The 28th Amendment: Is It Time For A New Amendment On The Meaning Of Citizenship?

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

“Well, it’s a new world. It’s the same Constitution.”

Those words from Chief Justice John Roberts during this week’s oral arguments signaled that the conservative justices are unlikely to reject birthright citizenship. Of course, nothing is certain until this summer when the Court issues its opinion in Trump v. Barbara. However, we need to consider the need for a 28th Amendment to reaffirm the meaning of citizenship.

As some of us stressed before the oral argument, the odds were against the administration prevailing in the case, given more than a century of countervailing precedent.

There are good-faith arguments against reading the 14th Amendment as supporting citizenship for any child born in this country.

It is doubtful that the drafters of the 14th Amendment could have envisioned millions of births to illegal aliens. They surely did not imagine foreigners coming to this country for the purpose of giving birth — or even, without ever entering the U.S., contracting multiple U.S. residents to carry babies to term for them as surrogates.

The historical record is highly conflicted. Some drafters expressly denied that they intended for birthright citizenship to be covered by the 14th Amendment.

The rampant abuse in this country and the widespread rejection of birthright citizenship by other countries (including some that once followed it) did not seem to impress the conservative justices. Roberts’s statement was in response to Solicitor General John Sauer’s argument that “We’re in a new world now … where eight billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who’s a U.S. citizen.”

Although President Trump has lashed out with personal attacks on the conservative justices as “disloyal” and “stupid,” they are doing what they are bound by oath to do: apply the law without political favor or interest. I expect most of the justices agree with the vast majority of countries — and the president — that birthright citizenship is a foolish and harmful policy. But they are not legislators; they are jurists tasked with constitutional interpretation.

Trump appointed three principled justices to the court. To their (and to his) credit, Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett have proven that they are driven by the underlying law, not the ultimate outcome of cases.

For conservatives, constitutional interpretations offer less leeway than their liberal colleagues or believers in the “living constitution.” If you believe in continually updating the Constitution from the bench to meet contemporary demands, constitutional language is barely a speed bump on your path to the preferred outcome in any given case.

In my Supreme Court class, I call this a “default case” in which justices tend to run home.  When a record or the law is uncertain, conservative justices tend to avoid expansive, new interpretations. That was precisely what Trump said he wanted in nominees.

These justices are not being “disloyal” to him, but rather loyal to what they view as the meaning of the Constitution. I have at times disagreed with their view of the law, but I have never questioned their integrity.

None of this means we should accept the expected outcome in this case as the final word on birthright citizenship. Justice Robert Jackson once observed that he and his colleagues “are not final because we are infallible, we are infallible because we are final.”

The final word actually rests with the public. We can amend the Constitution to join most of the world in barring birthright citizenship. There is no more important question in a republic than the definition of citizenship.

We are becoming a virtual mockery as we watch millions game the birthright citizenship system. China alone has hundreds of tourism firms that have made fortunes in arranging for Chinese citizens to come to U.S. territory to give birth and then return home.

No republic can last without controlling its borders and the qualifications for citizenship. We have allowed U.S. citizenship to become a mere commodity for the most affluent or unscrupulous among us.

The combination of open borders and open-ended citizenship can be an existential threat to this Republic. It is not that we cannot absorb millions of births, but rather that no republic can retain its core identity without more clearly defining and controlling the meaning of being a citizen.

The U.S. is and will remain a nation of immigrants. We welcome lawful immigrants who come to this country to embrace our values and our common identity. But being a nation of immigrants does not mean that we are a nation of chumps.

In my book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I discuss the foundations of our republic and the world’s fascination with it. After our Revolution, one leading Frenchman known as John Hector St. John wrote a popular book that asked: “What then is the American, this new man?”

The answer to that question was obvious at our founding. We were the world’s first true enlightenment revolution — a republic founded on natural rights that came not from the government but God. We did not have a shared bond of land, culture, religion, or history. We were a people founded on a legacy of ideas; a people joined by common articles of faith in natural, unalienable rights.

The question is whether we can answer St. John’s challenge today. “What then is this American” if citizenship can be based on as little as a tourist visa or an illegal crossing?

There would be no better time to reaffirm the meaning of citizenship than the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence. Roberts is correct: “It is the same Constitution” that created this republic, but we are the same people vested with the responsibility, as Benjamin Franklin put it, “to keep it.”

It is time to reclaim both the Constitution and our common identity. As a free people joined by a common faith in natural rights, it is our own birthright.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

* * * ZeroHedge Store Top Sellers (rolling 7 days)

• IQ Creatine (almost out, not gonna link to it)

• ReadyWise 7-Day Emergency Food Supply Grab Bag (spring sale almost over)

• IQ Brain Rescue - critical maintenance for ongoing cognitive support

• ZeroHedge Coffee - Dark Roast (Organic Heirloom, no mold, bold, legit)

• ZeroHedge Waxed Canvas Hat

Thank you for your support!

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 10:15

Prices Jump, Employment Dumps As US ISM Services Disappoints In March

The last six months or so has seen S&P Global's and ISM's Services PMI surveys diverge dramatically (former at three year lows, latter near four year highs).

But, following S&P Global's Services PMI plunge into contraction in March, ISM's Services PMI actually 'agreed' and fell also (but only modestly) from 56.1 to 54.0 (still in expansion but worse than the expected 54.9)...

Source: Bloomberg

Under the hood it was a very mixed bag with a surge in New Orders (highest since Feb 2023 - good), but a simultaneous spike in Prices Paid (highest since August 2022 - bad), and a sudden plunge in Employment (weakest since Dec 2023 - ugly)...

Thirteen industries reported growth in March, one fewer than in February, and the number reporting contraction remained at three. 

“The PMI survey data show the US economy buckling under the strain of rising prices and intensifying uncertainty, as the war in the Middle East exacerbates existing concerns regarding other policy decisions in recent months, notably with respect to tariffs," said Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence.

Something for everyone in this report - doves will focus on slowing growth and tumbling employment; hawks on the continued expansion and spiking prices. For now, the market is undecided with rate-change odds flat.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 10:06

Stockman Warns This Is Not Your Grandfather's Stagflation

Authored by David Stockman via The Brownstone Institute,

It was pretty obvious even before February 28th that the US economy was grinding to a halt, even as inflation was already working up a head of steam. But then came war. 

We are going to get a globe-shaking economic conflagration erupting from the void that was the Persian Gulf commodity fountain. That includes between 20% and 50% of all the basic commodities that drive global GDP, including crude oil, LPGs, LNG, ammonia, urea, sulfur, helium, and sundry more.

Accordingly, the global share of crucial industrial commodities that now stand in harm’s way. This includes both those directly transiting the Strait of Hormuz and also the share of supply from the wider Middle Eastern region that is also exposed to the current Iranian War disruptions but is delivered by pipeline, train, or alternative waterways like the Red Sea/Suez Canal route.

This ballooning dislocation of daily global commodity flows will have a double whammy effect: It will both cause production and output to fall immediately in response to soaring input costs or limited availability... even as it encourages the central banks to “help” by printing more inflationary money.

This all adds up to a bout of classic stagflation, but it is not going to be merely the mildly painful type that unfolded during the 1970s. After all, despite a 120% rise in the price level during the decade, it wasn’t a total wipeout when measured from the vantage point of real median family income.

As it happened, the 1970s stagflation came on the heels of what had been an actual Golden Age by the standards of history between 1954 and 1969. During that period, real median family incomes rose from $39,700 to $66,870 or by a robust 3.53% per annum.

Of course, that uphill march of Main Street prosperity slowed sharply during the inflationary 1970s, but the blue line in the chart below did at least keep drifting higher. So between 1969 and 1980, real median family incomes grew by a not very impressive 0.61% per annum, but the direction of travel was still higher.

Real Median Family Income, 1954 to 1980

But here’s the thing. The US economy of the 1970s was able to cope with the pressures of high inflation, oil, and other commodity shocks and the stop-and-go disruptions of a Federal Reserve that had been newly released from the disciplinary effects of the Bretton Woods gold standard. In large part that was because the aggregate level of debt on the US economy was relatively modest.

Total public and private debt in 1970 stood at $1.5 trillion, representing just 147% of GDP, as shown in the graph below. Moreover, the latter was the long-time national leverage ratio (total debt divided by national income) through historic times of thick and thin, going all the way back to 1870.

Moreover, even after the large government deficits of the 1970s and a surge of inflation-driven private borrowing during the decade, total US debt stood at $4.6 trillion by 1980. That was just 162% of GDP.

In a word, the US economy during this decade of stagflation was battered by unprecedented peacetime inflation, but it was not yet smothered by crushing debt. As shown by the graph, the soaring national leverage ratio did not really leap skyward until after the mid-1980s, when Alan Greenspan took the helm at the Fed and launched the US (and the world) into a four-decade spree of money-printing and what amounts to Keynesian central banking.

As a consequence, total public and private debt is in a wholly different zip code today. Debt outstanding now totals nearly $108 trillion and weighs in at 343% of national income (GDP). That is to say, as we head into the next stagflationary era, the US economy will be carrying two turns of extra debt relative to income than was the case in 1970.

That does make a difference. The national leverage ratio during the 1970s averaged about 153% of GDP, meaning that had it been maintained since then total debt outstanding would now be $48 trillion. As it is, however, the actual leverage ratio currently stands at 342% of GDP and outstanding debt totals nearly $108 trillion.

So the math tells you all you need to know. The US economy is now lugging $60 trillion more debt than would be the case if the 1970s average national leverage ratio had been maintained. And even at a weighted average 5% interest rate across all sectors of the economy, that’s $3 trillion per year of more interest expense and therefore less cash flow available for investment and discretionary spending.

US Total Leverage Ratio: Debt-to-GDP, 1954 to 2025

Of course, Keynesian money printers and statists say “No sweat,” and view debt as a growth elixir rather than a burden on commerce and supply side output. But we beg to disagree, and strenuously so.

The empirical results tell you otherwise. For instance, real economic growth (final sales of domestic product) averaged 3.92% per annum during the 1954 to 1970 era when the national leverage rate was at or below its historical 150% norm. By contrast, since the pre-crisis peak in Q4 2007, real growth has slowed to just 1.97%.

That’s right. The trend growth rate has been reduced by fully 50% after the economy-wide leverage ratio shot the moon during the last 35 years.

Moreover, in the case of the industrial core of the US economy, the growth rate has not just slowed; it has actually come to a screeching halt.

Thus, between 1954 and 1969, the industrial production index rose by a robust 4.5% per annum. During the years since the debt-fueled financial crisis of 2008, however, there has been no growth at all in the industrial sector of the US economy.

On a net basis, the combined output of the manufacturing, utilities, mining, and energy sectors has amounted to one big fat goose egg.

Industrial Production Index, 1953 to 2025

So the question recurs. Why did we get so much debt and so little real growth after the Fed went full-on Keynesian under Greenspan and his heirs and assigns?

