"Let's Get Ruthless": Bulwark's Bill Kristol Suggests Illiberal Means Are Needed To Save Liberal Democracy

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

“Let’s get ruthless.”

Those words are, unfortunately, nothing new in this age of rage.

In just the last few weeks, various liberal pundits and politicians have been calling for radical and even violent action.

Even comedian Margaret Cho publicly declared this week that “we need a feral, bloodthirsty, violent Democrat.”

However, these words were reposted by Bill Kristol, the founder of the Weekly Standard and the current editor-in-chief of The Bulwark. Kristol was a leading conservative figure in the Republican Party.

Kristol left the Republican Party and is now a vehemently anti-Trump writer. There are certainly good-faith reasons why some conservatives have broken with Trump on a variety of issues.

However, the original column was endorsing the Democratic plan to pack the Supreme Court with an instant liberal majority to force through a slew of political changes in the country.

Various Democrats have been pledging to not only impeach Trump (and a long list of other figures), but to pack the Supreme Court as soon as they regain power.

James Carville declared, “If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F— it. Eat our dust. Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.”

This Nike School of Constitutional Law is catching on with a wide array of pundits and professors. Just do it.

Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.

Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder has put packing the Supreme Court front and center, explaining, “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.”

Years ago, I wrote an academic piece on the possible expansion of the Supreme Court, but there is a world of difference between that and a court-packing plan. Under my proposal, the court’s expansion would take almost two decades to ensure that no president could pack the court.

It was not just the company that Kristol is keeping on the issue, or his endorsement of the long-anathema concept of court packing, but also his rationale for the move. Kristol cited the successful Democratic gerrymandering efforts in California and Virginia as triumphs that should now propel the left to pack the Court.

Kristol reposted the call for court packing from his colleague Jonathan Last: “Expanding the Supreme Court is no different from redistricting in California and Virginia,” he said. “It is a proportionate response to Republican attempts to degrade liberal democracy and move America toward a post-liberal order.”

Praising governors Gavin Newsom and Abigail Spanberger for their “ruthless” leadership in response to Republican gerrymandering, Kristol insisted that Democrats must meet “force with force” and must now pack the Supreme Court. Being ruthless, he argues, is the “only road to preserving liberal democracy.”

There is, of course, a considerable difference between altering political districts and packing the courts. Political gerrymandering has been around since the earliest days of the Republic.

The courts are not the same political fungible units. Indeed, the favorite term on the left is “illiberal democracy” to refer to democratic systems used to curtail rights and weaken checks and balances. Yet this illiberal means is being cited by Kristol as essential to save liberal democracy.

Liberal justices have spoken out against these calls for court packing.

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it would destroy the continuity and cohesion of the court.

She added, “If anything would make the court look partisan, it would be that — one side saying, ‘When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.’”

The political districts are precisely that: political. They are part of the two political branches in a tripartite system. It is the courts that keep these political branches within their proper constitutional orbits.

There was, of course, no movement to pack the court when a series of liberal majorities rewrote major areas of constitutional law in the 1960s and 1970s. These demands from figures like Sen. Elizabeth Warren were only heard when the court began to rule against their chosen outcomes.

Warren explained that the court had to be packed to bring its rulings in line with “widely held public opinion.”

Of course, Article III was designed precisely to blunt such pressures to rule according to “widely held public opinion.” The Supreme Court is a counter-majoritarian body that was created to protect rights against the passions or demands of the majority.

As I discuss in my book, “Rage and the Republic,” the founders sought to avoid “democratic despotism” and “mobocracy” by creating barriers to direct democratic powers. The Supreme Court is essential as a bulwark against such impulse politics. Those pushing for an instant liberal majority would convert the court into the type of partisan judicial bodies seen in states like Wisconsin where jurists are selected to robotically vote for party priorities.

There is a reason why “ruthless” was not an attribute cited by anyone in the constitutional convention to be fostered in our Republic. On the contrary, the system is designed to temper ruthless passions for reasoned debate.

The court itself may be the ultimate test of the lingering capacity for reason among our citizens. Of course, we can be ruthless and tear down our institutions on the 250th anniversary of our Republic.

No democratic system is ever immune from self-inflicted wounds. That is why Benjamin Franklin reminded us that this remains our Republic if we can keep it. This year, we can celebrate that Republic, or we can ruthlessly destroy it in a fit of blind rage.

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

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 18:25

"Resurgence Of Electrification": Goldman Says EV Demand Gaining Momentum Amid Fuel Price Shock

There were early signs during the third week of the U.S.-Iran conflict that EV demand was gaining traction in Asia, where the energy shock has been felt the hardest. That was followed by a separate note earlier this month confirming that EV demand was beginning to reaccelerate.

Now, Goldman analysts led by Kota Yuzawa see global EV demand gaining momentum after several years of muted demand, as the fuel-price shock at the pump pushes consumers back toward EVs.

Yuzawa noted that the share of the top 30 countries where the EV sales mix rose month over month climbed from 30% in January to 60% in February and 80% in March. This acceleration suggests the energy shock is helping pull the EV industry out of a multi-year rut. 

The reacceleration of global EV demand has likely gained further traction in April amid elevated prices. Goldman's commodity team, led by Daan Struyven, wrote in a separate note that his WTI fourth-quarter forecast was revised from the previous $75 to $83.

This suggests the energy crisis is becoming more prolonged, and elevated fuel prices at the pump mean that EV demand will likely continue to rise - at least until Brent and WTI crater, depending on a Hormuz chokepoint reopening and a US-Iran peace deal being signed.

Yuzawa highlighted the global EV market in March:

• We are monitoring the rise in natural gas prices in the Indian market, as we are concerned about the impact on Maruti Suzuki, which has a high share of CNG vehicles.

• In the Thai market, both BEVs and HEVs are outperforming. The growing demand for HEVs, which offer excellent fuel efficiency, is a positive for Toyota and Denso.

• In the Chinese market, we have confirmed a narrowing of discounts on NEVs. Exports are also expanding, which underpins our bullish view on BYD.

• The expansion in demand for ESS is driven by the adoption of renewable energy against the backdrop of energy security. This expands the applications for automotive batteries, providing a tailwind for Tesla, BYD, and GS Yuasa.

EVs Outperform Amid Price Stabilization

Electrification Advances By Country

Really, all the EV industry needed wasn't lower auto loan rates but a Hormuz chokepoint closure and a global fuel-price shock to jolt demand back to life. Who would've thought...

Professional subscribers can read the full "Resurgence of Electrification" note at our new Marketdesk.ai portal.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 18:00

HUD Rejects Transgender Ideology For Women's Shelters

Authored by Catherine Salgado via PJMedia.com,

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is removing radical transgender ideology from dozens of regulations, which will, among other things, reserve women’s shelters only for women, not for mentally ill men.

HUD issued a press release on April 23 confirming that it is erasing "radical definitions of gender identity, sexual orientation, and gender" from some 50 regulations. Instead, HUD will apply the biological definition of sex and end the woke prohibition on "gender identity" discrimination.

The latter meant that shelters specifically for men or women were required to accept an individual's identification as male or female regardless of biological reality. Obviously, this was a rule ripe for abuse. Therefore, HUD is taking steps to end the potential and actual abuse.

