Zero Hedge

The Long Shadow Of Judge Indira Talwani

The Long Shadow Of Judge Indira Talwani

Authored by Jonathan Turley via Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in The Hill on the latest controversy from the chambers of Judge Indira Talwani. While the court could be upheld in halting the executive order on mail-in balloting in this case, Talwani is one of a number of jurists who have been habitual blockers of executive reforms and policies. Talwani has been criticized in the past as something of a one-stop option for forum-shoppers. Her record reaffirms the rationale for justices in using the emergency docket, or so-called "shadow docket," to deter gaming the system.

Here is the column:

This week, the Trump administration found itself in a familiar position: facing an injunction from Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Indeed, it had just secured an order from the Supreme Court on its emergency docket lifting her earlier injunction on the U.S. Postal Service requiring voting lists to confirm U.S. citizenship.

The case against the executive order on mail-in ballots has reasonable arguments on both sides, although (as I have said previously) the challengers are likely to prevail in defeating the rule or at least delaying the policy until after the midterm elections. The Constitution gives states the primary responsibility over "the times, places, and manner of holding elections."

However, the U.S. Postal Service is a federal agency, and the federal government does have a role in the funding and regulation of federal elections. More importantly, the Trump administration is arguing that it is not barring mail-in voting but merely imposing "modest informational requirements." Non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections, and the new rule "does not displace a single state election law. And it need not and should not prevent a single voter from voting by mail."

The controversy over Talwani is not necessarily the merits of her decision that the rule convenes the constitutional framework. Indeed, the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits and could well rule in favor of her interpretation.

The controversy is the pattern of sweeping injunctions by Talwani and a few other judges.

Litigants have been accused of forum-shopping by going to liberal, Democratically appointed judges to prevent Trump policies from being implemented in a wide array of areas, including immigration, elections, reduction in government bureaucracies, and foreign aid.

Like her colleague in Boston, U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy, Talwani is viewed by many as a one-stop-shop judge for forum-shopping. Both have issued hair-trigger injunctions, and both have been repeatedly reversed.

Talwani was reversed on Aug. 24 for imposing an injunction against the mail-in balloting policy. Her injunction was taken to be premature and without a legal injury, since the administration had not issued a formal rule. The truth is, the challengers had her at hello. She did not wait for a showing of a cognizable injury before issuing another injunction, because the decision appeared made before the case hit her own docket.

Previously, Talwani showed the same inclination in other cases.

For example, she issued an injunction against revoking the humanitarian parole program for hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Her order was lifted on appeal.

She also issued an injunction to stop the Trump Administration from defunding Planned Parenthood. That order was also set aside on appeal.

Regardless of the outcome of this latest injunction, Talwani has offered the strongest case in favor of the expanded use of the emergency docket, also known as the "shadow docket." Liberal law professors and litigants have bewailed the expanded use of this docket at the Supreme Court to resolve cases without the need for a long briefing and oral argument. However, judges like Talwani have created legitimate concerns over the use of the appellate system to slow or freeze new policies. This is why the "shadow docket" has become more prominent.

This year, confidential memoranda were leaked from the court on the use of the emergency docket and published by the New York Times. It was only the latest such strategic leak from a court that was once the paragon of confidentiality and civility.

The internal exchanges of the justices were illuminating as to the majority's underlying reason for allowing this fast-track review. The immediate issue was a move by the Environmental Protection Agency to impose unlawful regulatory burdens on electric utilities despite a countervailing earlier ruling in Michigan v. EPA. Chief Justice Roberts believed (as did many) that the EPA was using the ongoing litigation to force utilities to spend billions of dollars to comply with new regulations that the Supreme Court had already rejected.

"In other words," Roberts wrote, "the absence of stay allowed the agency to effectively implement an important program we held to be contrary to law."

As with the national injunctions that plagued the Trump administration in its first year, this tactic was all too familiar. Litigants would go to liberal judges in Washington, Boston, and other blue cities to secure injunctions that would take years to fully litigate. That approach effectively allowed individual judges to pursue their own preferred policies or to prevent a president from carrying out promises made during an election. At most, the president might have a year left after these cases slogged through the conventional appellate process. It is an administrative version of the old adage that "justice delayed is justice denied."

What concerned the justices was that many of these injunctions directly contravened earlier precedent, exposing the cynical purpose of these orders. For a president to be able to carry out major changes, he had to run a gauntlet of hundreds of judges, any one of whom could effectively negate reforms. In response, the Supreme Court ramped up the use of the emergency docket and cracked down on national injunctions, quickly reversing the rapidly increasing number of injunctions against the Trump administration.

