More Than Half Of Gen Z Investors Have Moved Money Into Sports Bets

A growing share of young Americans is folding sports gambling into their long-term financial plans, according to new research from the investment platform Betterment.

In an online survey of 1,000 U.S. retail investors conducted in late March and early April and released this week, 52% of Gen Z investors said they had shifted money originally set aside for stocks or other investments into sports wagers over the past year. Only about one-third of Gen Z participants reported no involvement in sports betting at all, compared with 63% across all age groups in the survey.

26% of Gen Z respondents - those born between 1997 and 2007 - said they view sports betting as a deliberate, ongoing part of their wealth strategy. That figure drops sharply with age: 14% of millennials, 6% of Gen X, and just 1% of baby boomers reported the same outlook.

Of those Gen Z respondents, roughly 11% described betting as an investment strategy aimed at high returns, while 15% treated it as a short-term way to raise cash.

The betting numbers sit inside a broader shift in where young investors get their information. Social media is now Gen Z's most commonly cited source for financial news, rising from 45% in 2024 to 60% this year - nearly three times the 21% who cite a financial advisor.

The findings highlight how the rapid growth of legal sports gambling and prediction markets is competing for the same discretionary dollars that once flowed into retirement accounts and brokerage portfolios. The state-regulated sports betting industry in the United States has expanded into a nearly $17 billion business in recent years. Prediction markets have also surged; Robinhood Markets, long known for democratizing stock trading, added them to its app in 2025 and has called the segment its fastest-growing business line ever.

Betterment Chief Executive Officer Sarah Levy warned that the trend carries risks. "When a prediction market or sportsbook starts to feel like a retirement strategy, we have a problem," she said in a statement. "These products are designed to keep people seeking the next quick score, not to help them build toward the next decade. Younger investors deserve access to the tools and information that meet them where they are, but the industry also has a responsibility to be clear about the difference between participating in a trend and building lasting wealth."

Robert Kosciuk, a 32-year-old from Huntington, New York, illustrates the shift - maintaining a Robinhood account for stocks but devoting more energy this year to betting, Bloomberg reports. He says he approaches sports wagers with the same discipline he applies to investing: researching outcomes carefully, avoiding emotional decisions, and limiting most bets to $100. He acknowledges the activity is gambling but believes he manages it more thoughtfully than casual players. So far this year he has earned roughly $2,500, enough to cover a vacation he attributes in part to successful bets on the Carolina Hurricanes.

Industry representatives push back on the idea that betting should be treated as investing. Joe Maloney, president of the Sports Betting Alliance - whose members include FanDuel, DraftKings, Fanatics Betting & Gaming, bet365, and betMGM - told Bloomberg that sports wagering is entertainment, not a wealth-building strategy. Adults who choose to bet, he added, should do so responsibly within a fixed entertainment budget and never with money needed for savings or essentials.

Broader economic pressures may be amplifying the appeal of high-risk options. Eighty percent of Gen Z respondents who already use or are considering speculative investments said concerns about falling behind financially played a role, according to a Northwestern Mutual study of 4,357 adults conducted by the Harris Poll in January. As homeownership grows more difficult and everyday costs rise, some younger adults are turning to sports betting, prediction markets, and crypto in hopes of accelerating progress toward their goals.

The Betterment survey also examined how investors make decisions. 56% percent said they rely primarily on their own research and judgment - more than any other single source. That self-reliance increased with age, rising from 40% among Gen Z respondents to 69% among baby boomers. About one in three participants reported trusting artificial intelligence for financial advice. Of those, 53% said AI had prompted a decision they would not otherwise have made, including 48% of all Gen Z respondents. Gen Z investors were eight times more likely than baby boomers to say they were comfortable using AI for long-term financial planning - 41% against 5%.

The survey polled 1,000 U.S. retail investors between March 27 and April 3, split evenly across four generations, meaning each generational figure rests on roughly 250 respondents. Participants were recruited through an incentivized online panel and were required to hold at least one investment outside a 401(k).

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 16:55

Rage Politics: Hakeem Jeffries Will Take A Baseball Bat To The Supreme Court

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has struggled to pander to the mob to secure power in the midterm elections, including brandishing a baseball bat on social media to show his radical bona fides.

With Democratic Socialists chanting “you’re next” when seeing Jeffries, he continues to struggle to stay in front of the mob.

This week, he doubled down on his pledge to throw the Supreme Court to the mob if they make him the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

After the recent gains by far-left candidates in states like Minnesota and the near victory of Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong in Wisconsin, Jeffries came out to reaffirm his intent to radically change the highest court. According to the Washington Times, Jeffries declared, “There’s a variety of different options that are on the table, and I think that we can’t foreclose any single one of them.” He added that the “conservative, right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has become basically a subsidiary of the MAGA Republican Party.”

He promised to make far-left Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) the driving force behind changing the Court, including possible 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices and expanding the Court to create an instant liberal majority.

Notably, none of these figures were claiming that the Court was fundamentally flawed until it ruled against them, particularly in cases that impacted their political power such as declaring racial gerrymandering to be unconstitutional.

What is interesting is that the liberal justices reject this narrative, reminding citizens that the Court has delivered major losses to the Trump Administration. Indeed, President Trump has routinely attacked conservative justices for ruling against him and his Administration.

In addition, polls show that the majority of the public supports virtually all of the recent major rulings, including the ban on racial gerrymandering.

It is only the Democrats who oppose those rulings and are now demanding a hostile takeover of the Court.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has called for packing the Court because it does not follow her views and those of “widely held public opinion.” I have pushed back on that rationale, given the Court’s function as a countermajoritarian institution. However, these polls even challenge the flawed rationale for court packing.

So Jeffries is promising that the work of James Madison will be undone by the likes of Jamie Raskin and Elizabeth Warren. To have these calls on our 250th anniversary is crushingly ironic.  Other leading Democrats have lined up to pledge to fundamentally change the Court, which has played a key role in making this the oldest and most stable republic in history.

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

I have called it the Nike School of Constitutional Law. Democratic leaders are pledging to “just do it” to appease the mob. Of course, some of these measures would be challenged if done without constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court would then have to rule on the effort to pack or limit its members. The expansion can be done by legislative vote. Although most Americans oppose court packing, Democrats view control of the Court as essential to pushing through a radical agenda to change the political system to their advantage.

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

In Federalist 10, Madison discussed the destructive impact of factions in forcing through opportunistic changes to advance their interests:

“By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”

We are witnessing the same factional politics being pushed by leaders who believe that they can ride a rage wave into power. They have a greater likelihood of causing lasting damage to our system than guaranteeing their own lasting power. History is not on their side. Today’s revolutionaries are often tomorrow’s reactionaries in an age of rage.

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 16:20

Woke 2.0 Will Be Worse

Authored by Spencer Klavan via AmericanMind.org,

Readers familiar with Dr. Seuss’s classic, The Cat in the Hat, will remember the twin chaos agents Thing 1 and Thing 2.

“‘These Things are good Things,’” the Cat reassures the children whose mother has inexplicably left them under the supervision of a fish.

“‘They are tame. Oh, so tame! / They have come here to play.’”

The Things briefly feign innocence, then quickly reveal themselves to be marauding imps, knocking over nightstands and ruining the linens.

“I do not like the way that they play!” says the son of the house.

Now here comes Woke 1 and Woke 2.

“Woke 1 was crazy,” said U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, quoting an unnamed city councilman in a viral interview for ABC. The congresswoman sheepishly acknowledged that Americans did not like the way Woke 1 played out, while also implicitly announcing that there will soon be, or already is, a Woke 2. And it will be tame. Oh, so tame!

There is, in fact, a new version of wokeness in the making. But just as Thing 2 was fundamentally identical to Thing 1, Woke 2 will not be any different in essence from Woke 1. They are both here to upend the furniture.

Wokeness in all its forms is grievance politics.

Its central idea is that an injustice lies at the heart of America and must be corrected to atone for the historical misery inflicted on groups of innocents.

What is changing in Woke 2 is the account of who those innocents are, and how they have been wronged. Woke 1 was founded on the notion that black women are the most oppressed, and therefore most righteous, of all people. “I’m thinking,” said Kamala Harris in her vice presidential victory speech, “about the generations of women—black women.” She mentioned many other kinds of women, of course, but the list began and ended with “the black women—who are too often overlooked, but so often prove that they are the backbone of this country.”

This approach had rhetorical power, up to a point. It traded on the successes of second-wave feminism and the reality of black slavery in America’s past. But it ran into some problems. Third-wave feminism, as worked out by theorists like Judith Butler, made it basically impossible not to affix the prefix “trans-” wherever the word “woman” appeared. So the flag of Woke 1 became the complicated and confusing progress pride flag—a gay rainbow with black and trans colors intruding from the left.

To make matters worse, the legacy of slavery did not actually touch all the racial minorities that Democrats wanted to bring into their fold. Most Nigerians, for example, had not experienced segregation in the United States. Nor had the millions of unvetted South and Central Americans streaming across the border. They were certainly “people of color.” But so were Chinese, Japanese, and Indian Americans, whose typically enviable life outcomes fit awkwardly into the narrative that the country was built on a ruthless caste system.

The contradictions heightened as Woke 1 faced a series of embarrassments such as Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the 2023 Supreme Court case in which Asian students complained that admissions officers were discriminating against them in favor of black applicants. Then there were the notorious Trump ’24 ads that pinned Harris to her previous support of taxpayer-funded gender surgeries for federal prison inmates. Placing black women at the center of the moral universe created an unexpected and electorally unworkable set of obligations to illegal immigrants and queer felons.

Clearly, the coalition needed shuffling. And so rearranging the order of priorities in the grievance hierarchy is what the reinvention of woke has actually been about. In place of the black trans woman who defined Woke 1, Woke 2 has chosen as its ideal victim the dispossessed Palestinian liberationist, fighting with Hamas against Israel. This has a number of interesting strategic advantages.

