Zero Rss

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll Submits Resignation Amid Tensions With Hegseth

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll is out. Early Monday evening The Wall Street Journal is the first to break the news, describing that he submitted his resignation to President Trump, following months of tensions with Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth.

Some national security sources have already been quoted as saying the development is "unsurprising" - with the WSJ writing that "Driscoll had been expected to step down this year from his role as the civilian leader of the Army after clashing with Hegseth."

via Associated Press

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly has confirmed that Driscoll resigned. It comes just days after the Iran war hit the six month mark, with no apparent exit strategy articulated by the White House or military leadership.

"Secretary Driscoll has been highly effective in advancing President Trump’s agenda to Make America Strong Again at the Department of the Army by providing outstanding leadership during historic military operations, restoring an emphasis on readiness and lethality, assisting with negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, and more," Kelly said in a statement.

There could be more high-level resignations at the Pentagon to come, amid several simultaneous controversies gripping internal Department of War ranks over several months. To review:

• First and foremost, there's the Iran war and its strategy and direction, and overextension of forces.
• Next, there's the still raging controversy over dwindling missile and interceptor supplies.
• Also important is that Hegseth has been doing some house-cleaning at the Pentagon - since the start of the administration's term sacking a series top generals and commanders, also amid questions of loyalty.

On this latter front, the Journal presents some of the latest developments as follows:

Last week, Driscoll attended the retirement ceremony at Fort Bragg for Gen. Chris Donahue, who served as the top Army officer in Europe until Hegseth downgraded his position, effectively bringing an end to his military career. 

Donahue’s abrupt departure was presented as part of Hegseth’s broader push to shrink the number of generals and admirals by 10% overall, plus a 20% cut to the number of four-star positions, the Journal reported. 

Hegseth's efforts at bringing radical change to the Pentagon has resulted in huge, rare frictions between his office and top generals and admirals across the globe, particularly centered on questions of force readiness and future vision and doctrine.

"Driscoll brought up concerns with the administration surrounding Army transformation and readiness and Hegseth's blocking those efforts specifically by firing the Generals who were responsible," the source said. https://t.co/sO1r6dYkZ7

— Idrees Ali (@idreesali114) August 31, 2026

There are some political dynamics as well, with WSJ also noting that "Driscoll is a former law school classmate of Vice President JD Vance. A former Army officer, he forged a close relationship with George, the former Army chief of staff who was fired by Hegseth in April. The two pushed soldiers to adopt new technology and become more adaptable battlefield threats."

So all this further seems bound up with personalities, loyalties, as well as contrasting visions for the future of America's armed forces. It should be noted that Driscoll as a Vance-ally was probably - just like the Vice President - deeply skeptical of many of the Trump's administration's Iran-related decisions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 20:05

Universities Could Lose Foreign-Student Certification Over Internship Rule Violations, Trump Admin Says

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump's administration has issued a memo to universities aimed at restricting certain internship work authorizations for international students. Officials cautioned that schools failing to comply could have their certification to enroll foreign students revoked.

A student walks toward Royce Hall on the campus of University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) on March 11, 2020. Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images

The memo, which is dated Aug. 24 and issued by the Student and Exchange Visitor Program under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), said the agency "has observed a rise in Curricular Practical Training (CPT) authorizations that appear to violate regulatory requirements which permit CPT only where the training is an integral part of an established curriculum."

"Failure to comply with SEVP regulations may result in an institution losing certification to enroll foreign students," the memo said.

Some schools have already stopped processing applications. The University of California, Los Angeles ceased issuing certain CPT authorizations while it reviewed the guidance.

"UCLA has paused certain Curricular Practical Training authorizations while it reviews recent federal guidance and determines next steps," a UCLA spokesperson said.

At the University of California, Berkeley, the international office described the Aug. 24 memo as "more narrow in focus, more direct, and includes content that is more restrictive in nature."

An earlier memo had been issued in mid-August. Berkeley said it is unlikely to process certain work authorization applications "in the near future" and told international students to plan accordingly.

The university will keep handling "degree-requirement" CPT as usual and plans to resume "Doctoral Dissertation and Master's Thesis Research CPT."

University officials said they would consult legal experts to align processes with the new federal requirements.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE's parent agency, said the underlying regulations have not changed.

"However, schools and employers should consider themselves on notice: under President Trump, abuse of this generous system will no longer be tolerated."

CPT allows eligible international students to participate in internships or training when the work forms an integral part of their academic curriculum. The memo stresses that the training must connect to an established academic program.

This step fits into an overarching set of changes for foreign students. In July, DHS completed a rule ending the long-standing "duration of status" policy. That system had permitted many F, J, and I visa holders to remain in the country without a fixed departure date.

The new rule, published in the Federal Register on July 17 and effective Sept. 15, limits most stays to four years unless students apply for extensions through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Extensions will require screening, background checks, and fraud reviews. The grace period after the conclusion of studies is reduced from 60 days to 30 days.

"For nearly half a century, the outdated 'duration of status' system has compromised national security and created an environment ripe for immigration fraud," DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin said at the time.

"By implementing clear, finite limits on these visas, the United States is reclaiming its ability to properly screen, vet, and monitor individuals within our borders."

The rule is being challenged in court by a coalition of unions and advocacy groups that say the new rule makes the United States less competitive as a destination for international talent.

Earlier this year, ICE published the findings of an investigation into Optional Practical Training, a separate post-graduation work program.

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said investigators "have identified over 10,000 foreign students who claim to be working for highly suspect employers."

Visits turned up empty buildings, locked doors, and addresses associated with hundreds of students who were not involved in the activity they claimed, he said. Officials also found "phantom employees" who never reported to the listed sites, as well as complex international financial transactions, according to Lyons.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 19:15

Take-Two Tumbles Most In Months As BofA Calls Grand Theft Auto Reveal "Impressive, But Unlikely To Surprise"

Take-Two Interactive shares plunged the most in nearly seven months on Monday as investors weighed a series of "Grand Theft Auto VI" leaks in recent weeks ahead of the Nov. 19 release. 

The leaked clips reportedly expose plot details, character scenes, and gameplay mechanics, prompting Rockstar Games (a studio owned by TTWO) to call the leaks "gut-wrenching" and warn that some of the game's surprises may have been spoiled. 

What X users are saying:

Time to address the elephant in the room:

No self-respecting man would like to play as an empowered, annoying 2/10 Latina in Grand Theft Auto.

This is lame and woke. pic.twitter.com/dgIVoT5Pf2

— Yorch Torch Games (@YorchTorchGames) August 30, 2026

So let get this straight...some Gaming writer at Forbes is speculating that GTA6 Online (not GTA6) could be 2 years delayed (according to himself) since $TTWO didn't mention it on their call and now $3B Mkt Cap gets whipped out ? lol

Thank you Mr Market pic.twitter.com/4CSjTucXsT

—  Q-Cap  (@qcapital2020) August 31, 2026

13 years of waiting and 1 BILLION dollars for THIS?

GTA 6 shaping up great pic.twitter.com/fQXy5PQ6HQ

— Rock Solid (@ShitpostRock) August 31, 2026

Omar Dessouky, an equity research analyst at Bank of America focused on gaming, digital advertising, and consumer internet companies, penned a note on Monday titled "GTA 6: Impressive Gameplay Reveal, but Unlikely to Surprise." 

Dessouky pointed out that the trailer released by Take-Two Interactive last week reduced the risk of another launch delay by showing GTA VI is already playable. 

"Some details in the footage are consistent with access to a genuine playable build. Were a distributable copy to circulate, it could weigh on sales (particularly the PC version); at this stage, however, there is no clear evidence one exists," the analyst said. 

Dessouky added that the footage delivered few surprises. Many of the mechanics had already been disclosed, while clips released by an anonymous account called CyberLeek stripped away some of the mystery ahead of the mid-November release. 

He forecasts that GTA VI will sell 45 million units during fiscal 2027, generate $3.44 billion in combined bookings with GTA Online, and deliver $898 million in incremental net income. Take-Two's total bookings are forecasted to jump 36% to $9.16 billion. 

Dessouky maintained his Buy rating and $368 price target. The stock dropped 6.3% late in Monday's cash session, marking its largest decline since Feb. 12, when it fell 6.6%. 

Gamers have waited 13 years for this point. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 18:50

FDA Authorizes Generic Ivermectin Shot To Prevent Screwworm

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Federal regulators have authorized a generic ivermectin injection for the prevention of New World screwworm in cattle.

The Food and Drug Administration on Aug. 27 granted emergency use authorization for Bimectin, the injection, for use within 24 hours of birth.

The drug can also be used when castration is performed, or when a wound appears. It cannot be used in lactating dairy cows or in calves destined for veal.

Bimectin is a generic version of Ivomec, which the FDA authorized in February. The FDA previously approved Bimectin for treating and controlling parasites in cattle. The application for Bimectin came from Bimeda Animal Health, an Ireland-based company.

Based on available evidence, FDA officials concluded that the injection may prevent screwworm in cattle, and that the known and potential benefits outweigh known and potential risks. That information includes studies carried out in Brazil and Argentina in the 1990s, and a 2019 study conducted in Brazil, which found ivermectin injection prevented screwworm infestations in cattle, according to an FDA fact sheet.

"The animal safety profile for cattle, including male and female reproducing cattle, is well-characterized, and the information provided support that the food products obtained from the treated animals are safe for human consumption when used under the conditions described in the authorization," the fact sheet stated.

"This authorization reflects the FDA's commitment to expanding generic drug options against New World screwworm," Timothy Schell, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine, said in a statement. "By authorizing both generic and pioneer products, the Agency is ensuring producers aren't dependent on a single manufacturer or product to protect their herds."

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic medication widely used in animals. The drug is also available for humans, primarily to prevent worm infections.

Screwworm, a flesh-eating pest, entered the United States from Mexico earlier in 2026 for the first time in years.

The Trump administration has since approved or authorized more than a dozen drugs for screwworm prevention and/or treatment, including an ivermectin oral solution for horses, a medication for dogs and puppies, and a generic treatment for dogs, puppies, cats, and kittens.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, in its latest update, with data current through Aug. 25, said that there have been three screwworm cases in August, all in Texas. Two of the cases were among sheep, and one was in a goat.

There were 14 cases in July and 30 in June.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 18:25

Fauci Told Aide To Delete Email About Risky Research

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Dr. Anthony Fauci said an aide should delete an email about risky research his agency was funding, according to documents released on Aug. 29 by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

"Please delete this e-mail and then delete from the deleted file," Fauci told Dr. Clifford Lane, a senior official at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), in a missive on March 4, 2012.

Fauci, NIAID's director at the time, was commenting on an op-ed that criticized risky research that created a more transmissible H5N1 influenza virus. The research, led by European scientist Ron Fouchier, was funded by the NIAID.

