Stuntman Felix Baumgartner Dies in Paragliding Crash At 56

Authored by Elma Aksalic via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Daredevil athlete Felix Baumgartner, best known for his record-breaking 2012 skydive from space, has died at 56 years old in a paragliding accident in Italy.

Felix Baumgartner poses for a photo as he arrives for a ceremony for his Walk of Fame star in Moscow, on Nov. 9, 2012. Kirill Kudryavtsev/AFP via Getty Images

According to officials in the coastal city of Porto Sant'Elpidio, Baumgartner died on July 17 after crashing into the side of a swimming pool.

“Our community is deeply affected by the tragic disappearance of Felix Baumgartner, a figure of global prominence, a symbol of courage and passion for extreme flight,” the town’s mayor, Massimiliano Ciarpella, said in a statement.

The exact cause of the incident remains unknown; however, Ciarpella noted that a “fatal illness” prior to the crash could have led to the accident.

“Porto Sant’Elpidio stands with his family and loved ones in this moment of grief,” the statement continued.

“On behalf of the Municipal Administration and all citizens, I express my sincerest condolences for this irreparable loss.”

The Austrian native made international headlines on Oct. 14, 2012, when he jumped out of a capsule in the stratosphere, free-falling for 24 miles towards Earth.

The jump was sponsored by Red Bull, an Austrian-owned energy drink company, with Baumgartner breaking the sound barrier during the feat.

He reached speeds of up to 843 miles per hour before opening his parachute and landing safely on the ground in New Mexico.

In a statement, Red Bull paid tribute to Baumgartner, thanking him for being “unyielding,” while remembering him as a colleague and friend.

“You always sought out the greatest challenges and mastered them with sharp thinking, relentless precision and a good dose of courage,” the statement read.

“You delved deep into every project. No detail was too small, no risk too great—as long as you could calculate it.”

“We grew with you and you with us. We wouldn’t trade a single day we had together. You will stay with us as a colleague, a loyal companion, but most of all as a friend.”

Baumgartner, a former military parachutist, teamed up with Red Bull in 1988 and over the course of his career made thousands of jumps from bridges, planes, skyscrapers, and famed global landmarks.

He broke 14 world records, including the highest parachute jump from the Petronas Towers in 1999, flying across the English Channel in a carbon fiber wing in 2003, and the world’s lowest BASE jump from the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro in 2011.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 16:55

Will Gavin Newsom Ditch Woke And Move To The Center?

Authored by Adair Teuton via RealClearPolitics,

In an age when political authenticity is currency, California Gov. Gavin Newsom is making a risky bet: that he can repackage his image from slick, left-coast progressive into pragmatic, media-savvy moderate.

Newsom’s strategy appears engineered to break out of the coastal liberal mold. His new iHeartRadio podcast, “This Is Gavin Newsom,” features guests from across the political spectrum. He’s launched a Substack, plastered Fox News with ads, and even taken his feuds with Donald Trump directly to national audiences. In one episode, he sounded more like a centrist mayor than a San Francisco progressive, defending the rule of law and even nodding to law enforcement concerns around crime and public safety.

But this isn’t just about booking podcast guests. In another instance, Newsom criticized the inclusion of biological males in women’s sports, conceding to Charlie Kirk that their inclusion was “deeply unfair.” The comment was a stark departure from his earlier record as a vocal supporter of expansive transgender rights. Progressive critics immediately pounced, accusing him of pandering to the right. The backlash highlighted the tightrope Newsom is now walking, trying to appeal to moderate voters without alienating his liberal base.

Such maneuvering makes sense. A June survey from the Public Policy Institute of California shows his approval hovering at just 47% among likely voters. More troubling for Newsom, a UC Berkeley-Los Angeles Times poll finds that 54% of Californians believe he’s more focused on national ambitions than governing the state. His shift in tone and strategy doesn’t do much to counter that very perception, but his pivot does allow him to reintroduce himself to a broader electorate before 2028 speculation becomes a reality.

It’s a rebrand as ambitious as it is audacious, and it may be guided by one of the most unlikely figures imaginable: Kimberly Guilfoyle, Newsom’s former wife, Donald Trump Jr.’s former girlfriend – and current Trumpworld operative.

Guilfoyle, a key figure in Republican fundraising and messaging, was once the glamorous first lady of San Francisco. Although she and Don Jr. apparently have parted ways, she has been nominated by Donald Trump to serve as U.S. ambassador to Greece. And she remains  a seasoned political operative known for her bombastic speeches, relentless media presence, and deep ties to the MAGA establishment. She served as national finance chair for Trump’s 2020 campaign and has been one of the movement’s most aggressive defenders on cable news and social media. According to The Wall Street Journal, Guilfoyle helped broker introductions between Newsom and hard-right populists Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon, a move that raised eyebrows across the political spectrum.

While she obviously holds no official title in Newsom’s political operation, her behind-the-scenes facilitation marks a surreal twist in California’s ongoing political theater: the governor once hailed as the prince of progressivism now courting the architects of right-wing populism.

Critics on both sides aren’t buying it. Conservatives see a cynical ploy, a progressive in centrist clothing. Some Democrats are equally skeptical, worried that cozying up to MAGA voices lends legitimacy to extremism. And with homelessness, crime, and housing shortages still plaguing his home state, Newsom risks looking like a politician distracted by vanity projects while California struggles.

Still, his media makeover may be more than a branding exercise. By engaging with adversarial audiences, he’s signaling an understanding of political polarization and attempting to do something about it. Whether voters reward him for that courage or punish him for perceived opportunism remains to be seen.

If Newsom’s transformation succeeds, he won’t just have reinvented his image. He’ll have rewritten the playbook for what it means to be a post-woke Democrat in an era where ideological purity often takes a backseat to electability. If it fails, expect both the left and the right to say: We told you so.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 16:20

Seven Reasons Why PBS And NPR Deserve To Be Defunded

When was the last time you heard of federal dollars flowing into overtly conservative programming?  While there may be a tiny handful of outliers, generally speaking this does not happen.  For decades the majority of public funding subsidies for social programs inevitably goes to progressive run organizations.  For anyone who is right leaning in their politics, the idea of their hard earned money being handed over to people who hate them and everything they stand for is disconcerting. 

Why should conservatives support federal funding if that money is being used to propagandize them and indoctrinate their children?  Why isn't there any requirement for publicly funded programs to remain politically neutral? 

The U.S. Senate this week passed the Trump administration’s proposal to cancel $9 billion in federal funds previously allocated for foreign aid and public broadcasting, and the House of Representatives approved the package after midnight Friday, sending it to President Trump’s desk. 

The Corp. for Public Broadcasting, which administers the funds for NPR radio stations and PBS TV affiliates, is on track to lose $1.1 billion that had previously been budgeted for the next two years.

Both PBS and NPR executives warn they will have to make drastic cuts to media content and will resort to layoffs to stay afloat.  The organizations rely on a mixture of federal funds, public donations and corporate advertising.  Federal subsidies make up around 15% of PBS operating dollars and up to 10% of NPR affiliate dollars.  This might not seem like much, but the institutions function on razor thin margins.  Loss of public cash would immediately put them in the hole. 

But is this a bad thing?  Maybe PBS and NPR deserve to fail.  Both outlets have engaged in some of the most egregious woke propaganda and authoritarian pontificating among all media platforms in the US.  Let's look at seven reasons why PBS and NPR should be unplugged from taxpayer life support.

1)  Lil Miss Hot Mess

"The hips on the drag queen go swish swish swish..." sings drag performer Lil Miss Hot Mess in a PBS promoted program in New York.  Though PBS did not directly fund the show "Let's Learn" on WNET, it did provide the platform.  The drag queen episode aired in 2021 and featured a drag performer (male pretending to be female) reading a LGBT children's about "drag" and gay pride.

2) Sesame Street Stands With BLM

It's impossible to list the number of times PBS used kids show Sesame Street as a vehicle to indoctrinate children with DEI concepts.  However, in 2020 they truly stepped over the line when the organization partnered with CNN, using Sesame Street characters hosting a town hall to explain to children why America is racist and why the national BLM riots were justified. 

Keep in mind, there were over 600 riots during the BLM protests, with 25 fatalities, thousands of police injuries and billions in property damages, all triggered because of the death of one career criminal hopped up on fentanyl.

3)  Pride Month And Two Gay Dads

In 2021, Sesame Street also featured a Pride Month special called "Family Day" about LGBT inclusion.  The show's audience of toddlers got to explore the relationship between a girl and her two gay dads, along with concept of "love is love".  

