Zero Hedge

While The Political Circus Distracts Us, Flock Builds The Digital Police State

While The Political Circus Distracts Us, Flock Builds The Digital Police State

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rurtherford Institute,

“You had to live - did live, from habit that became instinct - in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”

- George Orwell, 1984

While Americans remain transfixed by the political circus - cheering for their preferred party, jeering at the opposition, obsessing over every manufactured outrage and waiting for the next spectacle - the Surveillance State continues its steady march forward.

The government is watching.

It watches where you go, whom you meet, where you worship, what medical offices you visit, what political rallies you attend, what protests you join, what books you read, what websites you visit and what causes you support.

It watches through your phone, your car, your doorbell, your appliances, your purchases, your social media accounts and the cameras positioned along the roads you travel every day.

This is how freedom dies in the digital police state: not always through dramatic declarations of martial law or soldiers stationed on every street corner, but through the gradual construction of a technological dragnet—an electronic concentration camp—so pervasive that privacy becomes impossible and anonymity becomes suspicious.

Enter Flock Safety, a private surveillance technology company whose automated license plate readers have spread throughout thousands of American communities.

These cameras, which do much more than photograph license plates, represent the next evolution of the government’s public-private surveillance partnership.

They document the time and location of every passing vehicle and record identifying characteristics such as its make, model, color, damage, roof racks, bumper stickers and other distinctive features. That information can then be placed in a searchable database and used to retrace a vehicle’s movements over time.

Yet the real power—and the real danger—of Flock does not come from the cameras alone.

It comes from artificial intelligence.

A camera can photograph a car. Flock’s AI-powered platform can identify and categorize a vehicle, compare an observation with stored records, generate alerts, identify connections and help police reconstruct where that vehicle has been.

AI is what transforms a photograph into the building blocks for a suspect society.

With AI, every driver becomes a data point. Every data point becomes a pattern. And every pattern becomes a suspicion.

This is how ordinary movements become potentially suspect and subject to government scrutiny. It allows law enforcement agencies to search not only for a complete license plate number but also for partial plates and physical descriptions such as vehicle color, make, model, damage, roof racks, bumper stickers and other identifying characteristics.

A police officer might ask the system to locate every red pickup truck with a ladder rack seen near a protest, every vehicle that repeatedly visited a particular address, or every car observed traveling between two locations.

The artificial intelligence does the sorting. The database supplies the history.

The government receives a list of potential suspects.

This is no longer surveillance conducted by individual officers following particular leads. It is surveillance conducted at machine speed, across entire populations, with algorithms deciding whose movements merit further scrutiny.

Consider the scale of what is taking place.

License plate cameras now log approximately 20 billion vehicle scans every month.

Twenty billion.

That is not targeted policing. That is mass collection.

The overwhelming majority of those scans do not involve stolen cars, wanted suspects, kidnappings or violent crimes. They document ordinary people carrying out the ordinary activities of daily life: driving to work, taking children to school, visiting friends, attending church, keeping medical appointments, participating in protests or simply going home.

Yet each of those innocent journeys becomes part of a searchable police database.

At 20 billion scans a month, Flock is not searching for particular suspects and then attempting to follow them. It is recording the movements of everyone so police can decide later whom they want to follow.

That is the digital equivalent of assigning a government agent to trail every driver in America—and preserving the agent’s notes in case the government someday finds them useful.

Yet mass collection is only the first stage of the AI surveillance state. The next is merging those billions of observations with everything else the government and its corporate partners know about us.

Flock is also part of a much larger shift toward AI-powered “data fusion,” in which license plate records are combined with facial recognition results, surveillance video, police reports, social media activity, commercially purchased information, gunshot-detection alerts and other government databases.

The danger is no longer merely that one system can track a car. It is the merger of previously separate streams of information into a single system capable of mapping a person’s movements, relationships, habits and associations.

These systems increasingly do more than provide officers with information to evaluate. They assign significance to associations, flag supposed threats and generate investigative leads—often through proprietary algorithms that neither the accused nor the public can examine.

Artificial intelligence does not eliminate human prejudice, institutional bias or bad information.

It industrializes them.

Feed a flawed system inaccurate data, biased arrest records or constitutionally suspect surveillance, and AI can reproduce those defects at a speed and scale no individual police officer could match.

Once the computer labels someone suspicious, moreover, officers may treat the algorithmic conclusion as objective fact.

The machine accuses. The police act. The citizen is left to prove that the machine was wrong.

Despite the extraordinary reach of this technology, Flock continues to portray its system as a limited, carefully controlled crime-fighting tool.

Flock insists that its cameras collect information about vehicles rather than people, that agencies control access to their own data, that searches are logged and that information is generally deleted after 30 days. Yet these assurances largely amount to distinctions without a difference.

Vehicles are extensions of the people who drive them.

Track a vehicle long enough, and you know where its owner sleeps, works, worships, shops, socializes, seeks medical treatment and participates in political activity.

You know when someone leaves home, when they return, whom they visit and how often.

You may not know the contents of their conversations, but you know enough to construct an intimate portrait of their life.

That is surveillance.

It does not become less invasive merely because the government has outsourced the cameras, databases and algorithms to a private corporation.

Nor does it cease to be surveillance because police claim that the information may someday be useful in solving a crime.

Indeed, that is the sleight of hand that has allowed the surveillance state to expand so rapidly.

The government no longer has to install every camera, maintain every database or directly collect every piece of information.

It merely encourages private companies, businesses, homeowners’ associations, schools and individual consumers to create an interconnected surveillance ecosystem—and then asks for access.

This public-private arrangement allows government agencies to acquire capabilities they might never receive public approval or sufficient funding to build on their own.

It also makes accountability almost impossible.

When abuses occur, local police blame the technology provider. The technology provider insists that local police control the data. Federal agencies claim they merely requested access. Local officials say they were unaware that information could be shared beyond their jurisdiction.

Everyone points elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the American people remain under observation.

Flock has become especially controversial because its network can transform what appears to be a collection of local cameras into something far more powerful: a searchable surveillance system that permits law enforcement agencies to look far beyond their own jurisdictions.

Flock says data sharing among agencies is optional and controlled by its customers. Yet the entire value of such a system lies in its interconnectedness.

A camera in one town is a traffic-monitoring device.

Thousands of cameras connected through searchable databases constitute a movement-tracking network.

The danger is not simply that police might search for a stolen car.

The danger is that the system permits government officials to begin with a location, a description or a fragment of information and work backward until someone emerges as a suspect.

That reverses the traditional order of constitutional policing.

Under the Fourth Amendment, police are supposed to develop individualized suspicion, establish probable cause and then apply for a warrant to search for evidence connected to a particular person or crime.

Mass surveillance systems begin by collecting information on everyone.

In the process, every innocent person is treated as a potential suspect whose movements must be recorded just in case the government someday decides they are relevant.

This is guilt by algorithm.

It is also the same constitutional inversion at the heart of geofence warrants, which allow police to demand information identifying every cellphone that happened to be near a particular location at a particular time.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chatrie v. United States may signal that constitutional scrutiny is finally beginning to catch up with the surveillance state.

The case involved a geofence warrant used to obtain Google location records for cellphones near the scene of a robbery. Rather than beginning with an identified suspect, police demanded information about devices that happened to be within a designated area during a particular period and then worked backward to identify their owners.

The Supreme Court held that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they obtain an individual’s cellphone location history from a technology company.

That conclusion matters.

It rejects the government’s increasingly convenient argument that intimate information loses constitutional protection merely because a private corporation collected, stored or analyzed it.

The Court did not rule on Flock cameras or automated license plate databases. Nor did it decide that every geofence demand is necessarily unconstitutional. The justices left it to the Fourth Circuit to determine whether the warrant satisfied the Fourth Amendment’s probable-cause and particularity requirements at each stage of the search.

Nevertheless, the constitutional principle at the heart of Chatrie extends far beyond cellphones.

The government should not be able to evade the Fourth Amendment by outsourcing mass surveillance to private technology companies.

It should not matter whether the location trail comes from Google, Flock, a cellphone provider, a data broker or an interconnected network of privately owned cameras.

A detailed record of a person’s movements does not become less revealing because it follows a vehicle rather than a phone. The government should not be permitted to accomplish through Flock what it could not constitutionally accomplish by assigning police officers to follow millions of Americans everywhere they drive.

Indeed, Flock may present an even more troubling inversion of constitutional policing.

Geofence searches generally begin with a particular crime, location and period. Flock continuously collects information on millions of vehicles before any crime has occurred and before any individual is suspected of wrongdoing.

Police can then reach backward into that stored history and reconstruct a person’s movements.

The surveillance comes first. Suspicion comes later.

A warrant, when one is sought at all, may arrive only after the government has already built the database it intends to search.

Chatrie may provide constitutional ammunition for challenging this arrangement, but no single court ruling will dismantle the machinery of mass surveillance.

The technology is already embedded in thousands of communities.

The databases are already being populated.

The agencies are already connected.

And the companies profiting from this infrastructure will fight to preserve it.

Unfortunately, constitutional protections have rarely kept pace with the government’s appetite for surveillance.

The dangers are no longer theoretical.

Flock data has reportedly been used in investigations far removed from the serious violent crimes routinely invoked to justify these systems.

This is the inevitable trajectory of every surveillance technology. First, it is introduced as an emergency measure. Then it is justified as a crime-fighting tool. Then it is expanded to lesser crimes. Then it is used for administrative enforcement, political monitoring, immigration investigations and personal purposes.

Eventually, it becomes part of the background machinery of government—a permanent feature of daily life that no longer attracts attention because everyone has become accustomed to being watched.

That is how mission creep works.

Surveillance powers created to find kidnappers and violent criminals do not remain limited to kidnappers and violent criminals.

Databases built to locate stolen vehicles do not remain limited to stolen vehicles.

Government agencies cannot resist the temptation to use whatever power is available to them, especially when the use of that power is cheap, easy and largely hidden from the public.

The technology’s potential for error makes this even more dangerous.

License plate readers can misread plates, rely on inaccurate hot lists or associate an innocent vehicle with a crime. Once the system issues an alert, officers may treat the computer-generated result as fact.

The individual on the receiving end may be pulled over, surrounded by armed police, handcuffed, searched or detained before anyone discovers that the machine was wrong.

This is not justice. It is automated suspicion.

Flock is only one component of a surveillance ecosystem that includes doorbell cameras, facial recognition, drones, cellphone tracking, biometric databases and real-time crime centers.

The result is 360-degree surveillance.

A person may leave a home monitored by a smart doorbell, drive past a network of license plate readers, enter a business equipped with facial recognition, carry a phone broadcasting location data and return home along streets monitored by police cameras and private security systems.

At no point does the government need to physically follow that individual, because the infrastructure does it automatically.

Algorithms sort the information. Databases preserve it. Private companies monetize it. Government agencies search it.

All of this is taking place while the country remains locked in an endless partisan cage match.

Both parties have contributed to the Surveillance State. Both parties have expanded it. Both parties have exploited fear to convince the public that freedom must be sacrificed for safety.

The targets may change depending on who is in power, but the machinery remains.

Once the infrastructure exists, there is no guarantee that it will be used only against people you dislike or with whom you disagree politically.

That is the lesson Americans repeatedly refuse to learn.