The op-ed said the virus appeared to spread easily and would be lethal to humans if it escaped confinement or was stolen by terrorists. It highlighted the government's funding of the research.

It also noted that the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity had recommended that papers prepared by researchers such as Fouchier omit key details that might help terrorists make their own versions of risky viruses.

Fauci told Lane that "people are getting to" Phil Boffey, the writer of the op-ed, "and he is swallowing it." He said that the board's decision was wrong. And he wrote that if the board maintained its stance, "the field of research on influenza transmissibility and host adaptability has a very serious problem."

Fauci and Lane did not respond to requests for comment by publication time.

Boffey could not be reached.

Fouchier had told Science magazine that his team created "probably one of the most dangerous studies you can make."

Several weeks later, Fauci coauthored an op-ed in the Washington Post that said work by Fouchier and another group funded by the NIAID involved careful work in isolated laboratories and advanced understanding of how mutations of H5N1, sometimes known as avian influenza, worked.

"This research has allowed identification of genetic pathways by which such a virus could better adapt to transmission among people," the op-ed, titled A flu virus risk worth taking, stated.

Fauci's agency later funded research in China that made a modified coronavirus more pathogenic than the original version, among other gain-of-function experiments.

Fauci's directive to Lane was one of five times he told aides to delete emails, according to documents obtained and released by Paul. The other instances took place in 2009, 2011, and 2020. Fauci left the government in late 2022.

Paul said in a statement that the documents "show years of 'delete this email' orders." He has referred Fauci to the Department of Justice for prosecution after Fauci, during an appearance before the Senate panel Paul chairs, declined to answer questions. Fauci has not been charged.

Prior to leaving office, President Joe Biden gave Fauci a preemptive pardon covering conduct from Jan. 1, 2014, to Jan. 19, 2025.

It is a federal crime to destroy or attempt to destroy federal records. Dr. David Morens, one of Fauci's former aides, recently pleaded guilty to violating that law.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 17:40

SCOTUS Rules Trump Can Build White House Ballroom, Roberts Joins Dissenting Liberals

The U.S. Supreme Court just issued an order allowing construction of President Trump’s White House ballroom project to continue while the administration contests a lower court order that would block much of the development.

The justices voted 5–4 (with Chief Justice Roberts joining the three 'liberal' judges in dissent) to grant the federal government’s request to stay a lower court’s order halting above-ground construction of the ballroom while a lawsuit against the project by a historic preservation group plays out.

“We do not pass upon the legality” of the project, the court said in an unsigned eight-page decision from five of the court’s six Republican-appointed justices.

As The Wall Street Journal reports, two lower courts had declared the ballroom project illegal and said construction must be halted.

But a judge’s stop-work order was put on hold while the administration pursued appeals.

The Supreme Court’s ruling keeps that order on hold indefinitely, effectively giving a green light to one of Trump’s most visibly audacious projects, which critics see as the latest instance of the president ignoring Congress and flouting norms.  

Writing for the dissenters, Roberts said the project is “likely unlawful.”

“The White House is an iconic American building whose symbolism and history are wrapped up in its architecture,” Roberts wrote, adding that it is critical to “ensure that those responsible follow the rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People’s House.”

Roberts had already blocked the stop-work order from kicking in on Aug. 22 with a temporary measure that gave the justices more time to deliberate.

In his emergency appeal to the high court, the solicitor general warned that stopping work now would leave the half-built project “susceptible to strong winds during extreme weather, and vulnerable to erosion, water, foundation damage, and other setbacks that will fundamentally compromise the integrity of everything currently built.” 

The green light means the project could largely be completed before a final ruling on its legality.

Construction on the project, which calls for building a 90,000-square-foot ballroom, began in September 2025.

Building it required demolishing the East Wing, which Trump said was too small and in poor shape.

The facility is now expected to accommodate 1,000 guests, up from the initial 650 people projected, and its original $200 million price tag has doubled, though the true cost of the project is unknown.

Trump has pledged the project will be paid for entirely with private donations, but taxpayers could help fund security-related upgrades if a GOP-led Congress approves it. 

Developing...

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 17:20

The Fallacy Of Stable Prices

Authored by George Ford Smith via Mises Institute,

Though Herbert Hoover was a pioneer among presidents in getting the government to "do something" about a depression, he was no maverick. He had the support of distinguished court economists who promoted the idea that stable prices were the key to lasting prosperity.

Common sense tells us that if we walk into a store and find prices consistently lower than they had been, we are better off, other things equal, because our money buys more. As Rothbard wrote, "Increased productivity tends to lower prices (and costs) and thereby distribute the fruits of free enterprise to all the public, raising the standard of living of all consumers. Forcible propping up of the price level prevents this spread of higher living standards."

While the concept "stable price level" may not sound menacing, the mechanism for achieving it was. The theory's proponents, which included such economics luminaries as Irving Fisher and John Maynard Keynes, weren't too concerned with price stability when prices tended to rise during a boom, especially if prices were rising on the stock market where they were heavily invested. The price stability priests were mostly concerned with falling prices during a bust, and for that they relied on government's creature, the central bank. Falling prices, in fact, were regarded as the cause of depressions. Using enlightened "monetary policy," central banks needed to keep prices from falling to keep economies from collapsing.

Yale and Harvard Go Boom and Bust

Yale professor Irving Fisher helped popularize the view that the "new era" economy of the 1920s would last indefinitely. With the exception of stocks and real estate, prices were fairly level, and since the mainstream definition of inflation was and still is "a general and progressive increase in prices," the 1920s were and still are said to be a period of inconsequential inflation. Rothbard tells us that,

Fisher was particularly critical of the minority of skeptical economists who warned of over-expansion in the stock and real estate markets due to cheap money, and even after the stock market crash, Fisher continued to insist that prosperity, particularly in the stock market, was just around the corner.

Beginning in 1923, Fisher wrote a syndicated column, carried by leading newspapers, in which he discussed relevant economic issues of the day. Fisher's column was Yale's answer to the Harvard Economic Service. A 1986 paper issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) says that,

Fisher's predictions in the period before and after the crash, were no closer to the mark than those of his Harvard brethren.

"In two months I expect to see the stock market much higher than today," Fisher said on October 15, 1929. Economist Hernán Cortés Douglas tells us that,

Days after the crash [on October 29], the Harvard Economic [Service] informed its subscribers: "A severe depression such as 1920-21 is outside the range of probability. We are not facing a protracted liquidation."

After repeated forecasts of optimism, the Harvard Economic Service folded in 1932. Fisher's professional reputation gradually collapsed. Fisher's son estimates his father lost $10 million during the Depression (roughly $241 million in 2026 dollars). Yale had to buy Fisher's house and rent it back to him to keep him from being evicted. When he died in 1947 he left an estate so small it wasn't taxed.

Interestingly, the authors of the NBER paper applied "modern statistical techniques" to analyze the data Fisher and the Harvard service used in their forecasts. The result: "The statistical findings mirror the verbal pronouncements' systematic over-prediction of economic activity." In other words, both Fisher and Harvard were sound methodologically; it was just unfortunate that reality led them astray.

(NBER, it should be mentioned, runs a dating service - it dates when recessions begin and end. For example, its Business Cycle Dating Committee announced in December, 2008 that the US economy was in a severe recession that began a year earlier, in December, 2007. In September, 2010 they announced that the recession had ended 15 months earlier, in June, 2009. As top-tier economic scientists they avoid rushing to conclusions, so we can be sure of their results. Given that the last one has officially ended, there will be no continuity between it and the one to follow.)

Keynes was no less a forecasting bungler. An avid speculator, he saw nothing but good times ahead during the 1920s boom:

He met the Swiss banker, Felix Somary and was begging Somary to give him some great stock picks. When Somary said he couldn't recommend any stocks right now because he was expecting a crash, Keynes responded infamously, "We will not see another crash in our lifetimes." (Somary once said, correctly: "the state alone is responsible for inflation: inflation without government . . . is impossible.")

Keynes lost a fortune but went bargain-hunting in the early 1930s, putting aside his loathing of the barbarous relic and buying up gold stocks and managing money for insurance companies. He recovered handsomely until he was wiped out again when an incipient recovery collapsed in 1937. When he died of a heart attack in April, 1946 he had once more accumulated an impressive fortune.

Austrians Explain the Crisis - and the Cure

Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek were among the few economists to identify the economy of the 1920s as a credit bubble. Their crystal ball was the economic theory they had developed, known today as the Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle. It says bank credit expansion based on money created out of nothing generates booms that eventually go bust.

Activities that were profitable when money was made cheap are revealed as unsustainable when low-interest loans are no longer available. Economist Roger Garrison explains:

Mises showed that an artificially low rate of interest, maintained by credit expansion, misallocates capital, making the production process too time-consuming in relation to the temporal pattern of consumer demand. As time eventually reveals the discrepancy, markets for both capital goods and consumer goods react to undo the misallocation.

The market reaction is the bust phase of the business cycle, as producers attempt to bring production in alignment with actual consumer demands. Hans Sennholz has written,

Economic booms and busts occur in every case of fiat expansion, whether the expansion is one percent or hundredths of a percent. The magnitude of expansion. . .merely determines the severity of the maladjustment and the necessary readjustment.

Even if most prices should decline while monetary authorities expand credit at a modest rate, the injection of fiat funds falsifies interest rates and thereby causes erroneous investment decisions.

"Credit expansion" is another name for a policy of inflation. Inflation creates "the illusion of profit," as Mises noted in Socialism; inflation "discourages saving, and thereby prevents the formation of fresh capital." It is this "rottenness" - inflation - that must be extirpated along with all the bad bets, but - since Fisher and Keynes - it is considered the cure.

For further discussion see The Jolly Roger Dollar.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 17:00

Feminist New York Governor Sports Hijab While Pandering To Muslim Voters

New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a self described feminist and "social justice Catholic", has raised eyebrows this week after appearing in a hijab at an Islamic Cultural School in the Bronx to make statements against "Islamophobia".  The visit is part of a greater Democrat Party effort to strengthen political alliances with world immigrants and Islamic immigrants in particular. 

NY Governor Kathy Hochul is now wearing a hijab. pic.twitter.com/tzd7VIRxoS

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) August 30, 2026

Hochul received immediate backlash and criticism from conservatives, pointing out the hypocrisy of a feminist pandering to migrants who, under Sharia Law, view women as property.  Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) mocked Hochul, saying liberals like her complain President Donald Trump is “turning America into the Handmaid’s Tale” - only to then cover their heads with a symbol of submission to Muslim "patriarchy."  

Democrats: "Sexist Republicans are turning America into the Handmaid's Tale!"

