Zero Rss

Jack Smith's Team Spied On 44 Lawmakers' Texts, Built A Case On Them, And Misled Congress: Grassley

Former special counsel Jack Smith's investigators blew past the Justice Department's own privilege safeguards to directly access text messages between Trump White House officials and 44 members of Congress - then had the FBI match the phone numbers to lawmakers' names, according to DOJ records released Tuesday.

Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) in a letter accompanying the records that Smith's team "bypassed the Filter Team and directly accessed these text messages." The FBI then worked out which senators and House members had sent or received them, Davis wrote.

The filter unit existed for one purpose: to screen messages pulled from the National Archives for privileged material before line investigators ever laid eyes on them.

"All communication to/from the Filter Team must go through the Coordinator," one internal protocol document states - adding that nothing was to reach the investigative team without a filter attorney's sign-off.

The messages, sent between October 2020 and Jan. 20, 2021, ran between a bipartisan roster of lawmakers and Trump White House figures including chief of staff Mark Meadows, Dan Scavino, Ivanka Trump, Stephen Miller, Peter Navarro, now-CIA Director John Ratcliffe and now-FBI Director Kash Patel, the records show.

I received records frm DOJ confirming Jack Smith's investigative team reviewed the contents of text msgs sent by 44 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Im 1 of the 44

Im alerting my colleagues who were impacted and will release the records w Sen Johnson so American ppl can see the evidence

— Chuck Grassley (@ChuckGrassley) July 14, 2026

Among the 44 lawmakers: Grassley himself, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.); House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.); Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.); Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking member of the Armed Services Committee; then-Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.), now mayor of Los Angeles; and then-Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), now head of the EPA.

An internal DOJ email dated Aug. 21, 2023, shows Smith's team discussing "54 excel files with text messages from White House phones" being loaded into a shared drive - material gathered under the codenames "Project Coconut," the election-interference probe, and "Project Cranberry," the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

"Jack Smith's criminal investigation of President Trump was a runaway train that had no brakes," Grassley said Tuesday, charging that investigators reviewed messages from dozens of lawmakers "outside the scope of the government's investigation" - and that Smith's team "ran roughshod over the Constitution even after repeated warnings."

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) called the disclosure "yet another grotesque example" of the Biden-era Justice Department's weaponization, saying no one should be shocked by Smith's "recklessness and blatant abuse of power."

'Just toll records'

The records land squarely on testimony Smith gave under oath seven months ago.

At his Dec. 17 deposition before the House Judiciary Committee, Smith repeatedly assured lawmakers that his office's reach into Congress stopped at "toll records" - bare logs of who called whom, and when.

"Did you seek a search warrant for the content of any text messages from Members?" a committee lawyer asked.

"No, I don't recall that," Smith answered.

"It was just toll records?"

"Correct."

Asked separately whether the toll records his office obtained from members of Congress included "the content of text messages," Smith answered flatly: "No."

Jack Smith explicitly denied under oath during his House Judiciary deposition last December that he reviewed text messages from members of Congress:

Q: "Did the records that you requested from the Member of Congress include the content of text messages?"

Smith: "No." https://t.co/XLb9lyFXSP pic.twitter.com/jBDSAYYQzD

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) July 14, 2026

Strictly speaking, those questions concerned records sought directly from lawmakers and their phone carriers - not the White House data Smith's office already held. But nowhere in the 255-page deposition did Smith volunteer that his investigators possessed - and, per the Davis letter, had directly accessed - the actual contents of members' messages, harvested from the other side of the conversation. The committee, unaware of the National Archives trove, never asked.

A review of the transcript also found Smith sharpened his sworn answers after the fact. In an errata sheet correcting the record, Smith revised his response on whether any other lawmaker's phone had been seized from "I don't know" to a definitive "I don't -- no." Another correction strikes the word "text" from his reference to "text records" that could prove certain Jan. 6 calls happened - leaving just "records."

Either way, the 'perjury' word is being tossed around now...

Looks like perjury https://t.co/WzUTnqGati

— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) July 14, 2026

Roughly 30 pages of the transcript released by the committee - including the page carrying Smith's "just toll records" exchange - were inserted as images rather than searchable text, meaning keyword searches of the document skip past them. The committee did not respond to questions about the formatting.

Months of warnings

Tuesday's release caps a months-long drip of Arctic Frost disclosures: 197 subpoenas touching more than 430 Republican individuals and groups; toll records for at least 11 senators and six House members, all shielded by court-approved gag orders; and internal emails showing prosecutors were warned that congressional subpoenas could violate the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause.

In one email released this spring, a member of Smith's team wrote that the office was about to "fire off subpoenas for so many members tolls" that Smith himself should be looped in first.

Smith has insisted the phone-records furor is overblown. "Recent narratives about my team's work are false and misleading," he told the committee in his opening statement, stressing that toll records "do not include the content of calls." His attorneys have previously called the collection lawful - noting that special counsel Robert Hur obtained President Biden's toll records, and that the Justice Department under Trump's first term seized phone records of Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, along with those of dozens of congressional staffers.

"Jack Smith has answering to do," Grassley said, vowing to haul the former special counsel before the Senate Judiciary Committee "in the coming months."

December 2025: Jack Smith swore under oath that he didn't spy on text messages belonging to members of Congress.

Today: New evidence confirms he spied on dozens of members of Congress, myself included.

This is a blatant abuse of power, and exactly what our Founders warned… pic.twitter.com/3eqwiylLXI

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 14, 2026 Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 18:50

Rubio Invites Countries To Summit Addressing "Underestimated Threat" From Far-Left Terrorism

Authored by Bryan Hyde via American Greatness,

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is will meet with delegations from scores of countries this week for a summit focused on the neglected threat posed by “the resurgence of transnational far-left terrorism.”

ABC News reports that a note shared with foreign governments describes the concept of the meeting as addressing a threat that “has remained a blind spot in the international community’s counterterrorism focus, underestimated and under-resourced, despite the danger it poses.”

State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott told Newsmax that the Trump administration is taking seriously the gaps that have persisted for decades in counterterrorism strategy.

The United States is taking the resurgence of transnational far-left terrorism incredibly seriously. Under President Trump’s leadership, we are addressing gaps in our counterterrorism strategy that have been largely ignored by previous administrations. pic.twitter.com/fm0AXscLTT

— Tommy Pigott (@statedeptspox) July 13, 2026

The conference seeks to combat international organizations, specifically the decentralized antifa movement, which the administration has formally designated as a domestic terrorist organization.

Law enforcement and counterterrorism experts have exposed a “clear trend” of “globally networked, politically-motivated terrorists — particularly far-left terrorists” increasingly turning to “organized, deadly violence to advance their political objectives.”

The gathering will include senior ministers from over 60 countries — including nations across Europe, Latin America, Asia, as well as India and Israel—to discuss intelligence sharing and law enforcement cooperation.

The meeting, scheduled to take place in Washington on Thursday, will lay the foundation for “coordinated action” to counter international organizations that are “seeking to implement an extreme political vision through intimidation and coordinated campaigns of terror” according to ABC News.

The initiative aligns with a new U.S. counterterrorism strategy released in May 2026 that prioritizes “violent secular political groups” alongside traditional threats.

Some allies and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other critics have accused the administration of utilizing counterterrorism authorities to target politically opposed but peaceful activists and donors, according to ABC News.

🚨 IT'S OFFICIAL: Sec. of State Marco Rubio in the coming days will converge a swath of allies to DECIMATE Antifa and communist-linked terrorists across the world

ANY rioter or agitator waving Antifa flags should be arrested on the spot, because they are supporting terrorists! pic.twitter.com/le736pigYJ

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 12, 2026

The State Department has clarified that the terrorist designations are aimed at groups that are “engaged in violent terrorist activities such as kidnapping, targeting U.S. law enforcement, targeting the civilian population.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 18:25

New York's Millionaire Exodus Is Costing Billions In Lost Revenue

Mayor Zohran Mamdani stood outside Ken Griffin's $238 million Manhattan penthouse in April and declared victory. "When I ran for mayor, I said I was going to tax the rich. Well, today we're taxing the rich," he said in a social media video marking the debut of New York City's first pied-à-terre tax, an annual fee on luxury properties worth more than $5 million whose owners do not live in the city full time. He promised the tax would raise "at least $500 million directly for the city," money he said would fund free child care, cleaner streets, and safer neighborhoods. "This is a fundamentally unfair system that hurts working New Yorkers," Mamdani said. "Now it's coming to an end."

BREAKING: Mamdani announces new tax on all property worth over $5 million if the owner doesn’t live in NYC full time pic.twitter.com/qN7pU3xEDg

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) April 15, 2026

Three months later, a new study suggests the mayor picked an odd moment to celebrate.

The Citizen Budget Commission published an analysis Monday, finding that New York's shrinking share of the nation's millionaires cost the state an estimated $10.7 billion in lost personal income tax revenue in 2022 alone. New York's share of the country's millionaires fell from 12.7 percent in 2010 to 8.7 percent in 2022, the steepest decline of any state over that period. Had New York simply held its 2010 share, the Commission concluded, the state would have collected roughly $10.7 billion more in personal income tax that year.

So Mamdani, who took office in January, had inherited a tax base already showing signs of flight. His pied-à-terre push targets exactly the kind of high earners the CBC says have been leaving in growing numbers, and critics view the timing as more provocation than plan. Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is running for reelection in November, has stopped short of backing an outright tax increase on wealthy New Yorkers this year, though she supports the pied-à-terre concept for luxury second homes in the city.

"In New York, the top 1% of earners pay about 45% of all state income taxes in any given year, so New York's revenue is very reliant on high earners to stay in New York, and that has been a challenge in recent years," said Jared Walczak, an economist and senior fellow at the Tax Foundation think tank, told the New York Post.

Walczak said city-level measures like Mamdani's cannot fix the underlying problem, since any meaningful tax change requires action in Albany. He also warned that continued hikes combined with more competitive alternatives elsewhere could accelerate departures.

Abir Mandel, senior state policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said New York currently ranks last in the nation for tax competitiveness. She pointed to Elon Musk relocating his companies from California to Texas as the kind of decision New York risks inviting without reform, cautioning that the state will otherwise struggle to attract both population and business. Of Wall Street's outsized role in propping up state revenue, Mandel offered a blunt assessment. "Wall Street is the golden goose," she said. "But for how long?"

The CBC report traces the stagnation back well before Mamdani ever took office. Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo raised income taxes on high earners during the COVID pandemic, and Hochul now oversees Medicaid spending, which is on pace to reach $58 billion by the end of the decade. Ken Girardin, a research fellow at the Manhattan Institute, pointed to the state's 2019 rent-control overhaul and its green-energy mandate as a one-two punch that reduced housing supply and raised energy costs. "Albany is directly responsible for the stagnation," he said.

New York has lost more residents to every other state than it has gained from any of them, with Florida and Texas among the top destinations for departing New Yorkers, and that's a huge problem.

Justin Wilcox, executive director of Upstate United, called the study's findings hard to ignore. "It's difficult to not be alarmed by this data," he said. "With this CBC tool, Upstate New Yorkers can see for themselves the devastating impacts of Albany's policies - businesses failing to grow, population decline, and the loss of revenue. NYS needs to course correct now before it's too late and we become permanently entrenched in a cycle of fewer people."

Asked about the study on Monday during an unrelated event, Mamdani dismissed concerns that higher earners will flee the city, arguing that New York gained millionaires after past tax increases by Albany. He defended his broader philosophy without addressing the CBC's specific findings. "I've been very clear about the fact that we live in the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, and it's unacceptable that one in four New Yorkers are living in poverty, and I believe that the wealthiest can do a little bit more to ensure that everyone can afford to live here," he said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 18:00

Rubio Pledges To Dismantle International Criminal Court's Threat To US Sovereignty

Authored by Victoria Friedman via The Epoch Times,

The State Department is launching a campaign to “dismantle the threat posed by the International Criminal Court to U.S. sovereignty,” the department said, including through disabling the court’s ability to target American servicemen or officials.