A surveillance tool created by one administration will be inherited by the next. A database assembled for one purpose will inevitably be used for another. A system established to monitor “them” will eventually be turned against “us.”

Communities across the country are finally beginning to recognize the danger.

Some cities have terminated or declined to renew their Flock contracts. Others have paused deployments or demanded stronger restrictions on data sharing, retention and federal access.

This resistance is long overdue.

We cannot afford to become so distracted by the theater of politics that we fail to notice the architecture of tyranny being assembled around us.

The surveillance state does not care which party you support. It does not care whom you voted for.

It does not care whether you believe you have nothing to hide.

The cameras are watching. The databases are growing. The networks are connecting.

And as I make clear in Battlefield America: The War on the American People and its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, unless we act now, there may soon be nowhere left to go without the government knowing exactly where we have been.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 17:40

China's Memory-Chip Challenger Faces A Test Of How Far US Curbs Can Reach

China's Memory-Chip Challenger Faces A Test Of How Far US Curbs Can Reach

ChangXin Memory Technologies is approaching a turning point.

The Chinese memory-chip maker has advanced far enough to draw interest from some of the world's largest technology companies, including Apple Inc., which has considered using its chips. But the same growth that has raised CXMT's commercial standing has also made it a more prominent target in the widening technology confrontation between Washington and Beijing.

The Pentagon has blacklisted the state-backed company over alleged links to China's military. In South Korea, prosecutors have accused several former Samsung Electronics employees of leaking proprietary information to CXMT. The company's expansion is also being watched closely by US officials seeking to prevent Chinese semiconductor manufacturers from gaining access to advanced equipment and expertise.

CXMT's success will depend not only on whether it can narrow the technological gap with Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron Technology, but also on whether it can continue expanding without provoking restrictions severe enough to disrupt its supply chain.

That challenge has shaped the company from its earliest days.

CXMT broke ground on its first factory in Hefei in 2017, as another Chinese memory-chip project, sFujian Jinhua, was running into mounting pressure from the US. Washington's actions ultimately derailed Jinhua's rise, creating a cautionary example for Chinese semiconductor companies with global ambitions.

According to Taiwanese think tank DSET, cited by Bloomberg, Jinhua's collapse helped CXMT secure funding from both central government-linked and private investors. It also taught the company to proceed more carefully around the boundaries of US policy.

"This incident not only brought CXMT both central and private investment but also helped the company learn from Jinhua's downfall and carefully navigate around US red lines," DSET said.

That caution has become increasingly important as Washington has broadened its efforts to restrict China's access to advanced semiconductor technology.

In October 2022, the administration of President Joe Biden imposed sweeping export controls covering high-end chips, manufacturing equipment and technical expertise. The measures were intended to slow China's progress in artificial intelligence, supercomputing and other strategically sensitive fields.

CXMT remains unable to obtain the most advanced lithography systems used by its foreign competitors. Its access is largely limited to deep-ultraviolet equipment, which is less capable than the extreme-ultraviolet machines used by Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron to produce their most advanced memory chips.

CXMT's first 12-inch DRAM memory wafers displayed at the 2024 World Manufacturing Convention in Hefei.Source: Costfoto/NurPhoto/Getty Images

That constraint is particularly significant in high-bandwidth memory, or HBM, a class of chips that has become critical to artificial-intelligence infrastructure. HBM allows advanced processors to move large quantities of data rapidly, making it essential to the systems used to train and operate generative AI models.

Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron dominate the global market for those products. CXMT is trying to close the gap without access to the same manufacturing tools, placing greater pressure on its engineering capabilities and domestic suppliers.

Its strategy has been to reduce exposure to Washington by building a supply chain increasingly centered on Chinese companies. A domestic network can make CXMT less vulnerable to direct US controls, while also supporting Beijing's broader campaign to replace foreign semiconductor technology with local alternatives.

The approach does not eliminate CXMT's dependence on overseas equipment and expertise. China still lacks domestic substitutes for some of the most sophisticated tools used in chip production. But CXMT's progress suggests that export controls have not stopped Chinese companies from improving less advanced manufacturing processes or expanding production at scale.

The company has climbed to fourth place in the global memory-chip market, behind Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron. It remains substantially smaller and less technologically advanced than those rivals, but its emergence has begun to challenge an industry structure that has long been dominated by three companies.

CXMT is considering using about 30 billion yuan, or $4.4 billion, from a planned initial public offering to upgrade its technology and expand research and development, according to its listing application.

That investment would support Beijing's goal of securing a larger role in a sector increasingly treated as a foundation of economic and military power. Memory chips are essential to smartphones, computers and data centers, and the artificial-intelligence boom has made advanced products even more strategically valuable.

"Memory is a critical component in the AI infrastructure, and the US and China are the only two countries fueling the infrastructure boom," said He Hui, a Shanghai-based semiconductor research director at Omdia, in a comment to Bloomberg. 

China's restrictions on Micron have also created a commercial opening for CXMT. With one of the three dominant global suppliers facing limits in the Chinese market, domestic customers have stronger incentives to consider a local alternative.

"There are only three players - Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron, and China sanctioned Micron years ago, so this provides a great opportunity for CXMT," He said.

The company's founder, Zhu Yiming, brought experience from both the American and Chinese technology sectors. He studied at Tsinghua University and the State University of New York at Stony Brook before leaving doctoral study to work in the chip industry.

In 2004, Zhu founded the company that would become GigaDevice in a garage in Milpitas, California, with $100,000 in angel investment. When the startup ran short of money, a manager at Tsinghua University's incubator offered funding on the condition that Zhu relocate it to China.

He moved to Beijing with slightly less than $1 million and formally launched GigaDevice in 2005. The company later became a major chip designer and listed in Shanghai in 2016.

By then, Zhu was preparing the venture that would become CXMT. His background helps explain the technical and commercial foundations of the company, but CXMT's current importance extends far beyond its founder.

The company is now a test of two competing strategies.

For Beijing, CXMT is evidence that sustained financing, domestic procurement and industrial policy can produce a viable alternative to foreign chip suppliers. For Washington, its rise raises questions about whether export controls are containing China's technological progress or merely encouraging Chinese companies to build around them.

CXMT's growing profile increases both its opportunities and its risks. Interest from customers such as Apple would validate its technology and give it greater international credibility. But deeper integration into global supply chains would also expose the company to more scrutiny over ownership, security and intellectual property.

The Pentagon blacklist and the South Korean leak allegations show how quickly commercial progress can become a geopolitical liability.

CXMT does not need to overtake Samsung, SK Hynix or Micron to alter the global market. Establishing a dependable Chinese source of memory chips would reduce Beijing's reliance on foreign manufacturers, strengthen domestic equipment suppliers and weaken one source of US leverage.

Zhu Yiming, second right, at GigaDevice’s listing on the main board of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on Jan. 13, 2026.Photographer: Li Xukui/NBD/VCG/Getty Images Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 17:20

US Officials Say Iran's Ahmadinejad Was Mossad Asset, Met With Intel Chief In Hungary

US Officials Say Iran's Ahmadinejad Was Mossad Asset, Met With Intel Chief In Hungary

Iran's former hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of all people? 

The New York Times is out with a bombshell report on Monday which alleges that Israel's Mossad has for years sought to cultivate him as an Israeli intelligence asset.

Flash90

The apparent multi-year effort to recruit and re-install Ahmadinejad as leader of Iran has come to nothing, at a moment his status and fate remains unclear amid the fog of war, and after a prior US-Israeli strike on his house during the opening salvos of Operation Epic Fury resulted in him being whisked away from his Tehran neighborhood by his bodyguards.

The story, which cites US officials who are for whatever reason choosing this moment to 'leak' the insider info, begins in the following:

In early 2024, the rector of a university in Budapest received a startling request from a top Hungarian government official.

The official told the rector, Professor Gergely Deli, that Ludovika University of Public Service should hold a climate change conference and extend an invitation to an unlikely guest: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the widely reviled former president of Iran.

Even more shocking was the reason. The official told Mr. Deli that the conference was merely a front for Mr. Ahmadinejad to have secret discussions in Budapest with intelligence operatives from Israel, Mr. Ahmadinejad’s avowed enemy.

Back in early March, there were even some (premature) headlines of his death, saying he was 'assassinated' at a moment he was under house arrest at his residence. Supposedly this is what 'freed' him, and since then his whereabouts are unknown.

However, regional reports say he did attend the funeral of slain supreme leader Ali Khamenei earlier this month, and was briefly spotted surrounded by guards while wearing a mask and heavy coat.

The Mossad plot goes all the way back to 2022, NYT detailed based on the sources, and the suggestion is that he played along - seeing some kind of foreign intervention as his path back to leadership over the country. His house arrest sprung from the Iranian government being suspicious of contacts with the Israeli government.

He received Israeli financial support to cover travel and accommodation expenses while going to meet with Israeli operatives in Europe - which Israel prioritized to such an extent that even then-Mossad Director David Barnea personally met Ahmadinejad in the Hungarian capital in 2024. The NYT says that the CIA was eventually read in to the high-risk plan.

But upon the start of Operation Epic Fury and the bombing of his home, Ahmadinejad reportedly soured on the plan - becoming distrustful of the Israelis - and saw it as unrealistic.

From Mossad's point of view, he could emerge as a controllable puppet and new 'face' of the Islamic Republic regime, despite is prior well-documented rhetoric calling for the destruction of Israel and advancement of Iran's nuclear program.

The more believable aspect to this whole alleged saga is that Ahmadinejad was top of the list of West-Israel 'favored' candidates to lead Iran after he personally praised President Trump in a 2019 interview, and argued for a rapprochement between Tehran and Washington.

"Mr Trump is a man of action," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying. "He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision. We say to him, let’s calculate the long-term cost-benefit of our two nations and not be shortsighted."

Apparently some of the aspects which made him a candidate, or potential future US-Israeli puppet in Tehran (Delcy Rodriguez-style), was that he had been barred three times from running for president by Iran's unelected 12-member Guardian Council (in 2017, 2021, and 2024). Following his 2017 disqualification, he apparently flipped, becoming a highly vocal critic of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

This isn't the first time the NY Times has floated this story, but the publication is now seeking to fill in more details, apparently.

Amid the ongoing fog of war and heavy propaganda coming from all sides, this could simply by mythology - Hollywood script style - in order to continue sowing fragmentation, distrust, and discord among Iranian ranks. It wouldn't be the first time such a tall tale was spun for such purposes, and the whole thing ultimately will remain unverifiable, for likely at least years to come. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 16:40

Believe All Women - Unless They're Inconvenient

Believe All Women - Unless They're Inconvenient

Authored by Frank Salvato via The American Spectator,

The political Left has spent years promoting the slogan "Believe All Women," using it as a powerful weapon against conservatives, especially during critical events like the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. But this mantra has never been about seeking justice or protecting victims; instead, it serves as a cynical tool for gaining power - a way to undermine opponents while conveniently overlooking the serial abusers, gropers, and predators within their own ranks.

When the alleged victims are conservative women, or when the accused belong to the "right" political party, the Left's proclaimed solidarity vanishes, replaced by silence, excuses, and even cover-ups. This hypocrisy is a fundamental aspect of a movement that prioritizes tribal loyalty over truth, power over principles, and narrative over the genuine suffering of women.

