Zero Hedge

GOP Divide Deepens Over Venezuela: Ron Johnson Says "Get Rid of Maduro" While Rand Paul Calls It "Offensive War Of Choice"

GOP Divide Deepens Over Venezuela: Ron Johnson Says "Get Rid of Maduro" While Rand Paul Calls It "Offensive War Of Choice"

Authored by Liam Cosgrove,

Tensions are brewing within the Republican party over the Trump administration's stance on Venezuela - with some populist conservatives like Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) supporting all out regime change in the South American country, while Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has explicitly rejected regime change. 

Via BBC

Most republicans have thus far granted Trump leeway on the strikes which the administration says are strictly targeting cartel boats, however there are rumblings among the party that if regime change or a ground invasion is the goal, congressional approval will be required.

The party is largely split into three camps.

Hardliners: 'Long Overdue' and No Need for Congress

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) said the strikes didn’t require congressional approval, arguing forcefully that the U.S. had waited too long to confront what he described as a drug-trafficking and terror-financing threat.

“These guys are bringing drugs into our country. They’re killing Americans. It’s long overdue,” Burchett told ZeroHedge. “Trump gets that… that’s why he does executive orders, because we [Congress] ain’t got the guts to do anything.”

Asked whether Trump needed authorization from Congress, Burchett said:

“No, heck no… bust their ass.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-L) sees Maduro not as a head of state, but as a criminal. “He’s the head of drug cartels,” Scott told us. “He lost the election. He’s not the president of Venezuela… He needs to be arrested for selling drugs in this country.”

In agreement with Burchett and Scott, Johnson said he supports Trump acting unilaterally: “We elect presidents to make those kinds of decisions… I don’t see any reason to deny President Trump the same ability to make those tough calls.”

Conditional Support: Limited Strikes OK, War Requires Congress

Other Republicans drew a distinction between narrow operations and a broader conflict.

Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO) told us he believes the president has authority to take “limited action,” but only to a point.

“If we’re going to go into a war with another nation… if we’re gonna be doing some form of regime change… the president should be getting Congress’ buy-in,” he said.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) added that further escalation could trigger the need for congressional action. “At some point, insofar as there’s kinetic action in Venezuela, on Venezuelan soil, it may come to that [a vote in Congress],” Lee told us.

Constitutional Critics: 'Offensive War of Choice'

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told ZeroHedge he believes the strikes may raise legal and humanitarian issues, noting that U.S. law prohibits targeting incapacitated combatants.

“Once people are incapacitated by a bomb… crawling away, swimming away… our laws say you’re not allowed to bomb them,” Paul said. Further, Paul called for Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to testify under oath about the orders given.

He rejected colleagues’ calls for regime change, saying: “I agree with Donald Trump of 2015… who argued against regime change,” he said. “An offensive war of choice is not my choice.”

Senate Democrats are likewise taking the constitutionality angle in their criticisms of the President. 

“The constitution's very specific. The president is saying we're at war with unknown, unnamed people, and we should be coming before Congress,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) told us. “It's clearly, clearly a violation of our constitution.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 21:20

The Washington Post's Attack On Veterans' Integrity

The Washington Post's Attack On Veterans' Integrity

Authored by William Taylor via RealClearDefense,

On the eve of Veterans Day, a moment meant for gratitude and reflection, The Washington Post doubled down on its campaign against those who have served, accusing America’s Veterans of feigning mental health injuries as a means to secure disability benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The article, one in an unrelenting series of Veteran attack articles from the Post this fall, is disheartening and injurious to those who have sacrificed their minds and bodies for our country.

The series sparked an immediate backlash, with veterans and advocates writing to the Post in droves to slam the reporting as biased and misleading. And they’re right.

The Post’s articles risk leaving readers with the pernicious idea that it’s commonplace for Veterans and their private benefits consultants to scam the VA benefits claims system by using PTSD and other mental health disorders as an excuse to collect benefits from the government.

Mental health disorders are not mere excuses for Veterans to collect benefits; they’re a reality. Ryan Gallucci, Executive Director of the VFW’s Washington, D.C. office, put it best when he called PTSD one of “the signature wounds of modern warfare,” adding that it’s “either ignorant or deliberately cruel” to claim that conditions like this are fake and unworthy of benefits claims.

Mental injuries may not be as physically dramatic as a bullet or explosion wound, but too many Veterans hobble through life dealing with mental anguish, and some – more than 17 per day, according to a recent report – end their own lives early to finally be free of it.

America’s Veterans endured incalculable stress and anguish fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Post’s reporting does not contextualize exposure to the toxic burn pits, the constant threats of violence on patrol, and the grueling physical demands of war and counterinsurgency in 100-plus-degree and sub-zero temperatures for months at a time. And that’s not counting the horrors many Veterans store in their memories, like the dismembered body parts of comrades after their Humvees rode over IEDs – or the burned skin, torn muscles, and protruding organs after shrapnel from a rocket-propelled grenade that sprayed into fellow soldiers nearby.

These stressful memories can return, shaking us to our core. This is PTSD. It’s traumatic, it’s painful, and it’s real. I’m proud that my organization, Veterans Guardian – and the 150-plus Veterans, Veteran spouses, and spouses of active-duty service members who work there – have helped thousands of Veterans afflicted by PTSD and other mental health disorders get the benefits they’ve earned.

By glossing over the unfortunate truths of mental illness and accusing Veterans and those supporting them as fraudulent, the Post has belittled Veterans’ great sacrifices.

They’re also perpetuating an idea they’ve been conditioned to believe through the military, that they should “suck up and deal with” every challenge that comes their way. That standard shouldn’t apply when soldiers transition to Veteran status and civilian life. Civilians are not expected to “suck it up” if an insurance company denies a claim that should be honored.

The same principle applies to Veterans.

When recruits sign up for the armed services, they enter an agreement with the government and people of the United States. As soldiers, they would sacrifice their bodies and minds protecting the Constitution and the freedoms of Americans. But in exchange for these sacrifices, Veterans would receive benefits that help them manage health issues and integrate back into civilian life after serving. Veterans earned the right to receive these benefits, and they should be honored.

The VFW, in response to the Washington Post’s October 6tharticle casting Veterans in a dishonorable light for generalizing the bad actions of very few, perfectly summed up practically every Veteran’s feelings in three words: “honor the contract.”

Reputable claims consultants like Veterans Guardian and Veteran Service Organizations like the VFW may not always see eye to eye, however, we are in lockstep solidarity when it comes to protecting our Veterans, just as we are in our beliefs that the Washington Post doesn’t fully understand Veterans, the benefits system, and the gravity of their reporting.

These kinds of articles share the same hallmarks of the unfortunate reality of the misinformation environment around Veterans: inflammatory anecdotes, the inaccurate portrayal of Veterans as dishonorable, and the vilification of compensating our Veterans for the many burdens they’ve endured. I would ask that everyone that talks about Veterans and their struggles keeps in mind the potential negative impacts their statements can have on our Veterans and their mental health.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 20:55

China Debuts First Locally Built GE-Designed Gas Turbine

China Debuts First Locally Built GE-Designed Gas Turbine

China has launched its first power plant using an advanced gas turbine manufactured domestically, marking a major step toward reducing dependence on foreign technology amid a global equipment shortage, according to Bloomberg.

China Energy Investment Corp. commissioned the Anji Power Plant, which operates two GE-designed turbines of roughly 400 megawatts each.

Bloomberg writes that the turbine design comes from GE Vernova, which formed a joint venture with state-owned Harbin Electric in 2019 to localize production and supply up to a dozen units annually.

The achievement advances China’s long-running effort to build its own gas-turbine industry at a time when worldwide demand is surging—driven by data-center expansion and by developing nations shifting away from coal.

China’s gas-fired capacity is expected to reach about 150 gigawatts this year, with proposals to grow to 200 gigawatts by 2030. Gas power is becoming increasingly important in coastal regions facing limited land for renewables and grid bottlenecks, according to Qi Qin of the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.

Other domestic manufacturers, including Dongfang Electric and Shanghai Electric, are also speeding up their gas-turbine development programs.

The move carries broader geopolitical significance. As advanced gas turbines have long been dominated by a small group of Western and Japanese suppliers, China’s ability to localize production reduces a key point of technological leverage.

At a time when global supply chains for strategic equipment are tightening and export controls are expanding, demonstrating domestic capability in large-scale turbine manufacturing strengthens China’s energy security and lowers its vulnerability to potential sanctions or supply disruptions.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 20:30

The Link Between Transgenderism and Autism

The Link Between Transgenderism and Autism

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Chloe Cole grew up a tomboy, was diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by age 7, and referred for autism screening by age 17.