The answer is actually not that mysterious. The explosion of debt from $1.5 trillion to $108 trillion during the 55 years since 1970 happened not because consumers, businesses, and government suddenly became infected with a voracious appetite for debt, but because the central bank falsified its price via endless financial repression and pegging yields far below their natural free market clearing levels.

At the same time, the “cheap” debt that landed on US balance sheets did not go into a huge surge in productive investment, but instead fueled decades of financial asset inflation, leveraged speculation, and financial engineering in the corporate sector. The net result was malinvestment and wasted capital, labor, and other economic resources on an epic scale.

For instance, if the dramatic increase in the national leverage ratio since the heyday of prosperity during the 1950s and 1960s had actually gone into productive uses, it would necessarily have shown up in its counterpart—the national investment rate.

But no cigar there, of course. In fact, the 8% of GDP investment ratio (business capex and housing) has now dropped to just 4%. That is to say, all of the incremental borrowing went into government spending, current consumption, and financial asset inflation, not productive assets capable of generating future contributions to growth and living standards.

Net Investment % of GDP: 1947 to 2025

This brings us to the impending stagflation. As it was prior to February 28th, real output growth had already stalled. According to the real GDP statistics, growth between Q4 2025 and Q4 2025 posted at just 1.78%. But virtually all of that was due to the AI bubble-driven massive increase in spending for data centers and other AI infrastructure.

This massive diversion of capital was not owing to an overpowering use case for AI or the fact of superior returns on AI investments. In fact, there has been virtually no return on AI assets at all, with the surge of capital spending amounting essentially to a new version of “Build it and they will come.”

But after February 28th and Trump’s initiation of a war in the Persian Gulf that can’t be won and which will send the global economy into a tailspin like nothing seen since the mid-1970s, we are truly off to the stagflationary races.

Energy and fuel costs have already soared. Most importantly, the workhorse hydrocarbon of the US economy—diesel fuels used by the nation’s massive fleet of trucks, rail, and farm tractors—is already above its 2022 level at $5.40 per gallon and still climbing.

Likewise, on the very eve of the planting season fertilizer costs have already doubled, meaning that application rates will be cut back, yields will fall, and food prices will be soaring by the 4th of July when the USDA crop condition reports pretty much forecast the fall production levels.

And, of course, no one took into account that the natural gas processing plants of Qatar were fastened at the hip to the semiconductor plants in South Korea and Taiwan and from there to the entire manufacturing sector of the world. All of this through the life line of helium gas extracted from natural processing plants.

In short, these soaring commodity prices are going to push the inflation indices higher, even as industrial output contracts owing to rising costs and limited availability. Labor markets are frozen as much as they were in the depth of lockdowns from April 2020, while new home sales are evaporating. 

That’s stagflation by any other name, but this time the Fed will not be in a position to do much about either inflation or recessionary pressures.

The inflation genie is now out of the bottle but the Fed can not really slam on the brakes ala Volcker because the US economy is staggering under $60 trillion of incremental debt.

At the same time, the war and the erupting commodity inflation cycle it has engendered means that it can’t turn on the printing presses to “stimulate,” either.

So, as we said: This is not your grandfather’s Stagflation. Not by a long shot.

Reprinted from Stockman’s private service

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 09:50

Key Events This Week: CPI, PCE, Durable, FOMC Minutes And More

In addition to Iran war developments, this week’s economic calendar will focus on the inflation side of the Fed’s dual mandate following a solid March employment report. The key data releases this week are the February durable goods report on Tuesday, the February PCE report on Thursday, and the March CPI report on Friday. Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson will deliver a speech on the economic outlook on Tuesday. The minutes to the FOMC’s March meeting will be released on Wednesday. 

Briefly recapping the latest employment data, both headline (+178k vs. -133k) and private (+186 vs. -129k) payrolls far exceeded consensus expectations. To be sure, the rebound from strike- and weather-related weakness in February payrolls was somewhat  less impressive due to the downtick in average hourly earnings (+0.2% vs. +0.4%) and hours worked (34.2hrs vs. 34.3hrs). The same can be said of the surprise decline in the unemployment rate (4.26% vs. 4.44%), which was largely a function of a 332k decline in unemployment, as well as a 64k drop in employment lowering the labor force participation rate by a tenth to 61.9%. Indeed, some of the strength in the March payroll gains likely came at the expense of April given the early Easter Holiday date (April 5). Averaging through the Q1 employment reports, headline (68k) and private (79k) payroll gains are tracking up from their six-month averages of +15k and 52k, respectively. In addition, the Q1 unemployment rate averaged 4.34%, a slight improvement from the six-month average of 4.395%. In addition, Q1 ADP private employment gains averaged 46k – in line with their six-month average of 45k. Lastly, jobless claims have been stable with initial claims, on average, down 3.8% from Q1 2025 and continuing claims down 0.9%. In short, the picture that Fed officials should be getting of the labor market – at least prior to the latest geopolitical developments – is one of stability, albeit at uncomfortably low levels of activity driven by a combination of supply and demand factors.

Turning to the week ahead, it’s sparse on the Fedspeak calendar: the only scheduled appearances by Fed officials are on Tuesday, when Vice Chair Jefferson and Chicago’s Goolsbee are set to give speeches on the economic and monetary policy outlook. We have heard from both officials recently, so we will be most focused on how they have internalized last Friday’s stronger-than-expected jobs report into their expectations for monetary policy. We expect that the latest data, particularly the decline in the unemployment rate to 4.26%, will reinforce the notion that the Fed is in wait-and-see mode and that risks to the two sides of the dual mandate have come into much closer balance – if they aren’t already balanced.

The key highlight of this week’s data docket will be Friday’s March CPI where the impact of the largest energy supply shock since the 1970s will certainly be on full display. Deutsche Bank's expectations are for a roughly 25% increase in gasoline prices to yield a 0.95% monthly gain in headline CPI (vs. +0.27% in February), well above the bank's forecast for the gains in core (+0.33% vs. +0.22%).

Should DB's forecasts hit the mark, year-over-year rates for both would increase, the former from 2.4% to 3.4% and the latter from 2.5% to 2.7%. Shorter-run trends in core would also pick up under our forecast, with the three-month annualized rate rising from 3.0% to 3.4% and the six-month rate gaining three-tenths to 2.6%. In terms of the subcomponents, look for further signs of tariff-related price pressures on the goods side, particularly in apparel. Unlike prior months when declines in used car and truck prices helped to mask tariff-related increases in other core goods, this month should see lagged gains in wholesale used car prices feeding through and adding to CPI. On the services side, our focus will be on any potential bleed-through from higher gasoline prices into core, particularly from airline fares and delivery services.

Thursday’s February personal income (+0.3% vs. +0.4%) and consumption (+0.5% vs. +0.4%) release will provide monetary policymakers a snapshot of where the trend in core PCE inflation (+0.39% vs. +0.36%) stood on the eve of the Iran war. If our February forecast for the core PCE deflator – the Fed’s preferred inflation metric – is close to the mark, the three-month annualized rate will rise by 80bps to 4.5%, the six-month annualized trend will rise by 40bps to 3.5%, though the year-over-year rate should slip by a tenth to 3.00%. To be sure, some of the recent deterioration in the short-term core PCE inflation trends is due to outsized strength in some volatile goods categories. However, we expect “supercore” services inflation (+0.3% vs. +0.4%) to remain elevated in year-over-year terms (+3.3% vs. +3.5%). Indeed, supercore PCE inflation has shown virtually no improvement over the past five quarters and remains firmly above its 20-year
average of 2.7%.

Other data points this week will provide insights into business and consumer attitudes, as well as inform Q1 GDP forecasts. Monday’s services ISM (54.5 vs. 56.1) and Friday’s preliminary University of Michigan consumer sentiment (51.1 vs. 53.3) could be depressed by the latest geopolitical developments. However, the inflation components of the aforementioned surveys will likely garner more attention than the headline readings – in particular, the University of Michigan survey where we are likely to see one-year and longer run inflation expectations rise noticeably on the back of the surge in gasoline prices. While monetary policymakers would typically look through upticks in inflation driven by temporary supply shocks, that assumes that inflation expectations are well anchored. Given that the Fed has been missing on its inflation goal for the better part of the last five years, officials are acutely concerned about further increases in inflation expectations. Note that University of Michigan one-year and 5-10 year inflation expectations averaged 3.7% and 3.3%, respectively, in Q1 – roughly 40bps and 50bps above their 20-year averages (though some of that increase is due to a change in methodology).

Tuesday’s durable goods orders (-0.3% headline, +0.6% ex-transportation, +0.4% core), Thursday’s final print on Q4 real GDP (+0.7% final vs. +0.7% preliminary), as well as the above-mentioned February income/consumption release, will all inform the market's Q1 real GDP growth forecast (currently 2.8% annualized). To be sure, the US economy is dealing with several cross currents at present and it is simply too early to determine the net impact on the broader outlook for growth this year. As Chair Powell noted at his March FOMC press conference, “a number of people mentioned, if we were ever going to skip an SEP, this would be a good one because we just don't know.”

This week will also feature the minutes to the March FOMC meeting. As a reminder, at that meeting, the Fed held rates steady and the key elements were in line with expectations. In particular, the dot plot showed the median unchanged at one rate cut for this year and the long-run dot rose slightly to 3.1%. While Powell’s messaging skewed hawkish on inflation, he did not actively push for a balanced description of the policy outlook. DB's takeaway was that rate cuts may be less likely but are still more likely than hikes. Within the minutes, expect to hear continued hawkish signals, with some officials pushing for more balanced language around the policy outlook, including with some openness to the potential to raise rates, as we saw in January.

The key economic data releases this week are the February durable goods report on Tuesday, the February PCE report on Thursday, and the March CPI report on Friday. Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson will deliver a speech on the economic outlook on Tuesday. The minutes to the FOMC’s March meeting will be released on Wednesday. 

Here is a day by day summary of key events, courtesy of Goldman

Monday, April 6 

• 10:00 AM ISM services index, March (GS 54.5, consensus 54.9, last 56.1); We estimate that the ISM services index declined 1.6pt to 54.5 in March, reflecting convergence to our non-manufacturing survey tracker (which declined by 0.5pt to 51.8).

