Doing the tour to promote How NOT to Invest (paperback out now!) I got lots of interesting questions — about the book, my writing process, my investing philosophy, and my career.

The one (really two) questions that I was not prepared for had to do with the podcast:

“Who was your favorite guest(s) on MiB?” and/or “What was your favorite episode?”

These are actually two different questions — who I enjoyed meeting/chatting with is a different issue from which episode was the most informative and interesting conversation.

I would spout off an answer from the most fun recent episode I could recall off the top of my mind.  But I really should have a better answer than that . . .  so I sat down and thought about it, combining the two questions into one. The result was a list of 25ish shows (out of ~650) that were both memorable, informative, surprising, and fun.

All of these were fun, and have an interesting story around them — either how the guest joined me, or what else was going on that made these unique or special, presented in no particular order:

 

Bill Gross, PIMCO
Danny Kahneman, BeFi (Nobel)
Cliff Asness, AQR
Howard Marks, Oaktree
Ray Dalio, Bridewater

Jim Chanos, Kynikos (Short seller)
Michael Lewis Author
Jack Bogle, Vanguard
Bill McNabb, Vanguard
David Rubenstein, Carlyle

Marc Andreesen, A26Z
Richard Barton (Microsoft/Expedia/Zillow/Glassdoor)
Bill Gurley, Benchmark
Liz Ann Sonders, Schwab
Jenny Johnson, Franklyn Templeton
Toto Wolff, F1 Mercedes

David Einhorn, Greenlight
Brooke Lampey, Sotheby’s
Joel Tillinghast, Fidelity
Will Danoff, Fidelity
Ken Feinberg, Special Master

Scott Galloway, NYU
Richard Thaler BeFi (Nobel)
Bill Sharpe  (Nobel)
Eugene Fama  (Nobel)
David Risher (CEO Lyft)
Lawrence Juber, Guitarist
John Pizzarelli, Guitarist

 

You should definitely check out any of these you may have missed…

 

 

The post Masters in Business Top 25 appeared first on The Big Picture.

Bank Of Canada Warns Markets More Vulnerable To Sharp Correction Due To AI Concentration, Basis Trades

The Bank of Canada said the global financial system has functioned (surprisingly) well through recent global shocks, but underscored the risk of a sharp asset price correction as well as vulnerabilities related to the role hedge funds are playing in debt markets.

The central bank’s 2026 financial stability report released Thursday noted financial asset valuations have continued to rise, while the stock market is increasingly concentrated in a handful of large tech companies that are heavily invested in artificial intelligence. That makes asset managers more vulnerable to a sudden correction, and a negative shock to AI sectors would have an outsized impact on broader stock indexes.

The central bank also reminded markets that the risk of basis trades remains front and center, warning that the increased role of hedge funds in overnight funding markets poses a vulnerability to the overall financial system, Bloomberg reported.

“A sharp pullback in hedge fund activity in government debt markets, for example, could negatively affect the liquidity and functioning of these markets and other fixed income markets. This, in turn, could generate financial system stress,” the report said.

While senior Deputy Governor Carolyn Rogers said individually, these vulnerabilities look “manageable", he added that “the economic and geopolitical environment has become more volatile. And this has made it more likely that a new shock or a combination of shocks could cause several vulnerabilities to crystallize at once."

The report analyzes risks to the Canadian financial system, but doesn’t assign probability and isn’t a projection from the central bank.

Meanwhile for households and businesses, the bank said the main financial health vulnerability relates to a geopolitical or economic shock that leads to a deep recession and a spike in unemployment. While the central bank previously flagged mortgage renewals as a concern, it noted on Thursday that most borrowers have managed this risk well.

“With the final wave of these renewals set to happen over the next 12 months, we expect this risk to have fully passed by the second half of 2027,” Deputy Governor Toni Gravelle said.

While the ratio of household debt to disposable income has increased slightly over the past year, the central bank noted households appear better off when wealth is taken to account.

It attributes that improvement to higher home prices over time, but noted the recent increase in net worth has been driven by gains in financial markets as the housing market softened.

As for Canada’s big banks, the report says they have become more resilient over the past year amid higher profitability and healthy capital buffers.

“They have also set aside additional funds to absorb potential loan losses. This positions them to support the economy and financial system, even in a severe downturn,” Gravelle said.

The report cautioned that in the stress‑test scenario, as unemployment rises and housing prices fall, households and businesses come under significant stress. Rates of mortgage arrears increase and reach a multi‑decade high. Businesses face increased costs and a decline in demand, which pushes corporate default rates close to levels seen during the global financial crisis.

Meanwhile, the aggressive use of repo markets has further increased their importance in Canada’s financial system. More than $130 billion in repo transactions now take place in Canada each day, about double the amount from five years ago. A wide range of market participants use repos to obtain leverage, borrow and lend securities, earn returns on extra cash and manage funding liquidity.

The report cautioned that repo activity is rising in part because more Government of Canada bonds are being issued and traded.

Repos are a flexible and cost‑effective way to finance trading in government bonds and therefore play an important role in facilitating dealers’ market‑making activities. They also allow hedge funds to finance their activities, including basis trades in government bonds and futures. These activities, in turn, support liquidity and efficiency in the markets for government securities.

Government bonds are widely used as collateral and liquid assets to manage risks. They are also used as pricing benchmarks for other securities. Because of this, a disruption in repo markets would have broad implications for the financial system. These include:

• A sudden deleveraging by asset managers. For example, if hedge funds or other asset managers cannot obtain repo funding, they may need to quickly sell government bonds, further reducing market liquidity.
• A reduction in overall market liquidity. Wider bid‑ask spreads and higher trading costs in government bond markets could spill over into other fixed‑income and derivative markets. If this led to significant margin calls, it could result in a liquidity spiral as market participants are forced to sell liquid assets to raise cash.
• Sharp movements in the Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average (CORRA). This would affect the large numbers of financial instruments that use CORRA as a risk‑free rate, such as interest rate derivatives and floating rate notes.

The report concludes that if any of these situations were to occur, "borrowing costs across the economy would go up, leading to potential second‑round effects."

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 12:00

Bessent Warns Oman On Hormuz Toll Scheme, After Trump Threatened To 'Blow Up' US Ally

On an official level at least, Oman remains a close strategic partner and key ally of the United States in the Middle East; however, that relationship has been severely strained this month amid apparent Iranian-Omani cooperation regarding a potential toll system for the Strait of Hormuz. This of course flies in the face of the US posture in the region.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is the latest top Trump admin official to chastize Oman: "The United States Government will not tolerate any effort to impose a tolling system in the Strait of Hormuz," he said on X Thursday.

"Oman, in particular, should know that the U.S. Treasury will aggressively target any actors involved - directly or indirectly - in facilitating tolls for the Strait and any willing partners will be penalized," Bessent continued. "All nations should reject outright any efforts by Iran to disrupt the free flow of commerce. Tehran’s days of terrorizing the region and the world are over."

Sky News/Getty Images

Starting a week ago, official 'discussions' between Oman and Iran were widely reported:

Iran and Oman have discussed setting up a toll system to charge vessels transiting through the Strait of Hormuz, despite President Trump’s condemnation of charging fees to pass through the waterway.

“Iran and Oman must mobilize all their resources both to provide security services and to manage navigation in the most appropriate manner,” Iranian Ambassador to France Mohammad Amin-Nejad on Wednesday told Bloomberg News, which first reported the talks.

Given the country's geography, in the southeastern Arabian Peninsula, it is likely to play a key role in any final agreement or outcome, in terms of opening Hormuz back up to international maritime transit.

Bessent is continuing the pressure campaign soon on the heels of President Trump in somewhat shocking and surprise remarks saying that Oman could come under American military attack if it doesn't cooperate.

Trump said in the Oval and in front of cameras that the US would "blow up" Oman if it doesn’t "behave". The serious threat was issued in response to a reporter's question on whether the US would accept a short-term deal that involved Iran and Oman jointly controlling the Strait of Hormuz.

"No, the strait’s got to be opened to everybody, it’s international waters. Nobody’s going to control it. We'll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation," Trump told reporters during a cabinet meeting.

"Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we’ll have to blow them up. They understand that they’ll be fine," the president then emphasized.

President Trump threatens to attack Oman if they don't "behave."

"Oman will behave just like everybody else or else we'll have to blow em up." pic.twitter.com/Eae4h8BcmP

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) May 27, 2026

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei sought to explain earlier this week: "There is no toll. We need to pay attention to the words we use. We’re not after money. Iran and Oman need to create protocols for the safe passage of ships, and this will be based on international laws."

But then came the catch: "It’s only natural that the services we provide, like navigation and the preservation of the ecosystem of the Strait, the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman will have costs. These should not be considered tolls. Iran and Oman are being responsible in our efforts and I hope we will reach a conclusion soon," the spokesman said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 11:40

Newsom Vows 100% Tax On Trump "Anti-Weaponization Fund" Payouts

Authored by AG News Staff via American Greatness,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday that his administration will seek to impose a 100 percent tax on any California residents who receive money from President Donald Trump's newly created $1.776 billion "anti-weaponization" fund.

