Skip to main content
The FYCKL Project
No AI. No Bull.

Main navigation

  • Home
User account menu
  • Log in

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Aggregator
  3. Sources

Zero Rss

2.3 Million Illegals Gone: America's Immigrant Population Plummets For First Time In A Century

Zero Rss
3 weeks 2 days ago
2.3 Million Illegals Gone: America's Immigrant Population Plummets For First Time In A Century

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

The numbers the open-borders crowd swore were impossible are now in black and white.

A new Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey finds the illegal immigrant population has fallen by about 2.3 million since President Trump returned to office in January 2025. Another 600,000 legal immigrants have left. The total foreign-born population is down 2.9 million.

That is the first sustained drop in America's immigrant population in nearly a hundred years.

?? BREAKING — IT'S OFFICIAL: The illegal alien population in the United States has DROPPED by 2,300,000 under President Trump.

Another 600,000 LEGAL immigrants have LEFT the country, marking the largest reduction in the U.S. Immigrant population in a CENTURY!

"We are seeing... pic.twitter.com/xVkO8Y6OCk

— The Patriot Oasis™ (@ThePatriotOasis) September 4, 2026

CIS research director Steven A. Camarota and demographer Karen Zeigler tracked the government's monthly household survey from January 2025 through July 2026. The foreign-born total - naturalized citizens, lawful permanent residents, long-term temporary visitors and illegal immigrants - fell from roughly 53.3 million to 50.5 million.

Camarota's preliminary estimate puts the illegal population at 13.5 million in July, down from 15.8 million when Trump took the oath.

"We've never seen anything quite like this before," Camarota told The Washington Times. "This is big and sustained, as best as we can tell."

He added: "It is a fundamental change, and it's profound."

The same dataset shows what happened during the Biden years. From January 2021 to January 2025 the foreign-born population jumped 8.3 million - the largest four-year increase in American history.

Catch-and-release, mass parole, asylum abuse and a wide-open southern border did exactly what critics said they would do. The survey now shows that surge going into reverse.

CIS is not counting plane seats. It is measuring net change: new arrivals minus deportations, voluntary departures, legalizations and deaths. That is why the 2.3 million illegal decline can sit beside larger Homeland Security departure figures.

At the one-year mark of Trump's second term, DHS said nearly 3 million illegal immigrants had left the country, including about 675,000 formal removals and 2.2 million self-deportations. CIS is looking at who is still here after new arrivals are subtracted.

Latin American non-citizens who arrived in 1980 or later account for the entire drop in the foreign-born count. That group overlaps heavily with the illegal population. Naturalized-citizen numbers actually rose by about 680,000 over the same stretch. The collapse is among non-citizens who should not have been waved in.

Interior ICE removals more than tripled compared with the tail end of the Biden term. Voluntary departures tied to enforcement jumped as well. Camarota put it simply in the CIS release: "The best data we have shows an enormous decrease in the total foreign-born population, with most of the falloff among illegal immigrants."

He added, "Regaining control of the border and robust interior enforcement has partly undone the huge increase in the illegal immigration that took place during the border surge."

Only 44 percent of those who left were workers. That goes some way to explain why the national jobs numbers have not imploded the way corporate lobbyists predicted. U.S.-born employment has continued to rise even as immigrant workers in the household survey fell by a little less than 1.3 million. Some regional pockets - construction in South Texas is the example Camarota cited - have felt it. The country as a whole has not.

"It's nothing to panic about," he told the Times. "First of all, we're mostly losing low-income workers. But like anything else, it can create challenges. And it creates winners and losers."

Workers competing for jobs and housing are the winners. "On balance, I think it's a good deal for the country because I think most people are more worried about wages, housing prices, congestion and impact on schools and hospitals."

Census analysts had already flagged a "historic" drop in net international migration when they reported that overall population growth slowed to 0.5 percent from mid-2024 to mid-2025 - a window that captured only the first months of the new enforcement regime.

Camarota now says the country's total population is likely heading toward an unprecedented decline. That is what happens when an 8.3 million artificial surge is no longer being pumped through the border.

The media spent four years insisting the border was "secure" and that anyone who noticed otherwise was a bigot. Then Joe Scarborough, trying to score points on Trump's deportation totals, walked straight into the truth on his own show.

"They should know when to take the victory. They could have been campaigning on closed southern border this whole time!" Scarborough said. Then: "You're never going to get the [deportation] numbers that Joe Biden had, right? You're not going to get those numbers because Joe Biden and his administration were letting in so many illegal immigrants. It was very easy to sweep up 5,000 right on the border and send them back."

Nobody cornered him. He said it unprompted.

That is the whole scam in one clip. Biden-era "removals" were a revolving door at the Rio Grande. Trump closed the door. Crossings collapsed. The population inside the country started falling for the first time in a generation. The same networks that called that outcome "impossible" or "racist" are now reduced to quibbling over methodology while the survey they usually treat as gospel shows a 2.9 million decline.

The drop did not happen by accident. It happened because the new administration treated Temporary Protected Status as what it had become: a backdoor amnesty, not a temporary shelter.

A late Biden-era internal memo, exposed in July, laid out a plan to expand TPS in the final days of that presidency in a way that would have locked in de facto protection for more than 3 million foreign nationals and boxed the incoming administration into years of litigation. The scheme was designed to run out the clock through activist courts after voters had already chosen mass deportations.

Trump's team has been ripping that wiring out. The Supreme Court cleared the path to end TPS for Haitians and Syrians. Extensions that were never meant to be permanent are being terminated where the statute allows. The people who wrote that memo were not confused about the election result. They were trying to cancel it with paperwork.

Once TPS for Haitians lapsed, ICE moved from roughly one deportation flight a month to a weekly schedule. Internal documents reported by The New York Times described the ramp-up after the Court allowed the humanitarian program to be cancelled. Flights into Cap-Haïtien have already carried criminals alongside other removable aliens. DHS has publicly flagged deportees with records that include sex crimes involving children.

The press response was automatic. Outlets that spent years ignoring gang control of Port-au-Prince suddenly discovered Haiti the week shackled men appeared on a Homeland Security video walking onto a plane. The spin is always the same: enforcement is the crisis, not the policy that imported hundreds of thousands of people the statute never contemplated as permanent residents.

Haiti is violent. That is not an argument for turning Temporary Protected Status into a forever visa. It is an argument for not running a four-year parole-and-release machine that dumped the consequences on Springfield, New York, and South Florida while daring anyone to notice.

The same enforcement machine is now using third-country removals for people whose home governments will not take them back, or who have withholding orders that bar return to a specific country but not removal from the United States.

Over a ten-day stretch in late August, internal documents obtained by CBS News showed three ICE flights carrying more than 100 deportees to eight African countries: Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Liberia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. Nationals on those flights included people from Afghanistan, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Nepal, Turkey and Venezuela - not just Africans being sent "home."

Liberia has publicly agreed to take a large number of third-country deportees. Equatorial Guinea has already received dozens. Rights groups and legacy outlets have filled pages with horror copy about Level 4 travel advisories and "chain refoulement." What they will not say is why these flights exist: years of catch-and-release created a population of people with final orders who cannot be dumped back on a country that refuses the plane.

If a judge bars return to Caracas or Kabul, that order is about that country. It is not a lifetime lease in Houston. The prior administration built the backlog. This one is draining it.

DHS, asked for comment on the Times piece, sent an earlier release on collapsed border crossings. That is the other half of the story. You cannot shrink a 15.8 million illegal population if 10,000 more people walk in every week. Trump stopped the inflow first. Then he started removing the stock.

For four years the line was that immigration was a force of nature. "Root causes." Climate. Violence. Poverty. Anything except the obvious: if you fly people in, parole them, hand them a court date years out and dare ICE to find them in a sanctuary city, they stay. If you seal the border, end the parole pipelines, revoke the TPS expansions and put officers in the interior, they leave.

Jim Jordan put the prior era in one sentence at a recent hearing: a systematic plan to open the border, park millions in sanctuary jurisdictions, and then starve the agency that removes them. Voters watched it. They voted against it. The CPS is now recording the result.

The remaining illegal population is still enormous. CIS's 13.5 million is a decline, not a victory lap. DHS has used higher starting estimates than CIS. Either way, millions of people with no right to be in the US are still there. The difference is that the direction of travel has changed for the first time since the Depression.

Employers who built business models on an endless supply of illegal labor will complain. School districts that padded enrollment will complain. NGOs that lived on the casework will complain. Networks that spent half a decade calling enforcement a moral panic will complain loudest of all, then run another Haiti-video segment and call it news.

The households competing for apartments, emergency-room beds and entry-level wages are not complaining. They are watching the first government in a generation treat the immigration statutes as if they were written to be enforced.

America is not a holding pen for the Western Hemisphere. It is not a third-country processing hub with a welfare office attached. The survey data now shows what happens when a president acts like that is true: the illegal population falls, legal inflows tighten, and the foreign-born total drops by millions in eighteen months.

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 Sat, 09/05/2026 - 09:20
Tyler Durden

Alarm Bells Ring As Global Food Prices Hit 2022 Highs, Perfect Storm Stokes New Inflation Shock

Zero Rss
3 weeks 2 days ago
Alarm Bells Ring As Global Food Prices Hit 2022 Highs, Perfect Storm Stokes New Inflation Shock

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization's global food-commodity index climbed in August to its highest level since 2022, with the index now gaining momentum to the upside. The upside reinforces warnings from several major Wall Street desks, which we have covered extensively, that global food shortages could materialize next year.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) Food Price Index, which tracks monthly changes in the international prices of a basket of globally traded food commodities, averaged 133.3 in August, up 1.9% from July, with every major category advancing. Sugar prices surged 11.9%, while wheat gained 2.6% and now stands 15% above year-ago levels.

The surge in global food prices comes as a perfect storm of factors emerges, from El Niño and higher fertilizer and diesel prices to disruptions in the Black Sea and the Strait of Hormuz, all of which could push the global food system toward another crisis.

Earlier this week, the Bloomberg Agriculture Spot Index (BCOMAGSP) posted its largest monthly gain since the chaotic days of the Arab Spring riots and is nearing a breakout above its 2023 highs, signaling a broad-based acceleration in agricultural commodity prices.

Latest coverage:

  • Barclays Warns Next Commodity Shock Is Taking Shape: What You Need To Know
  • Agricultural Commodity Prices Break Out As JPMorgan's Food Crisis Warning Gets Louder

With diesel at record highs to end the week, agricultural markets tightening, and global food prices accelerating, another inflationary impulse is quickly moving through global supply chains just as central banks decide whether interest rates are restrictive enough.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 08:45
Tyler Durden

Mistrial Formally Declared In Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial After State Supremes Refuse Stay

Zero Rss
3 weeks 2 days ago
Mistrial Formally Declared In Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial After State Supremes Refuse Stay

Update (1505ET): The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied an emergency stay Friday afternoon in the Lindsay Clancy case, after which the judge formally declared a mistrial. 

JUST IN - Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt is hearing Lindsay Clancy's defense appeal to stay the mistrial judgement. pic.twitter.com/zOiGYlY9gv

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) September 4, 2026

Clancy, a former labor-and-delivery nurse, is charged with first-degree murder in the January 2023 strangling deaths of her three children (ages 5, 3, and 8 months) in Duxbury. The defense argued she was not criminally responsible due to postpartum psychosis.