True protection for women requires consistency, evidence, and fairness - not selective blindness from those on the Left.

Take Joe Biden, the dilapidated standard-bearer of the Democrat Party. Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer, came forward with detailed allegations that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993 by pinning her against a wall and digitally penetrating her. There was corroboration for her claims, including a friend she confided in at the time and a 1993 call to Larry King's show in which her mother referenced the incident.

However, the mainstream media, which claims to support the #BelieveWomen and the #MeToo movements, downplayed the story, questioned Reade's credibility, and defended Biden. The New York Times and the Washington Post published skeptical investigations that minimized Biden's pattern of "inappropriate touching" with multiple women. When Biden denied the allegations, the Left largely shrugged it off and continued to support him.

In contrast, any conservative accusation is met with immediate, intense scrutiny. Reade's claims posed a threat to the favorable image of their presidential candidate, so the media largely ignored them. Women only seem to matter when their stories align with the cause.

Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York who was once celebrated as "America's Governor" during the COVID-19 pandemic, faced credible allegations of sexual harassment from multiple women, including former staff members. These women described a troubling pattern of unwanted advances, groping, and a hostile work environment. Cuomo resigned amid the scandal; however, many Democrats rallied to his defense, with some downplaying the allegations as mere political attacks.

The media, which called for resignations in response to lesser offenses by conservatives, treated Cuomo's downfall as a reluctant necessity rather than a justified outrage. Where were the #BelieveAllWomen and #MeToo movements during this situation? Nowhere - because Cuomo was a powerful Democrat.

Al Franken, a comedian who later became a Senator, faced accusations from multiple women regarding inappropriate touching and forced kisses during his career in entertainment and politics. Photos surfaced of him mock-groping a sleeping colleague. Although Franken resigned from his position, many prominent voices on the Left, including some feminists, expressed regret over the loss of what they considered a "good man" and questioned whether the response was proportional. The urgency for judgment, typically directed at Republicans, was replaced by concerns about due process - only when it was convenient for their side.

Keith Ellison, a Congressman from Minnesota and former deputy chair of the Democrat National Committee, faced serious domestic abuse allegations from his ex-girlfriend, Karen Monahan. Her son claimed to have witnessed a video showing Ellison dragging her off a bed by her feet while shouting obscenities and making threats. Medical records and text messages supported aspects of her claims of abuse. Ellison denied all the allegations, and many on the left largely ignored the situation. As a rising star in progressive circles, his actions went overlooked.

There was no sustained outrage or calls for investigation from the usual advocates. In contrast, conservative women making similar allegations would likely have faced heavy scrutiny. Monahan, Ellison's alleged victim, faded into the background.

Eric Swalwell, the California Democrat, continues to face mounting scandals. Multiple women, including a former staffer, have accused him of sexual misconduct, ranging from sending naked, unsolicited messages to rape while the women were intoxicated or incapacitated. One woman provided a detailed account of being assaulted in a hotel room, which is corroborated by texts and eyewitnesses. Although Swalwell has denied these allegations, the consistent pattern raises serious concerns about entitlement.

Despite this troubling situation, the partisan machinery that typically amplifies accusations against conservatives has reacted sluggishly. Swalwell remains prominent in Leftist and Democrat circles, and his ambitions have only recently faced setbacks.

Even Graham Platner, the Democrat Senate nominee in Maine challenging Susan Collins, exposes the farce. Platner enjoyed robust support from the progressive apparatus, including Bernie Sanders allies, as a populist veteran and oysterman - until Jenny Racicot, a Maine woman from the Left who had dated him, came forward with a rape allegation. She detailed how in 2021, an intoxicated Platner entered her home uninvited, ignored her repeated objections, and forced himself on her despite her clear refusal. Only after this credible accusation from within their own camp - reported by outlets like Politico - did the Democrat establishment and mainstream media, including the New York Times, finally cease their backing, with calls for him to withdraw flooding in.

Prior controversies, including other troubling claims about their relationship, hadn't stopped them. But a Democrat woman's direct rape accusation? That finally pierced the protective bubble. The selective timing reveals everything: their #BelieveAllWomen and #MeToo piety is reserved for enemies, not inconvenient allies.

Conservative women, such as those who were criticized during the #MeToo movement or attacked for supporting America First policies, find little support from the Left. The Kavanaugh hearings demonstrated the strategy: use unproven allegations against those who threaten the agenda, and then discard principles when they implicate allies. The media-Democrat complex doesn't genuinely "believe all women"; rather, it selectively supports women at the right time for political gain; for the political "kill shot." Victims who do not fit this narrative - whether they are Republican, conservative, or simply inconvenient - are often dismissed as liars, opportunists, or fabricators; dragged through the mud into the public square.

This hypocrisy undermines trust in institutions - especially the media - and the experiences of genuine victims. Real abuse exists and deserves serious investigation with due process, rather than being used for partisan gain.

The Left's #BelieveAllWomen and #MeToo movements were never based on principles; instead, they served as a performative tactic to consolidate power. They overlook crimes against conservative women because acknowledging those victims would expose the underlying hypocrisy. This mandate only applies when it supports the Marxist, identity-focused agenda that reduces women to mere props in a cultural battle.

True protection for women requires consistency, evidence, and fairness - not selective blindness from those on the Left who preach empathy while practicing ruthless expediency.

Their silence regarding their own predators speaks volumes: power always trumps principle.

Frank Salvato is a 30-year independent journalist focused on constitutionalism and threats to the free West.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 16:20

Appeals Court Revives Tylenol Autism Lawsuits Against Kenvue

Appeals Court Revives Tylenol Autism Lawsuits Against Kenvue

A federal appeals court has breathed new life into litigation accusing Kenvue of failing to disclose alleged risks tied to taking Tylenol during pregnancy, reversing an earlier ruling that had effectively stopped hundreds of cases, according to a new report from Bloomberg.

On Monday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the trial judge went too far in throwing out testimony from three expert witnesses. The panel said the experts relied on recognized scientific approaches and that disagreements over how to interpret the available research should be weighed through the legal process rather than dismissed outright. The lawsuits will now return to the lower court.

The decision overturns a 2023 ruling that prevented roughly 500 claims from moving forward against Kenvue, the consumer health business that was spun off from Johnson & Johnson. Bloomberg Intelligence has previously estimated that the company could ultimately face thousands of similar lawsuits, creating the potential for billions of dollars in legal exposure.

Bloomberg notes that attorneys representing the plaintiffs said the appeals court recognized that their experts relied on legitimate scientific evidence. Kenvue countered that the ruling was procedural, not a finding that Tylenol causes autism or ADHD. The company continues to argue that the best available independent research has not established a causal relationship between prenatal acetaminophen use and neurodevelopmental disorders.

Recall back in September we noted when President Donald Trump advised pregnant women to avoid Tylenol, bringing renewed public attention to a debate that has divided researchers.Even so, many medical experts and large reviews of existing studies continue to say the evidence does not demonstrate that acetaminophen use during pregnancy causes autism, ADHD, or similar developmental conditions.

"With Tylenol, don't take it, don't take it," Trump said last year, adding that the FDA would issue a notice to physicians over the risk of acetaminophen during pregnancy, and begin the process to make a safety label change. "I think we've found an answer to autism."

In October, we noted that in a Feb. 8, 2018, email obtained by The Epoch Times, Rachel Weinstein, director of epidemiology at Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Janssen, wrote, “The weight of evidence is starting to feel heavy to me.”

Weinstein was emailing Jesse Berlin, Johnson & Johnson’s global head of epidemiology, about a review that concluded that nine studies suggested that use of acetaminophen—the active ingredient in Tylenol—by pregnant women was linked to autism and other neurodevelopmental issues in the women’s children.

The legal battle is unfolding while Kimberly-Clark works to complete its planned $40 billion purchase of Kenvue. The company has said it reviewed the potential litigation risks before agreeing to the acquisition.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 15:45

US Energy Efficiency: We Have Come A Long Way

US Energy Efficiency: We Have Come A Long Way

Via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

The graph below paints a very interesting picture of US energy efficiency and a key structural economic change in this country.

For roughly 25 years after WWII, the US economy’s crude oil consumption nearly tripled. Feeding the growth were a booming post-war economy and strong population growth.

To put consumption in a different context, the graph shows consumption as a ratio to a dollar of real GDP, on a per capita basis.

It shows that consumption per dollar of GDP declined rapidly starting in the mid-1970s, suggesting an increase in US energy efficiency.

The US per capita energy efficiency is less pronounced but noticeable.

In addition to productivity gains and urbanization, there are a few reasons for the gains in efficiency.

  • The 1973 Arab oil embargo was a shock to the economy. During this time, a quadrupling of gas prices and long gas lines forced policymakers and consumers to treat oil as a strategic vulnerability rather than a cheap given.

  • Washington enacted numerous measures in response to persistently high oil prices in the 1970s. For instance, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 mandated US energy efficiency standards for appliances and introduced fuel-economy standards. Legislators also encouraged a shift from oil and natural gas to coal for power generation. Utilities largely stopped building oil-fired plants.

  • Structural change was equally important. The economy shifted from heavy manufacturing to services and technology, sectors that require far less energy per dollar of output.

Ironically, AI data centers are now driving a renewed focus on efficiency, this time with natural gas and renewables.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 15:25

Credit Card Chargebacks Surge As E-Commerce & Cashless Society Gets Messy For Consumers

Credit Card Chargebacks Surge As E-Commerce & Cashless Society Gets Messy For Consumers

US consumers are disputing card purchases at a record pace, as online fraud, confusing billing practices, and sneaky subscription charges drive a surge in chargebacks.

Bloomberg cites new data from research firm Juniper Research on consumers' aggressive use of chargebacks. Last year alone, US consumers filed 158 million transaction disputes, up 29% from 2021 and outpacing overall growth in card spending. Global disputes jumped 46% over the same period.

The increase may reflect not only more legitimate fraud but also subscription traps, unfamiliar merchant names, poor service, and "friendly fraud," in which shoppers mistakenly or knowingly challenge legitimate purchases.

The report continued:

Some of this growth in reported fraud is indeed a reflection of growth in real fraud. More people are getting scammed, especially online.

But according to Michael Greenwood, a senior research analyst at Juniper who focuses on digital payments, that's not the main source of dispute rates. Instead he points to two other phenomena responsible for the ballooning number of chargebacks: growing confusion among consumers over how the transactions on their monthly statements correspond to their actual purchases, as well as an increasing willingness, especially among younger shoppers, to engage in a little bit of fraud of their own.

Rising chargebacks may also signal growing consumer stress, as online fraud and distrust of merchants increase. This appears to be one of the drawbacks of going cashless for some people in the era of e-commerce. Some shoppers are struggling with subscription traps, unclear billing, and deteriorating service, while a growing share are also using disputes to reverse legitimate purchases.

The spike in chargebacks is also hurting retailers, resulting in higher fraud losses and processing costs.

Business revolt? 

Meanwhile, consumers are carrying near-record credit card balances as inflation remains elevated. The average credit card interest rate is hovering near a record high of 22%.

The good news is that consumer credit figures in May fell for the first time since Nov. 2024 as interest rates spiked.