The State Department said in a July 13 statement that actions under consideration include U.S. officials contacting foreign nations to highlight the ICC’s abuses and the risk posed to other countries by the court, and urging them to withdraw from the body.

The Trump administration is also considering revoking visas and imposing travel bans on ICC personnel, imposing increased sanctions against the ICC and its affiliates, and increasing pressure on nations that refuse to reject ICC rulings while still relying on U.S. assistance.

“No diplomatic option will be off-limits in the campaign to dismantle the threat posed by the ICC to Americans,” the department said.

The ICC was established in 2002 to prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, asserting its jurisdiction if a member of the ICC is unable or unwilling to undertake prosecutions itself.

The United States has never been a member of the ICC; however, the court’s statutes give it the power to prosecute crimes committed in a member state by nationals of non-member states, including Americans.

“The ICC poses an intolerable threat to U.S. sovereignty - it claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison American servicemen and officials operating on behalf of America’s national interest,” the State Department said.

“Americans never signed up for this, and all American presidents since the ICC’s ratification have maintained that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Americans.”

The ICC’s spokesperson, Oriane Maillet, said the court would not comment on the matter at this stage.

President Donald Trump’s opposition to the court goes back to his first term in office. He and other officials in Washington have long said the ICC should not have the authority to investigate and prosecute U.S. citizens, particularly members of the military.

In March 2020, ICC prosecutors opened an ​investigation in Afghanistan that included looking into possible crimes by U.S. military personnel. However, since 2021, it has deprioritized the United States’ role, focusing ⁠on alleged crimes committed by Taliban forces and the Afghan government.

‘Waging a War Against Our Country’

“As we speak, the ICC and its friends are waging a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles, but with statutes and compacts and the force of so-called international law,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a video message posted on July 13.

Rubio said that when the ICC was established, it said it was limited to dealing with the most serious of offenses.

“But the truth is, it was something far more radical and extreme. It was a global tribunal staffed by unelected globalist bureaucrats who claim their power is almost unlimited,” he said.

Rubio said that the court’s power has only continued to grow, and that the United States should not stand idle and let judges living thousands of miles away make determinations well beyond their jurisdiction.

“The American people never agreed to any of this, and they never will,” Rubio said.

“Read the words of our Declaration of Independence. We fought a revolution against a foreign power, transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses. Independence is our birthright. We will never let foreign bureaucrats take that away from us.”

In December 2025, Rubio sanctioned two ICC judges after accusing them of being engaged in the “illegitimate targeting” of Israel. Rubio said at the time that neither the United States nor Israel is a party to the Rome Statute, the international treaty that established the ICC, and therefore rejected the court’s jurisdiction.

“The ICC has continued to engage in politicized actions targeting Israel, which set a dangerous precedent for all nations. We will not tolerate ICC abuses of power that violate the sovereignty of the United States and Israel and wrongly subject U.S. and Israeli persons to the ICC’s jurisdiction,” Rubio said in the Dec. 18 statement.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 17:00

New York Becomes First State To Enact One Year Ban On New Data Centers

The blowback against data centers escalated this morning, when New York became first state in the nation to enact a moratorium on data centers, pausing construction on new facilities for one year.

An executive order by Gov. Kathy Hochul bans state lawmakers from approving environmental permits for hyperscale data centers. Hochul said Tuesday the pause will give lawmakers time to create a framework to protect residents and the environment. 

"Massive data centers are being built across our state and our country. The scale and speed of this development has put unprecedented demand on energy and water resources, and threatens to drive up utility costs. Before it goes any further, I need safeguards in place to protect New Yorkers," Hochul said in a social media post. 

AI data centers, which contain thousands of servers and typically use 50 or more megawatts of power to operate, have been blamed for everything from noise pollution to sending regional electricity prices soaring. They also require a steady supply of water to keep cool. 

Hochul said the state still welcomes AI investments and businesses, and looks forward to helping them grow and thrive. 

"But when you benefit from the talent and energy of New York, we expect you to protect our resources and give back to our communities," Hochul said. 

New York will lead in responsible innovation while protecting families and communities.

Today, I’m signing a first-in-the-nation Executive Order to hit pause and set the rules for AI data centers.

Join me live: https://t.co/5T2eFyoc7m

— Governor Kathy Hochul (@GovKathyHochul) July 14, 2026

The order comes as the state is experiencing unprecedented growth in the demand for data center development driven by AI and other computing operations, according to the governor's office. The data centers require "millions of gallons of water, draining the local supply." 

"The bottom line is progress shouldn't arrive with a higher utility bill, depleted water supplies, or noise pollution. So we have no choice but to address these challenges created by these massive facilities," Hochul said. 

Hochul said New York will require data centers to either produce their own energy or pay a premium for accessing New York's grid. Hochul also said she opposes any tax subsidies for AI data centers as well. 

The Department of Public Service will create the guidelines for centers to ensure new facilities meet consistent standards. 

Hochul said the process will take up to a year, prompting the moratorium. Once state officials finalize the standards, the ban will be lifted. 

Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand applauded the move: "This one-year moratorium is fundamentally about trust. Right now, New Yorkers aren't convinced these massive facilities benefit them. Before we move forward, our communities need ironclad guarantees that their energy bills won't spike, their water will be protected, and their air will remain clean," Gillibrand said.   

Gillibrand described the need for federal action regarding AI as well: "That requires establishing clear, reliable rules of the road. We must build a framework that protects our kids from harmful algorithms and social media tools; shields seniors and consumers from AI-driven scams and fraud; and safeguards American jobs and livelihoods from displacement."
"It kills good-paying union jobs"

Not everyone is pleased with the moratorium. 

"A shortsighted moratorium only accomplishes one thing: it kills good-paying union jobs. Rather than implementing guardrails to build the future of American ingenuity, Governor Hochul is taking her ball and going home. We urge the governor to work with all parties, including the hardworking New Yorkers whose jobs are at stake, to implement common sense guardrails," United Association of Union Plumbers and Pipefitters general president Mark McManus said. 

The  Associated General Contractors of New York State also objected to the moratorium, calling it "the wrong policy for New York." 

"Halting permits for as much as a year in this fast-moving sector will not simply delay projects—it will send them permanently to Virginia, Texas, Georgia and other states actively competing for these investments and the construction and other jobs that come with them. Once a developer breaks ground somewhere else, that project—and the opportunities and tax revenue that come with it—are not coming back," AGS NYS president and CEO Mike Elmendorf said. "Data center construction is the strongest-performing segment in an otherwise uncertain construction market nationwide, and New York's construction industry—which still has not recovered to pre-pandemic employment levels—cannot afford to forfeit it."

Elmendorf called the moratorium a "de facto ban that tells the marketplace New York is closed for business."

Meanwhile, PA senator John Fetterman, snubbed the NY decision by simply stating "China wins."

China wins. 🇨🇳 pic.twitter.com/tTiMwxPNaq

— U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) July 14, 2026

A grassroots pushback against data centers has been spreading across the nation in the past year and most recently culminated in the so-called Silion Alley in Virginia - which has the highest concentration of data centers in the US - and where we reported a week ago that giant data center landlord Blackstone is walking away from plans to build its portion (which at this point is the only portion left after its partner already pulled out days earlier) of a 2,100-acre data center campus in Virginia - also known as Prince William Digital Gateway which would house as many as 37 data-center buildings - handing a win to residents who fought for years to topple the project. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 16:40

Offload Risks Onto The Bottom 90% And Immiseration Follows

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

The underlying story of the past 50 years has been the offloading of risk onto workers and consumers.

On my map of how the world works, we start with structures of control that distribute the good stuff--resources, assets, income and power--and the bad stuff: costs, losses and risks. As I explained in The US Economy In a Nutshell: Privatize the Gains, Socialize the Costs, the current arrangement distributes the gains to the top 10% and the costs and risks to the bottom 90% via privatizing the gains and socializing--i.e. dumping them onto the biosphere and the public--the costs and losses.

This follows a power-law distribution: the few at the top reap most of the gains, and the leftovers, scraps and crumbs are distributed in descending order, with most of what's left going to the top 9.5% and a diminishing dribble is scattered over the lower 90%, so that by the time we get to the bottom half of households, 170 million people own a grand total of 2.5% of the nation's financial assets, while the top 0.1% own 16.6%--6.6X the bottom 50%.

A key mechanism in this wildly asymmetric distribution of gains and costs is the system favors capital over wages. As the charts below illustrate, the financial gains go to the owners of capital, and since ownership of capital is highly concentrated, these few owners siphon up the vast majority of the gains.

One way to understand how the current arrangement favors capital over wages is to reverse the tax liabilities of capital and wages. Employers and employees pay 15.3% of every dollar of wages in Social Security / Medicare taxes, plus income taxes that quickly rise to 22%, for a total tax rate of 37.3% on wages. (Note self-employed people like myself pay the full 15.3% ourselves, as we're both employer and employee.)

Capital gains are taxed at 20%, but only when the asset is sold, so the wealthy borrow against their unrealized gains and live off this borrowed money to avoid selling and having to pay tax on capital gains. And since the system depends on debt to survive, the interest on debt is deductible, giving the wealthy borrowers a tax deduction for avoiding capital gains.

Now imagine all capital gains, realized or unrealized, were taxed at 37% and the first $80,000 of wages were tax-free. The median wage is around $80,000, hence my picking that number. As for the hue and cry about unrealized capital gains being taxed, that's easily addressed: unrealized gains in primary-residence owner-occupied homes and retirement accounts would be exempted. Every other gain made playing in the casino would be taxed.

Reversing the asymmetry of tax liabilities would dramatically alter the distribution of gains and costs. Wages have lost ground for 50+ years, and the favoring of capital is a key driver of this decline in the share of the economy that's distributed to wage earners.

Half the nation's households--170 million people own a grand total of 2.5% of the nation's financial assets:

The winner-take-most arrangement favoring capital:

Another key driver is the offloading of risk from owners to consumers and workers, a perverse process that has been obscured by incremental degradation. Risk is a strange phenomenon that defies easy definition. Risk isn't a direct loss or cost; it's the probability of losses and costs arising in what appears on the surface to be a stable arrangement.

Consider the stunning decline in the quality of durable goods such as appliances, and global industry adopting a laughably valueless one-year warranty across the board. Appliances that routinely lasted 30 years before "Progress" took the reins now routinely fail in 3+ years.

In the good old days before "Progress" took the reins, manufacturers absorbed the risk of premature failure of the goods they produced. Now this risk has been offloaded onto consumers, who are now forced to buy "extended warranties" as the only means of mitigating the risk they now carry of premature failure.

This is in effect a form of extortion: "nice refrigerator you got there, too bad it's at risk of breaking." Well, if current manufacturers had the same standards as previous generations, we wouldn't need "extended warranties." Welcome to the Mafia Economy: low quality goods and services force "upgrades," i.e. extortion.

Consider the offloading of risk onto workers. Employment other than casual labor once included healthcare insurance and other basic benefits. In the "gig economy" of contract employment and gigs, the worker is now responsible for paying their Social Security / Medicare taxes, healthcare insurance and retirement contributions.

The decline of hourly wages is another offloading of risk onto the worker. The percentage of workers paid by the hour has declined in favor of salaried positions with open-ended demands on workers: where hourly workers get paid for hours on the job, salaried workers are now on the hook for work beyond a conventional 8-hour work shift.

