Germany To Scrap Subsidy For Rooftop Solar

Germany is planning to abolish fixed feed-in tariffs for small rooftop solar installations as of 2027, saying that falling costs have made the technology economically sound without subsidies (narrator: "it isn't"), Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing a draft proposal for reforms it has seen.

At present, rooftop solar installations of any kind are eligible for guaranteed tariffs. But this could change in a few months, if the government approves the proposal of the German economy ministry to have subsidies abolished for projects of less than 25 kilowatts, according to OilPrice.

The ministry argues that the small rooftop solar are now often viable on their own without incentives, thanks to the lower costs.

“To strengthen the cost efficiency of solar expansion, a stronger focus will in future be placed on cost-effective solar parks,” the ministry’s proposal reads, as carried by Bloomberg.

The plans for a reform of the subsidies was first leaked by German media outlets.

“If the leaked draft is genuine, it would be yet another attack on renewable energy, following the grid package proposal,” said Ursula Heinen-Esser, president of Germany’s renewable energy association BEE.

Abolishing support for rooftop solar would have “disastrous consequences” for the sector and would deprive homeowners from participating in the energy transition, Heinen-Esser added.

The German Solar Association, BSW-Solar, also deplored the leaked draft proposal as “a frontal attack on Germany’s energy transition.”

Germany plans to boost onshore wind capacity to 115 gigawatts and solar capacity to 215 gigawatts by the end of the decade—targets which it will keep in the proposal for reforms. Europe’s biggest economy has a target to have renewables account for 80% of its electricity generation in 2030.

In solar, Germany is halfway through reaching its 2030 solar power targets, BSW-Solar said in June last year.

Germany saw the highest number of onshore wind turbines commissioned in the first half of 2025 for eight years, but the rebound in installations is still off track to reach the official targets, the German wind energy association, Bundesverband WindEnergie (BWE), said in the middle of 2025.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/01/2026 - 07:35

In Sensational Ruling, Court Prohibits German State From Classifying AfD As A "Confirmed Right-Wing Extremist" Organization

Authored by 'eugyppius',

Old friends may remember the farce we experienced last May, when outgoing Marshmallow Interior Minister Nancy Faeser pushed her gaggle of goons in the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) to upgrade their political classification of Alternative für Deutschland.

No longer did the BfV consider the national political party to lurk under mere “suspicion of right-wing extremism,” oh no. They announced suddenly and with much establishment fanfare that they had determined the AfD to be “confirmed right-wing extremists.”

Faeser and her goons hoped this new designation would edge the AfD more firmly into Evil Nazi Fascist Hitler territory in the popular mind, thereby preparing the way for banning the party. According to the dumb Gender Studies-tier retards unassailable and unbiased experts of the BfV, the AfD were more definitely Evil, more definitely Nazi, more definitely Fascist and more definitely Hitler than ever before. They had such clear proofs of all the Evil Nazi Fascist Hitlerism lurking within the AfD that they could not even reveal them. Doing so, Faeser said, would compromise the mysterious sources and methods of her highly sophisticated political spy agency. Instead, the Interior Ministry leaked a classified dossier supporting the upgrade to sympathetic media like Der Spiegel, and these media promptly published earnest articles telling us all how absolutely Fascist and Evil and Nazi and Hitler all the secret evidence showed the AfD to be, because trust us bro.

What happened next is that somebody leaked the full 1,000-page dossier to the alternative news outlets Cicero and NiUS, both of which promptly published the full .pdf. It turned out to be one of the stupidest and most trivial documents I’ve ever read. The supersecret hyperspy sources tapped by the BfV? Google and social media posts. The supersecret hyperspy methods used by the BfV? Compiling interminable lists of potentially untoward or possibly impolite things AfD politicians uttered in googlable documents or on social media. It was so bad that almost overnight the dossier destroyed much of the momentum for an AfD ban – exactly the opposite of what its architects had intended. Even many establishment figures quietly admitted what a travesty the whole thing had turned out to be.

NEVERTHELESS: The establishment moved quickly to capitalise on the new extremist designation. Various state governments began plotting to cleanse the civil service of AfD members on the grounds that they were affiliates of an officially “extremist” organisation. In Rheinland-Pfalz they even toyed with the idea of illegally excluding AfD candidates from running in local elections also on the basis of this bureaucratic designation. The Social Democrats began pushing to initiate ban proceedings against the AfD, a move that – if successful – would grant the left parties indefinite parliamentary majorities both nationally and across many state parliaments, amounting to a kind of legal coup and casting us into a new DDR-light regime.

Meanwhile, the AfD filed suit with the Administrative Court in Cologne to overturn their upgraded designation because it was so obviously dumb and unfounded. They also asked the court to prohibit the designation temporarily, while their primary lawsuit is pending – a long involved process that will take years. The Cologne judges released their unusually extensive 55-page decision on the temporary injunction yesterday. For the party-banning speech-repressing opinion-monitoring enthusiasts of Our Democracy, it is a disaster.

From the Cologne court’s press release:

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) may not classify and treat the Alternative for Germany (AfD) as a confirmed right-wing extremist organisation until the conclusion of the main proceedings … The BfV must also refrain from publicly announcing such a classification …

In its decision today, the court has rejected the BfV’s assessment. We give the following reasons: According to the findings of the summary proceedings, there is sufficient certainty that the AfD houses some efforts directed against the free democratic basic order … These efforts, however, do not characterise the AfD such that its overall essence may be described as anti-constitutional.

That is very important.

Not only the AfD, but all political parties, have randos saying potentially or probably or even certainly anti-constitutional things.

To justify a ban, you need more than random people saying random things.

You need to show a) that the party is fundamentally opposed to the “free democratic basic order” (an ideological trinity consisting of human dignity, democracy and the rule of law), and b) that it exercises this opposition in an “aggressive” or “combative” manner. The BfV have hardly addressed b) at all, and their evidence has not convinced the court that a) applies.

To argue their case, the BfV seem to have positively emptied their archives, submitting not only the leaked 1,000-page dossier to the court, but also an additional raft of supporting materials running to 7,000 pages across 20 different binders and electronic files extending to 1.5 terabytes.

The court finds that some “anti-Muslim” demands formulated by the AfD in the course of the 2025 election campaign are contrary to the German Basic Law, because these would tend to vitiate “the equal practice of religion,” but the judges also find that these are insufficient to “establish the anti-constitutional character of the party as a whole.” The court further noted that the BfV “has not disclosed any intelligence information … even in court proceedings” relating to allegedly secret anti-constitutional plots within the AfD, which means that “we cannot assume to the detriment of [the AfD] that [the party] is pursuing such further plans internally.”

A significant prong of the constitutional protectors’ argument held that the AfD’s advocacy of “remigration” was itself openly unconstitutional. Importantly, the court completely disagreed:

… [N]o sufficient conclusions can be drawn from any plans pursued by [the AfD] … with regard to so-called remigration. The vague term “remigration” does not imply a concrete political goal in the sense of undifferentiated deportations … In the absence of a more concrete explanation of specific anti-constitutional intentions with respect to implementing a … remigration policy, such intentions are not apparent.

As I said, this is only a temporary ruling, but given the devastating wording of the court’s judgment, it seems unlikely that the judges in Cologne will ultimately uphold the “extremist” designation when to comes time to decide the main case some years from now. The constitutional protectors may also appeal this injunction, but they would be unlikely to win, and also too I think there is a substantial chance that their ultimate boss, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU), directs them to let this go. Whatever happens, the case for banning the AfD has taken a major, perhaps a fatal, blow. The fundamental problem this whole time has been that the AfD programme is pretty much constitutionally unassailable. Those who want to ban the party have had to hope against hope that the constitutional protectors could unearth secret AfD Nazi plans via their super advanced espionage methods. Instead they’ve spent years copying and pasting Facebook posts and they have basically nothing.

This case converges with other evidence suggesting that the German state – while it may presently wish to ban the opposition and repress its critics – increasingly lacks the internal resolve and coherence for this project.

I’ll write more about that tomorrow; today’s adventures (see below) interrupted my routine, but I wanted to get this news out there as soon as possible.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/01/2026 - 07:00

After The Iran Attack, Is Bitcoin Giving A "Green Light" Ahead Of Monday's Market Open

The first time Iran found itself in a major regional war with Donald Trump about to enter the White House, was April 13, 2024 when as part of escalating tensions with Israel, "Iran began an attack on Israel by launching dozens of suicide drones" on April 13, 2024. That said, it is s stretch to call that particular weapons exchange war, as both sides just wanted some theatrical appreciation rather than rearranging the borders of the middle East. What is more notable, is that the war started in the deep dark of a Saturday morning (April 13, 2024) when global markets were closed, and the only traded asset was crypto in general, and bitcoin in particular. The kneejerk reaction was sharply lower. 

The second time Iran found itself in a major regional war with Donald Trump (already in) the White House, was a little over a year later, on June 21-22, when in a much more serious and aggressive attack, Operation Midnight Hammer saw airstrikes, cruise missile attacks and B-2 bombers drop Massive Ordnance Penetrators on three key Iranian nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, all of which were quickly destroyed As a result, Iran's nuclear enrichment process was effectively (and literally) buried under a mountain, and then the major regional conflict was again promptly forgotten. What is most notable, is that that war, too, started in the deep dark of a Saturday morning (June 21, 2025) when global markets were closed, and the only traded asset was crypto in general, and bitcoin in particular. The kneejerk reaction this time too, was sharply lower. 