Fortunately, HUD and Secretary Scott Turner are restoring sanity to the agency's regulations. The press release explained:

HUD’s Equal Access Rule would be adjusted to protect women’s shelters and replace the prohibition on discrimination against “gender identity” in all Community Planning and Development programs. Common terms such as father, mother, man, woman, boy, and girl would be defined consistent with biological reality across HUD’s regulations.

Turner proudly and emphatically confirmed that the biblical and biological reality is his priority.

“God created two sexes: male and female,” the secretary said.

“The Left’s war on biological reality through radical gender ideology will no longer take precedence over the safety and security of America’s most vulnerable women. This proposed rule will bring biological truth and sanity back to HUD’s policies.”

This follows up on a February 2025 order from Secretary Turner: “Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs.” This order started the process of offering services at shelters and other HUD-funded housing programs only in accordance with the biological definition of sex.

At the time, Turner stated, "We, at this agency, are carrying out the mission laid out by President Trump on January 20th when he signed an executive order to restore biological truth to the federal government. This means recognizing there are only two sexes: male and female. It means getting government out of the way of what the Lord established from the beginning when he created man in His own image."

He continued, "As I have said before, we are going to take inventory of HUD’s programs and ensure every dollar that goes out the door is advancing HUD’s mission, which is to provide quality, affordable homes for communities across the country – urban, rural and tribal –and promote economic investment to build stronger communities and a brighter future for all Americans."

The new announcement is part of this comprehensive effort at HUD. The Biden administration flouted and rejected biblical values at every opportunity. They defied both biological reality and Scriptural morals. What a difference the new administration makes.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 17:40

Bye-Bye Bibi? Israeli Opposition Leaders Join Forces In 'Together' Alliance To Topple Netanyahu

Former Israeli prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid unveiled Monday that they are merging their parties into a joint ticket dubbed "Together - Led by Bennett" - as a major challenge to current leader Benjamin Netanyahu in the upcoming elections.

During a press conference Bennett said the alliance with Lapid is the "most Zionist and patriotic act we have ever done, for the sake of our country" - adding that the "era of division is over." Netanyahu out soon?

//--> //--> //--> Will Benjamin Netanyahu be the next Prime Minister of Israel?
Yes 43% · No 57%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

Bennett will lead the ticket as its prime ministerial candidate, and has invited Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar party and a former army chief of staff, to join, saying that “our door is open for you too.”

Bennett describes himself as a "right-wing, liberal Zionist" and has emphasized he will only rely on "Zionist parties" - and so no Arab representative support will be involved in his coalition. "We're not in the left bloc or the right bloc, we're in the bloc of the entire Israeli nation," he proclaimed.

And Lapid has announced, "We are uniting today to win the elections and to establish a Zionist government, strong and stable. A partnership between the center and right, between religious and secular, between north and south - without draft dodging and without extremism."

"Israelis deserve a government that will provide security, focus on education, lower prices, fight corruption, and draft the Haredim into the army," he added.

Lapid said he and his Yesh Atid party are "setting ego aside and doing what is right for the State of Israel," adding that "to win the elections, the entire Israeli center must stand behind Naftali Bennett."

Fresh polling featured in The Jerusalem Post predicts the 'Together' party would win 27 seats if elections were held today:

In the previous survey, Likud and “Bennett 2026” were tied at 24 seats each, and Bennett and Lapid’s parties together reached 31.

Additionally, former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot appears to benefit from the merger, with his party rising from 12 to 15 seats. The result positions him as a central player in the opposition camp.

If Eisenkot were to join Bennett and Lapid, the unified list would rise to 41 seats, making it far larger than Likud. Still, the bloc map would remain unchanged, with the opposition unable to reach a 61-seat majority without the Arab parties.

But Bibi's coalition would still be ahead. Bennet has further declared, "After 30 years, it is time to part with Netanyahu and open a new chapter for Israel."

via CNN

Indeed, Netanyahu is the longest serving prime minister in Israel's history, but the clock is ticking as his government is now in the final months of its four-year term, with new elections required to be held by the end of October. Lapid and Bennet first united and tried to defeat Netanyahu once before, but failed.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 17:20

"The Democrats Have To Cheat To Win": Voter Fraud Is Legion In America

Via  Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

The next big battle in elections is the 2026 Midterms in November.  Dr. Jerome Corsi has a Harvard PhD in political science.  He has written more than 30 books with many of them becoming best-sellers. 

Dr. Corsi says the Democrats have been stealing elections nationwide for years.  This November, the Dems will try again, but team Trump is trying to stop the biggest ever voter and election fraud that robs the voice and will of “We the People.” 

Dr. Corsi contends:

“I think this is probably one of the biggest stories in America.  The vote cheating by Democrats is legion.  I mean it’s rampant.  You’ve got 29 states that refuse to turn over to the Department of Justice (DOJ) their state voter registration data bases because they know they are packed with people that don’t exist, illegal immigrants and dead people.  These voter rolls are a disgrace.”

Assistant DOJ AG Harmeet Dhillon recently found 350,000 dead people and 25,000 foreign citizens on the voter rolls in the states that complied with the DOJ request.  These were red states.  So, what are the odds the amount of dead, non-existent and illegals go way up in the blue state voter rolls?

How is the cheating done with inaccurate and fraudulent voter rolls?  Dr. Corsi explains, “The voter rolls have algorithms in them that we have shown allow the creation of all these records that are false records..."

"  The records can be hidden in the data base and pulled out and used in mail-in ballot schemes.  That’s what’s been happening, and it just happened in Virginia.  The ballot was being taken on the redistricting, and when you watch it very carefully, the vote against redistricting was leading.  Then, there were two bumps.  Those bumps were the registration of mail-in ballots, and the vote favoring redistricting are ahead, and they stay ahead.  Well, that’s not accidental.  That is the voting of false records, and this is a pattern in order to cheat on the election, on the side of the Democrats’ favor.”

Dr. Corsi goes on to say, “They can go into the computer, and they vote the non-citizen and the non-existing voters..."

"  They suddenly ask for mail-in ballots, which are not mailed anywhere.  They are printed and tabulated, and since the number of the non-existing voters matches the number of the ballots, it’s counted.  The trick is to create voters that don’t exist, voters that shouldn’t be on the rolls and give them legitimate state ID’s and vote them through the machine and get away with it as cheating.  This is done in virtually every state in the country. . .. Study after study has been done that show these techniques are used and done.”

It does not look like the “Save America” voting legislation is going to get past the Democrats and RINOs in Congress.  This means it will all come down to the President’s executive powers to stop voter and election fraud.  This will be a huge violent fight because Dr. Corsi says:

“The Democrats have to cheat to win.  If they can’t cheat, the Democrats will lose massively.  Half of all Democrats elected into Congress will lose.  The American people are not with them.  So, the President is going to have to put the National Guard in states that won’t cooperate.  You can’t just challenge the 29 state voter rolls that are fraudulent.  You are going to have to send in the National Guard, confiscate those voter rolls and control the election.”

Will this turn violent?  Dr. Corsi says:

“Sure, the only reason the crime rate dropped in Washington D.C and Memphis is the National Guard was there, and they were not going to put up with it.  You are dealing with violent behavior, which means you are going to have to have massive force to restrain it.”

There is much more in the 59-minute interview.