Then there's the immense mass of risk and labor that's been offloaded onto consumers and workers as shadow work, often the result of having to fix failures in goods and services that were once the responsibility of the provider or employer and have been dumped on consumers and workers. This is a topic I've often addressed.

This Is Why You're Drowning in Busywork: We have been told that A.I. will take people's jobs. What no one mentions is that many of those jobs are landing on us. The A.I. revolution involves a huge transfer of labor-- not from worker to machine but from worker to consumer. (nytimes.com, paywalled)

Another source of risk is the dependence on debt to fund the lifestyles we deserve: as the purchasing power of wages has declined, the easy "solution" is to fill the gap between what earnings can buy and what we want / need / expect / deserve with borrowed money.

As we all know, debt comes with risk, as falling behind greases the slide to default, bankruptcy and ruin. 27% interest rates on credit cards steepen the slide into a cliff: one missed payment can trigger a cascade of events that cannot be reversed. This is why I often observe that fewer bad things can happen if you have no debt.

Last but far from least, is the current arrangement's dependence on serial credit-asset bubbles as the sole driver of "growth", a dependence that has led to a casino economy in which wage earners lose ground and in desperation turn to gambling as their last-ditch hope of gaining ground.

But despite 24/7 assurances that "this isn't a bubble," all bubbles pop with devastating consequences for those who believed the assurances of those operating the casino.

The underlying story of the past 50 years has been the offloading of risk onto workers and consumers, with the inevitable consequences being higher costs and losses leading to impoverishment and immiseration. We're frogs in water that's getting measurably hotter, and it's getting harder to muster the means to jump out of the simmering pot.

*  *  *

My book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free). Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com. Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 16:20

Venezuela's Oil Revival Faces A Critical Services Bottleneck

Authored by Rystad Energy via OilPrice.com,

• Venezuela could increase crude production by about 194,000 bpd by late 2028, with most growth coming from existing producing fields rather than new discoveries.

• International oil companies led by Chevron are expected to deliver nearly two-thirds of the forecast production increase through brownfield investments.

• The biggest obstacles are operational, including drilling rigs, diluent supplies, infrastructure upgrades, and a competitive fiscal regime capable of attracting long-term investment.

Venezuela's upstream industry has entered a new phase. Following sweeping hydrocarbon reforms and broader geopolitical developments in early 2026, the conversation has shifted from whether the country can reopen its oil sector to whether it can successfully execute a meaningful production recovery. The country's resource potential has never been in doubt. The greater challenge now lies in converting policy momentum into sustained operational growth.

Rystad Energy estimates Venezuela's crude production could increase by approximately 17%, or around 194,000 barrels per day (bpd), between the fourth quarter of 2025 and the fourth quarter of 2028. Importantly, this growth is expected to come primarily from existing producing assets rather than large-scale new discoveries, highlighting that operational execution, not resource availability, will determine the pace of recovery.

Near-term production growth will be dominated by heavier crude grades. Around three-quarters of Venezuela's output through 2028 is expected to come from heavy, extra-heavy crude and bitumen, with the Orinoco Oil Belt accounting for roughly 60% of total production. This makes access to diluents, workover activity, infill drilling, and mature field management considerably more important than reserve additions over the next several years.

Venezuela upstream figure 1

International operators are driving the recovery

International oil companies (IOCs) are expected to contribute nearly two-thirds of Venezuela's forecast production increase through 2028. Chevron remains the largest contributor, followed by Repsol, Eni, Maha Energy and Maurel & Prom. Most of this growth is expected to come from expanding production at existing joint ventures, reflecting renewed investment following regulatory changes and sanctions relief rather than greenfield developments.

Chevron continues to occupy a particularly strategic position. Recent portfolio adjustments have strengthened its exposure to the Orinoco Oil Belt, while future production growth is expected to rely on brownfield optimization, infill drilling and the phased development of Ayacucho 8. Beyond Chevron, companies such as Eni and Repsol continue to play a dual role in both Venezuela's crude and natural gas sectors through assets including the Cardón IV block and the giant Perla gas field.

However, international participation remains highly selective. Companies continue to balance the opportunity presented by Venezuela's vast resource base against fiscal uncertainty, operational complexity and long-term investment risk.

Execution, not geology, remains the key constraint

While policy reforms have improved the investment outlook, they do not eliminate the operational bottlenecks that have constrained production for years.

Sustained production growth will require continuous access to diluents, higher drilling activity, extensive workover campaigns, improved infrastructure and significantly greater rig availability. These operational requirements represent the critical link between resource potential and realized production.

Fiscal competitiveness also remains an important consideration. International operators have indicated that future capital commitments will depend on further improvements to Venezuela's fiscal framework, particularly around royalty rates and taxation. Lower project breakeven costs through more competitive fiscal terms could materially improve investment economics and encourage broader participation across the sector.

Oilfield services could become the industry's defining bottleneck

Perhaps the greatest challenge facing Venezuela's recovery lies beyond the upstream operators themselves. The Venezuelan Oil Ministry has identified a requirement for 93 active drilling rigs by 2028, a significant increase from current activity levels. Achieving this target would require a phased expansion involving reactivating domestic rigs, refurbishing idle equipment, and eventually importing additional rigs from international markets.

This creates substantial opportunities for drilling contractors and oilfield service providers but also highlights the scale of the execution challenge. Companies must balance equipment mobilization costs, contract duration requirements, and country risk before committing capital.

Local contractors have begun reactivating existing fleets, while international service providers remain more cautious, waiting for greater evidence that recent policy reforms will translate into a stable, commercially attractive operating environment. As a result, rebuilding operational capacity may ultimately prove just as important as attracting upstream investment.

Venezuela upstream figure 2

The next phase depends on implementation

The 2026 Hydrocarbons Law represents one of the most significant structural reforms to Venezuela's upstream sector in decades. By expanding opportunities for private participation and introducing greater fiscal flexibility, the legislation has created a more attractive framework for future investment.

Yet legislation alone cannot restore production. The speed of implementation, the stability of fiscal policy, continued sanctions relief, and the industry's ability to rebuild operational capacity will ultimately determine whether Venezuela can translate ambition into sustained output growth.

For investors and operators alike, the opportunity is considerable. But the country's upstream revival will depend less on the size of its resource base than on its ability to consistently execute across drilling, infrastructure, services, and investment policy. That execution gap, not geology, is likely to define Venezuela's production trajectory over the remainder of the decade.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:45

Lucid Calls Bankruptcy Report "Completely False" As Shares Stage V-Shaped Recovery

Summary: 

• Lucid Exec Calls Bankruptcy Report 'Fake News' 
• Lucid Reponds, Denies AlixPartners Has Recommended Bankruptcy Route  
• Lucid Crashes On Report It's Weighing A Take-Private Or Bankruptcy

Lucid PR Head Calls Report "Completely False" 

Nick Twork, Lucid's chief communications officer, took to X in late-afternoon trading to deny Electric-Vehicles.com's report about a potential bankruptcy, stating that the "company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special board committee to explore the scenarios reported today."

Twork stated:

The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today.  Our focus is on improving execution, strengthening operations, and positioning Lucid to realize the full potential of its technology, products, and innovation. AlixPartners is assisting us in that and nothing else and has not recommended bankruptcy to management or the Board. We

$LCID The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today. Our focus is…

— Nick Twork (@ntwork) July 14, 2026

Shares crashed nearly 50% at one point today and, in the final hour of trading, staged a V-shaped recovery. 

Bloomberg data show Lucid is heavily shorted, with 37.22% short, or about 63.6 million shares.

One can only assume that short sellers used the crash to cover some of their bearish positions.

Lucid Denies Report 

Lucid responded to Electric-Vehicles.com's report, stating that restructuring adviser AlixPartners has not recommended bankruptcy.

Bloomberg headline:

• LUCID SAYS ALIXPARTNERS HAS NOT RECOMMENDED BANKRUPTCY

Electric-Vehicles.com's report did mention that another strategic option would be a take-private transaction.

Here are Lucid's top shareholders:

Lucid Crashes On Report It's Weighing A Take-Private Or Bankruptcy

Shares of struggling EV maker Lucid plunged as much as 49% after auto-industry news website Electric-Vehicles.com reported that the company is working with restructuring adviser AlixPartners to evaluate strategic options, including a potential take-private transaction or a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

Lucid (LCID) considering going private or chapter 11, according to https://t.co/lDDwzdDPdL

LUCID DOWN 45%

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 14, 2026

Lucid EV

Here's more from the report:

According to the sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the review is strictly confidential, AlixPartners is urging the board to run one more round of restructuring in the United States and Europe, and to narrow the company's focus onto its Gravity SUV.

. . .

One person close to the matter told EV that the two starker questions, whether Lucid should be taken private or seek Chapter 11 protection, are among the scenarios the adviser has been asked to weigh.

Neither, the person stressed, is a decision the board has taken.

Shares were halved in late-afternoon trading in New York... Multiple trading halts were seen. 

How long until Lucid denies the report?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:41

Big Blew It! IBM Crashes Most Since '60s Amid CapEx Woes; Goldman Warns Over 'Software Bear Case'

Summary:

• Wall Street Desks Stunned 
• IBM Shares Crash Most On Record, Exceeding Dot Com & 1987 Crashes 
• CEO Arvind Krishna Blamed Preliminary 2Q Results on "Shifting" Customer CapEx Spending

IBM's surprise second-quarter warning blindsided traders Tuesday morning, raising new concerns that enterprise technology budgets are being redirected toward AI infrastructure at the expense of traditional software and IT services.

Shares plunged 24% in the first 20 minutes of New York trading. Should those losses hold through the close, IBM would suffer its largest one-day crash on record, based on Bloomberg trading data going back to 1968.

Here's what Wall Street's top desks are saying in first takes:

UBS analyst Robert Ruple:

The big news this morning was a surprising negative preannouncement by IBM, down 22%, with Q2 sales of $17.2 bn versus $17.8 bn expected and EPS of $2.93 versus $3.02. Citing unanticipated capex reprioritization impacting client buying patterns with numerous large deals failing to close on time, cybersecurity distractions and some supply chain-related impact where they saw clients shift their quarterly capex spend toward servers, storage, and memory purchases to secure supply-constrained infrastructure (thanks to AI boom) ahead of expected price increases. This redirection of budgets towards AI has been a topic that Karl Keirstead/team have been articulating as potential risk for some time (particularly for incumbent SaaS suppliers and IT Services companies), which sounds like a harbinger of commentary that could be further accentuated by other software, IT services and hardware-related companies as Q2 reporting season progresses that is sure to weigh on sentiment incrementally.

David Vogt provides his initial thoughts on the IBM miss and these results suggest that enterprise IT spending pressures are hitting sooner than investors anticipated, leading to a revenue shortfall and non-GAAP EPS guidance of $2.93, below both expectations and consensus. The primary driver was weakness in IBM's zSeries mainframe cycle, which hurt its high-margin Transaction Processing (TP) business. While Red Hat delivered solid 11% constant-currency growth and recently acquired assets such as HashiCorp and Confluent performed well, these positives were overshadowed by a sharp decline in TP revenue, which appears to have fallen in the mid-teens year over year and represents nearly 30% of IBM's Software segment. As a result, investors are likely to reassess IBM's long-term software growth outlook, particularly for 2027 and beyond, as rising infrastructure costs and tightening IT budgets weigh on demand. These results reinforce concerns that stronger growth areas like Red Hat may not be sufficient to offset prolonged weakness in TP business, increasing pressure on IBM to pursue larger acquisitions or other growth initiatives to sustain its software growth trajectory remaining at neutral.