First, the racial argument has been neatly streamlined. Rather than implausibly analogizing every racial group in America to the victims of Jim Crow, Woke 2 presents the black American story as just one instance of a global fight for justice carried out by minorities everywhere and epitomized in the intifada.

In 2023, on a panel for the Democratic Socialists of America, future New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani claimed that “when the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF.” He was outlining the blueprint for Woke 2, which takes its cues not from Judith Butler but from post-colonialist Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth (1961). “Between colonial violence and the insidious violence in which the modern world is steeped,” wrote Fanon, “there is a kind of complicit correlation, a homogeneity.” Therefore, “The colonized, underdeveloped man is today a political creature in the most global sense of the term.”

Recently, in an intriguing interview with The New Yorker’s David Remnick, Democratic Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed put forward an argument that connects Fanon’s global struggle to America’s domestic economy. He claimed that pro-Israel politicians are allowing “the money that should be spent taking care of our kids to be sent to a military that has done a genocide.”

In other words, Woke 2’s new order of priorities allows its proponents to suggest that white or white-coded (read: Jewish) oppressors are funneling money away from America’s working poor to fund a worldwide campaign of mass slaughter. Distant as this account is from reality, it is much more ruthlessly focused as a line of woke reasoning. It emphasizes foreign policy and the economy, where the public’s real anger lies, and deftly mutes the discredited claims of LGBTQ extremists.

In practice, any woke administration of any variety will end up imposing pretty much the same bizarre sexual priorities on the country once elected. But for purposes of advertisement, Woke 2 will try to keep its trans members less conspicuous than Woke 1 did, for at least as long as it takes to re-establish national power. Replacing the progress pride flag with the Palestinian flag will distract from the ravages of queer excess while infusing socialist revolution with the moral self-righteousness of anti-white resentment.

Whether this tactic succeeds with voters is another matter.

If it does, though, Americans will discover that both Woke 1 and Woke 2, like Thing 1 and Thing 2, only play nice until they can start pitching over tables.

If we want to avoid a rerun of the early 2020s, then—to paraphrase Seuss—we will have to get rid of Woke 1 and Woke 2.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 15:10

Ukraine Hits Key Russian Space Facility With Flamingo Cruise Missiles

Ukraine's long-range drone attacks have frequently targeted military bases and oil refinery and energy sites of late, and more recently warehouses of major Russian online retailer Wildberries - but on Saturday a new target has been added: space facilities.

Ukrainian forces have touted that they've struck the Progress Rocket and Space Center in Russia's Samara region. The facility focuses on the manufacturing and operation of space launch vehicles.

Illustrative: Baikonur Cosmodrome, Space.com/NASA

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said on X that Ukraine hit the space manufacturing center with FP-5 Flamingo cruise missiles - among the largest in Ukraine's arsenal, and which are domestically developed and produced.

He said it was necessary to target Russian space agency Roscosmos as among Russia's "key enterprises" - and that the targeted site was also involved in "electronics production" connected to military operations.

Other sites targeted in the fresh wave of attacks included Savasleyka air base in the Nizhny Novgorod region, which hosts aircraft used to attack Ukraine, as well as an oil facility in Ust-Luga, which lies close to the Estonian border.

"Our plan of long-range sanctions against Russia for this war is being implemented, and it is important that Russia’s war potential be reduced," Zelensky stated.

Ukrainian national media offered this as a backgrounder:

The “Progress” Rocket and Space Center is one of the key enterprises in the Russian Federation’s rocket and space industry, producing launch vehicles of the “Soyuz” family. These are used to launch Russian spacecraft for military, reconnaissance, and communications purposes into orbit.

In particular, the “Soyuz-2.1b” is used to deploy the Russian “Rassvet” satellite constellation – a broadband satellite communications system that Russia positions as an analogue to Starlink.

The Progress Rocket and Space Center also manufactures Earth observation satellites, which the enemy uses for reconnaissance purposes.

Russia also attacked Ukraine overnight, as has long been the norm. Over 150 Russian drones were sent on the country, with Ukrainian forces claiming shootdown or neutralization of 124 of these, according to a military statement.

Ukraine has struck a facility used in the production of Russia’s new satellite internet system.

Kyiv deployed Flamingo cruise missiles to target the Progress Rocket Space Centre in Samara, south-western Russia, in an overnight attack, Volodymyr Zelensky said on Saturday ⤵️… pic.twitter.com/eoalkZcMgz

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) August 15, 2026

The fresh onslaught resulted in dozens of injures. As for potential casualties inside Russia, little is yet known of this in terms of secretive space and airbase facilities targeted.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 14:35

Somali Piracy Surges Amid Hormuz Blockade

Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has forced hundreds of commercial ships onto longer routes around Africa, and Somali pirates are moving quickly to exploit the sudden increase in traffic off the continent’s eastern coast. Oil tankers MT Honour 25, MT Eureka and MT Asana were hijacked in the Gulf of Aden and off Puntland between April and July 2026, the largest attacks by Somali pirates in years. The Iran war has now delivered these groups more targets, spread across thousands of miles of ocean, while diverting naval resources to the Persian Gulf and Red Sea.

Somali piracy peaked in 2011 before an international crackdown reduced attacks to a fraction of their former levels. The first major revival came in late 2023, when Houthi attacks in the Red Sea forced hundreds of vessels away from the Suez Canal and around the Cape of Good Hope. And with U.S. forces all diverted to the war against Iran in the Persian Gulf, it’s largely a free-for-all for Somali pirates.  Unlike the disorganized bands of the early 2000s, today's Somali pirates are ranging much farther from shore, and their operations have become much more sophisticated. And perhaps even more concerning, according to reports from a UN panel of experts, there is now direct coordination between Yemeni militants and Somali networks.

In exchange for creating maritime chaos to keep Western navies distracted, the Houthis have supplied Somali pirate cells with advanced weaponry, military training and precision GPS tracking devices to pinpoint commercial hulls. Al-Shabaab--one of the most lethal terrorist groups in Africa--provides onshore logistical backing along parts of the Somali coast where pirate gangs launch operations or hold hijacked vessels. Intelligence reports indicate the group receives a generous cut of up to 30% from successful maritime ransom payouts.

According to a joint study by Interpol, the World Bank and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Horn of Africa piracy generated over $400 million in ransom payments from 179 hijacked ships between 2005 and 2012, averaging roughly $2.23 million per ship. The money follows a structured economy, with pirate crews receiving a standard 10% to 15% fee, local financiers claim 30% to 50% for funding food, fuel and weapons, while the rest is laundered into legitimate businesses, according to the study. And it’s only becoming more lucrative with time. 

A June 30, 2026, analysis by the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime (GI-TOC) reports that ransom demands have been made for all three commercial vessels hijacked in the current wave.

The demand for Eureka was reportedly $10 million.

Separately, the pirates holding Honour 25 have demanded $3 million for the tanker, cargo and crew. 

GI-TOC says pirates received $1.2 million-$1.5 million for the release of the Chinese fishing vessel Liao Dong Yu 578 in March this year. The same vessel had reportedly generated another $2 million ransom in 2024. GI-TOC says counter-piracy officials believe the latest payment helped catalyze the current wave of attacks.

The Gulf of Guinea is yet another piracy hotspot in Africa thanks to the region’s riches in oil and gas as well as a well-trained militia due the Delta's secessionist movement. While local law enforcement and naval forces have managed to curb attacks in shallower waters, pirates are highly adaptable to new environments. Now, they are using heavily armed mother ships to strike targets well outside state jurisdictions and exclusive economic zones. The region’s pirate networks now operate with military-grade weapons, an intricate shipping intelligence network and complicated financial backing.

War-risk insurance premiums for commercial shipping transiting the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf spiked by over 1,000%--surging from pre-conflict levels of roughly 0.15%–0.25% of a vessel's value up to 7.5% and 10% per voyage shortly after the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in March.

With African maritime zones highly vulnerable due to a lack of equipment and manpower, and with American forces diverted to the Persian Gulf indefinitely, piracy sees its biggest opportunity yet. It means an African diversion isn’t necessarily going to avoid risk premiums.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 14:00

Record Highs: Should You Chase The Rally?

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Pinned and Stretched

There is nothing bearish about the tape, and the overall trend could not be much cleaner. The S&P 500 sits above every major moving average and above a rising 200-day line it has not closed beneath since April. That is a healthy, intact uptrend, and it deserves respect. The problem is not the direction, but the distance from the longer-term trend, which is more concerning. As is always the case, deviations above the long-term trend eventually “revert to the mean.” We see it almost every year.

At Friday’s close, the index sat roughly 10% above its 200-day moving average. That is one of the widest gaps of this entire cycle, and it sits about 3.7% above the 50-day line, too. Add our Money Flow and Breadth Indicator at 80%, with 72% of members above their own 200-day average. This market has done a lot of work in a short window. Friday’s quiet fade from record highs is the kind of small caution flag that shows up when a tape gets this extended.

Look at the ceiling first. Price is pressed right against its own record highs, with Thursday’s 7,801 close and 7,817 intraday high just overhead. Above that sits the round 8,000 mark, which also happens to be Goldman’s year-end target. Round numbers act like magnets until they act like ceilings, so that’s where sellers tend to dig in. The floor sits much further away. First support is the 20-day line near 7,585, then the 50-day line near 7,510, both comfortably below Friday’s close. The takeaway is the asymmetry. There’s little cushion above, and plenty of open air below, down to those averages.

Neither support level is very far away, and a pullback to either would be routine housekeeping within an uptrend, not a break of it. The number that matters for risk is lower down. As noted, the gap from here to the rising 200-day line near 7,076 is roughly 10%, and that mean-reversion “air pocket” is the risk. The trend remains up, but momentum is overbought; therefore, entries here offer poor near-term reward relative to risk.

