Nearly 5,000 Haitians Killed In 9 Months As Gang Violence Spreads Beyond Capital

The United Nations in a fresh report issued Friday is urging international support for Haiti, amid crippling gang violence has claimed 4,864 lives between October and June.

In this nine month period, over 20% of these deaths occurred in the Centre and Artibonite areas, signaling that violence is extending well beyond Port-au-Prince into surrounding regions.

File image via University of Miami

"The spread of gang control poses a serious threat of escalating violence and fueling cross-border trafficking of weapons and people," the report warns

Gangs are believed to be expanding their influence in these areas as part of a broader effort to control critical routes linking the capital to northern Haiti and the Dominican Republic border, to extract payments.

One key element of the UN report is the call for outside nations to tighten regulations on firearm sales to Haiti and to continue strong support for the Kenya-led security mission aimed at bolstering the country's police force - an initiative that Washington backed.

"Human rights violations are worsening outside Port-au-Prince in regions where the State has little or no presence," Ulrika Richardson, the UN’s resident coordinator in Haiti, has said.

Al Jazeera has for example, documented one such major instance of violence which occurred outside the capital:

One instance the UN chronicles from March involved the police interception of a minibus driving from the city of Gonaives to Port-au-Prince. Officers allegedly found three firearms and 10,488 cartridges inside the bus, a fact which sparked concern and uproar among residents nearby.

“Enraged, members of the local population who witnessed the scene lynched to death, using stones, sticks, and machetes, two individuals: the driver and another man present in the vehicle,” the report said.

Haiti has long been a failed state crisis which at times enters in an out of mainstream media coverage and public awareness.

En Haïti, toujours plus enlisé dans la violence, 27.000 personnes déplacées en une semaine@IOMHaiti I @BINUH_UN I @OCHAHaiti I @UNHumanRights I @UlrikaR_UN https://t.co/nLR5kAGmBP

— ONU Info (@ONUinfo) July 11, 2025

But it's a nightmare political issue for any US administration, and the US has long ago sought to wash its hands of direct involvement there, after several failed and controversial UN 'boots on the ground' missions there.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 17:40

El Salvador Recalls Ambassador To Mexico Over Drug Plane Allegations

Authored by Melanie Sun via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele said on July 9 that he was recalling El Salvador’s ambassador to Mexico for consultations after Mexico’s security chief claimed that a plane allegedly carrying cocaine had originated in El Salvador.

Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele speaks during a news conference in San Salvador, El Salvador, on Feb. 4, 2024. Jose Luis Gonzalez/Reuters

In a social media post, Bukele called the accusation false and urged Mexico to clarify and correct comments by Security Minister Omar Garcia Harfuch, who said during a press conference that the July 3 flight had come from El Salvador before it was intercepted in Colima, Mexico.

Bukele shared an image of the flight path and said tracking data showed the plane never entered Salvadoran airspace.

The president said Costa Rica reported a suspicious radar trace northwest of its territory on July 3.

“It was Costa Rica that activated the regional alert through APAN, a Central American air security network,” Bukele said.

“According to its own report, the aircraft’s trace entered Costa Rican airspace, briefly disappeared from radar, and then reappeared as it exited toward the Pacific. Our radars did not register any aerial contact within our airspace ... Their report is clear: the aircraft flew over the Pacific Ocean and never entered Salvadoran territory.”

Bukele also criticized the Mexican government for not making public that three Mexican men were arrested over the flight.

“El Salvador does not shield criminals nor tolerate drug trafficking. We didn’t before, and we won’t now,” he said. “Nor will we allow attempts to involve us in operations that are neither our responsibility nor within our jurisdiction.”

Mexican authorities previously said three people were onboard the flight. They were arrested in Colima after 940 lb (427 kg) of cocaine was allegedly seized from the plane after landing.

Within hours of the post, Garcia Harfuch responded to Bukele on the social media platform X, saying that Mexican authorities first detected the plane about 200 km (120 miles) south of San Salvador, after which it ordered the military to intercept the suspicious flight. The map he posted also showed the plane’s route, although incomplete, over the Pacific Ocean.

Garcia Harfuch acknowledged that the men were Mexican and said they were facing criminal charges.

“We reiterate our respect and appreciation for the people of El Salvador,” he added.

Bukele responded to Garcia Harfuch’s post, saying that while the information he shared was factual, it failed to mention that there is no indication the aircraft originated in El Salvador.

“On the contrary, it was neither a Salvadoran aircraft nor did it have a Salvadoran crew,” he said in a reply to Garcia Harfuch’s post.

“We are willing to grant the benefit of the doubt and understand that what was said during the press conference may have been a misunderstanding, but we expect a more accurate clarification. It must be absolutely clear that there is not the slightest indication that the aircraft departed from our country, nor that anyone in El Salvador is linked to that drug shipment.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 17:15

No One Believes...

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Flux Rules

"We're trapped in a structure. We named the Structure 'Jeffrey Epstein'."

- Eric Weinstein

No one in America - not even the most deranged, spike-faced, pink-haired transtifas - believes the latest Epstein story as played out by Mr. Trump and AG Bondi in this week’s cabinet parlay: nuthin to see, just a bunch of pointless child porn, fuggeddabowdit. . .

But stay! Much is moving, flowing unseen. The world is yugely in flux, large events in human affairs are in motion, many things are breaking, rotating, dissolving and re-forming, while others wind into giant hairballs. . . so many players acting as though they live in one great hall of mirrors, and treachery abides at every turn. Nobody seems to be actually managing any of it, though there is plenty of pretense, jockeying, staging. The public’s anger and anxiety rise in tandem.

One thing about Epstein is likely certain: it was an intel operation. And one thing is probable: it was a joint operation between the CIA, Israel’s Mossad, and the UK’s MI6. The object: to get as many political poohbahs on-the-hook for disgraceful behavior of the lowest kind and blackmail-able. Under the thumb. Theories and suppositions abound.

If Mr. Trump was in on the Epstein sex shenanigans, as Elon blurted this week, why did the Democratic Party not go after him for it in three election campaigns (and all the many months in between)? Well, not to put too fine a point on it, Elon appears to be losing his shit. His CEO at “X” bailed on him this week. His A-I app, Grok, started spouting Hitler gags, and his empire of world-beating genius is tottering on a broken business model.

You can write all that Elon stuff off as a sideshow for now — wildly grotesque as it may be. But what is actually going on in the three rings of this circus?

Flux in the Middle East is one.

Whatever else the “Twelve Day War” was about, it’s the end of Israel threatening to bomb Iran’s nuke program out of existence. We’ve done that favor for them, or pretended to, as some are saying, kabukied it out. So, Israel, shut up about that for now . . . is the policy.

