Aggregator

Sabrina Ionescu even acknowledged at practice Wednesday that the game would be a major stress test for the Liberty’s offense.

Brasília Makes Friends With Beijing

Authored by Jake Scott via FEE,

On a Sunday night in late July, Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and China's Xi Jinping spoke for more than an hour. It was cordial and faintly triumphant, with the two governments announcing their intention to accelerate a long-stalled China-Mercosur trade agreement. Alongside this, there are plans to deepen cooperation on satellites and critical-minerals processing, and waive short-stay visa requirements.

Image Credit: Custom image by FEE

This marks a serious change for Brazil. For years, it was Brasília that had spearheaded all resistance to exactly this sort of deal within the Mercosur bloc. The reversal was as sudden as it was shocking, taking only a fortnight to emerge, following a new American tariff taking effect and the Brazilian president deciding that the cost of alignment with the United States had, at last, exceeded its benefits.

Confronted with a United States that has moved from partner to antagonist, Brazil sees itself as neither retaliating in kind nor capitulating; it is hedging, deliberately, on several fronts at once. For many observers, this is a rational reaction to the emergence of an increasingly multipolar world. But just under a century ago, this practice had a name: "pragmatic equidistance." It was the way Brazil described its international strategy of balancing relationships with competing powers without committing to either.

The ongoing and escalating international trade war fueled by retaliatory tariffs has been the main catalyst here. In late July, a 25% tariff covering a broad range of Brazilian goods came into effect; per the Brazilian National Confederation of Industry's reckoning, nearly half of all Brazilian exports to the United States are now subject to some form of additional duty. Alongside the general tariffs, a "forced-labor" levy of 12.5% was introduced by the US to enforce bans on importing goods made with forced labor abroad, which in many ways represents a globalization of America's existing ban on Chinese goods using forced labor.

It is estimated that the hardest-hit goods carry a combined tariff of 37.5%.

President Lula's response has been to reframe the introduction of these tariffs as Washington's error rather than Brazil's, calling the tariffs a "strategic mistake" in the Washington Post, and warning that the tariffs will drive Brazilian firms to replace their American suppliers with partners elsewhere.

The rhetoric is only part of it, though: Brazil has filed for consultations with the World Trade Organization to challenge both the broad tariffs and the forced-labor levy as breaches of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The effectiveness of these consultations is up for debate given the WTO's general paralysis, but what matters more is what this reveals for Brazil's international-relations strategy: it is pragmatic equidistance on display. Brazil has filed the complaint with the WTO, while continuing negotiations with the US.

Meanwhile, Brazil is attempting to hedge its bets by engaging with the wider global economy. This month, ApexBrasil (the Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency) has launched a R$105 million ($20.5 million) program to support just shy of 2,500 exporters across 57 industries in their search for new markets, including the EU, Southeast Asia, and Central Asia.

Simultaneously, the Mercosur bloc is actively pursuing parallel deals with India, Japan, and Canada, with Brazil at the heart of this strategy. Lula has enacted the Mercosur-Singapore agreement, the bloc's first with a Southeast Asian economy, under which Brazilian exports will progressively enter duty-free.

What is also interesting is what the imposition of these tariffs has meant for Lula at home. Many Brazilians read the tariff regime as a direct attempt to influence the Brazilian elections that are due to take place in October 2026, which in turn has allowed Lula to cast himself as a defender of Brazil's sovereignty against foreign interference. This strategy has borne fruit: Lula's polling has remained steady in the mid-40s, while Flávio Bolsonaro-the only other major contender-has seen his popularity steadily decline since April 2026, meaning Lula's lead has slowly widened.

It may not have helped Bolsonaro that his presidential bid launch saw him flanked by Javier Milei and Benjamin Netenyahu, with few Brazilian politicians in the room. International campaigning is increasingly common, but in a climate skeptical of foreign interference, that move may have been more than a little tone-deaf, especially given the increasingly strained relations between Argentina and Brazil.

Not only this, but when the US sent election officials to verify the integrity of Brazil's electoral system, their visas were simply denied. For a public that is heavily resistant to the sense of being managed from abroad, this was a message that landed exactly in the way it was needed to.