With the midterm elections rapidly approaching, the odds favor challengers in either running out the clock or prevailing on the merits on the mail-in ballots. But Talwani and some other judges have reinforced suspicions of the Roberts court that some courts are willing allies of partisan groups in seeking to gum up the system.

Ironically, Roberts is one of the most likely conservative justices to be concerned with the Trump administration's effort to force election integrity reforms on the states. Either way, it is the shadow of these judges, not the docket, that is casting the most ominous concern for many of the Supreme Court justices.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of "Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution."

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 20:55

'Betrayal': Internal Pentagon Spat Emerges Over Leaked Middle East Deployment Plans

'Betrayal': Internal Pentagon Spat Emerges Over Leaked Middle East Deployment Plans

A number of US military top generals have taken the rare step of formally registering warnings to Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth over potential plans for a new phase of strikes against a non-compliant Iran. 

The warnings reportedly emerged through the Secretary of Defense Orders Book, which enumerates the availability of US military resources and force posture around the world - with direct input from American regional commanders.

via Reuters

The book is typically published twice a month, but this time it was reportedly filled with pushback by those overseeing operations in Latin America, Europe and Asia - who have seen training missions canceled, and ships and aircraft diverted to the Middle East for counter-Iran operations.

The Washington Post reported over the weekend that a chief complaint by the top officers was that the Iran conflict "has degraded their ability to fulfill homeland-defense obligations."

Amid fresh troop movements based on new orders reportedly issued in mid-August, commanders made clear they do not agree with the new force trajectory, but are ready to carry out the Commander-in-Chief's orders regardless.

Still, the leaking of this information, and such a rare public airing of grievances, has Hegseth and the Trump administration furious. The Washington Post reports:

The Aug. 14 orders book directs some troops deployed in the Middle East to remain there through September and some others into 2027, said those familiar with the document. The prospect of extending those forces further compelled military leaders to voice their concern, these people said.

Leaders of the U.S. European Command, the U.S. Pacific Command and the U.S. Southern Command, along with the Navy’s top admiral, responded with what is characterized in the SDOB as a “non-concur,” those familiar with the assessment said — meaning they disagree with the secretary’s order to extend their forces but will execute it nevertheless.

Another key line from generals cited in the WaPo reporting is that the Iran war - which the Trump White House early on had promised would be 'swift' - has been "too much for too long".

Some pundits are warning that this alleged rare leak is an alarming sign Trump could be preparing to do something 'big'...

That section from the WaPo report reads as follows:

Army and Air Force leadership concurred with Hegseth’s desire to extend their deployed forces, but each emphasized that doing so would come with significant risk, these people said.

Overall, the tenor from the military leadership is that the ongoing Iran operation, having reached the six-month mark, has been “too much for too long,” said one person familiar with the assessment.

The military’s warning to Hegseth, which has not been previously reported, offers new insight into the administration’s dilemma as Trump seeks to end the conflict on terms favorable to the United States while Iran, cognizant of the war’s unpopularity with most Americans and its mounting toll on the U.S. arsenal, refuses to capitulate.

As expected, the Pentagon has responded by calling it fake news and saying that leakers of classified information will be sought and dealt with.

"This fake news, poorly sourced reporting is full of inaccuracies," Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement. More from Parnell on X:

He added: "Decisions regarding the scope and duration of specific force commitments to any Combatant Command are made based on the current threat assessment, strategic priorities established by the President, and the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Combatant Commanders. However, the Department of War does not discuss internal operational processes, including the Secretary of War Orders Book (SWOB), or specific concurrences, non-concurrences, or risk assessments provided by the Services or Combatant Commands during force allocation deliberations."

But the reality is that this conflict is a full six months in, and the generals are perhaps keenly aware it is now in quagmire stage, with no plans for an exit or final strategic 'mission accomplished' vision in sight. Meanwhile, every escalation in the Persian Gulf tends to beget more escalation. What's the endgame here? 

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 20:30

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll Submits Resignation Amid Tensions With Hegseth

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll Submits Resignation Amid Tensions With Hegseth

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

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

via Associated Press

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reuters contributed to this report.

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

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

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

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

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

What X users are saying:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gamers have waited 13 years for this point. 

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

FDA Authorizes Generic Ivermectin Shot To Prevent Screwworm

FDA Authorizes Generic Ivermectin Shot To Prevent Screwworm

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There were 14 cases in July and 30 in June.

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

Fauci Told Aide To Delete Email About Risky Research

Fauci Told Aide To Delete Email About Risky Research

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Boffey could not be reached.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Developing...

