US to take 10% equity stake in Intel, in Trump’s latest corporate move
Washington just went from regulator to shareholder. On Friday, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. government will take a 9.9% stake in Intel, scooping up shares at a discount as part of a deal that flips billions in federal grants into equity. Means, taxpayers now officially own a chunk of America’s most famous chipmaker.Intel will pocket about $10 billion in funding for U.S. factory projects, while Washington shells out $8.9 billion for 433 million shares roughly $4 cheaper than where the stock closed. The deal follows weeks of drama between Trump and Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, who the president recently suggested should resign over ties to Chinese firms. After a tense back-and-forth, Tan cut a deal that Trump framed as a win: “He walked in wanting to keep his job and he ended up giving us $10 billion for the United States.”This is just the latest in a string of eyebrow-raising government interventions in corporate America. Washington has already grabbed a “golden share” in U.S. Steel, brokered a deal with Nvidia to skim revenue from China chip sales, and even made the Pentagon a top investor in a rare-earth mining company.
But not everyone is cheering. Critics say the White House is blurring the lines between public policy and private enterprise, raising new kinds of risks for companies caught in the political crossfire. For Intel, the government’s passive stake comes without a board seat but includes warrants for another 5% if its foundry business stumbles.
The big question is can Intel use this breathing room to close its massive gap with Taiwan’s TSMC and fend off rivals like AMD and Nvidia? With $18.8 billion in losses last year—the company’s worst since the ’80s. So, the pressure is on.
Compliance and regulations
The landscape of government buying is undergoing a radical transformation with the Part 12 refresh, placing a laser focus on Category Management. This isn’t a minor update; it’s a fundamental rewrite of procurement rules that elevates the Best-In-Class (BIC) requirement, a Tier 3 designation within the Category Management framework, to unprecedented importance. For contractors, this means the vehicles you rely on—GSA MAS, SEWP, OASIS+, and others—are now viewed through a strict Category Management lens. Since these are currently Tier 2, actively monitoring their tier status and any evolution toward Tier 3 is your new critical mission. Your entire Category Management strategy must now include diligent use of the Acquisition Gateway, the official source for tier definitions and qualified contract lists.This pivot means your engagement with government customers must also evolve. While traditionally wary of “educating” COs, the current flurry of changes creates an opening for constructive dialogue. A savvy approach to Category Management allows you to thoughtfully illustrate how these new rules impact the use of your contracts, turning a regulatory shift into a collaborative conversation. Ultimately, thriving in this new environment demands more than just compliance; it requires a proactive and expert Category Management strategy that aligns your offerings with the government’s streamlined buying goals. Your competitiveness and bottom line now depend on it.
Protest Exposes Flaws in GSA’s AI Acquisition Reform
A major acquisition reform effort has backfired, putting the GSA’s celebrated $1-per-year AI pacts under a harsh spotlight. A formal protest filed with the GAO claims these deals represent a failure in modern acquisition reform, dangerously bypassing mandatory security and pricing rules. The heart of the issue is that the offered commercial versions lack vital FedRAMP authorization and ITAR compliance, effectively excluding the Department of Defense. This hurried acquisition reform tactic also contradicts the GSA’s own OneGov strategy by using a reseller instead of dealing directly with manufacturers. The protest serves as a critical reminder that true acquisition reform must prioritize rigorous compliance and long-term value over the allure of a cheap press release. This case is a textbook example of how not to implement acquisition reform, potentially creating more risk and vendor lock-in than progress.
Trump’s Big Push & Fight for a Convicted Clerk
It’s August 2025, and Donald Trump is back in the headlines. But this time, it’s not about rallies, debates, or tweets. It’s about a woman named Tina Peters and Trump’s loud demand to set her free.
Tina Peters is a former election clerk from Colorado. She was convicted of crimes related to election data tampering. Many say she broke the law. Others say she was trying to protect the truth. But now, Trump is stepping in, calling her a “hero” and asking for her release. And people are talking.
So what’s really going on here? Why is Trump putting his weight behind someone most Americans have never heard of? And what does this moment say about where we are as a country?
Who Is Tina Peters?