Most notable, however, is Brazil's attempt to sidestep all of this via improved trade relations between the Mercosur bloc and China. Of course, Mercosur is a customs union, and so all members must negotiate jointly-which is why a proposed China agreement has been formally proposed and "under study" since around 2017. In this, Brazil had been the brake, while Uruguay had spent years advocating for the trade agreement, and pursuing its own China talks whilst the other Mercosur members stalled.

In January 2023, Lula traveled to Montevideo to argue that Mercosur should secure an EU deal first, and only then negotiate with China. With this deal signed in Asunción in January 2026-after 26 years of negotiations-and coming into effect in Brazil in April, the roadblock had been cleared. At least, on Brasília's end: Argentina's President Javier Milei is ideologically opposed to China, and will likely veto any deal pursued by Mercosur. China is already Brazil's largest trading partner, with bilateral trade valued at $188 billion, and a deal could meet Brazil's other strategic interests, such as widening agricultural access.

Regardless, Brazil has been hedging its international trade relations with careful maneuvering, and in the long run, this may be the smart move.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 22:35

You can’t impose costs on one business and then allow a competing business to avoid them in the name of entrepreneurship. This isn’t compassion or “business-friendly” policy; we all know it’s just pandering.

For one night, a Yankees offense that had been emerging disappeared.

The supermodel's ageless looks had jaws dropping.

The supermodel's ageless looks had jaws dropping.

One thing offensive coordinator Frank Reich said he is not worried about is the lack of a veteran quarterback to help Geno Smith along. 

As great as Myles Garret is, even he has idols he looks up to. Garrett appeared as a guest on “Boardroom Talks,” and listed former Los Angeles Lakers Hall of Famer Kobe Bryant as someone he constantly studies. “You get to see the duality of it,” Garrett said. “You have [Lawrence Taylor], you have Kobe,...

A maniac with 33 prior busts stabbed a city schools worker to death and repeatedly slashed his buddy during an unhinged attack on a Bronx street on Wednesday, cops and sources said.

The "Gimme More" hitmaker was released from a 13-year conservatorship in 2021.

The "Gimme More" hitmaker was released from a 13-year conservatorship in 2021.

Jury Weighs Whether "Darn Good Mother" Lindsay Clancy Is Criminally Liable For Murdering Her 3 Kids

Jury deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial started on Aug. 27 after five weeks of testimony.

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, is accused of killing her three young children while her now-ex-husband was running errands in January 2023.

The 36-year-old mother faces three counts of first-degree murder, one for each child: Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan.

Judge William Sullivan gave the jury the option to instead consider second-degree murder or manslaughter.

Only a few hours of deliberations happened before Sullivan ordered a recess until 9 a.m. on Friday at the Plymouth Superior Court in Plymouth, Massachusetts.

No verdict was reached on Thursday.

In his closing argument on Aug. 27, Jacki Thrapp reports for The Epoch Times, that defense attorney Kevin Reddington urged jurors to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, alleging that “her mind was gone” during the killings and said she was in the throes of postpartum psychosis.

“This young lady is not guilty of the killing of her children because she was suffering from a disease and defect, as his honor instructed you,” Reddington told jurors in closing arguments.

“And they’re not going to be able to prove otherwise.”

Additionally, Reddington describved the accused murderer by saying: "This young lady did nothing wrong in her life. She was… a darn good mother."

Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney:

“This young lady did nothing wrong in her life. She was… a darn good mother.” pic.twitter.com/mL03GAuHlg

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) August 27, 2026

Clancy admitted to strangling her kids with exercise bands in the basement of their home in a coastal Boston suburb, slicing her wrists and neck with a knife, and jumping out of a window in a failed suicide attempt, which left her paralyzed.

Her now-ex-husband, Patrick, said that months before the incident, the mother told him she was having thoughts of suicide and harming their kids.

Clancy was also prescribed medications and checked into a psychiatric hospital ahead of the incident.

Her then-husband testified that Clancy had a “normal” demeanor when he left to run errands that day.

When he returned, he found his injured wife, who informed him that the kids were in the basement.

Clancy detailed what happened in a call with him a week after the incident, he said.

“She heard a man’s voice telling her that if she didn’t do ​it now, she would lose her chance or something like that,” he testified.