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

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

Trump Mulling New 'Limited' Strike Package, After Iranian Attack On Jordan Base Summary
  • Trump vows retaliation, mulls more 'limited' strikes after Iran's own 'retaliatory' missile attacks on US bases in Jordan.
  • Eight Iranian missiles were intercepted by Jordan amid the first major tit-for-tat military strikes in a month.
  • US forces struck Iranian missile launchers on Larak Island, reportedly killing two people.
  • Iran threatens further retaliation, while regional tensions reignite across UAE, Qatar and Red Sea.
  • Global oil prices rose Monday in wake of the overnight renewed fighting.
//--> //--> Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal by October 31?
Yes 11% · No 90%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

* * *

Trump Mulling New 'Limited' Strikes (Again)

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

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

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

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

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

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

More latest from Trump (via Newsquawk):

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

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

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

Trump Vows US will Respond to Iranian Attacks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Military Strike Tit-for-Tat Resumes After Weeks 

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

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

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

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

Trump: 'Failed Nation'

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

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

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

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

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

Crude Transit Opening?

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

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

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

We previewed this in a note last week titled:

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

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

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

Weekend Developments
  •  US attacked two missile launchers of the IRGC on Larak Island on Sunday, which were said to be on standby to launch missiles with sea mines toward the Strait of Hormuz, while there were later reports of explosions heard near Larak Island.
  • US Central Command said IRGC claims of US aggression in the Strait of Hormuz are false, but added the US conducted limited precise action against IRGC minelaying forces that posed an imminent threat in the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Iran’s Revolutionary Guards warned the US strike on Larak Island would be met with a response and punishment, while it said several soldiers and civilians were killed and wounded in the assault.
  • Iran's Revolutionary Guards later announced that they retaliated with missiles and drones against two US bases in Jordan and warned that any attack against them will be met with a more devastating response, although a US official cited by Fox News stated no major damage in Iranian attacks on US forces in Jordan and that all missiles were intercepted.
  • Iran's Press TV noted reports of Iran firing missiles towards US vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, and there were reports of explosions heard in the UAE and in Qatar, while Iran's army later said it launched tens of drones at the Al Minhad air base in the UAE.
  • IRGC said a supertanker caught fire and was halted after being struck by two naval mines in the Strait of Hormuz, while it added that the tanker was attempting to pass illegally through the Strait of Hormuz and that ships must comply with its rules for passage. IRGC separately announced that it shot down a US MQ-9 drone over the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Iran's Foreign Ministry said it will respond decisively to any further enemy military aggression, and stated that the US and parties supporting its military actions bear full responsibility for consequences of escalation.
  • US President Trump reiterated in a pre-recorded Fox News interview that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and said the Iran blockade has been unbelievable, while he also commented that the US had to intervene in the Middle East to prevent Iran from using a nuclear weapon against Israel and other countries in the region and possibly against the US.
  • US President Trump posted a generated video with the caption "Kharg Island being blown to smithereens!!!"
  • US Treasury Secretary Bessent said the US Treasury plans to impose more Iran secondary sanctions every week, starting with banks. He also stated that they are telling banks it's not okay to have Iranian money and to aid the Iranian regime, and they will probably just sanction a bank outright next time, after the US imposed curbs on an Egyptian bank's United Arab Emirates branches.
  • Iranian President Pezeshkian said they are not looking for war, but will give a decisive response to the aggressors, while he added that instability and unrest in the region are not in the interest of any countries and will create challenges for everyone.
  • Iran's President said on Friday that Iran is ready for cooperation and understanding with regional countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while it is to open its route if four commitments are met. He also stated that Iran is to increase gasoline prices, and that exports and imports have decreased by up to 35% because of US sanctions and the blockade.
Overnight Developments
  • US officials said they are monitoring the Strait of Hormuz and will strike any forces that threaten navigation in the waterway, Al Arabiya reported.
  • Iran's IRGC Navy said compliance with regulations issued for the Strait of Hormuz is mandatory and warned against being “misled” by the US, Press TV reported.
  • Yemeni armed forces reportedly targeted Saudi ships in the Red Sea, ISNA reported citing Yemeni media reports.
  • UAE Ministry of Defense denied reports that Al Minhad Air Base was targeted by missiles, calling the claims unfounded and saying it remains on high alert and fully prepared to respond to any threats.
  • Iranian oil operations are continuing on Kharg Island, and the oil sector there has not stopped, Al Hadath reported.
Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 15:15

Rickards: The Dollar's Not Dying

Rickards: The Dollar's Not Dying

Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BESSENT GOES AFTER THE BOND MARKET

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

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

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

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

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

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

BESSENT'S 3-3-3 GAMBIT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But that doesn't matter.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HERE'S THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET

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

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

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

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

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

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

Investors should assume the worst.