Goldman analysts:

IBM: Negatively preannounced Q2 results this morning, with Revenues coming in well below estimates on shortfall led by Software & Infrastructure performance. Stock -17% in pre. Prelim Q2 Revenue missed estimates ($17.2bn vs. cons $17.9bn).  Company said "did not anticipate magnitude of CapEx reprioritization."  Shortfall vs. consensus was led by "Software and Infrastructure performance shortfall." Mgmt commentary: "What played out was worse than our expectations, driven by a shortfall in our Z performance and the associated software stack, primarily in Transaction Processing. In the last few weeks of June, we saw clients shift their quarterly capex spend toward servers, storage, and memory purchases to secure supply-constrained infrastructure ahead of expected price increases. This dynamic impacted client buying patterns. While we anticipated some supply chain related impact in our expectations, we did not anticipate the magnitude of the capex reprioritization." BOTTOM LINE:  This should fully play into the Software bear case, and would imagine should drive fairly broad-based weakness across software + services layer today (most names down 3%+ early in pre).

Goldman analyst James Schneider:

What happened: We expect the stock to trade meaningfully lower following IBM's negative pre-announcement this morning, which was driven by a shortfall in Infrastructure and Software to a lesser extent. We believe the mainframe shortfall reflects client demand re-prioritization toward near-term server and other hardware purchases given surging memory and component prices, a dynamic consistent with what peers such as Dell and HP have cited. This reprioritization also drove a shortfall in Transaction Processing because of perpetual licenses tied to new mainframe purchases. In addition, we believe the company's Data & Automation software segment saw weaker demand due to company-specific execution issues. Red Hat results were in line with expectations at a growth of 11% in the quarter. We leave our estimates unchanged for now, pending further color from the company on next week's earnings call on updated 2026 guidance and potential remediation efforts.

BNP Paribas analyst Stefan Slowinski: 

IBM is trading -22% pre-market on a disappointing Q2 earnings pre-announcement, driven by the company's Infrastructure (hardware) and Software businesses, blamed on capex reprioritization (i.e. crowding out) and delays caused by cybersecurity uncertainty, with no indication of any improvements yet.

Barclays analyst Andrew Keches:

The news: IBM pre-released selected 2Q26 results alongside a letter to shareholders, with revenue below expectations amid shortfalls in Software and Infrastructure. Revenue came in at $17.2bn overall (vs. $17.9bn est.), while at the segment level, Software grew 5% y/y (vs. +11% est.), Infrastructure fell 7% (vs. -3% y/y est.), and Consulting was flat (vs. +2% y/y est.). The company attributed most of the underperformance to unexpected shifts in clients' late-quarter budget allocations toward securing supply-constrained infrastructure ahead of price increases. IBM also acknowledged an execution component, with numerous large deals failing to close on schedule.

The context: Today's update comes at a sensitive point for IBM's investment narrative. Software has become the company's primary growth engine, and management had increasingly framed AI as additive to the software stack rather than a source of disruption. Today's update complicates that framing as the shortfall was concentrated in Z and the associated Transaction Processing software stack, with clients redirecting spending toward supply-constrained servers, storage, and memory. The key debate, in our view, will be whether this represents a temporary shift in the timing of enterprise purchases, or evidence that rapid AI infrastructure investment is beginning to crowd out portions of traditional software spending.

Our take: Clearly the results are a disappointment and the equity move alone (-20% premkt as of writing) will be a drag on credit performance. Credit metrics would not be impacted in a meaningful way, but the development adds to already weak sentiment in the name. We are mindful of the pointed M&A comments made on the last call (valuations attractive, appetite could be higher than in normal years), and although this pre-release suggests nothing about the topic, weak results will add to the overhang. Moreover, IBM spreads have held in better than most A/BBB TMT curves in the recent TMT sell off, widening the differential to BBB telco and single-A software curves such as NOW. To be clear, we view this quarter as a one-off rather than a step function in mainframe and software demand and also acknowledge that IBM has the cash flow to absorb medium sized M&A, but the impetus to step in and defend the structure at these levels is not obvious to us.

Laterals: The clearest potential beneficiaries from IBM's commentary are hardware providers levered to the spending categories being prioritized, such as servers and storage at DELL and HPE, and memory at MU. Conversely, the update may reinforce concerns around software names broadly, as well as consulting and IT-services businesses such as ACN and KD, if AI infrastructure investment is crowding out other portions of enterprise technology budgets. That said, we are somewhat surprised by the breadth of the read-through across the group so far this morning. IBM explicitly acknowledged company-specific execution issues, including large deals that failed to close on schedule, and the decision to pre-release more than a week before its scheduled earnings call suggests that its shortfall may be more outlier than industry-wide. We understand that this is a "sell first, ask questions later" market, but we would be cautious about treating IBM's results as a 1:1 read-through to every software and services company.

Laterals: The clearest potential beneficiaries from IBM's commentary are hardware providers levered to the spending categories being prioritized, such as servers and storage at DELL and HPE, and memory at MU. Conversely, the update may reinforce concerns around software names broadly, as well as consulting and IT-services businesses such as ACN and KD, if AI infrastructure investment is crowding out other portions of enterprise technology budgets. That said, we are somewhat surprised by the breadth of the read-through across the group so far this morning. IBM explicitly acknowledged company-specific execution issues, including large deals that failed to close on schedule, and the decision to pre-release more than a week before its scheduled earnings call suggests that its shortfall may be more outlier than industry-wide. We understand that this is a "sell first, ask questions later" market, but we would be cautious about treating IBM's results as a 1:1 read-through to every software and services company.

Bloomberg tracked analysts have an average 12-month price target of $300 on IBM, highlighting how far Wall Street expectations had run ahead of the shock preliminary second-quarter results earlier. Of the 25 analysts covering the stock, 17 rate it a Buy, six are Neutral and just two recommend selling. 

SaaSpocalypse Is Back: IBM Crashes Most Since 1987 As Customers Abruptly "Shift CapEx Spending"

IBM shares plunged almost 20% in premarket trading, putting the stock on track for its worst intra-day collapse since the infamous Oct. 19, 1987.

Worse than the Dot Com crash...

The catalyst for the selloff was IBM CEO Arvind Krishna's letter to investors outlining preliminary second-quarter results.

Here is what's key:

• IBM CEO: DID NOT ANTICIPATE MAGNITUDE OF CAPEX REPRIORITIZATION

Traders were likely caught off guard by a 7% decline in infrastructure revenue, raising new concerns about demand across one of IBM's key business segments.

Here are the preliminary 2Q results:

• Revenue of $17.2 billion, up 1%

• Software revenue up 5%

• Consulting revenue flat, up 1% at constant currency

• Infrastructure revenue down 7%

Krishna detailed in the letter to investors that customers unexpectedly redirected their June technology budgets toward servers, storage and memory to secure scarce equipment before anticipated price increases.

In return, that left less money and management attention available for IBM's z17 mainframes and related transaction-processing software. Deals IBM expected to close during the quarter were delayed or pushed into later periods, rather than necessarily canceled outright.

Here are Bloomberg headlines:

• IBM CEO: SAW CLIENTS SHIFT QUARTERLY CAPEX SPEND IN JUNE

• IBM CEO: THIS DYNAMIC IMPACTED CLIENT BUYING PATTERNS

Signaling a return to the SaaSpocalypse (client spend shifting from commoditized software to constrained hardware), Krishna wrote:

When we discussed our expectations with you in April, we noted that we would be wrapping on the launch of z17 in the second quarter.

Given this was the strongest start to a mainframe program in our history, we expected Infrastructure revenue to decline low-single digits for the year, beginning this quarter.

What played out was worse than our expectations, driven by a shortfall in our Z performance and the associated software stack, primarily in Transaction Processing.

In the last few weeks of June, we saw clients shift their quarterly capex spend toward servers, storage, and memory purchases to secure supply-constrained infrastructure ahead of expected price increases.

This dynamic impacted client buying patterns. While we anticipated some supply chain related impact in our expectations, we did not anticipate the magnitude of the capex reprioritization.

In addition, clients were distracted with rapidly-evolving, industry-wide cybersecurity concerns in the quarter.

Krishna also admitted: "We did not adapt and move quickly enough," with large deals failing to close on expected timelines.

The key question is whether IBM is emerging as an early warning sign that the AI boom is beginning to crack, with a potential "token revolt" taking shape as customers push back against surging AI costs.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:36

De-Banked: It's Only A Matter Of Time Before It Happens To You

Via InternationalMan.com,

"We are writing to inform you that we cannot continue serving you.

As a result of this decision, your account will be closed within 14 days from the date of this letter.

Any remaining account balances will be sent by check to the address we have on file."

Sooner or later, expect your bank to send you a letter like this.

They won't even tell you why they are closing your account, and you will probably have trouble opening accounts at other banks.

De-banking is a disturbing and growing trend.

In short, the ruling elite - parasites, more accurately - have weaponized the banking system to enforce conformity to their preferred narrative.

If you don't lap up their lies about Covid, climate, elections, wars, rising crime, or whatever the media is hyping as the "current thing," expect the financial hammer to come down on you without warning.

You could lose your ability to take payment from your customers and pay your bills at the drop of a hat.

We've seen banks close the accounts of prominent doctors critical of the Covid mass hysteria and politicians opposed to schemes to centralize power on a global level (globalism).

However, for every example of a bank closing a high-profile person's account, hundreds - or thousands - of other ordinary people likely receive the same despicable treatment but are never heard from.

Every day people are losing their ability to interact in the economy because the elite have determined they committed a thought crime.

Interestingly, the banks never canceled the accounts of the warmongers who spread the lies about WMD in Iraq or the liars that led to the toppling of the Ghadafi government in Libya and the liars that fueled the Syrian conflict.

All of their bank accounts are in good standing, even though they contributed to the unnecessary deaths of countless innocents.

Nor did the banks close the accounts of those who, for years, peddled the Russiagate lies that tore the country apart or those who claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story was phony when it was, in fact, real and probably affected the outcome of an election.

All of their bank accounts are in good standing too.

The banks also did not close Jeffrey Epstein's accounts, even though they were likely aware of what he was up to.

These are just a few examples of the blatant double standard.

If you are skeptical about whether men can get pregnant or if cow farts will destroy the planet, you should expect very different treatment than Jeffrey Epstein or people whose lies align with the military-industrial complex.

De-banking is another example of how formerly free societies are rapidly descending into high-tech totalitarianism.

It's only prudent to expect de-banking to worsen as governments fall deeper into bankruptcy and become more desperate to maintain control. Controlling the narrative - partly by de-banking anyone with opposing views - is crucial for them to try to hold on to their power.

Today you can be de-banked for having the wrong opinion. Tomorrow you could be de-banked for even more trivial reasons.

For example, even if you loyally follow whatever the TV tells you to think, the banks may notice you are purchasing "too much" meat or gas and are therefore exceeding your monthly carbon allowance. In the name of saving the planet and maintaining their ESG scores, they'll close your account.

Think that's far-fetched?

Consider that already, today, Bank of America shares all gun purchases from its clients with the FBI. It would be naive to assume they and other banks don't automatically share additional data.

Or that PayPal recently floated the idea of charging people $2,500 for promoting so-called "misinformation" - a vague propaganda term that really means "information the people in charge don't want you to know because they're afraid you will come to a conclusion they don't like."

It's not hard to see where the de-banking train is going.

We're only a few stops away from a full-blown social credit system.

There Is No Free Market in Money and Banking

Money is simply supposed to be something useful for storing and exchanging value.

Banks are simply supposed to be money warehouses.

However, that is not how it works today.

Governments have perverted money and banking into tools to control the population.