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog as he goes one-on-one with Dr. Jerome Corsi of GodsFiveStones.com.  Find out why Dr. Corsi predicts President Trump will be forced to stop massive voter and election fraud this November by Executive Order backed up by armed National Guard troops.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 17:00

22-Year-Old Indian Man Dupes "Horny" Guys Online With Fake Blonde Female MAGA Influencer

A 22-year-old medical student from northern India found an unlikely way to fund his education: building a fake online influencer using artificial intelligence, according to The Daily Beast and Wired. 

After struggling to earn money through more traditional side hustles like YouTube and selling study notes, he turned to generative AI tools to create “Emily Hart,” a fictional persona presented as a young, conservative American woman.

Using platforms like Google Gemini, he crafted everything from her appearance to her captions, positioning her as a pro-Christian, pro-gun, and anti-immigration personality designed to resonate with a specific audience.

The strategy worked quickly. By tailoring posts to a niche group—particularly conservative American men—the account began pulling in millions of views and rapidly growing followers.

“Every day I’d write something pro-Christian, pro-Second Amendment, pro-life, anti-woke, and anti-immigration,” he said.

Within weeks, the persona was generating income through subscriptions, merchandise, and paid content on platforms like Fanvue, with the student reportedly earning thousands of dollars a month while spending less than an hour a day managing it.

The report says that he later admitted the shift to targeted political content was key, after generic “influencer” posts failed to gain traction.

Despite its success, the operation raised serious concerns about deception and the growing sophistication of AI-generated content. The accounts were eventually removed for violating platform rules, but not before demonstrating how easily realistic digital personas can attract attention—and money—online.

The student, who used a pseudonym to avoid jeopardizing his medical career, said the project was purely financial and has since stepped away to focus on his studies.

“If you want a reason to unfollow: Christ is king, abortion is murder, and all illegals must be deported,” he wrote in one post. Maybe he should now add, "Oh, yeah. And because I'm completely made up."

 

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 16:40

A Feral And Savage Party

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."

- Ian Fleming

Don’t you love the way the news media pretends it can’t figure out the motive of Cole Tomas Allen, who tried to shoot-up Saturday’s White House correspondents’ gala. He was a creation of the very White House correspondents who ducked under their tables at the sound of his shots.

Cole Tomas Allen had digested and internalized the “narrative” spewage of the Democratic Party’s propaganda department. MSNOW occupied his brain like a glistening parasite.

CBS tried to amplify the shooter’s own motive on Sunday night’s 60 Minutes show when Norah O’Donnell read out-loud from his manifesto, “I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes,” and asked President Trump “What is your reaction to that?” Mr. Trump did not fall for the ruse — which was just an opportunity to reinforce a well-worn scurrility.

“You’re a disgrace,” the president replied, and Ms. O’Donnell just continued with the interview as if his answer never registered.

There it is.

In fact, Cole Tomas Allen traveled all the way from Los Angeles to Washington for the rare chance to find Mr. Trump and most of his cabinet all together in one room where he might be able to kill as many of them as possible. He styled himself: “Cole ‘coldForce’ ‘Friendly Federal Assassin’ Allen. “I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done,” he concluded in his short manifesto, reportedly composed and sent out minutes before he left his room at the Washington Hilton to perform his rash deed.

That rage, you understand, was planted in his head by the likes of Norah O’Donnell of CBS news and the scores of reporters, editors, and news producers who had to abandon the festive menu starters of spring pea and burrata salad and crab terrine with a nice Veuve Clicquot when the shots rang out. The gala is a night when the Blob’s media errand boys and call girls like to treat themselves like royalty. (Meanwhile their hated enemies back in the truck stops of MAGAland get by on lowly chili-lime jerky and Little Debbie Zebra Cakes, washed down with Red Bull — good for five-hundred miles of hauling, at least.)

The former president can’t guess Cole Tomas Allen’s motives. He is a liar, a cad, and a fraud. As for political violence in general, you have not heard Mr. Obama complain about Antifa mayhem, BLM riots, tranny school murders, harassment of ICE officers, or any other violence approved by the Lefty-left. Mr. Obama is himself a bona fide seditionist. When he repeats the shibboleth “our democracy” he means simply the Lefty-left’s malevolent will to power — which is predicated on nothing more than feeding the Democratic Party’s never-ending rackets, doling out money to its captive clients for votes, solely to remain in power: Ouroboros, the snake eating its own tail. His mealy-mouthed sanctimony serves only his personal need to evade prosecution for his own crimes.

The only way Barack Obama can evade prosecution for RussiaGate and then for covertly running the “Joe Biden” White House from his HQ across town is if he is named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the RICO cases to come. That will be enough for historians to understand what happened here in the early 21st century. And what about the other traitors, the long list of Blob apparatchiks who schemed to overthrow the executive from 2016 to 2021, and then labored to throw thousands in prison, ran a fake pandemic op, queered two elections, hijacked the courts, shut down opposing opinion, and poisoned the minds of several assassins?

Justice is coming for them. They know it, and their “resistance” seeks to turn feral and savage in the months leading to the midterm elections. It will start in a few days with “Mayday Strong” rallies and street marches. Their slogan, “It’s workers over billionaires,” is just another lie. The part they leave out is that these actions are funded by billionaires: George Soros, Neville Roy Singham, Hansjörg Wyss, et al. Don’t expect the action to remain “mostly peaceful,” either. The idea, of course, is to get violent so as to goad President Trump into invoking emergency powers to put down an insurrection.

I doubt that President Trump will shrink from invoking the Insurrection Act, an amalgamation of laws passed by Congress starting in 1792–1795 with the Militia Acts, then the key 1807 law signed by President Thomas Jefferson, and major amendments during and after the Civil War, including the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act. It is codified in Title 10 of the United States Code, Chapter 13, specifically §§ 251–255. It is a statutory exception to the Posse Comitatus Act (1878), which generally prohibits using federal troops for domestic law enforcement.

The Insurrection Act (with its predecessor statutes) has been invoked approximately 30 times in U.S. history by 16 presidents — Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Grant, Hayes, Arthur, Cleveland, Wilson, Harding, FD Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan, and Bush — in episodes including the Whiskey Rebellion, the Southern Secession, many violent labor strikes, several race riots, and looting in natural disasters.

President Trump might have to use the Insurrection Act to stop what has been an ongoing coup against his elected administration by an opposition party that has turned criminal and traitorous. He may have to convene extraordinary military tribunals to adjudicate crimes that include those committed by the federal judiciary itself. If he does all this, it must include an executive order mandating common sense election procedure for the midterm: citizenship and photo ID required, paper ballots only, no vote-counting machines, voting only on one day deemed Election Day, and mail-in ballots limited only to military, people required to be out of the country, and the disabled.

All this is looking increasingly unavoidable.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 16:20

US Allows Venezuela To Fund Maduro's Defense After Court Challenge

Authored by Tom Gantert via The Epoch Times,

The United States will ease sanctions on Venezuela to allow its regime to pay legal fees for former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in a U.S. drug trafficking case, according to a court filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The April 24 filing states that the U.S. Treasury Department authorized an exception to existing sanctions, permitting funds to be used for Maduro’s legal defense.

Maduro is awaiting trial on federal charges, including those related to narco-terrorism and drug trafficking.

Attorney Barry Pollack, on behalf of Maduro, said in court documents filed in February that Venezuela, under its laws, had an obligation to pay Maduro’s legal expenses. Pollack said Maduro lacked his own funds to pay for legal counsel and “is being deprived of his constitutional right to counsel of his choice.”

