Individual Economists

Pakistan Outraged At Being Called An Emerging Missile Threat To US By DNI Gabbard

Zero Hedge -

Pakistan Outraged At Being Called An Emerging Missile Threat To US By DNI Gabbard

The US declared Pakistan a major non-NATO ally all the way back in 2004, but relations have soured at various points since then. But given Pakistan does indeed remain a close regional ally, which is also nuclear-armed, the country is outraged at Wednesday's Senate Intelligence hearing wherein Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard raised some eyebrows over a new 'missile threat'.

She for the first named the South Asian country along with Russia and others in the 2026 Annual Threat Assessment Report, citing that Pakistan's missile program could be a future threat to the Untied States.

"Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have been researching and developing an array of novel, advanced, or traditional missile delivery systems with nuclear and conventional payloads, that put our homeland within range," Gabbard told the intelligence committee.

She then specified: "Pakistan's long-range ballistic missile development potentially could include ICBMs with the range capable of striking the homeland."

Pakistan ballistic missile, file image/Arab News

While other countries listed - especially Iran and North Korea have long been named by US officials as 'rogue' actors or else part of an 'axis of evil' (going back to the Bush era) - this appears to be the first time Pakistan was openly named in such a high-level annual briefing before Congress. Perhaps Washington is thinking that the conservative Islamic country is just 'one coup away' from becoming highly dangerous.

Gabbard also described more broadly the South Asian region as a place of "enduring security challenges" - warning that India-Pakistan relations "remain a risk for nuclear conflict." At the moment, Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan under the Taliban are in a state of active hot war, though there have been reports of a shaky ceasefire.

Pakistan is angry at being singled out, and has communicated its objections to Washington:

On Thursday, Tahir Andrabi, spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said: "Pakistan categorically rejects the recent assertion by a United States official alleging a potential threat from Pakistan’s missile capabilities."

Pakistan's strategic capabilities are "exclusively defensive" in nature, he said, and are "aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty and maintaining peace and stability in South Asia."

The foreign ministry official further explained, "Pakistan’s missile program, which remains well below intercontinental range, is firmly rooted in the doctrine of credible minimum deterrence vis-a-vis India. In contrast, India’s development of missile capabilities exceeding 12,000 kilometres [7,460 miles] reflects a trajectory that extends beyond regional security considerations and is certainly a cause of concern for the neighborhood and beyond."

At times in the last couple decades, the US has accused Pakistan of cooperating with terrorists, and for failing to reign in ISIS-type operatives in its restive northwest province - a region which has long proven a headache for the whole region.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 23:05

Why Is Australia Not Already Rationing Fuel?

Zero Hedge -

Why Is Australia Not Already Rationing Fuel?

Authored by 'Fast Eddy' via 'The World according to Fast Eddy' substack,

I’m an Australian Wholesale Fuel Trader

An insider's explanation of what is going on...

The commentary below was lifted from a Reddit post.

Other than the issues I have already raised in previous articles How Is Iran Blocking and Mining Hormuz? And so it begins.... the question I am asking after reading this analysis is:

Why is Australia Not Already Rationing Fuel?

I’m the pricing, sales and trading guy at one of Australia’s fuel importers. It’s been an insane two weeks on the trading and supply front, but now it’s the weekend and my brain is still wired running at 150%.

My partner asked me last night in detail to explain the overall situation. I thought I’d share my knowledge here and happy to answer questions. I’ll respond when I can throughout this weekend!

Note we don’t have any retail sites so I can’t really speak for retail fuel. I also obviously can’t share anything proprietary.

1. Australian fuel is 90% imported these days, mainly from Asia.

The Asia refiners are more competitive and have economies of scale that compete Australian refineries, that’s why most of our have closed. Australia for over a decade has not met the internationally agreed 90-day buffer of fuel reserves in the country, we sit a roughly 32 days of stock. This is the fault of both Labor and Liberal governments in the past. Note: it’s easy to store crude oil but much more difficult to store refined products like diesel and petrol, they are flammable and go off after a few months of sitting in a tank. It is very expensive to build brand new storage tanks, which is why no commercial personal is doing it - this is why we import so much oil throughput.

2. Not all crude oils are the same.

The Asian refineries are set up to refine medium sour crude (far more experienced chemical engineers, or Google, can give you more info of the API and Gravity ranges of crude oil types). This is mainly produced by the Middle East. It is very hard to replace this crude oil into the refineries at short notice. So it doesn’t matter how many barrels the US releases from its crude stock piles as that is a “light sweet crude” (and is prohibitively expensive on the ocean freight component). Asian refiners have been cancelling contracts and governments like Thailand and China are banning diesel and petrol exports to keep these critical fuels in their own countries. Therefore, it has gotten very expensive to source alternative cargos to supply Australia (something called the MOPS Premia has skyrocketed. So has backwardation).

The best analysis I am reading is a soon as the Middle East waterway (Strait of Hormuz) opens up, it will still be 1.5 to 2 months before the Asian refiners are running at full capacity again.

Ed: Australia - and I am sure most countries - do not have stored fuel that will last this long even with rationing.

The critical mining industry in Australia runs on diesel...

If this situation does not urgently get resolved, we will soon be dead men walking.

Meanwhile, the world sits on it’s hands watching and refusing to act. 

Am I alone in thinking there is something wrong with this picture?

Note you can’t just shut down a refinery, these things are designed to run 24/7. Shutting down completely puts equipment at serious risk of damage, therefore refiners are choosing to run at say 50% capacity to delay to running out of crude oil feedstock and not damage refinery equipment.

3. While Brent crude has gone from say 70 to 100 USD/barrel (ie roughly 40%), refined products like diesel, petrol and jet fuel, have spiked far higher relatively speaking.

This mainly comes down to the regional supply and demand issues being experienced in Asia. Note Australian fuel is roughly priced as Singapore fuel + ocean freight + local costs. Therefore you can’t just take the increase in Brent crude (main type of crude oil) and assume that’s the increase in cost to the fuel that you buy. Diesel seems to be facing far worse supply constraints compared to petrol aka gasoline (and jet fuel even worse than that). I’ll link a great article at the end on why jet fuel is spiking so much more (it’s a free article on substack)

4. Regional Australia wholesale diesel All the oil majors (Mobil, BP, Ampol etc) are understandably holding onto their own product to keep supplying their own retail stations (this was the case last week at least).

They stopped selling in the wholesale market. The oil majors years ago largely exited regional Australia and delivery services to farms etc. Independent wholesale business filled in this gap. They do not import their own fuel, but rather buy on the wholesale spot market (where I sell to them), and therefore usually have no term supply guarantees from BP, Ampol etc. Given regional Australia still runs on diesel fuel for all farming, food transportation etc, this is why you hear regional Australia having a fuel crisis more than the cities. This is why I believe that the electrification of key transportation supply chains is critical for Australia’s future. So for Chris Bowen, our Energy Minister, saying he is working with the majors to secure more diesel that is dedicated/prioritised for regional communities, I have no idea how the government are practically going to pull that off (price caps? Allocated volume with some sort of government mandated fixed price? Who knows how it’ll work, but it sounds nice in a speech).

5. Conclusion/generic thoughts

This situation isn’t resolving itself anytime soon unfortunately. There is a saying commodity trading - “high prices cure high prices and low prices cure low prices”. When the price sky rockets, demand drops off where possible or supply is increased. When there’s super low prices, supply reduces as said suppliers can’t stay in business selling at those low prices. In this current high prices situation, supply can’t increase right now, so the only lever is to reduce demand. If the price is kept low by governments, demand would stay around, you would have no more supply coming into Australia, and you would eventually run out of fuel.

Neither is a good situation, but running out of fuel entirely is probably worse than having some fuel at a high price, which theoretically destroys some flexible demand.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 22:40

Comey Subpoenaed For Alleged 'Grand Conspiracy' Against Trump

Zero Hedge -

Comey Subpoenaed For Alleged 'Grand Conspiracy' Against Trump

Former FBI Director James Comey has been slapped with a subpoena as part of a wide-ranging case against Obama-Biden-era officials who helped frame Donald Trump is a Russian asset in a "grand conspiracy." 

The grand jury subpoena, issued last week by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, focuses on Comey’s role in the preparation of the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that concluded Russia sought to influence the election in favor of Trump and against Hillary Clinton. The probe, which Trump allies have described as examining a “grand conspiracy” against the president, has issued more than 130 subpoenas in total, according to Axios, citing people familiar with the matter.

