My end-of-week morning reads:

• The Credit Market Lens: Rich Spreads, Cheap Treasuries, and an Incomplete Explanation: The evolution of credit spreads remains driven primarily by credit fundamentals, investor risk appetite, flows, and broader market technicals rather than relative value between Treasuries and swaps. (PIMCO)

• Meet All The Middle Aged Women Who Don’t Exist: They’re all gorgeous. They’re all “57.” And they’re all selling you NMN. AI-generated wellness influencers targeting women over 40 — fake people selling real supplements with fabricated testimonials. The grift is sophisticated and growing fast. (Charlotte’s Book) see also The Fake Influencers Selling Wellness on Your Feed: The New York Times video investigation of the same phenomenon. (New York Times)

• Palantir’s greatest enemy: Not competition or regulation. The thing most likely to undo Palantir is its relationship with the U.S. government. Barrett Brown has spent 15 years investigating Peter Thiel. Now he lives in exile in Mexico. But he’s plotting his comeback (Dispatch)

• How Wall Street’s Bots Are Cashing In on Trump’s Truth Social Posts: Traders who already monitor the president’s pronouncements with automated systems can pay for an ultrafast feed. At least five firms have signed up. (Wall Street Journal) but see also The ‘decayed’ impact of Trump’s Truth Social bombs: Markets are gradually learning to ignore the president. (Financial Times free)

• Forever chemicals are hidden in farm soil. Scientists found a new way to remove them: Existing methods of PFAS cleanup are expensive. A new approach is an order of magnitude cheaper—and could also help fight climate change. (Fast Company)

• The breakthrough changing how Americans donate organs: A growing form of donation is expanding the organ supply in the US — and testing how medicine protects dying patients. (Vox)

• ‘Ideological Emigration’: The Most Optimistic Israeli in Jerusalem Is Leaving the Country: Former brain researcher Hagai Agmon-Snir is behind a raft of initiatives to promote tolerance between Israelis and Palestinians, but he now has a one-way ticket to Italy. For him, Israel has become hopeless. A Haaretz profile of an Israeli who spent years arguing that things would get better — and finally gave up. The piece says as much about the state of Israel as it does about the man. (Haaretz) See also A Growing Number of Americans Are Seeking Residency and Citizenship Abroad—Here’s Where They’re Going: The emigration wave continues. Condé Nast Traveler maps where Americans are going — Portugal, Mexico, New Zealand, Ireland — and what’s pushing them out. It’s part of a global trend of travelers building so-called “sovereign portfolios,” a new report shows. (Conde Nast Traveler)

• ‘See the whole world in lichens,’ the marvels that grow anywhere: You might think that in the kingdom of green that is our Northwest, the mighty Douglas fir is supreme, or perhaps the red cedar. Ah, but consider the humble, the ancient, the ultimate in Northwest non-fussy, the enduring, inspiring signature of our regional character. That companion to Washington landscapes, whether east side or west, that thrives on just about any surface — dry, wet, bright, dark, hard, soft, natural, manufactured, whatever. Consider lichens. (Seattle Times)

• The history of stadium design in 15 buildings. From Ancient Greece Colosseum to SoFi Stadium to the modern Gulf States, the stadium’s evolution over millennia has relied on numerous innovations, many of them first tested at the buildings on this list. How the places where we watch sports have evolved, and what they reveal about the cultures that built them. (De Zeen)

• The Biggest Hygiene Mistakes People Make in the Pool: We asked infectious disease doctors and water-quality experts which hygiene mistakes they see most. Here’s what you’re probably getting wrong—and what to do instead. (Time)

Video of the day: Jamie Dimon: Why I Won’t Buy Bonds, AI’s Future & Leadership Lessons

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Lori Heinel, Global Chief Investment Officer of State Street Investment Management, the money management arm of investing giant State Street. She oversees over $5.7 trillion in assets (as of year-end 2025), which includes everything from index funds and ETFs to active strategies, multi-asset solutions, and alternatives. She was named to Forbes’ 2025 “50 Over 50” list.

IPOs Have Been a Losing Bet Since 2019

Source: Apollo

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Friday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

The Multipolaristas' Are China-Maxxing

Authored by Iain Davis via Off-Guardian.org,

Let’s consider the arguments of those who advocate global governance, the people whom Hrvoje Morić identifies as the Multipolaristas. They are often engaged in China-maxxing and are, whether they know it or not, essentially serving as propagandists for the global oligarchy.

Research conducted by analysts working for the South China Morning Post (SCMP)—an English-speaking, Western-aligned Chinese news outlet—suggests that, between 2015 and 2025, a notable shift occurred in the way China and its government were portrayed by the leading Western media organisations.

Chief analyst Jianlu Bi, who is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Policy Studies and a research fellow at the Charhar Institute in Beijing, wrote:

[N]early 70 per cent of stories covering China’s economy, technology or environment in 2019 had a negative tone [but] by 2025, the share of negative stories dropped to around 40 per cent, along with an increase in neutral coverage across all categories and positive coverage of the [Chinese] economy.

This notable Western media narrative shift is part of a wider trend that can be described as “China-maxxing.” With outlets like The Economist, the Financial Times, and The New York Times—all previously known for their staunch anti-China propaganda—now quite regularly extolling the virtues of China and, most notably, its economy, “China-maxxing” is an identifiable phenomenon.

The Western mainstream media is gradually shifting to sell the Chinese government to us as the “good guys.”

Recently, Elon Musk has engaged in some China-maxxing of his own. Musk is part of the gaggle of oligarchs eager to roll out AI data centers wherever they can. Musk was keen to point out that the only national government that has, in his view, adopted the right approach is China’s:

The availability of energy is the issue. If you look at electrical output outside of China, it’s more or less flat. Very slight increase, but pretty much flat. [. . .] If you’re putting data centers anywhere except China, where are you going to get your electricity? Especially as you scale, how are you going to turn the chips on? Magical power sources? Magical electricity fairies?

The previous blanket Western media vilification of China was always absurd state propaganda. China has been framed as the comic-book villain to encourage Western populations to accept further suppressions of their rights by their own governments and to claim justification for increased public spending on the Western military-intelligence complex.

Meanwhile, the multinational corporations that benefit from the government contracts, supposedly awarded to protect Western populations from the fabricated Chinese threat, such as Musk’s SpaceX, are led by oligarchs who genuinely pose a threat to everyone.

Though he didn’t use the term himself, in trying to explain China-maxxing, Mr. Jianlu offered a list of potential reasons for it. These included the Western media’s recognition of China’s technological and economic progress, the Chinese government’s apparent commitment to tackling climate change, its drive for efficiency, and so on. Jianlu argued that all of this has combined to force Western media outlets to reevaluate how they cover China and China-related matters.

Nation-states and national governments are set to be replaced by a global Technocracy. At some point, therefore, the conversation about moving away from the extant governance system to which people are accustomed to the new one has to commence.

Returning to Jianlu’s analysis, he is a leading Western policy think tank representative, and the media outlets he discussed primarily serve as propagandists for Western policy. Buried in the analysis, there is a brief statement that indicates what the real purpose of China-maxxing is:

Unlike the US, where policy shifts can abruptly occur due to political changes and short-term economic pressures, [. . .] China’s long-term strategic planning and consistent policy implementation have yielded results.

Dark Enlightenment-enthused oligarchs like Peter Thiel want to “escape from politics in all its forms,” and beyond dictatorship, there is no political mechanism of any kind in the Technocracy advocated by oligarchs like Elon Musk.

The oligarchy intends to make itself the feudal lords (founders) of private smart city-states similar to those currently being developed in China. The UN desires the same transformation. China-maxxing suits their shared agenda perfectly.

China-maxxing is yet more Western media propaganda, this time intended to convince Westerners that the model of government they are accustomed to no longer works. The Chinese development of Technocracy is better because it “yields[s] results.” Irrespective of the fact that no Westphalian-model Western government has ever operated as a democracy, China-maxxing has arrived to persuade Westerners that the so-called “representative democracies” that they have been misled to believe are democracies are now surplus to requirements.

Multipolaristas, specifically those working in the independent media, perhaps unwittingly argue that the dictatorial state control of human beings’ access to resources is acceptable because the accompanying surveillance state seemingly “yields[s] results.” Some say it reduces crime or that the gleaming towers of the new city-states are so beautifully clean and convenient. Others that China’s infrastructure investment strategy shows the world a clear alternative to austerity.

China is nation-building while Western nations decline and collapse. Chinese Technocracy “yields[s] results” that failing Western nations cannot match. Unless, logically, they too adopt Technocracy.

To an extent, the Multipolaristas make reasonable points. Who wouldn’t want to live in safe, clean cities? Who wants austerity when the state could invest in much-needed infrastructure instead? Who wouldn’t want the employment opportunities and the economic benefits that result? But all of the Multipolarista’s ostensibly reasonable observations and commentaries are based upon fatal omissions that result in them essentially spreading Western propaganda, intentionally or otherwise.

No state needs to impose a centralised technological population surveillance system in order to improve public safety, clean the environment or the streets, or invest in public infrastructure and its own economy. By effectively promoting global governance and Technocracy, the Multipolaristas’ foolhardy suggestion is that functional oligarchies are benevolent and that we should trust them.

Oligarchs are constructing their digital kill chains, and oligarchs like Musk are also promoters of China’s blossoming Technate. This is not a coincidence.

There are no historical examples of a state ever successfully imposing the full gamut of despotic behavioural control systems on a large population. But with its Greater Bay Area initiative, linking China’s numerous smart city projects together, China is reaching that point. Now Western mainstream and independent media outlets are showcasing China’s development to sell all the alleged benefits of Technocracy to Western populations.

Neither fascism nor communism even comes close to the behavioural dictatorship Technocracy is designed to inflict. Ignoring this aspect of China’s undoubtedly impressive modernisation is an epistemological error so profound it renders the rest of the Multipolaristas’ arguments practically irrelevant.

If the objective was not to enslave us, no state and no oligarch would construct Technates. The sole purpose of Technocracy is systematic human bondage.

From humanity’s perspective, there is nothing good about living in a Technocracy. No matter what incentives we are given, irrespective of the claimed benefits offered to entice us, giving our consent to those who wish to foist Technocracy upon us is an act of generational suicide.

There is, of course, no reason why we should agree to any of it.

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/24/2026 - 02:00

The Odyssey And The Tiresome Woke War Against White Culture

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

We’ve all heard the argument for most of our lives: “White culture doesn’t exist.” It’s perhaps the most common racial refrain because it’s the most socially acceptable to repeat. If someone said “Black culture doesn’t exist because black people all herald from different tribes…” that person would be browbeaten as a bigot by the woke mob. When it comes to white culture, such claims are applauded.

The question is, why is it okay to diminish or denigrate white culture while worshiping every other culture? Furthermore, if white culture doesn’t exist, why are woke minority groups constantly trying to hijack white history and accomplishments?

I want to explore this issue a little more deeply, mostly because of the endless targeting of western civilization through the leftist deconstruction of our most popular figures and mythologies. This time, the Hollywood elites have chosen Homer’s The Odyssey, an ancient Greek classic deeply rooted in western history (white history), as their victim.

Hollywood has pulled out ALL the stops for this movie and I suspect it’s because they are desperate. They are desperate for a woke win. They’ve had hundreds of failures both in film and television in the past few years and it’s starting to look like “Get Woke, Go Broke” is becoming the dominant force in popular discourse. The leftists can’t stand it.

In response, Hollywood has stacked the deck – They brought in Christopher Nolan, one of the only directors left in the industry who still has a built-in audience of simps who will go see his movies regardless of their quality. The distributors have focused on IMAX ticket sales for a wealthier clientele, artificially inflating the overall box office take.

