we got 12 appropriations bills actually done, and completed in a couple of weeks? It’s almost impossible to do,’ Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., told Fox News Digital last week.

Passing 12 individual appropriations bills, each funding separate aspects of the federal government, has been Republicans’ goal each time the Sept. 30 fiscal year (FY) deadline nears.

But that has not happened since 1996 — FY1997 — and the partisan environment in Washington has only gotten more polarized since. Recent Republican-backed legislation has all but sidelined the once-powerful appropriations committees in both chambers.

Meanwhile, House Republicans are more broadly eager to adhere to the Trump administration’s request to cut $163 billion from non-defense government spending than their Senate counterparts – which could result in a standoff between the two chambers.

‘It’s looking like it’s going to be higher than what the president’s budget is. And that, I’m not a fan of,’ Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., a member of the House Appropriations Committee, told Fox News Digital last week.

Another committee Republican, Rep. Riley Moore, R-W.Va., said, ‘I’m really proud of the work the committee has done so far. I do feel like we’re gonna be able to get these bills done. The question is, what’s the Senate going to do?’

Further compounding difficulties between the two sides of the U.S. Capitol is the 60-vote filibuster threshold that most bills in the Senate must ram through.

That means that any spending bills have to be bipartisan, but after Senate Republicans advanced President Donald Trump’s $9 billion rescissions package, Senate Democrats have warned that they won’t play ball.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said that he would like to go ahead with a regular appropriations process, but that Senate Democrats ‘have signaled that they don’t want one.’

‘The Democrats have been very clear,’ he said. ‘They are already conferencing the idea of a government shutdown — I don’t have any idea, no idea how that is helpful for them or to anyone.’

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., previously warned that if Republicans were successful in passing the rescissions package — after icing out Democrats during the budget reconciliation process — that there could be trouble down the road in generating enough bipartisan support to pass spending bills, nonetheless avert a partial government shutdown.

Sen. John Hoeven, chair of the Senate Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations subcommittee, told Fox News Digital that if Democrats planned to block everything, then ‘what would you expect?’

‘By working with us, that’s how they actually will get some of their priorities,’ the North Dakota Republican said. ‘But when they’re going to just block us, then why should their priorities be included?’

A House Appropriations Committee member who spoke with Fox News Digital on the condition of anonymity indicated that Republican lawmakers are beginning to accept the possibility of a short-term continuing resolution (CR), a stopgap measure extending the previous fiscal year’s funding levels in order to keep the government open.

‘You could see a situation where you’re in a short-term CR, and we’ll try to negotiate topline numbers and all that,’ that House lawmaker said.

It’s a situation that House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., didn’t rule out to reporters early last week – while agreeing with Senate Republicans’ concerns about Democrats failing to work across the aisle.

‘I’m always worried about a shutdown, because I think the Democrats have a very hard time bargaining with Donald Trump. I mean, that’s why we ended up in a CR,’ Cole said, referring to the last round of government funding talks that resulted in a CR from March through the end of FY2025.

‘We offered them a much better deal than a CR, and they couldn’t do it. So I hope this time they can, but the temperature on the other side is very high, and Democratic voters are punishing their own members for cooperating on things like keeping the government open.’

That could create issue with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, however, who have fiercely pushed back against CRs or ‘omnibus’ spending bills in the past – though no such standoffs have led to a shutdown in recent years.

Both House and Senate Republicans are dealing with razor-thin margins of just three votes.

House Republicans scored an important victory last week in passing their $832 billion defense funding bill. That, along with the bill funding military construction and Veterans’ Affairs, make up more than half of the discretionary budget requested by the White House earlier this year.

But they’re not expected to hold House-wide votes on any of the remaining 10 bills before early September, when Congress returns from August recess.

Senate Republicans are also gearing up to consider their first spending bill, one for military construction and the VA, on Tuesday that will likely end up being a test of how the appropriations process, and likely government funding extension, will play out in the coming months.

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said after the rescissions package passed that she wanted to see the panel return to form, and in doing so, keeping the bipartisan spirit of appropriations alive.

‘It is unfortunate that many members of this body have voted to make that a whole lot harder,’ the Washington state Democrat said.

One senior House GOP lawmaker who spoke with Fox News Digital ultimately downplayed concerns of a shutdown, however.

‘The factors of the Senate wanting more money than the House, Democrats wanting more money than Republicans – those have been in place for a generation. And most of the time, shutdowns don’t happen,’ that lawmaker said.

‘It would seem to me that although the Democrats are big mad about Elon and Trump, and reconciliation, at some point, that temperature’s going to fade and people are going to realize that a shutdown doesn’t really serve our national interests.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Politics

Iran seeks China, Russia help to stall UN sanctions ahead of nuclear talks with Europeans

Iran said it will hold talks with Russia and China on Tuesday in an attempt to circumvent U.N. snapback sanctions as the deadline for a nuclear agreement looms.