An unconvincing argument you may hear is that banks are private companies exercising discretion on their clients. They are within their right to de-bank whoever they want.

They say it is no different from a baker having the right to refuse to bake a cake for someone they don't like.

You could make that argument if only there was a totally free market in money and banking... but there isn't. Not even close.

Here's a more accurate analogy.

Imagine a situation where the only bread available on the market is government bread, and the only way you could obtain such bread is through government-approved bakeries. Independent bakeries would not exist.

The government could then exert overt and subtle pressure on the bakeries to ensure they aligned with their preferred narrative by removing their permission to operate or threatening to. They could also impose fines, start invasive investigations, or add more regulations.

There would be no shortage of ways a bureaucrat could find to make things unpleasant for the bakeries.

The bakeries' owners know such a dynamic exists, so they enthusiastically fall in line with the "current thing" to avoid problems.

Then, suppose it became known to the bakery that one of their customers had committed a thought crime. They wouldn't hesitate to throw him to the curb, even if he had been a loyal customer for many years. It simply wouldn't be worth the potential problems. Word would spread to other bakeries that he was trouble, and they'd avoid his business too.

Since the only bread on the market is government bread, which is only available from government-licensed bakeries, he would be unable to obtain bread.

A similar situation exists today in money and banking.

In Marx's Communist Manifesto, the 5th plank calls for the "centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."

That perfectly describes fiat currency and the Federal Reserve, which oversees the banking system.

The free market wouldn't choose easy-to-produce government confetti as money without laws forcing their use.

Here's another way to think of it.

Imagine if Tony Soprano forced his neighborhood to use pieces of paper with his signature as money and threatened violence against anyone who disobeyed. That's what governments are doing with their currencies today.

It's a far cry from when people used gold - a politically neutral, hard-to-produce asset voluntarily chosen on the market - as money.

That's why the notion of a free market in money is laughable.

We don't have free market money; we have communist money forced upon us with violence and threats of violence. Further, for most practical purposes, the banking system is needed to use this lousy "money."

Similarly, modern banks are not creatures of the free market like the independent money warehouses of the past. Today banks exist at the pleasure and service of the state - and obtain special privileges as a result.

Perhaps the most obvious observation is that there would be zero government bailouts in a free market and certainly no such thing as "too big to fail" banks. Incidentally, it's no coincidence that the most egregious de-bankers are the "too big to fail" banks.

Further, modern banks resemble government-sanctioned Ponzi Schemes, as they rely on the false belief that depositors' (fake) money is readily available when, in fact, it isn't because of fractional reserve banking. If only a tiny portion of depositors demanded their money back, most banks would be in big trouble.

Governments allow banks to commit this fraud that would be illegal in any other industry.

For example, imagine a fractional reserve car dealership or jewelry store where the car salesman and jewelry store owner could create 10x more claims for cars and pieces of jewelry than what actually exists in their inventories. They would be selling claims for goods that don't exist.

Not only would such a practice be fraudulent, but it would also not be sustainable.

If even a few people who purchased fractional reserve claims on the nonexistent cars and jewelry asked for delivery, it would blow the whole scam up.

The government and the banks understand this dangerous dynamic, which is one reason they created the so-called "lender of last resort," the Federal Reserve. When the banks get in trouble, the Fed can create new currency units out of thin air to bail them out.

Let me translate it into plain English.

A "lender of last resort" means legalized counterfeiting of the currency to backstop a legalized Ponzi Scheme.

Such blatant fraud would have no place in a free market for money and banking. However, because it is institutionalized and has the government's blessing, most people thoughtlessly accept the situation as normal.

In a truly free market for money, people would voluntarily choose whatever was most suitable for storing and exchanging value. Historically, that meant gold because it was the one physical commodity that was hardest to produce and most resistant to debasement. Tomorrow it might be Bitcoin.

In a truly free market, banks would cease to be government-sanctioned Ponzi Schemes and revert to their historical role as independent money warehouses. Further, anyone could enter the banking business in a free market; you wouldn't need the approval of the Federal Reserve cartel, as banks do today.

That's why the argument that de-banking is simply private companies rightfully exercising discretion is disingenuous.

The Solution

The ideal solution is to get the government entirely out of banking and money and have a totally free market. But that's probably not going to happen anytime soon.

So what can you do about de-banking?

First, don't expect to use physical cash as a solution for long.

The elites have long had nefarious plans to eliminate cash. Today they're

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:05

Billionaire Ken Griffin Has Spent $40 Million To Keep The Senate Red, But Snubs Trump's Favorite Texan

Ken Griffin has put roughly $40 million into Republican midterm efforts this year and could double that by November, according to the Wall Street Journal. The money runs through nearly every competitive Senate race in the country - except for one... Ken Paxton's run for a seat in Texas, which won't see a dime of it.

According to the report, the Citadel founder has no plans to help the Texas Republican nominee - the candidate President Trump pushed onto the ballot by helping end John Cornyn's Senate career. The Journal notes that donors rarely broadcast who they're refusing to fund. When one does - a day before super PACs file their quarterly reports, and eight days before Senate Majority Leader John Thune headlines a Washington fundraiser for Paxton - it's fair to assume other donors are meant to hear it.

The refusal lands in the middle of an argument Republicans have been having since late May, sometimes privately and increasingly on the record: who pays for the candidates Trump forced on the party? The president's own political action committee, MAGA Inc., was sitting on roughly $382 million as of last month, the Boston Globe reported, and hasn't said what the money is for. Cornyn, asked about funding the man who beat him, told Semafor: "I think he can spend his money."

Where Ken Is Spending

Griffin's biggest check this cycle, $10 million, went to the Senate Leadership Fund, the super PAC aligned with Thune, according to the Journal. He gave $2.5 million apiece to groups backing Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska and Sen. Susan Collins in Maine, and $1.5 million to one supporting Rep. Ashley Hinson in Iowa's open-seat race. The Cook Political Report rates Alaska and Maine as tossups, while Iowa leans Republican - a state Trump carried by double digits in 2024. On the House side, he gave $5 million in May to the Congressional Leadership Fund and $5.5 million split between two other groups, including one that backs veterans running as Republicans. "I am able to fully fund these races because of his steady investment cycle over cycle," said Chris Winkelman, the Congressional Leadership Fund's president.

The people familiar with his giving told the Journal that Griffin is focused on the Senate because six-year terms give his money the longest reach into the party's future after Trump, whose term ends in January 2029. A senator elected this fall serves until January 2033. Whoever wins the White House in 2028 will be confirmed, funded and investigated by the class Griffin is paying to elect right now.

He has already said which 2028 candidate he'd rather see. At the Allen & Company conference in Sun Valley on July 8, interviewer Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Griffin to pick between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance in a hypothetical primary. Griffin said he'd be "predisposed" toward Rubio, whose 2016 campaign he backed with $5 million to a supporting super PAC, Axios reported. (The Journal notes the question offered only those two names.) According to Revenge, Axios reporter Alex Isenstadt's book on the 2024 campaign, Griffin urged Trump not to put Vance on the ticket at all. Vance has said he'll decide on a presidential run after the midterms.

Griffin's distance from Trump goes back years. Worth an estimated $50 billion-plus, he was the country's fifth-biggest political donor in 2024, giving $108 million by OpenSecrets' count - about 37 percent of what top donor Elon Musk spent that cycle - and none of it went to Trump, whose campaigns he has never funded. He spent $5 million that cycle keeping Nikki Haley's primary bid alive. He voted for Trump - "not with a smile on my face," he said afterward - gave $1 million to the inaugural committee, and has since praised the administration's border enforcement while criticizing its tariffs and its pressure on the Federal Reserve. If his giving doubles as projected, Griffin would join the cycle's top tier of donors, which a New York Times analysis this spring put at Andreessen Horowitz ($115.5 million), George Soros ($102.9 million) and Elon Musk ($85 million).

Then There's Texas

Paxton, the state attorney general, launched his challenge in April 2025, and Senate Republican leadership spent heavily to stop him. Cornyn and his allies put more than $90 million into the primary, according to the Texas Tribune, including $11 million from One Nation, the nonprofit arm of Thune's political operation; pro-Cornyn groups outspent Paxton's side by roughly nine to one. Cornyn finished a point ahead in the March 3 first round but short of a majority. A week before the runoff, Trump endorsed Paxton, calling him "a true MAGA warrior." Cornyn became the first Republican senator in Texas history to lose his party's nomination, in a spring when Trump-backed challengers also took out Sen. Bill Cassidy in Louisiana and Rep. Thomas Massie in Kentucky.

Democratic nominee James Talarico, an Austin state representative, had raised more than $40 million through his primary and took in $600,000 in the two hours after Paxton won, his campaign said. Paxton had raised $7.6 million and had $2.3 million left as of early May, per FEC records cited by NBC News. Republican operatives told the network that holding the state, with its roughly 20 media markets, could cost outside groups $100 million. Meanwhile, anti-Paxton Republicans handed Democrats their script: a 2023 impeachment on corruption charges by the Republican-led Texas House (the state Senate acquitted him) and years of legal and ethics controversies besides.

That history, the people familiar with Griffin's giving told the Journal, is why he's staying out.

The $10 million question

There's a catch to Griffin's ghosting of Paxton - The Senate Leadership Fund hasn't ruled Texas out. If the group goes in this fall, Griffin's $10 million goes in with it; money doesn't stay in labeled jars. So either "no plans to help Paxton" has some give in it, or the leadership PAC's most prominent donor has effectively told it where not to spend. Neither Griffin's office nor Latcham has answered that question on the record.

The backdrop: Republicans hold the Senate 53-47, Democrats need to net four seats, and Griffin's side of the ledger has strengthened without him lifting a finger. In Maine, Democrat Graham Platner - who won the June 9 primary with about 70 percent of the vote - formally quit the race July 10 over a sexual assault allegation he denies, leaving the party to pick a replacement at a 601-delegate convention on July 25, two days ahead of the ballot deadline. Collins, backed by Griffin's $2.5 million and $42 million in SLF reservations, currently has no opponent at all.

The quarterly filings land Wednesday, and the Paxton fundraiser is a week later.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:45

Sheriff Says Somali Youth Gangs Are Running Wild In Minneapolis

Authored by Joe Schaeffer via Liberty Nation,

A Minneapolis sheriff has triggered an uncomfortable conversation by saying out loud what you are not supposed to talk about in Minnesota. "Out of control" gangs of Somali youths are terrorizing the city, and the mayhem is poised to get worse.

(Photo by Christopher Mark Juhn/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher released a livestream video on July 6 decrying widespread violence by Somali gang members over the Fourth of July weekend. He also took the opportunity to criticize media outlets in the Twin Cities and the state for refusing to cover the problem.

Fletcher "stated that the Somali gangs are responsible for at least 14 murders in the last two years as well as over 100 shootings - many of them at high-profile events like graduations and the State Fair. Fletcher also said in his promo video that he heard from a Minneapolis police officer who said that 20 percent of their homicides are now Somalis," local news site Alpha News reports.

The situation is blowing up right in front of the public eye.

'It's All About Ego for 99% of It'

"Investigators say Somali gang violence is growing quickly and now spans the metro [area], with 12 Somali gangs tracked from Minneapolis and St. Paul to St. Cloud, Apple Valley and Burnsville. Most of the violence involves guns, according to the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office," Fox-9 TV in Minneapolis reports. "Authorities say the gangs are still young and growing, with about 300 people involved right now."

Ramsey County Deputy Ben Seidel said the Somali youth gangs don't operate like traditional inner-city gangs in the sense of being motivated by money. "From what I've seen... it's all about showboating. It's all about ego for 99% of it. They aren't selling narcotics. It's all about just gloating," Seidel states in the video.