Speaking to reporters, Newsom denounced the fund as a "slush fund" and pledged to block Californians from financially benefiting from it.

"Anyone from California that receives any of those funds, we want to tax 100 percent of those proceeds," Newsom said during a press conference.

"He pardoned all of those folks that were beating up cops and absolved them, providing them 1.776 billion dollars," Newsom said. "So not only do you get a pardon, you get rewarded. That's why this is needed."

The fund was established as part of Trump's settlement with the Department of Justice stemming from his lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns.

Trump has described the program as restitution for Americans harmed by what he called politically motivated government actions during the Biden administration.

Last week, Trump defended the fund as compensation for people "badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration."

Democrats in several blue states are now attempting to block recipients from keeping any payouts tied to the program.

In New York, Democratic Assemblyman Alex Bores introduced legislation that would similarly impose a 100 percent tax on recipients of the fund.

State Sen. Mike Gianaris said Democrats in Albany are pushing to advance the measure before the legislative session ends next week.

"There's widespread, bipartisan agreement that this is baldfaced corruption at its worst and if we have the ability in New York to combat it by ensuring that none of this money benefits anyone in our state's borders, I'd expect there'd be widespread support for that idea," Gianaris said.

Democratic lawmakers in New Jersey are also drafting similar legislation.

State Sen. Andrew Zwicker called the proposal "a brilliant counter move to Trump's corruption."

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 11:20

Oklo COO Says Nuclear Waste Could Power America For 150 Years

Earlier this week, we covered Oklo’s approval by Chris Wright’s DOE to convert plutonium previously set for disposal into new fuel. “Fuel supply constraints are a key throttle to advanced reactor development,” Oklo CEO Jacob DeWitte said following the announcement. 

Jacob’s wife and Oklo’s COO Caroline DeWitte joined ZeroHedge and Radiant Energy Group’s Madison Hilly. Caroline laid out Oklo’s ambitious vision: recycle spent nuclear fuel, build fleets of reactors for AI hyperscalers like Meta, and turn what the industry currently treats as a liability (nuclear waste) into a strategic asset.

And unlike many of the “PowerPoint reactor” startups flooding the space, she says they are already building.

Nuclear Waste And A New Energy Order

One of the company’s core theses is that the U.S. is sitting on a massive untapped energy reserve in the form of spent nuclear fuel already stockpiled around the country.

“It has enough energy in it to power the entire country for 150 years. So let’s use it.”

Unlike conventional light-water reactors, Oklo’s fast reactors are designed to utilize fuel currently treated as waste, potentially bypassing future uranium bottlenecks while lowering long-term fuel costs.

The company is also pushing aggressively into isotope production, a market DeWitte suggested remains critically undersupplied after years of Western dependence on Russian supply chains.

“Some of these isotopes… if you had a kilogram, it might be a trillion dollars.”

Oklo is now racing to bring an isotope test reactor online in Texas and DeWitte says they hope to hit criticality around July 4th.

pic.twitter.com/fNjQsmgIoR

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) May 27, 2026

Silicon Valley’s AI Boom Fast-Tracking Nuclear Energy

The AI infrastructure arms race has abruptly transformed advanced nuclear energy from a niche policy idea into a strategic national priority.

DeWitte said the current policy environment, under Trump’s energy secretary Chris Wright, has dramatically accelerated Oklo’s deployment timelines.

“It’s been a world of difference since about a year ago.”

According to DeWitte, working through a Department of Energy partnership framework allowed Oklo to begin construction activities roughly two years earlier than would have been possible under the traditional Nuclear Regulatory Commission process. And Oklo currently has six DOE projects underway.

The company’s recent deal with Meta highlights where much of the demand is coming from: hyperscale AI infrastructure desperate for reliable baseload electricity.

“Everyone needs as much as they can get as soon as they can get it.”

Public sentiment around nuclear power appears to be shifting as communities increasingly resist giant AI server farms.

“Is there going to be a data center in my backyard?... Oh no, no, no, just a nuclear power plant. And they’re like, ‘Oh, good.’”

pic.twitter.com/8TH2ImTNpe

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) May 27, 2026

Check out the full interview below or listen on our Spotify.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 11:05

Remarkable Turns Of Events

By Michael Every of Rabobank

It’s remarkable screen oil prices are little changed at below $100 today after Trump said the US is “not satisfied” over talks with Iran, days after claiming a deal was imminent, and hours after saying the terms the Iranians had leaked that the US agrees to --a real TACO-- were a “complete fabrication.”

It’s more remarkable when Trump added Iran and Oman will not control the Strait of Hormuz, which they say they will; vowed to blow up Oman if it misbehaves; struck Iran again in another “defensive action”; and reiterated a deal requires the region to sign up to the Abraham Accords, underlining it has to be a turning point to a new geopolitical/economic architecture.

It’s truly remarkable given Trump added he can outwait Iran and dismissed the growing economic impact of this crisis and the looming midterm elections; and that Israel ordered the mass forced displacement for all the population of south Lebanon as the IDF-Hezbollah conflict intensifies, destroying terror infrastructure across thousands of civilian homes.

Meanwhile, another think tank report argues US munitions depleted by the Iran war will take until 2030 or 2031 to restore. That leaves a global shortfall already being felt in Europe and Asia and requiring them to develop their own systems, and supply chains, at very high cost – and it will require the kind of ‘reverse perestroika’ change to the US political-economy previously discussed for it to overcome that bottleneck more rapidly.

Relatedly, the UK claims half a million Russians are dead in the war, as a senior Ukrainian commander claims a 'turning point' in its favor, but Zelenskyy asked Trump for immediate air defence support that might not be available. On the other side, Russia is tasking bankers with shooting down Ukrainian drones. The grimness of war aside, and in the best Russian black-humour tradition, the latter brings to mind the joke about three econometricians shooting at a target, one 20 feet to the left, one 20 feet to the right, and the third crying, “I hit it!” without firing.

Brussels now has a timetable for Ukraine's and Moldova’s EU bids, which should be made public mid-June, as Albania says it will accept membership with a probation on vetoes as it is the “EU Taliban” in its fanaticism about joining. The former move will only increase EU-Russia tensions, as another ex-Soviet republic, Armenia, signs a strategic partnership deal with the US.

Elsewhere, India-Pakistan border tensions simmer; Japan welcomed the Philippines’ President Marcos as their defence ties deepen; China says it drove away a Dutch warship near the Paracel Islands; and US Secretary of War Hegseth is heading to Asia ‘with Taiwan questions swirling.’

In related geoeconomics, the ECB warned of a financial crisis triggered by the Iran war impact; a ‘plastic shock' is hitting Asia; Central Asia could turn to China over water security fears; and China and Cuba are holding agriculture talks as Beijing backs it against US pressure.

The US Trade Representative just stated, “We've just come to terms with the fact that there is not going to be some giant comprehensive reform of the way the Chinese political system works.” US policy will adapt accordingly. France said it may accept 'Made in Europe’ subsidies for UK cars; an EU wind turbine maker called non-western rivals ‘a security threat’; and it’s argued Germany can’t tariff China as its so reliant on inputs from it; as US tariffs and slumping EV sales are reportedly crippling the Canadian auto sector, with the local press asking if it will survive.

In technology, Nvidia chief Huang is to join a Tim Cook-chaired board at a prestigious Beijing university as the Chinese press share that their scientists claim AI is massively increasing China’s new weapon development speed – as it is in the US, of course, but not in those who don’t have that AI muscle.

In politics, what were once unthinkable Overton outcomes are becoming normal and so is political turmoil. New York lawmakers just passed a billionaire’s pied-a-terre tax; Australia is pressing ahead with its new property and capital gains taxes; Britain faces a ‘lost generation’ as youth worklessness heads for 1.25 million, claims one paper - as former PM Blair attacks current Labour PM Starmer and the pretender Andy Burns for a lack of vision; indeed, the Financial Times argues the UK has ironically become a European country since Brexit in that it now has high public debt and permanent political instability; and, in Europe, a police raid on the party headquarters of Spanish PM Sanchez, whose wife is already charged with corruption, has increased the pressure on him.

In markets, as oil --so everything else-- clutches at favoured straws, the FT has another op-ed which argues, ‘Want to predict central banker behaviour? Look to their birth date’, because “Formative experiences shape our views on future inflation as much as the data.” If so, what will the deeply dissatisfied youth growing up with the background described above take as normal regarding inflation and monetary policy?

Will they think in the same way those born when “I can’t get no satisfaction” was written, and look to technocratic econometrics as the answer to their multifaceted geopolitical and socio-economic problems? The election of Mamdani in New York, and of right and left populism globally, suggests not. Also note a 2025 YouGov poll showed a quarter of self-described US ‘very liberals’ say political violence is sometimes justified to achieve desired outcomes - as Luigi Mangione, on trial for murdering a US health executive, is as a social-media icon. Hikes followed by cuts can take on an entirely new meaning in that kind of socio-political context.

Of course, technocrats can clutch at straws, and at more technocracy, too. The Australian press this week saw a Rolling Stones-era author make a decent historical argument that immigration policy shouldn’t be politicized, and is complex, so “Perhaps it's time to consider relieving politicians of responsibility for it, just as they were relieved of monetary policy 30 years ago.” The Overton window looks so over!