One story is that the actual Epstein material, whatever still exists, that is, which might reside in multiple locations, is so destructive to the architecture of global leadership that it must be squelched for the sake of majorly realigning forces, tensions, and polities across the Middle East, namely, the Abraham Accords. Getting all that lined up is more important to Mr. Trump for the moment than defenestrating the various perverts-in-office around Western Civ. It just is. . . so. . . gotta lump it.

Let’s surmise that the president has learned a lot about the intel hall of mirrors over the past decade, but especially lately, in his second term, from DNI Tulsi Gabbard, who has access to every document in the bottomless pit of the intel archives. The President knows he is not exactly in control of his intel “community.” And he aims to do something about it. You could make the case that the so-called “community” is just a giant criminal syndicate engaged in the most nefarious activities ongoing in this world of sin: human trafficking, drugs, money-laundering, weapons, every off-the-book turpitude you could imagine. Nor is John Ratcliffe exactly in control of his own agency, though he can utilize some of its services. . . but more about that later.

Forget about Bondi’s gaffe. She is just following orders, as are Messrs. Patel and Bongino, standing down, good soldiers, and only on the Epstein business. You can’t even rule out the possibility that Jeffrey Epstein is not dead. Was it suicide? Or an escape? Shall we say, a rendition to parts unknown? I would not assert that, just proffer it as a possibility, since the events of that night in the Manhattan federal lockup were so astoundingly sketchy — the sleepy guards, the broken CC cameras, the missing minute in the one camera recording that worked, the suicide-proofed jail cell. . . . But, then, the autopsy reports. . . performed upon. . . whom, exactly. . . ?

There is parallel matter of Ukraine to consider. Mr. Trump is yugely frustrated by his inability to put a quick end to it, to make that golden deal with Russia. The Ukraine War is the globalists desperate final project, its last stand. By saying which, let’s assume that the Globalists are “a thing,” a combo of the UK’s remaining potent assets (MI6 and the City of London financial octopus), the megalomaniacal EU bureaucratic leadership (von der Leyen & Co.), and the WEF-Davos gang. Ukraine was their instrument to break up Russia. The project has failed. Yet the war goes on. Mr. Trump says he was not even informed about Ukraine’s recent long-range drone attack deep into Russia, to take out its strategic bombers. Wasn’t informed? WTF???

Was it because the CIA has gone rogue over in Ukraine? Running the war their way — and not even Mr. Ratcliffe has a handle on all that? Consequently, Mr. Trump is yugely embarrassed in his many skull sessions with Mr. Putin. And thus, Mr. Putin seeks to bring about an end to this enormous pain-in-the-ass situation by simply winning the war. Which he is doing. His terms have been simple, plain, and straightforward from the get-go: a disarmed, neutralized Ukraine that must surrender the Donbas provinces, end-of-story, and don’t even mention Crimea because there’s nuthin to talk about there. And, of course, regime change in Kiev. . . eighty-six on Nazis, thank you.

In the natural course of things, the incompetent drug-addict Zelenskyy should have been overthrown by his own people months ago and it is only the rogue US intel community that continues to prop him up. As political dramaturgy, Mr. Trump must pretend to oppose Russia’s winning of the Ukraine War — we don’t let Russia win wars! — though it is the logical best solution to the problem. So, he is forking over the last $100-million, probably just to pay government salaries, pensions, and social services in Kiev for a month or so. But Russia will win and the UK-EU-WEF will be the big loser, and then Britain, France, and Germany can get on with the job of committing suicide, as they’ve dedicated themselves to do.

Mr. Ratcliffe, meanwhile, earnestly attempts to not become a hostage to the agency he’s supposed to run. So amidst all the other sturm-and-drang of July 2025, he issued that report on former CIA director John Brennan’s 2017 Intel Community Assessment that kicked off RussiaGate. Ratcliffe’s report looked like a predicate for a prosecution. And indeed, Mr. Ratcliffe (an experienced prosecutor himself) issued a criminal referral to the DOJ on the matter. . . and voila. . . we learn next that the FBI has indeed been investigating Brennan and former FBI chief James Comey for months — probably since the very day that Patel and Bongino got their office keys.

Well, about goshdarn time. These two seditious caitiffs will be going to court, looks like. Maybe just for lying to congress, which is easy to prove with video and documents, and doesn’t require the spinning-out of a vast prosecutorial narrative that a hostile DC jury could nitpick. We’re also informed that there are more “targets” in the FBI’s investigation. A lot of things are in motion now. Expect cascades of developments.

 

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 16:25

From Nick Villa at Moody's The Office Sector’s Double Whammy

The ongoing challenges affecting the office sector have not only resulted in deteriorating space market fundamentals—evidenced by the record-high national office vacancy rate in the second quarter of 2025—but have also had a direct negative impact on capital market activities, including the performance of commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS). Figure 1 illustrates the office sector’s “double whammy”—in particular, record-high vacancy rates and CMBS conduit delinquency rates. Specifically, the chart benchmarks the cumulative change in each of these metrics going back to the end of 2019. While the U.S. office vacancy rate has increased by nearly four percentage points over this period, the rise in office-backed CMBS delinquency has been significantly higher at around 11 percentage points.

As one would expect, vacancy rates have slowly inched higher from weaker tenant demand and new supply entering the market, while the long-term nature of most office leases has helped delay the full impact on net operating income. Consequently, this has temporarily masked the underlying CMBS distress, which has recently become more apparent through rising loan delinquencies and declining property valuations. For example, the office-backed CMBS delinquency rate increased by approximately 600 basis points in 2024, which was the fastest annual increase on record since data collection began in 2000. In other words, 2024’s full-year delinquency spike even outpaced levels seen during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). Concerningly, however, the first six months of 2025 reflected the fastest midyear increase on record, underscoring the unique structural challenges now facing the sector.

The second graph shows the office vacancy rate over time.

Moody’s Analytics reported that the office vacancy rate was at 20.7% in Q2 2025, up from 20.4% in Q1 2025, and up from 20.1% in Q2 2024.

This is the highest vacancy rate on record and is above the 19.3% peak during the S&L crisis.

California, Los Angeles Join Activist Lawsuit Against Federal Authorities Over ICE Operations

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, along with the attorneys general from several other states, submitted an amicus brief on July 7 in an effort to prevent the federal government from continuing its immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles.

The case, Perdomo v. Noem, was filed on behalf of individuals who say they were unlawfully stopped or detained by federal agents. The lawsuit alleges that federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are deploying unconstitutional and unlawful immigration tactics, and stopping individuals based on race and ethnicity.