There's a history to Somali gang violence in Minneapolis that explains the seeming novelty of these officers' remarks. In blue-dominated Minnesota, criticizing the Somali community in any way is immediately defined as racist. The "R card" has been so weaponized in the state that health-care fraud was allowed to flourish for years, which may have cost American taxpayers up to $9 billion.

There is nothing new about Somali gangs in Minnesota. They have been identified as a growing problem for 20 years or more. And it has never sounded like child's play. Every few years, the issue is ventilated, only to recede amid de rigueur pressure from "anti-racist" organizations and personalities.

The City of Minneapolis commissioned a study in 2007 after a series of robberies by Somali teens in 2005. As Minnesota Public Radio detailed at the time:

"The report's author, consultant Shukri Adan, presented her findings to members of the city council.

"Adan says at first it was thought the Somali youth were involved in loosely organized groups of 'troublemakers.' However, Adan says as these young people ended up in jail, they met established gang members and learned from them how to organize.

"'They're very sophisticated and they've adapted some of that into the Somali gang structure. But for the Somali gangs that I've identified, they were specifically Somalis and all their membership were Somalis, even though they had associations with other gangs.'"

Yet leftist MPR made sure to point out that "[t]he report says gang activity is relatively small. Statistics from the Minnesota Gang Strike Force identifies 52 Somali gang members - less than one percent of all known gang members in Minnesota."

Three years later, the Somali youth had moved on to serious organized criminal activity.

Somali Gangs Trafficking African American Girls

A "federal indictment unsealed in November [2010] in Tennessee charges 29 people with crimes from sex trafficking to credit card fraud to witness intimidation. It said the accused were members or associates of three Somali gangs - often acting as one larger gang - bent on forcing girls into prostitution for their own profit," the Associated Press reported in 2011. The gangs were trafficking girls from Minneapolis to Nashville and Columbus, Ohio - three cities with significant Somali populations.

The article featured a harrowing account of the brutalization of a 12-year-old girl. And there was a further revelation that the professional "anti-racists" would rather you not hear about.

"The indictment details several instances in which young Somali or African American girls were taken from place to place and forced to engage in sex acts with multiple people. One girl was under 13 when she was first prostituted. Another girl was 18 when she was raped by multiple men in a hotel room," the AP reported in November 2010.

Whereas much of the violence perpetrated by Somali youth gangs is targeted at their fellow East African immigrant communities, underage native-born American black girls were among those being sexually exploited by this ring, as well. Where was the outrage from the Congressional Black Caucus?

Just as with MPR, the AP seemed to downplay the number of Somali gang members in 2011. "There are seven Somali gangs in Minneapolis, and a total of about 200 documented Somali gang members and associates, [Minneapolis police officer and Somali community liaison Jeanine Brudenell] said - about 10 percent of the roughly 2,100 documented active gang members in the Minneapolis Police Department's system. The gang members are a small fraction of the Somali population," the AP stressed.

Fast forward to 2026 and we're up to 300 gang members (and who knows how many more yet to be identified?). Even Sheriff Fletcher, while calling out the problem nobody wants to talk about, treads carefully.

"Fletcher was careful not to castigate the entire Somali community or even all of their youth in his comments," Alpha News noted of the livestream video. "Rather, he said that the violence is stemming from a small number of misguided, mostly male youth, which he later clarified is about 300 young people participating in about 12 gangs across the metro [area] and Minnesota."

There's one final element we should emphasize. As Somalis moved en masse to states like Minnesota, they retained their fiercely held tribal identities.

"[C]lan rivalry is often the most important reason for gang violence" within the Somali community, Viktor Marsai at the Center for Immigration Studies wrote in March. "Clan violence is fueled not only in the offline space. More and more Somali TikTokers and Youtubers are using online platforms to glorify their own clan tradition and savage rival groups. In many cases, tens of thousands of people are following these accounts and add hundreds of comments. The inflammatory effects spill over from the online... these influencers utilize their clout to support violence in their country of residence and in Somalia."

Americans may not be able to comprehend the meaning behind what Deputy Seidel refers to as "showboating" among Somali gang members. How much of this comes from lingering clan identification dating back to the old country? How much is fueled by a foreign culture wholly incompatible with the American way of life?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:25

Watch: Yet Another Shocking Video Of UK's Two-Tier Policing Drops

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

Fresh footage from Northern Ireland captures police sprinting past a group of knife- and stick-wielding feral youths to cuff a local man who had grabbed a stick to protect the native women and children in his street.

The scene in Dungannon underscores a now-familiar pattern: authorities appear quicker to restrain locals standing up for their communities than to neutralise imported threats.

The video, shared widely on X, shows a large group of youths described as "foreigners" arriving armed in a Protestant area of the town. One man, who also appears to be of foreign descent, picks up a stick in response. A police officer runs straight past the armed mob and detains the defender instead.

A large group of foreigners armed with knives and sticks show up at the protestant area of Dungannon in Northern Ireland.

A police officer runs past them to arrest a local man who had picked up a stick to defend his community.

Two-tier policing... pic.twitter.com/SXlix63Pkz

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) July 14, 2026

Official police accounts confirm serious disorder in the area yesterday evening.

District Commander Superintendent Peter Stevenson stated: "At approximately 7.45pm police received a report of altercation involving approximately 10 men armed with knives and bats at a property in the Killyman Road area. The men smashed the windows and caused damage to the front door of a property. Officers attended and a 32-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of criminal damage. Two other men, aged 32 and 35, were arrested on suspicion of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. They remain in police custody at this time."

The Superintendent continued, "At approximately 11pm, officers on patrol came across a large group of males gathered in the Newell Road area. Further reports had also been received of a number of males in the area carrying knives and bats. One man had been assaulted and sustained cuts to his hands and face. He attended hospital for treatment for his injuries. An 18-year old man was arrested on suspicion of grievous bodily harm and possession of an offensive weapon with intent to commit an indictable offence. He remains in police custody."

DUP MLA Deborah Erskine voiced growing local frustration: "There is no place for violence, intimidation or criminality on the streets of Dungannon. Criminality is criminality, regardless of who is involved or which section of the community they come from. It must be called out and condemned consistently."

"There can be no selective condemnation when it comes to lawlessness and public disorder," Erskine continued, adding "People have a right to feel safe in their own homes and neighbourhoods, and any allegations of violence or intimidation must be thoroughly investigated. Too often, when residents raise such legitimate concerns, or when I raise those concerns in the Assembly Chamber, elements of the Assembly are quick to dismiss them with accusations of racism or bigotry."

"That approach does nothing to solve problems or build community confidence. It is time for people to listen to genuine concerns, stop applying labels, and start taking meaningful action," Erskine further urged.

Dungannon hosts a substantial migrant population, including a large East Timorese community drawn to local meat-processing plants, making up a significant share of the town's non-national residents.

Social media reports tied to the footage describe the armed group as foreigners, many from East Timor, turning up in a Protestant area, while some official framing casts the clashes as internal community matters.

These foreigners are mostly from East Timor, by the way.

What the fuck are people from East Timor doing in Northern Ireland? They shouldn't even know NI exists let alone be in the country.

— Haribo (@kerrso94) July 14, 2026

Regardless, the video evidence reveals the two-tier reality on the ground: the defender gets the cuffs while the knife-and-stick mob receives the pass.

This latest episode fits a lengthening list of migrant-linked violence and uneven policing responses across Northern Ireland. Last month, north Belfast saw a brutal street attack in which an African migrant repeatedly stabbed and attempted to saw off a victim's head with a Stanley knife-style blade.

Bystanders had to drag the attacker off and beat him back until police arrived. The victim suffered life-altering injuries. Official and media descriptions initially softened the horror to a generic "stabbing incident," sparking fury over downplaying and delayed accountability.

Patterns of sex crimes and grooming scandals in parts of Northern Ireland have also continually triggered nights of anti-immigration unrest, with locals expressing fury at perceived failures to protect communities or deport offenders. The same complaints of selective enforcement keep surfacing.

The Dungannon footage now joins a wider catalogue of two-tier policing examples stretching across the United Kingdom. In one recent case, officers were captured shielding three black aggressors who had assaulted a white British teenager in Birmingham, then manhandling and swearing at the victim while forcing him into a police vehicle the wrong way. Bystanders trying to explain the situation were ignored as more officers piled in.

Other documented incidents include South Yorkshire Police officers using batons, shoves and Tasers on teenage girls during dispersal operations, with the force later admitting the clip looked "nothing short of shocking."

Separate footage showed officers manhandling a five-year-old boy, smashing a man's head into a bollard before dragging him, and slamming an elderly woman, Siobhan Whyte, to the ground during protests linked to the murder of her daughter by an illegal migrant.

A 50-year-old military veteran was struck with riot shields and kicked in the head multiple times while sitting on a wall filming.

The inquest into the death of 18-year-old Henry Nowak continues to examine whether police handcuffing contributed to his fate after he was stabbed five times in Southampton. Reports indicated officers initially focused on restraining the victim rather than immediately addressing his wounds, while the attacker was not promptly secured.

Bodycam and witness accounts have raised questions about training priorities that appear to emphasize ideological considerations over straightforward protection of the vulnerable.

These cases share a common thread: native residents or victims frequently encounter swift, heavy-handed intervention, while threats tied to mass migration and certain imported communities receive softer or delayed responses until public outrage forces attention.

Bodycam footage and civilian videos repeatedly contradict official narratives that downplay risks or deflect criticism by labeling concerns as bigotry. The result is eroding public trust, with communities left feeling that law enforcement operates under different rules depending on who is involved.

Northern Ireland's recent history shows what happens when these pressures build without resolution. Local people have watched graphic attacks, heard excuses, and seen footage of defenders being targeted while armed groups operate with apparent impunity. The same dynamic now plays out in towns like Dungannon, where long-standing Protestant areas face new tensions from rapid demographic change and selective policing.

Britain's experiment with open borders and ideological policing has produced predictable outcomes: rising disorder, native communities on the defensive, and officers caught between political directives and the basic duty to protect everyone equally.

The Dungannon video is not an isolated clip. It is the latest confirmation that two-tier standards are actively undermining safety and consent on the streets.

The solution is straightforward. Policing must return to equal application of the law, without regard to background, migration status, or political fashion. Communities deserve the right to defend themselves when authorities hesitate, and they deserve officers who prioritise stopping armed threats over everyday people trying to defend their families.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:05

Whose-muz?

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Whose-muz?

Oil leaped 9%, the largest move since 2020. Today, it’s up another 2.5% to $85 at time of writing. It’s a good job we also have the Cleveland Fed’s trimmed-mean inflation measure out as well, right? Obviously, oil was driven by developments in Hormuz - or rather Whose-muz? There, besides reimposing the naval blockade of Iran, President Trump stated those using the waterway will now pay 20% of the value of cargo as compensation to the US, the strait’s new guardian. While the proposed Iranian toll the US rejected was $2m per tanker, or $1 per barrel of oil and $22 per tonne of LNG, Bloomberg estimates Trump fees at $30m per supertanker, the equivalent of $8 on oil and $177 on LNG. Naturally, the UN shipping agency is opposed to any fees for any strait and wants details on that Trump tariff – as if that will stop it.

More bluntly, Iran responded with missile attacks on tankers, with two from the UAE hit, as well as more strikes against the GCC and US military bases, the latter so far avoiding both energy and critical infrastructure. As we noted in ‘Comfortably Bomb’ yesterday, Iran can’t destroy such facilities and build bridges to the GCC if it sees itself defeating the US and gaining regional leadership. By contrast, the US is again in ‘take it down’ mode: Trump is reportedly weighing taking out Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site, requiring a phenomenal explosion to neutralise.