The investigation is being overseen by a grand jury in Fort Pierce, Fla., under U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee who previously presided over the classified-documents case against Trump that was dismissed in 2024. The U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Jason A. Reding Quiñones, a Trump appointee, is leading the effort.

Representatives for Comey declined to comment on the subpoena. The Justice Department doesn’t typically confirm or comment on ongoing grand-jury proceedings.

The move marks a significant escalation in scrutiny of Obama-era officials who were involved in the early stages of the Russia investigation, including the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane probe and the special counsel inquiry led by Robert Mueller. Comey, who was fired by Trump in May 2017 amid the Russia probe, has long been a central figure in debates over those investigations.

Democrats and former officials are pissed, of course, and have described it as politically motivated retribution against adversaries from the 2016 election cycle. Supporters argue it addresses unresolved questions about potential abuses of authority or procedural irregularities in how the Russia inquiries were conducted.

The Intelligence Community Assessment, which Comey helped oversee as FBI director, has been a point of contention for years. Trump allies have questioned aspects of its sourcing and conclusions, particularly regarding the inclusion of material related to the controversial Steele dossier.

This development unfolds against a backdrop of heightened political and legal tensions in Trump’s second term, with the Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi pursuing several high-profile reviews of prior administrations’ actions.

No charges have been announced in connection with the investigation, and it remains unclear what specific information prosecutors are seeking from Comey or how he intends to respond to the subpoena. Grand-jury proceedings are secret, and details are expected to emerge slowly, if at all, absent court filings or official disclosures.

The subpoena to Comey renews focus on one of the most divisive episodes in recent U.S. political and law-enforcement history, with potential implications for how past investigations are viewed and whether additional former officials will face similar demands.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 22:15

SoCal Heat-Wave Prompts Health Warning Of High Bacteria Levels At Los Angeles Beaches

Zero Hedge -

SoCal Heat-Wave Prompts Health Warning Of High Bacteria Levels At Los Angeles Beaches

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

Health officials warned that some Southern California beaches may be unsafe for swimming due to elevated bacterial levels this week amid elevated temperatures across the region.

The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health on March 18 said that visitors should avoid swimming, surfing, or playing in the ocean waters between Malibu and Santa Monica due to bacteria levels that it said exceed state health standards.

“These warnings are issued because recent water samples showed bacterial levels exceeding health standards, which may increase the risk of illness,” the department warned.

The health department did not elaborate on the species or type of bacteria that prompted the warnings.

The warnings issued by the county health department appear to apply mainly to areas near storm drains, restrooms, and creeks.

Specifically, the advisory said the warnings applied to areas within 100 yards up and down the coast from:

  • the Culver Boulevard storm drain at Dockweiler State Beach

  • the public restrooms at Leo Carrillo State Beach in Malibu

  • Walnut Creek at Paradise Cove

  • the Wilshire Boulevard storm drain at Santa Monica Beach (north of Tower 12)

  • Topsail Street in Venice

  • the lagoon at Topanga Canyon Beach in Malibu

  • Escondido Creek at Escondido State Beach

  • and the entire swim area at Mother’s Beach in Marina del Rey

Advisories were lifted at Inner Cabrillo Beach in San Pedro, the Santa Monica Pier in Santa Monica, the Marie Canyon Storm Drain at Puerco Beach, the Santa Monica Canyon Creek at Will Rogers State Beach near Will Rogers Tower 18, and the Malibu Lagoon at Surfrider Beach, the Los Angeles Health Department said.

Temperatures in Southern California are under a “long-duration heatwave” throughout this week, according to the National Weather Service (NWS). Temperatures are around 25 to 35 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, and a number of daily records will be broken, the weather agency said.

Forecasters say that for March 19 and March 20, temperatures across Los Angeles are set to exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit, while the weekend will see lower temperatures.

“Numerous and widespread daily and March monthly record highs are likely, with some locations in California already breaking their March monthly records on Tuesday,” the NWS wrote in a bulletin Thursday.

Elevated bacteria at beaches have long been a concern for some groups. Nearly two-thirds of beaches tested nationwide in 2024 experienced at least one day in which indicators of fecal contamination reached potentially unsafe levels, conservation group Environment America said in a report issued last summer.

The group reviewed beaches on the coasts and Great Lakes and found that 84 percent of Gulf Coast beaches exceeded the standard at least once. The number was 79 percent for West Coast beaches, 54 percent for East Coast beaches, and 71 percent for Great Lakes beaches, it said.

The report also said more than 450 beaches were potentially unsafe for swimming on at least 25 percent of the days tested.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 21:00

Bezos Plots Colossal $100 Billion Fund To Transform Companies Using AI: WSJ

Zero Hedge -

Bezos Plots Colossal $100 Billion Fund To Transform Companies Using AI: WSJ

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is in early discussions to raise as much as $100 billion for a new investment vehicle aimed at acquiring and revitalizing manufacturing companies through the application of artificial intelligence, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The proposed fund, described in investor materials as a “manufacturing transformation vehicle,” would target companies in strategic industrial sectors such as semiconductor fabrication, defense and aerospace. Bezos has held preliminary meetings with some of the largest asset managers in Asia and the Middle East, though the talks remain at an nascent stage, the Journal said.

The initiative is closely linked to Project Prometheus, the AI startup Bezos co-founded and co-leads as CEO. Launched in late 2025 with $6.2 billion in initial funding—much of it from billionaire himself—the company is developing advanced AI models designed to understand and simulate the physical world.

Project Prometheus, valued at roughly $30 billion following its initial round, is separately pursuing additional capital, the Journal also reported.

The unprecedented surge in investment into artificial intelligence has raised a host of unresolved questions. Is the AI boom a bubble destined to burst? And perhaps more pressingly, how will the world muster sufficient energy to sustain this revolutionary technology amid soaring power demands from data centers?

In an interview at Italian Tech Week in October, Bezos offered an answer to the second question.

The Amazon founder predicted that “gigawatt-scale” data centers—massive facilities capable of drawing power on the scale of entire cities—will begin to be constructed in orbit within the next 10 to 20 years. The billionaire argued that the orbital installations would harness constant, uninterrupted solar energy, free from clouds, weather, or nighttime interruptions that constrain terrestrial operations.

These giant training clusters…will be better built in space, because we have solar power there, 24/7. There are no clouds and no rain, no weather,” Bezos said during a fireside conversation with Ferrari and Stellantis Chairman John Elkann. “We will be able to beat the cost of terrestrial data centers in space in the next couple of decades.”

The concept of orbital data centers has gained traction among tech giants as Earth-based facilities devour electricity and water to cool their racks of servers. Continuous sunlight and zero weather make space an appealing option - at least in theory.

But Bezos acknowledged there are serious hurdles ahead: maintenance and upgrades would be far more difficult in orbit, rocket launches are costly, and any failure could wipe out billions in hardware in a flash.

Still, the Amazon founder insisted that as launch costs fall and technology improves, the economics will eventually tilt in space’s favor.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 20:35

Super Micro Co-Founder Arrested In Alleged $2.5 Billion Nvidia Chip Smuggling Scheme

Zero Hedge -

Super Micro Co-Founder Arrested In Alleged $2.5 Billion Nvidia Chip Smuggling Scheme

Federal prosecutors have charged a co-founder of Super Micro Computer Inc. and two associates with participating in a scheme to divert roughly $2.5 billion in advanced Nvidia chips to China, according to an indictment unsealed Thursday afternoon. The charges mark a notable escalation in Washington’s effort to police the flow of high-end artificial-intelligence hardware, shifting focus from overseas resellers to individuals with direct ties to U.S. technology firms.

The indictment alleges that the defendants obtained restricted graphics processors - used to train large AI models - and routed them through intermediaries to obscure their ultimate destination. U.S. export rules bar the sale of the most advanced chips to China without a license, citing national-security concerns.

U.S. prosecutors have charged three men - senior executive Yih-Shyan “Wally” Liaw (the co-founder), Ruei-Tsang “Steven” Chang, and Ting-Wei “Willy” Sun - with conspiring to divert billions of dollars’ worth of advanced U.S.-made AI servers to China, bypassing strict export bans.