Fast forward to today, when in the most serious war between Iran and a coalition of US and Israel forces in decades, Iran was promptly "decapitated" as all of its top generals and IRGC personnel were killed, while also losing its spiritual head, the Ayatollah, who had led the country ever since those fateful days in 1978 when Shah Mohammed Reza-Pahlavi was replaced with Ruhollah Ayatollah, and an American embassy and its occupants were taken hostage. This conflict started shortly after the sun rose, as the attacking generals thought a night attack which everyone - and especially Iran - would expect as it is "meant" to be surprise would have little impact. They were right, and Ayatollah Khomeini was promptly vaporized. Where there was similarity to previous conflicts is that this one too started early on Saturday, when global markets were closed. Well, not all: bitcoin was trading. And, like the previous two most recent regional wars, Bitcoin's kneejerk reaction this time too, was sharply lower... but not for long, and shortly after it emerged that Ayatollah Khameini was dead and most of the army leaders had been killed, bitcoin - that weekend trading risk barometer - staged a remarkable rebound and was actually trading well above where it was before the currency sold off shortly after midnight on Saturday East Coast time.

Which begs the question: is the conflict now effectively over and is Wall Street getting the all-green signals? 

This is also the question asked by Academy Securities strategist Peter Tchir, who in a late Saturday note - when most of the latest development were already known -  wrote that he remains comfortable buying the market.

He explains why below: 

A lot was priced in. Brent has gone for $60 late December to $72 on Friday. Some of that move in energy prices likely tied to cold winter in America, etc, but away from the risk of conflict, the market was positioned for selling off. So far the "bad" news on the oil front should have been largely priced in.

• Insurance for shipping in region cancelled.  pretty standard
• Limited or no transit in the Strait of Hormuz. Should be expected

The "good" news on the oil front is that nothing has happened that would prevent transit if there is an off ramp. 

China supposedly has large stockpiles of crude and the U.S. in good shape, so a short disruption (a week or so) should have minimal impact. Spot oil contracts might go as high as $80 but am not expecting a big move out the curve

Furthermore, while it is early, so far intelligence and military in action have delivered at high levels for the US and Israel. Not so much for Iran.  Maybe they have another round up their sleeve, but according to Tchir, :"their calculus should be adjusted - to seek off ramp"

With confirmations stating that the leadership has been hit hard, what is the thought process of those assuming command:

You know that Isreal and the U.S. probably know who you are and possibly where you will be. That cannot be comforting.

Their weapon systems have performed as advertised (or maybe even better than expected).

Your weapons, like in prior attacks, and like Russia has experience, have not been as good as expected.

Which brings us to Bitcoin, which Tchir - and anyone else - views as a risk-on type of asset in this situation, has now recovered from small early loss to slightly highere. 

Putting it all together, Tchir - looking through the fog of war - says that he is optimistic for a "risk on" start to the week, while may sound a little bit callous, which is also why the Academy Strategist notes that "we can only hope that the events in the Middle East lead to a peaceful resolution, putting the Iranian people on a better path to prosperity and freedom, while minimizing the loss of life for everyone in the region."

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/01/2026 - 00:19

What A Taiwan Invasion Would Cost China

Authored by Antonio Graceffo via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Shortly after meeting with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping in late October, President Donald Trump said China would never attack Taiwan while he is president because Chinese officials “know the consequences.” While support from the United States is welcome news for Taiwan, Trump’s words raise a real question: Does Xi actually know the cost of invading Taiwan?

A U.S.-made F-16V fighter jet taxis on the runway at an airforce base during the annual Han Kuang military drills in Hualien, Taiwan, on July 23, 2024. Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images

Much of the analysis of a potential Beijing attempt to seize Taiwan by force has centered on the Chinese military’s capabilities and Taiwan’s defenses, especially if supported by the United States. Many assessments conclude that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is not currently capable of defeating the U.S. military in a direct conflict.

However, analysts still warn of a worst-case scenario in which Xi, seeking to cement his legacy, launches a premature strike. Xi has tied his legitimacy to the “China Dream” of national rejuvenation by 2049 and has framed unifying Taiwan with the mainland as essential to achieving that goal.

The recent wave of purges, particularly of senior leaders such as former Central Military Commission (CMC) Vice Chairman General Zhang Youxia, has intensified speculation. With most of the commission allegedly removed and the CMC now effectively consisting of Xi and loyalist Vice Chairman Zhang Shengmin, some analysts argue that Xi has eliminated voices that could have dissuaded him from attacking Taiwan. Even if that was not his intent, the practical result may be similar. With little meaningful pushback inside the system, Xi could face fewer internal constraints if he chooses to act.

The German Marshall Fund and the Rhodium Group recently published “If China Attacks Taiwan,” a report examining the potential costs to Beijing of a prolonged war. The authors note they were not asked to adopt Xi’s personal perspective and acknowledge that Chinese authorities could misjudge the likely consequences.

Even when costs are high, national leaders sometimes proceed if perceived benefits or political pressures outweigh the risks. Xi could conclude that failing to act—particularly if he believes Taipei is moving toward permanent separation with U.S. backing—would damage his authority more than launching a risky military operation.

The study examines how a conflict would affect China’s economy, military capabilities, social stability, and international position. It warns that war could produce massive economic disruption, catastrophic military losses, serious social unrest, and severe sanctions. This brings the analysis back to three critical questions: What would the price of a Taiwan invasion be? Is Xi fully aware of that price? And does he care? The latter two only Xi can answer, but the first is measurable, and the potential impact on the CCP would be staggering.

In the report’s major war scenario, an invasion lasts several months and draws in the United States and its allies. The conflict begins with an amphibious assault and missile strikes on Taiwan as well as on U.S. forces in Japan and Guam. Although Chinese forces land on Taiwan, sustained Taiwanese and U.S. strikes disrupt resupply across the Taiwan Strait. After months of heavy fighting, the PLA withdraws to the mainland, having lost roughly 100,000 personnel. Taiwan suffers approximately 50,000 military and 50,000 civilian casualties. The United States loses 5,000 military personnel and 1,000 civilians, Japan loses 1,000 military personnel and 500 civilians, and the PLA retains control only of Kinmen and Matsu.

An aerial view of vehicles awaiting their export at a port in Nanjing, eastern Jiangsu Province, China, on Dec. 9, 2025. AFP via Getty Images

The report argues that a failed Chinese attack would impose severe economic, military, social, and international costs, and that it would be a mistake to assume Beijing would necessarily prevail. Even a limited military engagement could result in trillions of dollars in losses.

A 2022 Rhodium study estimated economic damage of at least $2 trillion to $3 trillion under conservative assumptions, while Bloomberg analysts projected costs closer to $10 trillion. In a prolonged war ending with Chinese withdrawal, the economic impact would extend beyond market disruption to systemic breakdown.

China is uniquely exposed because roughly 20 percent of its GDP and about 13 percent of its employment depend on exports, double the U.S. share. A major conflict would likely trigger a near-total embargo by G7 nations. After years of doubling down on high-tech manufacturing such as electric vehicles, semiconductors, and green technology instead of strengthening domestic consumption, China would have few alternative markets for its surplus output. Without export demand, large portions of its industrial base would idle, leading to a contraction in GDP potentially worse than during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

[ZH: And where, pray-tell, does the west get all of the 'shit' made during this embargo?]

Financial decoupling would compound the shock. The report anticipates the freezing of China’s roughly $3.39 trillion in foreign exchange reserves and places its $3.6 trillion in foreign direct investment at risk. Even if Beijing achieved military objectives, the global financial system could treat China as permanently uninvestable, effectively ending its role as a global financial hub. Hong Kong would likely lose its status as the primary gateway for international capital into the mainland.

Energy and food security add further strain. A months-long war could allow the United States and its allies to impose a distant blockade, cutting off 70 percent to 90 percent of the oil and roughly 40 percent of the natural gas that China imports by sea. Severe energy and food rationing could follow, increasing the risk of domestic unrest. With domestic demand already weakening, sanctions or a blockade would strike at one of China’s remaining growth engines.

The CCP’s legitimacy depends heavily on economic stability. A failed war that produces mass unemployment, shortages, a financial crisis, and long-term technological isolation could fracture the global economy into rival blocs, leaving China isolated for decades. Although the PLA has grown stronger, its economic vulnerabilities mean that the cost of a failed invasion could pose an existential challenge to the CCP itself.

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 23:40

The Transatlantic Divide In Language Learning

The benefits of learning a foreign language are extensive and go way beyond the ability to converse with people from other countries.

Speaking a second language broadens the horizon, takes the guesswork out of restaurant orders on vacation and even makes the Super Bowl Halftime Show more enjoyable.

It has professional benefits as well, as multilingualism is a much sought-after skill in today's globalized world. Even though you can get by pretty well speaking only English, learning a second, or third, language is always going to be worth it.

While learning foreign languages is ubiquitous in Europe, where most students start learning English as early as primary school, the story in the U.S. is completely different. Most European countries have a national-level mandate for studying languages at school but such standards are non-existent on the other side of the Atlantic where such legislation only exists at school district or state-level, if at all.