🚨 JUST IN: The Lindsay Clancy prosecution has ALREADY told the court they WILL be re-trying this case

Lindsay WILL NOT walk free (or walk at all). It's looking like it'll occur later in the fall.

Clancy remains in custody, and the next hearing is Sept. 29th. pic.twitter.com/58aPmVJyie

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 4, 2026

* * *

Update (1226ET): After the jury remained deadlocked following 36 hours of deliberations over seven days, Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder case - however he's given the defense one hour to seek a stay from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

Judge says he will give Reddington one hour to get a stay from the Supreme Judicial Court.
MISTRIAL ON HOLD in Lindsay Clancy case.

— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) September 4, 2026

Why would the defense want a stay of a mistrial? Because if they can instead force the holdout juror to be removed, they avoid a brand new trial and Clancy will go free. 

"This is really intense. Reddington asked for emergency Supreme Judicial Court intervention moments before the jury walked back in," reports NewsNation's Brian Entin.

Developing...

* * *

Update (1135ET): A mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy case on Friday, after a holdout juror refused to bend the knee and let her off, Fox News' Bill Melugin reports.

BREAKING: Judge declares mistrial in Lindsay Clancy murder case after hung jury.

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) September 4, 2026

* * *

Lindsay Clancy's defense team is absolutely melting down after Judge William Sullivan refused to remove a holdout juror in Clancy's triple-murder trial, in which the jury must decide whether Clancy is criminally responsible for strangling her three children, Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months. Her defense claims that she was suffering from hallucinations amid postpartum psychosis. The prosecution claims she was not in psychosis when she sent her husband out of the house on long errands, before she murdered her children and then tried to make it appear as though she attempted suicide. 

Reuters

On Thursday, the jury foreperson sent a note indicating one juror was refusing to apply the judge’s instructions on reasonable doubt. Judge William Sullivan questioned each juror individually at sidebar, then gave the full panel what defense attorney Kevin Reddington later called a "soft" reminder of the law and sent them back to deliberate.

"They’ve said at this point that they can," Sullivan said. "That was specifically addressed towards the specific question, and that’s what I’m doing."

Reddington demanded that the holdout to be removed, and requested a more pointed inquiry - which Sullivan declined. 

JUST IN: Lindsay Clancy stares at the jury as Judge William Sullivan sends them home for the day.

The moment came shortly after Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, fumed and called on Sullivan to remove one of the jurors. https://t.co/r7g6JPmXyM pic.twitter.com/32z5efMIKP

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 3, 2026

According to Clancy's defense team, the holdout juror is a man. 

"Clearly, we have a person who, under their oath, stood in front of you yesterday … under oath looked you in the eye and lied," said Reddington. "That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law to the facts as you asked him."

Reuters

When court resumed Friday, Reddington hammered Sullivan, arguing that the prior instruction was inadequate, and pressed again for removal or further questioning of the juror (whom he accused of having lied under oath). Sullivan refused additional inquiry, stating he had considered the issue at length and would not remove the juror. Redding responded by calling Sullivan 'soft' - to which Sullivan replied: "What do you want me to do?! Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the Massachusetts Supreme Court. The fact I perhaps did not give it my full inflection, I'm sorry about that, I'm not an actor - I'm giving instruction.

🚨 BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is MELTING DOWN in court and DIRECTLY SPARRING with the judge, calling the judge "SOFT"

DEFENSE: Stop being soft with jury instructions!

JUDGE: What do you want me to do?! Get a BRASS BAND?! I read the instruction as written by the… pic.twitter.com/dijDZAdqzG

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 4, 2026 No More Sidebars!

Following the spat, Clancy's defense team filed a motion to Sullivan asking that there be no more sidebars for the remainder of the trial - and that all further proceedings be handled in open court. The prosecution, meanwhile, suggested that there be no further questioning of the jury, and asked that Sullivan send them to continue deliberations, arguing that the holdout juror has "no indication of lack of impartiality or bias or extraneous influence, and no indication of inability to deliberate."

Reddington disagreed - arguing that the juror appears to have a personal issue getting in the way of him being able to deliberate fairly, and demanded that he be replaced with an alternate. 

According to Massachusetts law, a judge can only send a jury back for deliberations twice before declaring a mistrial - which looks like where we're headed.

//--> //--> //--> Lindsay Clancy convicted of murder?
Yes 9% · No 92%
View full market & trade on Polymarket Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 08:33
Tyler Durden

Ukraine Pushes Congress For Russia Sanctions Before Election Recess

Zero Rss
3 weeks 2 days ago
Ukraine Pushes Congress For Russia Sanctions Before Election Recess

Authored by RFE/RL staff via OilPrice.com,

Ukraine's top sanctions official says he remains optimistic about prospects for a sweeping Russia sanctions bill in the US Congress despite growing uncertainty over when the House of Representatives will take it up, as lawmakers face a sharply shortened legislative calendar ahead of the November elections.

Vladyslav Vlasiuk, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's sanctions commissioner, spent this week in Washington meeting lawmakers and congressional staff as Kyiv presses Congress to advance the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026.

The legislation passed the Senate on August 7 by an overwhelming 86-11 vote, reflecting rare bipartisan agreement. The bill would give the president additional authority to impose punitive tariffs on countries that continue buying Russian fossil fuels. It also includes provisions targeting Iran, which Vlasiuk said is engaged in close military-industrial cooperation with Moscow.

But the measure faces a more complicated path in the House, where some Democrats have expressed reservations about provisions that would give President Donald Trump additional authority to impose tariffs.

Republican leaders announced on September 3 that the final two weeks of the pre-election House session are canceled, severely curtailing what had been a full legislative calendar for September.

House members are expected to leave Washington no later than September 17 and not return until mid-November. The House will reconvene for one additional week of business after next week's Labor Day break.

The compressed calendar has increased pressure on supporters of the sanctions legislation. Senior Republican aides told RFE/RL that the bill remains a GOP priority, provided Democrats "get their ducks in a row."

Democratic aides, in response to RFE/RL inquiries, expressed cautious optimism about the measure, underscoring uncertainty over whether Speaker Mike Johnson will bring it to the floor.

Vlasiuk: 'Good Chance'

Vlasiuk said he held roughly 20 meetings with lawmakers and congressional staff during his Washington visit, including discussions with members of both parties.

He said the Ukrainian delegation encountered broad support for increasing pressure on Russia and that no lawmaker told him outright that they would oppose the legislation.

"Everyone agreed that it was necessary to increase pressure on Russia," Vlasiuk said at a briefing at the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington. "No one said that he definitely would not support this bill."

He described Ukraine as "quite optimistic" about the level of support for the legislation, including among Democrats.

One potentially important route would be for the House to consider the bill under suspension of the rules, a fast-track procedure generally used for legislation expected to command broad support. Vlasiuk said that was among the realistic scenarios for moving the bill forward.

"I think that there is really good chance that this bill will be brought onto the floor," he said.

Vlasiuk has previously identified the week after next as Kyiv's preferred window for a House vote. With the House calendar now compressed, that period could provide one of the last opportunities for a vote before lawmakers leave Washington.

Asked by RFE/RL whether the momentum surrounding the bill was still there, Vlasiuk pointed to what he characterized as continued bipartisan backing for Ukraine.

"There is a lot of support for Ukraine on the Hill," he said, adding that Kyiv has been "very vocal" in stressing the urgency of passing the bill. "At the same time, well, I mean, let's wait and see," Vlasiuk said.

Democrats Wary Of Trump Powers

The principal obstacle is not broad disagreement over confronting Russia, according to Thomas Melia, a former senior State Department official and Senate Foreign Relations Committee deputy staff director who is currently with the Free Russia Foundation.

In an interview with RFE/RL, Melia explained that Democratic leaders have several reasons for hesitating. One is that the legislation is not strictly necessary for the administration to impose sanctions, he said. Trump already possesses significant authority to sanction Russian individuals and entities.

The bill's principal value, in Melia's assessment, is therefore partly political and symbolic: Its bipartisan backing would demonstrate congressional resolve to increase pressure on Moscow.

But Melia said the House Democratic leadership was not sufficiently involved in negotiating the version that ultimately emerged from the Senate.

That concern is particularly relevant to Representative Gregory Meeks of New York, the senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who has expressed general support for tougher pressure on Russia but has raised concerns about provisions of the legislation.

There is also a substantive concern: The final version of the legislation gives the president additional tariff authority. Melia said that has created hesitation among Democrats who are wary of giving Trump another instrument that could be used broadly against US trading partners.

Melia also emphasized another change from the bill's earlier form: The final version makes the sanctions optional rather than mandatory.

That distinction matters, he said, because the original legislation's political force came in part from its mandatory sanctions provisions and overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate.

After the death of Senator Lindsey Graham, the administration backed a version of the legislation but sought changes that made sanctions nonmandatory and added tariff authority, Melia said.

The result, in his view, is a weaker measure than the original. Melia said the final version nevertheless retains substantial political significance because of the broad bipartisan support that surrounded the tougher proposal.

Kyiv Backs Tariffs

Vlasiuk defended the tariff provisions, arguing that they could make sanctions substantially more effective. "This is a powerful instrument which will allow to amplify the effect of the sanctions," he said.

He argued that tariffs and sanctions can have similar economic effects but differ in their ability to be circumvented.

"Sanctions can be adapted, sanctions can be evaded, tariffs cannot be adapted or evaded," Vlasiuk said.

He also rejected concerns that countries could be arbitrarily targeted under the bill, saying the legislation establishes criteria based on purchases of Russian fossil fuels.

In particular, he pointed to China and India, which Ukraine considers central to Russia's continued ability to sell its energy exports.

Vlasiuk said the pressure could represent "a huge blow" to Russia's ability to finance its war against Ukraine.

Ukraine also supports the bill's inclusion of Iran, he said, citing Tehran's close military cooperation with Moscow.

"Everyone understands how close cooperation is between the military-industrial complex of these countries," Vlasiuk said. "Therefore, Iran is very well-deserved."

House Vote Window Narrows

The political stakes are heightened by the House's decision to cancel its final two weeks of pre-election legislative work.

The chamber is expected to depart Washington no later than September 17, although Republican leaders have said members could be recalled if the Senate advances a party-line budget reconciliation package. That scenario is not currently expected.

Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska, a Republican who has supported the sanctions effort, described the lack of congressional action as a serious failure.

"This is a real shame. It passed 86-11 in the Senate," Bacon said. "Congressional inaction on Russia's invasion of Ukraine and on Putin's crimes is a real failure. The history books will not be kind."

For Kyiv, the urgency is not simply legislative.

Vlasiuk warned that Ukraine faces another difficult winter after months of Russian missile and drone attacks. He said 160 people had been killed in missile and drone strikes in recent months.

"We have to increase the pressure over Russia to make them change their plans, to make them really negotiate," he said.

He argued that passing the sanctions bill now would have two effects: It could eventually increase economic pressure on Russia, while immediately sending a political signal to both Ukraine and the Russian government.

There is, he said, an element of inertia in sanctions policy. Even after legislation passes, implementing measures can take days, and producing a significant effect on Russia's economy can take weeks.

"But at the same time, the very fact of passing this sanction bill," Vlasiuk said, would send a "strong signal of support to Ukrainian people" and a "really strong signal to Russian government."