The servers (packed with powerful restricted Nvidia chips) are banned from sale to China without special government approval because of national security risks. No licenses were ever obtained. Authorities say the group used a combination of third-party entities and altered shipping documentation to bypass those restrictions. Details on the volume and value of the shipments weren’t immediately available.

How the Alleged Scheme Worked:

  • The group used a company in Southeast Asia as a front buyer to place huge orders with a California-based U.S. manufacturer.
  • Once the servers arrived in Southeast Asia, they were quickly repackaged and secretly shipped to customers in China through a network of brokers.

Cover-Up Tactics:

  • Fake documents claiming the Southeast Asian company was the real end-user.
  • When audits happened, they staged warehouses with non-working “dummy” replica servers.
  • One defendant allegedly posed as a lawyer during a U.S. government inspection.
  • Text messages show they knew the rules were tightening but rushed shipments anyway (e.g., “We need to speed these up before May 13!”).

They've been charged with three counts; Conspiracy to violate the Export Control Reform Act, Conspiracy to smuggle goods from the United States, and Conspiracy to defraud the United States (impairing Commerce Department licensing and enforcement).

The case places an unusual spotlight on Super Micro, a Silicon Valley company that has emerged as a key supplier of servers configured with Nvidia processors for data centers and cloud providers. The inclusion of a co-founder raises questions about whether the alleged activity reflects isolated conduct or broader compliance gaps, though prosecutors haven’t accused the company itself of wrongdoing.

Shares of Super Micro fell sharply in extended trading following reports of the charges, reflecting investor concern that the case could disrupt relationships with customers and suppliers or invite additional scrutiny from regulators.

A Persistent Weak Point

U.S. officials have spent the past several years tightening export controls on advanced semiconductors, aiming to limit China’s ability to develop cutting-edge AI systems with potential military applications. Yet enforcement has lagged behind policy.

Investigations and industry disclosures have repeatedly shown that restricted chips continue to reach Chinese buyers through a web of resellers and transshipment hubs in Asia. The result is a gray market that has proven difficult to eliminate, even as Washington expands blacklists and licensing requirements.

The latest case suggests a shift in strategy. Rather than focusing primarily on overseas networks, prosecutors appear increasingly willing to pursue individuals closer to the source of supply - where access, knowledge and documentation can be harder to disentangle.

"The conduct by these individuals alleged in the indictment is a contravention of the Company’s policies and compliance controls, including efforts to circumvent applicable export control laws and regulations," Supermicro said in a statement. "Supermicro maintains a robust compliance program and is committed to full adherence to all applicable U.S. export and re-export control laws and regulations."

This isn't the first time Super Micro has made news for shady practices. Back in 2020, the company (and its then-CFO) were slapped with a $17.5 million SEC settlement for years of classic accounting gimmicks - prematurely booking revenue on servers that were still sitting in warehouses, shipping incomplete units, and all the usual channel-stuffing tricks that inflated profits by hundreds of millions. Fast-forward to 2024, and short-seller Hindenburg dropped a bomb accusing Supermicro of ongoing related-party deals tied to the CEO’s family in Taiwan/China, more revenue-recognition games, and enough red flags that Ernst & Young quit as auditor and the DOJ opened a criminal probe.

High Stakes for the AI Supply Chain

The chips at the center of the case are among the most sought-after components in the global technology industry. Nvidia’s high-performance processors underpin everything from generative-AI models to advanced analytics systems, and demand has surged as companies race to build out AI infrastructure.

That demand has also created incentives to circumvent restrictions. Industry executives have privately acknowledged that once chips leave the U.S. or authorized distributors, tracking their final destination becomes challenging.

Related:

2 Chinese Nationals, 2 Americans Charged With Smuggling Nvidia Chips To China

For Super Micro, the episode comes at a pivotal moment. The company has benefited from a boom in AI-related spending, positioning itself as a fast-growing provider of specialized server systems. Any perception of compliance failures could complicate that trajectory, particularly if customers or partners reassess risk.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 20:10

NASA May Shrink Boeing's Moon-Mission Role While Handing SpaceX Core Rocket Responsibilities

Zero Hedge -

NASA May Shrink Boeing's Moon-Mission Role While Handing SpaceX Core Rocket Responsibilities

President Donald Trump's NASA chief could soon announce Boeing's diminishing role in returning astronauts to the Moon, while leaning heavily on Elon Musk's SpaceX rocket company to do the heavy lifting.

Boeing's Space Launch System (SLS), originally the rocket backbone of the Artemis mission, would no longer carry the Lockheed Martin-built Orion crew capsule to the Moon. Under the new plan, SpaceX's Starship would take the lead.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman plans to meet with the companies working on the Artemis program next Tuesday, including Boeing, SpaceX, and Blue Origin, to discuss progress and current paths forward. Sources close to the program said any significant changes could face immediate Congressional scrutiny.

"NASA is committed to using the SLS architecture through at least Artemis V, which is necessary to support both human landing system providers, and their associated acceleration plans to return American astronauts to the Moon," Isaacman said in a statement. "We're incredibly supportive of both our HLS providers and their plans to accelerate America's path forward to the moon," Isaacman added.

If Isaacman does boot SLS from the core rocket during the launch of the Orion crew capsule to the moon, it would be a massive blow to Boeing, which has been mired in setbacks ranging from Starliner capsule issues to SLS launch delays. Notably, Starship still lacks a fully successful orbital flight.

The effort to swap SLS for Starship shows Isaacman's urgent push to accelerate Artemis timelines (target: 2028 landing) after years of delays and cost overruns, with SLS missions costing over $4 billion each.

Isaacman has also been weighing alternatives for the HLS on the Moon from both SpaceX and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin - both of which hold multibillion-dollar contracts to develop Moon landers for Artemis.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 19:45

Minnesota Audit: State Agency 'Accidentally' Blocked Kickback Investigation Into Autism Services

Zero Hedge -

Minnesota Audit: State Agency 'Accidentally' Blocked Kickback Investigation Into Autism Services

Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A state agency erred when it blocked autism-services kickbacks from being investigated—a decision based on the agency’s flawed, decades-old definition of “fraud,” according to a Minnesota audit released March 17.

A view outside the Minnesota State Capitol building in Minneapolis, Minn., on June 20, 2020. Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

That was the key finding of the state’s Office of Legislative Auditor, a state watchdog that conducted a two-year special review. The autism-services program that auditors examined is among many health and welfare benefits that Minnesota’s Department of Human Services runs or oversees.

For months, Minnesota has been a focal point for government-program fraud that could total billions of dollars, with dozens of people, mostly Somalis, having been charged and convicted since 2022. Additional schemes emerged late last year and remain under investigation, with more charges expected, prosecutors have said.

Concerns about fraud have recently expanded nationwide. On March 16, President Donald Trump signed an executive order creating an anti-fraud task force. Saying that other states such as California and New York may have fraud problems that are worse than Minnesota’s, the president directed Vice President JD Vance and Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson to root out fraud in federally funded social services and welfare programs.

During the Minnesota audit, investigators told auditors that they believed they lacked “authority to investigate allegations of kickbacks” in the autism program without additional claims of “fraud, theft, abuse, or error.”

The department’s fraud definition, set in 1995, failed to specifically include “kickbacks.” Those are payments or “anything of value” to induce referrals to providers of federally funded health care—a practice that is illegal under federal law, the report noted.

Auditors opined that the department had misapplied or misinterpreted a rule that includes that fraud definition. The agency had the power to amend the rule and correct an erroneous federal-law citation “without any legislative action,” the report stated.

Had [the department] done so at any point since 1995, it would have had clear authority to suspend payments” to providers who were strongly suspected in kickback schemes, according to the report.

Auditors recommended that the agency amend its fraud definition “to clearly include kickbacks"—or lawmakers should do so, the report says.

James Clark, inspector general for the state Department of Human Services, said the department agrees with that recommendation.

However, in his written response appended to the report, Clark said the standard rulemaking process could take a year or two to complete, unless officials or lawmakers agree to fast-track it.

The autism-services program, which has operated in Minnesota since 2013, aims to provide “early intervention” for autism-diagnosed patients who are under age 21.

Under the program, providers receive reimbursement for services rendered.

Federal prosecutors have brought charges against at least two people for alleged autism-services fraud in Minnesota.

