Justice Department Withdraws Subpoenas Of New York Times Journalists

Authored by Timothy Frudd via The Epoch Times,

The Justice Department has withdrawn subpoenas for three reporters from The New York Times following criticism from a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian indicated on July 23 that he would have granted the request from the newspaper to reject the subpoenas if the Justice Department had not withdrawn them.

Subramanian said that the government was required to ensure that it could not obtain the information it sought from any other sources before subpoenaing journalists.

“Subpoenas are not the first thing you do; they are the last thing you do,” the judge said.

The Justice Department issued subpoenas to three journalists at The New York Times on July 10 after the newspaper published a report on alleged concerns about the new Air Force One, the plane used by the president, which was donated by the Qatari government.

The report alleged that the new aircraft lacked advanced security features, including anti-missile capabilities. It also said the Secret Service had urged President Donald Trump to use the old Air Force One as he departed from the NATO summit in Turkey earlier this month.

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton, who was nominated by Trump to be the next director of national intelligence, issued the subpoenas.

During the July 23 hearing, Subramanian questioned government lawyers regarding the steps they took in their investigation. He cited rules protecting against violations of the First Amendment and said the department’s actions had turned the law “on its head.”

“When you see something like this, if this were a civil proceeding, what I would normally do is ask the parties to show causes why sanctions should not be issued,” the judge said.

A Justice Department spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email on July 23 that Subramanian threatened the government attorneys with sanctions unless the subpoenas were withdrawn. The spokesperson said the judge also blocked the government from “presenting the meticulous process of this investigation.”

“The grand jury has a right to hear testimony from all material witnesses in a federal criminal investigation,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times. “This judge’s conduct overrides clear longstanding principles and common sense-blocking the grand jury from receiving core evidence in a national security investigation.”

Despite withdrawing the subpoenas on Thursday, the Justice Department spokesperson confirmed that the investigation remained ongoing.

“Make no mistake, this investigation remains ongoing, and we will pursue justice against those threatening national security by leaking classified information, a serious federal crime,” the spokesperson added.

In a statement on July 11, David McCraw, the senior vice president and deputy general counsel for The New York Times, criticized the subpoenas as an “attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs.”

The Justice Department’s rapid response account responded by saying that the department had an important role to ensure that people entrusted with classified information did not share it. “To be clear, reporters are not the targets; those leaking classified information are,” the department said.

On July 15, The New York Times asked a court to toss out the grand jury subpoenas. In a motion unsealed on July 20, the paper also said the Justice Department issued subpoenas to obtain phone records of the publication’s journalists and some of their family members.

“Two of the subpoenas seek records beginning on January 1, 2026, long before the events that are purportedly the basis for the Department’s investigation,” the publication wrote in a letter. “That timeframe strongly suggests that the Department is using this investigation not to focus on any purported concerns arising from the July 8 and 9 articles, but instead to forage for information about the Journalists’ source relationships more broadly.”

During his confirmation before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 15, Clayton maintained that the Southern District of New York’s office followed protocol when issuing the subpoenas.

“I’m confident that the procedures that we have in place to protect the First Amendment and protect the freedom of the press and not result in intimidation of journalists or the like were followed,” he said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 19:15

James Carville Calls On Democrats To Cave On Voter ID

The SAVE America Act, which would mandate proof of citizenship along with valid ID for federal elections and tighten mail-in voting rules, remains stalled in Congress due to the Democrats' filibuster in the Senate, even though the underlying idea is among the most popular in American politics.

Gallup found 84 percent of Americans favor requiring photo identification at the polling place, and 83 percent favor proof of citizenship for first-time registrants - including 98 percent of Republicans, 84 percent of independents, and 67 percent of Democrats. Pew Research Center put photo-ID support at 83 percent, with 95 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats behind it and only 16 percent opposed. Rasmussen found 77 percent of likely voters calling photo ID a reasonable measure to protect election integrity. Thirty-six states already request or require identification for in-person voting.

As CNN's Harry Enten put it: "The bottom line is this: Voter ID is NOT controversial in this country."

A bill with that kind of consensus isn't controversial, yet Senate Democrats keep blocking it. Now longtime Democratic strategist James Carville is looking at those numbers and has decided his own party needs an exit ramp. On his podcast, Politics War Room, he told Democrats to stop fighting voter ID and find a way out of a fight he believes is already lost.

The trigger for the conversation was New Jersey. Carville's co-host Al Hunt opened by noting the right had seized on Gov. Mikie Sherrill's disclosure that roughly 6,600 noncitizens were registered to vote in the state, fewer than 400 of whom cast ballots.

"Voter fraud in the United States is an infinitesimal problem," Carville said. "I don't even... to the extent, I guess you could say it exists, anything could exist, it exists on such a minuscule scale, and it's been proven time and time and time again."

That is where most Democrats stop - the problem is too small to bother with. Carville kept going.

"But I don't know if we're not better off saying, okay, we'll take that alternative ID, bring your gas bill or your light bill or something," he said. "Because for whatever reason, it polls at 75%."

He pointed to his home state of Louisiana, where voters already have to show a driver's license at the polls, and asked why the national party keeps treating that standard as an emergency. A rule allowing alternative documents such as a gas or electric bill still polls at 75 percent - a number that should give pause to a party that has spent a decade calling identification requirements a modern poll tax.

"We are not gonna win the war" on some kind of ID, Carville said. "I never had a problem with it. I'm just saying of all the things... if every poll shows 75 or better, saying we should have some kind of ID to vote... just quit fighting it and go along with it and move to the next thing."

Hunt pushed back, arguing that most states already have ID requirements and criticizing the SAVE America Act directly. Carville was quick to draw the same line. "I'm not talking about the SAVE Act, I'm not talking about the SAVE Act at all," he said. His proposal was narrower: "Whatever the law in Louisiana is, make it the national law."

It is worth being precise about what the New Jersey episode actually was, because it is not quite the case for the policy Carville is conceding. Those 6,600 people had pressed "no" when a Motor Vehicle Commission keypad asked whether they were U.S. citizens, and a software defect registered them anyway. They held valid state identification - that is why they were at the MVC. An ID check at the polling place catches someone voting under another person's name. It does not catch a state agency overriding what an applicant told it.

Which is rather the point of Carville's argument. He is not claiming voter ID would fix anything. He is saying it costs Democrats nothing and they are losing the fight anyway - that a party cannot win by declaring war on a basic expectation shared by nearly every voting bloc, and that the energy would be better spent on arguments it can win.

The concession is notable coming from this particular program. Politics War Room has hosted the Brennan Center's Michael Waldman to argue that widespread voter fraud is a myth and to pick apart the SAVE Act. Carville still believes the first part. He has simply stopped believing it matters.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 18:50

Trump Admin Weighing Military Intervention In Mali

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that the Trump administration is considering conducting military action against an al-Qaeda affiliate in Mali, which, if carried out, would mark the eighth known country bombed by the US since President Trump returned to power last year.

The report said there is disagreement among Trump officials over the potential military intervention, and named Sebastian Gorka, a British-born former radio host who currently serves as senior director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council, as a vocal advocate for military force in the administration.

File image via Brookings

Gorka also pushed for the US to escalate its air war in Somalia, and he got his wish, as the Trump administration has carried out a record-shattering number of airstrikes in the country, attacks that are ignored by US media, but there is little to show for the escalation as al-Shabaab has continued to make advances against the US-backed government.

The al-Qaeda-linked group in Mali, known as Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam, or JNIM, has been waging a major offensive along with Tuareg separatists, formally known as the Azawad Liberation Front, against the Mali government, which took power in a 2021 coup and is backed by Russia.

The US's ally Ukraine has been on the other side of the conflict, as it’s known to have provided drones and intelligence support for Tuareg militants fighting against the Malian military and Russian mercenaries.

When asked by the Post if the administration intends to take military action in Mali, a White House official told the paper that terrorist activity in the Sahel is a “multinational problem” and urged “regional partners and NATO allies to support the Alliance of Sahel States in their war against JNIM and ISIS.”

The Alliance of Sahel States (AES) is a confederation of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, three West African countries where military juntas ousted governments that had maintained close ties with Western countries and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).

Sebastian Gorka — also a strong advocate for maintaining US ops against Al-Shabaab — is pushing for US military intervention against JNIM

The Trump Admin called for ECOWAS and NATO to “support the Alliance of Sahel States” and blamed the juntas’ military failures on Russia https://t.co/HqO1xW7fuP pic.twitter.com/xGgDTM5uaq

— Josh (@rohmerfan1127) July 22, 2026

The official suggested the administration may attempt to peel Mali and other countries in the region away from Russia, saying that Moscow “has proven to be an ineffective security partner for Mali” and that the US hoped “that other African nations take note of Russia’s terrible performance in combating terrorism.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 18:25

AI Debates Reveal A Deeper Shift In American Values

Authored by Peter Earle via AmericanThinker.com,

A survey finding that 70% of Americans support putting half the stock of major AI companies into a public wealth fund reveals a deeper cultural shift toward viewing wealth as zero-sum and favoring redistribution of innovation rewards, unlike the more market-accepting attitude during the internet era.

Thirty years ago, the commercial internet burst onto the scene amid sweeping predictions. It would transform commerce, eliminate industries, reshape labor markets, and create fortunes on an unprecedented scale. It did all of those things. Yet there was not just remarkably little public appetite for confiscating half the equity of internet companies and redistributing it through a government-run fund: there was none. Americans largely accepted that entrepreneurs, investors, and workers who assumed extraordinary risks would also enjoy extraordinary rewards. Today, by contrast, a new survey finding that roughly seven in ten Americans support transferring half the stock of major AI companies into a public wealth fund suggests that something more profound than anxiety over a new technology is taking place.

Every technological revolution has its Luddites, however, marginal their appearance. What’s new is that today’s Luddites don’t merely want to stop the machines; they want to confiscate their owners’ property.

Certainly, artificial intelligence has generated genuine concerns. Many fear job displacement, misinformation, privacy violation, or the concentration of economic power in a handful of firms. Those concerns deserve discussion. But support for effectively nationalizing half the ownership of successful companies marks a dramatic departure from the country’s traditional understanding of property rights, entrepreneurship, and the relationship between entrepreneurship and reward.

