Alberta Proposes New Oil Pipeline

By Irina Slav of OilPrice.com

Alberta has proposed to build a new oil pipeline to the British Columbia coast that could carry up to 1 million barrels daily of crude oil, to be exported to Asian markets.

The Calgary Herald reported the provincial government was ready to commit C$14 million to early planning for the project, with Premier Danielle Smith expressing hope the project could get federal approval as early as next month.

Opposition, however, has been swift. The Premier of British Columbia said that “The problem that we have is Smith continues to advance a project that is taxpayer-funded, has no private sector proponent, is not a real project and is incredibly alarming to British Columbians, especially First Nations along the coast,” as quoted by Global News.

Indeed, a representative of several coastal First Nations said they would not support a new pipeline project “now or ever,” according to a report by CBC News. “This is not something that we would ever support,” Marylin Slett told the publication.

“There is no project that ... we would ever support the lifting of that moratorium,” referring to a ban on oil tankers for northern British Columbia ports.

“I think coastal provinces have a special obligation to be generous and make sure we’re creating access to ports for all of our products,” Alberta’s Smith said.

The Alberta government has been pushing for new oil pipeline capacity to expand Canadian oil’s access to international markets for a while now, but British Columbia’s government has been against it from the start.

“The only way that pipeline across the north gets built is if the government of Alberta and the federal government pony up tens of billions of tax dollars to build it,” B.C. Premier David Eby said in September, as quoted by Bloomberg, estimating the potential price tag of such an infrastructure project at some $C$60 billion, equal to around $43 billion.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 21:25

FICO Spikes On Plan To Go Direct To Lenders, Upends Experian, Equifax, TransUnion

Fair Isaac shares surged today after announcing a plan that bypasses the big three credit bureaus - Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion - in providing its credit scores directly to mortgage lenders.

Until now, mortgage resellers had to purchase FICO scores through the bureaus, who added markups of about $10 per score, according to the Wall Street Journal. FICO will now sell directly, offering lenders either a flat $10 fee or $4.95 per score plus a $33 closing fee. The company said the new closing charge replaces reissue fees but didn’t disclose the prior cost.

WSJ writes that the change threatens a long-standing revenue stream for the bureaus. “We believe this change adds substantial uncertainty to a sector that has already been undergoing heightened volatility amid a series of potential regulatory changes,” wrote UBS analyst Kevin McVeigh.

The move follows pressure from regulators to reduce costs in an unaffordable housing market. Earlier this year, the FHFA authorized lenders to use VantageScore—developed by the three bureaus—for government-backed loans, challenging FICO’s dominance.

FHFA Director Bill Pulte called FICO’s plan a “first step” and urged bureaus to “take similar creative and constructive actions” while pressing VantageScore to ensure “they are competitive, in every way, including but not limited to costs.”

Industry reactions were cautiously positive. TD Cowen analysts called the change “politically positive.” Mortgage Bankers Association chief Bob Broeksmit said it was a “step in the right direction” but warned it “remains to be seen” whether it will meaningfully lower costs.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 21:00

Top FDA Vaccine Official Says US Vaccine Schedule May Be Suboptimal

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

The current vaccine schedule in the United States may not be optimal, the Food and Drug Administration’s top vaccine official said in a new interview.

Dr. Vinay Prasad, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, in an undated file photograph. FDA via The Epoch Times

“I think the scientific establishment blindly defending the U.S. vaccine schedule is incorrect,” Dr. Vinay Prasad, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, told the Free Press in an interview published Sept. 29. “It is possible that our schedule is suboptimal.”

The FDA is part of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Another HHS division, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sets the immunization schedule, which contains more vaccines and doses than many other countries, such as Denmark.

“I’ve seen some pundits claim that Denmark can get away with a different schedule because they’re a smaller country,” Prasad said. “That’s illogical. Denmark is connected to all of Europe. It would be like arguing that Boston could have a different vaccine schedule than the rest of the Eastern Seaboard if we made it its own nation.”

Susan Monarez, who headed the CDC until she was recently fired, told a congressional committee last month that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said during a private meeting that the vaccine schedule would be changing.

Monarez said she would only sign off on changes if she were presented with evidence backing them, and said she was not.

“The childhood vaccine schedule has been vetted and validated through science and evidence,” Monarez said.

If children receive vaccines when recommended by the schedule, they receive multiple shots across multiple visits.

President Donald Trump in a Sept. 22 briefing said that parents should space out vaccines.

“I think the president has a deeper point about the evidence to support combination and concomitant administration. By background, combination vaccines combine two or more into a single vial or shot, while concomitant administration means administering two or more at the same visit. Historically, FDA has had stronger levels of evidence for combination than concomitant administration, but that is changing,” Prasad told the Free Press.

“We are planning new guidance to raise the bar for concomitant administration, and we have a paper now submitted in a medical journal.”

Measles, Hepatitis B Vaccines

Trump also proposed delaying the hepatitis B vaccine, which is currently on the immunization schedule at three doses in early childhood, or two doses for adolescents, and taking separate vaccines against measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox rather than combination vaccines.

Also recently, advisers to the CDC recommended the agency remove the measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox vaccine from the schedule for children younger than 4 years of age, emphasizing a different vaccine that targets measles, mumps, and rubella, due to an elevated risk of febrile seizures. Advisers also considered delaying the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine regimen, but ultimately tabled the decision to explore whether to alter or remove the entire regimen. The CDC has not yet acted on the advice.

“I think the president is 100 percent correct that it is prudent to take the chickenpox shot separately,” Prasad said.

He said that Trump and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) were right to question whether hepatitis B shots should be administered to babies born to mothers who tested negative for hepatitis B, noting that some other countries do not give the vaccine to such children.

ACIP is also examining the cumulative impact of the vaccination schedule, advisers said in June.

Trump’s comments drew criticism from some, including the American Academy of Pediatrics.

“Pediatricians know firsthand that children’s immune systems perform better after vaccination against serious, contagious diseases like polio, measles, whooping cough and hepatitis B. Spacing out or delaying vaccines means children will not have immunity against these diseases at times when they are most at risk,” the academy said in a statement.

Prasad said that Trump was offering personal advice and not trying to compel anyone to follow that advice. When asked whether Trump’s comments would drive vaccine hesitancy, Prasad said people are getting fewer vaccines due to the imposition of COVID-19 vaccine mandates during the pandemic.

“We will have more vaccine hesitancy for a generation. The president’s comments are not the driver of what we are seeing,” he said.

Prasad rejoined the FDA in August, several weeks after resigning. He had left the agency after some of his past comments were recirculated, including remarks about supporting Democrats.

“The FDA is steadfast in its commitment to rigorous, gold-standard science in the approval of vaccines, ensuring that every decision reflects the highest standards of safety and effectiveness. Science requires continual review and adaptation; when health recommendations become outdated or no longer align with the latest evidence, it is the responsibility of public health officials to make the necessary changes,” an HHS spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email on Wednesday.

“Dr. Prasad’s comments underscore the open-mindedness that true gold-standard science demands, and that the health of our citizens depends upon. At this time, HHS and FDA cannot comment on potential future policy changes.”

*  *  *

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 20:35

Russia Has Upgraded Missiles To Successfully Evade Ukraine's Patriots

We've been documenting how more and more US Patriot missile batteries have been showing up in Ukraine, as even Israel has of late openly acknowledged sending one, with more said to be on the way.

But it hasn't taken long for Russia to respond by upgrading its ballistic missile systems to evade Ukrainian air defenses, including US-supplied Patriot systems, according to a report by the Financial Times on Thursday. The report, which cites Ukrainian and US officials, details that the modifications affect both the Iskander-M short-range ballistic missiles and the air-launched Kinzhal missiles.

