Skip to main content
The FYCKL Project
No AI. No Bull.

Main navigation

  • Home
User account menu
  • Log in

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Aggregator
  3. Sources

Zero Rss

Is 'Communist' No Longer A Slur?

Zero Rss
2 days 20 hours ago
Is 'Communist' No Longer A Slur?

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

It is not difficult, these days, to see the neo-communist flipside of “Democratic Socialists”—once they find power.

Indeed, the more the ossified Democratic Party claims that its growing cadre of socialist renegades are not really socialists, the more they act like—and even appear comfortable being called—communists.

With every new policy they propose, the socialists have been dropping the pretense that they are not Marxists.

How about declaring capitalism a failure?

All the socialists now do that—and even Democratic California governor Gavin Newsom has also started agreeing that “capitalism as we know it doesn’t work either.” Oddly, Newsom himself, a multimillionaire and a beneficiary of arch-capitalist Gordon Getty’s largesse, seems to have done quite well under capitalism.

Confiscating private property?

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani claims he will do just that if New York’s landlords, in his opinion, are poor custodians of their own property.

Dismantling the U.S. Constitution?

Almost all Democrats have long called for destroying the 238-year-old Electoral College. And now the socialists openly brag that, when they take over the Democratic Party and then the nation, they will, as good Bolsheviks, go much further: destroying the Senate, destroying the Pentagon, destroying prisons, destroying the police, and destroying our borders.

And they want to take over utilities, break up or absorb corporate agriculture, and own major industries. Apparently, socialists believe that with a snap of their fingers they can destroy key elements of the U.S. constitutional order. Would these “socialists” even resent their agenda being called “communist”?

They also seem to have taken their cue for such radical change from “mainstream” Democrats—for example, Kamala Harris. Now in her third vain bid for the presidency, she has adopted the doctrine of “if you can’t beat them, join them.” So Harris now promises that if she is elected, she will pack the court, admit two new blue states (to snag four liberal senators), end the filibuster, and junk the Electoral College. How she plans to amend the Constitution to that effect she never tells us.

Like all good Marxists, these “ends-justify-the-means” leftists show an utter lack of principle: if two new red states wished to join the U.S., they would lecture us on the sanctity of a 50-state union. If they were a permanent Senate minority, they would, as in the past, honor the filibuster. If they had lost the popular vote in two recent elections but won the Electoral College, they would praise the wisdom of the Founders. If they had their Earl Warren-era majority again, they would laud the continuity of the 157-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court.

How about making “enemies of the people” lists and forcing sales of private property?

Mamdani just sent out a public list of nearly one million New York homeowners. He sent official warnings to 17,000 of these property owners that, if within four weeks they cannot prove that they have lived full-time in their own properties, the city will levy a huge surtax on them to drive home the point that no one should own an additional high-value home. Are show trials next for those who decline to reply?

In other words, Mamdani has flipped the American tradition of “innocent until proven guilty.” Instead, almost 20,000 New Yorkers are now automatically presumed guilty of being house-hoarding, capitalist leeches who owe the exploited classes tens of thousands of dollars a year in reparations, unless they—the newly presumed guilty—can prove themselves innocent.

Welcome to Mamdani’s revolutionary court.

Mamdani’s new surtax could add from $40,000 to $350,000 a year to tens of thousands of homeowners’ taxes—in addition to already-existing steep property taxes that often range from $5,000 to $150,000.

Most owners will do the math and see that the new aggregate tax payouts in just a few years could be more than the value of the home itself.

Why is Mamdani doing this?

The socialist mayor’s aim here seems twofold:

First, he wants to flush out and dox anyone owning two homes as a purported enemy of the people.

And so, Mamdani created a list of his targets, including their addresses, and published it. To the extent that many properties really were second homes, Mamdani has now made sure that all New Yorkers, including envious rubberneckers, would-be squatters, and hardened criminals, know exactly where they might target a sometimes-vacant home.

Second, he wants to force a massive fire sale of second homes that would crash home values in general and so redistribute now “affordable” houses to those whom Mamdani considers, as victims of capitalism, to be more deserving of these properties.

Recently, on cable news, the national co-chair of the Democratic Socialists of America, Megan Romer, was asked a series of questions about her group’s published agenda. Far from denying its communist radicalism, she gleefully confirmed it all—from destroying the border to ending prisons, the military, and the police.

But it is in Spain, and Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s corrupt and unpopular regime, where we see what one-eyed-jack socialists can do when they are finally in power, especially when they are hated and on their way out.

Sánchez has given amnesty to 600,000 illegal aliens. One result was that 60,000 Muslim men from North Africa in a single day recently swarmed Spain’s colonial outpost on the Moroccan coast at Ceuta, demanding amnesties and free subsidized passes into European Spain—while looting and vandalizing businesses and attacking Spaniards.

So why do European socialists and American leftists, once elected, destroy borders, create conditions of mass chaos, and welcome in millions of illegal aliens—poor, often angry, and unassimilated—from the Third World?

Aside from their belief that the capitalists and their bourgeois hirelings deserve chaos, violence, and upheaval, they hate the fact that capitalism is too class-fluid to furnish a permanent exploited proletarian underclass.

And so they import a huge victim class, and virtue signal their purported moral superiority. Then they spend lavish social largesse upon the influx, and, in quid pro quo fashion, thus bind their imported underclass with their welfare-state assurances.

Mail-in and early ballots, no-ID voting, same-day registration, ballot harvesting and curing, and no final verdicts on Election Day were all leftist projects, all designed to enroll as many illegal voters as possible.

The Left has also learned from experience that the time between immigrant parents fleeing third-world hellholes to find safety, freedom, and prosperity in the U.S. and their children hating the very generous host that welcomed them—and demanding that America be radically transformed to resemble the catastrophe from which they or their parents fled—is often only about 20 years.

So if one enjoys watching the careers of Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, AOC, or Zohran Mamdani, then one should certainly vote socialist to ensure that they are the new model for American elected officials.

It is the paradox of our age that anyone can flee Somalia, the West Bank, Puerto Rico, or Uganda and then win the global lottery by being accepted into America’s constitutional society and free-market economy—only to do their best to repay the generosity of their host by turning their new country into something unrecognizable to the prior 10 generations of Americans.

But then again, America might become quite similar to the mess they abandoned.

So far, the model holds true: socialist candidates (as opposed to registered socialist activists) hide their communist-adjacent agendas during elections. But once in office and drunk with power, they find socialism too wishy-washy and go full communist. So they destroy borders, institutions, names, dates, statues, norms, customs, and traditions to replicate the illiberalism and concomitant failures of a new Haiti, a West Bank, or a Morocco in the West.

In sum, to make a new socialist America, you must first destroy everything that made Americans and all that they hold dear.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 20:55
Tyler Durden

The Byproduct Ate The Product: Inside America's Proteinmaxxing Cheese Glut

Zero Rss
2 days 20 hours ago
The Byproduct Ate The Product: Inside America's Proteinmaxxing Cheese Glut

For most of the history of dairy, whey was the stuff you got rid of - the watery byproduct left after milk becomes cheese, fed to hogs or poured out while the actual product went to market. In 2026, with an entire nation proteinmaxxing its way through GLP-1 prescriptions and 40-gram breakfast bars, the 'cheddar' isn't in the cheese itself: America is now producing record amounts of cheese because that's how you get whey.

According to NBC, this has resulted in record-high US cheese production, with processors making more cheese to capture the whey stream and exports absorbing the growing pile nobody specifically ordered. The USDA's latest Dairy Products report shows total cheese output excluding cottage cheese hit 1.28 billion pounds in May, up 2.0% from a year earlier - while the whey side of the ledger ran considerably hotter, with total dry whey production up 12.2% year-over-year and whey protein concentrate up 3.0%. Cheddar output actually fell 1.2% in the same month, which tells you the growth is not being driven by anyone's sudden craving for cheddar.

Whey Cool

The demand shock behind all this has been building for two years. The average US supermarket now carries 38,708 products advertising their protein content, according to NielsenIQ figures cited by AP, as food companies bolt whey onto cereal, chips, bagels, tortillas and coffee drinks to chase consumers who have been told - by their trainers, their doctors, and increasingly their Ozempic prescribers - that every bite needs protein in it. The GLP-1 craze has been a huge catalyst: the drugs suppress appetite so aggressively that getting enough protein becomes a challenge, and a widely-cited concern holds that rapid weight loss on semaglutide strips muscle along with fat. The STEP 1 body-composition substudy found roughly 40% of the weight lost on semaglutide came from lean mass - though how much of that is actual contractile muscle, as opposed to water, glycogen and liver fat that body scans miscount, is contested, with some researchers arguing the muscle loss is no worse than ordinary dieting. Either way, the perception has been enough to send GLP-1 users reaching for protein, and the industry has followed the money.

High-grade whey wholesale prices were up roughly 250% year-over-year by early summer, per that same reporting, and the squeeze got tight enough that US exports of 80% whey protein to China fell 47% in the first four months of the year, with Vesper dairy analyst Jasper Endlich telling AP that exports have been "paused as much as possible" because there is not enough product for American customers. China, displaced from US supply, is now bidding up European whey, which is also short - a global scramble for a substance the industry spent a century treating as drainage.

USDA's own forecasting desk noted the inversion months ago. In its December World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, the department cut its 2026 cheese price forecast to $1.6750 per pound on persistent weakness while raising its 2026 dry whey forecast to 63.50 cents on strong demand - and the cash market has since overshot both calls in the whey-friendly direction. Per USDA AMS's latest National Dairy Products Sales Report, 40-pound cheddar blocks averaged just $1.49 per pound for the week ending July 18, well below the department's full-year forecast, while dry whey fetched 65.3 cents and rising. 

Every Boom Builds Its Own Glut

According to dairy economists, whey is now driving a growing share of the farmer's milk check, which creates a direct incentive to overproduce cheese simply to get at the whey - and industry boards are already scouting export markets in Latin America, Asia and the Pacific to offload surplus cheese that domestic demand will not clear at current prices. The new cheese plants under construction are, functionally, protein-extraction facilities that happen to emit cheddar and mozzarella as a co-product, engineered around WPC-80 and isolate output rather than the cheese case. 

The precedent the industry itself reaches for is the chicken wing - a low-value scrap until Buffalo, New York found a use for it in 1964, now the part that drives poultry economics. Whey is running the same play at commodity scale, with one difference: every incremental pound of protein powder for the proteinmaxxers arrives bolted to roughly ten times its weight in cheese that somebody, somewhere, will eventually have to eat. Long whey, short whoever ends up holding the gouda.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 20:30
Tyler Durden

Oil Tumbles On Iran Deal Buzz As Rubio Still Insists 'Denuclearization' Is The 'Ultimate' Goal

Zero Rss
2 days 20 hours ago
Oil Tumbles On Iran Deal Buzz As Rubio Still Insists 'Denuclearization' Is The 'Ultimate' Goal Summary
  • Rubio: The "ultimate deal" is the denuclearization of Iran, while Omani talks focus on reopening Hormuz.
  • Stalemate persists: Iran refuses nuclear negotiations until the conflict ends, leaving both sides far apart.
  • Deal optimism sees oil slide: Brent fell below $80 on reports of progress in Oman-mediated Hormuz talks.
  • Bessent claims a Hormuz agreement could come "today or tomorrow".
  • Major doubts remain given Iran denies formal talks, security risks persist and the reported Oman plan could leave Tehran with broad control over Hormuz traffic.
//--> //--> //--> US x Iran Effective Ceasefire by August 14?
Yes 81% · No 19%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

*  *  *

Rubio: "Denuclearization of Iran" is the "Ultimate Deal"

Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke at the White House Tuesday, just after headlines out of Qatar touting that a new draft deal initiative is gaining momentum.

Rubio insisted again that Strait of Hormuz remains open and that vessels are continuing to pass through it, but said the US is working to open it up to bigger vessel transit flows.

"I think there is a conversation and a negotiation that we are involved in between Iran and Oman on how more ships can be able to go through there safely in the short term, as we move towards… longer-term talks about denuclearization," said Rubio. He then emphasized that that the "denuclearization of Iran" is the "ultimate deal".

But from Tehran's point of view, this will constitute Washington shifting the goalposts back to square one once again. Iran has insisted it will not negotiate the end of its nuclear program, especially while the conflict is still in an active phrase. It has consistently said that nuclear talks can happen later, only once an agreement to end the war has been accomplished. The two sides continue to be far apart, despite the Tuesday morning onslaught of 'Hormuz deal imminent' headlines. 