“Mr. Maduro, as Venezuela’s head of state, has both a right and an expectation to have legal fees associated with these charges funded by the government of Venezuela,” the February court filing stated.

If declined, the cost of Maduro’s defense would be shifted from Venezuela to U.S. taxpayers even though Venezuela was willing and obligated to pay for it, Pollack stated in his brief.

“After invading another country and forcibly bringing its sovereign head of state to the United States, the government of the United States is now actively preventing him from retaining counsel of his choice and receiving a fair defense in this Court, in violation of his Sixth Amendment and Due Process rights,” the February filing stated.

Pollack had moved to get the indictment dismissed.

The United States captured Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in a Jan. 3 raid. U.S. President Donald Trump posted a photo to social media showing Maduro in custody while blindfolded and handcuffed aboard the U.S. Navy ship USS Iwo Jima.

According to the February filing, Maduro was being held in isolation at the Metropolitan Detention Center in the Brooklyn borough of New York City pending trial on charges that “relate to alleged conduct that occurred while he was the head of state of a sovereign nation.”

The U.S. Department of State said Maduro led the Cartel of the Suns, a drug-trafficking organization that was made up of high-ranking Venezuelan officials.

In November 2025, the State Department declared Venezuela’s Cartel of the Suns as a terror organization.

Maduro took over leadership of Venezuela in 2013 and became increasingly politically hostile toward the United States as the years progressed, according to the U.S. War Department.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 14:45

"Unprecedented": Travel Prices Expected To Soar To And From World Cup Matches This Summer

Traveling to matches during the 2026 FIFA World Cup may prove to be one of the biggest hurdles for fans, with transportation costs and logistics shaping up to be a major concern across U.S. host cities, according to Bloomberg.

Prices for getting to stadiums are expected to spike due to high demand, limited parking, and reliance on rideshare services, where surge pricing could make even short trips expensive. 

Costs for simply getting to and from matches could vary widely depending on the city and mode of travel. Rideshare prices are expected to surge during peak game times, potentially reaching hundreds of dollars for relatively short distances, while limited stadium parking could also carry premium rates or require advance reservations.

In some regions, special event transit fares may climb significantly higher than normal daily prices, with round-trip tickets potentially reaching well over $100 for high-demand routes. For those seeking convenience, private shuttles and chartered services will likely come at a steep markup, and luxury options like helicopter transfers—already being advertised for tens of thousands of dollars—highlight just how expensive last-mile transportation could become during the tournament.

Chopper rides could wind up "costing as much as $30,000 for a group of eight passengers." the report notes.

Bloomberg writes that public transit agencies are preparing for a massive influx of riders, but upgrades and expanded service come with significant costs. In some areas, fares are expected to rise sharply, and not all stadiums will be easily accessible by train or bus. Officials are working to expand capacity, but many systems are still recovering from pandemic-era budget shortfalls, making it difficult to scale up quickly.

At the same time, tensions are growing over who should pay for these improvements. State and local leaders argue that hosting the tournament should not burden everyday commuters with higher costs.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill emphasized this stance, saying, “We are committed to ensuring costs are shared fairly,” and adding, “We will not be subsidizing World Cup ticket holders on the backs of New Jerseyans who rely on NJ Transit every day.” With only limited federal funding available, cities are under pressure to find solutions before millions of visitors arrive.

FIFA says that host cities are expected to expand transit services, manage crowds, and cover security-related logistics, all of which come with significant expenses. Some state leaders, including New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, have argued that FIFA should help cover those costs rather than shifting the burden onto taxpayers or everyday commuters. FIFA, however, maintains that its agreements with host cities already allow agencies to charge riders enough to cover expenses, marking a shift from earlier arrangements that required free public transportation for ticket holders.

FIFA officials pushed back strongly on the idea of contributing additional funds, signaling tension as planning ramps up. The organization said it was “quite surprised” by calls to share transportation costs and defended its existing agreements with host cities.

“To arbitrarily set elevated prices and demand FIFA absorb these costs is unprecedented,” said Heimo Schirgi. “No other global event, concert or major sporting promoter has faced such a demand.” 

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 14:25

Micro-Cap Oil Stock Soars On Helium Offtake Deal As Gulf Shock Spurs Hunt For Reliable Supplies

The Hormuz chokepoint, with the U.S.-Iran conflict about to enter its third month, remains closed, and global energy flows are being rewired. One industrial gas we've identified as facing supply disruption risks is helium, which threatens to upend end markets ranging from semiconductor production to medical imaging.

Earlier this month, we published a note titled "Wyoming's Helium Empire Ascends As Qatar Gas Goes Flat." The note focused on how ExxonMobil stands out as a major beneficiary of the helium disruption in the Gulf region.

We previously cited UBS analyst Manav Gupta, who noted:

XOM's LaBarge facility in Wyoming, provides 20% of the world's supply, which has not been impacted by recent events in the Middle East. With an estimated eight decades worth of helium left to produce there, LaBarge is poised to play a significant role through the end of this century.

That leaves the market searching for alternative helium suppliers that could become net beneficiaries of the Gulf-related supply shock. 

One potential beneficiary is U.S. Energy Corp., which announced Monday that it has signed a five-year helium offtake agreement with an unnamed investment-grade global industrial gas company, giving the company its first contracted revenue stream tied to its Big Sky Carbon Hub in Montana.

The deal covers 100% of Phase 1 helium production, up to 1.2 million cubic feet per month, or 14.4 million cubic feet annually, under a take-or-pay structure. Phase 1 commercial operations remain targeted for early next year.

"The execution of this agreement with an investment-grade industrial gas company with global distribution infrastructure represents a defining milestone for U.S. Energy and validates years of development work at Big Sky," USEG CEO Ryan Smith wrote in a press release.

Smith noted, "This contract establishes long-term, contracted helium revenues and meaningfully de-risks Phase 1 commercial operations at Big Sky. It also reflects the strength we're seeing in the helium market today, where constrained global supply and increasing demand for reliable volumes are supporting a step up in long-term pricing."

He said under the agreement, helium pricing is fixed at $285 per MCF on a plant-gate basis, with no deductions, meaning the buyer assumes transportation, processing, and downstream costs.

Smith added that this agreement reduces risk for Big Sky's Phase 1 development by locking in long-term cash flow with a creditworthy counterparty.

USEG shares surged 35% by late morning in the US cash session.

USEG appears to be positioning itself as a major domestic helium supplier - not quite as big as XOM's LaBarge - but large enough to be noticed by the market, at a time when Gulf-related disruptions are exposing fragile energy supply chains worldwide.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 13:45

Kalshi, Polymarket Among 27 Prediction Platforms Banned In Brazil

Authored by Amin Haqshanas via CoinTelegraph.com,

Brazilian authorities have moved to shut down 27 prediction market platforms, including Kalshi and Polymarket.

The decision, announced Friday, follows a directive from the Ministry of Finance and enforcement by the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel), according to state-owned news outlet Agência Brasil. Authorities claimed that such services fall outside Brazil’s current legal framework and therefore operate illegally.

“We have been monitoring the evolution of this sector in Brazil, which suffered a period of anarchy because there were no rules, no oversight, from 2018 to 2022,” Finance Ministry executive secretary Dario Durigan reportedly said during a press conference at the Palácio do Planalto.