Chloe Cole, who began transitioning at age 12 and now regrets surgically removing her breasts, holds testosterone medication used for transgender patients in Northern California on Aug. 26, 2022. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Cole began identifying as a boy during adolescence and sought physical changes to match.

Doctors readily consented to medical intervention. They prescribed puberty blockers and testosterone at age 13. At 15, surgeons performed a double mastectomy, she told The Epoch Times.

But doctors didn’t address her neurological issues first. The same gender specialist who referred her for breast surgery later referred her for autism screening. Cole has described herself as being on the autism spectrum, but said she was never formally diagnosed.

Cole is now a leading campaigner against interventions to transition children with gender dysphoria.

She said many of those she knew personally when she was involved in the transgender community, as well as many of the detransitioners she knows, “are either somewhere on the autism spectrum, or they have been diagnosed with similar conditions, like ADHD.”

Her observations are increasingly supported by research. For at least a decade, studies have reported links among transgender identity, autism, and other neurological conditions. These connections have recently gained greater public attention.

Growing evidence of an autism–transgender link is already prompting some nations to recommend neurological screening before intervention. In America, the treatment model remains unchanged, and the predominant “affirmation” model makes the link difficult to investigate.

Chloe Cole in Washington on Jan. 12, 2023. The overlap between gender dysphoria and neurodevelopmental issues such as autism and ADHD is more pronounced than people realize, Cole said. Melvin Soto-Vázquez/Cpi Studios For The Epoch Times Autism and Gender Dysphoria

A report published this month by the British think tank Centre for Social Justice showed that autism and ADHD were “overrepresented,” or disproportionately high, among youth with gender dysphoria.

​The report, citing data from the UK’s National Health Service, showed 32.4 percent of gender dysphoria referrals had an autism diagnosis, and 11.7 percent had an ADHD diagnosis. ​

Those numbers were 16 times higher than the national population averages for autism, and more than twice as high for ADHD. The population-wide averages for autism and ADHD in the United Kingdom are estimated at 2 percent and 5 percent, respectively.

“Individuals with autism spectrum disorder are far more likely to identify as transgender,” Joseph Nicolosi Jr., a licensed clinical psychologist and researcher in California, told The Epoch Times via email.

A pair of studies conducted in 2016 and 2019 indicate that autistic children are between four and seven times more likely to experience gender dysphoria or gender variance, he said. A 2019 study was conducted by researchers at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, and a 2016 study was conducted at New York University.

Nicolosi said there are several reasons for the connection, including “rigid thinking.”

​For example, if a boy with autism lacks stereotypical male interests, he may doubt he is a boy and assume he must be a girl. Reading social cues is often hard for those with autism, so they may perceive same-sex peers as getting along better than they do.

​“This heightens their sense of alienation from their peers,” Nicolosi said.

Chloe Cole holds a childhood photo in Northern California on Aug. 26, 2022. Cole recalled that around fourth grade she started to have difficulty coping with her body beginning to mature—‘a common sentiment amongst people who have either ADHD or autism.’ John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Cole recalled having difficulty coping with her body beginning to mature around the fourth grade, younger than most of her peers.

“The older I got, the less I associated with femininity, and I didn’t really feel like I fit in—especially with my female peers—but with my peers in general,” she said.

“It’s a common sentiment amongst people who have either ADHD or autism.”

Erin Friday, who gained national attention for successfully steering her ADHD daughter away from identifying as a transgender male, said she knows many detransitioners who are on the autism spectrum. A detransitioner is someone who had previously taken steps to transition to the opposite gender.

But most of the medical community doesn’t recognize transgender identity as a maladaptive coping mechanism, she told The Epoch Times.

They view autism and transgender identity as complementary and natural, instead of looking at causality, she said.

“This is the intersection of autism and transgenderism, like peas and carrots, it goes together,” Friday said. “They’re not even looking at ... what is the causality?”

She observed that some hospitals offering pediatric transgender care have integrated autism and gender dysphoria services.

“It’s a feeder,” she said. “So it gives an endless stream of patients.”

Children’s National Hospital in Washington runs a Gender and Autism Program that treats autistic patients with gender dysphoria, illustrating the recognized connection between the two, she noted.

“We do not understand why autism and gender expansiveness often occur together, but we do know that this co-occurrence can be complex to navigate for young people and their families,” the website states.

The hospital did not respond to a request for comment.

Attorney Erin Friday joins “Our Duty” supporters at the California State Capitol Building in Sacramento on Aug. 28, 2023. Friday gained national attention for successfully steering her daughter with ADHD away from identifying as a transgender male. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times Neurological Screening

In the UK, a seminal report released last year on how the country has handled treatment of children with gender dysphoria suggested screening children for neurodevelopmental conditions, including autism and mental health issues.

That review, led by pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, sparked a wave of reforms, and the UK’s National Health Service all but halted the prescription of puberty blockers because there was a lack of evidence that the treatment was beneficial.

The Cass report found that young people distressed about their gender often have complex problems contributing to that distress, including mental illness, neurodiverse traits, and a variety of social problems.

Sweden and Finland recommend that neurodevelopmental conditions such as Autism and ADHD be addressed as part of the evaluation process for the treatment of pediatric gender dysphoria.

In the United States, however, psychological organizations prioritize “gender-affirming care” without recommending neurological screening.

Instead, most follow the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care, which call for individualized, age-appropriate care to “improve health and wellbeing” of youth who identify as transgender.

The organization says assisting gender dysphoric patients “may include gynecologic and urologic care, reproductive health, voice and communication therapy, mental health services (e.g., counseling, psychotherapy), and/or hormonal or surgical treatments, among others.”

Pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass speaks about the publication of the Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People in London on April 9, 2024. The report recommends screening children for neurodevelopmental conditions, including autism, as well as for mental health issues. Yui Mok/PA Wire

WPATH does not believe an autism diagnosis should prevent “gender-affirming care.”

“There is no evidence to suggest a benefit of withholding [gender affirming medical and surgical treatments] from [transgender] people who have gender incongruence simply on the basis that they have a mental health or neurodevelopmental condition,” according to WPATH.

Likewise, a 2023 commentary appearing in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics said that autistic youth deserve “gender-affirming care, and an [autism spectrum] diagnosis should not prevent youth and families from providing informed consent to gender-affirming care.”

The Autistic Self-Advocacy Network said in its June newsletter that the government shouldn’t interfere with an autistic person’s decision to transition.

“They think autistic people cannot really know if we are transgender. They say we are being tricked or we are confused. They think we should not be allowed to get gender-affirming care,” the newsletter stated.

Republican lawmakers in many states have enacted bans against gender-related medical treatments on minors, with corresponding federal actions to restrict funding for such practices.

Shortly after taking office earlier this year, President Donald Trump signed an executive order stating that the federal government will not fund or promote transition-related care for children who identify as a different gender.

This spring, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a 409-page review of medical procedures used for gender dysphoric children. The report advocates for psychotherapy as a “noninvasive alternative to endocrine and surgical interventions,” since the benefits of hormones or surgery have not been established.

“Many of these children and adolescents have co-occurring psychiatric or neurodevelopmental conditions, rendering them especially vulnerable,” the executive summary for the report states.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 20:05

Billions Spent By One-Party-Rule Maryland Democrats With Little Oversight

Billions Spent By One-Party-Rule Maryland Democrats With Little Oversight

The one-party rule of 'Democratic Kings' in Maryland continues to reveal an optically displeasing truth about these leftist activists masquerading as competent politicians, who are anything but, and their epic mismanagement of state finances has only occurred because of limited oversight into their radical agendas.

Fox Baltimore reports that a state legislative audit uncovered major concerns about the oversight of billions of dollars spent by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore and his rudderless leftist allies in Annapolis, who champion everything from failed climate-crisis policies to wokeism to gender identity agendas to social justice and criminal justice reforms, as well as protecting illegal aliens (new voter base) - this is anything but 'Maryland First'...

"Most recently, a state audit revealed 42 state offices spent a total of $8.5 billion last year with minimal oversight. That audit came on the heels of a State Highway Administration audit detailing $360 million in unauthorized spending for federal projects, and a separate Social Services Administration audit revealing a lack of protections for foster care children in Maryland," Fox Baltimore wrote in a report. 

Taxpayers Protection Alliance president David Williams told Fox Baltimore journalist Jeff Abell, "It's a problem that almost $9 billion is going to these entities and we just don't know where the money is going."

Williams expressed serious concerns over the findings, pointing out, "This is supposed to be a system of checks and balances. We know the checks have gone out but there are no balances to be sure the money is being spent wisely."

He called for increased oversight, saying, "If you're receiving taxpayer money, there has to be full accountability, and this is billions of dollars we're talking about."