Record Highs: Should You Chase The Rally

Last week in the Bull Bear Report, I flagged that our Money Flow and Breadth Indicator had pushed into extreme overbought territory. This week, it pushed even further.

“As of August 14, 2026, with the S&P 500 at 7,785.76, the Money Flow Breadth Ratio (MFBR) stands at 80% and rising, versus 75% the prior week – a 15 percentage-point increase over the trailing four weeks. This places the indicator in extreme overbought territory (75% or higher). The raw breadth signal still reads BUY, but the MFBR is a contrarian indicator at extremes: readings this stretched have historically been followed by below-average forward returns, so the model treats this as a caution flag rather than a green light to add risk.“

Regardless, the market shrugged, as it tends to do when momentum runs this hot. The S&P 500 is back near record highs, just under 7,800, and suddenly everyone wants back in the pool. So, here is the honest question before us this week:

“Should you keep chasing record highs here, or is the smarter move to participate while quietly managing the risk building underneath it?”

The Inflation Data Just Made The Bulls’ Job Easier

Before we answer that larger question, let’s touch on what changed this week. Both inflation reports came in soft. July CPI rose just 0.1% on the month and 3.4% over the year, with core at 0.2% and 2.5%. The reports were all in line with forecasts, and the shelter reading did most of the lifting, a slow-moving piece that the Fed will likely fade. The next morning, PPI landed flat at 0.0% versus a 0.2% gain expected, and the annual rate cooled to 4.7% from 5.5%. Final demand goods prices actually fell 0.7%. The tariff “passthrough” the hawks keep warning about simply hasn’t shown up in the pipeline yet, a point I walked through in Friday’s commentary.

That data is important, as the upcoming FOMC meeting in September won’t be about rate cuts but rather about a small minority of “hawks” rescinding their previous dissenting opinions. Coming into the week, futures had the September meeting near a coin flip. After the CPI print, the odds of the Fed holding rates jumped to roughly 64%, and the soft PPI only reinforced that move. A hike on September 16 is now the least likely outcome, particularly following very weak employment and retail sales reports.

For stock buyers, a Fed parked on hold removes the one macro tail risk that could have knocked a richly priced tape off course, a surprise hike into record highs. Notably, the recent data isn’t the same as “all clear,” and inflation is still running north of 3% keeps the Fed on hold for now. However, the near-term policy threat is smaller, and that is precisely the backdrop that emboldens buyers.

Speaking of that, let’s talk about who has been buying this market lately.

The Buyer List Behind Record Highs Keeps Growing

Give the bulls their due, because the setup is real. Scott Rubner at Citadel Securities laid out his “buyer checklist” this week, and it keeps getting longer.

Earnings are carrying the load, with Q2 profits for the index growing roughly 33%, one of the steepest revision paths in a quarter century. Furthermore, the forward multiple has actually fallen to about 20x earnings from 23 last October.

In other words, earnings are doing the heavy lifting, not “easy money” multiple expansion. Passive demand never blinked either. Households pushed a record 350 billion dollars into ETFs in July alone, part of 1.6 trillion in year-to-date inflows.

More than a trillion dollars of buyback authorizations reopen this month, and nearly 70% of them sit outside Technology.

When several sources of demand strengthen simultaneously, and selling pressure fades, the path of least resistance is higher. Breadth has healed, volatility has fallen, and the same rule-based strategies that were dumping stocks in the spring can start buying them back. Such is the mechanical reality of this tape right now.

That is the bull case, and it is a compelling one. However, a market where the buyer list is this crowded, moves this fast, and is on the heels of a 26th record high for the year, is also a market where the easy part of the move is behind us. In other words, it is now the marginal new buyer who is “paying up” for exposure near the highs.

Retail Is Back, And Buying What Already Burned It

As noted above, retail investors returned as net buyers across Citadel’s platform with a vengeance, reversing the selling seen at the end of June. However, while participation is back, conviction seems to be lacking. The same traders buying cash equities are still paying up for downside protection. Put buying sits near its highest reading since the March lows, and “what” they are buying is notable. Over the last two weeks, retail’s most-bought names were semiconductors and memory, the exact “story” trades that got cut hard in the summer washout.

We wrote about one flavor of this on Monday in Leveraged ETFs: Math Often Trumps Hype, where a widely shared post pitched a 2x-leveraged SK Hynix fund as “magnified exposure” to a doubling of the stock. The math does not work that way in option-backed ETFs. Daily resets and volatility decay mean a leveraged fund can end a year in the red even when the underlying stock doubles. Buying the same crowded names that already burned you, and doing it with leverage, is not a strategy. It is a “this time is different” bet.

The question, naturally, is if the flows are this strong, why fight them? I am not saying fight them. I am saying do not confuse a strong tape with a safe entry point.

Stretched Breadth: A Reason To Chase Record Highs?

As discussed in yesterday’s Daily Market Commentary, market breadth is very healthy. As noted above, more than 72% of the S&P 500 now trades above its 200-day moving average, the broadest participation since December 2024, up from a washed-out 41% this spring, and cross-stock correlation sits near record lows.

Historically, when more than 50% of stocks are trading above their 200-day moving averages, it indicates a long-term uptrend. As StockCharts has noted for years, readings north of 70% are technically overbought, yet in a real uptrend, overbought stays overbought. Over the next 6-12 months, broad market participation like this has been a tailwind more often than not. Citadel’s own point reinforces this:

“Breadth is rising while cross-stock correlation sits near record lows, indicating a wide market, not a narrow pocket of leadership.”

From a contrarian view, this is also where the risk resides. Elevated breadth by itself has NOT reliably preceded corrections. What precedes them is a divergence, the index pushing to new highs while fewer stocks tag along. We don’t have that today, as breadth is rising into the highs rather than fading beneath them.

Here is what you should take away from this data. The biggest forward returns show up after washed-out lows near 20%, not after the crowd is already all-in near 70%. In other words, breadth predicts risk better than it predicts return. While over the next 3, 6, and 12 months the odds tilt toward higher returns, the next month is the stretch when an overbought tape can correct without changing the larger trend.

That is exactly why this past Monday, we took profits in winners like MSFT across the Equity 60/40 Portfolio and the Dividend Growth Model, and rebalanced the AI, Crypto, and Infrastructure thematic sleeves back toward target weights

The “Supply Of Stock” Nobody Is Talking About

With the market now back to more overbought conditions, what could cause the next correction? Is there a “supply of stock” waiting above current levels, where “trapped longs” who bought the previous semiconductor highs and rode them down into the lows will look to sell the instant they get back to breakeven? The honest answer is: yes, but less than a classic top. In a classical textbook distribution-topping process, the index pushes to record highs while fewer and fewer stocks tag along. That “divergence” is what marks the overhead supply. Currently, we do not see that in the data, particularly with breadth rising into the highs, not fading beneath them.

When overall market participation is high, and prices reach record highs, most of the buyers who were underwater relative to the old highs are getting whole and holding, not dumping. That is the difference between a market building a base of support and one quietly distributing stock to the next greater fool. Do not confuse less supply with no risk, though. Such is where the calendar comes in.

As shown in the chart above, September is typically the weakest month of the year for stocks. Over the last decade, the S&P 500 has averaged a loss in September and finished higher only half the time, the worst reading of any month on the calendar. Now layer the events on top. A September 16 FOMC meeting with a fresh dot plot, a midterm election on November 3 that reliably injects volatility, and a VIX pinned near 14.6 after spiking toward the low 30s in the March selloff. The VIX seasonal pattern points in the same direction. Volatility tends to trough right about now and grind higher into the fall, and it does so more dependably in a midterm year.

A compressed VIX is not a signal to sell. It is a signal that protection is cheap, right before the calendar turns hostile.

Key Catalysts Next Week

Next week hands us the two things this tape cares about most. We get a fresh read on the consumer and the Fed. After Friday’s soft retail sales print, the retail bellwethers offer a real-time answer to the same question. The FOMC minutes hit on Wednesday, and Jackson Hole starts Friday, pushing the rate-path debate back to center stage. All of it lands right before the September 16 meeting.

This week, we also get numbers from key retailers to gauge consumers’ actual health. Are high oil prices finally creating some demand destruction in the economy? Or is slower job growth showing up in consumer spending that suggests the economy is slowing more than expected?

The through-line is simple. Say the retailers echo Friday’s soft sales, and the minutes show a Fed leaning toward patience. Then the “Fed on hold” story we lean on gets firmer footing. If a hawkish surprise turns up at Jackson Hole, the calm priced into that 14-handle VIX gets tested in a hurry. Either way, the playbook holds, and this is a week to hold quality, keep the cash buffer, and let the tape come to us.

What Should Investors Do Now

So what do you actually do with all of this? For now, continue to participate while managing your risk. Those two actions are not in conflict and do coexist successfully. The trend is up, breadth is broad, and the flows are real, so this is not the moment to run to cash. It is the moment to stop chasing record highs and start rebalancing.

Consider the setup on both sides. Goldman just raised its year-end target for the S&P 500 to 8,000, roughly 3% above current levels. However, here is the “risk” for your portfolio: while there is 3% to gain, the market sits roughly 10% above its 200-day moving average, one of the widest stretches of this entire cycle. Pay attention to the math: for every new dollar you invest, you risk $3.33 in losses.

When the upside is a coin-flip 3%, and the downside air pocket is roughly three times larger, committing fresh capital in size into record highs right here is the textbook definition of poor risk-reward. That skew doesn’t argue for selling, but does argue for how you participate, which is why the following tactics make sense.

Does that mean sell everything and hide? No. It means take the gifts the market is handing you now, while it is still handing them out. Such is the discipline that separates managing risk from trying to time the top.