Late last year, prosecutors also said that many more suspects remained under investigation for allegedly failing to provide autism services—or for allegedly paying kickbacks to parents who fraudulently enrolled their children for services they didn’t need or never received.

The number of Minnesota autism-service businesses grew from about 150 in 2020 to more than 500 in 2024. Similarly, the number of autism-service recipients nearly tripled during that period, from about 1,400 patients in 2020 to more than 5,600 patients in 2024.

During that same timeframe, the program’s cost burgeoned from about $38 million to nearly $325 million.

Faced with that dramatic expansion and other concerns, lawmakers strengthened state laws in 2025, the legislative auditor’s report noted.

Auditors examined complaints that the state Department of Human Services’ investigative division received between July 2017 and February 2024.

That sample included seven completed investigations that were handled appropriately, auditors concluded.

However, among 25 complaints that were dismissed without further investigation, three involved alleged kickbacks. The auditors concluded the agency should have done more in those instances.

The auditors’ report does not disclose dollar amounts of the alleged kickbacks, nor does it say whether the faulty definition of fraud could have affected other state-administered programs.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 19:20

Obama Judge Strikes Down Ten Commandments In Arkansas Classrooms

Zero Hedge -

Obama Judge Strikes Down Ten Commandments In Arkansas Classrooms

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

A federal judge has struck down a law in Arkansas that required the display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms, finding it violated children’s rights.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks (Obama) ruled on March 16 that not enjoining the law, Act 573, would violate the religious and Free Exercise rights of children in public school.

A copy of the Ten Commandments is posted along with other historical documents in a hallway of the Georgia Capitol in Atlanta on June 20, 2024. John Bazemore/AP Photo

“Act 573’s purpose is only to display a sacred, religious text in a prominent place in every public-school classroom. And the only reason to display a sacred, religious text in every classroom is to proselytize to children,” Brooks wrote.

Nothing could possibly justify hanging the Ten Commandments—with or without historical context—in a calculus, chemistry, French, or woodworking class, to name a few. And the words ‘curriculum,’ ‘school board,’ ‘teacher,’ or ‘educate’ don’t appear anywhere in Act 573. Accordingly, there is no need to strain our minds to imagine a constitutional display mandated by Act 573. One doesn’t exist.”

John Williams, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, one of the plaintiffs, said in a statement that the ruling shows “Arkansas lawmakers cannot sidestep the First Amendment by mandating that a particular version of the Ten Commandments be displayed in every classroom.”

Brooks had on Aug. 4, 2025, preliminarily enjoined the law in certain districts. It went into effect statewide the day after.

Arkansas officials had argued that the law was legal and should not be struck down.

The act was approved by state lawmakers and signed by Republican Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders in 2025.

“The 10 Commandments aren’t just the foundation of our faith—they’re the foundation of every law and moral code in the West,” Sanders said in a March 17 post on X. “That’s why we are appealing this ruling.”

Several other states have recently enacted similar laws.

A granite Ten Commandments monument stands on the grounds of the Texas Capitol in Austin, Texas, on May 29, 2025. Eric Gay/AP Photo

A different federal judge blocked Louisiana’s law requiring schools to display the Ten Commandments, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in February overturned that decision, finding that the case was not ready to be litigated yet because there were unresolved questions, including how the Ten Commandments would be displayed and whether teachers would reference them during classes.

Dissenting judges in that case pointed to the Supreme Court’s 1980 decision striking down a similar law in Kentucky.

Lawsuits are ongoing against a Texas law, signed in 2025, that required public school classrooms to feature the Ten Commandments. The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in one of the cases earlier this year.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 18:20

US Fast-Tracks Billions In 'Emergency' Arms Sales To Gulf, Bypassing Congress

Zero Hedge -

US Fast-Tracks Billions In 'Emergency' Arms Sales To Gulf, Bypassing Congress

On the one hand President Trump and Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth have declared that America is 'winning' against Iran, having destroyed its navy and air defenses, and having seriously degraded its missiles - but on the other the admin has put in for a more than $200 billion supplemental request to Congress to fund the war.

It seems Congress will likely eventually sign off on this gargantuan figure - for an 'excursion' which should end 'soon' we are told by Trump - given that even the effort to pass so much as a War Powers resolution gets repeatedly stymied. 

Still, the US administration is busy bypassing standard congressional review requirements, on Thursday approving a series of emergency arms sales across the Middle East, at a moment US regional allies are being pummeled by Iranian drones and ballistic missiles.

US military file image

The argument is that Washington's allies are in imminent danger, and given that indeed vital Gulf infrastructure is getting hit quite seriously - new arms have to be rushed over there on an emergency basis.

According to details in Saudi-owned Al Arabiya:

The largest package was approved for the United Arab Emirates, totaling more than $8 billion. It includes the $4.5 billion sale of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), $2.10 billion for FS-LIDS counter-drone systems, $1.22 billion in Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs), and $644 million in F-16 munitions, including GBU-39 small diameter bombs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs).

In parallel, Washington approved an $8 billion deal for Kuwait to buy Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor Radars, significantly enhancing the country’s missile detection and tracking capabilities.

Jordan was also included in the emergency approvals, with a $70.5 million package covering aircraft support and munitions to sustain operational readiness.

Notably, a US base all the way over in Jordan, the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, was struck by Iran in the opening days of the war, satellite imagery showed.

This development of all these newly approved 'emergency' arms and weapons shipments begs the question: is this more evidence that Washington is settling in for a 'long war'?

After all, Trump has given no timeline despite being repeatedly asked, and Israel too is saying the anti-Iran campaign is not even halfway complete. In the end it's certainly not the American people 'winning' here (and they are not going to think so especially at the gas pump either), but the major defense firms.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 18:00

All This Fuss About A Fiat Dollar

Zero Hedge -

All This Fuss About A Fiat Dollar

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

Throughout the First World, and, particularly in the US, there is an increasing consciousness that fiat currency, far from being the solution to economic problems, is, in fact, a cause of them.

There are even those who, over the years, have predicted that the continued massive creation of fiat dollars may well lead to price controls, destruction of savings, looting, riots and, possibly, even revolution. A decade ago, such predictions were regarded by most as nonsense. Today, all of these eventualities seem more likely, although there still remains a strong contingent (possibly even a majority) who believe that, “It can’t happen here.”

A Brief History of Colonial US Fiat Currency

At this juncture, with regard to the US, it may be helpful to mention that not only can it happen here… it in fact, already has – back when the US was first created.

Much has been said about the American founding fathers having been “visionaries,” and this is most certainly true.

But how was it that so many people in pivotal positions in late 18th-century America possessed such insight, such inspiration in terms of designing a country whose Constitution was based upon free-market values, and avoided, as much as possible, a central government that had its fingers in the economic pie?

The answer lies in the simple fact that they had not only experienced the outcome of the use of a fiat currency, but had done so in recent memory.

In the 1750s, the use of fiat currency by the colonies (particularly in the financing of military endeavours against the French in Quebec) caused massive inflation. The situation became so dire that Mother England stepped in and called an end to the creation of debt-related promissory notes. There was an immediate return to using coinage.

The result was prosperity. Although the colonies did not yet possess their own coinage, they used gold and silver coins from England, France, Holland and Spain as unofficial currencies. (Note: The word “unofficial” is key here as a free market prevailed and was able to adjust itself, as necessary, with regard to the purchasing value of each form of coinage.)

But this was not to last. When the American Revolution broke out in 1775, the Continental Congress saw fit to “solve” the cash-flow problem by starting up the printing presses. (Once again, war created the incentive to print paper currency.) At that time, the colonial money supply had been some $12 million. Within five years, over an additional $600 million had been created. Whilst this monetary creation initially served as a boost to the economy, the predictable end result was that massive inflation returned, laying waste to the economy.

Then, as now, many people could not understand why the Continental Congress did not simply keep printing until the problem went away.

By the time the war had ended, the newly-formed United States was deeply mired in economic troubles. Although there were those who called for an end to the rolling of the presses, the government did what governments typically do: exert a greater level of force to get the people to use the debased currency. Wage and price controls were created, in addition to stiff penalties for anyone who refused to use the Continental Dollar. Congress declared that, any person shall hereafter be so lost to all virtue and regard for his country as to refuse to accept its notes, such person shall be deemed an enemy of his country.