As Statista'a Felix Richter reports, according to the National K-12 Foreign Language Enrollment Survey conducted by the Americans Councils for International Education, less than 20 percent of K-12 students in the U.S. were enrolled in foreign language classes in 2014/15, the latest available data.

You will find more infographics at Statista

This is a far cry from the enrollment rates seen across Europe, as Eurostat data shows.

Many European countries have enrollment rates close to 100 percent, with an average of 91 percent of primary and secondary school students learning at least one foreign language across the European Union.

More than one in three students in the EU even study two or more foreign languages, showing that many student learn more than "just" English.

While English is by far the most widely taught foreign language across Europe, Spanish is the most popular second language in the U.S.

Of the 10.6 million students enrolled in a foreign language class in 2014/2015, 7.4 million studied Spanish and 1.3 million learned French.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 23:00

Fed Plans To Release Sweeping Bank‑Capital Rule By Late March: Top Regulator

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Long-awaited banking regulation—also known as the Basel III Endgame framework—will be released next month, said the Federal Reserve’s top banking regulator.

Michelle Bowman, vice chair for supervision of the Federal Reserve Board, in Washington on July 22, 2025. Ken Cedeno/Reuters

Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman, appearing at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Feb. 26, confirmed that regulators are expected to release an updated Basel III proposal at the end of March.

But while this is the chief goal, Bowman hinted that the deadline might need to be extended.

She told lawmakers that officials at the Fed, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have reached a consensus on the reproposal.

Basel III is a regulatory blueprint crafted in the fallout of the global financial crisis of 2008. It features a number of capital reforms and tighter requirements for how large U.S. banks measure credit, market, and operational risk.

In recent months, Bowman has teased that Basel III has retooled capital requirements, a move that could bolster lending by traditional lenders, particularly in the mortgage market.

“We’re very focused, as we were thinking about the Basel approach, in ways that we could right-size and recalibrate the approach for residential mortgage lending so that we could encourage the banks to get back into the mortgage business,” Bowman told senators.

“We’re refocusing our supervision in a laser focus on material financial risks.”

This comes shortly after Bowman suggested new mortgage capital rules for U.S. banks would be integral to the Basel III proposal.

Appearing at an American Bankers Association event on Feb. 16, Bowman stated that one change could tie a mortgage’s risk weight to its loan-to-value-ratio, effectively removing the one-size-fits-all approach. Another update could remove a provision requiring that banks deduct mortgage‑servicing assets from regulatory capital.

For years, critics have argued that the original Basel III proposal would have reduced lending due to higher capital mandates and would have led to higher funding costs for borrowers.

Proponents say higher capital requirements are necessary to prevent a similar financial crisis in the future.

But while the focus has been on Basel, Bowman argued that other issues also need to be addressed, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s stringent requirements and the sizable penalties banks face if they make mistakes on mortgage applications.

“I think it’s important that we think about this in a broader manner and holistically as we approach thinking about banks getting back into the mortgage space,” Bowman said.

Support for Homeownership

Overall, Bowman noted, the upcoming reproposal could spark affordable homeownership, ensure banks of all sizes come off the sidelines, and support market liquidity.

“My approach is to calibrate the new framework from the bottom up, rather than reverse engineer changes to achieve predetermined or preconceived outcomes to capital requirements,” she stated.

This comes as a group of eight major banking and housing associations urged regulators to ease mortgage capital requirements.

In a letter to the Fed, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the organizations stated that today’s regulatory environment discourages bank participation in mortgage markets, exacerbating housing affordability challenges.

The groups said they support current efforts to alter the Basel III Endgame rule, casting the process as an opportunity to strengthen mortgage‑market stability and create space for banks to play a larger role in home lending.

Homes for sale in Maryland on Nov. 12, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

“Adequate capital reduces the likelihood of bank failures that threaten broader financial stability, which can prove costly for households, financial institutions, and taxpayers,” the letter stated. “However, excessive capital requirements that are misaligned with empirically derived risk assessments can negatively affect the cost of and access to credit.”

Revitalizing the mortgage market has been one of the current administration’s objectives to ensure more households have an opportunity to become homeowners.

In his record-length State of the Union address, President Donald Trump noted that his economic agenda balances the needs of current homeowners and homebuyers.

“Low interest rates will help reduce the Biden‑created housing affordability crunch,” Trump said. “We want to protect those values. We want to keep those values up. We’re going to do both.”

As of Feb. 26, the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage is 5.98 percent, according to Freddie Mac’s Primary Mortgage Market Survey.

A recent National Association of Realtors poll found that 85 percent of U.S. voters believe homeownership is central to the American dream.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 22:20

Epstein Had More Female Accomplices: Some Were Masquerading As Victims

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

New revelations from Rep. Anna Paulina Luna expose Jeffrey Epstein’s network as a sophisticated honeypot operation likely tied to foreign intelligence, designed to compromise powerful figures through sex trafficking and blackmail.

Luna, leading the congressional probe, asserts the scandal runs deeper than previously known, with inconsistencies in plea deals for key female accomplices fueling suspicions of a cover-up to protect the elite.

Based on evidence reviewed in the investigation, Luna stated that Jeffrey Epstein was running an intelligence-gathering operation, stating “In my professional opinion, I do believe it was a honeypot operation.”

Based on our congressional investigation it is my professional opinion that Jeffrey Epstein was running a honey pot operation. I am calling on Oversight to bring these 4 women in for questioning as co-conspirators to child sex trafficking. pic.twitter.com/KmxEovN9hC

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 27, 2026

“It has become very evident…that Jeffrey Epstein was running an intelligence gathering operation,” Luna continued, noting “We might be able to get justice.”

She elaborated, “I do believe that Jeffrey Epstein was targeting many politicians, many influential people, especially in regards to economic policy. I do believe that it was possible that not just (Bill Clinton), but Secretary Clinton as well as a number of other people were targeted.”

Luna called for subpoenas on four women identified as co-conspirators: Sarah Kellen, Nadia Marcinkova, Adriana Ross, and Lesley Groff.

?Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna drops BOMBSHELL, reveals she believes Jeffrey Epstein was running an Intelligence gathering Honey Pot Operation based on evidence and testimony.

She is also calling on on four co-conspirators involved in trafficking who she says are being… pic.twitter.com/WUgdiv2G34

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) February 27, 2026

These individuals received immunity under Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement, despite allegations of scheduling abuse, recruiting victims, and participating in acts.

Luna also highlighted other discrepancies, such as Susan Hamblin sending an email in which she told Epstein his “littlest girl was naughty,” yet receiving victim status and a plea deal.

? Rep Anna Luna just revealed that Epstein “victim” Susan Hamblin sent the “your littlest girl was naughty email”

“Susan Hamblin sent this email. She took a plea deal and was given “victim” status under previous DOJ. DOJ should look into charges.

Possible human rights… pic.twitter.com/NMIxgv1sLk

— Red Panda Koala (@RedPandaKoala) February 18, 2026

The Congresswoman also pointed to Nadia Marcinkova, who sent explicit emails as an adult co-conspirator but was granted victim status.

This email was sent by a woman named Nadia. The same Nadia that was listed as co-conspirator in the NY case. She was then given a plea deal and “victim” status.

There’s a big difference between minors that were victimized versus ones that became adults and then chose to do… pic.twitter.com/NOXGDdgg6m

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 18, 2026

Luna demanded, “The DOJ NEEDS to re-open these cases, adding that the “Previous DOJ let them off.”

She added, “Why were a number of Epstein’s co-conspirators given plea deals for trafficking minors? Child sex traffickers do not deserve plea deals or immunity. EVER.”

Why were a number of Epstein’s co-conspirators given plea deals for trafficking minors? Child sex traffickers do not deserve plea deals or immunity. EVER. pic.twitter.com/wT4CEQz1Gd

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 27, 2026

Barry Levine, author of “The Spider,” reinforced on Jesse Watters’ show that female co-conspirators received plea deals for trafficking.

Levine noted models from around the world were involved, echoing Luna’s foreign ties concerns.

Barry Levine knocked it out of the park on Watters right now. FEMALE Co-conspirators were given plea deals! There is a lot here. Trafficking etc. everyone needs to see this segment. pic.twitter.com/B2dfYbBLDG

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 27, 2026

Jesse Watters highlighted, “Hillary did seem perceptive to the idea.”

BREAKING: Rep Anna Paulina Luna says Hillary was PRESSED on Jeffrey Epstein’s FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE TIES ?@RepLuna: “It’s safe to say, Epstein was TIED to Foreign Intelligence… RUSSIA, IRAN, ISRAEL” ?

“Hillary did seem perceptive to the idea” ?? pic.twitter.com/1GkJJG8Ynh

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) February 27, 2026

In another major development in the case, former President Bill Clinton testified under oath that President Trump was not involved at all with Epstein to his knowledge.

?? BREAKING: Democrats are DONE. President Bill Clinton testifies UNDER OATH that President Donald Trump WAS NOT involved with Jeffrey Epstein

"Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved [with Epstein]."pic.twitter.com/seQ15pfTrI

— The Patriot Oasis™ (@ThePatriotOasis) February 27, 2026

Clinton stated, “Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved [with Epstein].”

Luna confirmed, “President Trump has been exonerated. He is not considered a person of interest in our Congressional investigation.”