The network's popular "Arthur" cartoon series also produced an episode with a same sex marriage and two gay dads.  Why they felt the need to explore the sexual orientation of "Mr. Ratburn" to a bunch of preschool viewers is a mystery, unless child indoctrination was the goal.

4)  Refusing To Watch Porn And Masturbate Might Be Linked To "Extremism"

NPR joined the endless leftist war on the "manosphere" in a 2024 podcast which linked the "NoFap" movement to extremism.  The degenerate Kinsey-esque dialogue admonishes the trend of young men refusing to watch porn and refraining from masturbation as medically and psychologically concerning.  The movement was started due to the near-infinite access young people have to pornography in the digital age, leading to porn addiction and an inability to socialize in healthy ways.  

NPR characterizes the NoFap movement as misleading American youth into a life of misery while they ignore the rising evidence of the negative effects of the porn industry. 

5)  Suspended For Pointing Out Leftist Bias

NPR suspended a 25 year veteran editor Uri Berliner after he criticized the network for leftist bias.  The editor discovered that the NPR newsroom was stacked with 87 registered Democrats and zero Republicans.  He pointed out that NPR prolifically reported on the Russian collusion hoax, and that “[Adam] Schiff talking points” were “the drumbeat of NPR news reports.”  

After exposing NPR staff as utterly partisan, Berliner was removed. 

6)  NPR Helps To Undermine The Covid Lab Leak Theory

The Wuhan leab leak theory, which is now widely regarded as the most logical explanation for the spread of the covid virus from Wuhan, China to the rest of the world, was throttled in the news cycle and banned on social media platforms for years due to the efforts of US and Chinese government officials (and corrupt medical representatives) working to suppress the story.

Why?  To this day it's not clear but the Wuhan lab's long running gain-of-function research projects which essentially weaponize viruses were funded by US government interests, the same interests who ended being in charge of the draconian response to the covid outbreak.

NPR repeatedly dismissed the theory that COVID-19 originated in a lab - a conclusion now deemed likely by the FBI, CIA, and Department of Energy.    They published propaganda pieces including:  "Scientists Debunk Lab Accident Theory Of Pandemic Emergence", and “As Trump Pushes Theory Of Virus Origins, Some See Parallels In Lead-Up To Iraq War".

7)  Absolute Bias In Election Coverage

A 2024 Media Research Center study found that PBS’s coverage of the Republican National Convention was 72% negative, while coverage of the Democratic National Convention was 88% positive.  

In 2023, a study found that congressional Republicans saw 85% negative coverage while congressional Democrats saw 54% positive coverage on PBS’s flagship news program   

According to a 2024 study, PBS news staff used 162 variations of the term “far-right,” but only six variations of “far-left.”

This all might sound like common sense to most conservatives - Of course NPR and PBS are politically biased, but it's not supposed to be this way.  The public has been conditioned to accept such bias over time and conservatives have been told to shut up when complaining about their money being used to feed far-left content. 

The above list could go on for dozens of pages; it's only a taste of NPR and PBS' trespasses in the past five years. Trump's defunding of these platforms is long overdue and if they implode in the process, so be it.  They are nothing more than brainwashing campaigns disguised as humanitarian projects.    

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 15:45

Red, White, And Bitcoin

Authored by Logan Beirne via RealClearPolitics,

Bitcoin may feel futuristic, but when you peel away its digital veneer, it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity. Having reached record highs, Bitcoin has been making headlines as nations declare strategic stockpiles and corporate America embraces the new asset class. Why now? 

The answer lies in a pattern as old as civilization itself: When governments corrupt a currency, people innovate their way to something better.

As the saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” When the first coin clanked into existence in 600 B.C., it was not merely a gold and silver alloy stamped with the face of the Lydian king. It was a financial revolution. For the first time, people could move past the inefficiencies of barter and instead use a medium of exchange to trade. But this value was not in the sparkle; it was the individuals’ collective understanding that these coins have worth.

The integrity of that system has waxed and waned over the ensuing millennia, typically driven by governmental spending policies. The silver-backed Roman denarii enabled the empire to flourish, but as subsequent emperors diluted its value – reducing their silver content to fund wars and build grand palaces – citizens lost faith in their currency. When Emperor Nero reduced silver content from 98% to 83% in A.D. 64, Romans began hoarding old coins and rejecting new ones. By A.D. 260, the denarius contained just 5% silver. Inflation spiraled and commerce crumbled, contributing to the eventual fall of the empire. 

The United States has battled currency crises since our nation’s birth, but unlike Rome, America has consistently innovated solutions along the way. After we declared independence from Britain, the Continental Congress printed the nation’s first paper money. Called “Continentals,” it was backed by neither gold nor silver – simply by belief in its value. While gold and silver are at least relatively scarce metals that constrain supply, paper can be printed. And that is precisely what the first U.S. government did. 

Desperate to pay troops and buy supplies necessary to wage the Revolutionary War, Congress turned to making more Continentals. Bills flooded the market, driving down value as Americans questioned whether the new nation could honor its promises. In 1777, one patriot complained to his father as inflation spiked by an estimated 200%, writing, “America has much more to fear from the effects of large quantities of paper money than from the operations of British Generals.” 

Prices climbed so rapidly that George Washington himself came to refuse Continentals as payment. In fact, it became common to describe something of little value as “not worth a Continental.” The currency became such a laughingstock that sailors paid in the bills would sew them onto their clothes and parade through town to mock it. But rather than crumble like the Roman Empire, the U.S. innovated: This currency crisis was a driving force that led our Founding Fathers to scrap the American government under the Articles of Confederation and draft our current Constitution.

This change represented more than political reform – it was monetary advancement, shifting from discretionary to rule-based money. The new U.S. government adopted a bimetallic standard in 1792, which tied the value of dollars to both gold and silver. The country eventually simplified its approach by shifting to a de facto gold standard in 1834, which lasted until 1971 when President Nixon abandoned it in favor of fiat currency. Like the Continentals before it, the dollar has since been backed by belief in its value: full faith and credit of the U.S. government. 

And then came the 2008 financial crisis. Lehman Brothers fell, banks wobbled, and the public? They started asking: “What is money?” It was then, from the digital shadows, that an anonymous figure – Satoshi Nakamoto – dropped a whitepaper like a patriot dropping a leaflet on the eve of the Revolutionary War: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. No emperors. No banks. Just math, cryptography, and an unbreakable record called the blockchain. A new kind of trust was born – not in a ruler, but in code.

What was initially viewed as an interesting hypothetical idea was quickly put to real-world use. Users beget more users. Trust grows. Entrepreneurs dream. It’s a full-blown historical saga unfolding in real time.

Bitcoin has risen above the other cryptocurrencies it inspired, in large part due to its scarcity: no longer could an Emperor add bits of cheap copper to silver coins or Congress print more paper because it is hardcoded that only 21 million Bitcoin will ever exist. Further, all Bitcoin transactions are verified by a decentralized network of approximately 20,000 individuals’ computers across the world, all checking one another beyond politicians’ control. In an age of runaway government spending, investors have turned to those scarce Bitcoin that no government can dilute. A decentralized system that guards the people from government domination – how American is that! 

It is no coincidence that Bitcoin has skyrocketed to a $2 trillion valuation just as the U.S. national debt has reached record highs. Researchers debate how long fiat currencies last on average throughout history, with some placing time of death at between 27 and 35 years. Since the U.S. has been off the gold standard for over 50 years, history suggests the dollar is poised for decline. 

People are simply asking the age-old question: What is money, really? As trust is shaken in paper money due to inflation and ballooning federal spending, many are turning to innovation. Even nations themselves have begun to set up strategic reserves. In fact, the United States is the largest known state holder of Bitcoin – once again positioning America at the forefront of monetary evolution.

As John Adams advised in 1787, “All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from the defects of the Constitution, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” It is incumbent upon Americans to arm themselves with knowledge and engage in the age-old American tradition of challenging broken systems with better ideas in the pursuit of liberty. 

Logan Beirne serves as the chief legal officer at Strive and is the bestselling author of “Blood of Tyrants.” He teaches corporate law at Yale Law School. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 15:10

Curiosity Mounts Over Bannon's 15 Hours Of Epstein Interviews

With the Trump administration under fire from angry conservatives demanding the release of the federal government's information about Jeffrey Epstein, increasing attention is turning to a trove that's in private hands: Steve Bannon's 15+ hours of videotaped interviews with Epstein.