The lawsuit also alleges that the agencies are stripping detainees of constitutionally mandated due process and that ICE and CBP policies ignore the need for reasonable suspicion. The lawsuit also alleges the actions are in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The lawsuit, which was announced on July 2 at the Bubble Bath Hand Car Wash in Torrance, the site of several removal operations, was filed as a result of one specific incident. According to the ACLU of Southern California, five individuals were stopped or arrested on July 2.

They subsequently filed suit alongside the Los Angeles Worker Center Network, United Farm Workers, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, and legal services provider Immigrant Defenders Law Center.

The lawsuit seeks to put an end to the stops and arrests, as well as to ensure those who are detained receive due process and access to counsel while in federal detention.

The lawsuit comes just two days after the Trump administration sued the City of Los Angeles on June 30 over its ‘sanctuary city' policies, alleging in federal court that the ordinance violates the Constitution by thwarting immigration enforcement.

“The United States Constitution’s Supremacy Clause prohibits the city from picking and choosing which federal laws will be enforced and which will not,” United States Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli said in astatement on the lawsuit.

The amicus brief supports the plaintiffs in the case, who are requesting a temporary restraining order to prohibit ICE and CBP from carrying out stops in Los Angeles during immigration actions, unless there is reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

The attorneys general in their amicus brief also argue that the stops, as well as federal agents wearing masks and concealing the name of the law enforcement agency for which they work, have undermined public safety.

“The lawsuit comes amid the Trump Administration conducting aggressive, militaristic immigration raids in Los Angeles that have terrified immigrant and non-immigrant residents alike, chilled community members’ participation in civic society, and impeded law enforcement and public safety,” Bonta’s office said in a statement on July 7.

Bonta argues that the ICE operations are not about safety or justice, but rather about enforcement quotas.

“The actions of ICE and CBP during the raids in Los Angeles are part of a cruel and familiar pattern of attacks on our immigrant communities by an administration that thrives on fear and division,” Bonta said.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement that the Fourth Amendment protects everyone from unreasonable searches and seizures.

“Instead of targeting dangerous criminals, federal agents are detaining U.S. citizens, ripping families apart, and vanishing people to meet indiscriminate arrest quotas without regard to due process and constitutional rights that protect all of us from cruelty and injustice,” Newsom said.

“Their actions imperil the fabric of our democracy, society, and economy. This isn’t law and order—it’s cruelty and chaos. We stand solidly in support of progress, of the law, and the foundation upon which our founding fathers built this great nation.”

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi has said the city’s actions amount to obstruction of federal law.

“Jurisdictions like Los Angeles that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level – it ends under President Trump,” Bondi said in a statement on the suit.

Bonta likened the Trump administration’s deportation of illegal immigrants to the 1954 Operation Wetback, under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in which an estimated 300,000 people were arrested and deported, including naturalized U.S. citizens.

“The dragnet has resulted in U.S. citizens being wrongfully detained and has created a culture of fear and COVID-style ghost towns,” Bonta’s office said in a statement.

The attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington signed on to the amicus brief, which is focused on events taking place in Los Angeles.

Los Angeles, Pasadena, Culver City, Montebello, Monterey Park, Pico Rivera, Santa Monica, and West Hollywood, as well as the County of Los Angeles, have also filed a motion to intervene in the Vasquez Perdomo et al. v. Noem et al. lawsuit.

“The Administration is treating Los Angeles as a test case for how far it can go in driving its political agenda forward while pushing the Constitution aside,” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said.

“The City of Los Angeles, along with the County, cities, organizations and Angelenos across L.A., is taking the Administration to court to stop its clear violation of the United States Constitution and federal law. We will not be intimidated – we are making Los Angeles the example of how people who believe in American values will stand together and stand united.”

In one high-profile arrest, on July 2, ICE arrested Mexican boxer Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. at his home in Studio City, near Los Angeles. Chavez, who the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) says entered the country illegally, is accused of being an associate of the Sinaloa Cartel, which has been designated a foreign terrorist organization.

“This Sinaloa Cartel affiliate with an active arrest warrant for trafficking guns, ammunition, and explosives was arrested by ICE. It is shocking the previous administration flagged this criminal illegal alien as a public safety threat, but chose to not prioritize his removal and let him leave and COME BACK into our country,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement on July 3.

The DHS said that its Los Angeles operations have resulted in the arrest of those with convictions for murder, pedophilia, fentanyl trafficking, spousal abuse, sexual assault, and armed robbery.

“Under the Trump Administration 70% of illegal aliens arrested have been convicted or charged with a crime beyond illegally entering our country,” McLaughlin said in a statement on June 26.

“As bad faith politicians attempt to demean and vilify our brave law enforcement, we will only double down and ramp up our enforcement actions against the worst of the worst criminals.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 15:45

MTG Moves To Strike Half-Billion Of Military Aid To 'Nuclear-Armed Israel'

Vying for the title of Most Brazen Bull in the china shop that is America's relationship with the State of Israel, Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced she will introduce an amendment to strike a half-billion dollars in additional military aid for the country -- and she notably emphasized its status as a nuclear power. 

“I’m entering amendments to strike $500 million more for nuclear-armed Israel. And it’s important to say nuclear-armed Israel, because they do have nuclear weapons,” Greene said on Steve Bannon's "War Room" podcast, an influential hub of the MAGA movement with an audience of listeners comprising not only everyday Americans but also West Wing officials. 

Marjorie Taylor Greene announced her cost-cutting amendment on Steve Bannon's "War Room" podcast

The additional $500 million would flow to a program that lie "at the heart of Israel's aerial defense operations," reports Responsible Statecraft. Greene says enough is enough. "We already give them $3.4 billion every single year...they don't need another $500 million in our defense budget. That's for the American people's defense," Greene told Bannon. "That's for the defense of the United States of America and our borders."  

It's highly significant that, in her references to Israel, Greene used "nuclear-armed" five times, noting that "it's important to say 'nuclear-armed' because they do have nuclear weapons -- this is not a helpless country." While Greene's nuclear references ostensibly underscored the country's military strength, she may have had other intentions: 

• Spotlighting the hypocrisy of "nuclear-armed Israel" pushing the United States to war over Iran's nuclear program. While the US intelligence community has concluded isn't aiming for a nuclear weapon, Greene did give credence to Israel's claims to the contrary, saying last month's US strikes "on [Israel's] behalf... destroyed Iran's nuclear problem." 
• Firing a shot across the bow of all Israel aid, by violating a long-standing US government policy of refusing to confirm that Israel has a nuclear arsenal. Those refusals to acknowledge Israel's nuclear status are part of a decades-long conspiracy to keep billions of dollars in aid flowing to Israel in violation of US law.