Prosecutors acknowledged that Clancy suffered from mental health issues but said she carried out the killings while knowing it was wrong.

“This case is not about our mental health system or how it treats women,” Assistant ​District Attorney Jennifer Sprague told jurors.

“That’s a distraction to get you angry and passionate about an important issue, but an issue that’s not on trial here.”

Clancy faces life in prison with no possibility of parole if she is convicted on any of the first-degree murder charges she faces.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 22:10

Shaquille O'Neal opened up about what added bonus convinced him to sign with the Lakers.

Al Michaels showed that he is tapped into the United States’ current events.

Jose Miranda stopped by a laundromat in The Bronx to wash his clothes one hot August day two years ago, and was hacked to death, randomly, by a maniac with a meat cleaver.

The 77-year-old highly respected pitching mind who spent eight years as the Astros pitching coach, is headed back to the organization to work as a pitching consultant for the remainder of the season. 

ATLANTA — Dodgers manager Dave Roberts said he was “not too concerned” on Thursday afternoon. That even amid his team’s latest stumble, he still knows “we’ve got a good ballclub.” Lately, however, one opponent after another has shown there might be plenty of others that are better. Because, after getting shut out by Chris Sale...

California is now among a shrinking group of states where cocktails to-go remain a temporary measure.

States Race To Cut Food Stamp Errors Before Penalties Kick In

Authored by Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times,

States are racing to reduce faulty payments to food stamp recipients, in a bid to avoid penalties included in the signature budget bill passed by Republicans last year.

Starting in October 2027, states with payment error rates of 6 percent or higher must cover 5, 10, or 15 percent of SNAP benefit costs, depending on the payment error rate.

Even though the deadline is more than a year out, enrollment in the program has dropped by more than 5 million recipients as a result of the stricter rules, according to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.

Forty-one states and the District of Columbia made improper payments of more than 6 percent in 2025, according to the Department of Agriculture. Nearly half of states will have to pay more than $100 million in penalties, according to publicly available federal data.

Just nine states fell below the 6 percent error threshold in the 2025 fiscal year: Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Nebraska, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Four states are considering dropping the food stamp program entirely as a result of the new rules, according to a survey by the American Public Human Services Association.

California, New York, and Florida would be responsible for more than $1 billion in SNAP costs if they failed to reduce their rates of erroneous payments. Texas would owe around $750 million.

For several states, however, a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill delays the cost-sharing requirement for an additional two years. Nicknamed "the Alaska Carveout," the provision allows states with improper payment rates of 13.34 percent or higher in fiscal 2025 to put off the cost-sharing requirement until fiscal 2029.

Similarly, states exceeding that threshold in fiscal 2026 can put off cost-sharing until fiscal 2030.

In addition to next year's deadline, beginning this October, states will bear 75 percent of the costs to administer the food stamp program.That's up from the 50 percent share paid by states since the program was started in 1964.

The tighter rules address a "financing mismatch" in the food stamp program, according to the Cato Institute, a policy research organization. For decades, states have processed SNAP applications and distributed benefits, while financial consequences have fallen overwhelmingly on federal taxpayers. That gives states little incentive to control waste and prevent fraud.

SNAP payment errors totaled more than $10 billion in 2025. More than 87 percent of that amount was due to overpayments.

A sign indicates that a store accepts SNAP benefits in Miami on April 21, 2026. Joe Raedle/Getty Images 'Significant Waste'

SNAP is a federally funded program, administered by the states, that provides food benefits to low-income families. In 2025, federal taxpayers spent about $103 billion on SNAP benefits and nearly $7 billion in administrative fees.

With an overall error rate of 10.6 percent, nearly one in nine food stamp allotments went to an ineligible recipient or was paid in the wrong amount.

State agencies made improper payments mainly because they did not verify recipients' eligibility criteria, such as citizenship, employment, finances, identity, residency, and household size, before making a payment, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Although the 2025 error rate decreased slightly from previous years, it still showed "significant waste" at the state level, according to a June statement from the Department of Agriculture.

Errors can stem from either state agencies or recipients. While state agencies can make mistakes when updating recipient information or processing payments, recipients may also forget to report income changes or additional family members.