Tuesday, April 7 

• 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, February preliminary (GS -5.0%, consensus -1.0%, last flat); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, February preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.4%); Core capital goods orders, February preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.5%, last +0.1%); Core capital goods shipments, February preliminary (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.4%, last -0.1%): We estimate that durable goods orders declined by 5% in the preliminary February report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted), reflecting a decline in commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.5% increase in core capital goods orders and a 0.4% increase in core capital goods shipments—the latter reflecting the rise in orders in recent months.
• 12:35 PM Chicago Fed President Goolsbee (FOMC non-voter) speaks: Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee will take part in a moderated Q&A on the economy and monetary policy at the Economic Club of Detroit. Moderated Q&A is expected. On April 2nd, Goolsbee said that “if [the recent increase in oil prices] is an extended increase in costs, it’d be a pretty tough supply shock for the US economy.” He also noted that the high salience of energy price increases could increase inflation expectations, which “will potentially put us into a tougher spot still.”
• 05:50 PM Fed Vice Chair Jefferson speaks: Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson will deliver a speech on the economic outlook at the University of Detroit. Text and audience Q&A are expected. On March 26th, Jefferson said that “the increase in energy prices to date should have relatively modest effects on inflation, though consumers are seeing higher gas prices at the pump now.” He also noted that “an extended bout of elevated energy prices could put upward pressure on a variety of other products.” Jefferson said he continued to see “our current policy stance as appropriately positioned to allow us to assess how the economy evolves.”

Wednesday, April 8 

• 02:00 PM FOMC meeting minutes, March 17-18 meeting: The minutes to the FOMC’s March meeting will be released on Wednesday. The FOMC left the policy rate unchanged at 3.5-3.75% at the March meeting, and the median participant continued to project one cut in each of 2026 and 2027. We saw the meeting as a bit hawkish because only one participant dissented in favor of a cut and Powell expressed a bit less concern about the labor market than at previous meetings but took the risk from the oil price shock to inflation seriously.

 Thursday, April 9 

• 08:30 AM Personal income, February (GS +0.4%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.4%); Personal spending, February (GS +0.6%, consensus +0.6%, last +0.4%); Core PCE price index, February (GS +0.32%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.4%); Core PCE price index (YoY), February (GS +2.93%, consensus +3.0%, last +3.1%); PCE price index, February (GS +0.34%, consensus +0.4%, last +0.3%); PCE price index (YoY), February (GS +2.77%, consensus +2.8%, last +2.8%): We estimate that personal income and spending increased by 0.4% and 0.6%, respectively, in February. We estimate that the core PCE price index rose 0.32% in February, corresponding to a year-over-year rate of +2.93%. Additionally, we expect that the headline PCE price index increased 0.34% in February, or increased 2.77% from a year earlier.
• 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended April 4 (GS 210k, consensus 210k, last 202k); Continuing jobless claims, week ended March 28 (consensus 1,833k, last 1,841k)
• 08:30 AM GDP, Q4 third release (GS +0.8%, consensus +0.7%, last +0.7%); Personal consumption, Q4 third release (GS +2.1%, consensus +2.0%, last +2.0%): We estimate a 0.1pp upward revision to Q4 GDP growth to +0.8% (quarter-over-quarter annualized), reflecting an upward revision to consumer spending (+0.1pp to +2.1%) and stronger residential investment.

Friday, April 10 

• 08:30 AM CPI (MoM), March (GS +0.87%, consensus +1.0%, last +0.3%); Core CPI (MoM), March (GS +0.28%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.2%); CPI (YoY), March (GS +3.28%, consensus +3.4%, last +2.4%); Core CPI (YoY), March (GS +2.69%, consensus +2.7%, last +2.5%): We estimate a 0.28% increase in March core CPI (month-over-month SA), which would raise the year-over-year rate to 2.69%. We expect mixed autos inflation, reflecting a 1% increase in used car prices, unchanged new car prices, and a 0.1% increase in the car insurance category. We forecast a benign 0.20% increase in the rent category, reflecting a continued slowdown in its underlying trend, but an acceleration to 0.30% in the OER category, reflecting upward pressure from the unwind of an unusually soft reading six months prior. We expect increases in the travel services categories (airfares: +4%; hotels: +0.5%), reflecting the signals from alternative price data. We expect upward pressure from tariffs on categories that are particularly exposed (such as recreation) worth +0.03pp. We estimate a 0.87% rise in headline CPI—reflecting higher food prices (+0.3%) and sharply higher energy prices (+9.4%)—which would raise the year-over-year rate to +3.28% from +2.43%.
• 10:00 AM Factory orders, February (GS -0.1%, consensus -0.2%, last +0.1%)
• 10:00 AM University of Michigan consumer sentiment, April preliminary (GS 51.5, consensus 51.8, last 53.3); University of Michigan 5-10-year inflation expectations, April preliminary (GS 3.3%, consensus 3.5%, last 3.2%)

Source: DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 09:40

US Satellite Firm 'Indefinitely Withholds' Iran War Images Per Government Request

Authored by Alan Mosley via AntiWar.com,

Planet Labs says it will "indefinitely withhold" satellite visuals of Iran and the wider Middle East war zone after a request from the US government and the Trump administration. In an email to customers, the firm said it is shifting to a "managed distribution" model, releasing imagery only case-by-case for "urgent, mission-critical requirements," or when release is deemed "in the public interest." Planet also said it will withhold imagery dating back to March 9, and it expects the policy to remain in effect until the conflict ends.

On March 6, Planet Labs announced a mandatory 96-hour delay on new imagery collected over the Gulf states, arguing that near-real-time pictures could be exploited to "endanger allied, NATO, and civilian personnel." That measure later expanded into a 14-day delay, described by Planet as an extension of the earlier hold. By March 30, Al Jazeera’s Digital Investigations unit was reporting that independent verification had become harder as commercial providers restricted satellite imagery.

A satellite image shows Iran’s Law Enforcement Command (FARAJA) in Tehran, Iran, March 3, 2026, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran. 2026 Planet Labs PBC/Handout via REUTERS

Satellite imagery matters because, unlike press briefings, it can corroborate damage, assess patterns of targeting, and check narratives that would otherwise be accepted on authority.

Reporting by the Global Investigative Journalism Network describes how open-source teams used satellite imagery and videos to probe contested incidents during this war, quoting Bellingcat's head of research warning that a "two-week delay" slows verification and reduces the certainty investigators can reach while events are still developing. It also quotes the Defense Secretary saying, "Open source is not the place to determine what did or did not happen."

Despite the insinuation that open source investigative journalism is less credible, even mainstream news organizations utilize such tools in their reporting. For example, Reuters has also used satellite imagery in its war coverage, including sharing said imagery and post-strike visuals with a munitions researcher in reporting on the strike on a girls’ school in Minab which killed over 170 people, mostly children. While later reporting added that the strike may have involved outdated targeting intelligence, it is worth noting that the president claimed “without evidence” that Iran was responsible.

One can concede that operational security is real and still recognize that "trust us" is an unsafe substitute for public evidence. In mid-March, the White House claimed Iran’s ballistic-missile capacity was "functionally destroyed," with “complete and total aerial dominance,” while reporting in the same period described continued missile incidents and interceptions. But the Trump administration’s claim of total control over Iranian airspace seems dubious when countered with reports of military losses, such as the downing of multiple aircraft just since the start of April.

Just got this from Planet Labs:

Dear Tyler Rogoway,

Due to the conflict in the Middle East, the U.S. government has requested all satellite imagery providers voluntarily implement an indefinite withhold of imagery in the designated Area of Interest (AOI). Effective… https://t.co/JCJiTodRv0

— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) April 4, 2026

The blackout of satellite imagery from the region is not a story about one firm’s products or customer service. It is a reminder that foreign intervention tends to produce domestic control, often without the drama of a formal censorship order. The same state that wages war can narrow the evidence available to judge that war. The predictable result is that the public is pushed to take the word of the administration’s spokesmen at face value, without timely means to verify or falsify their claims.

* * * Stock up! Four days left...

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 09:30

Trump Admin Appeals Order Halting White House Ballroom Construction, Citing Security Concerns

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

The Trump administration on April 3 appealed a judge’s order to halt construction on a new White House ballroom, elevating security concerns associated with the project.

On March 31, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon issued an order declaring the president lacked the authority to order the $400 million addition on the presidential residence.

Leon’s ruling came as a win for the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, a congressionally chartered nonprofit for the preservation of U.S. monuments and historic sites, which has challenged the White House renovation.

The U.S. National Park Service filed an emergency motion before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on April 3, arguing that halting the construction in progress exposes a construction site with highly sensitive security features.

Beyond simply building an expanded facility to host guests, the National Park Service said the ongoing construction includes the installation of new protective features to withstand attacks from high-powered rifles, drones, missiles, and other unspecified “emerging national-security technologies and threats.”

Supporting the National Park Service in the case, U.S. Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn described the open construction site as a “managed safety hazard” that creates added challenges for the president’s security detail. The National Park Service argued the project should be finished quickly, writing, “Time is of the essence!”

In his ruling enjoining the construction project, Leon said that as president, Trump is the steward of the White House, but not an owner who can do with the residence as he chooses. The district judge wrote that the true authority over federal property rests with Congress, not the president.

In its appeal, however, the National Park Service argued that presidential authority covers security-related renovations at the residence.

“The district court took the erroneous, sweeping view that Congress did not authorize the ballroom construction at the White House—yet correctly allows construction ‘necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House and its grounds, including the ballroom construction site, and provide for the personal safety of the President and his staff,’” the National Park Service wrote.

Leon acknowledged security issues in his March 31 order to halt the construction.

In a separate order, the district judge said construction could not proceed on the development of the ballroom, but left room for the Trump administration to proceed with construction actions “strictly necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House and its grounds, including the ballroom construction site, and provide for the personal safety of the President and his staff.”

Leon’s order calls for a halt to the ballroom construction by April 14.

The district judge’s order of injunction was issued in the same week that the National Capital Planning Commission approved plans for the ballroom construction project.

The commission voted 8–1 in favor of the project, while two commissioners voted present, and another abstained from voting.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 09:10

Iran Rejects Direct US Talks Amid Escalation As Israel Attacks Key Petrochemical Plant At South Pars Gas Field Summary: 

• A Sunday night Axios report on a US-proposed 45-day ceasefire has by Monday morning been rejected by Iran: diplomatic talks are "absolutely incompatible with ultimatums, crimes, and threats to commit war crimes," the Foreign Ministry said.

• Israel strikes large petrochemical plant at South Pars, which is responsible for half of the country’s petrochemical production.

• There's been another extension of what had been a 10-day deadline for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz - a deadline that was initially set to expire on Monday evening. Now Trump says Iran has until 8pm on Tuesday.

• Trump warned Iran on Easter Sunday to 'Open the Fuckin' Strait' or "you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah."

*  *  *

Israel Attacks Petrochemical Plant At South Pars Gas Field

Iranian state media is reporting a Monday attack which targeted the South Pars petrochemical facility in Asaluyeh. "A few minutes ago, the sound of several explosions was heard from the South Pars Petrochemical complex in Asaluyeh," according to the Fars report. Also Tasnim describes an attack on two utilities companies in Assaluyeh which have cut off electricity supply to petrochemical units. The same outlet revealed the following details:

• Petrochemical plants in Asaluyeh, including Jam and Damavand, were targeted.
• Mobin and Damavand companies, which supplied electricity, water, and oxygen to the Assaluyeh petrochemical plants, have been targeted.
• Pars Petrochemical is safe and has not been damaged.