The interviews took place between 2018 and 2019. That's prior to Epstein's July 6, 2019 arrest on sex-trafficking charges that eventually led to his death in a New York City jail, but after the Miami Herald put a new spotlight on Epstein's manipulation of the criminal justice system after he was first investigated for sex crimes with underage girls in 2005, with the Herald tracking down scores of his victims. 

In 2021, a trailer was released promoting an upcoming, Bannon-co-produced documentary called, "The Monsters: Epstein's Life Among the Global Elite." The trailer includes snippets from the interviews. However, nearly four years later, the documentary has yet to be released. Bannon says we can expect to see it early next year. 

Steve Bannon recorded 16 hours of interviews with Jeffrey Epstein for a film, “The Monsters,” which never went to production

This 2021 trailer is all the public has seen of Bannon’s project

Time to release the full Epstein tapes? pic.twitter.com/weXPgjpXcN

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) July 10, 2025

According to Epstein's brother, Mark Epstein, the interviews were part of Bannon's effort to salvage Jeffrey Epstein's ruined public image. “[Bannon] told me he has like 15 or 16 hours of videotape of Jeff. He was trying to help Jeff rehabilitate his reputation,” Mark Epstein told NBC News. “They spent a lot of time together." 

According to Michael Tracey, who's been diving into this summer's eruption of Epstein controversy at his Substack newsletter, Bannon and Epstein are believed to have first met in December 2017, by which time Bannon was an alumnus of the first Trump administration and -- more significantly -- a renowned principal architect of Trump's stunning, establishment-defying 2016 triumph.

Citing Michael Wolff's book Fire and Fury, Tracey relates that Bannon participated in a media-strategy meeting with Epstein and others in late 2018 or early 2019. One of those others was former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. “[Epstein] probably can’t be hated any more,” Bannon is quoted as declaring at the planning session. “We’ve flatlined on this. He can’t get deader. While the chances of reviving him are remote, what’s the alternative?”

It remains unclear whether Bannon was helping Epstein as a favor, or as a paid consultant with a recent history of masterful molding of public opinion about a controversial character. At the time, Epstein was shelling out $3 million a month to a British PR firm. Offering another potential insight into the nature of their relationship, Epstein's Paris butler told Radio France that Bannon was among American guests Epstein hosted in France, with Epstein routinely accompanied by "juenes femmes."  

‘Epstein is the key that picks the lock' of WHO REALLY CONTROLS the US — Bannon

Adds that resignations at the Justice Dept shouldn't be the goal, that only brings turmoil

'We need to get to the bottom of Epstein' pic.twitter.com/0bBo7vEgfB

— RT (@RT_com) July 12, 2025

Bannon certainly hasn't been talking like a man caught in an Israeli-intelligence honeypot, starting with his own public accusations that Epstein was tied to Israeli intelligence: 

"[The Epstein story] goes right to the intelligence services of both this country and Israel. Let's be blunt about this. That's why all the Israel First guys -- the Tel Aviv [Mark] Levins and all these guys -- say 'nothing to see here'." 

He's also been a thorn in Israel's side regarding the top item on the Zionist state's agenda. After Israel launched its war on Iran last month and made every effort to maneuver the United States into a major, long-term commitment to conflict, Bannon was among the most outspoken voices on the right calling for Trump to steer clear -- for example, telling Newsweek: 

"What [Israel] did is they drew us into a war they knew they couldn't finish. They drew us into a war they knew they couldn't defend against. So, this is my problem. We need to reset. We don't have an alliance with them, just like Ukraine. We've got to stop saying they're allies, they're not allies."     

Amid this month's firestorm over the Epstein files, which includes widespread suspicions that Epstein was an asset of the Israeli Mossad, Bannon has been calling for Trump to appoint a special counsel to navigate the release of information. “Epstein is a key that picks the lock on so many things, not just individuals, but also institutions, intelligence institutions, foreign governments and who was working with him on our intelligence apparatus and in our government,” Bannon said at a Turning Points USA conference. 

Steve Bannon on a recent episode of his War Room podcast 

Meanwhile, a growing number of people would like Bannon to share his extraordinarily rare asset: More than 15 hours of interviews with a man who'd spent much of his adult life shying away from media inquiries. “Let me see the videotapes. He’s my brother," Mark Epstein asked, via NBC News.

“We’re going to release the film, the five-part series next year — early next year,” Bannon said last week when asked about the documentary's status. “You’re going to have to name names, and you’re going to have to understand how the elites of the world but also the intelligence services are inextricably linked in the Epstein story. That’s the key.”

Given the interviews were seemingly done as part of a PR effort on Epstein's behalf, it strikes us as highly unlikely that Bannon's videotapes captured anything explosive -- but they would certainly make for highly-interesting viewing nonetheless. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 14:35

California Sues Trump Administration Over Termination Of High-Speed Rail Funding

Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

California sued the Trump administration on July 17 over its decision to revoke $4 billion in federal grants for the state’s high-speed rail project, calling the move politically motivated and illegal.

A drone view of a California High-Speed Rail bridge where it crosses through Fresno, Calif., on June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Fred Greaves/File Photo

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the lawsuit in a press release, accusing the administration of using the federal grant termination as retribution against California. The state claims the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) ended two grant agreements without cause, despite the project meeting its obligations under federal oversight.

“In reality, this is just a heartless attack on the Central Valley that will put real jobs and livelihoods on the line,” Newsom said in the release. “We’re suing to stop Trump from derailing America’s only high-speed rail actively under construction.”

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), which filed the suit, said in a post on X that “canceling these grants without cause isn’t just wrong, it’s illegal.”

CHSRA said it has met every requirement under its agreements, pointing to multiple federal reviews—including one as recent as February—that found the project to be in compliance.

The lawsuit argues that President Donald Trump’s actions are part of a long-running pattern of political retaliation, pointing to his first administration’s attempt to revoke high-speed rail funding the day after California sued to block his emergency declaration for a border wall.

In both instances, California claims, the timing and public remarks show the decisions were driven by personal animus, not project performance.

The state also claims that the FRA ignored its own oversight record. As recently as October 2024, the agency completed an annual monitoring review and “made no findings for which corrective measures were needed,” according to the suit.

The lawsuit says the abrupt reversal in Trump’s second term was unjustified and that CHSRA was given inadequate time to respond.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced the termination on July 16, following what the FRA described as an exhaustive compliance review. He said CHSRA failed to meet critical benchmarks, citing a $7 billion funding gap, missed procurement deadlines, and a lack of capacity to deliver the project’s first operating segment by 2033.

“This is California’s fault,” Duffy said in a statement. “Governor Newsom and the complicit Democrats have enabled this waste for years. Federal dollars are not a blank check–they come with a promise to deliver results. After over a decade of failures, CHSRA’s mismanagement and incompetence have proven it cannot build its train to nowhere on time or on budget. It’s time for this boondoggle to die.”

The administration argues the funds would be better spent on projects with clearer timelines and viable completion plans. The FRA said CHSRA’s responses to its findings were inadequate and did not address concerns outlined in a 300-page review.

The lawsuit, however, says the FRA’s case rests on a mischaracterization of CHSRA’s own Inspector General (IG). After the agency cited the IG’s report to support its funding gap concerns, the Office of the Inspector General-California High Speed Rail (OIG-HSR) issued a letter disavowing that interpretation.

“We have identified no citations by the FRA supporting its assertion that the OIG-HSR ever made this conclusion,” the letter said.

CHSRA says it is nearing the track-laying phase, with 171 miles under active construction, more than 50 major structures completed, and more than 15,000 jobs created. Environmental reviews for 463 miles of the corridor are complete, and the agency expects passenger service to begin between 2030 and 2033.

The rail project, initially pitched in 2008 as an 800-mile line connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles by 2020, has since been scaled back to a 171-mile segment from Merced to Bakersfield. Projected costs have risen to an estimated $135 billion, according to the Department of Transportation.

Last month, the department warned that federal funding was at risk if California failed to resolve what it called a pattern of mismanagement and unrealistic projections. CHSRA rejected those claims, arguing the project remained on track with state support and that federal findings ignored recent progress.

In this week’s lawsuit, California asked the court to block the FRA’s termination decision and allow the state to retain the remaining federal grant funds.

The Epoch Times has contacted the White House for comment.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 14:00

National Anti-Trump "Good Trouble" Protests Fizzle With Little Fanfare

The establishment media has taken on a new role in recent months; rather than reporting on events that already happened progressive outlets are promoting events before they happen.  Specifically, the media has taken on the role of protest organizer in the Trump era in an attempt to rally the public to show up and fill out otherwise dwindling activist attendance. 