So one drawback of e-commerce and an increasingly cashless economy is the rise in chargebacks. Digital transactions create more opportunities for fraud, billing confusion, and subscription disputes.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 15:05

Mick Jagger Has Some Sage Advice For Trump-Hater Springsteen

Mick Jagger Has Some Sage Advice For Trump-Hater Springsteen

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

Mick Jagger is pushing back against the trend of rock stars turning stages into campaign rallies, offering a refreshing contrast to Bruce Springsteen's repeated anti-Trump outbursts.

In a recent New York Times podcast interview, Jagger made his position crystal clear. While contrasting his approach with Springsteen's, he stated: "My job in the live music world is for those people that come to have the best time ... And you don't want to lecture them."

This comes as Springsteen has made a habit of injecting leftist political commentary into his shows, often targeting President Trump and his administration.

From calling Trump "treasonous and corrupt" during his European tour to labeling America itself a "reckless, unpredictable, predatory, untrustworthy, rogue nation" in a DC concert, the so called Boss has turned performances into platforms for activism.

Springsteen has relied on a teleprompter for his anti-Trump and anti-billionaire rants, scripting attacks on the "richest men in America" and claims about a president who "cannot handle the truth."

His latest efforts include an angry 'look at my serious playing face' anti-ICE music video titled "Streets Of Minneapolis," railing against the Trump administration.

Trump has continually clapped back at Springsteen's criticisms.

Never forget that Springsteen was among those pushing strict COVID-era restrictions, endorsing concerts limited to the fully masked and vaccinated.

Fans and commentators have taken notice of Jagger's stance, with many applauding the decision to prioritize the audience's enjoyment over boring lefty sermons.

Jagger's comments strike a chord in an era where many entertainers seem more focused on pushing ideology than delivering the escapist joy fans pay for.

While Springsteen sees his role as political engagement, Jagger understands that most concertgoers want to rock out, not endure lectures - especially from multimillionaire performers far removed from everyday struggles.

This divide highlights a broader fatigue with celebrities who lecture from their bubbles while ignoring their own inconsistencies. America First means putting fans and freedom first, not turning every stage into a partisan soapbox. Jagger gets it. More should follow.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 14:45

The Absurdity Of The Hunter Biden Defamation Case

The Absurdity Of The Hunter Biden Defamation Case

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

I have taught torts, including defamation for over 30 years, but I have never seen the like of the Hunter Biden defamation case.

The defendant made defamatory statements and then just refused to appear. That led to an equally bizarre $1.7 million award by U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson of the Central District of California to Biden, consisting of just $1 in nominal damages and the rest in punitive damages.

Here is the most interesting line of the opinion: “the damage to Plaintiff’s reputation is difficult to calculate.”

It may be the single greatest understatement in the history of judicial opinions.

However, the court also noted “Plaintiff does not seek actual damages above a nominal amount.”

That means that Hunter Biden’s counsel, in a default case, elected not to argue for compensatory damages due to loss of reputation. Why would he do that?

It might be that he has little reputation to lose and that opening up that part of the case was fraught with perils.  However, it also created a potential major appellate issue. His counsel was making it clear that they were litigating purely for punitives.

For Hunter Biden, this is a much-needed windfall. His art sales notably collapsed with the value of currying favor to the Bidens. He is reportedly being pursued by creditors, including former counsel.

The question is whether the award will stand.

For many critics, Hunter Biden is virtually ‘libel proof” as an individual who has no reputation to lose. However, as we have previously discussed, that status is reserved for the most reviled personalities who cannot be defamed due to the lack of any positive reputation.

Judge Wilson, a Reagan appointee, admits in his opinion that determining reputational harm to someone like Biden is difficult to do and further recognizes the argument that “prior tarnishing of Plaintiff’s reputation may reduce the reprehensibility of Defendant’s conduct.”

The case involves a claim by former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne that Biden took part in an $800 million bribery scheme involving Iran and failed to defend his claims in court.

Hunter Biden has long been accused of influence peddling that generated millions for him and his family. I have been one of his longest critics as part of a corrupt family enterprise.

However, this claim was not one of those that his critics, and Congress, focused on during the Biden years. There is no evidence that he took a bribe or payment in a quid pro quo for releasing the money to Iran.

The lawsuit was part of a flurry of such actions brought against Biden’s critics. Most were later dismissed, but played a part in the scorched-earth campaign of Biden. I was even threatened with such an action after criticizing his counsel and financial backer, Kevin Morris.

As Biden dropped the other lawsuits, this one continued to be litigated. It was an easy kill. Byrne simply did not defend himself and defaulted. That left the matter to Judge Wilson, who was clearly irate.

The opinion recounts an extraordinary pile-up as Byrne sought to replace lawyers:

“Defendant initially attempted to replace Mr. Murphy with three new lawyers: Eric Neff, Tom Yu, and Stefanie Lynn Lambert Junttila. ECF Nos. 290, 291, 292. Ms. Lambert was not a member of the California Bar, and her application to appear pro hac vice was denied2 due to her recent history of unethical conduct, which gave the Court reason to doubt she would abide by the Court’s rules and practices. ECF No. 295. When Defendant learned that Ms. Lambert was not qualified to represent him in this case, Defendant also instructed Mr. Neff and Mr. Yu to remove themselves.

Moreover, Defendant himself, now unrepresented, still failed to appear at trial. Accordingly, the Court issued an order to show cause why it should not enter default judgment against Defendant and ordered the parties to return the following day. At that hearing, on July 30, 2025, Defendant again failed to appear. Mr. Yu, who was not authorized to represent Defendant at trial, argued on Defendant’s behalf for a continuance, in lieu of default judgment.”

The defendant would miss a series of filing and appearance dates, including orders that he appear in person.

Wilson, 85, ruled in his opinion that Byrne acted with “intentional misrepresentation” and “conscious disregard” for Hunter’s rights. Making things worse, Byrne was found to have continued making the false claims after the lawsuit, and said Byrne continued to amplify the false allegations even after Hunter filed the lawsuit against him.

Accordingly, the court found that the “defamation went far beyond mere negligence,” and that Byrne actively sought to spread the false claim on social media and to make the story go viral.

The problem is that the actual compensatory damages are rather to gauge for a plaintiff who was found by Congress to have actively sought to use his influence or access to his father to shake down foreign figures and businesses.

In these well-documented dealings, there were gifts such as diamonds, lavish expense accounts, and a sports car, in addition to massive payments that Hunter claimed were “loans.” There are messages like the one to a Chinese businessman, openly threatening Joe Biden’s displeasure if money is not sent to them immediately. In the WhatsApp message, Hunter stated:

“I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the Chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

So, accusing Hunter Biden of influence peddling would hardly seem a material blow to his reputation.

Wilson awarded just $1 in nominal damages to Biden but then ordered $1.7 million in punitive damages. Byrne was also ordered to pay nearly $35,000 in previously imposed court sanctions within two weeks or face an additional $1,000 penalty for each day payment is delayed after the deadline.

That 1:1,700,000 ratio is a bit startling. The general rule is that a ratio of greater than 1:10 in compensatory to punitive damages can raise serious constitutional concerns. What makes this case different is the contempt and default elements.

In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case, BMW of North America v. Gore, striking down a punitive damage award. The case involved the practice of the company to repair and repaint cars damaged in transit without telling the customers. The jury in the original trial awarded $4,000 in compensatory damages for the lost value to the car in not having a factory paint job and other damage; it then imposed $4 million in punitive damages for the company’s dishonesty.

The Court stated three factors in crafting punitive awards: (1) the degree of reprehensibility of the nondisclosure; (2) the disparity between the harm or potential harm suffered by plaintiff and the punitive damages award; (3) and the difference between this remedy and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.

Even though the Alabama Supreme Court previously reduced the punitive award by half, the U.S. Supreme Court still found that the award violated the Due Process Clause as “grossly excessive.”

The fact that this case involves nominal damages may allowed for greater leeway in the ratio. See Arizona v. ASARCO LLC, 773 F.3d 1050, 1058 (9th Cir. 2014). That is clearly a critical part of the decision of counsel to ask for only nominal damages while litigating for punitive damages. However, this ratio is astronomical.

Judge Wilson addresses BMW v. Gore but effectively untethers the ratio analysis from this case, precisely what Biden’s counsel had hoped in seeking only nominal damages. It is an approach that would effectively gut BMW v Gore. Any litigants with a bad reputation or insufficient reputational harm could simply ask for nominal damages and then ask for the moon in punitive damages.

However, it gets weirder. I was curious how, without any record on harm, the Court could come up with $1.7 million. It turns out that the Court used the damages awarded by a Canadian court against Byrne in a similar defamation case. That case in a foreign jurisdiction awarded $1.134 million. Wilson simply blithely declares that, since Byrne continues such conduct, “a $1.134 million award would be inadequate to deter this particular Defendant. The Court therefore calculates a punitive damages award of $1.7 million, approximately 50% greater than the total judgment in the prior case.”

That is it. The court simply used the damage award in a foreign torts case and elected to increase it by 50%.  However, that earlier judgment only included $250,000 in punitive damages.

I think that the court is dead wrong on the punitive damages analysis. The only question is whether the extent of Byrne’s contempt and default will work to quiet the concerns of appellate judges.

It is a case worthy of appeal.

It is a fascinating car wreck of a case with a scandal-plagued plaintiff, a defaulting plaintiff, the use of a foreign judgment as the basis for a damages award, and a 1:1,700,000 ratio in damages. We will be watching if an appeal is filed by Byrne.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 14:05

This Chevrolet Suburban Is The Secret Service's New Anti-Drone Weapon

This Chevrolet Suburban Is The Secret Service's New Anti-Drone Weapon

For any indication of how seriously the federal government is taking the threat posed by one-way attack drones on the homeland, particularly against President Trump, look no further than the US Secret Service's new Chevrolet Suburban.

The Secret Service’s Counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems Branch operates a specially equipped Chevrolet Suburban Premier, known as “Hindsight,” to detect and mitigate suicide drones and other loitering munitions during National Special Security Events and other high-profile security operations, according to the Instagram account "dmvfireandpolice."

The Suburban is outfitted with an Axis Communications IP camera, radio-frequency antennas, and additional counter-UAS technology, and it appears to have a mobile command station inside.

Dmvfireandpolice reported that the latest sighting of the new anti-drone command center on wheels was at Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia, as it was departing.

The vehicle is likely outfitted with jamming equipment, yet new details this week of fiber optic drones in Mexico have sparked alarm bells with security experts because these drones - very similar to Ukrainian and Russian ones - are unjammable, which only suggests kinetic solutions are needed.

The drone threat against President Trump materialized last month when far-left revolutionaries were foiled by federal agents in their alleged plot to use suicide drones to target "capitalists" at the UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House.

Trump made an odd statement on Friday: "I’ve been on their list for a long time. That’s what we’re dealing with." He then followed with: "The only thing is, I've left instructions—if anything happens—to just literally bomb them at levels that they've never seen before."

As we have detailed before, there are multiple ways to prepare for the asymmetric-warfare boom, as the US government and private firms race to harden the airspace above high-value assets, from airports and data centers to power grids, stadiums, and other critical infrastructure.

We may also be seeing the early stages of an M&A cycle across the drone and counter-UAS space. Ondas Holdings’ acquisition of DZYNE last week could be an early signal that larger defense and industrial technology firms are beginning to consolidate specialized firms before demand from the Department of War accelerates next year (read that report here).