But for now, it’s what is and isn’t over the Middle East that’s the primary focus.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 10:45

Chinese Navy Pushes Dutch Frigate From Claimed Waters Via Electronic Warfare

The Netherlands has become the latest Western nation to tangle with Beijing and exchange tense words after testing its sweeping claims to the South China Sea.

A tense military encounter unfolded involving a Dutch warship, identified as the HNLMS De Ruyter, after it had entered waters near the disputed Paracel Islands. China's military reportedly used electronic warfare measures to force it out of the China-claimed waters in the incident on Wednesday.

source: Defensie.nl

Chinese military spokesperson Zhai Shichen later charged that the Dutch ship violated "China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime and air security," while further alleging that the ship illicitly launched multiple helicopter sorties and entered Chinese airspace.

"The Dutch side’s actions…seriously undermine peace and stability in the South China Sea and could easily lead to misunderstanding and miscalculation," Zhai said.

"We firmly oppose such acts and solemnly demand that the Dutch side immediately cease its infringement and provocative actions. The Chinese military will maintain a high state of alert at all times and resolutely safeguard China's national sovereignty, security and regional peace and stability," the PLA statement added.

However, the Netherlands has rejected this account, instead saying "the frigate has not been in territorial waters" and "operates in accordance with international law," according to the words Dutch navy spokesperson Marinka Hiraldo Vos-van Kooten.

USNI News details the Dutch frigate's mission as follows:

The Royal Netherlands Navy De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate is deployed to the Indo-Pacific for Amsterdam’s five-month-long Pacific Archer mission. The mission aims to promote freedom of navigation and foster ties with allies and partners. De Ruyter is also set to attend the Rim of Pacific naval drills around Hawaii later this summer.

One week before the incident, De Ruyter moored in Manila for a port visit and activities with the Philippine Navy. The frigate’s captain told local media outlet Manila Bulletin that the ship’s previous interactions with a Chinese helicopter was “professional” and did not involve a territorial challenge.

Following a brief but intense naval clash with Vietnam in the 1970s, Beijing seized control of the Paracel Islands. There remain overlapping claims among many nations in the region.

Encylclopaedia Britannica

In the decades since, China has systematically militarized the region, constructing extensive military infrastructure across a network of sprawling artificial islands. The US, Europe, and regional allies see much of this as international territory and waters.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 10:15

US New Home Sales Tumbled In April As Prices Soared

With Case-Shiller reporting existing home price declines in half of America's largest cities, and after two straight months of rip-roaring demand, NAR reports that New Home Sales in April tumbled 6.2% MoM (almost twice as bad as the 3.2% MoM decline expected). March's 7.4% MoM spike was revised down bigly to just +3.4%, all of which left new home sales down 

Source: Bloomberg

Overall, new home sales have really gone nowhere for four years...

It seems lower mortgage rates did nothing to help new home sales...

Finally, while existing home prices are lower, median new home price rose 2.2% y/y to $422,500; average selling price at $508,800.

This was the biggest MoM jump in median new home prices since 2019...

Not great for affordability.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 10:07

US Charges Google Employee With Pocketing Millions From Insider Trading Bets On Polymarket

Authored by Stephen Katte via CoinTelegraph.com,

US authorities have charged a Google employee with allegedly using information from the company to make bets on Polymarket and profit $1.2 million.

The Justice Department said on Wednesday that it unsealed charges against Google software engineer Michele Spagnuolo, accusing him of accessing unreleased internal information at Google and placing 25 bets worth $2.7 million on markets related to the most searched individuals on Google in 2025.

Prosecutors said Spagnuolo owned the Polymarket account “AlphaRaccoon”, which profited $1.2 million on “outcomes that the market treated as unlikely” when Google published information on the most searched individuals in December.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed a twin complaint against Spagnuolo on Wednesday, making similar allegations of insider trading.

Prediction markets are facing growing scrutiny over insider trading, with Congress launching a probe into Polymarket and Kalshi on Friday, questioning the companies’ response to incidents of insider trading on the platform, with lawmakers concerned that government officials are using insider knowledge to make bets.

Manhattan US District Attorney Jay Clayton said in a statement that the charges “reinforce a decades-old message: Corporate insiders cannot use confidential business information to turn a profit in our markets.”

Source: US Attorney Southern District of New York 

AlphaRaccoon account allegedly changed name 

According to the court documents, communities on Discord and X started discussing the possibility that AlphaRaccoon was a Google insider in December. Soon after, the username was allegedly changed to a wallet address.

Prosecutors alleged that the funds in the AlphaRaccoon account were also sent to a decentralized crypto swapping service and to an unnamed transfer service that offers privacy protection for blockchain transactions

The Justice Department charged Spagnuolo with commodities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering, and could face a maximum sentence of 50 years in prison.

In its complaint, the CFTC seeks restitution, disgorgement, civil monetary penalties and trading and registration bans. 

CFTC Director of Enforcement David Miller said in a statement that “the division is a cop on the beat in policing the illegal use of inside information in the prediction markets and other markets within the CFTC’s jurisdiction.”

Source: CFTC

“We will continue to take action to protect markets from insider trading and other forms of fraud, abuse and manipulation,” Miller added.

It comes after the Justice Department charged a US soldier in April with using classified information to place bets on the US capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 09:50

The post Political Corruption Did Not Begin and Will Not End with Citizens United appeared first on CEPR.

Tony Blair Calls For UK To Get Closer To Trump And Ease Climate Change Targets

Authored by Rachel Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the Labour Party to three election victories, said the government should repair its relationship with the United States rather than look to rejoin the European Union.

Blair, who remains a deeply divisive figure within the party, published an essay on Tuesday amid a crisis engulfing Prime Minister Keir Starmer, with a leadership challenge widely expected by September.

The influential former premier, who took the UK into the Iraq War in 2003 based on what an official UK inquiry later concluded was faulty intelligence, wrote that Starmer should not have prevented Washington from using British bases in the United States and Israel’s ongoing war with Iran.

“The initial request was simply for the use of our military bases for the refuelling of American planes. I understand the reasons for refusal but it’s not the best way to treat our ally,” Blair wrote, arguing this decision had made the UK’s partnership with the United States “weaker.”

America’s ‘Staunchest Supporter’

He wrote: “I know how hard it is to be an ally of the USA. We were its staunchest supporter post 9/11. We went through Afghanistan and Iraq together. But it mattered deeply to America and so it mattered to us also. America remains the indispensable core of Britain’s security alliance. But staying with it means even when it is difficult or unpopular.”

Blair argued for the government to smooth relations with U.S. President Donald Trump, who has been critical of Starmer over immigration and free speech issues as well as his decision not to back military action in Iran.

Polling in the UK suggests that while Starmer is personally unpopular as PM, most Brits back his decision not to involve the country in the war.

Blair also criticized cuts to international aid, which he said had weakened Britain’s influence on the global stage, including for the purpose of EU negotiations.

Known for his staunchly pro-European Union views, Blair said that Labour must resist reversing or weakening Brexit to please those within the party who view it as an economic disaster.

Likely Labour leadership contender Wes Streeting has made clear his desire to see the UK back in the EU “one day,” while another possible contender, Andy Burnham, has made similar musings in the past.

Blair was ​the party’s longest-serving premier, holding office between 1997 and 2007, and transforming the party from one with a traditional working-class voter base through his centrist “New Labour” ideological vision.

Starmer is currently being circled by party rivals after Labour’s disastrous results at the recent local elections, largely at the hands of Nigel Farage’s populist Reform UK, but also losing votes to the left-wing Green Party.

The former premier, who published the 5,600-word essay for his influential think tank, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, said the government should dial down its net zero commitment, intended to combat climate change.

Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaks to small business owners during a visit to Home Cafe and Kitchen in London, on May 18, 2026 Yui Mok/Pool Photo via AP

‘Cheap’ Over ‘Clean’ Energy

Blair backed the UK making the most of its resources to address the ongoing energy crisis, writing: “We must prioritise cheaper energy and electrification over net zero and use what is left of our North Sea oil and gas resources.

“At a minimum, the government should try to limit the effect of the changes made and, as we have argued consistently, remove those parts of the net-zero agenda which prioritise clean energy over cheaper energy; and from now on make sure the actions match the words on growth.”

Blair urged Labour, which won the last national election by a landslide in July 2024, to concentrate on policy to improve its standings in the opinion polls, as Starmer battles some of the lowest approval ratings historically of any leader.

“The government’s principal problem isn’t Keir’s personality. Or a ​failure to communicate ‘our achievements’. Or a need to assert more strongly Labour’s ’values’,” Blair wrote.

“Whether there is a ‌leadership change ⁠or not is irrelevant if it doesn’t start with a policy debate.”

Blair, who swept to power with his own landslide in 1997 following 18 years of Conservative rule, appeared to take aim at both Streeting and Burnham in his polemic.

Burnham, the current Mayor of Greater Manchester, who needs to win an upcoming by-election in order to return to national level politics before he can mount a challenge, is regarded as being on the so-called “soft left” of the party.