Images from Al Arabiya show smoke rising from a ship hit by a projectile near the Strait of Hormuz

صور حصرية للعربية تظهر تصاعد الدخان من سفينة أصيبت بمقذوف قرب مضيق هرمز pic.twitter.com/pSOfYpS8k8

— العربية عاجل (@AlArabiya_Brk) August 4, 2026

PressTV, however, has said that Iran-Oman talks on opening Hormuz are in a "new phase" - and despite what it calls "US obstruction" - but so far it appears this management scheme will be favorable to Iran's demands. And yet there's still some signs of compromise on the horizon:

IRAN WEIGHS ALLOWING EUROPE TO CLEAR MINES IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ

Here's where things stand on the Iran-Oman talks for Hormuz management, which would leave Iran in a favored position, and maintaining an immense amount of leverage over the waterway:

  • Iran controls vessel entry, Oman exit: RTRS
  • Iran has ability to intervene in waterway
  • Potential service fee, revenue split: NYT
  • The U.S. and regional governments rejected Iran's demand to collect fees and instead demanded guarantees that Iran's proxies will not attack or threaten their territory, according to a senior official - WSJ

“Over the next two and a half years” pic.twitter.com/x6e8GychXb

— Justin Logan (@JustinTLogan) May 30, 2026 Oil Slides amid return to Another Round of 'Deal Imminent' Headlines

Another fake ceasefire in progress? Or are we to believe it's for real this time? There's nothing on the ground-level at all that currently suggests the warring sides are imminently about to agree to a new ceasefire, or are so much as back at the negotiating table.

And yet Tuesday morning headlines are now being driven by a Qatari Foreign Ministry statement saying that "language" for a possible US-Iran resolution "has been drafted" and "is being circulated between the parties."

via Doha News

Ministry spokesman Majed Al-Ansari didn't offer any time line for a potential deal in relaying the statement before a press briefing but said that current diplomatic efforts are focused on preventing further escalation, reopening the Strait of Hormuz and creating conditions to resume talks.

He described that the focus is on short term resolution that would restart US-Iran talks and return the sides to mediation, but also admitted that there's "nothing the the books when it comes to direct talks." This comes as President Trump has told Iran that he wants to see a deal done on the Hormuz Strait immediately, per Bloomberg.

This was enough for regional media, including Israel's i24 to report 'progress' in the Omani mediated Hormuz talks, with the American side - as yet only participating indirectly - said to be "much more" flexible in their demands than even the Omani side, amid Iranian recalcitrance.

"Iran has conveyed a message: any solution that we agree to and sign must also be approved by Washington," i24 has written. This somewhat forced and perhaps manufactured return yet again to peace optimism has sent oil sliding...

BRENT CRUDE OIL FALLS BELOW $80 FOR FIRST TIME SINCE MID JULY

The day prior, President Trump continued to address Tehran in threatening language, however. He said before reporters in the Oval Office: "I want to give them every last chance before decapitation. Very tough to do what what we have planned, still planned. We'll see what happens, but it's very very tough thing to do. I think I'm very proud of the fact that I will give people a chance."

Bessent Floats Maybe 'Iran Deal Tomorrow' To Open Hormuz

Just on the heels of the above 'draft deal' headlines, and in a carefully timed CNBC appearance, Washington brought out its heavy hitter to re-anchor the administration's narrative, seeking to assure markets that a diplomatic deal with Tehran is not only real, but imminent - potentially coming together even as soon as Tuesday through Wednesday.

"We may have an Iran deal tomorrow to open Hormuz," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declared, signaling that a major diplomatic resolution is within reach. He pointed out that physical maritime traffic is already quietly resuming, regardless of headline volatility.

Bessent gets dragged in to justify "imminent Iran deal" as algos no longer reacting to $100,000 Truth Social API

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 4, 2026

Bessent claimed the administration is seeing "quite a few ships coming out of Hormuz, even now," suggesting the chokehold is loosening ahead of an actual deal and formal signature. With physical crude flows expected to resume, Bessent predicted that elevated energy prices will soon settle down, paving the way for a massive "relief trade" across broader markets:

"We are in talks with the Iranians, and I think there is a chance we may have a deal today or tomorrow to open the Strait and move towards a more normalized position in this conflict,” Bessent said in an interview with CNBC.

Asked if Tehran would be allowed to charge a toll, Bessent said the deal would allow freedom of movement in the strait.

"It would be freedom of movement," he said. "Even though things are still a little dicey there over the past few days, we saw quite a few ships coming out even now.”

Of course, we've heard all of this before, and notably Bessent's commentary came just after Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian insisted that while Tehran would defend its borders, it does not seek to expand the war, according to state media. An advisor to the Supreme Leader also reiterated that if the blockade continues, US vessels and forces will face serious risks and casualties. And there's this not so small hiccup in the strait emerging Tuesday:

  • A vessel has been struck in the Strait of Hormuz near Oman, the UK maritime security firm Vanguard says. One crew member is missing.

🔺 Senior Iranian figure warns US forces will “face serious risks and casualties” if the Hormuz blockade continues

Mohsen Rezaei, senior military advisor to the Supreme Leader and former longtime commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), warned that US vessels… https://t.co/Oozl8C5sLw

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 4, 2026 Oman Hormuz Blueprint Would Leave Iran Largely With Control

Looming large over all of this is the fact that the Iranians have still denied that they are in formal talks with Washington, which Trump the day prior described as a ruse, venting his frustration while insisting that the Iranians have been engaging. The Hormuz blueprint as it basically stands:

Reuters: Iran would gain full control over vessels entering the Strait of Hormuz under a temporary plan being discussed with Oman, an Iranian official says.

Outbound vessels would use the route between Iran and Oman, with Oman approving their exit only after notifying Tehran. The plan would give Iran full visibility over outbound traffic and the ability to intervene if needed and Iran is unlikely to accept any other proposal to open the strait

The Bessent clip:

Bessent on Iran:

We've seen Trump, last week, threaten what would have been the largest military campaign since World War II against the Iranians, and now, because of that, we are in talks with the Iranians.

I think there's a chance we may have a deal today or tomorrow to open… pic.twitter.com/mnel0A16O0

— Clash Report (@clashreport) August 4, 2026

*  *  *

Amid the sudden and dubious return to 'optimism', let's recount how we got here...

Trump's Iran Strike Threats: A Timeline

March 21: Trump threatened to "hit and obliterate" Iranian power plants unless Hormuz reopened within 48 hours.

March 23: Delayed strikes for five days, citing "productive conversations" with Iran.

April 7: Warned "a whole civilization will die tonight."
Hours later: A two-week ceasefire was announced.

April 21: Said he expected "to be bombing" if talks failed.
Later that day: Extended the ceasefire.

May 17: Warned, "the Clock is Ticking."

May 18: Paused planned strikes after requests from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

June 11: Said the U.S. would hit Iran "VERY HARD TONIGHT."
Hours later: Canceled the operation, saying a deal was near.

August 1: Said the U.S. was "locked and loaded."
Later: Called off the attack to pursue a deal with Tehran.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 20:15
Tyler Durden

The New McCarthys: 40% Of Professors Against Hiring A Trump-Voter

Zero Rss
2 days 21 hours ago
The New McCarthys: 40% Of Professors Against Hiring A Trump-Voter

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

According to a new survey, roughly 40 percent of college faculty would “oppose hiring a Trump supporter.” The results of the study are not surprising to many in the field of teaching. Indeed, it may be low given faculty reluctance to admit political bias or the delusion of others that they are without it. Yet, the virtual purging of Republicans from most departments reveals a long-standing ideological exclusion in higher education.

While far-left hires are common, even a moderate Republican is a rarity on faculties in a country with a majority of conservative and libertarian voters.

Even assuming that many faculty members will not expressly acknowledge their bias, this forty percent is willing to state that they will vote against candidates based on their political views without any consideration of the intellectual content of their scholarship.

In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss these arguments to justify the current levels of intolerance and orthodoxy in higher education.

I had dinner with a Harvard Law Professor, who expressed disbelief that I expected him to vote for any faculty applicants who held views he considered wrong. When I noted that I regularly vote for faculty candidates who hold opposing views, he just shrugged and said that, if he rejects their views, he cannot vote for those views to be taught to students.

There are few remaining conservatives or libertarians on law school faculties, which have been purged of dissenting voices through a biased hiring and promotion system. Despite years of complaints and declining public trust in higher education, faculty members continue to reinforce bias and orthodoxy in our schools.

I wrote about the rise of this new McCarthyism on the left seven years ago.

Recently, I discussed the example of Fordham University School of Law professor John Pfaff, who called for “repercussions” for professors who do not “recant” their view that the 14th Amendment does not protect birthright citizenship.

Tolerance is intolerable for professors like Pfaff. After the decision in Trump v. Barbara, Professor Pfaff went on BlueSky to vent against anyone who dared to voice a dissenting view in academia, calling such faculty “parasites” that have to be effectively stomped out of higher education. In his post, Pfaff declared:

“There MUST be repercussions for the lawprofs who advanced such untenable arguments. Their behavior is — and I mean this literally, not dehumanizingly — parasitic.

They exploit norms of collegiality and presumptions of integrity to advance trash. Which undermines the work of ALL of us.”

His rationale for punishing opposing viewpoints is an insight into the arguments used against intellectual diversity and institutional neutrality in higher education.

I recently participated in a debate with the President of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), who opposed the principles of institutional neutrality.

Some sites, such as Above the Law, have supported the exclusion of conservative faculty.  Senior Editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” by arguing that hiring a conservative law professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university.

Not long ago, I debated Professor Randall Kennedy at Harvard Law School about the lack of ideological diversity at the school. I respect Kennedy, and I do not view him as anti-free speech or intolerant. Yet when I noted the statistics on the vanishing number of conservative students and faculty in comparison to the nation, Kennedy responded that Harvard “is an elite university” and does not have to “look like America.”

Of course, the problem is that Harvard does not even look like Massachusetts, which is nearly 30 percent Republican.

At Yale, the faculty achieved a type of academic nirvana in reaching a point where not a single faculty member gave to a Republican candidate.

When pressed, faculty members often claim that they cannot find credible or competent conservatives. During my debate with Professor Kennedy, I noted that, if a university made such a claim to explain the virtual absence of minority professors, a judge would laugh them out of court. The virtual absence of conservative or Republican faculty in most departments shows a deep and unrelenting bias.

There is little self-reflection on the left in considering the historical or cultural implications of such bias. While often alluding to the McCarthy period in criticizing the right, professors rarely acknowledge their own effective black list against conservatives and certain Trump supporters. Few conservative applicants today would risk admitting to being Trump supporters in interviews.

The intolerance in higher education will not change because it is a cultural touchstone for faculty. Professors prove their bona fides with intolerant statements in meetings and even in classes. I heard from closet conservative students at Harvard how faculty routinely used their classes to rail against Trump and Republicans. They sit like a silent captive audience.

Surveys show that this intolerance has produced widespread self-censuring by students, particularly conservative students.

Some 49 percent of Republican students report self-censoring on three or more topics. Independents are the second most likely at 40 percent. Some 38 percent of Democrats admit to self-censoring.

Sixty percent of college students strongly or somewhat agree that “[t]he climate at my school or on my campus prevents some people from saying things they believe, because others might find it offensive.”

That is the environment of intolerance created and maintained by this generation of administrators and faculty. It will not change until donors stop giving money to schools without greater balance and intellectual diversity.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 20:05
Tyler Durden

"It Could Be Tomorrow": California's Top Earthquake Expert Sounds Alarm On "The Big One"

Zero Rss
2 days 21 hours ago
"It Could Be Tomorrow": California's Top Earthquake Expert Sounds Alarm On "The Big One"

A new peer-reviewed study found that the fault system running beneath Los Angeles and the Inland Empire is carrying more stress today than at any point in the last millennium, and that a single rupture could tear across both the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults at once.

The research, led by Dr. Liliane Burkhard of the University of Bern and published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, simulated 1,000 years of earthquake cycles on the southern San Andreas and San Jacinto systems.

The flashpoint is Cajon Pass, the junction northeast of Los Angeles where the two systems meet, and where Interstate 15, freight rail lines, power corridors and the aqueducts that supply Southern California's water all cross.

The model puts Coulomb stress at 3.6 megapascals on the San Jacinto-Bernardino segment, the highest value anywhere in the entire 1,000-year reconstruction, and 2.8 megapascals on the San Andreas Mojave South segment. Both are elevated, and both are closely aligned, the same configuration that preceded joint ruptures in the past.