‘We are in constant consultation with these two countries to prevent activation of the snapback or to mitigate its consequences,’ Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said during a Monday press briefing, reported Iran International. ‘We have aligned positions and good relations.’

Both China and Russia are signatories of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), an agreement that seemingly failed to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions following the U.S. withdrawal from the deal under the first Trump presidency in 2018 and the subsequent nuclear advances Tehran made.

The news of the impending meeting comes one week after France, Germany and the U.K. announced they would enforce snapback sanctions on Tehran if it fails to enter into a new nuclear agreement by the end of August.

What would need to be included in a new nuclear deal remains unclear and Iran has not yet renewed nuclear negotiations with the U.S. after Washington levied significant strikes against its top atomic facilities last month in coordination with Israel.

The snapback mechanism was reserved under the JCPOA and allows any signatory of the agreement to recall stiff international sanctions on Iran to be enforced by all 15 members of the United Nations Security Council – including Russia and China – if Tehran is determined to have violated the terms of the 2015 deal.

Since the first Trump presidency, the U.S. has threatened the use of snapback sanctions, though Washington can no longer call for the re-implementation of the economic tool as it left the agreement – a decision determined by the U.N. and the other JCPOA signatories.

But top D.C. officials, like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have continued to encourage European allies to use this tool to push Iran to cease nuclear development.

Iran is also set to hold talks with France, Germany and the U.K. – an alliance also known as the E3 – this Friday, though the window to secure a new nuclear deal is closing despite years of repeated attempts.

‘Snapback at the UNSC remains, not just the Trump administration’s, but the international community’s most powerful political and diplomatic tool against the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program,’ Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iranian expert and senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Iran program, told Fox News Digital.

‘Snapback and a restoration of older, tougher UNSC resolutions that contain arms export prohibitions, missile testing prohibitions, as well as a panel of experts to monitor sanctions compliance, will actually magnify the political and military dividends that the U.S. and Israeli strikes have given,’ he added.

Security experts have been sounding the alarm for months that it will take roughly six weeks for U.N. sanctions to be enforced, largely due to procedural reasons, and the ability to enforce snapback sanctions under JCPOA terms will expire on Oct. 18.

Ben Taleblu also warned that these intense sanctions on Iran could instigate further security threats to the West when it comes to Tehran’s nuclear program, as it could prompt Iran to leave other major international nuclear agreements like the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Politics

Obama-era officials mum on allegations of ‘manufactured’ intelligence launching Trump-Russia probe

Former Obama administration officials named in new revelations surrounding the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation have been silent amid allegations they ‘manufactured’ intelligence that led to the opening of the yearslong probe.

On Friday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified documents revealing ‘overwhelming evidence’ that demonstrated how, after President Donald Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, then-President Barack Obama and his national security team laid the groundwork for what would be the yearslong Trump–Russia collusion probe.

Gabbard said the documents revealed that Obama administration officials ‘manufactured and politicized intelligence’ to create the narrative that Russia was attempting to influence the 2016 presidential election, despite information from the intelligence community stating otherwise.

The new documents name former President Barack Obama, top officials in his National Security Council, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others.

Gabbard, on Monday, sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department related to those findings. DOJ officials did not share further details on whom the criminal referral was for.

Gabbard told Fox News Digital that this ‘is not a partisan issue,’ but one that ‘concerns every American.’

‘The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government,’ Gabbard told Fox News Digital. ‘Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people.’

Gabbard said the ‘egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution’ by Obama-era officials ‘threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic.’

‘No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again,’ Gabbard said. ‘The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic, and therefore the future of our nation, depends on it.’

Gabbard added: ‘As such, I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.’

Gabbard’s criminal referral comes just a week after CIA Director John Ratcliffe sent a criminal referral for Brennan.

FBI Director Kash Patel opened a criminal investigation into Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey for potential wrongdoing related to the Trump-Russia probe, including allegedly making false statements to Congress, Justice Department sources told Fox News Digital.

None of the former Obama-era officials have responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Politics

Hunter Biden special counsel got ‘one resume’ from DOJ to help prosecute president’s son

Former special counsel David Weiss got little support from the Department of Justice (DOJ) when he sought lawyers to help prosecute President Joe Biden’s son Hunter, Weiss told Congress during a recent closed-door interview.

Amid delicate plea deal negotiations between Hunter Biden and Weiss in 2023, Weiss said he asked the DOJ deputy attorney general’s office for a team of trial lawyers and received a single resume, according to a transcript of the interview reviewed by Fox News Digital.

‘Actually, as I think about the sequencing, I had started to reach out myself directly to offices or people that I knew and make my own inquiries,’ Weiss told House Judiciary Committee staff of his struggle to hire lawyers for the sensitive job of trying the president’s son.

