Zero Hedge

Figure CEO Says Humanoid Robots Could Soon Enter Homes For $600 A Month

Figure CEO Says Humanoid Robots Could Soon Enter Homes For $600 A Month

Figure's CEO told Sourcery's Molly O'Shea that the humanoid robotics company is preparing for a "near-term" push to bring humanoid robots into homes, where they would perform basic household tasks under a consumer subscription model that could cost "hundreds per month," similar to a car lease.

Molly O'Shea asked Figure CEO Brett Adcock:

"In the near term, what do you see as the first commercial application for these robots? Like, is it gonna be in the home? Is it gonna be in the factory?"

Adcock responded:

"In the near term, we're gonna be selling these into the home. So you can lease a Figure 03 for something like $600 a month."

He continued:

"Yeah. You can plug it into a wall outlet, and it'll go to its dock and charge. I want it to do the laundry every day, dishes every day, and tidy the house multiple times a day. That's what I want."

Adcock posted a chart on Threads showing, he said, "Humanoid robots manufactured at Figure by month," revealing a clear production ramp.

However, the chart lacked a Y-axis, leaving the actual shipment numbers unclear.

Forbes pointed out that shipments may have climbed from roughly 60 units in February to 120 in March and 240 in April. However, those shipment numbers remain far below China's Agibot, which reportedly shipped 5,000 humanoids over three months.

Our latest note on the humanoid robot space, including UBS's delivery estimates, is available here.  

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 22:10

The Golden State Has Fallen: Welcome To The Islamic Republic Of California

The Golden State Has Fallen: Welcome To The Islamic Republic Of California

Authored by Rabbi Michael Barclay via American Greatness,

On April 8, the California Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement voted 19–0 to adopt AB2017, followed on April 22 by the California Assembly Committee on Appropriations, which voted 7–0 to adopt the bill. And with those votes, all that is left for this to become California law is the passing of it by the State Assembly and Senate and approval by the governor.

And with it, the state of California will no longer exist as we know it, but will become the Islamic Republic of California.

Introduced by California Assemblyman Matt Haney (D-San Francisco 17th District) at the behest of CAIR, the bill seeks to officially recognize the Islamic holidays of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha as California state holidays.

There are no holidays from other religions that are recognized as state holidays in California.

Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, and Epiphany are all extremely important holidays in Judaism and Christianity.

But none of them are recognized as California state holidays.

But according to Haney and the California legislature, apparently, Islamic holidays are much more important to the state than either Judaism or Christianity.

This bill is clearly unconstitutional, as it is in direct contradiction to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”

By placing two Islamic holidays as official state holidays, they are respecting the establishment of a specific religion. But the problem is greater than just their violation of the Constitution in attempting to pass this bill.

The holidays themselves, Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, are expressions and manifestations of the very worst aspects of Islam.

Eid al-Fitr marks the end of the Islamic month of Ramadan and is the penultimate celebration of the month and its meanings. Ramadan is the month-long holiday commemorating Mohammed’s first vision in 610 CE, in which he supposedly was visited by the angel Gabriel (named Jibril in Arabic) in a cave near Mecca and given a revelation that ultimately became the Quran. It is a month of fasting and a national holiday in countries such as Iran, Turkey, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim theocracies.

It is also traditionally the month of war in Islam. Although war is forbidden in the Quran during four other months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th), it is not only allowed during Ramadan; it has historically been encouraged to be a month of initiating war against “infidels.” The Yom Kippur War against Israel in 1973 was started by the Arabs during Ramadan. Three years ago, Ismail Haniyeh, who was considered the political leader of Hamas (and who lived in Qatar until killed in July of 2024 and had a net worth of over two billion dollars), called for all Arabs to attack Israel during Ramadan and to siege and blockade the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and have continual mass riots there. Ramadan, going back to Mohammed himself, is the time to start wars on non-Muslims and is a source of Islamic pride as the time to forcefully convert the world to Islam. The Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s official arm in Syria, has even described Ramadan as “a month of conquests.”

Some historical examples of the Islamic intention during Ramadan include the Battle of Badr, a victory led by Mohammed himself in the second Ramadan; the conquest of Mecca, 6 years after Badr; the war for Andalusia in 711 CE; the Battle of Ain Jalut against the Mongols; and the Battle of Hattin during the Crusades.

And that’s just in the first 200 years of Islamic history.

But Matt Haney and the California Legislature want to make this holiday, which is about military victory over non-Muslims, into an official state holiday!

And then there is the second Islamic holiday that they want to make an official state holiday: Eid al-Adha, the “Feast of the Sacrifice.” This is a holiday about being willing to violently sacrifice and kill if it is commanded by Allah. It includes throwing stones at a wall to symbolize the willingness to fight for the “will of God” by stoning Satan and exemplifies the observant Islamic belief in stoning when “required.” Animals are also sacrificed as part of this holiday’s celebration. And this is not a small sacrifice of one chicken for an entire community, but rather, the expectation is that each Muslim will perform animal sacrifices.

In Bangladesh, 13 million animals are sacrificed each year; in Pakistan, more than nine million; and globally, it is estimated that approximately 50 million animals are sacrificed each year for this Islamic holiday.

Each year, this holiday causes the death of 50 million animals and encourages the practice of stoning anything that is contradictory to the Quran, Hadith, and Islamic theology. And this is the holiday that Haney and his Democratic colleagues in the California State Legislature want to make into an official state holiday.

War, stoning, and animal sacrifice—these are the values that have been unanimously approved by the committee, and are on track to becoming approved by the California government.

Yom Kippur is a Jewish holiday about the value of being self-reflective and atoning for our personal sins. Epiphany is a Christian holiday celebrating the baptism of Jesus; Good Friday deepens the Christian faith as it honors the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for all of humanity; and Ash Wednesday reminds Christians of the journey of Jesus during Lent that leads to the Resurrection on Easter. Atonement, spiritual awareness, faith in God: these are values that the State of California rejects as holidays while honoring the Islamic values of war and death.