It may be beneficial to read this simple statement a second time, whilst considering just how timeless and universal it is. It is the position governments typically take whenever they have created a problem that the public have ultimately paid the price for. When the public ultimately realise that they have been victimised, and back off from the government “solution,” they (the public) are described by the government as being “unpatriotic.” In this case, Congress went so far as to describe the public as “enemies.”

Today, Americans have not yet reached this point; however, it should not be surprising if, as the US dollar declines more severely, they are once again described as enemies of the state, should they move away from using the dying dollar in favour of a more stable form of wealth, such as precious metals.

Money in the US Constitution

It was in the immediate aftermath of the 1787 monetary debacle that the Constitutional Committee met to create the Constitution. Having read the foregoing, it should not be surprising to the reader that a primary concern of the American founding fathers was that, in future, neither the state nor the federal governments should have the ability to create fiat currency, period.

Oliver Ellsworth, a Connecticut attorney, stated at the time,

This is a favourable moment to shut and bar the door against paper money. The mischief of the various experiments which have been made are now fresh in the public mind and have excited the disgust of all the respectable parts of America.”

It was under this sentiment that the Committee consciously rejected a recommendation for the federal government to “emit bills of credit.” And, instead, allowed the federal government only to “… coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.”

Central Bank Tug-of-War

It is clear that, in 1787, there existed a true “vision” as to a government’s rightful role in the economy. However, it should be stated that, as early as three years later, in 1790, a move was afoot to create a central bank, modeled after the Bank of England, and that that bank, in addition to having the power to borrow for national interests, would have the exclusive right to issue bank notes.

For another century, a tug of war existed over both the wisdom and the Constitutional legality of a central bank that could issue fiat currency, and this struggle waxed and waned throughout the 19th century. In 1913, a cabal of bankers succeeded in creating the Federal Reserve, and, for the last hundred years, the US economy has been subject to its manipulation. Currency is one manipulation, but the Fed’s manipulation extends beyond currency manipulation.

Back in the late 18th century, the former colonists found themselves in a disastrous economic situation which was a direct result of debt and fiat currency. In 1787, businesses were bankrupted, looting became commonplace, and there was mob violence in the streets. However, the situation was saved by a small group of people who had been given the responsibility to craft the American Constitution. In my belief, the greatness that the US experienced was due, in no small part, to the rejection of fiat currency and a focus on free-market values.

However, today, the American Constitution has largely been abandoned, and the economic debacle of the late 18th century is being repeated. It is conceivable that the present situation is so dire that the US will again see the currency controls and riots that occurred in 1787.

It is left to the reader to consider whether the present situation will generate a movement to re-establish both the word and spirit of that exceptional document – the American Constitution – or whether the powers that be will dig in their heels in favour of their own ability to control both the population and the economy.

The answer could well determine whether the US can rise again as a great nation, or whether it will fall to the wayside.

*  *  *

The above is as old as fiat money itself: when governments print to fund their promises, the public pays through inflation—and when confidence cracks, officials reach for controls and coercion. If you want a clear, practical way to think about protecting your purchasing power as the dollar’s strength is questioned, we’ve prepared an urgent special dispatch featuring legendary investor Doug Casey explaining what the mainstream media won’t tell you about gold. Click here to see the free dispatch now.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 17:40

What Would A Bank Run Look Like Today?

Zero Hedge -

What Would A Bank Run Look Like Today?

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

The movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” (1946) features what is today the most famous bank run. It’s film and fiction, yes, but fits with a scenario that has been common for centuries. When the movie came out, the bank runs of 1930–1932 were very much in people’s memory. For older people, they remember the Panic of 1907. Before that, there was the Panic of 1893, the Panic of 1873, the Panic of 1837, and the Panic of 1819.

Panics and banking go together and have for 500 years.

It’s funny that we call them panics, as if people randomly start hurling themselves around in irrational fear. All that’s really going on is that people want their own money and ask for it. Customers grow concerned that the bank—which makes loans on deposits—has overextended and cannot make good on its redemption promises.

It’s a test that the bank passes or not. The bank run is nothing more than a rational check on the soundness of the bank. It’s not “panic” but merely a demand for one’s own property.

The bank run also serves a hugely important market function. The fear of one inspires banks toward prudence. Any attempt to suppress them invariably leads the banking system to become overextended, pushing out leverage beyond a sustainable point. When conditions change, unsound and overextended banks go belly up. This is nothing more than the market at work.

From 1913, with the establishment of the Federal Reserve, the driving ethos of banking and monetary policy has been to reduce bank runs and failures. It was to broadcast a message of confidence in the financial system so that people would no longer panic. It did not quite work, however, as evidenced by the vast bank failures of the early 1930s. President Franklin D. Roosevelt even declared a bank holiday to stop them, which didn’t work, so he turned to gold confiscation and devaluation.

All this is background to a note I just received from my own bank. It’s an update to the terms of service. Here is what it says:

“Added a new Section 8(e) (Digital Wires—Transaction Limits) to clarify that, to protect your account, online wire transaction limits may have daily or rolling 30-day restrictions and that we may establish or modify limits on the amount, frequency, or type of transactions you can initiate using our payment services, or your transaction limits may be temporarily reduced or subject to additional restrictions. Subsections following this one have been renumbered accordingly (Sections 8(f)–8(l)).”

Hardly anyone reads updates to terms of service. I’m probably in the 1 percent of customers who even clicked on the link. What it means should be obvious. My bank can restrict my access to money anytime it wants and by any amount. I might want to take it all in cash or move it to another institution. My bank has told me that this is entirely up to them. By continuing to bank with this famous institution, I have implicitly agreed to this.

To be sure, we should be grateful for banks that protect our accounts. That’s fine. What’s not fine is preventing access to money that is ours. It’s hard to know which is which, and while I would not suggest that banks would naturally lie to us, enterprises are not beyond some limited duplicity when financial survival is at stake.

Should I change banks? It’s probably pointless. Every bank, if it doesn’t have this as part of its terms of service, will adopt it anyway. You could say that this means nothing. Maybe that’s right. Or maybe the bank is just preparing for a rainy day that never comes, and so this update to the terms of service is practically meaningless. One hopes so.

But it did get me thinking: How would a bank run look today?

There will be no George Bailey rushing to the Building and Loan to calm the panicked depositors, explaining how the institution works (e.g., “Your money’s in Joe’s house”). These days, banks are not even very busy with customers. Every time I need to go to one, I walk right up to the window because no one is there. Nearly all money flows and banking services are done electronically.

I’m grateful for this change. My monthly bill-paying efforts take less than a minute. My childhood memories of my father on bill-paying day still stick with me. He had a small room off the kitchen that was his office. Once a month on Saturday, he would go inside. The kids knew not to disturb him. He had a stack of bills. He would write checks and put them in envelopes with stamps. With each bill paid, he went to his ledger and balanced the checkbook.

As he watched the family accounts drain more and more with each bill, he would grow ever more frustrated and upset. He made a salary of $14,500 and supported two kids, a wife, a home, and two cars, and we took plenty of vacations. In real terms, that’s about $114,000 today, a full household on one income. We made ends meet, but it was often a struggle, one from which he protected the family.

Our entire lives were being held by the bank.

There were never issues of trust.

I doubt that my father ever considered the possibility.

These days, money flows are throttled in every direction even without banking panics.

Venmo limits unverified weekly sending and spending to $300. Verified accounts allow up to $60,000 per week for payments to others. Outgoing bank transfers are limited to $5,000 per transfer and $20,000 per week as long as it is verified. Zelle’s limits vary by the bank: Bank of America permits $3,500 per day up to $20,000 per month. The others are the same or similar.

If you want to move real money, you have to go to ACH (automated clearinghouse) or FedWire (an improvement over old-style wiring) or get a crypto account and use a stablecoin (which moves $1.2 trillion per month, making it dominant). Regardless, it is not easy, and most depositors do not avail themselves of it.

Banks made ACH rather difficult, with pull-down menus of verified recipients. It can be extremely difficult to get serious blocks of money from here to there already. Mostly we don’t need to, so the system has not been really tested. Most people have no idea how much the system of electronic payments and withdrawals is already throttled.

As for cash, it is mostly out of the question. Your bank will give you the stare-down if you ask for $5,000 and make you fill out some law enforcement forms for $10,000. You dare not attempt to carry this kind of cash through an airport. You will be taken aside and asked to provide a full accounting for it. It’s even true for driving: If you are stopped and searched, you risk everything.