The internet itself offers an illuminating comparison.

Few technologies have been as economically disruptive. Newspapers collapsed, retailers disappeared, travel agencies became obsolete, music stores vanished, classified advertising evaporated, and countless occupations either changed radically or ceased to exist. At the same time, the internet created entirely new industries employing millions of people while dramatically lowering costs, expanding consumer choice, and increasing productivity. Although critics worried about monopolies or privacy, proposals to seize half the ownership of companies such as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, or eBay scarcely emerged, let alone attracting something approaching majority public support.

Why has the public reaction shifted so dramatically?

One explanation is that Americans have become increasingly accustomed to viewing wealth through a zero-sum lens. For decades, political rhetoric, media coverage, and even educational institutions have increasingly emphasized inequality over wealth creation as an engine of overall prosperity. Rather than asking whether society as a whole becomes richer through innovation, discussion often centers on whether innovators have become “too rich.” When economic success itself is viewed with suspicion, redistribution naturally appears more reasonable than allowing innovators to retain the returns from their investments.

A second explanation is declining confidence in upward mobility. During the internet boom, many Americans believed they could personally participate in the gains, whether by starting businesses, purchasing stocks, or finding new career opportunities. Today, younger generations often face high housing costs, elevated student debt, and persistent pessimism about their future prospects. If people increasingly believe they won’t participate in economic growth through ordinary market participation, government intervention begins to seem like the only remaining avenue to benefit from economic progress.

A third possibility is that artificial intelligence itself feels more immediate and personal than previous technological revolutions. The internet largely complemented human labor before gradually replacing certain businesses and occupations. AI, by contrast, appears capable of performing cognitive tasks once thought uniquely human. White-collar professionals from writers, programmers, accountants, designers, and analysts now perceive direct competition from software. Fear often produces demands for political intervention that would have seemed unnecessary under more optimistic circumstances. (See the New Deal for additional evidence.)

None of this means policymakers should ignore legitimate questions surrounding AI. Governments have an appropriate role in enforcing contracts, protecting property rights, ensuring competition, prosecuting fraud, and addressing clearly demonstrated harms. But confiscating ownership after firms have invested billions of dollars in research and accepted enormous commercial risks would establish a troubling precedent extending well beyond artificial intelligence. Among other effects, inventors, and their backers would understandably ask which successful industry might be next.

The survey therefore reveals something larger than public opinion about AI. It reflects a striking evolution in American attitudes toward markets, technological, advancement, and private property. The internet transformed the economy every bit as profoundly as artificial intelligence promises to do, yet Americans overwhelmingly viewed its rewards as something to be earned rather than redistributed. If American citizens increasingly see extraordinary innovation as justification for extraordinary government force, the most important story may not be artificial intelligence at all. It may be the changing philosophy of the society deciding how to govern it.

If a majority can be persuaded that today’s successful innovators no longer deserve to own what they built, there is little reason to believe AI will be the last industry to find itself in the redistributionist crosshairs.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:40

Three Levers China Is Pulling To Weather Gulf Energy Shock; How Long Can Beijing Hold Out?

The new troubling development is that maritime chokepoint chaos spread overnight from the Strait of Hormuz to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, where Iran-backed Houthis targeted two Saudi Arabian tankers. The attacks expose yet another maritime chokepoint and risk further physical market tightening, forcing traders to price a larger war-risk premium into Brent crude futures and pushing the benchmark above $100 a barrel Thursday morning.

Oil headed to Asia generally does not flow through both chokepoints. Persian Gulf exports pass through Hormuz and sail east, while Saudi crude loaded at Yanbu enters the Red Sea and passes south through Bab el-Mandeb.

Asia takes most of Hormuz crude, with China alone absorbing nearly two-fifths. On Saudi Arabia's Red Sea route through Bab el-Mandeb, China recently accounted for more than half of exports.

With both chokepoints disrupted, we want to check back in with China to understand what levers Beijing is pulling to absorb the energy shock - this builds on our three previous notes:

• China's Oil Imports Plummet To Eight-Year Low
• Visualizing China's Role In Stabilizing Oil Markets
• China's Refiners Slash Runs To Lowest Since 2017, As Asia Refiners Slow Purchases Of Mid-East Oil

On Wednesday, Goldman commodities strategist Hongcen Wei outlined three factors that have so far allowed Beijing to contain the economic fallout from the Gulf energy shock:

1. drawing down fuel inventories,
2. switching to coal and renewables,
3. and concentrating production cuts in oil- and gas-intensive industries.

China's real GDP growth slowed to an annualized 3.6% in the second quarter from 5.3% in the first, while total energy demand still rose .4% from a year earlier in April and May. Destocking of coal, oil and NatGas added 5.4 percentage points to energy-demand growth.

Fuel substitution also softened the impact. Lower oil and gas use subtracted 1.7 percentage points, while increased consumption of coal and renewables added 2.2 points. Gasoline demand sank 23%, but EV charging jumped 60%, allowing transportation activity to migrate toward electricity.

The remaining damage was concentrated in industries heavily dependent on oil and NatGas, while industries with greater flexibility shifted toward electricity and alternative fuels.

Wei provided the full rundown on how China is absorbing the energy shock:

Major Fall in Net Imports, but Total Energy Demand Growth Still Positive. Ordinarily the largest importer of energy products shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, China has drastically reduced its net imports of fossil fuels, effectively acting as a shock absorber for global energy prices through reduced demand. Net imports of crude oil cratered in China and the rest of Asia beginning in March, but recovered in the rest of Asia to 2025 levels by June while continuing to fall in China through the first half of July (Exhibit 3).

China's net imports of oil/natural gas/coal fell 24%/7%/24% YoY in April and May reflecting YoY price jumps of 59%/49%/38% (Exhibit 4). These reductions in fossil fuel net imports were the largest source of negative total energy demand growth, representing -3.7pp/-0.3pp/-1.2pp of China's total YoY energy demand growth of +0.4% (Exhibit 5).

Exhibit 3: China Crude Oil Net Imports Continue to Fall While the Rest of Asia Recovers to 2025 Levels

Chinese total energy consumption in April and May increased by an average of 0.4%, or 52 petajoules, year-over-year. To roughly estimate the impact of the supply shock on energy consumption, we estimate counterfactual consumption growth as the average +3.1% annual total energy demand growth rate from 2014-2023.[2] Applying this rate to China's average total monthly consumption in April and May 2025 would imply 375 PJ counterfactual YoY energy demand growth. This would suggest roughly 323 PJ of demand destruction for April and May, or 2.7pp reduction in the potential YoY growth rate. China's Q2 real GDP growth fell to 3.6% after 5.3% Q1 growth quarterly annualized, slightly exceeding our China team's nudged-down June forecast of 3.5% Q2 growth but missing market expectations. Lower GDP growth reflected mostly slower government spending, but also higher energy prices and unfavorable weather conditions.

Below, we highlight three factors that helped mitigate the total demand shock.

#1 Effective Destocking of Coal, Oil and Natural Gas Filled in for Fall in Fossil Fuel Imports and Production

Importing less of its energy needs from abroad, China has turned to its domestic inventories--rather than domestic production growth--to supplement the supply of fossil fuels.

Total domestic fossil fuel production actually fell slightly YoY in April and May, with lower coal production comprising a 0.5 percentage point reduction in total energy supply growth (Exhibit 5). Domestic crude oil production was unchanged compared to April and May of last year, likely constrained by high extraction costs in China's aging brownfields.

The bulk of the rise in total energy consumption has been driven by the effective destocking of fossil fuels.

• Thermal coal inventory levels increased by 1.6%/3.7% during April/May 2026, significantly lower than the 4.7%/5.8% MoM increase of April/May 2025. Though China's coal inventory level rose this April and May, we consider the reduction in MoM additions compared to last year's flows--in other words, how much less China added to its coal inventory this April/May compared to April/May 2025--as effective destocking. Defined this way, coal stock use contributed 3.0 percentage points to total YoY demand growth (Exhibit 5).
• We estimate that oil destocking also accelerated, contributing 2.2pp to total YoY demand growth (Exhibit 5). Moreover, changes in China's visible crude oil stocks also appear directionally consistent with our implied destocking estimates of around 1mb/d in May and June, suggesting a shift from restocking in Q2 2025 to greater inventory use this year (Exhibit 6).
• Effective natural gas destocking accounted for 0.2pp of total YoY energy demand growth (Exhibit 5).

#2 Fuel Substitution to Coal and Renewables Has Limited the Demand Destruction

To avoid wider demand destruction caused by lower fossil fuel imports and production, China has increased its reliance on coal and renewables in its wider energy mix. Lower oil/natural gas use in China's overall energy demand contributed -1.6/-0.1 percentage points to its total YoY energy demand growth in April and May, while greater reliance on coal/renewables contributed +1.4/+0.8pp (Exhibit 7).

As an example of this fuel switching in practice, we observe China substituting driving with gasoline for driving with electricity. Gasoline consumption fell 23%/23%/21% YoY in April/May/June, but EV charging growth rose to 62%/60%/57% YoY. Despite much lower gasoline consumption, traffic congestion remained relatively stable, falling only 1.2% YoY in April before growing by 0.2% and 2.1% YoY in May and June (Exhibit 8). These findings are consistent with our prior reporting on China's uptick in domestic EV sales since the start of the Iran war (despite seasonally-adjusted total passenger car sales remaining flat) and may reflect substitution both in car purchases (more EVs bought) and especially in choosing which kind of energy to drive on.[3]

#3 Energy-Related Reductions in Output Are Concentrated in Oil- and Natural Gas-Reliant Sectors

Several industries that are highly oil- or natural gas-intensive have slowed production. Physical output of processed crude oil fell by 10.9% YoY in Q2 reflecting lower crude oil inputs (Exhibit 9).[4] Sulfuric acid, produced as a byproduct during oil and natural gas refining, saw 4.6% lower Q2 physical output YoY. Chemical fibers, produced with either oil or natural gas feedstocks like ethane or naphtha as inputs, saw 3.7% lower Q2 physical output YoY.