The crackdown follows Resolution 5.298 issued by Brazil’s National Monetary Council (CMN) on Friday, which takes effect in early May and sharply limits what prediction market platforms can offer. Under the new rules, contracts tied to sports, politics, entertainment, or social events are banned, as authorities consider them closer to gambling than financial investments.

Only contracts linked to economic indicators, such as inflation, interest rates, exchange rates, or commodity prices, will remain allowed and fall under financial market oversight.

Brazil flags prediction platforms as debt risk

Durigan claimed that prediction markets could deepen household debt and expose users to financial harm. “At a time when we are working to reduce debt levels among families, small businesses, and students, we must also prevent new forms of harmful indebtedness,” he said.

The blocked platforms include a mix of international and Brazil-focused services, with major names including Kalshi, Polymarket, PredictIt, Robinhood (via its forecasting feature) and Fanatics Markets.

Banned prediction markets in Brazil. Source: Agência Brasil

Other affected platforms include ProphetX, Hedgehog Markets, Novig, Polyswipe, PRED Exchange and Stride, alongside several Brazil-focused services such as Palpita, Cravei, Previsao, and MercadoPred.

More countries ban prediction markets

A growing number of jurisdictions have moved to ban prediction markets, often folding them into gambling or financial regulations. Several European nations, including France, Belgium and the Netherlands, have blocked or penalized platforms operating without authorization.

In the United States, the situation is more fragmented, with an ongoing tug-of-war between federal regulators and individual states over prediction markets.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 13:25

5Y Auction Tails Despite Jump In Foreign Demand, Yields Hit Session High

After a mediocre 2Y auction to start the week's coupon issuance this morning, moments ago the Treasury sold 5Y notes in another average auction.

The sale of $70BN in 5 Year paper stopped at a high yield of 3.955%, down fractionally from 3.980% last month, and tailing the When Issued 3.950% by 0.5bps. This was an improvement from last month's 1.4bps tail, but more concerningly this was the 11th tail in a row for 5Y issues.

The bid to cover was also on the muted side, at 2.330, up from 2.287, it was below the six-auction average of 2.348. 

The internals improved notably, however, with Indirects awarded 72.3%, above last month's 61.9% and also well above the recent average of 62.1%. In fact this was the highest award for foreign buyers since May 2025. And with Directs dropping to 15.03%, Dealers were left with just 12.7%, the lowest since January.

Overall, this was a stronger auction than this morning's 2Y sale thanks to the surge in foreign buyers, which probably offset concerns about the 11th tail in a row. Even so, 10Y yields have pushed to session highs, rising above 4.34% although that's due to the continued rise in oil which remains the only thing that the bond market is focused on for now.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 13:18

Supreme Court To Review Geofencing In Pivotal Case For Privacy Rights

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

The Supreme Court on April 27 will hear oral arguments in a case with major implications for privacy rights—and how law enforcement uses Americans’ cell phone data while investigating crimes.

The case, Chatrie v. United States, centers on law enforcement’s use of “geofencing warrants”—judge-authorized requests for cell phone location data near the scene of a crime.

Okello Chatrie told the Supreme Court that the government’s use of these warrants, which resulted in a criminal conviction over his robbing a bank while his smart phone was on his person, violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The government, meanwhile, has argued that such data is not protected when provided voluntarily to a “third party” like Google.

The court said it would focus on the circumstances of Chatrie’s case rather than the constitutionality of geofencing more generally. However, experts say that the Supreme Court’s decision will reverberate through future cases concerning privacy in the digital age.

Dr. David Super, a professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, described the case to The Epoch Times as “once-in-a-generation,” whatever the outcome.

Chatrie’s Warrant

In 2019, law enforcement received a geofence warrant from a state court seeking anonymized location data for devices within 150 meters (about 500 feet) of the bank robbery. In this form, the data couldn’t be used to identify specific cellphone users.

After Google complied with the first request, law enforcement then sought location data for devices over a longer, two-hour period, without seeking an additional court warrant. Google again provided the information.

Then—still without seeking a warrant—investigators asked Google for “de-anonymized subscriber information for three devices,” and Google complied.

One of those devices belonged to Chatrie, and the information provided the basis for Chatrie’s eventual conviction for armed robbery.

Though Chatrie confessed, his lawyers argue that the geofencing evidence should be tossed because the warrant deprived him of his Fourth Amendment rights, which guarantees that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

Chatrie’s lawyers argued that the geofence warrant allowed investigators to gather the location history of people who were near the scene of the crime even though there was no other probable cause.

Super told The Epoch Times that geofencing was “pivotal” to the case against Chatrie. “The question in Chatrie is whether something as dramatic as a geofencing search is limited by the Fourth Amendment and requires the government to show specific needs with a proper basis,” he said.

Digital Privacy

To access certain services on their phones, cell phones must constantly transmit their exact location to service providers. Several services store this data.

Through the use of a so-called “geofence warrant,” law enforcement can request location data on every person who was present at a specific location over a certain period of time.

In recent years, such information has increasingly become more and more sought out by law enforcement agencies to assist in investigating crimes.

In the case at hand, a geofencing warrant was issued against Google. However, such warrants have also been served on Apple, Lyft, Snapchat, and Uber, according to a filing from Chatrie.

“The question is whether the Fourth Amendment will be adapted to cover these new technologies” or not, Super said.

“We’re not talking about whether this particular individual should be released or not, right?” Nathan Moieker, a senior attorney covering the case for the American Center on Law and Justice, told The Epoch Times. “Rather, we’re talking about ... the fundamental principles at stake here.”

The Justice Department told the court that a warrant was unnecessary for obtaining geofencing data.

“The government in this case did not conduct a ‘search’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment,” it said in a filing. “Individuals generally have no reasonable expectation of privacy in information disclosed to a third party and then conveyed by the third party to the government.”

In another filing, the DOJ argued that restricting geofencing warrants could “render it seemingly impossible for judges to authorize the acquisition of valuable evidence” in cases like Chatrie’s and would completely foreclose the use of a valuable tool to catch modern-day criminals.

Big Tech Data

According to some previous court rulings in Chatrie and related cases, the data collected and held by Big Tech firms like Google, Apple, Meta, and others is considered “third-party” data.

Third-party data, the Supreme Court has said, is exempt from normal rules governing evidentiary warrants.

Established in the 1976 Supreme Court case United States v. Miller, the so-called “third-party doctrine” allows the government to gather certain kinds of information shared by individuals with third parties, without a warrant.

Chatrie’s attorneys have argued that the third-party doctrine shouldn’t apply in the case.

Historically, the doctrine has allowed law enforcement to request information from third parties like bank records.

But Chatrie’s attorneys—and others opposing the state’s position—have argued that the scope of Google location data is an account more akin to a “digital diary.”

They also raised doubts about the government’s claim that Chatrie voluntarily opted into sharing his location data. They cited opaque and complex terms of service and pop-ups during phone setup.

Big tech companies—Microsoft, X, and Google—backed some of Chatrie’s arguments. In an amicus brief, Google told the Supreme Court that geofence searches were overbroad and that the third-party doctrine shouldn’t apply to tech companies. The company long ago stopped recording the kind of location data that contributed to Chatrie’s arrest.