Israel has announced it was behind the attack, per Washington Post. Does this violate Israel's prior pledge to Trump to not take unilateral action against South Pars? This as the threatened major US escalation against vital energy and civilian infrastructure looms:

Israel attacked a key petrochemical plant at Iran’s massive South Pars natural gas field and killed a top Revolutionary Guard commander, putting into question the negotiations aimed at getting the U.S. and Tehran to reach a ceasefire.

Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz confirmed what he called "a powerful strike on the largest petrochemical facility in Iran" that’s responsible for half of the country’s petrochemical production. Israel’s military spokesperson, Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, said there would be “no immunity” for Iran as talks progress.

The Israeli Air Force struck Iran's largest petrochemical facility, the South Pars gas field in Asaluyeh. It has been completely destroyed. pic.twitter.com/Jh3KPDwgh2

— Israel News Pulse (@israelnewspulse) April 6, 2026

In Israel, Iranian missiles have continued to fall at steady pace, with Israel's emergency services reporting that at least 28 impact sites in central Israel on Monday, describing that cluster munitions have resulted in damage. Ramat Gan, Bnei Brak, and Givatayim were struck, and a man in his 40s was "moderately wounded" - according to local reports.

Iran Rejects Any Ceasefire That is Temporary: 'Normalization of War Crimes'

Iran rejected a temporary ceasefire in the US-Israeli war, stating it would give adversaries time to regroup and prepare for continued conflict; however, a foreign ministry statement did not specifically reference the 45-day proposal being reported by Axios.

"We are calling for an end to the war and for preventing its recurrence," foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said, according to Iran’s state news agency IRNA. Analysts have long understood that Tehran's retaliation on Gulf states and Israel has been so fierce because it seeks to deter any potential future attack. Iranian leaders fear that without proper and final resolution, the country will just get attacked again, be it a year from now, or even several years down the road.

The foreign ministry also on Monday stated that Iran has prepared a response to US demands to end the war and will announce it "when necessary," referring to the 15-point list conveyed by Washington to Tehran through Pakistan - which Baghaei reiterated is "extremely excessive and unusual and illogical." He further reminded the world that Tehran has a "very bitter experience of negotiating with the US." The idea of talks at this moment remain "absolutely incompatible with ultimatums, crimes, and threats to commit war crimes," Baghaei continued.

Once again, an avalanche of headlines on 'negotiations' were issued hours before markets open Monday morning...

Separately, Iranian Armed Forces spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaghari stated Monday that if attacks on civilian targets continue, Iran’s retaliation will expand significantly and losses will be "several times greater," according to Tasnim.

Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told his French counterpart on Monday related to Trump's threats to wipe out civilian infrastructure, "This threat amounts to the normalization of war crimes and genocide."

Fresh Axios Report of US-Proposed 45-Day Ceasefire

With a potential globally-catastrophic escalation looming on Tuesday, Middle East mediators are communicating with Iran and the United States about a proposed 45-day ceasefire, Axios reported Sunday evening. The ceasefire is being positioned as the first of a two-phased deal, with the second phase being a negotiated, permanent end to the war that Israel and the United States started with a surprise attack on Feb. 28 amid ongoing negotiations. 

The slim ray of hope comes after President Trump issued a profane, Easter Sunday threat to make life miserable for 90 million Iranians whom he just weeks ago promised to liberate:  "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell."    

How it started vs. how it's going. pic.twitter.com/LNgxOsF5GK

— Brandan P. Buck (@brandan_buck) April 2, 2026

In addition to vitriol, Trump's social media posts also brought an extension of what had been a 10-day deadline for Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz -- a deadline that was initially set to expire on Monday evening. Now Trump says Iran has until 8pm on Tuesday. In the interim, Trump has scheduled a 1pm news conference on Monday. The described it as a press conference "with the military," suggesting it may be focused on celebrating US Special Forces' retrieval of a downed US Air Force weapons officer over the weekend. Held in the Oval Office, it may be open to only a small subset of the White House press corps. 

The combination of the ever-so-slightly encouraging Axios report and the Trump presser could make for the latest of many market whipsaws since the war started. Trump told Axios that there are "deep negotiations" ongoing with a "good chance" of success. On the other hand, he was quick to add that "if they don't make a deal, I am blowing up everything over there." Trump's threats to lay waste to Iran's civilian infrastructure has elicited Iranian promises to retaliate in kind across the Persian Gulf. In a video issued Sunday, Iran threatened "complete and utter annihilation" of OpenAI's $30 billion Stargate data center in Dubai. 

Iran leveling up
They released a video of threatening to strike 1GW Stargate AI datacenter in the UAE.

The data center is hidden on Google maps they even shown that pic.twitter.com/LuOGIp3BVj

— Furkan Gözükara (@FurkanGozukara) April 3, 2026

While the precise nature of the negotiations is unclear, Axios reported that Pakistani, Egyptian and Turkish mediators are at the center of the conversations, and that there have been "text messages sent" between Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Significantly, the outlets' sources said mediators couldn't foresee a full re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz until a final deal is inked. 

• The mediators want to see whether Iran could take partial step on [nuclear enrichment and Strait of Hormuz navigation] in the first phase of the deal. They are also working on steps the Trump administration could take to give Iran guarantees that the ceasefire will not be temporary and that the war will not resume.

• The Iranian officials made clear to the mediators they don't want to be caught in a Gaza or Lebanon situation where there is a ceasefire on paper, but that the U.S. and Israel can attack again whenever they want to.  -- Axios

Going into these latest conversations, the gap between US and Iranian demands was enormous. Among other things, Trump is demanding that Iran weaken the ballistic missile program it now used twice to retaliate against US-Israeli aggression, and to cease any nuclear enrichment, even though Iran is otherwise privileged to do so as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (a status Israel lacks). Iran has demanded reparations for the damage caused by Israeli and US attacks, the closure of US bases in the region, the lifting of all sanctions, and a hard-wired guarantee against more rounds of intermittent US-Israeli attacks. Regarding the latter demand, some have envisioned passage of a US law that would cut off aid to Israel if it attacks Iran again. 

Speculation that Pilot Rescue was Cover for Uranium Ground Op

Beyond the potential for escalation via attacks on civilian infrastructure, there's also the potential for a US commitment of ground forces. Trump may feel emboldened about proposed operations to seize Kharg Island and/or strait-adjacent territory following the dramatic weekend rescue of a downed F-15E crew member -- which itself brought the first known deployment of soldiers on Iranian soil. (We should note that there's a growing number of veterans and other people -- pointing to factors like the involvement of C-130 cargo craft and the location of their makeshift airfield -- theorizing that the rescue was actually a failed attempt to capture Iran's cache of 60%-enriched uranium.)

US PILOT ‘RESCUE’ OP COST:

— 2 MC-130 aircraft ($100 MILLION+ EACH) ‘intentionally DESTROYED’

— 4 MH-6 Little Bird helicopters

Iran drops NEW WRECKAGE IMAGES pic.twitter.com/TMYCEspepc

— RT (@RT_com) April 5, 2026

Meanwhile, there's little to indicate that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is interested in deescalation.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 08:15

JPM's Dimon Warns Of "Skunk At Party," Talks Credit Cycles, Touts U.S. Military Power

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon began his annual shareholder letter on Monday by tying the bank's legacy to the nation's history: "In 2026, America is celebrating its 250th anniversary. This year, we are also celebrating the 227th anniversary of JPMorgan Chase, which was founded in April 1799."

Quick Summary 

Dimon used his annual letter to tout another year of record financial results, while warning that investors may be underestimating the risks building across the global economy. These risks include the U.S.-Iran conflict entering its second month, trade negotiations that exacerbate geopolitical tensions, the convergence of surging oil prices and inflation, and elevated asset prices.

Touting 2025 JPM Results 

The largest U.S. bank said 2025 revenue rose to a record $185.6 billion, while net income reached $57 billion and return on tangible common equity (ROTCE) was 20%. JPM also lifted its quarterly dividend twice during the year, to $1.50 a share from $1.25, as it continued to note the strength of its balance sheet. 

The letter also highlighted JPMorgan's significant role in the US and global economies. Dimon said the bank extended credit and raised capital totaling $3.3 trillion in 2025, moves nearly $12 trillion a day across more than 120 currencies and 160 countries, and safeguards more than $41 trillion in assets. 

Risks

Beyond the numbers, Dimon warned about "some scenarios that would result in a recession, which generally reduces inflation, and other scenarios that would lead to a recession with inflation (stagflation—where inflationary forces overcome deflationary ones)."

He said the "skunk at the party" could emerge this year and "would be inflation slowly going up, as opposed to slowly going down," adding, "This alone could cause interest rates to rise and asset prices to drop. Interest rates are like gravity to almost all asset prices. Falling asset prices at one point can change sentiment rapidly and cause a flight to cash."

Tailwinds 

However, Dimon pointed out, "there are lots of tailwinds helping the U.S. in 2026, including:

• Increasing fiscal stimulus from the One Big Beautiful Bill. Our economists believe this will inject another $300 billion (effectively 1% of GDP) into the economy. This has to be very modestly inflationary this year.

• Benefits from the Fed's purchase of $40 billion of additional securities each month, which is supposed to be reduced to $20 billion–$25 billion this April. At a minimum, this supports asset prices and helps ensure there is no liquidity squeeze in the financial system.

• Positive effects of comprehensive deregulatory policies. This was badly needed and long overdue. Change is clearly evident in bank regulations that will free up capital and liquidity, which can be lent out (and we already see this happening), and in deregulation across many other industries, from energy to home building. It is fair to say that actions taken have clearly increased confidence and animal spirits. This should add to productivity and be modestly deflationary this year.

• Huge increase in AI-driven capital spending and construction by the five hyperscalers. In 2025, this number was $450 billion, and in 2026, it will be approximately $725 billion. While AI will clearly drive productivity, which is generally good for inflation in the long run, all of this spending is probably inflationary in the short run.

Larger Risks

He warned of a series of unresolved "larger risks" shifting beneath the surface of the economy, "like tectonic plates—always moving and periodically causing earthquakes and volcanoes when they crash into each other."

Those larger risks include:

• First and foremost, geopolitics. Russia's war in Ukraine and its ongoing sabotage in Europe and now the war in Iran and its potential effects on energy prices can cause events that are unpredictable. We all hope these wars get properly resolved. But war is the realm of uncertainty, as each side in a war determines what it wants to do (as is often said, "the enemy gets a vote"), and these conflicts involve many countries. Not only do they have a major impact on the nations at war, but they also have an impact on countries and economies across the globe that are not directly involved in war. Nations that are heavily dependent upon imported energy are already seeing the effects. And it's not just energy, it's commodity products that are byproducts of oil and gas, like fertilizer and helium. And given our complex global supply chains, countries are experiencing disruptions in shipbuilding, food and farming, among others. The outcome of current geopolitical events may very well be the defining factor in how the future global economic order unfolds — then again, it may not.

