
Lithium Revolution Begins: Elektros Positions Itself Among Future Market Leaders
SUNNY ISLES BEACH, FL / / May 29, 2025 / Elektros, Inc. (OTC PINK:ELEK) is rapidly expanding its lithium strategy in Sierra Leone as the company eyes a leadership role in the clean energy transition. With electric vehicles, energy storage, and global infrastructure relying on lithium, the time for action is now.
Elon Musk was recently quoted saying, "The biggest constraint on EV growth is lithium. We need more lithium - fast."
Financial Times report noted, "Lithium is not just about energy-it's a strategic asset for global growth and power distribution in the 21st century."
Reuters wrote, "As lithium projects scale, early entrants are attracting unprecedented investor interest. These firms are setting the tone for energy's next era."
Tickers such as $ALB, $LTHM, and $SGML have captured market momentum. Elektros, with its untapped mineral access, could soon enter this conversation.
CEO Shlomo Bleier said, "We're acting with urgency. Elektros has identified a world-class opportunity, and we're assembling the right partners to turn it into shareholder value."
The lithium revolution isn't waiting - and neither is Elektros.
For more information, please visit:Website: www.elektrosinc.comEmail: info@elektrosinc.comFacebook: fb.com/elektrosinc
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements:
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements about future business operations, strategic partnerships, and market opportunities. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, and projections, and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially due to risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, the availability of financing, regulatory approvals, and the risks inherent in the development and commercialization of mineral resources. Elektros Inc. undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, except as required by law.
SOURCE: Elektros, Inc.
View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is Dogecoin Still Worth a Look?
Dogecoin is an asset that's driven by sentiment, not fundamental value. There's a little-known reason it isn't suitable for long-term holding. The coin is a classroom for meme-driven markets, but it shouldn't be a core holding. 10 stocks we like better than Dogecoin › Dog-themed meme coins like Dogecoin (CRYPTO: DOGE) can be funny diversions. But there's nothing funny about its gain of 7,300% during the past five years. Nor is there much to laugh about for investors who bought the coin at the peak of its popularity and who have been deeply underwater ever since. The question for investors today is simple: After all that volatility, is this meme coin still worth thinking about buying? Surprisingly, the answer to that question is "yes," but that doesn't mean it's worth actually pulling the trigger. As the first meme coin to go to the moon, Dogecoin has a special place in the crypto ecosystem as shown by its market cap of $28.5 billion. With so much capital parked in the coin, it will probably still be as viable in 10 years as it is today. That doesn't mean you should be racing to buy it. But it does mean that it is reasonable to evaluate as an investment with a bit more attentiveness than the average meme coin. First, let's take a look at its supply. Dogecoin mints a fixed 5 billion coins every year, with no cap on its total issuance; there are currently around 149.5 billion DOGE in circulation. That perpetual inflation means long-term holders depend on demand always outpacing the coin's expanding float, or the coins available for pubic trading -- a tall order for an asset that offers no staking yield or token burn mechanism. In other words, by default, holding it for the long term just results in your value getting diluted more and more over time. Those drawbacks mesh with the main problem with Dogecoin. It began as a joke coin and never pivoted because the original developer abandoned the project and because there was no roadmap for features to add to the coin. There is no formal foundation behind it, no clear product vision, and no moat beyond community enthusiasm, which tends to be fickle. That leads us to the last point to appreciate. Its price catalysts remain completely external and unpredictable. When Elon Musk or another celebrity says something about holding or buying Dogecoin, it might cause the price to spike. Obviously, that's not anything that a serious investor can plan around. Furthermore, during a speculative frenzy, the coin's price can reasonably be expected to rise -- but it's impossible to know when the music is going to stop, which makes it very difficult to properly time an exit from a position. In short, there's no intrinsic value here beyond the Dogecoin brand. And there's not really any mechanism by which that brand value can increase or be expected to increase in the future. While buying a lottery ticket might scratch the same speculative itch as buying Dogecoin, allocating meaningful retirement capital is hard to justify. Investors looking for long-term compounding of their cryptocurrency investments are likely better served by assets with hard supply caps, active developer communities, and real-world utility, or at least some features that can be expected to change in a way that could generate some value for holders. Nonetheless, Dogecoin can still serve a purpose, primarily for investor education. It illustrates the reflexive relationship between sentiment and price, why unlimited supply suppresses an asset's intrinsic value, and how liquidity injections from retail traders can overpower weak fundamentals in the short run but not in the long run. Similarly, it's a good example of the kind of asset that tends to see wild run-ups during periods of widespread financial speculation, and also a good example of the ferocious hangovers such periods tend to cause when they inevitably end. Appreciating each of these lessons deeply will make you a better investor in stocks as well as in cryptocurrencies. And that's why Dogecoin is still worth a look today even if it is not worth buying. Before you buy stock in Dogecoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Dogecoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Alex Carchidi has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Is Dogecoin Still Worth a Look? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
The Millers: Washington power couple straddles Trump-Musk feud