The slowdown in leftist protests has "coincidentally" occurred at the same time as the shut down of easy federal funds supplied by agencies like USAID.  The monetary incentives for professional provocateurs is drying up.

This means the political left is now forced to rely on actual grassroots participation, and it's not working out well for them.  Corporate news platforms have been pivoting into protest organizing as a stopgap, publishing maps and schedules for events with minimal success. 

A recent interview between NewsNation's Brian Entin and Adam Swart, CEO of an activist group called "Crowds on Demand" revealed that an unnamed organization offered Swart's company $20 million to recruit demonstrators for upcoming anti-Trump protests on July 18th.  Swart noted:

"We had to reject an offer worth around $20 million for nationwide, large-scale demonstrations across the country. Personally, I don't think it's effective. I'm rejecting the contract not because I don't want the business, but because, frankly, this is going to be ineffective and make us all look bad..."   

The CEO of “Crowds on Demand” tells me he was offered $20,000,000 to recruit demonstrators for the anti-Trump protests on Thursday. pic.twitter.com/2A6ezwo0cc

— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) July 15, 2025

The event he is referring to is the "Good Trouble" protest which took place this Thursday.  Similar to the less than successful "No Kings" protests, Good Trouble is funded by an army of NGOs. But without federal cash the reach of such organizations is greatly diminished.  Good Trouble partners include:

Activist rhetoric focused mainly on Trump's deportation policies, which they claim are a violation of "immigrant rights" (illegals do not have any right to stay in the US and can be removed for any reason).  Good Trouble rallies were primarily limited to a handful of deep blue cities and attendance was low.  Organizers in Denver, CO, for example, noted that they only brought in 2000 attendees - Far lower than the 10,000 protesters they were expecting. 

Around 300 protesters showed up in Madison, WI.  Organizers said they are protesting the “most brazen rollback of civil rights in generations", though they did not specify what rights Trump has take from American citizens. 

The Chicago event drew "hundreds" of protesters, though no concise numbers were provided and crowds on the scene were small.  Another trend which many have noticed with progressive events in 2025 is the presence of large numbers of aging activists.  The crowds are often rife with people of the "boomer" variety - A big change from 2020 and the BLM riots when younger protesters were the majority.

One theory asserts that retirees don't have to take off work to attend rallies and are willing to show up for less money.  Younger career activists demand larger payoffs and have stricter schedules.  

The Good Trouble protests hardly registered as a blip on the social media radar and one would barely know they happened except for the extensive coverage provided by legacy news networks.  The dwindling activity of the woke left raises questions on how much previous mass protests and riots were actually engineered using vast government funds and marketing influence.   

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 13:25

Virtual Power Plants Helped Save The Grid During Heat Dome

By Brian Martucci of UtilityDive

As the eastern half of the United States baked under record heat late last month and electricity demand reached multi-year peaks, it looked like the grid might succumb. 

Grid operators and public officials scrambled to avoid a disaster, ordering generators to defer maintenance and customers to conserve energy. The PJM Interconnection served about 161 GW of load on June 24, its highest demand since 2011 and not far off its all-time high of 165.6 GW.

But aside from scattered outages caused by heat-damaged electrical delivery equipment in parts of the New York City area, Eastern U.S. grids largely weathered the heatwave. 

Grid experts — and at least one grid operator — say at least some of the credit goes to distributed energy resource aggregations and flexible loads dispatching at higher rates than ever before. Those “virtual” or distributed power plants helped keep the lights on as generator reserve margins plummeted.

“PJM said that demand response was essential,” Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Mark Christie said in a June 30 press conference focused on the need for resource adequacy amid rising load forecasts. “That 161-GW peak would have been higher without DR, so DR is an important part of the mix too.”

Major virtual power plant operators matched near-record peak loads with unprecedented dispatch activity. Sunrun dispatched more than 340 MW from customer-sited batteries on the evening of June 24. The same day, EnergyHub shed 900 MW of peak load and shifted 3.5 GWh of energy away from the highest-demand periods. Uplight managed about 350 MW of flexible load in 45 dispatch events across 16 utility programs over the course of the heat dome week. 

Supportive state policy, expectations for rising power demand and simple economics are pushing once-skeptical utilities to embrace VPPs, said Hannah Bascom, chief growth officer at Uplight.

“You’re seeing [utility] folks on the supply side saying, ‘Wait, how many megawatts do we have lying around?’ And the light bulbs are starting to go off,” Bascom said in an interview.

Quicker and cheaper than traditional generation

It helps that it costs far less — and takes less time — to aggregate existing customer-sited resources than it does to build new dispatchable generation or storage, Bascom added. 

A new, 400-MW VPP has a net cost of $43/kW-year, compared with $69/kW-year for a utility-scale battery and $99/kW-year for a gas-fired peaker plant, the U.S. Department of Energy said in a January update to its virtual power plant liftoff report. An RMI report released last July said VPPs could be deployed in six to 12 months, quicker than any form of utility-scale generation. 

RMI’s report made a point of saying utilities eyeing VPPs in mid-2024 could have them ready in time for this summer’s heat. 

It’s clear many utilities and other load-serving entities have launched or expanded VPP offerings recently, said Kevin Brehm, a manager in RMI’s carbon-free electricity practice. 

“We’re definitely seeing progress in terms of the number of utility [VPP] programs, and in regulation and policy being implemented to advance VPPs,” he said in an interview.

Last year, RMI and the VPP Partnership published a flipbook featuring 75 U.S. VPPs with 3.9 million enrolled customers and 1.5 GW of capacity. That’s a small fraction of DOE’s 30 GW estimate of total U.S. VPP capacity in 2024.

Brehm cautioned that because VPPs can be deployed so quickly, published figures may underestimate capacity and thus the potential for utilities and aggregators to dispatch it during extreme weather events.

“Actual VPP capacity is what ultimately determines the level of response,” he said. “And [public reports] don’t tell the whole story because there’s a lag.”

Residential smart thermostats are already central to hot-climate VPP programs like Arizona Public Service Cool Rewards, whose 140 MW of thermostat capacity accounted for most of the utility’s 190-MW VPP as of last September. They’ll become even more important as smart thermostat adoption increases from today’s relatively low levels, Brehm said.

Commercial and industrial participation has room to grow

But much of the country’s VPP capacity still comes from manual commercial and industrial demand response programs, where power-hungry facilities agree to curtail load during peak periods, Wood Mackenzie said last year in a report. Another report by Energy Systems Integration Group showed C&I enrollments in wholesale demand response programs ranging from 4% to 10% of total potential capacity in most grid operator territories.

“Given how much capacity prices have risen recently, we’re going to see a lot more [C&I] demand response, and the potential is on the [multi] gigawatt scale,” Brehm said.

With the notable exception of the California Independent System Operator’s territory, C&I demand response enrollment has recently flatlined or declined in most regions due to limited customer awareness, weak financial incentives and barriers to wholesale market participation, according to ESIG. 

Brehm is hopeful that better technology and program design will turn the tide. Some VPP operators, like Voltus and CPower, coordinate multiple customer-sited resources, rather than interrupting power at a facility’s meter and shutting down production lines, he said. During the June heatwave, CPower says it dispatched 18.5 GWh across 120 events in PJM, ISO-New England and the New York Independent System Operator’s territory.

Small and midsize commercial facilities can also provide meaningful support during extreme weather events, said Thomas Flynn, chief administrative officer and general counsel at Budderfly, a commercial energy management provider serving more than 7,000 restaurants, medical clinics, convenience stores, hotels, gyms and other commercial sites nationwide.

Budderfly activated its first VPP on June 1, just in time for the heatwave. Flynn said the initial deployment included capacity in PJM, ISO-New England and the Southwest Power Pool — all hit hard last month — as well as CAISO. Enrollment could expand to NYISO and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas soon.

“We ran events across all of our programs during the week of the heat dome, activating programs from coast to coast,” Flynn said. “The events went well.”

For now, Budderfly’s VPP mainly dispatches HVAC systems via smart thermostats, but Flynn said it will soon expand to include onsite refrigeration systems, lighting, rooftop solar, electric vehicle chargers and onsite battery storage.

Because Budderfly owns those resources, dispatch is simpler than for customer-owned equipment, Flynn said. For local utilities, that simplicity — and the fact that commercial sites generally have larger and more consistent power loads — means more reliable and predictable VPP capacity.  