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 08:10
Tyler Durden

Germany Braces For AfD Election Breakthrough In Saxony-Anhalt

Zero Rss
3 weeks 2 days ago
Germany Braces For AfD Election Breakthrough In Saxony-Anhalt

Voters in Saxony-Anhalt head to the polls on Sunday, followed two weeks later by elections in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin. With the right-wing Alternative for Germany leading the national polls, the elections could be the opening act of an 18-month period in which Europe "lurches to the right," as Nomura analysts explained last month.

UniCredit's chief German economist, Dr. Andreas Rees, told clients on Friday: "Three state elections in just 14 days will test Germany's government coalition and its reform plans. While political noise is likely to increase, we expect the push for structural reform to remain on track."

The polling chart compiled by Rees' team shows the rising popularity of the AfD and the pressure facing Germany's establishment parties. The AfD leads nationally at roughly 28%, compared with 21% for the CDU/CSU and 12% for the SPD. In Saxony-Anhalt, the gap is far wider, with the AfD polling near 41%, versus 23% for the CDU and just 8% for the SPD. However, CDU/CSU leads over AfD in Berlin. 

Rees touched on this Sunday's big election in Saxony-Anhalt, which could quite possibly usher in AfD leadership:

On Sunday, voters in Saxony-Anhalt will head to the polls; two weeks later, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and the city-state of Berlin will follow. Formally, these are state elections with regional specifics and differences. Politically, however, three elections within 14 days will probably be viewed as a report card for Chancellor Friedrich Merz's CDU/CSU-SPD coalition, at a time when the government is trying to move from fiscal firepower towards structural reforms of the pension system, the labour market and bureaucracy.

THE DATA

The starting point is uncomfortable for the conservative CDU/CSU alliance and the Social Democratic Party (SPD). In the latest nationwide opinion polls, the right-wing AfD stood at about 28%, ahead of the CDU/CSU with around 21%, while the SPD came in at just 12%. Recent polls for the state of Saxony-Anhalt, the election federal policymakers may watch most nervously, even put the AfD at around 41%, far ahead of the CDU, which is polling at 23%. The SPD is currently only at around 8%. In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the AfD also leads clearly, while the SPD is holding up considerably better. In Berlin, the race is highly fragmented, according to opinion polls.

OUR VIEW

Sunday's election outcome in Saxony-Anhalt could grab most of the headlines. At current polling levels, the AfD does not have an outright majority. But with several parties, including the SPD, hovering around the 5% threshold, relatively small shifts in votes could translate into larger changes in seats and potentially open the path to an AfD-led government, the first one in a federal state. However, from an investor perspective, there is one question that matters more: what does this all mean for the federal government in Berlin?

  1. The CDU/CSU-SPD coalition will continue. Even poor results would give neither the conservatives nor the Social Democrats a good reason to leave the government. A weak CDU performance could strengthen demands within the Union for a tougher profile on migration, security and economic competitiveness. A poor SPD result in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, where the prime minister is a Social Democrat, however, would intensify pressure on the party to defend its social-policy priorities.
  2. The structural reform agenda remains (largely) intact. At the beginning of July, the CDU/CSU and the SPD agreed on a 34-measure reform package spanning pensions, labour-market rules, competitiveness, taxation and bureaucracy reduction, with key measures intended to pass the Bundestag by the end of this year. Politically, abandoning these reforms after strong AfD results would be difficult for either party to defend. Mr. Merz could argue that voters are punishing weak growth and insufficient change, while the SPD needs to demonstrate that reforms can be combined with social protection.
  3. A more-fragmented Bundesrat could not block large parts of the reforms. Saxony-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin together hold 11 of the Bundesrat's 69 votes. However, the federal states' leverage differs substantially across individual reforms. For instance, the envisaged tax cuts for low- and middle-income households, financed by tax hikes on top-income earners, require the Bundesrat's consent. Core pension and labour-market reforms, meanwhile, are generally not dependent on Bundesrat approval.

Overall, we expect more political noise in the next few weeks, but not political paralysis in Berlin. A few reform measures may be diluted or delayed beyond year-end 2026, but the broader reform push is likely to remain on track.

The rise of the AfD in the polling data is not a surprise. It is a closely watched political theme we have been tracking, and one that has quite clearly terrified German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has fear-mongered about the potential for AfD victories.

The problem with Merz's AfD fear angle is that Nomura counters it, arguing that markets are welcoming populist right-wing political parties and are more concerned about left-wing regimes that "desire to increase spending, often paid for through higher borrowing or higher taxes, which are likely to shut the engine off of already stuttering economies."

Here's the EU election roadmap over the next 18 months, according to Nomura:

The shift to the right is happening across the West.

Brazilian socialist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's lead over right-wing Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro has imploded. If Bolsonaro can pull off a victory next month, that would cement the continent's shift from nation-killing left-wing socialism to right-wing common sense.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 07:35
Tyler Durden

How To Tackle Domestic Extremists' Foreign Enablers

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
How To Tackle Domestic Extremists' Foreign Enablers

Authored by Daniel McCarthy via The Epoch Times,

Left-wing terrorism is a serious problem in the United States, though for political reasons it doesn't receive anything like the attention right-wing violence gets.

When most people think of violence connected to abortion, they imagine attacks on abortion clinics - yet lately, pro-abortion extremists have been firebombing crisis pregnancy centers across the country.

These centers help women who want to have their babies or who are undecided about having an abortion: In other words, women who are making a choice, just not the choice supposedly "pro-choice" abortion advocates find acceptable.

So a group calling itself "Jane's Revenge," referring to the "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, has declared war on anyone who might choose life.

A report in the left-wing Guardian newspaper, headlined "Pro-choice militants are attacking 'crisis pregnancy centers' across US," documented terroristic attempts at intimidation from New York and North Carolina to Wisconsin, Texas and Washington state in the past several years.

The paper noted: "The methods have been extreme: vandals have thrown molotov cocktails, committed arson, damaged property and made threats."

Jane's Revenge issued a statement demanding "anti-choice establishments" shut down in 30 days or face further violence.

That was in 2022 - yet the group continued operating, until its website went dark just days ago thanks to a Trump administration crackdown on terrorist infrastructure.

Jane's Revenge and various other radical organizations, including antifa groups, were part of a network relying on web services provided by Italy's "Autistici/Inventati," or A/I Collective.

According to the State Department, the A/I Collective "builds and operates the digital infrastructure for violent Antifa cells and other far-left militants across the world," providing technology "designed to support the operations of far-left terrorist networks, built to enable them to organize, recruit, communicate, disseminate propaganda, share target information and tactics, and carry out violent attacks - all while remaining anonymous, untraceable, and beyond the reach of the law."

The collective has been facilitating leftist provocations for years.

But on Aug. 26, the State Department struck back, officially deeming the A/I Collective a "specially designated global terrorist."

The designation means sanctions can be imposed on domestic individuals and financial institutions that do business with the foreign group, as well as restricting any of the collective's assets that are under American jurisdiction.

Results were immediate: radical sites shut down.

"Antifascism and anticapitalism are not terrorism," the collective complains in a media statement. "Protesting is not terrorism."

Yet all too often, it is: Groups like Jane's Revenge consider terrorism a legitimate form of protest.

And antifa organizations specialize in using protests as cover for carrying out acts of mayhem.

Indeed, that's the grand strategy - to tear down American society, which is capitalist and "fascist" in the left's eyes, by exploiting the freedoms our "capitalist" Constitution protects.

Legend has it Lenin once said capitalists would sell communists the very rope they would use to hang them.

Today's militant left is counting on capitalists and constitutionalists to provide them the legal protections they need to incite and perpetrate violence.

But the Trump administration refuses to play along.

The State Department's action is long overdue:

Americans should not have had to wait for a Republican administration like this one before government acts to dismantle the infrastructure that supports intimidation and violence.

Foreign interests like the A/I Collective are often suppliers of that infrastructure:

America's domestic extremists are not simply isolated local loonies who spring up at random in our own communities - they're connected to and coordinated with international networks.

The networks encourage cross-pollination and collaboration:

A/I Collective, the State Department notes, provides services to European "anarchist cells responsible for sabotaging rail systems across France, Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands" as well as to the domestic "anarchist cell responsible for waging a violent campaign to prevent the construction of a law enforcement training center in Atlanta, Georgia."

The violent left is a transnational movement, and the Trump administration is right to see it in the same light as other networks that support or engage in terrorism.

Domestic sites and groups using A/I Collective resources have published calls for "direct action" against the nation's immigration laws - and the officers responsible for enforcing them.

That includes publishing pamphlets urging activists to shine laser pointers at Customs and Border Protection helicopters, intending to blind pilots and potentially cause them to crash.

Other sites "dox" ICE agents, providing personal information on immigration-enforcement officers to allow activists to harass them at home - or to firebomb their homes, if they take inspiration from groups like Jane's Revenge.

This is not protesting, and it's not certainly not democratic: These are attempts by a radical fringe to do through intimidation and violence what they can't do at the ballot box.

Going after the foreign enablers of far-left violence and threats is a first, common-sense step in defending the very principle of self-government.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 23:25
Tyler Durden

Starbase Louisiana 101: A Look At Elon's New Space City

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Starbase Louisiana 101: A Look At Elon's New Space City

Following the Starbase Louisiana announcement last week, questions have swirled over Musk's motivation for choosing this location. In response, Deutsche Bank analyst Edison Yu takes a closer and identifies four main reasons including i) orbital trajectory (optimizing for ODCs), ii) geography, iii) regulation, and iv) propellant (bringing processing/production onsite).

New Starbase

SpaceX announced a new $100 billion Starship launch site in Louisiana last week with initial plans to build five two-pad complexes or ten towers. Longer term, Elon Musk commented there could be over twelve towers capable of launching more than 30 flights daily. The site is expected to be materially larger than Starbase Texas and essentially be a "space city" with on-site fuel processing/production, dedicated power generation, deep-water port, employee housing, and potentially an airport; Starship manufacturing however will seemingly not occur here. Construction is slated to begin next year with first launch slated for no earlier than in 2029 (2030 is more realistic). Headline investment amount is $100bn although this could span over a decade. The exact location will be an area called Pecan Island (~125k acres), located in the Vermilion Parish which is on the Gulf of America coast. The site was formerly owned by ExxonMobil and was transferred to the state following settlement of a coastal environmental lawsuit. SpaceX expects to create about 10,000 jobs with 60-80% being locally hired.

Rationale #1 - Orbital trajectory

To establish some basic principles: the Earth's spin is fastest at the equator. Therefore, a rocket launching eastward starts with that speed already in hand. The further from the equator a launch site sits, the less benefit from that free push. Inclination is the angle an orbit makes with the equator. For example, a satellite in a 0° orbit circles above the equator; one in a 90° orbit passes over both poles.  The rule is essentially a rocket can most efficiently reach any orbit whose inclination is at least the latitude of its launch site. Reaching a lower inclination requires an expensive mid-flight turn, burning fuel that could otherwise have carried payload. Azimuth is the compass direction the rocket flies after liftoff. Rockets shed spent stages and occasionally fail, so regulators only permit trajectories where debris would fall over open ocean water or empty land.