They're the Washington couple at the center of power in the Trump administration. They're also straddling opposing sides of an explosive breakup between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk. CNN reported last week that Katie Miller, the wife of Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff, would be departing her senior role at the White House as a top spokesperson and adviser for Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. She was on her way to work for Musk as he went back to running his companies, helping the tech titan manage and arrange interviews unrelated to his time in government. But days later, amid the smoldering ruin of Musk and Trump's epic meltdown on Thursday over social media, that job suddenly took on a whole new layer. Among the attacks both men lobbed at each other was Musk endorsing the possibility of impeaching Trump and installing Vice President JD Vance in his place. Trump, in turn, raised the possibility of terminating federal contracts for Musk's companies. The episode has left the Millers on conflicting sides of the biggest breakup of Trump's second term, spawning gossip among White House aides and rounds of speculation about how the fallout could impact the political fortunes of one of the most powerful couples in Trump's Washington, where loyalty reigns. 'Everyone is talking about it,' a former Trump staffer told CNN. Katie Miller was in Texas last week for the series of interviews Musk held with space and technology journalists as SpaceX's Starship had its ninth test flight. It was there that Musk first delicately expressed he was 'disappointed' in the Republican's domestic policy bill in an interview with CBS News. Her X account is now a steady stream of laudatory posts about Musk and his companies, with a banner photo of a SpaceX rocket launching into space and a biography that says, 'wife of @stephenm.' Her only social media post on Friday was a reply with laughing emojis to an altered photo of her husband as a Home Depot employee attached to a post about immigration raids on the chain's stores. One former colleague told CNN that she will ultimately need to make a choice. 'She has a choice between Elon and Trump, but it can't be both,' the administration official said. Musk unfollowed Stephen Miller on X on Thursday, although both Millers continued following Musk on the platform into Friday. There are divided views on how the situation will impact Stephen Miller's ascendance. Among Trump's closest advisers, many believe he is surpassed in power only by Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, fueling speculation among some over whether he could take over should Wiles decide to move on. 'This whole thing will definitely make that more complicated,' one senior White House official told CNN. 'Katie being paid by Elon is not good for Stephen.' Another senior White House official strongly pushed back on the idea that this episode with Musk would impact Miller in any way with the President. 'Next to Susie, Trump trusts and relies on Stephen the most,' the official said, adding that the President and top brass were understanding that his wife working for Musk had nothing to do with Stephen or the current state of events. Katie Miller declined to comment for this story. Deeply connected and influential in Republican circles and at the highest levels of government, Stephen Miller and Katie Miller (née Waldman) met during Trump's first term in 2018. He was a senior adviser and speechwriter at the White House; she was on the Department of Homeland Security's public affairs team and on her way to becoming then-Vice President Mike Pence's communications director. He developed a reputation as the architect of some of the administration's most hardline immigration policies, becoming an influential and trusted aide in the Trump orbit. She developed her own reputation as a staunch supporter of those policies, once reflecting on a trip to the US-Mexico border as the administration came under fire for its child separation policy. 'My family and colleagues told me that when I have kids I'll think about the separations differently. But I don't think so … DHS sent me to the border to see the separations for myself — to try to make me more compassionate — but it didn't work,' Miller told NBC News journalist Jacob Soboroff in an interview for his book, 'Separated.' The pair married at Trump's Washington, DC, hotel in February 2020. Trump attended the wedding. In the four years after Trump left office, both set their sights on a Trump return to the White House. Stephen Miller launched a conservative nonprofit group, America First Legal Foundation, that served in part as a prelude to the policy of Trump's second term. Katie Miller headed to the private sector, where she consulted a number of major companies, including Apple. They were also raising three young children. Stephen Miller returned to the White House in January with a vast mandate, deeply involved in many of the president's signature policy initiatives and further empowered from the first term. Katie Miller joined the administration as well, working on behalf of DOGE and Musk, who had become a new figure in the Trump orbit after being an active campaign surrogate and 2024 megadonor. Like Musk, Katie Miller was working at the White House as a 'Special Government Employee,' which limits the number of days one can work within the administration. As their professional lives intertwined, the couple also became personally close with Musk, socializing outside of work. In the heat of the Thursday afternoon social media showdown, Stephen Miller had been scheduled to appear on Larry Kudlow's show on Fox Business Network – an appearance that was canceled. 'We lost Mr. Miller to a meeting in the Oval Office. Perfectly understandable. When I was in government, it would happen all the time. We'd have to kill a TV show. You're at the president's beck and call,' Kudlow said during his eponymous broadcast. This is not the first time Trump has divided a marital relationship. During his first term, Trump lashed out at the husband of one of his top advisers, Kellyanne Conway. Her husband, George Conway, had been intensely critical of Trump on social media. 'He's a whack job. There's no question about it. But I really don't know him,' Trump said at the time of George Conway. 'I think he's doing a tremendous disservice to a wonderful wife.' In 2023, the couple announced they were filing for divorce. George Conway, a prolific user of Musk's X platform and ardent anti-Trump figure, posted dozens of times about the Trump-Musk spat. 'Does anyone have any updates on Katie Miller?' he asked Thursday evening.


