Aggregator

On Friday night, Dodgers manager Dave Roberts was cautiously optimistic.

Michigan Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed spoke at a Detroit conference alongside 9/11 conspiracy theorists Cenk Uygur and Zaid Shakir.

On a brutal day for American stars at the U.S. Open, Coco Gauff offered a bright spot.

“One for the history books right here.”

“Selling immigration benefits for cash is a blatant abuse of public trust,” US Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Ryan Raybould said in a statement on Friday. 

Chip Wilson, whose net worth is valued at $6.1 billion, and his wife Shannon "Summer" Wilson are calling it quits, according to a report.

The Real Elites Vs. The Ruling Elites

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

Always and everywhere, political institutions are controlled by elites. It doesn't matter if the regime type is democratic or monarchical. It doesn't matter if there is a written constitution or not. All political institutions - and certainly every sovereign state - are run by a group of elites who control the means of coercion.The myth of "rule by the people" is precisely that: a myth.

But this leaves a big question open: who are the elites? Wilfredo Pareto, that pioneer of Italian elite theory, convincingly suggests that elites are simply those people who are most skilled in their respective fields. Being skilled does not suggest any sort of virtue or beauty, of course, and we cannot assume that any member of the elite will be more moral or refined than any, say, middle-class mechanic.

In the case of political elites, to be "elite" simply means to be the most effective at organizing and commanding political action. This can be done toward both virtuous ends or evil ends. The political elites excel at the gaining and wielding of political power. Nothing more. In hereditary monarchies, for example, the monarch is a monarch because his ancestors were more effective at using violence - and at stealing and killing - than were their competitors. Their descendants are able to remain in the elite through effective political scheming to maintain their positions. In democracies, those who gain and maintain power are effective at deceiving the voting public and at currying favor with the ruling coalitions of various interest groups. They're not "the elite" because they are especially virtuous or well educated. They simply excel at cultivating the knowledge necessary to wield the power of the state against their enemies and against potential rivals.

Economic Elites vs. Political Elites

There is, however, often confusion as to the difference between economic elites and political elites. One could say that economic elites are those who are most skilled at the management of property. Yet, the nature of the economic elites depends largely on what type of regime exists within society. In a society that has a mostly market system, the economic elites are those who are most productive in the free marketplace. These are the people who are skilled at entrepreneurship, sales, logistics, investing, and all other aspects of a freely functioning market. In a mostly free society, the economic elites are free to spend most of their time on their activities in the marketplace, and they are thus rewarded for spending their efforts in improving their own productivity. Moreover, all of society benefits from these sorts of economic elites. This is because rewards in the marketplace stem from delivering more goods and services to more people at a price that a growing number of people can afford.

Things are different in a society where the economy is dominated by the state - and thus by the political elite. In such a society, the economic elites are those who are most skilled at using the power of the state to achieve success in the state-regulated marketplace. In this case, the economic elites are those who are able to partner with the regime to obtain policies that benefit the elites through the manipulation and regulation of the market. These policies include bailouts, state-backed monopolies, and an easy-money-fueled financial system. In this system, the economic elites are able to maintain and enhance their positions and their wealth through effective political action, and by serving the political elites instead of customers in the marketplace.

When this happens, we cannot assume that the economic elites are there because they add value to society. Rather, the economic elites in this latter system are parasitical. They rely on the exploitation of others to maintain their positions and to expand their market share. One of the most dramatic examples of this can be seen in the response to the financial crisis that began in 2008.

Had the marketplace been allowed to function, many large banks and other firms would have been bankrupted, and their property repurposed by other, more efficient owners and managers. Those new owners could have become a new economic elite. But thanks to the intervention of the incumbent political elites, failing firms were saved through the redistribution of wealth from the productive classes to hand-picked, politically connected incumbent firms and owners. Thus, firms like Citicorp and AIG were bailed out, new regulations imposed, and firms like JP Morgan greatly expanded their market share. The Federal Reserve's mass purchasing of mortgage-backed securities rescued a large portion of the financial sector from insolvency. As a result, most of the economic "elite" we find in the financial sector owe their positions to political action rather than any actual skill in the marketplace. Sure, these people are fond of telling themselves that they are rich because "the market" values them so highly. In reality, they are successful because lobbyists have succeeded in propping up their firms and ensuring, through constant monetary inflation, growth in their portfolios.

But this is just one example. In any society where the political elites are prolific spenders, or engage in widespread regulation of the economy, the economy is continually distorted in a way as to favor the politically well connected at the expense of everyone else. For example, the economic "elites" who rely heavily on government contracts - e.g., Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, the founder of Flock Safety, et al - are not in the elite because they are especially productive in a free market. They are in the elite because they are adept at seizing the property of taxpayers through the tax-and-spend mechanism.