Russian MoD/TASS 

These have ranges of up to around 300 miles, with the upgraded missiles now said to be capable of performing sharp maneuvers or steep dives as they approach their targets, making them significantly more difficult to intercept.

One Ukrainian official admitted the development to be a "game-changer for Russia" - as cited in Financial Times. Western intel sources further conceded a noticeable drop in successful interceptions by Ukraine's air defenses as a result.

"Ukraine's ballistic missile interception rate improved over the summer, reaching 37 per cent in August, but it plummeted to 6 per cent in September, despite fewer launches, according to public Ukrainian air force data compiled by the London-based Centre for Information Resilience and analyzed by the Financial Times," the report underscores.

A notable successful Russian strike which was able to evade significant air defenses was on August 28, when a major facility for the manufacture of Turkish-made Bayraktar drones was hit, in what many analysts said at the time sent a clear message to Ankara.

And during an attack wave on September 18, Ukraine’s Air Force reported - somewhat unusually - that all four Iskander missiles launched that day bypassed Patriot defenses entirely. Such had become a 'pattern' over the summer.

These prior instances in the summer saw Ukraine's air defenses at times down merely one missile out of seven or more, and that the intercept rate was previously consistently higher.

An American Patriot surface-to-air missile lies on the streets in Kiev:

Also of note in the fresh report is the feedback that major defense makers are getting in real-time. "Ukraine shares Patriot engagement data with the Pentagon and the air defense system’s US manufacturers, said the western and Ukrainian officials," FT writes.

"Virginia-based Raytheon makes the Patriot system, while Maryland-based Lockheed Martin produces the system’s interceptor missiles," the report continues, describing that "The data is used to make updates needed to keep pace with Russia’s adjustments, but one official said those improvements often lagged behind Moscow’s evolving tactics."

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 20:10

Data Centers "Primary Reason" For High PJM Capacity Prices: Market Monitor

By Ethan Howland of Utility Dive

Capacity prices — a cost that is ultimately paid for by electricity consumers — surged in PJM’s last two July capacity auctions.

An Amazon Web Services data center near single-family homes on July 17, 2024, in Stone Ridge, Virginia. Data center load resulted in $16.6 billion in capacity auction revenue in the PJM Interconnection’s last two capacity auctions, according to a report released on Oct. 1, 2025, by the grid operator’s market monitor

The 2024 auction results led to double-digit electric bill increases for some utility customers in PJM’s footprint, which covers parts of 13 Mid-Atlantic and Midwest states and the District of Columbia.

PJM holds capacity auctions to help ensure that it has adequate power supplies to meet future needs. In the last auction, PJM bought capacity for a one-year period that starts on June 1. The grid operator is preparing to hold its next auction in early December to buy capacity for a year beginning on June 1, 2027.

Monitoring Analytics contends it is “misleading” to say that PJM’s recent capacity market results simply reflect tightening supply and demand.

“The current conditions are not the result of organic load growth,” it stated. “The current conditions in the capacity market are almost entirely the result of large load additions from data centers, both actual historical and forecast.”

Also, the “extreme uncertainty” in data center load forecasts is unprecedented and “raises questions about the meaning of clearing a capacity auction based on those forecasts,” Monitoring Analytics said.

In June, the market monitor recommended requiring new data centers to supply their own generation instead of tapping into existing power supplies in PJM.

“The impact of the uncertain forecast of data center load on other customers would be limited or eliminated” by the requirement, Monitoring Analytics said in the report.

PJM is in the middle of a fast-track stakeholder process to develop new rules for adding large data centers to its system with a goal of filing a proposal before the end of the year at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

As part of the process, PJM is proposing to bolster its load forecasting for data centers and other large loads, according to an Oct. 1 presentation from PJM staff. Under the proposal, state utility commissions could review and provide feedback on large load adjustments before they are included in PJM’s load forecast.

Utilities would also have to ask if any data center proposals in their service territory are duplicative proposals. Staff suggested requiring large load customers to post financial security for the capacity they plan to buy in an auction.

PJM has dropped a proposal for “non-capacity-backed load” that was widely opposed by its stakeholders, according to the presentation.

On the issue of a price cap and floor for PJM’s capacity auctions, the last auction would have been $3.2 billion, or 20%, higher except for a cost cap that grew out of an agreement between the grid operator and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, according to the market monitor’s report.

The impact of data center development on PJM’s auction results will increase sharply in the 2028/2029 base capacity auction scheduled for June, when the maximum and minimum price caps in the agreement expire, Monitoring Analytics said.

Separately, the Union of Concerned Scientists this week found that utility ratepayers in PJM will pay about $4.4 billion for data center-related transmission projects that were approved in 2024 with similar results expected this year.

*  *  * Psst... Now you can actually see the ZeroHedge multitool

ZeroHedge Multitool, available at https://t.co/8cISZJCfSU pic.twitter.com/wLiuUZAfSy

— ZeroHedge Store (@ZeroHedgeStore) October 1, 2025

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 19:45

Six Thematic Takeaways, Buy-Rated Stocks From Goldman's Global Sustainability Forum

Goldman Sachs hosted its 2025 Global Sustainability Forum in New York, outlining key takeaways on sustainable investing strategies in a rapidly evolving world where reliability and aging demographics dominate and act as tailwinds.

• Reliability -- prioritized investments, including infrastructure and efficiency solutions, towards keeping the power on, water running and water clean amid surging demand, aging infrastructure and more extreme temperatures/weather events.

• Aging Populations in developed markets, which are opening opportunities for labor access as a competitive advantage.

"We continue to see multiple themes, strategies and stocks that we believe will supersede policy/macro uncertainty, and we expect that if Sustainable fund performance improves, AUM penetration will follow," a team of Goldman analysts led by Brian Singer penned in a note on Monday morning. 

Singer and his team outlined the presenting institutions at the Forum (Buy-rated stocks in bold):

• Amcor, Applied Materials, BNP Paribas, California Resources, Carlyle, CMS Energy, CPP Investments, Estée Lauder, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, IBM, Installed Building Products, Jacobs Solutions, Japan GX Acceleration Agency, J.P. Morgan, LRQA, Maersk, Morgan Stanley Investment Management, New York State Teachers' Retirement System, NYC Bureau of Asset Management, NiSource, osapiens, Prologis, Prysmian, Putnam Investments, Repsol, SAP, Telefónica, Temasek, Vornado, Water Asset Management, Weyerhaeuser.

The event reinforced optimism around investable themes that transcend macroeconomic uncertainty, with continued optimism driven by:

• Investable thematic opportunities that supersede uncertainty.

• Maturation of Sustainable Investing via a greater embrace of nuance towards more performance and investability-linked approaches.

• Potential for a more favorable (or less unfavorable) cyclical backdrop.

Four Forum takeaways on the direction of Sustainable Investing:

• Sustainability as Investability: Asset manager and corporate focus is shifting from "what's needed to achieve Sustainable Development Goals" towards "what's on track and what's likely," elevating measurable risk factors, returns implications and preservation of asset value.

• Real Economy Impact: Shift from "Reducing Financed Emissions" to "Financing Reduced Emissions."

• Optimism on Sustainability opportunities in private markets.

• Corporates remain committed to Sustainable metrics despite recent quieting.

Six Forum thematic takeaways

• Accelerating power demand growth, product availability driving All-of-the-Above energy sourcing, with long-term nuclear optimism.

• Labor and reskilling is increasingly a potential constraint and differentiator.

• AI a disruptor of labor markets and power markets as investors/corporates seek confidence in the extent of AI's Sustainability benefits.

• Adaptation focus increasing -- both physical risk and investable opportunities.