Researchers caution these are modeled values that depend on the simulation's assumptions, not direct measurements from underground. Burkhard's team describes Cajon Pass as an "earthquake gate," a junction that can either stop a rupture cold or let it through.

The 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake, magnitude roughly 7.9, stopped there, while the 1812 Wrightwood event is believed to have crossed both faults. A through-going rupture today, the study claimed, could reach magnitude 7.4 to 7.8. More than 160 years of slip has piled up since 1857. Caltech seismologist Lucy Jones, who helped build the widely cited magnitude-7.8 "ShakeOut" scenario, said the San Andreas is California's longest fault and therefore capable of its largest earthquakes.

The chilling scenario projects nearly two minutes of shaking, more than 1,800 deaths, 50,000 injuries and over $200 billion in damage. "It could go another 100 years. It could be tomorrow," Jones said in an interview with ABC7.

A 2008 USGS forecast put the 30-year odds of a magnitude-6.7 or larger quake on the southern San Andreas at 59 percent, the highest of any fault in the state. Burkhard stopped short of forecasting a date, telling Newsweek that while this does not mean an earthquake will happen tomorrow, "the system is as loaded as it has ever been in our record, and the question is not really if but when."

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 19:40
Tyler Durden

New York Cannot Ban Federal Agents From Wearing Masks, Judge Rules

Zero Rss
2 days 21 hours ago
New York Cannot Ban Federal Agents From Wearing Masks, Judge Rules

Authored by Chris Summers via The Epoch Times,

A judge ruled on Aug. 3 that New York cannot ban federal agents from wearing masks or balaclavas, or require them to wear visible identification.

Masked federal agents wait outside an immigration courtroom in New York on July 8, 2025. Olga Fedorova/AP

U.S. District Judge Mae D'Agostino, for the Northern District of New York, wrote that New York state's perspective "is grounded in unavoidable observations of recent troubling events which loom darkly over the public perception of the manner in which federal immigration law is enforced."

"New York appears to be well-intentioned in its pursuit of transparent policing," she said in her ruling.

"However, the issue now before the Court is about constitutionality - not transparency or preferable policy decisions. There is a constitutional proscription on direct state regulation of federal agency operations."

She said that whether federal law enforcement agencies have chosen to carry out their operations in a "sufficiently transparent manner" was an important question, but it was not for the court to decide at this time.

Federal Agents Fear Doxxing

Federal agents have been wearing masks to protect their identities because they and their families fear being doxxed by activists.

The federal government argued that New York's law goes against the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bars state governments from regulating federal law enforcement.

The Trump administration argued the New York state law violated "principles of intergovernmental immunity and are invalid under the Supremacy Clause because they unlawfully regulate or discriminate against the Federal Government ... or are preempted by federal law."

New York's law to ban face coverings and implement identification measures was included among several law enforcement policies in the state budget bill that was signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul, a D in May and came into effect in June, according to D'Agostino's ruling.

The definition of face coverings includes any "opaque mask, garment, helmet, headgear, balaclava, ski mask, neck gaiter, or tactical mask," but excludes transparent face shields, medical masks, or respirators.

On Feb. 9, 2026, a federal district court judge partially blocked a similar law in California, finding that it discriminated against federal officers.

Judge Christina Snyder of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled in favor of the Trump administration, prohibiting the state from enforcing its No Secret Police Act - which was scheduled to go into effect earlier this year - against federal law enforcement officers.

The federal government sued California, challenging both laws: the aforementioned law and the No Vigilantes Act, which requires federal officers to wear identification. Snyder ruled that the second law was not discriminatory.

Several other blue states had followed California and New York's example.

In May, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Connecticut in federal court over a new state law that prohibited federal agents from wearing masks and also established protected areas - including schools, hospitals, and houses of worship - where people cannot be detained for immigration violations.

New York Reviewing Legal Options

Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement after D'Agostino's ruling.

"While the court enjoined enforcement of New York's mask ban, we stand firm in our belief that masked agents do not make New York safer, and our offices are reviewing all legal options at this time," Hochul and James said.

D'Agostino also denied the federal government's motion for a preliminary injunction blocking New York's ban on 287(g) agreements between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and local law enforcement, which would have allowed ICE to delegate certain immigration enforcement functions to local officers.

Hochul and James welcomed that ruling.

"As we have said from the start, New York's ban on 287(g) agreements is legal and will keep our communities safe," they said in their joint statement.

"Local law enforcement should be focused on local matters, and New York taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for any collaboration with ICE."

Hochul's Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, which was proposed in January, prohibits federal agents from using local detention centers for civil immigration enforcement, including what the governor described as "mass raids" and detainee transport.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 19:15
Tyler Durden

This Is The Income Needed To Be Happy In 50 US Cities

Zero Rss
2 days 22 hours ago
This Is The Income Needed To Be Happy In 50 US Cities

How much money does it take before earning more no longer makes people happier? Researchers call this threshold the satiation point, and it varies considerably across the United States.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte, ranks 50 of the most populous U.S. cities by the annual income at which self-reported life evaluation stops improving, using data from Remitly.

Remitly adapted Purdue University‘s income satiation research by adjusting it for purchasing power and inflation, then scaling the U.S. figure to each metro using Numbeo’s cost-of-living index.

Coastal U.S. Cities Have the Highest Price of Happiness

Nationally, happiness levels off at an estimated annual income of $134,827. In New York City, the threshold rises to $195,969, or 45.3% above the national figure.

New York is followed by Honolulu ($192,441) and San Francisco ($191,266). In all three cities, the estimated income threshold exceeds $190,000 a year.

The table below shows the price of happiness in each of the 50 cities and how each compares with the $134,827 U.S. average:

Rank City State Price of Happiness vs. U.S. Average 1 New York NY $195,969 +45.3% 2 Honolulu HI $192,441 +42.7% 3 San Francisco CA $191,266 +41.9% 4 Seattle WA $176,960 +31.2% 5 Washington DC $171,081 +26.9% 6 San Jose CA $169,317 +25.6% 7 Boston MA $168,925 +25.3% 8 Oakland CA $166,965 +23.8% 9 Berkeley CA $163,634 +21.4% 10 San Diego CA $160,694 +19.2% 11 Anchorage AK $159,715 +18.5% 11 Los Angeles CA $159,715 +18.5% 13 Miami FL $155,795 +15.6% 14 Sacramento CA $155,207 +15.1% 15 Philadelphia PA $154,423 +14.5% 16 New Orleans LA $150,092 +11.3% 17 Jersey City NJ $149,328 +10.8% 18 Chicago IL $148,936 +10.5% 19 Atlanta GA $147,565 +9.4% 20 Portland OR $147,369 +9.3% 21 Denver CO $147,173 +9.2% 22 Dallas TX $142,861 +6.0% 23 Baltimore MD $140,706 +4.4% 24 Phoenix AZ $140,314 +4.1% 25 Buffalo NY $140,118 +3.9% 25 Minneapolis MN $140,118 +3.9% 27 Nashville TN $137,766 +2.2% 28 Pittsburgh PA $137,570 +2.0% 29 Tampa FL $137,178 +1.7% 30 Charlotte NC $136,786 +1.5% 31 Columbus OH $136,002 +0.9% 32 Richmond VA $135,218 +0.3% 32 Orlando FL $135,218 +0.3% 32 Indianapolis IN $135,218 +0.3% 32 Madison WI $135,218 +0.3% 36 Raleigh NC $132,867 -1.5% 37 Oklahoma City OK $132,279 -1.9% 38 Fort Worth TX $131,103 -2.8% 39 Salt Lake City UT $130,711 -3.1% 39 Boise ID $130,711 -3.1% 41 Austin TX $130,123 -3.5% 42 Milwaukee WI $128,751 -4.5% 43 Cleveland OH $127,772 -5.2% 44 Knoxville TN $127,184 -5.7% 45 Jacksonville FL $126,400 -6.3% 46 Tucson AZ $125,420 -7.0% 47 Houston TX $125,224 -7.1% 48 Albuquerque NM $123,852 -8.1% 49 San Antonio TX $123,656 -8.3% 50 Cincinnati OH $122,480 -9.2%

The upper end of the ranking is dominated by coastal cities. California alone claims five of the top 10 spots: San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, Berkeley, and San Diego. Seattle ($176,960), Washington, D.C. ($171,081), and Boston ($168,925) also rank among the most expensive cities.

Overall, 35 of the 50 cities have income thresholds above the national figure, partly reflecting the higher living costs found in many of America’s largest metropolitan areas.

Where Happiness Costs the Least in America

Cincinnati has the lowest estimated price of happiness in the ranking at $122,480, or 37.5% less than New York. Put another way, reaching income satiation in New York requires about 1.6 times as much income as it does in Cincinnati.

Texas is the most heavily represented state near the affordable end of the ranking. Austin ($130,123), Houston ($125,224), and San Antonio ($123,656) all place in the bottom 10, alongside Albuquerque, Tucson, and Jacksonville. Dallas is the only Texas city in the upper half, ranking 22nd.

The pattern closely tracks broader cost-of-living differences between U.S. metros, which also shape the income needed to live comfortably in U.S. cities. Where housing and everyday expenses are lower, the estimated income required to reach the plateau falls as well.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Money Can Buy Happiness After All on Voronoi.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 18:50
Tyler Durden

From Forward Guidance To Market Guidance: Warsh's Reflexive Wrecking Ball?

Zero Rss
2 days 22 hours ago
From Forward Guidance To Market Guidance: Warsh's Reflexive Wrecking Ball?

Authored by Nohshad Shah, Citadel Securities EMEA Head of Fixed Income,

The Fed sounds hawkish... but markets are testing the reaction function

Chair Warsh was unequivocal that there is “no soft inflation target”, that five-plus years of above-target inflation cannot be cured by nine weeks of better data, and that this Fed “will not waver”. Yet despite that language…and three members preferring an immediate hike…the FOMC again declined to move.

Warsh instead repeatedly highlighted the large rise in nominal and real Treasury yields since June, arguing that reduced forward guidance had allowed markets to respond more directly to the data and, in effect, deliver some tightening on the Fed’s behalf. 

But all forms of FCI tightening are not equal…higher front-end yields because the Fed has acted to restrain demand are different from a higher long-end driven by investors demanding greater compensation for inflation, term risk, and uncertainty over the reaction function. 

Warsh also left markets with some uncertainty over how inflation will ultimately be judged. He confirmed that PCE remains the measure attached to the 2% target under the current framework, but left open whether that will remain the case after the strategy review concludes in January, while invoking Goodhart’s Law, the Lucas critique, and a broader (but unspecified) set of inflation measures. Those are legitimate cautions against relying mechanically on a single statistic. 

But investors will still want greater clarity over what the Fed will regard as evidence that inflation has returned to 2%. A fixed numerical target attached to a potentially changing measure risks making the reaction function harder to interpret, particularly while inflation remains materially above target. There may be a strong case for improving the framework, but markets will want reassurance that reform does not amount to changing the measuring stick before success has been achieved.

The initial market response suggests that reassurance has not yet been secured: 30y Treasuries have sold off, breakevens have widened, while equities and the dollar have weakened. Investors may interpret that combination less as a clean tightening in response to stronger growth and more as a challenge to the credibility or clarity of the policy framework. 

It is also an uncomfortable outcome in a market already unsettled by rising oil prices amidst the conflict with Iran and the accelerating unwind in AI momentum. The risk from here is a negative feedback loop: higher long-end yields pressure duration equities; equities fall while bonds fail to hedge; correlated losses force further deleveraging and the resulting tightening in financial conditions gives the Fed another reason to wait…which, in turn, encourages investors to demand still more inflation and term premium. 

This is the reflexivity at the heart of “market guidance”…the Fed holds because markets have tightened, while markets tighten because the Fed has held.

Markets may be able to deliver part of the required tightening, but they will still look to the Fed to anchor the inflation outlook.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 18:30
Tyler Durden

Darline Graham Stumbles Out Of Gate In Bid For Lindsey's Senate Seat

Zero Rss
2 days 23 hours ago
Darline Graham Stumbles Out Of Gate In Bid For Lindsey's Senate Seat

In recent years, few forces in electoral politics have been as potent as an endorsement from Donald Trump. However, the first polls in the special South Carolina primary race for the Senate seat that was held by the late Lindsey Graham shows his sister Darline is in second place, with half of GOP voters saying her Trump endorsement is irrelevant to them. Graham's campaign faces other headwinds, as many South Carolina Republicans aren't enthusiastic about turning one of their Senate seats into an inheritance for someone with a thin political resume.

