Aggregator
Former CIA Director James Woolsey suffered from Havana Syndrome before his death, wife claims
Grim final photo shows 5 friends fishing moments before they all drowned in Ohio river tragedy
House Passes Defense Policy Bill That Attaches SAVE America Act
Authored by Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times,
The House of Representatives on July 22 passed a $1.15 trillion defense policy bill that attaches a key election integrity bill championed by President Donald Trump.
The tally for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was 216–212.
Six Democrats crossed the aisle to back passage of the bill, while six Republicans - among them Reps. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) - opposed the bill.
Amendments introduced by Republicans were voted on late on July 21; some of them passed and some were rejected. One amendment that passed was cutting the defense budget by 0.5 percent if the Pentagon fails an audit. The amendment, which passed by voice vote, cut funding that would go to the Treasury Department. Exempted from the amendment are military personnel, reserve personnel, National Guard troops, and Defense Health Program accounts. The Pentagon failed its eighth consecutive audit in 2025.
With the final vote, Republicans agreed to attach their election integrity bill, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act, to the defense measure following its passage. House Republicans have attached the SAVE America Act to other major bills passed this month by the lower congressional chamber and forwarded to the Senate.
The House passage comes a week after Senate Democrats blocked a procedural vote to advance the NDAA in the upper congressional chamber. The tally was 50–46, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) switched his vote from yes to no so that he could again bring up the motion to invoke cloture, which requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.
The Senate Armed Services Committee advanced the bill to the Senate floor on June 11 in a bipartisan 18–9 vote.
However, Republicans and Democrats failed to agree on top-line defense and non-defense spending levels, creating tension between the two sides.
Democrats cited the resumption of the war in Iran as a reason for their opposition to the procedural vote.
“Now the White House has formally notified Congress that hostilities have resumed, that American strikes are underway again and our forces remain positioned for more,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the floor before the vote.
“Yet Republicans want the Senate to take up the NDAA, the defense bill, as though none of this is happening.”
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said the vote was unprecedented.
“It’s unprecedented not to pass the motion to proceed on the NDAA, and it reflects a decision and a mindset on the part of ... Schumer not to cooperate at all because so much of this has been done on a bipartisan basis,” he said.
“It really is a new low.”
The $1.15 trillion measure would allocate almost $1.1 trillion to the Department of War, more than $41.14 billion to the Energy Department to manage the nation’s nuclear arsenal, and $11 billion to other defense-related activities.
The NDAA includes a 3.6 percent pay raise for all military members.
It would also fund educational agencies affected by the enrollment of military and Department of War civilian dependents.
Many House conservatives have for weeks pushed for House leaders to put pressure on the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act.
The legislation is highly favored by President Donald Trump, who has called it a “common sense” measure to require photo ID to register to vote and ensure that only eligible voters cast ballots.
Critics of the bill say that it would make it harder to vote, imposing strict requirements that would require most Americans to have either a U.S. passport or a copy of their birth certificate to vote.
Democrats in the Senate have vowed to oppose the bill, and its prospects with the upper chamber’s Republicans are unclear.
In view of these difficulties, Republicans are also pursuing passage of a grant-style program that would provide rewards for states that pursue programs similar to the SAVE America Act.
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 21:45Memphis father accused of killing 3-year-old son, stuffing body in suitcase
Sabrina Ionescu’s torrid fourth quarter leads comeback win over Sky to send Liberty into All-Star break
Gerrit Cole’s strong start goes to waste for Yankees
Lakers legend’s brutal reality check for LeBron as he keeps NBA waiting
Trendy LA sneaker boutique at center of sinister multimillion-dollar Nike theft ring
Florida town manager candidate who had sex with high schoolers arrested for violating offender registry requirements
Crumbl Cookies employee caught styling another worker’s hair in North Carolina store’s kitchen
Deutsche Bank: Humanoid Robot Market Accelerates Globally As China Ramps Production
The latest "Humanoid Robot Pulse" report from Deutsche Bank states that the global humanoid robot market is accelerating, with China, unsurprisingly, leading the race.
"The humanoid robot market is accelerating globally. China is leading in production, with government officials estimating 100,000 units of humanoid robot production in 2026, significantly higher than our expectation of ~40,000 units," analyst Iris Zheng wrote in the report.
The Hong Kong-based Deutsche Bank analyst specializes in Asia-Pacific automation and industrials, providing clients with key updates across the industry:
- Activities in the US stepping up: Agility going public through SPAC by 4Q26; Meta acquiring an embodied AI model startup; OpenAI recruiting robotics engineers; and NVIDIA expanding its robotics team in China.
- Continuing developments in China: AGIBOT accelerating production; updates from BYD and Li Auto on robotics; Alibaba unveiling robotic models; and Kepler undergoing acquisition.
- Policy updates: China to produce 100,000 humanoids in 2026; Shanghai to deploy 100,000 humanoids by 2030; the US could restrict Chinese robotics; and Japan to deploy 10mn AI robots by 2040.
- Use case: Livestreaming of humanoids working in factories and warehouses by AGIBOT and Figure.
- Emotional companion: Bionic humanoids from UBTECH and DOBOT.
More color here:
In the US, Agility Robotics utilizes a 75% locally sourced supply chain and aims to reduce the bill of materials (BOM) cost from US$125k currently to US$30k.
AGIBOT and Figure AI have livestreamed their humanoid robots working in factories and warehouses, demonstrating commercial viability.