• Increased confidence in the Reliability (of power and water) theme, with Reliability prioritized over affordability and both reliability/affordability prioritized over decarbonization.

• US renewables outlook bullish through 2028, more in debate afterwards. Exhibit 1: We see the confluence of multiple forces impacting Sustainable Investing and the broader economy in 2025, driving opportunity for stocks exposed to themes of Reliability, Efficiency, AI/Automation, Training/Reskilling, Womenomics and Affordability/Access as well as companies that are Quality Operators

Putting it all together...

Tailwinds for Reliability and Efficiency and headwinds for Green Capex

What the analysts said they learned at the Forum:

In the US, companies generally expect strong renewables investment to continue through 2028. However, there were mixed views as to whether we would see a material step down post 2028 when IRA incentives sunset. Companies appeared more positive on utility-scale solar and battery storage than onshore/offshore wind.

Stocks mentioned in the report.

The full report, with additional charts and detail, is available to ZeroHedge Pro Subs. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 19:20

Sanctions And Houthi Threat Boost Fuel Oil Demand

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Contrary to earlier expectations, global demand for fuel oil has jumped the most since 2019 as longer routes to avoid the Houthi threat around the Red Sea and the surge in shadow fleet numbers have contributed to higher fuel oil use in the shipping industry, analysts tell Reuters.

Ship owners have installed the so-called scrubbers to reduce emissions from fuel oil use instead of significantly boosting the use of marine gasoil and low-sulfur fuel oil (LSFO), according to industry experts.

In the past two years, the geopolitical situation has also contributed to higher fuel oil demand. Vessels began avoiding the Red Sea at the end of 2023 amid Houthi attacks on commercial shipping. That has made the voyage via the Cape of Good Hope in Africa much longer and requires higher fuel oil volumes per trip.

Moreover, a growing number of very old vessels are joining the so-called shadow fleet to transport Russian, Iranian, and Venezuelan oil and oil products. These tankers are inefficient and burn higher fuel oil volumes.

The shadow fleet has expanded significantly since 2023 as the West banned Russian oil imports unless priced below a price cap.

The shadow fleet accounts for about 17% of all in-service oil tankers in the ocean today, according to the research firm S&P Global Market Intelligence. The average age of the shadow vessels is around 20 years, compared with 13 years for the overall global oil fleet.

“Many of these vessels will be proverbial rust buckets that are more than 15 and, in some cases, even older than 20 years,” Eugene Lindell at consultancy FGE told Reuters.

These oil ships are less fuel-efficient and travel on long-haul routes, which further boosts their fuel oil consumption, Lindell added.

Additionally, the major Middle Eastern oil producers, led by Saudi Arabia, use and import growing volumes of fuel oil, including from Russia, as they burn oil for power generation and look to free more of their crude output for exports.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 18:55

Your Hot Tea May Come With A Splash Of Microplastics

There's nothing quite like a Saturday morning ritual, brewing a pot of green tea and settling into the study with a favorite read, whether it's "The Creature From Jekyll Island" or "Controligarchs" or a collection of declassified briefings on China's irregular warfare against the West, or even ZeroHedge lifestyle pieces via Watches of Espionage. While many reach for tea hoping its antioxidants will deliver a health and brain boost, new research suggests a hidden and very dark downside: those generic store-bought tea bags may be a far bigger source of microplastics than previously realized.

Researchers at the University of Birmingham published a new study analyzing 31 different beverages, including coffee, tea, juices, sodas, and energy drinks, and found microplastics in every single one. The biggest disappointment was the discovery of the highest concentrations of microplastics in hot beverages, such as tea and coffee. 

Lead researcher Professor Mohamed Abdallah from the University of Birmingham told The Independent, "We noted that a lot of research in the microplastics sphere is focusing on drinking water – tap water, bottled water – and we've also released a paper from the UK on water. But we realised that people don't only drink water during their day. You drink tea, coffee, juices..." 

"We found a ubiquitous presence of microplastics in all the cold and hot drinks we looked at. Which is pretty alarming, and from a scientific point of view suggests we should not only be looking at water, we should be more comprehensive in our research because other sources are substantial," Abdallah explained. 

Abdallah and his team found that heat significantly increased plastic shedding from packaging, with polypropylene and PET among the most common polymers found in the drinks. 

"This supports previous studies indicating that heat increases microplastic release from packaging materials, thereby suggesting that hot beverages pose a greater risk of microplastic exposure than cold beverages," the researchers wrote in the report. 

He added: "We're consuming millions of teas and coffees every morning so it's something to definitely look at. There should definitely be legislative action from the government and also from international organisations to limit human exposure to microplastics … they're everywhere."

Other research suggests that microplastics' impact on health is very damning:

• Microplastics Are Linked To Heart Disease 

And now, back to tea. Real tea is great - just not the kind laced with glue, ink, or plastics (in other words, most brands on grocery store shelves). That's why we went out of our way to track down the best microplastics-free option. We found it in Kindred Harvest, and we've just added it to the ZeroHedge Store. (If you're looking for just one, try the Black Tea)

Every product we curate is something we personally use - because we know our readers demand the same standards.

ZeroHedge tumblers. 

. . .

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 18:30

Department Of Energy Cancels Another $7.6 Billion In Energy Project Funding

By Irina Slave of OilPrice.com,

The U.S. Department of Energy has canceled $7.6 billion in funding for previously approved energy projects on the grounds that they would not produce any palpable benefits for Americans.

The canceled projects are 223 in total, approved by various agencies from the Department of Energy during the previous administration. Per this one, however, “these projects did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.”

“On day one, the Energy Department began the critical task of reviewing billions of dollars in financial awards, many rushed through in the final months of the Biden administration with inadequate documentation by any reasonable business standard,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said.

The Department of Energy reported that 26% of all the projects canceled were awarded between Election Day, in November 2024, and Inauguration Day, in January this year.

“President Trump promised to protect taxpayer dollars and expand America’s supply of affordable, reliable, and secure energy. Today’s cancellations deliver on that commitment. Rest assured, the Energy Department will continue reviewing awards to ensure that every dollar works for the American people,” Wright added.

This is not the first project cancellation since the new administration took over. Earlier this year, the DoE canceled another 24 energy projects worth over $3.7 billion in government funding. The list, by the way, included a project proposed by Exxon for the production of low-carbon hydrogen at a petrochemicals facility.

Meanwhile, the government shutdown that began yesterday has paused approvals for new wind and solar projects, although oil and gas leases are still on schedule, according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. The agency said it would use carryover funds to maintain work on “priority conventional energy projects,” including offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska, even as more than 70% of its staff are furloughed.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 18:05

Copper Highest In Year On Supply Disruptions Collide With AI And Power Grid Demand

Copper futures on the London Metal Exchange rose above $10,500 a ton - the highest since May 2024 - driven by a mix of investing themes, macro tailwinds, and worsening supply outlook. 

Freeport-McMoRan's (FCX) recent force majeure declaration at Indonesia's giant Grasberg mine, the world's second-largest copper source, adds to mounting disruptions already squeezing the market. Add growing demand from AI data centers and grid upgrades, and the shiny industrial metal looks poised for further upside.

Last week, Goldman's commodity specialist James McGeoch called the Grasberg mine incident a "black swan event"... The full note can be read here. 

 

The Grasberg mine open pit

The Grasberg mine incident highlights the copper market's vulnerability to global supply shocks and is just the latest disruption to the industry. It follows Hudbay Minerals' disclosure last month that it was shutting operations at a mill at its Constancia mine site in Peru due to ongoing social unrest.

Supply woes for the industrial metal are colliding with rising demand for "The Next AI Trade" and "Powering Up America" themes, and more recently, Goldman told clients that the power grid is a "vulnerable link in energy security."