The lack of oversight in Maryland comes as no surprise, given that the state suffers from a disastrous one-party rule of far-left Democrats who care more about upholding the globalist framework of climate-crisis and illegal alien policies. 

Moore's photo next to dark-money-funded NGO emperor Alex Soros makes it all the more clear why he and Maryland Democrats operate with a globalist framework in the first place.

The result of one-party rule has been a ballooning deficit, soaring taxes, a credit rating downgrade, and a continued large-scale exodus of residents fleeing to red states as Maryland quickly loses its charm and is on track to transform into the next "Illinois 2.0." On top of the financial failures, power grid mismanagement has collided with surging data center demand, sending power bills through the roof.

Another Democrat-run state under scrutiny this week is Minneapolis, where far-left Gov. Tim Walz seemingly ignored his Somali voting base that looted taxpayers in billion-dollar welfare fraud schemes - with some of the funds allegedly ending up in the hands of overseas terror networks.

If Maryland and Minneapolis have oversight problems, imagine what's happening in all the other Democrat-run states.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 19:40

US Data Center Power Demand Could Reach 106 GW By 2035

US Data Center Power Demand Could Reach 106 GW By 2035

By Brian Martucci of UtilityDive

Summary:

  • U.S. data center power demand could reach 106 GW in 2035, BloombergNEF said Monday in one of the more aggressive load growth estimates to date. The U.S. had about 25 GW of operating data centers in 2024, Bloom Energy said earlier this year.
  • BloombergNEF’s latest forecast is 36% higher than its previous prediction, released in April. The jump is due in part to the higher average size of the 150 significant U.S. data center projects announced in the past year, over a quarter of which are larger than 500 MW, BNEF said.
  • The Energy Information Administration, which tracks demand for the federal government, generally only publishes detailed projections out two or three years, and few other analyses have attempted firm forecasts as far out as 2035.

BNEF’s report comes as some energy industry analysts and executives warn that an artificial intelligence bubble or speculative data center proposals could be fueling excessive load growth projections. 

A report from Grid Strategies released last month said utility forecasts of 90 GW additional data center load by 2030 were likely overstated; market analysis indicates load growth in that time frame is likely closer to 65 GW, it said. 

A July report from the Department of Energy estimated an additional 100 GW of new peak capacity is needed by 2030, of which 50 GW is attributable to data centers. Those facilities could account for as much as 12% of peak demand by 2028, according to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

BNEF’s data center project tracker shows the industry diversifying beyond traditional data center hubs like Northern Virginia, metro Atlanta and central Ohio into exurban and rural regions served by existing fiber-optic trunk lines for data traffic.

A map of under-construction, committed and early-stage projects shows gigawatts of planned data center capacity spreading south through Virginia and the Carolinas, up through eastern Pennsylvania and outward from Chicago along the Lake Michigan shore. More data centers are also planned for Texas and the Gulf Coast states.

Much of the capacity is poised to materialize on grids overseen by the PJM Interconnection, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. BNEF predicts PJM alone could add 31 GW of data center load over the next five years, about 3 GW more than expected capacity additions from new generation. 

With the expected surge, the North American Electric Reliability Corp. warned late last year of “elevated risk” of summer electricity shortfalls this year, in 2026 and onward in all three regions. 

Some experts disputed NERC’s methodology, however. MISO’s independent market monitor said in June that the group’s analysis was flawed and that MISO was in a better position than grid regions not expected to see exponential data center growth, like ISO New England and the New York Independent System Operator. 

Other technology and energy system analysts expect a significant amount of proposed data center capacity to dissipate in the coming years due to chip shortages, duplicative permit requests and other factors. 

In July, London Economics International said in a report prepared for the Southern Environmental Law Center that meeting projections for U.S. data center load in 2030 would require 90% of global chip supply — a scenario it called “unrealistic.” 

Patricia Taylor, director of policy and research at the American Public Power Association, told Utility Dive earlier this year that it’s common for data center developers to “shop around” the same project across neighboring jurisdictions. 

Still, U.S. grid operators face an “inflection moment” as they balance the desire to accommodate large-scale data centers with the obligation to ensure reliable service for all customers, BNEF said.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 19:15

Judge Restricts Immigration Arrests In DC

Judge Restricts Immigration Arrests In DC

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge on Dec. 2 ordered the Trump administration to stop making warrantless immigration arrests in the District of Columbia without probable cause.

Federal officers arrest a man in the District of Columbia on Aug. 30, 2025. Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said the plaintiffs made a strong case that immigration officers have been arresting immigrants without warrants or conducting assessments to determine if each individual poses a flight risk.

Federal law states that an officer can arrest an immigrant without a warrant “if he has reason to believe that the alien so arrested is in the United States in violation of any such law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest.”

“Defendants’ systemic failure to apply the probable cause standard, including the failure to consider escape risk, directly violates the clear statutory requirement,” as well as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations implementing the law, Howell said in an 88-page decision.

Howell ordered the Department of Homeland Security and its divisions, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to stop making warrantless arrests without an individualized determination of whether the person is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained and that the person being arrested “is in the United States in violation of law or regulation regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion or removal of aliens.”

The Department of Justice, which represents agencies in legal cases, and the DHS did not return requests for comment on the ruling.

CASA, a Maryland-based organization that sued along with individuals who have been arrested in the nation’s capital in recent months by immigration officers, did not respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit stated that federal agents have been “indiscriminately arresting without warrants and without probable cause District residents whom the agents perceive to be Latino” without warrants and without individualized assessments that those being arrested are illegally in the United States or likely to escape before agents can obtain a warrant.

“In some cases, officials belatedly realize that there is no legal basis to hold in custody the individual whom federal agents arrested without any individualized assessment and release them,” it stated. “Even those released from detention experience significant physical and psychological harm from their arbitrary arrest and detention, and they fear that they will experience those harms again.”

Federal officials said in court filings that, in carrying out President Donald Trump’s order to make the District of Columbia safer, they have been arresting people identified as being illegally in the country, and that Howell should not enter a preliminary injunction.

“Plaintiffs assert that ICE has a pattern and practice of acting otherwise, but that evidence consists of their individual arrest experiences, pseudonymous third-party anecdotes, and third-party statements by immigration attorneys,” officials stated. “At most, those declarations describe varying, unconnected encounters, not an official, routinely applied, district-wide warrantless arrest pattern and practice. Plaintiffs thus have not even shown an unlawful law enforcement policy—let alone that they face a ’real and immediate' threat of being harmed by it.”

Earlier this year, a federal judge in Colorado and a federal judge in California issued similar rulings. Another judge in California ordered officers not to stop people based on factors such as race. The Supreme Court put that order on hold.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 18:25

DOE's Hyperspeed Reactors

DOE's Hyperspeed Reactors

As the rate of data center development rises, more states should be following the Texas example, where each data center must have its own “behind the meter” onsite power generation. Instead, it appears data center development will continue to grossly outpace the rate of production for on-site electricity generation in most states.

With power demand surging, driven heavily by new AI data centers, more people are starting to realize the best means for addressing future demand will be through clean nuclear energy. Unfortunately, decades of atrophy currently afflict today’s nuclear industry, and nuclear engineers are in desperate need of a “nuclear iteration playground” to quickly develop their advanced reactor designs to the commercial stage.

The current framework of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) does not allow for efficient iteration of reactor design. The licensing process, which used to take several years and has recently been reduced to a comparatively shorter timeline, would need to be heavily repeated for changes to reactor and secondary systems, reopening reactor developers to lawfare attacks from anti-nuclear activists like the Sierra Club and Beyond Nuclear. This leads to the million dollar question: “How do we enable efficient nuclear reactor iteration?”

Enter the Department of Energy

Derived from the Executive Orders issued by President Trump on May 23, 2025, the Department of Energy (DOE) launched the Reactor Pilot Program (RPP). Under this program, multiple companies were chosen to work with the DOE under an expedited licensing pathway to enable faster timelines to reach reactor construction, bringing reactor developers closer to the desired stage of design iteration to achieve economic and commercial scale at a faster pace.  The DOE also initiated the Fuel Line Pilot Program (FLPP) to rapidly progress technology within the nuclear fuel chain.

The primary goal of the RPP was to facilitate three new reactors achieving criticality by July 4, 2026, which was the specific directive given by the Executive Orders. The expedited path to actual steel in the ground is a massive secondary benefit. We recently highlighted one of the program's successes with Valar Atomics achieving cold criticality with Project NOVA.

The FLPP‘s biggest win to date came with the recent announcement of Oklo receiving approval for their Nuclear Safety Design Agreement (NSDA) for the Aurora Fuel Fabrication Facility, approved in just under two weeks.