How to profit:
This rapidly developing market indicates growing component demand, which bodes well for component manufacturers. Within our APAC Industrials coverage, we prefer Hengli (Buy, closing price RMB110.58), Shuanghuan (Buy, closing price RMB42.39), Harmonic Drive (Buy, closing price ¥7,430), and Yaskawa (Buy, closing price ¥5,490). We also highlight Tesla (Buy, closing price US$394.46) and Mobileye (Buy, closing price US$9.43) (through Mentee Robotics) as humanoid robotic OEMs in the US.
The rise of physical AI has prompted Blackstone, the world's largest alternative asset manager, to place a major bet on Futronic, an automotive supplier that has adapted its motion-control technology for use in actuators for humanoid robots.
Related:
Professional subscribers can read a lot more on humanoid robots at our new Marketdesk.ai portal.
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 21:20Livvy Dunne rocks custom Paul Skenes-themed boots for Pirates-Yankees game in New York
LeBron James delaying free agency decision for one key reason
US carrying out new wave of Iran strikes as military attacks Islamic Republic for 12th straight night
Netflix star Blake Robertson slams ex-fiancée Hayley Hendrich’s abuse allegations, claims ‘self-defense’
Netflix star Blake Robertson slams ex-fiancée Hayley Hendrich’s abuse allegations, claims ‘self-defense’
Drew Fortescue understands how important this summer is for his Rangers development
California AG Rob Bonta rigs language in Voter ID initiative
Supreme Court To Decide If Plane Can Be Seized Over 6-Pack Of Beer
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,
The U.S. Supreme Court on July 20 agreed to hear the appeal of an Alaska pilot whose small airplane was seized for attempting to haul beer into a so-called dry jurisdiction where alcohol is banned.
The court’s decision in Jouppi v. Alaska took the form of an unsigned order. No justices dissented. The court did not explain its decision.
The aircraft was subject to a legal process known as civil asset forfeiture, under which property, including a vehicle, that was used to commit a crime is deemed an instrument of the crime and can be seized.
Civil libertarians and those subject to asset forfeitures arising from criminal convictions—in addition to cases in which a person is merely suspected of a crime—have long complained that the practice can be arbitrary and excessive.
The petitioner, bush pilot Ken Jouppi, argues that Alaska’s plan to forfeit his 1969 Cessna after he unknowingly in 2012 carried beer stowed in a passenger’s luggage to Beaver, a village that bans beverage alcohol, violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against excessive fines. The state temporarily seized the plane, valued at about $95,000, but it was later returned to him pending the final disposition of the case.
Jouppi said he was familiar with Alaska’s dry village system and that he would not intentionally carry alcohol illegally, but that he does not search passengers’ luggage to look for alcohol. No law required such a search, and besides, doing so would be “invasive and demeaning,” his attorneys at the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, said in his petition.
The passenger was carrying Budweiser and Bud Light to give to her husband, who worked in Beaver. As Jouppi loaded the aircraft, state troopers searched it and discovered the beer, saying that at least a six-pack of Budweiser could be seen in a shopping bag.
The state filed charges against Jouppi, his company, and the passenger for the misdemeanor of knowingly carrying alcohol into a dry community. The passenger pled guilty. Jouppi and his company went to trial and were convicted by a state jury. He was sentenced to 180 days in jail with 177 days suspended, along with a $3,000 fine with $1,500 of it suspended, and a term of three years of probation, according to the petition.
The trial court first ruled that the forfeiture of the plane was not allowed under state law because at the time of the offense it hadn’t arrived in Beaver, so the alcohol could not be considered to have been transported there. The Alaska Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the state law required forfeiture “regardless of whether the alcoholic beverages are actually transported toward their destination.”
The case returned to the trial court, which then ruled that the forfeiture constituted an unconstitutionally excessive fine. The state appealed, and the appeals court reversed. Then the Alaska Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the forfeiture was constitutional “as a matter of law.”
The state’s dry-community law was enacted to combat alcohol abuse statewide, and the Alaska Legislature “determined that the harm from even a six-pack of beer knowingly imported into a dry village is severe enough to warrant forfeiture of an aircraft,” the Alaska Supreme Court held.
The forfeiture of the plane was “not grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense for which [Jouppi] has been convicted and, therefore, the forfeiture does not violate” the Eighth Amendment, that court ruled.
Jouppi’s lawyers urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case, saying the Alaska Supreme Court incorrectly emphasized the gravity of the offense, as opposed to the actual conduct of the defendant. The state high court’s standard is also at odds with precedents in its home federal circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the petition said.
By contrast, Alaska urged the nation’s highest court not to take up the case.
The Alaska Supreme Court’s decision was correct and adhered to existing precedent, the state said in a brief.
That court found that Jouppi saw the alcohol in the cargo and that his “general policy of willful blindness weighs against him,” and also that he failed to show that forfeiture would be “unconstitutionally excessive.”
In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that a constitutional ban on excessive fines, which Indiana had argued applies only to the federal government, applies to all U.S. states.
The decision overturned a ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court that the state was entitled to keep a 2012 Land Rover LR2 valued at $42,000 that was confiscated from Tyson Timbs.
Timbs had used the vehicle when selling a total of $385 worth of heroin to undercover police, a crime for which he was convicted. He entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to a year of house arrest and five years of probation, but no prison time.
The new case is expected to be heard in the Supreme Court’s term that begins in October. A decision is likely to follow by June or July 2027.
Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 20:55