Manage risk into the strength, not after it breaks. I hope this helps.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 12:50

Lutnick Draws Red Line: "Great American Companies" Shouldn't Use Chinese Memory Chips

One week after The Wall Street Journal reported that Tim Cook's Apple was testing memory chips from China's CXMT, a company blacklisted by the Pentagon over alleged ties to the People's Liberation Army, the outlet published a follow-up story with an interview with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who publicly urged Apple not to proceed. The standoff comes as the AI data-center buildout absorbs global memory supplies, driving prices sharply higher and forcing consumer-electronics manufacturers to explore alternative sources.

"The Trump administration is not in favor of that," Lutnick said in an interview after touring a new Apple manufacturing plant in Houston, Texas. There have to be "other solutions to the memory issue, but it's not great American companies using Chinese memory."

Lutnick said he has told Apple "plainly" that US tech giants shouldn't use Chinese memory. Apple has tested chips from CXMT and Yangtze Memory Technologies for potential use in devices sold in China, though Chief Operating Officer Sabih Khan declined to comment on the trials, saying her team must examine "all options."

Apple can buy standardized Chinese memory chips without government approval, but customized components could require licenses.

As we've covered, the iPhone maker has been waging a lobbying campaign to secure the White House's blessing to ease the financial pressure from soaring memory-chip prices. A recent FT report said Apple approached the Commerce Department earlier this summer about procuring Chinese memory chips.

Related:

• Apple Wants To Buy Memory From China As Soaring Chip Prices Spark Inflation Shock

But Lutnick's comments to the WSJ make clear that the White House has, at least for now, withheld that blessing.

Meanwhile, Micron Technology and US senators from states benefiting from planned US memory investments are lobbying the administration to block US tech giants from procuring Chinese memory chips, warning that doing so would undermine domestic production and national security.

The WSJ previously reported that other device companies are also seeking supplies from CXMT:

Laptop makers HP and Acer have started using memory chips from CXMT in devices sold outside the U.S. to alleviate some of the memory supply strain, people familiar with the matter said.

Back to the Lutnick interview from Friday, the outlet reported:

Even so, Lutnick, who is spearheading the administration's plan to increase domestic chipmaking, said the administration continued to press Apple to bring more production to the U.S. 

"Relentlessly, more and more and more," he said, describing the pressure. "They've built their supply chains on low-cost labor. And now they need to build a supply chain on advanced manufacturing. Can Apple do it? Of course they can." 

"You're going to see step by step, and piece by piece, they're going to bring significant portions of their business home," Lutnick said. 

Most of Apple's supply chain is in Asia, and the company has been working with contract manufacturers to build new iPhone assembly plants in India.

Asked if Apple has any plans to bring iPhone production to the U.S., Khan pointed to efforts the company has already made, including commitments to spend tens of billions of dollars on made-in-USA chips for iPhones, as well as adding an assembly line for Apple's popular Mac Mini desktop computer in Texas. He also said Apple was focused on helping chip manufacturers reshore their supply chain end to end.

To sum up, Apple does not appear to have the White House's blessing to use Chinese memory chips, leaving the company with fewer options to offset soaring component costs and signaling continued upward pressure on product prices.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 12:15



 

 

This week, I speak with Ankur Crawford, Executive Vice President at Alger and Portfolio Manager of the Alger Capital Appreciation, Focus Equity, and Spectra Strategies.

We discuss her journey from engineering to investment, along with understanding AI and compute investment cycles. She discusses how she builds an investment strategy.

A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Alex Morris of TSOH Investment Research. He is the author of “Buffett and Munger Unscripted: Three Decades of Investment and Business Insights from the Berkshire Hathaway Annual Shareholder Meetings.” The book was namedm one of Amazon’s “Best Books of 2025.” To write it, he reviewed every Berkshire annual meeting from 1994 through 2024 — 100s of hours of video covering more than 1,700 shareholder questions over 31 years — after Berkshire released the meeting archives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Ankur Crawford, Portfolio Manager, Alger Capital Appreciation appeared first on The Big Picture.

The Gold Tax Surprise: When Gold Profits Get Taxed At 28 Percent

Authored by Adam H. Douglas via The Epoch Times,

If you bought gold during its 2023-2026 rally, you may be sitting on a large profit and a tax rule you have never heard of.

Gold’s tax treatment can surprise investors, especially when selling after a major rally. Nattapon Saisaard/shutterstock

The IRS classifies physical gold, and even the popular bullion-backed gold exchange-traded funds (ETFs), as collectibles, a category shared with art, stamps, and antiques. That classification changes the tax bill when you sell. Most holders discover it at the worst possible moment: after the sale, when nothing can be done.

Here is the rule to understand before you sign anything.

Quick Answer: How Is Gold Taxed When You Sell?

Long-term gains on physical gold and bullion-backed ETFs are taxed as collectibles: at your ordinary income tax rate, capped at a maximum of 28 percent. That cap is the part many investors misunderstand and what a lot of media coverage gets wrong. If you are in the 12 percent bracket, you pay 12 percent, not 28 percent. The 28 percent figure only bites investors whose ordinary rate would otherwise be higher, and it compares unfavorably to the 15 or 20 percent long-term rates on gains on stocks.

Gold held for one year or less generally produces short-term gain taxed at ordinary income rates. State tax and, for some higher-income taxpayers, the 3.8 percent net investment income tax may apply separately. Choosing the year you sell can be a structural advantage, so learn the rules first.

The 28 Percent Rule - The Details

Two important details about the 28 percent rule:

• It's a ceiling, not a flat rate. Long-term collectibles gains are taxed at whatever your ordinary rate is, up to 28 percent. Many retirees selling in a modest-income year owe far less than the headline rate.
• It only applies after one year. If you sell gold that was held for a year or less, the gain is short-term, taxed as plain ordinary income with no cap benefit at all. For someone in the 35 percent bracket, selling a month early costs more in tax than if they were to wait another month.

Higher earners should also budget for the 3.8 percent net investment income surtax and any state income tax, which stack on top for gold just as they do for stocks.

The Same 'Gold' Is Taxed Three Different Ways

The ETF row surprises the most people. Funds that hold physical bars in a vault are typically structured as grantor trusts, so the IRS looks straight through the fund wrapper to the metal inside. You never touched a coin, but you are taxed as if you had.

Mining stocks, by contrast, are shares of companies, taxed like any other stock. Gold in a traditional IRA or 401(k) is generally taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn, not at the collectibles rate. Roth treatment differs.

Cost Basis: Where Sellers Save or Lose Thousands

You are taxed on the gain, not the sale price, and the gain depends on your cost basis. Basis generally starts with what you actually paid for the gold, including any dealer premium and applicable acquisition costs, not merely the spot price. A seller who reports only the spot price on the purchase date overpays.

The classic problem arises from coins bought for cash years ago. If you cannot document what you paid, the IRS may treat your basis as zero and tax the entire sale price. Before selling, gather what you can:

• Dealer invoices and receipts, the gold standard of proof
• Credit card or bank statements showing the purchase
• Records of the date acquired, so you can reconstruct the price and premium from that day

Even partial reconstruction beats nothing, and a folder of paperwork assembled before the sale is worth thousands after it.

Inherited Gold and Gifted Gold Are Opposites

These two get confused constantly, and the difference is the whole tax bill. Inherited gold generally receives a stepped-up basis: Your cost resets to the market value on the date of death, and the holding period is automatically long-term, so selling soon after often produces little or no taxable gain.

Gifted gold is the trap. It carries over the giver's original basis and holding period, so if mom hands you coins she bought decades ago, and you sell, you owe tax on all those decades of appreciation. Families deciding whether to give gold now or leave it later should understand they are choosing between those two treatments.

The Deadline You Choose

Almost every other tax rule happens to you on someone else's schedule. This one waits for your signature. You decide the year the gain lands, which means you can sell in a lower-income year, split a large sale across two tax years, or confirm your documentation first.

Knowing the collectibles rule before the sale, rather than after, is the entire game.

FAQs About the Gold Collectibles Tax Rate Does Everyone Pay 28 Percent on Gold Profits?

The 28 percent figure is a maximum, not a flat rate. Long-term gains on gold are taxed at your ordinary income rate, capped at 28 percent, so a seller in the 12 or 22 percent bracket pays that lower rate. The cap only matters for investors whose ordinary rate would exceed 28 percent. Short-term gains, on gold held for a year or less, get no cap at all and are taxed as regular income.

Are Gold ETFs Really Taxed as Collectibles?

The physically backed gold ETFs are taxed as collectibles. ETFs that hold bullion in vaults are generally structured as grantor trusts, so shareholders are treated as owning a slice of the metal itself, and long-term gains face the collectibles rate of up to 28 percent. Funds that hold mining stocks are taxed as ordinary equity funds at 15 or 20 percent. Check the fund's tax documentation before assuming, because the ticker alone does not tell you.

What If I Have No Receipts for Gold I Bought in Cash?

Act before you sell. Search for any payment records, dealer correspondence, or notes establishing when you bought your gold, then reconstruct the price and typical premium from that date. Documented partial basis is far better than none, because without any support, the IRS can treat your basis as zero and tax the full sale amount. For large holdings, a tax professional can help you build a defensible basis file.

Does the IRS Know When I Sell Gold?

Form 1099-B reporting depends on the transaction, the dealer's status as a broker, the form of the metal, and applicable quantity thresholds. Current IRS instructions provide exceptions for many precious-metals sales, including transactions below the minimum quantity required for a CFTC-approved regulated futures contract (CFTC stands for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission); related sales within 24 hours, however, may be aggregated. Regardless of whether a Form 1099-B is issued, you must report a taxable gain or loss.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 11:40

Socialism Simplified: A System Where Government Uses Your Money To Solve Everyone Else's Problems

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

They are coming for your money, and they have a ton of momentum right now. Democratic Socialists are winning election after election by promising free stuff, but of course free stuff is never actually free. Somewhere along the way, someone has to pay for it. If you find yourself protectively reaching for your wallet as you read this, I don’t blame you one bit. Socialism is a system where the government uses your money to solve everyone else’s problems. Unfortunately, it is also a system that is becoming increasingly popular among our young adults.