In other words, analysts Lina Thomas and Daan Struyven told clients last week, "The need to invest in the power grid – a vulnerable link in the energy supply chain – and the associated metals demand boost are becoming more acute with the rise of AI, geopolitical tensions, and the shift to hybrid warfare." 

Both analysts pointed out that with AI and defense putting the power grid at the center of energy security, copper is the new oil. 

"Such grid upgrades are metals-intensive: we expect grid and power infrastructure to drive ~60% of global copper demand growth through the end of the decade, adding the equivalent of another US to global demand and underpinning our bullish copper price forecast of $10,750/t by 2027," they said. 

With that being said. Copper prices are marching higher.

. . . 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 17:40

How To Broker A Gerrymandering Ceasefire

Authored by Andy Jackson via RealClearWire,

The United States is in the middle of another round of the redistricting wars. 

This latest battle began in late August. The Texas legislature approved maps that will likely result in five additional Republicans being elected to Congress. In response, the California legislature passed a plan that would likely result in five Republicans being replaced with Democrats. The California plan is subject to voter approval in November.

Those appear to be just the opening salvos in the mid-decade redistricting fight, as other states look to jump into the fray. 

It is time for a ceasefire.

But how?

Many redistricting reform advocates have focused on changing who draws the maps. They have called for redistricting commissions to take that responsibility away from state legislatures.

Commissions are not a panacea, however. They are often unaccountable, with members usually serving temporarily and not subject to being fired, recalled, or defeated for reelection. They can also be manipulated by partisan groups that infiltrate hearings pretending to be ordinary citizens.

Nor do commissions guarantee states protection from lawsuits. For example, a group of citizens successfully sued the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission for racial gerrymandering in 2023. 

More important than the “who” of redistricting is the “what.” What are the standards being used to draw districts?

On the heels of the last midterm election, I co-authored a comprehensive report on limiting gerrymandering for North Carolina, but its criteria can be applied to any state.

Those criteria can be divided into two broad categories. The first is that districts should be tied to local communities. Statewide considerations, such as creating maps with the “correct” partisan balance, should not subsume local interests. To that end, states must be required to minimize splitting counties, municipalities, and voting precincts. Districts should also be as compact as possible, consistent with keeping political communities whole. Many states follow those criteria in word but bend them to partisan considerations in practice.

Second, the use of partisan data, such as voter registration numbers and election results, should be banned. Partisan data is helpful only for those seeking to reach some predetermined goal regarding the partisan distribution of legislative seats or to ensure that certain districts elect candidates from a favored party. While gerrymandering has been with us for centuries, the advent of computer mapping programs and the data fed into them made gerrymandering the precision weapon it is today.

Additionally, maps should be drawn openly on computers that the public can view in person and online, and mid-decade redistricting should be banned absent a court order.

Redistricting reform should also be implemented nationwide. That can be done in two ways. The first is through an act of Congress, putting conditions on how states draw congressional districts.

One weakness of that approach is that the Elections Clause of the Constitution permits Congress to alter the rules only for electing U.S. representatives, so redistricting for state legislative districts would be unaffected.

Another approach would be an interstate compact. The compact would have a trigger clause to go into effect only if states representing a majority of congressional districts join and those districts are roughly evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.

Either approach would involve federal courts as an enforcement mechanism. While the United States Supreme Court pointed out in Rucho v. Common Cause that “federal courts are neither equipped nor authorized to apportion political power as a matter of fairness,” they would have an appropriate role in ruling on violations of federal law or liability for breaking interstate compacts. That court presence would force states to adhere to redistricting standards, including those they are already supposed to be following.

However we arrive at a truce in the redistricting wars, we should seek it before the 2028 presidential election. The president’s party usually suffers in midterm elections. The last pre-redistricting midterm election in 2010, during Barack Obama’s first term, led to Republican dominance of the redistricting process. 

We have little idea of how that pendulum might swing before 2028. That uncertainty should incentivize both sides to reach an agreement out of fear that the other side could dominate redistricting in 2031 without such a deal. 

It won’t be easy to convince partisan politicians to put down their map-drawing arms, but it is worth the effort to get the high-tech redistricting wars behind us.

Andy Jackson is the director of the Civitas Center for Public Integrity at the John Locke Foundation in Raleigh, N.C.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 17:15

"Blatant Fraud": USCIS Operation Uncovers Fraud In 44% Of Pending Immigration Cases In Minneapolis

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the FBI, has announced the results of Operation Twin Shield, a large-scale fraud detection effort conducted across Minneapolis-St. Paul from September 19 to 28. Minneapolis is home to one of the largest Somali communities in the U.S., reflected in the election of Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American who became the first refugee and one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress.

The operation marked the first targeted surge of its kind, with immigration officers investigating more than 1,000 pending cases flagged for fraud or ineligibility concerns, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration.  USCIS said officers carried out over 900 site visits and interviews, uncovering fraud, non-compliance, or security issues in 275 cases—about 44 percent of those reviewed.

As of now, USCIS has issued Notices to Appear or referred 42 cases to ICE, with four individuals taken into custody. The agency expects those numbers to increase as administrative investigations are completed. The effort focused on marriage and family-based petitions, employment authorizations, and certain parole requests, in line with Executive Order 14161, which emphasizes protecting the United States from terrorist, national security, and public safety threats.

USCIS announced in a release this week that officials said the operation exposed a wide range of schemes. In one case, a man admitted to paying $100 for a falsified Kenyan death certificate to claim a marriage had ended; his spouse, still alive and living in Minneapolis with their five children, was very much present.

Another case involved the son of a known or suspected terrorist who overstayed his visa and had previously been denied multiple immigration benefits for marriage fraud. A petitioner confessed to marriage fraud only hours after swearing during a USCIS interview that her marriage was genuine. In yet another case, an immigrant manipulated an elderly U.S. citizen spouse in a fraudulent marriage that also involved elder abuse.

*  *  * Reminder: order meat by Sunday at midnight for Monday shipment *  *  *

Steak Lover's Bundle (best seller)

Filet Mignon & other goodies

*  *  *

“USCIS is declaring an all-out war on immigration fraud. We will relentlessly pursue everyone involved in undermining the integrity of our immigration system and laws. With help from ICE and the FBI, USCIS’ Operation Twin Shield was a tremendous success—hundreds of bad actors will be held accountable,” said USCIS Director Joseph B. Edlow.

“Immigration fraud undermines the integrity of our lawful immigration system, harms those who follow the law, and poses risks to national security and public safety. Under President Trump, we will leave no stone unturned.”

According to USCIS, this is the first time the agency has deployed resources at this scale in one geographic region. Officials emphasized that, unlike during the Biden administration, immigration officers are now empowered to thoroughly vet applicants as required by law and to pursue immigration fraud wherever it is encountered.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 16:50

Generals Gathered In Their Masses…

Authored by Daniel McAdams via The Ron Paul Institute,

On Tuesday we observed one of the strangest spectacles of our time. President Trump and his "Secretary of War," Pete Hegseth, called a mandatory meeting of all the top brass in the US military. Some 800+ general officers, admirals, and the like gathered at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia for a doubleheader talk from Hegseth and Trump.

Because such an event is nearly unprecedented – at least in peacetime – the days leading up to the meeting were increasingly filled with speculation and even dread.

Tensions between the US and Russia are soaring over reports that the Trump Administration may provide and assist in the launching of Tomahawk missiles – capable of both hitting Moscow and of carrying nuclear weapons. The Putin Administration pointed out the obvious: such weapons would require the active participation of US intelligence as well as trained US or NATO personnel and should they be used would bring Russia and the US/NATO to a state of war. It is a war that, given both US and Russian nuclear doctrine, could very quickly rise to the level of an exchange of nuclear weapons and total destruction.