As discussed in our Data Centers in Space series, SpaceX is seeking to deploy a large number of orbital data centers. The ideal position for these satellites is a type a sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) running along the day-night boundary (“dusk-dawn orbit”), to maximize continuous sunlight. To launch to SSO, the rocket needs to fly nearly due north or due south. That means a launch site with open water or empty land in that direction is optimal. SpaceX's existing Starship site at Boca Chica sits at the southern tip of Texas, on the Mexican border. It launches east over the Gulf  of America because southerly trajectories run into Mexican territory almost immediately. So while it is a decent site for the orbits Starship has been testing into, it is not ideal for high volume SSO launches. In comparison, a site on the central Louisiana coast sits further from the Mexican coastline and opens a long southerly corridor over open water.

Rationale #2 - Geography

Due to Starship’s enormous size, it’s impractical to use truck or rail for transport. Instead, the rocket will be moved by barge on water and be relatively accessible from the production site in Texas. Pecan Island is an 18-mile strip with a deep-water bayou off the Gulf of America which can serve as a port. Moreover, there’s also the sheer size of the area (125k acres), allowing for the build out of towers, propellant farms, power generation, etc… Other locations are either too small or crowded (e.g., multiple entities launch from Florida now). For context, the total scope of area in Texas owned or controlled by SpaceX covers <10k acres even after factoring in potential annexations.

In relation, the LA location is ideal for methane supply. Henry Hub is in Vermilion Parish and sets the US natural gas benchmark pricing (nearly 10% of US production is in Louisiana). Around a dozen interstate and intrastate pipelines interconnect here. The Louisiana Gulf Coast is also home to a very dense concentration of gas liquefaction expertise built up around the LNG export terminals over the years.

Rationale #3 - Regulation

SpaceX indicated it has been looking for a high-rate launch site for about seven years and discussions began with state officials (Project Osprey) in early 2026. DB's original view was that Texas could scale up to 4-5 launch pads and the regulatory regime would gradually adapt. With the Louisiana location, this should help de-risk longer-term capacity constraints by shifting traffic to a different corridor although certain details still need to be worked out (launch licenses, wildlife, airspace, etc…). Currently, the FAA has capped Starbase Texas at 25 launches annually (up from initial 5) and could scale up further to >100; a bottleneck would emerge at some point even factoring in an additional 120 licensed flights out of Florida, where SpaceX is planning to have three pads. Ultimately, Florida will be mainly used for NASA/govt missions and Vandenberg will continue launching Falcon 9 for the foreseeable future, leaving Texas and Louisiana to be workhorse sites for Starship-captive missions (Starlink, Starmind).

Rationale #4 - Propellant

Beyond launch operations and regulation, the next structural bottleneck appears to be propellant, which the Louisiana set-up can potentially address. For background, Starship's Raptor engines run on liquid methane or LCH4 and liquid oxygen or LOX (known together as methalox). A fully fueled stack weighs roughly 5,000 metric tons at liftoff, of which about 4,600 metric tons is propellant. The engines burn the two in a ratio of ~3.6 parts oxygen to 1 part methane.

At small scale, propellant can be transported via trucks. To illustrate, a typical LOX trailer holds about 20 metric tons, implying 180 trucks per flight. However, this is not scalable once Starship reaches hundreds of flights annually, let alone thousands. It is therefore likely that LOX will be made onsite and then piped to tank farms near the pad. LOX is made out of air, using electricity by compressing, cooling, and then distilling. To do this requires large cryogenic air separation units (ASUs). Similarly, methane is also trucked in now but will be processed onsite and piped. In fact, SpaceX already is building Starpipe in Texas (8-mile, 16-inch natural gas pipeline from Brownsville) along with its own liquefier and air-separation unit. Long term, assuming a launch cadence in the thousands, this type of architecture will be required and could drive large cost savings.

More in the full DB report available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 22:48
Tyler Durden

The Politics Of Measles

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
The Politics Of Measles

Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times,

By the middle point of 20th-century American history, measles was widely considered a rite of passage for kids. You get it and you shake it off. You earn lifetime immunity. This was true of every generation just before mine.

For the previous century, measles had become ever less dangerous with sanitation and nutrition. By the time the vaccine came along, it was fully controlled and only very rarely led to hospitalization. The protocols were taught in every school and understood by all classes.

I was apparently part of the first generation to receive the inoculation. It was convenient, but not necessary simply because society had systems and traditions in place to manage it well. How much difference did the shot make in driving infection to zero? Some, surely, and this added to the prestige of vaccines.

That said, I did get chicken pox as a natural infection and recall well what it was like. That no longer happens except in a few communities. I was the last to experience this and I'm happy to share the experience.

My parents came to me excitedly and said we were going to a party. I found myself among a group of kids I did not know and we played and played for hours. Then we left. That was fun, I thought, but a bit confusing. The next day, I woke up with itchy red spots.

My parents cheered. Their plan had worked. I recalled feeling great confusion. Why were my parents celebrating my sickness? It seemed very odd. They had their reasons. They knew the science.

They explained to me how the immune system works and why it is best that I get this when I'm young rather than old. My immunity would be durable and be boosted later in life as my own kids caught the normal childhood infections, which in turn would protect me from the related infection of shingles.

There is this tendency now to treat these strategies as paleolithic as compared with syringes and fluids in the childhood vaccination schedule. Actually, we should look back on these days as the height of serious science. My parents knew exactly what they were doing and it taught me a valuable lesson as a kid. I learned about the high complexity of the immune system that needs exposure as training.

Eventually, of course, the chicken pox vaccine came along and many others as well, resulting in a vast mixture of combined shot after shot. Industry profited. Human health suffered. The Trump administration is trying to fix the problem. Industry doesn't like that. It is calling in favors from politicians to stop the return to science.

This takes us to the wild drama now playing itself out in Pennsylvania. In April of this year, the media and the governor's office started going on about a measles outbreak. It was centered in Lancaster and Lebanon counties - both with sizable Amish and Mennonite populations.

The framing here matters. The Amish and Mennonite communities routinely expose children, just as my parents did. It is not an "outbreak" but an application of sophisticated science.

The health of this community ranks among the highest. The most common health issues affecting children in the United States are nearly absent among the Amish, including autism, obesity, diabetes, ADHD, and so on.

Nonetheless, Pennsylvania set up 91 pop-up clinics around the infected community and jabbed kids with more than 4,000 doses using the MMR shot that many people connect to the rise of autism. Forty more clinics are planned.

In science, you have the control group and the tested group. The Amish are the control and keep revealing that there might be a better way. Eliminate the control and you eliminate the embarrassment. This is precisely what both Pfizer and Moderna did after their own tests of the COVID shot: they pushed it on the saline group following first results.

In Pennsylvania, opposition arose to this push for industrial inoculation, and understandably so. In the post-COVID era, trust in public health is depleted to near zero.

Here is where the current drama picked up. On Aug. 14, a newborn child died in Strasburg Township, Lancaster County. The cause of death was later given by the county coroner: lacerated/ruptured spleen, massive blood loss. The postmortem used the PCR test (which detects presence, not infection) and found measles in utero. Obviously, this baby could not otherwise have been vaccinated. It is pointless to call a baby unvaccinated for measles, just as it is ridiculous to observe the infant is illiterate.

A week later, the Pennsylvania Department of Health announced two "measles-associated" deaths in Lancaster County: unvaccinated residents, they said. They claimed these were the first measles-related deaths in Pennsylvania in 35 years. There were no other details given: nothing about the cause of death, nothing about ages, nothing about anything.

Governor Josh Shapiro announced two deaths caused by measles. Not merely associated or related, but caused. The media ran with the story, using the language of causation. He called the deaths preventable and tied them to lack of immunization. He highlighted his clinic campaign and told reporters that Secretary Kennedy had called to offer help with the outbreak to which he responded:

"I was very, very blunt with him, and I made very clear that his actions and the rhetoric that's coming from this administration are having a negative impact on communities across America, particularly right here in Pennsylvania."

It was at this point that the narrative fell apart. The CDC called. The governor's office could give no more information. The Lancaster County Commissioner Josh Parsons spoke out and said that the coroner's office has zero deaths with measles listed as immediate cause; one person died with measles, not from it.

No one could find out anything else about this supposed second death. The coroner's office said it had no such death at all. RFK, Jr. said what everyone was thinking: the second death "may even have been altogether fabricated." Meanwhile, all available evidence confirmed that the baby died of traumatic spleen laceration and the spleen was not enlarged/inflamed.

Even the mainstream media started getting frustrated at this. You cannot whip the public up with measles fears based on wholly fabricated data. When asked about this, Shapiro deflected:

"I think the Department of Health has made clear that they've shared all the information that they are permitted under state law to share, and that those two deaths were measles related. ... I don't think it serves the interest of public health or slows the spread of this outbreak for me to get into a back-and-forth about conspiracy theories that are showing up online."

Much of the mainstream media has now dialed back its claims but the New York Times has still not corrected its story from Aug. 25: "Two unvaccinated people in Pennsylvania have died from measles, as a large outbreak there continues to spread."

That sentence in the paper of record is factually incorrect. It's my personal guess that the reporter would like to make a correction but these people are hemmed in by editors and committees. At this point, to change the wording would be to admit a significant breach.

We are no longer a naive people. Whether the media comes around or not, the real story is already out there.

What concerns me is that we have now several generations who know not what I was taught as a kid, that routine exposure is a necessary and safe way to deal with normal childhood infections that are not deadly and easily treatable. A measles case is not a disaster; it is protective, both broad and durable. Superior to a vaccine? Every expert has to admit that it is. In private, they do.

We have gone so crazy with vaccination that a whole generation of medical professionals and industry leaders have been cajoled into saying that potions can replace the immune system. There is an ocean of money at stake in these decisions. Chicken pox parties are lacking in profit just as is natural immunity generally.

Demonizing religious communities is not a good path for public health and neither is raging against any changes to the childhood schedule. The parents of Pennsylvania, Amish or not, should be left alone. It's ghoulish for the state to plot the elimination of the control group.

As for my parents, they were wiser than the faculty of Harvard and Yale and the executives of pharmaceutical companies. They knew then what we need to rediscover now. Potions and jabs are not an automatic pathway to health and actually do much to compromise and sometimes end it. We need to rediscover this wisdom we mistakenly left behind.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 22:35
Tyler Durden

Warner Bros. "Lanterns" Series Is Another Whiny Woke DEI Disaster

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Warner Bros. "Lanterns" Series Is Another Whiny Woke DEI Disaster

Comic book content is largely dead in Hollywood.  Not because audiences don't want to see it anymore (Spider-Man: Brand New Day brought in nearly $2.4 billion in global box office, absolutely crushing Christopher Nolan's Odyssey film), but because the studios have turned most of these franchises radioactive with woke politics.  

James Gunn's DCU projects for Warner Bros. have proven this over and over again.  His girl-boss version of Supergirl was an abject failure largely because of the woke undertones of the film.  One would think these people would learn their lesson, or at least care enough about making money to change their behavior.  There are two problems, though...

First, activists always double down.  They do not learn.  They can be forced to shut up and do their jobs properly if studios apply pressure, but left to their own devices they will inevitably inject everything they touch with propaganda.  They can't help themselves, they're ideological fanatics.

Second, sometimes studios want to change course and steer away from DEI cultism because it rarely makes any money.  But, a lot of the projects in their line-up started production years ago when Hollywood still thought that every American was going to be reeducated into the woke fold.  Meaning, they now have all this content slated for release which started development back in 2022-2023.