“Utilities see this model as a more reliable and scalable solution for flexible load capacity, particularly in regions where traditional demand response has been underutilized,” Flynn said. Budderfly can target dispatch in grid nodes without big industrial customers to provide load flexibility on a larger scale, he added.

Like Budderfly, Sunrun generally owns customer-sited resources. Its rapidly growing arsenal of batteries allows it to play a meaningful role in responding to extreme weather events, said Chris Rauscher, its head of grid services.

“We’ve fully embraced a storage-first strategy over the last few years,” Rauscher said. “Nearly 70% of our new installations include battery storage, up from just 10% a few years ago.”

Republican attack on renewables could help VPPs

Despite the recent U-turn in federal policy around renewables, the Trump administration’s preference for dispatchable power and declaration of an energy emergency create an opening for distributed asset owners like Sunrun, Rauscher said.

“Dispatchable energy is a top priority for this administration, and critical for grid stability,” he said. 

At the same time, Rauscher added, utilities are waking up to the fact that they need more electrons as fast as possible. Sunrun operates 17 VPP programs across the U.S., including utility-run programs like ConnectedSolutions in the Northeast and state programs like Demand Side Grid Support in California.

“The narrative is shifting [and] utilities are starting to see VPPs not just as pilots, but as core infrastructure,” Rauscher said.

Uplight’s Bascom agreed. While the rollback of clean energy tax credits will likely slow the deployment of distributed energy resources, that will also make it more expensive to build utility-scale generation, likely netting out to a boost for VPPs, she said.

“We still haven’t hit mass-market penetration,” she said. “We think there’s a lot of opportunity to leverage these resources for way, way cheaper than any type of new generation.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 12:50

Russia Will Target Any 'Coalition Of The Willing' Forces In Ukraine

Via The Libertarian Institute

The Russian Foreign Ministry said any troops from third countries deployed to Ukraine will become targets. European nations have discussed plans to send their soldiers to Ukraine if a ceasefire with Russia is reached. 

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova explained that any country that joins a coalition of the willing and deploys troops to Ukraine will become targets. "We have repeatedly stated that a deployment of armed forces of other countries in Ukraine under any pretense would be absolutely unacceptable," she said.

Via Wiki Commons

"We regard this as preparations for foreign military intervention. We will consider these so-called ‘multinational forces’ as legitimate military targets," she added.

Several European countries have said they would be willing to join a "coalition of the willing" to deploy soldiers to Ukraine after a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Earlier this month, UK Defense Minister John Healey said, "The prime minister has always been clear that he’s ready to put troops into Ukraine to help reinforce a ceasefire."

"The coalition of the willing" is an infamous phrase used by the George W. Bush administration to try to sell the Iraq War. 

Moscow says it is unwilling to enter into a ceasefire with Ukraine and is seeking a permanent end to the conflict that addresses the Kremlin’s security concerns. 

Multiple leaks throughout the war have exposed that a small number of American and NATO troops are inside Ukraine. However, Europeans are now discussing a large-scale deployment meant as a deterrent to a future Russian invasion. 

The escalating support for Kiev has led some in the Kremlin to argue for Moscow to take a more aggressive position against Ukraine’s Western backers. Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President and current deputy head of the National Security Council, suggested launching preemptive attacks. 

"What is happening today is a proxy war, but in essence it is a full-fledged war," Medvedev, who is now a senior Russian national security official, told the Tass news agency. "We need to act accordingly. Respond in full. And if necessary, launch preventative strikes."

However, Medvedev also acknowledged that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ruled out attacking more European countries. "Let me remind you that our president stated unequivocally: Russia does not intend to go to war with NATO or ‘attack Europe’. Such claims by Western politicians are utter nonsense."

He continued, "I would also like to add that this kind of drivel is deliberately injected into the information space to destabilize an already difficult situation. It is yet another front in the West’s open war against us."

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 11:40

Mossad Chief Pushes For US Assistance In Removing Gazans To Outside Countries

According to a new report by Axios, Mossad director David Barnea visited Washington this week to seek US support for Israel's efforts to persuade regional countries to accept large numbers of Palestinians which Israel plans to forcibly remove from Gaza.

Citing two sources familiar with the discussions, Axios reported that Barnea informed White House envoy Steve Witkoff that Israel has been holding talks with Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Libya about taking in Palestinian refugees. This as there's been on and off negotiations with Hamas, which haven't produced any truce settlement, and the war with Hamas has continued to spiral.

Via AFP

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that any relocation of Gaza’s population would be "voluntary," many international legal experts and war monitors argue that such a plan would amount to ethnic cleansing and should be deemed a war crime.

The sources cited in Axios said Barnea told Witkoff that the three countries showed a willingness to accept substantial numbers of Palestinians, and that he suggested the US provide incentives to encourage their cooperation.

In the case of two of the countries, Ethiopia and Libya, there are long-simmering clashes and the potential for renewed civil war present. Libya in particular is actually controlled by at least two rival governments and powerful warlords have sway over the east.

It doesn't appear that Witkoff has committed to supporting the proposal, and representatives from the three named countries have not issued public statement.

Back in February, President Trump put forward an ultra-controversial proposal to expel all two million Palestinians from Gaza, paving the way for Israel transform the strip into the "Riviera of the Middle East."

It was at that time that US officials reportedly began to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu to identify countries willing to take in large numbers of Palestinians displaced from the Gaza Strip as a result.

The McAmericanization of ancient Gaza?

Gaza will not be free until it has casinos, strip clubs, Chick-fil-As, and Starbucks... pic.twitter.com/LaEja79eRk

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) July 19, 2025

As it stands, nearly the entire population of Gaza, of over two million people, has been internally displaced, as Israeli airstrikes have devastated much of the region, including the destruction of homes, hospitals, mosques, schools, and even churches.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 11:05

Nearly Two Dozen Injured After Car Plows Into Crowd Outside Los Angeles Nightclub

Chaos erupted outside an East Hollywood nightclub early Saturday morning after a vehicle plowed into a crowd, leaving at least 20 people injured. 

The Los Angeles City Fire Department stated, "Initial reports of an unknown vehicle into a crowd, 20+ patients. Estimated 4-5 in at least critical condition, 8-10 in serious condition, 10-15 in fair condition."

AP News quoted Capt. Adam Van Gerpen, who said dozens of people were waiting along Santa Monica Boulevard in East Hollywood, waiting to enter a nightclub, when a Nissan Versa struck them. 

NEW: A car plowed into a crowd near Santa Monica Blvd and Vermont in East Hollywood, injuring over 20 people.

Driver reportedly lost consciousness, hit a taco cart, then slammed into a crowd outside a club.

At least 3 critical, 6 serious. pic.twitter.com/lkllOL6Ipk

— Christopher Webb (@cwebbonline) July 19, 2025

Van Gerpen said first responders discovered one patient had been shot, but details remain scant. 

He said, "They were all standing in line going into a nightclub. There was a taco cart out there, so they were ... getting some food, waiting to go in. And there's also a valet line there," adding, "The valet podium was taken out, the taco truck was taken out, and then a large number of people were impacted by the vehicle."

"This is under police investigation," Van Gerpen. "This will be a large investigation with the LAPD."

Local authorities have not confirmed whether the crash was a car ramming attack or triggered by a medical episode. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 09:55

Meta Won't Sign EU's Code Of Practice For Generative AI, Says Executive

Authored by Evgenia Filimianova via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Meta’s chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, said on Friday that the U.S. tech giant will not sign the EU’s new voluntary code of practice for general-purpose AI, citing legal uncertainties and measures that go beyond the scope of Europe’s main AI law.

A pedestrian walks in front of a new logo and the name "Meta" on the sign in front of the Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., on Oct. 28, 2021. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

In a statement posted on LinkedIn, Kaplan said the company will not be signing the Code of Practice for General-Purpose AI (GPAI), a set of nonbinding guidelines covering AI transparency, copyright, and security.

Designed for developers of general-purpose AI models, the code aims to help them prepare for, and comply with, the AI Act, which takes effect in stages starting Aug. 2.

“Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI,” Kaplan said. “We have carefully reviewed the European Commission’s Code of Practice for general-purpose AI models and Meta won’t be signing it. This Code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act.”

The EU’s AI Act creates one system for all EU countries, dividing AI into four risk levels: unacceptable, high, limited, and minimal. High-risk systems, like those in critical infrastructure or hiring, face strict requirements, including safety checks and documentation.