Also Democrats: pic.twitter.com/7lWhOtvXFN

— Brandon Gill (@realBrandonGill) August 30, 2026

Hochul's virtue signal is not exactly a new thing among Democrat women, however.  Hochul has worn the hijab in the past.  Female politicians breaking out the hijab to rub elbows with Muslim advocacy groups are common these days. 

Last year Peggy Flanagan (Minnesota Lt. Governor, Catholic), then a U.S. Senate candidate, wore a hijab while visiting the Karmel Somali Market in Minneapolis and speaking on Somali-language television. She used the greeting “As-salamu alaykum” and said the Somali community is “part of the fabric of the state of Minnesota.” Critics called it pandering amid the now infamous Somali-linked welfare fraud investigation.

Mikie Sherrill (New Jersey Governor) posted photos in March of herself wearing a hijab at the Islamic Center of Passaic County in Paterson during a Ramadan event. She took selfies with attendees and the mosque’s imam. The visit drew scrutiny because of the imam’s past deportation case involving alleged Hamas ties.   

And of course, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY Congresswoman, Catholic) wore a hijab at an Eid al-Adha event in the Bronx alongside Mayor Zohran Mamdani. She spoke onstage and later said head coverings were “the respectful move” at a mosque.

The act of wearing the clothing is not in itself the issue.  The issue is the incessant cries about "women's oppression" from feminists when it comes to western culture, all while bowing at the feet of a foreign ideology that actually, factually, treats women as second class citizens.    

This is yet more proof that the political left is obsessed with securing a multicultural "Utopia" in the US.  So much so that they are willing to look the other way when it comes to their most "sacred" principles and ideals if it means maintaining alliances with third worlders.  

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 16:40

Oh, Canada?

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Clusterfuck Nation,

"Carney increasingly reminds me of Fauci. He has that exact same air of technocratic infallibility. . . ."

- Hans Mahncke on X

You go for decades without even thinking of the place. The Great White North. Very polite people, somewhat Scottish, seems like. There's poutine! Une invention Québécoise - an indigestible mélange of French fries, gravy, and cheese curds, like something you'd cook up at 4am after a toga party in a frat house. Ice hockey (of course, but was it necessary?) Polar bears. Puffins on the Labrador cliffs. Tar Sands. Plaid upholstery...

Years ago, we used to go up there from college in the farthest reaches of upstate western New York just to get a half-fake buzz of being in "a foreign country." Niagara Falls was like Times Square without the charm. Bunch of squalid wax museums and ashtray shoppes. Toronto was Rochester on steroids, beyond forgettable.

I once took a choo-choo train from Seattle to Vancouver just to take in the scenery along the Pacific Coast. Bald eagles galore all the way up feeding on stuff out in the Pacific tidal mud-flats. Got to Vancouver. They yanked me out of the customs line and stuffed me in a back office. A female immigration officer swaggered in, said they found a nine-year-old DUI conviction for me on some computer (well. . .. okay. . . a night of fishing with rum). Said she could keep me out of the country if she was in a bad mood. I couldn't help wising off: "Nice to know Canadian immigration policy depends on your mood." Whoops. They detained me for an extra two hours just to make me feel the pain. But I was eventually released into that boring city. Thank God for the Chinese restaurants.

And now. . . Mark Carney! He's a beauty. A refined ectoplasmic manifestation of all the Globalist huggermugger working tirelessly to upend Western Civ. He has a weird glow of semi-transparency - not in the sense of revealing any truths, but more like you can partly see through him . . . he's only half there . . . a ghost in the geopolitical machine.

More to the point, Mark Carney has made himself a pain-in-the-ass for President Donald Trump.

On the surface, this US / Canada rift appears to be all about trade relations.

Naw. It's about Mark Carney being a tool for merry old England attempting to capture the resource base of northern North America to collateralize what little remains of the UK's once-sprawling, now sinking, empire. England is not so merry these days. It has somehow managed to issue a fatwa on itself and entered a gruesome process of assisted economic and cultural suicide. You can't even raise a British flag there anymore without risking weeks in the slammer. The home folks get stabbed and beheaded. It's all blight, rape, kebabs, and hijabs over there. Not a good look if you still want to be that country you dimly remember.

Plus, they want to kick off a big war with Russia. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Really? Lacking much of a military, Ukraine was Britain's tool for that. Trouble was the huge expense of that project. Thought they could work-around it by turning Ukraine into a money-laundry, washing, rinsing, and disbursing US-sourced funds to Mr. Zelenskyy, with giant kickbacks to the Democratic Party's money apparatus. Worked nicely when the phantom "Joe Biden" haunted the White House. He and his sicko son, Hunter, were already in so deep in Ukraine since JB's felonious veepdom that Mark Carney - then chief of the Bank of England - could hang the Bidens out to dry anytime, if required.

Lo, these many years, then, Britain and NATO have sponsored all that drone-making and missile-launching action from Ukraine deep into Russia - in case you wonder how Zelenskyy carries on this stupid war, considering there are no young men left in Ukraine eligible to reinforce the battle lines in Donbas. Britain and NATO probably also furnish the satellite targeting of Russian assets. You must doubt that the USA is involved in that anymore. Luckily, Mr. Putin has the Christian patience of a true saint.

Our president is sick of Ukraine and the festering geopolitical disease it has been infected with by our increasingly-former allies in Europe. NATO's aim with Russia is exactly the same as Britain's push in Canada - a resource grab for the failing nations of Europe, who are getting choked to death by Ursula von der Leyen and her EU flying monkeys. Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain. . . all whirling around the drain. Our president sees all that. (You don't need magic glasses.)

Maybe it's time to just send the 82nd Airborne into Ottawa. Flight time: under two hours from Fort Bragg, NC. Drop them on Parliament Hill. Let them hang around a few hours. Then, declare the whole thing a gag and fly them home. It'd be worth it. Or maybe go in and snatch Mark Carney like we did Maduro. Stuff Carney in an adjoining cell at the MDC in Brooklyn. I'm sure the two could amuse each other, swap satisfying gripes and sob stories.

Really, why stop at just re-naming Lake Ontario. Take the whole darn thing like a pie that has been left on the windowsill too long. The Canadian people would get over it in five minutes. Everything is easier in the USA. Running a company, especially. They could keep their poutine and their hockey, learn to have a little fun once in a while. Quebec could become a theme park (what else have they got going there?). No more tariffs to get hung about. Honk if you like the idea.

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

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 16:20

LA County Steals $5M Fire Relief For ICE-Raid Checks

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

In bombshell findings, Los Angeles County sliced a wildfire housing fund in half and steered the cash toward households claiming income loss from ICE raids, detentions, and deportations - without requiring anyone to disclose immigration status.

Taxpayers who watched entire neighborhoods burn in January 2025 now watch the same government treat federal immigration enforcement as another "emergency" worthy of six-figure rent wipeouts.

After the Eaton and Palisades fires, supervisors approved $10 million to help tenants and landlords dealing with fire-related rent losses. They then kept $5 million for fire claims and moved the other $5 million into a priority category covering "economic hardship because of federal actions targeting immigrant communities." Another $9.788 million from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund was pointed at the same category unless fire victims still had unmet need.

? BOMBSHELL: Los Angeles County is STEALING funds from a wildfire relief fund to give up to $15K CHECKS to noncitizens or residents "impacted by ICE raids"

All "without checking the recipient's immigration status"

$5 MILLION has already been redirected ?

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!... pic.twitter.com/49ZnnZHFen

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) August 29, 2026

Households can receive up to six months of housing debt relief, generally capped at $15,000 per rental unit. Eligible costs include unpaid rent, mortgages, and related expenses.

The county's own February 2026 program guide states: "Program eligibility does not require the disclosure of household members' immigration status."

If an applicant claims federal enforcement caused the hardship, officials may ask for detention records. They do not have to produce them. An attestation or other hardship can still qualify the household. The county therefore cannot tell the public how many noncitizens received the money - because it chose not to collect the data.

White House correspondent Natalie Winters first laid out the paper trail: money assembled after neighborhoods burned was reassigned to cushion the consequences of ICE operations, then structured so the public may never know who was paid.

EXCLUSIVE: L.A. County took $5 MILLION from wildfire rent relief—and redirected it to erase housing debt after ICE detentions and deportations.

Illegal aliens can collect up to $15,000. County officials explicitly wrote the rules so immigration status does not have to be... pic.twitter.com/2rrjT4tUQ6

— Natalie Winters (@nataliegwinters) August 24, 2026

County leaders have not hidden the priority. Fourth District Supervisor Janice Hahn said, "Rent relief is about stability - keeping people safe in their homes and making sure landlords stay whole. This is real help, not a loan, and it does not depend on immigration status."

Third District Supervisor Lindsey Horvath framed the two events as equivalent: "Whether you are fighting to survive the impacts of the fires or of ICE, we are standing with you to keep you housed." She also said, "Parents are choosing between risking detention to earn wages or staying home and watching bills pile up. No one should face such a choice."

Board Chair Hilda L. Solis grouped "emergencies like federal immigration enforcement and the 2025 wildfires" in the same sentence.

The program later reopened so tenants could apply directly. Demand immediately outran supply. Round One drew thousands of applications seeking tens of millions more than the pool available. Officials still treat immigration-enforcement hardship as a qualifying emergency on the same form as fire displacement.

A separate Small Business Resiliency Fund has already sent more than $5.4 million to 1,327 businesses officials say were hit by enforcement actions, curfews, and workforce disruptions. Grants of $2,000 to $5,000 covered rent, payroll, and inventory. That pot came from Care First Community Investment dollars and later supervisor add-ons, not the original fire housing line, but it sits in the same political project: treat ICE activity as a local disaster requiring cash.

Nearly 600 days after the January 2025 firestorm, large numbers of Palisades and Altadena families remain displaced. Reporting in late July found roughly two-thirds of surveyed survivors still out of their homes, with homeowners facing rebuild gaps around $500,000.

Federal long-term recovery money has moved slowly. Local officials spent months expanding categories and rewriting application rules instead of concentrating every available dollar on people whose houses actually burned.

The pattern is larger than one county line item. Governor Gavin Newsom's $2.5 billion state wildfire package saw roughly $14 million diverted to California Highway Patrol overtime for downtown Los Angeles demonstrations against ICE the summer after the fires.

Investigative reporting showed much of the money that was spent circulated back through state agencies rather than reaching survivors directly. A substantial share of the original allocation was never released.

California's political class has spent a year and a half telling fire victims that help is coming while writing program language that treats an immigration raid the same as a house reduced to ash.

The result is a rent-relief machine that can cut a $15,000 check to a household that never lost a roof to fire, never has to prove lawful presence, and can decline to produce detention records.

This is a prime example of the Democrats showing Americans who they really are.