The media has been running non-stop interference, promoting the movie heavily months in advance. Evidence also suggests that Rotten Tomatoes is once again rigging the audience score for this film by rejecting most negative reviews (they have done this with multiple woke tent pole movies over the years).

Hilariously, journalists are already declaring The Odyssey “proof” that “Get Woke, Go Broke” is a fallacy. As I write this, the movie hasn’t made a dime in profit yet. What I find most interesting, however, is that these activist journalists are actually using the phrase “Get Woke, Go Broke” in their vernacular. It’s an indirect admission of their agenda.

They are specifically citing our movement as their enemy and declaring us “defeated” because The Odyssey is projected to make money. By default, they are admitting that we are a threat to them, and that The Odyssey is a woke project designed to “silence us.” But why does this matter?

It’s important to understand that leftists think like children. They believe that having a “majority” is the same as being right; having a majority to them is the same as having power. If the Odyssey is a box office success, they think this proves that they are the dominant political movement.

They don’t care if their supposed majority is actually astroturf; if they can fool the public into thinking the political left has a social mandate, this will win them control over the culture. In other words, they’re trying to manufacture a consensus.

The Odyssey film is a clear salvo aimed directly at conservatives and western history. It is a multicultural travesty, a joke of a movie filled with historical inaccuracies and based on a deconstructionist translation written by a feminist academic from Oxford (Emily Wilson). The movie explicitly undermines the heroism of the story and makes Odysseus a broken man, suffering from “trauma” and PTSD over his regrets of the war and his “colonist” behavior.

But the spurious additions to the mythology are less interesting to me than the reasons they were included.

The deconstruction of Odysseus reminds me of what Kathleen Kennedy and friends at Disney did to Luke Skywalker in “The Last Jedi”. They took a brilliant, courageous and moral man and turned him into a shattered, crusty and nihilistic little bitch – completely the opposite of his original character. This was not a mistake, this was quite deliberate.

White people are not allowed to have bold, wise and confident heroes. We’re supposed to regret our history and our accomplishments. We’re not supposed to celebrate such things, because that might inspire us to be bold, wise and confident today.

The race swapped cast of The Odyssey featuring black actors, Hispanics, Asians, and other people (including a transgender Ellen Page playing a male Greek warrior) who would never have populated Homer’s era is the common angle of attack for woke Hollywood, but it’s not the only attack. If a main protagonist is white, as is the case in Nolan’s film, he must be torn down and made weak. He must be portrayed as shamed and desperate for redemption, which, of course, he will only receive by embracing progressive ideals.

The last thing Hollywood wants is to portray a white hero who is unapologetic for his actions and values.

This is the underlying woke messaging that really poisons the well when it comes to The Odyssey. The minority actors are primarily a shield from criticism. If anyone complains about African or Hispanic or Asian actors in a Greek epic, the media can pull the “racism” card and dismiss the issue outright. They assert that we merely hate seeing minorities in movies.

But it’s not minorities in movies that we have a problem with; it’s the injection of woke propaganda. This is the real crime. If Christopher Nolan made a film based on the African “Epic of Liyongo” from the 9th Century and he replaced the Swahili characters with white actors in a bid to hijack African history, the left wing would lose their collective minds and scream “cultural appropriation.”  The double standard is obvious.

Will Odyssey make a profit? Possibly. The movie had a big first weekend, but adjusted for inflation it didn’t even crack the top fifty on the list of opening weekend box office winners. The film has to make around $700 million in order to break even, not counting the 20% of the gross receipts that go to Christopher Nolan according to his contract.

I am doubtful that the studio will make much money on this flick, but Hollywood will declare it a victory all the same. Firstly, because no woke movie has had similar momentum in years. And secondly, because the political left is dying and they need a very public win in order to justify their habit of doubling down on failure.

Any sane and intelligent person would point out that one “successful” movie does not make up for the cemetery filled with woke box office disasters. This doesn’t matter to the activist mob. They think that one win will erase all their previous losses.

Furthermore, The Odyssey is intended to act as a continuation of the long Marxist march towards a multicultural west and the end of white history as we know it.

Homer’s epic poem was composed around 2800 years ago and is one of the oldest surviving works of literature in human history. It stands as a testament to the incredible accomplishments of the western world; part of the wellspring from which the modern west poured forth.

At the time The Odyssey was created, the Mediterranean was overwhelmingly Caucasian according to genetic records. This includes North Africa, which was majority Caucasian and largely “white” by modern standards. It should be noted that Sub-Saharan Africans did not exist in any notable quantity in North Africa or the Mediterranean until many centuries later because travel across the deserts of central Africa prevented their migration north for thousands of years.

Arabs were also limited and did not occupy the region in great numbers until the invasion of the Muslim hordes long after Homer lived.

Numerous images from the ancient Greeks and Macedonians, including pottery, murals and other surviving art, depict people of fair skin, often with blue eyes, and in some cases blonde hair, etc. In other words, they were white – Varying shades of white, but still white.

Simply pointing out this historical and scientific fact will immediately trigger the woke mob and their academic allies. You will be inundated with a flurry of exceptions and some tiresome mental gymnastics about why the people of these early civilizations were not really “white”. Remember, “white culture doesn’t exist”, only other cultures exist.

Far too many critics and historical conspiracy nuts actually think the demographics of North Africa and the Mediterranean in the time of Homer were the same as the demographics of North Africa and the Mediterranean today. They don’t know anything about the great migration shifts of the Middle Ages or the invasion of the Muslims. No meaningful discussion can be had with these people because their point of reference is built on pure ignorance.

Beyond that, there is another subset of dishonest people (woke leftists) who see it as their duty to undermine white history and rewrite as if it never existed. They often cater to the inferiority complexes of minority groups by asserting that white history is actually THEIR history. White people just “stole” accomplishments from other civilizations and replaced them over time.

This is part of the narrative that motivates the discourse over Christopher Nolan’s dismal film version of The Odyssey. It is a woke treatise, a magic talisman designed to brown-wash and feminize yet another piece of western heritage. It’s part of a greater agenda to make white people forget who we are, or at the very least, make us ashamed of who we are.

The end game? Like I said, it’s about the multicultural takeover of the western world. Everything stems from this scheme. Hollywood’s woke reboots are rooted in it. The mass immigration policies of leftist governments drive the agenda forward. The deconstruction of our history in public schools and colleges is designed to indoctrinate children so they never learn the truth.

Until one day, we look around, and everything that makes us who we are is gone, from meritocracy to republicanism, from Christianity to critical thinking, from innovation to entrepreneurship, from individual liberty to free markets, from property to responsibility, and yes, colonialism (the act of improving third world hellholes where people are incapable of improving their own surroundings so they don’t turn into pillagers trying to invade our countries).

All of it replaced with a socialist purgatory in which everyone is equally pathetic, hopeless and useless.

The whole conspiracy has become quite transparent and grimly boring. Luckily, one garbage movie isn’t going to change the overwhelming trend, which is the slow but steady decline of left-wing insanity. Nothing they are doing is hidden from us. We see it all, and in the long run, they’re going to lose. It’s inevitable.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 23:25

China Plans Planetary Defense Test By Slamming Mach 26 Spacecraft Into Asteroid

A new paper under peer review by the Chinese-language Journal of Deep Space Exploration lays out an ambitious plan to crash a spacecraft at Mach 26, or 20,000 mph, into a near-Earth asteroid to test new planetary defenses.

The South China Morning Post reports that a team led by Li Mingtao, chief scientist for planetary defense at the China National Space Administration, is planning a mission even more ambitious than NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART).

That mission would slam a spacecraft into 2015 XF261, an asteroid estimated to be about 30 meters wide, in either 2029 or 2030.

"Dart was the first to demonstrate asteroid deflection by kinetic impact in space, but it did not directly change an asteroid's orbit around the sun relative to Earth, making it different from a real planetary-defense scenario," the researchers wrote in the report.

The planned impact would be nearly 50% faster than NASA’s 2022 DART, which hit the asteroid Dimorphos at 6.1 kilometers per second, or about Mach 18.

According to the paper, the mission calls for two spacecraft: one interceptor and one observation spacecraft, which would use a Venus gravity assist before rendezvousing with the target. It would deploy a small probe to monitor the collision and measure changes to the asteroid's orbit, shape, surface, and internal structure.

"Focusing on China's first asteroid-defense demonstration and verification mission, planned for implementation before 2030, this paper systematically reviews the frontier scientific questions in kinetic-impact asteroid defense to support mission design, implementation, and preliminary scientific research," the researchers said.

If successful, the test would become China's first end-to-end demonstration of an operational planetary-defense system. It will help scientists better understand how – and when – a kinetic impactor spacecraft could be used to deflect an Earth-bound asteroid.

Meanwhile, SpaceX will launch the NEO Surveyor asteroid-detection telescope no earlier than September 2027, which will discover and monitor most of the potentially hazardous asteroids and comets that come within 30 million miles of Earth's orbit.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 23:00

Will The Supreme Court Legalize Home Distilling?

Authored by Andrew M. Grossman & Robert Alt via RealClearPolicy,

Ohioan John Ream is an accomplished aerospace engineer and brewery owner. He would like to try his hand at making Bourbon. However, federal law prohibits distilling spirited beverages at home. On Monday, he filed a petition in the Supreme Court of the United States asking it to hear his case, which raises important questions about the limits of federal power.

Home distilling is, of course, as American as apple pie, and certainly a lot older. George Washington's Mount Vernon estate featured a distillery that, by 1799, was producing more than 10,000 gallons of whiskey per year. Nonetheless, Congress barred distilling inside any "dwelling house" or "shed, yard, or inclosure connected with a dwelling house" in what was, by all indications, a sop to the temperance movement. Later, Prohibition killed off what remained of craft spirits production.

The home-distilling ban ultimately survived both Prohibition and repeal, along with the distilled-spirits tax. Under the law, distilling, or even owning a set-up still, in a prohibited location like a home is punishable by fines, property forfeiture, and imprisonment. Given the draconian penalties, it's little surprise that hobby distilling has floundered while craft brewing and small-batch winemaking, both of which the law allows, have flourished.

Mr. Ream filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging whether that disparity has any lawful basis. The federal government, after all, possesses only the limited powers specified in the constitutional text. States, meanwhile, retain broad authority to legislate for the public good. This vertical separation of powers between the federal government and the states promotes accountability, responsiveness, and ultimately individual freedom.

Or it would, if the Court hadn't refashioned the Constitution's Commerce Clause, which authorizes Congress to "regulate Commerce...among the several States," and had long been understood to reach only interstate trade and the channels of such trade. But in the 1942 Wickard v. Filburn ruling, the Supreme Court eviscerated such limitations. At issue was a Soviet-inspired law capping wheat production to "rationalize" the agricultural sector and, by limiting its volume, drive up prices. Roscoe Filburn was an Ohio farmer who exceeded the imposed cap and grew enough wheat to feed both his family and the animals on his farm. The Court held that Congress may regulate any activity that, in aggregate, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Because widespread home-production of wheat would prevent Congress from regulating interstate prices, Congress could therefore restrict home production as part of its price-regulation scheme.

For the six decades following Wickard, the Court demurred in enforcing the Commerce Clause's limits. But by the mid-1990s, the Court appeared ready to chart a new course. First, it struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act in a 1995 decision, United States v. Lopez, reasoning that merely carrying a gun near a school was too attenuated from interstate commerce to substantially affect it. Then the Court doubled down in United States v. Morrison (2000), which held unconstitutional a federal statute authorizing lawsuits by victims of gender-motivated violence. Morrison pared back Wickard's aggregation principle, suggesting that it applies only to inherently economic activities, and refused to defer to Congress's view on whether local activities substantially affect interstate commerce. Legal observers proclaimed a nascent "federalism revolution."