• High global sovereign deficits and debt. Global deficits are significantly elevated, particularly during what has been a relatively healthy global economy and, until recently, a time of peace — the deficit globally is at an extremely high 5%, while global sovereign debt is at all-time highs. The current forecast from the Congressional Budget Office has our debt-to-GDP ratio going from 100% today to 120% in 2036. High government debt is somewhat offset by low consumer debt, which was nearly 100% of GDP in 2007 and is now below 70%. Similarly, corporate debt is at a fairly normal healthy level of 45%. High and increasing government debt will eventually have to be dealt with — the right way would be to deal with it now before it becomes a problem; the wrong way would be to let it become a crisis, which, in my opinion, is probably the likely outcome. Importantly, almost 60% of government spending is for entitlements and is not discretionary. This makes the job that much harder. A crucial note on the importance of growth: If interest rates went down 100 basis points and GDP grew at 3%, the debt-to-GDP ratio could actually start to go down instead of going up.

• High asset prices and very low credit spreads. In and of itself, this is not a bad thing. Household net worth as a percentage of GDP is now 560%. The high during the housing peak in 2006 was 460%. But this also means that anything less than positive outcomes could have a dramatic impact on global markets. Rapidly decreasing asset prices can sometimes create a self-reinforcing loop. It's always good to remember that prices are set by the marginal buyers and sellers — which, on the average day, is only a small fraction of asset owners. And it's also good to remember that foreigners own almost $30 trillion of U.S. equities and bonds. While U.S. investments and the U.S. dollar are generally havens of security in a troubled world, that didn't stop recessions and bad markets in prior times.

• Trade 2.0. The U.S. tariffs themselves had only minor effects on inflation or growth, and were only one straw on the camel's back. But the trade battles are clearly not over, and it should be expected that many nations are analyzing how and with whom they should create trade arrangements. This is causing a realignment of economic relations in the world. While some of this is necessary for national security and resiliency, which are paramount, it is hard to figure out what the long-term effects will be.

• U.S. and China relations. This relationship is critical to the whole world and is also impacted by the events mentioned above. The United States and China clearly have different systems, values, goals and objectives, and while both sides are currently engaging, we have to expect that there will be some bumps in the road — maybe even some large ones. We should all hope that ongoing proper engagement continues to lead to what may be a competitive but peaceful future.

• Private credit and credit in general. The leveraged private credit market totals $1.8 trillion. As a comparison, the U.S. high yield bond market totals $1.5 trillion, and the bank syndicated leveraged loan market totals $1.7 trillion. Taking a wider view, the total market size of investment grade bonds is $13 trillion. And the total market value of all residential mortgage securities and loans is also $13 trillion. In the great scheme of things, private credit probably does not present a systemic risk.

Credit Cycle

Dimon continued, "I do believe that when we have a credit cycle, which will happen one day, losses on all leveraged lending in general will be higher than expected, relative to the environment." We've been extensively tracking the cracks emerging across credit (latest here). 

Geopolitics

On the topic of what appears to be Eurasia on fire, with multiple warzones raging, Dimon emphasized three critical issues about preserving the American empire:

1. The United States must maintain the premier military force in the world.

2. The United States must maintain its preeminent economic position in the world, which also requires reigniting the American Dream.

3. The United States must manage its foreign economic affairs to strengthen the U.S. economy and that of our critical allies so that the first two points remain true.

US Military & American Empire 

All about the empire... Dimon said, "We at JPMorganChase feel an enormous responsibility to our nation and many others — and we remind ourselves that many companies will only thrive if their countries thrive. With the right policies and committed actions, the United States will maintain the strongest military and strongest economy and will remain the bastion of freedom and the arsenal of democracy."

Dimon, who turned 70 in early March, has transformed JPMorgan into the nation's largest and most profitable bank, making it one of the core pillars of the U.S. financial system. This year's annual letter carries a warning that the world is becoming more fractured and, in at least one key region, engulfed in war. The broader message is unmistakable: American power is supreme, and JPMorgan intends to help preserve the empire for decades to come.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 08:10

Slower EV Sales Will Be The "New Normal" For Tesla Amidst AI, Robotics Push

Tesla Inc. is increasingly betting its future on AI, autonomy and robotics — but it still depends on selling cars to finance that shift, and that core business is under pressure, Bloomberg reported this week. 

Wall Street estimates point to roughly 372,160 vehicle deliveries last quarter. That would mark an 11% increase from a weak year-ago period, yet still place among Tesla’s softer recent results and far below its near-500,000 peak quarters. Earlier headwinds — including political backlash involving Elon Musk and Model Y production interruptions — weighed on prior performance.

A slower pace of growth may persist. Demand for EVs is cooling globally, US buyers no longer benefit from federal tax credits, and Tesla’s lineup is narrowing as Models S and X are phased out, all while competition intensifies.

“If they can show that there’s stability in the numbers without the tax credit — and they can, at least with the delivery number — I think that that would be a win,” said Gene Munster.

Bloomberg notes that regional trends are mixed: Europe remains subdued, while China is rebounding, with February shipments from Shanghai surging 91%, according to preliminary industry data. Investors are closely watching whether demand can hold without incentives.

At the same time, attention is shifting away from quarterly deliveries. Many investors are more focused on Tesla’s long-term bets — including robotaxis, the Cybercab and the Optimus robot — with the car business increasingly seen as a means to fund those efforts. After reaching a record high in December, the stock has since cooled.

Garrett Nelson, senior vice president of equity research at CFRA said: “It’s not so much about the deliveries, it’s more about bigger picture like the Terafab announcement, and this spending binge that Tesla is embarking on. Concerns regarding this explosion in spending are really weighing on sentiment towards the company.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 07:50

EU Parliament Shocks Brussels: Chat Surveillance Rejected, Deportation Centers Approved

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Brussels’ assault on industry and small-to-medium businesses is a child of German ideology. This applies not only to the absurd climate battle; German statism also reveals itself in the proposed spying system of EU-wide chat surveillance. The open-border policies, executed in the style of a hippie state, can be attributed equally and without hesitation to Germany’s political record of this century.

Three dramatic political miscalculations, three intellectual detonations, leading to devastating societal consequences. All made in Germany, but certainly not made for Germany.

Berlin’s climate crusade and hippie ideology have inflicted severe economic and societal damage on the European Union, sparking a social movement that points to deep internal cultural and social conflicts.

The next generation will struggle to preserve its identity in Europe and assert itself politically. That this identity is not even articulated on a national German level guarantees the exclusion of the AfD under the Brandmauer-Ägide.

Colorful and intellectually reduced coalitions of SED communists, red and green socialists, and the statist CDU, randomly blended together, shape this Brandmauer idyll in Germany. The parliamentary Thursday in Brussels must have struck like a whip.

The European People’s Party (EPP), including the CDU/Union, joined forces with three right-conservative parties, among them the AfD, France’s Rassemblement National, and the Patriots for Europe (PFE), against the three ideological pillars of the globalist, German-inspired political restructuring project of the EU.

The political hammer of the day was undoubtedly the EU Parliament’s resolution to force the EU Council and Commission into a debate over establishing migrant deportation centers in third countries. A decision is expected in June. Yet at this point, the Parliament itself is powerless, as it famously has no legislative initiative rights.

We can therefore anticipate that political undermining of this resolution will begin immediately.

A shock, at least, for the Berlin political-media bubble, which is primarily engaged in covering up the consequences of uncontrolled migration and systematically pursuing and sanctioning criticism of the open-border regime with a comprehensive censorship apparatus.

Following the migration decision, the same parliamentary majority struck again against one of Berlin and Brussels’ favorite political projects. They also rejected the push for comprehensive private chat surveillance. This means the proposed EU regulation for so-called end-to-end encryption, which could have decrypted massive messaging content, is temporarily off the table.

How this will proceed remains unclear. Chancellor Friedrich Merz already announced a national solution for this issue on the same day. He seems in no hurry to assert ultimate control over citizens’ private communications.

For – and Thursday in the European Parliament demonstrated this – the wind is blowing increasingly against the German party cartel, and it comes from the patriotic side of the house.

Opposition is growing. Strong political forces like Italy’s government under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni are shaping substantial opposition, which in both rhetoric and action resists both the climate cult and the open-border policies.

Multiculturalism, alongside the green degrowth agenda, counts among Germany’s political priorities. And the German chief ideologues are increasingly losing their allies in Brussels.

It won’t be long before Berlin could indeed stand isolated. This was indicated by the third surprising vote on Thursday.

Finally, the Parliament voted to loosen the EU supply chain law and reduce, above all, the environmental due diligence obligations for companies.

What purpose does it serve to require companies to document and analyze arbitrarily set social and ecological standards along complex supply chains, even down to primary production?

Brussels’ bureaucracy pushes such regulations deep into national power structures. We know this mechanism from CO2 taxation: German ideology is declared general EU regulation via Brussels, a new source of revenue is created, and a sanctions mechanism is established. At its core, this policy represents pure isolationism, dressed in the garb of European moral posturing with a distinctly German flavor.

How far must the European economic crisis penetrate society before the conservative-patriotic coalition can bring itself not to halt halfway but to ban bureaucratic monsters like the supply chain law permanently into the eternal hunting grounds of political delusions?

An interesting parliamentary week in otherwise sleepy Brussels ends with a bang, raising the question: is there perhaps reason to hope that the ideologically stuck political system can heal itself?

Could the geopolitical pressure, particularly from the United States, enable the conservative-patriotic coalition to gain the upper hand within the EU?

Ultimately, it is up to voters to create clarity at the national level and enforce a course correction. Should Germans, however, continue to resist a paradigm shift, the country could face mid-term isolation on a European level, as the wind there clearly blows from a conservative-patriotic direction.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe is a German graduate economist. For over 25 years, he has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 07:25

'New Iranian Terror Group' Claims Responsibility For Attacks Across Europe

A group that did not exist online or anywhere else before March 9, 2026, has suddenly claimed responsibility for a string of low-tech arson and attempted bombings at synagogues and US banks across Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and the UK.

Police in Paris at the scene of the thwarted attack on the offices of Bank of America © Nathan Laine/Bloomberg

Mainstream outlets like FT and counter-terrorism analysts are rushing to label Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia (HAYI, or "Ashab al-Yamin") as an Iranian intelligence "hybrid warfare" front. But a closer look raises serious red flags: the group's amateurish execution, suspiciously perfect timing amid the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, and a pattern that seems tailor-made to stoke the antisemitism narrative and justify further crackdowns on Tehran and its proxies.

The first claim surfaced on March 9 via Telegram channels tied to Iraqi pro-Iranian militias. Two days later, HAYI took credit for firebombing a synagogue in Liège, Belgium. Subsequent claims included attacks on a Rotterdam synagogue (March 13), a Jewish school in Amsterdam (March 14), a site linked to Bank of New York Mellon in Amsterdam (March 16), Hatzola Jewish ambulances in London's Golders Green (March 23), and a foiled plot outside Bank of America in Paris (March 28). An attempted synagogue strike in Heemstede, Netherlands, was also stopped on March 20. Some other claims, including an alleged Greece attack - appear to be outright disinformation.