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 13:00

Lindsey Graham's Eerie Last Words Revealed

Lindsey Graham's Eerie Last Words Revealed

The sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) reverberated through the capital over the weekend, and some of the veteran interventionist's final remarks have lent the loss an unsettling poignancy.

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

In a telephone call with an unnamed individual, Mr. Graham, 71, said he intended to seek medical attention for feeling unwell, but only after his scheduled appearance Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." On the same call, the senator joked about deferring his own mortality.

"I can't die now. I still need to do the Russia sanctions, get Iran sorted out and do Israeli-Saudi normalization," the senator said, according to Axios.

Graham's office announced his death early Sunday, hours after he returned from Ukraine, where he toured a secret military drone factory and held talks with Volodymyr Zelensky.

The senator also spoke Saturday evening with President Donald Trump about the Ukraine trip and the bipartisan Russia sanctions package he had been working to advance through Congress alongside Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), the New York Post reports.

Preliminary findings released by the District of Columbia medical examiner's office indicated Graham died from "Aortic Dissection due to Arteriosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease." The condition, a tear in the body's main artery, predominantly affects older men.

Trump said Monday he has recommended that the senator's sister serve as his temporary replacement in the Senate. In a social-media post, the president urged Gov. Henry McMaster (R) to appoint Darline Graham Nordone to fill the remainder of Graham's term, which expires in January.

McMaster is expected to announce his selection later Monday. A special election is scheduled for next month to choose a new Republican nominee in the general election for the seat.

H/T CAPITAL News

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 12:20

Strategy Adds $467 Million In Cash, No Bitcoin As StanChart Warns Saylor Needs Clarity In Pivot Message To Convince Investors

Strategy Adds $467 Million In Cash, No Bitcoin As StanChart Warns Saylor Needs Clarity In Pivot Message To Convince Investors

Strategy, the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, raised fresh capital by selling MSTR shares through its at-the-market (ATM) offering last week while leaving its BTC treasury unchanged.

As CoinTelegraph's Helen Partz reports, Strategy sold 4.8 million shares of its Class A common stock for $466.7 million between July 6 and July 12, according to a Monday 8-K filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. 

The company did not buy or sell any Bitcoin during the period and reported holdings of 843,775 BTC at an average purchase price of $75,476 per BTC. 

The update comes as investors continue to watch how Strategy balances equity issuance, Bitcoin accumulation and its growing preferred stock offerings as it expands its BTC-focused corporate strategy.

Ahead of Monday's Nasdaq open, MSTR shares were trading down roughly 3%, to $91.80 apiece, according to Yahoo Finance. Bitcoin was trading at about $62,580, down more than 2% in the past 24 hours.

Cash buffer grows to $3 billion

Strategy increased its US dollar reserve to $3 billion as of July 12, up from $2.55 billion a week earlier. The reserve is used to fund dividend payments on its preferred stock and interest payments on its outstanding debt.

The reserve includes expected proceeds from MSTR shares sold through the company's ATM offering that had not yet settled as of the reporting date.

Source: SEC

Strategy has $23.8 billion of remaining capacity under its MSTR ATM offering, including capacity from a new $21 billion offering the company announced on March 23. The company said it may begin selling shares under the additional capacity once the existing offering is substantially depleted.

Last week, Strategy announced it sold 3,588 BTC for about $216 million to replenish its US dollar reserve and fund preferred stock dividend payments.

The transactions included the sale of 1,363 BTC at an average price of $59,256 between June 29 and June 30, followed by another 2,225 BTC at an average price of $60,773 between July 1 and July 5.

In the same June 29 8-K filing, Strategy also reported no BTC purchases, while disclosing the sale of 12.7 million MSTR shares through its ATM offering, generating $1.15 billion in net proceeds.

STRC moves to twice-monthly dividend schedule

Strategy is boosting its USD reserve as it readies its first semi-monthly dividend payment to its STRC preferred stock holders on Wednesday.

Under a new schedule announced on June 8, STRC will use record dates on the 15th and the last day of each month, with payments made on the following record date.

The first semi-monthly record date was June 30, 2026, with the first payment date scheduled for July 15.

Saylor

Additionally, CoinTelegraph's Robert Lakin notes that Strategy co-founder and chairman Michael Saylor again took to social media on Sunday to offer his latest signal to investors, even as one analyst said Saylor’s messaging needed more clarity to help Bitcoin regain its momentum.

“Orange dots tell only part of the story,” was Saylor’s message in a post that accompanied a chart from Saylortracker.com, similar to previous social media messages that have preceded news of Strategy's Bitcoin (BTC) purchases, typically announced the day after his posts.

Need clarity in BTC pivot message to convince investors: StanChart

Standard Charter’s global head of digital assets research, Geoff Kendrick, said Strategy’s recent actions - and Saylor's manner of communicating them - “are muddying the waters for BTC near-term.”

“We think effective communication of MSTR’s new strategy (using BTC to back STRC) is key to reassuring markets that wholesale selling is unlikely; this should in turn support BTC prices,” Kendrick wrote in a note to clients on Friday.

“Indeed, if this signalling proves effective, it should remove the need for MSTR to actually sell any BTC by supporting STRC’s price,” he said.

StanChart sees inconsistencies in “never sell” approach

Kendrick said that Strategy’s long-held “never sell” approach limited what the company could with its industry-biggest digital asset treasury.

“The problem with the ‘never sell’ approach is that it limits what MSTR’s BTC holdings can do — or, perhaps more importantly, what they are perceived to be doing,” the StanChart analyst said.

“MSTR has started to shift its communication strategy on this in recent months. It has sold BTC twice and recently announced a BTC monetization program.”

Source: Standard Chartered Bank

Still, he sees Strategy’s “market signaling” as potentially improving soon and bringing more clarity to the outlook for Bitcoin, on which StanChart maintains its $100,000 year-end forecast.

Shares struggle from year low ahead of earnings report

Investors who bought into the Strategy narrative have not had an easy time in the past 12 months. The STRC preferred shares were formulated to hold a price of $100 apiece. Shareholders saw that par value fall to the wayside last month, to the lowest value since the preferred stock was introduced a year ago.

The common shares, trading under the MSTR ticker, have lost more than 70% of their value since July 2025, closing at $94.64 per share on Friday, down from a 52-week high of $457.22.

The company is slated to report second-quarter earnings on July 30, with analysts consensus of $4.28 per share, according to Yahoo Finance data. Earnings have fallen short of analyst forecasts in six of the last eight quarters, according to Fintel.io data, including a 33.76% negative surprise in the first quarter of 2026.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 11:20

Mamdani's Affordability Agenda Flops As NYC Rents Surge To Record Highs

Mamdani's Affordability Agenda Flops As NYC Rents Surge To Record Highs

New York City's socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani, and his radical-left lieutenants in City Hall promised voters free bus rides, government-run grocery stores, cheap housing, and much more. Yet the dream of a left-wing utopia has not materialized. In fact, rents in the NYC metro area just hit a record high.

New data from The Corcoran Group, a major residential real estate brokerage founded in NYC, shows that rents in the metro area have climbed to a new record high.

Manhattan's median rent rose 8% from a year earlier to $5,295, while Brooklyn reached $4,350, also up 8%, according to the report. Manhattan's vacancy rate narrowed to 1.49%. In Queens, Rego Park posted particularly sharp increases, with one-bedroom rents up 12% and studio rents up more than 20%.

"Manhattan renters are chasing a shrinking pool of available apartments, and the result has become predictable — record rents. Available listings dropped 16% year-over-year in June, while the borough's median rent climbed to a new high of $5,295 . Leasing activity clocked in 7% below last year's pace due to the lack of inventory, causing competition to remain fierce. Additionally, June marked one year since implementation of the FARE Act, a milestone that may still be influencing pricing trends, particularly within the non-doorman market. Across the board, quality apartments are commanding a premium, and renters have little room to negotiate," Corcoran COO Gary Malin wrote in the report.

Malin continued, "Brooklyn's rental market is also rewriting the record books. Median rent jumped 8% year-over-year to an all-time high of $4,350 and apartments spent 30% fewer days on the market. This steep annual decline underscores how tight the market has become, with flat inventory and strong demand strong causing available units to rent far faster than a year ago. While lease signings were lower on an annual basis, activity picked up from May as renters moved quickly to secure apartments ahead of the busiest stretch of the summer season. Throughout the borough, competition."

City Comptroller Mark Levine commented on the new report, saying, "NYC's housing affordability crisis is at DEFCON 1. We need to push harder on every front to address our housing shortage."

"Update zoning, invest more City $ in affordable units, lower the time & cost City bureaucracy imposes on construction, get 1000s of vacant regulated units back on the market. We need bold action. This is a crisis," Levine added.

Yet, as Libs of TikTok on X pointed out, "We don't have a housing shortage. We have an illegal alien invasion," adding, "Forty percent of NYC rentals are occupied by people born outside the US."

Last week, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas published a new report showing that the "unprecedented boom in unauthorized immigration" sparked a nationwide housing demand shock in the presence of a relatively fixed short-run housing supply, accounting for 30% of home price growth and 20% of rent growth in the average local market during the boom period.

Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America bloc at City Hall will never acknowledge the illegal alien invasion has played a major role in tightening NYC's housing market. Instead, the response from far-left clowns is blaming "racist capitalism" and arguing that the existing system must be dismantled for one that actually has never worked anywhere in the world - look at Cuba.  

That leaves a fundamental policy contradiction: Mamdani and his socialist allies claim they can solve the affordability crisis by building more housing, yet that will take years. The easiest solution would be to cooperate with ICE or support deportations, which could reduce pressure on housing, schools, and other public services almost immediately. Good luck reconciling those positions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 11:00

Obama Appointed Federal Judge Blocks Trump Admin's Anti-DEI Grant Conditions

Obama Appointed Federal Judge Blocks Trump Admin's Anti-DEI Grant Conditions

Via American Greatness,

A federal judge in California has blocked the Trump administration’s push to attach anti-DEI strings to federal grant money. The court ruled this week that the executive branch overstepped its constitutional authority by imposing the conditions on a group of West Coast cities and counties.

Obama-nominated U.S. District Judge William Orrick granted a preliminary injunction Thursday barring the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and the Interior from enforcing the contested conditions against 11 local governments, concluding in a 68-page order that the restrictions likely run afoul of both the separation-of-powers doctrine and the Administrative Procedure Act.

“What defendants seek to do likely violates the Constitution (separation of powers and Spending Clause) and the Administrative Procedures Act,” Orrick wrote.

The suit was filed by the cities of Fresno, Santa Clara, Redwood City, Santa Cruz, Stockton, Beaverton, Corvallis and Hillsboro, along with Los Angeles, San Diego and Santa Barbara counties, all of which argued the administration attached ideological requirements to grants Congress had already approved for public safety, disaster preparedness, policing, fire protection, water conservation and crime victim services.

Orrick sided with the localities, finding the new certification requirements “have nothing to do with or contradict the Congressional purpose” behind the underlying grant programs, and affirming that spending authority ultimately rests with Congress rather than the White House.