Tina Peters used to work as an election clerk in Mesa County, Colorado. In 2021, she got into trouble for allegedly allowing unauthorized access to voting machines. She said she was trying to expose problems in the system. The courts didn’t agree. She was convicted and sentenced.
Most politicians moved on. But Trump didn’t.
Trump’s Message: “She’s a Patriot”
Just this week, Trump posted on social media, saying Tina Peters was “wrongfully punished” and “should be released immediately.” He called her a “brave woman” who “stood up for election integrity.” He even hinted that her case was part of a bigger plan to silence people who question the system.
This isn’t the first time Trump has defended someone in legal trouble. But this case feels different. It’s not about a big-name ally. It’s about a local clerk. A small-town figure. And that’s what makes it powerful.
Why This Matters
Trump’s support for Peters is not just about one person. It’s about sending a message. He’s telling his base: “If you fight for what you believe, I’ve got your back.” And for many Americans who feel unheard or pushed aside, that message hits home.
Some see this as dangerous. They say it encourages people to break the law. Others see it as bold. They say it’s about standing up to a system that feels rigged.
Either way, it’s making waves.
The Bigger Picture: Project 2025
This moment also ties into something bigger, something called Project 2025. It’s a plan created by conservative groups to reshape the government. And Trump is already putting parts of it into action.
The plan includes cutting electric car incentives, adding work rules to Medicaid, and changing how federal agencies work. It’s bold. It’s fast. And it’s already halfway done, just six months into Trump’s second term.
Supporting Peters fits into this plan. It’s about challenging the old system and building a new one. One that Trump and his allies believe is more fair, more honest, and more “American.”
What People Are Saying
Not everyone agrees with Trump’s move. Critics say he’s defending someone who broke the law. They worry it sends the wrong message. They say it’s about loyalty, not justice.
But Trump’s supporters see it differently. They say Peters was punished for speaking out. They say Trump is doing what leaders should do—protecting the people who stand up for truth.
Social media is buzzing. News outlets are debating. And once again, Trump has turned a quiet legal case into a national moment.
What Comes Next
Will Peters be released? Will Trump’s push change anything? It’s hard to say. The courts don’t move fast. And legal systems don’t bend easily.
But one thing is clear: Trump’s voice still matters. When he speaks, people listen. And when he picks a fight, it becomes a headline.
This story isn’t just about one woman. It’s about power, loyalty, and the future of American politics.
Trump Turns Up the Heat on the Fed
President Donald Trump has turned up the heat on the Federal Reserve, this time taking direct aim at one of its own governors. On Wednesday, Trump demanded the resignation of Lisa Cook, a Biden appointee who made history as the first Black woman to serve on the Fed’s seven-member board of governors. The push comes after Bill Pulte, head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and a vocal Trump ally, accused Cook on social media of mortgage fraud, claiming she falsified bank documents and property records. Pulte said he referred the allegations to the Justice Department, though no charges have been filed. Trump, seizing on the moment, has reportedly been exploring legal avenues to fire her if she refuses to step down.
Cook Refuses to Resign: Legal Hurdles and Political Stakes
Cook, however, isn’t budging. In a statement, she dismissed the attacks as political bullying and vowed not to resign. Removing a Fed governor isn’t so simple. Trump would have to prove Cook broke the law or engaged in gross misconduct to justify firing her. But the threat itself highlights Trump’s broader goal: reshaping the central bank in line with his push for lower interest rates, which the Fed has so far resisted.If Cook were ousted, the board would be left with two vacancies following another resignation earlier this month. That would open the door for Trump to flip the balance of power in his favor, giving him a 4-3 majority on the board, a scenario that could significantly tilt U.S. monetary policy.Meanwhile, Pulte’s involvement is drawing its own scrutiny. He has previously made similar allegations against other Trump opponents, including Rep. Adam Schiff and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both of whom are now under DOJ investigation. Critics say the timing raises red flags about whether the Justice Department is being weaponized against Trump’s political adversaries.
Market Concern: Threats to Fed Independence
Economists warn the bigger risk is to the Fed’s independence. If Trump succeeds in bending the central bank to his will, confidence in U.S. economic stability could be shaken—something that markets are already watching closely.