Keeping out of the fight so far is Israel: the 2026 headline there from the New York Times is Mossad trying to recruit former Iranian President Ahmadinejad as an agent, and potential front man, in a failed plan for regime change. However, the Yemeni government, OK’d by the Saudis after Trump approval, bombed a runway in Houthi-occupied Sanaa to try to prevent an Iranian plane landing; now the Houthis are firing at the Saudis again for the first time in years, potentially endangering vital east-west oil flows via Yanbu on the Red Sea.

The realpolitik take is more evidence of a new (old) Mahan world disorder where countries use force to impose or restrict maritime trade flows: first Iran, now the US; the devastating Ukrainian attacks on Russian ships in the Sea of Azov is another concurrent example; and note the Hong Kong press asks, ‘Will Manila and Hanoi’s maritime deal challenge Beijing in the South China Sea?’

It’s also the US underlining that it’s fighting for a region, and world economy, that benefits from an open Hormuz but will no longer do it for free. Indeed, there’s a US message to the GCC and NATO/Europe/US allies – help us win this fight rather than saying ‘Not our war’ again. Don’t be surprised if anyone who aids the US now gets the 20% tariff lifted - which still implies it will have to be imposed on others to create that incentive.

If you think that’s cynical, in some see this as the US keeping Hormuz closed so it benefits as an LNG exporter. Indeed, as Dubai plans a new east-coast port for oil, LNG giant Qatar looks badly placed, Doha now looking at a project with the US (which likely won’t pay a penny?) for an Iraq-Syria pipeline. Even outside energy, the Asian press note the US has emerged as the helium winner amid the Iran war and China’s restrictions on exports of that key gas needed for chipmaking, with Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea turning to America for flows.

Which model?

Obviously not recalling all the reports on how Germany was artificially competitive within the Eurozone because of the low FX rate it was allowed to join at, Chancellor Merz just called for a dialogue with China on its monetary and FX policy, saying that the EU could not win, no matter how innovative or good the bloc may be, against a competitor that artificially manipulates its currency. He argued that CNY is 20-30% undervalued and needs to be allowed to float more freely so that it can appreciate to a fairer level. In this, listening to Europe in 2026 is like listening to the US in 2016.

To be clear, there is no world in which China will allow, or Europe is in any way able to impose, a new Plaza Accord on China: it is not going to happen. End of discussion. China could decide it wants to see CNY appreciate for its own reasons, such as to shift towards consumption as a growth driver, which is different. However, that’s a strategic theme echoed for decades by (mostly Western) economists, who are constantly surprised when it doesn’t happen and China’s trade surplus grows, and ever higher up the value-added ladder.

Yet the surging Chinese trade surplus with the EU, which is now larger than with the US and is close to doubling since 2020, must be addressed by October (by magic; or Chinese pledges of purchases of EU soybeans; or of Airbus aircraft when Beijing is also winking at Boeing?) or Europe says it will be forced to follow the US high tariff path after many years of patronising eyerolling at how disruptive such atavistic tactics are. China trade data today saw its imports up 36% y-o-y vs. 26.1% expected and exports up 27% vs. 19%: we will have to wait for the breakdown of the EU numbers, but they are unlikely to show what Brussels wants to see.

The larger point here is one repeatedly underlined in this Daily for many years: the problem is not one of FX levels, per se. Rather, it is of economic statecraft (a neomercantilist model) vs. neoclassical/neoliberal economic policy (a ‘free trade’ Merkelcantilist model), between which there is only one realpolitik winner: the former. If you dispute that fact, look at any pertinent production data, especially on the military side, or ask yourself which of the two is better placed to ride out an energy crisis. The logical trajectory on that basis is therefore to either assume the macroeconomic and market dynamic wherein:

• (i) the latter model adapts to the former by mirroring it, as we specifically projected in the case of the US vis-à-vis China in 2017 – and here we are in 2026; or
• (ii) the latter model doesn’t change, so continues to see ever-wider trade deficits, deindustrialisation, political polarisation, lack of strategic autonomy, and “slow agony,” as Draghi put it. And that’s before we get the fast-forward pain of who controls Hormuz.

Anyway, while we wait for Warsh’s take on the above, the Fed’s Waller has just warned of sticky inflation suggesting more rate hikes might be needed, as has the RBNZ’s Conway. Yet that all depends in large part on who wins the current battle in the Middle East, and how quickly - which is a reflection of the effectiveness of a given political-economy model.

Whocouldanooed?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 13:45

China's Helium Export Ban Raises New Risks For Global Supply Chains

Authored by Michael Zhuang via The Epoch Times,

China has imposed a temporary ban on helium exports, adding fresh uncertainty to global supplies of a gas essential to semiconductor manufacturing, aerospace, medical equipment, and other high-tech industries.

The first pilot helium production facility in Europe, located in Saint-Parize-le-Châtel, France, on Sept. 11, 2024. FREDERIC MOREAU/Hans Lucas via AFP/Getty Images

The July 10 announcement by China's Ministry of Commerce and General Administration of Customs comes as Beijing faces mounting pressure on its own helium supplies following disruptions to imports from Qatar and Russia.

Analysts who spoke to The Epoch Times say the move appears primarily aimed at safeguarding China's domestic supply rather than directly targeting the United States. However, since Chinese companies have increasingly served as intermediaries for Russian helium exports, the restriction could further disrupt global supply chains, particularly in Europe.

Beijing Announces Temporary Export Ban

The Chinese regime said the export restriction was imposed under the country's Foreign Trade Law. It took effect immediately. The regime did not specify how long the temporary measure would remain in place.

Helium is a colorless, odorless, non-toxic inert gas extracted as a byproduct of natural gas processing. Since it cannot be manufactured or replenished, it is considered a strategic resource.

The gas plays a critical role in semiconductor production, where it is used for wafer cooling, plasma etching, chemical vapor deposition, atomic layer deposition, photolithography support, and leak detection. It is also widely used in medical imaging, aerospace, scientific research, and advanced manufacturing.

Despite expanding domestic production, China still relies heavily on imported helium.

According to industry data from China Fortune Securities, approximately 84 percent of China's helium supply is dependent on foreign imports, with natural gas producers Qatar and Russia accounting together for nearly half of global helium production. The United States is the world's largest helium producer, producing more than 40 percent of global production.

China sources roughly 46 percent of its helium imports from Qatar and about 35 percent from Russia. But these import channels have come under increasing pressure this year.

According to a report on Chinese news portal Sina, maritime routes carrying Qatari helium through the Persian Gulf were disrupted amid the Iran war. In April, Russia announced temporary export controls on helium through the end of 2027, reducing export quotas to Asia to roughly 40 percent of 2025 levels. The China Liquefied Natural Gas Association estimated that those developments have created a helium supply shortfall exceeding 60 percent for China.

Cheng Cheng-ping, a professor of finance at Taiwan's National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, told The Epoch Times that Beijing's decision appears to be driven largely by domestic supply concerns rather than geopolitical retaliation.

"The timing suggests this is primarily an act of self-preservation," he said. "It is different from previous export controls on rare earths, which were more directly aimed at the United States."

Beijing has been working to expand China's domestic semiconductor industry while reducing reliance on advanced chips restricted by U.S. export controls.

"China is engaged in intense competition with the United States in high-end industries but remains behind technologically," Cheng said. "Restricting exports allows it to retain more resources to support its own advanced manufacturing."

Shen Ming-shih, a research fellow at Taiwan's Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told The Epoch Times that several factors likely influenced the decision, but domestic industrial demand appears to be the primary consideration.

"The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can still import helium from Russia for now," Shen said. "But if Russian supplies tighten further through 2027 while imports from other sources remain constrained, China's own helium resources will become increasingly scarce."

China's Role as a Russian Helium Middleman

While the export restrictions may help preserve domestic supplies, they could also tighten international markets because Chinese companies have become important intermediaries in the global helium trade.

According to a June report by U.K.-based industry intelligence firm Gasworld, Western sanctions have largely prevented Russia from exporting helium directly to Europe. Instead, Chinese companies have been importing Russian helium at relatively low prices - often in volumes exceeding China's own domestic consumption - and re-exporting part of those shipments to overseas markets, including Europe.

Russian helium exports to China averaged 38 million cubic feet per month in 2025, a 60 percent increase from the previous year, according to the report. Shipments reached 71 million cubic feet in December alone.

China's export ban could further tighten global helium supplies because of the country's growing role as a redistribution hub for Russian helium.

Cheng said the United States is unlikely to be significantly affected because of its own supplies.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the United States accounted for 44 percent of global helium production in 2024, followed by Qatar at 34 percent, Russia at 9 percent, and Algeria at 6 percent.

"The impact will be much greater for Europe and other countries that previously relied on Russian or Qatari helium but increasingly obtained those supplies through China," Cheng said.

With Russian exports constrained by sanctions and Middle Eastern supplies facing periodic disruptions, China has gained considerable leverage as an intermediary, he said.

"By restricting exports now, China is increasing risks across the global supply chain," Cheng said.

He added that Beijing has previously leveraged its position in global supply chains to exert pressure on agricultural imports from Australia, Brazil, and Taiwan.

"Now, helium has become another example," Cheng said. "China is only an intermediary, but it is using that position as a tool to influence markets and supply chains. Companies trading with authoritarian regimes need to factor these risks into their supply-chain planning."

Shen said the ultimate impact of the export restrictions will depend on how heavily individual countries rely on Chinese helium exports and whether they can secure alternative suppliers.

European countries may experience greater short-term disruptions, he said, but the move could also encourage importers to diversify their sources and reduce dependence on China.

Tang Bing, Luo Ya, and Reuters contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 13:05

Just 27.6% Of Stocks Outperform The Market While 60% Destroy Shareholder Wealth, New Study Finds

From 1926 through 2025, just 27.6% of stocks beat the broader market. Nearly 60% actually destroyed shareholder wealth, and the median stock delivered a lifetime return of -6.9%. Yet despite those sobering odds, U.S. stocks collectively created roughly $91 trillion in wealth over the last century, with just 46 companies responsible for half of it.

Those are some of the headline findings from a new study by Hendrik Bessembinder of Arizona State University's W.P. Carey School of Business, who examined the performance of nearly 30,000 U.S. stocks over the last century. The research paints a striking picture of how wealth is actually created in the stock market: while broad market indexes have generated exceptional long-term returns, the vast majority of individual stocks have failed to keep pace.

Bessembinder analyzed 29,754 publicly traded U.S. stocks between 1926 and 2025. Over that period, the overall stock market produced an annualized return of about 10.1%, turning every dollar invested into more than $15,000, according to the study, detailed in this white paper. 

But those impressive aggregate returns mask an uncomfortable reality. The typical stock fared far worse. In fact, the median stock lost 6.9% over its lifetime, fewer than half of all stocks generated a positive lifetime return, only about 41% outperformed Treasury bills during the time they were publicly traded, and just 27.6% managed to outperform the market itself.

The reason is simple: stock market returns are incredibly uneven. While any stock can fall to zero, there is effectively no limit to how much a winner can rise. Over long periods, a tiny number of extraordinary companies generate gains so large that they more than offset the thousands of stocks that stagnate, disappoint, or disappear altogether. Those rare winners account for an outsized share of the market's overall success.

Perhaps the most surprising finding is that this concentration has become even more extreme. In Bessembinder's original research covering 1926 through 2016, 89 companies accounted for half of all shareholder wealth created by the U.S. stock market. After adding the last nine years of data, total wealth creation more than doubled to roughly $91 trillion, yet the number of companies responsible for half of it fell to just 46.