Chatrie’s allies also point to a 2018 Supreme Court decision known as Carpenter v. United States. In that case, a majority of the Supreme Court wrestled with the third-party doctrine and cell phone location data. It said the FBI had invaded a man’s reasonable expectation of privacy.

“Cell phone location information is not truly ‘shared’ as one normally understands the term,” Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said.

He described cell phones and their services as pervasive. “Apart from disconnecting the phone from the network, there is no way to avoid leaving behind a trail of location data,” he said.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who are also still on the court, joined that decision. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch were among those who dissented.

“By obtaining the cell-site records of MetroPCS and Sprint, the Government did not search Carpenter’s property,” Thomas said. “He did not create the records, he does not maintain them, he cannot control them, and he cannot destroy them.”

Potential Decision

Experts who spoke to The Epoch Times said that the complexity of the case makes it difficult to predict how the matter will be decided.

In Chatrie’s case, one district judge ruled that the practice may be unconstitutional, yet permitted the evidence to go to trial.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ultimately held that the search wasn’t the type that would fall under the Fourth Amendment. Because Chatrie opted to share his location history with Google, “he cannot now claim to have had a reasonable expectation of privacy,” U.S. Circuit Judge Julius Richardson wrote for the majority.

When the whole circuit reviewed the case, it similarly rejected Chatrie’s constitutional arguments.

In reviewing the fourth circuit’s reasoning, the Supreme Court could rule in a variety of ways.

Chatrie told the court that even if the initial warrant was constitutional, the government violated his rights in the way it executed it. Additional warrants, he said, were needed for the second and third requests involving narrower sets of device information.

Because those narrower sets of information weren’t specified in the initial warrant, the warrant itself was too broad to be constitutional. Chatrie pointed to a Supreme Court case—Groh v. Ramirez—from 2003 that rejected a warrant because it wasn’t “particularized” enough.

“If the government’s going to get all this location data for all these people ... courts [should] look at that very closely to determine if those requests are appropriate,” Moieker said.

The government defended the authorities’ actions, stating that the initial warrant laid out three separate searches that they could undertake. They added that the issuance of a warrant itself implied that the multiple searches were reasonable.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 12:45

Apple Fixes Bug That Allowed FBI To Read Deleted Signal Messages

Authored by Brian Quarmby via CoinTelegraph.com,

Tech giant Apple has fixed a security flaw that had allowed the FBI to access a Signal user’s deleted messages through their phone’s push notification database, despite the app being deleted and messages being set to disappear.

In a security advisory released on Wednesday, Apple said it had fixed a bug that allowed “notifications marked for deletion” to be “unexpectedly retained on the device.”

In an X post on Wednesday, Signal said the update fixed the issue that made a user’s messages retrievable by law enforcement.

"Apple's advisory confirmed that the bugs that allowed this to happen have been fixed in the latest iOS release," Signal said.

Signal uses end-to-end encryption to secure messages between its users. The bug is a reminder that messaging encryption may not be enough to keep data protected when using certain devices or operating systems.

Apple’s notes on the security patch. Source: Apple

FBI found a backdoor to private messages

This security flaw was first highlighted by independent technology news website 404 Media, which reported on April 9 that documents recently unsealed in Texas federal court related to an FBI case over an attack on the Prairieland ICE Detention Facility last July.

The court proceedings showed that the FBI was able to forensically extract a defendant's Signal messages from the iPhone's notification database, which contained cached, readable previews of incoming Signal messages even after disappearing messages were enabled and the app was deleted.

Following the 404 Media report, Signal President Meredith Whittaker called on Apple to quickly fix the issue, noting in an April 14 X post that "notifications for deleted messages shouldn't remain in any OS notification database."

Pavel Durov, the co-founder of competing privacy messaging app Telegram, also commented on the report, arguing in an April 14 Telegram post that the only way to truly stay safe was for the app to "force an absence of notification previews" on both ends of a conversation.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 12:05

Supreme Court Hands Texas GOP Redistricting Win, While Virginia Judge Backs Democrats

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday granted Republicans a significant boost in the ongoing battle over congressional boundaries, issuing a summary reversal that allows Texas to proceed with its 2025 mid-decade congressional map for the November 2026 elections.

In the case, Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, the justices overturned a federal district court’s earlier injunction against the new boundaries. The majority referenced its own prior opinion from late 2025 in the same litigation, while Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson noted their disagreement with the outcome.

The Texas map, redrawn by the Republican-led legislature last year, had faced challenges from voting-rights organizations that claimed it improperly relied on race. A lower court had blocked its implementation in November 2025, but the Supreme Court had previously paused that order to let primaries move forward.

Dems Score Win In Virginia

In a separate but related development playing out the same day, a Virginia state court delivered a win for Democrats on Sunday by rejecting a Republican-led challenge to a newly approved congressional map.

Richmond Circuit Court Judge Tracy Thorne-Begland turned down a last-minute bid by the Republican National Committee, the state GOP, and other plaintiffs seeking to halt certification of results from a voter referendum held the previous week. That ballot measure narrowly passed a set of new district lines drawn by Democratic lawmakers.

The judge emphasized that courts do not weigh in on the merits of policy choices but instead check whether elected officials followed constitutional rules. He found they had done so here. While acknowledging that the updated districts are less compact than before and reflect partisan considerations, Thorne-Begland concluded the question of compactness was open to reasonable debate after reviewing competing expert testimony, including from Boston University political scientist Maxwell Palmer.

Virginia’s current congressional delegation holds a 6-5 Democratic majority. The new configuration, if it survives final review, would expand that edge to 10-1 and create up to four additional competitive opportunities for Democrats in the fall midterms.

Plaintiffs had argued the map violated state constitutional standards and lacked proper legal authority when enacted. The judge, however, determined they were unlikely to succeed on the core claims at this stage.

The Virginia Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments later Monday on separate but overlapping questions about the legality of the referendum process and timing.

* * *

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 11:45

Average 2Y Auction Is A Big Improvement From Last Month's Debale

In today's first of two coupon auctions (due to the week's truncated schedule as the Fed is on Wednesday), the US Treasury sold $69BN in 2 year paper in a mediocre auction, yet one which was notably stronger than last month's issuance.

The sale stopped at a high yield of 3.812%, down from last month's 3.936% and tailing the When Issued 3.811% by 0.1bps. This however was a big improvement from last month's 1.8bps tail, which was the biggest since March 2023. 

The bid to cover was 2.653, a notable improvent from last month's 2.440, above the recent average of 2.61%. That said, the BTC has come in a very narrow range of 2.4 to 2.8 for the past decade with little variation. 

The internals were marginally weaker, with Indirects taking down 56.48%, down from 59.38% and below the recent average. And with Directs almost doubling from 16.50% to 31.65%, Dealers were left holding 11.87%, down from a surprisingly high 24.12% in March.

Overall, this was an average auction yet the fact that it was a solid improvement from last month's ugly 2Y sale should probably be enough to position the market well heading into the day's second auction, the sale of 7Y paper at 1pm ET.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 11:43

Germany's Merz Says US 'Humiliated' By Iranians & Trump Lacks Strategy, Exit Plan

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in a rare moment torched US foreign policy and the Trump administration's Iran war gambit. There's been plenty of criticism out of Europe since Operation Epic Fury kicked off on February 28, but Merz's Monday words are especially direct and scathing.