President Trump has been exonerated. He is not considered a person of interest in our Congressional investigation. Democrats continue to insist otherwise to smear him and sabotage his presidency. It’s a political game to them. pic.twitter.com/QlwlWE3YFd

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) February 27, 2026

She accused Democrats of smearing Trump, saying, “Democrats continue to insist otherwise to smear him and sabotage his presidency. It’s a political game to them.”

“We had cooperation, we asked the victims directly and he was exonerated,” Luna said.

Fresh documents from the mass file release have also revealed a shocking intrusion into the FBI’s NYC office on Super Bowl Sunday in 2023, resulting in the loss of approximately 100TB of evidence.

FBI Special Agent Aaron Spivack detailed the breach in a declaration, stating, “500 terabytes of data was gone as a result of the intrusion. I was able to recover about 400 terabytes of that data, however. I was told to Google how to recover the data. No one else tried to help us.”

Spivack described discovering unusual activity: “Around 3:30pm or so we located the log files and began combing through, which is when we noticed strange IP activity that took place yesterday from two IP addresses. The activity included combing through certain files pertaining to the Epstein investigation.”

He continued, “I reached out to one of the case agents to see if they were in the office yesterday, thinking that maybe they inadvertently changed a setting on the NAS or if they noticed anything strange about them.”

Further investigation revealed, “Around 4/4:30pm we dove into the IPs and checked all of our computers to see which had the IPs in question. One computer, our discovery computer, matched one of them and is located in a room next to the lab. The other IP is one we don’t recognize, but it is the same address as the IP on our network, leading us to believe it was a computer that accessed our network somehow.”

Spivack concluded, “We were not able to identify the computer, but it had to have accessed our network either by being plugged into the network, or possibly by telnetting in virtually.”

This breach raises serious questions about security lapses and potential efforts to suppress evidence in the Epstein case.

These disclosures build on anomalies detailed in our prior reports, where DOJ documents referenced Epstein’s death as a “MURDER” and highlighted red flags like mismatched autopsy details and missing footage.

The inconsistencies point to elite protection of the operation. 

Theories that both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were intelligence operatives linked to Mossad, other foreign entities and a “supra government” shielding elites have exploded online.

As demands for the full client list grow, these revelations expose a web of elite impunity. The public deserves unredacted truth to dismantle any remaining deep state shields.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 21:00

If You're Freaking Out About A Future Jobless AI Dystopia...

Amid an armada of dystopian futurists, projecting linear thoughts into a future of 'AI uber alles', Marc Andreessen stands as a beacon of potential utopian light, seeing a future that looks very different and very positive for young and old alike.

In a brief few minutes, the co-founder of Netscape and VC firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) believes instead that we are living through a unique (and most incredible) time in history with the rise of AI coming right as human civilization needs it...

"we're going to have AI and robots precisely when we actually need them [with populations shrinking] to keep the economy from actually shrinking."

Simply put, Andreessen says that fears of AI-driven mass job loss are overly simplistic.

After decades of unusually slow technological change and low job churn, AI could restore historical productivity levels (exemplified by the period from 1870-1930), sparking opportunity, innovation, and net job growth rather than displacement. 

Declining populations and reduced immigration will make human labor increasingly valuable. AI's timing is "miraculous", Andreessen exclaims, preventing economic shrinkage from depopulation.

In even radical scenarios, explosive productivity leads to output gluts, collapsing prices, and massive real-wealth gains - equivalent to "giant raises" for everyone - while making safety-nets more affordable. 

Whether incremental or transformative, Andreessen sees the outcome as fundamentally positive economic news.

"...there's all this concern among young people that their jobs are not going to be there for them. AI is replacing them..."

Andreessen replies (emphasis ours): 

So the job-substitution/job-loss thing is very reductive. I think it's an overly simplistic model. And again it goes back to what I said at the very beginning which is we've actually been in a regime for 50 years of very slow technological change in the economy... like at half the rate of the previous era and a third the rate of like 100 years ago.

And so we're coming out of this kind of phase where we've had like almost no technological progress in the economy. We've had remarkably little job churn as a result of that relative to any historical period. And so even if AI triples productivity growth in the economy, which would like be a massively big deal, it would take us back to the same level of job churn that was happening between 1870 and 1930.

And if you go back and you read accounts of 1870 to 1930, people just thought the world was awash with opportunity. Right? At that rate of technological transformation, kids were able to develop new careers into new areas of the economy, building new kinds of products and services. A huge part of everything in our modern world today was kind of invented and proliferated during that period.

And so even if AI triples the pace of economic change in the economy, it's going to translate to a much higher rate of economic growth; it's going to translate to a much higher rate of job growth. And there will be some level of like task level and job level substitution that will take place but that will be swamped by the macro effects of economic growth and innovation that will happen and that then corresponding to that there will be hiring blooms quite honestly I think all over the place

And then again go back to the fact that this is all happening in the face of declining population growth and increasingly population shrinkage. So human workers in many, many, many countries over the next you know 10, 20, 30 years are going to be at more and more of a premium, literally because you're going to have shrinking population levels.

[While] we don't really want to get into you know politics particularly but it does feel like the world broadly is going to reverse course on the rates of immigration that we've had for the last 50 years. it seems to be kind of a broad-based thing happening - rise in nationalism, concerns about the rate of immigration - and immigration historically in countries like the US ha ebbed and flowed over time based on how the national mood shifts.

And so in a country like the US (or any country in Europe), if you combine declining population with less immigration, the remaining human workers are going to be at a premium not at a discount. And so I think that the combination of faster productivity growth, faster economic growth, and then slower population growth and less immigration - actually means there's going to be much less of this kind of dystopian/no-jobs thing. I just think it's probably totally off-base. 

"That is extremely interesting. So, what I'm hearing is you're not super worried about job loss. Is the key here that the timing kind of just works out, this population decrease, you know, like all these kind of have to line up for there not to be this massive job loss with AI?"

Andreessen replies (emphasis ours): 

Yeah.

Well, look, if we didn't have AI, we'd be in a panic right now about what's going to happen to the economy. Right? Because what we what we'd be staring at is a future of depopulation and depopulation without new technology would just mean that the economy shrinks. Right? 

So it would mean that the economy kind of itself kind of shrinks over time, the opportunity diminishes, and there are no new jobs, there are no new fields. There's no new source of consumer demand for spending on things. And so you would be very worried about going into period of severe decline or stagnation.

Essentially you'd be looking at these very dystopian scenarios of like an economy self-euthanizing over time. 

So you'd be very worried about the opposite of what everybody thinks that they're worried about. The only reason we're not worried about that is because we now know that we have the technology that can substitute for the lack of population growth and also for the for the lack of immigration that's likely.

And so, I would say the timing has worked out miraculously well in the sense that we're going to have AI and robots precisely when we actually need them, to keep the economy from actually shrinking. 

And that's just like a fundamentally good news story.

To get to the mass-job-loss thing that people are worried about, you'd have to look at like far, far, far higher rates of productivity growth. You'd have to look at rates of productivity growth that are 10, 20, 30, 50% a year - something like that - which are orders of magnitude higher than we've ever had in any economy in the history of the planet.

It's possible that we get that. I mean, look, I have my utopian temptation along with everybody else.

If AI radically transforms everything overnight, then maybe... let's play out the kind of utopian scenario. 

You get to a much higher level of productivity growth.

You get to a much higher level of technological change.

Corresponding to that you'll have a massive economic boom. 

You'll have massive growth in the economy and then corresponding with that you'll have a collapse in prices. 

And so the price of goods and services that are affected by (or commoditized by) AI will collapse.

There'll be price deflation and then as a consequence of price deflation everything that people are buying today gets a lot cheaper and that's the equivalent of a gigantic increase in wealth right across the society.

This is actually worth talking about because people I think people get kind of sideways on this issue.

So if AI is going to transform the economy as much as the utopians or dystopians (or whatever kind) think that it will, the necessary economic calculation of what happens is massive productivity growth. 

The consequence of massive productivity growth literally means mechanically more output requiring less input, right? 

So you get more economic output for less input, right? So you're substituting in AI for human workers.

And as a consequence, you get like this massive boom in output with much lower input costs. 

The result of that is you get lots of goods and services in all those affected sectors. The result of those gluts is you get collapsing prices, right? 

The collapsing prices mean that the thing today that cost you $100 now cost you $10 and now cost you $1.

That's the equivalent of giving everybody a giant raise, right? 

Because now they have all this additional spending power. 

That additional spending power then translates to economic growth, right? 

The development of new fields. Everybody's materially much better off very quickly. And then by the way, to the extent that you do have unemployment coming out the other side of that, it's now much cheaper to provide the kind of social safety net to prevent people from being immiserated, right? 

Because the prices of all the goods and services that a welfare program has to pay from, they're all collapsing, right? And so the price of healthcare collapses, the price of housing collapses, the price of education collapses, the price of everything else collapses because of the incredible impact that AI is having. 

And so in this kind of utopian/dystopian scenario that people have, there's no scenario in which everybody's just poor. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

Everybody gets a lot richer because prices collapse and then it's actually much easier to pay for the social safety net for the people who, for some reason, can't find a job.

And so, maybe we end up in that scenario. 

I mean, the optimistic part of me says, yeah, maybe AI is that powerful and maybe the rest of the economy can actually change to accommodate that and maybe that'll happen.

But the result of that is going to be a much better news story than people think it's going to be. 