 As Brian McGlinchey explained in a deep-dive on the topic at Stark Realities: 

While having amassed upwards of 200 nuclear warheads, Israel is not a member of the the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)...That makes U.S. aid to Israel illegal under the Symington Amendment of 1976, which bars economic and military assistance to countries that acquire nuclear reprocessing technology without submitting to international safeguards and inspections. The law was reinforced by the Glenn Amendment of 1977.

The proposed redistribution another $500 million of American wealth to Israel is contained in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the annual bill that funds the Department of Defense. “There are some parts of this NDAA that I cannot support, and that’s continued foreign aid and foreign funding, and it needs to come out,” said Greene. Bannon called this year's iteration of the NDAA "disastrous," as it calls for a trillion dollars in total purported "defense" spending. 

Greene is among the foremost boosters of President Trump, but said his attack on Iran felt like "a bait-and-switch" after his promises to end US wars in the Middle East (Brynn Anderson / AP via Politico) 

When it comes to opposing Israel's agenda, Greene is on a roll. When Trump last month ordered the United States military to join Israel's war on Iran, Greene lashed out via social media. Noting that she "traveled the entire country" campaigning to elect Trump on the basis of his promise to stop foreign wars, Greene said the attack on Iran "feels like a complete bait-and-switch to please the neocons, warmongers, military industrial complex contracts, and neocon tv personalities that MAGA hates and who were NEVER TRUMPERS!"

Also in June, Greene refused to vote for a resolution condemning antisemitism, noting it was the 21st such resolution Congress had voted on just since she took office in 2021. “Prioritizing one group of Americans and/or one foreign country above our own people is fueling resentment and actually driving more division, including antisemitism," Greene explained. 

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R): I’m filing amendments to stop sending our defense money overseas.

Nuclear-armed Israel doesn’t need more cash. Taiwan doesn’t either. Jordan and Africa can fund their own programs.

This is America’s budget. Let’s spend it defending America. pic.twitter.com/l6LsZvKn64

— Bannon’s WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) July 9, 2025

Greene, whose district lies in Georgia's far northwest corner, told Bannon she's also moving to strike $500 million for Taiwan. "We give them $300 million every year in the State Department, and they just got $2 billion -- two billion with a 'b' in 2024 from the foreign aid supplemental under the Biden administration."  She's also trying to kill an extra $500 million for Jordan, which already gets $1.6 billion a year. 

Finally, Greene said her amendment to target two things that she finds "outrageous": $15 million for AIDS prevention in Africa and $118 in overseas humanitarian aid and disaster relief. On the latter point, she noted, "I didn't see foreign countries flooding into America when Lahina burned, when California burned...[or] running to Texas right now."   

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 15:25

Senate Committee Votes To Block FBI Headquarters Relocation

Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

The Senate Appropriations Committee voted to ban the Federal Bureau of Investigation from a planned move to the Ronald Reagan building in Washington, D.C.

The July 10 vote approved a Justice Department funding bill amendment that blocked the Trump administration from keeping the FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., through a change in destination for the bureau.

The Republican majority committee voted 15-14 to adopt language that would halt a move from the J. Edgar Hoover Building site to any location that isn’t the previously approved site in Greenbelt, Maryland, that was chosen by the General Services Administration in 2023.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) crossed party lines to join Democrats in supporting halting the administration’s proposed move.

“My understanding is that this has been a decision that was made just very recently,” Murkowski said ahead of the vote. “So I, for one, would like to know that this analysis has actually been going on for more than just a couple [of] months, that there’s actually been that effort to ensure that we’re going to move forward.”

The amendment to block the move was introduced by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who said the previous decision to move the FBI to Maryland was made as a result of a lengthy process that involved Congressional criteria and lengthy discourse.

According to the lawmaker, the Trump administration did not perform adequate research and analysis before choosing to repurpose the Ronald Reagan building for the FBI headquarters.

“A few weeks ago, the administration just announced that it wanted to snatch the $555 million that had been set aside for down payment on that selected site and use it instead to move the FBI into the Ronald Reagan Building,” Van Hollen said during the markup session.

“No analysis done with respect to security requirements, no analysis done with respect to FBI mission requirements, no review of the underlying statute as to the purpose of the Ronald Reagan Building, no analysis of what they would do with current tenants in that building.”

According to Van Hollen, allowing the change to happen sets a dangerous precedent that cedes power designated to the legislative branch and allows the executive branch to overstep.

Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) contradicted that argument, saying that Congress is “micromanaging the FBI.”

“We have to trust the experts as we put them in place,” Mullin said before the vote on the amendment, referencing those in authority at the agency.

“To make the assumption that the FBI would possibly put their men and women in a less secure building is laughable.”

The lawmaker rebutted the idea that Congress would know better than the FBI what the agency’s security decisions for a location should be.

“They know security, I promise you, better than all of us. This is what they fight, they fight threats … for us to try to micromanage their site planning is ridiculous,” Mullin said.

“We need to allow them to make a decision. We haven’t been able to make a decision, nor do we make a decision; we allow and support their decision that they make.

“I would assume we need to lean in and trust these individuals, because we’re not talking about Republicans or Democrats, we’re talking about the FBI.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to the FBI for comment.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 15:05

What this means: On a weekly basis, Realtor.com reports the year-over-year change in active inventory and new listings. On a monthly basis, they report total inventory. For May, Realtor.com reported inventory was up 28.9% YoY, but still down 12.9% compared to the 2017 to 2019 same month levels. 
Here is their weekly report: Weekly Housing Trends: Latest Data as of July 5

• Active inventory climbed 26.7% year-over-year

The number of homes actively for sale remains on a strong upward trajectory, virtually unchanged from last week, at 26.7% higher than this time last year. This represents the 87th consecutive week of annual gains in inventory. There were more than 1 million homes for sale again last week, marking the ninth week in a row over the threshold and the highest inventory level since December 2019.

• New listings—a measure of sellers putting homes up for sale—rose 9.3% year over year

New listings rose again last week on an annual basis, up 9.3% compared with the same period last year.

• he median list price was up 0.2% year over year

The median list price climbed again this week but is still down 0.3% year to date. The median list price per square foot—which adjusts for changes in home size—rose 0.8% year over year. With inventory on the rise and more than 1 in 5 sellers cutting prices, the market is tilting back toward balance, marked by slowing price growth and increasing buyer leverage.

With inventory climbing, and sales depressed, months-of-supply is at the highest level since 2016 (excluding the start of pandemic) putting downward pressure on house prices in an increasing number of areas.

California To Lose 17% Of Oil Refining Capacity: EIA

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

California could lose 17 percent of its oil refinery capacity over the next 12 months due to two scheduled refinery closures, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in a July 9 statement.

In October, energy company Phillips 66 announced plans to shut down its Wilmington refinery in the Los Angeles area by the fourth quarter of this year. The facility processes 139,000 barrels per day of oil.