In a previous article, I noted that a poll that was taken in 2025 found that a whopping 62 percent of U.S. adults under the age of 30 now have a positive view of socialism.

That should chill you to the core.

Meanwhile, Americans view capitalism less favorably than they once did…

• Fewer than half of Americans say capitalism is working even “somewhat” well — down from 60% about a decade ago, according to a June Wall Street Journal-NORC poll.

• 61% of Americans said they were bothered “a lot” by the feeling that the wealthy don’t pay their fair share in taxes, per a Pew Research Center poll in January. That included 41% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents.

• The same poll showed another 60% overall — and 42% of Republican-inclined voters — said the same about some corporations paying their fair share.

• And views of big business went from 19 points positive in 2012 (58%-39%) to 25 points negative last year (37%-62%), according to the Gallup data.

This is crazy.

So why is this happening?

Well, the truth is that a large portion of the population is very frustrated with the economy.

The rising cost of living has been absolutely eviscerating the middle class, and many young adults consider homeownership to be completely out of reach because home prices are so absurdly high.

When someone comes along and starts promising all sorts of free stuff in this very harsh economic environment, it can be very seductive.

But if the Democratic Socialists of America were actually able to implement their entire agenda on the federal level, it would more than triple federal spending…

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) propose new spending that could more than triple federal outlays. They propose the government pay for health care, housing, higher education, and electricity. Jobs are government-guaranteed, retirement benefits are expanded, paid family leave is universal, fossil fuels are eliminated, and reparations are paid.

The DSA platform claims that the bill for all this will be sent to “the richest individuals and corporations.” Tally up that bill, and it ballparks between $71 trillion and $212 trillion in new spending over the next decade. Confiscating every dollar of high-end wealth and corporate profits would cover only a fraction of those costs. The DSA agenda necessitates high taxes on middle-class Americans.

If you took every penny from every billionaire in America, that would only account for 8.4 trillion dollars.

So where is the rest of the money going to come from?

They don’t have an answer to that question, but they have been winning major races all over the country.

And now a 37-year-old Democratic Socialist named Francesca Hong is favored to win Wisconsin’s Democratic gubernatorial primary…

The 37-year-old restaurateur and chef-turned-member of the state Assembly is leading in polls by relatively wide margins ahead of Tuesday’s Democratic gubernatorial primary. Hong, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America who represents the famously liberal state capital of Madison, comes equipped with politically problematic tweets covering everything from abolishing the police to the racist origins of Thanksgiving.

It is hard to believe that someone like that could actually become the next governor of Wisconsin.

I wouldn’t even hire her to run a Dairy Queen.

But this is where we are at as a society, and it appears that lots of Democratic Socialists will be heading to D.C. after the midterm elections.

In 2026, Democratic Socialists have been repeatedly winning primaries in deep blue congressional districts…

• Claire Valdez (New York – 7th District): Won the Democratic primary in an open congressional race.

• Darializa Avila Chevalier (New York – 13th District): Defeated a 30-year progressive incumbent in a highly publicized upset.

• Melat Kiros (Colorado – 1st District): Defeated long-time incumbent Representative Diana DeGette in the Denver-based Democratic primary.

• Christopher Rabb (Pennsylvania – 3rd District): Won the open Democratic primary race for this Philadelphia-based congressional seat.

• Donavan McKinney (Michigan – 13th District): Unseated incumbent Representative Shri Thanedar in the Michigan Democratic primary.

What will D.C. look like if the Democrats take back both the House and the Senate?

Some of the Democrats that are running for seats in Congress appear to be absolutely psychotic.

If there is a major progressive wave in the fall, that could potentially make Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez one of the frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028.

As Ben Shapiro has aptly pointed out, she seems to be pushing a new version of “woke” that is more palatable to many Americans…

Woke 1.0 forced Americans to say, “Am I racist or am I not?” Woke 2.0 is, “Is American capitalism inherently corrupting and bad? Is the West’s system of freedoms and free markets inherently imperialistic, colonialist, genocidal, and racist?”

It’s easier to pitch woke 2.0 than woke 1.0. Why? Americans have been convinced over the course of the last 25 years or so that America is the bad guy, that we and our allies are fundamentally evil, that our foreign policy decisions of the past two decades and maybe longer, going all the way back to World War II, according to some, are actually terrible and horrible, and we’re the bad guys in the world.

Add the economic angst right now, combine those two things, and you get woke 2.0, Ocasio-Cortez’s new program. It is about hatred of America.

But no matter how AOC may want to market it, the content is still the same.

In so many ways, the socialists want to turn our country completely upside down and make it the exact opposite of what it once was.

They intend to do this by taking over the Democratic Party.

Democratic Socialists always run for office as Democrats, and most of them openly identify themselves as Democrats…

Self-identified democratic socialists do not see socialism as being mutually exclusive and continue to identify with other terms on the left, including more mainstream Democratic labels. Of Socialist Democrats, 92% consider themselves to also be Democrats, 84% consider themselves to also be Obama Democrats, and 80% consider themselves to also be progressive.

We are being told that there is a civil war in the Democratic Party, but the truth is that the differences between “mainstream Democrats” and Democratic Socialists are not actually that significant these days.

They are all heading in the same direction. Mostly, their disagreements are about how far to go and how fast it will take to get there.

We already have the biggest government in human history, but they want to make it even bigger.

But socialism doesn’t work.

As Margaret Thatcher once warned, the problem with socialism is that the socialists always eventually run out of other people’s money to spend.

Considering the fact that we are nearly 40 trillion dollars in debt, our country is rapidly approaching that point too.

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 10:30

Post-Maduro Venezuela Wants Its $4BN In Gold Back From England

Venezuela wants its gold back. And now with Maduro having been removed and Caracas being essentially a puppet of Washington influence and interests, it has a much better chance at this than ever before.

Venezuela’s government and opposition are teaming up to wrest back $4 billion in gold bullion currently locked in the Bank of England’s vaults, according to a Friday report by the Financial Times.

Bank Of England/Shutterstock

A freshly issued joint statement confirmed they are actively working "to recover Venezuela's international reserve assets held in the Bank of England."

If successfully repatriated, the funds are slated in part for post-earthquake reconstruction efforts and to soften the blow of years of US sanctions, which still haven't actually been fully lifted.

The funds have been the subject of a lengthy court battle, after since 2018 the United Kingdom has blocked access by denying recognition to Venezuela’s revolutionary socialist government.

Despite Maduro having been ousted by a US military operation last January during a shock overnight military raid on the capital, the Bank of England is demanding absolute legal clarity on who actually holds the reins of power in Venezuela before agreeing to open up the vaults.

An unnamed opposition figure revealed to the FT that both factions are hashing out a "transparency mechanism" designed to ensure the billion-dollar windfall isn't quietly siphoned off.

President Delcy Rodriguez, who was Maduro's former VP, has made personal request to King Charles for the gold:

The bullion has been the ​subject of a long-running legal battle in British courts, and it has not been released despite Maduro's capture by the U.S. in January and a ​request by acting President Delcy Rodriguez to King Charles.

The South American ​nation was hit by devastating twin earthquakes at the end of June that killed ‌more ⁠than 6,000 people.

Rodriguez said the government and lawmakers had agreed to focus on projects aimed at rebuilding households, health capacities, electricity availability and clearing rubble, and to this end, "concentrate efforts to promote ​the recovery of ​Venezuela's international assets ⁠in the Bank of England."

Venezuela had long charged England with "theft" as part of a regime change agenda aimed at the former government, which Washington had finally effected early this year.

For the first time there is no longer a clean "we don’t know who the legitimate government is" excuse... The value of the gold roughly doubled while it was frozen.

This is a perfect case study in how physical resource control actually works.

Since 2018–19 the UK has refused to release roughly 31 tonnes of Venezuelan gold sitting in the Bank of England vaults — now worth around $4 billion — because London did not recognise the Maduro… https://t.co/GzMdOquAbS

— ResourceGeopolitics (@ResGeoPol) August 14, 2026

Under Rodriguez, the socialist system does remain in place, however Caracas has shown itself to now side with the US and West on a variety of foreign policy issues - from shifting its outlook on Israel, as well as distancing itself from Russia, China and Iran.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 09:55

The post Trump’s War Sends Interest Rates Soaring appeared first on CEPR.

China Copies America's Futuristic "Sub-Second Detect-To-Fire" Anti-Drone Swarm Dome Gun

China appears to have replicated a next-generation counter-drone system we first covered in mid-July. The system uses a multi-barrel hemispherical array that reduces much of the latency associated with conventional turrets, shortening the sensor-to-shooter engagement cycle. Beijing's apparent interest reflects the design's potential as a next-generation counter-UAS system capable of engaging drone swarms approaching simultaneously from multiple directions.

X user Drone Wars revealed that Chongqing Jianshe Industry, a Chinese state-owned arms manufacturer specializing in light weapons, developed a multi-barrel weapon concept designed to counter drones approaching from multiple directions.

Drone Wars added more color:

The patent describes several barrel assemblies connected to a common propellant chamber. Each assembly uses a feed tube containing spherical projectiles, with a spring mechanism automatically moving the next projectile into position after firing. According to the design, propellant gas drives a locking block during firing, closing the feed opening and preventing gas from escaping. Once pressure drops, a return spring moves the block back, reopening the feed path and allowing the next projectile to enter the firing position. The concept reportedly allows multiple barrel assemblies to be mounted at different angles, enabling simultaneous fire in several directions. The design appears intended to increase the likelihood of engaging small drones approaching from different angles.

China’s Chongqing Jianshe Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. has reportedly developed a multi-barrel concept intended for countering unmanned aerial vehicles.