Everything I've just described, by the way, is just a very straightforward extrapolation on very basic economics. I'm not making any like bold predictions in what I just said. This is just a straightforward mechanical process that plays itself out if you have higher rates of productivity growth, which are necessarily the results of higher rates of technological growth.

And so, to be clear, I think we're looking at a world that's not like radically transformed the way that maybe the utopians think that it will be or the dystopians think it will be. 

I think it'll be more incremental.

But I think that incremental shift is overwhelmingly going to be a good news process. And then even if it's much faster, it's also going to be a good news process. It'll just be a good news process in the other way that I described.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 20:20

Iran Says US-Israeli Attack Hit Elementary School, Killing 85+ Girls

Via Middle East Eye

At least 85 people, almost all of them young girls, have been killed in an air strike on a primary school in southern Iran, the Iranian judiciary said. The attack on Saturday morning hit Shajareh Tayyebeh schoolin the city of Minab, in Hormozgan province, as the United States and Israel began launching strikes on targets across Iran.

The victims were between seven and 12 years old, according to Iran's Tasnim and Fars news agencies. A staff member at the Minab school, who asked not to be named, told Middle East Eye she remains in shock at the intensity of the attack. Iran's foreign minister also featured the attack on social media.

Video posted on pro-government Telegram accounts shows Iranians searching through a destroyed school in Minab, via Telegram

Through tears, she said she used to watch the young girls playing at school every day. After today’s strikes, however, she saw their bodies lying on classroom benches and in different corners of the school.

She said she had stepped out of the school to take care of something when she suddenly heard a horrifying sound. Within seconds, a missile - or something like it - hit the school building. After hearing the blast, she ran back towards the school and was faced with a scene she says she would never forget. 

“I felt like I had gone mute. I couldn’t speak,” the staff member told MEE. “You could hear the sound of children crying and screaming.” When rescue teams arrived, she said, they began to understand the scale of the disaster.

“We still don’t know how many are under the rubble. Some are even saying more than 100. Some of these small children are severely injured. Their parents have come to the school, and this place has turned into a house of mourning.”

The air strike on the school left many inside the building trapped beneath the rubble. There were 170 female students at the school at the time of the attack. So far, at least 45 people have also been reported wounded.

Footage posted by Telegram accounts affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps appeared to show people digging through the rubble.

Smoke could be seen rising from surrounding buildings, while a wrecked car lay in the street. People were heard screaming and wailing; others appeared to be in shock. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denounced the attack on X and said the deaths of the children would "not go unanswered".

"The destroyed building is a primary school for girls in the south of Iran. It was bombed in broad daylight, when packed with young pupils," he wrote. "Dozens of innocent children have been murdered at this site alone."

At least 70 people, including some 60 children, were killed when U.S. and Israeli strikes hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab, southern Iran, according to the Fars News.

The attack reportedly struck during school hours, with about 170 girls inside.… pic.twitter.com/G7dE0z660f

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) February 28, 2026

Country-wide attacks

US and Israeli strikes on Iran have also heavily targeted Tehran. Explosions echoed across the capital as Iranians set out for work on the first day of the week, before quickly spreading across the country.

Attacks were reported in a range of cities, including the holy city of Qom, as well as Karaj, Isfahan and Kermanshah. An overall death toll has not yet been released, but Reuters reported that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had been moved to a “safe location”.

US President Donald Trump said the joint attacks were aimed at "eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime".

"Short time ago, US military began major combat operation in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating threats from the Iranian regime," he said. Trump also made a number of other statements and predictions without offering any concrete evidence, such as Washington's refusal to allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon.

"We are going to annihilate their navy. We are going to ensure that the region’s ‘terrorist’ proxies can no longer destabilise the region or the world. "We will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. It is a very simple message." 

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 17:00

DOE Announces $171 Million For Geothermal Expansion

The DOE released a Notice of Funding Opportunity offering up to $171.5 million for next-generation geothermal field tests and resource exploration. 

The program targets field-scale demonstrations of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) for electricity generation, along with drilling to characterize and confirm hydrothermal and next-gen prospects nationwide.

The funding splits into two initial open topics: up to $100 million for EGS field tests and $71.5 million for exploratory drilling. Letters of intent are due March 27, with full applications due April 30. The move directly supports President Trump’s Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy,” according to the agency.

Geothermal currently supplies roughly 4 GW of U.S. capacity, but represents only about 0.3% of total power generation. DOE estimates the resource base could support 300 GW or more by 2050 with technology improvements, delivering firm, 24/7 baseload power that complements intermittent renewables and meets rising demand from data centers and AI infrastructure.

Recent studies show that some of the best locations in the United States for new geothermal sites are in the western part of the country and some of the southern states. 

Assistant Secretary Kyle Haustveit of the Office of Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy stated the initiative will “directly support our commitments to advance energy addition, reduce energy costs for American families and businesses, and unleash American energy dominance and innovation.”

One of the only pure-play publicly traded geothermal companies is Ormat Technologies (ORA), which develops, owns, and operates geothermal power plants primarily in the U.S. and internationally. The company has recently expanded via long-term power purchase agreements with data-center operators (Google), underscoring commercial interest in reliable geothermal supply.

Some Democratic appropriators are pitching a fit, noting the $146.5 million tranche exceeds the $118 million Congress appropriated for geothermal in FY2025 and requesting further review. Proponents counter that successful pilots could unlock far larger private investment and help diversify the grid beyond wind, solar, and gas.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 16:20

"Expect Moderate Disruptions": Oil Tankers Avoid Strait Of Hormuz As Operation Fury Hits Iran

Automatic Identification System (AIS) vessel-tracking data indicate that multiple tankers abruptly reversed course near the entrance to the critical maritime chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz early Saturday, following the U.S.-Israeli operation (Operation Epic Fury) targeting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps command-and-control infrastructure in multiple Iranian cities.

Bloomberg reporter Stephen Stapczynski pulled data from the Terminal that shows shipowners of crude oil, crude products, and LNG tankers are avoiding the strait, even though the waterway remains open and traffic has not stopped entirely.

"A number of oil and LNG tankers are avoiding sailing through the Strait of Hormuz NYK has advised its ships to avoid the waterway," Stapczynski wrote on X.

A number of oil and LNG tankers are avoiding sailing through the Strait of Hormuz

NYK has advised its ships to avoid the waterway pic.twitter.com/oAubwJBjxs

— Stephen Stapczynski (@SStapczynski) February 28, 2026

Stapczynski noted. 

PLEASE NOTE: There are still tankers traveling through the waterway. Not a total halt right now https://t.co/pSzNZuBMoL

— Stephen Stapczynski (@SStapczynski) February 28, 2026

Less than a day before Operation Epic Fury began, Bloomberg macro strategist Michael Ball warned, "US military action on Iran would result in sudden-yet-tradeable risk aversion. The negative markets impulse only sustains if there's material disruption to regional oil production and shipping flows around the Strait of Hormuz."

Map: Strait of Hormuz

Sources told CNN earlier this morning that Operation Epic Fury was the result of "months of joint planning" and will involve several days of attacks. The key question is whether the operation against Iran will spill over into next week. If it does, that would suggest potential disruptions at the critical maritime chokepoint, which handles one-fifth of global seaborne oil and LNG flows.

Rapidan Energy Group analyst Fernando Ferreira commented on the situation, indicating:

Iran understands that threatening traffic through Hormuz is its most credible asymmetric lever. Even limited interference can raise oil prices and impose immediate economic costs on the US and its partners, increasing pressure on Washington to de-escalate.

We expect at least moderate disruptions to Gulf oil flows in the coming days, with the risk tilted toward something more severe if tensions escalate further. 

And here it is:

• FT: INSURERS TO CANCEL POLICIES FOR SHIPS IN GULF, HORMUZ STRAIT

Goldman analyst Adam Crook provided clients, shortly after the operation began, with an overview of how oil and gold were positioned heading into the weekend:

Tallulah Adams (Commods Sales): “We have seen significant engagement from the franchise in Oil and European Gas upside over previous weeks, being the most directly impacted Commodities in an escalation scenario (20% each of Global Oil and LNG flows transit through the Strait of Hormuz).

Oil remains the most direct and liquid expression as a geopolitical hedge – while a full closure of the Strait of Hormuz remains a tail scenario, even a disruption of flows through the Strait via other means (targeting of ships, insurance issues) poses an upside scenario closer to $100/bbl. Additionally, whilst not our base case, an attack on Iranian Oil infrastructure puts 2mb/d of Iran Crude exports at risk.

Despite a Middle East escalation remaining top of mind, positioning ironically feels cleaner (vs mid-Feb) with franchise flows skewed toward profit taking over the past week. This has kept a lid on call vols despite increasingly hawkish news flow + flat price moving higher in a high spot-vol correlation regime. Front month Brent implied volatility was at 60v on Friday, compared to a high of 90v in June last year. Meanwhile, 1 month 15 delta call skew was at 14 vols, compared to a 27 vol high last June. Net managed money (Brent + WTI combined) is sitting in the 59th percentile vs the previous 3 years. To play for a reprice in front vols and skew, we like owning front wingy outright calls.