In April, Valero Energy Corporation said it would cease operations at Benicia refinery in the Bay Area, which processes 145,000 barrels per day, by April 2026.

Closure of the facilities can lead to “increases in fuel price volatility on the West Coast,” EIA said, highlighting that California “usually has higher retail gasoline prices compared with the national average.”

According to data from the American Automobile Association, the average price of regular gasoline was $4.53 per gallon in California as of July 10, the highest among all 50 states and up by almost 43 percent compared to the national average price of $3.17 per gallon. Mississippi had the lowest price at $2.71 per gallon.

In a May 30 commentary, Vance Ginn, president of Ginn Economic Consulting, LLC, called California’s high gasoline prices a “man-made problem—a case study in government failure, not market failure.”

Ginn blames decades of state taxes, and what he called misguided climate mandates and regulatory overreach, for distorting California’s gasoline market. He pointed out that regulatory costs and taxes alone make up over $1.30 per gallon in costs, which he said was “nearly double the national average.”

“California has the highest gas tax in the country, at $0.678 per gallon, not including additional fees and environmental surcharges,” he said.

“Add in the Cap-and-Trade program, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), and boutique fuel blends that are required only in California, and it becomes clear why Californians pay more.”

According to a May 5 post by the EIA, California mandates a special gasoline blend in a bid to cut down pollution and improve air quality. Such fuel is more costly to produce due to expensive blending components and processing steps involved, the agency said.

In its July 9 statement, the EIA said a reason for high gasoline prices in California was the “relative lack of logistical connectivity” on the West Coast compared to other refinery hubs such as the Gulf Coast.

The supply shortfall created by the closure of Wilmington refinery in the Los Angeles area and Valero’s Benicia refinery is likely to result in an “outsized impact” on the West Coast “because it cannot be easily filled by other refineries elsewhere in the country,” the EIA warned.

“Given the limited connectivity to other U.S. refining hubs, the most likely source of replacement fuels will be imports from Asia, particularly imports of jet fuel and gasoline,” it added. “Phillips 66 is planning to produce some California-grade gasoline at its refinery in Washington, and some refineries in India and South Korea can meet these specifications.”

The EIA forecasts a small increase in retail gasoline prices on the West Coast next year due to capacity closures. In contrast, gasoline prices elsewhere in the country are predicted to decline.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 14:25

California To Lose 17% Of Oil Refining Capacity: EIA

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

California could lose 17 percent of its oil refinery capacity over the next 12 months due to two scheduled refinery closures, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in a July 9 statement.

In October, energy company Phillips 66 announced plans to shut down its Wilmington refinery in the Los Angeles area by the fourth quarter of this year. The facility processes 139,000 barrels per day of oil.

In April, Valero Energy Corporation said it would cease operations at Benicia refinery in the Bay Area, which processes 145,000 barrels per day, by April 2026.

Closure of the facilities can lead to “increases in fuel price volatility on the West Coast,” EIA said, highlighting that California “usually has higher retail gasoline prices compared with the national average.”

According to data from the American Automobile Association, the average price of regular gasoline was $4.53 per gallon in California as of July 10, the highest among all 50 states and up by almost 43 percent compared to the national average price of $3.17 per gallon. Mississippi had the lowest price at $2.71 per gallon.

In a May 30 commentary, Vance Ginn, president of Ginn Economic Consulting, LLC, called California’s high gasoline prices a “man-made problem—a case study in government failure, not market failure.”

Ginn blames decades of state taxes, and what he called misguided climate mandates and regulatory overreach, for distorting California’s gasoline market. He pointed out that regulatory costs and taxes alone make up over $1.30 per gallon in costs, which he said was “nearly double the national average.”

“California has the highest gas tax in the country, at $0.678 per gallon, not including additional fees and environmental surcharges,” he said.

“Add in the Cap-and-Trade program, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), and boutique fuel blends that are required only in California, and it becomes clear why Californians pay more.”

According to a May 5 post by the EIA, California mandates a special gasoline blend in a bid to cut down pollution and improve air quality. Such fuel is more costly to produce due to expensive blending components and processing steps involved, the agency said.

In its July 9 statement, the EIA said a reason for high gasoline prices in California was the “relative lack of logistical connectivity” on the West Coast compared to other refinery hubs such as the Gulf Coast.

The supply shortfall created by the closure of Wilmington refinery in the Los Angeles area and Valero’s Benicia refinery is likely to result in an “outsized impact” on the West Coast “because it cannot be easily filled by other refineries elsewhere in the country,” the EIA warned.

“Given the limited connectivity to other U.S. refining hubs, the most likely source of replacement fuels will be imports from Asia, particularly imports of jet fuel and gasoline,” it added. “Phillips 66 is planning to produce some California-grade gasoline at its refinery in Washington, and some refineries in India and South Korea can meet these specifications.”

The EIA forecasts a small increase in retail gasoline prices on the West Coast next year due to capacity closures. In contrast, gasoline prices elsewhere in the country are predicted to decline.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 14:25

It's A Smart Move For Russia To Strike Ukrainian Draft Centers

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The Financial Times (FT) reported that “Russia attacks Ukraine’s draft offices in effort to undermine armed forces”, which drew attention to its latest strategy nearly three and a half years into the conflict.

What began as a special operation quickly transformed into a proxy war that’s since become a “race of logistics”/“war of attrition”.

Accordingly, without Trump coercing Zelensky to comply with Putin’s demands for peace and given his promise to send more “defensive weapons”, the conflict will continue.

It therefore makes sense that Russia would finally target Ukraine’s military logistics, particularly its draft centers, with a view towards preventing Kiev from replenishing its frontline losses in order to consequently raise the chances of a game-changing breakthrough somewhere along the front. Russia still won’t destroy Ukraine’s bridges across the Dnieper, possibly for the reasons speculated here last year, but striking its draft centers is better than nothing and could give also Russia a soft power edge.

As the FT acknowledged in their report, these draft centers are incredibly unpopular among the people, so it therefore follows that Russia’s destruction of them could lead to average Ukrainians breathing a sigh of relief and perhaps becoming more inclined towards a political solution to this long-running conflict. Those that already were anti-Russian or became so throughout the course of the hostilities might not change their political views, but what’s important is that they might not oppose concessions to Russia.

To be sure, the primary reason why Zelensky doesn’t want to comply with any of Putin’s demands for peace is because it could set into motion fast-moving events that remove him from power, but public opinion also plays a role in falsely justifying this self-interested position to the population. The independent organization of large-scale protests is practically impossible in Ukraine nowadays due to the SBU’s domestic dominance, but decisive shifts in public opinion could prompt a power struggle.