Streeting, who recently quit as health secretary, is considered further to the right. Streeting has been described by others as a Blairite but rejects the label.

Polling shows the party members prefer Burnham, a more experienced politician, who served as a junior minister in Blair’s government, and that he would defeat Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest, whereas the prime minister would win in a one-on-one with Streeting.

Blair argued against both Streeting and Burnham’s mooted solutions to Britain’s various problems—either an attempt to rejoin the EU or a shift to the left.

The Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, on a morning run in Manchester, England, on May 18, 2026. Jon Super/AP Photo

De-Brexit ‘Not the Answer’

“It is one thing when in opposition to indulge this perennial delusion that when we lose seats to the ​right the country is really signalling it wants Labour to move ​left; it ⁠is dangerous to do it in government,” he wrote.

“Just as Brexit was never the answer to Britain’s challenges back in 2016, reversing it isn’t the answer to the country’s far worse ⁠situation in ​2026.”

Blair wrote that the government should instead try to forge “a structured, formal relationship” with the EU—akin to Starmer’s stated ambitions for closer ties with the bloc while stopping short of an attempt to rejoin.

Blair suggested it was a mistake for Labour to remove Starmer as leader, writing: “The Labour party is playing with fire; or, more accurately with its future, and that of the country.”

“Trying to force the prime minister out, before we know what policy direction we’re bringing in, is not a serious way of conducting ourselves.”

Blair said there are two “epochal changes” happening in the world today—one geopolitical, with the rise of China and India, and the other technological, through artificial intelligence, with Britain “not prepared for either.”

‘The Radical Centre’

He said that these two shifts “require radical change in policy, system of government and politics,” and that in his view, the best political position from which this could be achieved is what he terms “the Radical Centre.”

“[Any renewal of Britain] requires a fundamental reset,” he wrote. “Labour’s only ​electorally viable strategy is to become the Radical Centre.”

Blair said there is “no point in debating“ whether the AI revolution ”is a good or bad thing.”

“Just know it is a ‘thing’. In fact, it is ‘the thing’. It will displace jobs, though creating new ones, but no one yet knows the full consequence,” he wrote.

Under a subsection entitled, “The New World Order,” Blair said he understood Europe’s anxiety over Trump’s “America First” policies, but countered that the U.S. president has identified “the principal threats—in the Arctic from Russia; longer term, globally, from China; and in the Middle East from Iran—no differently from how Europe sees the world.”

“President Trump has demanded increases in NATO spending not dissolution of the alliance,” Blair added.

He said that Starmer had been “absolutely right” to visit China in January because “we need a functioning relationship with the other superpower.”

The wide-ranging essay sparked much commentary and debate within the UK media, with criticism coming mainly from the left faction of the Labour Party. Starmer has made no public response so far.

Burnham, who will contest the Makerfield by-election in the northwest of England on June 18, told the Observer that Blair had misunderstood why voters had abandoned the political center in the first place.

Burnham said Blair’s essay “doesn’t mention inequality once” and argued that 40 years of widening inequality and declining living standards for many people were the driving reasons for voters turning away from the two main parties.

“If you don’t get how that’s driving politics now, if you are not rooting your analysis in the fact that people are unable to live and that things that were taken for granted are no longer affordable, then you are not understanding what’s going on,” Burnham said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 09:15

'He's Having A Stroke': Jill Biden Admits Joe's Debate Disaster Scared Her 'To Death'

Opportunistically timed to boost sales of her soon-to-be released memoir, Jill Biden has come clean on her reaction to Joe Biden's catastrophic performance in his June 2024 debate with Donald Trump. Though she publicly lauded his performance at the time, now she admits she thought her husband was having a stroke. 

Immediately after the debate, Jill took a stage with Joe to tell him how well he had performed, in a manner that some at the time compared to a teacher praising a kindergartner:  "Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question, you knew all the facts."  

Former First Lady Jill Biden previously said she thought then-President Biden did a “great job” after his 2024 debate. She now tells CBS News that she thought he was “having a stroke.” https://t.co/JVINZzMu0h pic.twitter.com/O2e7mgsSIo

— Akayla Gardner (@gardnerakayla) May 27, 2026

Now, however, Jill Biden says he did so terribly that she thought he was having a major medical episode that was affecting his brain. “I don’t know what happened,” Jill Biden told CBS News Sunday Morning. “As I watched it, I thought, ‘Oh, my God, he’s having a stroke.’ And it scared me to death.”

Timing is everything: Next week, the former first lady will release her memoir, "View From The East Wing." Publisher Simon & Shuster's promotional copy for the $32 book quotes an unnamed novelist "who once wrote, 'There are stories one must tell, and years when one must tell them.' Jill Biden’s time to discuss her four years in the White House is now." 

Trump just released a brutal 95 second ad of Joe Biden's debate lowlights: pic.twitter.com/enusIKHhwN

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) June 28, 2024

Though Jill Biden may be offering some overdue candor about the debate that led to a tumultuous summer for the Democratic Party -- culminating in Biden withdrawing from the race after the Democratic primaries had already run their course -- she's not done putting Americans' credulity to the test. In particular, anyone who observed any number of painfully awkward Joe Biden press conferences and interviews in 2024 is going to have a hard time buying Jill Biden's ending of this sentence in her CBS interview:  "I wasn't horrified, I was frightened, because I had never, ever seen Joe like that, before or since."  

Jill Biden said she feared Joe Biden was “having a stroke” during his widely criticised 2024 debate against Trump.

In an interview with CBS News, she said she had “never seen Joe like that before or since” and was “frightened” by his performance.pic.twitter.com/e2jgY0nRST

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 27, 2026

Even some Biden-administration insiders are scoffing at Jill Biden's new-found honesty. “Unfortunately, when you wait this long to tell your own story in your own words, it’s extremely hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube," Michael LaRosa, Jill Biden's communication director in 2021, told the New York Post. "She owed it to herself to be candid and transparent in the moment or the days after.” Another said her memoir should be called, "View From the East Wing, Blindfold On," adding, "Find it in the fiction aisle of your local bookstore."

As Americans staggered away from their televisions, the Biden White House tried to attribute the fiasco to jet lag and a common cold. “Why did we push out he had a cold if she thought he had a stroke?” an anonymous former Biden administration team member rhetorically asked the Post. 

Though the debate sealed Biden's political doom, it risked being a strategic disaster for then-incumbent Trump. Recall that, even as he led the polls, Trump aggressively pushed for an extraordinarily-timed debate to take place even before the Democratic convention officially made Biden the nominee. By prematurely thrusting Biden's crumbling mental capacity into the spotlight, Trump opened the door for the Democrats to substitute a more formidable foe. Fortunately for Trump, the leftists completely squandered the opportunity, railroading profoundly uncharismatic Kamala Harris into the presidential-nominee slot, and the rest is history. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:50

Americans' Savings-Rate Slumps In April As Fed's Favorite Inflation Signal Soars

After accelerating significantly in March, The Fed's favorite inflation indicator - Core PCE (a measure of price changes in consumer goods and services that excludes volatile food and energy costs) - rose 0.2% MoM in April (less than expected +0.3% MoM), but pulled up the YoY measure to +3.3% (as expected) - its highest since Nov 2023.

The rise in Services costs (headlined by Housing & Utilities, Financial Services, and Healthcare) dominated the increase in Core PCE YoY...

The headline PCE jumped 0.4% MoM (+0.5% MoM exp) dragging the YoY up to +3.8% - the hottest read since May 2023

The impact of the war is evident in crude prices and the PCE's energy index, but arguably, this is as bad as it gets in terms of inflation...

Higher prices were met with higher spending (+0.5% MoM notional) but flat income growth (0.0% MoM)...

With the growth in spending versus de-growth in incomes more evident below...

Sending the savings rate plunging to its lowest since June 2022...

With the savings rate barely above record lows, it seems that Americans are digging into their savings to keep up with inflation. No wonder sentiment is so low...

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:41

"It Wasn't Copied": Ferrari CEO Defends First EV After Design Backlash

Ferrari shares trading in Milan have not recovered since plunging the most in nearly eight months after the company unveiled its first EV sports car earlier this week, breaking with eight decades of petrol-powered tradition. The debut drew immense criticism, with one Wall Street analyst calling the new EV a "mix between a Honda Accord EV and Tesla."

By Thursday, Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna was on damage-control duty at an event in Modena, where he defended the design of the battery-powered, four-door, five-seat Luce, which costs a staggering €550,000 ($638,660), according to Bloomberg.

"The Ferrari Luce has nothing to do with electric cars you have seen from other players," Vigna said earlier today. "You have to see it and drive it to understand that it wasn't copied — not the interiors, not the exterior, not the performance."

Pope Leo was shown Ferrari’s first fully $640,000 electric car in Rome on Tuesday. The pope sat inside the Ferrari Luce and was presented with the vehicle’s steering wheel by Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna. pic.twitter.com/mIxAniwULm

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 27, 2026

Vigna said, "Look at the people writing to us, the people placing orders. Some are existing clients and others are new."

"Maybe some people understood that Ferrari was going only electric. We will continue to make all types of powertrains," he added.

Vigna noted, "The final answer comes from clients."