It didn't last. The promise of Lopez and Morrison was cut short by a 2005 decision, Gonzales v. Raich, upholding the Controlled Substances Act's prohibition on the home cultivation and consumption of marijuana subject to state regulation. Going well beyond Wickard, Raich applied its aggregation principle to noncommercial activity and adopted the maximally deferential "rational basis" standard for assessing Congress's need to regulate non-interstate activities. Taken on its own terms, Raich all but declares that anything goes with regard to regulation under the Commerce Clause.

One doubts that is the view of the current Court. Justice Thomas is the sole holdover from Raich, from which he dissented. His opinion explained how, if the Raich majority were right, then "the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers." Chief Justice Roberts wielded that same logic in his opinion holding that Obamacare's "individual mandate" to purchase health insurance was not authorized by the Commerce Clause, and the dissent joined by Justices Thomas and Samuel Alito reasoned similarly. Although the justices appointed by President Trump have not been afforded the occasion to opine on the Commerce Clause's limits, all three take seriously the Constitution's original meaning, its structural features, and the enumeration of powers as a constraint on federal power. Expect them to be more skeptical of assertions of federal authority than was the Raich majority.

John Ream's current challenge to the home-distilling ban takes aim at the excesses of Raich, and would be a meaningful first step toward rekindling the federalism revolution.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the home-distilling prohibition, ruling that the ban, while not a tax, "is a necessary and proper means of collecting the federal excise tax on spirits," because stills could be hidden within homes in order to evade taxation.

The more defensible view on this same matter was expressed in a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decision by Judge Edith Jones issued eleven days earlier. Far from furthering collection of the tax, the ban serves to "reduce revenue by preventing individuals from making distilled spirits" otherwise subject to taxation. It would be improper to allow Congress to "criminalize nearly any at-home conduct only because it has the possibility of concealing taxable activity."

The split between the Fifth and Sixth Circuits on the home-distilling ban's constitutionality is reason enough for the Supreme Court to take Ream's case, resolve this conflict, and provide national uniformity in the law. But there's also a need for further clarity on the Commerce Clause and Raich's continued viability. Given the massive growth of the federal government and its intrusion into every facet of modern life, there are few issues more important or pressing for the Court's consideration.

Andrew M. Grossman and Robert Alt represent John Ream in his litigation and also the plaintiffs who prevailed before the Fifth Circuit. Mr. Alt is President and CEO of The Buckeye Institute, where Mr. Grossman is a Senior Legal Fellow.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 22:35

Mapping Americans' Per Capita Health Care Spending By State

Health care represents a major share of consumer spending in America, but the amount spent per resident varies considerably by location.

New data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis highlights the differences in per-capita health care spending across the country in 2024.

The map below, via Visual Capitalist's Srijaa Chatterjee, ranks every state using the latest Personal Consumption Expenditures by State data from the BEA. Figures are reported in current dollars and allocated according to residents’ state of residence.

Which States Spend the Most on Health Care?

Below is a ranking of states based on per-person health care spending:

Rank State Per-Capita Health Care Spending 1 Alaska $14,044 2 District of Columbia $13,865 3 South Dakota $12,451 4 New York $12,221 5 West Virginia $12,055 6 Delaware $11,987 7 Massachusetts $11,985 8 North Dakota $11,667 9 Vermont $11,493 10 Indiana $11,071 11 California $11,054 12 Maine $10,913 13 New Hampshire $10,682 14 Connecticut $10,639 15 Minnesota $10,567 16 New Jersey $10,468 17 Pennsylvania $10,262 18 Ohio $10,202 19 Nebraska $10,192 20 Louisiana $10,148 21 Wisconsin $10,079 22 Missouri $10,036 23 Kentucky $9,964 24 Oregon $9,931 25 Illinois $9,895 26 Rhode Island $9,864 27 Hawaii $9,808 28 Montana $9,747 29 Washington $9,693 30 Wyoming $9,640 31 Florida $9,545 32 Maryland $9,456 33 Virginia $9,123 34 Kansas $9,066 35 Oklahoma $9,052 36 Michigan $9,023 37 Colorado $8,871 38 Tennessee $8,761 39 North Carolina $8,744 40 Georgia $8,680 41 Iowa $8,660 42 Arkansas $8,562 43 Arizona $8,556 44 New Mexico $8,469 45 Mississippi $8,135 46 Idaho $8,078 47 Alabama $7,980 48 Texas $7,807 49 South Carolina $7,741 50 Nevada $7,536 51 Utah $7,233

Alaska spent nearly twice as much per resident on health care as Utah in 2024.

Several Northeastern states, along with South Dakota and Washington, D.C., also ranked near the top. Meanwhile, much of the Mountain West and South recorded below-average spending.

Why Do Some States Spend More Than Others?

Higher spending does not necessarily mean residents receive more medical care.

Numerous studies have found that differences in prices, especially for hospital and physician services, explain much more of the variation in U.S. health spending than differences in how often people use care. Administrative costs, provider wages, and regional labor markets also play major roles.

State-specific factors matter as well. Alaska’s remote geography and limited provider network make delivering care significantly more expensive, while states with older populations often spend more because seniors tend to use more medical services.

Broader insurance coverage can also increase the share of care captured in personal consumption expenditures.

Health Care Spending Continues to Climb

Nationally, health care expenditures continue to rise.

CMS projects U.S. health spending will approach $9 trillion annually by 2034, driven by increased enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid, along with continued growth in health care prices. Despite already spending more per person than any comparable high-income country, the U.S. is expected to devote an even larger share of its economy to health care over the next decade.

International comparisons show the U.S. spends substantially more on health care than other high-income countries, largely because medical services cost more rather than because Americans use dramatically more care.

As national spending continues to rise, the nearly twofold gap between states highlights how geography remains a major factor in what Americans ultimately spend on health care.

If you enjoyed this visualization, check out Americans Pay More for Healthcare, Yet Have Shorter Life Expectancy on the Voronoi app, where you can discover thousands of data-driven charts from trusted sources covering health, economics, markets, and more.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 22:10

Waste Of The Day: Education Fraud Sweeps Nation

Authored by Jeremy Portnoy via RealClearInvestigations,

Topline: Since 2019, school districts across 24 states and Puerto Rico have lost $225 million to fraud confirmed by the U.S. Department of Education inspector general's semiannual report to Congress. No more than $67 million has been recovered.

Key facts: Open the Books and the State Financial Officers Foundation documented 74 instances of confirmed school fraud, averaging over $3 million each. There are far more that have gone unprosecuted or undetected.

Florida and Illinois schools each had the most instances of fraud with 11.

Indiana lost the most money - $44 million - due to inflated attendance numbers that increased state funding to two schools. The schools' founder then allegedly sent the money to companies he owned. The schools closed in 2019, and four alleged conspirators were charged in 2024.

At Broward County Public Schools in Florida, information officer Anthony Hunter allegedly used district funds to buy $17 million worth of school supplies from a friend's business, ignoring the competitive bidding process. In return, the friend hired Hunter and his son to work a security job and sold Hunter a house for $150,000 below market value, state prosecutors claim

Chicago Public Schools received $1 million of federal grants meant for Native American students, using an application that included more than 1,000 students of South Asian descent. The district was unable to verify how many students were actually in the program, and agreed to repay the money.

Fraud arguably hits small school districts the hardest because they have fewer budgetary resources to begin with. When Janis Bucknor, former head of Community Preparatory Academy in California, admitted to stealing $3 million from the school over five years, it amounted to one-third of all the school's state and federal funding.

Bucknor spent $220,600 of the money on Disney vacations and also funded her internet shopping and private school tuition for her kids. She was sentenced to three years of home detention and ordered to repay the money.

Summary: The government loses hundreds of billions of dollars to fraud annually, but redirecting money away from children's education is especially egregious.

The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 21:45

India Targets Five Small Modular Reactors By 2033

India expects to build domestically five small modular reactors (SMRs) by 2033, India’s Atomic Energy Minister, Jitendra Singh, said. The five SMRs would be part of India’s push to accelerate nuclear power capacity installations over the next two decades, the minister told lawmakers in a written reply to questions as carried by local media.

The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), India’s premier nuclear research facility under the Department of Atomic Energy, is currently developing a 220-MW Bharat Small Modular Reactor, a 55-MW reactor, and a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor designed to produce hydrogen, Singh said quoted by OilPrice.com.

As per India’s nuclear energy roadmap, the country aims to boost its installed nuclear power capacity from 8.78 gigawatts (GW) now to about 22 GW by the 2031-32 fiscal year, the minister said.

India goal is to boost its installed nuclear power capacity to 100 GW by 2047, up from just 8.8 GW now. This would require as much as 19.28 trillion Indian rupees, or $200 billion at current exchange rates, of cumulative capital, a panel set up by India’s power ministry said in the ‘roadmap to 100 GW’ report last year.

At the end of 2025, India’s government approved the landmark Atomic Energy Bill, which allows private companies to invest in its nuclear energy industry for the first time, as the country looks to boost nuclear power capacity tenfold within two decades.

The so-called SHANTI (Sustainable Harnessing of Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India) Act could drive huge investments from private companies in India’s nuclear energy sector.

Yet, Indian state-owned NTPC Ltd, the biggest utility in the country, is expected to account for 30% of the new nuclear power capacity installations by 2047.

NTPC, currently the only nuclear power generator in India, is now looking to acquire stakes in uranium assets globally to secure fuel for the expected massive expansion of India’s nuclear power capacity.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 21:20

Behind America's Growing 'Food Freedom' Movement

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times,

Joel Salatin wants to liberate Americans from over-regulation with neighbor-to-neighbor food commerce.

Salatin, who runs Polyface Farm in the hills of Virginia's Shenandoah Valley, is pitching the concept of a "Food Emancipation Proclamation."

Chickens, turkeys, and cows at Polyface Farms, in Swoope, Va., and The Family Cow, in Chambersburg, Pa., in these file photos. The regenerative farms are part of a growing push for “food emancipation”—neighbors feeding neighbors. Courtesy of Polyface Farms, Courtesy of The Family Cow

Through what he envisions as a federal declaration, consenting adults would be allowed to buy and sell homemade and farmstead food directly, without the costly commercial infrastructure and cumbersome government regulation currently in place.

Salatin's mission reflects a push among homesteaders and independent farmers to cultivate local food networks, where food is grown and raised without chemicals and consumers can gain a more transparent connection to how food is produced.

The Next 15 Years

At its core, food emancipation and local food networks are about neighbors feeding neighbors, sidestepping a system many no longer trust.

Salatin told The Epoch Times that the American food system is at a historic inflection point. He points to an aging farm class; the average American farmer is now around 60 years old.

Around half of U.S. agricultural equity is expected to change hands in the next 15 years, he said.

"That's the most unprecedented peaceful transfer in modern history," he said.

In 2025, Americans spent 56.3 percent of their food dollars on items prepared outside the home, at restaurants, at fast-food chains, and through takeout delivery services. Overall, out-of-home food spending reached a record $1.41 trillion out of a total $2.51 trillion in national food spending, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Meanwhile, the farmer's share of the retail food dollar after production expenses has plummeted to roughly 5.8 cents today, according to the USDA. That figure was 40 cents in the mid-20th century.

The idea of food emancipation is simple: Let small producers legally and freely sell directly to the people who want their food.

Salatin notes that the real barrier to young people entering farming is not access to land alone, but the inability to profit from small-scale, value-added food production under existing rules.

He illustrates the gap with a simple calculation.

On a couple of acres, a farmer might raise 1,200 pastured chickens, selling them as whole birds or cut-up parts at an average of about $30 per bird, yielding $36,000 in gross income, he said.