With the passing of this bill, which is not certain but is highly likely, California will officially have gone off the cliff, rejecting Western civilization in favor of officially adopting Islamic practices and values.

Rest in peace, California. We will miss you.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 21:45

US Intelligence Only Sees Limited Additional Damage To Iran Nuclear Program Since Last June

US Intelligence Only Sees Limited Additional Damage To Iran Nuclear Program Since Last June

A widely circulating fresh report in Reuters has raised eyebrows and serious questions related to the effectiveness of the 38-day aerial campaign which saw US-Israel bombs unleashed in the many thousands (combined: some 20,000+ munitions expended) on the Islamic Republic.

"US intelligence assessments indicate that the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon has not changed since last summer, when analysts estimated that a US-Israeli attack had pushed back the timeline to up to a year, according to three sources familiar with the matter," the report lays out.

"The assessments of Tehran's nuclear program remain broadly unchanged even after two months of a war that US President Donald Trump launched in part to stop the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear bomb," it continues.

via Fox

The Israelis are believed to have done most of the direct targeting of Iranian nuclear facilities in the late February through April air campaign. This after already since last June, the White House insisted Iran's nuclear program was 'obliterated'.

Again, one wonders what nearly 40 days of record-levels of bombardment of Iranian cities and military sites actually accomplished in terms of degrading Iran's nuclear enrichment capability - which has emerged as the primary US goal (stalled negotiations have centered on the demand that Tehran given up its nuclear material). It seems the needle may have hardly moved in terms of degrading Iranian nuke sites since last June?

The Reuters report gives the following additional conclusion: "The unchanged timeline suggests that significantly impeding Tehran’s nuclear program may require destroying or removing Iran’s remaining stockpile of highly enriched uranium, or HEU."

And that of course brings the situation back to the square one dilemma of whether to launch ground operations to recover what Trump calls the 'nuclear dust' - which further raises the prospect of utter disaster and endless quagmire (and there are signs of quagmire already, even without ground forces).

In shifting from 'Epic Fury' to 'Project Freedom' - the US administration seems to want to find a way out of this without a protracted ground war, which would mean serious losses in blood and treasure. The below is the official latest White House position:

While Operation ⁠Midnight Hammer obliterated Iran’s nuclear facilities, Operation Epic Fury built on this success by decimating Iran’s defense industrial base that they ‌once leveraged as a protective shield around their pursuit of a nuclear weapon,” said White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales, referring ‌to the June operation and the latest war that began in February.

"President Trump has long been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon – and he does not bluff."

But Iran has countered that it considers its enriched uranium stockpile a matter of national sovereignty, and will 'never' allow it to be transferred outside the country.

Next round of US-Israeli bombing being planned?

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei two weeks ago denied reports at the time which said Tehran had agreed to transfer its highly enriched uranium abroad, saying "enriched uranium is sacred to us, as is Iranian soil." The Iranians have since repeatedly made clear that the issue is a non-starter, and wants to focus talks on opening Hormuz and ending the war.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 19:40

How A Musk Victory Vs. Altman Would Reset America's AI Roadmap

How A Musk Victory Vs. Altman Would Reset America's AI Roadmap

A courtroom victory for Elon Musk in his high-stakes federal trial against Sam Altman and OpenAI would deliver one of the most disruptive blows to the artificial intelligence sector in its brief but explosive history - potentially forcing the $850-billion-plus company to unwind its for-profit empire, ousting its top leaders, and handing Musk a symbolic and financial hammer to reshape the global race for AGI while weakening one of its fiercest competitors.

The case is now being argued in a federal courtroom in Oakland, before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The trial opened on April 28 and entered its second week on Monday, when OpenAI president Greg Brockman took the stand and confirmed his personal stake in the company is worth roughly $30 billion. Musk's counsel returned to the figure more than a dozen times in two hours of questioning.

The Case

Musk co-founded OpenAI in late 2015 as a nonprofit and contributed roughly $38 million in its early years. He left the board in 2018. The following year, OpenAI created a capped-profit subsidiary to attract the capital that frontier AI now requires; Microsoft has since invested more than $13 billion. ChatGPT launched in November 2022. By 2025, OpenAI was preparing for what would have been one of the largest initial public offerings in history.

Musk sued in 2024. The original complaint contained twenty-six claims; only two survive - breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment - while the fraud claims were dismissed before trial. Microsoft is named as a co-defendant for allegedly aiding and abetting the breach, a detail often elided in summary coverage.

The remedies sought are unusually sweeping. Musk wants OpenAI's for-profit structure unwound and its assets returned to the nonprofit foundation. He wants Sam Altman and Brockman removed from leadership. And he is seeking up to $150 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft combined, with any award flowing directly to OpenAI's charitable arm rather than to Musk personally.

Structure of the Trial

Judge Gonzalez Rogers has bifurcated the proceedings into a liability phase, expected to conclude around May 21, and a separate remedies phase that would follow only if the defendants are found at fault. A nine-person jury sits during liability alone, and its verdict is advisory. Structural remedies - including any order to dissolve the for-profit subsidiary - fall solely to the judge.

This procedural detail matters more than it may appear. Coverage that casts the jury as the decisive actor misreads the case. The jury can shape narrative momentum and offer a finding the judge may weigh, but it cannot order OpenAI to unwind anything. Whatever the verdict, Gonzalez Rogers writes the remedy.

What a Musk Win Would Actually Mean

Setting aside the $150 billion headline - which is a ceiling, not a floor, and is divided across defendants - three concrete consequences would follow a substantive ruling against OpenAI.

The first is restructuring. A finding that the 2019 capped-profit conversion and its 2025 successor breached a charitable trust would, at minimum, force a reorganization placing the nonprofit foundation back in unambiguous control. The IPO would be delayed indefinitely, if not foreclosed. Investor returns would be capped or rewritten. Microsoft's roughly $13 billion stake, and the larger commitments that followed from Amazon, SoftBank, and Nvidia, would all face revaluation.

The second is leadership. Musk's complaint seeks the removal of Altman and Brockman. Whether the court orders that remedy in full is uncertain; partial governance reform is the likelier outcome. Either way, the result would be destabilizing for an organization whose competitive position rests substantially on the people at the top of it.

The third is precedent, and it may prove the most durable. A ruling for Musk would establish that nonprofit-to-commercial transitions in American technology can be reversed years after the fact, once the entity has grown large enough to be worth reversing. Founders, donors, and investors in mission-driven labs would have to reckon with a previously hypothetical risk: that the structure they signed up for is the structure they will be held to, indefinitely.

The Defense

OpenAI's response, articulated by lead counsel William Savitt, is that Musk himself supported a for-profit restructuring as early as 2017 - as long as he was placed in charge of it. When the other founders declined, he left, predicted the company's failure, and later launched a competitor. The obvious angle here is that the lawsuit is a delayed instrument of competitive harm rather than a vindication of charitable principle.

The defense will lean on contemporaneous evidence: Musk's own emails proposing for-profit structures; his instruction to associates to register a for-profit corporation in OpenAI's name; and Brockman's private journal, which Musk's team has used to suggest financial motive but which also records the founders' resistance to handing OpenAI to Musk.

What Remains

Several witnesses are still to come. Altman has not yet testified. Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella is expected. Stuart Russell, the Berkeley computer scientist, will appear as Musk's expert on AI risk; the judge has already declined a request from Musk's counsel that Russell be permitted to range beyond his written report into extinction scenarios.

Two days before the trial began, Musk texted Brockman to gauge interest in settlement. When Brockman proposed mutual dismissal, Musk replied that he and Altman would be the most hated men in America by week's end. The judge declined to admit the exchange. No settlement has materialized.

The trial is expected to run another two to three weeks. The remedies phase, if it comes, will follow.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 18:00

ISO New England Trims 10-Year Forecast Based On Electrification Outlook

ISO New England Trims 10-Year Forecast Based On Electrification Outlook

By Robert Walton of UtilityDive

Electricity consumption in New England will grow about 9% over the next decade, driven by electrification of buildings and vehicles, the region’s independent system operator said in an annual report published Friday. While significant, the rise in consumption is lower than its forecast in the two previous reports, reflecting changes in “government policy,” ISO New England said.

The “2026-2035 Forecast Report of Capacity, Energy, Loads, and Transmission,” or CELT report, estimates annual consumption will rise from 116,679 GWh this year to 127,660 GWh in 2035, an increase of about 0.9% annually.

In 2024, the ISO said it anticipated a 17% rise in annual energy use by 2033. In 2025, it reduced its 10-year outlook to an 11% rise by 2034.

The energy forecast “reflects more conservative assumptions around future adoption of electric vehicles and heat pumps in light of government policy changes,” the ISO said in a blog post.

New England’s net annual energy use has trended downward since 2005, “mainly due to more efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances, and lighting,” as well as growth in behind-the-meter solar, the grid operator said. Now, it predicts “that trend will reverse over the next decade.”

“Steady growth in net annual energy use is expected as state policy goals for carbon emissions reductions continue to incentivize electrification of heating systems and transportation in the region,” the ISO said.

Notably, the ISO said sustained load growth means it will soon be a dual-peaking system.

While New England has typically seen electricity demand peak during the hot summer months, the addition of electric heating load means that by 2035, the ISO expects winter and summer peaks to be roughly the same, around 26.5 GW. ISO New England’s all-time peak of 28.1 GW was set in summer 2006.

The grid operator anticipates peak demand of 25.2 GW this summer and 20.5 GW this upcoming winter season.

Heating electrification is projected to contribute 5,533 MW to the winter peak in 2035/2036, ISO said, while transportation electrification is forecast to contribute 1,509 MW. In the ISO’s previous CELT report, it estimated electric vehicles would account for 1,764 MW of the winter peak in 2034/2035, while heating electrification was is expected to account for 4,765 MW that season.

The ISO said it revised its EV adoption forecast down to account for the removal of federal incentives and revisions to state policies and expectations for each vehicle class. Its heat pump forecast was similarly adjusted to account for expiring federal tax credits.

Behind-the-meter solar is forecast to have a growing impact on winter peak demand, reducing it by an expected 316 MW in 2035/2036, the ISO said in its latest report.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 17:40

From DEI To Equal Protection: A New Direction In Civil Rights Policy

From DEI To Equal Protection: A New Direction In Civil Rights Policy

Authored by Kenin M. Spivak via RealClearPolitics,

The Trump administration is restoring the core value of equal opportunity to civil rights enforcement. It is eviscerating the race-baiting, intersectional policies of the Biden and Obama administrations, and giving substance to the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (2025) that whites, men, and heterosexuals are not held to a higher standard in discrimination cases.

This is a time for rejoicing, tempered by concern that the administration will not have time to complete its work, and that its reliance on executive orders, rather than legislation and consent decrees, will allow the next Democratic president to rip asunder President Trump’s laudable accomplishments.

Despite more than a century of Supreme Court decisions forbidding discrimination on the basis of race, Democrats generally, and progressives specifically, have inverted President John F. Kennedy’s executive order establishing affirmative action. Intended to bring an end to discrimination because of race, creed, color, and national origin, progressives instead transformed affirmative action into a system of preferences based on melanin content, and absorbed this once hopeful construct into radical philosophies used to justify bias, including Critical Race Theory (CRT), intersectionality, disparate impact theory, and ultimately DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion).

They oppose Trump’s effort to dismantle their race-addled policies with every lever available to them. Ivy League universities have to be bludgeoned into enforcing equal rights. Blue city mayors continue their fight to sideline white males. Hollywood artists and programmers refuse to work for studios and tech companies that recognize political and legal realties. Liberal Supreme Court justices bemoan the majority’s refusal to rule based on the intersectional hierarchy of so-called “marginalized” minorities, and Obama- and Biden-appointed federal judges enjoin proper exercises of executive power.

CRT originated in the 1970s as a tortured rationale advocating that colorblind laws inevitably serve the interests of white people.

Intersectionality has become a cornerstone of CRT. Developed principally by Columbia Law Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, it utilizes a hierarchy of social oppression to allocate benefits and burdens, providing the doctrinal basis for DEI policies, transgender activism, and antisemitism. The latter shows the bankruptcy of the dogma: Despite hundreds of years of oppression, pogroms and the Holocaust, as a result of educational and business achievements, Jews are seen as powerful oppressors, while Palestinians and other Muslims are seen as marginalized minorities.

Disparate impact is a central tenet of progressive litigation strategy. Its premise that marginalized communities must receive their proportionate share of opportunities is the progenitor of the “equity” prong of DEI. Liability is established if there is a shortfall, regardless of whether that shortfall is caused by discrimination.

DEI is the fusion of these philosophies, a malevolent form of affirmative action that allocates benefits based on race, sex, and gender identity. To ensure pre-determined outcomes, progressive decisionmakers and courts have tampered with and eliminated entry exams, waived criminal background checks, and watered down academic, disciplinary, admissions, graduation, employment, and promotion standards.

In 2024, the Biden administration took a bow for more than 650 actions that required federal, state, and local government agencies and contractors to award and allocate burdens, opportunities, and benefits based on race, sex, and gender identification.

Progressives defended these manifestly unconstitutional and unlawful actions by claiming that while the words of the 14th Amendment, federal civil rights statutes, and President Johnson’s executive order on equal employment opportunity prohibit the use of race in government actions, their true meaning was the opposite – that race and other innate characteristics must be used to achieve outcomes based on these characteristics.

The Biden administration also targeted people of faith, with abuses ranging from FBI infiltration of Catholic churches to weaponizing the FACE Act against pro-life Americans. And it adopted rules requiring that universities treat biological males who identify as women as actual women, and ended due process for any grievances filed for allegedly violating their rights, or in sexual harassment cases. Respondents were denied notice, the right to examine the complainant, or a right of appeal. The university investigator was permitted to serve as the hearing officer.

Progressives justified the administration’s attack on religion, female athletes, and due process as necessary to protect the rights of marginalized minorities.

Underscoring the left’s situational ethics, as the Biden administration embarked on a whole-of-government censorship enterprise to silence its critics, the ACLU abandoned its 100-year commitment to free speech, declaring that speech that denigrates marginalized groups can “inflict serious harms and is intended to and often will impede progress toward equality.”

Upon taking office for his second term, President Trump revoked Biden’s executive orders impacting race, sex, and gender. He issued orders prohibiting DEI, other race-based programs, and disparate impact in federal government hiring, promotion, and contracting; terminated federal employees hired for the Biden administration’s massive DEI apparatus; and ordered “appropriate action” to pressure K-12 schools into abandoning race-based disciplinary policies. He rescinded an executive order that required federal contractors to utilize affirmative action in their hiring practices.

Rejecting intersectionality, Trump issued orders tying federal funding to elimination of extreme gender ideology, proclaiming, “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality,” and protecting children from chemical and surgical mutilation – positions belatedly adopted by leading medical organizations. He also ordered the Department of Education to take all appropriate action to keep biological men out of women’s sports.

Trump directed federal agencies to improve security vetting for international students and to prioritize civil rights protections for Jewish students. He eliminated collection and publication of data used in a misguided effort to claim that environmental harms targeted minorities because manufacturing facilities are concentrated in lower-income neighborhoods, and he issued an order to pressure the Smithsonian Institution to restore balance to its depiction of American history.

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division under Harmeet Dhillon and Education Department under Linda McMahon launched enforcement actions against Ivy league universities to protect Jewish students and restore viewpoint diversity. The Justice Department also commenced investigations, filed and intervened in lawsuits, and reached settlements with public and private institutions to protect Americans of all backgrounds and faiths – just last week forcing Colorado to abandon a law that favors AI algorithms that promote “diversity.” It investigated the Biden administration’s weaponization of the FACE Act, issued an 882-page report exposing the abuses, and eliminated them. The Education Department ordered universities to bring back due process in university grievance procedures.

The left is vigorously fighting back. Universities have slyly rebranded DEI offices, legal challenges have been filed against Trump’s executive orders and related regulations, Democrat-appointed judges have issued injunctions, and Democratic Party officials have doubled down on racial and gender politics. For the most part, the administration has prevailed in lower courts or secured stays of adverse rulings pending appeals.

Some progressives support intersectionality, disparate impact, and DEI to harm straight white Americans. Many are so caught up in innate characteristics that they believe individual opportunity and fairness is determined at a group level, while other progressives delude themselves into believing they can choose winners without creating losers. The administration must hold firm against the left’s vitriolic counterattacks. As Donald Trump restores the American dream of equal opportunity, his challenge with just eight months until the probable loss of the Republican legislative majority is to create enduring change, rather than an interregnum in progressive rule.

Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including RealClearPolitics, The American Mind, National Review, television, radio, and podcasts.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 17:00

Alberta Separatists Say They Have Enough Signatures To Force Referendum On Leaving Canada

Alberta Separatists Say They Have Enough Signatures To Force Referendum On Leaving Canada

A group pushing for Alberta to break free from Canada announced Monday that it has submitted nearly double the number of signatures required to force a referendum -- which could come as early as October. While Alberta Premier Danielle Smith opposes independence, she has assured Albertans that she will not try to thwart a referendum if the signature hurdle were cleared.  

A signature in support of an independence referendum is collected atop a mountain in Alberta (via Stay Free Alberta)

Triggering a referendum requires 178,000 signatures, but the separatist organization Stay Free Alberta says it amassed more than 301,000. As in the United States, referendum organizers usually aim to far overshoot the required number so as to survive challenges on the validity of individual signatures.

On Monday, the group's leader, Mitch Sylvestre descended on Alberta's election offices in Edmonton with the petitions, aboard a convoy seven trucks strong. Celebrating the accomplishment, he likened it to Canada's favorite sport. “This day is historic in Alberta history,” he said. “It’s the first step to the next step — we’ve gotten by Round 3 and now we’re in the Stanley Cup final.”

Despite Sylvestre's triumphalism, the independence drive could hit a snag this week, as a judge may rule on a challenge of the referendum filed by a First Nations group. That term is used to describe indigenous people who are not Inuit or Métis. Their legal challenge centers on the claim that Albertan independence would deny them privileges afforded them by treaties. The verification of referendum-support signatures has been stayed pending the decision. However, Stay Free Alberta attorney Jeff Rath said these are mere speed bumps. "As far as we're concerned, whatever the court does or whatever Elections Alberta does at this point is meaningless,” he told CBC, given the premier can't ignore more than 300,000 signatures.  

Alberta has been on the wrong end of a Canadian policy called "Equalization" -- a more palatable term than what it should be called: "Wealth Redistribution." According to the Canadian government's official description, Equalization "address[es] fiscal disparities among provinces." It does so by distributing the fiscal fruits of federal taxation to provinces in such a way that poorer provinces get more money than more-prosperous ones. Alberta is easily Canada's best-off province on a per-capita basis. 

Alberta (AB) is easily Canada's wealthiest province, and sees its wealth redistributed throughout the country under the "Equalization" scheme (via Canadian government)

A victory for the "yes" side of the referendum won't guarantee independence, as more legal challenges will certainly sprout up, to say nothing of the thorny negotiations with the Canadian government that would be required -- negotiations that could be slow-walked by Albertan leaders who aren't enthused about breaking away.  

For those and other reasons, some who support independence are wary of how the referendum will play out. For example, even if the pro-independence side prevails, the waters could be muddied by the results of concurrent referendum questions. Writing at the Brownstone Institute earlier this year, Bruce Pardy painted a picture: 

If voters support independence but also other constitutional changes, what do they mean? Which should be pursued first? Which is the last resort? What if voters support independence but also support Alberta having the right to opt out of federal programs while retaining federal funding? Both of those things cannot happen. One requires that Alberta be a province, and the other requires that it not be. Any referendum result that requires interpretation is not clear.

A pro-unity group called Forever Canadian has been active too, racking up more than 400,000 signatures on a petition that asked, "Do you agree that Alberta should remain within Canada?” Meanwhile, polls show an uphill climb for the separatists, with huge differences between United Conservative Party and New Democratic Party voters: 

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 16:40

AMD Dumps & Pumps (To New Record High) After Beat-And-Raise

AMD Dumps & Pumps (To New Record High) After Beat-And-Raise

Just wow...

AMD shares initially puked after results dropped showing top- and bottom-line beats:

  • EPS: $1.37 vs. $1.29 adjusted expected

  • Revenue: $10.25 billion vs. $9.89 billion expected

But now they are exploding higher after the second-largest AI chipmaker raised estimates:

  • For the second quarter, AMD said it expects about $11.2 billion in revenue, versus expectations of $10.52 billion, according to LSEG

That is a new record high...

Revenue jumped 38% from $7.44 billion a year ago, the company said in a release on Tuesday, beating in every segment...

  • Data center revenue $5.78 billion, +57% y/y, estimate $5.61 billion

  • Gaming revenue $720 million, +11% y/y, estimate $668.6 million

  • Client revenue $2.89 billion, +26% y/y, estimate $2.73 billion

  • Embedded revenue $873 million, +6.1% y/y, estimate $868.4 million

“Looking ahead, we expect server growth to accelerate meaningfully as we scale supply to meet demand,” Chief Executive Officer Lisa Su said in the statement.

“We delivered an outstanding first quarter, driven by accelerating demand for AI infrastructure, with data center now the primary driver of our revenue and earnings growth.”

Oh and in case you didn't see enough beats...

  • Capital expenditure $389 million, +83% y/y, estimate $215.2 million

  • Adjusted operating income $2.54 billion, +43% y/y, estimate $2.41 billion

  • Adjusted operating margin 25% vs. 24% y/y, estimate 24.3%

  • Free cash flow $2.57 billion vs. $727 million y/y, estimate $2.35 billion

  • R&D expenses $2.40 billion, +39% y/y, estimate $2.26 billion

Tonight's gains come AFTER AMD's stock has more than tripled over the past year, including a 66% jump so far in 2026.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 16:29

NIH Virologist Vincent Munster Caught Smuggling Deadly Viruses Into U.S., FBI Investigating

NIH Virologist Vincent Munster Caught Smuggling Deadly Viruses Into U.S., FBI Investigating

Authored by Paul D. Thacker via The DisInformation Chronicle,

Since the COVID pandemic landed on American shores in early 2020, virologists and allied science writers have engaged in a vociferous propaganda campaign to deny the dangers of virus experiments. When Nature Magazine published a 2021 article minimizing a Wuhan lab accident as the pandemic’s cause, science writer Amy Maxmen quoted Vincent Munster, a virologist at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories, a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), in Montana.

Munster told Nature’s Maxmen that there was nothing suspicious about a novel coronavirus popping up in the same city as the Wuhan Institute of Virology which was studying coronaviruses. Labs tend to specialize in the specific viruses found around them, Munster explained, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology focuses on coronaviruses because many circulate in China and neighboring countries.

“Nine out of ten times, when there’s a new outbreak, you’ll find a lab that will be working on these kinds of viruses nearby,” Munster told Nature.

Well, kind of. Sort of. But really not.

In fact, virologists regularly collect viruses from far away countries and bring them back to their own cities to study. And according to emails I have seen that are now circulating inside the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), one of those virologists is the NIH’s Vincent Munster.

“We are unable to comment as this is under investigation,” wrote HHS spokesperson, Andrew Nixon in an email. “So we will refer you to the FBI.”

When contacted about their investigation into Munster and his NIH researcher, the FBI press office replied by email, “We decline to comment.”

While on a trip back from the Democratic Republic of Congo earlier this year, Munster and a scientist in his NIH lab were pulled aside for an airport security inspection. Inside their luggage, one of the two had a hard-shelled protective case used to transport sensitive property such as electronics and firearms. When the protective case was opened, it was found to contain pathogen samples collected from patients.

However, the human pathogens, which included monkeypox virus, may have been inactivated by reagents and rendered no longer infectious.

Munster and his NIH research fellow Claude Kwe Yinda published a February study in a Lancet journal that cited monkeypox as a global threat. Without any hint of irony, they warned about “multiple travel-associated cases reported since 2024, including seven in the USA.” The Democratic Republic of Congo has been considered the global epicenter of monkeypox virus, with over 100,000 cases as of October last year.

HHS regulates monkeypox as a “select agent”—microorganisms and toxins that pose a severe threat to public safety. Federal programs control their possession and use, while Department of Transportation regulations manage their shipment and transport.

Munster and his lab scientist did not have paperwork required by law to transport deadly pathogens from Africa to his NIH lab in Montana. Both NIH scientists were placed on leave. Contact information for both Vincent Munster and Claude Kwe Yinda have been removed from the HHS employment directory.

Last year, the Department of Justice charged two Chinese nationals with criminal conspiracy for smuggling a dangerous plant fungus through a Detroit airport so they could study it in a lab at the University of Michigan.

Munster did not return repeated requests for comment sent to his NIH email asking him to explain if the monkeypox and potentially other viruses he was transporting had been inactivated or were still infectious. According to his bio at NIH’s Rocky Mountain Labs in Montana, Munster has field study sites in the Republic of the Congo to study Ebola virus with collaborators at the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Laboratoire National de Santé Publique in Brazzaville.

Rocky Mountain Labs is an integral part of the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the institute once led by Tony Fauci. The Montana facility has a BSL-4 lab where virologists study the world’s most deadly viruses including Ebola, Marburg, and Lassa Fever.

Andrea Marzi, the Acting Chief of Virology at Rocky Mountain Labs, did not return emails asking if the monkeypox and other possible viruses Munster was transporting had been inactivated or were still infectious. Nor did she reply to requests asking if Munster’s lab had been secured.

Senator Rand Paul sent the NIAID director a letter two years ago regarding Munster, who was listed as a partner for a project called DEFUSE that was submitted in 2018 to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). As part of DEFUSE proposal to DARPA, virologists planned to engineer novel viruses by taking the backbone of a bat virus and inserting a spike protein with a furin cleavage site. A furin cleavage site allows viruses to infect the cells of human lungs.

DARPA denied funding for DEFUSE, but the following year, a novel bat virus with a furin cleavage site began infecting humans in Wuhan. No other virus closely related to the COVID virus has this furin cleavage site.

Shortly after the COVID virus began infecting Americans, Columbia University virologist Vincent Racaniello sent Munster an alarming February 2020 email, saying he had heard that the new COVID virus had a furin cleavage site “that might have been engineered.”

“If true this is very bad for all of virology research,” Racaniell wrote to Munster.

“And the fun begins,” replied Munster.

The news about Munster hits during an especially hard media cycle for virologists. I reported last week for RealClearInvestigations that the federal government had quietly removed University of North Carolina virologist Ralph Baric from all his NIH grants; UNC also placed Baric on leave. A senior HHS official, who reviewed the government’s classified material, told me that UNC is terrified the public will learn that they were complicit in starting the COVID pandemic.

“Baric designed the gun,” he said. “But the Chinese built it, and then they pulled the trigger.”

That same day, the Department of Justice indicted Tony Fauci’s senior advisor, David Morens, for concealing federal records concerning funding for virus research during the COVID pandemic. The indictment listed Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance as “CO-CONSPIRATOR 1” and Boston University virologist Gerald Keusch as “CO-CONSPIRATOR 2.”

Last month, I reported on newly unearthed emails that show Morens, Daszak, and Keusch plotted against me for writing a 2021 investigation for the BMJ that concluded virologists had conspired in a misinformation campaign to cover up a possible Wuhan lab accident as the COVID pandemic’s cause.

In emails discussing me and my 2021 article, Keusch asked Morens and Daszak if they knew how to get in contact with former BMJ editor Peter Smith to complain. Daszak emailed back that contacting the BMJ about me was “a really good move” as my reporting was “pretty offensive stuff.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 16:20

Trump Pauses Project Freedom Amid "Great Progress" Towards 'Complete & Final' Agreement With Iran

Trump Pauses Project Freedom Amid "Great Progress" Towards 'Complete & Final' Agreement With Iran Summary

  • Trump announce 'pause' to Project Freedom amid optimism of a "complete and final" deal with Iran; French ship confirmed hit in cruise missile attack, crew members injured

  • Rubio declares 'offensive' actions of Operation Epic Fury are over, and now Project Freedom is in swing. Another vessel comes under attack in Hormuz.

  • UAE under attack again, confirmed in state sources - however which Iran denies doing - instead saying its actions were directed at the United States. White House still hasn't declared end of ceasefire.

  • Pentagon addresses whether ceasefire over or violated: Caine says Iran's Monday operations were "all below the threshold of restarting major combat operations at this point."

  • Contradictory statements out of Tehran on UAE attack, amid reports of division between IRGC & civilian leaders.

  • Two US Navy destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz and entered the Persian Gulf.

  • Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi travels to Beijing to discuss crisis with Chinese counterpart.

The odds of a peace deal being completed just jumped...

*  *  *

Trump Pauses Project Freedom

There is a knee-jerk wave of optimism across assets with WTI crude futures lower, US equity contracts and Treasury futures higher after President Trump said Project Freedom will be paused.

Trump also said there is progress toward a final agreement with Iran which is what investors really want to see as it could potentially mean a reopening of Hormuz. 

Trump statement on his TruthSocial feed (emphasis and spacing ours):

Based on the request of Pakistan and other Countries, the tremendous Military Success that we have had during the Campaign against the Country of Iran and, additionally...

...the fact that Great Progress has been made toward a Complete and Final Agreement with Representatives of Iran...

...we have mutually agreed that, while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, Project Freedom (The Movement of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz) will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the Agreement can be finalized and signed. 

WTI crude futures are testing back below $100...

Polymarket odds of Hormuz traffic returning to normal has jumped to better than a coin-flip...

Don't hold your breath though as there have been several false starts of this kind before, and traders will soon lose faith unless there are more details from the Iranian side.

Additionally late Tuesday, a French cargo ship was confirmed hit in a missile attack, injuring crew members:

A cargo ship in the Gulf region was hit by a possible land-attack cruise missile, causing several injuries among the ship's Filipino crew, two U.S. officials told CBS News.

The hit on the CGM San Antonio — which is owned by a French firm — took place late Tuesday evening local time, the officials said. The ship was near Dubai as of midday on Tuesday, but it is not clear whether the vessel has moved since then, according to public ship tracking data.

Rubio Declares Conflict in New Stage

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced Tuesday afternoon that offensive stage of Iran war is 'over'. He further said that ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz are facing a humanitarian crisis and accused Iran of holding the world hostage by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is denying that it attacked the United Arab Emirates, with the foreign ministry saying its 'defensive actions' were 'exclusively directed at the U.S.'

Operation Epic Fury is over, now Project Freedom.

The remarks were issued just as a new attack is unfolding on a foreign cargo ship in the strategic waterway:

Reaction in oil...

...as the goalposts keep shifting:

Trump Asked Whether Ceasefire is Dead

A revealing exchange in the Oval Office strongly suggests that even amid a second Iranian attack wave on the UAE Tuesday, the White House is unwilling to say that the ceasefire has collapsed - also given there's yet been no direct exchange of fire between US and Iranian forces: 

President Trump, taking questions from reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday, would not specify what Iran would need to do to violate the cease-fire. Asked by a reporter what would constitute a violation, considering that the country has fired on U.S. ships several times, Trump said: “Well, you’ll find out, because I’ll let you know.”

He added that “they know what to do,” and “they know what not to do, more importantly.”

Earlier the Pentagon clearly indicated that the ceasefire is still active, from Washington's point of view. 

The Iranian government is meanwhile trying to bat down rumors of a division between the presidency and the IRGC/military apparatus.

Second UAE Attack Wave Active

The country's Ministry of Defense has just released official statement of inbound projectiles out of Iran:

  • The UAE's air defenses are currently dealing with missile and drone attacks originating from Iran.
  • The Ministry of Defense confirms that the sounds heard in scattered areas of the country are the result of the UAE's air defense systems intercepting ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones.
  • UAE Air Defences system are actively engaging with missiles and UAV threats MOD asserts that the sounds heard across the country are the result of ongoing engaging operations of missiles and UAV's

There are meanwhile reports of explosions being heard on Iran's Qeshm Island, and questions raised about scenes like the following:

Is Ceasefire Over? Pentagon Answers Definitively 

In the Tuesday morning Pentagon presser led by War Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine stated very clearly that the US views Monday's escalation (the attack on UAE and some vessels in the Strait of Hormuz) as actions which are "all below the threshold of restarting major combat operations at this point."

The Trump administration has argued that it doesn't have to seek congressional approval to continue military operations beyond a 60-day limit because there is a ceasefire in effect. But the question raised Monday is: does the fresh Iranian cross-Gulf mark the end of ceasefire? Clearly the Pentagon and Trump administration are saying no. "No adversary should mistake our current restraint for a lack of resolve," Caine then emphasized.

Below are some of the latest top developments from various MSM sources:

—Trump’s desire to end the Iran war is being put to the test after Tehran fired at American warships on Monday and violently disrupted a U.S. effort to revive shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Still, Trump wants to avoid a fresh bombing campaign, officials say, preferring a negotiated end to Tehran’s nuclear advancements and the weekslong war that has raised gas prices and hurt the global economy. (WSJ)

—U.S. intelligence assessments indicate that the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon has not changed since last summer, when analysts estimated that a U.S.-Israeli attack had pushed back the timeline to up to a year. The unchanged timeline suggests that significantly impeding Tehran's nuclear program may require destroying or removing Iran's remaining stockpile of highly enriched uranium. (RTRS)

—Trump says war could stretch 3 more weeks, claims US 'already won.’ (ABC)

Below: Pentagon slide in Tuesday's briefing showing Iranian attacks on Hormuz shipping: "Iran has fired at commercial vessels nine times and seized two container ships since the ceasefire was announced" (Gen. Caine).

And this puts things in perspective...

Internal Iranian Schism Over Monday UAE Attacks(?)

There's a lot of chatter that Iran's civilian government and the IRGC are at direct odds over Monday's attack on UAE, which resulted in a large blaze at the Fujairah oil facility and the three injured Indian nationals. Al Jazeera for example observes:

By targeting the facility, Iran is sending a direct message to UAE saying: “We can target your most important economic points even if you think you can get around the Strait of Hormuz,” said Turak.

Iran’s government has not confirmed or denied responsibility for the attack. Turak noted there are "quite contradictory" statements coming out of Iran, however.

And Saudi-funded Iran International claims the following dramatic schism and internal rupture over the risky cross-Gulf operation, which could signal the end of the ceasefire (though curiously President Trump himself has not said it is broken):

Exclusive information obtained by Iran International points to a growing clash between Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian and its military leadership over Monday’s escalation in the Persian Gulf and attacks on the United Arab Emirates.