Additionally, we have seen a re-engagement in Gold upside as prices have consolidated above $5000/oz and 5 day realised vols have compressed to 27v vs a 100v high. Gold upside flow has migrated from VKO’s/Continuous KO’s to a mix of vanillas/EKO’s/Digis. While ETF holdings have continued to build, the market feels under positioned from the fast-money community - net managed money on Comex is sitting only in the 17th percentile vs the last 3 years and SHFE positioning is on multi-year lows.

A synthetic weekend market via IG has crude oil prices up as much as 8%. 

IG has gold up nearly 3%. 

Related:

• Playbook For Iran Risk "oils Down To Disruption

• Supertanker Rates Soar As War Fears Put Strait Of Hormuz Chokepoint At Risk

Operation Epic Fury coverage:

• Iran Retaliates On US Bases In Five Countries Simultaneously As Tehran Bombed

• Iran Signals Ready To Deescalate After Defense Minister, IRGC Chief Killed In US-Israeli Strikes

The key question is whether this operation remains confined to the weekend or spills into next week. If a spillover does occur, it would be unequivocally bullish for Brent crude and gold futures on Sunday evening.

Professional subscribers can read more Iran ​​​​​research on our new Marketdesk.ai portal.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 12:15

We Didn't Just Get Expensive Electricity. We Built A System That Makes It Inevitable.

Authored by William Murray via RealClearEnergy,

Most Americans don’t think about electricity until the monthly bill arrives.

It comes once a month, often quietly, but lately it’s landed like a thud. Heating your home now costs hundreds more a month than it did just a few years ago. You use the same appliances. You flip the same switches. Nothing in your daily life has changed – except the price.

Why?

When one looks inside the electricity system, the experience is less like analyzing an immense machine than being fed into one, resembling the immortal scene in “Modern Times” where Charlie Chaplin’s factory worker is swallowed by the equipment he’s working on.

The American electricity market is not guided by an “invisible hand” of supply and demand, but an accumulation of misaligned rules laid down over decades. Layer upon layer of regulation, subsidy, mandate, and accounting rules to a point where the system became fixed in an upward, inflationary tilt, impervious to efforts to change.

There are at least a half-dozen federal environmental regulations that have more to do with rising electricity prices than tariffs or the data-center buildout, and a good example to start with is called Construction Work in Progress (CWIP).

As a new issue brief makes clear, it helped change who pays for America’s infrastructure.

Chief among these contrivances was the quiet transfer of financial risk from investors to the public. Before the 1970s, utilities had to finish building a power plant before they could charge customers for it. If a company wanted to build something, it had to take the risk. Investors would put up the money. If the project succeeded, they earned a return. If it failed, they paid the price.

But during the inflation crisis of the 1970s, power plants — especially nuclear plants —became vastly more expensive to build. Utilities argued they couldn’t afford to wait years to recover their costs. During a moment of civic weakness, state regulators started allowing utilities to charge customers while the plants were still under construction.

CWIP permanently shifted investment risk away from investors and onto ordinary people. Today, you can open your electric bill and pay for projects that don’t exist yet and may be cancelled in the future.

No banker in his right mind would accept such terms voluntarily. Yet millions of Americans are compelled to do so every month if they’re served by an investor-owned electric company.

This system could have operated below the waterline indefinitely, had it not collided with the renewable energy revolution of the last 15 years. Wind and solar generation increased fourfold between 2011 and 2020, reaching record output by 2024.

These sources have advantages. But they also have a basic limitation: they don’t produce power all the time.

So utilities must build backup systems. Extra transmission lines. Extra capacity.

None of this redundancy is free. Every mile of wire, every idle backup turbine, every overpriced and underutilized battery storage unit will eventually, without fail, appear on a customer’s bill.

And thanks to rules like CWIP, they can charge you while you wait.

Many of these policies came from a sincere place. Beginning in the 1970s and accelerating in the decades that followed, a network of public-interest law firms and environmental advocacy groups gained enormous influence over how infrastructure gets approved.

Their goal was to protect the public.

But over time, something else happened.

They built a system where stopping projects became easier than building them. Where delay became a strategy. Where lawsuits became routine.

Each delay added to costs. Each cost increase justifies charging customers sooner. Each increase made the next one easier to accept.

Even writers like the New York Times’ Ezra Klein — hardly a critic of environmental goals — have begun to acknowledge the problem. He has argued that well-intentioned rules have made it far too hard to build the infrastructure society needs.

People think this is an important admission by Klein and his ilk, but it is not.

These ‘well-intentioned rules’ were simply created by an earlier generation of Ezra Klein “Abundance” types who set up the public interest lawfare firms and NGO indulgences system in the first place.

Klein’s autopsy revealed only that the Left promotes things that make themselves feel better while making the world worse, yet their slobbering idealism protects them from feeling the shame of failed responsibility. There is a Kafkaesque process at work, filled with Orwellian word games that stymie everything. It’s a dirty, soiled, can’t-do spirit masquerading as something more noble and dignified.

Because the issue isn’t whether the goals were noble. Noble intentions don’t matter.

It’s that the results are what matter, and the results are failures.

There is, however, a remedy — not a technological breakthrough, but something far better (albeit rarer) in Washington: legislative clarity.

One promising approach is legislation such as Representative Troy Balderson’s “Affordable, Reliable, Clean Energy Security Act.” The bill seeks to establish clearer definitions of key terms like “affordable,” “reliable,” and “clean,” ensuring that investment risks are limited to cost-effective infrastructure projects only.

By recognizing the role of dispatchable resources such as natural gas and nuclear power, the legislation would also help ensure the grid maintains the reliability necessary to support modern life, all while meeting the standards of the Clean Air Act.

These reforms would not eliminate electricity price increases overnight. But they would begin to address one of the root causes: a system in which incentives increasingly misalign diverge from the interests of customers.

Electricity is not a luxury. It is a necessity that underpins economic growth, public safety, and household stability. Ensuring its affordability requires more than promises. It requires policies that encourage efficient investment, allocate risk appropriately, and maintain reliability.

Most of all, it comes from remembering a basic principle that once guided American growth:

You should pay for things when they work.

Not before.

Until that principle returns, electricity bills will continue their quiet climb upward, and Americans will continue to wonder why modern life feels harder to afford than it used to.

William Murray is a former speechwriter for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the past editor of RealClearEnergy from 2015-2017, and currently the chief speechwriter for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 11:40

France's Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest, Names Successor

Via Remix News,

In March 2025,  Le Pen was convicted on charges dating back years ago, in a move that was widely contested and seen as a highly political attempt to keep her from running in next year’s presidential election.

Now, she says she has no intention of running if her ban from running is lifted, if it means she must wear an electronic tag, i.e., ankle monitor.

She is also ready to place full trust in Jordan Bardella, current leader of the National Rally (RN).

Le Pen’s comments came during an interview with French television station BFMTV, her first since French prosecutors asked a court to uphold her five-year ban. A ruling on her case is expected on July 7.

“You cannot campaign under these conditions. Can you campaign without going out in the evenings to meet your constituents at rallies?” she asked, referring to the idea of having to campaign while wearing a monitor and under house arrest.

BREAKING:

Today marks the day democracy died in France.

A judge ruled Marine Le Pen is ineligible to run for president in 2027.

She is the frontrunner.

8 MEPs from her party are also barred from participating in elections.

Judges are now deciding elections across the EU. pic.twitter.com/HHuMv8hsja

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) March 31, 2025

Prosecutors had asked for Le Pen to be sentenced to four years in prison (three of which were suspended) and a fine of €100,000.

In France, shorter prison sentences are often commuted, meaning that if the court follows the prosecutor’s request, Le Pen could spend anywhere from a few months to a year under house arrest, wearing an anklet.

However, Le Pen has said she would not campaign under such circumstances.

Le Pen says she will be present in court on July 7 to hear the Court of Appeal’s decision.

“Of course I will go, as I went every day to the trial in the first instance and on appeal because I respect justice,” she told BFMTV.

Regarding the 2027 election, Le Pen said regarding RN leader Jordan Bardella:

“The best-case scenario is that I am elected president of the Republic and he is my prime minister.”

However, if she cannot run, then “Jordan will find himself a prime minister,” and she will take whatever “role he wants me to have.”

Emphasizing that Bardella will be free to make his own choices, Le Pen told listeners, “If I cannot be a candidate, he will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience.”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 08:10

92% Of Illegal Arrivals At Spain's Canary Islands Are Men, And Half Of 'Unaccompanied Minors' Are Adults

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

A European Parliament fact-finding mission to the Canary Islands has revealed that around half of migrants who claimed to be unaccompanied minors upon arrival were ultimately determined to be adults.

The Committee on Petitions conducted the visit in September 2025 to assess the impact of illegal immigration on the Spanish archipelago. According to a draft report from earlier this month, prosecutors informed MEPs that “among approximately 1,500 unaccompanied minors whose age was not clear and who were subjected to age-assessment procedures at their arrival to the adult reception centers, around half of them were ultimately determined to be adults.”

The report also acknowledged systemic weaknesses in the initial screening process, stating that “initial assessments by police are often inaccurate, leading to some being misplaced in the wrong center before their age is confirmed.”

The scale of arrivals remains significant.

By Aug. 31, 2025, 201 boats had reached the Canary Islands in that year carrying 12,249 migrants, including 9,955 men, 782 women, 192 minors traveling with parents, and 1,320 unaccompanied minors.

Authorities recorded 629 individuals whose age was in doubt, and officials noted that 92 percent of arrivals were male.