If that same farmer could legally turn those birds into homemade chicken pot pies - free of dyes, seed oils, and industrial additives - and market them as high-quality convenience food, the average value per bird could jump to around $200, he explained, turning the same flock into $240,000 in revenue on the same land.

Once a farmer moves from raw ingredients to prepared foods, the regulatory threshold explodes, going from a home kitchen with existing equipment to what he described as "a half-million-dollar requirement to sell one chicken pot pie."

Saving The Family Farm

Pennsylvania dairy farmer Edwin Shank told The Epoch Times that his family nearly lost a four-generation farm after expanding from 40 to 300 cows under university-driven advice that prioritized volume above all else.

Despite filling a tractor-trailer with milk every two days, the Shanks were going bankrupt.

Milk checks came once a month - whatever the processor felt like paying. His banker warned that if nothing changed in three to four months, the farm would be gone.

A family portrait from that period, he said, looks idyllic - flowers, six children, a tidy yard - but behind the smiles they "were losing the farm."

"Inside the fence, hope is outside the fence," he said, quoting a conventional dairyman who described it as "a hard time to be a farmer these days."

The Shanks' response was to step outside the fence.

They converted their operation to certified organic; then, with borrowed money and little capital, they began selling raw milk directly from the farm under Pennsylvania's permit system. They couldn't afford a modern facility, so they bought used refrigerated semi-trailers - or reefers - for a few thousand dollars each and bolted them together into a makeshift cold-storage complex.

Business started to flourish after a phone call from New Jersey. A mother in Trenton asked if Shank could deliver raw milk across the state line. Legally, he could not, but he took a cue from Salatin.

"I told her, 'I can't deliver to you alone, but if you have enough friends, I can meet you at the state line,'" Shank recalled. The customer organized five families. That was enough for Shank to load his minivan and make the three-hour trip.

He drove down I-95 and reached the exit ramp to New Hope.

"Right there, it went through me," he said. "God, are you telling me something?"

That first drop point grew into a network of 55 delivery locations. Shank's business, The Family Cow, ships raw dairy, grass-fed beef, pastured pork and poultry, and other regenerative products five days a week to thousands of households.

'Survival Of The Collaborators'

Around 90 percent of the business is now online, Shank said, with about 10 percent sold through a new on-farm retail store and cafe that offers sourdough-based sandwiches piled high with organic, grass-fed meats and slathered in real butter.

Shank abandoned the idea that his farm had to produce everything it sold. He opted to develop what he calls "survival of the collaborators."

Multiple family farms share production.

Two dairies supply raw milk, seven families produce pastured eggs, and 11 families raise grass-fed beef. Other families specialize in pastured pork, turkeys, and piglets.

The Family Cow brought aboard three young families to raise pastured poultry. The farm provided the market, butchering, and marketing know-how, while the families provided the labor and land. In their first year, the group produced 10,000 chickens.

Shank is open to suggestions from entrepreneurs. A mother and daughter approached him, offering water kefir priced at $5 per jar. Initially, Shank acknowledged that he doubted customers would pay.

Within six months, they sold 10,000 jars through The Family Cow network, Shank said.

Getting Healthy

Max Kane, a raw milk activist and farmer in Wisconsin, reversed a life-threatening illness by changing his diet and has emerged as a leading voice in the fight for food sovereignty, raw milk access, and local farm-based economies.

Diagnosed with degenerative Crohn's disease at 11, he spent more than a decade cycling through surgeries, supplements, and medications with little improvement. The Chicago native rejected the conventional medical path and switched to an all-unprocessed, farm-direct diet from local producers. That restored his health and allowed him to leave federal disability assistance and become what he calls "a functional, contributing member of society" in his mid-20s.

Today, Kane operates a 211-acre farm in southwest Wisconsin and a raw milk buying club that has served Chicago-area families for around two decades.

In 2009, he said, the USDA, Food and Drug Administration, and state authorities tried to put him in jail for 18 months over his raw milk deliveries to Chicago. The experience spurred his advocacy for legalizing raw milk and reinforced his view that Americans must have the freedom to opt out of the industrial food system and to form private food networks between farmers and consumers.

He created Farm Match, an online marketplace he described as "Etsy for local food." The platform connects consumers directly with vetted farms and buying clubs.

Homesteading at any level - whether it involves full rural homesteads, balcony gardens in urban high-rises, or suburban backyard gardens - is on the rise because of the failures of the current industrial food system, defined by ultra-processed foods and unpredictable supply chains, Kane told The Epoch Times.

Industrial supply chains lack true transparency and traceability, which allows ingredients to be legally hidden from labels and makes it difficult for consumers to understand what they are eating or to track the source of contamination when something goes wrong, Kane noted.

Economically, this "takes the money out of the local economy and sends it far away, undermining rural communities and small producers," he said.

"Simply put, the food people eat is the single biggest determinant of their ability to perform their life, no matter what they do for a living," Kane said. "If citizens cannot legally build private food systems that nourish their bodies and minds, they risk becoming permanently dependent on an infrastructure that leaves them sick, disempowered, and economically sidelined."

Sally Fallon Morell agrees. The founding president of the Weston A. Price Foundation - a nonprofit that promotes traditional diets, whole foods, and the consumption of animal fats - shared a simple grassroots strategy that bypasses corporate supply chains and empowers small, pasture-based producers during her discussion with The Epoch Times.

"If we asked people to spend half their food dollars on direct purchases from farms, it would change everything, and we'd get back to the kind of farming that we want to promote," Fallon Morell said.

Her vision includes buying raw milk, eggs, and meat directly from regenerative farmers, and supporting local artisans and small-scale producers of sourdough bread, sauerkraut, and other traditionally prepared foods.

This encourages interdependence and local networks, she added.

"The goal is a resilient local web of producers and eaters, not a homestead cut off from the broader world," she said.

Customers wait at Raising Canes Chicken Fingers in Washington on March 12, 2026. In 2025, Americans spent around 55 percent of their food dollars on items prepared outside the home at restaurants, fast-food chains, and through takeout delivery services. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 20:55

These Are The States Where Speeding Is Most Likely To Kill You

Montana has the highest rate of speeding-related traffic deaths per capita in the United States, underscoring a reality that runs counter to how most people think about dangerous driving, according to a new study by Siegfried and Jensen. 

While speeding is often associated with crowded urban highways and aggressive commuters, the greatest danger appears to exist on long, open rural roads where higher speed limits, lighter traffic, and longer emergency response times can turn a single mistake into a deadly crash.

Speeding claimed 11,288 lives across the country in 2024, making it the second-leading cause of fatal crashes behind only alcohol-impaired driving. It was a contributing factor in roughly 29% of all traffic fatalities, meaning nearly one out of every three people killed on American roads died in a crash where speed played a role.

A new analysis by Siegfried & Jensen ranked states by speeding deaths after adjusting for population. Montana finished first, followed by South Carolina, Wyoming, New Mexico, and North Carolina. Many of these states have similar characteristics, including vast stretches of rural highway, relatively high posted speed limits, and significant distances between towns, hospitals, and emergency responders.

The findings challenge the conventional wisdom that speeding is primarily an urban problem driven by congestion or road rage. Instead, the data suggests rural highways may be even more dangerous. Drivers often feel comfortable traveling well above the speed limit on open roads, but when crashes occur at those speeds, the consequences are far more severe. With fewer barriers, longer response times, and higher impact forces, accidents that might be survivable elsewhere are much more likely to become fatal.

There is also a seasonal pattern to these crashes. Fatal speeding accidents climb sharply during the warmer months, with May, June, and September each recording close to 1,000 deadly crashes involving excessive speed. The trend remains elevated throughout late summer and into early fall, suggesting increased travel, vacations, and heavier highway traffic all contribute to the higher death toll.

Despite decades of public awareness campaigns, stricter enforcement, and tougher penalties, speeding remains one of the nation's deadliest driving behaviors. Unlike some other traffic risks that have gradually improved through advances in vehicle safety technology, excessive speed continues to claim more than 11,000 lives every year.

The report also notes that speeding's true role in fatal crashes is likely even larger than official statistics indicate. A crash is only classified as speeding-related when investigators determine a driver was speeding, racing, or traveling too fast for road or weather conditions. In many serious collisions, speed may contribute to the outcome without ever being officially recorded as the primary cause.

The broader findings suggest geography plays an enormous role in roadway safety. While the country's largest states record the highest raw number of traffic fatalities, smaller and more rural states consistently post the highest death rates after adjusting for population. Long travel distances, limited transportation alternatives, and high-speed rural roads appear to create a particularly dangerous combination.

The analysis serves as another reminder that speeding is far more than a traffic violation. It remains one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in the United States, and the places where drivers feel safest putting their foot down may ultimately be where the risks are greatest.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 20:30

Authorities Arrest Fugitive Behind Alleged $547 Million Medicare Fraud

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

A man on the FBI’s Most Wanted Fraudsters list, accused of a scheme to defraud Medicare of $547 million, was arrested by authorities on Monday.

The foreign national, Khalid Satary, 54, owned and operated multiple diagnostic testing laboratories in the United States between 2016 and 2019 that billed Medicare for “expensive and medically unnecessary genetic tests,” the Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a July 21 statement.

Satary is accused of conspiring with several patient recruiters and telemarketing services to generate unnecessary cancer genetic test samples that were reimbursed by Medicare at the rate of $10,000 to $20,000 per sample.

To run the operation, Satary allegedly paid millions of dollars in bribes and illegal kickbacks to patient recruiters and doctors.

The defendant was initially indicted in 2019. However, Satary was later released on bond, with the condition that he doesn’t work in the healthcare sector. While on bond, Satary allegedly conspired with labs in Texas to continue submitting fraudulent genetic testing claims to Medicare.

A federal arrest warrant was issued against him in December 2022. However, Satary failed to appear for a court hearing and was believed to have escaped the United States. On July 20 this year, the defendant was arrested in the Middle East with a fake Mexican passport using a fake name. He was then transferred to U.S. authorities.

The Most Wanted Fraudsters list was announced by FBI Director Kash Patel last month. The White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud partnered with the FBI to compile the list, according to a June 19 X post from Vice President JD Vance, the task force’s chairman.

The task force was established through a March 16 executive order signed by President Donald Trump, which said criminals and other individuals were exploiting various benefit programs intended to provide American citizens with a safety net.

Trump ordered the task force to “coordinate and accelerate a comprehensive national strategy to stop fraud, waste, and abuse within Federal benefit programs.”

One of those on the list, Said Abdullahi Ereg, surrendered to law enforcement on June 10, according to the FBI and federal prosecutors. Ereg is accused of laundering millions of dollars from a program that aimed to feed needy children during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Another individual on the list, Herbert Leon Kimble, accused of $1.2 billion Medicare fraud, was arrested on June 11 in the Philippines.

In its latest statement, the DOJ said that Satary has been charged with various fraud-related crimes, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and paying bribes and illegal healthcare kickbacks. He faces a multi-decade prison term if convicted.

“The arrest of Khalid Ahmed Satary and return to the U.S. is the third Most Wanted Fraudster capture from this FBI and our partners in just five weeks—continuing the historic run of success for this new initiative,” Patel said in the statement.

“This is another subject who exploited a program dedicated to helping our most vulnerable and instead stole for himself. Satary has been on the run since 2022, but we got him thanks to great work and coordination from the interagency and our overseas partners.”

The Epoch Times was unable to reach Satary’s legal representative.

According to the FBI’s website, Satary is one among nine individuals currently mentioned on the Most Wanted Fraudsters list.

One of the individuals is a naturalized U.S. citizen of Somali origin wanted for allegedly being part of a fraud scheme that exploited the federal Child Nutrition Program during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Another individual, a female from Jamaica, is linked to a scheme that fraudulently obtained more than $32 million from COVID-19 relief funds.