Customers have already shunned Ferrari hybrid models, as a recent report by Goldman analyst Christian Frenes noted that these hybrid sports cars are depreciating far faster than their petrol-powered counterparts, suggesting buyers still prefer V-8 and V-12 combustion engines.

Earlier this week, AIR Capital analyst Pierre-Olivier Essig said the Luce looks like a "mix between a Honda Accord EV and a Tesla."

Frenes noted today that Luce's negative reaction was "overblown" ...  

He explained:

We view the strong market reaction to the Luce reveal as overblown and of less investment significance than media commentary suggest. While the Luce is Ferrari's most controversial product launch of late, we see limited near-term risk to estimates given that both investor and management expectations were already conservative ahead of the event. On long-term product strategy concerns, we equally view recent public commentary as an overreaction: management has explicitly reaffirmed its commitment to powertrain flexibility and made clear that the Luce's design language does not define future models.

Ferrari Luce vs. EU Peers: Specification and Pricing Benchmarking

For a fraction of the cost and with better all-around performance, the Tesla Model S Plaid outperforms the Luce.

Ferrari has been benchmarking the Model S Plaid.

Still valid imo, since Ferrari has been benchmarking this car for a couple of years: https://t.co/Td5h6F1Xez

You’d think they would surpass it. pic.twitter.com/trLuWBWX3C

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) May 27, 2026

If car enthusiasts don't care about performance but want a similar design to the Luce, there is the Nissan Leaf.

The Luce risks joining the Mondial in Ferrari's hall of shame.

Professional subscribers can read the full Ferrari note here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:20

My morning train WFH reads:

• Land Appreciates. Homes Depreciate. The structure (house) is a depreciating asset: without continuous investment and updates, its value declines over time, even after renovations. The land is the appreciating component: long-term price gains in real estate are primarily driven by rising land values, not by the building itself. Jonathan Miller’s clean reminder of the real-estate math nobody likes: the dirt accrues, the structure depreciates. Useful framing for anyone confused about why the renovation pencils. (Housing Notes)

• There’s Never Been a Better Time to Study Computer Science: The Atlantic pushing back on the “CS is dead” panic — the freshman entering today is graduating into a labor market that still pays for the rare combination of fluency and judgment. Less doom than your timeline thinks. (The Atlantic) see also Tech CEOs are apparently suffering from AI psychosis: TechCrunch on the tech CEO class working themselves into an AI-induced lather — Altman, Musk, Zuck, et al, sounding less like operators and more like a Hieronymus Bosch panel. Funny until you remember whose capital they’re burning. (TechCrunch)

• SpaceX-stasy: This IPO is a trainwreck: Once you arrive at the financials you start to realize what the language is overcompensating for: awful numbers. The company generated $4.7 billion in Q1 2026, up only 15% from the year before (very low for an “AI company”). It also lost $4.3 billion, up 700% from the year before. That means the company is spending roughly twice as much as it makes (and on pace to explode those losses even more), while growing its topline six times slower than Nvidia. The manic SpaceX listing — investor euphoria, narrative compression, and the precise moment “optionality” became the only thing being underwritten. (Prof G Media)

• How Barnes & Noble Became Private Equity’s Most Radical Retail Experiment: A Bloomberg feature on the surprise comeback of Barnes & Noble under Elliott — local manager autonomy, smaller stores, books actually displayed face-out. The rare PE story with a happy ending. (Bloomberg)

• A Century of Stock Market Winners—and Why Most Stocks Failed to Deliver: The compound buy-and-hold return to the entire U.S. stock market over more than 100 years was 1,504,057%. Yet the median individual stock lost money. (Wealth Management)

• ICE Raids Did Lasting Damage to American Businesses: In one corner of Charlotte, foot traffic and sales remain depressed six months after deportation raids. Bloomberg on the Charlotte data — what enforcement actions actually did to local payrolls, vacancies, and small-business closures. The macro story behind the cable news clips. (Businessweek)

• The One Big Reason YouTube Will Never Replace Stephen Colbert: On YouTube, a new generation of hosts is updating the talk show genre for the way we watch now: on our schedule, on our phones and in short clips. It starts with podcasting, which is now being increasingly consumed as a video product. It extends to, say, “The Adam Friedland Show,” whose host’s charm and neurosis would feel familiar to fans of Dick Cavett or a young Woody Allen. It also includes more experimental formats, such as “Subway Takes,” on which the host, Kareem Rahma, engages his guest in a series of quick-witted, subterranean agree/disagree, point/counterpoints, all shot on an active New York City subway train. (New York Times)

• 6 things a neurologist does to keep his brain healthy: Brain atrophy tends to begin in your 30s and 40s, but certain lifestyle changes can slow or even reverse shrinkage. WaPo service journalism — a neurologist’s six habits for keeping his own brain working. The list isn’t novel but the bylined credibility makes it stick. (Washington Post)

• As Trump Politicizes Justice Dept., Prosecutors Struggle With Grand Juries: The NYT on grand juries quietly refusing to return indictments in politically charged DOJ cases. The most important slow-motion check happening right now. (New York Times)

• The universe may be lopsided — new research: The Conversation walks through fresh data suggesting cosmic isotropy may not hold. If it survives replication, every cosmology textbook from the last fifty years needs a chapter rewrite. (The Conversation)

Video of the day: The Real Reason We Left the Gold Standard

Be sure to check out our special Masters in Business this week, Remembering Jonathan Clements with Bill Bernstein and Jason Zweig. The two recall Clements’ impact on the investor community; they discuss his posthumous book, “Money and Me.”

Global sales of combustion engine cars peaked in 2017

Source: Our World In Data

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Spare Me Another Pride Month!

Authored by Dave Summers via DailySceptic.org,

Are you aware? Really aware? Or are you like me, struggling to keep up with the blizzard of social and political awareness events that bring a rich texture to our lives?

Do you worry that you can’t recall if Black History Month – that time when I approach my BAME colleagues with even more reverence than usual – is in June or July? Are you confused as to whether Pride Month and LGBT History Month are the same or distinct entities? Have you kept pace with the latest incarnation of their life-affirming, multicoloured flag? Does your wife frown at you because Menstrual Hygiene Day has passed you by? Have you forgotten World Alzheimer’s Day again?

Then worry no more – help is finally at hand, in the shape of the Awareness Calendar, your one-stop source of those important dates that can be handily pinned to your fridge door.

The calendar, stuffed tighter than a drag queen’s corset, is a golden treasury of opportunities to remind yourself of those burning issues that might otherwise have easily slipped away in the busy working week.

Are you that loser who still carries your butty box around in a holed plaggy Co-op bag rather than one of the several ‘Bags For Life’ you have crammed into a kitchen cupboard? Plastic Bag Free Day on July 3rd has got you covered. Still hyperventilating about CFCs’ part in the destruction of the planet? Then the International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer on September 16th is your thing. Or perhaps you are racked with guilt by your mindless mowing down of a squirrel on your journey into work? If so, Animal Road Accident Awareness Day on 10th October ought to assuage (or heighten) your remorse. Perhaps you’re tormented by the knowledge that you once slurped through a single-use straw in 2015? World Refill Day on 16th June has you in its sights. Or maybe you’ve let yourself down again with incorrect pronoun etiquette? International Pronouns Day on 21st October is waiting to correct you.

Schools, colleges and, I suspect, many large institutions love this endless parade of themed months, days and observances, each demanding veneration and performative allyship. Black History Month is huge in my school, with each department being tasked to create displays that look to “celebrate the achievements, history and contributions of Black people”. In my leafy shire, largely untouched by the ‘diversity’ of urban centres (unless you include the burgeoning numbers of Hong Kong Chinese), this is a task that feels entirely performative and strange. Consequently, English display boards are adorned with the stately Maya Angelou who gazes down imperiously on the bemused in every classroom. The occasional working-class writer might have more resonance to some of our kids, but good luck finding an image of a D.H. Lawrence or Shelagh Delaney.

The English department can, however, ace Pride Month – there’s never been a shortage of gay wordsmiths throughout history. But pity the poor maths students who will discover that a single omnipresent image of Alan Turing does an awful lot of heavy lifting in their discipline.

I console myself with the thought that all this virtuous bluster is altruistic in origin, shining a light on overlooked issues.

But in reality, it’s catnip for middle managers desperate for something – anything – to put on their annual appraisal under ‘Diversity and Inclusion’.

Consequently, in its smothering ubiquity, it ends up diluting anything good into mere background noise.

When every day is somebody’s awareness day, none stand out.

A quiz to finish: how many of the following awareness days are real and how many the product of my fevered imagination?

• Winnie the Pooh Day

• World Hand Hygiene Day

• Gypsy Roma and Traveller History Month

• International Kissing Day

• World Town Planning Day

• International Talk Like a Pirate Day

Answer: They’re all real. Haharrrr, me hearties!

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 02:00

FBI Arrests CIA Official With $40 Million in Gold Bars, $2 Million In Cash Stashed in His Home

In what may be the most bizarre story of the week, if not all of 2026, the NYTimes reports that a senior CIA official was arrested last week after investigators found hundreds of gold bars worth over $40 million stashed in his Virginia residence, a non-fiat fortune that he apparently brought home from work, according to court papers.