Weiss appeared on Capitol Hill for the interview in June as part of the committee’s inquiry into the DOJ’s years-long investigation and prosecution of Hunter Biden.

Now no longer a DOJ employee, Weiss spoke candidly for hours with the committee, shedding new light on his interactions with the Biden DOJ and giving fresh insight into why Hunter Biden was never charged with certain violations.

Who is David Weiss?

Weiss was appointed U.S. attorney of Delaware during the first Trump administration and began investigating Hunter Biden at that time. Former Attorney General Merrick Garland made Weiss special counsel in August 2023 after a plea agreement with Hunter Biden fell apart.

Republicans had accused Weiss of offering Hunter Biden a ‘sweetheart’ plea deal that involved only misdemeanors. But in an unusual move, a judge rejected the deal, leading Weiss to instead bring two successful indictments against the then-first son, one for illegal gun possession and another for nine tax charges, including three felonies.

Weiss came under enormous scrutiny by Republicans and Democrats for his handling of the investigation, which had become a hyper-political national news story centered on the salacious behavior and wrongdoings of Hunter Biden, a recovering drug and alcohol addict, and allegations that Joe Biden was complicit in his son’s crimes.

Republicans claimed Weiss was not tough enough on Hunter Biden, while Democrats said he was being treated more harshly than a typical defendant because he was the president’s son. Joe Biden ultimately granted an unconditional pardon to his son, a move widely criticized by members of both parties.

Weiss gets ‘one resume’

Weiss said during the interview that he was ‘fortunate enough to obtain a couple very excellent prosecutors,’ a reference to the two DOJ attorneys who handled trial preparations for Hunter Biden.

But, Weiss also indicated that when he first requested lawyers in the spring of 2023, he had to be self-sufficient in finding them and that the deputy attorney general’s office was unhelpful. Weiss noted he did not deal directly with former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco at all and assumed she was recused from Hunter Biden’s cases.

Weiss said that at one point he ran into the director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, which handles recruitment, at an event and asked if any hiring progress had been made.

Weiss did not ‘have a whole lot of success’ during that conversation, he said.

‘What do you mean, you didn’t have success? … They didn’t give you lawyers?’ a committee aide asked.

‘I got one resume,’ Weiss replied.

The aide asked, ‘Nobody wanted to come prosecute Hunter Biden?’

‘I don’t want to say that because I don’t know that they weren’t trying to find people,’ Weiss said. ‘All I know was I didn’t get a whole lot of resumes.’

Weiss eventually gained two attorneys, Leo Wise and Derek Hines, who went on to secure a conviction by a jury in Delaware after a week-long trial on gun possession charges and a guilty plea to all nine of Hunter Biden’s tax charges.

A committee aide pressed Weiss on why he felt there was ‘such a drought’ of help at DOJ headquarters.

‘As I said a moment ago … I did not receive a lot of resumes in response to my initial request,’ Weiss said, noting that eventually the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section assisted him.

Asked if the Public Integrity Section helped him because Weiss proactively reached out, Weiss replied, ‘Probably.’

Burisma tax years and FARA

For his testimony, the Trump DOJ gave Weiss permission in a letter to talk to Congress about Hunter Biden’s cases. The department noted, however, that it could not authorize Weiss to talk about the former first son’s confidential tax information.

Weiss suggested, though, that he would have charged Hunter Biden for the 2014 and 2015 tax years if he could have.

‘To the extent I can put together — and this is general — a case that involves more years than not and allows me to more fully develop allegations about a course of conduct and a scheme, that’s better for the prosecution,’ Weiss said. ‘So it’s not like I’m looking to cut out years generally when you’re pursuing a tax investigation.’

During the years in question, Hunter Biden was raking in $1 million per year as a board member of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father, then vice president, was overseeing foreign policy with Ukraine. The scenario became ripe for questions about conflicts of interest, in part because of suspicious interactions between Hunter Biden and the Obama State Department.

In Weiss’s final special counsel report, he dodged explaining why he brought charges of failure to pay taxes and tax evasion against Hunter Biden only for the tax years after 2015, citing Joe Biden’s pardon. Now, Weiss said, he would be more willing to talk about it if he were legally allowed to do so.

Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, pressed Weiss, saying the ‘political aspects of Burisma’ raised ‘glaring’ questions about the prosecutorial decisions made for the years for which Hunter Biden avoided charges.

‘I understand,’ Weiss replied. ‘Absolutely. Yes. And I wish that I could address it. But it’s my understanding that, for me to trip into 2014 and ’15 is a violation of [U.S. code].’

Weiss also told the committee his team had no serious discussions about charging Hunter Biden under a foreign lobby law called the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

‘We just couldn’t put together a sufficient case,’ Weiss said.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS