Europe Will Lose Billions In Revenue If US Military Bases Shut Down

Europe is in far greater economic trouble that most people realize.  In an April 2026 report by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), it was reveled that the UK's GDP per capita is lower than all 50 U.S. states, including the poorest, Mississippi. While the majority of Britons mistakenly believe the UK is as wealthy or wealthier than the US, data shows the UK's average income lags behind the lowest-performing US states, highlighting a significant economic gap.

The quiet decline of the once mighty British Empire right under the nose of the general populace is just one of many examples of Europe not understanding their own precarious economic circumstances. 

Far-left governments on the other side of the Atlantic have openly sought to sabotage conservative political movements, imposing authoritarian lawfare and mass censorship in order to prevent losing their grip on power.  The globalist leadership in these countries has designated the Trump Administration and US nationalist groups as a "bad influence" on their own citizens. 

The key conflict is about forced third world immigration and forced multiculturalism.  Leftist politicians desperately want this process to continue, but the US is enforcing a migrant reversal, which makes Europeans wonder why their governments are not doing the same?  The juxtaposition is embarrassing and makes the liberal agenda more difficult. 

Because of this snub against the multicultural project, the Trump Administration's scrutiny of European censorship, tariff's against nations that had their own tariffs on US goods and Trump's demand that NATO countries pay their fair share in defense, the elitists across the pond have turned sour on their relationship with America.

They have been noticeably interested in undermining US operations in the Gulf against Iran, denying the US access to airspace and making things unnecessarily complicated.  One can theorize the deeper motives behind this decision (the presence of 50 million Muslims in Europe, many of them migrants, might explain the apprehension to do anything that might be seen as European hostility to Iran), but it's clear that the behavior of some EU leaders has grown increasingly petty.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently sparked intense controversy by stating that the U.S. is being "humiliated" by Iran and lacks a clear strategy in the conflict, calling the situation "ill-considered".  It's difficult to understand this assertion without knowing Merz's definition of "humiliation". 

With the majority of Iran's leadership dead or incapacitated, at least half of their missile stock destroyed and Trump's reverse blockade crushing the Iranian economy within just a couple weeks ($1 US dollar is currently equal to around 1.8 million Rial), one has to wonder what success looks like to the Germans (perhaps an old-school blitzkrieg would impress them more). 

It doesn't really matter, because Merz's comments were met with a sharp response from the Trump Admin, and now it is likely that US bases in the country will soon be shut down.  Upon hearing this news, Merz suddenly changed his tune and praised the US partnership with Germany:

"The United States is and will remain Germany‘s most important partner in the North Atlantic Alliance. We share a common goal: Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons..."

The United States is and will remain Germany‘s most important partner in the North Atlantic Alliance. We share a common goal: Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

— Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz (@bundeskanzler) May 3, 2026

That's an incredible attitude adjustment in the span of only 24 hours.  At the same time, a NATO spokesperson scrambled to rekindle diplomatic relations, claiming that European leaders were trying to understand the US decision to pull troops, as if the reasons were not blatantly clear already. 

Why is Merz abruptly shifting his rhetoric?  Probably because he just realized the benefits Germany draws from the US military bases in the region; benefits which Germany has enjoyed for decades. 

Citizens in Italy, Spain and Germany are expressing concerns that the removal of US bases will cost local and national economies dearly.  With approximately 36,400 active-duty US personnel (as of late 2025) across major sites like Ramstein Air Base and facilities in Bavaria, the US military functions as a major economic engine, especially in rural and smaller urban areas. 

Germany rakes in around $4.1 billion annually through US spending around military bases.  US operations support more than 10,000 direct German jobs (civilian employees at bases) and an estimated 70,000 indirect jobs (in construction, services, and supply chains). The US also invests billions annually in base operations, expansion, and modernization.  The removal of troops would squeeze these already struggling rural communities.   

President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw at least 5,000 US troops from Germany has raised concerns among residents living near Ramstein Air Base. pic.twitter.com/hllQNYiuYg

— DW News (@dwnews) May 3, 2026

Italy collects around $312 million every year in base generated revenues in Naples alone, and at least 5000 direct jobs are created. 

In Spain, $713 million is pumped into local economies annually through US bases, plus around 8000 jobs for Spanish military staff and civilian workers.   

U.S. defense spending directly supporting European security is substantial, with the U.S. maintaining a nearly $1 trillion global defense budget. While direct on-ground operational costs were previously estimated around $30–$36 billion annually in 2025.  This might not sound like much, but the effects are substantial in poorer rural areas.  

The economic advantages of the US presence go far beyond direct spending.  US military security allows Europe to spend minimal on defense, which means they have far more cash to spend on social welfare programs like universal healthcare.  All of these programs go away with a US exit from NATO.  

Beyond the obvious loss of defense capability that comes with a US exit from NATO, the economic factor should not be overlooked.   

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/04/2026 - 05:45

All-Time High 55% Of Americans Say That Their Financial Situations Are Getting Worse

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse,

Americans were not even this stressed about their financial situations during the Great Recession. As you will see below, a brand new Gallup survey has discovered that 55 percent of Americans believe that their finances are getting worse. That is higher than any reading that Gallup recorded during the recession of 2008 and 2009, and it is higher than any reading that Gallup recorded during the pandemic. But of course this shouldn’t exactly be a surprise to any of us. We have been in a historic cost of living crisis since 2020, and our standard of living has been steadily deteriorating as the purchasing power of our money has gone down.

If you are making the same amount of money as you did at the beginning of this decade, you are in far worse shape financially today.

That is just the reality of the time that we are living in.

The cost of just about everything has been going up and up and up.

As a result, people are more concerned about the economy than anything else.

According to Gallup, the percentage of Americans that believe that their finances are getting worse has been rising for five years in a row and is now at the highest level ever recorded…

Americans’ financial outlook in 2026 is also historically poor, with a record 55% now saying their financial situation is getting worse. While similar to last year’s 53%, this is up from 47% in 2024 and marks the fifth consecutive year more Americans say their finances are worsening rather than improving.

The only similar multiyear period when the larger share felt their financial situation was worsening was during the Great Recession.

At this stage, there is no denying the trend that we are witnessing.

Gallup found that Americans are particularly concerned about monthly bills, healthcare and retirement…

Majorities worry about not having enough money for retirement (62%) and being unable to cover medical costs in the event of a serious accident or illness (60%). Slightly smaller majorities (54% each) worry about their investment returns and maintaining their standard of living.

Nearly half are concerned about routine healthcare costs (48%), while 41% worry about paying their normal monthly bills and 40% about affording college. Fewer worry about housing costs (35%) or making minimum credit card payments (28%).

Living paycheck to paycheck is not fun at all.

Many of you know exactly what I am talking about.

Today, much of the country is just one major setback away from financial ruin…

According to a recent national survey, a little over $6,000 in additional debt is all it takes to push a family over the edge. Six thousand dollars. The cost of a half-decent secondhand car. A modest kitchen renovation. In the country that put a man on the moon, mapped the human genome, won two world wars, and produces more billionaires per capita than anywhere on earth, that’s the cliff edge.

The old vocabulary no longer fits. The conservative catechism of thrift, discipline, and delayed gratification has aged poorly in light of the evidence. Tariffs, as the survey notes, rippled through supply chains and left a sizeable dent in consumers’ pockets. Health care waits in the background, capable of dismantling a decade of careful saving with a single bad diagnosis. American households have always lived under financial pressure. The difference now is the direction — or rather, the directions. It is coming from everywhere at once, which is what makes it almost impossible to outrun.

The middle class is being systematically eviscerated all around us.

It is a national crisis that just keeps intensifying year after year.

As finances have gotten tighter and tighter, millions upon millions of Americans have fundamentally changed their behavior…

The response has been behavioral rather than political, which is another way of saying people have given up waiting for someone to fix it. Nights out get canceled. Rent falls behind. Medical appointments get postponed and rarely rescheduled. None of this is irrational. When survival takes priority, everything else enters a waiting room with no clear appointment time. What makes it particularly disturbing is that financial distress doesn’t stay financial. It moves through relationships and communities, rearranging what people believe is possible for themselves.

Some will call it hyperbolic to suggest the American Dream is dead. Perhaps. But a dream balanced on a six-thousand-dollar ledge, in a stiff wind, is not exactly thriving. With energy prices soaring and the probability of a recession climbing with every new data release, the wind is picking up.

What about you?

Have you found yourself changing your spending behavior in recent years in an attempt to save money?

If so, there are countless others that are in the exact same shoes.

Unfortunately, the outlook for the months ahead is not promising at all.

On Tuesday, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States rose to the highest level that we have seen since the war with Iran began…

Gas prices climbed Tuesday to their highest level since the Iran conflict began.

The national average for a gallon of regular hit $4.18, up 15 cents from a week earlier and about $1 higher than a year ago, according to AAA.

As energy prices rise, it is going to affect the cost of everything else too.

Meanwhile, the government just continues to tax us into oblivion.

As I have detailed in other articles, each year Americans are hit with literally dozens of different taxes and fees.

When you add all of them together, some Americans end up paying more than 50 percent of their incomes in taxes and fees.

In fact, Bill Maher is claiming that he pays about 60 percent of his income in taxes and fees…

Even for liberal HBO host Bill Maher, the math behind Tax Day no longer adds up.

Maher took to his platform on “Real Time” to sound the alarm on a staggering personal tax burden that he says claims the majority of his earnings, sparking a wider debate on whether the American government is simply “incompetent and corrupt” despite a $5 trillion revenue stream.

“Last week was Tax Day… I paid to the government, if you add in state tax, local, sales, property, fees, Obamacare, probably almost 60% of what I earn. That’s a lot,” Maher said on a recent episode.

If you have to hand over more than half of what you earn to the government, you are no longer living in a capitalist system.

Some people out there don’t seem to have figured that out yet.

In this environment, you should be thankful if you still have an income coming in, because we continue to see mass layoffs all over the nation.

For example, Nike just announced yet another round of layoffs…

Nike announced a new round of layoffs Thursday affecting approximately 1,400 employees across the organization, mostly concentrated in its technology department.

In a note from COO Venkatesh Alagirisamy, the company said the layoffs were part of Nike’s broader “Win Now” turnaround strategy aiming to reshape its technology team, modernize its Air manufacturing, move some of its Converse Footwear operations and integrate its materials supply chain work into its footwear and apparel supply chain teams.

Our economy is coming apart at the seams all around us.

And now the crisis in the Middle East threatens to plunge the entire global system into an extended downturn.

We really are facing a nightmare scenario, and it won’t be too long before that is completely and utterly obvious to everyone.

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/04/2026 - 04:15

Russia's Oil Revenues Surge As The World Scrambles For Supply

Authored by Felicity Bradstock via oilprice.com,

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, several major world powers introduced strict sanctions on trade with Moscow. Europe and the United States have been gradually decreasing their dependence on Russian gas and other energy products and putting pressure on other countries to do the same, to place a financial strain on Moscow, as the war with Ukraine continues. However, some countries, such as India and China, have used these sanctions as an excuse to buy discounted crude and gas from Russia, in a bid to reduce costs and boost energy security. 

Imports of Russian crude to China and India have increased significantly since 2022. In 2024, China bought a record of more than 100 million tonnes of Russian oil, which contributed nearly 20 percent of its energy imports. Meanwhile, India spent an estimated $140 billion on Russian energy imports. Over the last year, both Asian countries deepened their ties with Moscow following the imposition of high tariffs on imports by the United States. 

Although several countries have decreased their dependence on Russian energy since the invasion of Ukraine, shifting dependence to alternative energy sources, some have been forced to turn back to Russia in the wake of the “largest oil disruption in history”. Even the United States, the main advocate for the imposition of strict sanctions on Russian energy, appears to have changed its tune in recent weeks.

On 16th April, the U.S. Treasury Department extended a sanctions exemption on the sale of some Russian crude, which is expected to be in effect until May 16. This follows a previous sanctions waiver on Russia, which expired on April 11. The move by the Trump administration to ease sanctions is in response to the strain placed on the global energy market following the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran in February and subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz. 

The move is expected to decrease the cost of oil as countries are permitted to legally purchase hundreds of millions of barrels of crude from Russia. A spokeswoman from the U.S. Treasury said: “As negotiations accelerate, Treasury wants to ensure all oil is available to those who need it.”

In recent weeks, it has remained unclear if the Strait of Hormuz will be fully opened again or whether it will remain under threat of attack. On April 10th, Iran reopened the Strait to all commercial ships before closing it once again less than 24 hours later, citing the ongoing U.S. blockade on Iranian ports as the cause.

As the trade outlook in the Middle East remains uncertain, Russian sales of crude to India are expected to remain near record highs in April and May, largely owing to the latest U.S. sanctions waiver. The finances earned from the sale of Russian oil could help Moscow fund its military spending for the war in Ukraine.

India shipped around 2.25 million bpd of Russian crude in March, marking an increase of almost 100 percent compared to February volumes. Russian crude arrivals in Indian ports were expected to reach 2.1 million bpd for the week of April 20 to 27, an increase from 1.67 million bpd the previous week.

The ongoing disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has led India and China to compete for global oil supplies, mainly from Russia, as well as Saudi Arabia. “The competition for Russian crude between India and China has been intense and will continue to be so for June-loading cargoes,” a senior analyst at Kpler, Muyu Xu, told CNBC. “The de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz is prompting Asian countries to seek cheap crude that is readily available, and Russian crude falls into this category,” added Xu.

Before the War in Iran, China was importing vast quantities of Iranian crude. However, the conflict has caused major disruptions to energy trade as well as led to the destruction of energy infrastructure across the Middle East. This has led China to rely more heavily on Russia for its oil supplies.

It is not just China and India that are turning to Russian energy, as, in April, Indonesia announced plans to buy up to 150 million barrels of oil from Russia. Roughly 20 to 25 percent of Indonesia’s oil imports typically come from the Middle East and traverse the Strait of Hormuz. “Indonesia has now secured a commitment from the Russian government. We can store 150 million barrels in Indonesia to address economic volatility issues,” the Antara state news agency quoted President Prabowo Subianto’s brother Hashim as saying. 

The ongoing Middle East conflict continues to drive up energy prices due to the severe energy trade disruptions, caused largely by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This has led many governments to seek alternative energy sources to ensure their energy security for the coming months. The temporary waiver for sanctions on the import of Russian energy is expected to drive up oil and gas trade significantly in the coming months, which could result in more money being channelled into Russia’s war efforts in Ukraine – the exact thing that the United States and Europe were originally trying to avoid by introducing sanctions.

Tyler Durden Mon, 05/04/2026 - 03:30

Rudy Giuliani Hospitalized In Critical Condition

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has been hospitalized and is in critical condition, according to The New York Times, citing his spokesman, Ted Goodman.

"Mayor Giuliani is a fighter who has faced every challenge in his life with unwavering strength, and he's fighting with that same level of strength as we speak," Goodman said, before asking "that you join us in prayer" for the former NYC mayor.

Goodman did not disclose what medical emergency sent Giuliani to a Florida hospital Sunday afternoon.

President Trump also released a statement on Giuliani's medical emergency, telling those on Truth Social, "Our fabulous Rudy Giuliani, a True Warrior, and the Best Mayor in the History of New York City, BY FAR, has been hospitalized, and is in critical condition."

"What a tragedy that he was treated so badly by the Radical Left Lunatics, Democrats ALL — AND HE WAS RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING! They cheated in the Elections, fabricated hundreds of stories, did everything possible to destroy our Nation, and now, look at Rudy. So sad!" the president said.

Giuliani is a former federal prosecutor, NYC mayor, and longtime Trump supporter.

He first rose to national prominence as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York in the 1980s, where he prosecuted organized crime, Wall Street corruption, drug trafficking, and public corruption.

One of his most defining legal wins was helping break the power grip of NY's Mafia families through RICO prosecutions.

From the mid-1990s through 2001, Giuliani served as mayor of NYC, where his administration became known for its tough-on-crime posture. He later ran unsuccessfully for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination before re-emerging as a major political figure and Donald Trump's personal attorney, particularly during the Russia hoax investigation and the post-2020 election fight.

*This is a developing story.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 19:44

Jane Street Paid Employees $9.4 Billion, Twice What It Paid Last Year, After Record 2025 Results

Jane Street Group has evolved from a niche trading shop into one of Wall Street’s most profitable firms and employees are reaping the rewards. The firm paid roughly $9.4 billion in compensation last year, more than twice what it distributed a year earlier, according to Bloomberg.

On average, that translated to about $2.7 million per employee, far ahead of traditional banks like Goldman Sachs. The massive payouts followed a record year in which Jane Street generated nearly $40 billion in trading revenue, outpacing major banks and rivals in the market-making business.

Bloomberg writes that the firm started in 2000 trading American depositary receipts before expanding into ETFs and other electronically traded assets. As more markets became automated, Jane Street scaled aggressively and now handles trading across equities, bonds, ETFs, and other products.

Its financial resources have grown just as dramatically. The firm’s internal capital base has climbed to roughly $45 billion, up nearly twentyfold over the past decade, giving it significant flexibility to capitalize on market swings without relying heavily on outside funding. It has also raised additional cash through debt markets.

That war chest has allowed Jane Street to move beyond day-to-day trading. The firm has built positions in high-growth tech companies, including Anthropic, and has also backed CoreWeave while exploring deals involving Fluidstack.

Jane Street also operates differently from most major financial firms. It doesn’t have a traditional CEO hierarchy and is instead overseen by a group of partners. The firm is well known for recruiting mathematicians, engineers, and problem-solvers to sharpen its trading systems.

Despite regulatory and legal challenges — including scrutiny in India and litigation tied to the collapse of Terraform Labs — Jane Street continues to widen its lead. It outperformed Citadel Securities last year and is continuing to expand, including plans for a larger office in London.

Recall, we wrote just days ago that Jane Street reeled in a Wall Street record $39.6 billion of trading revenue last year, more than any Wall Street bank. According to the report, the firm beat out all global investment banks after reaping $15.5 billion in the year’s final quarter, and with only 3,500 employees, it beat nearest rival JPMorgan by 11% during the year. The company's adjusted ETBIDA for the full year was a stunning $31.2 billion. 

While Jane Street’s profits were lifted by surging valuations of its stakes in privately held companies, the firm’s main business matching buyers and sellers across assets thrived on bouts of market volatility. The new annual record - which includes gains on long-term investments - shows "how the balance of power has shifted in one of the most lucrative arenas of global finance."

While it has kept a remarkable low profile, its recent public appearances have been less than laudatory: The company's record haul is confirmation that Jane Street, long known for its secrecy, was able to keep growing after getting thrust into the spotlight in mid-2025 when authorities in India accused of manipulating markets while running what had once been one of the firm’s most lucrative trading strategies.

Jane Street has denied those allegations and is fighting them in court. In February, Jane Street was sued by the bankrupt Terraform Labs estate, accusing it of engaging in insider trading that precipitated the $40 billion crash of cryptocurrencies associated with Terraform; this week the HFT firm also urged a judge to throw out that lawsuit.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 19:15

Jailed Iranian Nobel Peace Prize Winner Hospitalized In Critical Condition

Narges Mohammadi, the 2023 Nobel Peace Prize laureate and prominent Iranian human rights activist, remains in critical condition in a hospital in Zanjan, northwestern Iran, after collapsing in prison last week with severe cardiac distress. She was transferred by ambulance to the local hospital’s coronary care unit on Friday, May 1, 2026, following repeated episodes of loss of consciousness, extreme chest pain, and blood pressure fluctuations, the NY Times reports.

Narges Mohammadi poses in an undated photo provided by her family. The Nobel laureate has suffered from heart ailments for years, according to her family. Credit...Mohammadi family

Her family and lawyer have urgently called for her transfer to a specialized facility in Tehran, where her longtime cardiologist could provide care, but Iranian judicial authorities have refused the requests. The Narges Foundation and her husband, Taghi Rahmani, who lives in exile in Paris with their children, stated that her life is in danger and described the move to the Zanjan hospital as a “last-minute” response after prison doctors determined her condition could no longer be managed on-site.

“We are extremely worried about her; she has collapsed and lost consciousness several times, and her life is in danger,” Rahmani said in an interview. “Our request is basic and urgent: send her to a hospital in Tehran immediately.” Her lawyer, Mostafa Nili, confirmed on social media that she had experienced acute cardiac crisis symptoms in recent days and was initially reluctant to go to the Zanjan facility due to her medical history, which includes multiple angiographies and stent placements.

Mohammadi, 54, has long suffered from chronic heart problems, a prior lung embolism (pulmonary embolism), and persistent headaches linked to ill-treatment in prison, including beatings by guards, according to her family and legal team. Prison authorities have repeatedly denied her adequate medical care in the past, opting instead for treatment in rudimentary prison clinics despite medical recommendations for specialized care.

This latest emergency follows a suspected heart attack in late March 2026, when she was found unconscious in her cell in Zanjan Prison on March 24. Fellow inmates reported she lay with her eyes rolled back for over an hour. Despite clear signs of cardiac distress, authorities refused hospital transfer or specialist evaluation at the time, according to reports from her legal team and visits documented by human rights groups.

She has spent much of her adult life imprisoned for her pro-democracy and women’s rights activism in Iran’s theocratic system. She was previously serving a sentence that included approximately 10 years on national security charges. In February 2026, a court added seven and a half more years—six years for “assembly and collusion against national security” and one and a half years for “propaganda activities”—along with a two-year internal exile and travel ban, bringing her total sentence to around 17–18 years, according to her foundation and lawyers.

She had been granted a yearlong medical furlough in December 2024 due to her deteriorating health but was rearrested on December 12, 2025, while attending a memorial service in Mashhad for slain human rights lawyer Khosro Alikordi. She delivered a speech critical of the government and was violently detained along with other activists. She was subsequently transferred to the more restrictive Zanjan Prison, far from her family in Tehran.

In 2023, while imprisoned, she received the Nobel Peace Prize for “her fight against the oppression of women in Iran and her fight to promote human rights and freedom for all.” The award highlighted her decades of work documenting executions, advocating against compulsory hijab laws, and supporting political prisoners.

Her current hospitalization occurs against a backdrop of intensified repression in Iran. Following nationwide anti-government protests in January 2026 and the escalation of conflict involving the United States and Israel that began in late February 2026, authorities have ramped up arrests of activists, journalists, and students. Human rights monitors report that Iran has carried out at least 22 executions of political prisoners in the past six weeks (mid-March to late April 2026), with at least 10 linked to the January protests. Dozens more face imminent risk of execution.

On April 30, 2026 (Thursday), 21-year-old Sasan Azadvar Junaqani (also spelled Jonaghani or Joonqani), a karate athlete from Isfahan, was executed in Dastgerd Prison in Isfahan. Arrested during the January protests and accused of throwing a stone at security forces and other protest-related acts, he was convicted of “moharebeh” (enmity against God) in a swift Revolutionary Court proceeding widely criticized by rights groups as a sham trial lacking due process. Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) and HRANA documented the case as one of at least 10 protester executions tied to the recent demonstrations.

Omid Memarian, a senior fellow and Iran expert at the Washington, D.C.-based Dawn think tank focused on U.S. foreign policy, described the pattern as part of a broader campaign of intimidation enabled by the wartime environment.

“The wartime security environment has significantly increased the risks of activism in Iran, giving the government a broader pretext to use violence and making the level of repression, outside peak protest moments, considerably harsher than before the war,” Memarian said.

Iran’s mission to the United Nations declined to comment on Ms. Mohammadi’s health situation. Her family, the Narges Foundation, and international observers continue to demand her immediate transfer to Tehran for proper medical treatment and have expressed fears that delays could prove fatal. As of Saturday, May 2, and into Sunday, May 3, she remained in unstable condition in the Zanjan hospital’s intensive care unit, receiving oxygen support amid ongoing concerns from relatives and rights advocates.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 18:05

Contempt Of Court: Hakeem Jeffries Denounces the Supreme Court As "Illegitimate"

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais took 36 pages to explain why Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is about combating intentional racial discrimination, not allowing racial gerrymandering. However, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries wrapped it up in one word: “illegitimate.”

Jeffries was not speaking of the case, but the Court. The man who would become the next Speaker of the House if Democrats retake power in November has joined other radicals in denying the legitimacy of the nation’s highest court.

Just for the record, the Supreme Court did not strike down Section 2, but said that neither the law nor the Constitution allows legislators to manipulate district lines to guarantee that candidates of a particular race will be elected. It was written not to give any race an advantage, but to prevent a state from creating a disadvantage to voters based on their race. The Act prevents any State from intentionally drawing districts “to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.”

This is a matter upon which people of good faith can disagree. Many of the justices have been long opposed to racial criteria in areas ranging from college admissions to voting districts. Chief Justice John Roberts stated it bluntly in 2006 that “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” Like others, Roberts abhors racial discrimination but declared in another case that “way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

You will find no such distinctions in much of the press where experts declared the death of equal voting laws in America. UCLA Law Professor Richard Hasen dispenses with any nuance and simply ran a Slate column titled “The Slaying of the Voting Rights Act by the Coward Alito.”

For years, liberal law professors have been trashing conservative justices, including Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, who called them  “partisan hacks.”

However, the name-calling has mutated into a movement to scrap the Court or the Constitution, or both. Chemerinsky wrote a book recently titled “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) joined Jeffries in calling for changing the Supreme Court after the decision: “we’re going to have to try to transform the way the Supreme Court has been gerrymandered itself and stacked and packed with MAGA appointees.”

There was, of course, no such movement during the decades with a liberal majority that set aside an array of long-standing cases. It was only when a stable conservative majority emerged that law professors declared the Court illegitimate or dangerous, with many calling for packing the Court with an instant liberal majority once Democrats retake power.

I discuss some of these voices as the “new Jacobins” in my book Rage and the Republic, figures echoing the radical concepts or means used in France before what became known as “The Terror.”

Law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale have called for the nation to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.” Last December, they published a column titled “It’s Time to Accept that the US Supreme Court is Illegitimate and Must be Replaced.”

They insist that citizens must be rid of this meddlesome court: “remaking institutions like the US supreme court so that Americans don’t have to suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule that makes a parody of the democracy they were promised.”

Many Democrats realize that the public is rather attached to both the Constitution and its core institutions. That is why various Democratic politicians and pundits have been pledging to pack the Court once they are back in power.  Some have suggested that, if they are going to change the political system and retain power, they will have to do it with the help of a compliant Court.

Democratic strategist James Carville stated matter-of-factly, “They’re going to recommend that the number of Supreme Court justices go from nine to 13. That’s going to happen, people.” He added recently, “Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.”

To do that, you must first delegitimate the Court. You must attack both the individual justices and the institution itself. You need true rage to get a people to tear apart the core institution of a Republic on its 250th anniversary.

Now you have the next possible Speaker of the United States declaring the Supreme Court illegitimate because he disagrees with its interpretation of the law.

What these figures do not mention is that the majority of opinions by the Supreme Court are unanimous or nearly unanimous.  A comparably few cases break along strict ideological 6-3 lines. Indeed, just last week, it was President Donald Trump who was denouncing the conservative justices as disloyal and weak for, again, ruling against his Administration.

It is not the voting record nor the underlying interpretations that are motivating this campaign of delegitimation. It is power. Former Attorney General Eric Holder explained it most clearly recently in pushing the packing plan after the Democrats retake power: “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power, if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.”

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

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 12:50

Big Tech Is Funding Space Solar And Fusion While Running On Gas

Authored by Haley Zaremba via OilPrice.com,

• Meta signed a deal with startup Overview Energy to develop up to 1 gigawatt of space-based solar power, though a pilot satellite won't launch until 2028 at the earliest -- and commercial viability remains years away.

• Despite clean energy ambitions, Big Tech is still heavily dependent on natural gas: Meta is funding 10 new gas plants for its Louisiana data center campus, and Google is building a major gas facility in North Texas.

• Google admitted its carbon emissions rose 48% in five years and has conceded its 2030 net-zero target may be out of reach as AI energy demand continues to accelerate.

The AI boom has unleashed an energy monster unlike anything the world has ever seen before. No one is exactly sure how much energy the AI sector will require in the coming years as large language models continue to advance and expand. In fact, we don’t even really know how much energy it’s consuming now. But most experts agree that we can expect a sharp and continuing rise in demand from the data centers that power the tech sector in the coming years as the global economy increasingly integrates AI into virtually every market sector on Earth.

“AI’s integration into almost everything from customer service calls to algorithmic ‘bosses’ to warfare is fueling enormous demand,” the Washington Post reported last year. “Despite dramatic efficiency improvements, pouring those gains back into bigger, hungrier models powered by fossil fuels will create the energy monster we imagine.”

And, so far, it’s consumers who are bearing the burden of this ‘energy monster.’ As data centers place unprecedented strain on local power grids, consumers are paying the price for the extra competition at the meter. But this system is unsustainable, and in flux. In May, as a result of voter outcry ahead of the midterm elections, Big Tech firms signed a pledge to either purchase or provide their own energy supplies to power their energy-hungry data centers in order to buffer consumers from rising energy prices.

As a result, major tech firms are starting to invest more heavily in next-gen and clean energy alternatives in a bid to find ways to power their enormous future needs without throwing their climate pledges out the window. Just this week, Meta announced a deal with Overview Energy to start developing a solar power system in space, which would be able to beam energy down to Earth even in darkness.

Overview Energy is a startup seeking to put solar satellites into Earth’s orbit, where they can harvest power from the sun at all times of day and night. Meta, the company behind Facebook, has signed a deal with the energy startup to develop up to 1 gigawatt of space solar power, or the equivalent of the energy output of a nuclear reactor.

However, the deal is all theoretical at this point, as the technology of space solar has not yet caught up to the vision set out by the two companies. Overview Energy aims to launch a pilot satellite into orbit by 2028 – meaning that a gigawatt of power is still quite a few years away from becoming a reality, if it comes to fruition at all. But proponents of the technology feel that it’s just a matter of time before space-based solar becomes commercially viable, and some contend that it could even be cost-competitive with other energy sources as soon as 2040.

Silicon Valley is also investing more and more into a high-stakes bet on nuclear fusion as a silver bullet solution to slay the AI energy monster. “There’s no way to get there without a breakthrough,” Sam Altman, co-founder and CEO of ChatGPT firm OpenAI, said at the 2024 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “It motivates us to go invest more in fusion,” he went on to specify.

Tech giants, including Meta and Google are also increasingly investing in next-gen geothermal energy research, which uses enhanced drilling methods borrowed from the oil and gas sector and even, in some projects, from nuclear fusion to drill down to tap into the Earth’s heat from nearly anywhere on the surface.

In the meantime, however, Meta and other Big Tech firms are heavily relying on natural gas to power its massive AI ambitions. Meta alone is funding the development of 10 new gas-fired plants for its biggest-ever AI data center campus in rural Louisiana. Meanwhile, Google is developing a massive natural gas facility attached to a data center campus in North Texas.

So while Big Tech has major clean energy ambitions, these technologies are still years away, and real-time emissions are continuing to balloon. In 2024, Google admitted that the firm’s carbon emissions had risen 48 percent in five years thanks to the AI boom. Google had previously pledged to reach net zero by 2030, but the officials have conceded that “as we further integrate AI into our products, reducing emissions may be challenging.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 11:40

Will Black Voters Rescue The GOP In 2026?

The Republican Party is bracing for a brutal midterm election this year. Polls show Democrats ahead in the generic congressional ballot, and prediction markets give them solid odds of taking the House and a modest chance of flipping the Senate. But despite polls and prediction markets, there are signs that the GOP could defy history.

And it comes down to black voters.

Could black voters actually be the secret weapon that keeps Republicans in power after the 2026 midterms? The numbers, at least according to CNN's Harry Enten, suggest the question is worth asking seriously.

Enten laid out a striking case, walking through data that shows Donald Trump and the GOP making inroads with African American voters that the Republican Party simply hasn't seen in decades. 

While there’s no doubt that Democrats still have a solid advantage among black voters, that advantage is shrinking, and in tight races, even modest shifts can flip outcomes.

Trump's approval rating among black voters sat at 12% during his first term. It's now at 16%. It’s a modest shift that could be consequential, Enten argues, in states like Georgia, where margins are razor-thin, and every percentage point is a battleground. "Republicans absolutely love the shift that's going on," Enten said, "because Democrats have had such a long-term advantage." He argued that Trump "actually gaining ground versus where he was in term number one... has major implications for elections down the line."

The party identification numbers are another good sign for the GOP in November. Democrats have a 51-point advantage with African-American voters, which may sound good, but it’s actually a devastating number when you consider that during Trump's first term, Democrats held a 63-point advantage. 

The Democratic advantage has shrunk by 12 points. 

"This to me was absolutely stunning," Enten said, noting that the Democratic lead among black voters is now "actually smaller than any lead from 2006 to 2021" - a stretch of time that includes Barack Obama's two presidential runs.

What makes this more than just a polling curiosity is that the gains appear to be sticking. Democrats got shellacked with black voters in 2024. Trump turned in what Enten called a "historically strong performance" with that group, and Democrats had their worst showing in a generation. The natural assumption would be that some of that was a one-cycle anomaly, and that current economic concerns and opposition to the war in Iran would erase the gains Trump made. 

But the data says otherwise. 

Pre-election polling ahead of 2024 showed Kamala Harris leading among Black voters by 63 points. That number now sits at 62 points. "Republicans are holding onto the gains that they made among African Americans in 2024," Enten observed.

Whether these gains will stick after Trump leaves office remains to be seen, but as far as the 2026 midterm elections go, it’s clear there’s no Democratic bounce-back. The voters who drifted toward Trump or away from the Democratic Party haven't come back. This is a huge problem for the Democratic Party coalition, which has relied heavily on the loyalty of black voters.

 "The Donald Trump-led Republican Party is making gains among African Americans that we simply put have not seen the Republican Party make in a generation." 

Trump's GOP is holding on to the generational gains they made with Black voters in the 2024 election.

The GOP has gained 12 pts on the Dems on party id with African Americans vs. Trump term 1 at this point.

Trump's approval with Black voters is higher than it was in term 1. pic.twitter.com/EKiEv561jk

— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) April 30, 2026

The implications of these numbers is huge for the 2026 midterms.

Southern states with competitive House and Senate races depend heavily on black voter turnout and margins. This means that if Democrats are hemorrhaging even a few percentage points of that support, the math gets ugly for them really

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 11:05

The Left's Reaction To Arrest Of The Latest UK Stabbing Is As Predictable As It Is Disgraceful

Authored by Paul Birch via DailySceptic.org,

These people have never been in a life-or-death situation like the arresting officers

One would think that even when the police successfully detain a suspect who was alleged to have been conducting a marauding knife attack, the professional activists would have a day off.

But you would be wrong. Amid all the ‘Don’t Look Back in Anger’ cliché bingo, voices of criticism were heard. Among them, the blue-tick career race-baiter Shola Mos-Shogbamimu. She was quick to take to X following yesterday’s attack on the Jewish community in Golders Green, north London. The 45 year-old suspect, a British national of Somali origin, had reportedly stabbed two Jewish men at random. The suspect – depressingly, inevitably – had previously been referred to the Government’s counter radicalisation programme, Prevent.

Shola Mos-Shogbamimu criticised police officers who are shown kicking the suspect in the head while he is on the ground. She opined:

Contemptible abuse of police power. Why kick him in the head several times when he’s already Tasered and in your control? Should he not be alive to be brought to justice in a court of law for stabbing two Jews??!! Disgusting.

Also, Green Party leader Zack Polanski, still playing at politics, was quick to condemn the actions of the arresting officers, using a retweet to maintain that:

Essentially his (Commissioner Mark Rowley’s) officers were reportedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was already incapacitated by taser.

What Shola, Zack and other commentators do not understand – because they have never been in a life-or-death situation – is that force is not judged by how it looks in a six-second clip. It is judged by necessity in the moment. These keyboard warriors have no idea what it’s like to face immediate and possibly lethal violence armed with often nothing more than some irritant spray and a stick. Your priority is to keep members of the public safe, followed by yourselves as much as possible.

These officers would have had no idea in such a fast moving situation whether the suspect was acting alone or as part of a cell. He needed to be neutralised as soon as possible in order to keep people safe. He wasn’t showing his hands; he was still holding a bloodied weapon that he had just used to attack Jewish members of the public; he had been moving rapidly towards them, and they would have had no idea if he was wearing an explosive vest (wearing a coat on a warm day is never a good sign).

Policing is not theatre. It is not performed for social media approval. It is messy, fast and often brutal. Because the people officers deal with are messy, fast and often brutal. A man armed with a knife who has already stabbed two people, who refuses repeated commands to disarm and who continues to pose a threat even after being tasered, is not “under control”. He is an active danger until the weapon is removed. That is the reality, no matter how uncomfortable it makes Left-leaning commentators feel.

The idea that officers should politely wait or somehow apply ‘gentler’ tactics while a suspect still has the capacity to kill is not just naïve in the extreme, it is dangerous. It puts officers’ lives at risk. It puts the public at risk. And it reveals a complete detachment from reality (I am reminded of the occasion when then Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, declared that Islamic State murderer Mohammed ‘Jihadi John’ Emwazi should have been arrested in war-torn Syria rather than killed.)

This is the gap at the heart of modern public debate on policing. One side deals in real-world consequences. The other deals in optics. The officers in Golders Green had seconds to act. Not minutes. Not the luxury of hindsight, slow-motion replays or viral commentary. Seconds. In those seconds they made unquestionably the right decision: remove the threat as quickly as possible, by whatever means necessary short of lethal force. And that point matters. Because the same voices now condemning ‘excessive force’ would be the first to demand answers if those officers had hesitated and others had been stabbed.

There is also an uncomfortable truth that many would rather avoid: this attack was not just violent, it was targeted. Two visibly Jewish men were attacked in broad daylight in a part of London with a large Jewish community. That context matters. It should matter. It’s part of an ever growing pattern of antisemitic attacks carried out by people holding extreme Islamist ideologies.

Yet instead of sustained outrage about antisemitic violence, the conversation was almost immediately derailed, redirected toward the conduct of the officers who stopped it. That inversion of priorities is telling.

It reflects a culture where the instinct is no longer to back those who confront violence but to scrutinise them first, and often most harshly. Where the benefit of the doubt is extended to offenders, those enforcing the law are expected to meet an impossible standard of perfection under extreme pressure – often from their own senior management.

And it is precisely this culture that erodes effective policing. If every split-second decision is second guessed by people with no operational understanding, officers will become more hesitant. More risk-averse. Less pro-active. That is not compassion. It is a recipe for more victims.

None of this means police should be beyond scrutiny. Of course they shouldn’t be. But scrutiny requires context. It requires full evidence. It requires intellectual honesty. A selectively edited clip on social media is not scrutiny. It is propaganda. That is the real issue here.

Not just one commentator getting it wrong, but an entire ecosystem that rewards outrage over accuracy, speed over truth and narrative over fact. The Metropolitan Police, to their credit, did something increasingly necessary: they put out the full body-worn footage. They showed the public what actually happened. And when people saw the complete picture, the narrative collapsed. Because reality is stubborn like that.

In the end, strip away the noise and the incentives of social media and the situation becomes very simple. A violent attacker stabbed two innocent men. Two unarmed officers confronted him. They stopped him. They went home alive, and so did everyone else.

That is not a scandal. That is policing working exactly as it should.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 09:20

Ukraine Flexes With Much Deeper Drone Reach Targeting Russia's Refineries 

Ukraine has been demonstrating deeper targeting reach inside Russia, as several key oil sites have come under direct drone attack this week, resulting in significant destruction.

This as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Wednesday announced "a new stage in the use of Ukrainian weapons to limit the potential of Russia's war."

Satellite image of Perm attack aftermath, via Reuters.

The massive Tuapse complex on Russia's Black Sea coast has been hit no less than three times in under a month, sparking a series of massive fires that in some cases took days for emergency crews to extinguish.

In some cases, targets in the Urals - nearly 1,000 miles away from the Ukraine border - have been hit.

Transneft’s oil pumping and distribution facility in the city of Perm was struck this week, which lies very far into Russian territory.

The Ukraine Security Service (SBU) owned up to it, boasting that the targeted facility is "a strategically important hub of the main oil transportation system." It further declared that "almost all oil storage tanks are on fire."

Amid the fresh Perm attack, Russia had said it downed nearly 100 Ukrainian drones across various regions, while Russia’s presidential envoy to the region, Artem Zhoga, conceded that "The Urals are now within reach, be vigilant."

Putin's office has also denounced these fresh assaults on oil facilities as "terrorist attacks". As for the prior Black Sea export and refining hub attacks of the last month, CNN reviews:

For the third time in 12 days, the Russian Black Sea town of Tuapse woke up Tuesday to apocalyptic scenes.

Thick toxic fumes, and flames rising up from the latest Ukrainian drone attack on the Rosneft-owned Tuapse oil refinery, almost reached the heights of the surrounding Caucasus mountains.

By Thursday morning, authorities said the fire had been extinguished. Fires from the two previous attacks, on April 16 and 20, also took days to put out, with toxic substances pouring down in black rain and blanketing cars and streets in oily grime, leading to what experts are dubbing the worst environmental disaster in the region in years.

Huge fireball at Perm oil site...

Ukrainian drone attacks have struck Perm (about 1,500 km from Ukraine), targeting oil infrastructure. pic.twitter.com/lCXo8Pb1tb

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 30, 2026

Currently, the globe's attention is largely focused on the Iran war and the Hormuz Strait blockade, and with that efforts to reach a political and peace settlement in Ukraine have faded as well. Earlier in the Ukraine war, these major refinery attacks would dominate world headlines, but at the moment they have remained in the background given the constant Iran-related news flow. President Putin has lately communicated to Trump that he's open to a 'Victory Day' ceasefire, a proposal the Kremlin said Washington has backed.

Tyler Durden Sun, 05/03/2026 - 07:35

Alliance Fracture Is Now Global

Authored by Gregory Copley via The Epoch Times,

Western focus was, in 2026, on whether U.S. President Donald Trump would fulfill his threat to withdraw the United States from NATO. Eastern and Southern focus was on whether the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS alliance were even functioning.

In the U.S.–NATO standoff, it may take more complex political maneuvering for Trump to achieve a breakup of the alliance. Certainly, he could withdraw the U.S. military from European basing, but Congress in 2023 approved legislation that would prevent any president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an act of Congress. The measure, spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and, ironically, Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)—now Trump’s secretary of state—was included in the annual National Defense Authorization Act signed by President Joe Biden.

It may be more feasible for Trump to have the United States leave aspects of the military component of the North Atlantic Alliance, as French President Charles de Gaulle did in withdrawing from the NATO integrated military command structure—but not the North Atlantic Alliance—in 1967. Other members of NATO may themselves go beyond that to abandon NATO in order to form a new alliance, but that is a separate issue.

Of real, but as yet unexplored, interest is that other alliances have been forced to the sidelines because Trump initiatives, and time, have rendered them ineffective.

Among the most important of these are the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS. Secondarily, the informal Quad alliance against China—of India, the United States, Japan, and Australia—is quietly becoming less tight.

The SCO, which emerged in 2001 from the 1996 Shanghai Five security arrangement, now has 10 member states, most of which harbor suspicions about other members of the SCO. It was meant to contain a mutual security clause to require members to support other members under attack from outside. SCO membership includes Iran, and that clause has proven to be unenforceable as the wars against Iran continue. So the SCO is now effectively inoperable, except as a showcase with an expensive bureaucracy.

Similarly, BRICS—which began as a working group of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—was designed to circumvent U.S. domination of global trade systems by finding alternatives to trading using the U.S. dollar. The BRICS membership had expanded by 2026 to 10 states, adding Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. But it failed to shake the United States’ ability to control and sustain a global sanctions regime against political leaders who used the U.S. dollar in ways deemed inimical to U.S. interests.

BRICS achieved some new trading modalities that avoided the use of the U.S. dollar, but this did little to weaken the U.S. currency, or strengthen the currencies of BRICS members. But that was to be expected. This journal, as early as 2008, was discussing the end of the globalist, multinational framework of financing the international logistics chain based on the U.S. dollar. It discussed a return to bilateralism of trading methodologies, including barter and countertrade, which had, even in the 1970s, been a normal practice.

The past year-plus has seen the promoters of BRICS—as a defensive mechanism against the United States—becoming incapable of creating a new trade finance system. A proposed BRICS currency has come to naught; the currency of China has weakened to the point that it is hardly tradeable. And so on.

At what point is the Trump administration prepared to push for the complete breakdown of “opposing currencies,” not just of the BRICS states’ proposed new currency, but even of the euro and sterling?

Has all of this saved and bolstered the U.S. dollar? By default, yes; there is still no viable alternative to the use of the U.S. currency for major world trade.

But is Trump yet through with his plans to diminish, and perhaps totally dispense with, the United Nations? He has certainly hit key aspects of the U.N. that were heavily dependent on U.S. taxpayer contributions. The U.N. itself has been making itself less relevant and less forceful; it has taken an extremely polarizing, leftist position on many international issues and, at the same time, has been disregarded by the United States and other powers.

This, in turn, has made it less useful to Beijing, which entered the U.N. on Oct. 25, 1971, displacing the original founding member, the Republic of China, also known as Taiwan. China then began a sustained campaign to use U.N. agencies for political influence. So some of Trump’s anti-U.N. activities were clearly designed as moves against China.

What is the impact of the diminishing role of the U.N.? It has become less trusted as an instrument to impartially mediate interstate conflicts, and this makes its International Criminal Court (ICC)—to which the United States is not a signatory—also less trusted. The attempt to use the ICC as a key body to create “international law” out of thin air has now become discredited, or less of an influence. The World Trade Organization is also increasingly disregarded, as are regional bodies, such as ECOWAS in West Africa, and the Organization of American States.

So to what extent was the “rules-based world order” a creature of this utopianist U.N. thinking, or was it merely a reflection of a pax Americana?

If Trump wished to move heavily against the U.N., his best timing might be before the U.S. midterm congressional elections in November. But could he make it stick?

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 23:20

DOJ Releases Report Alleging Anti-Christian Bias Under Biden

Authored by Savannah Halsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on April 30 released a 500-page report detailing alleged anti-Christian bias on the part of the Biden administration.

According to the report by the DOJ’s Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias, the former administration’s prosecutions, policies, and practices constituted bias throughout multiple agencies, in accordance with the administration’s priorities.

The task force is chaired by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.

“No American should live in fear that the federal government will punish them for their faith,” Blanche said. “As our report lays out, the Biden Administration’s actions devastated the lives of many Christian Americans.”

Around 200 pages of the report are dedicated to the actions of more than 17 federal agencies that uncovered alleged religious discrimination. The investigation included a review of internal discussions and case files, as well as prosecutorial decisions.

There were details of a since-retracted 2023 FBI memo on “radical traditionalist” Catholics, which cited the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The review also listed Biden-era regulations on abortion, contraception, gender, and human sexuality, among other issues that pitted the government against religious groups.

The report also makes note of the Biden administration’s reading of the 2019 Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, which led to decisions that were based on what the Trump administration report called “sex-based discrimination in federally funded schools and sports.”

According to the DOJ report, the previous administration used the FBI, IRS, Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, and other agencies to monitor, investigate, and apply pressure to various Christian groups at a federal level.

The current DOJ’s task force was formed in accordance with President Donald Trump’s Feb. 6, 2025, executive order titled Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias.

The president ordered multiple agencies to investigate what he called an “egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians, while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses.”

Conflicting Response

This is a “very different Department of Justice ... than the previous administration,” said Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers.

“The conclusion in the report, at least from an enforcement perspective, was that ... federal law was disproportionately used to prosecute pro-life and other Christians under the Biden administration,” he told The Epoch Times.

However, Rahmani, who worked at the DOJ from 2009 to 2012, said that while policies change, he has not seen a “systematic bias for or against” any one religious group.

“I don’t necessarily see ... [that] Christian activists in this country are receiving more prison time for violent acts, as opposed to, you know, Muslim or other religious groups.”

According to Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, director of the Conscience Project, the report “calls out the brazen assault against religious freedom by the former administration for what it was: a failure of constitutional and statutory duty.”

Picciotti-Bayer said in an emailed statement that the Biden administration disregarded “fundamental guarantees” in the First Amendment and federal civil rights law, and treated “sincere religious objections as obstacles to overcome, prosecuting peaceful prayer, trampling on parental rights and steamrolling conscience rights.”

The Interfaith Alliance, however, which states its mission is to “challenge Christian nationalism and religious extremism,” responded to the DOJ report, saying their group has “consistently opposed the work of this ‘task force.’” It accused the DOJ of trying to “undermine Americans’ religious freedom and First Amendment rights.”

The alliance called the task force’s report a “political stunt designed to promote the lie that American Christians are a persecuted group, while providing justification to target anyone deemed out of step with their Christian nationalist agenda.”

Previous Report

This report comes just weeks after an 800-page report from the department, detailing the “weaponization” of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which called out alleged prosecutorial problems, surveillance activities undertaken by pro-abortion groups, and failures to comply with federal law.

Biden’s DOJ did not enforce the law evenly, according to the April 14 report.

The task force under the Biden administration treated pro-life groups differently from pro-abortion groups, outlining disproportionate coordination with pro-abortion groups that, according to the report, indicated bias and prosecutorial overreach.

In her statement, Picciotti-Bayer said, “Religious freedom isn’t a courtesy the government extends—it’s a legal check on what government can do. It’s refreshing to see that recognized today.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 22:10

The US Spends More On 'Defense' Than The Next 8 Countries Combined

For the first time on record, the top 15 military spenders allocated more than $2 trillion to defense in 2025.

Total global defense spending also reached a record $2.6 trillion, signaling a major shift in geopolitical priorities.

Using data from the International Institute for Strategic Studies, this visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, ranks the 15 countries driving this surge in military spending.

While the U.S. still operates on an entirely different scale, the biggest shift is happening in Europe, where countries are no longer just maintaining military capacity but expanding it significantly.

The $2 Trillion Arms Race: Defense Spending by Country

The U.S. defense budget reached $921 billion in 2025, larger than the combined military spending of China, Russia, Germany, the UK, India, Saudi Arabia, France, and Japan.

Looking ahead, Donald Trump has proposed increasing defense spending to $1.5 trillion by 2027, although this plan has not been enacted. If realized, this would represent roughly 90% higher spending than the Cold War peak in real terms.

China ranked second globally with $251.3 billion in defense spending in 2025. Its share of Asia’s military spending has climbed to 44%, up from 39% in 2017, highlighting its expanding regional influence.

Below is the breakdown of the 15 nations with the largest defense budgets in 2025.

Russia’s defense budget reached $186.2 billion in 2025, rising by more than $40 billion in a single year and equivalent to 7.3% of GDP.

However, spending is expected to decline in 2026, the first drop since the invasion of Ukraine. With a growing deficit, the country faces mounting economic pressure, though higher oil prices have recently provided some relief.

Europe’s Expanding War Chest

With Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine and pressure from the U.S., European NATO members have committed to spending 3.5% of GDP on defense by 2035.

This would translate to roughly $1.2 trillion by 2035, the largest defense buildup among these countries since the Cold War.

Outside of Russia, Europe holds six of the world’s 15 largest defense budgets, led by Germany ($107.3 billion) and the UK ($94.3 billion). Both countries increased spending by tens of billions between 2024 and 2025.

What was once gradual growth has become a sharp acceleration, making defense one of the fastest-growing spending categories across advanced economies.

To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the world’s largest armies in 2026.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 21:35

Alaska Governor Vetoes Election Reform Bill Due To 'Significant Operational Burdens'

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed a major election reform bill on April 30, arguing it would place “significant operational burdens” on the state’s Division of Elections months before high-stakes statewide and federal contests.

Alaska Gov. Michael Dunleavy in Washington on Oct. 29, 2019. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

The bill, at least a decade in the making, sought to allow absentee and other ​voters track their ballots and see when they had been received and ​counted.

Dunleavy announced the veto of Senate Bill 64 after the measure arrived following its passage in both chambers of the legislature.

The legislation, which had won bipartisan support in the state’s House of Representatives and Senate, also sought to expand acceptable voter identification, modify voter roll ⁠maintenance, change the absentee ballot timeline, and create a rural community liaison position.

“Going forward, I encourage those who wish to continue this work to use this bill as a starting point to ensure that any proposed changes comply with state and federal law and pass any election legislation on a timeline that allows the Division of Elections to develop, test, and implement the necessary systems properly,” Dunleavy said in an April 30 statement. “While the Alaska gasline bill is the most important bill this session, I am open to a conversation with lawmakers on how we can address the legal and operational issues this session.”

In his veto letter, the Republican governor noted his misgivings about provisions requiring expanded ballot tracking and the curing of minor errors on mail-in ballots. He said such changes would be particularly difficult to implement securely and reliably ahead of the November elections.

“Taken as a whole, the bill would impose significant operational burdens on the administration of Alaska’s elections during an election year,” Dunleavy wrote. The Division of Elections had warned such mid-cycle alterations would be “extremely difficult, if not impossible,” to complete without risking reliability.

House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, an independent, said the veto was disappointing.

“This was a bipartisan effort to address the real challenges of voting in a state as vast, rural, and remote as Alaska,” Edgmon said in a statement. “Alaskans deserve a system that reflects our unique geography, not one that ignores it. This veto does exactly that.”

State Sen. Bill Wielechowski, a Democrat from North Anchorage and one of the bill’s key sponsors, said in a post on social media that the legislation was a “decade in the making, passed with broad bipartisan support, and reflected the governor’s own stated priorities.”

He said the veto also blocks efforts to strengthen voter ID rules.

“The Governor’s veto also blocks tightening of voter ID laws that would have limited acceptable IDs to government-issued identification,” Wielechowski added.

The legislature will have an opportunity to override the veto in the future.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 21:00

The U.S. Wants To Ban Chinese Cars, But They're Already At The Gate

Efforts in Washington to block Chinese-made cars often sound like a future problem - but in practice, those vehicles are already within reach of American consumers, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Just south of the U.S. border, Chinese automakers have been rapidly expanding in Mexico, setting up dealerships and offering vehicles at prices far below what most new cars cost in the U.S. Brands like BYD, Geely, and Great Wall Motor are selling electric and gas-powered models packed with features - often for the price of a used car in the U.S. That proximity matters: American consumers living near the border can easily see, test, and in some cases drive these vehicles, even if large-scale imports remain restricted.

Meanwhile, U.S. policymakers are moving in the opposite direction. Proposed tariffs, import restrictions, and national security reviews are all aimed at limiting Chinese auto penetration, especially in the electric vehicle market. The concerns go beyond economics—lawmakers have raised questions about data security, supply chains, and the long-term competitiveness of domestic automakers.

The Journal writes that the situation is more complicated than a simple “ban.” Chinese-built vehicles are already entering the U.S. market indirectly. Some come through global partnerships, shared manufacturing platforms, or brands that don’t obviously appear Chinese to consumers. Others arrive in small numbers through personal imports or cross-border use. In other words, the presence is already here—it’s just not always visible at scale.

At the same time, Chinese automakers are becoming major global players. Companies like BYD, for example, have surged in electric vehicle production and are expanding across Latin America, Europe, and beyond. Their strategy often focuses on affordability and speed to market—areas where traditional U.S. automakers have struggled, especially as new car prices continue to climb.

That pricing gap is a key pressure point. Many American buyers are increasingly priced out of new vehicles, creating demand for cheaper alternatives. If Chinese automakers were allowed to compete freely in the U.S., they could significantly undercut domestic offerings—something that worries both policymakers and legacy car companies.

So while the political conversation centers on keeping Chinese cars out, the reality is that the market is already shifting around that goal. The vehicles are being sold nearby, seen by U.S. consumers, and in some cases already used on American roads.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 20:25

First US Integrated Humanoid Robot Factory To Build 100,000 NEO Robots By 2027

Authored by Neetika Walter via Interesting Engineering,

U.S.-based robotics firm 1X has started full-scale production of its humanoid robot NEO at a new manufacturing facility in Hayward, California.

The factory marks a key step toward commercializing general-purpose humanoid robots designed for home use. The company says the robots are built to safely operate alongside humans and assist with everyday tasks such as mobility support, light household activity, and routine interaction.

NEO robot units working at the NEO Factory in Hayward, California.1X on YouTube

Spanning 58,000 square feet, the facility currently employs more than 200 workers and is expected to expand further as production scales. It has the capacity to produce up to 10,000 robots annually, with plans to increase output beyond 100,000 units by 2027. The setup is designed for rapid iteration as hardware and AI systems evolve.

The company has already seen strong early demand. It said its first-year production capacity of over 10,000 units sold out within five days of launch in October, signaling early commercial interest in humanoid home robotics.

Full-stack manufacturing push

A key feature of the factory is its vertically integrated production model. 1X designs and manufactures core components in-house, including motors, batteries, sensors, structures, and transmission systems.

This approach allows the company to control the entire production process, from raw material handling to final assembly. It also reduces reliance on external suppliers and supports faster iteration cycles, especially for hardware upgrades and safety improvements.

“We’re building the world’s safest, most reliable humanoid robots—right here in Hayward, California,” said Vikram Kothari, VP of Manufacturing & Hardware.

The company says its setup includes automated motor manufacturing lines and systems that handle precision tasks such as copper coil winding. This level of integration is aimed at improving reliability, reducing production bottlenecks, and scaling manufacturing efficiently without outsourcing key subsystems.

Robots produced at the facility are currently being routed to internal testing, validation, and research environments. Customer shipments are expected to begin in 2026, starting with early access users before wider rollout.

AI brains power robots

Each NEO robot is powered by NVIDIA’s Jetson Thor computing platform, which serves as the system’s onboard processing unit.

The platform enables real-time AI inference directly on the robot, allowing it to perform perception, reasoning, navigation, and decision-making tasks without depending heavily on cloud infrastructure. This improves response time and reduces latency in real-world environments.

1X is also using NVIDIA’s Isaac simulation tools to train its robots in virtual environments. These simulations allow large-scale reinforcement learning and help improve robot behavior before deployment in physical homes.

“Humanoid robots require high-performance, real-time AI inference and continuous training and testing in simulation for safe and reliable operation,” said Deepu Talla, vice president of robotics and edge AI at NVIDIA.

CEO Bernt Børnich said the factory signals a shift from concept to execution. “Production is happening now, and American consumers will be among the first in the world to welcome NEO into their homes.”

NEO will be offered through an early access program priced at $20,000, with a subscription option starting at $499 per month. The company plans to sell the robots directly through its online platform.

1X says building robots at scale in the United States will allow faster delivery, localized support, and quicker product improvements based on user feedback. The company also aims to reduce supply chain risks by keeping core manufacturing domestic.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 19:50

Ahead Of Trump-Xi Summit, Beijing Tells Chinese Firms To Ignore U.S. Sanctions On "Teapot" Refineries

President Donald Trump is set to travel to Beijing in mid-May for a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the first U.S. presidential visit to China in eight years, and a meeting already delayed once by the Iran war.

The pair will obviously discuss the U.S.-Iran conflict and the resulting energy shock, which has hit Asia fastest and hardest. There is no shortage of issues for the two leaders to discuss, including Taiwan, trade, AI chip controls, rare earths, and sanctions.

One important topic the two leaders will likely spend time on is the energy shock and the maximum pressure campaign imposed by the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control on Chinese independent "teapot" refineries, particularly in Shandong Province, due to their continued purchases and refining of Iranian crude.

Perhaps last week's sanctions on China's teapot refiners are part of a leverage campaign by the Trump team ahead of the upcoming meeting.

By Saturday morning, Beijing announced that companies in the country should ignore and not comply with U.S. sanctions targeting five domestic refineries. 

The refiners, including Hengli Petrochemical's Dalian refinery and several privately owned processors, had been hit with U.S. asset freezes and transaction bans earlier in the week, according to Bloomberg.

Beijing's Commerce Ministry called the sanctions unlawful, saying they restrict normal trade with countries and lack authorization under international law.

"The Chinese government has consistently opposed unilateral sanctions that lack authorization from the United Nations and a basis in international law," the department said.

It appears that Beijing is shielding its refiners to mitigate Washington's pressure campaign on Iranian crude flows as the energy shock still festers across Asia.

The good news last week is that China reopened its fuel export spigot to surrounding countries, as domestic inventories are now at comfortable levels. This will provide some relief to countries dealing with fuel shortages caused by the Hormuz chokepoint, which remains partially frozen to this day.

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 19:15

Federal Court Blocks Abortion Drug Mifepristone From Being Sent Via Mail

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times,

Americans won’t be able to receive abortion drug mifepristone in the mail, according to a temporary ruling by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court on May 1.

“FDA conceded it had failed to adequately study whether remotely prescribing mifepristone is safe,” the three-judge panel in New Orleans ruled on Friday.

The decision will block the drug from being shipped via mail until the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can ensure the drugs are “safe and effective” before they can be marketed in the United States.

Mifepristone, often called “the abortion pill,” is part of a two-drug regimen which allows a woman “to end a pregnancy up to 70 days into gestation,” according to Johns Hopkins University.

The FDA first approved mifepristone in 2000, but doctors were only allowed to prescribe it after three in-person visits.

The procedure changed in 2023 after the Biden administration expanded access to “medication abortion,” which provided a pathway for patients to avoid an in-person visit to the doctor and, instead, order the drug online to be shipped to their house.

The state of Louisiana challenged the rule in 2025, arguing the justification for allowing this was based on “flawed or nonexistent data.”

Louisiana alleged the medication “resulted in numerous illegal abortions” in the state and it also made women pay “thousands in Medicaid bills” for being harmed by mifepristone.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill called Friday’s decision a “victory for life!”

“The Biden abortion cartel facilitated the deaths of thousands of Louisiana babies (and millions in other states) through illegal mail-order abortion pills. Today, that nightmare is over, thanks to the hard work of my office and our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom,” Murrill wrote.

“I look forward to continuing to defend women and babies as this case continues.”

A bill to ban mifepristone was introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) in March.

“The science is clear: The chemical abortion drug is inherently dangerous to women and prone to abuse. Yet major companies like Danco Laboratories are making billions off it,” Hawley said.

Hawley’s bill would also allow women to sue manufacturers for damages if they are harmed by the chemical abortion.

Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) criticized the federal court decision on social media.

“Mifepristone is safe and reliable,” Ramirez wrote in an X post on Friday.

“IT SAVES LIVES.
 Extremist attempts to control our bodies and restrict our choices make women less safe. The right to make decisions about our bodies and our healthcare are OURS. They don’t belong in the hands of judges or politicians.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 18:40

Trump On Hormuz Blockade: "We're Like Pirates - And It's Very Profitable"

Rare agreement with Iranian officials? President Trump has newly said the US Navy is acting "like pirates" as he described an operation about seizing a ship amid the ongoing blockade of Iranian ports.

"We … land on top of it and we took over the ship. We took over the cargo, took over the oil. It’s a very profitable business," Trump told a large audience at a rally in Florida on Friday. "We’re like pirates," he added as the crow cheered him on. "We’re sort of like pirates. But we’re not playing games." Watch the US President also declare "it's a very profitable business":

TRUMP ADMITS AMERICANS ARE PIRATES

“It’s a very profitable business. We’re like pirates.” pic.twitter.com/p7g6kMPCmG

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) May 2, 2026

The irony in this statement is that it precisely echoes Tehran's own accusation that the Pentagon is indeed engaged in 'piracy' in Persian Gulf waters, and as the US seeks to interdict other Iranian vessels on the high seas globally, especially near Asia.

This week Iran issued formal request to the UN Security Council that it stop the "continuing internationally wrongful acts of the United States through yet another piracy-style seizure and deliberate targeting of commercial vessels, namely the M/T Majestic and M/T Tifani."

Some of Iran's embassies abroad have also directly responded to the fresh Trump piracy clip. Here's what the Iranian Foreign Ministry had to say on X through one of its diplomatic outposts in south Asia:

"Sort of like pirates"? No, Donny—that's textbook piracy. One upside to an incompetent opponent: moments like this. But the crowd cheering and clapping along? That's the truly disturbing part. U.S. urgently needs a swift and serious regime change.

Additionally, one show host with Russia's RT had this to say by way of reaction: "The only good thing about Trump is that he openly admits the US is a rogue state that doesn’t care at all about international law, he doesn't bother to cover up the US’ heinous actions with the bogus liberal PR language that previous Presidents used."

It is also akin to when Trump became the first US leader to declare that American troops were in Syria to "secure the oil" - contradicting prior presidents and officials who insisted Washington was merely engaged in 'counter-ISIS' operations.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei has said on X this week Americans have an "undeniable right and the solemn duty" to demand accountability from the White House over the ongoing US-Israel "war of choice" against Iran.

The war is "a clear, unprovoked act of aggression" - he stated, and called on Americans to rise up challenge their leaders for "waging this illegal war against the nation of Iran and for all the atrocities perpetrated."

Tyler Durden Sat, 05/02/2026 - 18:05