Such is the case with the Warner/HBO series "Lanterns", a modern take on the comic book series "Green Lantern".  The show went into development in 2022...and it's obvious.  The crux of the story?  A black man (John Stewart) is set up to replace a white guy (Hal Jordan) as the great hero.  Stewart's family was essentially ruined by Hal Jordan when Stewart's father failed a test of fear for the Lantern's powerful ring.  Hal Jordan ends up taking the ring instead. 

The Lanterns interviews are just hilarious. Just say you hate white people and be done with it already🙄 pic.twitter.com/DymaS3pWWt

— Steph Anie (@mynerdyhome) September 2, 2026

You see, the fear that prevented John Stewart's black father from earning the ring of a heroic Green Lantern was not his fault.  He grew up with constant fear because of "white supremacy".  In other words, the black community's failures are once again deflected and foisted upon a nefarious white conspiracy to hold them back from greatness.  It's all the ridiculous 2016 to 2020 BLM talking points packed into a 2026 comic book show.

So Hal Jordan was only chosen to be Green Lantern after John Stewart's father failed the test... pic.twitter.com/jp0pcykIXZ

— DCU Brief (@DCUBrief) August 31, 2026

The story is apparently meant to be a combination of the legacy comic and the gritty True Detective series (yes, right off the bat we're entering low IQ narrative territory with this idea).  The comic book setting aside, the writers and creators of the series have been very vocal about their intentions with the story and they openly admit - This is about the black man finally taking back what is "rightfully his" after the white man "stole it" from him. 

Showrunner Chris Mundy described the series as being “about replacement,” with Hal as the aging figure who should “step aside” and out of the way of the younger and more competent John Stewart.

We knew the #lanterns creators hated hal Jordan

But damn.... pic.twitter.com/KOgmbOp2ig

— SyL ☕ #SyLgorithm (@sylabdul) September 2, 2026

"As a black person, being in an interview, that's one of our worst nightmares, being in a position where you're being judged by a white person."

-HBO Max's official "Lanterns" podcast pic.twitter.com/rJEM59K0cV

— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) September 1, 2026

Keep in mind, many studios are cleaning house today and kicking a lot of their DEI hires to the curb, but this process is slow and there's no guarantees that they will ever be able to return to decent storytelling anytime soon.  So, in the meantime they're still stuck with a bunch of talentless minority and LGBT writers they hired to gain virtue points and ESG loans. 

Most of the middle-aged white guys with imagination and merit were cast out. 

It is therefore ironic that the entire basis for the Lanterns series is the fallacy that minorities are rejected because of their skin color and "cultural experiences", rather than a lack of merit.  When, in Hollywood, this has been the exact case with DEI hiring pushing out white male actors and writers with talent for the past decade (unless they are gay).  

The inferiority complex of activist writers is apparent in the stories they obsessively tell - Build up a popular white hero into a washed up strawman who is then easy to tear down.  They can't surpass their pale skin peers in the real world without outside help, so they have to beat up artificial white men in artificial worlds.    

At bottom, minority groups in the west have been hand fed, enjoying promotions and positions of influence within politics, the corporate world and entertainment media.  Many of these people where hired despite not having the ability or intelligence to do the job.  They were hired to fill an ethnic quota, and that is all.  And, this trend shows in the steady decline of media and numerous other sectors of western society.  

Lanterns may be nothing more than a meaningless superhero show being used as a vehicle for black leftists to cry about not being good enough, but it gives us another window into the warped mind of the opposition.  What do we see in through that window?  A group that will never take responsibility for themselves and their own problems.  They will always blame someone else.  Which means, there's no reason to hold their hand anymore.  It's a waste of time.   

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 22:10
Tyler Durden

How Neoliberals Fueled The Rise Of Socialism

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
How Neoliberals Fueled The Rise Of Socialism

Authored by Connor O'Keeffe via Mises Institute,

The rising popularity of politicians on the American left who either explicitly identify as socialist or, at least, don't shy away from or disavow the term appears to be causing genuine concern within the Washington establishment.

That is, of course, entirely justified. Socialism is profoundly unjust and destructive.

These days, the socialists like to present their entire ideology as nothing more than having a bit of empathy for those in need or an interest in seeing everyone "have" access to services like modern healthcare.

Look any deeper, though, or ask some follow-up questions, and the truth will eventually surface. What the socialists actually want is a massive increase in government interventionism that would see nearly every aspect of life politicized and the remaining productive components of the economy hollowed out into a zero-sum lobbying battle to claim some of the diminishing loot of a much larger, more powerful, and tax-happy federal government.

Any step towards socialism needs to be energetically opposed by everyone who cares about the rights and material well-being of everyday Americans.

However, the concern we're seeing from the neoliberal and neoconservative establishment is frustrating. Because the political order that they have built and preserved over the last half century has made the growing popularity of this kind of "democratic socialism" all but inevitable.

Scholars like Gabriel Kolko, Murray Rothbard, and Patrick Newman have written extensively about how the powerful, centralized federal government that we live under today originated in the so-called Progressive Era in the late 1800s and early 1900s. And, importantly, it was not grassroots reformers who spurred the growth of the federal government at the time, but well-connected business interests.

The narrative many of us were taught in school of government officials reluctantly giving themselves more power over the economy at the turn of the century to placate a public demanding an end to laissez-faire capitalism is merely a convenient creation myth to justify what has always been a scheme to use state power to redistribute wealth from the broader public to a small caste of well-connected families and firms.

As nearly all of human history makes clear, these sorts of crony, state-empowered redistributive schemes tend to be rather unstable.

That's in part because people typically aren't all that pleased when it starts to become clear that the government is transferring some of their wealth to people that are already far wealthier - requiring the opinion molders of the political class to frequently scramble to find some new way to excuse the policies making up the racket.

But also, the government doing things like warping credit markets to benefit certain industries or launching unnecessary wars to enrich weapons companies and empower foreign leaders who are good at lobbying has plunged the country into several economic and geopolitical crises.

So far, the American political class has done a remarkable job using these crises to greatly expand and accelerate their self-enriching redistributive rackets. But every crisis is unique. Different situations have required different responses.

Which brings us to the rise of what's often called the neoliberal "Washington consensus."

The political establishment's well-known embrace of neoliberalism in the 1980s was primarily a response to the events of the 1970s. For much of that decade, the country was forced to endure a prolonged period of high price inflation that was caused by the Federal Reserve's extensive money printing in the 60s and early 70s to help finance the Vietnam War and Johnson's Great Society programs. That economic chaos was then intensified by the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, the OPEC oil shocks, and Nixon's wage and price controls.

As we've seen in the past few years, inflation alone is more than enough to create strong public demand for political change. But in the 70s, previous credit expansion combined with the government's persistent unwillingness to allow the economy to correct itself also resulted in a stagnant economy. And that combination of high inflation and stagnant economic growth, or "stagflation" as it's come to be known, was considered economically impossible by Keynesian economists.

So the high inflation, low economic growth, and real-time collapse of Keynesianism - the school of thought the political class had been using to justify its economic interventionism - meant change was coming. Also, by the mid-to-late 1970s, the so-called New Left movement, which had started as student protests against the Vietnam War in the 60s, had descended into a highly disturbing mix of lethargic drug use and outright terrorism.

Into that vacuum stepped Milton Friedman.

The nerdy, quick-witted, suit-sporting economist was a perfect foil to the radical, convention-flouting far left much of the country was growing tired of. Friedman's ability to quickly, thoroughly, and politely eviscerate left-wing economic arguments in a highly entertaining fashion made him a star on the talk shows of the day. And, unlike the Keynesians, Friedman's monetarism seemed vindicated by the stagflation.

Thanks in large part to Friedman, the neoliberals took hold of the culture enough to prompt the left-leaning Carter administration to deregulate many parts of the economy including the railroad, airline and trucking industries.

And then, of course, came Ronald Reagan.

Together with Friedman and his fellow Chicago School economists and foreign leaders like Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and his political successors supposedly rolled back all the reforms made since the Progressive Era, ushering in an age of "market fundamentalism," or unfettered capitalism. They helped bring about the modern "Washington consensus" that the government ought not meddle in the economy at all, which we're told is only just now - four decades later - starting to face some pressure from figures like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

At least, that is the narrative that both neoliberals and their opponents have settled on. But it is a lie.

The rise of neoliberalism in the 70s and 80s was, to be sure, a real ideological shift. The Friedmanites did come to dominate the economics discipline and political culture in very much the same way Keynesians had decades before.

However, the actual implementation of those free-market ideas was nowhere even close to what the establishment's narrative would have us believe.

Virtually all the deregulation that occurred during the Reagan presidency had actually been passed during the Carter administration. It was only because the changes were phased in during the Reagan administration that made it seem like the new president was deregulating the economy. In fact, he was doing no such thing.

The same goes for tax cuts. As Murray Rothbard explained, the much-heralded Reagan tax cuts that were passed in 1981 were more than offset by tax increases that same year. The administration then spent years raising taxes even more in the name of "closing loopholes."

And all of that was necessary to help fund the massive increase in government spending that took place throughout the Reagan years. The so-called Reagan revolution was truly, to paraphrase Rothbard, an acceleration of statist intervention, rolled out under the cover of free-market rhetoric.

There was, however, one area where the Friedmanites did see their policy prescriptions implemented in a genuine and lasting way: monetary policy.

Unfortunately, when it comes to monetary policy, the Friedmanites entirely abandon their support for markets and instead advocate for government central planning. These new establishment-approved neoliberal economists believed - not only in a fiat monetary system controlled entirely by a government central bank - but in a highly active, inflationist central bank.

Friedman himself even wrote a famous book with Anna Schwartz that used questionable econometric methods to argue that the Great Depression happened because the Federal Reserve had not been printing enough money.

Unsurprisingly, the political class was a lot more than willing to implement a Friedmanite program that gave them more power over the economy rather than less. And so, it was in the realm of monetary policy that the largest expansions of both state power and the crony rackets it's utilized for took place under the new neoliberal paradigm.

First, the Fed was leaned on to print money to help pay for the hawkish foreign policy of the post-1980 Republican Party. And then, especially under the Chairmanship of the late Alan Greenspan, the central bank began to directly prop up the financial sector.

The evolution of Wall Street from one of many options for investing one's savings to essentially being the nerve center of the entire economy was not the result of some natural change in saver preferences; it was the consequence of government policy. Specifically, Greenspan's Fed helped prop up Wall Street with a steady supply of easy money and cheap credit to artificially boost the sector, paired with extensive bailouts for these firms whenever the good times ran out.

This was, in effect, a major escalation of the kinds of crony rackets the federal government had been carrying out since the Progressive Era - all justified by Friedman's monetarist apologia for government money printing.

And that gets to the core of it. The Friedmanite, Reagan-led neoliberal revolution did not end economic interventionism, it rebranded it. And the financialized economy was that new brand. Getting rich on Wall Street became the epitome of capitalism. The rising stock market was the new metric for economic strength. And the Fed's money printing became the economy's lifeblood.

In the decades since, that Fed-enabled racket has expanded dramatically and has seeped far beyond the financial sector. It has allowed the political class to supercharge the rackets built up over the last century - which, remember, the neoliberals never did away with - transferring far more of our wealth to that small caste of well-connected cronies.

And yet, thanks in large part to the neoliberals of the past and present, this highly-interventionist system where the government is actively warping the market to benefit those already on top is called - and truly considered by many to be - genuine, free-market capitalism.