Concern was expressed by many as to the amount of technical rigor applied to the NSDA review. How could the DOE review in two weeks what would’ve taken the NRC several months, or years? The answer we think others are missing lies in the six years of collaboration between Oklo and the DOE national laboratories. Oklo has been coordinating with Idaho National Laboratory (INL) on multiple projects, including their fuel fabrication facility and their fuel reprocessing technology, since 2019.  The DOE was able to use those two weeks to verify if there were any outstanding questions with the research and coordination that have occurred over those several years, instead of having to take several months or years to perform an independent review of data that had already been coordinated and verified by government laboratory scientists and staff (what the NRC would have to do).

Companies like Oklo will continue to enjoy benefits like these for the remainder of their time under the DOE. Eventually, they will also be able to utilize the recent addendum signed between the DOE and the NRC to very easily and rapidly transition their already approved Aurora reactor design to the NRC license review process for quick commercialization. 

Another under-discussed benefit to working with the federal government on federal land, is the lack of absolute nonsense that reactor developers no longer have to deal with.

  • Oklo doesn't have to sit at a local town meeting and listen to grandma complain about how she doesn't want Chernobyl in her backyard
  • Atomic Alchemy doesn't have to wait for state and local lawmakers to finish bickering and dragging their feet over changes to zoning laws
  • Terrestrial Energy doesn't have to be subject to the weaponization of environmental regulations by the Sierra Club to force them to spend $900 million to protect salmon

To a large extent, the federal government gets to do what it pleases on federal land. For now, it seems like the federal government is finally ready to give reactor developers what they have been in desperate need of – a nuclear iteration playground.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 16:40

The AI Economy And The Public Risk Few Are Willing To Admit

The AI Economy And The Public Risk Few Are Willing To Admit

Authored by Mark Keenan via GlobalResearch.ca,

Artificial intelligence is being sold as the technology that will “change everything.” Yet while a handful of firms are profiting enormously from the AI boom, the financial risk may already be shifting to the public. The louder the promises become, the quieter another possibility seems to be:

What if AI is not accelerating the global economy - but masking its slow down?

The headlines declare that AI is transforming medicine, education, logistics, finance, and culture. But when I speak with people in ordinary jobs, a different reality emerges: wages feel sluggish, job openings are tightening, and the loudest optimism often comes from sectors most financially invested in the AI narrative.

This raises an uncomfortable question: Has AI become a true engine of prosperity — or a financial life-support system?

The Mirage of Growth

Recent economic data suggests that a significant portion of U.S. GDP growth is being driven not by broad productivity, but by AI-related infrastructure spending — especially data centers.

A study from S&P Global found that in Q2 of 2025, data center construction alone added 0.5% to U.S. GDP. That is historic. But what happens if this spending slows? Are we witnessing genuine economic expansion — or merely a short-term stimulus disguised as innovation?

This pattern is not new. In Ireland in 2008 — before the housing collapse — construction boomed, GDP rose, and skepticism was treated as pessimism. The United States experienced something similar the same year: real estate appeared to be a pillar of prosperity — until it wasn’t. On paper, economies looked strong. In reality, fragility was already setting in.

Today, echoes of that optimism are returning — except this time, the bubble may be silicon, data, and expectation.

The Productivity Paradox

AI has been presented as a labor-saving miracle. But many businesses report a different experience: “work slop” — AI-generated content that looks polished yet must be painstakingly corrected by humans. Time is not saved — it is quietly relocated.

Studies reflect the same paradox:

  • According to media coverage, MIT found that 95% of corporate AI pilot programs show no measurable ROI.

  • MIT Sloan research indicates that AI adoption can lead to initial productivity losses — and that any potential gains depend on major organizational and human adaptation.

  • Even McKinsey — one of AI’s greatest evangelists — warns that AI only produces value after major human and organizational change. “Piloting gen AI is easy, but creating value is hard.”

This suggests that AI has not removed human labor. It has hidden it — behind algorithms, interfaces, and automated output that still requires correction.

We are not replacing work. We may only be concealing it.

AI may appear efficient, but it operates strictly within the limits of its training data: it can replicate mistakes, miss what humans would notice, and often reinforce a consensus version of reality rather than reality itself. Once AI becomes an administrative layer — managing speech, research, hiring, and access to capital — it can become financially embedded into institutions, whether or not it produces measurable productivity.

As I explore in the book Staying Human in the Age of AI at that point, AI does not enhance judgment — it administers it. And then we should ask:

Is AI improving society — or merely managing and controlling it?

The Global Data Center Stampede — But Toward What?

McKinsey estimates that over $6.7 trillion  may be spent on AI and computing infrastructure by 2030 — a level of capital allocation typically seen in wartime. But what exactly is being built, and will it ever return value to ordinary people?

The United States is not the only nation embedding AI within its economic strategy. Similar trends are emerging globally:

  • EU: funding AI infrastructure via public bonds

  • China: integrating AI into its “national rejuvenation” strategy

  • Singapore / UAE / Ireland: offering major tax incentives to build data-center zones

  • BRICS: framing AI as a counterweight to Western digital dominance

AI may no longer be a neutral technology — it is becoming a strategic instrument shaped globally by national policy, geopolitical competition, and financial pressure. The question is no longer whether AI will shape national policy — but whether policy itself is already being reshaped in service of an AI orthodoxy.

Analysts warn that parts of the industry may already resemble a circular economy of expectations: cloud and chip companies invest in AI startups that then buy computing services from the very firms that fund them. Speculation becomes demand — and demand becomes proof of viability.

If this pattern repeats globally, AI may not represent a technological revolution — but a new public liability embedded into national strategies.

The Genesis Mission — And the Rise of State-Protected AI

A November 2025 U.S. executive order — internally referred to as the “Genesis Mission” — may institutionalize AI infrastructure by merging:

  • federal supercomputers

  • national-lab datasets

  • taxpayer funding

  • private-sector AI firms

into a unified national AI platform.

This does not guarantee bailouts — but it creates the conditions under which major AI firms may become “too big to fail”. Once AI is embedded into national strategy, failure becomes political.

We may be witnessing the transformation of AI from speculative investment into a publicly underwritten enterprise.

Under these conditions, any failure — technological, economic, or environmental — will not remain private. It will become a public cost.

Are we potentially witnessing a new socialisation of private risk and debt — similar to what occurred after the 2008 housing collapse in the United States, Ireland and elsewhere — with the burden once again transferred onto the public?

Who Carries the Risk?

The concern is not just the data boundaries of AI itself and the “consensus reality” it portrays — but where the financial risk may already be hiding.

Large retirement funds and passive index portfolios are now concentrated in AI-dependent giants such as Nvidia, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Tesla. On the debt side, data-center financing and private credit tied to AI infrastructure are quietly entering bond portfolios.

This means the AI boom is not simply an investment trend. It may already be embedded inside the retirement accounts of ordinary citizens — without their knowledge.

Across borders, governments risk repeating the same pattern: constructing AI infrastructure before proving that it benefits society.

Questions the Global Public Deserves Answers To

  • Is AI transforming work — or creating new layers of hidden labor?

  • Are data centers driving prosperity — or merely propping up GDP?

  • Are citizens knowingly investing in AI — or being invested through passive portfolios?

  • Is AI creating value — or simply absorbing public capital and subsidies?

When enough money, debt, and public credibility are tied to a technology, questioning it becomes difficult — and supporting it becomes mandatory.

Conclusion

As I wrote in the book Staying Human in the Age of AI, we should not allow AI to overshadow human thought. History reminds us that optimism is most dangerous when it becomes unquestioned. AI may still deliver genuine breakthroughs — but belief is currently moving faster than evidence.

If AI delivers value, perhaps this risk will be justified. If it does not — the cost will not fall on venture capital. It will fall on pensioners, savers, taxpayers, and future generations.

Now that AI is being treated as national infrastructure, its success or failure is no longer a private gamble. It has become a global public risk — and public risks always come with a public bill.

If we allow AI to define the future, we risk forgetting that the future is still ours to define.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 16:20

Jan. 6 Defendant Sues Federal Government Over Alleged Abuses In Custody

Jan. 6 Defendant Sues Federal Government Over Alleged Abuses In Custody

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

A former Jan. 6 defendant who alleges he was repeatedly abused in custody is suing the federal government for almost $18 million.

Ryan Samsel of Bristol, Pennsylvania, was convicted in September 2024 of civil disorder-related offenses in connection with the civil disturbance at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and was incarcerated and awaiting sentencing when President Donald Trump pardoned him on Jan. 20 of this year.

The civil legal process in Samsel’s case was initiated when the Department of Justice (DOJ) was served with a notice under the Federal Tort Claims Act on Nov. 28, his attorney, Peter Haller, told The Epoch Times. A tort is a wrongful act or infringement of a right that gives rise to civil liability.

