Zero Hedge

US Data Center Power Demand Could Reach 106 GW By 2035

US Data Center Power Demand Could Reach 106 GW By 2035

By Brian Martucci of UtilityDive

Summary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Judge Restricts Immigration Arrests In DC

Judge Restricts Immigration Arrests In DC

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DOE's Hyperspeed Reactors

DOE's Hyperspeed Reactors

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

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

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

Enter the Department of Energy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authored by Mark Keenan via GlobalResearch.ca,

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

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

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

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

The Mirage of Growth

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

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

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

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

The Productivity Paradox

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

Studies reflect the same paradox:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Global Data Center Stampede — But Toward What?

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

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

  • EU: funding AI infrastructure via public bonds

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • federal supercomputers

  • national-lab datasets

  • taxpayer funding

  • private-sector AI firms

into a unified national AI platform.

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

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

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

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

Who Carries the Risk?

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

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

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

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

Questions the Global Public Deserves Answers To

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

F-16 Fighter Jet Crashes In Southern California

F-16 Fighter Jet Crashes In Southern California

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

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

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

Developing…

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

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

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

Authored by Gabrielle Temaat via The College Fix,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

They faced up to 20 years behind bars if convicted.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cuellar Reassures Dems

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

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

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

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

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

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

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Spending Slowdown Hits Apple App Store In Major Markets

Spending Slowdown Hits Apple App Store In Major Markets

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Whoops.

Not good.

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

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

Pages