That isn't true. It's a trick - a trick meant to mislead us so that whenever a new economic crisis strikes, we reflexively conclude the crisis happened only because the government isn't involved enough in the economy. And that is the mindset that has made so many normal, everyday, non-ideological people open to the arguments of these self-described democratic socialists.

The neoliberal and neoconservative establishment has done much to carry out this trick. They shouldn't be surprised that it's working.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 21:45
Tyler Durden

Pimco's Top-Performing 60/40 Fund Bets AI's Next Winners Are In Asia, From Chips To Rare Earths

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Pimco's Top-Performing 60/40 Fund Bets AI's Next Winners Are In Asia, From Chips To Rare Earths

Emmanuel Sharef, who oversees Pacific Investment Management Co.'s flagship Balanced Income and Growth Fund, spoke with Bloomberg about how the next leg of the artificial-intelligence boom could be concentrated in Asian stocks and beyond. 

Wealthy clients in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and mainland China have been piling into the $19 billion fund, which has outperformed 97% of its peers during the past three years.

The fund is underweight most hyperscalers and members of the Magnificent Seven as soaring AI capital expenditures increase debt loads, pressure free cash flow, spark credit concerns, and make already eye-popping valuations much harder to justify. 

"We're underweight the majority of hyperscalers at the moment and we're underweight the majority of the Mag seven just given their high valuations," Sharef told the outlet earlier this week.

He continued, "You don't necessarily need to own the most expensive stocks to capture a particular theme or a particular market trend."

The 60/40 Balanced Income and Growth Fund has been moving further down the supply chain toward companies that build data center components and has become overweight in Asia, where it sees stronger earnings growth, cheaper valuations, and greater exposure to the companies that should be viewed as the building blocks of a data center.

That infrastructure includes semiconductor components, cooling systems, cable interconnects, optical equipment, power supplies, construction machinery, and industrial metals.

"The AI capex build-out is enormous," he said. "It would imply significant demand for semiconductor components for chips, cooling equipment, cable interconnects, optical equipment, power supplies, construction equipment, metals, all of the things that go into building a data center."

The fund's 60% stock allocation gained exposure to AI last year by plowing billions of dollars into firms such as Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing.

Sharef also highlighted a theme we've been developing: the importance of exposure to mining and materials companies tied to data-center construction and global rare-earth supply chains.

"Chinese resource extraction and materials companies are quite significant, not just for the data center buildup, but also for rare earths," he added.

Sharef's call to gain exposure to rare earths and critical materials reinforces a theme we have been developing: the AI trade is ultimately constrained by access to the physical inputs required to build chips, data centers, and power infrastructure. Rare earths and other critical materials are becoming a crucial component of the next AI trade as Chinese suppliers restrict some shipments to the US and US companies accelerate efforts to secure alternative sources beyond Beijing's reach. 

The takeaway from Sharef's conversation with Bloomberg is that the next AI winners will be on an ex-US basis, mostly in Asia. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 21:20
Tyler Durden

AI Tax Increases Are Like The Tractor Tax Proposals Of Old

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
AI Tax Increases Are Like The Tractor Tax Proposals Of Old

Authored by Bruce Thompson via RealClearMarkets,

President Ronald Reagan famously described Washington politicians' solutions to every problem as "if it moves, tax it." That is exactly what many in Washington today want to do with artificial intelligence.

As Wall Street Journal chief economic commentator Greg IP wrote recently, a growing number of experts believe there is "a simple answer to AI job losses." Tax it. His column described a petition signed by 1,000 economists, including 17 Nobel laureates, pleading for higher taxes on AI to prevent "large scale" job losses.

Reagan knew what he was talking about. He grew up in the Midwest in a small town surrounded by farms, and he surely remembered a time when politicians wanted to tax tractors, a new technology driving change. In the early 1900s, the tractor was revolutionizing farming, and politicians were pushing proposals to tax the tractor and prevent the loss of farm jobs. Rep. Willian Connery, a Massachusetts Democrat and Chairman of the House Labor Committee, was a leading advocate of taxing tractors and other labor-saving machines to stop mass unemployment.

The introduction of tractors was the most revolutionary change in our history, affecting millions of jobs and driving millions off the farm. Between 1910 and 1960, nearly 10 million farm workers lost their jobs and 25 million people left their farms for the city. The benefits of the tractor were enormous. Farm production soared, food prices dropped, and the U.S. provided enough food to feed people around the world.

The farm revolution transformed the American economy, creating growth, and increasing prosperity. Millions of farm workers were freed from back-breaking labor and found better jobs in the city. An NBER study called tractors the "engine of growth" and estimated they doubled per-capita GDP and created millions of jobs.

AI promises a bright future of technological and scientific progress, increased productivity, and a more prosperous economy. Like many changes in the past, there are concerns about the impact on jobs. But taxing AI would be just like taxing tractors, a futile knee jerk reaction to change.

Not surprisingly, there is no shortage of terrible tax ideas floating around Washington. Senator Bernie Sanders has proposed a 50% tax on the equity of AI companies. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ron Wyden have proposed new taxes on data centers. House Democrats have proposed a new tax on AI computing powers, and others have proposed a tax on robots. If it moves, they want to tax it.

None of these tax increases are a good idea. Raising taxes on AI would slow investment, curb innovation, and only help our foreign competitors. Just like a tractor tax, a new AI tax would only slow new technological advances that will benefit everyone.

Rather than taxing AI, Washington should focus on assisting those jobs which have been most affected by automation, such as entry-level jobs. Congress should consider targeted tax incentives for entry-level employment, including payroll tax relief and job training for junior workers. Helping young workers get started is a much better response to the AI revolution than trying to stop it with a tax increase.

Bruce Thompson was a U.S. Senate aide, assistant secretary of Treasury for legislative affairs, and the director of government relations for Merrill Lynch for 22 years.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 20:55
Tyler Durden

Online Betting Adoption Goes Parabolic: First-Timers Triple, Gen Z Overtakes Millennials, And Football Season Hasn't Even Begun

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Online Betting Adoption Goes Parabolic: First-Timers Triple, Gen Z Overtakes Millennials, And Football Season Hasn't Even Begun

Online betting is off to the races - and this summer the adoption curve started looking like a hockey stick.

According to a new analysis by Bank of America - which can see every ACH, debit and credit card payment its customers make to and from sportsbooks, horse-racing platforms and prediction markets their own customers make: 

  • Roughly 5% of BofA customers sent money to an online betting platform in July.
  • The number of online bettors is up 40% since the start of the year.
  • The number of first-time bettors in June and July was more than triple the January level.

The bank credits the summer spike to the World Cup and "promotions and buzz" around prediction markets, and fair enough: every adoption curve has a catalyst. What matters is what the base looks like once the catalyst passes, and here the seasonal pattern is instructive. First-time users jump with every major sports season, and the 2025 football season - which the bank defines as September through February, so it sweeps in the NFL, college ball and most of the NBA and NHL - produced 22% more first-timers than the year before. Each season enrolls a larger freshman class. The class that enrolled this summer was three times the size of January's, and it arrived right before the busiest stretch of the calendar.

Nor is this something people try once and forget. Per a CivicScience survey cited in the note, 34% of online sports bettors wager weekly and 23% bet daily; fewer than one in five are the several-times-a-year Super Bowl crowd. That is the engagement profile of a social app, not a lottery ticket.

The turning point

By generation, Gen Z (48%) and Millennials (40%) accounted for 88% of online betting activity in July. Gen X managed 9%; Baby Boomers, 3%. And as recently as this spring, Millennials were the larger group. Gen Z overtook them this summer - a shift BofA describes as a "turning point" in the composition of online bettors.

BofA defines Gen Z as anyone born after 1995, which means the oldest members are turning 30 this year and the cohort came of age alongside legal, app-based sports betting. BofA points out that younger consumers have consistently been first to adopt every emerging digital platform - crypto, BNPL, online marketplaces - and that betting appears to be following the same script.

When it comes to income - betting activity is split almost evenly across terciles - 37% lower, 34% middle, 29% higher.

Oh it's investing!

According to a BofA survey conducted in March, 20% of respondents said they consider sports betting a form of investing, with Gen Z twice as likely as everyone else to say so. Across every generation, buying event contracts on a prediction market was more likely to be classified as investing than placing a sportsbook wager.

Prediction markets have listed contracts on almost anything - whether a politician sips water on camera during a speech, how many flu cases the year will bring - dressed in the language of derivatives: standardized, exchange-traded, resolved at a point in time. BofA notes that prediction markets, crypto, retail trading and sports betting all share "community participation and real-time pricing," which is a polite way of saying they share a user interface. To a generation raised on the Fed put, zero-day options and a community tab, a football game is simply another underlying.

And then there's  the red tape...

Naturally, the regulators have noticed - and, naturally, their first move is a jurisdictional fight. The CFTC's position, per BofA's public-policy team, is that certain event contracts traded on federally regulated exchanges are derivatives under the Commodity Exchange Act and therefore federal turf. State and tribal regulators counter that contracts tied to sports and entertainment are gambling with extra steps and belong under existing state gaming, licensing and consumer-protection law. Lawmakers from both parties and both chambers have filed bills. The CFTC has also opened a rulemaking on perpetual futures and issued an advisory warning event-contract venues away from sweepstakes-style rewards and prizes "based on pure chance" - the sort of promotional program that helped fill the summer's freshman class - and, per BofA Global Research, is trying to draw a brighter line between prediction markets and sportsbooks by targeting in-house market making, incentive programs and "casino style odds."

None of it slows adoption. Arguing over whether a contract is a "derivative" or a "wager" is an argument over who gets to regulate and tax the growth, not whether the growth happens. By the time the rulebook is written, the users will already be there. Most of them already are.

And it's not even football season yet...

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 20:30
Tyler Durden

Cannabis Gummies Harm Driving Performance Hours After Use, Study Says

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Cannabis Gummies Harm Driving Performance Hours After Use, Study Says

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The use of commercially available cannabis edibles impairs people's driving ability, even after several hours of consumption, a study has found.

Published in the JAMA Network Open journal on Aug. 31, the peer-reviewed study looked at simulated driving performance after the consumption of cannabis edibles.

Conducted in a Canadian hospital, the study analyzed data of 40 people aged 19-45 years. They received gummies containing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) - the main psychoactive chemical in cannabis that causes brain-altering effects. Various combinations of THC and placebo edibles were given to achieve four doses of THC exposure - 0 mg, 2 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg.

The study measured the standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP), which assesses how drivers adjust lane position and is used to evaluate the effects of medicines and illegal drugs.

Researchers found that SDLP was "significantly increased" at 20 mg and 10 mg doses compared with the placebo at two and five hours post-consumption, suggesting greater difficulty in maintaining lane position.

Reaction time and the standard deviation of speed were "negatively influenced" among drivers due to THC exposure, the study said. The individual's willingness to drive was also found to have "significantly decreased" at 20 mg exposure, according to the study.

For the highest dose of 20 mg, whole-blood THC concentrations peaked at 3.4 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL). This falls within the 1 to 5 ng/mL limits for drivers set by some U.S. states.

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto highlighted the link between driving impairment and blood THC levels in an Aug. 31 statement.

All peak blood THC concentrations in the study were below or near common thresholds used for roadside enforcement, the statement said. This was true even among those who consumed the highest dose.