A third person, a U.S. citizen, is wanted for alleged involvement in a mail fraud scheme in Georgia. The man allegedly defrauded at least $10 million from his victims.

Meanwhile, on June 23, the DOJ announced that a coordinated enforcement action involving a whole-of-government approach led to the arrests of 455 individuals for their alleged role in healthcare fraud and opioid abuse schemes.

The schemes, which involved more than $6.5 billion in false claims, posed “significant patient harm,” including death. Among the arrested were two Estonians connected to a $10.6 billion fraud scheme.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 20:05

Seven Pipeline Projects That Could Break Iran's Grip On Hormuz Chokepoint

Brent crude futures topped $100 a barrel (Read RBC note) as disruption at the Strait of Hormuz spread to Bab el-Mandeb in the southern Red Sea. Combined with intensifying Black Sea fighting between Russia and Ukraine, the widening chokepoint crisis has put the energy complex and broader global commodities market on edge.

"The curve on Brent and WTI is getting again very steep backwardated compared to when the diplomatic route to solve the Middle East conflict was on the table and seemed to be making progress," UBS analyst Claudio Martucci wrote in a note.

The reemergence of chokepoint chaos in the Strait of Hormuz, now spreading to Bab el-Mandeb, has provided Gulf states with a critical reminder of the risks associated with maritime export routes. This disruption is accelerating efforts to bypass vulnerable chokepoints and spurring a major infrastructure boom.

At least seven major pipeline projects are under construction, being planned or under discussion, according to the Associated Press.

Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline already provides the region's most important alternative, carrying crude from Abqaiq to Yanbu on the Red Sea.

The UAE has also increased oil shipments to Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman, bypassing Hormuz. Together, the Fujairah route and Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline had between 3.5 million and 5.5 million barrels a day of spare capacity before the war, according to the EIA. Both pipelines are now operating near capacity.

Even Dubai's state-owned ports and logistics giant, DP World, is planning to bypass the critical waterway with a new container port on the UAE's east coast in Fujairah.

The UAE has plans to expand Fujairah's export capacity, and more recently, the US is backing talks to revive an oil pipeline from Iraq to Syria's Mediterranean coast. This would create yet another export route that would entirely bypass the Hormuz chokepoint and, in turn, erode Tehran's leverage over shipping traffic.

Our coverage on the Gulf energy rewiring:

• Gulf States Considering Network Of New Pipelines To Bypass Strait Of Hormuz
• Great Rewiring: US Supports Iraq-Syria Oil Pipeline To Erode Tehran's Hormuz Leverage
• Dubai's New East Coast Port Signals The Beginning Of End For Iran's Hormuz Leverage

What's key to understand here is that seven projects by U.S.-aligned Gulf states are set to rewire energy flows in the Gulf region, which will only erode Tehran's leverage over Hormuz.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 19:40

Justice Department Withdraws Subpoenas Of New York Times Journalists

Authored by Timothy Frudd via The Epoch Times,

The Justice Department has withdrawn subpoenas for three reporters from The New York Times following criticism from a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian indicated on July 23 that he would have granted the request from the newspaper to reject the subpoenas if the Justice Department had not withdrawn them.

Subramanian said that the government was required to ensure that it could not obtain the information it sought from any other sources before subpoenaing journalists.

“Subpoenas are not the first thing you do; they are the last thing you do,” the judge said.

The Justice Department issued subpoenas to three journalists at The New York Times on July 10 after the newspaper published a report on alleged concerns about the new Air Force One, the plane used by the president, which was donated by the Qatari government.

The report alleged that the new aircraft lacked advanced security features, including anti-missile capabilities. It also said the Secret Service had urged President Donald Trump to use the old Air Force One as he departed from the NATO summit in Turkey earlier this month.

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton, who was nominated by Trump to be the next director of national intelligence, issued the subpoenas.

During the July 23 hearing, Subramanian questioned government lawyers regarding the steps they took in their investigation. He cited rules protecting against violations of the First Amendment and said the department’s actions had turned the law “on its head.”

“When you see something like this, if this were a civil proceeding, what I would normally do is ask the parties to show causes why sanctions should not be issued,” the judge said.

A Justice Department spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email on July 23 that Subramanian threatened the government attorneys with sanctions unless the subpoenas were withdrawn. The spokesperson said the judge also blocked the government from “presenting the meticulous process of this investigation.”

“The grand jury has a right to hear testimony from all material witnesses in a federal criminal investigation,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times. “This judge’s conduct overrides clear longstanding principles and common sense-blocking the grand jury from receiving core evidence in a national security investigation.”

Despite withdrawing the subpoenas on Thursday, the Justice Department spokesperson confirmed that the investigation remained ongoing.

“Make no mistake, this investigation remains ongoing, and we will pursue justice against those threatening national security by leaking classified information, a serious federal crime,” the spokesperson added.

In a statement on July 11, David McCraw, the senior vice president and deputy general counsel for The New York Times, criticized the subpoenas as an “attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs.”

The Justice Department’s rapid response account responded by saying that the department had an important role to ensure that people entrusted with classified information did not share it. “To be clear, reporters are not the targets; those leaking classified information are,” the department said.

On July 15, The New York Times asked a court to toss out the grand jury subpoenas. In a motion unsealed on July 20, the paper also said the Justice Department issued subpoenas to obtain phone records of the publication’s journalists and some of their family members.

“Two of the subpoenas seek records beginning on January 1, 2026, long before the events that are purportedly the basis for the Department’s investigation,” the publication wrote in a letter. “That timeframe strongly suggests that the Department is using this investigation not to focus on any purported concerns arising from the July 8 and 9 articles, but instead to forage for information about the Journalists’ source relationships more broadly.”

During his confirmation before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 15, Clayton maintained that the Southern District of New York’s office followed protocol when issuing the subpoenas.

“I’m confident that the procedures that we have in place to protect the First Amendment and protect the freedom of the press and not result in intimidation of journalists or the like were followed,” he said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 19:15

James Carville Calls On Democrats To Cave On Voter ID

The SAVE America Act, which would mandate proof of citizenship along with valid ID for federal elections and tighten mail-in voting rules, remains stalled in Congress due to the Democrats' filibuster in the Senate, even though the underlying idea is among the most popular in American politics.

Gallup found 84 percent of Americans favor requiring photo identification at the polling place, and 83 percent favor proof of citizenship for first-time registrants - including 98 percent of Republicans, 84 percent of independents, and 67 percent of Democrats. Pew Research Center put photo-ID support at 83 percent, with 95 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats behind it and only 16 percent opposed. Rasmussen found 77 percent of likely voters calling photo ID a reasonable measure to protect election integrity. Thirty-six states already request or require identification for in-person voting.

As CNN's Harry Enten put it: "The bottom line is this: Voter ID is NOT controversial in this country."

A bill with that kind of consensus isn't controversial, yet Senate Democrats keep blocking it. Now longtime Democratic strategist James Carville is looking at those numbers and has decided his own party needs an exit ramp. On his podcast, Politics War Room, he told Democrats to stop fighting voter ID and find a way out of a fight he believes is already lost.

The trigger for the conversation was New Jersey. Carville's co-host Al Hunt opened by noting the right had seized on Gov. Mikie Sherrill's disclosure that roughly 6,600 noncitizens were registered to vote in the state, fewer than 400 of whom cast ballots.

"Voter fraud in the United States is an infinitesimal problem," Carville said. "I don't even... to the extent, I guess you could say it exists, anything could exist, it exists on such a minuscule scale, and it's been proven time and time and time again."

That is where most Democrats stop - the problem is too small to bother with. Carville kept going.

"But I don't know if we're not better off saying, okay, we'll take that alternative ID, bring your gas bill or your light bill or something," he said. "Because for whatever reason, it polls at 75%."

He pointed to his home state of Louisiana, where voters already have to show a driver's license at the polls, and asked why the national party keeps treating that standard as an emergency. A rule allowing alternative documents such as a gas or electric bill still polls at 75 percent - a number that should give pause to a party that has spent a decade calling identification requirements a modern poll tax.

"We are not gonna win the war" on some kind of ID, Carville said. "I never had a problem with it. I'm just saying of all the things... if every poll shows 75 or better, saying we should have some kind of ID to vote... just quit fighting it and go along with it and move to the next thing."

Hunt pushed back, arguing that most states already have ID requirements and criticizing the SAVE America Act directly. Carville was quick to draw the same line. "I'm not talking about the SAVE Act, I'm not talking about the SAVE Act at all," he said. His proposal was narrower: "Whatever the law in Louisiana is, make it the national law."

It is worth being precise about what the New Jersey episode actually was, because it is not quite the case for the policy Carville is conceding. Those 6,600 people had pressed "no" when a Motor Vehicle Commission keypad asked whether they were U.S. citizens, and a software defect registered them anyway. They held valid state identification - that is why they were at the MVC. An ID check at the polling place catches someone voting under another person's name. It does not catch a state agency overriding what an applicant told it.

Which is rather the point of Carville's argument. He is not claiming voter ID would fix anything. He is saying it costs Democrats nothing and they are losing the fight anyway - that a party cannot win by declaring war on a basic expectation shared by nearly every voting bloc, and that the energy would be better spent on arguments it can win.

The concession is notable coming from this particular program. Politics War Room has hosted the Brennan Center's Michael Waldman to argue that widespread voter fraud is a myth and to pick apart the SAVE Act. Carville still believes the first part. He has simply stopped believing it matters.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 18:50

Trump Admin Weighing Military Intervention In Mali

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that the Trump administration is considering conducting military action against an al-Qaeda affiliate in Mali, which, if carried out, would mark the eighth known country bombed by the US since President Trump returned to power last year.

The report said there is disagreement among Trump officials over the potential military intervention, and named Sebastian Gorka, a British-born former radio host who currently serves as senior director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council, as a vocal advocate for military force in the administration.

File image via Brookings

Gorka also pushed for the US to escalate its air war in Somalia, and he got his wish, as the Trump administration has carried out a record-shattering number of airstrikes in the country, attacks that are ignored by US media, but there is little to show for the escalation as al-Shabaab has continued to make advances against the US-backed government.

The al-Qaeda-linked group in Mali, known as Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam, or JNIM, has been waging a major offensive along with Tuareg separatists, formally known as the Azawad Liberation Front, against the Mali government, which took power in a 2021 coup and is backed by Russia.

The US's ally Ukraine has been on the other side of the conflict, as it’s known to have provided drones and intelligence support for Tuareg militants fighting against the Malian military and Russian mercenaries.

When asked by the Post if the administration intends to take military action in Mali, a White House official told the paper that terrorist activity in the Sahel is a “multinational problem” and urged “regional partners and NATO allies to support the Alliance of Sahel States in their war against JNIM and ISIS.”

The Alliance of Sahel States (AES) is a confederation of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, three West African countries where military juntas ousted governments that had maintained close ties with Western countries and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).

Sebastian Gorka — also a strong advocate for maintaining US ops against Al-Shabaab — is pushing for US military intervention against JNIM

The Trump Admin called for ECOWAS and NATO to “support the Alliance of Sahel States” and blamed the juntas’ military failures on Russia https://t.co/HqO1xW7fuP pic.twitter.com/xGgDTM5uaq

— Josh (@rohmerfan1127) July 22, 2026

The official suggested the administration may attempt to peel Mali and other countries in the region away from Russia, saying that Moscow “has proven to be an ineffective security partner for Mali” and that the US hoped “that other African nations take note of Russia’s terrible performance in combating terrorism.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 18:25

AI Debates Reveal A Deeper Shift In American Values

Authored by Peter Earle via AmericanThinker.com,

A survey finding that 70% of Americans support putting half the stock of major AI companies into a public wealth fund reveals a deeper cultural shift toward viewing wealth as zero-sum and favoring redistribution of innovation rewards, unlike the more market-accepting attitude during the internet era.