The CIA official, David Rush, is being held in jail while he awaits a detention hearing in the coming days on charges of stealing public money by filling out fraudulent time sheets. But, as the NYT admits, the charging documents filed in Alexandria, Va., still leave a lot unanswered about his recent conduct.

The only formal charge lodged against Rush is that he inflated his academic credentials and obtained military leave pay worth tens of thousands of dollars. The authorities say he falsely claimed to be a member of the Navy Reserve when he was discharged.

In a 2009 application for a government position for which he was subsequently hired, Rush allegedly lied about obtaining a bachelor's degree from Clemson University and a master's degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, according to the affidavit. The investigation revealed that Rush never attended or obtained a degree from either institution, according to the affidavit. 

The court papers describe Rush as a “former senior executive service-level employee at a United States government agency.” According to NYT sources, he until very recently held a senior position at the CIA.

In a joint statement, the CIA and FBI said the arrest occurred on May 19, after the agency alerted the bureau.

“After a C.I.A. internal investigation identified potential violations of the law, C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe referred the information to the F.B.I. for a law enforcement investigation,” the statement said.

From last November to March, the court papers say, Rush asked for, and received, “a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses.”

When the CIA conducted a review of where the gold and currency were stashed, the agency was “unable to locate the gold bars or significant amounts of the foreign currency,” according to court papers.

On May 18, FBI agents searched Rush’s home and found “approximately 303 gold bars, each of which weighed approximately one kilogram,” according to an affidavit. Based on the price of gold, the affidavit said, the estimated value of the gold exceeded $40 million. Investigators also seized nearly three dozen luxury watches, many of them Rolexes.

The affidavit also claims that Rush lied about his military credentials while applying to enter the senior executive service level ranks and committed "timecard fraud" regarding military leave. He allegedly claimed 744 hours of military leave, resulting in $77,000 in compensation, since being honorably discharged from the Navy in 2015, according to the affidavit.

The biggest question of all remains unanswered: the court papers do not indicate why Rush appears to have kept so much gold, and $2 million in U.S. currency, not to mention 35 Rolexes in his home, or what work project would have required him to amass such wealth.

Below is the full charging affidavit from the criminal case (1:2026mj00177 USA vs Rush, Virginia Eastern Court).

David Rush Affidavit by Zerohedge

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:54

The Beautiful Multipolar New World Order

Authored by Iain Davis via Off-Guardian.org,

BRICS-based multipolarity will save us from The Technocratic Dark State by making the rollout of an oppressive global surveillance state much better.

This will be the result of “improving global governance.”

At least, that is according to the BRICS Outcome Document published by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs after the latest riveting meeting of BRICS foreign ministers.

Centralised global dictatorship will be a happier, fluffier kind of new world order tyranny under the BRICS’ multipolar model because it will be “more just, equitable, agile, effective, efficient, responsive, representative, legitimate, democratic and accountable.” Fantastic news, doubtless welcomed by those Hrvoje Morić refers to as the “Multipolaristas.”

Though the BRICS’ document reads like the worst kind of globalese dross imaginable, it is important to remember that the BRICS are offering us the promise of a “beautiful multi-polar world order defined by win-win cooperation.” Presumably, this is because humanity must have some sort of centralised, oligarch-led global dictatorship enslaving it for any of us to have a chance to “win.”

By all means, feel free to wade through the BRICS’ turgid propaganda (link above), but hopefully I’ve saved you the time.

The quotes I’m about to share really were collectively published by the BRICS foreign ministers—I haven’t made it up, though you may wish I had.

The BRICS are going to strengthen “multipolarity” by upholding the “Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations (UN) in their entirety.” The entire purpose the UN Charter is to centralise global political authority, primarily in the hands of the UN Security Council, over all nation states.

The brainchild of oligarchs, the UN is a public-private partnership where national governments are reduced to mere enabling partners whose task it is to enable multinational corporations to get whatever they want. Apparently, the imminent multipolar global dictatorship will be nicer when the BRICS “play a greater role” in telling everyone else what to do through the UN Security Council. Sounds enticing, I have to say.

The BRICS are fully committed to global technocracy—sorry, I mean sustainable development—but are a bit worried that “current global challenges are complex and interlinked” and that this globally interlinked complexity might “impede economic growth and sustainable development.”

The solution to this is, of course, to recognise the “contemporary realities of the multipolar world” and push ahead with more “equitable global governance.” This must be true because that’s exactly what the World Economic Forum wants, and who could argue with the WEF? Certainly not the BRICS’ foreign ministers, that’s for sure.

The BRICS ministers are also fretting about “peace and security.” Seeing as Iran is a BRICS member state that was just attacked by the US and Israeli governments for no immediately apparent reason, you might think that this war crime would be resoundingly condemned by our multipolar BRICS saviours. However, as recently reported by Edward Slavsquat, internal BRICS politics meant actually speaking out against warmongering tyrants was a bit tricky. So the BRICS delegates decided not to mention Iran by name to avoid any embarrassment.

Instead, the foreign ministers “expressed deep concern on the recent developments in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region” and noted the “differing views among some members.”

Though there was no specific mention of the attack on Iran—for diplomatic reasons you understand—Cuba, Syria, Sudan, and Lebanon all got honourable mentions. The BRICS foreign ministers emphasised the need for “peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue,” “UN peacekeeping missions,” and “post-conflict reconstruction and development”—like in Gaza, for example.

With regard to genocide in Gaza, collectively, the BRICS ministers expressed their “grave concern.” Though they stressed that some BRICS member states “had reservation” about Palestinian statehood.

Fiercely opposing genocide slightly, The BRICS politicians “called for the implementation of the relevant UNGA and UNSC Resolutions.” This, they observed, includes UNSC 2803 which welcomes and endorses both the 29th September 2025 “Comprehensive Plan” for peace in Gaza and the subsequent 13th October “Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity.” This is the UN resolutions the Trump administration is using to turn Gaza’s child graveyard into a deregulated Special Economic Zone playground for multinationals and billionaires.

Supporting the technocratic “post-conflict reconstruction” of Gaza, the BRICS foreign ministers ultimately settled on trotting out the same platitudes that every other government—other than Israeli government—trots out. BRICS ministers advocated a return to a “State of Palestine within the internationally recognized 1967 borders.” Well, kind of, at any rate.

Yeah! That’s sticking it to ‘em.

BRICS foreign ministers meeting 2026. Source: https://diplomacybeyond.com/brics-foreign-ministers-meeting-2026/

The UN’s dystopian “Pact for the Future,” including its “Global Digital Compact and the Declaration of Future Generations,” shouldn’t just ruin the lives of people living in developed nations.

No, no, according to the BRICS, populations in “Emerging Markets and Developing Countries (EMDCs), as well as Least Developed Countries (LDCs), especially from Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean” must also be walled up inside the digital Panopticon. What’s the point of global governance unless everyone is controlled by it?

This, of course, is why the transnational capitalist oligarch crowd invented multipolarity in the first place. But I digress.

Like the US, Israeli, and UK governments—and just like all the other EU, Five Eyes, and Commonwealth member states—the BRICS governments are equally agreed that “Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)” are the key drivers for “socio-economic growth.”

Therefore, the global “digital transformation” must surge ahead. Again, the WEF and its partners—such as the UN—must be cock-a-hoop that the BRICS enthusiastically endorse the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR).

The BRICS are offering beautiful multipolarity, not the awful authoritarian technological control grid currently being served up by ugly Western governments and their corporate sponsors. So the snappy Schwabian acronym “4IR” is not in the BRICS’ lexicon. The 4IR is called “Industry 4.0,” lest there be any confusion.

In BRICS globalese, the entirely separate and distinct “Industry 4.0” digital transformation necessitates establishing a vibrant technology company “start-up ecosystem.” This is also completely different from the Silicon Valley oligarchs’ Dark Enlightenment inspired accelerationism because reasons.

You can tell it’s not the same because “digital public infrastructure, leveraging emerging technologies” will “aim at accelerating innovation-led economic growth,” you see.

It’s important to understand that BRICS-led multipolarity has arrived to save us all from the insidious schemes of the transnational capitalist oligarchs. It is not simply the next logical and long-planned step on the path toward the envisaged “new world order.” And anyway, even if it is, many Multipolaristas say that the Rhodes/Milner “new world order” model doesn’t mean anything, other than serving as a general term for global governance. . . . Oh, and that global governance is necessary.

Multipolarity is regional not global.

The multipolar world order is about delivering fairness and healthy regional competition, promoting peace, and stimulating innovation and better international trade relations. Multipolarity is good, and anyone who says otherwise is merely shilling for “Western Empire” and is probably a conspiracy theorist who thinks they’re all in it together.

The BRICS governments say the “ICT environment” they are building will be “interoperable.” The multipolar Industry 4.0 digital transformation will be “more inclusive, accessible, sustainable and interoperable” than the 4IR digital gulag on offer from the Western Empire. This is because, say the BRICS foreign ministers, their digital Panopticon will be based upon “globally interoperable common rules and standards.”

Globally interoperable rules and standards? Interoperable with what?