He proclaimed that Iran's leadership was embarrassing the US, claiming it was prompting US officials to travel to Pakistan and then return without achieving any outcome. "The Iranians are obviously very skilled ⁠at negotiating, or rather, very skillful at not negotiating, letting the Americans travel to Islamabad and then leave again without any result," he said.

The top German official made the remarks before students in the town of Marsberg. His sharpest attack came in the following: "An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, especially by these so-called Revolutionary Guards. And so I hope that this ends as quickly as possible."

Pool image/NY Times

Merz then claimed, "If I had known that it would continue like this for five or six weeks and get progressively worse, I would have told ​him even more emphatically." ​And yet the criticisms from EU leaders in the opening days were somewhat muted, meager, and weak.

The German leader further questioned whether the US had a clear exit strategy:

"The Iranians are clearly stronger than expected and the Americans clearly have no truly convincing strategy in the negotiations either," Merz said during a school visit in Marsberg, a town in his home region of Sauerland.

"The problem with conflicts like this is always: you don't just have to get in, you have to get out again. We saw that very painfully in Afghanistan for 20 years. We saw it in Iraq."

Indeed a tiny handful of Republicans in Congress have made a similar argument, most especially Rep. Thomas Massie, in dissenting from the Iran war, especially given there's been no formal Congressional approval or war authorization.

Merz also commented on the potential blowback to Europe: "It is at the moment a pretty tangled situation," he said. "And it is costing us a great deal of money. This conflict, this war against Iran, has a direct impact on our economic output."

Given the Trump admin's positions of late, Merz saying "An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership" certainly opens the door to withdrawing US troops from Germany. pic.twitter.com/2DmcB35Q24

— Justin Logan (@JustinTLogan) April 27, 2026

The fresh critique is certainly going to add fuel to the fire of Trump's ratcheting anti-EU and anti-NATO rhetoric, given their absence in helping the US get the Strait of Hormuz back open and the return to normal functioning of global energy transit once again.

But Trump's own words have been confusing for allies to say the least - on the one hand lambasting them for not joining a US-led coalition, but then sometimes in the same breath declaring that Washington does not 'need their help'. Naturally this enables uncertain fence-sitting allies to shrug and say simply, this is "not our war" - as the lead European powers are doing.

Some American conservative pundits have been increasingly breaking with Trump over the Iran war, a trend that is likely to grow the longer the war and Hormuz crisis persists:

At this point, more California teachers have tried to assassinate Trump than Iranians have.

I really wish he’d get back to domestic concerns and stop cleaning up the rest of the world.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) April 26, 2026

The White House is said to be mulling 'punishment' for allies who haven't stepped up - for example removing US troops from European territory, at a moment EU leaders have warned of the 'Russia threat' related to the ongoing Ukraine war. There's even a NATO 'naughty' list supposedly circling within the US administration. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 11:05

The post Will Gravity Pull Down the AI Bubble? appeared first on CEPR.

Hold The Horses

By Rabobank

There are five G10 central bank meetings scheduled this week and not a single policy move is expected between them. That said, the signalling of policymakers will be crucial. For each of the BoJ, Fed, BoC, ECB and the BoE, the market will be watching to see how rate setters are gauging the two sided the risks to growth and inflation implied by the Iran war. It remains Rabo’s view that the Fed will likely cut rates again this year. This outcome may have been made a little easier by the weekend announcement from Senator Tillis regarding President Trump’s nominee for the next Fed Chair. Following Friday’s news that the Department of Justice would drop a criminal investigation into Fed Chair Powell, related to renovations at the Federal Reserve, Tillis has removed his objection to nominee Warsh facing a vote in the Senate. While Trump may be a step closer to seeing his choice of candidate in the position of Fed Chair, US treasury yields have ticked higher this morning with the market still focused on inflation risks in the absence of little concrete news regarding a peace deal in the Middle East.

There may not have been any recent peace talks but Iran’s Foreign Minister Araqchi has had a busy few days. Following trips to Pakistan and Oman to talk with peace negotiators over the weekend, he has now travelled to Russia in a bid to ratchet up support. Having cancelled a trip by US negotiators Witkoff and Kushner to Pakistan, Trump made it clear that Iran could use the telephone to make a deal - Iran had made clear that talks would be indirect. Trump also reiterated the US’s condition that Iran must not be able to obtain a nuclear weapon. For its part, Iran is maintaining that it will not re-enter talks with the US while its navy is blocking the Strait of Hormuz.

On disappointment over the lack of fresh peace talks, Brent crude spent the first few hours of the European session edging higher before reversing those gains. While US stock market indices closed mixed on Friday, it hasn’t taken much for equity markets to revert to their ‘glass half full’ approach to the global outlook. Despite the very real risks to the global economy implied by higher inflation, much of this optimism has been driven by a solid set of Q1 earnings reported by corporate America. This week there will be no escaping the focus on the tech sector with results due for five of the huge US hyper-scalers.

Week ahead 

The BoJ will be the first of this week’s G10 central banks to announce its policy decision which will come tomorrow. In contrast to the other four central banks that meet this week, the market had been debating the risks of an April rate hike from the BoJ since the start of the year. BoJ rate hike risk has now been shifted to June. Whether that risk shifts again will be dependent on the tone of rate setters at this week’s meeting. The absence of hawkish rhetoric is likely to place fresh upside pressure on USD/JPY which may force the MoF to step up its push back against JPY weakness and a potential break beyond the psychologically important USD/JPY160.00 level.

Aside from the policy guidance offered by the Fed, the market will be watching on Wednesday to see if outgoing Chair Powell is intending to retain his seat in the FOMC after his term as Chair concludes. Almost all of Powell’s predecessors have decided to leave when their term as chair ends, though technically Powell could stay until 2028. If he leaves, Trump will have another seat to fill, which the market could anticipate as having a slightly dovish implication for the FOMC. There is less scope for drama at the BoC. The market is currently priced for slightly higher BoC policy rates on a 6-month view, though the swing in market expectations regarding policy rates in Canada falls a long way short of that seen in the UK since the start of last month.

Ahead of the start of the Iran war, the market had been confident of two more rate cuts from the BoE this year as growing excess capacity in the UK slowed inflation potential. At one point last month, this had swung to expectations of as many as four rate hikes, guided by the UK’s recent poor experience with sticky inflation. These excessive rate hike expectations have now moderated. However, it is Rabo’s view that there will still likely be one rate hike this year in order to demonstrate vigilance. For the ECB, we also see the risk that policy makers will opt for some tightening in the face of the inflation shock, though we have moved our forecast to June. Clearly by June, policymakers will be much wiser regarding the duration of the war and the extent to both the potential impact on their respective economies.

While the question of how long the Strait of Hormuz will be closed continues to limit focus on economic data, there are some interesting releases this week. These include Australian Q1 CPI inflation data, which could dictate the next policy action of one of the most hawkish G10 central banks. US March personal income and spending data will also be released this week in addition to US Q1 GDP. In Europe, GDP and labour data are due.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 10:45

MAHA Advocates To Converge In Washington For 'People Vs. Poison' Rally

Authored by Jeff Louderbeck via The Epoch Times,

A bipartisan crowd of Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) proponents is set to converge on the U.S. Supreme Court steps on the morning of April 27 and bring attention to the Trump administration’s handling of glyphosate and alleged health hazards stemming from use of the chemical.