This aligns with the findings from across Europe.

In 2023, Frontex data indicated that exactly 92 percent of illegal migrants were males, with that number being remarkably stable over the years.

Crime and public safety were repeatedly raised during the mission. MEP Sebastian Kruis questioned why migrants appear statistically overrepresented in prison figures, asking “the reasons why, in proportionate terms, an immigrant has a 1.5 times higher chance of being in prison,” as in the Canary Islands, migrants represent 31 percent of inmates but they only account for 22 percent of the total population.

“There has been an increase in criminality following the arrival of unaccompanied minors, with offenses committed mainly against them,” the report states.

However, it continues to explain that these offenses are predominantly “fights, insults, and sexual assaults, occurring mainly within reception centers,” meaning that while offenses may be committed against migrants, they are also being committed by them.

Neighborhood representatives in La Isleta, near the Canarias 50 reception center in Las Palmas, told MEPs they had experienced a growing “feeling of insecurity.”

The report also detailed the difficulty of prosecuting smuggling networks. In 2024, 282 preliminary investigations were opened in relation to boat arrivals, yet 97 percent were provisionally suspended due to a lack of identified perpetrators.

On returns, authorities said expulsions to Morocco are limited because many arrivals lack documentation, and Morocco does not process papers for undocumented nationals. It was noted that 92 percent of repatriation requests by Spain are rejected by Rabat.

Maritime Rescue representatives stated they “did not carry out interceptions of vessels” and were limited to search-and-rescue operations within Spain’s area of responsibility, which often results in migrants being brought ashore in Spain even when their point of departure is known.

In the report, Dutch MEP Sebastian Kruis of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group argued that he had experienced a “big difference between the presentations given by official representatives and NGOs and what the people from the districts close to the reception centers and the news are saying about incidents concerning migrants.”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 07:00

China's Biological Weapons Labs In America

Authored by Gordon Change via The Gatestone Institute,

China has been maintaining at least two facilities — one in California and the other in Nevada — that are part of a biological weapons program.

A Declaration of Arrest Report, issued by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department in connection with the detention of Ori Solomon on January 31, states that there is a "deeper conspiracy" between an illegal biological lab in Reedley, California and a residence containing apparently dangerous substances in Nevada.

On January 31, Las Vegas SWAT and federal agents raided a home on the eastern outskirts of the city and seized over a thousand vials of an unknown substance or substances. Those vials have been sent to an FBI lab in Maryland for analysis.

A housecleaner tipped off authorities after she and others temporarily residing at the home got "deathly ill."

Solomon was the property manager of the location.

Jiabei Zhu, a Chinese national also known as Jesse Zhu, Qiang He and David He, is the listed agent of a company, David Destiny Discovery LLC, that is the registered owner of the Las Vegas house along with Zhaoyan Wang, his business partner and the mother of his child.

Zhu will go to trial in April on federal charges for the operation of the lab in Reedley, near Fresno in the Central Valley.

Fortunately, in California, Code Enforcement Officer Jesalyn Harper in December 2022 noticed a garden hose connected to a supposedly abandoned building.

She entered the structure and discovered what appears to have been a secret biological weapons laboratory. Inside, Harper found Chinese nationals working in white coats.

The lab stored nearly a thousand transgenic mice — 773 live and more than 175 dead — "genetically engineered to catch and carry the COVID-19 virus."

Authorities also found medical waste and chemical, viral, and biological agents. There were on-site at least 20 potentially infectious pathogens, including those causing coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis, and herpes.

The lab contained a freezer labeled "Ebola." The freezer held unlabeled sealed bags used to store high-risk biological materials. Researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology are studying Ebola, which has a natural fatality rate of 50%, undoubtedly to weaponize it.

The Reedley facility was run by Chinese fronting for parties in China. Among the fronts is Zhu.

In 2024, Brandon Weichert, author of Biohacked: China's Race to Control Life, in comments to Gatestone, called the Reedley facility a "kamikaze lab," which was "unsecured, poorly contained, makeshift, containing a couple dozen pathogens near a population center."

There are reasons to be alarmed.

First, as Weichert noted at the time, the Reedley facility could not be a "one-off." Now, we know that he was right. There is — at least — a second location, the "deeper conspiracy" as the Las Vegas police termed it.

Moreover, the Chinese regime is behind that conspiracy. Wang fled to China sometime in 2023. While there, she kept tabs on the Las Vegas home by, for instance, monitoring cameras at the location.

Zhu was also a top official at one of China's state-controlled companies that had links to the People's Liberation Army. According to recent reporting, he has maintained business relations with parties connected to the Chinese regime.

All this demonstrates that China's Communist Party, which could have ordered Zhu and Wang to shut down the effort after the discovery of the Reedley lab, allowed it to continue. Among other things, the continuation of the effort suggests there is a broader effort to spread disease in the United States.

Second, Zhu operated the Reedley and Las Vegas facilities with malign intent.

Zhu, according to Canadian court statements, told a co-conspirator in an earlier theft of U.S. intellectual property that these efforts would help "defeat the American aggressor and wild ambitious wolf!" "The law is strong," he added at the time, "but the outlaws are ten times stronger."

These statements were included in the Las Vegas Declaration of Arrest Report. As a recent analysis states, "the declaration reveals, for the first time, the full scope of what U.S. investigators believe they are dealing with: not merely a rogue lab operator, but a PRC-trained biologist with state-linked corporate ties, a proven history of stealing American technology for Beijing's benefit, and language that investigators now treat as evidence of ideological motivation."

As Weichert said of the Reedley lab two years ago, "It is, I believe, a part of a large Chinese military operation to spread disease throughout the American population."

He is undoubtedly correct. A quarter century ago, General Chi Haotian, China's defense minister and vice chairman of the Party's Central Military Commission, reportedly gave a secret speech advocating the extermination of Americans. "It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans," he said. "But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the Communist Party leads the world."

Chi's plan was to use disease for this purpose.

The FBI now appears to be concerned about the extent of the Chinese effort. It executed a search warrant on the Reedley facility on February 8th.

Have U.S. authorities now discovered everything? "We need to know if there is a third biological weapons location and maybe a fourth," Blaine Holt, a retired U.S. Air Force general who now specializes in civil preparedness measures, told Gatestone this month. "We are on notice that the Chinese regime is preparing to spread disease in America. We have been very slow off the mark and have absolutely no time to lose. The Chinese regime could give the go-signal at any moment."

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 23:25

Will China Come To Iran's Rescue?

Via Middle East Eye

As tensions between Iran and the US-Israeli alliance approach a critical juncture, a question echoes through global capitals, newsrooms and policy circles: will China come to Iran’s rescue? And if so, what would that assistance look like?

The answer defies the binary expectations of traditional military alliances. China is unlikely to dispatch troops or engage directly in any conflict, but to interpret this as passivity would be to misread the nature of 21st-century great power competition. China's support for Iran is real, multifaceted, and in some ways more sustainable than military intervention; it just operates on a different strategic wavelength.

At the UN Security Council, China has consistently deployed its most potent weapon: the veto-wielding power of principle. In an emergency meeting last month, Chinese Ambassador Sun Lei delivered a stark message to Washington: "The use of force can never solve problems. It will only make them more complex and intractable. Any military adventurism would only push the region toward an unpredictable abyss."

This is not empty rhetoric. China’s official position explicitly supports "safeguarding Iran’s sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity”, while opposing “the threat or use of force in international relations”. 

By anchoring its stance in the UN Charter and international law, China provides Tehran with something invaluable: legitimacy on the world stage, and a powerful counter-narrative to western pressure.

Strategic alignment

The diplomatic calculus shifted fundamentally when Iran was formally approved in 2021 as a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), joining China, Russia and Central Asian nations. This was followed by Tehran’s inclusion in the Brics bloc. 

These are not military pacts, but they create something perhaps more enduring: a framework for permanent consultation and strategic alignment.

Last year, Chinese, Russian and Iranian diplomats met in Beijing and agreed to “strengthen coordination” within international organizations such as Brics and the SCO. This institutional embrace means that any aggression against Iran is now implicitly an issue for the world's most powerful counterweights to US hegemony. 

While China avoids direct confrontation, it has not shied away from visible military cooperation. Earlier this month, Russia, China and Iran deployed naval vessels for joint security exercises in the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. A Russian presidential aide framed these drills in the context of building a “multipolar world order in the oceans” to counter western hegemony.

More tangibly, news has emerged of significant defense cooperation. Middle East Eye reported last year that Iran had received Chinese-made surface-to-air missile batteries to rebuild its air defense capabilities, part of an oil-for-weapons deal that allowed Tehran to bypass US sanctions. 

Some reports have also suggested that Iran may receive advanced J-20 fifth-generation fighter jets, J-10C aircraft, and HQ-9 air defense systems, although there has been no official confirmation.

The symbolism is as striking as the substance. During Iran’s Air Force Day celebrations this month, a Chinese military attache presented a model of the J-20 stealth fighter to an Iranian air force commander - a gesture widely interpreted as signalling a new chapter in defence engagement between the two nations.

Multipolar age

Perhaps China’s most consequential support remains invisible on the battlefield, but visible in Iran's national accounts. Despite US sanctions and pressure, China remains Iran’s top energy partner, with approximately 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports now directed to Chinese buyers.