To sue under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a claimant has to file an administrative claim with a federal agency within two years after the injury takes place. The agency then has six months to settle or deny the claim. The plaintiff then has six months after the claim is denied or the agency fails to respond to the claim to file a civil lawsuit against the federal government in federal district court.

The document that begins the process, known as a Standard Form 95, states that Samsel is seeking $17,980,000 from the federal government for personal injuries suffered from January 2021 through January 2025.

Samsel, now 42, was found guilty of “assaulting Officer C.E. with a deadly or dangerous weapon and inflicting bodily injury,” during the civil unrest at the U.S. Capitol, the DOJ said last year.

The DOJ said Samsel was also convicted on felony charges of civil disorder, assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers, as well as assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon.

Haller said his client disputes the criminal allegations and that the officer identified as C.E. suffered no injury, which he said was clear from a magnetic resonance imaging scan and other medical evaluations.

Samsel alleges he was subjected to physical abuse while in custody at facilities operated by the DOJ and the U.S. Bureau of Prisons in the District of Columbia, New York, and Virginia.

There were 62 “separate assaults and other torts committed against Mr. Samsel while in the custody of the United States, as well as cruel and unusual punishment,” Haller said in the legal filing.

“Given the severity, duration, and documented multiplicity of the abuses suffered by Mr. Samsel, he is likely to be recognized as the most tortured individual by the Federal Government in recent American history,” the attorney said.

The form states that during Samsel’s four-year federal detention, he suffered 62 torts that “reflect a continuous scheme to physically and mentally harm him throughout his imprisonment and continuously deny him necessary medical treatment for serious vascular issues that pre-existed prison as well as for most injuries sustained from attacks by corrections officers during prison.”

The form said Samsel was held in custody for almost seven months but was not indicted until Aug. 25, 2021, which was “in clear violation of due process.”

As a result of his incarceration, Samsel suffers from “permanent physical impairment stemming from multiple documented injuries sustained during his incarceration.” Among those injuries are a dislocated jaw, broken right orbital bone, broken nose, lacerations, contusions, and acute kidney damage, “all resulting from coordinated assaults by correctional staff and other inmates,” the form said.

He still suffers from partial loss of vision in his right eye, persistent pain, and swelling related to his injuries, and needs ongoing medical attention for eye and chest injuries, blood clots, and thoracic outlet syndrome, according to the form.

In addition, he suffers panic attacks and “other uncontrollable emotional consequences,” as well as physical deterioration, chronic pain, and high cholesterol that came about as a result of his prolonged confinement and inadequate nutrition while in custody, the form said.

In November 2021, Samsel was forced to sit in a restraint chair for about 17 hours, where he was on public display for local schoolchildren to see him through a window. While in the chair, he was left in his own waste and developed a blood clot, according to a table of torts attached to the form.

From January to August 2021, Samsel was placed in a segregated unit for Jan. 6 prisoners in which the lights were on at all times. He was denied exercise and showers. He suffered sleep deprivation for about seven months, the table said.

Haller said his client received three “major beatings” from corrections officers and in two different prisons he was housed in closet-sized rooms.

Haller said the abuse his client experienced was comparable to the experiences of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, Iraq, more than two decades ago.

Reports of alleged widespread torture and abuse of prisoners held by U.S. forces at Abu Ghraib during the 2003 Iraq war first emerged more than 20 years ago, when leaked photos appeared to show detainees being forced into humiliating positions.

“The parallel of Ryan’s torture to that of Abu Ghraib is remarkable–17 hours in a restraint chair with students as witnesses, multiple beatings by officers, multiple multi-month stretches in solitary with lights on 24/7, a broom closet for a cell, housed in a high security floor of [Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York] with murderers who stabbed him, starvation, repeated humiliation,” Haller told The Epoch Times.

“These forms of severe mental and physical abuse, disorientation and humiliation were all applied against Ryan Samsel just as they were against the prisoners of Abu Ghraib; the only meaningful difference is that in Abu Ghraib, Arab and Middle Eastern terrorists generally suffered torture for a year or less—whereas Ryan Samsel was tortured for four years,” Haller said.

The Epoch Times reached out to the DOJ for comment. No reply was received by publication time.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 15:45

F-16 Fighter Jet Crashes In Southern California

F-16 Fighter Jet Crashes In Southern California

Southern California's ABC7 reports that an F-16 fighter jet has crashed near Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake.

Breaking911 has posted what appear to be images of the aftermath of the jet crash.

"F-16 Thunderbird 5 photographed with its last takeoff before it crashed in Trona, CA. Insane to see six of them take off from Nellis and only five returned. I'll try to post the images later of the Thunderbird's last takeoff. This is just a picture of the screen from my camera," photographer Kelvin Cheng wrote on X.

Developing…

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 15:11

9 In 10 College Students Think 'Words Can Be Violence'; Survey

9 In 10 College Students Think 'Words Can Be Violence'; Survey

Authored by Gabrielle Temaat via The College Fix,

Nine out of ten undergraduate students think that “words can be violence” at least “somewhat,” according to a new Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression survey. 

The poll also showed that ideological gaps between left-leaning and right-leaning students are widening.

When respondents were asked how much the statement “words can be violence” describes their thoughts, 47 percent answered with “completely” or “mostly.” Twenty-eight percent said it describes their thoughts “somewhat,” and 15 percent said “slightly.”

Additionally, around 59 percent of students said “silence is violence” describes their views at least “somewhat,” though only 28 percent said it describes their thoughts “completely” or “mostly.” 

“When people start thinking that words can be violence, violence becomes an acceptable response to words,” FIRE Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens said in a news release following the poll. 

“Even after the murder of Charlie Kirk at a speaking event, college students think that someone’s words can be a threat. This is antithetical to a free and open society, where words are the best alternative to political violence,” Stevens said. 

The poll also showed that moderate and conservative students have grown less supportive of disruptive or violent tactics to stop campus speakers, while liberal students’ support for those tactics has stayed the same or risen slightly compared to the spring. 

At the same time, moderate and conservative students have become more open to allowing controversial speakers, while liberal students have maintained or increased their opposition to those speakers.

In particular, opposition among liberal students “increased considerably” to a speaker who previously said “The police are just as racist as the Ku Klux Klan” and “Children should be allowed to transition without parental consent,” according to the survey report. 

FIRE conducted the survey in collaboration with College Pulse to evaluate campus free speech after Charlie Kirk’s Sept. 10 assassination at Utah Valley University. The poll contained 21 questions and was given to 2,028 undergrads to gauge their comfort with a range of sensitive topics.

Half of the students surveyed said Kirk’s assassination has made them less willing to attend or host controversial events on campus, and about 20 percent reported feeling less comfortable even going to class.

A majority of students said the incident made no difference in their willingness to speak up on controversial political topics in class. However, 19 percent said they felt a “great deal” less comfortable 26 percent said they felt “slightly” less comfortable.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 15:05

Rep. Henry Cuellar Assures Democrats He's Still Loyal After Trump Pardons Him From Money Laundering, FARA Case

Rep. Henry Cuellar Assures Democrats He's Still Loyal After Trump Pardons Him From Money Laundering, FARA Case

Earlier Wednesday, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he's pardoning Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), who was charged along with his wife in May 2024 for allegedly partaking in two schemes involving bribery, unlawful foreign influence, and money laundering. 

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) gives an interview in Laredo, Texas, on Oct. 9, 2019. Veronica Cardenas/Reuters

Specifically, they were charged with two counts of conspiracy to commit bribery of a federal official and to have a public official act as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA); two counts of bribery of a federal official; two counts of conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud; two counts of violating the ban on public officials acting as agents of a foreign principal required to register under FARA; one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering; and five counts of money laundering, the Epoch Times notes. 

They faced up to 20 years behind bars if convicted.

"For years, the Biden Administration weaponized the Justice System against their Political Opponents, and anyone who disagreed with them. One of the clearest examples of this was when Crooked Joe used the FBI and DOJ to “take out” a member of his own Party after Highly Respected Congressman Henry Cuellar bravely spoke out against Open Borders, and the Biden Border “Catastrophe.” Sleepy Joe went after the Congressman, and even the Congressman’s wonderful wife, Imelda, simply for speaking the TRUTH," Trump wrote. 

"Henry, I don’t know you, but you can sleep well tonight — Your nightmare is finally over!"

The Charges Between at least December 2014 and November 2021, Cuellar and his wife allegedly accepted approximately $600,000 in bribes from an oil and gas company wholly owned and controlled by the government of Azerbaijan, and a Mexico City-based bank, according to a statement from the Department of Justice.

The payments were allegedly laundered “through a series of front companies and middlemen into shell companies owned by Imelda Cuellar, who performed little to no legitimate work under the contracts,” the statement said.