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 Mon, 08/31/2026 - 15:40

EU Commandos Board 6th Russian 'Shadow Fleet' Tanker After Putin Threatened Reverse Action

Another Russian 'shadow fleet' tanker has been boarded by European forces - and this time the provocative action took place in Mediterranean waters. In a Monday post on X, Kaja Kallas announced the action by troops under the EU's Operation Irini. They boarded the MV Sun tanker for "flag verification," following suspicions that the vessel was in violation of international law.

"Illegal oil sales from shadow fleet ships are a critical lifeline for Russia’s war in Ukraine, and we’ll continue to cut them off," Kallas wrote of what marks the sixth shadow fleet ship to be boarded in recent months. Most of these have happened in northern European waters, with Mediterranean incidents being more rare.

Kaja Kallas/X

It was specifically the Italian Defense Ministry that carried out the EU action, with Italian navy's Thaon di Revel ship conducting the boarding which occurred to the west of the island of Pantelleria as the targeted vessel was progressing from the port of Cotonou in Benin to Istanbul.

Russian President Vladimir Putin just a little over two weeks ago threatened to do the same in reverse, after the past year saw several examples of EU intercept action, sometimes involving French or Swedish commandos descending onto a tanker's deck from helicopters and arresting crew members. The seized vessels are then typically taken to nearby European ports.

The latest European Union sanctions package passed last month stipulates that EU members can sell the oil or any seized cargo obtained from these 'shadow fleet' vessels.

Putin has reiterated Kremlin outrage at this scheme, condemning it as "piracy and banditry". This also after Sweden has lately declared its intent to hand seized Russian grain over to Ukraine.

"We will be forced to respond in kind," Putin said in mid-August. Russian forces will act "wherever we ourselves deem necessary and appropriate — anywhere," he added.

According to more of what Putin threatened at the time, as translated and presented in Reuters...

"We can see that the authorities of certain countries, in violation of international maritime law, are attempting to restrict the movement of our economic operators’ vessels..., and ​have recently gone so far as to consider the possibility of seizing our vessels and selling off ⁠the ⁠property they have plundered from ⁠us," said Putin.

"Naturally, ​this is nothing less than piracy and robbery. And if this begins to be put into ​practice, we shall be forced ⁠to respond in kind. And not necessarily in those waters where raids on our ships and vessels are planned, but wherever we ourselves deem it necessary and appropriate."

But so far this has yet to happen, other than major Russian military action in the Black Sea, which has chiefly targeted Ukrainian imports, as well as southern Ukrainian ports.

🇪🇺#EU naval forces has seized tanker belonging to the🇷🇺Shadow Fleet yesterday
EUNAVFOR MED IRINI pic.twitter.com/lupJ7wBfYz

— C4H10FO2P ☠️ (@markito0171) August 31, 2026

So while Russia would not likely act in European waters, such a scenario would be more likely to go down in places like the Black Sea or Baltic region, or perhaps the faraway Indian Ocean. Still, Putin's patience is likely wearing very thin.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 15:20

Trump Mulling New 'Limited' Strike Package, After Iranian Attack On Jordan Base Summary

• Trump vows retaliation, mulls more 'limited' strikes after Iran's own 'retaliatory' missile attacks on US bases in Jordan.
• Eight Iranian missiles were intercepted by Jordan amid the first major tit-for-tat military strikes in a month.
• US forces struck Iranian missile launchers on Larak Island, reportedly killing two people.
• Iran threatens further retaliation, while regional tensions reignite across UAE, Qatar and Red Sea.
• Global oil prices rose Monday in wake of the overnight renewed fighting.

//--> //--> Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal by October 31?
Yes 11% · No 90%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

* * *

Trump Mulling New 'Limited' Strikes (Again)

New reporting from Axios: "President Trump and his senior aides have been considering waging limited strikes in the Strait of Hormuz to prevent Iran from reconstituting its radar and missile capabilities to attack ships, according to three U.S. officials."

This suggests that once again when US 'bad options' tighten related to Iran and the Hormuz crisis, there is still this (bad) idea among decision-makers that the Pentagon can just 'bomb its way out' of a crisis that's of Washington's own making. Such an assumption has already been tried and tested several times before, amid what is now six months into the war.

"The plan, which was developed over the past week by U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) and supported by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, had not been approved by Trump ahead of this weekend's exchange of fire with Iran," Axios continues. "But he could greenlight it after the new escalation."

And still this reported new potential escalation is being presented by Axios as if it's somehow the US fully in the driver's seat, when in reality this continues to be a "bombing campaign in search of a strategy". More from Axios:

• One U.S. official said the idea behind the plan is to reduce the risk of Iranian attacks on oil tankers, U.S. Navy ships and Air Force aircraft — to "mow the lawn," as this person put it.
• A White House said: "The President retains all options at his disposal. The Iranians want to make a deal, but they are always a day late and a dollar short."

This comes as some top generals have taken the ultra-rare action of leaking their views of this to the press. "Several U.S. military leaders have advised Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that prolonging large-scale operations against Iran is unsustainable and risks weakening their ability to confront threats elsewhere, including the U.S. homeland, according to people familiar with a recent assessment prepared for the Pentagon chief," wrote the Washington Post on Sunday.

More latest from Trump (via Newsquawk):

US President Trump says Iran strikes will be limited; Strait of Hormuz is in extremely good shape; A lot of oil coming out of Hormuz; Ships came through Hormuz last night with Navy assist.

The Iranians meanwhile appear to be ready for the possibility of renewed dialogue, but they also certainly don't appear to be "begging" - as Trump has maintained. "The US must return to its commitments and abide by the terms of the memorandum; only then can we exit this situation," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Telegram Monday.

Vance: I believe that Trump was sending a message to Iran through his post about Kharg Island. https://t.co/y3HZjRhjEE

— barry with the NED (@bonzerbarry) August 31, 2026

"The solution is clear and unambiguous: the US must return to its commitments and to the agreement its own president signed" - and, he continued, "Should that happen, everything can be put back on track." The Iranian top diplomat said, "All countries share the concern that the war must end as quickly as possible."

Trump Vows US will Respond to Iranian Attacks

President Trump has continued teasing possible 'retaliation' on Kharg Island after an Iranian overnight ballistic missile attack on American bases in Jordan. Trump says the US will respond to the Iranian attacks, according to Fox. According to further context via Newsquawk: 

• Note, the remarks from US President Trump were broadcast as part of a interview on Fox on "Sunday Night In America".
• Follows the US hitting Larak Island on Sunday. In response, Iran fired on US bases within Jordan.
• Reports since indicate that Iran's retaliation did not cause any significant damage.
• Modest upside seen in energy benchmarks and downside in the risk tone in proximity to this remark.

Iran state media is meanwhile reporting that two were killed in the CENTCOM attack on Larak Island late yesterday, which triggered this fresh round of fighting.

"During the attack on Larak Island late Sunday, two people were martyred and several others were injured. The injured in the incident are receiving medical services and their treatment is ongoing," the official IRNA news agency said.

Also, the Iranian foreign ministry stated: "The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will have no hesitation in exercising their inherent right to self-defense and will respond decisively, as appropriate, to any military aggression by the enemy."

The Jordanian government has meanwhile confirmed the Iranian ballistic missile attack: 

The Jordanian Armed Forces said Sunday it intercepted eight missiles that had entered the country's airspace, according to Jordan's Al-Mamlaka TV broadcaster.

A spokesperson for the military said all eight missiles were destroyed before they could do any damage, according to the broadcaster.

Military Strike Tit-for-Tat Resumes After Weeks 

Brent crude futures climbed back above $90 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate topped $86 after the US and Iran exchanged strikes for the first time in about a month. Tehran also claimed that an unidentified supertanker was struck by naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, diesel crack spreads are approaching $100 a barrel again, suggesting an increasingly severe shortage across refined-product markets as the summer draws to a close. 

US Central Command said American forces struck Iranian rocket launchers that were preparing to deploy anti-ship mines in the critical waterway. The US has touted the Oman shipping corridor as open for business and moving crude and other energy products. Tehran's inability to halt tankers passing through that part of the strait may suggest that its offensive capabilities have been degraded.

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it retaliated by targeting US air bases in Jordan, while the United Arab Emirates intercepted an Iranian drone over its territorial waters.

Trump: 'Failed Nation'

Trump on Monday morning issued a Truth Social declaring Iran a "failed nation":

The US military (CENTCOM) has said it did not target Kharg Island in the overnight strikes. According to a summation of there things stand:

The latest U.S.-Iran escalation appears increasingly centered on control of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has been using small boats to monitor and identify commercial vessels transiting the Strait using Omani waters for an undetermined period. The boats can blend into civilian maritime traffic, making them difficult to distinguish from ordinary vessels. This comes amid sporadic Iranian attacks and attempts to restrict ships transiting Hormuz without Iranian permission.

The U.S. then struck Iranian missile launchers on Larak Island after assessing they were preparing to deploy sea mines into the Strait. Iran responded with missile attacks targeting U.S. bases in Jordan, with eight missiles reportedly intercepted. Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar was also reportedly targeted, though that remains unconfirmed.

The pattern suggests Iran is attempting to reassert control or disrupt maritime traffic through Hormuz, while the U.S. is acting to prevent Iran from closing or mining the waterway. Various reports indicate transits through the strait of Hormuz have declined. What remains to be seen is whether the strikes from both sides tonight will continue in the coming days.

Crude Transit Opening?

"Brent crude is firmer at $90.48/bbl, up 2.5%, as tensions around the Strait of Hormuz support the geopolitical risk premium," UBS analyst Dharmesh Gangaram wrote in a note.

Gangaram continued, "Overall, the desk sees a cautious, risk-off start to the session. Geopolitical developments and lower European liquidity are likely to remain the key drivers, with particular attention on the resources complex amid broad-based weakness in precious metals."

Despite the overnight tit-for-tat attacks, an estimated 6 million to 8 million barrels per day of crude, primarily from US-allied Gulf producers, continues to move through Hormuz.

We previewed this in a note last week titled:

• "Dark" Tanker Fleet Shatters Iran's Hormuz Stranglehold As Gulf Oil Exports Top Two-Thirds Of Pre-War Level

"The key is to watch the barrels, and as long as they continue to flow through the Strait of Hormuz, the buying appetite in the market remains muted for fear of being caught out," Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank, wrote in a note.

Last week, the top US commander for the Middle East said American forces had cleared Iranian mines from the Hormuz waterway, declaring the shipping lanes open.

With its missile batteries, drone launchers, naval units, surveillance networks, or command infrastructure degraded, Iran appears to be shifting from conventional sea denial toward a lower-cost asymmetric strategy.