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

That could mean 4.0% inflation.

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

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

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

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

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

Which side of that trade are you on?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the report:

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

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

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

Shares shot sharply lower on the news.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lake America Name Begins Appearing On Google Maps In US

Lake America Name Begins Appearing On Google Maps In US

Authored by Tom Gantert via The Epoch Times,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lindsay Clancy And The Political Weaponization Of Mentally-Ill Women

Lindsay Clancy And The Political Weaponization Of Mentally-Ill Women

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thalacker wrote:

Bottom Line:

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

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

Thalacker continued:

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

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

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

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

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

Key Events This Week: Jobs, JOLTS, Beige Book And ISM

Key Events This Week: Jobs, JOLTS, Beige Book And ISM

Following on the heels of Warsh’s speech at Jackson Hole last Friday, which was hawkish yet which also sent yields to multi-year highs thus refuting claims the Fed Chair regained some credibility, the data docket picks up this week with the main event being Friday’s August employment report. Regarding Warsh, he delivered a crisp message to market participants last Friday that resolved much of the confusion from his July post-meeting press conference. Indeed, Warsh went one step further and provided his own views on recent data trends. On inflation Warsh stated, “And while this summer's PCE and CPI readings were better than expected, they do not tell me that underlying trends have meaningfully improved.” It will be interesting to see if Governor Waller reinforces this message when he takes part in a moderated discussion on inflation this Thursday at Reuter’s Next conference.

On the labor market, Warsh noted that “When labor supply is barely growing, monthly job gains are naturally going to run low. There are always areas of concern in the labor market—for example, among recent graduates. In general, though, people who want to work, by and large, are holding or finding jobs. They may well be concerned about possible future labor disruptions, but as of now, I believe the labor markets are consistent with full employment.” In short, Warsh delivered a message that was bullish on the economy and hawkish on inflation, reinforcing our longstanding view that the Fed will hike rates at the September 16 FOMC meeting.   

Market participants will no doubt be trading upcoming data within the context of the views Warsh laid out last Friday. Though economists expect headline nonfarm payrolls to rebound (+65k forecast vs. -23k previously) due to payback from state and local education hiring, the private payroll forecast is somewhat more muted (+25k vs. +30k). Meanwhile, Bloomberg economists say there is a "decent chance" of a second consecutive negative print... and the Fed has never hiked after two negative prints.

That said, with average hourly earnings (+0.4% vs. +0.1%) also expected to rebound following some unusually soft prints in specific sectors last month, the year-over-year growth rate of the DB payroll proxy for nominal income should remain around 4.0%. To be sure, Fed officials are likely to focus greater attention on the unemployment rate, which economists expect will remain unchanged at 4.1%, though there is some risk that it rounds up to 4.2%. However, even if the unemployment rate ticks up a tenth, it is unlikely to result in the Fed reappraising its labor market view, particularly given as Chair Warsh noted “Unemployment claims, on a four-week average—an empirically robust real-time indicator—are near their lowest level in decades.”

As DB notes in its weekly preview, there are a few data points ahead of Friday’s employment report print that could on the margin impact sentiment heading into the print. While Tuesday’s JOLTS data are somewhat dated given that they correspond to July, they will nonetheless provide the latest readings on the hiring, layoffs and quits rates. Broadly speaking, most of these rates are expected to remain unchanged from recent tight ranges – still painting the picture of a “low hiring / low firing” labor market environment that we’ve been accustomed to for the past three years. Wednesday’s ADP private employment survey (+44k exp) should reinforce the picture of a stable labor market, albeit at depressed levels of gains partly due to low labor supply growth that Chair Warsh mentioned. Our ADP forecast is consistent with the latest reading for their weekly series.

Lastly, Tuesday’s manufacturing ISM (55.8 vs. 55.6) and Thursday’s services ISM (54.1 vs. 54.1), while not directly impacting forecasters’ payroll expectations, will nevertheless provide a more forward-looking view from businesses on hiring trends. Note that while the employment component of the manufacturing survey has been trending up over the last three months, the employment component of the services series has been moving in the opposite direction and remains below 50.

In summary, should this week’s labor market data come in close to expectations, it will reinforce monetary policymakers’ view of a stable labor market that is consistent with their maximum employment mandate. As Chair Warsh emphasized “Inflation is running above our 2 percent target. So the Fed's predominant focus right now should be on prices.” As we noted in our Jackson Hole recap note, the specificity of Warsh’s comments and the uniformity of the color in a hawkish direction, has changed the setup for the September FOMC meeting. As long as incoming data do not surprise meaningfully to do the downside, Warsh’s speech has established a rate hike as the most likely policy outcome next month.