“Plaintiffs maintain that ‘[n]othing in the Constitution or federal statutes authorizes Defendants to impose the Challenged Conditions, or anything of the kind, on funds administered through congressional grant programs,'” Orrick wrote. “I agree.”

The conditions at issue required grant recipients to certify they were not running programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion in violation of federal anti-discrimination law, along with separate provisions encouraging cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and compliance with related executive orders.

The administration has  said such conditions are a legitimate use of executive authority to ensure federal dollars aren’t used to fund discriminatory practices, and the Justice Department is expected to appeal Thursday’s ruling.

Orrick found that letting the conditions stand while the case proceeds would jeopardize funding for programs including anti-terrorism initiatives, disaster mitigation, flood protection, wildfire preparedness, law enforcement training, forensic science, and human trafficking and crime-victim services — writing that the disruption would “irreparably injure plaintiffs and their ability to provide critical services, as well as would threaten public safety.”

The preliminary injunction will remain in effect while the underlying lawsuit moves forward, leaving the administration’s broader anti-DEI funding strategy in legal limbo pending the expected appeal.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 10:40

British MP Exposes Secret Society Behind UK's Lurch Toward Socialism

British MP Exposes Secret Society Behind UK's Lurch Toward Socialism

Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

The stunning transformation of Great Britain in recent years - from a beacon of decorum and stiff upper lips to a cautionary tale of wokeness run amok - has been blamed on everything from socialism to satanism.

However, Rupert Lowe, a member of the British Parliament and founder of the organization Restore Britain, said the reality may be even more sinister.

In a recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, he said a shadowy group of elites known as the Fabian Society was deliberately trying to wreck the country.

“I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of the Fabian Society, but if you go and have a look at it, it was basically most of the Labour Party for many, many years,” Lowe said, referring to England’s leading left-wing party, the equivalent of U.S. Democrats.

America’s Left may be facing a similar identity crisis as it tries to shake off the subversive influence of the Justice Democrats, Democrat Socialists of America and other fringe elements that are pushing neo-Marxist ideas.

But the British version has been around for nearly 150 years. The club, founded in 1884, was a direct reaction to the philosophy of Karl Marx (who died a year earlier in London).

Rather than forcing a collectivist government as Marx suggested, through class struggle — which generally led to uncomfortable outcomes for aristocrats — the society advocated for a socialist society to take root slowly and incrementally.

It was the brainchild of intellectuals including the man who first created “My Fair Lady” heroine Eliza Doolittle — playwright George Bernard Shaw. Science-fiction visionary H.G. Wells also counted himself a member.

“It’s the most extraordinary organization,” Lowe told Rogan. “Their emblem is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, as if that doesn’t tell you what they’re doing.”

Among the beliefs it endorsed was eugenics, the idea of breeding out unwanted attributes through various means, scientific and otherwise.

While the Nazis would go on to run with the idea — and ultimately help to effect its demise — the Fabian Society also was rumored to have inspired author George Orwell, whose dystopian 1984 (written in the late 1940s) was set exactly 100 years after the society’s founding.

According to Lowe, not all of the society’s ideas have vanished entirely. Rather, some of them simply evolved into a modern political framework.

“Everyone should look at the Fabian Society, because that runs deep through the veins of Labour,” he said.

Writing for The Telegraph, former Fabian research director Stephen Pollard sought to dismantle the claims by attacking Lowe as a conspiracy theorist. However, his argument may have only helped to make the case for some that “basically what it wants to do is destroy all good and create a dependency culture.”

After defending ideas like eugenics as having been widely accepted in their time, Pollard insisted that the current society was more concerned with selling magazine subscriptions than world domination.

Many of its policy papers now deal with addressing the nation’s housing crisis.

“To take that and conclude that they are in fact part of a secret cabal dedicated to destroying Britain is not so much misguided as a sign that someone is truly away with the fairies,” he claimed.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 10:00

Key Events This Week: CPI, PPI, Retail Sales, Warsh Testifies, China Data, And Earnings Galore

Key Events This Week: CPI, PPI, Retail Sales, Warsh Testifies, China Data, And Earnings Galore

As well as two epic World Cup semi-finals before that, and the start of the Open golf it’s a packed week ahead in markets, writes DB's Jim Reid.

The headline events are tomorrow’s US CPI and Wednesday’s US PPI, alongside Fed Chair Warsh’s first Humphrey–Hawkins testimony before the House Financial Services Committee (tomorrow) and the Senate Banking Committee (Wednesday). Elsewhere, key data includes China’s Q2 GDP and their monthly data dump (Wednesday) and the UK’s May monthly GDP (Thursday) as well as the announcement of a new leader of the ruling UK Labour Party as a special conference on Friday.

Let's run through the key details of the week ahead.

Front and centre is tomorrow’s US CPI report. DB economists expect lower gas prices to pull headline CPI down by -0.16% (vs. +0.47% in May), with core at +0.23% (vs. +0.21% previously). On a year-over-year basis, headline inflation is projected to fall from 4.25% to 3.81%, while core eases only marginally by 2bps to 2.83%.

Wednesday’s PPI will help complete the picture for core PCE. DB economists’ forecast is for a +0.23% increase (vs. +0.32% last month), which would see the year-over-year rate decline by 3bps to 3.38%. Within the details, the price index for portfolio management and investment advice will be worth watching, particularly given the boost from May’s equity rally.

Turning to the rest of the data calendar, Thursday’s June US retail sales and Friday’s industrial production will feed into estimates for Q2 real GDP growth. The preliminary University of Michigan survey (52.0 expected at DB vs. 49.5) on Friday will also be in focus, particularly inflation expectations, which have started to moderate from a high level after recent energy-driven increases.

After a relatively quiet spell for Fed speakers, this week brings a wave of communication ahead of the blackout period starting at the end of the week. Governor Waller begins today with a speech at NYABE. Chair Warsh follows with his testimony on Tuesday and Wednesday, while additional commentary comes after the CPI release (Governor Cook on Wednesday, and Vice Chair Jefferson, Dallas Fed’s Logan, and Kansas City Fed’s Schmid on Friday). This week effectively represents the final window for policymakers to signal their thinking ahead of the July FOMC meeting. Reid expects Warsh to broadly stick to recent messaging and avoid firm guidance on near-term policy moves. In contrast, Waller has historically been more explicit about their reaction function, so today’s speech will be closely scrutinised for clues on their preferred policy path—even though it arrives before the CPI data.

Staying with the global theme, central bank decisions from the Bank of Canada (Wednesday, no change expected) and the Bank of Korea (Thursday, DB forecast a +25bp hike) will also be in focus. In China, growth is expected to slow to 4.4% YoY in Q2 (from 5% in Q1), with June activity data released alongside. More detail is available in our Chinese economists’ full week-ahead note here. Finally, the UK reports May monthly GDP on Thursday, the day before Andy Burnham is expected to be confirmed as Labour Party leader, ahead of him officially taking the PM reins a week today and tapping into the England World Cup winning celebrations. Oh wait this must be another major hallucination.

And just to keep everyone busy, Q2 US earnings season kicks off tomorrow with results from five major US banks. Q1 marked the strongest non-recessionary rebound since the late 1990s, so the bar is high. ASML (Wednesday) and TSMC (Thursday) should also provide an early read on global tech trends. On earnings, tomorrow features JPMorgan, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. Wednesday brings Morgan Stanley alongside ASML, Johnson & Johnson and BlackRock, offering a useful cross-sector snapshot. Thursday is especially busy, with TSMC, Netflix, General Electric and UnitedHealth reporting across tech, industrials and healthcare. By Friday, attention shifts to European names including Volvo, Sandvik and Saab, rounding out the global picture.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events

Monday July 13

  • Data: US June federal budget balance, Germany May current account balance
  • Central banks: Fed's Bowman and Waller speak, ECB's Schnabel speaks, BoE's Pill speaks

Tuesday July 14

  • Data: US June CPI, NFIB small business optimism, May total net TIC flows, China June trade balance, Japan May capacity utilisation, Germany June wholesale price index
  • Central banks: Fed Chair Warsh testimony before House Financial Services Committee, Fed's Barr, Cook, Bowman and Goolsbee speak, BoE's Bailey speaks
  • Earnings: JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Citigroup

Wednesday July 15

  • Data: US July Empire manufacturing index, June PPI, China Q2 GDP, June retail sales, industrial production, home prices, investment, Japan May core machine orders, Eurozone May industrial production, Italy May general government debt, Canada June existing home sales, May manufacturing sales
  • Central banks: Bank of Canada decision, Fed Chair Warsh testimony before Senate Banking Committee, Fed’s Beige Book, Fed's Cook, Williams and Musalem speak, ECB's Nagel and Panetta speak
  • Earnings: ASML, Johnson & Johnson, Morgan Stanley, Blackrock, Progressive, Bank of New York Mellon

Thursday July 16

  • Data: US July NAHB housing market index, New York Fed services business activity, Philadelphia Fed business outlook, June retail sales, pending home sales, May business inventories, initial jobless claims, UK May monthly GDP, Italy May trade balance, Eurozone May trade balance
  • Central banks: Fed's Logan and Schmid speak, Bank of Korea decision
  • Earnings: TSMC, UnitedHealth, General Electric, Netflix, ABB, Abbott, Intuitive Surgical, Prologis, Atlas Copco, State Street, Publicis Groupe, Alcoa

Friday July 17

  • Data: US June industrial production, import price index, export price index, housing starts, building permits, capacity utilisation, July University of Michigan survey, Italy May current account balance, ECB May current account, Canada May international securities transactions
  • Central banks: Fed's Jefferson speaks, ECB's Cipollone speaks
  • Earnings: Volvo, Sandvik, Saab

Looking at just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data releases this week are the CPI report on Tuesday and the retail sales report on Thursday. There are several speaking engagements with Fed officials this week including Chairman Warsh's semiannual Congressional testimony on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Monday, July 13 

  • There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 
  • 05:25 AM Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Bowman speaks:  Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman will speak at a Bank Policy Institute roundtable on modernizing financial regulation. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 12:30 PM Fed Governor Waller speaks: Fed Governor Christopher Waller will speak at the New York Association of Business Economics. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On July 6, Waller said, "forward guidance can help speed up policy transmission, but if it is not flexible enough, it can hinder policy transmission." 