Weekend Developments

•  US attacked two missile launchers of the IRGC on Larak Island on Sunday, which were said to be on standby to launch missiles with sea mines toward the Strait of Hormuz, while there were later reports of explosions heard near Larak Island.
• US Central Command said IRGC claims of US aggression in the Strait of Hormuz are false, but added the US conducted limited precise action against IRGC minelaying forces that posed an imminent threat in the Strait of Hormuz.
• Iran’s Revolutionary Guards warned the US strike on Larak Island would be met with a response and punishment, while it said several soldiers and civilians were killed and wounded in the assault.
• Iran's Revolutionary Guards later announced that they retaliated with missiles and drones against two US bases in Jordan and warned that any attack against them will be met with a more devastating response, although a US official cited by Fox News stated no major damage in Iranian attacks on US forces in Jordan and that all missiles were intercepted.
• Iran's Press TV noted reports of Iran firing missiles towards US vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, and there were reports of explosions heard in the UAE and in Qatar, while Iran's army later said it launched tens of drones at the Al Minhad air base in the UAE.
• IRGC said a supertanker caught fire and was halted after being struck by two naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz, while it added that the tanker was attempting to pass illegally through the Strait of Hormuz and that ships must comply with its rules for passage. IRGC separately announced that it shot down a US MQ-9 drone over the Strait of Hormuz.
• Iran's Foreign Ministry said it will respond decisively to any further enemy military aggression, and stated that the US and parties supporting its military actions bear full responsibility for consequences of escalation.
• US President Trump reiterated in a pre-recorded Fox News interview that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and said the Iran blockade has been unbelievable, while he also commented that the US had to intervene in the Middle East to prevent Iran from using a nuclear weapon against Israel and other countries in the region and possibly against the US.
• US President Trump posted a generated video with the caption "Kharg Island being blown to smithereens!!!"
• US Treasury Secretary Bessent said the US Treasury plans to impose more Iran secondary sanctions every week, starting with banks. He also stated that they are telling banks it's not okay to have Iranian money and to aid the Iranian regime, and they will probably just sanction a bank outright next time, after the US imposed curbs on an Egyptian bank's United Arab Emirates branches.
• Iranian President Pezeshkian said they are not looking for war, but will give a decisive response to the aggressors, while he added that instability and unrest in the region are not in the interest of any countries and will create challenges for everyone.
• Iran's President said on Friday that Iran is ready for cooperation and understanding with regional countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while it is to open its route if four commitments are met. He also stated that Iran is to increase gasoline prices, and that exports and imports have decreased by up to 35% because of US sanctions and the blockade.

Overnight Developments

• US officials said they are monitoring the Strait of Hormuz and will strike any forces that threaten navigation in the waterway, Al Arabiya reported.
• Iran's IRGC Navy said compliance with regulations issued for the Strait of Hormuz is mandatory and warned against being “misled” by the US, Press TV reported.
• Yemeni armed forces reportedly targeted Saudi ships in the Red Sea, ISNA reported citing Yemeni media reports.
• UAE Ministry of Defense denied reports that Al Minhad Air Base was targeted by missiles, calling the claims unfounded and saying it remains on high alert and fully prepared to respond to any threats.
• Iranian oil operations are continuing on Kharg Island, and the oil sector there has not stopped, Al Hadath reported.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 15:15

Rickards: The Dollar's Not Dying

Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

Last week's financial media was full of apocalyptic headlines: "$40 trillion in national debt!" "U.S. debt in a doom loop!" "The end of the dollar is near!"

Gold and bitcoin soared in lockstep with the dollar doom and gloom. If you took the headlines at face value, one would assume the dollar was already toast and U.S. Treasuries were worth no more than digital confetti.

The truth is that the dollar's position as the leading reserve currency is not in jeopardy. Of course, foreign exchange reserves are not simply piles of currency. They are largely held in liquid financial assets, including U.S. Treasury securities denominated in dollars.

Dollar-denominated assets will dominate global reserves for decades to come.

The reason is simple. There are few sovereign bond markets with the size, liquidity and depth of the U.S. Treasury market. Other large government bond markets, including Japan and major European markets, do not offer the same combination of scale and liquidity. King dollar will remain king.

This does not mean interest rates won't rise or inflation won't increase. Both are likely. But neither means the end of the dollar. It just means the Treasury pays more to borrow and you pay more at the gas pump and grocery store.

So, there are problems in the dollar bond markets, but debasement-trade hysteria is not a useful way to understand them.

BESSENT GOES AFTER THE BOND MARKET

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has just announced a plan to address higher interest rates in U.S. Treasury securities markets and, by extension, mortgage and credit card markets. It has both long-term and short-term components.

One short-term component involves U.S. support for Japan's efforts to prop up the yen, including joint currency intervention and potential greater use of the Federal Reserve's FIMA Repo Facility. That facility allows Japan to borrow dollars against its U.S. Treasury holdings rather than selling those securities outright.

In turn, that could take pressure off U.S. interest rates. Japan is the world's largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries, with about $1.12 trillion as of June.

Another short-term component is for the Treasury to purchase longer-dated Treasury securities, specifically those in the 10- to 30-year sectors. The Treasury recently announced that it will at least double the size of certain scheduled buyback operations from $2 billion to $4 billion, with the possibility of going higher.

Treasury has also relied heavily on short-term maturities such as one-month, three-month and six-month Treasury bills in its overall financing mix. These Treasury bills generally carry lower interest rates than longer-dated notes and bonds. Greater reliance on shorter maturities can lower U.S. interest expense, at least in the short run.

Treasury bills are also prized by dealers and hedge funds because they are highly liquid and are widely used as collateral in financial transactions. Supporting liquidity at the long end while maintaining a large supply of short-term Treasury securities makes sense. Why it is causing such hysteria in the media is a bit of a mystery.

BESSENT'S 3-3-3 GAMBIT

The longer-term component of the Bessent Plan is sometimes referred to as the Three Arrows.

The first arrow is to keep annual deficits at 3.0% or less of GDP. The second arrow is to achieve GDP growth of 3.0% or more. The third arrow is to increase U.S. energy production by the equivalent of 3 million barrels of oil per day.

That's where the shorthand 3-3-3 comes from: a 3% deficit, 3% real GDP growth and 3 million additional barrels of oil equivalent per day.

Since oil output does not directly impact fiscal policy, we can leave that to one side in our analysis. The deficit and GDP growth targets, however, are critical.

The metric that really matters in terms of whether investors have confidence in U.S. Treasury securities is the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio. It's silly to hyperventilate about $40 trillion as the U.S. national debt unless you put that number in the context of the GDP available to finance and roll over the debt.

Right now, gross U.S. federal debt is roughly 123% of GDP. That's the result of approximately $40 trillion of debt divided by roughly $32.5 trillion of annualized nominal GDP. That ratio is near the highest levels in U.S. history.

High debt-to-GDP ratios can be a drag on growth and leave governments with less room to respond to crises. A ratio of 60% is much more comfortable. A ratio of 30% is more comfortable still. The previous postwar high was reached around the end of World War II.

The annual deficit will not go down to zero. That's a fantasy. The level of U.S. national debt will also not go down anytime soon. That's another fantasy.

But that doesn't matter.

What does matter is whether the debt-to-GDP ratio goes down.

The way to do that is to grow the economy faster than the debt. If you can do that, the ratio goes down even if the debt goes up. That's Bessent's plan. That's what he meant when he said the U.S. could "grow its way out" of the debt problem. In theory, he was right.

For example, let's say annual deficits are $2 trillion so that a year from now the national debt will be $42 trillion. That's a 5.0% increase in the national debt.

But if GDP grows from $32.5 trillion to $34.5 trillion, that's a 6.2% increase. The debt-to-GDP ratio drops from roughly 123% to 121.7%. That's still high, but it's lower than the year before.

That's all the so-called bond market vigilantes need to see. As long as the debt-to-GDP ratio is coming down, bond investors have reason to retain confidence in U.S. Treasuries and the U.S. dollar.

The U.S. has done this before. The gross federal debt-to-GDP ratio reached roughly 119% in 1946 and was down to about 31% by 1980. That process took more than three decades and occurred under both parties using a combination of fiscal and monetary policy, strong nominal growth and inflation.

During that period, the national debt increased substantially. But GDP increased by more than 1,000%. And that was the key. If GDP grows faster than debt, the ratio comes down and America's fiscal position improves.

HERE'S THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET

So, that's the plan. But there's a dirty little secret that Bessent has not emphasized.

When the government computes debt-to-GDP ratios, it's using nominal numbers, not numbers adjusted for inflation.

In the example above, GDP grew by about 6.2% while the national debt grew by 5.0%. That lowers the ratio, but it does not reveal how much of the GDP growth was real and how much was inflation.

The 6.2% nominal growth could have been 4.2% real growth plus 2.0% inflation. That's fairly healthy. But it could have been 2.2% real growth plus 4.0% inflation.

At 4.0% annual inflation, the purchasing power of the dollar is cut roughly in half in about 18 years and cut in half again over the next 18 years. That kind of inflation can destroy your net worth and income if you're not prepared.

So, how much inflation is included in the Bessent Plan? Secretary Bessent didn't say.

Investors should assume the worst.

The U.S. has had difficulty sustaining real growth of more than about 2.0% per year on average since the global financial crisis. If we need roughly 6.0% nominal growth to outrun the growth in debt and if we can only produce 2.0% real growth per year, then the difference has to come from inflation.

That could mean 4.0% inflation.

That's not a policy preference. It's just fifth-grade math.

In describing how the U.S. lowered its debt-to-GDP ratio dramatically between the end of World War II and 1980, I conveniently omitted the fact that consumer prices rose about 50% between 1977 and 1981.

That's one way the U.S. government took care of the debt problem.

I lived through that period. It was a fun time if you owned gold or real estate, if you used leverage and if you had a job that gave you a raise every few months.

It was not a fun time if you depended on fixed-income streams like annuities, insurance policies, pension plans or Social Security.

Which side of that trade are you on?

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

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 15:00

'You Will Only Have Yourselves To Blame': Trump Warns Anti-Data-Center Crowd Not To 'Kill The Golden Goose'

Despite recent polls showing that 70% of Americans oppose building AI data centers in their area (including 60% of Republicans), President Trump on Monday warned that communities that don't embrace them will "end up being backwards and poor."

"The only reason that communities throughout the U.S.A. should not want Data Centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "If they want to be successful and rich, with far lower taxes and jobs all over the place, let Data Reign."

And if people "kill the Golden Goose" by successfully resisting AI data centers, "you will only have yourselves to blame," Trump continued, adding "China could not be happier with this anti Data Center movement. Actually, they can't believe it is happening!"

According to a Gallup poll published in May, 71% of Americans oppose building AI data centers in their local area, including 48% 'strongly opposed' - and only about a quarter in favor. Opposition crosses party lines: Gallup's breakdowns showed 63% of Republicans strongly or somewhat opposed to a data center where they live, while a July Fox News poll found that 60% of Republicans and 53% of self-described "MAGA Republicans" oppose data centers where they live.  