Note that in this interventionist system, the real economic elites - the people who would have risen to the top of an actually free economy - are crowded out and kept down by government action that favors certain firms. Who are these would-be elites? We'll never know, and instead we are left with our counterfeit billionaire class which is "elite" only in their skill at exploiting people who do real work in the private sector.

Conclusion

Thus we have a merging of the economic and the political elite. Both types of elites generally rely on some sort of deception to buttress their claims.

The political elite, for example, claim their positions by virtue of some sort of mandate from heaven, or moral virtue, or because they allegedly reflect the "will of the people." These are all lies, of course, but have nonetheless worked to fool and pacify the public for many centuries.

Under a regime of economic interventionism, the economic elites rely on lies as well. They claim they are elites because they are efficient or hard-working, or "serve the customer." These are lies as well since, in the absence of a free - or even mostly free - market, the elites are, in fact, in their positions due to political maneuvering. They are, in effect, merely an extension of the political elite. The more interventionist the regime is, the more this is true.

The real elites have always been those who receive the voluntary and free support of others through the private sector, or through other non-violent means of interaction: through families, religious institutions, and other institutions of the private sector. On the other hand, those who become "elites" through the initiation of violence, and through the looting of others, have always been frauds and imposters.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 23:20

The Yankees are going to have to find a way to consistently beat lefty starters. Saturday was an encouraging day in that regard. 

This was veering toward a sadly familiar story for Naomi Osaka. But she didn't let that happen.

During a September that will be defined by development and not by victories, Monday looms as a large day for the Mets.

The "Empire" alum had fellow celebs Sanaa Lathan and Normani cheering her on in the comments section.

The "Empire" alum had fellow celebs Sanaa Lathan and Normani cheering her on in the comments section.

Hegseth's Polygraphs Return To Pentagon In 'Major Leak Hunt' Over Iran War

The polygraphs have returned to the Pentagon, after the Trump administration has been furious over what the president calls 'leaks' by US officials to the press, particularly regarding alleged diminished munitions stocks and missile shortages.

The New York Times reports Saturday that Pentagon investigators have questioned roughly 50 personnel on the Joint Staff whether they had disclosed classified information to journalists.

File image, Anadolu Agency

The publication calls it a "major leak hunt" - with the widespread polygraph tests having taken place in August, and possibly with more rounds to come.

"Between 1,500 and 2,000 officers and officials work for the Joint Staff, which coordinates operations, policy and war plans with combatant commanders around the world," the NY Times notes.

Dozens of other officials, including under US Central Command (CENTCOM), were also polygraph tested earlier this summer.

An avalanche of media reports in August, and from earlier in the summer, have said the US exhausted much of its stock of long-range Tomahawk missiles on the Iran war, along with Patriot and THAAD missile interceptors.

US officials have stated to CBS that no one failed the tests, but it has had a chilling effect, given that sources have also described the scope of the dragnet as "extraordinary". 

All of this seems not only geared toward preventing leaks to the press, but comes amid a climate of perceived 'disloyalty' and dissent against War Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Polygraphs are typically used in the military or intelligence community in cases of suspected foreign espionage or instances of suspicion of handing off classified information. Hegseth has already greatly narrowed his trusted inner-circle.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell has only said that the Department of War "takes all leaks of classified national security information extremely seriously and investigates accordingly."

This isn't the first wave of polygraphs at the Pentagon under Trump. Hegseth had previewed these actions all the way back in Fall 2025. There's also been widespread signings of NDAs.

Now they gotta do it again to find out who leaked this https://t.co/t0P837nvoq

— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) September 5, 2026

While there already exist laws and policies covering unauthorized disclosure of classified, restricted, or sensitive information, this is clearly part of a broader push to tighten up leaks.

The reality too is that leaks to the media are a fairly standard part of any administration, going back through American history. Trump likely knows this, but is naturally leery of any further efforts to undermine his policies - especially in this sensitive moment ahead of the November midterm elections.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 22:45

"As a parent, you hear what this c–t did and you just want to beat the crap out of him," Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco said of the axed deputy.

Make no mistake: Arch Manning is back.

The Golden State may be billions of dollars in debt, but its lawmakers still manage to offer one of the nation’s most generous aid packages for undocumented college students.

California has decided that being in the country illegally should not stand in the way of getting help from California taxpayers to pay for college.

China Expands Online Content Controls, Putting More Pressure On Creators

Authored by Michael Zhuang via The Epoch Times,

China's new rules governing companies that produce and distribute content for social media took effect on Sept. 1, potentially exposing both independent content creators and the accounts they manage to penalties for violations.