Forbes
33 minutes ago
- Forbes
Trump Drops A Cybersecurity Bombshell With Biden-Era Policy Reversal
Less than 24 hours after President Trump's public feud with Elon Musk, a new cybersecurity executive order was issued on June 6, 2025, introducing major revisions to the Biden administration's final cybersecurity directives. The order not only modifies key elements of Biden's January 2025 framework but also signals a broader realignment of federal cybersecurity priorities. It shifts focus away from federal digital identity initiatives and revises compliance-heavy software security mandates. Officially titled 'Sustaining Select Efforts To Strengthen The Nation's Cybersecurity And Amending Executive Order 13694 And Executive Order 14144,' the order represents a strategic departure from prior approaches, emphasizing operational pragmatism over regulatory expansion. Notably, it comes at a time when President Trump's nominee to lead the Cybersecurity And Infrastructure Security Agency, Sean Plankey, has yet to be confirmed due to opposition and delay tactics from both sides of the aisle. President Biden's Executive Order 14144 was issued on January 16, 2025, just four days before President Trump's inauguration. It was interpreted by many observers as an effort to define long-term cybersecurity direction before the change in administration. The order included measures to bolster software supply chain security, expand digital identity infrastructure and accelerate post-quantum cryptography adoption. However, this latest Trump order criticized several of these elements as overreaching or insufficiently vetted, characterizing them as 'problematic and distracting' and specifically noting that they were 'sneaked' into policy in the final hours of Biden's presidency. The language used in the accompanying fact sheet is unusually blunt for a federal document, suggesting a clear intent to publicly distance the new administration from its predecessor's policy posture. 1. Attribution Of Threats: Direct Language On Foreign Cyber Aggressors The executive order opens with unusually direct language, identifying the People's Republic of China as the most 'active and persistent' cyber threat to U.S. government systems, private sector networks and critical infrastructure. It also names Russia, Iran and North Korea as continuing sources of malicious cyber activity. This blunt attribution departs from the more generalized threat descriptions of previous administrations. By naming adversaries explicitly in the policy preamble, the administration signals a shift toward greater transparency in threat acknowledgment and a hardening of posture. The message is clear: U.S. cyber strategy is now being framed not only by evolving technologies but by intensifying geopolitical realities. 2. Software Security Compliance: Shifting From Mandated Attestations To Voluntary Implementation: Biden's order imposed a layered framework requiring federal contractors to submit attestations, artifacts and documentation tied to NIST's Secure Software Development Framework. Some would say that these requirements risked turning development teams into compliance teams. Trump's order eliminates attestations entirely. NIST will still provide guidance through the National Cybersecurity Center Of Excellence, but reporting is no longer mandatory. This reflects a shift toward flexibility over formality. 3. Digital Identity Verification: A Full Repeal Rooted In Fiscal And Legal Concerns: The Biden administration had envisioned digital credentials as a gateway to streamlined government services. Trump's order reverses course, citing concerns about entitlement fraud and improper access. The fact sheet explicitly warns that Biden's policy could have enabled unauthorized immigrants to obtain digital IDs. As a result, pilots on interoperability and identity federation are halted. 4. Artificial Intelligence In Cybersecurity: Tighter Focus On Defense And Vulnerability Management: Biden's order encouraged AI-driven collaboration across academia and industry. Trump's order takes a narrower view. It requires agencies to track vulnerabilities in AI systems, integrate them into incident response pipelines and limit data sharing to only what is feasible under security and confidentiality constraints. AI is repositioned as a potential liability to be secured, not a universal defense engine. 5. Post-Quantum Cryptography: A Deadline Remains But The Path Is Streamlined While both administrations agree on the risk posed by quantum computing, Trump's order simplifies the roadmap. By December 2025, CISA and NSA must publish a list of product categories ready for quantum-safe encryption. TLS 1.3 or its successor must be adopted by 2030. Oversight is split between NSA for national security systems and OMB for civilian agencies. 