At the same time, Beijing structurally benefits from anything that slows US compute (and according to X, are amplifying the outrage).

Some observations

• Eighteen months ago, American frontier models from Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI had virtually no competition - and the entire AI bubble (circle-jerk) was based on already-insane revenue projections. 
   
• Then, Chinese labs began rolling out open-weighted AI models that are up to 90% cheaper per token, for around 95% the same performance as US frontier models. Suddenly, the American AI buildout thesis that led the market to all-time highs this year, was pricked - and companies are migrating towards these cheap Chinese models they can run on their own infrastructure. Chinese providers went from under 2% of OpenRouter tokens a year ago to over 45% of weekly volume by April 2026, and Chinese models surpassed US models in weekly token volume for the first time in February. An a16z partner estimated roughly 80% of US startups build on Chinese base models.
   
• The July tape made it official: chip stocks shed more than $1 trillion as investors began asking whether AI infrastructure spending is peaking faster than expected - even as the hyperscalers, undeterred, still guide to roughly $660-690 billion in 2026 capex, nearly double last year's.  
   
• Chinese AI firms are also starting to run proprietary chips - a workaround to years of banning Nvidia's top of the line AI chips. Beijing's Cyberspace Administration barred major tech firms from buying Nvidia chips in September 2025, and state-backed data centers now require domestic silicon. Domestic suppliers are projected to capture nearly 90% of Chinese AI accelerator sales this year. That said, Huawei's Ascend still trails Nvidia on raw performance and software, and its flagship CloudMatrix cluster draws roughly four times the power of Nvidia's comparable system - a trade Beijing happily makes, because China is substituting electricity (which it has) for chip quality (which it doesn't).
   
• China is also able to rapidly expand both data centers and electricity generation because the CCP gives zero fucks about NIMBY Chinese 'having a say' over whether they plunk a loud data center or power generation facility next to their house. Instead, provincial officials are rewarded for building, the grid is state-owned, and the new Five-Year Plan explicitly treats data centers as a demand sink to soak up surplus renewable generation. In China, data centers are the solution to too much electricity. In America, they've become the cause of expensive electricity.

China Is Loving This

Trump isn't wrong that Beijing benefits from anything that slows the US buildout. But the astroturf version of the argument was quickly dispelled: data center investor Kevin O'Leary claimed China was behind the protests, admitted he had no evidence, and is now being sued for defamation by two Utah groups. And the polling is real too - Heatmap asked the identical question about data centers in Americans' backyards four times in 12 months and watched a 33-point collapse, from a 43/42 split last August to 75% opposed now. Public opinion doesn't move like that because of foreign bots. It moves like that because of utility bills.

The grievances have receipts. PJM's independent market monitor found data centers responsible for 63% of the capacity auction spike - $9.3 billion recovered from ratepayers in a single year, with measured bill impacts of $21/month in DC, $18 in western Maryland, $16 in Ohio. Total PJM capacity costs went from $2.2 billion to $14.7 billion to $16.1 billion in two years - and the latest auction only stopped at $329.17/MW-day because of a price cap Pennsylvania's governor demanded. Gallup's own open-ended data shows what's actually driving opposition: half of opponents cite resource consumption - 18% each naming water and energy - plus noise, pollution, and traffic. Not anti-AI ideology. Bills.

And when the industry had the chance to carry its own costs, PJM members voted down all 12 proposals to shift them in July. Ratepayers remain the unpaid sponsors of the buildout. Meanwhile, dozens of companies – including Meta, Amazon and Google - have signed onto Trump's "ratepayer protection pledge" to cover increased energy costs. You don't create a ratepayer protection pledge against an imaginary grievance.

Meanwhile this is about as bipartisan as it gets: Greg Abbott has frozen new data centers in Texas, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee - Senate Republicans' own campaign arm, warned in an August memo that the campaign against them "will expand far beyond Ohio," where the issue has Jon Husted in a dead heat with Sherrod Brown - a Democrat Ohio voters fired statewide just two years ago.

And what Trump fails to see, apparently: the CCP would entertain exactly none of this. There is no mechanism in China for citizens to oppose infrastructure - and what the no-veto model produces isn't just speed. Many local-government data centers run at 20-30% utilization, Beijing is now planning a national scheme to resell the surplus compute, and even SMIC's own chairman warned the rushed buildout "has not been fully thought through." The people of Licking County get a say. The people of Gansu get a ghost data center.

Trump says China "can't believe" the anti-data-center movement is happening. Of course not - there is no version of it available to Chinese citizens.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 14:40

Amazon Shares Tumble Amid News Of FTC 'Advertiser Deception' Lawsuit

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is about to drop a lawsuit on Amazon today alleging that the e-commerce platform manipulated prices paid by businesses to advertise on its retail platform, which made the company tens of billions of dollars over a seven-year period, WSJ reports, citing agency officials. 

According to the report:

The lawsuit, joined by a bipartisan group of more than 20 state attorneys general, will allege that Amazon deceived advertisers by secretly raising the minimum price advertisers had to pay to place ads promoting their products, FTC officials said.

The case, to be filed in a Seattle federal court, will become the consumer-protection agency’s third major case against Amazon, which agreed to pay $2.5 billion last year to settle an earlier suit alleging it tricked people into signing up for its Prime service and made it hard to cancel the subscription. Another lawsuit alleging that Amazon engaged in illegal monopolization is headed for trial next year. -WSJ

Amazon's digital advertising platform is the third-largest in the world, behind Alphabet's Google and Meta - earning $68 billion in ads in 2025, according to the report - which claims that advertisers suffered billions of dollars in harm by paying higher prices for ads. Some states may attempt to claw some of the money back. 

Shares shot sharply lower on the news.

Every time a shopper searches for a product on Amazon, merchants compete to offer different types of ads to get in front of consumers. According to the FTC, Amazon began changing its ad auction strategy in 2018 - raising prices on advertisers in a way they wouldn't notice. 

The way this worked was through a mechanism called a "soft reserve": 

The company had historically run a special type of auction, popular in Silicon Valley, designed to attract more bids and protect winners from dramatically overpaying. That formula tended to reduce the price a merchant paid to advertise.

To raise the price, Amazon began entering its own bid, known as a “soft reserve,” which was higher than the price of the runner-up bidder, the FTC will allege. Under the rules of the auction, that raised the price paid for an ad. Amazon knew the merchants’ competing bids and didn’t disclose its new practice, officials said.

Amazon’s ad executives tracked the “surcharge” they earned from the strategy and sought to limit how much others knew about it, FTC officials said. The executives initially deployed the strategy only on popular shopping days when companies would think higher ad rates resulted from intense competition for shoppers’ attention, the officials said. -WSJ

According to the FTC, Amazon's goal was to capture more of the value of each retail sale connected to a successful ad - in recent years intervening in auctions to raise the minimum price 70% - 80% of the time. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 14:20

"Prepare For More Severe Scenarios": Bank Of England Chief Warns Of AI Threat To Global Financial System

As the world marches towards open-weight, efficient, unrestricted frontier AI models out of China, Western leaders are starting to panic over the lack of guardrails. Most recently, Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey suggested that the threat posed by AI could lead to a chaotic correction in global financial markets, as frontier models are now showing "increasingly sophisticated autonomy and problem-solving abilities, as well as threat capabilities."

Governor of the Bank of England Andrew Bailey addresses the media during a press conference concerning interest rates, at the Bank of England, in London, Britain, November 2, 2023. HENRY NICHOLLS/Pool via REUTERS

"Financial institutions, financial market infrastructures, and technology providers will therefore need to strengthen vulnerability management, response and recovery capabilities, and prepare for more severe scenarios involving simultaneous disruption across multiple firms or shared technology dependencies," Bailey wrote in a two-page letter published Monday to G20 finance ministers and central bank governors in his capacity as chair of the Financial Stability Board - an international body that coordinates international policy and provides recommendations to national authorities. 

Bailey says the cyber risk posed by AI is "the most immediate concern" for the global financial system. 

"Frontier AI may have the ability materially to alter the speed, scale and economics of cyber risk, which could undermine market confidence system-wide, especially due to highly concentrated third-party service providers," he wrote, adding. "Recent developments have also highlighted to me that many jurisdictions do not have the protocols in place to manage the development, release, and deployment of advanced frontier AI models, heightening risks for the financial sector and beyond." 

Bailey's warning comes one month after the Bank for International Settlements warned that the AI bubble itself is one of three of the most alarming threats to global prosperity at this time. 

"Disappointment in returns could trigger a sudden pullback in financing and turn the capex boom into a protracted investment bust, with potential knock-on effects on financial conditions," the BIS said, before observing that "a major equity-market correction could have larger macroeconomic consequences today than in the past."

Officials highlighted vulnerabilities linked to funding, including complex arrangements such so-called “circular financing” deals that can mix equity and debt with supplier-client contracts (as discussed here "The $1.8 Trillion Off-Balance Sheet Time Bomb At The Heart Of The AI Supercycle"). 

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 14:15

Lake America Name Begins Appearing On Google Maps In US

Authored by Tom Gantert via The Epoch Times,

Google Maps has updated its site to include Lake America in place of Lake Ontario, following the direction of President Donald Trump's executive order renaming the Great Lake.

"It's official! LAKE AMERICA on Google Maps," Steven Cheung, assistant to the president and White House director of communications, posted on X on Aug. 30.

It’s official! LAKE AMERICA on Google Maps. pic.twitter.com/CotsXetERJ

— Steven Cheung (@StevenCheung47) August 30, 2026

Google released a statement on the changing of the name of the body of water.

"The U.S. Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) has formally changed the name for 'Lake Ontario' to 'Lake America' in the United States," the company said.

Since it updates Google Maps to reflect name changes in official government sources, people using the application in the United States will see "Lake America," Google said.

In Canada, users of Google Maps will continue to see "Lake Ontario," and those outside of the two countries will see both names, the statement reads.

Trump signed an executive order on Aug. 27 directing the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Board on Geographic Names to update federal records to identify Lake Ontario as Lake America.

The president said the change recognizes the United States' role in protecting and maintaining the Great Lakes. The order cites nearly $4 billion in U.S. spending on the Great Lakes ecosystem during the past decade and said the U.S. Coast Guard operates nine of the 11 icebreaking vessels serving the lakes.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney rejected the change, saying that Canadians would continue calling it Lake Ontario. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has also said the state will retain the lake's traditional name.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced on May 9 that her government had sued Google over the company's decision to label the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America after Trump changed the name of that body of water.

Google made the change for U.S. users after Trump's executive order directed the federal government to adopt the new name. Users in Mexico continued to see the Gulf of Mexico, while users elsewhere saw both names.