After Lindsey Graham suddenly died on July 11, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster appointed Darline Graham to be a placeholder for the remainder of her brother's term that ends in January. It was seen as a sentimental and politically-safe gesture, with no expectation that she would enter the race for the six-year term that starts on July 11. Then Trump issued a Truth social post, encouraging her to run and saying she'd have his full endorsement. Three days later, Graham told Fox's Sean Hannity "I'm in."  

Despite her Trump endorsement, Darline Graham, who's never held an elected office, trails House Rep. Ralph Norman

According to an Emerson College poll of the crowded race, Graham is starting in second place. She has the support of only 19% of likely GOP primary voters, while US Rep. Ralph Norman leads the way at 22%. A 73-year-old with a background as a real estate developer, Norman has represented South Carolina's 5th District since 2017, and served in the state legislature for 11 years before that. Graham has never held an elected office. Until this summer, she was commissioner of the South Carolina Commission for the Blind, and earlier held a communications role in the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation Department. 

Two other candidates are in the double-digits: US Rep Russell Fry at 12% and former governor and former House representative Mark Sanford at 11%.  Fry, who was reportedly hand-picked by Trump to unseat Republican Tom Rice in 2022, as payback for Rice's vote to impeach Trump over the Jan 6, 2021 Capitol Hill riot. A quarter of likely voters are still making up their minds. The primary is just a week away, on Tuesday, Aug 11, and the top five candidates debated on Monday evening. Unsurprisingly given her lack of experience discussing national issues, some observers said Graham seemed to lean heavily on her notes. Then, in a moment of spontaneity, Graham oddly suggested that constant noise from data centers is somehow a uniquely leftist and maybe imaginary concern: 

Darline Graham Nordone’s message to South Carolinians is clear: build more data centers, and if you’re concerned about the constant noise they bring, just get over it. pic.twitter.com/qmJOqBacas

— Kelly McCarty (@KellyLMcCarty) August 4, 2026

With no candidate likely to top 50%, expect a run-off of the top two vote-getters on Aug. 25. Assuming Graham makes it to the run-off, our intuition tells us most of those who'd voted for someone other than Graham in the Aug. 11 primary will migrate to the remaining non-Graham option.  

The race is a test of Trump's endorsement power, and only 29% of those polled by Emerson say Trump's endorsement makes them more likely to support a given candidate. 53% say a Trump endorsement doesn't affect them one way or the other -- but 18% say Trump's endorsement makes them less likely to support the endorsee. Not surprisingly, Graham's greatest strength comes from the oldest voters: 30% of voters over age 70 back her. 

Trump's endorsement has ruffled feathers of Republicans in the Palmetto State, including Dorchester County GOP chair CJ Westfall. Speaking in the context of Trump's endorsee for governor having been clobbered in the June primary, Westfall told CNN: 

"The president continues to get bad advice about South Carolina. We certainly empathize with Darline — and even the president, as Lindsey was a really good friend of his — but he’s certainly getting bad advice. We’ve got a lot more exciting options for this seat. It’s a once-in-a-generation opportunity.”

Other members of the GOP machine in South Carolina are likewise irked by Trump's move, with one state legislator calling it a "backroom deal" and another saying "Trump threw us all a curveball with Darline. That wasn’t expected. It wasn’t exactly welcomed here, either."  

Importantly, only 4% of Republican special election voters think their senator should focus on foreign policy. That's not good news for Darline Graham, as her brother was only known for his foreign policy exploits that centered on collaborating with the State of Israel to support US interventions in the Middle East, and partnering with Ukraine in America's proxy war with Russia. Reading the winds, Darline Graham has already made a point to say she wants to focus more on domestic issues like the cost of living.  

Darline Graham says she’ll be more invested in affordability issues than national security:

“Lindsey was more focused on national security. I know that’s important but I’ll probably be more focused on affordability, what matters to families, the struggling families.” pic.twitter.com/txDfpt6zoy

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) August 3, 2026 Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 18:10
Tyler Durden

Nick Shirley's New Video Dismantles The Left's Narrative On Ceuta's Migrant Crisis

Zero Rss
2 days 23 hours ago
Nick Shirley's New Video Dismantles The Left's Narrative On Ceuta's Migrant Crisis

Authored by Aaron Hanscom via PJ Media,

Intrepid investigative journalist Nick Shirley isn't one to shrink from danger. He had to escape from Cuba when spies followed him during his trip to the communist island and was forced to hire 24/7 security after exposing Somali fraud in Minneapolis. In his latest video, Shirley once again finds himself in serious peril when a Muslim man chases him through the streets while wielding a knife and threatening to stab him.

AP Photo/Antonio Sempere

The scene of the pursuit was the Spanish North African enclave of Ceuta, which has made headlines in recent days after 60,000 illegal migrants poured in from Morocco. Shirley traveled to the autonomous city to report on the current state of the crisis, which has become more manageable after most of the migrants returned to Morocco.

While the knife chase - in which the enraged man yells, "I'm going to stab both of you," at Shirley and Javier Mansilla, the Spanish vigilante who accompanies Shirley in the video, as they run down the street - will likely attract the most attention, there are several other revealing moments I want to highlight that go against the left's preferred narrative of what is occurring in Spain right now.

Spaniards feel unsafe

A woman from Ceuta tells Shirley that she "felt threatened" in the immediate days after the border breach. "I couldn't go outside with my baby. We couldn't go outside. I live up high, but my neighbor lives on the ground floor. And they were scared they were going to break into the house," she says.

Mansilla then expresses the anger that so many Spaniards, like the more than 1,000 who protested in Madrid on Sunday, feel about the country's migrant crisis, which has resulted in horrific crimes against women:

I feel very, very angry. I cannot understand how we let our own women live with fear going, running to their homes with the baby. Like "I don't want to stay in the street. I go home. Thank you. Thank you." I'm not going to allow this. Any Spanish guy shouldn't allow this. If we are men, if we are real men, we should do something right now.

Mansilla continues with a warning to all of Europe: "If we don't wake up now, we will fall. For sure. For sure. This is our moment. Wake up, Europe. Wake up."

There is a political party that is talking about the link between insecure borders and crime: the conservative Vox party, led by Santiago Abascal, who traveled to Ceuta on Sunday. He called what happened an "invasion" and said, "The frontiers of Ceuta and Melilla are the walls of our home and homeland, and they are not being protected by a corrupt and traitorous government."

The media portrays Vox and other European parties opposed to illegal immigration as radical or far-right in order to render their ideas unfit for serious debate. In a similar fashion, the media - like Anne Applebaum in her Atlantic piece, "The Far Right Is Distorting Ceuta" - has tried to dismiss the right's concerns over the crisis in Ceuta while criticizing it for labeling the situation an "invasion." That's why the work of independent journalists like Shirley is so important: it helps uncover the true story.

The illegal migrants sure do love Pedro Sanchez

While lefties like Spanish actor Javier Bardem are busy spreading conspiracy theories about Israel being responsible for Spain's border crisis, the migrants whom Shirley interviews are pretty clear about who motivated them to risk death - at least 72 people died while crossing - to come to Spain: Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez. Indeed, the most frequently repeated words in the video are "Viva Pedro Sanchez!" or "Long live Pedro Sanchez!" "I love Pedro Sanchez" is also a popular refrain. As I wrote in Elon Musk Was Right: Pedro Sanchez Is a Traitor, "Their gratitude to the Socialist prime minister is due to his mass amnesty plan, which received 1.2 million applications by its June 30, 2026, deadline."

But don't take my word for it. A 17-year-old Moroccan migrant, when asked by Shirley how he expects to leave Ceuta and get to mainland Spain, says matter-of-factly, "Through asylum."

The idea that muslims view Spain as occupied isn't a myth

After another migrant in Shirley's video declares, "This is Morocco," Mansilla explains that Ceuta in fact became part of Spain hundreds of years before Morocco gained its independence in 1956.

Not everyone cares about that fact. As I wrote in a 2007 article for the Strategic Studies Group on the "intifada of Spain's Ceuta":

The autonomous regions of Ceuta and Melilla are seen by Islamists as the opening fronts in their anticipated reconquest of Spain. Last year a North African group calling itself Nadim al-Magrebi warned of a holy war against the infidel Spanish state which has occupied the two cities. Al-Qaeda's number two, Ayman Zawahiri, has called for Islamic land to be reconquered from Al-Andalus to Iraq and compared the Spanish occupation of Ceuta and Melilla to the Russian occupation of Chechnya and the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

The irony that Spain, perhaps the most antisemitic country in Europe - or at least the one with the most antisemitic leader - should be so hostile to Israel, which, like Spain, faces claims that its territory is occupied, is obvious. That's why I agree with my colleague Scott Pinsker that mockery of Spain's (and the left's) hypocrisy on this issue is warranted.

The left craves chaos

Shirley asks Mansilla why he thinks Spain's politicians are allowing the border crisis to happen.

If they allow this to become the Third World, they know - people in power - they know they will be able to do whatever they want. They will increase their power because a ruler in the Third World is a real ruler. The thing here is that people in power know that if they become this, the Third World, they will increase their power and their money even more. That's the thing because they can control the society in an easier way. I mean, if, if you keep this full of third-worlders, you can do whatever you want if you are in power.

Vox leader Abascal calls Sanchez, who is mired in corruption scandals, a mafia leader and a traitor. Americans should remember how recently their own country had wide-open borders and a president mired in corruption scandals. Victor Davis Hanson explained on Fox News' Hannity why the Biden administration also craved open-borders chaos:

First of all, they are nihilist; they like the chaos. Second, they feel all these people will come, and they cannot assimilate or culturally integrate. They have no skills or background checks. No health care. And that means they will have enormous demands on the state, with bigger government, more taxes, more redistribution. And of course they are a constituency. They will be dependent on the state, and they are going to vote for a socialist ticket. And that is the subtext of both what is going on in Spain and what is going on over the border. And what the socialists have done here.

President Donald Trump has connected the situation in Ceuta to warnings about what the United States could return to if Democrats regain control of the White House and Congress. We should heed that warning as we watch Nick Shirley's video.

Aaron Hanscom is an editor at PJ Media, where he has worked since 2007. He was also an editor at RealClearPolitics.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 17:50
Tyler Durden

NY School District Pauses Classroom Humanoid Robot Amid Privacy Concerns

Zero Rss
3 days ago
NY School District Pauses Classroom Humanoid Robot Amid Privacy Concerns

Authored by AG News Staff via American Greatness,

A western New York school district has hit pause on a plan to place a lifelike humanoid robot inside a high school classroom after regulators and community members raised concerns over student data privacy.

Salamanca City Central School District announced July 24 it was suspending a pilot program with robotics company Realbotix that would have brought an artificial intelligence assistant called Optio, paired with a seated, silicone-skinned humanoid robot, into AI and robotics courses this fall. District officials said they must finalize enhanced student data privacy agreements with the New York State Education Department before moving forward, and they are continuing to hear from the community.

The district agreed to pay $57,590 for the Optio platform and one M-Series robot, according to the school board contract, a discount off the robot's $95,000 list price. Had it proceeded, the program would have given roughly 500 high school students access to AI tutoring avatars, while the single physical robot served as a classroom demonstration tool, reportedly programmed with a Western New York accent and instructed to say "I don't know" rather than fabricate answers.

Some media reports have tied Realbotix's corporate parent to Intima LLC, a business in the adult companionship market, a connection the company strongly denies applies to the school project.

"For clarity, some media reports have falsely connected the Salamanca project to an adult product or adult-products business," Realbotix told CyberGuy. "The Salamanca robot is a newly manufactured, purpose-built educational unit; no existing product or hardware is being modified or repurposed for the school." The company added that its education-focused subsidiary "focuses exclusively on non-adult commercial applications" and said the two businesses do not share staff, facilities or technology.

Realbotix has cast the project as a teacher-supervised supplement, not a replacement for instructors. "The program is intended to complement, not replace, teachers by giving students supervised access to emerging AI and robotics tools as part of the district's existing STEM curriculum," the company said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 17:10
Tyler Durden

AMD Crashes Despite Big Beat, CapEx Almost Triple Expectations

Zero Rss
3 days ago
AMD Crashes Despite Big Beat, CapEx Almost Triple Expectations

AMD beat on its top- and bottom-line:

  • Revenue: $11.54B vs $11.28B expected

  • Adjusted EPS: $1.66 vs $1.62 expected

Good news.