"Many people may underestimate the impairment caused by cannabis edibles," Dr. Christine Wickens, co-author of the study, said in the statement. "Our findings show that commonly consumed doses can significantly affect critical driving skills, reinforcing the need for caution when making decisions about driving after use."

The study was funded by a grant from Public Safety Canada. Two authors reported conflicts of interest, including receiving grants from pharmaceutical companies.

In an April 20 statement, the University of Colorado Anschutz also reported similar findings. In these studies, people were made to use a driving simulator before and after consuming cannabis.

Cannabis was found to affect driving performance, especially lane-control measures, such as lane departures and weaving. Inhaling cannabis showed smaller and less consistent changes, while edible cannabis resulted in "more noticeable impairment, including slower speeds and increased lane variability and departures," the statement said.

US Cannabis Reclassification

In the United States, the Trump administration recently reclassified cannabis, or marijuana, under the Controlled Substances Act. On April 23, the Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration announced placing some cannabis products under Schedule III of the Act.

Schedule III drugs are deemed to have lower abuse potential and are accepted for medical use. The classification is only applicable to cannabis items approved by the Food and Drug Administration or regulated by a state medical marijuana license.

The American Trucking Associations (ATA) has raised concerns about public safety risks arising from the reclassification.

In an April 24 statement, Brenna Lyles, ATA's vice president of safety policy, highlighted concerns about rescheduling cannabis without proper safeguards to preserve the U.S. Department of Transportation's (USDOT's) testing authority for workers carrying out safety-sensitive jobs.

"Absent clear protections for USDOT's marijuana testing authority, a policy shift could undermine the Department's drug- and alcohol-testing program and weaken highway safety," Lyles said.

"That risk is compounded by the lack of a reliable, widely accepted standard to measure marijuana impairment, whether roadside or before a driver gets behind the wheel."

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 20:05
Tyler Durden

This Red State Is Betting It Can Abolish Its Income Tax

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
This Red State Is Betting It Can Abolish Its Income Tax

The data center debate isn't going so well for the builders, as Americans far and wide seriously oppose the construction of new data centers near where they live. One state, however, thinks it can incentivize residents. 

Country roads take West Virginians home across the Virginia state line near Charles Town, where the data center debate has intensified. (Charlie Creitz/Fox News)

Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (R) has unveiled seven principles aligned with 2025 legislation to reduce and eventually eliminate state income tax. Under the plan, West Virginia would set aside 50% of its revenue from approved hyperscale data center projects towards the elimination of the state personal income tax - though let's be clear: the poor, rural residents they'll be building the DCs next to don't pay income tax - so no benefit to them. Middle class voters (and up), however, will have all sorts of reasons to support the move. 

"Today, as the world stands on the cusp of a new digital and economic frontier, West Virginia is stepping forward once again to lead, not by repeating the mistakes of other states, but by implementing a proactive, 20-year development strategy on our terms," Morrisey said in a statement obtained by Fox News. 

The second listed "principle" in Morrisey’s plan says all West Virginians should benefit from data center projects approved through Charleston’s "High Impact Data Center Designation (HIDC)" process and the revenue they generate. The process was established under a separate 2025 state law.

Morrisey’s plan includes "direct tax relief for citizens," with none of the HIDC revenue entering the state general fund.

"By law, 50 percent of project revenue is dedicated directly to reducing and ultimately eliminating the State Personal Income Tax," reads the plan. 

Counties would benefit also - with those hosting data centers receiving 30% of the revenue for schools and local government, and 10% of the revenue distributed to all 55 counties. Another 10% will fund infrastructure upgrades, which include public water systems in a state that's struggled since the decline of the coal industry. 

"This shared framework gives us the exact blueprint we need to attract billions in private investment, create thousands of high-paying construction and technology jobs, lower taxes for our citizens, and revitalize economically distressed regions, all while preserving the wild and wonderful state we call home," said Morrisey. 

The anti-data center movement, meanwhile, has become quite vocal in neighboring Virginia's Jefferson and Berkeley counties - as residents have taken note of sprawling data centers in Loudoun county.

"We are a cautionary tale for the rest of the country," Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA) in recent remarks. "[I]f my district were a country, it would have more data centers than almost every other country in the world."

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 19:40
Tyler Durden

Victor Davis Hanson: The Left Is Dragging America Back To The Dark Ages

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Victor Davis Hanson: The Left Is Dragging America Back To The Dark Ages

Via The Daily Signal,

Editor's note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today's video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal.

The more you look around us today, I think a good description of 2026, culturally, economically, socially, politically, is that we are in a modern medieval world.

Maybe we're progressive regressives, and I don't mean that just in the sense that progressives are regressive, and they are, but that one part of our society is advancing at lightning speed to the future and progressing. But the other part is regressing, and regressing at a phenomenal pace back to what I would call the medieval period.

Remember, the medieval period was roughly that area in time after the fall of the Roman Empire in the West, roughly AD 500 to around AD 1300 to 1400, the beginning of the Italian Renaissance. In medievalism, we often talk about primitivism after the destruction of the classical world during the Dark Ages, the early medieval period, and it's characterized by epidemics, bubonic plague, typhus, typhoid, smallpox, terrible sanitation in urban centers. They had forgotten the Roman use of sewage and aqueducts.

There were open borders. National states popped up that couldn't defend themselves, so you saw castles and walls pop up all over the European countryside in a way you had not during the Roman period. In cities, they were walled, towns even, and the gates closed at dusk to prevent gratuitous crime.

But at the same time that this was happening, you had some of the greatest works of literature in the Western world. You had Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales," Dante's "Inferno," St. Thomas Aquinas' "Summa Theologica." And if you look at the architectural expertise and scientific knowledge of architecture, it was progressing at a geometric rate when you look at the huge cathedrals at Seville or Cologne.

I should remind everybody that around 536, Santa Sofia was created, the Church of the Holy Wisdom in Constantinople. It would be the largest church in Christendom for a thousand years. And everything from the mass production of crossbows to eyeglasses was a product of the medieval period, even if, as I said, the daily lives of most people were wretched.

Now let's switch to the modern period.

All of us now can call anywhere in the world in seconds on our iPhones. Anything you want to know, past, present, future, you can just get on a cheap computer and ask an artificial intelligence program from the many free platforms. You can watch movies, you can watch entertainment on satellites. Anything you want is at your fingertips.

The nation itself is exploring space. We're getting close to conquering cancer. I can attest to that. Computers allow you to write without even speaking. You can, unfortunately, compose a whole term paper or a book with AI. You can make a movie with AI.

Yet at the same time that's happening, look at what's going on in Berkeley here in California or Los Angeles. We're seeing outbreaks of medieval diseases that we thought had been conquered years ago, given our sophisticated knowledge of sewage and water treatment. We had a typhus breakout in Los Angeles. We had leptospirosis, a rat disease, in Berkeley.

You look at the homeless camps all over our major cities. People are just out in the open fornicating, urinating, defecating, injecting drugs. There's tons of feces that has to be removed, and it's so strange in this modern medievalism.

We have sophisticated researchers who go into a hospital in Chicago or go to a cancer center in San Francisco and have to check the bottoms of their shoes to make sure they don't have feces as they go into their space-age laboratories.

It's really funny. In the medieval period, public hangings and beheadings were sort of public events that people flocked out to see. Is that any different than our glorification of murderers?

And there is a difference. Luigi Mangione, they named an opera after him in California. The killer of Charlie Kirk brought people jubilation. I won't even get into Lindsay Clancy, who strangled her three children and became every woman to the feminist left.

At least in the medieval period, they knew that the murderer had done something wrong and was being punished. In the post-medieval period, we are glorifying that murderer, and that's really striking.

And so, what I'm getting at is we are the most regulated, the most advanced, the most modern, the most scientific society in history, even as we can't solve problems that were solvable, and the medieval period would have died to know the solutions that we have in our hands to make sure we have clean water, to make sure there is no crime, to make sure there is no disease, to make sure that people don't defecate on the street. But we don't do it. We willingly don't do it.

Now, the question to finish is why?

We have an elite that has embraced a very toxic ideology throughout history, and that is mandated, government-sanctioned equality of result. And they have divided, therefore, to further that ideology, the world into victims and victimizers, an arbitrary classification, sometimes based on class, but increasingly on race.

And once they identify someone as a victim who's not responsible for his plight, then it's the duty of the society to allow him to express himself. If you have a lot of teenagers who want to loot a jewelry store, then you say they were hungry and they needed food.

If you see homeless people living on the street, then it was because of something the majority culture did to them.

And the result of that is when people engage in very dangerous antisocial behavior, an elite will tell the rest of us that they're not subject to law enforcement or they're not subject to the laws that apply to the rest of us.

But there are two really pernicious addenda here.

No. 1, the people who do this on the left, who believe in this mandated equality and a binary of victim and victimizer, are never subject to the consequences of their own ideology. Nancy Pelosi's home is not surrounded by homeless people. Jane Fonda doesn't have to trip over people injecting drugs when she walks outside her door. The Hollywood stars in Malibu who champion the homeless have very clear security. You can't get near their homes.

In other words, we, the lab rats, are those upon whom they experiment.

And there's another reason as well. It's not just that they experiment on us - and this ideology is not applicable to itself - but more importantly, they believe that they are morally superior because most of them are agnostics or atheists. They have lost their God, but they have found it in a post-Enlightenment caring, abstract though it may be, for victims.

And when you put this religious element to it, because it makes no sense to allow medieval diseases and medievalism to dominate your cities in crime, filth and homelessness, but they do it.

They feel morally superior, and it gives them meaning in their life in a way that we, the majority, find not morally superior, but morally repugnant.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 19:15
Tyler Durden

El Nino Crushes Atlantic Hurricane Activity, Lowest Since 1941

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
El Nino Crushes Atlantic Hurricane Activity, Lowest Since 1941

The peak of the Atlantic hurricane season arrives next Thursday, yet by this point the basin would normally have produced multiple systems tracking through the Caribbean, the Gulf of America, and the open Atlantic. This year, however, a strengthening El Niño and record vertical wind shear are tearing apart disturbances before they can rapidly intensify.

Bloomberg reports that only five short-lived tropical storms have formed this season, and none has intensified into a hurricane. The Atlantic has not recorded so little activity at this point in the season since 1941.

"We're crushing all sorts of shear records this year," said Phil Klotzbach, lead author of Colorado State University's annual seasonal forecast. "The models are so anemic on storm development coming up in the next 10 days too."

Forecasters and researchers are tracking accumulated cyclone energy, or ACE, which measures the combined strength and duration of tropical storms and hurricanes during a season.

"We currently have an ACE of 4.4," Klotzbach said. That is the lowest since 1941. A low ACE indicates that storms have generally been weak or short-lived, reflecting the fact that no tropical disturbance has intensified into a hurricane.

For the US energy complex, the absence of hurricane activity is great news. Gulf Coast refineries, offshore platforms, pipelines, and LNG export terminals have avoided precautionary shutdowns, allowing facilities to operate near full capacity as the global refined-products crisis deepens. This has been a boon for US producers as the country exports record volumes of crude oil and diesel. 

Still, a lull in tropical activity does not entirely rule out the possibility of a destructive late-season storm, as roughly 12.5 weeks remain before the season ends on November 30.

Meanwhile, Southern California and Hawaii are bracing for potential impacts from tropical systems over Labor Day weekend.

"It just seems like it's one storm after another out there because of the atmospheric conditions and the water being pretty warm," Robbie Berg, a warning coordination meteorologist at the National Hurricane Center, told the outlet, referring to the activity in the Pacific.