Sheinbaum had threatened legal action in February, arguing that the United States could rename only the portion of the gulf under its jurisdiction, not the body of water. She disclosed the lawsuit during her briefing but provided no details about where it was filed or what relief Mexico was seeking.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 13:40

Lindsay Clancy And The Political Weaponization Of Mentally-Ill Women

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

After the publishing of George Orwell’s 1984, communist governments and organizations around the world condemned the book as “anti-Soviet slander” and “capitalist propaganda.” Orwell died only eight months after the book’s release and his personal feelings on the details of the story are limited to a few personal letters to friends and publishers.

Orwell was a Democratic Socialist, but even he was disturbed by the path that socialist movements had taken in light of genocidal far-left governments. His criticisms of Stalinist politics were treated by leftists as a betrayal.

However, it was Orwell’s depiction of women within authoritarian systems that angered the political left most of all. They have attacked 1984 for decades as “misogynistic”and “blind to gender oppression”. But as time passes, Orwell’s views on leftist women have proven more and more prophetic and they were written well before second wave feminism became a reality. In 1984, the character of Winston Smith described them thus:

“He disliked nearly all women, and especially the young and pretty ones. It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy…”

“She had not a thought in her head that was not a slogan, and there was no imbecility, absolutely none, that she was not capable of swallowing if the Party handed it out to her…”

The women in Orwell’s Stalinist world were a key tool in controlling society. They are easily brainwashed to serve “Big Brother”, turning them into affection-less robots. Their ability to nurture a family is conditioned out of them and if they are allowed to have children, they have no care for them. The children immediately become property of the state.

It’s not just women’s biological habit of following the dictates of the herd, it’s also their inherent desire for chaos that makes them destructive to society at large. Nearly every civilization from the beginning of recorded history has understood this problem and sought to keep it contained. Only in the modern west in the past century have we abandoned reason for madness.

I have said it many times in previous articles and I will repeat it here now: Feminism is by far the most destructive movement in the history of western civilization. In the US, almost every political and social crisis we face today can be linked directly or indirectly back to the rise of feminist ideology. The weaponization of mentally ill women is the single most effective attack on the foundations of our culture.

It’s not because women are particularly scary or dangerous. It’s because, as western men we have adopted principles of fairness; to care about elevating those who are weaker than us and value their contributions. Feminism is designed to exploit our love of fairness and our love of women and it turns our love into a weakness.

Compare the west to almost any other civilization in this regard and you will find undeniable differences. There is no such thing as fairness, equal rights or feminism throughout most of the world. Women are, at best, barely tolerated. At worst, they are chattel to be abused with impunity.

Often considered one of the greatest accomplishments of the First World (as opposed to the third world), men have ALLOWED women to rise to equal standing. In many cases, we have prioritized them and given them privileged status, and this is where we made a big mistake.

All of our problems with feminism are self created. Western men allowed the ideology to spread. Conservatives talk a lot about the dangers of “suicidal empathy” when it comes to liberals and mass immigration, but we suffer from suicidal empathy when it comes to women.

The early women’s suffrage movement had numerous ties to Marxist causes and the communists saw very early how useful women could be in destabilizing western nations. Marxists like Friedrich Engels argued that women’s oppression began with the institution of private property and class division, not biology.

This, of course, is pure nonsense – A great lie which requires us to ignore thousands of years of recorded history from every feudal monarchy and empire that existed previous to the 18th Century Enlightenment.

Because of their biology, women are naturally removed from the power dynamic except for influencing men to take actions in their favor. For women as a group to have power requires numerous artificial social constructs and laws be put in place.

Marxists also argued that the family unit must be targeted for deconstruction as a social pillar. They claim that the family unit is “how capitalism uses women as free labor to raise new workers for the system.” In reality, the family unit represents the atomic core of any civilization. Breaking it apart, and using women to do it, will inevitably destroy that civilization and make it ripe for conquest.

Leftists and their globalist cohorts do not care about women. Feminism does not care about women. The goal of these movements is to turn women into suicide bombers. Their goal is to radicalize women to forsake their biological and psychological imperatives, turning them into corrosive saboteurs willing to sacrifice their own happiness for the sake of the Marxist cult.

Millions of women have even been convinced that their grand mission requires them to kill their own children. Sometimes this is done in the name of freeing themselves from the “shackles” of the family unit. Sometimes it’s done as an offering to the collective feminist coven to prove they are “worthy.”

This is why a child killer like Lindsay Clancy, a woman who openly confessed to the crime, has attracted the full attention, adoration and protection of the liberal congregation. She didn’t just go to a clinic and abort a baby, she went the Full Monty; she murdered her own growing children in cold blood. She looked into their eyes when she did it, and the feminists are impressed and they want more.

What has followed is a sort of hysterical worship, a swirling vortex of dark-feminine chaos as the brood searches for ways to protect Lindsay Clancy from punishment while also rationalizing her crimes. The case has become a nexus point for the ever festering conflict between the champions of moral order and the terrorism of morally relative chaos.

In my recent articles I have talked about the eternal battle between the producer class and the pillager class, but this is only half the story. The other half is the battle between the champions of conscience and the purveyors of subjective nihilism. The political left has happily embraced nihilism.

We might find it bewildering, but this is why these people are defending a child murderer. If Lindsay Clancy can be glorified, even deified as a oracle of the feminist calling, then any evil can be justified. “Do as thou wilt” could become the prevailing ideal of a soulless age brought into being by female insanity.

All they have to do, in their view, is help Clancy to escape blame and responsibility for her crime.

The postpartum excuse is the most common strategy because it works. Around half of all female child murderers who use this defense get off with a jury decision of “not guilty by reason of insanity.” The concept ignores the fact that ANYONE who kills kids is mentally ill or broken in some way. Postpartum is simply a more acceptable excuse for diminishing the crime.

It’s a way to paint the killer as a victim; a more empathetic victim than the dead children.

If western women can be convinced that they can get away with murdering their offspring out of the womb, we would be setting a new and horrific precedent. The feminist mob will jump on every crime involving a woman in an effort to leverage them out of repercussions. The legal system already has so many double standards in favor of women, but we are getting dangerously close to a two tier system.

If Clancy escapes with a lesser charge or institutionalization instead of prison, leftist women will see this as political victory. That said, the case is opening the door to an awakening among men. Young men are using the case to “test” their girlfriends and wives. If these women show any inkling of sympathy for Lindsay Clancy, men are dumping and divorcing them without a second thought.

It’s a smart move and, for now, it’s the only strategy against the ongoing cancer of liberal female derangement. But it doesn’t solve the greater issue of feminism as a societal influence. In the meantime, families are not being built.

I would point out that there are men who kill their own children as well. It’s not as if this crime is exclusive to women. However, I can’t find a single instance in which a mob of men rallied together to defend a father who murdered his family. This is strictly female behavior.

The Clancy trial is nearly over, and regardless of what the jury decides to do there’s no denying that the event has reminded us, once again, that western men have ignored the single most poisonous problem in our society for far too long.

Liberal women are the most privileged, most entitled and most coddled people on the planet. No other group comes close. Their obsessive grasping for power by any means necessary is corrosive. Their rabid efforts to elevate their own egos as the focal point of politics, government and the social contract is sinking our nations one by one.

Perhaps this quest for power needs to end? Perhaps western men need to finally abandon the liberal experiment in equality or “equity” and bring our countries back to the models they were founded on? Or at the very least, we need to bring back certain limitations. Not all freedoms are good and we have seen where our current path leads.

If liberal women have been weaponized, then liberal women need to be nullified and controlled. Or, at the very least, their level of participation in institutions of power needs to be restricted. In other words, we would have to set aside our empathy, be the bad guys and TAKE power (and rights) away from the leftist cabal. We would have to fundamentally overturn every facet of feminism and erase it from our daily lives.

We have seen what these women do with liberty and we’re not impressed. The celebration and adoration of a child murderer is, in my view, the last straw. If their first inclination is to use their freedoms as a license to tear the world down instead of building things up, then they no longer deserve those freedoms.

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

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 13:00

PG&E, California Utilities Crash As Wildfire Bill Spark Downgrade Wave

Shares of California's largest publicly traded utilities crashed on Monday morning after state lawmakers unveiled wildfire legislation that failed to provide the liability protections Wall Street analysts had hoped for.

PG&E plunged as much as 21%, its sharpest decline since 2020, while Edison International crashed as much as 24%, its largest drop since 2018. Sempra fell 5%.

The development sparked a wave of Wall Street downgrades tracked by Bloomberg. Mizuho Securities downgraded PG&E, Edison, and Sempra to neutral from outperform, citing the absence of meaningful liability reform, while also reducing its price targets.

BMO Capital Markets analyst James Thalacker, who downgraded PG&E to market perform from outperform, wrote in a note to clients that California's proposed wildfire legislation failed to provide durable liability protections.

Thalacker cut his price target to $21 from $28, writing that Senate Bill 492 "sets fire to hopes for meaningful reform."

Thalacker wrote:

Bottom Line:

We move to Market Perform following the release of SB492, which failed to address/improve upon key elements of the state's wildfire framework. The proposed legislation does nothing to ensure the wildfire fund's long-term solvency (and associated liability cap), which exposes investors to open-ended wildfire-related tail risk.

We currently do not see support to revisit this critical deficiency. Our $21 target now reflects assumptions for uncapped future wildfire liability post-2030. While management is expected to respond with a revised capital allocation strategy shortly, we do not see that response as sufficient to improve investor sponsorship.

Thalacker continued:

Although the state's iterative approach established a robust legislative wildfire framework via AB1054/SB254, the proposed SB492 in our view falls woefully short of codifying the elements necessary to ensure the wildfire fund's solvency and protect the state's investor-owned utilities (IOUs) from wildfire-driven bankruptcies. As such, we expect PCG to be down materially at the open tomorrow and, longer term, to find it incrementally harder to attract capital relative not only to its utility peers given investors' preference for accelerating, large-load-driven growth and aversion to significant wildfire-related liabilities, but also for generalist investors given the challenge of open-ended wildfire-related tail risk despite the company's low absolute valuation. Moreover, given the lack of progress this year despite a more wildfire-educated legislature, the CEA's third-party road map and clear message on "the cost of doing nothing," it is unclear if there will be sufficient political interest in 2027 to revisit the legislation (particularly absent Newsom's support for reform) to improve further California's wildfire framework, which is key to unlocking PCG's terminal value and associated upside.

Despite the significant relative discount to its utility peers, we are downgrading PCG to Market Perform and reducing our target price to $21 to reflect revised wildfire liability assumptions in our MTM/SOTP framework. While we still employ the framework that discounts the liability to PCG shareholders from future wildfires through 2040, we raise assumed liabilities above the 20% T&D liability cap for fires beyond 2030 to reflect a depleted fund/eliminated liability cap. While our revised target price still implies meaningful upside capital appreciation, without the visible prospect for a meaningful improvement to the state's wildfire framework, we believe PCG shares will struggle to find both dedicated and generalist sponsorship, leaving the stock range-bound despite its attractive absolute valuation (~8x).