With Data center revenue up 107% year over year to  $6.72B, better than the $6.6B expected.

More good news.

As Bloomberg reports, last month, Chief Executive Officer Lisa Su rolled out new products that the company said will outperform offerings from Nvidia, adopting a more aggressive stance in a market it predicts will reach $1.4 trillion by 2030. That further raised already lofty investor expectations.

The chipmaker forecast that third-quarter revenue will be $13 billion, plus or minus $300 million ($12.5 billion consensus).

The outlook boost is good news, but some Wall Street estimates were well north of $13 billion, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Additionally, operating income for the last quarter was only a little better than forecast and clearly traders were hoping for more.

But, AMD shares are down dramatically after-hours, erasing all the day's exuberant gains and then some...

Here's why...

Free cash flow was 20% below forecasts because Q2 Capital Expenditures came in at stunning $808 million, almost triple the $298 million expectation...

It appears the market is unwilling to reward hyperbolic AI spending... without some signs of ROIC (which the revenue forecast did not provide relative to the spend).

This is not great news for AMD’s competitors, like Intel, ARM, and Marvell.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 16:55
Tyler Durden

SpaceX Slides Despite Big Revenue Beat, Tame CapEx

Zero Rss
3 days ago
SpaceX Slides Despite Big Revenue Beat, Tame CapEx

Ahead of the SpaceX earnings today - its first as a public company - we said that investor focus is increasingly shifting beyond the quarter itself, and while revenue and EBITDA performance will matter, the August 6 lockup expiration appears likely to be the bigger near-term driver, opening the door to the first meaningful wave of insider selling just days after results.

On the call, management is expected to spend considerable time on AI-related initiatives. Investors will be looking for updates on data center buildouts, potential increases to compute targets and any incremental commentary around Grok deployment timelines. Stronger-than-expected AI revenue could represent one of the more credible upside catalysts.

Beyond AI, attention will also center on Starlink and Starship. An updated Starlink subscriber figure could be disclosed, although the market may be hesitant to place significant weight on the metric while the network remains largely supported by V2 Mini satellites. For Starship, investors are likely to focus on execution milestones, launch cadence and any signals around the path toward operational payload launches.

Lastly, positioning remains an important factor. As we warned earlier, and as Musk amplified, there is a huge retail short overhang.

I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷‍♂️

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026

Hedge funds also screen as notably short, which could amplify upside if AI revenue exceeds expectations or if Starlink economics surprise positively, particularly around ARPU. Even so, the UBS desk believes the lockup expiration is likely to dominate the T+1 reaction and remain the primary stock-specific overhang in the near term.

And with all that in mind, here is what SpaceX reported for its first quarter as a public company, technically the second quarter of 2026:

  • Total Revenue $7.8 billion, beating estimate $6.81 billion 
    • AI $2.561BN
    • Space $962MM
    • Connectivity (Starlink) $4.291BN
  • Total Operating Loss $143MM, better than the $970MM loss a year ago
    • AI segment operating loss $1.26 billion, beating an estimated loss of $2.39 billion
    • Connectivity operating income $1.656MM, up from $923MM a year ago
    • Space operating loss $205MM, worse than the $93MM a year ago

Out of its three segments, SpaceX’s Connectivity business -- which encompasses its Starlink satellite business -- continues to be the only profitable one of the trio. Space, which covers launch and Starship development, as well as AI are operating at a loss.

Going down the income statement: 

  • Total EBITDA $3.538BN, up from 1.214BN a year ago
    • AI EBITDA $1.146 billion,up from a $276MM loss a year ago 
    • Connectivity EBITDA $2.597BN, up from $1.583BN a year ago
    • Space EBITDA ($205MM), worse than the ($93MM) a year ago
  • Total CapEx $18.369BN, up huge from the $2.825BN a year ago, but just below the median estimate of $18.58BN
    • AI CapEx $15.828 BN YoY, above est of $13.09BN
    • Space CapEx $1,174MM up from $946MM YoY
    • Connectivity CapEx $1.367BN, up from $1.130BN YoY

Taking a closer look at the last one, capital expenditures jumped to $18.4 billion in the second quarter, from $10.1 billion in the first three months of the year and just $2.8 billion a year earlier. Capex for AI was 86% of the 2Q total and exceeded estimates. SpaceX 2Q AI Segment Capex $15.83B, Est. $13.09B

And visually:

Focusing on the company's Space Segment, it writes that...

Starship V3 development continued to advance towards full and rapid reusability:

  • Completed Starship V3’s first suborbital mission in May, Flight 12, which achieved a successful lift off from our new Starbase pad, a precision landing of Starship’s upper stage, and deployment of modified V2 Starlink satellites
  • Subsequent to the second quarter, completed Starship Flight 13 in July, which achieved all flight objectives including deploying 20 production V3 satellites, demonstrating in-space relight of a Raptor engine, and executing the softest ever splashdown of Starship, providing critical views of an intact heatshield

Worth noting that Starship continues to add to SpaceX’s expenses. The total costs and expenses for its Space segment, which includes Starship development, were up by $389 million year-over-year, as the company "continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program, which... will reduce the cost to orbit by 99% or more relative to the historical average, and unlock significant revenue potential across all business segments." In other words, Starship development continues to be expensive.

Numbers linked to SpaceX’s AI segment also showed improvement this quarter, mainly thanks to all the deals the company has signed to provide computing power. AI revenue for the second quarter was almost $2.6 billion, up from $737 million this time last year, with most of it coming from AI infrastructure. 

But the wins in the AI business, which include the release of Grok 4.5 in July as well as the computing agreements, also come with huge capital expenditures. AI cap ex is around $15.8 billion, with capex for the whole firm this quarter being about $18.4 billion.

Here are the other highlights from the investor deck:

  • Demonstrated the power of extreme vertical integration, delivering revenue growth of 92% year-over-year across Space, Connectivity and AI
  • Completed two successful Starship V3 flight tests in the past 90 days, advancing towards full and rapid reusability
  • Closed multiple industry-leading Cloud Services Agreements resulting in $14.1 billion of contracted sales
  • Announced agreement to acquire Cursor for $60 billion to accelerate the AI enterprise opportunity
  • Released our most powerful AI model yet with Grok 4.5 in July
  • Delivered 66% revenue and 79% income from operations growth year-over-year for the Connectivity segment, driven by a doubling of Starlink Subscribers and continued momentum in Enterprise & Government
  • Awarded over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield

Of the above, the last is perhaps the most notable beause as Bloomberg notes, "In case there was ever doubt, SpaceX’s first shareholder deck as a publicly traded company underscores the value of government contracts: “Awarded over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. Government contracts for Starshield” 

And the visual highlights:

One thing to note here: SpaceX still remains its own biggest customer of its Falcon rockets. Of the 78 launches it performed in the last six months, the majority were spent deploying Starlink satellites.

Some more details:

  • SpaceX Ended 2Q With $100B Cash, Cash Equivalents, Securities
  • SpaceX Ended 2Q With $47.5B Backlog

The bottom line: revenue (especially at AI where it surged from $737MM to $2.6BN) solid, and CapEx came in just below expectations, so overall a solid quarter. 

The (relatively brief) earnings report also has some CFO commentary. Bret Johnsen writes that the business is scaling across all three segments. He says revenue growth “accelerated across all our business segments” and points to “strong operating leverage,” with margin expansion driven by the new AI computing agreements (the business of renting data center capacity to other tech companies -- Google and Anthropic).

Additionally, the company "ended the second quarter with $100 billion of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, and $47.5 billion in backlog." This financial strength gives SpaceX the "capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework."

Notably, there was no mention of Tesla or the Terafab in this release, although it is certain that analysts will ask about this on the call.

Also Bloomberg notes that there’s no direction on cap ex and it isn't clear what it would be. However, after the IPO and SpaceX tapping the corporate bond market, the CFO paints a picture of SpaceX being in a strong position to spend.

“This financial strength gives us substantial capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework.”

Looking ahead, there isn't much (any) information on what comes next, as there does not appear to be a forward outlook section. So no details on projected revenues and costs. We’re also lacking information on what comes next for its business segments.

When will SpaceX launch Starship again on its next test flight? What will the launch schedule look like moving forward? And what  about the timelines for its V3 Starlink satellites and Starmind AI data center satellite system? Perhaps we’ll get some snippets about that during the earnings call.

So what to make of all this? While the quarter was solid, with revenue coming in $1BN above estimates, with capex below the bogey, the fact that the stock ran up aggressively during today's session may have set up the results for failure, and sure enough, after initially spiking higher, shares are off their highs (and lo0ws) and trading is choppy as shares drop more than 1%, erasing all of their previous post-market gains. However, as noted earlier, the stock gained nearly 10% in today’s regular session, its best performance since June. So on net, it is still up modestly on the day.

Investors are also likely gaming out what will be said on the conference call ahead of a Thursday share unlock which could flood the market with as many as 911.5 million additional shares. The options market was also pricing in a roughly 15% move after the results so more volatility may be ahead.

And while it’s not unusual for stocks to fall after a company reports solid earnings (especially its first earnings), Bloomberg notes that it usually follows a period of outperformance for shares. SpaceX is still down solidly from its $135 IPO price and has more downside pressure ahead as share lockups start to expire.

Full investor presentation below (pdf link):

SpaceX Reports Second Quarter 2026 Results by Zerohedge

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 16:39
Tyler Durden

Reality Denied

Zero Rss
3 days ago
Reality Denied

Authored by James Thorne via RealClearPolitics.com,

Elon Musk’s recent interview with The Economist underscored a simple but increasingly uncomfortable truth: In today’s political climate, stating the obvious can sound like provocation. The Overton Window, the range of ideas considered acceptable in public debate, has not merely drifted, it has been pulled away from the constraints of reality.

Musk’s real value in this conversation is not that he is always right. It is that he forces a confrontation between reality and rhetoric. And once that confrontation occurs, the limits of the prevailing framework come into view: It can organize language and signal virtue, but it struggles to explain outcomes. The exchange itself illustrated the point.

Rather than fully engaging his arguments, the interviewer at times defaulted to dismissive framing, implying that Musk himself was the issue. It was a familiar substitution: Discredit the speaker, avoid the substance.

Start with basics.

The United States should control its borders. Public safety should be enforced. Governments should operate within fiscal limits. Safe and secure elections are non-negotiable. Public institutions should act responsibly in the interests of their citizens. Industrial and trade policy should strengthen domestic production and deliver clear benefits to American workers.

These are common-sense views held by ordinary citizens, not some extreme ideological position as they are often portrayed.

That is precisely why they are now contested.

Basic logic and common sense are increasingly labeled as “extreme,” often coded as right-wing regardless of their content.

For too long, parts of the progressive left have effectively weaponized the Overton Window to enforce those labels. Questions grounded in observable facts, whether about immigration, crime, fiscal limits, trade, pandemic-era trade-offs, or basic policy outcomes, are too often branded “MAGA,” “far-right,” or a “conspiracy theory,” then brushed aside with confidence instead of answered on the merits.

This mechanism is effective because it shifts the cost of debate. Instead of defending weak outcomes, it raises the social and reputational cost of pointing them out. Dissent is not refuted, it is stigmatized. What was once ordinary becomes controversial. What remains inside the window is treated as settled, regardless of results.

The consequences are increasingly visible. Concerns about migration pressures on housing and public services are waved away as the hollowing out of middle America. Crime is discussed without equal emphasis on enforcement. Fiscal constraints are acknowledged rhetorically but deferred in practice, even as interest costs rise. Industrial policy is justified in expansive terms, but less often judged by whether it delivers measurable, broad-based gains for American workers.

The pattern extends to how arguments are received. When Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton spoke about border security, it was widely viewed as pragmatic. When Donald Trump raised similar concerns, they were often treated as outside the bounds of acceptable discourse. More broadly, the deeper problem is less about any single statement than the tendency of much of the media and the progressive left to protect favored figures from scrutiny while abdicating the traditional role of the fourth estate. That is what Musk attacks head on.

Over time, this weakens the connection between policy and results. When outcomes disappoint, the response is often reinterpretation rather than recalibration. Housing shortages persist, public safety concerns linger, deficits expand – yet the underlying assumptions remain largely intact.

A functioning political system requires more than intention. It requires feedback, accountability, and a willingness to confront inconvenient facts. When common sense is pushed outside the Overton Window, the system loses its capacity for self-correction.