Likewise, media reports and observers of the movement of military equipment have been raising a red flag over the past several days on the massive movement of US fighter jets and aerial refueling tankers from the US toward the Middle East. Observers point out the similarity to the days leading up to the US attack on Iran in late June, just over three months ago. With Israeli president Benjamin Netanyahu in town earlier this week, has President Trump been talked into again joining Israel in its war on its neighbors?

Additionally, US warships have been gathered off the coast of Venezuela for weeks and at least three speedboats accused of running narcotics have been blown out of the water by the US military. The New York Times reported on stepped up US efforts to overthrow the Venezuelan government and install a new leader (as the Trump team attempted and failed in his first term). Media outlets are reporting that the Trump Administration is even considering military strikes deep inside Venezuela, which would of course be unprovoked acts of war.

What to expect of the gathering of the generals? Many of us waited at the edge of our seats.

What we were able to see was a pair of not particularly well-prepared – and less well-received – speeches by Trump and Hegseth on transforming the US military into a “MAGA” force and the evils of late middle-aged rotundity among senior military personnel. The crass treatment of America’s tip military officers – whether some deserved criticism or not – will likely have an effect opposite of what was intended.

The pauses in the pre-prepared speeches meant to allow for applause were met with stony silence.

Fat-shaming and chest-pounding is not the way to go about building esprit de corps in the US military. Especially when such a dressing-down was broadcast to the rest of the country via live video hook-up.

But what if some of our initial sense of dread was not misplaced? In his essential Sonar21 blog, former CIA officer Larry Johnson wonders whether there was a (very) public message delivered to conceal a secret and more dangerous message.

First Johnson quotes Yves Smith of the Naked Capitalist blog:

After Charlie Kirk, perhaps I have become too fond of complicated theories.

But it’s ludicrous to have called so many senior guys in for such a silly agenda. A stern memo and/or video sessions would have done. 

So the big stoopid meeting, IMHO was to cover for a smaller gathering that had to be done in person. And where whoever was summoned would be a big tell as to what the focus was.

Johnson then signals his agreement with the speculation:

No, Yves… I think you nailed it. Besides the massive US naval force parked off the coast of Venezuela, we are now hearing that US tanker aircraft are flying to the Middle East via England. We saw the same phenomena in the days preceding the June 24 attack on Iran.

If the Trump administration is planning a coordinated attack on Venezuela and Iran, the commanders of USCENTCOM and USSOUTHCOM would be involved. While the plans for such attacks could have been discussed over a SVTCS (i.e., Secure Video Teleconferences), those sessions usually have dozens of straphangers watching. If you want to keep close hold on such planning, you do it in person. If the CENTCOM and SOUTHCOM commanders had been called to Washington alone, the odds are high that someone would have reported this. With the presence of the US naval force off the coast of Venezuela and the movement of US aircraft towards the Persian Gulf, this likely would have attracted unwanted attention…

What Larry Johnson writes here makes a good deal of sense. Even in Trump World, spending millions of dollars to publicly dress-down the US military makes little sense. A memo or video hook-up would have been far more effective and less disruptive.

Was the real purpose of this spectacle to hold a secret side meeting to give orders for an impending, multi-continental war? We’ll know soon…

*  *  *

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 16:25

Trump Plans Up To $14 Billion Farm Bailout Amid China Pivot To Brazil, WSJ Says

Update (1555ET):

The Trump administration has been signaling for about a week that it may tap tariff revenues to fund a multibillion-dollar aid package for American farmers, as China shifts its agricultural purchases to Brazil.

The Wall Street Journal revealed new details about the potential aid package on Thursday afternoon. People within the administration, or those familiar with the discussions, said Trump is considering a package between $10 billion and $14 billion, though the exact size has yet to be confirmed.

Sources said the aid package would focus on soybean farmers across the Midwest (some of Trump's biggest supporters), who have been hit hardest by both sliding prices and collapsing Chinese demand. 

Earlier, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that the administration could announce a new "substantial support" as soon as next Tuesday. Sources told WSJ that the timeline could be pushed out a little further due to the government shutdown. 

On Wednesday, President Trump blasted China on Truth Social for "hurting" American farmers during the negotiation period of a trade deal. He also said soybeans will be a "major topic of discussion" in his upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Trump even hinted at the incoming aid package to farmers: "We've made so much money on Tariffs, that we are going to take a small portion of that money, and help our Farmers."

What's been reported so far:

• Trump To Bail Out Farmers With Tariff Money, Will Investigate Seed & Fertilizer Companies Over Jacked Prices

• China Pivots To Brazil, Squeezing U.S. Farmers As Trump Plans Relief Fund

• Trump, Bessent Hit Back At China's Ag Purchase Pivot, Promise Farm Support Next Week

The key chart that shows China's shift in purchasing from U.S. farmers to Brazil...

Source: Financial Times 

*    *    * 

Following last week's news of China's massive shift away from American farmers in favor of Brazilian ones, the Trump administration is seeking financial support to mitigate the impact on U.S. farmers and plans to address the issue in upcoming trade talks with Beijing.

On Wednesday, President Trump wrote on Truth Social that U.S. farmers are "being hurt because China is, for negotiating reasons only, not buying," adding, "We've made so much money on Tariffs, that we are going to take a small portion of that money, and help our Farmers."

In fact, Beijing's pivot to ag purchases in Brazil is merely one way to target Trump's farm base, with hopes that the hybrid pressure campaign will force his supporters to push the president into concessions in the trade war. Trump, however, has stated that he would use tariff revenue to cushion American farmers.

Source: Financial Times 

Related:

• Trump To Bail Out Farmers With Tariff Money, Will Investigate Seed & Fertilizer Companies Over Jacked Prices

• China Pivots To Brazil, Squeezing U.S. Farmers As Trump Plans Relief Fund

Earlier today, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said U.S. farmers could see an announcement on a "substantial support" package as soon as Tuesday. 

*BESSENT: NEWS COMING TUE. ON SUBSTANTIAL SUPPORT FOR US FARMERS

*BESSENT: UNFORTUNATE CHINA DECIDED USING SOY IN TRADE TALKS

*BESSENT: MET WITH TRUMP, ROLLINS YESTERDAY ON FARMER ISSUE https://t.co/xpPdlZPm71

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 2, 2025

Trump noted in the Truth Social post above that he will be meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in four weeks and will make Soybeans a "major topic of discussion." 

. . . 

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:55

Putin Warns US Tariffs On Russia's Partners Will Backfire: 'Oil Will Skyrocket, Exceed $100'

Update(1550): Earlier, we reported below that Washington is now openly affirming it will provide Ukraine with US intelligence assistance for long-range strikes targeting Russian oil facilities. Throughout the war, Ukraine has already hit the majority of Russian refineries - a hand full of them more than once - in drone attacks. Also, Europe is busy escalating with the French Navy having boarded what's believed to be a sanctions-busing oil tanker flying the Benin flag. 

Putin warned on Thursday that imposing higher tariffs on Russia's trading partners would lead to increased global prices and compel the US Federal Reserve to maintain elevated interest rates. His comments also reflected on the US introduction an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods in August, raising the total tariff on some Indian exports to 50%. Putin further criticized Washington's attempts to pressure countries like India and China to scale back their energy cooperation with Moscow, warning of unintended economic consequences.

He's had enough, and said severe countermeasures are coming during the Valdai discussion club meeting in Sochi. While oil prices have been steadily falling, Putin has threatened warned, oil prices "will skyrocket" and immediately exceed $100 per barrel without Russian crude supplies getting to the global market.