The production of the industrial chemical ethylene increased in Q2 by 1.2% YoY, rebounding from a 4.1% YoY fall in April to +2.1% and +5.5% YoY growth in May and June. Though conventional ethylene production involves steam cracking of oil feedstocks like ethane or naphtha, the recent rebound in ethylene output growth may reflect China's significant acceleration in modern coal-to-chemicals pathways like Coal-to-Olefins (CTO) where coal is gasified into syngas, synthesized into methanol, and dehydrated to form ethylene. China's use of coal in chemical production rose by 11.5% in April YoY amid the energy supply shock according to DBX Commodities, with coal-to-chemicals facilities residing atop domestic coal reserves well-positioned to facilitate the transition.

Furthermore, energy-intensive products more reliant on power than oil or natural gas feedstocks saw more resilient output growth. The production of caustic soda, a major industrial chemical, is highly electricity-intensive but does not require oil or natural gas as unique inputs. Physical output of caustic soda grew by 2.4% YoY in Q2. EV production, more reliant on power than on materials made with oil and natural gas, also increased 17.0% YoY.

The key question is how long China's energy strategy to bridge Hormuz and Red Sea disruptions can last.

China recently had 1.3 billion to 1.4 billion barrels in crude inventories, including roughly 400 million barrels accumulated during 2025. At the current import shortfall of about 3.5 million barrels a day, that recent stock build is about four months of coverage. Of course, the substitution strategy also has its limits. Coal, renewables, and EVs can replace gas-fired power and some gasoline consumption, but they cannot entirely substitute for oil used in aviation, trucking, petrochemicals, or industrial processes.

The bigger risk comes when China stops drawing on its strategic stockpile and returns aggressively to the global crude market.

Earlier today, Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, warned in a note that "war enters a dangerous phase with the Red Sea and critical infrastructure at risk." Read it here.

Professional Subscribers can access our latest energy-market intelligence, including analysis of Hormuz and other critical maritime chokepoints, through the new Marketdesk.ai.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:20

California's Civil Rights Mafia

Authored by Christopher F. Rufo and Kenneth Schrupp via City Journal,

In 2018, two women filed a class-action suit against Riot Games, the video-game colossus responsible for League of Legends, Valorant, and other popular titles. They claimed that the company had denied them and other female employees "equal pay," favored men for promotions, and created a "hostile work environment." The women wanted Riot Games to pay out and to "cause social change."

One year later, the parties agreed to a $10 million settlement. It was a massive sum, but not enough for California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which intervened to block the agreement and claim that Riot Games could be on the hook for a staggering $400 million. Facing a court battle against a deep-pocketed state agency, Riot Games later agreed to a $100 million settlement, about ten times the original amount.

California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, now called the Civil Rights Department, has turned the Riot Games strategy into an entire playbook. For years, the state's civil rights apparatus has enabled nonprofits and lawyers to shake down major companies, spinning small-dollar claims into massive, multimillion-dollar settlements.

The system operates like a mafia. Its "don," Governor Gavin Newsom, sits at the top. His capo, CRD director Kevin Kish, runs the shakedown campaigns. And the state advances the interests of the entire Democratic apparatus: the Civil Rights Department secures settlement cash for radical NGOs, labor leaders can use the cases to create pressure for unionization, and left-wing lawyers "cause social change" at scale. For the first time, we are revealing the inner workings of California's civil rights mafia - and exposing the corruption of state government.

California's Civil Rights Department was created in 1980 as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. The department was initially tasked with enforcing nondiscrimination law, but in the wake of the #MeToo and George Floyd social movements, the state's power structure saw an opportunity to turn the agency into a powerhouse. They rebranded the organization as the Civil Rights Department in 2022, in keeping with the agency's focus on shaking down companies for "civil rights violations."

The shakedown campaigns have been remarkably successful. In the last four years alone, the CRD has coerced corporations like Microsoft ($14 million), Snap Inc. ($15 million), and Riot Games ($100 million) to shell out eight- and nine-figure payments. These settlements have variously included provisions for class members, interest groups, and the CRD itself, which is allowed by state law to recoup fees associated with its prosecutions.

The CRD's enforcement actions often include one or more predictable features. First, the CRD finds a handful of women or minorities who claim that a large corporation has mistreated them. Then the agency initiates or intervenes in an action against that corporation. Finally, to spin small-dollar claims into massive payouts, the CRD generates outrageous liability estimates, which goad the company to the negotiating table.

The point man on this scheme is Kevin Kish, a Yale Law School graduate and the CRD's director. On its website, the agency notes Kish's reputation for taking "a creative approach to advocacy," which involves "collaborations" with nonprofits and "organizing campaigns" - in other words, using the department to advance the interests of unions, nonprofits, and other left-wing groups.

Kish mastered this approach during his time in the progressive legal movement. Before starting in state government, he worked as director of the Employment Rights Project for Bet Tzedek Legal Service, where, in one instance, he helped turn a small-time wage-and-hour case into a multimillion settlement against Walmart and one of its contractors.

Apparently pleased with Kish's efforts, then-Governor Jerry Brown appointed him to lead the Department of Fair Employment and Housing in late 2014. Gay activists celebrated his appointment, with one LGBT group calling Kish a "strong and passionate legal champion."

In his first few years at the DFEH, Kish oversaw several small-time suits: in 2015, he got a Mexican restaurant chain to cough up $130,000; in 2017, he induced a rural welfare nonprofit to shell out $152,000. Then, in 2019, he intervened in the Riot Games case, which later delivered a nine-figure payout and apparently encouraged him to expand his ambitions. For Kish, who has argued that "there is almost no [adult] transgender person who has not experienced . . . some form of discrimination," the role represented an opportunity to enforce his broad understanding of "hate."

By 2021, Kish had perfected the shakedown model and picked a new target: Activision Blizzard, the video-game giant that owns titles like World of Warcraft and Call of Duty. The CRD sued the company, alleging, among other things, that it had discriminated against female employees and cultivated a "frat boy" culture. According to a criminal referral that we obtained, which was filed by a group tied to former Activision CEO Robert Kotick, the pretext for the department's action was an earlier federal complaint, which concluded that charging Activision would "send a message to the industry as a whole."

The original class-action suit included just ten of Activision's more than 9,000 employees. The complaint claimed, among other things, that "only about 20 percent" of the company's employees were female, that some of its employees riffed "about their sexual encounters," and that a female employee had committed suicide, potentially in connection with an alleged relationship with a supervisor.

Activision initially tried to placate the CRD. Kotick reportedly "pledged to add resources to ensure that Activision Blizzard's hiring practices are more diverse." The company's then-president, J. Allen Brack, said that he "disdain[ed] 'bro culture'" and had spent his "career fighting against it." Activision apparently even offered paid time off to workers who wanted to participate in a staged "walk-out."

It didn't work. In fact, things got worse: later that year, sensing the company's vulnerability, a labor union called the Communication Workers of America (CWA) filed a suit with the National Labor Relations Board. The union accused the company of trying to prevent workers from demanding a "more equitable, sustainable, and diverse workplace."

The CRD and the CWA apparently had shared ambitions - to punish and to unionize Activision - and even hired the same law firm. Kish's CRD hired the same firm (Outten & Golden) that represented the CWA in another suit. The firm's lawyer said that he believed it was the "first time the State of California has retained a private firm to prosecute employment law claims in trial court." (In response to a question about Outten & Golden, CRD pointed us to a ruling in California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment v. California State Personnel Board.)

In September, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought its own misconduct suit against Activision. The agency claimed, among other things, that Activision had exposed "female employees to sexual harassment." The two sides agreed to an $18 million settlement, but the CRD wasn't satisfied.

Kish saw an opportunity for a billion-dollar shakedown. Under his direction, the CRD moved to block the eight-figure settlement with the federal government, reportedly arguing that it "was monetarily inadequate and contrary to public policy." Their bid proved unsuccessful: a federal court denied the CRD's requested intervention, and the settlement took effect the following March.

By this point, Activision had already agreed to pay nearly $20 million and declared its intention to change its policies and performance-review system. But Kish apparently wanted to inflict more damage on the company. The Wall Street Journal reported that sometime in 2021, the CRD estimated that Activision was responsible for nearly $1 billion in damages - an outrageous sum.

Despite the federal settlement, the CRD continued its lawsuit, and other elements of the shakedown campaign came to life. In November, then-Journal reporter Kirsten Grind and others alleged that Kotick failed to disclose alleged sexual misconduct committed against female employees. The company's stock price fell 8 percent within a month.

Some Activision executives and other allies suspected that the state colluded with the press. The same legal filing we obtained claimed that Grind is a "CWA-affiliated union member" and had contacted Janette Wipper, the CRD attorney overseeing the Activision case under Kish, in hopes of having an "important" conversation "off the record." Grind and a coauthor gloated that, after her report, "some employees and investors called for Kotick's ouster, and Microsoft saw an opening to make a deal" to buy Activision.

When we asked Grind, now with the New York Times, for comment on this story, she suggested that we reach out to the Wall Street Journal.

Activision executives wanted to fight back. Under pressure from the state, the unions, and the media, the company hired three lobbyists: Greg Campbell, Dana Williamson, and, according to a source familiar with the case, Alexis Podesta.

In early 2022, the tide began to turn. In March, Newsom's office fired Wipper. Notably, she was fired on the same day that a federal court approved the EEOC settlement, which our source interpreted as a sign that the governor's office was feeling pressure and wanted the case to go away.

Less than a month later, Wipper's subordinate, Melanie Proctor, resigned in protest, claiming that Newsom's office had "repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation."

Eventually, Kish scaled back his demands. In December 2023, Activision settled for $55 million. In the settlement agreement, the state conceded that "no court or any independent investigation has substantiated" allegations of systemic harassment, but the company likely signed the deal to make the lawsuit go away. The government had not proved its case but still managed to shake down its mark for tens of millions of dollars.

The Civil Rights Department made sure to spread the winnings around. In the settlement, Activision agreed to deliver a handsome reward to the CRD's NGO foot soldiers. The court required the company to send up to about $9 million to the CRD and Outten & Golden, the CWA's former counsel. The rest of the $55 million was supposedly reserved for affected workers, but any leftover funds not claimed by those workers would support future shakedowns - specifically, CRD-selected organizations that "promote employment rights for workers in California and/or . . . advance the interests of women workers in technology industries."