“In exchange for the bribes paid by the Azerbaijani oil and gas company, Congressman Cuellar allegedly agreed to use his office to influence U.S. foreign policy in favor of Azerbaijan,” it said.

“In exchange for the bribes paid by the Mexican bank, Congressman Cuellar allegedly agreed to influence legislative activity and to advise and pressure high-ranking U.S. Executive Branch officials regarding measures beneficial to the bank.”

Cuellar Reassures Dems

Shortly after the pardon, Cuellar told a small group of reporters that it "came as a surprise," adding "I want to thank President Trump for this. … Now we clear the air. Nothing has changed, and we’re going to be ready to win re-election again."

Trump's announcement stoked concerns among Democrats that the 11-term veteran might finally switch to the GOP after years of hinting at it, or that he could simply retire - which would give Republicans a much better chance to flip his seat. 

"Nothing has changed — I’m a good old conservative Democrat," Cuellar said Wednesday. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 14:45

"Get Rid Of It" - Trump Suggests He'll Soon Slash/End Income Tax

"Get Rid Of It" - Trump Suggests He'll Soon Slash/End Income Tax

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

President Trump signaled Tuesday that the federal income tax could soon be history. Speaking to reporters after a cabinet meeting, Trump laid out a vision of economic freedom powered by massive tariff revenues from foreign nations— putting America First instead of bleeding hardworking citizens dry to fund globalist giveaways.

With tariffs surging and billions pouring in from trade deals, Trump is paving the way for a tax revolution that could explode the economy overnight. The President’s declaration came during a press gaggle at the White House, where he emphasised the unprecedented revenue streaming into U.S. coffers thanks to his tough trade policies.

“I believe that at some point in the not-too distant future, you won’t even have income tax to pay,” Trump stated plainly. He elaborated, “Because the money we’re taking in is so great and it’s so enormous that you’re not going to have an income tax to pay. Whether you get rid of it or just keep it around for fun or have it really low, much lower than it is now, but you won’t be paying income tax.”

Trump’s push to axe the income tax isn’t new—it’s rooted in his America First agenda that flips the script on how the government funds itself. As he explained in his inaugural address, “Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens. For this purpose, we are establishing the External Revenue Service to collect all tariffs, duties, and revenues. It will be massive amounts of money pouring into our Treasury, coming from foreign sources.”

This echoes his campaign trail musings, where he told podcaster Joe Rogan that tariffs could fully replace income taxes. “Yeah, sure, why not?” Trump replied when asked if he was serious about ditching personal income taxes.

Now, with tariffs already raking in hundreds of billions—up 250% from last year—the numbers are backing him up. Income tax hauled in about $2.7 trillion in fiscal 2025, but Trump’s team projects tariffs and foreign investments could eclipse that, especially with pledges like Japan’s $650 billion, South Korea’s $350 billion, and the EU’s $950 billion pouring into U.S. plants and jobs.

Recent reports highlight how this fits into broader reforms, including the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which promises huge tax refunds and real wage hikes in 2026. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent boasted at the same meeting: “In 2026, we are going to see very substantial tax refunds in the First Quarter… We’re going to see real wage increases. I think next year is going to be a fantastic year.”

Of course, the usual suspects in the media and academia are already hyperventilating. Economists aligned with the old guard, like those from UCLA and NYU, whine that tariffs “can’t replace” income tax revenue, claiming it’d shift burdens or balloon the debt. Funny how they never complain when trillions get funneled to Ukraine or climate scams, but suggest letting Americans keep their money? Suddenly, it’s “fantasy.”

Trump himself dismissed the doubters by pointing to historical precedent: the U.S. thrived in the late 19th century with “all tariffs, no income tax.” His vision includes potentially eliminating the IRS altogether, a dream for anyone who’s suffered through their audits and overreach.

Fox Business notes this as Trump’s “most explicit endorsement” yet of scrapping income taxes, marking a potential overhaul unseen in over 100 years. And with a narrow House majority, the fight will be fierce—but Trump’s track record on trade wars shows he doesn’t back down from globalist bullies.

Trump expanded on the timeline in recent comments: “Over the next couple of years, I think we’ll substantially be cutting—and maybe cutting out completely—income tax. We could be almost completely cutting it because the money we’re taking in is going to be so large.” He tied it directly to protecting American industries: “We’re taking in, think of it, hundreds of billions. Next year, it’ll be a trillion dollars or more, but we’re taking in all this money while protecting our country. And we’re respected again.”

This isn’t about handouts; it’s about fairness. Why should blue-collar workers foot the bill for elite excesses when foreign nations can pay up through tariffs? As Trump put it, “They actually respect us. And they made the deals. I mean, they respect us, but they pay us.”

If he pulls this off, it’ll be a massive win for freedom, unleashing prosperity like never before. America First means keeping your paycheck—all of it!

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

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 14:25

Spending Slowdown Hits Apple App Store In Major Markets

Spending Slowdown Hits Apple App Store In Major Markets

Apple App Store spending cooled in November, dragged down by weakening demand across several of Apple's largest global markets, which together account for more than half of all App Store revenue.

Goldman analysts led by Michael Ng published a note Tuesday citing Sensor Tower data showing Apple App Store spending last month rose just 6% YoY, down from 9% in October and half the growth rate seen in July.

Sensor Tower data showed that Games, the App Store's largest category (44% of revenue), drove most of the slowdown, falling 2% YoY after growing 3% the previous month.

"Weakening consumer demand for products and services. Apple's products and services are typically sold to consumers, and any weakness in the macroeconomic environment could reduce demand for Apple products and services," Ng said.

There was no definitive explanation beyond the softer "macroeconomic environment" for the App Store slowdown.

By geography, four of Apple's top five markets - the US, Japan, the UK, and Canada - experienced a broad-based slowdown in App Store spending. This raises near-term downside risk and could weigh on App Store revenue.

However, despite slowing App Store spending growth rates, Ng still expects Apple's F1Q26 Services revenue to meet guidance (14% YoY) because other Service lines - including iCloud+, AppleCare+, Apple Music, Apple Pay, and broader subscriptions - continue to perform well.

Here are the key takeaways from the App Store spending slowdown:

  • November 2025 App Store net revenue grew +6% YoY, decelerating from +9% in October. November marks the slowest month of 2025 and sits below the 2022–2024 average November growth rate of +10% YoY.

  • By category, the slowdown was primarily driven by Games (-2% YoY vs. +3% YoY in October), which represent ~44% of total revenue. Among the next largest categories: Entertainment (15% of total) accelerated to +5% YoY (from +4%), while Photo & Video (8% of total) decelerated slightly to +16% YoY (from +17%).

  • By geography, spending slowed across Apple's largest markets: the US (36% of total) cooled to +3% YoY (from +8%), Japan (10%) fell to -2% (from +4%), while China (20%) improved slightly to -1% (from -2%).

Notice that the App Store spending slowdown has persisted for much of the year.

Whoops.

Not good.

The question of why consumers are cutting back on gaming apps is a big one. It's happening across Apple's major markets, which could point to more financially pressured consumers, smartphone fatigue, or competitive app stores soaking up market share. Whatever the cause, the drop in demand signals Tim Cook will have to take corrective measures heading into 2026.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 13:45

"Deckchairs" On The Titanic?

"Deckchairs" On The Titanic?

By Michael Every of Rabobank

The conclusion to yesterday’s Global Daily was that we are still in a systemic metacrisis. True, many market metrics don’t show it - but how many deckchairs told the Titanic’s passengers they were heading for the iceberg? Markets have a vital role, as do chairs, but expecting them to reflect the potential enormity of what’s going on could end up with you being in very cold water.

Here are two recent headlines to send a shiver down spines: ‘Fear and loathing come for Bitcoin as big investors ponder selling’ (Australian Financial Review); and, ‘It’s time to sound the alarm on growing fiscal and financial risk’ (Financial Times) as “Rising public debt is one concern - another is how it is being financed.” Of course, things look healthier in other areas.

Let’s continue with central banking. The RBA Governor said rates might have to go back up if inflation does. Who knew? Not the RBA or the markets reassured by its projections. Trump says he’ll nominate the next Fed Chair in early 2026’: it seems Hassett is frontrunner. That opens the door to new Fed purpose as well as personnel. Markets are slow to grasp the full implications.

Russia said talks with the US about a Ukraine peace plan were “constructive”, but “no compromise” had been reached on territorial issues. However, we see serious concerns this ends up in an ugly --and expensive-- deal which weakens Europe. Pressure is also increasing for NATO to spend more, faster: but with whose money? The European Commission is making a late offer to win Belgian backing for its Russian asset loan scheme, which the ECB is refusing to back - critics argue it’s a de facto asset confiscation that could damage Europe’s reputation as well as ensuring there’s no peace deal. It is, in effect, ‘victor’s terms’ when Europe has won nothing.