It covers the regulation of large language models and foundation models built by companies such as Meta’s Llama, OpenAI’s GPT-4, Google DeepMind’s Gemini, and Anthropic’s Claude.

Companies failing to comply could face fines ranging from 7.5 million euros ($8.7 million) or 1.5 percent of turnover, to as much as 35 million euros ($38.2 million) or 7 percent of global turnover.

Businesses Voice Concerns

The release of the GPAI Code was delayed several times before the European Commission published the final version on July 10.

The EU said companies that voluntarily sign the GPAI will face a lighter administrative burden and gain more legal certainty compared to proving compliance through other methods. Last week, ChatGPT-maker OpenAI announced its intention to sign the code.

Kaplan pointed to industry uncertainty over the EU’s AI regulation, citing concerns by 44 of Europe’s largest companies, including Bosch, Siemens, SAP, Lufthansa, Airbus, and BNP.

In an open letter, dozens of top European business leaders earlier this month urged EU officials to postpone key parts of the AI Act by two years, warning that the current rules are too complex and risk undermining Europe’s competitiveness in artificial intelligence.

The group said the AI Act, set to impose new obligations on both high-risk AI systems and general-purpose AI models starting in 2025 and 2026, could stifle innovation if implemented too quickly.

“We share concerns raised by these businesses that this over-reach will throttle the development and deployment of frontier AI models in Europe, and stunt European companies looking to build businesses on top of them,” Kaplan said.

New Guidelines

Meta’s announcement came on the same day the European Commission published new guidelines explaining how general-purpose AI companies must comply with the EU’s AI Act.

The guidelines list several key requirements, including writing clear technical documentation, explaining what data was used to train the models, setting copyright policies, and protecting AI systems from misuse or hacking.

For the most advanced AI models that could pose risks to public safety, human rights, or society, developers will also need to run safety tests, reduce potential harms, and report serious incidents to EU regulators.

“By providing legal certainty on the scope of the AI Act obligations for general-purpose AI providers, we are helping AI actors, from start-ups to major developers, to innovate with confidence, while ensuring their models are safe, transparent, and aligned with European values,” the EU’s executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, security, and democracy, Henna Virkkunen, said in a statement.

To support innovation, the commission said companies making significant modifications to existing models will only need to document the changes and the new training data used, rather than provide full documentation of the entire model.

Officials said this approach is designed to enable most developers to build on existing models without facing excessive regulation.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 09:20

Total Cargo Theft Surges 13%, Metals Theft Surges 96%, In Q2 2025

Cargo theft is rising sharply across North America, with criminals increasingly targeting high-value commodities and employing complex fraud tactics, according to new data from CargoNet, a product of Verisk Analytics. 

In the second quarter of 2025, CargoNet recorded 884 supply chain theft incidents across the United States and Canada—a 13% increase over the same period in 2024 and a 10% rise from the first quarter of this year. The estimated total loss exceeded $128 million, based on average loss values applied to incidents without specific reports.

The data also shows a month-over-month acceleration in theft activity during the quarter: incidents rose 14.6% in April, 4.4% in May, and a staggering 21.9% in June, highlighting growing urgency around supply chain security.

Certain commodities saw significant spikes in theft, indicating a shift from opportunistic theft to more calculated, market-driven operations. Metals theft nearly doubled, surging 96% year-over-year to 53 incidents, a rise that coincides with copper trading near record highs.

Food and beverage products were another major target, with 180 reported thefts, marking a 68% increase from Q2 2024. This category now accounts for over 20% of all cargo thefts, with alcoholic beverages, energy drinks, and meat products among the most commonly stolen items.

“The strategic targeting of specific commodities reveals the business-like approach of modern cargo theft operations,” said Keith Lewis, vice president of operations at Verisk CargoNet. “These aren’t opportunistic crimes – they’re calculated operations targeting goods with the highest illicit-market value and easiest resale potential.”

The average stolen shipment value in Q2 reached $203,586, with downstream effects including increased insurance premiums, delivery disruptions, order replacements, and ultimately higher consumer prices.

In addition to physical theft, CargoNet warns of a rising trend in sophisticated fraud-based cargo theft, involving document forgery and identity theft. These schemes are often executed by international organized crime groups and are becoming increasingly difficult to detect.

“Traditional physical security measures alone are no longer sufficient,” Lewis cautioned. “The industry must adopt a multi-layered approach combining physical security, digital verification, and real-time intelligence sharing to combat these evolving threats.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 08:45

EU Budget Showdown: A Choreographed Conflict?

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

EU Budget Showdown: A Choreographed Conflict?

One day after the European Commission unveiled its new multi-annual budget, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz cast himself as its fiercest opponent. What we are witnessing, however, is nothing more than a choreographed quarrel between allies.

Merz was the first senior European politician to officially reject the EU Commission’s mega-budget proposal. He called Brussels’ ambitions “unacceptable” and ended with the classic political platitude that one must make do with the resources at hand. The same man, however, presides over a debt-driven government in Berlin — so does the maxim apply to himself?

The Commission’s proposal outlines €1.816 trillion in spending between 2028 and 2034 — an increase of an astounding €750 billion.

Diversionary Tactics and Strategic Intent

What we are watching is a staged performance — a well-worn ritual designed for public consumption. The declared goal of European elites is to crown Brussels with full tax sovereignty and expand the EU's central body into a gravitational hub of geopolitical power. The endgame is a government of governments — a supranational mega-structure.

But to achieve this, public approval must be secured. Let’s not say “manipulated” — let’s say: shaped. So the elites serve up political theater and media distractions. The script is simple: Brussels demands the maximum. Predictable outrage follows — as from Merz — and in the end, both parties “compromise” on a figure that lets everyone save face and claim victory.

Even if Merz ends up trimming €100–200 billion off the budget, it’s likely still part of the Brussels PR playbook.

Fiscal Consolidation — Whether We Like It or Not

Over-indebted EU member states — particularly in the South — are seeking to consolidate their liabilities under the Commission’s protective umbrella. And they’ve found the ideal vehicle in the European Central Bank. With the ECB backstopping debt through ongoing interventions and yield curve control, the illusion of solvency can be maintained — at the expense of European taxpayers.

This would mark the end of a fragmented European bond market. Full integration would eliminate the last vestiges of fiscal competition between member states. From there, it’s “fire at will,” to quote the style of Germany’s SPD General Secretary.

Should Brussels succeed in enacting its unholy trinity — debt consolidation, its own tax sovereignty via CO₂ levies and corporate taxes, and the introduction of a digital euro to stem capital flight — then little will remain to stop the fortress-Europe vision from materializing.

United States of Europe

Brussels believes itself close to achieving its long-sought objective. This explains the growing hostility toward national-conservative parties — the last real bulwark against the centralizers’ dream of total government. The United States of Europe is being built atop vulgar Keynesian economics, propped up by media control and narrative discipline.

At its core, it’s grotesque. With laws like the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act, EU bureaucrats inadvertently confirm their fear: that their frontal assault on national autonomy and economic liberty may ultimately fail. Brussels’ policy signals are defensive — and this budget draft is a preemptive effort to shore up its crumbling authority.

The Zombie’s Arms

A quick glance at the budget confirms the diagnosis: €131 billion is earmarked for European military projects. That’s a fivefold increase — and it comes on top of massive national military expansions. The EU’s central body, finding itself in the early stages of a fiscal crisis, is now retreating into militarism.

Media-fueled Putin panic serves as the justification to activate this new limb of the artificial euro economy.

The other limb — the so-called Green Deal - is kept alive by another €700 billion in subsidies. Thirty percent of the entire EU budget will now rotate the subsidy machine, pumping debt-financed money into the carbon-neutral, biodiversity-friendly fantasies of anemic euro-zone planners.

It’s bizarre. While the Commission tries to weave the Green Deal into mainstream media narratives, environmental groups reflexively attack the budget draft as strategically incoherent. Predictably, subsidies can never satisfy society’s growing dependency on the sweet drug of “free” money. EU-Europe has become the dealer — injecting that drug into the continent with no regard for social or economic consequences.

The entire debate is detached from economic reality. It’s as if Brussels is trying to drown all criticism in cheap money — and buy NGO support with state funding. Unless opponents of euro-centralism finally catch a tailwind, more lost years lie ahead. Especially alarming: the creeping militarization — in both rhetoric and policy.

That the left remains largely silent about this marks a significant political shift. Party competition has been replaced by a cartel of interests.