The middle has not become extreme. The definition of “acceptable” has. And when common sense is treated as rebellion, the shift reflects changes in elite discourse, particularly within major media and institutional voices, more than any transformation among the public itself.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 16:20
Tyler Durden

World's Largest PC Makers Start Using Memory Chips From China's CXMT

Zero Rss
3 days 1 hour ago
World's Largest PC Makers Start Using Memory Chips From China's CXMT

It's not just Apple that is scrambling to find cheap memory alternatives to the DRAM offerings from the memory "cartel" of Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron: according to the Nikkei Asia, a trio of the world's leading PC makers - HP, Asus and Acer - have started to use small amounts of chips from China's ChangXin Memory Technologies (better known as the recently IPOed CXMT) amid an unprecedented memory shortage fueled by demand for artificial intelligence infrastructure.

Many major PC makers completed the qualification process for CXMT's DRAM chips around the middle of this year and have started to use a limited amount in their notebook computers, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

The amount of CXMT chips used and the number of notebook models utilizing them are very limited as of now, as CXMT is prioritizing a large part of its production capacity for Chinese clients, such as Huawei. The notebook models that use CXMT chips are for sale in non-U.S. markets.

The PC companies are also taking a restrained approach over their use of CXMT chips due to concerns that doing otherwise would anger leading global memory chipmakers Micron, Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, two sources said.

"The top three memory chipmakers accounted for more than 90% of global market share," an executive with a PC company with direct knowledge of the matter told Nikkei Asia. "PC companies have to be very careful and stay low-key about [the use of CXMT chips] ... After all, it is a seller's market now. We dare not source too much from CXMT at this moment."

CXMT, moreover, is included on a Pentagon list of companies alleged to have ties to the Chinese military, making sourcing from it potentially sensitive for U.S. companies. The Chinese company has denied the allegations and is not subject to an outright trade blacklist.

Still, the adoption marks a significant win for CXMT, which recently listed on Shanghai's STAR Market and after soaring nearly 8-fold since its IPO last week, boasts a market valuation exceeding that of Intel, America's top microprocessor maker.

"Although PC makers only use very small volumes [of CXMT's DRAM] for budget models, they don't want to neglect a potential important source, particularly when the market is so constrained," one supply chain manager supplying to HP and Asus told Nikkei Asia.

Not everyone is terrified of retaliation by the memory cartel: another industry executive said some PC makers have secured additional supplies of central processing units (CPUs) and are now racing to lock in more memory to match, making them much more open to sourcing from any available supplier, including CXMT. "After all, PC makers still hope to work with all the available sources as the market is very constrained now," the person said.

In response to request for comment, Acer said: "We do not disclose our suppliers, but that we keep in close contact with multiple global manufacturers and suppliers to dynamically adjust operations to manage component prices changes. We work with multiple manufacturers and suppliers to enhance our supply chain resilience."

The PC and smartphone industries have been suffering from shortages of memory chips and CPUs since late last year. Earlier thi year, Nikkei Asia was the first to report that HP, Dell, Asus and Acer were considering using CXMT's DRAM.

PC companies have prioritized chips for premium models and raised overall prices by several hundred dollars to reflect the rising component costs. Smartphone companies like Xiaomi, Oppo, and Vivo, on the other hand, cut their 2026 shipment forecasts several times due to the memory shortages.

The global PC industry is expected to decline more than 11% this year due to the unprecedented memory crunch, with supply conditions worsening toward the end of this year, market research company IDC estimates.

The shortfall in memory chips has turned out to be a golden opportunity for CXMT to tap the global PC supply chain. The Hefei, China-based memory chipmaker listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange's tech-focused STAR Market on July 27 and its share price soared almost 5x on the first day of trading. Its market capitalization reached more than 3.5 trillion yuan ($545 billion) as of Tuesday, topping Intel and starting to approach Micron and SK Hynix.

CXMT estimated in a filing to the Shanghai Stock Exchange that its net profit for the first half of 2026 would reach between 52 billion yuan and 58 billion yuan, up as much as 2,530% from a year earlier. The chipmaker attributed the surge to favorable market conditions and a better pricing environment. CXMT already supplies to almost all the top Chinese tech companies including Tencent, Alibaba Cloud and ByteDance.

"You would think CXMT's price is cheaper than the top three players, which is a wrong assumption. ... Their DRAM is definitely no cheaper than the likes of Samsung," one of the people said. "We also couldn't book supplies from CXMT beyond the current quarter, as so many companies are racing to secure DRAM from it," the person added.

CXMT and domestic peer Yangtze Memory Technologies (YMTC) are undertaking their most aggressive capacity expansion plans at home. CXMT is expanding plants in Shanghai with the aim of having a capacity two to three times larger than its homebase in Hefei, including capacity for building high-bandwidth memory (HBM), a crucial AI component, Nikkei Asia reported earlier.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 15:40
Tyler Durden

Chipotle Pulls Jalapeños As Minnesota Salmonella Outbreak Widens To 15 States; Shares Tumble

Zero Rss
3 days 1 hour ago
Chipotle Pulls Jalapeños As Minnesota Salmonella Outbreak Widens To 15 States; Shares Tumble

Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG) shares fell sharply Tuesday after Bloomberg reported that the chain had removed jalapeños from Minnesota restaurants over a suspected link to a salmonella outbreak that has sickened 110 people in the state - while WaPo reports that the outbreak has spread to 15 states. Chipotle stock fell as much as 8.5% against Monday's close - some outlets clocked the low nearer 9% - and was trading roughly 7% lower in the afternoon.

Chipotle pulled the packs of (potentially) poopy peppers from every store that received them and swapped in product from other growers. Laurie Schalow, the company's chief corporate affairs and food safety officer, framed the move as proactive, taken after Chipotle learned of a potential salmonella problem in a supply chain serving multiple food-service retailers.

The epidemiological signal is strong: of 84 sickened people interviewed, 75 said they had eaten at a Chipotle. Illness onsets trace to meals between June 14 and July 14. Minnesota's health department said the chain has cooperated fully - providing records and taking preventive steps - and that it is no longer concerned about Chipotle specifically now that the peppers are out of its restaurants.

The FDA posted its investigation on July 22 tied to 212 people. Minnesota said federal authorities are running a traceback on produce - including but not limited to jalapeños - potentially contaminated with Salmonella Javiana.

Bloomberg also reports that Michigan health officials were in contact with Taco Bell parent company Yum! Brands about the cyclospora outbreak in early July, weeks before Taco Bell publicly alerted consumers. MDHHS held a call with Yum on July 2, per documents obtained through a public records request, and in a follow-up email asked to reach the company's supply-chain quality assurance and communications teams to discuss interventions or notifications that could reduce future cases.

Michigan advised businesses handling raw produce to take extra precautions on July 4, and a state rapid response team pressed Taco Bell again for documents on July 6, citing the pace and scale of illness. Taco Bell didn't confirm publicly until July 14 that it had removed limited ingredients at select restaurants, saying at the time that no link to the chain, an ingredient or a supplier had been confirmed. Federal authorities didn't publicly connect Taco Bell to the outbreak until July 17.

Shitty Situation

Cyclosporiasis cases nationwide have topped 18,000 across 45 states since May 1, of which the CDC has laboratory-confirmed 6,707, with 423 hospitalizations and more than 11,500 still under investigation. Only a slice of that is Taco Bell's: the CDC has 1,644 sick people who reported eating there, and says plainly it is chasing other cyclospora outbreaks that have nothing to do with this one. Michigan is the epicenter either way, with more than 11,000 cases and the outbreak's only two deaths, both in people the state said had significant underlying conditions.

That timeline is the relevant backdrop for how the market read today's Chipotle news. Chipotle's disclosure posture - pull first, say so publicly, cooperate on the record - is the opposite of what the Michigan documents describe, and Minnesota's health department went out of its way to say the chain is not its concern. The stock fell 8.5% anyway.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 15:20
Tyler Durden

Democratic Socialists Openly Call For The Erasure Of Constitutional Government

Zero Rss
3 days 2 hours ago
Democratic Socialists Openly Call For The Erasure Of Constitutional Government

Joseph McCarthy was right about everything.  Communist movements have been playing the long game from inside western nations, exploiting the liberal freedoms westerners enjoy as a backdoor to sabotage free market choice and constitutional checks and balances from within.  The players might have changed over the decades, but the ideological goals remain the same.  

Forget about the "false left/right paradigm"; that concept is now dead.  Whatever logical clarity or loyalty to the American way that average progressives might have had is long gone.  They have detached completely from morality and ideals of merit and responsibility.  They are financially backed by some of the most evil NGOs and globalist corporations on the planet.  They have ties to some of the most despicable and oppressive governments in the world.  

The political left is the monster they claim to be fighting against.  They are the foot soldiers of the globalist order.  They are the greatest existing threat to western civilization.  To be "right wing" today simply means your principles sit to the right of Stalin and Mao.  It doesn't take much deviation to find yourself a mortal enemy of the leftist fold. 

Furthermore, these groups are intricately organized and operating using classic communist subversion tactics commonly used throughout Europe from the 1920s to the 1990s.  This includes front organizations, labor infiltration, agitation, influence operations, paramilitary training and mass propaganda.  

Remember when Democrats used to argue that the woke movement was not communist and to label it as such was a misinterpretation of what communism actually is?  Remember when they argued that Cultural Marxism is not a real thing?  Well, now they're coming out and openly admitting the agenda.

DSA candidates are infesting the Democrat Party, and if you thought the typical blue state liberals were extreme, get ready because the next generation is full-bore collectivist in their rhetoric and resolve.  In recent interviews with DSA politicians and campaigners, they list a series of goals (or demands) then intend to enact once they gain enough governmental power.  For example...

Erasure Of The Electoral College:   In other words, the destruction of the republic and the institution of a traditional "democracy" in which the 51% rule over the 49%.  Leftists have long believed that they are the majority of the US population, which is why they constantly call for the end of the electoral college.  Donald Trump's latest presidential win showed that leftists can't always count on a popular majority to maintain power, but they have an answer for that.

End Of The Two Party System:  This might sound like a rational policy, especially for libertarians.  However, America already has an open party system; there is no law preventing third, fourth or fifth party candidates from participation in elections.  What the DSA wants, at bottom, is a parliamentary system of government similar to governments across Europe.

Why?  Because parliamentary systems are designed to suppress conservative and nationalist movements.  In a parliament, multiple leftist parties will often vie for greater control but whenever conservative movements arise these parties join forces to stonewall the right-wing from any real power.  We have only to look to Europe today to see these suppression tactics in action, from France to Germany to the UK. 

End Of The Senate:  Again, this is something conservatives might agree with out of anger over Senate inaction, but leftists have a far different motive.  They want a massive and expansive congress which would create even more bureaucracy, have the power to choose the president or leader of the executive branch instead of the public, and remove all checks and balances through the three branch framework.  

Expand Or Replace The Supreme Court:  Socialists want a court that is completely subservient to congress and is loaded with leftist judges.  They rage over the idea that judges might interpret constitutional law against the favor of leftist policies.  Want to keep your gun rights or free speech?  Forget it if the DSA ever gets into power.

32-Hour Work Week And Extreme Increases To Minimum Wage:  DSA activists are economically retarded and have no concept of budgets and profit margins.  They think more like pillagers - They see companies with wealth and they want to take it by any means necessary.  The problem is, drastic cuts to productivity and huge wage increases will only lead to the destruction of businesses.

They will have to close up shop or fire a substantial number of workers to survive.  Leftists will then try to force companies stop layoffs.  This level of control is a fantasy and companies will fire people anyway.  The end game will, of course, be socialist calls for the government to nationalize the economy, which will also end in financial collapse as demand greatly outweighs production.

Paid Leave And Free College:  Who is going to pay for a bunch of low IQ dissidents to get degrees in gender fluid studies or underwater basket weaving?  Only the taxpayer.  Who is going to pay for European-style paid leave programs?  Only larger companies will be able to afford it, meaning small businesses will die out. 

Defund The Police And Eliminate The Prison System:  We've already seen how this goes.  When woke activists tried these programs in blue cities across the US, crime skyrocketed.  Social service workers and "community outreach" personnel are utterly incapable of handling the typical criminal.  So, they will do nothing instead and let repeat offenders run rampant. 