Worse, in response to Europe’s hardline political rhetoric and slimline actions, Putin warned that he doesn’t want war, but if Europe does, Russia is ready - and will defeat it. That’s as Ukrainian drones attacked their third Russian shadow fleet ship this week and Putin stated he will retaliate against Ukrainian shipping and those countries helping it, i.e., Europeans. There’s little middle ground between those two outcomes, but markets are assuming a geopolitical median.

Meanwhile, Europe bewails it “would have given almost anything for peace, but Beijing had a different calculus” - including siding with China vs. the US (where The Economist says ‘Trumpworld thinks Europe has betrayed the West’ – watch Macron in China for more on that ahead); and India, which the EU wants to build deeper ties with as a counterbalance, just ratified a strategic defence partnership with Russia.

The Honduran election currently has the centrist candidate whom Trump didn’t want to win ahead, promising fireworks(?) We are all waiting to see what happens in Venezuela. US lawmakers say they will force a vote on the War Powers Act if Trump attacks it, but the current -anti-terror designation may be workaround – and Trump just said any country trafficking drugs into US could be attacked. That includes a few famous names.

Trump signed a bill to deepen US-Taiwan ties, as the island’s opposition party blocked government plans to increase defence spending. That’s as tensions between Japan and China over PM Takaichi’s recent comments continue to remain high. Even the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty between the US and Japan is being drawn in --China publicly rejecting it-- with potentially worrying parallels to the historical legalese heard around the Russia-Ukraine issue before February 2022. If peace treaties are no longer valid, borders can only be set by threat of or actual force.

That’s as a new Chinese naval flotilla, including an assault ship, is in the Philippines Sea and may be heading for Australia, the latter armed with dangerously high house prices. If you think markets are pricing for these kind of grey rhino risks --how?!-- ask your trader or broker what their view of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty is. I’m sure it will be enlightening.

In the Middle East, a new Israel – Hezbollah confrontation appears worryingly close. Whether that spreads to Iran remains to be seen: ‘optimists’ suggest it’s a story for 2026. Markets are better at pricing those kind of oil risks and seem relaxed so far.

In geoeconomics, floods in Thailand have paralyzed IT goods trade flows globally; US Treasury Secretary Bessent praised Bank Santander for pulling its credit lines from oil trader Gunvor following US claims that the firm, now with new leadership, was a ‘Kremlin Puppet’; Costco is suing the Trump admin for “full refund” on its tariffs, upping the ante; Macron wants to rebalance trade with China as it floods Europe with imports --how?-- as German firms are doubling down on their investments in China; China’s state media boasted its “dirt cheap” hypersonic missiles could upend global defence markets; and Russia said it’s ready to address India's concerns over their massive bilateral trade deficit – see how trade deals and defense pacts go together?

In the (political!) economy, Michael Dell donated $6.3bn for ‘Trump Accounts’ for children – patriotism, or akin to EM billionaires whose governments ‘encouraged’ them to ‘share the load’? The Trump admin also took a $150M stake in chip startup, a once shocking headline already becoming normalized. Yet overlooked by markets, because it isn’t a number on a Bloomberg screen, China's local government debt has reportedly risen to $18.9tn, implying total public debt to GDP is far above 200% and rising, vs. the US’ ≈100% and rising, with China’s private sector debt also around 200%, as in the US. That underlines *China’s structural* necessity to maintain capital controls and a vast, neo-mercantilist trade surplus. The FT touched on that recently; then it moved on to play with the next shiny bauble rather than nailing down the ensuing logical conclusions as principles for its flow of policy recommendations. But their deckchair has a wonderful rear view.

In (economic!) politics, two former EU political heavyweights, Mogherini and Sannino, are in custody over a fraud probe. The UK is mulling a ban on crypto cash in politics, which will put Reform UK’s Farage in the firing line; the UK’s now-headless Office of Budget Responsibility said it had warned the Treasury over budget ‘misconceptions’ (like a deficit being a surplus); and UK jury trials are to be scrapped for crimes with sentences of less than three years, reversing ancient precedent, to make the trial process 20% faster. In France. ‘Macron denies 'Ministry of Truth' plan in standoff with far right’ (Euractiv). In the US, a new immigration crackdown and perhaps a global travel ban loom. India’s government is demanding the installation of state apps on all smartphones; and ‘China looks to AI and big data to guard against Western values’ (SCMP), as Xi “tells Politburo that new technology should be applied to promote socialist ideology.” How do markets price for all the above – or do none matter(?)

To conclude, even if some deckchairs are collapsing, we can continue to sit comfortably on most of them for now. However, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be thinking about the direction of travel and what may lie ahead of us. It isn’t an iceberg per se, and there will be both upsides and downsides. Just don’t assume it will be plain sailing.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 13:25

Fed Regime-Change: Groupthink May Be Ending

Fed Regime-Change: Groupthink May Be Ending

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Starting in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, a profound change to the Fed’s liquidity-providing role in the capital markets was underway.  We can sum up the Fed regime change with a popular quip: The Fed has shifted from lender of last resort to the lender of only resort!

In our articles QE Is Coming and its follow-up, How The Fed Deals Liquidity, we discuss why the Fed has become the primary provider of liquidity since 2008 and the tools it uses to maintain ample liquidity in the markets. While that Fed regime change has been incredibly impactful on the financial markets, there is a growing possibility of another meaningful regime change that could prove equally impactful.

This article, like the two linked above, is dry. Still, investors today must understand that monetary policy has become a primary driver of liquidity, which in turn significantly influences asset prices. Without a clear understanding of what the Fed is doing and how it functions, your investment ideas, no matter how solid, can be flawed.

Groupthink Has Been The Fed Norm

The Fed’s monetary policy-setting group, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), meets every six weeks to discuss the economy, financial markets, liquidity, and a host of other factors that help the Fed set monetary policy to meet its inflation and employment objectives.

After two days of data analysis, conversation, and debate, the FOMC’s voting members vote on whether to adjust monetary policy. Most often, the policy changes involve the Fed Funds Rate and or the monthly pace of QE or QT.

The committee is comprised as follows:

  • Seven members of the Board of Governors- including the Chairman

  • Four rotating regional Fed Presidents

  • The President of the New York Fed

While there are debates and many divergent views expressed at the FOMC meetings, the published results always give the impression of agreement. This is evident in the meeting statement, which lists the members who voted for the monetary policy actions and those who dissented. The example below from the October 29, 2025, meeting shows that two of the twelve members dissented or voted against the prescribed policy actions.

Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Michael S. Barr; Michelle W. Bowman; Susan M. Collins; Lisa D. Cook; Austan D. Goolsbee; Philip N. Jefferson; Alberto G. Musalem; and Christopher J. Waller. Voting against this action were Stephen I. Miran, who preferred to lower the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/2 percentage point at this meeting, and Jeffrey R. Schmid, who preferred no change to the target range for the federal funds rate at this meeting.

Historical Dissents

As we shared above, there were two dissenting votes at the last meeting. On average, since 1936, 5% of members have cast dissenting votes per meeting. Since 2000, the most dissenting votes at a single meeting were three. On average, over the last 25 years, the odds are 50/50 that one member will dissent at each meeting.

The bottom line is that dissents occur with some regularity, but the votes for or against policy action are always a strong consensus. More simply, the Fed has been in a groupthink regime fro the last 100 years!

Consensus At The Fed

In the FOMC minutes, released three weeks after the meeting, we gain a better understanding of the debates that took place. It’s clear from these minutes that there are many divergent opinions. This should not be surprising, as the members come from different regions across the country and have diverse economic views. This has been the case since 1936, when the Fed began sharing the minutes.

While there may be many views on the economy and the right course for monetary policy, the graph above clearly shows that almost all Fed members coalesce around a single policy action. 

Quite often, the Fed Chair steers the FOMC toward presenting a consensus view.

Politics At The Fed

We argue that, despite its supposed independence from the executive branch, the Fed has always been political to some degree. Furthermore, we must assume that every Presidential nomination of a Fed member is primarily based on the nominee’s alignment with the President’s views.

Thus, it’s not shocking that Stephen Miran, Trump’s latest appointee, is arguing for aggressive rate cuts. Furthermore, Trump’s possible appointee to replace Lisa Cook and Chairman Powell when his term ends in May will most likely also hold dovish views.

While there is an infusion of dovish voters to join existing dovish members, there also remains a camp of hawkish voters. It appears that most of the dovish-hawkish standoff is a function of whether members are more concerned about keeping a lid on inflation (hawkish) or about preventing a worsening of the labor market (dovish).

However, we offer that the debate may be becoming political as well. Is the Fed morphing into entities like the Supreme Court or Congress that are politically motivated?