El Niño Impacts

"For an El Niño year, this is what we would expect," Berg said. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 18:50
Tyler Durden

Asian Oil Buying Spree Sends Dubai Crude Toward $100

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Asian Oil Buying Spree Sends Dubai Crude Toward $100

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

Stronger appetite for Middle Eastern crude grades from China and India has added upward pressure on prices for these grades, pushing the Dubai futures close to $100 per barrel, Bloomberg reported today, citing unnamed traders.

Demand for Middle Eastern oil is especially strong from refining majors such as Indian Oil Corp. and PetroChina, as well as refiners in South Korea and Japan, the report said. This is despite the latest escalation between the United States and Iran, with Saudi Arabia's oil exports dropping to the lowest since 2017, according to data from ship-trackers including Kpler and Vortexa.

A further price rally may well be on the table as some cargoes face delays from August to September and October, Bloomberg also noted. At the time of writing, Murban futures, the UAE benchmark, was trading at $106.10 per barrel, and DME Oman, the Middle East sour crude benchmark for Asia, was trading at $99.18 per barrel.

The stronger demand comes despite depressed flows of oil via the Strait of Hormuz. Over the past week, the average daily volume of oil making its way via the waterway stood at between 6 and 8 million barrels.

Asian buyers, meanwhile, are also stepping up purchases from other regions, notably Brazil, Canada, and Argentina, with China and India also buying more Russian crude.

While Middle Eastern oil prices rise, Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate dipped yesterday, reflecting uncertainty about developments in the Middle East even as mutual strikes between the United States and Iran continue. According to some analysts, the dip in prices came in response to a pause in the strikes. It appears traders believe the pause could extend, despite a statement by President Trump that "It was a very heavy attack last night, and we're prepared to do another one any time we want."

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 18:25
Tyler Durden

Vance Suggests Iran Conflict Could Drag Through Midterms, But At Least We're Not Calling It A War

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Vance Suggests Iran Conflict Could Drag Through Midterms, But At Least We're Not Calling It A War

The White House has returned to its prior talking point that the war against Iran shouldn't be called a war. In earlier stages of the conflict President Trump had applied various monikers that stopped far short, from an "excursion" to a "little detour" to a "stopover" to a mere limited "military operation".

A full five months ago he had proclaimed, "We had to take a little detour. Won’t be long." Various phrases like this have been repeated on a monthly basis, as what the American public was 'assured' was supposed to be a "four to six week-long" operation has blown past the six month mark this week. And yet, the administration is back at it, despite new heavy fire having been exchanged between the US and Iran just in the last few days.

Vice President JD Vance in Thursday remarks rejected the use of the word "war" to describe the conflict with Iran and declined to predict whether it would be over by November's midterm elections. At the moment Republicans hold narrow majorities in Congress, but now must face down voters amid an increasingly unpopular quagmire conflict in the Middle East. Vance in taking questions from reporters sought to reason that, "Right now, there is no active shooting."

JD Vance praises Trump for winning wars, says moments later of Iran that "I wouldn't call it a war" 🥴 pic.twitter.com/2RAoFtwa9M

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 3, 2026

Ironically, it was a mere few hours prior to Vance's comments that Iran had once again fired on US Gulf ally Kuwait, also amid some reports that the UAE was targeted as well. And the day prior to that, US bases in Jordan were rocked by missiles once again, though Jordan said it intercepted most. Tehran claimed high casualties among US forces, while the Pentagon has sought to bat this down, denying that casualties resulted.

The Vice President characterized this latest flare-up as a US "responsibility" to conduct strikes on Iran, given it has been targeting commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

Vance also notably didn't want to set "artificial timelines." He responded to a reporter by positing: "But when you ask, 'When will this end?' You're asking me a question like, 'When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?'" Vance said. "I think the reality is, I don't know the answer to that question. You would have to ask the Iranians."

But the reality remains - the US is still fighting for a return to the pre-war status of the Strait of Hormuz, which had before February 28 been open to all international shipping, and with no 'fee' or 'tax' imposed by Tehran or other regional nations.

Recall too that back in May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio articulated with crystal clarity that the goal of the war in Iran is to restore the Hormuz Strait "back to the way it was" before Trump initiated Operation Epic Fury.

Back to the way it was... --Marco Rubio, May 5, 2026

When Vance went back-and-forth with reporters this week over the war's timeline, November elections, and potential impact on the GOP's future, the White House was already battling some terrible optics.

Increasingly, even mainline normie conservative publications like Newsmax are highlighting how fallen and wounded service members are being politicized at a moment the US can't decide whether it's in a war or not:

The administration in July faced scrutiny after it reclassified four fallen soldiers as well as dozens of wounded troops in its Defense Casualty Analysis System, which Pentagon officials have repeatedly pointed to as the definitive source on the numbers of dead and wounded from the conflict.

Those killed or wounded in fighting after a brief ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran fell apart were classified in a new category called "Overseas Operations" after initially being tallied in the totals from the war.

Also this week there was this alarming and disturbing story in the esteemed Military.com: Widow of Airman Killed in Iran War Claims She Was Denied Death Benefits.

"The Air Force recently told me that because we haven't officially declared war, my kids and I aren't eligible for some benefits," the widow of deceased US Air Force Major John "Alex" Klinner wrote. He died in action over Iraq connected to Iran operations.

On CNBC early this week, US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick was discussing the Iran war when he asserted: "There haven’t been American deaths. It’s really been an economic choke-out."

According to the Pentagon's own official tally, a total of 18 US service members have been killed in action against Iran to date. Some pundits have long suspected it could be more, and that the Pentagon could indeed continue to be playing political games in terms of how to 'classify' ongoing or potential deaths. Lutnick's words to CNBC were shocking enough for Trump to directly intervene, claiming that he had mistakenly had "Venezuela on his mind"...

President Trump says Howard Lutnick “had Venezuela on his mind” when Lutnick said there have been no American deaths in the Iran war. https://t.co/BTEgyhOIgN pic.twitter.com/WWe6j1NWdq

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) September 3, 2026

After all of the above, Trump again took to Truth Social to then berate the media and its critical coverage of the Iran war and Hormuz crisis. He called journalists questioning the White House narrative 'treasonous scum'.

Trump particularly singled out recent and ongoing reports of US missile and interceptor shortages, which he has slammed as false. He went on to claim that the US has "virtually unlimited amounts of Mid to High Grade Ammunition".

Probably the bulk of American voters aren't buying it. Is all of the above evidence of serving and protecting America First? We haven't heard this phrase out of the administration in a long while.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 18:00
Tyler Durden

Brazilian Lift: Diplomats Accused Of Helping Fugitive 'Dr. Frankenstein' To Flee US

Zero Rss
3 weeks 3 days ago
Brazilian Lift: Diplomats Accused Of Helping Fugitive 'Dr. Frankenstein' To Flee US

Authored by Jonathan Turley via JonathanTurley.org,

There is an intriguing story out of Brazil where Joao Arajuo, 57, a plastic surgeon known as "Dr. Frankenstein," resurfaced after cutting an ankle monitor and fleeing the United States. The infamous plastic surgeon mocked the police and recounted how easy it was to flee the country. However, in detailing his escape, he implicated Brazilian diplomats in actively assisting the flight, making them accessories after the fact.

Araujo was awaiting trial for a variety of crimes linked to cosmetic surgeries, including procedures that were botched and left patients disfigured. These treatments included liposuction, fillers and laser treatments.

The 14 counts included felonies for grand theft, practicing medicine without a license, and fraud.

However, Araujo decided not to wait for a trial: "When I decided to leave, I simply cut off the electronic ankle bracelet. I took [Interstate] 95. I took a boat owned by an acquaintance and went to [the island of] Bimini [in the Bahamas], [then to] Nassau, Panama, Rio de Janeiro."

He offered details that could be used to identify any collaborators: "I left at 4:30 a.m. I arrived in [the island of] Bimini [in the Bahamas] early. From Bimini, I took a plane at 230 p.m. I arrived in Nassau 40 minutes later. Because the flight was fully booked to Panama, I had to spend the night" before going "from Panama to Rio de Janeiro."

So Araujo had his friend sail him to the Bahamas and then flew to Rio. He celebrated by mocking the police. However, he implicated Brazilian diplomats in making the escape:

"Any idiot knows how to leave the United States. I had all the support of the Brazilian consulate ... They are all my friends. Both the Brazilian federal police and the Brazilian embassy gave me all the support in Miami."

The direct assistance of diplomats in the flight of a fugitive would be a serious breach of diplomatic status.

For any diplomat, this would be the knowing commission of a criminal act as an accessory after the fact.

While diplomats have immunity, they could be declared persona non grata under Article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Araujo was required to surrender his only known passport from Brazil. That means he somehow obtained a new one. It is unclear whether the passport was fake or whether his "friends" took the extraordinary step of issuing him a new passport to facilitate his flight.

While he did not name his "friends," he noted in a prior interview that "the consul in Miami is my friend" and used the first names of both the current general consul and his recently departed predecessor. The acting consul general in Miami, Andre Odenbreit Carvalho left in May. He also referenced Marcelo Ivo, the Brazilian Federal Police Liaison for the Consulate in Miami.

Notably, according to Steven Nelson at the New York Post, the US government in April asked Ivo to leave his post "in a reciprocal action after Brasilia booted an unnamed American official in apparent retaliation for US immigration officials briefly detaining a former Brazilian congressman."

Tensions between the countries are already high under leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. The Trump Administration previously canceled the visa of the Brazilian ambassador, Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti.

The administration has also hit Brazil with massive tariffs in a trade war.

While Araujo expressed a desire to live in Europe, the United States will likely seek an Interpol warrant that would expose him to arrest. The Brazilian Constitution bars the extradition of its citizens. However, even if Brazil does not extradite him, he will have trouble traveling. Even those "idiots" that he attacked could track and arrest him in international transit.

Tyler Durden Fri, 09/04/2026 - 17:40
Tyler Durden

Pagination

  • First page
  • Previous page
  • …
  • Page 49
  • Page 50
  • Page 51
  • Page 52
  • Page 53
  • Page 54
  • Page 55
  • Page 56
  • Page 57
  • …
  • Next page
  • Last page
Checked
9 minutes 25 seconds ago
URL
https://www.zerohedge.com
Zero Rss feed

zero rss

News feeds

  • Eight Marines Were Injured By Iranian Anti-Ship Cruise Missile Attack 2 Weeks Ago
  • UK Pride Group "Captures" A 1,000-Year-Old Castle
  • Dutch Doctors Euthanize Two-Year-Old Toddler In First Case Of Its Kind
  • South Korea Summons Acting Ukrainian Ambassador Over North Korean Prisoner Transfer Revelation
  • Where Robots Do The Most Housework
  • British Schoolkids Told To List Only The Positives Of Mass Migration
  • Leaked Anthropic IPO Prospectus Shows $42BN Net Loss, $518BN In Unfunded Spending Commitments, And $20BN In Cash
  • The Rising Drone Threat: Why Our Critical Infrastructure Has Become Dangerously Exposed
  • Trump Admin Asks Supreme Court To Revive Third-Country Deportations
  • The Hidden Mechanism Behind Washington's Control Of Iraq's Oil Money
More

zero rss

Copyright (c) 2026 FYCKL Project