"It’s impossible to imagine that the loss of Russian oil would maintain normalcy in the global energy sector and the global economy. That won’t happen," he stated. "Is that really in the interests of the economies of countries that are already doing poorly, including European countries?"

He's also once again highlighting the ongoing contradictions and hypocrisy in EU policy.

* * *

The Kremlin is downplaying reports out of the Wall Street Journal and Reuters which cite unnamed US officials to say the Trump White House has quietly reversed policy on providing Ukraine with intelligence to assist in hitting long-range targets on Russian territory. The entrenched narrative is that the US under Trump had resisted this, and that it was Biden who had really put in place the American intelligence-sharing apparatus in Ukraine.

Specifically, as The Wall Street Journal reports, "The U.S. will provide Ukraine with intelligence for long-range missile strikes on Russia’s energy infrastructure, American officials said, as the Trump administration weighs sending Kyiv powerful weapons that could put in range more targets within Russia."

But Moscow's response has been unexpectedly calm and cool, with a statement describing that nothing in fact has change, highlighting that US intelligence had already been flowing to Kiev for a long time.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: "The US transmits intelligence to Ukraine on a regular basis online. The supply and use of the entire infrastructure of Nato and the US to collect and transfer intelligence to Ukrainians is obvious."

In the opening months of Trump's second term, the president got the warring sides to agree to a halt on attacking each other's energy sites. Though it held for perhaps weeks, it didn't take long for the moratorium to break down.

Ukraine especially has used it as a tactic to try and bring Russia's war machine to its knees. And there are recent reports showing some degree of success in inflicting economic pain.

Unprecedented refinery crisis in Russia after Ukrainian drone strikes.

— 38% of Russia’s refining capacity is offline, the highest ever disruption.

— Gasoline output fell by 1 million tons in September, creating a 20% domestic shortfall.

Economist cited by EP via RBC:… pic.twitter.com/PRfvSPkfUM

— Clash Report (@clashreport) October 1, 2025

"President Trump recently signed off on allowing intelligence agencies and the Pentagon to aid Kyiv with the strikes. U.S. officials are asking North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies to provide similar support, these people said," WSJ continues, marking the first such instance of Trump openly greenlighting Ukrainian strikes on Russia with long-range missiles.

The question of providing Tomahawks still remains an open one, and the Kremlin has said it would be "surprised" if the White House allowed such a serious escalation. Still, J.D. Vance early this week said the administration is seriously looking at the European request.

"The expanded intelligence-sharing with Kyiv is the latest sign that Trump is deepening support for Ukraine as his efforts to advance peace talks have stalled," WSJ adds.

International estimates are that thus far during the war Ukraine has struck a whopping 21 out of Russia's 38 refineries, some of them more than once, which has proven costly - also as sanctions have made it hard to find parts for quick repairs.

This alleged 'policy change' may be the direct result of heightened lobbying from Zelensky and the Europeans. After Zelensky was in New York last week for the UN General Assembly, Trump wrote on social media, "After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form." But this was also a way of simply handing off the bulk of the war effort to the Europeans, which itself could prove highly dangerous, even if Trump wants to washing his hands of it.

*  *  * Add to cart, get 50% off Peak Focus

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:50

White House Puts Vance At Helm To 'Drive [Shutdown] Fight Home'

Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClearPolitics,

Historically, no one really wins a government shutdown. But JD Vance might. In the 24 hours after Senate Democrats voted against a continuing resolution to keep the federal lights on, the vice president quickly became the face of the White House counterargument.

Vance began the day on Fox and Friends to blast Democrats for taking the government “hostage.” By midmorning, he was rallying the MAGA base during an appearance on The Ben Shapiro Show, where he predicted that Democratic resolve was “cracking.” In the afternoon, the vice president made a surprise appearance in the White House briefing room.

Reporters were only tipped off moments before when an advance staffer set up the ceremonial flag of the vice president behind the podium. According to sources familiar with the day’s planning, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt invited Vance to meet the press in person.

The shutdown may amount to the first real crisis of the second Trump administration. The White House feels they have the upper hand because they are not the ones who caused it and because they have an ace up their sleeve in Vance.

Another source familiar with the strategy told RealClearPolitics that the vice president “is widely known as the administration’s bulldog, a natural, excellent messenger, maintains good relationships with his former Senate colleagues, and served in the Senate throughout multiple government funding debates.”

“It only makes sense for Vance to help President Trump drive this fight home,” they added. And if Vance succeeds as the administration’s point man in that debate, it could go a long way towards further cementing the expectation that Trump’s apprentice will become his MAGA heir.

But the squabble in question is a little different than the normal brinksmanship over government funding, in large part because of who currently occupies the Oval Office. At the heart of the battle is a policy dispute over extending Obamacare subsidies and restoring Medicaid cuts that Republicans made in the One Big Beautiful Bill, the president’s marquee domestic policy achievement.

Trump alleges that, in exchange for keeping the government open, Democrats are demanding that the federal government provide healthcare to illegal immigrants. Democrats counter that Republicans are lying because illegal immigrants cannot receive Medicare or Medicaid. As part of the OBBB, Republicans put up additional barriers to ensure, in large part, that non-citizens do not receive those benefits. They say that if the subsidies were restored, then millions of immigrants, who entered the U.S. illegally but were paroled by the Biden administration, would again have access to taxpayer-funded healthcare.

Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, pushed back: “Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to enroll in federally funded health coverage under existing law or Democrats’ funding proposal – but millions of American citizens will see their health care premiums double next year if Republicans keep refusing to act.”

As thorny as it is complicated, the fight centers around who exactly is “lawfully present” in the U.S. In short, Republicans made “lawfully present” immigrants ineligible for Obamacare subsidies, and now Democrats want to roll back that restriction. Into that thorny briar patch enters Vance.

“They say, ‘We’re not actually trying to give healthcare benefits to illegal aliens,’" Vance said of Democrats during his Fox News interview. “And here’s why it’s not true.” The vice president then pointed to two Biden-era actions, one that made immigrants eligible for emergency healthcare at hospitals and another that granted parole and Obamacare subsidies to millions of immigrants.

“So it’s not something that we made up,” he added. “It’s not a talking point. It is in the text of the bill that they initially gave to us to reopen the government. It’s preposterous for them to run away from it now.”

Procedural fights over funding the government do not normally move voters to the polls. But Trump has forced the political fight into the cultural zeitgeist when he posted an AI-generated video of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, complete with a fake mustache and sombrero. The Democrat called the images “racist” and “bigoted.” Vance laughed them off.

“I’ll tell Hakeem Jeffries right now, I make this solemn promise to you that if you help us reopen the government, the sombrero memes will stop,” the vice president told reporters. “And I’ve talked to the president of the United States about that.”

More than memes, the debate could have future political implications for Vance. The fight isn’t just about turning the lights back on. Longstanding conservative orthodoxy could shift in the process. The White House has told Democrats that they are willing to negotiate over Obamacare premiums but only after the government is reopened.

“Hopefully we can convince the president and others we can’t do that,” Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, told National Review of the possibility of continuing the Democratic extension of Obamacare subsidies. “I know people like me are vastly outnumbered here.”

Asked if the party that ran on repealing Obamacare for decades would actually extend Obamacare subsidies, Vance told RCP that the administration wants to ensure citizens have access to healthcare and “we are willing to have that conversation.”

“But I think it’s important to bracket that health care policy conversation,” the vice president clarified, “because it’s separate from the government shutdown.”