The patent describes several barrel assemblies connected to a common propellant chamber. Each assembly uses a feed tube… pic.twitter.com/AfBCMVNZTv

— Drone Wars (@Drone_Wars_) August 13, 2026

Circling back to our report last month, titled "Sub-Second Detect-To-Fire": Futuristic Dome Turret Could Be US Military's Answer To Drone Swarms, China's answer to Picket Defense Systems' multi-barrel hemispherical array appears very similar.

"Fixed multi-barrel hemispherical array: no slewing delay. Sub-second detect-to-fire. No dead zones, no blind spots, no reaction time," Picket wrote in a slide deck.

This week in the counter-UAS market, Northrop Grumman unveiled a chain gun designed to defend critical infrastructure from drone swarms.

The skies are changing. Defending against one threat isn’t enough anymore. Our Raid Hunter™ is built to meet the challenge with precision-guided gunfire and the speed needed to help protect what’s critical. pic.twitter.com/Meuqyg04oY

— Northrop Grumman (@northropgrumman) August 11, 2026

We suspect a procurement supercycle for drone and counter-drone systems will kick off next year.

How to profit:

• "Only The Beginning": How To Profit From The Asymmetric Warfare Boom
• Unusual Machines Jumps After Trump Slaps 100% Drone Tariff In "Hard Decoupling" From China
• This American Drone-Motor Company Is Positioned For "Massive Procurement Tailwind"
• Wall Street Zeroes In On This "Pure-Play" US Attack Drone Company

Drone swarms with fully automated kill chains will only increase demand for next-generation counter-UAS systems, such as multi-barrel hemispherical arrays.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 08:45

War On Rowling Continues (Sans Facts)

Authored by Christian Toto via American Greatness,

Journalists love to ask two questions spun from the same unhinged premise.

Do you support trans women in women's sports, and do you agree with author J.K. Rowling's "anti-trans" views?

The former bullies athletes for passing Biology 101. The latter targets the Harry Potter author at every possible turn.

We're seeing both in action of late. Indiana Fever guard Sophie Cunningham is under media assault for sharing a simple truth about men in women's sports, a fact supported by science at every turn.

"She's MAGA Barbie," select outlets cry!

Rowling is under a fresh attack from an actor lucky enough to snag a role in HBO Max's hotly anticipated Harry Potter TV series. Bel Powley, who plays Petunia Dursley in the upcoming series, told The Telegraph that she "strongly disagrees" with Rowling's position on trans issues.

"I strongly disagree with J.K. Rowling's views on gender. I think that the trans community deserves safety and dignity and respect and total acceptance ... but I love Harry Potter. I grew up with the books. I am from that first generation of readers and, again, I love magic and spookiness."

That's why Powley took the gig. That, and the paycheck, of course. It's likely that The Telegraph asked Powley about the Rowling issue and that the actress didn't bring it up on her own.

Either way, it's part of a larger, disturbing media trend. Reporters describe anyone who doesn't embrace the whole activist trans agenda as "anti-trans." And they never ask the person in question to share specifics on what they're criticizing or recite the actual comments by the "villain" du jour.

For Cunningham, that means her critics won't admit the obvious. Men have clear, distinct biological advantages that don't vanish if they embrace "womanhood" or take hormones. Cunningham spoke very clearly on the issue. She did so without malice or political rhetoric.

The media and the Left, but we repeat ourselves, targeted her anyway.

Rowling also has been very careful in her language on trans issues. She doesn't wish the trans community harm. Her initial statements on the subject were kind and hardly alienating.

She simply understands the need for separate spaces for biological women while acknowledging the physiological differences between male and female athletes.

Oh, and she's faced frequent death threats for sharing her commonsense opinions.

Here's what Rowling wrote in 2020, responding to the very early stages of the Left's war on the beloved author.

"Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they're most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk...I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who've been abused by men."

Does that sound cruel or hateful? Hardly. Did Powley read Rowling's long, personal essay on the subject back in 2020? Has she read it lately? Unlikely.

The same is likely true for John Lithgow. The veteran actor plays Professor Dumbledore in the series, and he, too, has been coaxed into savaging Rowling for her trans views. They're "inexplicable," Lithgow said. Has he tried speaking with her directly? She's a key player behind the scenes of the new HBO Max show.

Why not start there?

Has he read everything she's said on the matter? Where does he agree or disagree? It's fine to disagree, of course, but he must know the intense cancellation movement she's faced in recent years.

Or does he realize that the "safe" position in Hollywood for anyone, let alone an 80-year-old actor, is to slam Rowling and leave any critical facts out of the conversation?

To be fair, the legacy media does just that, too.

Christian Toto is the editor of HollywoodInToto.com - "The Right Take on Entertainment." He's an award-winning journalist and movie critic whose film reviews are heard on radio stations across the country. He co-hosts Denver's Mike Rosen at the Movies radio show on KOA NewsRadio as well as the weekly "Hollyweird" segment on The Michael Brown Show.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 08:10

North Korea Rages At Upcoming US Drills: "Rehearsal For Aggressive War"

North Korea has issued a severe warning over the upcoming joint military exercise between the United States and South Korea, characterizing it as a rehearsal for an aggressive war and that it is is ready to respond.

North Korea's Foreign Ministry described Friday that these planned drills look different, and will be more dangerous, compared to all prior ones of the past-half decade, in that they appear offensive in nature as the exercise will focus on modern warfare tactics.

The Associated Press

The 10-day Ulchi Freedom Shield exercise will kick off this coming Monday, August 17, and will see tens of thousands of military personnel from the United States, South Korea participate - but also other allied countries such as Australia.

"The US announced that the forthcoming exercises are quite different from the ones of the past five years and intended to master the ability of fighting a war on the basis of the new aspects of modern warfare," the North Korea condemnation reads. 

"By doing so, it did not conceal its aim to complete preparations for the substantial military confrontation with the DPRK. This is tantamount to an admission that the exercises, which the US and the ROK describe as 'annual' and 'defensive' ones, are a rehearsal for an aggressive war," the ministry added in a statement published by Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

US military magazine Stripes has admitted that growing North Korean defense cooperation with Russia has given new impetus and shape to the joint war games:

North Korea’s growing military partnership with Russia and the battlefield experience its troops have gained in the war with Ukraine is shaping how U.S. and South Korean forces prepare for a potential conflict on the peninsula, a senior United Nations Command officer said Thursday.

Australian army Lt. Gen. Scott Winter, deputy commander of U.N. Command, said the allies are accounting for Pyongyang’s increased use of technology, its ballistic-missile development and lessons learned by North Korean troops supporting Russia as they prepare for Monday’s start of Ulchi Freedom Shield.

The command is "very conscious" that North Korea has used its relationship with Moscow as an opportunity to test ballistic missile systems and gain contemporary battlefield experience, Winter told reporters during a briefing on the exercise at the Press Center in Seoul.

Meanwhile North Korea has further stated: "It is our consistent principle of ensuring security to respond to a new level of a threat with a new level of a deterrent," and so the country "will more clearly express its stance on the enemies to cope with any threats and challenges through the responsible and decisive exercise of the right to legitimate self-defense."

North Korea threatens 'overwhelming' response to US-South Korea joint military drills — KCNA

Pyongyang claims the exercise that begins August 17 is not merely 'defensive' but rather 'provocative', simulating modern warfare, including drone, electronic and cyber operations pic.twitter.com/D9cjx5OcgC

— RT Intl (@RT_on_X) August 14, 2026

In Ukraine, President Zelensky has this month been highlighting a deepening role by Pyongyang in helping Russia militarily, including alleged use of North Korean ballistic missiles on Ukrainian cities.

Interestingly, Zelensky is using this narrative to try and goad South Korea into changing its policy and export heavy weapons, including anti-air defenses, to Ukraine.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/15/2026 - 07:35

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

• The Clocks on One Building: Four-Year Leases. Sixteen-Year Guarantees. Debt to 2049: Shanaka Anslem Perera’s essay on the clocks of a single building — a small meditation on time, architecture, and attention that unfolds into something larger. (Shanaka Anslem Perera)

• How Hard Can Quant Trading Really Be? I Tried It to Find Out. Hedge funds have armies of PhDs, Bloomberg terminals, and million-dollar data feeds. I have Python open in VS Code – and a PhD in political economy. How much can I reproduce on my laptop? Lauren Leek’s experiment in DIY quantitative trading — the strategies, the backtests, and the humbling distance between academic finance and live P&L. (Lauren’s data Substack)

• The Rich, Lonely Life of a Top-Tier Male OnlyFans Creator: The economics work. Everything downstream of the economics does not. CJ Clark makes millions selling adult content—and the illusion of companionship — to subscribers on the internet. His work pays for his nice house in the San Diego suburbs and the McLaren in his garage. But human connection is harder to come by. (GQ)

• G.P.S. and the Lost Art of Getting Lost: A new book, “Little Blue Dot,” by Katherine Dunn, raises questions about the unintended consequences of knowing where we are. (New Yorker)

• Inside the Billion-Dollar Industry That’s Keeping Your Beer Cold—and Saving Lives: Ice is essential to Texans in so many ways. So why does thinking about it give some of us a case of brain freeze? Ice is essential to Texans in so many ways. So why does thinking about it give some of us a case of brain freeze? (Texas Monthly)

• The Ultimate Horse: Selective breeding has pushed horses to the limits of biology. But at what cost? This is the paradox of the thoroughbred: breeders have spent centuries trying to create a faster horse, but in doing so, they may have bred away the very genetic diversity that would allow the horse to keep improving, or even to remain robust. Works in Progress on the centuries-long breeding project that produced the modern thoroughbred — selection, speed limits, and why horses stopped getting faster. Selective breeding has pushed horses to the limits of biology. But at what cost? (Works in Progress)

• What Was the Internet? As AI overtakes the web, five writers reflect on how far it’s fallen and what comes next. Five writers on how far the web has fallen as artificial intelligence overtakes it, and what replaces it. Fifty-six minutes, perfect for the weekend. (Boston Review)

• The Tantalizing Possibility Of Locating Consciousness In The Brain: NOEMA on the neuroscience of consciousness localization — the competing theories, the adversarial collaborations, and what’s actually testable. Few discoveries would be more consequential than identifying the specific neural structures responsible for subjective experience. ZZZ (NOEMA)

• See the Battlefield Innovations Reshaping the Russia-Ukraine War: Midrange strikes taking out Russian logistics, long-range strikes causing a fuel crisis in occupied Crimea and reaching refineries deep inside Russia. Technology helps Ukraine achieve an edge on the battlefield (Wall Street Journal)

• RIP Tony Bourdain, You Would Have Hated All This Discourse:  How would Tony the man feel about Tony the film? As Bourdain’s longtime assistant, I learned never to predict his responses. Bon Appétit on the A24 biopic and the posthumous Bourdain industrial complex — the man who despised sanctimony has become its favorite subject. (Bon Appetit)

Video of the day: I doubted this was the greatest album ever – then I heard these tapes. This is the full story of how The Beatles recorded Revolver, an album that changed popular music forever.