Democrat Socialist Co-chair Ashik Siddique: “Our police and prison system is stacked toward persecuting poor people... the language that we have in there is abolishing the police and prison system that protects capital over people.” pic.twitter.com/dg7XzyC828

— America (@america) August 2, 2026

Leftists use the claim that they want more equality of policing against "wealthy criminals" in order to appeal to the American distaste of elitism and corporate crime.  However, this is always pursued in tandem with less policing of "lower class" criminals (usually minorities).  The real reason leftist are so opposed to the criminal justice system is because most of them believe that lower class criminality is justified as an act of social justice against the rich (anyone with more money or success than they have).

Slavery Reparations:  No white American with any sense of dignity is going to pay reparations to black people who have never been slaves.  It's not going to happen.  But, socialists want minorities on their side as a righteous shield and so they will continue to promise reparations for decades to come. 

Feminism For All:  This is perhaps the most destructive goal of all, because it would enshrine feminism as a national ideological pillar.  The remnant of the old "patriarchy" is the only thing keeping the US from total collapse.  Feminists are a cancer on society and the source of most of America's ills. 

It's not just the abortion issue; feminists want women's supremacy, not equality, which means men (mostly white men) acting as the work engine the feeds women's coffers through taxation and government subsidies.  They are also the main source for the rise of the LGBT movement and gender-relativism.  The DSA would joyfully burn western civilization to the ground to achieve a system in which relativism is the standard. 

Open Borders And Path To Citizenship For All Illegals:  Nationalism is the barrier that prevents globalism from reaching its final form.  Borders, national identities and cultural separation are sins in the eyes of the woke cult.  They believe that if they eliminate all of these ideals then they will have no more enemies and they will therefore control the future of the human race forever. 

At this stage it's difficult to say if the DSA platfrom is going to resonate with enough Americans to gain significant momentum.  But, recent polls show 66% of all Democrats support the basic idea of socialism.  By extension, leftists are fuming over the reversal of public opinion on liberalism - They came so close to total control under Obama and under Biden and twice they have been thwarted.  

When leftists lose the first thing they always do is double down.  They do not take accountability and question their own thinking; they assert that they are right, everyone else is wrong or stupid, and they become even more insane.  The Democratic Socialists are a reflection of this mentality.  The more Democrats continue to lose ground, the more the DSA is going to grow because leftists don't care about being right, they only want to win.

Don't be surprised if the socialists rise from the woke grave to wreak havoc in 2028 and beyond.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 14:40
Tyler Durden

Musk Taunts SpaceX Bears Ahead Of Earnings: "I Tried To Warn Them, But They Just Double Down"

Zero Rss
3 days 2 hours ago
Musk Taunts SpaceX Bears Ahead Of Earnings: "I Tried To Warn Them, But They Just Double Down"

Summary: 

  • Musk Warns Bears (Again) 
  • Earnings at 1600 ET; Earnings Call at 1630 ET 
  • SPCX Short Position Soars 
  • SpaceX Earnings Preview: The Five Questions That Matter Most 
Musk Comments On ZH X Post 

Elon Musk has delivered another reminder to bears piling into SPCX shorts that "doubling down" can be a very costly strategy.

The stock is being squeezed nearly 10% higher in the afternoon trading hours in New York, with SpaceX set to report its first earnings as a publicly traded company in just a few hours.

"I try to warn them, but they just double down...," Musk wrote in an X post responding to our earlier report citing proprietary data from S3 Partners.

That data shows 95% of SpaceX shares available to borrow are already out on loan, with short interest amounting to 34% of the float.

I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷‍♂️

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026

Ahead of SpaceX earnings set to be released at 1600 ET (earnings call at 1630 ET), UBS analyst Christina Dwyer provided clients with color on what to look for ahead of earnings:

SpaceX (SPCX) reports after the closing bell on Tuesday and heads into its first major earnings report as a public company with investor focus increasingly shifting beyond the quarter itself. While revenue and EBITDA performance will matter, the August 6 lockup expiration appears likely to be the bigger near-term driver, opening the door to the first meaningful wave of insider selling just days after results. On the call, management is expected to spend considerable time on AI-related initiatives. Investors will be looking for updates on data center buildouts, potential increases to compute targets and any incremental commentary around Grok deployment timelines. Stronger-than-expected AI revenue could represent one of the more credible upside catalysts. Beyond AI, attention will also center on Starlink and Starship. An updated Starlink subscriber figure could be disclosed, although the market may be hesitant to place significant weight on the metric while the network remains largely supported by V2 Mini satellites. For Starship, investors are likely to focus on execution milestones, launch cadence and any signals around the path toward operational payload launches. Positioning remains an important factor. Hedge funds still screen as notably short, which could amplify upside if AI revenue exceeds expectations or if Starlink economics surprise positively, particularly around ARPU. Even so, the desk believes the lockup expiration is likely to dominate the T+1 reaction and remain the primary stock-specific overhang in the near term.

Polymarket odds of SpaceX beating on quarterly earnings currently stand around 35%.

SPCX Short Hits 34% Of Float Ahead Of Earnings 

SpaceX's first earnings report since its record-setting early June IPO is just hours away and will test whether investors can justify the company's lofty valuation after a vicious post-IPO bear market.

Shares hit a low of $104.83 on Monday, 22.4% below the $135 offering price and 53.5% beneath their June peak of $225, erasing more than $1 trillion in market value. However, the stock rebounded to $119 on Tuesday morning.

Wall Street expects a second-quarter loss of 24 cents per share on $6.8 billion in revenue, though limited financial disclosures have left analysts with little confidence in these estimates.

RBC analyst Ken Herbert outlined the five most important questions investors want answered before the earnings report, which will be released after the bell around 16:00 ET - 16:30 ET will be the earnings call (see report below).

Earlier this morning, we cited S3 Partners' proprietary short data, which shows that 95% of SpaceX stock available to borrow is out on loan, amounting to 34% short interest as a percentage of the float.

Massive SPCX shorting ahead of earnings: 95% of SpaceX stock available to borrow is out on loan, amounting to 34% short interest as percentage of the float: S3 pic.twitter.com/rELoXcyOJu

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 4, 2026

Musk stated last month: "The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low."

The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 17, 2026

Important: Mapping SpaceX's Lockup Expirations: HSBC Calculates When The Shares Could Hit The Market

SpaceX Earnings Preview: The Five Questions That Matter Most 

SpaceX has lost roughly $1.2 trillion in market capitalization since briefly peaking near $2.6 trillion in the first few trading days following its June 12 IPO. After an initial retail-driven buying frenzy, sentiment has sharply reversed, with the stock posting four consecutive weekly declines and now trading nearly 20% below its IPO price.

The steep pullback, driven largely by post-IPO technical selling, comes just ahead of the company's first earnings release as a public company, scheduled for after the market closes Tuesday. The report follows Tesla's quarterly results just weeks earlier.

RBC analyst Ken Herbert offered clients a preview of SpaceX's earnings, claiming that stock selling was driven more by technical factors than by deteriorating fundamentals.

Herbert expects second-quarter revenue to rise 66%, with adjusted EBITDA margins of approximately 30%, citing continued execution across Starship, Starlink, and the company's AI infrastructure. He warned that upcoming insider share lockup expirations are likely to put pressure on the stock.

Ahead of Tuesday's earnings, here's Herbert's view:

SpaceX (SPCX) will report its much-anticipated first public results on August 4. While the stock has significantly lagged since its initial post- IPO surge (down ~52% since its ~$225 peak), we expect lingering technical factors (share unlocks) and macro sentiment to remain headwinds. We believe the current valuation is attractive (under 17x consensus 2028 EBITDA), but we believe investors are focused on long term challenges, looking past near-term strength and strong fundamentals. With this preview we highlight what we believe will be five of the most important questions investors are focused on with the 2Q26 results.

Key points:

SPCX will report its 2Q26 results after the close on August 4. Beyond the actual results (we model 66% 2Q26 revenue growth and ~30% adj. EBITDA margins), the company has achieved several import milestones. The recent V13 Starship test flight was successful (and FAA regulations on re-use and launch cadence are set to ease), and the company continues to win significant government contracts (critical for space access and infrastructure funding). The initial 2026 guide will be a focus, but we believe investors remain overly focused on the mid-term operational and financial challenges, overly discounting the near-term outlook, in our view.

We see five key questions for SPCX heading into the 2Q26 results. First, we believe the upcoming share lockup expirations will remain a headwind (technical challenges). The best remedy is strong execution. Second, we are looking for a more detailed Starship update after the recent successful test flight. Third, investors are focused on SPCX's interest in becoming a full- scale consumer wireless operation (organically or through acquisitions)? Fourth, how is capacity expansion tracking and how will margin compute capacity be allocated? And fifth how would investors think about the software toolkit and SPCX's ability to succeed with higher margin products?

Where have the buyers gone? After the over-subscribed IPO--and the stock trading at under $110--we are often asked about the lack of demand. We believe the lock-up expiration is a material overhang (20% of insider shares are unlocked on August 6, with the incremental ~10% trigger unlikely), followed then by rolling 7% unlocks. The comparisons to Meta (significant under-performance in first year post-IPO) is likely appropriate, but we believe the current price overly discounts the maturity of the Connectivity and Space businesses.

We are maintaining our OP rating and $225 price target. Our PT continues to be based on a SOTP valuation. We believe the upcoming share lockups have been a headwind for stock sentiment, but see them as attractive entry points for investors. Our analysis of META's similar lockups is supportive of LT value in our view. Increasingly, we believe investors are also focused on a potential merger with Tesla, which we detailed in a recent note.

SpaceX 2Q26 Preview: Five of the most important questions investors will focus on in earnings:

Question #1: How has buying demand changed post-the heavily over-subscribed IPO and what impact could the lock-up period have on investor perception?

Answer: We believe the expected timeline for share un-lock is weighing on stock sentiment. The first lock-up period for SpaceX is scheduled for August 6, 2026, two days after the company reports 2Q26 earnings. Then, insiders will be able to sell up to ~20% of their locked-up shares, which equates to roughly ~911M shares. Comparing the company's lock-up expiry schedule to that of META's when it came public in 2012, we would highlight a similar stock performance to that of SPCX. META IPO'ed at $38/share and was down almost (50%) into its first 90-day lock-up expiry. SPCX is currently trading down (19.7%) from its $135 IPO price but is down (52%) from its high of $225.64.

Below, we have detailed the subsequent dates for additional lock-up expiration dates. As laid out in the prospectus, these dates are 70, 90, 105, 120, 135, and 180 days post pricing (June 12th). There is an additional lock-up expiry of 10% of shares on August 6th if SPCX closing price is greater than or equal to 30% above the IPO price of $135 ($175.50) for at least 5 of the 10 consecutive trading days ending on the first earnings release (Aug 4th), however this will not be achieved.

Question #2: What did we learn from the successful V13 Starship launch?

Answer: Last week, SpaceX launched Starship flight 13 (note here) achieving incremental steps with the launch. The launch marked a successful end-to-end mission, hitting all key milestones: the rocket lifted off from Starbase, the Super Heavy booster separated from the upper-stage and flipped for a Gulf of Mexico splashdown (though the landing was rougher than anticipated due to engine restart issues), completed its boostback burn, and the upper-stage climbed to orbit where it deployed 20 Starlink V3 satellites. Starship also successfully relit a Raptor engine in space — confirming the in-orbit restart capability that will be essential for future lunar missions — before re-entering the atmosphere to test its heat shield and splashing down in the Indian Ocean.

We believe SpaceX is likely to attempt to catch the next Starship with the tower on the next launch. After the success of flight 13, Elon Musk suggested that the company would attempt to catch the ship with the mechanical arms on the launch tower as it slows to a hover. The company has already successfully caught the Super Heavy booster but has not yet caught the upper-stage Starship with the launch tower arms. Performing a catch would entail sending Starship on a longer-range trajectory, potentially even into low-Earth orbit, in order to bring the vehicle back to the launch site. We believe formally scheduling the attempt, and successfully catching Starship could represent a positive catalyst for the stock. Given SPCX's plans for reusability of Starship, demonstrating a catch with the launch tower, could help sentiment behind the company's LT aspirations with Starship.

Question #3: What is the level of the company's interest in full-scale consumer wireless operation in the US, and is an acquisition a preferred path?

Answer: As the company is looking to increase its spectrum holdings, investors are weighing the company's opportunities to potentially acquire a carrier, build its own network, or pursue an MVNO route. As carriers are publicly shutting the door to MVNO talks with SpaceX, we view the company's spectrum pursuit as a leverage in the MVNO negotiations. We continue to view that operating a full-scale mobile operations in the highly-competitive US market entails a range of operational challenges, investments, and executive resources. We believe that a potential market share gain from the mobility market will not suffice to justify network and spectrum investments. However, the expansion of IoT, V2X and applications for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles could provide growth opportunities in periods beyond 2028.