Thirty years ago, the commercial internet burst onto the scene amid sweeping predictions. It would transform commerce, eliminate industries, reshape labor markets, and create fortunes on an unprecedented scale. It did all of those things. Yet there was not just remarkably little public appetite for confiscating half the equity of internet companies and redistributing it through a government-run fund: there was none. Americans largely accepted that entrepreneurs, investors, and workers who assumed extraordinary risks would also enjoy extraordinary rewards. Today, by contrast, a new survey finding that roughly seven in ten Americans support transferring half the stock of major AI companies into a public wealth fund suggests that something more profound than anxiety over a new technology is taking place.

Every technological revolution has its Luddites, however, marginal their appearance. What’s new is that today’s Luddites don’t merely want to stop the machines; they want to confiscate their owners’ property.

Certainly, artificial intelligence has generated genuine concerns. Many fear job displacement, misinformation, privacy violation, or the concentration of economic power in a handful of firms. Those concerns deserve discussion. But support for effectively nationalizing half the ownership of successful companies marks a dramatic departure from the country’s traditional understanding of property rights, entrepreneurship, and the relationship between entrepreneurship and reward.

The internet itself offers an illuminating comparison.

Few technologies have been as economically disruptive. Newspapers collapsed, retailers disappeared, travel agencies became obsolete, music stores vanished, classified advertising evaporated, and countless occupations either changed radically or ceased to exist. At the same time, the internet created entirely new industries employing millions of people while dramatically lowering costs, expanding consumer choice, and increasing productivity. Although critics worried about monopolies or privacy, proposals to seize half the ownership of companies such as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, or eBay scarcely emerged, let alone attracting something approaching majority public support.

Why has the public reaction shifted so dramatically?

One explanation is that Americans have become increasingly accustomed to viewing wealth through a zero-sum lens. For decades, political rhetoric, media coverage, and even educational institutions have increasingly emphasized inequality over wealth creation as an engine of overall prosperity. Rather than asking whether society as a whole becomes richer through innovation, discussion often centers on whether innovators have become “too rich.” When economic success itself is viewed with suspicion, redistribution naturally appears more reasonable than allowing innovators to retain the returns from their investments.

A second explanation is declining confidence in upward mobility. During the internet boom, many Americans believed they could personally participate in the gains, whether by starting businesses, purchasing stocks, or finding new career opportunities. Today, younger generations often face high housing costs, elevated student debt, and persistent pessimism about their future prospects. If people increasingly believe they won’t participate in economic growth through ordinary market participation, government intervention begins to seem like the only remaining avenue to benefit from economic progress.

A third possibility is that artificial intelligence itself feels more immediate and personal than previous technological revolutions. The internet largely complemented human labor before gradually replacing certain businesses and occupations. AI, by contrast, appears capable of performing cognitive tasks once thought uniquely human. White-collar professionals from writers, programmers, accountants, designers, and analysts now perceive direct competition from software. Fear often produces demands for political intervention that would have seemed unnecessary under more optimistic circumstances. (See the New Deal for additional evidence.)

None of this means policymakers should ignore legitimate questions surrounding AI. Governments have an appropriate role in enforcing contracts, protecting property rights, ensuring competition, prosecuting fraud, and addressing clearly demonstrated harms. But confiscating ownership after firms have invested billions of dollars in research and accepted enormous commercial risks would establish a troubling precedent extending well beyond artificial intelligence. Among other effects, inventors, and their backers would understandably ask which successful industry might be next.

The survey therefore reveals something larger than public opinion about AI. It reflects a striking evolution in American attitudes toward markets, technological, advancement, and private property. The internet transformed the economy every bit as profoundly as artificial intelligence promises to do, yet Americans overwhelmingly viewed its rewards as something to be earned rather than redistributed. If American citizens increasingly see extraordinary innovation as justification for extraordinary government force, the most important story may not be artificial intelligence at all. It may be the changing philosophy of the society deciding how to govern it.

If a majority can be persuaded that today’s successful innovators no longer deserve to own what they built, there is little reason to believe AI will be the last industry to find itself in the redistributionist crosshairs.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:40

Three Levers China Is Pulling To Weather Gulf Energy Shock; How Long Can Beijing Hold Out?

The new troubling development is that maritime chokepoint chaos spread overnight from the Strait of Hormuz to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, where Iran-backed Houthis targeted two Saudi Arabian tankers. The attacks expose yet another maritime chokepoint and risk further physical market tightening, forcing traders to price a larger war-risk premium into Brent crude futures and pushing the benchmark above $100 a barrel Thursday morning.

Oil headed to Asia generally does not flow through both chokepoints. Persian Gulf exports pass through Hormuz and sail east, while Saudi crude loaded at Yanbu enters the Red Sea and passes south through Bab el-Mandeb.

Asia takes most of Hormuz crude, with China alone absorbing nearly two-fifths. On Saudi Arabia's Red Sea route through Bab el-Mandeb, China recently accounted for more than half of exports.

With both chokepoints disrupted, we want to check back in with China to understand what levers Beijing is pulling to absorb the energy shock - this builds on our three previous notes:

• China's Oil Imports Plummet To Eight-Year Low
• Visualizing China's Role In Stabilizing Oil Markets
• China's Refiners Slash Runs To Lowest Since 2017, As Asia Refiners Slow Purchases Of Mid-East Oil

On Wednesday, Goldman commodities strategist Hongcen Wei outlined three factors that have so far allowed Beijing to contain the economic fallout from the Gulf energy shock:

1. drawing down fuel inventories,
2. switching to coal and renewables,
3. and concentrating production cuts in oil- and gas-intensive industries.

China's real GDP growth slowed to an annualized 3.6% in the second quarter from 5.3% in the first, while total energy demand still rose .4% from a year earlier in April and May. Destocking of coal, oil and NatGas added 5.4 percentage points to energy-demand growth.

Fuel substitution also softened the impact. Lower oil and gas use subtracted 1.7 percentage points, while increased consumption of coal and renewables added 2.2 points. Gasoline demand sank 23%, but EV charging jumped 60%, allowing transportation activity to migrate toward electricity.

The remaining damage was concentrated in industries heavily dependent on oil and NatGas, while industries with greater flexibility shifted toward electricity and alternative fuels.

Wei provided the full rundown on how China is absorbing the energy shock:

Major Fall in Net Imports, but Total Energy Demand Growth Still Positive. Ordinarily the largest importer of energy products shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, China has drastically reduced its net imports of fossil fuels, effectively acting as a shock absorber for global energy prices through reduced demand. Net imports of crude oil cratered in China and the rest of Asia beginning in March, but recovered in the rest of Asia to 2025 levels by June while continuing to fall in China through the first half of July (Exhibit 3).

China's net imports of oil/natural gas/coal fell 24%/7%/24% YoY in April and May reflecting YoY price jumps of 59%/49%/38% (Exhibit 4). These reductions in fossil fuel net imports were the largest source of negative total energy demand growth, representing -3.7pp/-0.3pp/-1.2pp of China's total YoY energy demand growth of +0.4% (Exhibit 5).

Exhibit 3: China Crude Oil Net Imports Continue to Fall While the Rest of Asia Recovers to 2025 Levels

Chinese total energy consumption in April and May increased by an average of 0.4%, or 52 petajoules, year-over-year. To roughly estimate the impact of the supply shock on energy consumption, we estimate counterfactual consumption growth as the average +3.1% annual total energy demand growth rate from 2014-2023.[2] Applying this rate to China's average total monthly consumption in April and May 2025 would imply 375 PJ counterfactual YoY energy demand growth. This would suggest roughly 323 PJ of demand destruction for April and May, or 2.7pp reduction in the potential YoY growth rate. China's Q2 real GDP growth fell to 3.6% after 5.3% Q1 growth quarterly annualized, slightly exceeding our China team's nudged-down June forecast of 3.5% Q2 growth but missing market expectations. Lower GDP growth reflected mostly slower government spending, but also higher energy prices and unfavorable weather conditions.

Below, we highlight three factors that helped mitigate the total demand shock.

#1 Effective Destocking of Coal, Oil and Natural Gas Filled in for Fall in Fossil Fuel Imports and Production

Importing less of its energy needs from abroad, China has turned to its domestic inventories--rather than domestic production growth--to supplement the supply of fossil fuels.

Total domestic fossil fuel production actually fell slightly YoY in April and May, with lower coal production comprising a 0.5 percentage point reduction in total energy supply growth (Exhibit 5). Domestic crude oil production was unchanged compared to April and May of last year, likely constrained by high extraction costs in China's aging brownfields.

The bulk of the rise in total energy consumption has been driven by the effective destocking of fossil fuels.

• Thermal coal inventory levels increased by 1.6%/3.7% during April/May 2026, significantly lower than the 4.7%/5.8% MoM increase of April/May 2025. Though China's coal inventory level rose this April and May, we consider the reduction in MoM additions compared to last year's flows--in other words, how much less China added to its coal inventory this April/May compared to April/May 2025--as effective destocking. Defined this way, coal stock use contributed 3.0 percentage points to total YoY demand growth (Exhibit 5).
• We estimate that oil destocking also accelerated, contributing 2.2pp to total YoY demand growth (Exhibit 5). Moreover, changes in China's visible crude oil stocks also appear directionally consistent with our implied destocking estimates of around 1mb/d in May and June, suggesting a shift from restocking in Q2 2025 to greater inventory use this year (Exhibit 6).
• Effective natural gas destocking accounted for 0.2pp of total YoY energy demand growth (Exhibit 5).

#2 Fuel Substitution to Coal and Renewables Has Limited the Demand Destruction

To avoid wider demand destruction caused by lower fossil fuel imports and production, China has increased its reliance on coal and renewables in its wider energy mix. Lower oil/natural gas use in China's overall energy demand contributed -1.6/-0.1 percentage points to its total YoY energy demand growth in April and May, while greater reliance on coal/renewables contributed +1.4/+0.8pp (Exhibit 7).

As an example of this fuel switching in practice, we observe China substituting driving with gasoline for driving with electricity. Gasoline consumption fell 23%/23%/21% YoY in April/May/June, but EV charging growth rose to 62%/60%/57% YoY. Despite much lower gasoline consumption, traffic congestion remained relatively stable, falling only 1.2% YoY in April before growing by 0.2% and 2.1% YoY in May and June (Exhibit 8). These findings are consistent with our prior reporting on China's uptick in domestic EV sales since the start of the Iran war (despite seasonally-adjusted total passenger car sales remaining flat) and may reflect substitution both in car purchases (more EVs bought) and especially in choosing which kind of energy to drive on.[3]

#3 Energy-Related Reductions in Output Are Concentrated in Oil- and Natural Gas-Reliant Sectors

Several industries that are highly oil- or natural gas-intensive have slowed production. Physical output of processed crude oil fell by 10.9% YoY in Q2 reflecting lower crude oil inputs (Exhibit 9).[4] Sulfuric acid, produced as a byproduct during oil and natural gas refining, saw 4.6% lower Q2 physical output YoY. Chemical fibers, produced with either oil or natural gas feedstocks like ethane or naphtha as inputs, saw 3.7% lower Q2 physical output YoY.