By the Numbers: Tim Cook’s era as Apple CEO ends on September 1, 2026.

Source: Ritholtz Wealth

 

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Dr. Ankur Crawford, EVP and Portfolio Manager at Alger. She heads the firm’s flagship Alger Capital Appreciation strategies. She was an Engineer at Intel, won the Intel Ph.D. Fellowship, and was awarded fellowship Natl Academy of Sciences, Engineering & Medicine, and holds several U.S. patents.  She was recognized as a “Top Women in Asset Management” in 2020 and serves on the board of The Knowledge House, a Bronx-based charity teaching technology skills to underserved communities.

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

All ICE Enforcement Officers In Maine Equipped With Body-Worn Cameras, Sen. Collins Says

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said Friday that all Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in Maine have been given body-worn cameras and trained how to use them.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents walk outside the Ventura County Government Center in Ventura, Calif., on July 27, 2026. Blake Fagan/AFP via Getty Images

Acting ICE Director David Venturella announced on Aug. 8 that federal agents would be equipped with body-worn cameras by the end of the month in a move to increase "transparency and accountability."

The cameras are a key measure that congressional Democrats demanded during a months-long dispute earlier this year over funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

In an Aug. 13 post on X, Collins said that she was pleased that as of 2 p.m. on Thursday, all ICE officers in Maine "have been equipped with body-worn cameras and trained in their use."

Collins said that when she spoke to Venturella last month, he committed to deliver body-worn cameras to ICE agents across the country by the end of August.

"I urged him to prioritize Maine, and they have arrived more than two weeks ahead of schedule," she added.

Democratic lawmakers have demanded that ICE be reformed following the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens by federal agents during operations in Minnesota earlier this year. Alex Jeffrey Pretti and Renee Good were both shot and killed by ICE agents in January.

According to a notice published by the DHS on Aug. 10, ICE plans to spend up to $20 million on gloves that can deliver electric shocks for its agents.

The devices, known as CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E, or Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter, are expected to be delivered by March 31, 2027, according to the notice.

The notice refers to the gloves as "conductive distraction and de-escalation" devices, which ICE seeks to buy for Homeland Security Investigations and Enforcement Removal Operations officers and agents.

The device manufacturer, Compliant Technologies, stated on its website that the devices were designed "to supplement existing tools for law enforcement, corrections, security, EMS [Emergency Medical Services] and the military."

The devices must be applied directly to a person's skin and are ineffective when applied through clothing or hair, according to the user manual. No more than two gloves should be used at a time, with each application lasting not more than 15 seconds, it stated.

A DHS spokesperson told The Epoch Times by email at the time that ICE aims to ensure its officers have the tools and equipment they need to safely arrest and remove "criminal illegal aliens" from the country.

"Every decision is made with careful consideration and appropriately reviewed to ensure that any technology ICE utilizes is consistent with all applicable law enforcement policies and standards," the spokesperson said.

In an Aug. 7 statement, ICE said it arrested more than 1,200 illegal immigrants across Georgia under Operation Safe Community-Atlanta, which targeted illegal immigrants with criminal histories, including charges of aggravated assault, sex crimes, assault and battery, and crimes against children.

The Trump administration is also imposing heavy fines on illegal immigrants.

In a July 23 statement, DHS said that more than $84 billion in civil fines have been imposed on such individuals. This includes a $998-per-day charge levied on any illegal immigrant who does not leave the country despite a final order for removal.

"Under President Trump and Secretary [Markwayne] Mullin, DHS is working faster than ever before to remove criminal illegal aliens from our country," assistant secretary Lauren Bis said in a statement at the time.

"Our message to illegal aliens is clear: LEAVE NOW. If you don't, you will face the consequences, including fines, arrest, and deportation. Illegal aliens have a choice," she added.

Tom Ozimek, Troy Myers, Jack Phillips, and Aldgra Fredly contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/14/2026 - 22:35

Forget Reminding Young People About 'Boat People': South America's Rejection Of Socialism Is Happening In Real Time

Andy Laperriere, Piper Sandler's head of US policy research in Washington, wrote in a note on Thursday that explained both parties are moving left on economic policy as populist measures gain support across the political spectrum. His big-picture view is that "hard-left and socialist candidates" are damaging the Democratic brand primarily through deeply unpopular positions on open borders, defunding the police, and transgender politics. In effect, the party's socialist class is willing to sacrifice broader electoral viability to defend nation-killing policies that most voters reject.

Policies with cross-party support include a $15 federal minimum wage, a temporary 10% cap on credit card interest rates, restrictions on Wall Street's purchases of single-family homes, and expanded government intervention lowering drug prices.

Even Republican voters back several of those proposals by wide margins, suggesting the post-election policy threat to markets will extend beyond Democratic control of Washington.

Here's where the numbers are striking: About 80% of Republicans support banning large institutional investors from buying single-family homes, 79% favor capping credit card rates, and 75% back a $15 minimum wage. Across all voters, 63% support higher taxes on corporations and billionaires, while 59% favor government-provided health coverage.

Laperriere pointed out that President Trump and JD Vance have helped move Republicans away from Milton Friedman-style free-market economics by framing trade, corporate power, and economic transactions in increasingly zero-sum terms.

Laperriere said Democrats face a different kind of problem, noting that the party's socialist and progressive economic proposals are often popular, but its positions on policing, immigration, and gender remain deeply unpopular. Only 29% of voters support abolishing ICE, 24% back transgender athletes competing outside their biological sex, and 11% favor abolishing the police.

Laperriere noted that two-thirds of Democratic voters now hold a favorable view of socialism, partly because younger folks have no lived memory of Soviet bread lines, the Berlin Wall, or the Vietnamese "boat people" who fled communism.

Furthermore, as we've outlined, the failed socialist experiment in South America has resulted in a once-in-a-generation shift to common-sense right-wing leaders, with Trump-backed Abelardo de la Espriella taking power in Colombia just a week ago. 

The political shift has extended far beyond Colombia. In recent years, voters across Bolivia, Peru, Honduras, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, and El Salvador have either rejected socialist governments or moved decisively against far-left parties.

Laperriere argues that younger Democratic voters lack any living memory of the "boat people" and therefore have little historical context for understanding how socialist and communist systems fail. But the warning signs are not confined to the Cold War era; rather, years of left-wing governance in South America that have coincided with currency crises, persistent inflation, capital flight, institutional deterioration, and rising crime that resulted in failed states, such as Venezuela and Cuba, are more than enough to show youngsters that socialism has failed - yet again. Latest figures show that there are nearly 800,000 illegal aliens from Venezuela in the US - and we wonder why ... 

More from Laperriere:

We want to make two related points in today's piece. First, voters across the political spectrum are more open to progressive/populist economic ideas than perhaps most investors think – and both parties (if Vance is the GOP nominee) are going to increasingly offer the voters leftof-center economic policies. The hard left and socialist candidates are not swimming upstream when they call for higher taxes on the wealthy, price controls, and more government entitlements. It's their ideas on the police, the border, and gender identity that will hurt them politically. Second, Democratic voters are fed up with their own establishment for two main reasons: a sense their leaders are feckless when it comes to challenging Trump and the fact that a significant and growing share of the Democratic voting base is hostile to Western civilization. 

We argued in our recent piece, A Policy Bear Market, that both parties increasingly evince an open hostility or at least a wariness to free markets. As we noted in that report, JD Vance is running against Milton Friedman and market fundamentalism. President Trump has tapped into a growing sense that the system is rigged – and over time has convinced more Republicans this is true. He has a zerosum view of economic transactions in which one side is, in his words, getting screwed. It's true there has always been economic populism on the right, and as we often noted you could call it 'populism' because it's popular. It's popular to say we won't touch your benefits, to make the other guy pay higher taxes, and to scapegoat other people for the price you have to pay for drugs, gasoline, or anything else. But as the table below shows, a lot of ideas we generally associate with the left end of the political spectrum enjoy broad or at least considerable support among Republican voters. The move to the left on economic policy isn't limited to Democratic voters.

And of course there has been a seismic shift to the left among Democratic voters. We noted in a recent piece that two-thirds of Democratic voters have a favorable view of socialism. Part of the reason is it has been a long time since ordinary voters have seen socialism in practice. Ask a group of people who grew up in the 1970s or 1980s what 'boat people' means and most of them will be able to tell you it's people who got on leaky boats (or put their children on them) to flee communism and seek a better life. It's most associated with immigrants from Vietnam but also Cuba and other places. See President Reagan's brief 1982 Christmas radio address for a moving story of US Navy sailors rescuing some Vietnamese in a desperate situation to get a sense of the phenomena. 

During the Cold War, socialism didn't have much purchase with voters because images of desperate people fleeing communism, the bread lines in the Soviet Union, and the fact that the guns mounted on the Berlin Wall pointed inward were there for all to see. There were a few exceptions (like Bernie Sanders, who honeymooned in the Soviet Union), but it was obvious to most voters that socialism doesn't work.