That institution and/or others could potentially see an opportunity in that scenario to allow some controlled protests for the purpose of pressuring Zelensky “from below” into doing what’s needed to end the conflict, which could then legitimize pressure upon him from their institution(s) too. The goal would be to remove him from power, even if only through the new elections that he promised would shortly follow the end of the conflict, and then potentially profit from lucrative reconstruction contracts.

For as compelling as this sequence might seem, it can’t be taken for granted, but the possibility still remains that Russia might at least obtain a soft power edge if it continues striking these draft centers. More average Ukrainians will likely appreciate that since they don’t want to die for Zelensky. Even JD Vance recognizes this reality as proven by him telling the world in late February during his fight with Zelensky in the White House about Ukraine’s forcible conscription policy and recruitment problems.

It's therefore a smart move for Russia to finally start striking Ukrainian draft centers since this could raise the chances for a breakthrough somewhere along the front, help to decisively shift domestic public opinion against the conflict, and thus make it easier for “deep state” forces to conspire against Zelensky.

Russia has nothing to lose and everything to gain by keeping up and possibly expanding these strikes since they hit Zelensky where it hurts in more ways than one.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 13:45

It's A Smart Move For Russia To Strike Ukrainian Draft Centers

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The Financial Times (FT) reported that “Russia attacks Ukraine’s draft offices in effort to undermine armed forces”, which drew attention to its latest strategy nearly three and a half years into the conflict.

What began as a special operation quickly transformed into a proxy war that’s since become a “race of logistics”/“war of attrition”.

Accordingly, without Trump coercing Zelensky to comply with Putin’s demands for peace and given his promise to send more “defensive weapons”, the conflict will continue.

It therefore makes sense that Russia would finally target Ukraine’s military logistics, particularly its draft centers, with a view towards preventing Kiev from replenishing its frontline losses in order to consequently raise the chances of a game-changing breakthrough somewhere along the front. Russia still won’t destroy Ukraine’s bridges across the Dnieper, possibly for the reasons speculated here last year, but striking its draft centers is better than nothing and could give also Russia a soft power edge.

As the FT acknowledged in their report, these draft centers are incredibly unpopular among the people, so it therefore follows that Russia’s destruction of them could lead to average Ukrainians breathing a sigh of relief and perhaps becoming more inclined towards a political solution to this long-running conflict. Those that already were anti-Russian or became so throughout the course of the hostilities might not change their political views, but what’s important is that they might not oppose concessions to Russia.

To be sure, the primary reason why Zelensky doesn’t want to comply with any of Putin’s demands for peace is because it could set into motion fast-moving events that remove him from power, but public opinion also plays a role in falsely justifying this self-interested position to the population. The independent organization of large-scale protests is practically impossible in Ukraine nowadays due to the SBU’s domestic dominance, but decisive shifts in public opinion could prompt a power struggle.

That institution and/or others could potentially see an opportunity in that scenario to allow some controlled protests for the purpose of pressuring Zelensky “from below” into doing what’s needed to end the conflict, which could then legitimize pressure upon him from their institution(s) too. The goal would be to remove him from power, even if only through the new elections that he promised would shortly follow the end of the conflict, and then potentially profit from lucrative reconstruction contracts.

For as compelling as this sequence might seem, it can’t be taken for granted, but the possibility still remains that Russia might at least obtain a soft power edge if it continues striking these draft centers. More average Ukrainians will likely appreciate that since they don’t want to die for Zelensky. Even JD Vance recognizes this reality as proven by him telling the world in late February during his fight with Zelensky in the White House about Ukraine’s forcible conscription policy and recruitment problems.

It's therefore a smart move for Russia to finally start striking Ukrainian draft centers since this could raise the chances for a breakthrough somewhere along the front, help to decisively shift domestic public opinion against the conflict, and thus make it easier for “deep state” forces to conspire against Zelensky.

Russia has nothing to lose and everything to gain by keeping up and possibly expanding these strikes since they hit Zelensky where it hurts in more ways than one.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 13:45

Trump Threatens To Pull Endorsements From GOP Senators Opposing DOGE Cuts

President Trump on Thursday night threatened to withhold endorsements from any Republican senators who oppose his $9.4 billion "DOGE" rescissions package targeting foreign aid and leftist public broadcasting outlets. This is setting the stage for a weekend showdown between the White House and GOP holdouts ahead of a planned vote next week. 

"It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together," Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social, using a hilarious nickname for MSNBC.

Trump added: "Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement." 

The proposal would codify some DOGE spending cuts, effectively asking lawmakers to reverse funding they had previously approved. Trump's pressure campaign is centered on Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who are seeking to amend the package to preserve federal funding for AIDS treatment in Africa and public broadcasting.

The GOP can only afford to lose support from three senators before requiring Vice President JD Vance to cast a tie-breaking vote on the bill. 

Set to expire on July 18 if Congress fails to act, the bill would claw back $8.3 billion from foreign aid programs and eliminate $1.1 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. It also targets USAID and agencies like the U.S. Institute of Peace—institutions that the president signed an executive order earlier this year to dismantle.  

The House approved the bill last month, but it was sidelined in recent weeks as the GOP focused on passing Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill." Now, the Senate is set to vote on DOGE cuts next week.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 13:25

Trump Threatens To Pull Endorsements From GOP Senators Opposing DOGE Cuts

President Trump on Thursday night threatened to withhold endorsements from any Republican senators who oppose his $9.4 billion "DOGE" rescissions package targeting foreign aid and leftist public broadcasting outlets. This is setting the stage for a weekend showdown between the White House and GOP holdouts ahead of a planned vote next week. 

"It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together," Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social, using a hilarious nickname for MSNBC.

Trump added: "Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement." 

The proposal would codify some DOGE spending cuts, effectively asking lawmakers to reverse funding they had previously approved. Trump's pressure campaign is centered on Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who are seeking to amend the package to preserve federal funding for AIDS treatment in Africa and public broadcasting.

The GOP can only afford to lose support from three senators before requiring Vice President JD Vance to cast a tie-breaking vote on the bill. 

Set to expire on July 18 if Congress fails to act, the bill would claw back $8.3 billion from foreign aid programs and eliminate $1.1 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. It also targets USAID and agencies like the U.S. Institute of Peace—institutions that the president signed an executive order earlier this year to dismantle.  

The House approved the bill last month, but it was sidelined in recent weeks as the GOP focused on passing Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill." Now, the Senate is set to vote on DOGE cuts next week.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 13:25

Trump To Send $300M In Weapons To Ukraine Drawn From Pentagon Reserves

For the first time, President Donald Trump is set to use his authority to send weapons directly to Ukraine from Pentagon reserves, Reuters reports, citing two sources familiar with the matter, after last week's brief halt in shipments and now subsequent reversal.