Thalacker outlined a downside scenario that values PG&E at just $3 a share if wildfire claims exhaust the state fund and adverse regulatory outcomes follow. His upside case reaches $35 if lawmakers enact meaningful reform in 2027.

California Democrats need utilities to invest tens of billions of dollars in grid reliability, wildfire prevention, electrification, and power capacity for AI data centers. Yet, lawmakers have refused to provide the liability framework needed to attract new investment.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 12:40

The 'Daejon Love' Stock Market

Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

Words cannot do justice to the sheer idiocy of the story that broke this past week. It is hilarious, depressing, fascinating and deeply embarrassing for the human race all at once…a story that is proof that we may collectively be both far more gullible and far more comfortable with deception than even the most cynical among us previously imagined.

The story centers on a man named Daejon Love who, according to federal prosecutors, allegedly spent years convincing women that he was a professional football player for the San Francisco 49ers when he wasn’t.

Not trying out for the 49ers. Not once affiliated with the team. Not played professionally somewhere else and exaggerated the details. He convinced women that he was an actual NFL player for one of the most famous franchises in American sports when we wasn’t.

Yes. You read that right. In an era in which the entirety of all human knowledge is accessible from a 6 inch by 2 inch rectangle sitting in literally everyone’s front pocket, this 35 year old allegedly constructed an elaborate fictional life around himself that everyone believed and no one took the time to fact check. He did it by, among other things, carrying a 49ers helmet and gear around with him and wearing them…no matter how absolutely f*cking ridiculous it looked…all the time.

He even had a 49ers birthday cake made with his name on it and apparently created a video of himself “signing” with the team. He carried the helmet everywhere, including to the beach, where he filmed himself running some of the worst wide receiver routes ever captured on camera while some rando with a vermicelli noodle for an arm underthrew him passes as he lumbered around full sized telephone company construction cones set up on a beach.

Eventually, according to reporting on the FBI investigation, Love’s fake online footprint became convincing enough that search engines and artificial intelligence occasionally helped perpetuate it. AI started listing him as a professional NFL wide receiver when he wasn’t.

I couldn’t help but read the story yesterday and realize it is a perfect analogue to our modern stock market. You don’t have to be an actual NFL player anymore. You just need the helmet, the jersey, some followers, a few pictures standing next to expensive shit and enough people repeating the story. Eventually an algorithm looks around, sees that everybody else appears to believe you’re an NFL player and concludes that you must, in fact, be an NFL player.

Look, many of today’s big name stocks are exceptional businesses generating actual free cash and net income. Just like Jerry Rice used to actually make his way onto the field and catch actual passes in real NFL games.

But there’s also a growing number of Daejon Love companies in today’s market, because somewhere along the way Wall Street decided that actually turning a profit no longer mattered. If Jerry Rice is a fat free cash flow yield, Daejon Love is the 10-K of a company posting massive losses while pointing to its revenue, narrative and bullshit future projections instead of its net income and capital needs.

Nowadays, revenue can be projected decades years into the future and slapped with a multiple that would have gotten you involuntarily committed in 1995.

Revenue projections are faking you’re an NFL player when you’re not. Like with Daejon, narratives get you “investors”. If you’re a 35 year old dipshit pretending to be someone else with all your free time instead of working an actual job for a living, revenue projections get you laid under false pretenses by women who’d never want to talk to you otherwise.

Net income, on the other hand, is terribly inconvenient. The line of thirsty women dries up quick when it comes down to profit and loss. The second that reality starts inching into the picture, you become the guy no one can stand or wants to talk to.

The modern market would much rather hear that revenue grew 48% than that you lost $2 billion last year.

Nowadays, when investors ask, “Did the company actually make any money?” analysts respond, “Why are you being so negative? Revenue grew 48%!”

When investors ask, “Okay, but did free cash flow grow?” analysts respond, “You’re missing the opportunity. Revenue grew 48%.”

When investors ask, “How much capital expenditure did it take to generate that growth?” analysts respond, exasperated, “This guy just doesn’t understand AI. Revenue. Grew. 48%.”

This is essentially the Daejon Love method of equity valuation: don’t ask whether I play for the 49ers. Just look at my helmet.

Federal prosecutors say Love and his alleged accomplice, Taylor Jamie Chan, built an elaborate system designed to convince women that Love was extraordinarily wealthy. Fake investment accounts were allegedly displayed. Chan allegedly played the role of Love’s successful financial adviser. Three way FaceTime calls reportedly showed supposed investment gains. The government says at least 26 women ultimately sent approximately $1.3 million.

The appearance of wealth established credibility. Credibility attracted money. The incoming money helped finance the appearance of wealth. That appearance attracted additional money. Every additional participant therefore helped validate the story for the next participant. Daejon invented the public relations department of a Ponzi scheme.

The stock market has developed its own similar loop. A company projects enormous future revenue, investors bid up the stock, and the higher valuation gives the company access to more capital. It raises money, makes acquisitions, increases spending, and uses its expensive stock as currency to generate the growth needed to justify its valuation. That growth pushes the valuation higher, allowing the cycle to repeat. In effect, the company is trying to grow into a valuation that is itself financing the growth. It works until the market stops providing cheap capital, the promised cash flows fail to materialize, and the entire loop begins to reverse.

This is when everyone in the world discovers you don’t play for the 49ers.

This is what makes the Love story such a wonderful metaphor. Again, Love’s fabricated internet presence became substantial enough that Google searches and AI generated results occasionally identified him as an actual 49ers player. The internet had effectively begun marking his bullshit to market. He could point toward the search result and say, effectively, don’t take my word for it. Google says I’m an NFL player.

Wall Street does this every day. Don’t believe the narrative? Look at the stock price. Don’t believe the stock price? Look at the market capitalization. Don’t believe the market capitalization? Look at the revenue growth. Don’t believe the revenue growth? Look at total addressable market. Don’t believe total addressable market? Look at the analyst price targets.

Why did the analysts raise their price targets? Because the stock price went up. Excellent. Due diligence complete. Look at the f*cking helmet.

Then, at some point nobody remembers which piece of evidence was originally supposed to independently validate which other piece of evidence. The machine is simply validating itself.

This isn’t entirely irrational. Rapidly growing companies should often prioritize expansion over maximizing near term profits. Amazon famously spent years reinvesting enormous amounts of money into its business. Many of the greatest companies in history would have been badly misunderstood if investors had looked exclusively at current year earnings.

But Wall Street has taken a reasonable idea and, as Wall Street tends to do, driven it directly through the guardrail. Remember WeWork’s “Community Adjusted EBITDA”?

We have entered an environment where investors can seemingly forgive almost anything if the revenue chart points northeast. No profits? Growth company. Negative free cash flow? Investing for the future. Massive stock based compensation? Noncash expense. Enormous capital expenditures? Building the infrastructure for the future. Constant dilution? Funding growth. Acquisition spending? Expanding the platform. Adjusted EBITDA? Now we’re talking.

This becomes especially entertaining when discussing AI. The AI revolution is real. The demand is real. The infrastructure buildout is real. The revenues are real. And some of the companies supplying the boom are producing extraordinary amounts of actual free cash flow and net income.

But the market doesn’t stop with those companies. It takes the legitimate economics at the center of the boom and radiates them outward. The chip company makes enormous profits, therefore the data center company deserves a giant multiple. The data center company is growing rapidly, therefore the electricity provider deserves an AI premium. The electricity provider needs generation, therefore nuclear is an AI trade. Nuclear needs uranium, therefore uranium is an AI trade. Data centers need cooling, so cooling is an AI trade. They need copper, so copper is an AI trade. They need buildings, so buildings are an AI trade. They need financing, so private credit is an AI trade.

Eventually the non-English speaking man on an e-bike from Senegal delivering the DoorDash lunch to another man responsible for emptying the portable shitters at the construction site of a data center will soon trade at 28x revenue himself…because he has “exposure to the AI infrastructure ecosystem.” This is how things lead up to a crash.

🔥 85% OFF IF YOU SUBSCRIBE TODAY: Anyone who becomes a paid annual subscriber to Fringe Finance today gets 85% off a subscription — a discount they can keep for as long as they wish to remain a subscriber: Get 85% off forever

Once the narrative attaches itself to a company, investors begin valuing revenue differently. Revenue is where imagination lives. Net income is where imagination goes to die. Free cash flow is worse because it asks the deeply antisocial question of whether shareholders will ever actually receive any money.

You can build magnificent valuation models when you don’t concern yourself with that detail. Take a company with $1 billion in revenue. Assume the addressable market is $100 billion. Assume it captures 20% of that market. Assume 30% margins once it reaches scale. Assume the market continues paying a premium multiple in 2032. Discount everything back using whatever rate produces the number you wanted before opening Excel. Congratulations. Your $15 billion company is worth $60 billion.

Valuation increasingly seems to work the same way. A company worth $20 billion can look speculative. At $50 billion, it becomes interesting. At $100 billion, institutions start paying attention. At $250 billion, analysts explain why it has a defensible moat. At $500 billion, portfolio managers explain why they have to own it. At $1 trillion, CNBC installs a permanent camera outside headquarters. At $2 trillion, somebody explains that you’re thinking too small. At $4 trillion, the valuation itself becomes part of the bull case. Obviously the market wouldn’t value it at $4 trillion if it weren’t worth $4 trillion. Right?

Price creates legitimacy. Legitimacy attracts capital. Capital pushes up price. Price creates more legitimacy. It’s the custom 49ers helmet of finance.

And if the stock gets there before the earnings do, simply extend the forecast another five years. Again: look at the jersey. Don’t ask who’s wearing it.

But when someone asks Daejon to suit up on Sunday? That’s where things get interesting. And that day is coming for the market and AI eventually…

--

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author. I cannot guarantee the accuracy of all facts and figures included in this article though I made my best effort to get them right. I have been wrong before and will be wrong again, and encourage you to always double check, do your own research and speak to a licensed financial professional.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions.

As of May 20, 2026 I am attempting to no longer actively trade as much as I once did (read my story here). My eventual goal is for investing/saving to be mostly done by recurring contributions mostly to sector ETFs and a few select equities, trusted third parties who oversee my accounts, and advisors. Such advisors or funds, through individual equities, options, index funds, mutual funds, ETFs, or other securities, may have positions in, exposure to, or holdings of names mentioned herein that I know nothing about. Basically, via index funds, ETFs and individual equities it is possible I could own, have exposure to, or not own anything at any point. As of the same date, May 20, 2026, in an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle, I’ve also excluded myself from fantasy sports, sports betting, online and in-person casinos and prediction markets.

And all positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 11:40