The unions had their victory, too. In October 2023, Microsoft acquired Activision for $75.4 billion after agreeing to a host of labor provisions. The CWA considered the merger a massive success, boasting that it provided "a clear path to collective bargaining for almost 10,000 workers."

With the final settlement agreement, the Activision story appeared to be over. But there another storyline was brewing beneath the surface, raising serious questions about the Newsom administration. That story involves Dana Williamson, the one-time Activision lobbyist, who, in January 2023, while the Activision litigation was ongoing, became Governor Newsom's chief of staff.

During her time in the governor's office, Williamson kept tabs on the Activision case. According to a source with detailed knowledge of the case, the governor sent a text message to Kotick, which we reviewed, one week after the December 2023 settlement, sharing gratitude that the saga was finally over. In January 2024, according to the source and government records obtained by the whistleblower Melanie Proctor, Kotick met with Williamson and former Activision lobbyist Alexis Podesta in the governor's office.

According to the source, Kotick, by then retired as Activision CEO, sat down with Williamson to discuss clearing Activision's name - after all, the state had admitted that it had found no evidence of systematic harassment. The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, claims that midway through the meeting, Newsom stepped into the room, engaged in conversation, and, unprovoked, said that he would fire Kish.

Newsom's office did not respond to our request for comment about these allegations.

Williamson apparently believed him. In November 2025, Williamson was indicted on a suite of federal corruption charges, including bank and wire fraud. According to court documents, Williamson conspired with Greg Campbell, another former Activision lobbyist, to siphon money from a dormant campaign account to pay a third party. She and Campbell were both later convicted, with Williamson pleading guilty to multiple fraud counts and lying to federal agents.

The alleged corruption was not related to Activision, but the indictment contained a transcript of a conversation between Williamson and Podesta, the former Activision lobbyist and un-indicted co-conspirator, that sheds light on Newsom's potential involvement in the civil rights mafia. In a conversation that occurred "[i]n or about June 2024," prosecutors said Williamson discussed a public records request related to a corporation's "litigation with the state." When Podesta asked Williamson if a state employee connected to that litigation would be fired, she said: "He sure [will]!"

According to multiple outlets and our own review of the evidence, the corporation in question was almost certainly Activision. And we can report, for the first time, that the official in question was likely the head of the Civil Rights Department. In other words, Williamson appears to have told her alleged co-conspirator that, as late as June 2024, Governor Newsom was planning to fire Kevin Kish.

The Kish firing, however, never materialized. Kish remains the director of the Civil Rights Department. And more shakedown campaigns are in the pipeline.

This all raises a question: Why is Newsom enabling this racket?

One theory is that Newsom sympathizes with Kish and wants to punish corporations like Activision, which, in his mind, are stand-ins for his political enemies. Another theory is that Newsom has always allowed bad behavior to fester around him at arm's length. Throughout Newsom's career, people in his orbit have been arrested for corruption, including, most recently, his chief of staff.

Perhaps Newsom tolerates Kish's bull-in-a-china-shop approach because he simply lacks the will to stop it.

The most likely explanation, however, is that Newsom will do whatever is politically expedient. Under this theory, Newsom might have promised to fire Kish to placate Williamson or corporate interests, then reneged on that promise to placate the unions and the activist groups. Throughout his career, Newsom has been willing to reverse his position if he believes that it is in his immediate interest.

Newsom's office did not respond to our request for comment on this story. The Civil Rights Department told us that they "take every complaint we receive seriously and evaluate them individually for further action based on the specific facts and circumstances."

If anything, Kish operated under even less restraint. The CRD has now set its sight on the largest target of all: Tesla CEO Elon Musk. In 2022, the department sued Tesla, alleging racial discrimination and harassment. Kish apparently hopes to go much further than in his campaigns against Riot Games, Snap, and Activision. According to a source familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity, Kish is hoping to shake down Tesla for up to $6 billion.

Unlike those other firms, however, Tesla hasn't settled and is taking its chances in court. If Tesla succeeds in fighting these allegations, its resistance could provide a model for future targets of the state's racket. If it fails, it will show that no company - no matter how powerful - can outrun the coordinated campaigns of California's civil rights mafia.

Christopher F. Rufo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of America's Cultural Revolution. Kenneth Schrupp is an investigative reporter at City Journal.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 17:00

India Blocks Mobile Internet In Central Delhi As Youth Protests Escalate

The Indian government has ordered telecom companies to disable ​mobile data services in central parts ‌of the capital Delhi, in and around the site of youth protests seeking the resignation ​of the education minister, two sources ​told Reuters on Thursday.

The companies have ⁠complied with the order, Reuters sources ​said.

There was ‌no ⁠mobile data connectivity in many parts of central Delhi on Thursday evening, Reuters journalists said.

Vendors, shopkeepers and restaurants ​complained that ​they were ⁠unable to accept digital payments.

India’s youth protesters have called for nationwide demonstrations on Friday even as Prime Minister Narendra ‌Modi’s government urged them to join talks, while shutting metro stations and mobile internet services and curtailing business in central Delhi.

The youth protesters, led by the self-named "Cockroach" Janta Party movement, have been ​camping in central Delhi since ​last ⁠month and are demanding the resignation of the education minister over leaks of medical school entrance test papers that affected some 2 million students in May and have been linked to several student suicides.

The protests have swelled ​into the biggest youth challenge to Modi since he came to power in 2014. Opposition parties have echoed the youth movement's demands and have disrupted the monsoon session ​of parliament that began this week.

It marks the biggest political crisis of Modi's third term, which began in 2024.

The government made ⁠a fresh appeal on Thursday to the protesters to join talks to resolve the crisis but they responded by calling for nationwide peaceful protests on Friday in solidarity ​with students who alleged police brutality during a march on parliament on Monday by tens of thousands of people.

Thousands of people had returned to the Jantar Mantar protest ​site by Thursday afternoon, carrying anti-government posters and chanting slogans amid heavy security deployment.

Protests also spread to other cities, including Ranchi, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram and Kolkata, local media reported.

Authorities in Delhi shut down 16 metro rail stations in and around the central parts of Delhi where the protesters have remained camped, inconveniencing thousands of commuters.

The government also ​ordered telecom firms to block mobile internet services in the area, sources told Reuters, a move that not only affected protesters but also stopped shops and restaurants from receiving ​digital payments by phone.

Separately, all offices and businesses in the Connaught Place area, the bustling central business district, were asked to shut early on Thursday by the New Delhi Traders ‌Association, which ⁠cited an advisory from municipal authorities due to the security situation in the area.

The measures are seen as an attempt by authorities to curb the protests and prevent any fresh outbreak of violence.

More than 10,000 people had gathered on Wednesday night at the Jantar Mantar protest site. Some protesters attacked police with stones and plastic bottles, injuring a few officers, news agency ANI quoted Delhi Police as saying.

In Monday's clashes during the march on parliament, police used tear gas and canes to push back the protesters.

Earlier on Thursday, Modi said that ​special courts would be set up ⁠to prosecute those behind exam paper leaks, his first public response to the crisis.

"Nothing is more important than the welfare and future of our youth!" Modi posted on X.

But CJP rejected the proposal, saying what courts do after paper leaks is just one ​aspect of the problem.

"But Modi-ji, tell us why are paper leaks happening in this country in the first place?" CJP ​spokesperson Ashutosh Ranka said, ⁠using the Hindi honorific.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 16:40

From Cash To Trash, Rinse And Repeat

Authored by Frank Giustra,

The Continental dollar, born in 1775, was meant to finance the colonies’ fight against Britain—the American Revolution. What it actually financed was a masterclass in how quickly a currency can evaporate when it has no anchor, no credible backing, and no one willing to stop the printing presses. Hundreds of millions of Continental notes were issued with nothing but the promise of future redemption in gold or silver—which the colonies did not possess in sufficient quantity. 

As wartime expenses mounted and the conflict dragged on, the colonies’ solution was a time-honored tactic. Just dig yourself a deeper financial hole by printing more currency. When confidence in the Continental buck inevitably collapsed, merchants demanded ever-larger stacks of paper for the same goods. 

By 1781, a barrel of flour that once cost a few Continental dollars cost hundreds or thousands. The exchange rate against silver reached the point where it took five hundred to a thousand Continentals to buy a single hard dollar (meaning a silver or metal coin). Some states saw the writing on the wall and simply stopped accepting the notes altogether.

The British, who had plenty of practice in meddling in colonial internal affairs, helped the debasement process along. They knew that counterfeiting Continentals on an industrial scale was cheaper than fighting military battles, and more effective. The result, as intended, was hyperinflation. When the dust settled, the phrase “not worth a Continental” had entered the language as shorthand for worthless. 

The Founders, having lived through the destruction of the Continental dollar, carried a deep suspicion of unbacked paper money into the constitutional debates. That suspicion helped produce a document that at least tried to constrain monetary experimentation. George Washington famously said, “Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have, to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open a door to every species of fraud and injustice.”

That was not the only such inflationary episode before the colonies became a republic. During and after the American Revolution, individual states issued their own notes with similarly dismal results—sharp depreciation, hyperinflationary spikes in the 1780s, and the general chaos that made a stronger federal hand on currency seem necessary. 

The War of 1812 brought another suspension of convertibility and the circulation of Treasury notes at discounts. The so-called Free Banking Era that followed (1837–63) is not unlike today’s cryptocurrency industry. It produced thousands of state-chartered banknotes, many of which traded at steep discounts or became worthless when the issuing (“wildcat”) banks, beset by fraud and panics, collapsed.

The Confederate currency of 1861–65 offers perhaps the cleanest parallel to the Continental story. Once again, massive overprinting to finance a war without adequate taxation was followed by hyperinflation so severe that prices rose thousands of percent before the notes became essentially worthless by the end of the Civil War. 

In every case, the pattern resurfaces predictably. Governments (or would-be governments) facing extraordinary expenses turn to the printing press when taxation and borrowing prove inadequate or inconvenient. It’s as if politicians and policy makers either never read a history book or had their memories magically erased. Without a credible anchor in hard assets or ironclad fiscal discipline, public confidence erodes, money velocity rises, and the currency loses purchasing power—sometimes gradually, sometimes in a sudden rush.

The modern version of this story began in earnest with the end of dollar convertibility into gold. Domestically this occurred in 1933, when FDR confiscated privately held gold. Internationally, the break came in 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window. 