Here is a day by day preview courtesy of Rabobank

  • Monday: sees German inflation numbers for August, starting with the regional states and followed later that day by the first estimate for the nationwide and harmonised gauge. Last week, data from France, Belgium and Spain already indicated that the rebound in energy prices would push inflation higher again following its easing trend since May. We expect the same in Germany. In the US, the main figure to watch is the (second-tier) Dallas Fed Manufacturing Activity survey for August.
  • Tuesday: German retail sales (July), Italian GDP details (Q2) and UK money supply and credit (July) all feature in the morning session, but the key figures to watch are Eurozone headline and core inflation for August. In particular, a renewed rise in core inflation (not our base case, but a possibility) could trigger further rate hike expectations beyond the September meeting. No change in the Eurozone unemployment rate for July would only underscore those risks. In the US, we have the JOLTS (July) labor-market flows data. Normally not a market mover, it could nevertheless shed more light on the recent slowdown in job growth. Meanwhile, only a small fall in the US ISM manufacturing survey for August (as per the consensus) could be interpreted by the market as a sign that US, as well as global, manufacturing activity is recovering despite ongoing concerns over tensions in the Middle East.
  • Wednesday: Australia releases its Q2 GDP numbers. Consensus expects quarterly growth to match Q1 at 0.3%. The Fed also releases its Beige Book, but Wednesday’s key event is likely to be the Bank of Canada’s interest rate decision, which investors may suddenly see in a different light since the eruption of the US-Canadian trade war. There are no signs that negotiations will resume anytime soon.
  • Thursday: Australia releases July trade balance figures, while the US calendar includes the July trade balance and August ISM services survey. Final S&P Global PMI releases and country extensions are also due, including for Spain and Italy, alongside Eurozone PPI and German factory orders for July.
  • Friday: The US nonfarm payrolls and unemployment figures are the highlight of the day. The street forecasts net job creation of 55,000 in August, following an unexpected dip in July. Although the jobs report is always a market mover, Fed Chair Warsh’s comments at Jackson Hole suggest the Fed’s focus is now on the near-term path for inflation rather than the labour market. Eurozone retail sales for July are expected to recover from a dip in June, but the underlying trend remains lacklustre as households face slowing real wage growth. The ECB’s Lane speaks in Dublin, but since –by then– the ECB’s pre-rate decision quiet period has commenced, he may not address current policy issues. 

Finally, looking at just the US, Goldman writes that the key economic data release this week is the employment report on Friday. There are several speaking engagements with Fed officials this week including events with Governor Barr on Tuesday and Governor Waller on Thursday. 

Monday, August 31 

  • There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 

Tuesday, September 1 

  • 09:05 AM Fed Governor Barr speaks: Fed Governor Michael Barr will speak about the economic outlook and financial inclusion at the Second Chance Lending Forum in Washington DC. Speech text and Q&A are expected. 
  • 09:45 AM S&P Global US manufacturing PMI, August final (consensus 53.3, last 53.2)
  • 10:00 AM ISM manufacturing index, August (GS 56.0, consensus 55.2, last 55.6): We estimate that the ISM manufacturing index edged slightly higher to 56.0 in August, reflecting a modest improvement in regional manufacturing surveys—our manufacturing survey tracker increased by 0.3pt to 56.3 in August—and a slight tailwind from residual seasonality.
  • 10:00 AM Construction spending, July (GS -0.1%, consensus flat, last -0.1%)
  • 10:00 AM JOLTS job openings, July (GS 7,300k, consensus 7,313k, last 7,359k): We estimate that JOLTS job openings edged down to 7.3mn in July based on the signal from online measures of job postings from Indeed and LinkUp.

Wednesday, September 2 

  • 08:15 AM ADP employment change, August (GS +55k, consensus +47k, last +44k)
  • 10:00 AM Factory orders, July (GS -0.2%, consensus +0.6%, last -0.3%)
  • 02:00 PM Fed releases Beige Book, September 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 July FOMC meeting period noted that economic activity increased at a slight to moderate pace in all but one Federal Reserve Districts and that consumer spending edged up as higher prices, particularly for fuel, dampened sales in other categories. 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, the evolution of labor demand, and firms’ expectations of activity growth for the remainder of the year.