To the original question, what would a bank run look like?

It would involve millions of people simultaneously attempting to max out their withdrawals, perhaps to buy gold. It would be the raiding of ATMs until they are empty, which would take about 30 minutes. All the while, the institutions would assure you that they are fully sound and there’s nothing about which to worry.

The same would continue the next day as the banks doled out allotments as necessary and only for verified purposes. You might have a million dollars in the bank, but it would only be numbers flashing on a screen, interesting to look at but impossible to use. There is simply no way to get to it. And forget going to your branch. They would likely put up signs with the explanation that withdrawals are limited to $1,500 or so.

In other words, a serious bank run today would be a quiet and strangely uneventful financial apocalypse in which money movements would be effectively frozen. The Federal Reserve would get to work flooding the entire system with liquidity, unfreezing withdrawals even if they are still throttled. The new money flooding the system to bail out the banks would result in hyperinflation about nine to 12 months later, after which your money would have lost half its value anyway.

What could kick it off? Could be the default of a financial product. Could be the collapse in commercial real estate or a sudden plunge in artificial intelligence asset valuations. Or it could be nothing other than an online rumor that goes viral. This happened often in the 19th century: One person starts the fear, and it spreads like wildfire.

We will not likely ever see a bank run like we did in past times. That’s not a good thing. The system today provides the illusion of liquidity, but take a look beneath the surface. A genuine financial crisis—which we have somehow avoided even during these tumultuous times—would be a civilizational disaster.

This column is not intended to scare you. It might do that anyway.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 17:00

One Reason This Energy Shock Is Not Like The One 15-Years Ago

Zero Hedge -

One Reason This Energy Shock Is Not Like The One 15-Years Ago

Arend Kapteyn, the global head of economics and strategy research and chief economist at UBS, told clients that one key reason the current Middle East conflict-driven energy shock "is not like 2011-2014" will be the absence of a comparable response from the shale patch, suggesting consumers are more likely to bear the brunt of the pain. 

Kapteyn noted that, on an inflation-adjusted basis, oil prices in 2011-2014 were actually higher than they are today, yet the U.S. economy absorbed that shock because the shale boom provided a lift to the industrial base. Soaring WTI crude prices at the time spurred oil/gas companies to increase drilling activity, production growth, and energy-sector investment. This helped create a tailwind for the US' manufacturing base and offset some of the drag from higher fuel costs.

However, this is where the bullish U.S. economic case starts to look a little shaky. As Kapteyn noted, "The oil sector is much less responsive to prices than a decade ago." 

The Trump administration has indicated that the oil price shock is temporary, suggesting shale drilling is unlikely to increase meaningfully or provide much of a tailwind for the manufacturing base.

That means this time, the pain from higher energy prices is more likely to hit consumers directly through weaker spending power, with less offset from booming domestic oil investment.

The shock at the gas pump begins:

We warned:

Kapteyn continued:

A common question is why current oil prices should be a concern for the U.S. economy when prices were substantially higher in 2011-2014 and growth held up well. Over that earlier period, Brent averaged around $110/bbl—close to $145/bbl in today's dollars, roughly 23% above today's spot prices—yet U.S. GDP growth still averaged just over 2%.

There are, of course, many differences relative to then: today's labor market is weaker, households are more liquidity constrained, and the inflationary impulse is sharper, reflecting a much faster run-up in prices (oil prices never rose more than about 55% year-on-year in 2011-2014, versus close to 100% if today's prices are sustained). But the key difference—and the focus here—is shale.

At the start of 2010, the U.S. mining sector (largely oil and gas) accounted for roughly 14% of industrial production. By 2012-2013, it was generating well over half of total U.S. IP growth, with brief periods in which mining effectively accounted for all of it. After oil prices collapsed in 2015-2016, U.S. mining output rebounded mechanically from a low base—but shale did not return to its pre-2014 investment or rig intensity. Oil production still responds to prices at the margin—via well completions, higher utilization, and productivity gains—but investment has become far less elastic. In other words, if current oil prices are perceived as temporary, the U.S. is unlikely to see anything resembling the 2011-2014 shale-driven supply response to offset the net income erosion that is likely to hit consumers.

Overnight developments, including Israeli and Iranian retaliatory strikes on upstream energy infrastructure across the Gulf area and Qatar's warning that Iranian attacks on its LNG complex - the world's largest - could leave capacity offline for months, if not years, only reinforce the view that global energy markets are set to tighten further. The risk now is a pump price shock, which could begin to weigh on sentiment in the weeks ahead if energy market turmoil persists. At the same time, signs of stress are emerging in credit markets, adding to concerns that the broader economic outlook could deteriorate. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 16:40

Costa Rica's President Cuts Off Diplomatic Ties With Cuban Regime

Zero Hedge -

Costa Rica's President Cuts Off Diplomatic Ties With Cuban Regime

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

Costa Rica’s President Rodrigo Chaves revealed Wednesday that his government has ceased recognizing the legitimacy of Cuba’s communist regime and ordered the Cuban embassy in San José to close.

The Costa Rican embassy in Havana, Cuba, on March 18, 2026. Yamil Lage/AFP via Getty Images

In a press conference in Peñas Blancas during the inauguration of new U.S.-donated mobile drug scanners at the northern border with Nicaragua, Chaves said the decision was a stand against the Cuban government’s oppression of its people.

Costa Rica does not recognize the legitimacy of Cuba’s Communist regime, given the mistreatment, repression, and undignified conditions endured by the inhabitants of that beautiful island,” Chaves said. “We must cleanse the hemisphere of communists.”

During Wednesday’s press conference, Foreign Minister Arnoldo André Tinoco said the government chose to shutter its Costa Rica embassy in Havana and asked Cuba to remove its diplomatic personnel from San José, while permitting consular services to continue for practical purposes.

The decision comes as the Chaves administration positions itself against perceived leftist influences in the region and transnational crime syndicates. Meanwhile, Costa Rica and the United States increased collaboration on stopping drug trafficking.

Chaves doubled-down on the country’s security infrastructure at key ports, including Japdeva’s Gastón Kogan port, Peñas Blancas, Paso Canoas, and Caldera. Chaves on Wednesday connected the technology’s rollout to his administration’s campaign against organized crime.

Chaves said the new scanners would play a key role in blocking cocaine and fentanyl flows, crediting American support while condemning past domestic setbacks.

Cuba’s foreign ministry said it was informed on Tuesday of Costa Rica’s order for diplomatic staff to withdraw, leaving only consulate staff in place starting April 1. It said Costa Rica offered no justification and called the decision “arbitrary,” claiming it was made under pressure.

The Costa Rican ​government, which displays a history of subordination to United States policy against Cuba, once again joins ​the offensive by the U.S. government in its renewed attempts to isolate our country,” the ministry said in a ‌statement.

The move follows Ecuador’s decision on March 8 to close its Cuban embassy and declare Cuba’s ambassador Basilio Gutierrez ​and his diplomatic staff “persona non grata,” giving him 48 hours to leave the country.

Cuba’s Foreign Ministry condemned the move, blaming the United States for Ecuador’s decision.

“This is an unfriendly and unprecedented act that significantly damages the historic relations of friendship and cooperation between both countries and peoples,” the ministry said in a statement on March 8.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 16:20

US LNG Export Terminals "Running Near Maximum" As MidEast Energy Infra Descends Into Chaos

Zero Hedge -

US LNG Export Terminals "Running Near Maximum" As MidEast Energy Infra Descends Into Chaos

The attacks on upstream oil/gas assets across the Middle East this week sparked turmoil across global energy markets. 

Israel set off the chain reaction with its attack on Iran's South Pars gas field on Wednesday morning, followed by Iran's retaliatory strikes on Qatar's LNG plant, Saudi Arabia's Red Sea export hub, and other targets across the surrounding Gulf states.

This week's attacks on critical upstream energy facilities across the Middle East, by both Iran and Israel, suggest the risk of prolonged outages and tighter global gas markets.

Read: 

That is bullish for U.S. LNG exporters along the Gulf of America, where waters remain calm and the risk of major conflict is low.

But as Criterion Research President, James Bevan, details below, these U.S. export hubs are already operating at or near full capacity.