European police have rounded up suspects aged 14-23. In the Netherlands, at least 10 arrests. France charged four, including minors. In the UK, three young men (two Brits aged 19–20 and a 17-year-old dual national) were charged with the London ambulance arson, with a fourth arrest. 

On arson attack on community ambulances in north London last month © Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty Images

Orthodox Jewish communities in London and elsewhere have their own ambulances operated by Hatzola (also spelled Hatzolah or Hatzalah), a private volunteer-run, community-funded emergency medical service.

French prosecutors revealed one teen claimed he was recruited on Snapchat, offered €500–€1,000, and initially told the "bomb" was revenge on a cheating girlfriend - before being instructed to film it for the cause. Many suspects were released on bail.

The "group" that wasn't there yesterday

Researchers at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT) note HAYI had "no known references, neither online nor offline" before March 9. Its statements contain linguistic quirks, misspellings, and inconsistencies. Claims were amplified almost immediately by channels linked to IRGC-aligned militias—yet the operation relies on disposable online recruits for pocket-change jobs. Julian Lanchès at ICCT called it unusual and suggested an Iranian intelligence project for deniability.

Doubts regarding the authenticity of HAYI are, however, not only raised by the appearance of its Telegram channel and the likely falsely claimed attack in Greece, but also by inconsistencies within the claim material itself. For example, the videos contain noticeable linguistic errors. Further, the Arabic inscription beneath the group’s logo, which closely resembles the flag of Hezbollah and other pro-Axis groups, except for featuring a Soviet SVD sniper rifle instead of the more typical AK-style imagery, includes multiple mistakes, including the misspelling of the word “Islamic.”

Skeptics aren't buying it. The Grayzone's Wyatt Reed highlighted glaring questions: Why aren't these "Iranian" operatives hitting targets in countries most aggressively involved in the war on Iran? Why the focus on symbolic Jewish and U.S. bank sites with minimal actual damage and zero casualties? Why do some communiqués contain phrasing that reads like it was generated with odd Israeli terminology quirks (e.g., references to "the Land of Israel")? And why were multiple suspects quickly released on bail while the "terror campaign" narrative rolls on?

MintPress News investigative piece by David Miller goes further, arguing HAYI looks like a fabricated "fake Iranian terror group" invented precisely to accelerate efforts to proscribe the IRGC as a terrorist organization across Europe - long a goal of pro-Israel lobbying networks amid the Iran war.

Cui bono? The timing is impeccable

The wave of attacks kicked off right as U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran intensified in late February 2026. Jewish communities were already on edge from post-October 7, 2023, tensions. UK groups like the Community Security Trust linked the London incident to rising antisemitism. Dutch officials openly probed "Iranian involvement." U.S. banks in Paris told staff to work from home. All of it feeds a story that Iran is exporting chaos. 

Who’s behind the bombings in Jewish areas in Europe? @wyattreed13 says major questions remain about “Ashab Al-Yamin”:

Why aren’t they targeting countries most involved in the Iran war?

Why are suspects being released on bail?

And why do they seem to communicate like Israelis? pic.twitter.com/LS1eNGlHyr

— The Grayzone (@TheGrayzoneNews) March 30, 2026

Iran's London embassy flatly denied involvement, calling the claims "unfounded" and reaffirming non-interference. But in the current climate, denials are dismissed as standard procedure.

Online discourse is split  - with some X posts and independent commentary (including from figures who faced backlash) have pointed to Mossad-style operations, citing historical precedents and the fact that the attacks generate maximum narrative value with minimum real risk. A UK mayor in Bath resigned after sharing posts suggesting the Hatzola ambulance arson was staged.

Even some mainstream analysts admit the group operates like a hastily assembled brand.

To analyse the activities of HAYI, we examined its digital footprint, including the first public mentions of the attacks online and the initial dissemination of the corresponding claim videos. This analysis was conducted using the OSINT tools XNetwork and TGStat, which were queried using Arabic-language keywords. In addition, an AI-based detection tool was employed, which indicated that all claim videos were likely genuine recordings. 

There are no known references, neither online nor offline, to HAYI prior to 9 March, when a post of the group was circulated in a Telegram channel seemingly affiliated with the Iraqi pro-Iranian militia Liwa Zulfiqar. In this post, HAYI announced “the start of its military operations against US and Israeli interests around the world,” although it made no reference to the attack against the synagogue in Liège that occurred on the same day. This would suggest that HAYI is a new group, established for the purpose of this bombing campaign. -Julian Lanchès, ICCT

Recruitment teens via Snapchat and Telegram for one-off gigs isn't exactly what hardened jihadists do - is it?

If the group known as "Ashab al-Yamin" isn't a Mossad front group, it's worst larp I've ever seen.

— Quinlan Forrest (@quinforr) March 31, 2026

Hybrid warfare... or hybrid narrative?

Pro-Iran voices and anti-war skeptics argue this fits a familiar playbook: manufacture or exaggerate a threat, amplify it through friendly think-tanks (some with clear ideological alignments), then use the panic to justify expanded surveillance, sanctions, military posture, and silencing dissent on Gaza or Iran policy. The low-body-count, property-only focus maximizes fear without crossing into "existential terror" that might backfire.

Whether HAYI is a sloppy Iranian cutout using disposable locals, a pure astroturf job, or something more orchestrated to serve specific agendas remains under investigation. Meanwhile the story has already succeeded in sowing anxiety, polarizing communities, and providing fresh ammunition for those pushing Europe deeper into the Iran conflict.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 06:15

Europe's Looming Jet Fuel Crisis: Hormuz, Policy Failure, And A Self-Inflicted Supply Shock

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Politics has established a new routine. Right at 12 noon, prices at German gas stations now rise day after day.

The government’s pricing decree, a hastily assembled mechanism, acts like an accelerant in an already dramatically strained fuel supply situation. Anyone with rudimentary economic understanding already knew that this form of price regulation would amount to political posturing with fatal consequences.

The market is reacting as expected. Gas station operators anticipate general price increases and indirectly coordinate their pricing behavior. If everyone is only allowed to raise prices once per day, that shot will be fired deliberately — better too high than too low. After that, it becomes a waiting game, observing how competitors react. If the next move can only be a price reduction, the risk can be solved in simple game-theoretical terms: prices are simply kept high as long as competitors do not move.

This creates a cartel-like situation that avoids the risk of rapid price cuts and the resulting loss of individual margins.

Market dynamics thus turn into generalized tactical hesitation. At the same time, political leadership is marked by a striking lack of direction in the face of real scarcity and a rapidly worsening supply situation. Hormuz is exposing the limits of political emergency measures.

The measures taken so far by the German government to curb rising prices are classic political camouflage — a well-rehearsed play for the public. The fundamental question of how to deal with energy imports is not being seriously addressed. Europe must import 60 percent of its energy to meet demand. And the stubborn stance toward Russia, Europe’s most important supplier of energy and raw materials, will likely prove to be the most fatal mistake of European policy — quite an achievement, given that it is already riddled with misjudgments and ideologically driven, erratic decisions.

It is also significant that Brussels’ CO₂ regime has severely damaged Europe’s refining capacity. Europe no longer has the infrastructure required to rapidly activate refining capacity in an emergency and close the widening gap in oil and gas supply, regardless of where new raw materials might be sourced.

EU policy is knowingly and deliberately escalating the current situation. This finding applies in particular to jet fuel imports. Europe’s aviation sector imports around 40 percent of its jet fuel from the Persian Gulf, making the current situation effectively unsolvable.

Since the beginning of the war, the price of jet fuel has roughly doubled, from $800 to $1,800 per ton.

The fact that the United States is taking its time to bring the Strait of Hormuz under military control is putting enormous pressure on European airlines. Scandinavian carrier SAS has already canceled 1,000 flights in April. Lufthansa is also considering grounding parts of its fleet.

Airlines that have hedged their fuel purchases may be able to cushion price increases somewhat — Lufthansa among them — but this does nothing to address the physical shortage of available jet fuel. Europe is on the verge of a massive jet fuel shortfall.

On April 9, the last tanker carrying jet fuel from the Persian Gulf will reach Rotterdam; existing reserves are likely to sustain European flight operations for three to four weeks. What happens afterward remains completely uncertain.

Given the destruction of refining capacity and related infrastructure in the name of the Green Deal, European policymakers find their hands effectively tied. The Hormuz crisis is likely to erupt with full force. If there is no rapid resolution to the Iran conflict, a loss of 40% of available jet fuel simply cannot be compensated.

Brussels could activate one of its favorite instruments and, by means of an EU emergency regulation — similar to the early days of the Ukraine conflict — enforce rationing measures for private jets and long-haul flights. The immediate release of idle commercial refining reserves, particularly in the major port regions of Rotterdam, Antwerp, and Amsterdam, would also be an option. Purchasing expensive jet fuel in North America with heavy subsidies might provide a short-term alternative to prevent a collapse in air traffic.

No matter how the acute fuel shortage in Europe develops in the coming weeks: the damage has already been done. The structural damage caused by European policy in its obsessive fight against CO₂ is now becoming visible in its full dramatic depth. Refining capacity cannot be restored overnight, and the world is now engaged in an intensified competition for the remaining circulating fuel supplies.

That prices will continue to rise for the time being is inevitable; the campaign of degrowth ideologues against individual mobility, air travel, and combustion engines is experiencing an unexpected moment of triumph. 

For civilization as a whole, this is a catastrophe — for individuals who have made themselves comfortable in the subsidized world of idle ideologues, it is indeed a victory. Yet it is unmistakably a Pyrrhic victory.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe is a German graduate economist. For over 25 years, he has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 05:30

'Open The F**kin' Strait': Trump Threatens To 'Blow Everything Up' If No Iran Deal By Tuesday Summary: 

• Trump offers Iranian negotiators amnesty, threatens to 'blow everything up' if no deal

• IEA Head warns Asia (implying Beijing) is panic hoarding fuel

• Trump warns Iran 'Open the Fuckin' Strait' or "you'll be living in hell'

Trump Talks With Fox Reporter About US-Iran Negotiations 

Shortly after President Trump wrote on Truth Social, "Open the Fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah," the president spoke with Fox News reporter Trey Yingst for 15 minutes early Sunday.

Trump provided Yingst with new details on the behind-the-scenes negotiations with the Iranians and what would happen if Iran does not reach a good-faith deal.

Yingst said Trump told him, "If they don't make a deal, and fast, I'm considering blowing everything up and taking over the oil." The reporter went on to say that the president added that if there is no deal, bridges and power plants will go down all over the country.

Yingst asked the president about the possibility of an agreement with the Iranians. The president said those negotiating on behalf of Tehran have been granted amnesty for now so they can continue the talks.