Glyphosate is the main chemical in Roundup, a product made by Bayer subsidiary Monsanto.

As the Supreme Court commences oral arguments about whether Bayer should be held legally liable for not letting its customers know that glyphosate could cause cancer, the “People vs. Poison” rally will take place outside.

“There are people from every walk of life coming to speak. This should be a bipartisan issue—to have a country where our food supply is not poisoned,” said Vani Hari, organizer of the event. Hari is a MAHA advocate who has a blog and website called “Food Babe.”

“The entire movement needs to organize and tell our stories and tell the voice of what this company is doing to our farmland, to our farmers, to our future, and to our children’s future,” Hari said.

The April 27 hearing at the Supreme Court centers around John Durnell, a Missouri man who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of exposure to Roundup. A jury unanimously found the exposure caused Durnell’s illness. The jury found Monsanto, which has been owned by Bayer since 2018, liable and awarded him $1.25 million after concluding that Monsanto failed to comply with state law requiring a warning about cancer risks.

Monsanto’s attorneys in court filings told the justices the case had been wrongly decided due to the legal principle of preemption, which says federal law takes precedence over state laws when the two are in conflict.

A day before the president signed an executive order relating to glyphosate, Bayer announced that Monsanto submitted a proposal for a $7.25 billion class‑action settlement.

In 2018, Bayer completed its acquisition of Monsanto for $63 billion including debt.

In 2020, Bayer agreed to a separate $10 billion settlement regarding non-Hodgkin lymphoma claims.

Glyphosate is used to kill weeds and dry crops before harvest.

Glyphosate-tolerant crops account for a significant majority of the corn, soy, and cotton acreage on American farms.

Through its subsidiary Monsanto, Bayer is the only U.S. producer of glyphosate, which is the key ingredient in Roundup. It is the most widely used herbicide in history, according to the Global Glyphosate Study.

Bayer did not return a request for comment from The Epoch Times by publication.

Trump’s executive order called glyphosate-based herbicides “a cornerstone of this Nation’s agricultural productivity and rural economy, allowing United States farmers and ranchers to maintain high yields and low production costs while ensuring that healthy, affordable food options remain within reach for all American families.”

However, MAHA proponents believe that the Trump administration should devote more resources to bolster regenerative farming methods, a practice that restores soil health while reducing or eliminating pesticides and fertilizers. Last December, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Agriculture announced a $700 million pilot program to help farmers adopt regenerative farming policies.

In February, the president surprised some MAHA movement leaders when he issued his executive order, which seeks to increase production of glyphosate and provide liability protections to Bayer, the company facing thousands of glyphosate-related lawsuits.

The order angered some MAHA proponents who are focused on educating people about the human health dangers posed by glyphosate and working to prevent chemical makers from getting legal immunity.

Monsanto would like the Supreme Court to rule that, under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), it cannot be held liable for not warning about a cancer risk if the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not determined such a risk exists.

The company is also arguing that FIFRA preempts any state requirements for such a cancer warning.

The EPA has concluded that glyphosate is “unlikely” to be carcinogenic.

U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to hear Monsanto’s case last year.

Sauer earlier this year filed an amicus brief that favored Monsanto. He requested and was granted permission to deliver oral arguments to the court supporting Monsanto’s position.

MAHA Community Speaks Out

Kelly Ryerson, known as the Glyphosate Girl and cofounder of American Regeneration, is one of the scheduled speakers at the People vs. Poison rally.

Ryerson told The Epoch Times that she believes the Trump administration “understands the importance of the MAHA constituency, and wants to keep communication open,” but she acknowledges that the fallout among MAHA proponents from the glyphosate executive order and support for Bayer in the U.S. Supreme Court case “might not be reparable.”

“I’m hopeful that they will try to win the grassroots voters back through the type of policy we expected when we supported this administration,” Ryerson said.

The MAHA movement is propelled by a grassroots group of bipartisan voters who are focused on addressing chronic disease, ultra-processed foods, corporate capture of government health agencies, and environmental toxins.

MAHA supporters are enthusiastic about what they deem wins since Kennedy became HHS secretary. Under Kennedy, the federal government began to phase out artificial dyes in some foods, removed junk food from several state SNAP programs, replaced members of a national vaccine panel, and worked to eliminate the “generally recognized as safe” policy that allows food companies to certify new additives as safe without gaining FDA approval.

However, the Trump administration’s management of glyphosate in 2026 has generated tension between MAHA proponents and the Republican Party.

Hari commended the Trump administration for its pro-MAHA initiatives but noted that “eating real food” is not a positive “when it’s being sprayed with glyphosate.”

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) are also among the rally’s scheduled speakers. Both lawmakers are farmers. They have teamed up to introduce an amendment to this year’s federal farm bill that strips legal immunity from chemical companies.

Provisions in the measure would shield chemical manufacturers from lawsuits and “would preempt state and local warning label laws or usage regulations for potentially harmful products,” according to an April 22 statement from Pingree.

The Pingree-Massie Protect Our Health Amendment would remove the language from the farm bill.

“Big Chemical has spent years trying to buy exactly this kind of protection from Congress: immunity from lawsuits, weaker safeguards, and a federal override of state and local pesticide protections. This Farm Bill would hand it to them on a silver platter,” Pingree said.

“If a company’s product makes people sick, that company should be held accountable. If states and local communities want to put stronger protections in place, they should have every right to do so. [This] is beyond politics and party lines. Congress should be protecting families, farmers, and children, not doing favors for Bayer and other chemical giants,” Pingree said.

Earlier this year, Massie delivered an address on the House floor saying that “all three branches of this government is under siege by lobbyists and lawyers from a German company named Bayer.”

“They spent over $9 million lobbying the executive branch and the legislative branch so that they don’t have to be liable for any damages that their herbicide causes,” Massie said.

“The Constitution guarantees people a trial if they’ve been harmed. Why are we contemplating going against the Constitution?”

Massie noted that then Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles, worked for Ballard Partners, a firm that registered to lobby for Bayer in December 2024.

Trump’s executive order stating that glyphosate production is “a national defense priority” was issued to protect Bayer from liability, Massie said.

“We shouldn’t succumb to the lobbyists—not in the executive branch, not in the judicial branch, and certainly not here in Congress and not in the state legislatures. There’s a lot of money at play, and I implore my colleagues to resist it and do not give them immunity,” Massie added.

Kennedy publicly defended Trump’s glyphosate executive order after it was issued.

“Donald Trump’s Executive Order puts America first where it matters most—our defense readiness and our food supply. We must safeguard America’s national security first. ... When hostile actors control critical inputs, they weaken our security. By expanding domestic production, we close that gap and protect American families,” he said.

In an X post, Kennedy noted that pesticides are “toxic by design and put Americans at risk, but the current system was inherited from prior administrations.”

He supported the move to bring production of glyphosate back to the United States from China and end reliance on adversaries while adding the need for a transition to regenerative farming methods and alternatives.

In an interview on “The Joe Rogan Experience” last month, Kennedy said he was “not particularly happy, to put it mildly,” with Trump’s executive order on glyphosate.

Kennedy noted that he has “spent 40 years fighting pesticides” and considers them poison, but he understands Trump’s position of not disrupting the agricultural sector.

He stressed that “we all know we’ve got to transition off of glyphosate” and highlighted work on alternatives like laser weed control and the regenerative agriculture pilot.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 10:30