Thursday, September 3 

  • 08:30 AM Trade balance, July (GS -$91.1bn, consensus -$90.0bn, last -$73.3bn)
  • 08:30 AM Nonfarm productivity, Q2 final (GS +1.4%, consensus +1.4%, last +1.4%); Unit labor costs, Q2 final (GS +1.1%, consensus +1.3%, last +1.3%): We estimate that nonfarm productivity growth will be unrevised at +1.4% quarterly annualized in the second release for 2026Q2. Since 2019Q4, labor productivity has grown at an annualized rate of 2.1%, a much stronger pace than the 1.6% average pace of the prior cycle. We estimate that unit labor costs—compensation divided by output—will be revised down by 0.2pp to +1.1%.
  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended August 29 (GS 205k, consensus 205k, last 203k): Continuing jobless claims, week ended August 22 (consensus 1,787k, last 1,778k)
  • 08:30 AM Fed Governor Waller speaks: Fed Governor Christopher Waller will speak in a moderated conversation at the Reuters Next event about the outlook for inflation, the U.S. economy more broadly, and the Fed's policy response;  
  • S&P Global US services PMI, August final (consensus 56.8, last 56.8); 10:00 AM ISM services index, August (GS 54.1, consensus 54.1, last 54.1)  We estimate that the ISM services index was unchanged at 54.1 in August, reflecting a decline in our non-manufacturing survey tracker (-1.1pt to 53.5) but a tailwind from potential residual seasonality.
  • 03:00 PM Cleveland Fed President Hammack (FOMC voter) speaks: Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack will give pre-recorded opening remarks at an event called Connecting Communities: When Every Dollar Counts: Worker Perspectives on the Economy. On August 27, Hammack said, "I think it’s appropriate for us to put some restraint there to help bring inflation back down to target... The longer inflation stays above our objective, the harder it will be for us to bring it back down."

Friday, September 4 

  • 08:30 AM Nonfarm payroll employment, August (GS +40k, consensus +55k, last -23k); Private payroll employment, August (GS +40k, consensus +53k, last +30k); Average hourly earnings (MoM), August (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.1%); Unemployment rate, August (GS 4.1%, consensus 4.1%, last 4.1%): We estimate nonfarm payrolls increased 40k in August, reflecting a softer signal from alternative data. Additionally, August payrolls have exhibited a consistent negative bias—particularly in initial prints—over the last decade. We estimate average hourly earnings rose 0.4% month-over-month in August, reflecting positive calendar effects. We estimate that the unemployment rate was unchanged at 4.1% in August, reflecting a stabilization in continuing claims.

Source: Rabobank, DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 11:30

Bessent To Unveil Weekly Iran-Related Secondary Sanctions, After 1st Round Falls Flat

Bessent To Unveil Weekly Iran-Related Secondary Sanctions, After 1st Round Falls Flat

The US Treasury Department plans to roll out new secondary sanctions every week to intensify economic pressure on Iran, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent revealed Sunday.

"You're going to see a lot more of these every week," Bessent said ahead of a meeting of Group of 20 (G20) financial leaders in Asheville, North Carolina, confirming that announcements will come on a weekly basis.

The warning and threat follows on the heels of the US having sanctioned a couple UAE branches of a major Egyptian bank last week, after which some pundits called out the weakness and flimsiness of the action.

via Reuters

Treasury named the UAE branches of Egypt's Banque Misr, alleging financial ties to Iran and money laundering, cutting them off from the US financial system for obtaining dollars.

However, Banque Misr itself - which is Egypt's second largest financial institution - is at the moment not facing any direct Washington punitive measures. Treasury had made clear the new measures wouldn't apply to "Banque Misr operations in any other country."

What's more is that even the targeted UAE branches of the Egyptian institution appear to have an appeals window of sorts, and may be given a chance to rectify the matter over a period of 30 days. No other UAE bank has come under the same threats so far.

According to Al Jazeera:

Banque Misr UAE’s customers include “front companies used by Iran’s Ministry of Defence and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to evade US sanctions, as well as to launder money on behalf of Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei,” the Treasury said.

The US government’s proposed punishment is expected to come into effect in 30 days after a public comment period, and will not impact any other branches of the bank.

So much for 'Economic D-Day'...

And recall this scene from just a week ago:

Reporter: You describe this as an economic D-Day, but D-Day wasn’t a threat of invasion, and the U.S. didn’t give a timeline to Germany. Why not impose the sanctions today?

Bessent: Well, we are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior. Why would I want to blow up the global financial system? We believe that it is important to level set, and give people a cure period, but they should know that will move very quickly and we are serious. Secondary sanctions are a very powerful tool.

Still, Bessent continues to talk tough, telling the AP in a Sunday interview, "This is going to be financial violence if we have to."

"We are showing people that we know who you are, you know who you are, and this has got to stop," he added.

Bessent further previewed his plan to reinforce the message to G20 finance ministers and central bank governors this week, stressing: "There can be no leakage. You're either with us, or you're with the Iranians."