Militarism as Endgame

Historically, militarization is often a symptom of regimes entering their terminal phase — a sign they’ve lost internal control. The Brussels offensive is not a show of strength, but a confession of weakness: the EU construct is cracking. Its facade of unity is held together only by floods of credit and increasing repression of dissent.

The militarist push not only signals a new arms race — it ushers in a post-democratic EU. National interests are sacrificed — in energy, migration, and fiscal sovereignty. The political price: simmering discontent, rising anti-system sentiment, and a collapse of trust in institutions.

The staged budget clash continues in migration policy — where flashy deportation flights and symbolic border controls offer the illusion of responsiveness, but nothing more. Here too, Brussels’ interests and the will of the European majority diverge sharply.

Let’s be honest: Brussels, with help from its national outposts, is executing a globalist agenda. Cleaning up the aftermath will define the political and cultural future of the continent.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 08:10

Man With Metal Neck Chain Critically Injured After Being Sucked Into MRI On Long Island

If you’ve ever thought all those “NO METAL” signs around MRI machines—on doors, walls, and even in the waiting room—seemed a little over the top, here’s your proof they’re not.

Today in Darwinism...a 61-year-old man was critically injured Wednesday after an accident involving an MRI machine at a medical facility on Long Island, according to the Nassau County Police Department.

The incident occurred around 4:30 p.m. at Nassau Open MRI in Westbury, New York. Authorities say the man entered the MRI room without authorization while the machine was operating, according to Fox 8.

Police reported that the man was wearing a large metal chain around his neck, which triggered a dangerous reaction. The powerful magnetic field of the MRI machine pulled him toward the device, resulting in a severe injury.

Fox 8 writes that the man experienced a "medical episode," police said, and was transported to a nearby hospital in critical condition. No further details about his condition or the circumstances were immediately released.

MRI machines rely on extremely strong magnets to scan the body and produce images of soft tissues. According to the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, “The magnetic field extends beyond the machine and exerts very powerful forces on objects of iron, some steels, and other magnetizable objects; it is strong enough to fling a wheelchair across the room.”

No other injuries were reported in the incident, and the investigation is ongoing.

        View this post on Instagram                      

A post shared by NBC New York (@nbcnewyork)

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 07:35

UK To Lower Voting Age To 16, But Could Plans To Garner 'Socialist Fodder' End Up Backfiring?

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Britain’s left-wing Labour government has announced plans to lower the voting age in time for the next U.K. general election, allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in what it described as sweeping electoral reforms to “modernize democracy.”

Ministers say the move is designed to rebuild public trust, but critics have accused the government of trying to tilt the electoral playing field in its favor, with recent polling suggesting Labour would benefit from a third of the votes.

The voting age reform is part of a broader Elections Bill that will also ease voter ID rules by allowing bank cards as accepted identification and introduce tougher regulations on foreign donations, campaigner abuse, and digital voter registration.

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said the plan would “break down barriers to participation” and deliver on Labour’s manifesto promise to extend the vote to young people who already “work, pay taxes, and serve in the military.”

Minister for Democracy Rushanara Ali called it a “generational step forward.”

But Nigel Farage, leader of Reform U.K., responded:

“I’m not in favor of it, but I’m really encouraged by the number of young people that are coming towards us. It’s an attempt to rig the political system, but we intend to give them a nasty surprise.”

Polling by Merlin Strategy suggests the issue is divisive even among teenagers.

Of 500 16- and 17-year-olds surveyed, 49 percent said they did not believe they should be allowed to vote, while 51 percent supported the move.

When asked how they would vote, 33 percent backed Labour, but Reform U.K. came in second with 20 percent. Only 10 percent of respondents said they would vote Conservative.

BREAKING: The UK is set to lower the voting age to 16 in landmark electoral reforms.

Julia: "Just when you think things couldn't get any worse... we're going to let kids vote over who runs the country - completely and utterly insane!"@JuliaHB1 pic.twitter.com/xXaRoOH2px

— Talk (@TalkTV) July 17, 2025

Shadow Communities Secretary Kevin Hollinrake told the Daily Mail the move risks undermining democracy:

“Even 16- and 17-year-olds don’t think they’re ready to vote. With only 18 percent saying they’d definitely take part in an election, it’s clear this is more about politics than principle.”

Former editor of The Sun, Kelvin MacKenzie, was blunter:

“In a desperate attempt to find anybody to vote Labour, Angela Rayner has announced 16-year-olds can vote. At 16, they know nothing of life and finance and therefore make great socialist fodder.”

In a desperate attempt to find anybody to vote Labour Angela Rayner has announced 16-year-olds can vote at the next General Election.
At 16 they know nothing of life and finance and therefore make great socialist fodder. Older voters sick of subsidising teenagers born with their…

— Kelvin MacKenzie (@kelvmackenzie) July 17, 2025

In a European context, the U.K. now joins Austria and Malta in allowing 16-year-olds to vote in all elections. Germany, Wales, and Scotland permit voting at 16 for local or regional elections, but most European countries still set the national voting age at 18.

The move could backfire for the Labour government. Just 43 percent of young people are supportive of the two legacy parties in Britain, Labour and the Conservatives, with the data suggesting they are sympathetic to left and right-wing causes.

With talk of a potential splinter party from Labour in the pipeline being set up by far-left MPs Zara Sultana and former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, and the indisputable success Reform U.K. had at the last general election through its use of social media targeting young people, Keir Starmer’s party could find itself being squeezed from both sides.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/19/2025 - 07:00

Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity

Authored by Bruce Abramson via RealClearWire,

I began studying AI in the mid-1980s. Unusually for a computer scientist of that era, my interest was entirely in information, not in machines. I became obsessed with understanding what it meant to live during the transition from the late Industrial Age to the early Information Age.

What I learned is that computers fundamentally alter the economics of information.

We now have inexpensive access to more information, and to higher quality information, than ever before.

In theory, that should help individuals reach better decisions, organizations devise improved strategies, and governments craft superior policies. But that’s just a theory. Does it?

The answer is “sometimes.” Unfortunately, the “sometimes not” part of the equation is now poised to unleash devastating consequences.

Consider the altered economics of information: Scarcity creates value. That’s been true in all times, in all cultures, and for all resources. If there’s not enough of a resource to meet demand, its value increases. If demand is met and a surplus remains, value plummets.

Historically, information was scarce. Spies, lawyers, doctors, priests, scientists, scholars, accountants, teachers, and others spent years acquiring knowledge, then commanded a premium for their services.

Today, information is overabundant. No one need know anything because the trusty phones that never leave our sides can answer any question that might come our way. Why waste your time learning, studying, or internalizing information when you can just look it up on demand?

Having spent the past couple of years working in higher education reform and in conversation with college students, I’ve come to appreciate the power—and the danger—of this question. Today’s students have weaker general backgrounds than we’ve seen for many generations because when information ceased being scarce, it lost all value.

It’s important to recall how recently this phenomenon began. In 2011, an estimated one-third of Americans, and one-quarter of American teenagers, had smartphones. From there, adoption among the young grew faster than among the general population. Current estimates are that over 90 percent of Americans, and over 95 percent of teenagers, have smartphone access.

Even rules limiting classroom use cannot overcome the cultural shift. Few of today’s college students or recent grads have ever operated without the ability to scout ahead or query a device for information on an as-needed basis. There’s thus no reason for them to have ever developed the discipline or the practices that form the basis for learning.

The deeper problem, however, is that while instant lookup may work well for facts, it’s deadly for comprehension and worse for moral thinking.

A quick lookup can list every battle of WWII, along with casualty statistics and outcome. It cannot reveal the strategic or ethical deliberations driving the belligerents as they entered that battle. Nor can it explain why Churchill fought for the side of good while Hitler fought for the side of evil—a question that our most popular interviewers and podcasters have recently brought to prominence.

At least, lookup couldn’t provide such answers until recently. New AI systems—still less than three years old—are rushing to fill that gap. They already offer explanations and projections, at times including the motives underlying given decisions. They are beginning to push into moral judgments.

Of course, like all search and pattern-matching tools, these systems can only extrapolate from what they find. They thus tend to magnify whatever is popular. They’re also easy prey for some of the most basic cognitive biases. They tend to overweight the recent, the easily available, the widely repeated, and anything that confirms pre-conceived models.

The recent reports of Grok regurgitating crude antisemitic stereotypes and slogans illustrate the technological half of the problem. The shocking wave of terror-supporting actions wracking college campuses and drawing recent grads in many of our cities illustrate the human half.