IBM—reportedly the largest industrial research organisation in the world—stresses why “interoperability,” especially between ICT systems, matters:

Interoperability is made possible by using common standards that define how data is formatted and exchanged between systems. [. . .] Interoperability is important because it optimizes data sharing between separate information systems, which helps prevent data silos, [. . .] so disconnected datasets can be easily accessed to achieve a common objective.

“Globally interoperable” means global, not regional.

You can call it “multipolar” if you want, but exerting global governance over that unified, interoperable digital system, to achieve “common objectives,” is the centralised control of a global system. In a world where everything, from the information we share, to the management of global supply chains and the control of the international financial and monetary system is digital and interoperable, all “multipolarity” suggests is global dictatorship.

Multipolarity is a sales gimmick. The Multipolaristas have created a fake dialectic, seemingly on behalf of transnational capitalist oligarchs. They suggest that one model of global dictatorship is better than another. They’re inviting people the world over to embrace their own enslavement within a global, digital surveillance state. They are seriously arguing that multipolar dictatorship is preferable. But then, the Multipolaristas would say that I’m just a Western imperialist analysing everything from my western perspective, guilty of binary thinking and failing to see the potential beauty of multipolar win-win cooperation.

Highlighting where I have gone so awry, the BRICS foreign ministers add that “strengthening digital financial security” is essential for better multipolar global governance. This can be achieved by enhancing “cross-border cooperation among customs authorities, financial intelligence units, law enforcement agencies, tax authorities and supervisory bodies.” To this end, the BRICS governments are ready to step up and take “leadership of the IMF and the WB [World Bank].”

Luckily, the multipolar world order will “enhance the legitimacy of the World Bank Group, as a better, bigger, and more effective development finance institution.” So that’s an end to global debt trap diplomacy, apart from expanding it and centralising control over it even further.

The BRICS governments are particularly looking forward to deepening their “cooperation in global health initiatives, including within the World Health Organization (WHO).” The BRICS seem quite keen on the “WHO Pandemic Agreement” and hope the “BRICS R&D Vaccine Center” can contribute effectively to the next global public-private pandemic.

It comes as a relief, then, that all of this oppressive, global technocratic tyranny will “ensure the promotion and protection of democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.” This is because, unlike Western governments that peddle exactly the same propagandist crap, the multipolar BRICS-led new world order places “humanity and people at the centre.” This leaves humanity—notably led by the Multipolaristas at the moment—the freedom to big-up the multipolar new world order. Or, as the BRICS foreign ministers put it, “people to people contacts” can amplify “the voice for greater BRICS representation in global governance.”

There are a few people around the world who aren’t yet entirely convinced that the beautiful multipolar world order is that attractive. Indeed, some go so far as to publicly question why we need any kind of oligarch-led world order at all. Fear not! The BRICS governments can stamp that nonsense out.

Worried that “promoting BRICS cooperation” might face some opposition, the BRICS ministers say that “the challenges stemming from and within the digital realm” can be overcome. By adopting “a comprehensive, balanced, and objective approach” to information “security,” and by deploying “globally interoperable common rules and standards,” BRICS governments are confident they can tackle the scourge of whatever they determine to be “misinformation, hate-speech, [and] disinformation.”

Phew, better global censorship at last! Perhaps the beautiful multipolar new world order is alluring after all.

What do you reckon?

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:25

North Korea Achieves Its First AI-Guided Missiles In Test Overseen By Kim

In a development that South Korea, Japan and the United States are likely to find deeply alarming, North Korea launched AI-guided cruise missiles in a test that analysts have described as the first of its kind for the sanctioned country.

The launch and test was overseen by Kim Jong-un early this week, and it was presented as part of his new military modernization and preparedness initiative which has been greatly hyped by Pyongyang over the last several years.

KCNA/EPA/Shutterstock

North Korea's goal is "to build the most modern and powerful artillery force which no one can match," Kim said according to state Korea Central News Agency (KCNA).

The army, he warned, should possess enough "destructive power" to make survival "impossible" for any enemy it strikes, the KCNA report continued.

The tactical missile utilizes "AI terminal guidance function" - which allows artificial intelligence to guide the missile during its final stage, until it reaches its target.

Pyongyang has never before acknowledged using AI in its missile systems, which Monday's successful test marks a milestone. Kim further hailed that tests were a "clear signal of upgrading of our military force" and expressed "great satisfaction" at the exercises.

Additionally, "The tests in particular confirmed the combat readiness of cruise missiles that will be deployed at artillery units near the border with ​South Korea equipped with precision navigation and AI-guided control that can strike targets at 100 km (62 miles)," Kim ​said.

According to some analysis of the launch featured by Reuters:

"It's about using ​AI when recognising the ​target and guiding the ⁠missile," said Yang Uk, a military expert at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. The North has previously said it had used AI technology in its drones.

Hong ​Min at the Korea Institute for National Unification said the North's claim likely ​involves an upgraded ⁠version of an existing digital guidance system combined with automatic target recognition technology, although the degree of its sophistication is impossible to verify from the report.

Pyongyang has also of late been touting modernization of the military's nuclear forces. It continues to expand its nuclear and missile capabilities, including plans to deploy new long-range artillery systems near the border with South Korea.

via The Telegraph

Meanwhile, South Korea's government has said it remains committed to its policy of peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula and will review the implications of the changes. But it has frequently hosted US military drills, which the north naturally sees as a serious threat to its national security.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:00

One Man's Manifesto - In Defense Of 250

Authored by John Gallo,

In hindsight I should have known better, but sometimes a conversation that seems harmless at the time lingers long after it is over. Last November I was in San Sebastian in Northern Spain enjoying food and a beer at a local bar. As I was finishing my food, I overheard a young American woman a few feet from me speaking with her friend explaining, "You know he's going to run again. He's definitely running again." It was clear she was talking about Donald Trump, and for better or worse, my cerveza overtook my discretion, and I said to her, "I'm sorry, but he's not running again, he can't do it." She appeared stunned, and told me that Trump was going to change the Constitution and was absolutely running again. After some back and forth, she asked whether I wore a "red hat or a blue hat." She didn't like my answer, and then proceeded to tell me that I was a "horrible person with horrible values." I wasn't angry, but there was not much I could do; I simply finished my beer, said "muchisimas gracias," and left the bar. I was amused at the time, because from my perspective, the woman had been coopted by a distorted set of facts. But seven months out, that conversation is a perfect example of our current political divide, and forced me to ask how we arrived at this point.

I enjoyed the benefit of a first-rate education - a prep school in Brooklyn, a private college in Pennsylvania, and law school in our nation's capital. For the majority of my personal and professional life, I have walked hallways and corridors with liberals and progressives. Many of my friends - both growing up and into adulthood - were Democrats, and I have listened to their ideas and worldview most of my life. My first vote for president was in 1976, and I responded as many college students at that time and voted for Jimmy Carter. I was taken by what I perceived to be Carter's fundamental decency as a person, but looking back, I had little understanding of either conservatism or the ideological differences between the two parties. More importantly, I had no historical understanding of the failures of progressivism. And while I always intellectually understood the arguments from my Democratic friends, there was always a part of me that found liberalism difficult to embrace - too many ideas just didn't make sense. I stopped reading The New York Times more than 25 years ago, a talking point that causes great consternation among my remaining friends on the left to this day. Over the past ten years, I have been called a traitor to my class, confused, and God knows how many other things. I have been excommunicated from a golf foursome for my political views, removed from guest lists, and lost more than one friend along the way. But I am at peace with my worldview, and I offer no apology for being willing to express my thoughts and ideas.

I have voted Republican for the majority of my adult life, never voted for Obama or Clinton, and voted for Trump in 2020 and 2024. I abstained from the presidential vote in 2016 because I believed that Trump's personality was too abrasive and stories about his past too disconcerting to think that he was an appropriate individual to occupy the White House. What happened in 2017 and beyond, however, was both alarming and eye-opening. I agreed with many of the policies that Trump tried to implement during his first term, and then watched as Democrats embraced a newfound craziness on an almost daily basis. It started with wearing pink hats and condoning violent protests on the streets of DC on Inauguration Day. Madonna shared her fantasy about burning down the White House, and Johnny Depp speculated about killing a president. Kathy Griffin displayed a severed head of a Donald Trump figure, and an actor dressed as Trump in a Central Park Shakespeare production was stabbed in the back. But that was just a preamble. What we have seen in the ensuing decade is the descent of Democrats from a political party that did not like Trump to a party that has sought to destroy all vestiges of conservatism - originally through protest and intimidation and now through violence as a political strategy. Bill Ayres would be proud. At first, we were exposed to behavior that most on the right thought was simply irrational. Progressives started to impose their agenda by removing names such as Abraham Lincoln and George Washington from schools, and removing statues of Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt from their rightful places in New York City. Conservatives of all stripes were being doxed, censored, and fired from their employment for not agreeing with leftist precepts. I was criticized routinely for questioning leftist ideology, but understood my universe well enough never to discuss politics in my workplace, save for a few exceptions. One was condemned if you dared to question BLM, or worse, critiqued Critical Race Theory or the anti-racist literature from Robin D'Angelo and Ibrahim X. Kendi. One thought carefully before saying systemic racism was an overhyped metaphor, and if you did not think Hamilton was the greatest play produced in the history of mankind, it was proof that you were an outright bigot. Under Biden, the left fully embraced the idea that "equity" was a fundamental principle to which everyone needed to conform. The new intellectuals discovered new pronouns, The 1619 Project was offered as legitimate history, and we were admonished that gender differences in athletics were simply an artificial construct. Intolerance became the order of the day.