Ever since, the dollar has functioned as a pure fiat currency. The cumulative effect on purchasing power has been substantial. What $1 bought in 1971 is what about 15 cents buys today. In other words, you need $6.50 to $7 to purchase what a single dollar bought in 1971. That’s a loss of roughly 85 percent of purchasing power over half a century—an outcome entirely consistent with the long-run behavior of unbacked paper currencies. It’s not hyperinflation in the dramatic sense we saw in 1920s Weimar Germany, or in 2000s Zimbabwe, but it’s a steady, grinding, quasi-invisible debasement that compounds across generations.

The usual excuses, “This time is different”, assume that American institutions are uniquely resilient or exceptional, that the dollar’s reserve status grants permanent immunity, and that the U.S. can abuse its currency without serious consequences.

These sound like the rationalizations heard at the late stages of any long monetary experiment. 

The historical record is not kind to such beliefs. Empires from the Spanish to the British to the French have discovered that the ability to print unlimited currency eventually encourages the very behaviors that undermine the currency. Countless wars have been financed by debt and debasement. Political fragmentation prevents corrective action, confidence bleeds away, and alternative stores of value gain traction. De-dollarization today, whether measured in central-bank gold purchases or shifting trade-settlement patterns, reflects a repeat of that loss of confidence.

The Founders understood something that today’s generation, lacking direct experience of currency collapse, finds easy to overlook. Paper money untethered from hard assets removes the shackles that keep politicians from doing what politicians would always rather do—abandon fiscal responsibility. 

The Founders had seen the Continental experiment up close. They knew that once the printing press becomes the path of least resistance, the incentive structure for politicians and central bankers alike encourages more spending, more debt, and more monetary accommodation. The result, over time, is the gradual erosion of purchasing power we’ve seen since 1971, punctuated by sharper episodes when political or geopolitical pressures intensify.

None of this is to predict imminent hyperinflation or the sudden disappearance of the dollar as a medium of exchange. Fiat currencies can limp along for decades, sustained by network effects, institutional inertia, and the absence of a clearly superior alternative. But the long-run arithmetic is unforgiving and requires only elementary school math to foresee. Every historical example of sustained, unbacked issuance ends the same way. The currency loses most of its value, new arrangements eventually emerge, and those who held real assets, particularly gold, preserve wealth while others do not.

The lesson is not complicated, just inconvenient. When a great power abandons any credible link to hard money, the currency loses purchasing power over time, and the temptation to finance geopolitical ambitions through debt and debasement grows ever stronger. 

The phrase “not worth a Continental” was once popular in the U.S. It wasn’t part of a Cadillac marketing campaign. It came about after the Continental Congress decided that printing its way out of a war was preferable to the messy and difficult business of collecting taxes.

As we’ve seen, the United States has lived through several episodes of this series. The only novelty today is the scale at which the experiment is being run and the amnesia with which it’s being conducted. Those who imagine the outcome will be any different this time around might usefully recall that the Continental Congress also believed its circumstances were unique—until the notes stopped buying anything at all. 

Is it too far-fetched to imagine that our descendants will one day adopt the expression “Not worth a US dollar”? 

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 16:20

NHTSA Begins Work On New Car Door-Handle Rules After Bloomberg's Tesla Report

Auto-safety regulators at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will begin considering new federal requirements for vehicle door handles and emergency-release systems following a series of deadly incidents in which occupants became trapped after electrically operated doors lost power.

NHTSA said an inaccessible or difficult-to-locate mechanical release could prevent occupants from escaping after a crash or fire, potentially resulting in serious injury or death. The agency granted a petition seeking "a robust and obvious door egress system in all motor vehicles" and will begin rulemaking proceedings.

The filing states in the "Action" section that NHTSA has denied a petition to open a defect investigation, offering a near-term reprieve for Tesla and other EV automakers that use similar flush-mounted electronic door handles. However, what comes next from the agency will be an industrywide rulemaking process covering emergency door-egress systems.

"A decision as to the issuance of a rule will be made on the basis of all available information developed in the course of the rulemaking proceeding, in accordance with statutory criteria," the filing said.

The action follows what Bloomberg says has been 15 deaths in a dozen or so accidents in which occupants or rescuers were reportedly unable to open the doors of crashed and burning Teslas. In several cases, occupants survived the initial impact but died or suffered serious injuries after becoming trapped.

Meanwhile on Reddit...

We reported as early as October 2019 on the "futuristic" door handle blamed for the death of a 48-year-old man driving a Tesla Model S in South Florida.

NHTSA declined to open a Tesla-specific defect investigation, citing only one complaint among 179,031 vehicles and concluding that the issue would be better addressed through industrywide regulation. The agency noted that the Model 3 has mechanical releases for its front doors but not its rear doors.

NHTSA noted, "The owner's manual for the 2022 MY Tesla Model 3 includes a section labeled "In Case of Emergency" that details how to open doors from the interior when the vehicle has no electrical power." 

The rulemaking process could take years and may face industry opposition over additional costs. The decision adds to mounting regulatory pressure, including a congressional proposal requiring manual releases and first-responder access, as well as a NHTSA investigation into complaints of children becoming trapped inside certain Tesla Model Y vehicles.

One has to wonder what Bloomberg hoped its reporting would trigger: a sweeping Tesla defect finding or recall.

That is not what NHTSA delivered. The agency denied the defect petition and shifted the broader issue into a lengthy, industrywide rulemaking process.

Perhaps the outcome would have looked different under a Kamala Harris administration.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 14:50

US Lays Groundwork For Approving Offshore Nuclear Power Projects

Authored by Melanie Sun via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. federal government has outlined a preliminary framework to oversee the approval of offshore nuclear power projects, advancing President Donald Trump's agenda to safely unleash domestic energy production and reestablish the United States as the global leader in nuclear energy.

Birds fly along the Pacific Ocean near the dry fuel storage of canisters containing spent nuclear fuel at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) along the Pacific Ocean south of San Clemente in San Diego County, Calif.., on June 9, 2023. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images

"While no commercial deployment on the Outer Continental Shelf is planned or approved at this time, it could greatly strengthen America's energy security in the future," Matt Giacona, acting director of the Interior Department's Marine Minerals Administration, said in announcing the initiative on July 22.

The Marine Minerals Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) released an agreement on Wednesday that lays the groundwork for a more "detailed cooperative framework" outlining jurisdictional oversight for development of offshore nuclear power projects in "a safe and environmentally responsible way."

The memorandum of understanding between the Marine Minerals Administration (MMA), which oversees energy projects in federal waters of the outer continental shelf, and the federal government's independent civilian nuclear regulator will "foster cooperation" and "allow shared technical expertise to ensure reviews are efficient and transparent," the NRC said in a statement.

Director of the NRC's Office of Advanced Reactors Jeremy Bowen said the agreement "creates a clear framework for how our agencies will work together and ensures our processes remain efficient, transparent, and technically robust."

"The agreement will also allow MMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to responsibly respond to industry requests, supporting novel offshore energy production," the MMA added.

The MMA also oversees offshore development such as seabed mining and space launch infrastructure.

Restoring Energy Abundance

The announcement is the latest step taken by the federal government as the president pushes forward with his agenda to quadruple U.S. nuclear power capacity by 2050 and restore American energy abundance.

The president declared a national energy emergency upon returning to office and has since signed numerous executive orders to achieve this goal, including licensing 10 new reactors by 2030.

Leaders in the energy sector have warned that significant investments are needed to address the increasing shortfalls in domestic power supply, as experienced during the recent summer heat waves, when grid operators were forced to issue warnings of potential outages due to inadequate resources to meet peak energy demand.

In March, major U.S. tech companies agreed to build their own electricity generation infrastructure to power their data center operations. They also pledged to help triple global nuclear capacity by 2050.

New Reactor Designs

The Trump administration's effort to speed the safe deployment of advanced nuclear technologies reached an early milestone in July, when three reactor designs achieved criticality.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, many countries are working to develop small modular reactors, including concepts suited for marine or floating applications. Russia is the only country currently operating a floating nuclear power plant, the Akademik Lomonosov. Located in the country's far east, it has been in operation since 2020.

Regarding the offshore use of nuclear technologies, Giacona said the military has safely relied on submerged reactor systems in ships and submarines for decades, calling them a "reliable source of energy in demanding marine environments."

A technician monitors Natura Resources’ MSR-1 molten salt research reactor in Lockhart, Texas, in 2024. The reactor is the first liquid-fueled advanced reactor ever licensed and the first university research reactor approved in more than 30 years. Courtesy of Natura Resources Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 14:30

Watch: Ukraine, Iran Tensions Run High In Rare Rubio-Lavrov Meeting

A US delegation headed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio is holding three day closed-door talks with Russia on the sidelines of an annual gathering by foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Manila.

The high point came in a rare direct Rubio-Lavrav meeting, where the US top diplomat said Russia should have the incentive to end a "very blood war" that has devastated both sides.

Rubio admitted that so far there's been an "unsuccessful or at least unfruitful" effort to end the war and find peace, but insisted the Trump administration is committed to finding a lasting solution "if conditions and factors have changed to make that possible."

"That’s been the challenge, an end that both sides can accept," Rubio said to reporters. "And we’ve tried and we’ll continue to try to see if we can, you know, find a middle ground that brings this about. And we’re prepared to play that role if the opportunity presents itself."

One of the more interesting moments came when FM Lavrov and Secretary Rubio ignored reporters' questions on whether Russia will agree to stop attacking Ukraine, in the wake of the obvious recent escalations of missile attacks on the Ukrainian capital...

Looks like an *American staffer* runs press out of the room as soon as the 'awkward' but still relevant questions were asked.

A reporter asks Marco Rubio whether he will ask Foreign Minister Lavrov about Russia helping Iran target U.S. troops. Another reporter asks Lavrov when will Russia stop attacking Ukraine. A staffer then removes the press from the room. pic.twitter.com/N7I7ZBVQOE

— Acyn (@Acyn) July 23, 2026

Lavrov underscored in the meeting "the unacceptability of further arming" Ukraine and accused European countries of pursuing Russia's "strategic defeat."