At the top of the list are many of today's biggest technology names. Apple ranks first, generating more than $5 trillion in shareholder wealth, followed by Nvidia, Microsoft, Alphabet and Amazon. Collectively, those five companies account for more than one-fifth of all net wealth created by the U.S. stock market over the past century, while Apple and Nvidia alone make up more than one-tenth of the total.

The concentration becomes even more remarkable further down the data. Out of more than 29,000 companies included in the study, just 1,082, less than 4% of the total, were responsible for all of the market's net wealth creation. Meanwhile, nearly six out of every ten companies actually reduced shareholder wealth relative to simply investing in one month Treasury bills.

The study also pushes back against the idea that market legends are built on impossible annual returns. Many of history's greatest investments didn't earn 50% or 100% per year. Instead, they compounded at annual rates in the low to mid teens over extraordinarily long periods. The lesson is that consistent returns sustained over decades are often far more powerful than eye popping gains that prove impossible to maintain.

For investors, the findings reinforce one of the strongest arguments for diversification. While the stock market as a whole has created enormous wealth over the past century, identifying the relatively small group of companies that ultimately drive those returns has always been exceptionally difficult. Missing just a handful of those long-term winners can dramatically reduce investment results, which helps explain why broad index funds have consistently outperformed most active stock pickers over long horizons.

Bessembinder concludes that the tendency for a small number of companies to drive most of the market's returns is unlikely to disappear because it is a natural consequence of how returns compound over time. The bigger question, he suggests, is whether technologies like artificial intelligence will make wealth creation even more concentrated in a handful of dominant firms, or broaden the playing field enough to create the next generation of market leaders.

You can read the full white paper here.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 12:45

AI Companies Absorbing Office Space At Record Pace: Report

Authored by Rob Sabo via The Epoch Times,

Artificial intelligence (AI) firms are absorbing office space in primary markets such as San Francisco and New York City at a record pace, and the sector’s voracious demand for office space to build out development teams and products has begun spilling into a select subset of submarkets as well.

National AI office demand was up 85 percent in the 12 months through May and spiked 179 percent in major AI hubs, a new AI report published on July 9 by AI-powered commercial real estate platform VTS states.

AI companies represented office demand of 16.8 million square feet across 17 markets during the period, VTS senior research manager Rene Moreira noted.

However, three metro areas represented nearly two-thirds of total office demand from AI companies, with San Francisco—the global epicenter for AI talent and development—accounting for 25 percent.

Office properties in San Francisco and Silicon Valley, California, and New York accounted for 63 percent of all current AI leasing, Moreira said.

“San Francisco alone sits at 5 million square feet, nearly a third of the national total,” he said.

Unprecedented office demand from AI companies in San Francisco is powering the city’s office market to a modest recovery after the COVID-19 pandemic. In the second quarter of 2019, San Francisco’s office market hit a vacancy rate of 4.7 percent. Vacancy soared following work-from-home initiatives, however, reaching 30 percent in 2023 and topping out at 35.7 percent as recently as the second quarter of 2025, the City of San Francisco reported.

San Francisco’s office vacancy stood at 32.6 percent at the end of the first quarter of this year.

“San Francisco’s 81 active AI requirements average 62,000 square feet, 2.3 times the average tech requirement across all markets,” Moreira said.

The 45 active AI office lease searches in New York average 61,00 square feet each, while the 58 active searches in Silicon Valley average about 48,000 square feet, or 2.8 million square feet of office space.

Each submarket caters to different AI users, VTS noted. San Francisco is the headquarters of AI pioneers Anthropic (Claude) and OpenAI (ChatGPT), while Silicon Valley’s AI firms tend to be chip designers, hardware manufacturers, and infrastructure providers. New York’s AI companies are skewed toward enterprise-level AI firms, a nod to the city’s massive financial, legal, and media industries. AI firms in Washington, such as Anduril, Palantir, and Shield AI, serve the defense industry.

Expansion

As the industry continues to grow, other markets are likely to become AI epicenters themselves, VTS said. Expansion will hit primary office markets such as Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Austin, Texas.

Seattle has already experienced a 390 percent year-over-year spike in growth from AI-related demand, the report said, signaling that outward expansion is already underway.

“Three pressures will push demand outward: AI engineering talent is scarce, San Francisco real estate is expensive, and 25 percent of active AI demand concentrated in a single submarket will produce the crowding that pushed prior cycles outward,” VTS said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 12:25

KeyBanc Downgrades Apple On New Growth Slowdown Fears

Apple shares fell 1% in premarket trading after KeyBanc Capital Markets downgraded the iPhone maker to "Underweight" from "Sector Weight" and set a 12-month price target of $250. This implies roughly a 21% decline from Monday's close, putting the stock in bear-market territory.

The downgrade by KeyBanc analysts Brandon Nispel and John Vinh is based on a widening disconnect between Apple's valuation and its underlying growth outlook. They cite soaring memory chip prices, which are pushing iPhone, Mac, and iPad prices higher. This increases the risk of demand destruction, slower unit sales, and a softer upgrade cycle.

At roughly 35 times forward earnings, Nispel warned that Apple's valuation leaves little room for a slowdown:

We downgrade AAPL to Underweight ($250PT; 19x '27 EV/EBITDA, 27.5x PE).

Our KFLD shows Indexed Spending -2% m/m, which is below the three-year avg of +9% m/m, another month of below-trend growth.

We think expectations NT are reasonable though we see: 1) slowing iPhone builds with price increases, weak U.S. upgrades, and changing device subsidy models; 2) '27 expectations that likely need to move lower for Mac, iPad, and Wearables; and 3) as unit growth likely slows, so will the growth in Apple's user base, likely pressuring Services. At 35x PE, we think AAPL is too expensive for this to occur

In mid-June, Apple CEO Tim Cook told the WSJ in an exclusive interview that price hikes were "unavoidable" because of the memory chip crunch.

While Apple doesn't report gross profit margins for individual products, TechInsights research suggests the margin on the $1,099 iPhone 17 Pro was a tidy 47%. Based on estimated costs, to maintain that profit margin for the iPhone 18 Pro, the company would have to charge $1,371. Because the company likes standardized pricing, the starting price tag would more likely be $1,299, yielding a 44% gross profit.

Source: WSJ

And this calculation doesn't account for a potential new camera system that will also cost Apple about 50% more than previous models, according to supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. In that case, following the same math, Apple could set the starting price of the iPhone 18 Pro at $1,399, or higher.

KeyBanc's view that consumers may push back on an upgrade cycle because of rising device prices - due in part to the memory chip crunch - is not the best news ahead of the iPhone 18 Pro and foldable iPhone launches in September.

The full KeyBanc report is available to professional subscribers.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 12:20

These Are The Riskiest States To Quit Your Job In

A new study from Affordable Contractors Insurance examined labor market conditions across all 50 states to identify where workers face the greatest challenges replacing a job after voluntarily leaving one. Researchers evaluated unemployment rates, hiring activity, competition for available positions, household income, and local living costs to create an overall risk ranking.

California finished at the top of the list as the most difficult state to recover after quitting a job, followed by Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, according to Affordable Contractors Insurance. 

California's combination of a sluggish labor market and high living expenses pushed it well ahead of every other state. The report found there are roughly 1.6 unemployed workers for every available job opening, while the state's unemployment rate stands at 5.5%—the highest in the nation. Employers are also adding workers at a relatively slow pace, with monthly hiring reaching just 3% of the workforce. Meanwhile, everyday expenses remain about 40% higher than the national average, increasing the financial pressure on anyone searching for work.

The ACI data shows that Massachusetts ranked second despite boasting one of the country's highest median family incomes. Researchers found that elevated wages are offset by a cost of living nearly 50% above the U.S. average, while hiring activity trails the rest of the country. Together, those factors can quickly drain savings for workers who leave without another paycheck lined up.

New York claimed the No. 3 spot. Although unemployment is slightly lower than California's, the state continues to face relatively weak hiring alongside living costs roughly one-quarter above the national average. The study suggests those conditions make extended job searches especially expensive.

Pennsylvania landed fourth on the list largely because employers are hiring at one of the slowest rates nationwide. While the state's cost of living is more manageable than many others in the top 10, researchers found that fewer employment opportunities increase the odds of remaining out of work for longer.

New Jersey rounded out the top five. Residents benefit from relatively high household incomes, but those earnings are partially offset by elevated living expenses and an unemployment rate near 5%, creating a competitive environment for anyone entering the job market.

The rest of the top 10 includes Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and Kentucky.

At the opposite end of the rankings, North Dakota was identified as the least risky place to leave a job. The state combines one of the nation's lowest unemployment rates—2.6%—with employers hiring about 4% of the workforce each month, giving job seekers a much stronger chance of finding work quickly.

Sean O'Keefe, CEO and founder of Affordable Contractors Insurance, said workers should evaluate how competitive their field is before resigning.

One simple way to gauge the market, he said, is by reviewing similar openings on LinkedIn and seeing how many applicants they attract. If most positions are drawing hundreds of candidates, job seekers should plan for a potentially lengthy search. O'Keefe also recommends securing financial flexibility—such as increasing an overdraft limit or arranging a short-term line of credit—before leaving a job, since those options are generally easier to obtain while still employed.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 12:05

Graham's Final Mission? Trump Backs Hard-Hitting Russia Sanctions Package

Apparently the late Senator Lindsey Graham's hawkish neocon legacy will continue to reverberate from beyond the grave. The 71-year old lawmaker died Saturday night "from a brief and sudden illness" - immediately after returning from Ukraine where he had toured drone and weapons factories.

President Trump is expected to support the passage of a new bipartisan Russia sanctions package that was long spearheaded by Graham, according to CNN citing a White House official.

via Associated Press

The South Carolina senator spent years trying to finally advance it across the finish line, but the Trump administration entered the White House loudly pushing diplomacy with Moscow and the idea that a swift end to the over four-year long war could be achieved by Trump's direct mediation and negotiating prowess. The policy reached an apex with the Trumpm-Putin Alaska summit, but failed to take off from there.

Instead, the world is currently witnessing the war's biggest escalatory phase in years, especially given the nightly major Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian energy sites and infrastructure. Russia's aerial bombardment of Ukrainian cities, including on the capital, has in turn stepped up.

The sanctions legislation would be America's toughest anti-Moscow move yet, greatly expanding on the original Sanctioning Russia Act:

Rather than requiring a presidential determination that Moscow had rejected peace efforts or violated a peace agreement, many sanctions would automatically take effect within 30 days of enactment.

The revised legislation would substantially broaden sanctions beyond Russian officials and financial institutions to include investment, sovereign debt, shipping, energy exports, uranium imports, financial messaging services, and other sectors of Russia's economy.

The legislation would also authorize the president to impose steep tariffs on imports from countries that continue purchasing Russian oil, natural gas, and uranium.

Pro-Ukraine hawks are salivating, with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, having announced that passing the bill would serve as a "fitting memorial" to Graham and everything he represented.

"There can be no more fitting memorial to Lindsey, his legacy, or the causes he fought for, than to pass this legislation and realize his long-held dream of an independent and secure Ukraine," she said.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) agreed. He told reporters Monday that passing the legislation "would be a great legacy, great tribute to Lindsey."

Lindsay Graham (2022) about NATO's proxy army fighting a long war:
- "I like the structural path we are on here. As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and economic support, they will fight to the last person" pic.twitter.com/gJTDWM8YJ9

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) July 13, 2026

GOP Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio said Sunday on Face the Nation, "This bill would be an important symbolism to say, 'We're going to be with Ukraine.' And I certainly hope the Senate moves it this week." Yet such a passage is only going to more deeply embed the United States in a lose-lose proxy war with Moscow which could soon spiral dangerously into a WW3-style nuclear armed confrontation.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 11:25