What is happening now, and why this is such a compelling moment in our history, is that there are two convergent forces working together to rewrite our country's future. One force comes from traditional Democrats, and the second from far-left radicals and the Progressive/Socialist wing of the Democratic Party. They are unified in interest because they are jointly motivated by their hatred of Donald Trump - a hate that sadly has evolved into an unhinged pathology never witnessed in American history. That hatred has erupted into a universe of irrational fears and false assumptions by the left, and is now offered as rationalization for acts of retribution on conservatives throughout the country. The hatred of all things related to Trump has engulfed the thought processes of both traditional Democrats and their far-left allies, and both are committed to employing all means necessary to achieve their respective goals. Traditional Democrats want power, and their objective is to reshape our governing institutions so as to cement changes into our institutions that will be permanent. They have made clear that they want to end the Senate filibuster and add the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico as states. And to control the legislative process, the Democrats will seek to increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court to thirteen. Once that is accomplished, there may be a movement to abolish the Electoral College, although this would be a multi-year process requiring changes to the Constitution. Democrats rely on one strategic maneuver - if they can't win by traditional rules, they will just change the rules, while simultaneously making disingenuous protestations about the status quo as a threat to democracy. If successful, the Democrats will create a new power structure with one-party rule that they will never surrender.

The far-left, however, want more. They don't want political power as much as they want to replace capitalism with socialism, and they harbor no pretense. We see socialist mayors in Seattle and New York City, and complete ineptitude in mayor's offices in Chicago and Los Angeles. We have socialists in Congress, billionaires have become evil, and "tax the rich" has become a talking point among progressives throughout the country. Antisemitism under the label "Free Palestine" is now in vogue. Democrats are heading towards a full embrace of Mamdani's campaign theme of socialism under the guise of affordability, while ignoring the fact that billionaires contribute a greater percentage of revenue to state and local governments than their numbers suggest, and dismissing the fact that increasing taxes on the wealthy does not reduce the wealth gap. Neither the child-like Mr. Mamdani nor the historically illiterate Ms. Cortez have a serious understanding of economics, but they do understand the power of rhetoric and social media. In the process, they have convinced a generation of young Americans that the capitalist system is flawed and must be changed. Unfortunately, socialists are unfamiliar with the work of economist Thomas Sowell, who has described The Communist Manifesto as a masterpiece of propaganda with "absolutely no contact with actual economic reality."

What has changed, however, is that Democrats and their radical allies understand that they cannot obtain their objectives through traditional democratic means, so instead have chosen intimidation and violence as their new weapons of choice. Democrats for a decade have called Trump supporters and conservatives deplorable, fascists, and Nazis, and all too often have employed a Hitler analogy, which is both obscene on its face and ignorant of history. Politicians on the left have encouraged supporters to get in the face of Republicans, and the last president gave a speech in Philadelphia before the entire nation in which he essentially called half the country racist. Earlier this year, Susan Rice pledged retribution against Republicans who supported Trump if Democrats take back power, and asserted that all such individuals would be held accountable for their behavior. "It will not end well" for Republican-leaning corporations was one of her threats. In April, Hakeem Jeffries declared that "we are on a state of maximum war" when discussing the ongoing redistricting battles. James Carville assured followers that Democrats will launch investigations into President Trump and his family if the party retakes Congress in the midterms, warning that the political fallout will feel like getting "punched in the mouth by Mike Tyson." Senator Booker has expressed his desire to punch President Trump in the face, and Nancy Pelosi famously commented, "people are going to do what they're going to do" when questioned about violence during the George Floyd riots.

But to this day, the left ignores that when you dehumanize and threaten a group of individuals, you leave the offended group no option but to take note. Worse, by constantly invoking the Hitler analogy, you convince unstable individuals that it is rational to commit acts of violence upon those whom you are calling Hitler. Logic dictates that it is appropriate to use any means necessary to kill someone as bad as Hitler, but when you embrace that rationale as part of your political rhetoric, mentally unbalanced people feel justified in taking matters into their own hands. Charlie Kirk would be alive today but for this logic.

Far-left activists have become the modern-day equivalent of the Jacobins of the French Revolution. This is not hyperbole; the language of revolution resonates throughout history, and repeats itself today. From Robespierre and the French Revolution: "The revolutionary government owes to the good citizen all the protection of the nation; it owes nothing to the Enemies of the People but death." Mao Zedong viewed violence as a way to destroy the Nationalists and build a new socialist society, and noted as far back as 1927 that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Che Guevara embraced hatred as a core element of his power struggle, and argued that to vanquish a "brutal enemy," revolutionaries must transform into violent killing machines. And from today, we have the Democratic social media influencer Hasan Piker, who offers strikingly similar rhetoric. Piker recently wrote: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable." Piker, an Antifa supporter who has more influence today within the Democratic Party than John Fetterman, has also said that America "deserved 9/11." Most ominous perhaps is the warning from Elon Musk, speaking about Democrats in the aftermath of the most recent attempt on Donald Trump's life: "If they're willing to die to assassinate, imagine what they will do if they gain political power."

In the past few years, we have seen three efforts to assassinate President Trump, one assassination attempt on a Supreme Court justice, and the assassination of a conservative thought leader. Following the George Floyd riots, 25 people were killed and over two billion dollars in property damage incurred nationwide in the name of a better world. There were violent protests with no legitimate justification in Ferguson, Missouri, following the death of a young male who had tried to rob a liquor store, and protestors in New York on behalf of Black Lives Matter expressed their desire to "fry cops like bacon." During 2025, there were approximately 238 assaults on ICE officers in the country including 68 assaults committed by individuals driving vehicles. St. John's church near the White House was set on fire during the George Floyd riots, and Tesla dealerships were burned in 2025 as a way of protesting budgetary constraints proposed by Elon Musk. There has been violence from the right - witness the 2025 murders of two Minnesota state representatives and the chaos of January 6. But the overall picture is not one of equivalence, and those who insist that it is are either poorly informed or willfully ignorant. Journalists such as Nick Shirley, who did nothing more than expose financial corruption in Minnesota, have received multiple death threats. None of this comes from the conservative echo chamber - it is purely a Democratic playbook run amuck. And to top things off, we have seen an appalling uptick in overt antisemitism in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks in Israel - according to the Anti-Defamation League over 7,300 reported incidents of antisemitism in 2024 and more than 6,700 in 2025. And while there are certainly antisemites on the far right who would engage in antisemitic violence if they had the opportunity, the current iteration of the anti-Israeli movement appears to come largely from the far-left progressives and the Free Palestine movement born on college campuses. Consider that in 2024 the Democratic Party debated whether a Jewish governor from Pennsylvania could be its nominee for vice president, and that the Democratic Party of Maine has chosen as its candidate for U.S. Senate a man who wore a Nazi tattoo on his chest. As a parallel, consider that Republicans in Florida are in the process of electing a black male as governor. The far left embraces its ideology more than it loves history, and is unconcerned that earlier historical tragedies could repeat themselves. Recent polling data make clear that members of Gen Z see political violence as a rational means by which to achieve their political ends, which in a normal world, would cause great concern across the political spectrum.

As we embrace our nation's 250th birthday, we need to remember that we are a good country, not a perfect one. We were born of a revolution, and protest is baked into our national DNA; protest is both legitimate and consistent with our history. However, what is happening now is not normal - what we are witnessing is a violence born of an irrational hatred of one individual that in some ways rivals the socialist uprisings of the early twentieth century or tracks the divisions that led to the Civil War. Donald Trump may have many personality traits that have stretched the bounds of presidential behavior, but none of what the left has done has either healed the nation or enhanced the cause of traditional Democrats. The traditional Democrats have remained silent in the face of the ongoing violence, and have formed a toxic relationship with the lunatic wing of their party that neither side is willing to break.

Perhaps the woman in San Sebastian was correct, and I am a horrible person with horrible values. I will let others decide that, but I am at peace with my beliefs. I have exhausted my attempts to convince people to change their minds, but I cannot unsee threats that to me are all too apparent. I cannot unsee individuals who openly mocked the death of Charlie Kirk, nor can I unsee individuals who expressed remorse that the Trump assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was not successful. That is too much to ask. I have believed for more than a decade that the far left is more dangerous than the far right. I know that we as conservatives have issues to address, but I am convinced that the behavior from the far left unchecked will lead to continued dissolution of our national fabric and further Balkanization of our nation. But this is exactly what the far left wants, and we as a constructive opposition must stand up against those who would dissolve our national identity. We have two legitimate weapons at our disposal - our voices and the ballot box. We must use both, and we cannot surrender our country to the untender mercies of the Jacobins. They are at the gate, or as Ronald Reagan once noted, "if fascism comes to America, it will be in the name of liberalism." We have been warned.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 22:35