The reporter noted that Trump thinks a deal can be reached by Monday. Trump said, "I think there's a good chance tomorrow. They're negotiating now."

NEW:

"If they don't make a deal and fast, I'm considering blowing everything up and taking over the oil," President Trump told me.

President Trump added that he believes he'll be able to get a deal with Iran by tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/a7EDL6hQUJ

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) April 5, 2026

International Energy Agency Head Warns Of Panic Hoarding Oil In Asia

International Energy Agency chief Fatih Birol told the Financial Times this weekend that governments must avoid panic hoarding and refrain from imposing fuel export bans as the Gulf energy shock ripples outward to Asia, Africa, Europe, and eventually reaches the US West Coast.

"I urge all countries not to impose bans or restrictions on exports," Fatih Birol emphasized in the interview. "It is the worst time when you look at the global oil markets. Their trade partners, their allies and their neighbors will suffer as a result."

The FT noted that Birol was "careful not to name China directly," but made very clear his warning was likely aimed at Beijing, which has already moved to restrict exports of critical refined products, including gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.

Birol said that "major countries in Asia who hold major refineries" should reconsider their current bans, adding, "If those countries continue to restrict or totally ban exports, the impact on the Asian markets will be dramatic."

Birol's hoarding warning in Asia comes shortly after the IEA's coordinated release of 400 million barrels from emergency reserves. Such hoarding by major countries would directly undercut efforts to stabilize global energy markets. He also warned that if the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz persists, losses of crude and refined products in April could reach roughly double the levels seen in March.

Early in the US-Iran conflict, energy economist Anas Alhajji joined UBS analysts on a call in which he warned of panic hoarding risks in the oil market. He said that he questioned back in January why the Trump administration was hoarding Venezuela's oil after the Maduro raid, instead of bringing it to market.

Alhajji noted then, "I'm not talking about conspiracy theories. We were criticizing the Trump administration, companies, and trading houses that bought Venezuelan oil, and asking why they weren't able to sell it to end users and why they were hoarding it. Now we know." He was implying that this hoarding was in preparation for Operation Epic Fury.

Asia has been hit hardest so far. JPMorgan's top commodities expert warned about the falling dominoes of how the energy shock transmits from Asia, then spreads to Africa and Europe, before reaching the US, especially California, shortly thereafter.

Source

"Unfortunately, we see that some countries are adding to their existing stocks during our coordinated oil stock release," Birol said. "They are stocking up. This is not helpful. In my view, this is a time for all countries to prove they are responsible members of the international community."

Jeff Currie of Carlyle recently outlined the hoarding risks in a note titled "A Crude Awakening": "The physical shortfall is the trigger; the behavioral response is the multiplier."

Trump Tells Tehran: "Open the Fuckin' Strait" 

Earlier on Easter morning, President Trump unleashed a fierce message on Truth Social: "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell."

Is the pressure building on Trump from the rest of the world (and domestically) to end this 'operation'? And/or are we getting closer to quagmire-inducing boots on the ground?

* * *

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 05:00

Countries Losing Trust In The US

Global perceptions of the United States are shifting.

Data from the Munich Security Conference shows a clear decline in trust across advanced and emerging economies.

This visualization, created by Visual Capitalist's Julia Wendling, in partnership with Inigo, provides visual context to these shifting perceptions and highlights where sentiment is changing fastest. These shifts reflect a broader reassessment of alliances in a more uncertain world.

Declining Trust Across Allies

Among traditional allies, the drop in trust is sharp. Canada records the steepest decline at -52%. Italy follows at -21%. France stands at -17%.

 

Germany and Japan also show meaningful declines at -15% and -16%. The United Kingdom is down -13%. These are not isolated moves. They point to weakening confidence across long-standing partnerships.

Policy uncertainty is one key driver. Shifting trade positions and tariff threats have strained economic relationships. Rhetoric around territorial expansion has also raised concerns, including proposals to annex Greenland and suggestions that Canada could become the 51st state.

At the same time, security concerns are rising across Europe. A January 2026 Eurobarometer poll shows 43% of respondents in France and 32% in Germany support higher defense spending. This suggests allies are preparing for a more uncertain security environment.

Emerging Economies Reflect Similar Trends

The pattern extends beyond Western allies. Brazil and South Africa both decline by more than -20%. India and China show smaller but still negative shifts at -10% and -9%.

This suggests a broad reset in global sentiment. It is not driven by one region alone. Strategic uncertainty is rising across markets.

A Rocky Road Ahead

The data points to a more fragmented global landscape. Trust in the United States is declining across multiple regions. At the same time, countries are preparing for greater uncertainty.

Rising defense support in Europe reinforces this shift. Public sentiment is signaling change. Global alliances may be entering a new phase.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 04:45

Did This Small Device Help Special Forces Locate Downed F-15 Crew

The New York Times confirmed that U.S. Special Forces operators were behind the recovery of the second crew member from the downed F-15E fighter jet, locating and extracting the weapons systems officer in a daring overnight mission deep inside Iranian territory.

Confirmed presence of Seal Team 6 in pilot rescue op moved the "US forces entering Iran" market to 100%.

Per NYT: "Navy SEAL Team 6 commandos extracted the officer in a massive operation that involved hundreds of special operations troops and other military personnel." https://t.co/szkJUBbP5s pic.twitter.com/W05LYaRDBv

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 5, 2026

The pilot had been recovered earlier, while the second airman remained hidden from Iranian forces for days as Special Forces operators raced to reach his position before Iranian forces did.

Around 200 soldiers from special operations units participated in the operation, Trump told Axios.

Trump said the Iranian military shot down the F-15 using a shoulder-fired missile. "They got lucky."

Speaking to Axios an hour after confirming the rescue, Trump said that "thousands of these savages were hunting him down," using that loaded term to refer to members of the Iranian military.

"Even the population was looking for him. They offered people a bonus if they captured him."

The officer hid in a crevice in the mountain, Trump said, and the U.S. managed to spot him with its technology.

Trump said that the U.S. military had "beeping information" about the officer's location.

But after a radio message, officials suspected he might be in Iranian captivity and the Iranians were "sending false signals" to try to lure U.S. forces into a trap.

One of the key devices that appears to have helped the survival and recovery of both pilots was Boeing’s Combat Survivor Evader Locator, or CSEL, a secure communications device that can transmit encrypted location and status bursts without exposing their position to enemy forces.

CSEL is a combat search-and-rescue survival radio system used by downed aircrew. Its purpose is to help rescue forces quickly and securely locate, authenticate, and communicate with a survivor without allowing enemy forces to triangulate the survivor’s position.

Israeli-based Ynetnews provided more context on how critical CSEL was to the survival of both aircrew members and how important it was for location and extraction operations:

To evade Iran’s advanced electronic warfare systems, reportedly supplied by China and Russia, the device uses techniques such as ultra-short burst transmissions and rapid frequency hopping.

These signals appear as random background noise to enemy intercept systems, making them extremely difficult to detect or trace.

The CSEL system relies on military communication satellites to relay data from hostile territory to command centers in the United States and other global bases.

The successful extraction of both the pilot and weapons systems officer deep behind enemy lines offered a rare look into the U.S. military’s doctrine for recovering isolated personnel during combat, otherwise known as Combat Search and Rescue, or CSAR.

Spotted flying at low level over western Iran this morning; a C-295W from the USAF’s 427th Special Operations Squadron, a clandestine unit that reportedly specializes in infiltration and exfiltration into enemy territory. pic.twitter.com/4UfAFj7AQb

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) April 5, 2026

How long until a U.S. studio makes a sequel to the 2001 action-war film "Behind Enemy Lines"?

Next year? 

* * * Order Rancher-Direct tonight. $25 shipping now on most items. 

Steak Lover's Bundle

Ultimate BBQ Bundle

Carnivore Trio

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 04:35

NATO Was A Big Loser In The Iran War

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

NATO members are not legally required to join any member’s military operations that are not formally sanctioned by the alliance or not aimed at protecting the homelands of the membership.

But they often do just that.

President Donald Trump speaks from the Cross Hall of the White House in Washington on April 1, 2026. Alex Brandon/Pool/Getty Images

Some NATO members joined the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq on the theory that, in the post-9/11 environment, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein were dangers to all Western security.

They followed the precedent set by America’s 1999 intervention in the distant Balkans, leading a three-month NATO campaign to dismantle Slobodan Milošević’s often bloody ambitions of a Greater Serbia. The United States also joined the 2011 U.N.-approved, and French- and British-inspired, NATO “coalition of the willing” bombing campaign in Libya.

That effort proved a seven-month misadventure—especially since the targeted Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi had given up his nuclear weapons program and was desperately trying to cut a deal with the West.

When NATO members in the past have operated unilaterally to defend their own national interests, they have often called on the United States, as NATO’s strongest member, for overt help.

For nearly 40 years, the United States had offered logistical, intelligence, reconnaissance, refueling, and diplomatic support to the French in their unilateral and postcolonial efforts to protect Chad from Libya and, later, Islamists.

During the 1982 Falklands War, a solitary Britain faced enormous logistical challenges in steaming halfway around the world to eject Argentina from its windswept and sparse islands.

U.S. aid was critical to the effort.

So America stepped up to help with intelligence, reconnaissance, the supply of some two million gallons of much-needed gasoline, and crucial restocking of Britain’s depleted Tomahawk missiles.

The American tilt to Britain prompted anger from most Latin American nations of the shared Western hemisphere, as well as from many Hispanic American citizens at home.

No matter—President Ronald Reagan rightly saw the importance of solidarity with a NATO member and a long-time American ally. So he gave Britain a veritable blank check for American aid.

Currently, America has not asked NATO members to help bomb Iran—even though Europe, not the United States, was in range of Iranian ballistic missiles, and soon perhaps nuclear-tipped ones as well.

Europeans are far more vulnerable to Iranian-inspired Islamic terrorism. They are more reliant on foreign oil from the Middle East, some of it passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

All the United States had initially asked for was basing support in disarming a common Western enemy that, for nearly half a century, has slaughtered American diplomats and soldiers and tried to kill a U.S. president and secretary of state.

But most NATO members could not even offer tacit help. Some damned the U.S. effort as either illegal or unnecessary.

The American public watched the British waffle for days over permitting Americans to use their Diego Garcia base.

The Spanish banned American use of their NATO bases and airspace.

The Italians refused a request from American bombers to land and refuel at a Sicilian NATO base.

Many NATO heads of state rebuked the United States to their domestic audiences while, in typical two-faced fashion, publicly offering empty verbal support for the U.S. effort.

The NATO response to an Iranian missile aimed at fellow NATO member Turkey was anemic.

Even worse was the pathetic British reaction to another Iranian missile launch at a British base at Akrotiri, Cyprus.

Yet a successful American effort in neutering a theocratic Iran was clearly of benefit to Europe. So is preventing the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz from becoming a toll booth run by the Iranian mullahs.

Such passivity was in sharp contrast to the five-year-long Ukraine War on the borders of Europe.