The Kremlin has of late warned the West of its growing direct involvement in targeting Russian energy sits as part of Ukraine's long-range drone operations, which have unleashed serious damage on oil production and export infrastructure. 

Lavrov also declared Russia’s readiness for "a political and diplomatic resolution of the conflict" and the upholding of commitment to agreements reached at last year's Alaska summit between Trump and Putin.

But Rubio threw up a significant roadblock and challenge, stressing on the question of arming Ukraine, "There’s been no change to our policy in that regard." But he also again said: "We want a peace deal. We want the war to end."

Another interesting and tense moment came when reporters raised the issue of recent widespread allegations that Russia is arming Iran and helping it with targeting information.

Rubio was clearly trying to not make this an issue at the summit and somewhat surprisingly strongly pushed back against the reports...

Reporter: Did you talk to the Russians about Russia sharing information with Iran targeting U.S. troops?

Rubio: Who says that they are?

Reporter: Are they not?

Rubio: Who says they are?

Reporter: There's been reporting...

Rubio: Reporting in the media? Oh, then it must be… pic.twitter.com/YERHdknMrC

— Clash Report (@clashreport) July 23, 2026

Reuters and others had reported Wednesday, "Iranian drone attacks on CIA facilities in the Gulf have prompted U.S. intelligence analysts to investigate whether Russia assisted by providing targeting information or ​advanced drone technology, said four people familiar with U.S. intelligence."

"These people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters, said U.S. intelligence officials have ‌not yet reached firm conclusions about the possible Russian involvement in the attacks on CIA facilities. But they cited the strikes' effectiveness and apparent precision, as well as Russia's broader technical support for Iran, as possible evidence," the Reuters report added.

Some analysts have pointed out that Moscow is inflicting 'payback' on the United States related to its having armed Ukraine for many years. US intelligence has been assisting Ukraine forces with targeting information. So the logic goes that Russia is now doing the same for Iran in the ratcheting Mideast conflict.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 14:10

Gov. Hochul Responds To Criticism, Explains Rationale For AI Data Center Moratorium

Authored by Oliver Mantyk via The Epoch Times,

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul had an op-ed published in The Wall Street Journal on July 21 responding to the publication's criticisms of her decision to halt data centers of a certain size from being built in her state.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul in New York City on March 19, 2026. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

In her op-ed, Hochul explained her stance on AI data centers and why she believes her decision to prevent the creation of large AI data centers in the state for a year was best for New Yorkers. The moratorium on the facilities is the first of its kind in the nation.

She was countering a July 14 WSJ editorial titled "New York's Data Center Self-Sabotage" published on the same day that Hochul signed her executive order for a statewide moratorium on large data centers, with the newspaper's editorial board calling her move "an act of monumental self-sabotage."

The editorial board said the moratorium on the centers was a popularity move more than a pragmatic one, and that the centers helped local areas with tax money. They also said that the issues of data centers taking up utilities like electricity are overstated.

The publication expressed suspicion of the one-year moratorium, comparing it to the 2008 one-year moratorium on fracking in the state, which was extended until fracking was entirely banned years later.

Hochul opened her July 21 op-ed response by saying the WSJ editorial had gotten New York's decision and rationale for the AI data center moratorium wrong.

She said the one-year pause on hyperscale AI data centers that use 50 megawatts or more is a responsible move, allowing for the establishment of rules for an industry that will hold much influence in the future.

According to Synergy Research Group, these large-scale data centers are the minority of operational centers, but are becoming more common, with hyperscale data centers doubling between 2019 and 2024.

AI data centers are different from regular data centers, which handle running software, web pages, and storing files. AI centers require different computer components focused on AI operations and require more energy and cooling.

Hochul made clear that the existing facilities will still operate, smaller projects will move forward, and the pause will end when rules to protect New Yorkers are in place.

"What we're pausing isn't innovation. It's the rush to build first and answer questions later," she wrote.

She said that New York doesn't need to pick between leading the future in AI and protecting its citizens and communities, and that regulating AI won't hand over technological victory to China.

"America's competitive advantage has never been the absence of rules. It has been our ability to attract the world's best talent, develop breakthrough technologies and earn public confidence in them," she wrote.

Hochul cited her Empire AI initiative as an example of New York's effort in advancing AI technologies.

The governor said that the expansion of data centers should come at the benefit of residents, not the detriment.

"Success means communities reap economic benefits, ratepayers don't foot the bill for massive new energy demand and infrastructure keeps pace with unprecedented growth," she wrote.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 13:50

Sen. Cruz Says GM Pushed The China Car Ban Provision That Would Also Knock Out Mercedes-Benz

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced the bill unanimously. Its chairman voted yes and then accused a Detroit automaker of writing part of it to remove a German competitor.

People look at a BYD Seagull car by Chinese electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer BYD Auto at the Bangkok International Motor Show in Nonthaburi on March 27, 2024. Lillian Suwanrumpha /AFP via Getty Images

The Senate Commerce Committee unanimously advanced the Connected Vehicle Security Act of 2026 on July 22, codifying into law a Biden-era executive order that barred Chinese and Russian automakers from selling passenger vehicles in the United States. The bill is sponsored by Sens. Bernie Moreno (R-OH) and Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), a Republican and a Democrat from two states that build cars. The vote was bipartisan and the margin was total, while the disagreement was about who benefits.

Committee chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX), who supports the bill, told the hearing that General Motors had been pushing for one of its ownership provisions in order to get Mercedes-Benz out of the American market and make its own Cadillac brand more competitive. He said flatly that "we would never consider" banning Mercedes-Benz sales in the United States, and that he would push to change the provision.

GM disputes the characterization. The company said the legislation isn't about any individual automaker and that it "supports policies that protect and strengthen American manufacturing and the global competitiveness of U.S. automakers." Cruz's account is his reading of GM's lobbying, not an established finding.

How A German Carmaker Ends Up In A China Bill

The provision at issue is an ownership test. As reported out of committee, the bill reaches not only companies "owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction" of a US adversary, but companies partially exposed to one - with a 15 percent threshold for vehicle manufacturers and 25 percent for software and hardware firms.

Mercedes-Benz carries roughly 20 percent passive Chinese investment. That is a minority financial stake, not operational control, and the company is accused of nothing. It clears the threshold anyway.

Moreno answered that Mercedes would have until 2030 to comply and could seek waivers from the ownership requirement. He also pointed to Detroit's own adjustments: GM plans to move production of its Chinese-made Buick Envision to the United States for the 2028 model year, and Ford has agreed to move Chinese-made Lincolns stateside.

One more supply chain is being redrawn. Moreno said Google's self-driving unit Waymo, which had been in talks with Chinese automaker Geely about sourcing platforms from China, "has committed to looking at a Detroit-based manufacturer for their future platforms."

Polestar said last month that the administration is forcing it to stop selling vehicles in the United States from the 2027 model year. The company is based in Sweden and majority-owned by China's Geely Holding.

Its sister brand Volvo Cars - which co-founded Polestar and shares the same ultimate owner - said in May it received authorization to keep selling in the United States, though it must still meet the rule's requirements. Same parent, opposite outcomes, which is roughly what an ownership-percentage regime is designed to produce and also why the percentages are being fought over.

What The Bill Is For

The stated rationale is concerns over data and control. Connected vehicles - and almost every new vehicle is one - carry Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cellular, and in some cases satellite links, any of which could in principle expose driver information or vehicle systems to a foreign adversary. The bill extends the existing ban beyond China and Russia to Iran and North Korea, removes light-vehicle weight limits, and sets a minimum civil penalty of $1.5 million or five times transaction value per violation. Software restrictions bite in 2027, hardware around 2030.

Slotkin's office says the legislation "closes the door on Chinese-origin vehicles, software, and key components at every stage" so that data gathered on American roads cannot be routed back to Beijing. Slotkin herself framed it in industrial terms: "The Chinese Communist Party's playbook of heavily subsidizing their product and underselling the competition puts Michigan's auto industry and millions of American workers at risk." Moreno was blunter - "We're preventing an absolute, total, and complete destruction of our industrial base." Roughly 8 million Chinese-made vehicles enter the global market each year.

Polestar 4 (via Top Gear) Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 13:30

Energy Department Issues Emergency Order As Hot Weather Conditions Threaten Blackouts

The Department of Energy (DOE) issued an emergency order authorizing Southwest Power Pool Inc. to use certain energy resources to reduce the risk of potential blackouts, according to a July 21 statement from the department.

Electrical transmission poles and lines in Commerce, Calif., on Aug. 7, 2025. Mike Blake/Reuters

The order, issued on July 20 and signed by Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, stated that Southwest Power Pool (SPP) had asked the DOE to temporarily permit certain resources to operate beyond their normal limits to help ensure grid reliability.

SPP, the regional grid operator serving 17 states in the central United States, also sought authorization to access and deploy backup generation resources at data centers and other large industrial and commercial customer sites.

On July 20, SPP issued multiple warnings about the possibility of rolling blackouts across its service area as high temperatures drove electricity demand to record levels. One alert said SPP had been forced to rely on some or all of its operating reserves after several power plants unexpectedly went offline.

According to the order, Wright determined that additional power dispatch was necessary and that backup generation resources might be needed to address the energy emergency created by the expected strain on the grid.

The determination was based on several factors, including an anticipated electricity shortage and the potential loss of power to homes and local businesses, which could threaten public health and safety.

Wright authorized SPP to use the necessary resources to meet electricity demand. He also permitted the grid operator to deploy backup generation resources as a last resort before issuing an Energy Emergency Alert.

In its statement, the DOE said that the order took effect on July 20 and expired on July 21. The department said the measure helped reduce the risk of power outages across the regions served by SPP.

"The Trump Administration is tapping into an abundant supply of unused backup generation to maintain affordable, reliable, and secure power for hardworking American families and businesses," Wright said in the statement.

The DOE estimates that more than 35 gigawatts of backup generation capacity remains unused nationwide.

Wright said the previous administration's policies weakened the U.S. power grid, leaving Americans vulnerable during emergency events.

"Thanks to President Trump's leadership, we are reversing those failures and using every available tool to ensure Americans have continued access to affordable, reliable, and secure energy to power and cool their homes," Wright said.

As the Epoch Times notes further, On July 15, PJM Interconnection, the nation's largest electric grid operator that serves 13 states, announced a hot weather alert for its service region through at least July 17.