Men play games on computers in an internet bar in Beijing on Dec. 16, 2015. Greg Baker/AFP via Getty Images

The regulations require companies providing services such as content planning, production, distribution, marketing, promotion, and talent management to register as service providers.

Critics and independent content creators told The Epoch Times that the rules could broaden the communist regime's control over online content, particularly information about sensitive social issues such as unemployment, unpaid wages, unfinished housing projects, and protests.

They spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of reprisal.

Under the new rules, companies already registered to provide such services have 30 days from the regulations' effective date to amend their business registrations.

Companies involved in online performance management, publishing, audiovisual services, or internet news services must also obtain the relevant licenses.

The rules require covered companies to appoint a person responsible for content management and establish a management team, as well as procedures governing employees and emergency responses.

When signing contracts with online creators, companies must verify their identities and clearly define their management responsibilities.

Platforms can also impose measures on both the companies and the content creators they have contracted with when alleged violations of laws, regulations, platform rules, or contractual agreements occur.

Those measures can include restricting account functions, suspending monetization, or shutting down accounts.

Risks to Online Creators

For people working in China as independent content creators, the new requirements have raised concerns about both income and uncertainty over what content is permissible.

A content creator in Shenyang, China, told The Epoch Times that the rules could directly affect the livelihoods of people who depend on online traffic for income.

"Many people doing livestreams don't know what they can say and what they can't say. Once the traffic gets high, the risks come with it," she said.

The content creator explained that she has seen other creators have their accounts blocked after their livestreams began attracting substantial audiences.

She also questioned how regime authorities and platforms would determine what constitutes prohibited content.

"What does it mean to incite emotions, and what does it mean to make false propaganda? Who decides? There is no clear standard," she said.

The regulations are formally framed as a system for managing businesses involved in the distribution and operation of online content.

However, critics say the requirements could extend beyond large multi-channel networks (MCNs), and apply to smaller operations that may not previously have considered themselves part of the industry.

A Chinese online commentator told The Epoch Times that the rules could encompass small studios, account-management teams, and small livestreaming accounts.

"In the past, many small studios simply helped people obtain advertising, edit videos, and do promotions. They didn't consider themselves MCNs," the commentator said.

"This time, the regulations are very broad. As long as you participate in producing content for online accounts, or help distribute it, you could be required to register and file records, and you would have to assume them as a condition for operating."

In his view, the system shifts part of the regime's censorship responsibilities onto platforms and content-operations companies. Rather than directly intervening in every piece of content, the regime can require companies and platforms to police the accounts under their control.

Concerns Over Reporting on Social Issues

The potential impact could be particularly significant for creators who cover social and economic problems in China.

An independent content creator in Harbin, China, who focuses on analyzing social issues and asked to be identified only by his surname Li, told The Epoch Times that he regularly follows issues including gig employment, difficulties facing restaurants and other businesses, unfinished housing projects, and problems withdrawing money from banks.

Such topics, he said, could potentially be interpreted by platforms as negative information or as an attempt to exploit social issues for attention.

"If influencers continuously follow these things, the network regulators may think you are hyping up a social incident, seeking attention, and making money from traffic," Li said.

"I can only speculate this way. The regime has not clearly stated the standards."

Although Li primarily analyzes information from the perspective of a reader, rather than reporting firsthand on every incident, he said he remains concerned about the restrictions.

"Some content is not false; it's just different from what the official releases say," he said. "Creators are afraid of losing their accounts or income, so they may simply give up publishing. This is self-censorship."

Li said the result could be that social events increasingly have only the version of events permitted by regime authorities.

Once creators face the possibility of having their accounts closed, losing their ability to earn money, or effectively losing their livelihoods, he said, they may choose not to publish information even when they believe it to be accurate.

The regulations impose penalties for violations under existing laws and regulations. Where no specific penalty is provided, the regime can issue warnings and impose fines ranging from 10,000 yuan ($1,490) to 200,000 yuan ($29,800).

For creators and critics, however, the greater concern may be the effect of the rules before any formal penalty is imposed.

If platforms and companies are held responsible for the content produced by the accounts they manage, they have an incentive to remove material that could attract regulatory scrutiny.

That could leave creators increasingly reluctant to report on sensitive social issues, not necessarily because the information is false, but because the potential loss of an account, audience, or income may make publishing it too risky.

Xiao Bin contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/05/2026 - 22:10

Mark Beall urges court oversight, strict guardrails on automated license plate readers used by law enforcement.

Officers found the restaurant manager drenched in blood on his clothing, hands and shoes, according to his arrest affidavit.