Ukraine was not in NATO.

Ukrainian politicos and ambassadors had sometimes played an intrusive, partisan role in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 American presidential elections.

Nonetheless, there were urgent European requests for the United States to honor the spirit of NATO solidarity and to get across the Atlantic as quickly as possible to protect the territorial integrity of Europe.

Yet continental Europe is not intrinsically weak. The combined population of the European Union and European NATO members is around 450 million—a population more than 100 million greater than that of the United States.

These same European nations enjoy an aggregate annual GDP of more than $22 trillion, 10 times the size of the Russian economy.

European diffidence comes on top of the perennial American effort to harangue NATO members to honor their 2 percent of GDP defense commitments—especially in the case of deadbeat Spain and Canada, who for years welched on their pledges.

Trump’s harangues were not what was undermining NATO.

Instead, he ripped off a happy-face scab and exposed a festering wound of increasingly anti-American hypocrisy beneath.

If you wanted to wreck the alliance, there would be no better way than to follow the duplicitous examples of Western European NATO members.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/06/2026 - 04:00

Long-Term Social Media Use Linked to Depression, Self-Harm in Young People: Study

Authored by Jerry Zhu via The Epoch Times,

An Australian-led study has found children and teenagers who spend more time on social media are more likely to experience depression, self-harm, substance use, and lower achievement later in life.

Published in JAMA Pediatrics, the systematic review examined data from 153 studies consisting of over 350,000 children and adolescents aged between 2 and 19 years, for up to two decades.

“The strongest pattern we saw was between social media use and later problematic media use, suggesting early patterns of engagement may become more entrenched and difficult to manage over time,” said Sam Teague, a senior research fellow at James Cook University.

The study focused on longitudinal research, which follows participants over time and offers stronger insight into how behaviours and outcomes develop.

Teague said previous research in the field often relied on snapshots collected at a single point in time, making it harder to determine whether social media use preceded negative outcomes.

However, she stressed the findings do not prove social media causes harm.

Instead, the results show consistent links between higher use and a range of developmental outcomes, including cognitive, social-emotional, physical health, and motor development.

Amy Orben, a professor at the Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit at the University of Cambridge, said the relationship may be more complex.

“It may be that children who are already struggling spend more time on social media, rather than social media being the cause of their difficulties,” Orben said.

“Similarly, some personality traits or life circumstances might make certain children both more likely to use social media heavily and more likely to experience poorer developmental outcomes.”

Adolescents Identified as Most Vulnerable

Teague said one possible explanation is that time spent online may displace activities linked to better mental health.

“Time spent on digital media [could] displace time that would otherwise be spent on things that are linked to improved mental health, like exercise and connecting with family and peers in real life,” Teague told The Epoch Times in an email.

She also contrasted the interactive nature of social media with traditional media.

“Unique to digital media over traditional media, is its interactive nature, whereby children and teens are encouraged to keep engaging with content through addictive features like auto-play and auto-scroll,” she said.

Adolescents in particular were identified as more vulnerable to the effects of social media.

“Early adolescence is when identity formation and peer relationships become key developmental systems for young people,” she said.

She added that social media can magnify these pressures through constant external feedback and large social comparison.

“Action is needed at the policy and platform level most to make our online environments, that are designed largely for adults, appropriate for children,” she said.

“Addictive design features particularly need attention, like auto-play and auto-scroll, as well as exposure to harmful content.”

Social Media Companies Taken to Court Over Claims of Addictive Design

The new research comes as plaintiffs won a landmark social media addiction case in the United States.

The civil trial in Los Angeles centres on a 20-year-old woman who alleges major tech companies designed their platforms to be addictive, contributing to mental health issues.

Defendants include Instagram and YouTube, while cases involving Snapchat and TikTok have been settled privately.

Lawyers for the plaintiff argue she became addicted to social media as a minor, leading to depression, body dysmorphia, and suicidal thoughts.

YouTube’s legal team has rejected the claims, arguing the platform is not addictive, and is comparable to video services such as Netflix, where users can stop scrolling at anytime.

On Feb. 18, Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg told the court the company had long since abandoned goals of “increasing time spent on apps,” instead focusing on engaging users through “creating value.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/05/2026 - 23:20

These Are America's Biggest Christian Groups

The Catholic Church is America’s largest Christian group - but it doesn’t have the most churches.

Drawing on data from the U.S. Religion Census, compiled by Julie Peasley via Visual Capitalist, this visualization compares the country’s biggest Christian denominations by two measures: adherents and congregations.

The comparison highlights a key divide in how these groups are structured. Catholics lead by membership, while the Southern Baptist Convention leads by church count. Non-denominational churches also rank near the top on both measures, reflecting how the composition of American Christianity has shifted over time.

The Largest Christian Denominations in America

Here’s a closer look at how America’s largest Christian groups stack up:

 

What Are “Adherents” and “Congregations”?

Two metrics drive this comparison:

• Adherents: the total number of people affiliated with a religious group.

• Congregations: the number of individual places of worship.

Together, they show both the size of each group and how widely it is distributed.

America’s Largest Christian Group Has Fewer Congregations

The Catholic Church has 61.9 million adherents—more than any other group—but only about 19,400 congregations.

By contrast, the Southern Baptist Convention has 51,400 churches, the most in the dataset, despite having far fewer members. Non-denominational churches also combine a large membership base with a wide church network.

The result is a clear tradeoff: some groups concentrate members into fewer congregations, while others are spread across a much larger number of churches.

The Rise of Non-Denominational Christianity

Non-denominational Christian churches have emerged as one of the largest groups in the country. Their growth reflects broader shifts in religious identity, as many Americans move away from traditional denominational labels.

According to broader research from Pew, religious affiliation in the U.S. has remained relatively stable in recent years, but the composition within Christianity continues to evolve. Non-denominational and evangelical traditions have gained prominence, especially in fast-growing regions.

A Diverse Religious Landscape

Beyond the largest groups, the U.S. is home to a wide array of smaller denominations, from Lutheran and Methodist branches to Adventist and Episcopal churches. Each contributes to a highly fragmented but vibrant religious ecosystem.

Geography helps shape these patterns. In this map of U.S. religion, Baptist and evangelical churches are heavily concentrated in the South, whereas Catholic strongholds align with areas shaped by European and Latin American immigration.

To see how Christianity compares on a global scale, check out Ranked: Countries With the Greatest Number of Christians on the Voronoi app.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/05/2026 - 22:45

California Bans Government Officials From Using Insider Knowledge To Bet On Prediction Markets

Authored by Dylan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday issued an executive order banning state officials from using insider knowledge to profit, or assist another person in profiting, on prediction markets, effective immediately.

The governor’s office said there have been mounting reports of individuals in the federal government with access to sensitive government information placing well-timed bets ahead of major Trump administration actions. These reports are currently allegations and have yet to be verified.

“Public service should not be a get-rich-quick scheme. At a time when Trump’s Washington is riddled with ethical failures and insider profiteering, California is drawing a bright line: If you serve the public as a political appointee, you serve the public—period,” Newsom said.

“We’re not going to tolerate this kind of corruption in California.”

Prediction markets are platforms that allow users to bet on real-world events, including government decisions, political events, sports, pop culture, and everything in between.

The governor’s office said that, in one example, six suspected insiders made $1.2 million betting on a U.S. strike against Iran from accounts funded only days before the strike and bet only hours before it occurred.

The governor’s office also said another person has made nearly $1 million from a 93 percent win rate on bets related to Iran and Israel.

In a separate incident, an individual made more than $400,000 betting on the U.S. military capturing former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro just hours before that occurred, according to the governor’s office.

Kalshi, one of the largest prediction market platforms, said on X in response to Newsom’s order that it already enforces insider trading violations and that these examples by the governor’s office took place on a separate, unregulated prediction market.

“Insider trading violates our rules, and we enforce them when we catch insiders,“ Kalshi said in a statement.

“Government employees should be aware that trading on federally regulated markets using material non-public information violates the law.”

Last week, on March 23, a bipartisan pair of senators went after the gambling side of prediction markets. Sens. John Curtis (R-Utah) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) introduced legislation aimed at banning sports betting through these platforms.

Curtis said in a statement that the measure is needed to protect state authority over gambling laws. He said the rapid expansion of these platforms exposes young people to gambling-like products that should fall under state, not federal, oversight. The legislation, he said, is intended to reaffirm states’ rights, protect consumers, and keep speculative financial products out of areas traditionally regulated as gambling.

Kalshi opposes the bill. Its spokesperson Elisabeth Diana told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement that banning sports-related prediction markets would backfire by pushing users to unregulated offshore platforms.

“It’s clear this bill is motivated by casino interests that are threatened by competition,” she said.

“They’re more worried about protecting their monopolies than protecting consumers.”

Diana said regulated prediction markets are a fairer alternative to traditional gambling because they don’t disadvantage successful users, and that competition—not protection of existing industries—should determine their future.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/05/2026 - 22:10

SEC Case Against Musk Over Twitter Stake Heads to Trial

Elon Musk and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission are no longer pursuing a quick settlement and instead appear headed for a courtroom fight over Musk’s 2022 takeover of Twitter, according to Bloomberg.

In a status update filed Wednesday, both sides said they had explored possible resolutions but ultimately agreed the case isn’t suited for mediation. “The parties do not believe that this case would benefit…from…ADR,” the filing states, signaling a shift toward full litigation.

At the center of the case is the SEC’s claim that Musk failed to promptly disclose he had accumulated more than a 5% stake in Twitter—an omission the agency says allowed him to buy shares at lower prices, costing investors more than $150 million. Musk has pushed back, calling the lawsuit “a waste of this court’s time,” but a judge has already rejected both his dismissal bid and the SEC’s attempt to win the case outright.

Bloomberg writes that the next phase will involve discovery, where Musk’s team says it needs up to a year to review what it described as a “voluminous investigative file” built over nearly three years, including testimony from dozens of witnesses.

The case unfolds alongside other legal setbacks tied to the deal. A jury recently found Musk misled investors during the acquisition saga, and a separate federal judge allowed a class-action suit over alleged stock manipulation to move forward.

Musk’s clashes with regulators and investors stretch back years, most notably to his 2018 “funding secured” tweets about taking Tesla, Inc. private. That episode led to an SEC enforcement action, a $20 million fine, and an agreement requiring oversight of some of his public statements—terms Musk has repeatedly criticized and tried to challenge in court.

He has also faced a steady stream of shareholder lawsuits tied to his companies, including disputes over compensation, market-moving statements on social media, and acquisitions. While Musk has successfully defended some cases, others have resulted in settlements or ongoing litigation, reinforcing scrutiny around his communications and business practices.

More broadly, the combination of high-profile deals, unconventional public remarks, and aggressive legal strategy has kept Musk frequently entangled in court battles over the past decade, making regulatory and investor lawsuits a recurring feature of his leadership across multiple companies.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/05/2026 - 20:45