For now, the vice president is front and center in the shutdown conversation. Democrats have concluded as much. This includes California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a potential Vance opponent in the coming 2028 presidential election. A sign of the current digital discourse: Newsom posted a deep-fake video of Vance dressed like and sounding like an Oompa Loompa.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:45

American Eagle CEO Says Company Stands Behind Sydney Sweeney Ads

Authored by Haika Mrema via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

American Eagle Outfitters’ chief executive has defended the retailer’s ad campaign featuring actress Sydney Sweeney, saying the company will not retreat in the face of public criticism.

“You can’t run from fear,” CEO Jay Schottenstein said in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal. “We stand behind what we did.”

The campaign, which launched in late July, spotlighted the 27-year-old actress, best known for her roles in “Euphoria” and “The White Lotus,” modeling the brand’s denim line.

The promotional tagline, “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans,” played on a double meaning. In one video, Sweeney remarked, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue.”

Sydney Sweeney x American Eagle, oh my god. pic.twitter.com/tDkeGT9R7G

— Sydney Sweeney Daily (@sweeneydailyx) July 24, 2025

The wordplay drew accusations from some critics who claimed the ads carried undertones of racism, sexism, or eugenics. The company declined to alter or withdraw the campaign.

Schottenstein, an Orthodox Jew, said he was surprised by such associations. He noted that his own family had endured the impact of Nazi Germany and said that if he and his team felt the campaign would be offensive in that way, “we never would’ve done it.”

In response to the criticisms, Schottenstein instructed his leadership team to remain calm, refrain from public comment, and assign a small group to monitor online reaction. American Eagle also hired an outside firm to poll customers about their response to the campaign.

The strategy appears to have benefited the company. Between July and September, the campaign helped attract nearly 1 million new customers, as reported by the Journal.

Popular items linked to Sweeney—including a cinched denim jacket and a wide-leg jean featuring a butterfly design—sold out within days. The company also reported an uptick in sales growth beginning in August, reversing earlier declines.

Some marketing experts said American Eagle’s decision to remain consistent set it apart from other corporations that have scaled back campaigns after online criticism. “By sticking to their guns, they gained customers,” said Susan Cantor, CEO of branding firm Sterling Brands.

The campaign also drew national attention beyond the retail world. President Donald Trump praised Sweeney and the ads in a post on Truth Social, calling it the “hottest” campaign running.

“Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the ‘HOTTEST’ ad out there,” the post read. “It’s for American Eagle, and the jeans are ‘flying off the shelves.’ Go get ‘em Sydney!”

American Eagle has continued building on the momentum, announcing a partnership with NFL player Travis Kelce, who is engaged to pop star Taylor Swift, weeks after Sweeney’s campaign launch.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:20

MMT RIP - Good Riddance

By Tom Teague of The Manhattan

Modern Monetary Theory is a macroeconomic theory developed in the early 1990s. It maintains that governments that issue their own currency are not financially constrained in the same way as households or businesses. According to MMT, governments can create money and spend as they see fit; taxes serve primarily as a tool to control inflation and create demand for the currency. MMT also emphasizes that government spending should aim to ensure full employment.

Putatively heterodox to most economists, MMT has often been quietly promoted as a back door to central planning. It is analogous to Critical Race Theory in that it is referenced everywhere, yet often denied when challenged. Although no major central bank has formally adopted it, MMT’s logic aligns with the behavior of many major central banks since the Global Financial Crisis.

During the GFC, the financial system nearly collapsed under excessive leverage to the housing market and a series of black swan events. The aftermath provided a platform for the political left—who had been sidelined by the fall of Communism—to return to power and lay the foundations for a new vision of society. This shift promoted “stakeholder” capitalism: an economy to be guided by elites seeking less greed, greater inclusivity, and more environmental focus. (See the World Economic Forum.)

New rules were implemented for Europe’s financial institutions, particularly insurance companies and pension funds. Post-GFC, European insurers were governed under Solvency II and III. Under these regimes, there was a zero risk-weight for government bonds and large capital charges for corporate bonds, equities, infrastructure, and securitizations. This forced a major reallocation of asset holdings in the insurance sector (which controls €9.5 trillion in assets) toward government bonds, and away from risk assets. Pension funds—managing another ~€10 trillion—were also affected by these regulations and incentivized to shift toward “safe” government bonds, though to a somewhat lesser extent. The result was a significant shift from the private sector to the public sector, greatly benefiting European governments that could now borrow more cheaply. This process arguably helped finance the ‘Great European Project,’ but at the expense of private sector vitality.

This regulatory drift toward government bonds did not stop in Europe. In the U.S., the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel III were implemented, which encouraged banks and other regulated institutions to hold Treasuries rather than risk assets. While these rules had a significant impact on banks’ balance sheets, their effect on insurance companies and pension funds was less direct. Basel III’s risk weightings granted U.S. Treasuries and MBS very low charges, while company loans, equities, private credit, and various securitizations faced 100% or higher risk charges. Notably, the risk weight for equities held on bank balance sheets increased from 100% to 250%.

Basel III’s greatest impact did not come from the risk weights alone, but from higher total capital requirements, new capital buffers, and the liquidity coverage ratio—all of which further favored government bonds and reinforced the preference for “safe assets.” In practice, this crowded out private sector lending and investment, even if risk weights themselves did not always change dramatically.

It is understandable that, following the near-collapse of the financial system, regulators sought to promote stability. Yet, the net effect of these efforts was to encourage lending to governments and discourage lending to the private sector—ironic, given that the crisis was rooted in regulatory failures to prevent excessive leverage in U.S. housing.

In the post-GFC era, governments—enjoying lower bond yields and greater regulatory power—found themselves in a position to expand spending. Using debt to solve problems and bail out economies became the norm. The crucial question is whether this shift was intentional, or merely a byproduct of circumstances. Given recent government agendas to “rebuild capitalism,” focus on climate initiatives, and promote forced equality (including through immigration), it seems unlikely to be accidental.

Government spending relative to GDP has accelerated in recent years. In the U.S., this figure grew from 35% in 2018 to 39.7% in 2024, peaking at 47% in 2020 during Covid (compared to less than 20% pre-GFC). In the EU, government spending hovered around 46.5% of GDP in 2015–2019, and surged to 52.9% during Covid. In Japan, government spending is normally about 40% of GDP and reached 47.1% during the pandemic. We have entered an age where governments use cheap borrowing to centrally plan economies.

A peculiar relationship has now evolved between central banks and governments. As government spending grows, central banks are increasingly tasked with protecting the government’s ability to borrow at low cost, instead of focusing on stimulating the private sector. Ambiguity arises when governments create jobs by expanding already bloated agencies, placing them in competition with the private sector. The result is a zero-sum game between the government and the private sector. Rather than fostering private sector growth, governments and central banks have tilted toward active intervention and control.

In 2017–2018, the Trump administration implemented deregulatory measures and passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, aiming to boost private sector business investment, productivity, and job growth. In response, Chairman Powell raised rates four times in 2018, moving the Fed Funds rate from 1.5% in March to 2.5% by December. The Fed’s rationale was to preempt inflation from an overheating economy—even as core inflation hovered near the 2% target. By Q4 2018, fears of tightening led to a major stock market correction.

In the past year, global bond yields have increased as markets become less tolerant of central planning and begin to price in weaker growth. German Bund yields have moved from 2.1% to 2.75% on the 10-year. In Japan, the 10-year JGB yield has climbed from 0.75% to 1.64%. Investors are realizing: 1) government spending is not effectively growing the economy (if it ever intended to), and 2) underinvestment in the private sector, due to energy costs, regulation, and offshoring, has eroded growth potential. Ultimately, the private sector must generate the taxes that service government debt.