The Strike

Iranian ballistic missiles struck Qatar's Ras Laffan Industrial City in two waves over 12 hours on March 18-19, causing extensive damage to both the Shell-QatarEnergy Pearl GTL facility and the LNG complex. The Pearl GTL complex, the world's largest gas-to-liquids facility processing approximately 1.6 Bcf/d of feed gas, was hit first on Wednesday evening. A second wave early Thursday struck LNG facilities directly. QatarEnergy confirmed sizeable fires and extensive further damage but did not specify which trains were affected.

Qatar's Ministry of Defence reported five ballistic missiles were fired at the complex; four were intercepted, and the fifth struck home. No casualties were reported, and all personnel had been evacuated hours earlier after the IRGC issued explicit warnings naming Ras Laffan among five energy complexes across Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar that it designated as targets. The fires have been showing up on NASA satellite flyovers, affirming the situation on-site.

The attacks were retaliation for Israeli strikes on Iran's South Pars gas field. The IRGC named five energy complexes across Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar as targets. Key developments across the Gulf:

  • Saudi Arabia intercepted missiles targeting Riyadh and the eastern region

  • UAE shut its Habshan gas facility and Bab oil and gas field after falling debris from intercepts

  • Brent crude briefly touched $119/bbl before settling around $114; TTF jumped 16%+ to 63.7 euros/MWh

  • Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed to tanker traffic

  • Trump warned the U.S. would destroy the entirety of South Pars if Iran strikes Qatar's LNG facilities again

What's Offline

Ras Laffan houses roughly 77 MTPA of liquefaction capacity, approximately 20% of global LNG supply. That capacity had already been offline since March 2, when earlier Iranian drone strikes forced a halt and triggered force majeure. The market initially treated the shutdown as temporary. Confirmed physical damage from this week's strikes changes the calculus:

  • Prior restart estimates assumed 2 weeks to resume + 2 weeks to stabilize

  • Structural damage to LNG trains, if confirmed, could push the timeline to months or years

  • Pearl GTL alone may face a multi-year outage if reports of destroyed air separation units prove accurate

US LNG: Running Full Out Into the Gap

While roughly a fifth of global LNG supply sits offline and damaged in Qatar, US export terminals are running at or near maximum capacity.

Per Criterion Research, total US LNG feed gas flows surged to 19,982 MMcf/d on March 19, recovering sharply from a brief dip the prior day. The current weekly average of approximately 19,883 MMcf/d represents a step-up from last week's 19,731 MMcf/d, and forward nominations suggest flows could climb toward 20,234 MMcf/d in the days ahead as commissioning activity progresses at multiple facilities.

The Math

Qatar's 77 MTPA offline equates to roughly 10.2 Bcf/d removed from the global market. US terminals at ~20 Bcf/d cannot physically replace it. No combination of non-Qatari suppliers can.

Goldman Sachs estimated a one-month Hormuz halt could drive TTF toward 74 euros/MWh, the threshold that triggered demand destruction during the 2022 European energy crisis. We are now well past one month of disruption, with infrastructure damage escalating. European storage sits at ~29% full, down 20+ points YoY, with injection season starting in April. In Asia, Qatar supplied ~53% of India's LNG imports, 72% of Bangladesh's, and 99% of Pakistan's.

Every incremental MTPA of new US capacity, whether from Golden Pass, Corpus Christi Stage 3, or Plaquemines, now carries outsized significance. The commissioning trajectory at these facilities is no longer a corporate milestone. It is a global supply security question. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 15:45

Leaks Allege Drones Spotted Over Base Where Rubio, Hegseth Live

Zero Hedge -

Leaks Allege Drones Spotted Over Base Where Rubio, Hegseth Live

Unidentified drones were allegedly detected above the Washington Army base where Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth live, according to three insiders who leaked the information to the Washington Post. Officials were unable to determine where they originated, two of the leakers said. 

Multiple drones were allegedly spotted over Fort Lesley J. McNair on a single night over the last 10 days, prompting increased security measures and a White House discussion on how to respond, said senior admin official "who spoke on the condition of anonymity."

The drones over Fort McNair prompted officials to weigh relocating Rubio and Hegseth, two of the people briefed said. The senior administration official said the secretaries haven’t moved. Their quarters on the base were publicly reported by multiple outlets in October.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell declined to discuss the drones. “The department cannot comment on the secretary’s movements for security reasons, and reporting on such movements is grossly irresponsible,” he said. -WaPo

And in leaks spanning both the Trump and Biden administrations, similar drone threats surfaced after Trump took out Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in 2020, according to the report. There were also unidentified drones spotted by Trump's Secret Service detail during the 2024 presidential race (or they may have just been inebriated?) during a news conference in LA and a motorcade ride through rural western Pennsylvania, where a bunch of regular people own drones

The news comes after officials locked down facilities at MacDill AFB in Tampa, Florida - home to US Central Command, which is conducting US military operations in Iran - after a suspicious package resulted in the closure of the base's visitors centers on Monday, while a second, unspecified security incident on Wednesday left the base under a shelter-in-place order for several hours. 

Marine One takes off from Fort McNair in 2023 with President Joe Biden aboard. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images)

"To ensure the safety and security of our people and the mission, commanders adjust their installation’s security posture in accordance with local threat assessments," a spokesperson said in a statement. 

The Post also reports that a leaked diplomatic cable from the State Department on Tuesday ordered all US diplomatic posts worldwide to "immediately" undertake security evaluations, citing "the ongoing and developing situation in the Middle East and the potential for spillover effects." 

Fort McNair is home to the National Defense University as well as some of the Pentagon's most senior military officials. While it has not traditionally housed political leaders, several Trump officials, including outgoing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, have been calling area bases home. McNair is close to Capitol Hill and the White House. 

For those keeping track, that's at least six leakers, leaking to the Post. That's a lot of 'trust us, bro.'

Also, and probably unrelated, remember all those weird 'car-sized' drones reported in Dec. 2024 that had zero explanation? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

* * * Top selling supplements (in stock)

Brain Rescue (on sale!)

Iodine Fortify (are you deficient?)

Resveratrol (potent antioxidant for healthy aging)

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 14:20

Some US Airports Face Possible Closure If Government Shutdown Prolongs: TSA Official

Zero Hedge -

Some US Airports Face Possible Closure If Government Shutdown Prolongs: TSA Official

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

Some U.S. airports may be forced to close down if lawmakers fail to reach a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and end the partial government shutdown, a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) official said on March 17.

Acting Deputy TSA Administrator Adam Stahl told Fox News that the TSA has “fully depleted” its available workforce from the National Deployment Office to cover staffing shortages at airports.

“So at this point, we’re fully stretched. Frankly, there’s not much else we can do,” he said.

“As the weeks continue, if this continues, it’s not hyperbole to suggest that we may have to quite literally shut down airports, particularly smaller ones.”

Stahl said the government shutdown has placed financial strain on TSA workers living paycheck to paycheck, some of whom are sleeping in their cars and drawing blood to pay for expenses.

“If there’s not action taken, particularly from Senate Democrats, this is going to get worse,” he said.

“It’s not going to get better, and there will be significant pain for passengers as well. Three- [to] four-hour wait time at select airports.”

Funding for DHS lapsed last month after Congress failed to strike a deal on immigration reforms sought by Democrats following the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents during operations in Minnesota earlier this year.

The partial shutdown has left about 50,000 TSA officers working without pay. More than 300 officers have quit the agency during the shutdown, according to DHS.

The department said that a little more than 10 percent of TSA officers were absent from work on March 15.

The CEOs of major U.S. airlines wrote a joint letter on March 15 urging congressional leaders to come together immediately to negotiate a deal to fund DHS and end the partial government shutdown.

In the letter, the CEOs said it is unacceptable for TSA workers to go without pay, noting that it is “difficult, if not impossible, to put food on the table, put gas in the car and pay rent” when they are not getting paid.

“This problem is solvable, and there are solutions on the table,“ they wrote.

”Now it’s up to you, Congress, to move forward on bipartisan proposals that will get federal aviation workers—including TSA officers, U.S. Customs clearance officers at airports and air traffic controllers—paid during shutdowns.”