But the Berlin Wall fell more than 35 years ago and socialism is rarely practiced anywhere in the world today. Ask a younger group of people what 'boat people' means and you get blank stares. A whole generation of people have grown up having seen nothing of the kind. Instead, a generation of young people has been taught in many schools (especially elite ones) that America (and Western civilization more broadly) is racist and rotten. This view is held disproportionately among young and highly educated white voters. 

This is the coalition that is fueling the insurgent campaigns that have taken out most Democratic House incumbents who have lost their primaries this year. They hold not only progressive or even socialist economic views; they are hostile to Western civilization. They view borders and the police as the vestiges of racism. As the table above shows, these views (in contrast to some of their economic views) are wildly unpopular. Francesca Hong, who narrowly lost the Wisconsin Democratic primary for governor this week, posted a few years ago that we should cancel Thanksgiving because it is "celebrating colonialism." We couldn't find a poll result for cancelling Thanksgiving, but imagine defending that in a general election. 

Nonetheless, she received more than 38% of the vote this week. That may be roughly the share of the Democratic primary electorate (which is much smaller than the Democratic general electorate, but nonetheless picks the candidates) that is hostile to Western civilization. Along with frustration with their leaders for being ineffective at challenging Trump, Democratic voters have been in a mood to vote out incumbents. The chart on the following page shows that 10 incumbents have been defeated in primaries this year, the most in a non-reapportionment year (in which incumbents end up running against each other or in territory they haven't represented before) going back to the 1950s. Most of the incumbents who have lost were Democrats who lost to younger, more left-wing candidates. The turmoil in the Democratic Party has a lot of similarities to the forces that propelled Trump to the Republican nomination in 2016. 

As a quick aside, of course there are other explanations for the shift to the left on economic issues. Corporate profits account for a larger share of GDP. Wealth is increasing faster than incomes, and that disproportionately benefits the wealthier people who hold assets. A decade of zero rates – and the return to more normal rates – has priced many younger people out of the housing market. There was the spike in inflation. There has been a steep decline in manufacturing employment during the past several decades (though not manufacturing output). And so on.

Regardless of the causes, the bottom line for investors is both parties are moving to the left on economic issues. The socialists and the progressive left have taken unpopular positions, but it's their social agenda that is likely to sink them politically. Many of these more left-wing economic policies are popular (including among many Republicans) and may be become law down the road.

Yet the nonprofit ecosystem of billionaire-backed foundations, far-left NGOs, Democratic Socialists of America activists, and progressive corporate media has little incentive to highlight the political shift across the Americas. The political backlash undermines the core narrative that capitalism is inherently destructive and that socialism will succeed if implemented correctly next time.

The Trump administration could exploit that vulnerability by expanding its messaging around Latin America's rightward turn. The objective would be to remind younger voters that socialism has miserably failed, and that its consequences always end in disaster: inflation, currency crises, capital flight, institutional decay, soaring violent crime and rising insecurity.

Related read: South America Just Rejected Socialism. So Why Is North America Buying It?

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/14/2026 - 22:10

Judge Drops Case Against 6 Nevada Republicans Accused Of Falsifying 2020 Election Result

Authored by Chris Summers via The Epoch Times,

Six Nevada Republicans, who were accused of submitting a certificate falsely declaring President Donald Trump had won the state's 2020 presidential election, will not face a trial after a judge dismissed the case against them on Aug. 13.

Nevada GOP Chair Michael McDonald walks on stage before speaking ahead of then-Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Nev. on Jan. 27, 2024. John Locher/AP

Nevada Judge Mary Kay Holthus ruled in favor of the defendants, who were Nevada GOP Chair Michael McDonald, Nevada GOP Vice Chairs James DeGraffenreid and Durward Hindle, Clark County GOP Chair Jesse Law, and Douglas County GOP officials Shawn Meehan and Eileen Rice.

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford - who, as a Democrat, will challenge Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican, in November's election - brought charges of forgery and "offering a false instrument for filing or record" against the six, who all pleaded not guilty.

In December 2023, Trump suggested that the indictment was politically motivated and tied to the Biden administration.

Trump won in Nevada by a large margin in 2016, but lost the election in 2020.

The 2020 election, conducted under the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, was marred by allegations of electoral fraud.

After the Nov. 3, 2020, election, the six Republican electors gathered outside the Nevada Legislature to sign a certificate giving the state's six electoral college votes to Trump. The ceremony was broadcast online, and the video footage was used by the prosecution as evidence in the case.

It would later emerge that Biden had won Nevada by more than 30,000 votes.

The case brought against the six Nevada defendants centered on their intent in submitting the certificate.

Prosecutors argued that the defendants intended for the certificate to be recognized as Electoral College votes by then-Vice President Mike Pence, who had to determine who had won the election on Jan. 6, 2021.

Defendants Said It Was 'Political Theater'

But the defendants said signing the certificate online was an act of "political theater" designed to publicize their concerns about alleged electoral fraud.

They said they had no intent to deceive a government agency but were preserving their rights to challenge the official election results.

"Testimony presented to the grand jury established that the submitted certificates were not treated as Nevada's official electoral certificates and were not accepted for filing or acted upon by the receiving agencies," she wrote in her ruling.

"Rather, the evidence demonstrated that the documents were recognized for what they were and returned because they could not be accepted.

"The Court further finds the public and political nature of Defendants' conduct significant in evaluating whether the evidence supports an inference of fraudulent intent.

"Defendants repeatedly explained the purpose of their actions during the televised ceremony and in contemporaneous communications."

Holthus said she concluded that the state had "failed to present sufficient evidence establishing the essential elements of the offenses charged."

Three similar cases in Michigan, Arizona, and Georgia have previously been tossed.

Nevada Attorney General to Appeal

Ford's office said it plans to appeal Holthus's ruling.

McDonald's defense attorney Richard Wright, in a statement emailed to The Epoch Times, said Holthus's order was "well reasoned."

"This hasty, premature announcement of an intention to appeal [by Ford] reeks of continuing a politically motivated and legally doomed prosecution," Wright wrote.

He accused Ford of wanting to continue a "harassment" and "waste of expensive prosecutorial resources."

The Nevada decision came on the same day Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced charges against five noncitizens accused of voting in the 2024 general election, and one U.S. citizen accused of registering her noncitizen spouse to vote.

The charges follow a state review of 38 suspected cases of noncitizen voting or related conduct from 2009 to 2025.

Donald Trump supporters protest the Nevada vote outside Clark County Election Department in North Las Vegas, Nev., on Nov. 5, 2020. Ronda Churchill/AFP via Getty Images Tyler Durden Fri, 08/14/2026 - 21:45

Trump's DOJ Will Reportedly Support End Of National Firearms Act After 92 Years

Why do Americans protected by the 2nd Amendment still need to get permission and approval from the ATF to have a rifle with a barrel under 16 inches, or a particular brand of stock, or a suppressor that, in most cases, doesn't silence a firearm at all but simply makes shooting it easier on a person's hearing?  Why, for 92 years, have citizens had to pay for a tax stamp and send their fingerprints to the government for guns that should be considered a constitutional right?

This is largely due to the National Firearms Act of 1934, passed under the highly overrated Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration.  The law became a permanent annoyance to every gun owner in the US and a lucrative revenue stream for federal agencies; at least, until now.  

Finally, after nearly a century, the law is being erased.  But how?  

The legality of the NFA relies heavily on the existence of a $200 tax stamp.  The government did not ban covered items outright in order to avoid a clash with 2nd Amendment protections.  Instead, they added a tax to various firearms and related accessories, then made the processing of the tax and approval on the purchases an arduous affair.  Until the Trump Administration stepped in, NFA approval on any particular item could take up to a year. 

This clunky process was deliberately designed to dissuade citizens from purchasing certain firearms and attachments.  For people suspicious of government lists, the fingerprinting and applications made them not want to bother.  Possession of any of the items covered under the NFA is considered a serious federal crime with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

However, when Congress passed Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" in 2025, this included a provision which lowered the NFA transfer tax to $0.  With the tax stamp gone, the legal loophole which made the NFA possible was eliminated.  Now, an army of legal challengers have brought their case to federal courts to remove the NFA entirely, and they have succeeded (for the most part).

Expectations within the gun community were reserved (gun rights advocates have long waited for this moment and remain anxious that the DOJ will try to ruin the party with an appeal).  But, this does not seem to be the case.  Trump's DOJ missed the first 7-day deadline for an appeal.  They also have another 60-day deadline, but reports suggest that the DOJ has no intention of interfering with the court's ruling. 

Rumors are swirling that Trump was personally involved in the DOJ decision to support the removal of the NFA by refusing to appeal.  Reportedly, according to Rep. Andrew Clyde who has been leading the charge on the legal fight, Trump has confirmed that there will be no further DOJ challenges to the NFA decision. 

So what does this mean?  The federal government will be issuing guidance over the next 60 days on how FFL holders and gun shops can proceed with the transfer of items listed in the NFA.  At first, coverage is limited to the plaintiffs involved in the court ruling (and their customers), however, the DOJ has the power to nationalize the court's decision, effectively making the NFA null and void for everyone everywhere (this is now a likely outcome).

This means, suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs) and other items could be purchased without tax stamps, fingerprinting and wait times.  A basic background check (Form 4473) will remain in place.  It may take another couple of months, but it appears that the NFA is effectively dead thanks to the Trump Administration.  Gun owners had to suffer for nearly a century, but the long battle is ending.  

Meanwhile, the Hughes Amendment is still a problem, preventing the sale or transfer of machine guns made after 1986.  But it's all about winning one fight and moving on to the next, and the end to the NFA is an epic accomplishment; one which most gun owners never thought they would see in their lifetime.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/14/2026 - 21:20