Notably, the Trump admin has been relatively silent on whether it intends to target Chinese entities, with Beijing having long been in effect an Iranian economic "lifeline".

The whole 'weekly' secondary sanctions rollout seems intended to just keep kicking the can down the road, as the US administration appears still in frantic search of a strategy for dealing with a continually defiant Iran. The endgame remains perfectly unclear.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 11:20

Something Big?

Something Big?

By Elwin de Groot, head of macro strategy at Rabobank

Icelanders voted “no” to reopening EU membership talks in a referendum over the weekend, albeit by the fairly narrow margin of 2.8 percentage points. Against a backdrop of uncertainty over global trade and geopolitical ructions – including the Greenland crisis at the turn of the year – one intriguing conclusion is that the vote appears to have been driven by economic interests rather than security concerns. Iceland has no military and relies on its NATO allies for defense. Yet it already enjoys good trade relations with the EU, while some voters feared that membership would leave its large fishing industry vulnerable to EU policies. At the same time, Europe’s recent inability to project geopolitical power convincingly and collectively probably did not help sway voters towards the “yes” camp. In a response, PM Frostadóttir said that negotiations with the EU would not continue and that “[…] something big has to change in the next 24 months for this [EU membership] to be at the top of the agenda.” Perhaps she had an ‘Iceland crisis’ in mind?

Staying with European politics, the latest Elabe presidential poll – conducted on 29-30 August 2026 for BFMTV and La Tribune Dimanche – unsurprisingly shows a highly fragmented French political landscape with one dominant feature: Marine Le Pen is the clear front-runner for the 2027 presidential election. Across the scenarios tested, Le Pen (RN) attracts 34% to 35.5% of first-round voting intentions, putting her well ahead of every rival. The contest for second place is much tighter. Édouard Philippe currently appears best placed, polling at around 47.5% against 52.5% for Le Pen. The poll also suggests that Mélenchon has lost momentum and may find it harder to reach the run-off, while social-democratic candidate Glucksman appears to be consolidating support on the centre-left. Most strikingly, Le Pen wins every run-off tested by Elabe: she is the overwhelming favorite to reach the second round and, on current projections, to win the presidency.

For investors worried about fiscal profligacy under a Mélenchon presidency, these probabilities – though they could still shift considerably with more than seven months to go – may offer some comfort. For the EU, however, a Le Pen presidency would still create a more difficult environment. Although she no longer openly advocates leaving the euro or holding a referendum on EU membership, she continues to seek a reduction in EU powers over areas including immigration, budgetary decisions, trade policy, and judicial and constitutional sovereignty. The current discussion over an expansion of the EU budget for 2028-2034 to almost €2 trillion – which requires unanimity – could become a flashpoint should discussions be delayed into 2027.  

Le Pen’s stance broadly resembles the approach of parties such as Meloni’s Brothers of Italy: not seeking to leave the EU, but deeply sceptical of further integration. Meloni has pursued that strategy with surprising success in Italy (and without major consequences for the EU), but France’s fiscal position is considerably more fragile. Could something big still change the polls?

Turning to financial markets, Friday certainly delivered something big. Fed Chair Kevin Warsh appeared to rebuild some of his credibility as an inflation fighter in his first speech at the annual Jackson Hole Symposium, stressing that the Federal Reserve still has “work to do” to return inflation to its 2% target. The message marked an important shift from the communication strategy he had followed since taking office. After the 17 June FOMC meeting, the US yield curve steepened and Treasury term premia rose noticeably as investors concluded that Warsh’s tough rhetoric on inflation was not being matched by policy action.

Part of that unease reflected Warsh’s outspoken opposition to forward guidance. In his view, excessive guidance encourages investors to pay less attention to incoming data and underlying economic trends, while constraining the central bank’s policy flexibility. Markets, however, read the combination of policy inaction and limited communication as a sign that Warsh was content to let higher market interest rates do part of the Fed’s work by tightening financial conditions and containing inflation.

At Jackson Hole, Warsh sought to dispel that impression without abandoning his broader philosophy – or at least that is our reading. He emphasised that “price stability does not emerge on its own, nor does inflation automatically return to target. It is the Fed’s responsibility to deliver price stability.” More importantly, for the first time since becoming Chair, he explicitly expressed dissatisfaction with recent inflation developments and signalled that he was open to further rate hikes unless underlying inflation began to improve convincingly. As he put it: “We must be convinced that underlying inflation is moving toward our target clearly and at a sufficient pace. Otherwise, we still have work to do.”