The previous government shutdown, in the fall of 2025, lasted 43 days, causing widespread flight disruptions and forcing the Federal Aviation Administration to order 10 percent reductions of air traffic at major airports nationwide.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 14:00

Another 2008 Analog: Goldman, JPM Offering Hedge Funds Ways To Short Private Credit

Zero Hedge -

Another 2008 Analog: Goldman, JPM Offering Hedge Funds Ways To Short Private Credit

The big story last week, a narrative which we may have inadvertently started, was the recurring comparison across various sellside desks (and quite a few buysiders) of the current double crisis (private credit as an analog to the subprime crisis of 2007/2008 coupled with soaring oil prices which peaked at just below $150 in the summer of 2008 before crashing along with the start of the global financial crisis, similar to now). None other than Michael Hartnett dedicated his latest Flow Show to describing how "Wall Street Is Ominously Trading The 2008 Analog."

Well, we now have another very stark comparison to events from 2008.

Recall back then, while big banks like Goldman were actively pitching long RMBS trades to clients, seemingly oblivious of the subprime risk, they were quietly arranging transactions for their best clients - such as Paulson and Magnetar - to short the entire RMBS/housing stack in advance of the subprime explosion that would spark the global financial crisis. In fact, it was this trade that make Paulson a billionaire (and some might add, a one hit wonder). 

While subprime was the crisis catalyst in 2008, this time around almost everyone agrees that ground zero of the next credit crisis will be the $1.8 trillion private credit market, which as we have described extensively, is in dire straits (with all due respect to Hormuz) as a result of not only the panicked surge in redemptions on a sudden revulsion to the asset class which has prompted numerous funds to impose gates...

... but also what Boaz Weinstein described as the "massive declines in everything from OTF, TCPC, FSK, OXLC, BPRE, the tripling of outflows for Cliffwater and Blue Owl, the frauds, the rise in bad PIK, the mis-labeling of Saas, the embellishment of what portion of the  portfolios are true 1L, and a whole lot more."

And it is private credit that the big banks are now quietly aiding their best clients to short, even as they publish report after report talking how the selling in private credit is irrational and should reverse. 

According to Bloomberg, Goldman and JPMorgan are among investment banks offering hedge fund clients ways to bet against the $1.8 trillion private credit markets, having assembled baskets of listed companies with exposure to the space.

Goldman’s indexes vary from one focused on European financial institutions with private credit exposure to a group of business development companies and another alternatives managers more broadly. JPMorgan’s basket meanwhile includes alternatives managers and BDCs, Bloomberg's sources said. Clients can also invest in the indices.

Meanwhile, Bank of America has a basket of European financial firms with exposure to private credit, including Partners Group, Deutsche Bank and Axa. The Financial Times reported earlier on Thursday that the bank had since awkwardly withdrawn a recommendation that clients bet against European companies potentially exposed to private credit shocks.

Why: because the bank doesn't want to get in trouble with European regulators who know very well that any push to tip over the private credit house of cards could lead to the next credit crisis, one which would almost certainly drag Europe's debt-challenged states in as well.

And just to make the 2008 analog complete, separately Bloomberg reports that another branch of Goldman, the bank's Asset Management division, has begun preliminary talks with investors to raise at least $10 billion for a global direct lending fund. 

The fund, West Street Loan Partners VI, will focus on companies across North America, Europe and Australia, typically targeting businesses generating more than $100 million in EBITDA. Its predecessor fund raised over $13 billion in 2024.

Goldman is targeting returns of between 10%-12% on a levered basis for the fund, and 6%-7% on an unlevered basis, Bloomberg's sources said. At least 80% of the portfolio is expected to consist of senior loan positions.

In other words, Goldman's trading desk is helping and arranging for its hedge funds clients sell and short exposure to private credit while another division of Goldman (one which is supposedly behind a Chinese Wall) is actively soaking up everything that is for sale, at a sizable discount of course. One can hardly wait for the 2028 Congressional hearings on the topic. 

* * * Top selling supplements (in stock)

Brain Rescue (on sale!)

Iodine Fortify (are you deficient?)

Resveratrol (potent antioxidant for healthy aging)

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 13:40

China Buys Gold For 16th Straight Month, Wall Street Sells As Retail Loads The Bullion Boat

Zero Hedge -

China Buys Gold For 16th Straight Month, Wall Street Sells As Retail Loads The Bullion Boat

For the 16th month in a row, China bought gold into reserves in February even as bullion prices hovered near record highs.

The People's Bank of China (PBOC) added another 30,000 troy ounces last month, lifting official reserves to approximately 2,309 metric tonnes (74.22 million ounces), valued at $388 billion.

This represents roughly 9-10% of China’s total foreign reserves.

At this pace, China is closing in on the top global holders (still behind US ~8,133t, Germany ~3,352t, but climbing fast).

Since November 2024, the PBOC has increased its gold holdings by a total of 1.4 million ounces.

Central banks are not alone, as CoinTelegraph's Martin Young reports, retail gold purchases have tripled over the last six months, while Wall Street selling has accelerated over the past four months, according to data from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

“Retail-driven exuberance,” increasingly channeled through exchange-traded funds (ETFs), “set the stage for outsize moves,” continuing the precious metal rally from 2025, reported the BIS in a quarterly review released on Monday. 

Since Q2 2025, retail investors have bought around $70 billion in gold ETFs, and these purchases have more than tripled over the last six months, observed the Kobeissi Letter, citing BIS data on Thursday.

“Retail investors are all-in on precious metals,” it noted. 

Gold has surged 60% over the past year, and some crypto proponents have speculated it has come at the expense of Bitcoin, which some argue competes with gold as a store-of-value asset.

BIS data shows cumulative retail inflows effectively tripled from around $20 billion to roughly $60 billion over the six months from late Q3 2025 to the end of Q1 2026.

However, institutional selling started around mid-November and accelerated after the precious metals market began to correct in January, according to the data. 

Bitcoin is not the only asset susceptible to high volatility from overleveraged positions

Prices of precious metals such as gold and silver reversed abruptly in late January and February 2026, while the “daily rebalancing of leveraged ETFs and margin‑triggered liquidations amplified the swings,” particularly in silver, BIS reported.

Smaller speculative derivatives traders, or “non-reportables,” had built up heavily leveraged long positions in silver heading into the crash, it added. 

Gold prices are in 'correction' currently, down over 16% from its record highs in January.

The abrupt price drop and the spike in precious metal volatility “point to the role of retail flows, and amplification of price moves due to forced sales by leveraged ETFs, trend-following investors such as commodity trading advisers, and margin dynamics,” BIS stated. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 13:05

Senate Again Rejects Effort to Restrict Trump's Iran War Powers

Zero Hedge -

Senate Again Rejects Effort to Restrict Trump's Iran War Powers

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Senate on Tuesday once again rejected a motion to discharge S.J. Res. 118, a joint resolution to withdraw American armed forces from military actions in Iran sans Congressional approval. The motion was shot down in a 47–53 vote.

The measure, introduced by Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), is an attempt to invoke the War Powers Resolution of 1973 to require explicit congressional approval for ongoing U.S. military involvement in the region.

The motion was rejected mostly along party lines, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) providing the lone Republican supporter and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) voting with Republicans.

“If there’s anything that is plain in that Constitution, it is that a president does not have the power to unilaterally bring a nation and its treasure, to bring a nation and its men and women into conflict without a say of Congress,” Booker said on the Senate floor.

“This is not a partisan issue. This is not a left or right issue. It is a right or wrong, do you stand with the Constitution of the United States of America?”

The U.S.-led military campaign against Iran entered its third week on Wednesday as Iran engages in retaliatory strikes across the region, disrupting global energy flows and driving up oil prices. Iran launched missiles and drones late Wednesday night a toward Israel and several Persian Gulf countries, continuing a trend of targeting its neighbors.

The Israel Defense Forces, as well as defense measures in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, have responded to Iran’s attacks. Israel conducted strikes in Tehran Tuesday, killing Ali Larijani, a top Iranian security official, as well as Gen. Gholam Reza Soleimani, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Basij force.

Meanwhile, Brent crude prices have skyrocketed above $100 per barrel as Middle East oil exports have been halted. Strikes against Iranian gas fields have contributed to the increase in oil prices. Two Canadian cargo ships are stranded in the Persian Gulf, unable to pass through the waterway.

U.S. intelligence says Iran’s regime remains in power, but it’s deteriorated.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has said it would likely dedicate years to rebuild drone, missile, and other capabilities if it does not fall as a result of the conflict.

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/19/2026 - 12:30

Pages