Tuesday, July 14 

  • 08:30 AM CPI (MoM), June (GS -0.11%, consensus -0.1%, last +0.5%); Core CPI (MoM), June (GS +0.17%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.2%); CPI (YoY), June (GS +3.87%, consensus +3.8%, last +4.2%); Core CPI (YoY), June (GS +2.76%, consensus +2.9%, last +2.9%): We estimate a 0.17% increase in June core CPI (month-over-month SA), which would lower the year-over-year rate by 0.1pp to 2.8% on a rounded basis. We expect soft autos inflation, reflecting a 0.5% decline in used car prices, a 0.1% decline in new car prices, and a 0.1% decline in the car insurance category. We forecast benign readings for the shelter categories—a 0.23% increase in the OER category and a 0.17% increase in the rent category—reflecting the continued slowdown in their underlying trend. We expect more moderate increases in the travel services categories (airfares: +1.5%; hotels: +0.3%), reflecting signals from alternative price data. We expect downward pressure from potential residual seasonality on the communication and new cars categories. We estimate a 0.11% decline in headline CPI—reflecting lower energy prices (-4.4%)—which would lower the year-over-year rate to +3.87% from +4.25%. Our forecast is consistent with a 0.24% monthly increase in the core PCE price index in June. We expect another large increase in the financial services component—reflecting the increase in equity prices in May, which flow through to the component with a lag—to contribute to the larger increase in core PCE prices than the core CPI.
  • 10:00 AM Fed Chairman Warsh speaks: Fed Chairman Warsh will testify before the House Financial Services Committee on the Federal Reserve's Semi-Annual Monetary Policy Report. In a panel discussion at the ECB Forum on Central Banking in Sintra, Portugal, Warsh said that “inflation expectations have come down, and inflation risks have come down,” and that if AI causes the supply side to expand, “that has huge implications for monetary policy.”
  • 12:40 PM Fed Governor Barr speaks: Fed Governor Michael Barr will speak on artificial intelligence at Federal Reserve Board Annual Financial Inclusion Conference. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 01:00 PM Chicago Fed President Goolsbee (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee will participate in a fireside chat at the Kenosha Area Business Alliance. Q&A is expected. On June 25, Goolsbee said, “You have seen now a little bit of improvement on this services inflation, and I’ve been identifying that as something that we would want to see. But right now, between the two sides of the Fed’s mandate, the inflation side and the job market side, clearly the problem’s on the inflation side.”
  • 01:30 PM Fed Governor Cook speaks: Fed Governor Lisa Cook will moderate a discussion on consumers, artificial intelligence, and financial inclusion at the Federal Reserve Board Annual Financial Inclusion Conference. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 02:55 PM Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Bowman speaks: Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman will speak on responsible innovation and financial inclusion via a pre-recorded video at the Federal Reserve Board Annual Financial Inclusion Conference. 

Wednesday, July 15 

  • 08:30 AM Empire State manufacturing survey, July (consensus 9.3, last 5.7)
  • 08:30 AM PPI final demand, June (GS +0.2%, consensus flat, last +1.1%); PPI ex-food and energy, June (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.4%); PPI ex-food, energy, and trade, June (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.8%)
  • 08:45 AM New York Fed President Williams (FOMC voter) speaks: New York Fed President John Williams will speak at an event organized by Partnership for New York City. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On July 9, Williams said, "The markets still expect oil prices to come down over the next six to 12 months. I think that's a pretty reasonable baseline. I still feel the fundamentals are that energy prices are likely to be around their peak and then to come down over time."
  • 10:00 AM Fed Chairman Warsh speaks: Fed Chairman Warsh will testify before the Senate Banking Committee on the Federal Reserve's Semi-Annual Monetary Policy Report. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 01:00 PM Fed Governor Cook speaks: Fed Governor Lisa Cook will speak on the economic outlook at the Exchequer Club. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 02:00 PM Fed releases Beige Book, July meeting period: The Fed’s Beige Book is a summary of regional economic anecdotes from the 12 Federal Reserve districts. The Beige Book for the June FOMC meeting period noted that economic activity increased at a slight to moderate pace for ten of the twelve Federal Reserve Districts and that there were reports of increased credit card usage, fewer retail visits, and stronger demand for necessities. In this month’s Beige Book, we will mainly look for anecdotes related to how consumers and firms are responding to the increase in energy prices from the conflict in the Middle East.
  • 06:30 PM St. Louis Fed President Musalem (FOMC non-voter) speaks: St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem will deliver welcoming remarks in the 2026 Homer Jones Memorial Lecture at the St. Louis Fed. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 

Thursday, July 16 

  • 08:30 AM Philadelphia Fed manufacturing index, July (GS 15.0, consensus 13.0, last 10.3)
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended July 10 (GS 220k, consensus 217k, last 215k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended July 3 (consensus 1,815k, last 1,814k)
  • 08:30 AM Retail sales, June (GS +0.1%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.9%); Retail sales ex-auto, June (GS -0.1%, consensus flat, last +0.8%); Retail sales ex-auto & gas, June (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.5%); Core retail sales, June (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.7%): We estimate nominal core retail sales increased 0.4% in June (ex-autos, gasoline, and building materials; month-over-month SA), reflecting a continued solid signal from alternative data. We estimate nominal headline retail sales increased 0.1%, reflecting lower gasoline prices.
  • 10:00 AM Pending home sales, June (GS -0.5%, consensus flat, last +3.8%)
  • 12:30 PM Dallas Fed President Logan (FOMC voter) speaks: Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan will speak in a conversation at the Houston branch of the Dallas Fed. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On June 6, Logan said, "I am increasingly concerned that higher interest rates could be necessary later this year to fully restore price stability and appropriately balance both sides of the Fed’s dual mandate. However, these decisions call for thorough analysis and debate."
  • 01:25 PM Kansas City Fed President Schmid (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid will speak at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Forum. Speech text and Q&A are expected. On June 4, Schmid said, "The big question now is do we stay patient? Our inflation numbers have probably crept up into the three and a half percent range, which nobody likes. Is it temporary...or do we act? Do we say, okay, now it’s time to raise rates a quarter or two and see if we can’t tamp this thing down?"
  • 07:00 PM Fed Vice Chair Jefferson speaks: Federal Reserve Vice Chair Jefferson will speak on the economy and monetary policy at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 

Friday, July 17 

  • 08:30 AM Import price index, June (consensus -0.6%, last +1.9%); Export price index, June (consensus -0.4%, last +1.3%)
  • 08:30 AM Housing starts, June (GS +12.5%, consensus +11.5%, last -15.4%)' Building permits, June (consensus -0.7%, last -0.9%) 
  • 09:15 AM Industrial production, June (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.2%, last +0.1%); Manufacturing production, June (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.1%, last flat);Capacity utilization, June (GS 76.2%, consensus 76.2%, last 76.2%): We estimate industrial production increased by 0.2% in June, reflecting strong auto and electricity production but weak natural gas production. We estimate capacity utilization was unchanged at 76.2%.
  • 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, July preliminary (GS 51.5, consensus 51.0, last 49.5); University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, July preliminary (GS 3.3%, consensus 3.3%, last 3.3%)

Source: DB; Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 09:47

With Graham Dead, Races Are On For Both Temporary And Permanent Senate Successors

With Graham Dead, Races Are On For Both Temporary And Permanent Senate Successors

While plenty of jaws are still agape following Saturday night's shockingly sudden death of Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, scheming over his vacant seat is already well underway. With Graham having been a chief champion of the West's proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, and a zealous collaborator with Israel in promoting American warfare against Iran, it's not just South Carolinians who are concerned about their representation in Washington.  

There are two separate tracks in this succession drama. First, under South Carolina law, Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster must appoint someone to represent the state for the balance of Graham's fifth term, which runs through January 3.

Separately, South Carolina Republicans must choose a new nominee for November's general election. Candidates can officially file starting July 21, with the window shutting on July 28. Then, a special primary election will be held on Tuesday, Aug. 11. If no candidate scores not just a plurality but a majority of the votes, the top two vote-getters would advance to a runoff election on Aug. 25. Before Graham's death, the Cook Political Report rated the Palmetto State "safe" for continued GOP control. It's doubtful that status will change no matter whom Republicans pick to go up against Democrat pediatrician Annie Andrews in November. In his 2020 re-election, Graham coasted to a 10-point win over his Democratic opponent.   

McMaster doesn't have a firm deadline for naming a temporary replacement, but choosing someone quickly gives him a potent opportunity to give someone a leg up in the primary race for the term that starts in January. As an alternative, he could go in the opposite direction and appoint a "caretaker" who has no ambition to hold the seat after the end of the year. McMaster, who is term-limited and will stop being governor in January, could conceivably appoint himself the interim senator, which would have Lt Gov Pamela Evette ascend to the governor's desk.  

With Graham's body still cooling, the man he trounced in the June primary -- businessman Mark Lynch -- wasted no time in announcing he will be a candidate in the special primary. On Sunday evening, Lynch committed $5 million to "finish the race we started." Amusingly, earlier in the day, Lynch had said, "today is not a day for politics." 

President Trump, whose endorsement is still powerful within the GOP despite his own crumbling popularity, declined on Sunday to tell NBC News whom he prefers for the seat. “I have somebody that I think would be great, but I don’t want to say it now because it’s just, you know, it’s too soon with Lindsey," Trump said. "I don’t want to even talk about anybody, but I do have somebody that I think is really good.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Zelensky are certainly among those most sorry to learn that Graham suddenly died. Graham was easily one of the most hawkish figures in Washington, and was constantly working with both foreign leaders to help keep US money and weapons flowing in their direction. In that light, they may have hoped that former South Carolina governor and former UN ambassador Nikki Haley would pursue the seat. However, a spokesman told Politico's Alec Hernandez that Haley "has no plans to run for office at this time."

Other potential opponents for Lynch include: 

  • Rep. Nancy Mace. She's poised to hand over her House seat in January, having foregone reelection for a failed bid for governor this year. She is actively considering a run for Graham's seat, according to Politico and The New York Times. Their reporting is reinforced by Mace's posting of a clip from Godfather III, in which Michael Corleone says the classic line, "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in."

  • Rep. Russell Fry. The 41-year-old Trump ally currently represents South Carolina's solidly-Republican 7th Congressional District. In un-Lindsey Graham fashion, Fry was one of a few dozen Republicans who voted in 2023 to direct President Biden to pull troops out of Syria within 180 days.  

  • Rep. Ralph Norman. At 73 years old, the hard-right Norman is two years older than the dead Graham and would test America's growing fatigue with Congress being a gerontocracy. Norman reportedly called Trump on Sunday to discuss a potential endorsement. Trump was said to have replied, "Give me a week." Norman's expected to make some kind of announcement about his intentions on Tuesday, and South Carolina outlet FITS News says he's running. 

  • Rep. Joe Wilson. Famed for yelling "you lie!" at President Obama during an address to Congress in 2009, Wilson's name has been circulating. However, on Sunday night he signaled that he wouldn't be running. "I was grateful to speak with President Trump today reminiscing about our mutual friend, Senator Lindsey Graham," Wilson tweeted. "I assured him my goal is to remain in the House to keep his two-vote majority for the American people!!!" 

  • Lt Gov Pamela Evette. She tried for the governor nomination this year, but lost to Alan Wilson, son of firebrand Rep. Joe Wilson. In an odd move, Trump endorsed both of them for the GOP nomination. 

There could be a crowded field, which would elevate the chances that a runoff would be needed. Within about 30 hours of each other, America saw two Grahams exit their Senate races in a bad way -- Lindsey Graham via heart failure, and Maine Democratic hopeful Graham Platner via being on the wrong end of a sex-assault accusation. Between the South Carolina special primary election and Maine Democrats picking a new candidate at a rushed convention this month, the entertainment is stacking up for political junkies in the dog days of summer 2026. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 09:35

Saudi Jets Bomb Sanaa International Airport To Stop Iranian Passenger Plane From Landing

Saudi Jets Bomb Sanaa International Airport To Stop Iranian Passenger Plane From Landing

Renewed conflict continues to be potentially breaking out over Yemen, as on Monday Saudi Arabia struck the runway of the Houthi-controlled Sanaa International Airport, amid growing allegations that Iranian flights have increasingly made use of Yemen's airspace.