Markets accordingly priced a greater probability of additional rate increases. Yet longer-dated Treasury yields fell, suggesting that investors saw Warsh’s remarks as reducing policy uncertainty and reinforcing the Fed’s commitment to restore price stability. Put differently, the reaction combined a slightly more hawkish near-term policy outlook with lower longer-term inflation and policy-risk premia.

So Warsh’s prepared remarks seemed designed to lift rate-hike expectations, rebalance the September debate towards the hawks and rebuild his inflation-fighting credibility after July’s “all talk, no action” criticism. Yet this creates a difficult balancing act, as the White House may oppose a hike so close to November’s midterms. On balance, we still think the FOMC is more likely to remain on hold for the rest of the year, but the upside risks to our forecasts have clearly rebounded, as our US Strategist and Fed watcher Philip Marey writes here.

Even so, Warsh delivered an important signal: the Fed is not relying on tighter financial conditions alone and remains willing to tighten further if underlying inflation stalls. The next round of data – especially the 4 September employment report and 11 September CPI – could therefore prove crucial for the Committee’s swing voters.

On inflation, medium- to longer-term gauges such as 5y/5y inflation swap forwards remain broadly consistent with central-bank policy targets – an observation also highlighted by Stephen Miran in a recent FT opinion piece. That is true in both the US and Europe. Yet these measures may not fully capture the upside risks, particularly as energy prices have continued to climb in recent weeks. Over the weekend, the US and Iran exchanged strikes for the first time in more than a month, as Iran launched a missile-and-drone attack on US air bases in Jordan early Monday in response to an American airstrike on Iranian rocket launchers on Sunday.

The weakening correlation between energy prices and inflation swaps could be reassuring: markets may simply trust central banks to keep long-run inflation anchored. But it could also indicate that investors view long-term inflation mainly through the lens of policy credibility and structural regime risks, such as a return of fiscal dominance. Such regimes rarely change gradually; they tend to shift suddenly. And that would take something big.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 11:00

Trump Says NBC's Kristen Welker Will Be Reported To FCC Over Endorsement Comments

Trump Says NBC's Kristen Welker Will Be Reported To FCC Over Endorsement Comments

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump said on Sunday that NBC News's "Meet the Press" host Kristen Welker will be reported to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Welker had "just stated that Donald Trump has 'mixed results' on his Endorsements of Candidates, when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100 percent for the U.S. Senate, and 98 percent for the U.S. House, recently and over the longterm," the president wrote on Truth Social.

Trump added: "How can anyone be allowed to say this, working for freely given Public Airwaves? Results are attached. Because of this purposeful inaccuracy, she will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment."

According to a transcript of "Meet the Press," Welker did not make the comment about "mixed results" on Sunday's program. Trump did not say in his social media post where he heard the comment.

Welker made the comment during a recent appearance on the NBC 4 Washington local affiliate station, reported Mediaite.

"He's going to loom large over these midterms," Welker stated, according to the outlet. "There's no doubt about that. He, of course, has endorsed a slate of candidates in the primaries. He's had some mixed results, but most recently, his pick of Senator Darline Graham, of course, the sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, was successful in her primary battle, so now she takes on Dr. Annie Andrews in South Carolina."

Graham defeated Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) in the GOP primary last week. Graham won with about 52.4 percent of the vote to Norman's 47.6 percent.

In his post on social media, Trump said that media outlets are "going out of their way to harass, demean, and libel anything 'TRUMP'" and that he has a "99% SUCCESS Rate on Endorsements, [and] 100% on Senatorial Endorsements."

"In actuality, it is, without question, the strongest Endorsement in the History of Politics," the president added. "If it were not, I would be the first to admit it. Darline Graham's run for the Senate was the biggest story in all of Politics, because she wasn't expected to win, and then, when I Endorsed her, and she easily won, the story of her Victory was hardly covered by anybody. Likewise, the future Governor of Oklahoma, who was behind in every Poll, I Endorsed him, he won, and the story was barely covered!"

Later, Trump wrote that he hopes that FCC Chair Brendan Carr and other commissioners in the agency will take the media's coverage of his endorsement record "very seriously."

NBC did not immediately respond to an Epoch Times request for comment Sunday.

A spokesperson for NBC said in a statement provided to media outlets that Welker "is one of the best in the business and we stand by her."

The comment comes roughly a year after Carr said that ABC host Jimmy Kimmel may have violated federal broadcasting regulations when Kimmel made comments about Charlie Kirk in the wake of his assassination. ABC suspended Kimmel's late-night show before he returned to the air around a week later.

And in June of this year, Trump abruptly ended an interview with Welker and said that "Meet the Press" was presenting a one-sided viewpoint.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/31/2026 - 10:20

Pages