Until now, the Trump administration had only transferred arms that were previously approved during Biden's prior term. Trump is likely to use the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), which enables the president to quickly provide military aid in 'emergencies', despite long-running fears that America could lack for key military hardware if fighting its own wars against a major power, Reuters says. It remains that the US hasn't fought a direct war with a 'great power' in quite some time, going back the WW2-era.

US Air Force

Trump on Tuesday indicated he would send more weapons to Ukraine amid intensifying Russian advances and aerial strikes, after the prior week saw hundreds of drones sent nightly.

"More than three years after Russia's invasion of its neighbor, Trump's team will identify arms from U.S. stockpiles to send to Ukraine under the Presidential Drawdown Authority, the sources said, with one saying they could be worth around $300 million," Reuters reports.

This is expected to include Patriot air defense missiles and medium-range rockets, which is somewhat surprising and alarming given the amount of Patriots the Pentagon has just blown through defending Israel, and mid Iranian attacks.

According to the Guardian, "The United States only has about 25% of the Patriot missile interceptors it needs for all of the Pentagon’s military plans after burning through stockpiles in the Middle East in recent months, an alarming depletion that led to the Trump administration freezing the latest transfer of munitions to Ukraine."

And as we noted earlier, US weapons manufacturers can only produce approximately 500 Patriot missiles per year. The US stockpile of air and missile defenses has been drained to aid Ukraine during the war with Russia. Missile interceptors are in short supply in the West.

Trump's fresh (up to) $300 million infusion would reverse Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's decision to pause shipments while a more thorough review can be made, after he expressed wariness of expanding support to Ukraine.

He reportedly made that call without first consulting the president, and the White House earlier this week acted like it was surprised that the pause ever happened. On Wednesday the president was questioned by a reporter as follows:

"Yesterday, you said that you were not sure who ordered the munitions halted to Ukraine. Have you since been able to figure that out?" a reporter asked the president.

"Well, I haven't thought about it, because we're looking at Ukraine right now and munitions, but I have, no I have not gone into it," he said.

The reporter followed up by asking, "What does it say that such a big decision could be made inside your government without you knowing?"

"I would know if a decision was made, I will know," Trump stressed. "I'll be the first to know. In fact, most likely I'd give the order, but I haven't done that yet."

Trump used to criticise Biden for sending weapons to Ukraine. Now, the Trump administration is making excuses for a brief halt to weapons supplies. "America First" is long gone pic.twitter.com/EYNiHOY94w

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) July 10, 2025

Such obfuscation could be the result of rising anger among Trump's base concerning the policy U-turn. Trump voters have wondered how keeping up the flow of massive monetary and defense aid to Ukraine is 'America first'.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 12:05

T-Mobile Scraps DEI Programs To Better Align With Trump Admin Policies

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

T-Mobile officially scrapped its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs to better align itself with the Trump administration’s policies, it has confirmed.

In a letter to FCC Chair Brendan Carr, T-Mobile executive Mark Nelson said the wireless carrier had made some “adjustments” to ensure its policies and practices “maintain close alignment with our values” and are “responsive to the direction you’ve provided.”

“For the last several years, we have described some aspects of our company culture and practices as aligned with ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI),” Nelson wrote.

“Our primary intention always was to create a culture that makes employees feel supported and therefore able to bring their best to the company.”

Nelson said the mobile carrier believes that “skills, aptitude, and a growth mindset are what contribute to exceptional performance—and that merit is how you advance at our company, regardless of who you are or where you’re from.”

The company recognizes, however, that the “legal and policy landscape” surrounding DEI under federal law has changed, and it remains “fully committed to ensuring that T-Mobile does not have any policies or practices that enable invidious discrimination, whether in fulfillment of DEI or any other purpose,” he wrote.

To that end, T-Mobile is ending DEI-related policies “not just in name but in substance,” according to Nelson.

The company will no longer have any individual roles or teams focused on DEI, and is redirecting the “handful” of employees who had previously focused on DEI within its human resources department to employee culture and engagement.

It is also removing any references to DEI on its websites, future communications, and employee training materials, Nelson said.

In addition, Nelson said the company will not take part in recognition surveys that “focus on employees’ protected characteristics.”

Nelson also noted that the company informed the FCC earlier this year that it was eliminating specific targets or goals for “diverse spend” in its procurement policies.

He said state regulators have required T-Mobile to set “non-binding goals” for spending with suppliers that are “owned by particular demographic groups, and federal policy has promoted consideration of suppliers’ diversity characteristics.”

Though the goals weren’t requirements, the wireless carrier has changed its supplier diversity program to a supplier development program that “focuses on small businesses and not specifically on suppliers whose owners identify with a particular race, sex, sexual orientation, or other protected characteristic,” he said.

“I appreciate the chance to explain how our values complement your commitment to promoting excellence and merit, expanding free speech and expression, and ensuring workplaces are free of invidious forms of discrimination,” Nelson concluded the letter.

President Donald Trump has issued multiple executive orders aimed at ending DEI policies and programs since taking office as part of efforts to ensure every person is treated with “equal dignity and respect” and that federal funding is spent properly.

Carr welcomed the move from T-Mobile in a statement on social media platform X, calling it “another good step forward for equal opportunity, nondiscrimination and the public interest.”

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, a Democrat, criticized T-Mobile’s decision, writing on X, “In yet another cynical bid to win FCC regulatory approval, T-Mobile is making a mockery of its professed commitment to eliminating discrimination, promoting fairness, and amplifying underrepresented voices.”

T-Mobile is awaiting FCC approval for its $4.4 billion deal to buy almost all of regional carrier U.S. Cellular’s wireless operations, including its customers, stores, and 30 percent of its spectrum licenses and spectrum leases.

In a May 2024 statement, T-Mobile said it expected the transaction to close by the middle of 2025.

The FCC is also looking at T-Mobile’s plan to establish a joint venture with the global investment firm KKR to acquire a 50 percent stake in the internet service provider Metronet.

T-Mobile said in a July 2024 statement that it would invest $4.9 billion for the stake, along with 100 percent of Metronet’s residential fiber retail operations and customers.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 11:45

From BofA:

Since our last weekly publication, our 2Q GDP tracking is down two-tenths to 2.3% q/q saar. [July 11th estimate]
emphasis added

From Goldman:

[W]e have lowered our Q2 GDP tracking estimate by 0.6pp to +3.0% (quarter-over-quarter annualized). Our Q2 domestic final sales estimate stands at +0.7%. [July 3rd estimate]

And from the Atlanta Fed: GDPNow

The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2025 is 2.6 percent on July 9, unchanged from July 3 after rounding. After this morning's wholesale trade report from the US Census Bureau, the nowcast of second-quarter real residential fixed investment growth decreased from -6.4 percent to -6.5 percent, while the nowcast of the contribution of inventory investment to annualized second-quarter real GDP growth decreased from -2.13 percentage points to -2.15 percentage points. [July 9th estimate]

The 'Count Dooku' Of Austrian Economics Faces 'Anakin' Murphy

Mises Institute Jedi Bob “Anakin” Murphy finally faced his nemesis: George Mason University’s David Beckworth, deemed the “Count Dooku” of Austrian Economics by Bob for Beckworth’s apprenticeship under Misesian scholars and subsequent drift into mainstream circles. 