The Saud-backed Yemeni government which has long been locked in a civil war for the country's future has singled out the Houthi rebels for hosting Iranian flights, warning that its "patience has run out" and that it will respond to any airspace violations.

Illustrative prior image of an Iranian passenger plane operating at Sanaa airport, after over the years direct flights from Tehran have taken place over Saudi objections. via AP

"The Yemeni legitimate government, in cooperation with the regional and international community, and by all diplomatic and legal means, has tried to convince the Iranian regime and the Houthi coup militias in Sana'a to return to the armed forces and not to penetrate the Yemeni airspace with the Iranian planes," an official statement said.

Residents of the Houthi-controlled capital of Sanaa have reported seeing warplanes flying overhead, after Houthi-affiliated Al-Masirah channel indicated the strikes targeted the airport’s landing and takeoff runways.

"In an unjust aggression, the Saudi enemy carried out several airstrikes against Sanaa International Airport," Houthi military spokesman Yahya Saree responded. "The Saudi aggression against Sanaa airport has ended the phase of de-escalation, and it must bear the consequences of its aggression," he added.

Another senior Houthi official, Hazem al-Assad, also threatened in follow-up remarks: "The Saudi regime will discover that it has dug its own grave."

The Iranian plane in question reportedly hasn't been hit or damaged, and was safely diverted to Yemen's Hodeidah International Airport.

The "internationally recognized" Yemeni government has long been propped up by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the US, after a lengthy half-decade long UAE/Saudi/US coalition air war failed to dislodge Houthi power. The pro-Saudi government operates out of Aden in southern Yemen, after the country's president fled there a decade ago.

Earlier this month there was another attempted Saudi warplane intercept of an Iranian civilian airliner, which was reportedly carrying Yemenis who had been stranded in Iran back to their home country.

The Houthis at the time of the prior incident said it was "breaking the Saudi-American siege on our people and expelling the occupiers."

As we featured previously, since 2015 Saudi Arabia has imposed a blockade on Yemen's land, sea, and air ports, severely restricting vital commercial and humanitarian imports, including fuel and food.

The blockade triggered what the UN called one of the most severe humanitarian crises globally, leading millions towards famine and drastically damaging healthcare and water systems.

The Houthis continue to be an important side-player related to the US-Iran war, given they've continually threatened to block the key Bab el Mandab Strait and return the war to the Red Sea region.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 08:55

Nuclear Fuel Leader Centrus 'At A Discount' As Structural Uranium Enrichment Deficit Looms; Needham

Nuclear Fuel Leader Centrus 'At A Discount' As Structural Uranium Enrichment Deficit Looms; Needham

Needham analyst Carter Goman published a report on Centrus Energy (NYSE: LEU), reaffirming a Buy rating while cutting the price target to $264 from $314. 

Recently trading around $171, the shares have lagged the broader markets year-to-date, presenting what Goman views as an attractive entry point for investors seeking exposure to the domestic enrichment leader.

Goman attributes the underperformance primarily to a “focus on capital expenditures for the planned Piketon capacity and normalized economics relative to established enrichment competitors Urenco and Orano, in addition to skepticism around timelines for new nuclear
build”. 

He leaves the core financial estimates largely unchanged but adjusts the target to reflect a mark-to-market on the cost of capital for the first-of-a-kind (FOAK) Piketon project.

The bullish investment thesis is underscored by Centrus' strategic positioning. As the only US-domiciled enricher, and the sole Western producer with demonstrated high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) capability, Centrus is poised to anchor the rebuilding of America's nuclear fuel cycle. 

Russian supply is phasing out under the 2024 Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, LEU markets are tightening, and HALEU demand from small modular and advanced reactors is set to ramp. With a credible path to at least 3.5 million separative work units (SWU) of capacity, the company is transitioning from a trading-exposed LEU broker into a vertically integrated, high-margin strategic asset.

Goman emphasizes a $3.9 billion backlog as of 1Q26, extending out to 2040 and offering long-dated visibility. The LEU segment accounts for the bulk ($3.1 billion), including $2.4 billion in previously contingent commercial commitments from South Korea tied to future Piketon production that are now 100% under definitive agreements. 

The Technical Solutions segment backlog contributes another $800 million. 

Federal support provides a critical foundation. Earlier this year, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced a $900 million task order to American Centrifuge Operating (a Centrus wholly-owned subsidiary) under the HALEU Production Contract. The company finally signed the contract earlier this month, with the award value surpassing $1 billion.

Goman notes that Centrus likely has access to “access to multiple potential sources of no / low-cost capital”, including possible National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) involvement, foreign direct investment, and third-party funding.

On the cost side, FOAK economics at Piketon will inevitably exceed Nth-of-a-kind (NOAK) benchmarks at mature foreign facilities. However, Goman points out initiatives like the Palantir partnership announced in 1Q26 have already identified approximately $300 million in potential savings through AI-driven optimization of project controls, manufacturing, and supply chain.

Goman's report also provides some context for the global enrichment market. Global SWU demand hovers around 54 million annually, with supply highly concentrated among a handful of state-influenced players: 

  • TENEX (Russia) 43% share
  • Urenco (Germany, UK, Netherlands) 29%
  • Orano (France) 12%
  • CNEIC (China) 15%

In the US, annual consumption is roughly 15 million SWU, but domestic production has been limited with only 4.3 million SWU from Urenco's New Mexico plant. The remainder relied on imports, with Russia previously supplying a sizable chunk before the import ban.

Goman outlines a structural deficit emerging as Russian volumes exit and demand grows. The Nuclear Energy Institute has flagged ~8.1 GW of potential incremental generation from uprates, restarts, and extensions. Government-backed plans for 10 new Westinghouse reactors could add substantial initial and ongoing SWU needs.

When combined with the Russian ban, this creates a meaningful "call" on domestic capacity exceeding 6.5 million SWU annually before advanced reactor and national-security demand. Spot SWU prices have surged above $200, reflecting limited uncommitted global supply and long lead times (5-10 years) for new capacity. Goman expects pricing to remain structurally elevated, supporting both legacy trading margins and future enrichment returns.

Urenco is expanding its U.S. footprint (targeting over 7 million SWU eventually), and Orano has their NRC review underway for a new facility. Centrus' AC100 centrifuge technology, NRC license through 2037, and existing Piketon site advantages provide a meaningful moat, especially for national-security applications where US-origin tech is mandated. HALEU represents additional upside as the majority of the reactors under the various DOE programs require it.

Goman's valuation framework assumes: 

  • 3.5 million SWU initial facility (with ~25% HALEU mix over time)
  • ~$7 billion cumulative CapEx
  • $250/SWU long-term pricing
  • 50% enrichment margins
  • 10% discount rate
  • 15x terminal multiple on FY35 EBITDA

Upside could come from accelerated federal support, manufacturing efficiencies at the Oak Ridge center, higher SWU prices, or faster HALEU commercialization. Downside risks include FOAK execution/cost overruns, funding delays, TENEX supply volatility through 2027, and potential equity dilution.
 

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 05:45

Britain Bets On Hydropower To Boost Energy Security

Britain Bets On Hydropower To Boost Energy Security

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

  • Britain has provisionally approved three major pumped storage hydropower projects in Scotland, the first of their kind in more than 40 years.

  • Pumped storage facilities will act as large-scale energy storage systems, helping balance intermittent wind and solar generation.

  • The projects are expected to improve energy security, reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels, and support the U.K.'s decarbonisation strategy.

After years of neglect, the United Kingdom has big plans for hydropower as part of broader plans for a green transition. The government is supporting the development of three large-scale hydro-storage projects as part of its plans to diversify the U.K. energy mix, support a green transition, and boost energy security.

Hydropower is one of the oldest and largest sources of renewable energy. It works by converting the energy of running water into electricity. Many hydropower projects rely on reservoirs created by dams to store large quantities of water and produce electricity as needed. Meanwhile, hydropower plants without reservoirs are typically called run-of-river power plants. In these types of facilities, production is controlled by the amount of water flowing past at any given time. Just four countries – China, Brazil, Canada, and the United States – produce roughly half of the world’s hydroelectricity.

The U.K. has been producing electricity from hydropower projects since the 1800s, and the energy source now contributes around 2 per cent of the country’s electricity generation. Two-thirds of hydropower-generated electricity is produced during the winter months. There are almost 1,700 hydropower schemes across the U.K. with an installed capacity of around 2 GW.

As part of plans for a green transition, the U.K. is expected to invest heavily in hydropower in the coming years. In October 2024, the U.K. government announced a new policy to promote investment in Long Duration Energy Storage (LDES) as part of the country’s decarbonisation plans.

The global demand for energy storage has risen dramatically in recent years, as many countries shift to less stable renewable energy sources to produce low-carbon power. LDES, also known as pumped hydropower storage (PHS), is a type of hydroelectric energy storage. It works by using two reservoirs at different heights to generate power by moving water from one to the other (discharging) as it passes through a turbine. The water can also be pumped back up to the higher reservoir (recharging) during off-peak electricity hours for reuse during peak demand. The system effectively functions as a massive battery, storing power for release as required.

The U.K. government aims to diversify the country’s energy mix to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and help strengthen energy security. Having invested heavily in intermittent clean energy sources, such as wind and solar power generation, it is looking to other energy sources, including hydro and geothermal power, to fill the gap.

There are currently four PSH schemes in the U.K., all of which were funded publicly from the 1960s to the 1980s to store overnight nuclear generation. By 2025, 11 PSH were under development across the U.K., with an expected combined power storage capacity of more than 10 GW and 200 GWh, or 25 per cent of the country’s power demand, once completed. A study from Imperial College London suggests that just 4.5 GW of new PHS with 90 GWh of storage could save up to £690 million a year in energy system costs by 2050. 

Last month, the U.K. energy regulator provisionally greenlit the first major new hydropower projects in over four decades, as part of plans to reduce the U.K.’s dependence on energy imports, in response to ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and severe disruptions to energy supply chains. Three new PHS power stations will be developed in Northern Scotland, using the region’s famous lochs to supply hydropower, pending final approval.

Statera Energy’s Loch Kemp project will use water from Loch Ness, while SSE’s Coire Glas project will rely on water from Loch Lochy, which is situated between Fort William and Inverness. Meanwhile, Gilkes Energy’s Earba project, expected to be the U.K.’s largest pumped storage hydro facility, will pump water from both Loch Leamhain and Loch Earba.

The three projects are expected to be completed by the early 2030s and will be the first PHS power projects since the Dinorwig hydropower plant was completed in north Wales in 1984. Dinorwig, also known colloquially as the “electric mountain”, can generate enough electricity to power nearly 2 million homes in a matter of seconds.

The U.K. Energy Minister, Michael Shanks, stated, “Forty years after the country’s last pumped storage facility, this government is getting Britain building again. The lesson from the conflict in Iran is clear: Britain cannot afford to remain at the mercy of volatile fossil fuel markets and leave families exposed to the next price shock.”

The new hydropower projects are expected to enhance the reliability of Britain’s renewable energy and help the country reduce dependence on fossil fuels once and for all. They will help reduce reliance on energy imports, support the government’s goals for a green transition, and enhance energy security through diversification. PHS projects also provide an alternative to lithium-ion battery storage, helping reduce imports of raw materials and batteries from China.

Tyler Durden Mon, 07/13/2026 - 05:00

Pages