The production of the industrial chemical ethylene increased in Q2 by 1.2% YoY, rebounding from a 4.1% YoY fall in April to +2.1% and +5.5% YoY growth in May and June. Though conventional ethylene production involves steam cracking of oil feedstocks like ethane or naphtha, the recent rebound in ethylene output growth may reflect China's significant acceleration in modern coal-to-chemicals pathways like Coal-to-Olefins (CTO) where coal is gasified into syngas, synthesized into methanol, and dehydrated to form ethylene. China's use of coal in chemical production rose by 11.5% in April YoY amid the energy supply shock according to DBX Commodities, with coal-to-chemicals facilities residing atop domestic coal reserves well-positioned to facilitate the transition.

Furthermore, energy-intensive products more reliant on power than oil or natural gas feedstocks saw more resilient output growth. The production of caustic soda, a major industrial chemical, is highly electricity-intensive but does not require oil or natural gas as unique inputs. Physical output of caustic soda grew by 2.4% YoY in Q2. EV production, more reliant on power than on materials made with oil and natural gas, also increased 17.0% YoY.

The key question is how long China's energy strategy to bridge Hormuz and Red Sea disruptions can last.

China recently had 1.3 billion to 1.4 billion barrels in crude inventories, including roughly 400 million barrels accumulated during 2025. At the current import shortfall of about 3.5 million barrels a day, that recent stock build is about four months of coverage. Of course, the substitution strategy also has its limits. Coal, renewables, and EVs can replace gas-fired power and some gasoline consumption, but they cannot entirely substitute for oil used in aviation, trucking, petrochemicals, or industrial processes.

The bigger risk comes when China stops drawing on its strategic stockpile and returns aggressively to the global crude market.

Earlier today, Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, warned in a note that "war enters a dangerous phase with the Red Sea and critical infrastructure at risk." Read it here.

Professional Subscribers can access our latest energy-market intelligence, including analysis of Hormuz and other critical maritime chokepoints, through the new Marketdesk.ai.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:20

California's Civil Rights Mafia

Authored by Christopher F. Rufo and Kenneth Schrupp via City Journal,

In 2018, two women filed a class-action suit against Riot Games, the video-game colossus responsible for League of Legends, Valorant, and other popular titles. They claimed that the company had denied them and other female employees "equal pay," favored men for promotions, and created a "hostile work environment." The women wanted Riot Games to pay out and to "cause social change."

One year later, the parties agreed to a $10 million settlement. It was a massive sum, but not enough for California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which intervened to block the agreement and claim that Riot Games could be on the hook for a staggering $400 million. Facing a court battle against a deep-pocketed state agency, Riot Games later agreed to a $100 million settlement, about ten times the original amount.

California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, now called the Civil Rights Department, has turned the Riot Games strategy into an entire playbook. For years, the state's civil rights apparatus has enabled nonprofits and lawyers to shake down major companies, spinning small-dollar claims into massive, multimillion-dollar settlements.

The system operates like a mafia. Its "don," Governor Gavin Newsom, sits at the top. His capo, CRD director Kevin Kish, runs the shakedown campaigns. And the state advances the interests of the entire Democratic apparatus: the Civil Rights Department secures settlement cash for radical NGOs, labor leaders can use the cases to create pressure for unionization, and left-wing lawyers "cause social change" at scale. For the first time, we are revealing the inner workings of California's civil rights mafia - and exposing the corruption of state government.

California's Civil Rights Department was created in 1980 as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. The department was initially tasked with enforcing nondiscrimination law, but in the wake of the #MeToo and George Floyd social movements, the state's power structure saw an opportunity to turn the agency into a powerhouse. They rebranded the organization as the Civil Rights Department in 2022, in keeping with the agency's focus on shaking down companies for "civil rights violations."

The shakedown campaigns have been remarkably successful. In the last four years alone, the CRD has coerced corporations like Microsoft ($14 million), Snap Inc. ($15 million), and Riot Games ($100 million) to shell out eight- and nine-figure payments. These settlements have variously included provisions for class members, interest groups, and the CRD itself, which is allowed by state law to recoup fees associated with its prosecutions.

The CRD's enforcement actions often include one or more predictable features. First, the CRD finds a handful of women or minorities who claim that a large corporation has mistreated them. Then the agency initiates or intervenes in an action against that corporation. Finally, to spin small-dollar claims into massive payouts, the CRD generates outrageous liability estimates, which goad the company to the negotiating table.

The point man on this scheme is Kevin Kish, a Yale Law School graduate and the CRD's director. On its website, the agency notes Kish's reputation for taking "a creative approach to advocacy," which involves "collaborations" with nonprofits and "organizing campaigns" - in other words, using the department to advance the interests of unions, nonprofits, and other left-wing groups.

Kish mastered this approach during his time in the progressive legal movement. Before starting in state government, he worked as director of the Employment Rights Project for Bet Tzedek Legal Service, where, in one instance, he helped turn a small-time wage-and-hour case into a multimillion settlement against Walmart and one of its contractors.

Apparently pleased with Kish's efforts, then-Governor Jerry Brown appointed him to lead the Department of Fair Employment and Housing in late 2014. Gay activists celebrated his appointment, with one LGBT group calling Kish a "strong and passionate legal champion."

In his first few years at the DFEH, Kish oversaw several small-time suits: in 2015, he got a Mexican restaurant chain to cough up $130,000; in 2017, he induced a rural welfare nonprofit to shell out $152,000. Then, in 2019, he intervened in the Riot Games case, which later delivered a nine-figure payout and apparently encouraged him to expand his ambitions. For Kish, who has argued that "there is almost no [adult] transgender person who has not experienced . . . some form of discrimination," the role represented an opportunity to enforce his broad understanding of "hate."

By 2021, Kish had perfected the shakedown model and picked a new target: Activision Blizzard, the video-game giant that owns titles like World of Warcraft and Call of Duty. The CRD sued the company, alleging, among other things, that it had discriminated against female employees and cultivated a "frat boy" culture. According to a criminal referral that we obtained, which was filed by a group tied to former Activision CEO Robert Kotick, the pretext for the department's action was an earlier federal complaint, which concluded that charging Activision would "send a message to the industry as a whole."

The original class-action suit included just ten of Activision's more than 9,000 employees. The complaint claimed, among other things, that "only about 20 percent" of the company's employees were female, that some of its employees riffed "about their sexual encounters," and that a female employee had committed suicide, potentially in connection with an alleged relationship with a supervisor.

Activision initially tried to placate the CRD. Kotick reportedly "pledged to add resources to ensure that Activision Blizzard's hiring practices are more diverse." The company's then-president, J. Allen Brack, said that he "disdain[ed] 'bro culture'" and had spent his "career fighting against it." Activision apparently even offered paid time off to workers who wanted to participate in a staged "walk-out."

It didn't work. In fact, things got worse: later that year, sensing the company's vulnerability, a labor union called the Communication Workers of America (CWA) filed a suit with the National Labor Relations Board. The union accused the company of trying to prevent workers from demanding a "more equitable, sustainable, and diverse workplace."

The CRD and the CWA apparently had shared ambitions - to punish and to unionize Activision - and even hired the same law firm. Kish's CRD hired the same firm (Outten & Golden) that represented the CWA in another suit. The firm's lawyer said that he believed it was the "first time the State of California has retained a private firm to prosecute employment law claims in trial court." (In response to a question about Outten & Golden, CRD pointed us to a ruling in California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment v. California State Personnel Board.)

In September, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought its own misconduct suit against Activision. The agency claimed, among other things, that Activision had exposed "female employees to sexual harassment." The two sides agreed to an $18 million settlement, but the CRD wasn't satisfied.

Kish saw an opportunity for a billion-dollar shakedown. Under his direction, the CRD moved to block the eight-figure settlement with the federal government, reportedly arguing that it "was monetarily inadequate and contrary to public policy." Their bid proved unsuccessful: a federal court denied the CRD's requested intervention, and the settlement took effect the following March.

By this point, Activision had already agreed to pay nearly $20 million and declared its intention to change its policies and performance-review system. But Kish apparently wanted to inflict more damage on the company. The Wall Street Journal reported that sometime in 2021, the CRD estimated that Activision was responsible for nearly $1 billion in damages - an outrageous sum.

Despite the federal settlement, the CRD continued its lawsuit, and other elements of the shakedown campaign came to life. In November, then-Journal reporter Kirsten Grind and others alleged that Kotick failed to disclose alleged sexual misconduct committed against female employees. The company's stock price fell 8 percent within a month.

Some Activision executives and other allies suspected that the state colluded with the press. The same legal filing we obtained claimed that Grind is a "CWA-affiliated union member" and had contacted Janette Wipper, the CRD attorney overseeing the Activision case under Kish, in hopes of having an "important" conversation "off the record." Grind and a coauthor gloated that, after her report, "some employees and investors called for Kotick's ouster, and Microsoft saw an opening to make a deal" to buy Activision.

When we asked Grind, now with the New York Times, for comment on this story, she suggested that we reach out to the Wall Street Journal.

Activision executives wanted to fight back. Under pressure from the state, the unions, and the media, the company hired three lobbyists: Greg Campbell, Dana Williamson, and, according to a source familiar with the case, Alexis Podesta.

In early 2022, the tide began to turn. In March, Newsom's office fired Wipper. Notably, she was fired on the same day that a federal court approved the EEOC settlement, which our source interpreted as a sign that the governor's office was feeling pressure and wanted the case to go away.

Less than a month later, Wipper's subordinate, Melanie Proctor, resigned in protest, claiming that Newsom's office had "repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation."

Eventually, Kish scaled back his demands. In December 2023, Activision settled for $55 million. In the settlement agreement, the state conceded that "no court or any independent investigation has substantiated" allegations of systemic harassment, but the company likely signed the deal to make the lawsuit go away. The government had not proved its case but still managed to shake down its mark for tens of millions of dollars.

The Civil Rights Department made sure to spread the winnings around. In the settlement, Activision agreed to deliver a handsome reward to the CRD's NGO foot soldiers. The court required the company to send up to about $9 million to the CRD and Outten & Golden, the CWA's former counsel. The rest of the $55 million was supposedly reserved for affected workers, but any leftover funds not claimed by those workers would support future shakedowns - specifically, CRD-selected organizations that "promote employment rights for workers in California and/or . . . advance the interests of women workers in technology industries."

The unions had their victory, too. In October 2023, Microsoft acquired Activision for $75.4 billion after agreeing to a host of labor provisions. The CWA considered the merger a massive success, boasting that it provided "a clear path to collective bargaining for almost 10,000 workers."

With the final settlement agreement, the Activision story appeared to be over. But there another storyline was brewing beneath the surface, raising serious questions about the Newsom administration. That story involves Dana Williamson, the one-time Activision lobbyist, who, in January 2023, while the Activision litigation was ongoing, became Governor Newsom's chief of staff.

During her time in the governor's office, Williamson kept tabs on the Activision case. According to a source with detailed knowledge of the case, the governor sent a text message to Kotick, which we reviewed, one week after the December 2023 settlement, sharing gratitude that the saga was finally over. In January 2024, according to the source and government records obtained by the whistleblower Melanie Proctor, Kotick met with Williamson and former Activision lobbyist Alexis Podesta in the governor's office.

According to the source, Kotick, by then retired as Activision CEO, sat down with Williamson to discuss clearing Activision's name - after all, the state had admitted that it had found no evidence of systematic harassment. The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, claims that midway through the meeting, Newsom stepped into the room, engaged in conversation, and, unprovoked, said that he would fire Kish.

Newsom's office did not respond to our request for comment about these allegations.

Williamson apparently believed him. In November 2025, Williamson was indicted on a suite of federal corruption charges, including bank and wire fraud. According to court documents, Williamson conspired with Greg Campbell, another former Activision lobbyist, to siphon money from a dormant campaign account to pay a third party. She and Campbell were both later convicted, with Williamson pleading guilty to multiple fraud counts and lying to federal agents.