Question #4: How is capacity expansion tracking and how will margin compute capacity be allocated?

Answer: We are modeling the company to exit the year at ~2GW of nameplate capacity and would view as the key bottleneck if we could see potentially bigger upside in '27. GOOGL and Anthropic are SPCX's two flagship customers contributing $26B of ARR starting in Q3, however, with those 2 only occupying an estimated 35% of estimated year-end capacity, the company tracking ahead on its deployment schedules would be very bullish. Further, META's commentary from Wednesday spoke to the depth of latent demand for added compute commenting that it had many offers from companies willing to pay a price that was multiples of its cost of compute (META's). This squares with SPCX's partnerships with the GOOGL and Anthropic deals priced at an estimated $50B annually/GW and $30B/GW, respectively.

Worth noting, on GOOGL's earnings call last week, in laying out the strategic rationale for leasing 3p compute to supplement its own, CEO Sundar Pichai gave a theoretical example where he arbitrarily cited renting compute from a partner for 6 months (as an example) at dilutive levels as being an acceptable tradeoff given it could quickly & accretively shift those workloads to its own compute once ready to deploy. We recognize the 6-month comment was only illustrative, but it wouldn't surprise us to hear questions probing at the durability of SPCX's partners. In some ways, we could assert this rhymes a bit with META's current capacity allocation conundrum where at some point, SPCX would need to show strong/accelerating traction with its own intelligence products to support the expected LT accretive mix shift of capacity allocation.

Question #5: How should we think about the software toolkit (Grok, Cursor, Build, Work,etc.c) being able to guide users tohigher-marginn products over time?

Answer: Most recent signs point to SPCX driving strong model training improvements as well as being on track for building out its expanding software & intelligence portfolio. We'd also expect some visibility around Cursor's growth which last reported ARR above $4B on June 8th up from $2B reached back in February. We believe the consensus view is now that owning & controlling the cost of compute is the surest way to achieving a durable moat in AI, though lately, we believe sentiment regarding moat formation at the harness & application layer is also warming as jobs are not being destroyed as was previously anticipated and many high quality companies are emerging at various checkpoints in the industry previously thought destined to be controlled by the verticalized frontier labs, etc. And with the open- weight/model affordability debate appearing more and more of a one-sided in favor of intelligence software being LLM agnostic, the path to creating a sticky user experience with land and expand capabilities remains somewhat less clear (for the industry by the way, not just SPCX). As such, we expect investors to be seeking visibility on technical, financial or any other mile markers for adoption where Cursor should remain at the forefront as it expands from a coding tool to a fuller multi-agent orchestration platform while the Grok platform of products will be coming from behind relative to the other frontier coding & work automation tools.

Herbert maintained an "Outperform" rating and a 12-month price target of $225.

Where the rest of Wall Street sits: 

Important: Mapping SpaceX's Lockup Expirations: HSBC Calculates When The Shares Could Hit The Market

Professional subscribers can read more on SpaceX here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal​​​​​​. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 14:26
Tyler Durden

Apple Demands Forensics, Injunction On OpenAI - Which Fired Back Hours Later

Zero Rss
3 days 3 hours ago
Apple Demands Forensics, Injunction On OpenAI - Which Fired Back Hours Later

Apple went to a federal judge on Monday with a sweeping demand in its case against OpenAI - in which two former Apple employees stand accused of funneling confidential information to the ChatGPT maker.

Apple wants an order barring OpenAI, io Products, Chang Liu, and Tang Yew Tan from touching its alleged trade secrets, plus forensic imaging of OpenAI's devices, cloud storage, email, and Slack, including anything that "previously contained" Apple data. The motion landed before Judge Edward J. Davila - yes, the Theranos judge - in the Northern District of California.

OpenAI fired back Monday night in a blog post titled "Apple is getting this wrong," calling the suit "careless, aggressive and oddly personal" and publishing email chains and iMessage screenshots to back it. Both sides have now put their evidence on the table, and the two accounts are irreconcilable.

"Apple is one of the greatest companies of all time, and built a reputation for obsessing over the smallest details. This careless, aggressive and oddly personal lawsuit sadly doesn't live up to that reputation," the company posted. 

As we reported last month, Apple sued on July 10, accusing OpenAI hardware chief Tan - a 24-year Apple veteran and former VP of product design for iPhone, AirPods and Apple Watch - and former senior electrical engineer Liu of running a scheme to funnel confidential hardware information to OpenAI. The complaint says more than 400 former Apple employees now work there. It was randomly assigned to a magistrate judge before Apple declined to consent, sending it to Davila. Apple's statement then: significant evidence had emerged that OpenAI employees wrongfully took its secret information on unreleased technologies. Monday's motion is the escalation, and it is far more specific than the complaint was.

After suing, Apple sent OpenAI a letter offering to stand down on injunctive relief if OpenAI would agree to five things:

  1. No future access, acquisition, use, disclosure, or solicitation of Apple trade secret information
  2. Halt any ongoing access or use
  3. Preserve relevant evidence
  4. "Permit Apple's counsel and third-party forensic analysts to inspect, image, and analyze all devices, storage drives, and accounts in OpenAI's possession, custody, or control that contain, or previously contained, any of Apple's confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information"
  5. "Search any OpenAI network location where any Apple proprietary and trade secret information may have been transferred or stored"

Per the motion, "OpenAI initially responded that it would be willing to agree to the first three items." Then, over more than two weeks of negotiations between the companies and their outside counsel, talks on items four and five went nowhere: "they could not reach agreement."

Translation: OpenAI would promise not to use Apple's secrets. It would not let Apple's lawyers image its machines. So Apple is now asking a federal judge to order it.

Apple's four-front theory

The motion accuses OpenAI of "misappropriation at the organizational level" running on four tracks - Apple's words:

"(1) using proprietary Apple information to acquire and use still more trade secrets, including from Apple's trusted business partners; (2) exfiltrating Apple's trade secret information directly (through conduct like Mr. Liu's); (3) maintaining ongoing information pipelines from contacts still employed at Apple; and (4) using Apple proprietary information during the recruiting processes to try to extract still more trade secrets from job candidates."

So - Apple is claiming they've got moles in their organization.  

The new evidence in Apple's filing

Beyond what was in the July complaint, the motion alleges:

  • One of the eleven additional ex-Apple employees now at OpenAI, "in the hours before his interview with OpenAI, began screenshotting and downloading information related to the highly confidential Apple project about which Mr. Tan inquired during his interview."
  • Liu allegedly told Yu-Ting "Alyssa" Peng, still at Apple, that another former Apple employee "fumbled" his answers to Tan's questions about the unannounced product - and helped her prep for her own OpenAI interview on the same subject matter.
  • Tan allegedly circulated Apple's own manager exit checklist to a departing employee, writing: "One thing for sure is that Apple will probably walk you out (wasn't like that a year ago but they have been clamping down recently .... Attached below is the manager's checklist so this will give you time to plan."
  • OpenAI has allegedly been "circulating to job candidates an Apple document that describes Apple's security processes when an employee leaves the company." Apple's gloss: "OpenAI's goal here is plain - to help departing Apple employees avoid the checks and protections of Apple's exit processes."
  • One interviewee was reportedly "surprised" that others brought Apple parts to OpenAI interviews because he "didn't even know we could take those from the office."

On the supplier front, Apple says the Corporate Defendants "directed a trusted Apple partner" - name blacked out in the public version - to run Apple's proprietary metal-finishing process for them, and that they "knew this too because they were involved in this partnership while at Apple." Apple put its own Surface Finishing Manager, Jackie Hughes, under oath on that one, alongside eight other declarants - including James Pooley, who wrote the treatise on trade secrets law, and forensic investigator Daniel Roffman, whose exhibits supply most of the quoted messages.

One wording note: coverage of the July complaint centered on Liu allegedly exploiting a rare authentication bug - a zero-day, per TechCrunch - to reach Apple's network after leaving. This motion frames the five download sessions as exploiting "residual access to Apple's third-party cloud storage." Same alleged outcome either way: thousands of pages out the door between his January exit and April.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 14:00
Tyler Durden

Palisades Fire Fraud: Man Headed To Prison After Scamming $64K Out Of FEMA

Zero Rss
3 days 3 hours ago
Palisades Fire Fraud: Man Headed To Prison After Scamming $64K Out Of FEMA

An East Hollywood man is headed to federal prison for a year and a day after collecting more than $64,000 in wildfire disaster relief on a Pacific Palisades home he had no connection to whatsoever.

People gathered on the beach near cleared lots where houses were destroyed in the Palisades Fire at the Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates in Los Angeles on June 25, 2026. Mario Tama/Getty Images

Delvonne Dashon Johnson, 32, was sentenced on July 31 in Los Angeles and ordered to repay $64,148 to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He pleaded guilty last year to fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency benefits - a charge that carries a statutory maximum of 30 years.

In February 2025, weeks after the Palisades Fire tore through the coastline, Johnson filed a FEMA claim listing a Pacific Palisades address as a home he owned. FEMA wired him $64,138 later that same month - except, he didn't own the house. Someone else did, and she was living in it.

The fraud unraveled only when the actual homeowner tried to file her own claim. FEMA told her someone had already submitted one on her property's behalf. When investigators interviewed her on April 2, 2025, she told them she had lived at the address since 2015, that it was her primary residence, that she was there when the fire hit, that she had never rented the place to anyone, and that she had never heard of Delvonne Johnson.

Johnson was not working alone - he was one of several people federal prosecutors swept up for running the same play on the same disaster. Deanniah Hogan, 32, of Compton, allegedly posed as a renter at a Palisades home and drew roughly $17,351. Zenalyn McIntre, 38, of Sherman Oaks, allegedly submitted a fabricated utility bill and a driver's license listing a different address, and received about $25,229. Hedeshia Robertson, 36, of Lakewood, pleaded guilty after obtaining some $24,899. Another defendant allegedly claimed a nonexistent Altadena address as her destroyed primary residence and collected $23,441, plus two FEMA-booked hotel stays. Jaime Arturo Carrillo, 48, pleaded guilty after claiming property damage and utility disruption at a South Los Angeles address roughly 20 miles from either fire.

The pattern extends well beyond Los Angeles County. In June, a Honolulu man was sentenced to two years for conspiring to submit false FEMA claims tied to both the Lahaina fire and the Pacific Palisades fire, with a co-defendant posing as his Maui landlord before turning around and claiming to have lived in Pacific Palisades herself. The pair collected more than $60,000. He then filed fabricated flight records with the court and picked up an obstruction charge on top.

Victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires could qualify for a one-time $750 FEMA payment, up to $43,600 in other-needs assistance covering personal property, transportation and medical costs, and housing assistance for as long as 18 months. Homeowners were eligible for up to another $43,600 in repair money. Money that moves fast enough to help people who just lost everything moves fast enough to reach people who lost nothing.

The two fires ignited on Jan. 7, 2025, burned close to 60,000 acres, destroyed more than 16,000 structures, and killed 30 people.

For claiming a slice of the recovery money set aside for those people, Johnson drew 12 months and one day.

Tyler Durden Tue, 08/04/2026 - 13:20
Tyler Durden

Pagination

  • First page
  • Previous page
  • …
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Page 8
  • Page 9
  • Page 10
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • …
  • Next page
  • Last page
Checked
33 minutes 48 seconds ago
URL
https://www.zerohedge.com
Zero Rss feed

zero rss

News feeds

  • Consumer Credit Jumps More Than Expected In June As Credit Card Debt Spikes
  • Senate Passes The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia & Iran Act Of 2026
  • Uncertainty Rules!
  • Trump Threatens To Jail Arms Shortage 'Leakers'
  • Saudi Arabia's $5 Oil Detour Is Expensive... But Worth It
  • 5th Small Modular Reactor Validated Since June, Poised For Mass Production
  • Exit Narrative Grows: Bessent Says New Deal & Ceasefire Will Open Hormuz 'Today Or Tomorrow'
  • Meet The Investors In SpaceX Who Say Their Shares "Disappeared"
  • Rockstar Founder Builds $300M Celsius Stake, Launches Activist Offense: Management "All Need To Be Fired"
  • US Senate Pushes CLARITY Act Vote To September
More

zero rss

Copyright (c) 2026 FYCKL Project