Such an alert is issued ahead of expected hot weather or high humidity to prepare power generation facilities and personnel to meet a surge in electricity demand.

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator, which serves 15 states, also issued an alert on July 15, citing above-normal temperatures, higher-than-forecasted loads, and power generation outages. The alert ended the same day.

High Temperatures

The emergency alerts issued by power grid operators came amid intense heat in parts of the United States.

According to a July 22 forecast by the National Weather Service's Weather Prediction Center, "hazardous heat" is expected to continue this week over the southern United States before expanding through the Great Basin and across the Northern and Central Plains.

"Forecast highs range in the mid-90s to mid-100s with heat indices exceeding 105-115 degrees for some locations," the center said.

"Widespread major to locally extreme HeatRisk (levels 3 and 4/4) is expected, which indicates a level of heat dangerous to anyone without adequate cooling or hydration."

Amid the high heat, more emergency alerts may be issued by various power grid operators, and the DOE may issue additional emergency orders to address the situation.

Elevated temperatures for the current summer season are a continuation of last year's trend. In a Jan. 13 post, nonprofit organization Climate Central said that 2025 was the fourth-hottest year on record for the contiguous United States. The nine warmest years in the country have all been recorded since 2012.

According to data from Injury Facts, an online resource run by nonprofit safety advocacy organization National Safety Council, high heat was responsible for 253 deaths in the United States last year.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 12:50

Boasberg's Law: Chief District Court Judge Under Renewed Scrutiny Over Pattern Of Unilateral Actions

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Chief Judge James Boasberg is frustrated … and he is not alone.

Recently, the D.C. federal judge reportedly “groused” that the D.C. appellate court had ordered him to reconsider a case about whether the D.C. government engaged in biased enforcement against political graffiti.

Conversely, the litigants are equally irked over what they see as Boasberg’s bias after he responded by, again, dismissing their claims without a trial.

For a second time, Boasberg has barred pro-life groups from access to a jury after members were arrested for writing in chalk “Black Pre-Born Lives Matter” on a sidewalk while Black Lives Matter writings were left untouched.

I wrote earlier about the emerging body of “Boasberg’s Law,” cases in which the judge has increasingly shown an untethered and expansive view of his own authority. Recently, Boasberg was found to have committed an “abuse of discretion” in twice finding that the Trump Administration was in contempt of court for failing to turn around deportation flights.

My disagreements with Boasberg are not over the underlying issues, but rather the court’s rejection of basic limits on its own authority.

While chastising President Trump for exceeding his authority, Boasberg has been reversed for exceeding his own.

In the earlier case, Boasberg dismissed grand jury subpoenas in the probe of Fed Chair Jerome Powell. I have been critical of that probe, but Boasberg’s refusal to allow the subpoenas to be executed was based on an opinion that was rife with open hostility for President Trump, dubious sources, and biased observations.

I have similar reservations in this latest case. During the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, streets in Washington were covered with BLM graffiti and the police watched as protesters wrote slogans and slurs on stores, streets, and sidewalks. The government itself even commissioned a massive painting of the message on a street near the White House.

However, when Frederick Douglass Foundation and Students for Life of America wrote their pro-life version of the slogan, they were immediately arrested and the chalk protest removed.

The D.C. Circuit’s reversal of Boasberg in the case was a major victory for free speech. Boasberg had applied the wrong standard to kill the case, holding that the group could not challenge the selective enforcement of the laws. In reaching that conclusion, Boasberg applied the wrong standard, imposing the heavy burden of proving that the city was engaged in “invidious enforcement.” While that standard was used correctly to dismiss an equal protection claim, it is not the standard for a free speech challenge.

The Court did not hide its dissatisfaction with the thrust of Boasberg’s opinion in dismissing the First Amendment claim:

“The First Amendment prohibits government discrimination on the basis of viewpoint. ‘To permit one side … to have a monopoly in expressing its views … is the antithesis of constitutional guarantees.’ The protection for freedom of speech applies not only to legislation, but also to enforcement of the laws.”

The appellate court sent the case back to Boasberg with the opportunity to apply the correct standard and to create a substantive record before issuing a ruling on the free speech claim.

Boasberg took the case and ruled again that the groups would not be allowed a trial. The new dismissal was issued despite the standard that, in seeking such a dismissal before a trial, the court must accept all material facts in favor of the nonmoving party or, in this case, the pro-life and pro-free speech litigants.

Boasberg rejected the factual claim that they were “similarly situated” to the BLM protesters. The litigants presented the results of discovery on the point, but Boasberg dismissed the claim on his own subjective view of the evidence.

They have now filed again with the appellate court to appeal his order.

Some of Boasberg’s factual findings are baffling.

For example, he maintains that the groups did not show that MPD officers “even witnessed any specific defacement during [Black Lives Matter] protests.” However, the groups presented such evidence as bodycam video of officers watching as a protester spray-painted ‘I can’t breathe’ on the street near the White House two weeks after the arrests of the pro-life protesters. They submitted other video evidence of officers watching protesters spray-painting BLM messages outside of the Department of Justice.

Moreover, they presented what they claimed is guidance from Assistant Chief of Police Jeffery Carroll, in charge of the Metropolitan Police Department’s Special Operations Division, in the application of different treatment for graffiti.

Carroll reportedly admitted to being “present” at BLM protests featuring “defacement” of property, public and private and Lt. Jason Bagshaw admitted that he also saw defacement “related to” BLM protests.

This does not mean that a jury would rule for these litigants but rather that court cannot substitute its judgment for a jury when a credible and supported claim has been made by litigants.

Boasberg declares that no such credible evidence was presented. The fact is that a reasonable jury could conclude that there was a different treatment shown in the enforcement of these laws based on the content of the speech.

The biased enforcement of laws is a common reality in other countries where courts enable such selective enforcement. In countries such as Iran and China, no level of evidence is sufficient to overcome the bias of courts in showing a preference for one side.

Judge Boasberg has had a distinguished career that is now being undone by a lack of restraint in these decisions. Again, I believe that the judge has been on solid ground in some of these conflicts, including criticizing the use of “intemperate and disrespectful” language in filings and demanding compliance with his orders. However, while Chief Judge Boasberg has described the President’s claim of expansive powers as “awfully frightening,” the same can be said about a judge who substitutes his own judgment for juries and disregards legal standards for disfavored groups.

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 Thu, 07/23/2026 - 12:30

SpaceX Meltdown Vaporizes $1 Trillion In Market Cap As Stock, Bonds Crater

SpaceX's Tuesday rebound was short-lived, with shares sliding to a new low of $110.85 late Thursday morning and extending their brutal post-IPO selloff.

At a current market capitalization of roughly $1.479 trillion, SpaceX has erased about $1.16 trillion, or 44%, since its valuation peaked at $2.639 trillion on June 23.

Shares are also trading well below the company's $135 IPO price, underscoring how quickly investor enthusiasm has evaporated.

The chart shows  a selloff across SpaceX's capital structure:

• Black line, right axis: SpaceX shares, down from $157.68 on June 29 to about $111.39, a decline of roughly 29%.
• Blue line, left axis: SpaceX's 6.65% senior unsecured bonds due 2056, down from roughly 97 cents on the dollar to 87.6 cents.

The bond is part of SpaceX's $25 billion inaugural debt offering, including $3.5 billion of 2056 notes. Despite attracting about $89 billion of initial orders, the long-dated bonds have sold off sharply since issuance.

Part of the bond decline reflects the broader surge in Treasury yields as soaring oil prices revive inflation concerns and rate hike fears.

Reuters noted:

Ortex estimates SpaceX short sellers have earned $15.5 billion on paper since the June IPO as shares fell below the $135 offer price to a record $115.26. About 360 million shares, or 56% of free float, were on loan through Tuesday.

Earlier Thursday, Gregory Miller, managing director and equity research analyst at Citizens JMP Securities, told clients that despite the broad selloff across the AI complex, his outlook remains constructive and investor concerns appear overdone.

What Set Off the Latest Downdraft

Why We Think the Fear is Overdone

"The End of the AI Trade" — Eight Times in Two Years

Why We Remain Constructive

Hyperscale Capital Spending — Line of Sight to One Trillion Next Year

Looking ahead, the next major catalyst for SpaceX will be the launch of its massive Starship rocket later this evening.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 12:10

This American Drone-Motor Company Is Positioned For "Massive Procurement Tailwind"

Looking at the state of modern warfare, H.C. Wainwright analyst Amit Dayal initiated Unusual Machines with a "Buy" rating, telling clients the drone-part maker is emerging as a key player in "anchoring the US drone industry's sovereign supply chain."

Dayal called UMAC a "pure-play, American-made, NDAA-compliant drone-component manufacturer" that is perfectly positioned for a "massive procurement tailwind" across the US drone industry as the US government races to stockpile everything from one-way attack drones to interceptor drones.

What's key about UMAC is that it makes NDAA-compliant parts for drones. Its product portfolio spans flight controllers, electronic speed controllers (ESCs), analog video systems, FPV headsets, drone motors, and, pending the Upgrade Energy acquisition, batteries, with multiple products approved on the Blue UAS Framework.

Dayal estimates the US-made drone parts market could reach $3 billion to $5 billion as the Department of Defense and US drone manufacturers seek secure alternatives to Chinese suppliers.

US Drone Parts Market Forecasted to Boom 

Six UMAC components, including its Brave F7 flight controller, Brave 55A speed controller, and Aura FPV camera, have been approved for the Defense Innovation Unit's Blue UAS Framework.

The top catalyst is the DoD's roughly $1 billion Drone Dominance program, which is intended to rapidly expand the US inventory of small, inexpensive, and attritable drones.

The first procurement phase covers about 30,000 drones, while the next phase is expected to order roughly 60,000 systems during the second half of 2026. Additional phases could drive demand for approximately 250,000 drones in fiscal 2027. More than half of the initial vendors selected for Drone Dominance were already UMAC customers in some capacity, according to Dayal.

"A massive procurement tailwind underpins a multi-year unmanned-systems cycle," the analyst said, adding that UMAC is "building a vertically integrated, 'Made in the USA' component platform."