The alleged corruption was not related to Activision, but the indictment contained a transcript of a conversation between Williamson and Podesta, the former Activision lobbyist and un-indicted co-conspirator, that sheds light on Newsom's potential involvement in the civil rights mafia. In a conversation that occurred "[i]n or about June 2024," prosecutors said Williamson discussed a public records request related to a corporation's "litigation with the state." When Podesta asked Williamson if a state employee connected to that litigation would be fired, she said: "He sure [will]!"

According to multiple outlets and our own review of the evidence, the corporation in question was almost certainly Activision. And we can report, for the first time, that the official in question was likely the head of the Civil Rights Department. In other words, Williamson appears to have told her alleged co-conspirator that, as late as June 2024, Governor Newsom was planning to fire Kevin Kish.

The Kish firing, however, never materialized. Kish remains the director of the Civil Rights Department. And more shakedown campaigns are in the pipeline.

This all raises a question: Why is Newsom enabling this racket?

One theory is that Newsom sympathizes with Kish and wants to punish corporations like Activision, which, in his mind, are stand-ins for his political enemies. Another theory is that Newsom has always allowed bad behavior to fester around him at arm's length. Throughout Newsom's career, people in his orbit have been arrested for corruption, including, most recently, his chief of staff.

Perhaps Newsom tolerates Kish's bull-in-a-china-shop approach because he simply lacks the will to stop it.

The most likely explanation, however, is that Newsom will do whatever is politically expedient. Under this theory, Newsom might have promised to fire Kish to placate Williamson or corporate interests, then reneged on that promise to placate the unions and the activist groups. Throughout his career, Newsom has been willing to reverse his position if he believes that it is in his immediate interest.

Newsom's office did not respond to our request for comment on this story. The Civil Rights Department told us that they "take every complaint we receive seriously and evaluate them individually for further action based on the specific facts and circumstances."

If anything, Kish operated under even less restraint. The CRD has now set its sight on the largest target of all: Tesla CEO Elon Musk. In 2022, the department sued Tesla, alleging racial discrimination and harassment. Kish apparently hopes to go much further than in his campaigns against Riot Games, Snap, and Activision. According to a source familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity, Kish is hoping to shake down Tesla for up to $6 billion.

Unlike those other firms, however, Tesla hasn't settled and is taking its chances in court. If Tesla succeeds in fighting these allegations, its resistance could provide a model for future targets of the state's racket. If it fails, it will show that no company - no matter how powerful - can outrun the coordinated campaigns of California's civil rights mafia.

Christopher F. Rufo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of America's Cultural Revolution. Kenneth Schrupp is an investigative reporter at City Journal.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:00

India Blocks Mobile Internet In Central Delhi As Youth Protests Escalate

The Indian government has ordered telecom companies to disable ​mobile data services in central parts ‌of the capital Delhi, in and around the site of youth protests seeking the resignation ​of the education minister, two sources ​told Reuters on Thursday.

The companies have ⁠complied with the order, Reuters sources ​said.

There was ‌no ⁠mobile data connectivity in many parts of central Delhi on Thursday evening, Reuters journalists said.

Vendors, shopkeepers and restaurants ​complained that ​they were ⁠unable to accept digital payments.

India’s youth protesters have called for nationwide demonstrations on Friday even as Prime Minister Narendra ‌Modi’s government urged them to join talks, while shutting metro stations and mobile internet services and curtailing business in central Delhi.

The youth protesters, led by the self-named "Cockroach" Janta Party movement, have been ​camping in central Delhi since ​last ⁠month and are demanding the resignation of the education minister over leaks of medical school entrance test papers that affected some 2 million students in May and have been linked to several student suicides.

The protests have swelled ​into the biggest youth challenge to Modi since he came to power in 2014. Opposition parties have echoed the youth movement's demands and have disrupted the monsoon session ​of parliament that began this week.

It marks the biggest political crisis of Modi's third term, which began in 2024.

The government made ⁠a fresh appeal on Thursday to the protesters to join talks to resolve the crisis but they responded by calling for nationwide peaceful protests on Friday in solidarity ​with students who alleged police brutality during a march on parliament on Monday by tens of thousands of people.

Thousands of people had returned to the Jantar Mantar protest ​site by Thursday afternoon, carrying anti-government posters and chanting slogans amid heavy security deployment.

Protests also spread to other cities, including Ranchi, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram and Kolkata, local media reported.

Authorities in Delhi shut down 16 metro rail stations in and around the central parts of Delhi where the protesters have remained camped, inconveniencing thousands of commuters.

The government also ​ordered telecom firms to block mobile internet services in the area, sources told Reuters, a move that not only affected protesters but also stopped shops and restaurants from receiving ​digital payments by phone.

Separately, all offices and businesses in the Connaught Place area, the bustling central business district, were asked to shut early on Thursday by the New Delhi Traders ‌Association, which ⁠cited an advisory from municipal authorities due to the security situation in the area.

The measures are seen as an attempt by authorities to curb the protests and prevent any fresh outbreak of violence.

More than 10,000 people had gathered on Wednesday night at the Jantar Mantar protest site. Some protesters attacked police with stones and plastic bottles, injuring a few officers, news agency ANI quoted Delhi Police as saying.

In Monday's clashes during the march on parliament, police used tear gas and canes to push back the protesters.

Earlier on Thursday, Modi said that ​special courts would be set up ⁠to prosecute those behind exam paper leaks, his first public response to the crisis.

"Nothing is more important than the welfare and future of our youth!" Modi posted on X.

But CJP rejected the proposal, saying what courts do after paper leaks is just one ​aspect of the problem.

"But Modi-ji, tell us why are paper leaks happening in this country in the first place?" CJP ​spokesperson Ashutosh Ranka said, ⁠using the Hindi honorific.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 16:40

From Cash To Trash, Rinse And Repeat

Authored by Frank Giustra,

The Continental dollar, born in 1775, was meant to finance the colonies’ fight against Britain—the American Revolution. What it actually financed was a masterclass in how quickly a currency can evaporate when it has no anchor, no credible backing, and no one willing to stop the printing presses. Hundreds of millions of Continental notes were issued with nothing but the promise of future redemption in gold or silver—which the colonies did not possess in sufficient quantity. 

As wartime expenses mounted and the conflict dragged on, the colonies’ solution was a time-honored tactic. Just dig yourself a deeper financial hole by printing more currency. When confidence in the Continental buck inevitably collapsed, merchants demanded ever-larger stacks of paper for the same goods. 

By 1781, a barrel of flour that once cost a few Continental dollars cost hundreds or thousands. The exchange rate against silver reached the point where it took five hundred to a thousand Continentals to buy a single hard dollar (meaning a silver or metal coin). Some states saw the writing on the wall and simply stopped accepting the notes altogether.

The British, who had plenty of practice in meddling in colonial internal affairs, helped the debasement process along. They knew that counterfeiting Continentals on an industrial scale was cheaper than fighting military battles, and more effective. The result, as intended, was hyperinflation. When the dust settled, the phrase “not worth a Continental” had entered the language as shorthand for worthless. 

The Founders, having lived through the destruction of the Continental dollar, carried a deep suspicion of unbacked paper money into the constitutional debates. That suspicion helped produce a document that at least tried to constrain monetary experimentation. George Washington famously said, “Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have, to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open a door to every species of fraud and injustice.”

That was not the only such inflationary episode before the colonies became a republic. During and after the American Revolution, individual states issued their own notes with similarly dismal results—sharp depreciation, hyperinflationary spikes in the 1780s, and the general chaos that made a stronger federal hand on currency seem necessary. 

The War of 1812 brought another suspension of convertibility and the circulation of Treasury notes at discounts. The so-called Free Banking Era that followed (1837–63) is not unlike today’s cryptocurrency industry. It produced thousands of state-chartered banknotes, many of which traded at steep discounts or became worthless when the issuing (“wildcat”) banks, beset by fraud and panics, collapsed.

The Confederate currency of 1861–65 offers perhaps the cleanest parallel to the Continental story. Once again, massive overprinting to finance a war without adequate taxation was followed by hyperinflation so severe that prices rose thousands of percent before the notes became essentially worthless by the end of the Civil War. 

In every case, the pattern resurfaces predictably. Governments (or would-be governments) facing extraordinary expenses turn to the printing press when taxation and borrowing prove inadequate or inconvenient. It’s as if politicians and policy makers either never read a history book or had their memories magically erased. Without a credible anchor in hard assets or ironclad fiscal discipline, public confidence erodes, money velocity rises, and the currency loses purchasing power—sometimes gradually, sometimes in a sudden rush.

The modern version of this story began in earnest with the end of dollar convertibility into gold. Domestically this occurred in 1933, when FDR confiscated privately held gold. Internationally, the break came in 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window. 

Ever since, the dollar has functioned as a pure fiat currency. The cumulative effect on purchasing power has been substantial. What $1 bought in 1971 is what about 15 cents buys today. In other words, you need $6.50 to $7 to purchase what a single dollar bought in 1971. That’s a loss of roughly 85 percent of purchasing power over half a century—an outcome entirely consistent with the long-run behavior of unbacked paper currencies. It’s not hyperinflation in the dramatic sense we saw in 1920s Weimar Germany, or in 2000s Zimbabwe, but it’s a steady, grinding, quasi-invisible debasement that compounds across generations.

The usual excuses, “This time is different”, assume that American institutions are uniquely resilient or exceptional, that the dollar’s reserve status grants permanent immunity, and that the U.S. can abuse its currency without serious consequences.

These sound like the rationalizations heard at the late stages of any long monetary experiment. 

The historical record is not kind to such beliefs. Empires from the Spanish to the British to the French have discovered that the ability to print unlimited currency eventually encourages the very behaviors that undermine the currency. Countless wars have been financed by debt and debasement. Political fragmentation prevents corrective action, confidence bleeds away, and alternative stores of value gain traction. De-dollarization today, whether measured in central-bank gold purchases or shifting trade-settlement patterns, reflects a repeat of that loss of confidence.

The Founders understood something that today’s generation, lacking direct experience of currency collapse, finds easy to overlook. Paper money untethered from hard assets removes the shackles that keep politicians from doing what politicians would always rather do—abandon fiscal responsibility. 

The Founders had seen the Continental experiment up close. They knew that once the printing press becomes the path of least resistance, the incentive structure for politicians and central bankers alike encourages more spending, more debt, and more monetary accommodation. The result, over time, is the gradual erosion of purchasing power we’ve seen since 1971, punctuated by sharper episodes when political or geopolitical pressures intensify.

None of this is to predict imminent hyperinflation or the sudden disappearance of the dollar as a medium of exchange. Fiat currencies can limp along for decades, sustained by network effects, institutional inertia, and the absence of a clearly superior alternative. But the long-run arithmetic is unforgiving and requires only elementary school math to foresee. Every historical example of sustained, unbacked issuance ends the same way. The currency loses most of its value, new arrangements eventually emerge, and those who held real assets, particularly gold, preserve wealth while others do not.

The lesson is not complicated, just inconvenient. When a great power abandons any credible link to hard money, the currency loses purchasing power over time, and the temptation to finance geopolitical ambitions through debt and debasement grows ever stronger. 

The phrase “not worth a Continental” was once popular in the U.S. It wasn’t part of a Cadillac marketing campaign. It came about after the Continental Congress decided that printing its way out of a war was preferable to the messy and difficult business of collecting taxes.

As we’ve seen, the United States has lived through several episodes of this series. The only novelty today is the scale at which the experiment is being run and the amnesia with which it’s being conducted. Those who imagine the outcome will be any different this time around might usefully recall that the Continental Congress also believed its circumstances were unique—until the notes stopped buying anything at all. 

Is it too far-fetched to imagine that our descendants will one day adopt the expression “Not worth a US dollar”? 

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 16:20