Enter the Scully Curve: an economic concept positing a relationship between government spending (relative to GDP) and economic growth. The curve, named after Gerald Scully, argues for an optimal spending level—typically 24–32% of GDP for industrialized economies. For each additional 1% of government spending above this range, GDP growth may decrease by 0.1–0.2%; if spending rises to 45–50% of GDP, a 0.5–1.5% reduction in growth can be expected. This weakening of the private sector ultimately leads to doubts about debt repayment and undermines the argument that “the government can do it better.”

Central banks, often in concert with fiscal authorities, may now raise rates to combat inflation resulting from deficit spending—which in turn lifts borrowing costs for businesses, crowds out private investment, and distorts market signals. Studies from the post-2008 period reveal that sustained high rates in Europe suppressed private sector recovery and channeled capital into sovereign bonds.

MMT was a prescriptive idea for more central planning, and it has left a profound mark on government debt markets and private sector growth in the West. Now, as economies confront a world of high spending and low growth, there is increasing urgency to reverse course. Populist leaders, most notably Trump, are calling for shrinking government and deregulation to unleash pent-up private sector demand. The U.S., uniquely among major economies, may still have the capacity to grow out of the MMT legacy.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:00

ACLU Sues ICE To Release Records Of Detainment Facilities

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), seeking to compel the agency to disclose records related to specific operations, according to the complaint filed on Oct. 1.

ICE agents charge toward protesters outside an ICE detention facility in Portland, Ore., on Sept. 1, 2025. John Rudoff/Reuters

The lawsuit, filed jointly by the ACLU and its Virginia and North Carolina affiliates in the District Court for the Southern District of New York, concerns the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

According to the lawsuit, ICE issued a Request for Information (RFI) on May 28, seeking information on available detention facilities capable of housing single adult populations to support the agency’s Washington Field Office.

An RFI is issued to gather information regarding services or products from suppliers, and in the case of ICE, it wanted information on detection facilities. While ICE owns five detention facilities, it relies on private prison companies and other facilities to detain a majority of people in its custody, the lawsuit said.

On Aug. 8, plaintiffs submitted an FOIA request to ICE, asking for records of responses to the agency’s RFI.

The FOIA “was enacted to facilitate public access to government documents,” the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit added that the basic purpose of FOIA is to “ensure an informed citizenry, vital to the functioning of a democratic society, needed to check against corruption and to hold the governors accountable to the governed.”

With this aim in mind, the FOIA statute requires that federal agencies such as ICE disclose records within 20 working days, the lawsuit said.

An additional 10-day extension for processing may be provided under certain circumstances.

However, “more than 30 working days have passed” since plaintiffs filed the request, and there has been no response from ICE with regard to providing the records, the complaint said, adding that the statutory time period has elapsed.

“Plaintiffs have exhausted all administrative remedies regarding ICE’s failure to respond to the Request,” the complaint stated.

ACLU and its affiliates asked the court to order ICE to process and release the necessary records.

The ACLU lawsuit comes amid protests and instances of violence against ICE’s immigration enforcement operations and the officials carrying them out.

On Sept. 24, a gunman opened fire at the ICE Dallas building. While no law enforcement officers were injured in the attack, two detainees died.

On Sept. 26, ICE’s processing facility at Broadview, Illinois, saw clashes between protestors and federal agents. In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Broadview Mayor Katrina Thompson said residents approached her looking for help due to chemicals being allegedly used by federal agents near the ICE facility.

The DHS said in a Sept. 26 statement that some of the rioters had arrived with fireworks and gas masks, with one apprehended carrying a gun.

“These lawless rioters began chanting ‘Arrest ICE, Shoot ICE,’” the department said.

Since ICE launched Operation Midway Blitz in early September, targeting criminal illegal aliens in Illinois, “rioters have assaulted law enforcement, thrown tear gas cans, slashed tires of cars, blocked the entrance of the building, and trespassed on private property,” DHS said.

The Epoch Times reached out to the agency for comment, but did not receive a response by publication time.

Efforts to Unmask ICE Officers

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law the No Secret Police Act (SB 627) on Sept. 20.

The act bans local and federal law enforcement, including ICE personnel, from wearing ski masks and other such “extreme masks,” according to a Sept. 20 statement from the office of California state Sen. Scott Wiener, lead author of the bill.

The bill was backed by a coalition of immigrant and civil rights groups. While the DHS asked Newsom to veto the bill, the governor opted not to do so, said the statement.

“The No Secret Police Act is a bold step that builds on a remarkable record of leadership defending our immigrant communities and democracy itself,” Wiener said.

In its Sept. 26 statement, DHS said that ICE officers were facing “a more than 1,000 percent increase in assaults against them.”

In a Sept. 26 X post, Bill Essayli, acting attorney for the Central District of California, criticized Newsom’s decision, accusing him of being “confused” with regard to his role under the U.S. Constitution.

Newsom “oversees California, not federal agencies. He should review the Supremacy Clause,” Essayli wrote.

“California’s law to ‘unmask’ federal agents is unconstitutional, as the state lacks jurisdiction to interfere with federal law enforcement. I have directed federal agencies to disregard this state law and adhere to federal law and agency policies,” Essayli said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 14:00

North Koreans Ordered To Identify Women With "Un-Socialist" Breasts

Authorities in North Korea have been ordered to identify women with "un-socialist" and "bourgeois" breast implants, The Telegraph reports, citing local media.

Illustration: Sanjeev Das

Undercover agents are now groping for 'enhanced' women, as well as for doctors who perform the cosmetic procedures, primarily around the city of Sariwon, with perpetrators facing potential detention in the country's notorious labor camps.

Suspected women will be "taken to hospitals to undergo medical examinations to ascertain whether any procedures have taken place," a tough job for whoever has to do it. 

The controversy bounced into the headlines after a dropout medical student was busted performing the surgery out of his home. During his trial, prosecutors displayed his surgical devices, along with imported Chinese silicone breasts and bundles of cash. 

The Telegraph reports:

The city’s residents, who had turned out to attend the public hearing, watched as the women and the doctor were dragged out onto an open stage, where they stood with their heads bowed for the proceedings.

The two women told prosecutors and the presiding judge that they had undergone the surgeries because they “wanted to improve their bodies”.

The judge called the breast augmentation surgery an “un-socialist act” and said one of the defendants “had no intention of being loyal to the organisation and group, but was obsessed with vanity and ended up becoming a poisonous weed that was eating away at the socialist system”.

A source, who refused to give their name out of fear, revealed to Daily NK: "Among the residents who watched the trial, there were voices of criticism such as 'doctors do all kinds of things for money,' but at the same time, there were also sympathetic comments such as 'Isn't he doing such things because he has no way to make a living?'"

Question of the day - and this is very serious as we are trying to raise awareness... are these unsocialist Korean breasts?

All pics via Instagram

How about these? (unrelated... because dry skin is the worst)

And these?

Unsocialist AI breasts? DELETE!

Wait, what???

Clearly we have some BIG fans of IQ Male Enhancement and our Waxed Canvas Hat. Unless Sanj is up to his old tricks.

So anyway... Kim's directive follows a pattern of measures targeting Western cultural influence in North Korea, including the execution of young citizens for listening to K-pop and a ban on commonplace terms such as "hamburger" and "ice cream."

Would she be targeted for Western cultural influence?

The situation in the isolated nation was detailed in a recent United Nations report, which documented that North Korea's secret police are conducting public executions for offenses including watching foreign films or sharing South Korean television dramas. The report cited one case in which a 22-year-old man from South Hwanghae province was publicly executed in 2022 for listening to 70 South Korean songs and distributing three films, actions deemed violations of the regime's restrictive laws. Defectors have suggested these public executions serve to "block people's eyes and ears," using fear to maintain control over the population.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/02/2025 - 13:00