Cost to Buld a FPV

UMAC operates across 62,500 square feet at five manufacturing sites and its Orlando headquarters. The company's 17,000-square-foot motor facility began operating in October 2025 and was producing about 15,000 motors per month by March, with production forecasted to reach 100,000 motors per month later this year.

Global Drone Market Forecast 

Global Drone Parts Market Forecast

Dayal has a 12-month price target of $42 on UMAC. Analysts tracked by Bloomberg have an average target of $36.

Shares were trading around $20 on Wednesday morning.

In the previous report, we focused on AeroVironment, Ondas, Red Cat, AEVEX, Redwire, Insitu and Teledyne FLIR. Private companies covered included Anduril, Skydio, Shield AI, Quantum Systems, Performance Drone Works, DZYNE, Firestorm Labs, and Neros.

Read the full report here.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 11:30

"Closing Time" On The AI Bubble Is Sooner Than Most Think; Ed Dowd Warns Iran War Brings Global Recession Closer

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Wall Street money manager and financial analyst Ed Dowd of PhinanceTechnologies.com warned at the end of May we could see “$250 a barrel oil and 11% inflation as a worst-case scenario in 2026.” 

That didn’t happen... yet.  Dowd explains, “We had two scenarios when we talked last..."

" One was the conflict would get resolved in the April – May time frame. 

Oil would peak out around $125 (per barrel), and inflation would peak out in May and go lower. 

That’s what happened, but recently, MOU (Memorandum of Understanding with Iran) has been torn up and oil is back on the rise. 

Oil collapsed to around the low $70s to high $60s after the MOU.  It’s now $80 and change. 

So, unless this is resolved quickly, the other scenario is on the table...

If the conflict continues and gets worse, and you want to watch it progress, if we break out technically, meaningfully to $100 to $125, and back test and hold support, then the next level is $200 to $250 a barrel. 

All we are talking about here is my thesis that we are going into a global recession, and it gets pulled forward that much quicker.  We will have a burst of inflation and massive demand destruction.”

The Iran/US war is not the only headwind Dowd sees. 

AI (artificial intelligence) investment is in bubble territory according to Dowd, and the lights are about to go out on that trade.  Dowd says:

“The stock market is 45% AI and AI adjacent. 

When the equity market figures out the party may be slowing or it’s over, that will affect the stock market. 

It’s a feedback loop that I think is beginning.  Let’s call it the AI summer of discontent...

Closing time is closer than most people think.  The party has been going on for a while. 

We had this huge impulse in semiconductor stocks in April and May.  The indices have 17% to 19% of the S&P 500, the semiconductor index. 

That is a warning sign in and of itself.  This is a notoriously cyclical boom and bust industry... There is inflation going on in this... AI build. 

All the projections of return on investment are going the way of the dodo bird because they are now paying exorbitant prices for commodity memory chips.  Also, power costs are going up, and they have to build power plants.  The whole math does not work with the AI infrastructure in the credit driven AI complex. 

So, the math kind of implodes on itself at some point...

I think the party is closer to the end than the beginning, and closing time will be upon us soon.”

When the AI bubble pops, Dowd expect a “nasty pullback in the stock market.” 

This is why Dowd is telling investors to raise cash levels just like famed investor Warren Buffett is doing by holding record amounts of cash in his fund.  Dowd says, “Cash is dry powder.” 

And for those who think the US dollar is going to tank, Dowd thinks just the opposite and says, “The dollar looks quite bullish.”

Dowd still likes gold as a core asset, and his target price is unchanged at $10,000 per ounce in the next few years.

There is much more in the 34-minute interview.

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog as he goes One-on-One with money manager and investment expert Ed Dowd as he explains why he is still seeing big trouble for the US economy.   Dowd predicted this was coming in January with his report called “US Economy Outlook 2026.”

To get Dowd’s latest red-hot reporting, go to his new Substack called “Ed Dowd: Beyond the Narrative,” by clicking here.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 11:10

Software Vendor Fires Back At NJ Governor Over Noncitizen Voting Scandal

New Jersey's noncitizen voter registration scandal has taken an uncomfortable turn for Gov. Mikie Sherrill, and the vendor she blamed for it is no longer taking the fall quietly.

IDEMIA, the French multinational that has worked with New Jersey's Motor Vehicle Commission for more than 40 years, is refusing to play the role assigned to it. What the company is now saying about who was responsible for approving registrations undercuts the governor's account.

A voter arrives at the Moorestown Township Fire Station to cast a ballot in the 2025 general election. (Emma Lee/WHYY)

Sherrill revealed on Tuesday that more than 6,600 noncitizens ended up on New Jersey's voter rolls between June 2023 and June 2024, and that fewer than 400 of them cast ballots. The individuals answered "no" when asked on an MVC keypad whether they were U.S. citizens, she said, and "through no fault of their own, the system registered them anyway." New Jersey has roughly 6.6 million registered voters.

"Let me be clear: this entire situation is unacceptable," Sherrill said. "It's unacceptable that the vendor released software with such a glaring error, it's unacceptable that the MVC took a year to get this issue fixed and it's unacceptable that no one in the previous administration brought this to light, demanded accountability or took action when it happened years ago."

The previous administration was that of former Gov. Phil Murphy, also a Democrat.

IDEMIA told a different story. The company disputed the governor's characterization of its role, saying its software's function is limited to transmitting data from the MVC to New Jersey's Division of Elections, which the company says bears ultimate responsibility for verifying voter eligibility.

"IDEMIA works with the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, and has for more than 40 years, to support the process through which eligible individuals may indicate their interest in registering to vote when applying for or renewing a driver's license or state-issued identification card," the company said in a statement. "IDEMIA's role is to transmit information through the motor vehicle system. The voter registration information is transmitted to the New Jersey Department of State, Division of Elections, which is ultimately responsible for verifying eligibility to vote. Information submitted by IDEMIA must still be validated and adjudicated by the Division of Elections."

Sherrill has said New Jersey will phase out the company's software regardless. She has also ordered the erroneous registrations removed, directed her chief counsel to investigate, and retained an outside firm, CSG Law, to conduct an independent review.

She simultaneously downplayed the severity of the situation and accused the Trump administration of trying to weaponize elections for political gain, saying the president has "zero credibility on the issue of election integrity."

The White House is all over it. "Democrats and their media allies have repeatedly said it is impossible for noncitizens to register to vote, let alone cast a ballot. Time and again, they have been proven wrong. As President Trump has said, there is nothing more important than the integrity of our elections," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said. "And this latest incident underscores the absolute necessity of the SAVE America Act. American voters deserve to have confidence that our elections are safe and secure."

Feds Get Involved

The dispute is no longer confined to New Jersey. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division has opened a federal investigation and demanded the state produce full names, dates of birth, nationalities, residential addresses, and registration dates and locations for the affected registrants, citing New Jersey's obligations under the Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act.

Running alongside it is a far larger and far less settled number. The Department of Homeland Security says it identified 19,497 New Jersey voter registrations where an individual's name, date of birth, address, and Social Security number matched federal records indicating the person is a noncitizen, and that a broader review suggests the figure could reach 35,152. 

"Election security is national security," said DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin. "As President Trump announced last night, DHS has identified over 250,000 potential non-citizens illegally registered to vote in just 4 U.S. states. Only Americans should be electing American leaders."

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 10:50

Jim Jordan Refers Jack Smith To DOJ For Possible Prosecution

Authored by Bryan S. Jung via PJ Media,

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has formally referred former Special Counsel Jack Smith to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution, alleging that Smith made false statements under oath to Congress about the scope of his investigation into President Donald Trump.

According to Fox News, in a July 22 letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Jordan alleges that Smith intentionally misled the House Judiciary Committee during a December 2025 deposition by testifying that his office obtained only telephone toll records and did not seek or review the contents of lawmakers' text messages.

Jordan contends newly released records contradict that testimony and amount to obstruction of Congress.

"All individuals have an obligation to comply with a duly authorized congressional inquiry. Mr. Smith is no different," Jordan writes, accusing the former special counsel of making "intentionally false statements" designed to impede congressional oversight.

The referral follows the release of documents by Republican Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who says Smith's investigative team accessed and reviewed text messages involving 44 members of Congress from both political parties, along with current and former Trump administration officials, during an investigation known as "Operation Arctic Frost."

Grassley also alleges investigators viewed some communications before a Justice Department "filter team" completed its privilege review, raising concerns about compliance with procedures intended to protect privileged information.

During his December deposition, Smith testified that his office sought telephone toll records containing historical routing information - including call numbers, dates, times and durations - but not the contents of calls or text messages. Republicans argue the newly released records show Smith's team obtained and reviewed message content, directly contradicting his sworn testimony.

The Justice Department confirms receipt of Jordan's criminal referral and says it will investigate any evidence of criminal conduct. No criminal charges have been filed, and the referral itself does not constitute a criminal prosecution.

Smith denies wrongdoing.

Last week, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told Fox News' Sean Hannity that Smith should be "prosecuted."

"What did he do with the text messages? We don't know that yet. What we do know is he absolutely read them. He absolutely shared them with members of his team and all of that illegally," Hawley alleged.

"The Justice Department requires that there be screening for any members of Congress [regarding] their text messages. Jack Smith said under oath that he didn't seek the text messages of members of Congress, but in fact, we know that he did. So he lied, he violated the law, he violated the Constitution. This guy ought to be prosecuted."

Democratic House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin condemns the referral as "baseless and vindictive," arguing Republicans misrepresent Smith's testimony. Raskin says committee investigators never specifically questioned Smith about presidential records or members' text messages during more than 13 hours of testimony and maintains Smith truthfully answered the questions that were asked regarding telephone toll records rather than message content.

The referral marks the latest escalation in congressional Republicans' scrutiny of Smith. In November 2025, Jordan separately referred Smith's former deputy, Thomas Windom, to the Justice Department for alleged obstruction of Congress.

Jordan told then-Attorney General Pam Bondi that "Congress cannot perform its oversight function if witnesses who appear before its committees corruptly refuse to provide information that the law requires them to furnish. The obstruction of a committee investigation undermines Congress's core constitutional oversight obligations."

Jordan's latest referral asks the Justice Department to determine whether Smith's testimony warrants prosecution for perjury or making false statements before Congress.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/23/2026 - 10:30