Those are "honest mistakes" rather than intentional fraud, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said in a July report. Even so, the errors prove that "state accountability is severely lacking in SNAP," Rollins said in a June statement.

People line up to receive free food during a Thanksgiving food giveaway at Shiloh Mercy House in Oakland, Calif., on Nov. 24, 2025. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

After the One Big Beautiful Bill Act took effect in July 2025, participation in the food stamp program dropped 12 percent-more than 5 million-to 37 million this April, according to Department of Agriculture data released in July.

Rollins attributed the decline to the administration's crackdown on fraud and ineligible recipients.

The downward trend may continue, as 11 states reported that they may narrow eligibility policies when costs change.

State Response

Error rates might not reflect the true picture of how a state distributes money, historical reports suggest.

A 2015 audit by the Office of Inspector General found that states hired outside consultants and error review committees to mitigate individual errors identified by quality control, rather than addressing the root causes of eligibility inaccuracies.

And in 2014, the Department of Agriculture could not validate state-reported error rates in 42 of 53 state agencies because of date-quality issues.

Nonetheless, a July survey of 39 states from the American Public Human Services Association found that agencies across the country are "working incredibly hard" to reduce error rates by addressing root causes.

States reported that they will invest in workforce training, root-cause analysis, and technology upgrades to improve payment accuracy.

Virginia, which would face 15 percent cost-sharing based on its 2025 errors, has stopped self-attestation of eligibility since the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed.

It previously allowed applicants to self-report expenses and incomes.

President Donald Trump shows his signature on the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” at the White House on July 4, 2025. Since the bill took effect, participation in the food stamp program dropped 12 percent, according to Department of Agriculture data released in July. Brendan Smialowski/Pool/ AFP via Getty Images

Louisiana is offering a $1,500 bonus to staff who maintain an error rate of 4 percent or lower.

The agency is also automating checks on household income to reduce unintentional errors, which account for 62 percent of the state's inaccuracies, according to the think tank Invest in Louisiana.

Mississippi is updating its 35-year-old eligibility systems to ensure program integrity, according to the Mississippi Department of Human Services.

Minnesota is investing millions of dollars to modernize decades-old technology used to administer state programs, according to the Minnesota House of Representatives.

Each change suggests that new financial accountability rules are making a difference, according to the American Enterprise Institute.

Workers and volunteers help distribute food boxes at a drive-through food distribution facility, in response to a federal government shutdown and SNAP/CalFresh food benefits delays, in City of Industry, Calif., on Nov. 5, 2025. Mario Tama/Getty Images

The American Public Human Services Association survey reported trade-offs for increased accuracy, including timeliness of benefit payments and a delay in EBT chip card implementation.

And four states indicated that they may drop out of SNAP altogether or pause participation in the program as a result of the cost-sharing provisions. The survey report did not disclose which states are considering dropping out of the program.

The American Public Human Services Association did not respond to a request for comment.

The 'Alaska Carveout'

Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, states with error rates at 13.34 percent or higher will secure a two-year delay in cost sharing. The "Alaska Carveout" provision was negotiated and secured by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) prior to voting on the budget bill.

In a July 2025 letter to Alaskans, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said the state had worked hard to include delayed cost-sharing in the act because it had the highest payment error rate in the country.

The provision currently affects six states and the District of Columbia. Those include Alaska, New Mexico, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, and Oregon.

But the exemption may precipitate a reverse effect by rewarding the worst-performing states while penalizing those working to reduce their error rates, according to a July report from the Cato Institute.

To delay penalties, states could slow efforts in correcting errors and keep improper payment rates elevated, according to the think tank.

Data Sharing

In an effort to overhaul fraud, waste, and abuse in government programs, the Trump administration is pushing to codify data sharing between states and the federal government.

"We need to know where your tax dollars are going, and if the state of California and the state of New York aren't going to tell us, we need Congress to force them to tell us," Vice President JD Vance told a fraud task force roundtable on Aug. 5.

Technological verification and data-sharing measures can solve the majority of integrity problems in government programs, said Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 21:45

Santa Monica needs a turnaround, and stat. Police presence alone won’t fix years of decline caused in part by a permissive, radical and at times looney-tunes City Council.