They waged battle at last night’s ZeroHedge debate on the question: Should we abolish the Federal Reserve?

Whether this was the first Dooku-Skywalker battle in which Anakin loses his arm or the second where Dooku loses his head — you’ll have to decide. Below were the highlights for those short on time and listen to the full debate on X or Spotify:

“Lender of last resort”

Beckworth believes the lender of last resort function is necessary but advocated for "some kind of federal facility, something that's approved by Congress… shifting the burden of being the lender of last resort or the bailouts to the federal government as opposed to the Federal Reserve.”

Murphy criticized the Fed’s motives during the GFC, arguing the ‘lender-of-last-resort’ principle was merely a pretext. He noted the irony that “right when they were saying all this stuff and buying the so-called ‘toxic assets’ is when the Fed started paying banks to not make loans to their customers,” referring to the introduction of interest on reserves in October 2008. Pretext aside… Murphy contended an omnipresent lender is not healthy: it “short-circuited” the necessary “cleansing process” of the market and resulted in favoritism rather than democratized crisis response: “Lehman goes down, others get saved.”

pic.twitter.com/0BRaTV6tJy

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) July 11, 2025

But who will finance the wars?

Murphy: “Making it harder for your government to take your people into war is actually a good thing. It's not a negative.”

Acknowledging that total elimination the Fed would be difficult, Murphy nonetheless insisted it is more realistic than reforming such a corrupt institution and could be possible with enough public will. “Once it was gone… it wouldn’t be there anymore” and will be a lot harder to reinstate.

Relying on minor reformations and trusting the benevolence of central bankers to self-restrain — Murphy argued — us naive: “Let's just be practical. These are some of the most powerful people on planet earth that have access to printing presses.”

pic.twitter.com/YBrrfJxdW6

— ZeroHedge Debates (@zerohedgeDebate) July 11, 2025

**

Listen to the full debate below:

https://t.co/ujhMe5XPu5

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 10, 2025

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 11:25

Education Department To Resume Interest Accrual On 7.7 Million Student Loan Borrowers

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Department of Education announced it will restart interest accrual for student-loan borrowers in the Saving on Valuable Education (SAVE) plan, starting from Aug. 1, according to a July 9 Education Department (ED) statement.

Launched in 2023 by the Biden administration, the SAVE plan calculated student loan payments based on the individual’s income and family size. The plan prevents interest from getting accrued, brings loan payments for those who earn less than $32,800 annually to zero per month, while providing early forgiveness for low-balance borrowers.

In June last year, a federal court blocked parts of the SAVE plan. As a result, student loan borrowers enrolled in the plan had their loans put in forbearance with a zero percent interest rate. The SAVE plan was struck down as illegal by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in February.

In April, a federal court issued an injunction to implement the decision made by the appeals court. The latest action by the ED was taken in order to comply with the court injunction.

The department will start charging interest rates from Aug. 1. The interest will not be assessed retroactively, the department said.

Interest will begin accruing from Aug. 1, when borrowers under the SAVE plan will see their loan balances grow. And when the SAVE forbearance period ends, borrowers will have to start making repayments on the loan, including the accrued interest, according to the ED.

Starting July 10, the department will begin direct outreach to 7.7 million borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan, providing instruction on how to move to a legal repayment plan.

“For years, the Biden administration used so-called ‘loan forgiveness’ promises to win votes, but federal courts repeatedly ruled that those actions were unlawful,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.

“Congress designed these programs to ensure that borrowers repay their loans, yet the Biden administration tried to illegally force taxpayers to foot the bill instead.”

“Since day one of the Trump Administration, we’ve focused on strengthening the student loan portfolio and simplifying repayment to better serve borrowers.

“As part of this effort, the Department urges all borrowers in the SAVE Plan to quickly transition to a legally compliant repayment plan–such as the Income-Based Repayment Plan. Borrowers in SAVE cannot access important loan benefits and cannot make progress toward loan discharge programs authorized by Congress.”

In its last days in office, the Biden administration forgave more than $600 million for 4,550 borrowers under the income-based payment plans.

“The Administration leaves office having approved a cumulative $188.8 billion in forgiveness for 5.3 million borrowers across 33 executive actions,” an ED statement said at the time. It has since been taken down.

The Biden administration’s zero percent “litigation forbearance” forced American taxpayers to foot the bill, while leaving borrowers without clear direction on how to legally repay their loans, the Education Department said in its latest statement, adding that the Trump administration will support borrowers in selecting a new, legal repayment plan.

The Biden administration announced the SAVE Plan just weeks after the Supreme Court blocked the Education Department from unilaterally waiving federal student loans.

According to the ED, 42.7 million borrowers currently owe $1.6 trillion in student debt.

“Only 38 percent of borrowers are in repayment and current on their student loans,” the ED said in April.

“Most of the remaining borrowers are either delinquent on their payments, in an interest-free forbearance, or in an interest-free deferment. A small percentage of borrowers are in a six-month grace period or in-school.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/11/2025 - 11:05



 

 

This week, I speak with Richard Bernstein, CEO and Chief Investment Officer of Richard Bernstein Advisors, which manages or advises on $15.7B in AUM focusing on Macro trends rather than individual stock selection. Rich has over 35 years′ experience on Wall Street, was slected for Institutional Investor’s “All-America Research Team” 18times, and was inducted into the Institutional Investor “Hall of Fame.” Previously, he was the Chief Investment Strategist at Merrill Lynch.

He explains why he always expects the S&P500 to be “+10%” regardless of how bearish the macro elements are.

He also discussed why he left Merrill Lynch in 2009 when he flipped bullish. Short version: The sales force, with the GFC still fresh in the minds, were unmoveably bearish.

A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Neil Dutta, head of the economic research team at Renaissance Macro Research. Previously, he was Senior Economist NA at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch under Ethan Harris and David Rosenberg. He has a history of making successful contrarian calls, including calling for no recession in 2022, and warning that the FOMC would raise rates aggressively in 2022. He is now expecting a mild recession late 2025/26.

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Richard Bernstein, CEO / CIO of RBA appeared first on The Big Picture.