6. Cyber Sanctions Policy: A Narrowed Scope One of the more politically sensitive changes lies in how sanctions are applied. Biden's order allowed for cyber sanctions against any person involved in disinformation or cyber-enabled threats. Trump's revision limits this to foreign persons only. Domestic political activity is explicitly excluded, a move the administration describes as a safeguard against misuse of cyber enforcement tools. Initial industry feedback has been swift. The executive order's reorientation of cybersecurity priorities is already reverberating across the federal ecosystem, private sector and innovation community. From compliance-light procurement to a tighter national focus on AI risk, the changes are reshaping expectations. Defense integrators and established IT vendors are among the most immediate beneficiaries. By removing detailed compliance documentation, particularly attestations tied to secure software development, the order reduces friction in procurement and lowers operational risk. Contract cycles may accelerate as audit-readiness gives way to implementation focus. This shift rewards incumbents with mature delivery models and embedded federal relationships. With CISA's role redefined and federal oversight of digital identity rolled back, state and local governments may gain more autonomy to design cybersecurity programs that fit local contexts. For well-resourced jurisdictions, this could spur innovation. But for others, especially those lacking talent or funding, decentralization could create new coordination gaps. Additional federal guidance may be needed to prevent fragmentation in national critical infrastructure protection. For enterprises, the EO's elimination of standardized compliance frameworks is a mixed bag. Under the previous EO, the bar for secure software delivery was clear, particularly for organizations that invested in transparency and attestation. Without a common benchmark, proving trustworthiness becomes more subjective. Kevin Bocek, CyberArk's Senior Vice President of Innovation, emphasized that the industry is entering a new era of cybersecurity not only dominated by AI and automation, but also by emerging risks that are not yet widely addressed. 'It is affirming that the EO is serious about safe and secure AI, hopefully laying the foundation to critically address one of the most urgent and overlooked threats: machine identity sprawl,' Bocek noted. According to CyberArk, machine identities now outnumber human identities 82 to 1 within enterprises, yet 68% of organizations lack security controls to protect them. Without federal guidance and clear identity accountability, Bocek warns that this vulnerability could become a significant blind spot in national cybersecurity. His comments underscore the risk of prioritizing operational efficiency over foundational security controls, a concern shared by many CISOs facing exponential identity growth from cloud and AI platforms. Digital identity initiatives long supported by privacy advocates, civic technologists and digital modernization leaders were seen as critical to enabling secure, user-friendly access to government services. They aimed to streamline verification, reduce fraud and close equity gaps in federal access. The Biden administration had embraced digital IDs as the backbone of modern digital government. The Trump administration, however, rescinded these efforts. The accompanying fact sheet expressed concerns that digital identity mandates could be exploited to extend entitlements improperly, particularly to unauthorized immigrants. This decision reflects a broader skepticism toward centralized identity infrastructure and a desire to limit the federal government's role in managing citizen-level credentials. The Biden-era policy positioned artificial intelligence as a strategic asset for defense, encouraging public-private collaboration, dataset sharing and predictive threat detection at scale. The Trump administration's new directive narrows that scope significantly. Instead of promoting AI as a systemwide defense multiplier, the EO limits AI's use to managing system vulnerabilities and tracking indicators of compromise. This reflects concerns about over-reliance on technologies that are still evolving, opaque and in some cases unregulated. As Bocek noted, 'Proper AI development is a tool for predictive defense,' but without protections for the AI itself, it could become a new risk vector. The administration's position is clear: AI should be secured before it is scaled. This AI reframing also signals a philosophical divergence between leveraging AI as a force for innovation versus containing it as a potential liability. Whether that caution slows adoption or increases security maturity remains to be seen, but the message is unambiguous: the era of unchecked AI optimism in federal cybersecurity is over. This executive order is not a one-off. It is part of a broader realignment consistent with the principles laid out in Project 2025, a policy blueprint advocating for streamlined federal governance, stronger executive control, and targeted decentralization of agency authority. More orders are expected, particularly in areas such as offensive cyber capabilities, state-level infrastructure resilience, and the restructuring of agencies like CISA. Trump's June 2025 cybersecurity order is more than a policy shift. it is a recalibration of federal cyber strategy that prioritizes execution over oversight, industry collaboration over mandates, and sovereignty over standardization. For industry leaders, innovators, and government stakeholders alike, the takeaway is clear: cybersecurity is no longer just about compliance. It is about preparedness, adaptability, and national competitiveness in an AI-driven world. The next wave of policy will not be about fine-tuning compliance frameworks but will be about defending digital sovereignty. Those who can pivot fastest, and secure what matters most, will shape the next chapter of America's cyber future.