According to sources familiar with Tehran’s deliberations, Pezeshkian has expressed strong anger at actions by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, led by Ahmad Vahidi, describing missile and drone strikes on the UAE as “completely irresponsible” and carried out without the government’s knowledge or coordination.

Pezeshkian is said to have described the IRGC’s approach to escalating tensions with regional countries as “madness,” warning of potentially irreversible consequences.

This certainly isn't the first time that Iran International, a London-based publication seen as also 'close' to Israeli intelligence, has alleged severe internal division in Iran's wartime decision-making, but the viewpoint is beginning to be echoed and reported on more broadly.

Two US Navy Destroyers Successfully Transit Strait

To review of Monday's major escalation, US Central Command said its forces had intercepted missiles targeting US Navy and commercial vessels, and also said American helicopters sank six small Iranian boats that officials said were targeting civilian vessels under American protection.

And also came a big milestone in terms of Washington aims to enforce Trump's newly announced Project Freedom plan to provide military escort for ships through Hormuz. Two US Navy destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz and entered the Persian Gulf on Monday and overnight after navigating an Iranian barrage, according to defense officials.

CBS reports, "The USS Truxtun and USS Mason, supported by Apache helicopters and other aircraft, faced a series of coordinated threats during the passage, the defense officials said. Iran launched small boats, missiles and drones against them in what officials described as a sustained barrage." The report underscores further that "Despite the intensity of the attacks, neither U.S. vessel was struck."

Apaches, Centcom handout 'No Military Solution'

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has issued an interesting statement decrying Trump's attempt at escalation in Hormuz, warning that there's no “military solution” to the crisis, while warning the US, UAE, and other regional countries against being drawn into a “quagmire” in the region.

"Events in Hormuz make clear that there’s no military solution to a political crisis," Araghchi wrote on X. "As talks are making progress with Pakistan’s gracious effort, the US should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers. So should the UAE. Project Freedom is Project Deadlock," to top Iranian diplomat asserted.

Also of note is that Araghchi will travel to Beijing on Tuesday for discussions with his Chinese counterpart. "During the visit he will meet his Chinese counterpart [Wang Yi] to discuss bilateral ties and regional and international developments," Iran’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Below: Graham says you either pay now or you pay later. “They tried to get a nuclear weapon. If you don’t believe that, you shouldn’t be allowed to drive.”

Officially at least, Beijing has a policy of "noninterference" in other countries’ internal affairs, and has claimed to not be involved in the Iran conflict - while Washington has consistently accused China of providing intelligence to Tehran, and even possibly military hardware or weapons.

Elsewhere in the region, South Korea’s presidential secretary Choi Soung-ah says "the safety of international maritime routes and freedom of navigation should be protected under international law" and that Seoul is "watching President Trump’s remark related to this," according Reuters. This after ann explosion and fire on a South Korean-operated ship in the Strait of Hormuz on Monday, which Trump blamed on an Iranian attack.

More Geopolitical Developments

via Newsquawk...

  •  US President Trump said Iran war could go on for another two to three weeks; time is not of the essence.
  • IRGC military source told Tasnim that the US shot two small boats carrying civilians instead of shooting IRGC speedboats.
  • "Iranian Defense Council member Ali Akbar Ahmadian: Our security does not accept negotiations, and Washington obstructed global navigation and energy security", Al Jazeera reported.
  • Iranian President Pezeshkian has requested an immediate and emergency meeting with Supreme Leader Khamenei to ask him to stop IRGC attacks on Persian Gulf nations and prevent a recurrence, Iran International reported.
  • Pezeshkian reportedly outlined that the IRGC attack on the UAE occurred without the knowledge of the government.
  • US intelligence suggests strikes from the start of the war led to limited new damage to Iran's nuclear programme, Reuters sources say.
  • US State Department official to Al Jazeera said the President is clear that direct communication between Israel and Lebanon is the best path toward peace; We are working to prepare the necessary conditions and political momentum to move forward with this
  • Two US Navy destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz and entered the Persian Gulf after navigating an Iranian barrage, according to defense officials who spoke to CBS News; "Iran launched small boats, missiles and drones against them".
  • Maersk (MAERSKB DC) said its subsidiary's US-flagged vehicle carrier, Alliance Fairfax, exited the Gulf via Strait of Hormuz on May 4th.
  • US Treasury Secretary Bessent had a "fierce row" with UK Chancellor Reeves last month over her outspoken criticism of the Iranian war, FT sources say.
  • US CENTCOM posted "US warships and aircraft deployed to the Middle East are enforcing the naval blockade against Iran while executing Project Freedom to support the free flow of commerce through the Strait of Hormuz.".
  • US officials say military closer to resuming combat operations than 24 hours ago, Fox reported.
  • US President Trump reiterates he feels Europe has been "very disappointing".
  • Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi posted "As talks are making progress with Pakistan's gracious effort, the US should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers. So should the UAE.".
  • Full post:"Events in Hormuz make clear that there's no military solution to a political crisis. As talks are making progress with Pakistan's gracious effort, the U.S. should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers. So should the UAE.Project Freedom is Project Deadlock.".
  • Mehr News Agency said a fire broke out in two commercial ships and spread to two others in Dayyer port south of Iran; cause not clear.
  • "Explosions were heard tonight in the port of Bandar Abbas (Iran) and on Qassem Island (Iran) in the Persian Gulf", N12 journalist reported citing sources in Iran.
  • IRGC political deputy said traffic in the Strait of Hormuz will only be done with Iran's permission, ISNA reported; "Any kind of traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, if it is from the enemy, will be met with a decisive and crushing response".
  • Iranian Parliamentary Speaker Ghalibaf said the new equation of the Strait of Hormuz is being solidified.
  • Actions of the US and allies have threatened the security of shipping and energy.
  • UNSC resolution prepared by the US, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait opens the door for potential enforcement measures, AsharqNews reported citing the resolution "to be distributed tomorrow".
Tyler Durden Tue, 05/05/2026 - 16:00

Pages