In other words, are some dovish members not as concerned about the labor markets as they appear, and instead pushing for a more accommodative policy to help Trump achieve his economic goals? Conversely, might some hold hawkish opinions, not because they fear inflation, but because they disagree with the President’s policies?

Is Consensus Dead?

If, as we postulate, the Fed is becoming more politically divided, might the Fed Chairman be losing the ability to present a group consensus? Interestingly, the odds of a rate cut at the next Fed meeting have been floating between 25% and 85%. Those odds have been shifting as various Fed members have weighed in on whether they may cut rates at the next meeting. Currently, there is a split between those wanting to cut rates and those dissenting from another cut in December. A few members also appear undecided. If the Chairman is unable to get the members to reach a consensus, it’s quite possible there could be four, five, or even six dissenters at the next meeting.

Our Take On Dissents

Historically, as we noted earlier, the Chairman gets the FOMC to form a strong publicly facing consensus. Doing so gives investors, consumers, and business leaders a false sense of confidence that the Fed is fully aware of what is happening in the economy and that it has the right policy prescription. 

We welcome dissent at the Fed. We welcome change. Groupthink, as managed by one person, the Chair, has led to significant policy errors. While the Fed will still make errors in the future, investors, business leaders, and consumers will at least be better versed in other policy opinions. For instance, a vote with multiple dissenting votes signals that the Fed is not confident in its views or policies. While that may make some uneasy, it’s better to recognize their stance than to believe something that isn’t true. Conversely, in an era of multiple dissenting votes, a complete consensus should lead investors to think the Fed has strong confidence in its views and policies.

Summary

As we said earlier, we welcome a regime change at the Fed. We want 12 autonomous FOMC members deliberating and voting on Fed policy. We don’t like the opinion of one person, the Chairman, dictating the views and policies of the Fed.

A new Fed regime consisting of 12 voting Fed members, voicing their own opinions and casting votes on what they think, not what the Chairman wants, would be a welcome change, albeit it might introduce short-term volatility in the financial markets.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 12:45

Europe Accuses Putin Of Faking Peace Talks With Trump Envoys

Europe Accuses Putin Of Faking Peace Talks With Trump Envoys

After the American delegation sent by President Trump met some 5 hours with President Putin and his team in Moscow Tuesday night, but with no significant progress made (and with some observers declaring it a 'failure'), some European officials are trying to have an 'I told you so' moment.

Ukrainian and European officials on Wednesday have alleged Putin is faking a desire to achieve peace, and is intentionally wasting Washington's time while prolonging the war and intensifying strikes on the battlefield.

For example, Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha declared immediately after the Moscow discussions that Putin should "stop wasting the world's time." The Zelensky government, it should be noted, has also been quietly frustrated with the White House for largely sidelining its long-running objection to territorial concessions. But the US plan is truly "new" in that it offers Russia de facto control of land in the Donbass and Crimea.

Getty Images

UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper voiced similar criticism, saying Putin "should end the bluster and the bloodshed and be ready to come to the table and to support a just and lasting peace."

Baltic and northern European states have continued in their rhetoric challenging the Kremlin, with Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna responding, "What we see is that Putin has not changed any course. He's pushing more aggressively on the battlefield." The top diplomat said, "It's pretty obvious that he doesn't want to have any kind of peace."

And Finland's Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen said similarly, "So far we haven't seen any concessions from the side of the aggressor, which is Russia, and I think the best confidence-building measure would be to start with a full ceasefire."

While the Kremlin has called the Tuesday Moscow talks "constructive" - it conceded that little actual progress was made toward a deal, given Russia is demanding nothing less than full legal and international recognition of the territories under its control. 

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte meanwhile is calling on allies to ensure Ukraine is in its strongest possible position as negotiations proceed. Of course this involves flooding Kiev with more money and weapons. "The peace talks are ongoing. That's good," Rutte said.

"But at the same time, we have to make sure that whilst they take place and we are not sure when they will end, that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position to keep the fight going, to fight back against the Russians. But also in the strongest possible position when peace talks really get to a point where they sit at the table," he added.

More allegations of feigning interest in a peace process out of Western pundits:

Meanwhile mutual strikes on energy infrastructure continues to escalate. President Putin has also warned his military is readying to expand strikes on Ukrainian ports, in retaliation for a spate of drone attacks on tankers transporting Russian oil to global markets.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 12:25

DOJ Charges Afghan National Over Online Threats To Build Bomb, Kill Americans

DOJ Charges Afghan National Over Online Threats To Build Bomb, Kill Americans

Authored by Arjun Singh via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Justice has indicted an Afghan national residing in Fort Worth, Texas, for allegedly making online threats to construct an explosive and kill U.S. citizens using it.

Mohammad Dawood Alokozay, 30, was arrested by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force and the Texas Department of Public Safety on Nov. 30. A statement from the Department of Justice indicated that he was charged with “transmitting a threatening communication in interstate commerce,” which violates 18 U.S. Code, Section 875(c), for making threats on social media platforms, specifically TikTok, Facebook, and X.

“We have zero tolerance for violence and threats of violence to kill American citizens and others like those allegedly made by this individual,” said Ryan Raybould, the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, whose office is prosecuting the case.

Alokozay on Nov. 23, while speaking in the Dari language, allegedly told two other men during a video stream on social media that he would build a bomb in his vehicle. He also allegedly described in detail bomb making techniques used by the Taliban in Afghanistan, who he described as “dear” to him. During his remarks, Alokozay allegedly stated that he intended to conduct a suicide attack on Americans, and that he was “not afraid of deportation or getting killed.”

The Epoch Times was unable to obtain a copy of Alokozay’s indictment, which is currently under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. If convicted, Alokozay faces a maximum of five years in prison for the crime.

Alokozay’s immigration status in the United States, and whether the federal government will place him in removal proceedings, has not been publicly disclosed. Currently, Afghanistan is ruled by the Taliban, a designated foreign terrorist organization, to which the United States has not conducted any publicized removal operations.

Normally, in cases where the country of origin of a deportee may present a risk to the deportee’s life, that person may apply for “withholding of removal” under Section 241(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and protections under the Convention Against Torture. These statuses, if granted by an immigration judge, prevent a person from being removed to their home country, though they may be removed to a willing third country.

Since Nov. 26, when one National Guard service member was shot and killed and another critically wounded in Washington, allegedly by Afghan national Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the U.S. government has increased scrutiny of existing Afghan nationals and other citizens of “high-risk” nations who reside within the country.

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 12:05

James Boasberg Snubs Senate Hearing On 'Rogue Judges'

James Boasberg Snubs Senate Hearing On 'Rogue Judges'

Authored by Luis Cornelio via Headline USA,

Two of the federal judges facing impeachment threats refused to attend a Wednesday Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on “rogue judges.” 

James Boasberg and Deborah Boardman, district judges in Washington and Maryland, respectively, told the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts that they would not appear over concerns about the separation of powers and judicial ethics. 

Their refusal was delivered through a Nov. 12 letter sent by U.S. Judge Robert Conrad, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, to Sen. Ted Cruz, who chairs the subcommittee. 

Conrad claimed that allowing the judges to testify could violate ethics rules and “encroach upon the separation of powers,” according to the Daily Caller. 

He cited judicial rule Canon 3A(6), which forbids judges from testifying about matters they have decided or that may be pending before them. 

“The commentary to this provision explains that the ‘admonition against public comment about the merits of a pending or impending matter continues until the appellate process is complete,’” Conrad added. 

Cruz scheduled the hearing to examine possible impeachment proceedings against federal judges accused of overstepping their authority.

Boasberg is one of those judges, Republicans argue. He is facing impeachment threats from Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas,  

Gill filed the articles of impeachment accusing Boasberg of abusing his “judicial authority” for approving Biden-era search warrants targeting Republican lawmakers and other conservative organizations part of the Jan. 6 investigation. 

“Judge Boasberg was an accomplice in the egregious Arctic Frost scandal where he equipped the Biden DOJ to spy on Republican senators,” Gill wrote in a statement. 

“His lack of integrity makes him clearly unfit for the gavel.” 

Boardman is also facing impeachment efforts, this time from Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, over her lenient eight-year sentence for the convicted would-be assassin of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.  

Boardman cited the attacker’s declared transgender identity to justify sparing him from a harsher penalty. 

“Boardman unequivocally based this weak sentence on the attempted assassin’s ‘gender identity,’ as the attempted assassin expressed that he views himself as a woman,” Roy wrote in a separate statement. “Instead of doing what the Judiciary calls for and sentencing this man to the base 30-year sentence recommended by the Department of Justice, Judge Boardman purposefully allowed this man off easy.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 12/03/2025 - 11:25

Pages