The abundance of information has destroyed its value. Because information—facts and data—are the building blocks upon which all understanding must rest, we’ve raised a generation incapable of deep understanding. Because complex moral judgments build upon comprehension, young Americans are also shorn of basic morality

We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels. We have outsourced knowledge, comprehension, and judgment to sterile devices easily biased to magnify popular opinion. We have bred a generation of exquisitely credentialed, deeply immoral, anti-intellectuals on the brink of entering leadership.

When the ubiquity of instant lookup evolves beyond basic facts and into moral judgments, banal slogans and mindless cruelty will come to rule our lives.

Is there a way out of this morass? Perhaps the only one that the ancients discovered back when information, understanding, and morality all retained immense value: faith in a higher power. Because the path we’ve set on our own is heading into some very dark places.

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/18/2025 - 23:25

Ukraine Drone 'Mega Deal' Possible With US, Zelensky Says

President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky are negotiating what's being widely dubbed a potential "mega deal" which allows for Ukraine to exchange its growing small drone arsenal and technology for more advanced American weapons.

Reports say that under the scheme the United States would purchase Ukrainian-made drones, while Ukraine would in turn buy American weapons, according to a Zelensky interview with the New York Post. "The American people need this technology—it should be part of your defense arsenal," Zelensky told the Post.

Ukrainian Presidency's Office

Ukraine was never much of a drone-producer, but the war with Russia has resulted in the country's transformation into a small-drone manufacturing powerhouse, now producing millions of small, cheap drones - amid a growing UAV and aerial war which over the past months has seen hundreds exchanged between Russia and Ukraine on a nightly basis.

Apparently US defense planners were impressed by Ukrainian UAVs' reach and effectiveness particularly during 'Operation Spiderweb' - which involved nearly 120 Ukrainian drones disabling or destroying multiple Russian bombers across four different airbases.

The Pentagon recently emphasized the urgent need to scale up drone production, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also calling for more drone training across all branches of the US military. The defense budget for next year will also seek to ramp up America's small drone warfare readiness.

As for the 'mega deal' being teased by Zelensky, it's anything but certain the degree to which the White House will actually sign on to this. Trump's emphasis of late has been for NATO's European members to give up their US-made weapons and transfer them to Ukraine first.

It's also clear that Ukraine doesn't have much in the way of weapons or technology to offer Washington, and there are currently many military tech companies and defense contractors which are ramping up small drone production. The tech offered by American firms like Anduril Industries is also without parallel - given AI integration.

But given Ukraine's drones are somewhat 'proven' - Zelensky is eager to tout whatever he has to offer, in hopes of convincing Trump to step up offensive and long-range weapons transfers to Ukrainian forces.

Ukrainian officials have been relentless in their demands that Kiev immediately receives more advanced hardware, even after hundreds of billions sunk into the Ukrainian cause.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/18/2025 - 23:00

China Might Not Want Russia To Lose, But It Might Not Want Russia To Win Either

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

A Russian loss would be catastrophic for China’s security, while a Russian victory could end the discounted energy bonanza that’s helping it maintain its economic growth amidst the slowdown, not to mention accelerate the US’ “Pivot (back) to (East) Asia” for more muscularly containing it.

The South China Morning Post (SCMP) cited unnamed sources to report that Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told his EU counterpart that China doesn’t want Russia to lose in Ukraine because the US’ whole focus might then shift to China. His alleged remarks were spun by the Mainstream Media as an admission that China isn’t as neutral as it claims, just as they and their Alt-Media rivals suspected. Both now believe that China will help Russia win, as in obtain its maximum goals, but that’s likely not the case.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Wang did indeed say what was attributed to him, it would align with the assessment around the conflict’s one-year anniversary in February 2023 that “China Doesn’t Want Anyone To Win In Ukraine”. The SCMP channeled the gist of the preceding analysis by writing that “One interpretation of Wang’s statement in Brussels is that while China did not ask for the war, its prolongation may suit Beijing’s strategic needs, so long as the US remains engaged in Ukraine.”

To explain, not only would the US be unable to “Pivot (back) to (East) Asia” for more muscularly containing China at the scale that Trump envisages if the Ukrainian Conflict drags on, but the continued pressure placed upon the Russian economy by Western sanctions would benefit the Chinese economy. China already imports a staggering amount of discounted Russian oil, which helps maintain its economic growth amidst the slowdown that it’s experiencing, but this could end if sanctions were curtailed.

Additionally, the greater that China’s role becomes in serving as a valve for Russia from Western sanctions pressure (both in terms of energy imports for helping to finance the Russian budget but also exports that replace lost Western products), the more dependent Russia will become on China. The increasingly lopsided nature of their economic relations could then be leveraged to clinch the most preferential long-term energy deals possible as regards the Power of Siberia II and other pipelines.

These outcomes could restore China’s superpower trajectory that was derailed during the first six months of the special operation as explained here at the time, thus strengthening its overall resilience to US pressure and therefore making it less likely that the US can coerce a series of lopsided deals from it. It’s for this reason that Trump’s Special Envoy to Russia Steve Witkoff is reportedly pushing for the US to lift its energy sanctions on Russia in order to deprive China of these financial and strategic benefits.

The nascent Russian-US “New Détente” could restore the Kremlin’s energy clientele as a first step via phased sanctions relief, thus expanding its range of partners to preemptively avert the aforementioned Russian dependence on China, especially in the event of joint energy cooperation in the Arctic. The purpose, as explained here in early January, would be to deprive China of decades-long access to ultra-cheap resources for fueling its superpower rise at the US’ expense.

All in all, a Russian victory (whether in full or in part via compromises) could end the discounted energy bonanza that’s helping China maintain its economic growth amidst the slowdown, ergo why Beijing won’t send military aid or troops to facilitate this (apart from also fearing serious Western sanctions).

Likewise, the scenario of the West inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia would be catastrophic for China’s security, ergo another reason for the aforesaid imports in order to help Russia maintain its war economy.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/18/2025 - 22:35

Pepsi Exec Floats Switch To Sugar After Trump Coca-Cola Announcement

PepsiCo’s top executive indicated on July 17 that the company may switch Pepsi’s sweetener from high-fructose corn syrup to sugar, one day after President Donald Trump said Coca-Cola would soon be making the change.

“Same journey that we have in foods, we’re following in beverages. This is a consumer-centric strategy. We’re following the consumer,” Ramon Laguarta, PepsiCo’s CEO, told investors on a call after being asked about Trump’s announcement.

“If the consumer is telling us that they prefer products that have sugar and they prefer products that have natural ingredients, we will give the consumer products that have sugar and have natural ingredients. So, this is a journey of following the consumer, trying to be a little bit maybe one step ahead of the consumer, but not too many steps. And it applies to both beverages and food.”

As Jasper Fakkert reports for The Epoch Times, Trump said on Wednesday that he had been discussing with Coca-Cola the possibility of switching Coke’s sweetener to cane sugar in the United States, “and they have agreed to do so,” he said.

A Coca-Cola spokesperson told The Epoch Times that the company appreciates Trump’s enthusiasm for its brand and promised to soon share “more details on new innovative offerings within our Coca‑Cola product range.”

Some Coca-Cola products feature cane sugar, although most Coke sold in the United States is made with corn syrup. Both Coca-Cola and PepsiCo updated their soda formulas in the 1980s to use corn syrup instead of sugar.

Laguarta’s announcement came during a call in which executives said that PepsiCo will relaunch its Lay’s and Tostitos brands later this year to highlight that they contain no artificial colors or flavors.

“We’re trying to elevate the real food perception of Lay’s. If you think about the simplest and most natural snack, it is a potato chip; it’s a potato, it’s oil, and it’s a little bit of salt—the most simple, no artificial ingredients,” Laguarta said.

The company also said it was expanding the use of avocado and olive oil across its brands, rather than the canola or soybean oil it uses. Some health influencers, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have promoted removing seed oils from food.

PepsiCo officials had announced in April that they were quickening the company’s transition to natural colors, in the wake of the Food and Drug Administration’s banning of two artificial dyes. Lays and Tostitos will not contain artificial colors by the end of 2025, he said at the time.

PepsiCo already offers Lays and Doritos without artificial colors or flavors under its Simply segment.

“The Simply line extension for existing chip brands is still in early innings,“ F/m Investments senior portfolio manager Christian Greiner said. ”Consumers have not engaged so far, and given that, it will be seen how consumers react to a rebranding of Lays and Tostitos over the next couple of quarters.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/18/2025 - 22:10