The US has taken notice. The Treasury Department last year imposed sanctions on a Chinese refinery in Shandong province accused of purchasing more than $1bn worth of Iranian oil, with the Trump administration vowing “to drive Iran’s illicit oil exports, including to China, to zero”. China’s embassy in Washington responded by condemning sanctions that “undermine international trade order and rules” and “infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies”.

While the China-Iran economic relationship has faced strains - Chinese state refiners have occasionally suspended purchases to avoid US financial risks - the overall trajectory is clear: China provides the economic oxygen that sustains Iran’s resistance to external pressure. 

So if China is already providing diplomatic cover, institutional support, military cooperation and an economic lifeline, why doesn’t it go further? Why not send warships or explicitly threaten intervention?

The answer lies in strategic prioritization. As is widely understood, Beijing's most pressing strategic goal is to achieve national reunification and, before this goal is realized, any actions that might unnecessarily and prematurely escalate comprehensive confrontation with the United States must be approached with extreme caution.

Looks like the USS Delbert D. Black has left the Red Sea and is backing up the Lincoln CSG in the Arabian Sea. After over a month of American saber rattling, it's probably safe to say that the armada is now fully in position. pic.twitter.com/0JFFYrGm0c

— barry with the NED (@bonzerbarry) February 27, 2026

Moreover, China believes that while significant US military action in Iran could inflict losses, regime change would be difficult to achieve. Under such circumstances, Beijing can adopt a model similar to its approach to the Ukraine conflict: refraining from direct participation while maintaining normal state-to-state relations with the party under attack, providing political and diplomatic support at the UN, and continuing economic engagement that doesn’t violate international law.

What we are witnessing is not traditional alliance politics, but something new: a form of strategic partnership designed for a multipolar age. China offers Iran diplomatic protection, institutional integration, visible military cooperation and an economic boost - all without crossing the line into a direct confrontation that would trigger a wider war.

For those asking whether China will "rescue" Iran, the answer depends on definition. If rescue means troops and battleships, the answer is no. If rescue means ensuring that Iran can survive, resist, and eventually negotiate from strength, the answer is quietly, persistently and strategically yes.

This approach has already proven effective and difficult for adversaries to counter. In the shadow of potential conflict, China has constructed a new kind of shield for its partner: one forged not from steel, but from strategic patience, economic interdependence, and the architecture of a rising multipolar world.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 21:45

Israel Launches Wave Of Strikes On Lebanon In Precursor To Potential Iran War

Some analysts fear Israel is testing out a precursor for another multi-front war as the US appears poised to attack Iran. Technically a ceasefire has been in effect in southern Lebanon, but the IDF military has been testing - or more like blowing straight past - these truce barriers.

The Israeli Army carried out at least eight airstrikes in eastern Lebanon on Thursday, focusing on the Baalbek area. Multiple buildings were hit, with casualty figures not initially confirmed.

Lebanese media

Lebanon's Health Ministry at one point specified that a "16-year-old Syrian boy was killed," according to the National News Agency. There were reports of dozens more wounded and injured.

The deceased was identified as Hussein Mohsen al-Khalaf, who died in a strike on Kfar Dan near Baalbek, L'Orient also reported.

The IDF claimed the targets belonged to Hezbollah's "elite Radwan Force" and were used for weapons storage and training. But as has been the pattern with these types of sporadic brief attacks, it provided no evidence for the claim.

Israel further said the sites violated the "ceasefire understandings" and posed a threat to Israel, after widespread allegations the fresh attacks constitute a severe breach the ceasefire in force between the two countries.

However, Middle East media reports have cited more than 1,000 strikes inside Lebanon by Israeli forces, killing hundreds, since the ceasefire took effect.

Israel has intensified attacks in recent weeks, citing the prospect of a US-Iran war. Israeli officials have warned Lebanon that civilian sites will be targeted if Hezbollah joins such a conflict. Hezbollah has long been a main proxy arm of Tehran's, but also acts in its own interests as a guarantor of Lebanon's Shia population.

So these deadly new assaults do appear to represent a kind of pre-Iran war anti-Hezbollah action. Israel has already over the past two years decimated Hezbollah's top leadership, and could now be looking for an excuse to finish the job.

All eyes on Iran: Pentagon build-up is the biggest in the region since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq...

Evacuation from Qatar
Evacuation from Iraq
Withdrawal from Syria
Evacuation of the 5th fleet from Bahrain

That's a bigger sign of war than an aircraft carrier https://t.co/HfvWhCGRGs

— Middle East Observer (@ME_Observer_) February 27, 2026

There's been no evidence that Hezbollah has fired a single rocket at Israel since the ceasefire began in November 2024, however. The group is very well-armed, but has been on a back foot, also after the West-Gulf axis successfully accomplished regime change in Syria.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 21:20

A Montreal Narco Network Busted For Allegedly Smuggling Super Fentanyl Into America

Submitted by The Bureau's Sam Cooper,

An elite Montreal-based narco network allegedly exported carfentanil and next-generation synthetic opioids 100 times deadlier than fentanyl to American consumers via the dark web, leading to the arrest of four yesterday, after 13 months of joint surveillance by U.S. federal agencies and Quebec police, and a seizure of more than 600,000 tablets of synthetic drugs in December.

The four suspects charged are reportedly connected, through their alleged street gang affiliate, to the Wolfpack Alliance — a network tied by DEA sources to a British Columbia fentanyl superlab, and by Canadian law enforcement and expert sources to Canadian outlaw motorcycle gangs, Iranian organized crime, and the Sinaloa Cartel.

On Wednesday, Quebec’s ENRCO — the unit mandated specifically to target organized crime leadership — arrested four residents of Montreal’s South Shore suburbs on charges connected to a network that had been, for more than a year, allegedly manufacturing and exporting carfentanil and industrial quantities of substances newer and deadlier than fentanyl to consumers in the United States. The investigation was conducted jointly with U.S. Homeland Security Investigations and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The four suspects are: Darren McAlpine, of Delson; Geneva Fournier, of Châteauguay; and Wanya Nathan Ellis and Cheyanne Buchanan-Dennis, both of Sainte-Catherine. All four municipalities sit in the region directly south of the Montreal Island. They appeared by videoconference before a judge at the Longueuil courthouse and face charges of possession for the purpose of trafficking, drug trafficking, and possession of a prohibited weapon.

The arrests followed searches executed on December 17, 2025, at addresses in Châteauguay and Sainte-Catherine. No U.S. federal charges have been publicly announced.

The December searches produced a seizure that reads like an inventory of the post-fentanyl synthetic opioid market.

Quebec police pointed to more than 600,000 tablets — comprising 288,000 metonitazene tablets, 128,000 methamphetamine tablets, 180,000 benzodiazepine tablets, and 10,000 MDMA tablets — alongside 81 litres of protonitazene in liquid form, cannabis, cocaine, dark web trafficking equipment, a loaded 9mm firearm, and 9mm ammunition.

The 81 litres of liquid protonitazene is an industrial-scale volume of a still-emerging synthetic opioid. The DEA permanently placed protonitazene in Schedule I in 2024; on February 11, 2026, it separately finalized Schedule I status for variants of metonitazene and protonitazene.

“Metonitazene and Protonitazene are substances not widely known to the public at present, but they are considered more potent than fentanyl,” Quebec police said yesterday.

In a previous interview, retired acting DEA chief Derek Maltz told The Bureau that chemicals like nitazenes are amplifying the existing threat from Chinese-supplied fentanyl — which he and many U.S. experts view as an intentional, war-like attack from Chinese state-linked networks aligned with Latin cartels.

“We’re getting crushed with carfentanil, xylazine, etizolam, isotonitazene — all those different new psychoactive substances which are coming out of China. So it’s just another phase of the attack,” Maltz said.

Six weeks before the Quebec arrests, on February 10, 2026, Montreal’s regional public health directorate had already issued a public warning about protonitazene’s effects — suggesting that product from this network, or a network supplying the same substances, was already circulating in Montreal’s drug supply while the police operation was still running.

Carfentanil was developed to tranquilize elephants.

According to the DEA, it is 100 times more potent than fentanyl — which itself is lethal at the 2-milligram range — and 10,000 times more potent than morphine. Russian special forces deployed an aerosolized version against Chechen hostage-takers in a Moscow theatre in 2002. More than 120 hostages died. The DEA reported in 2025 that it had tested more than 100 kilograms of carfentanil mixed with other drugs in 2024 alone — more than the previous three years combined — and that the substance is now predominantly appearing in pill form, pressed to resemble prescription medications.

Targeting America: The Montreal Network Exporting Carfentanil — 100 Times Stronger Than Fentanyl — Into the United States https://t.co/9FFnY4KPrU

— Sam Cooper (@scoopercooper) February 26, 2026

The network now charged in Montreal was allegedly supplying fentanyl southbound into the United States — a politically sensitive finding given that the Trump administration has partly justified tariffs against Canada on the allegation that Chinese Communist Party and Mexican cartel networks have increasingly leveraged Canada for fentanyl production, particularly via Vancouver, and shipment to the U.S. This new case adds Montreal as a major alleged node, one already associated with Mexican cartel human trafficking networks moving South American nationals from Montreal into New York State.

Evidence from the Canada Border Services Agency has identified China and Hong Kong as import sources for earlier nitazene variants. The seizure in this case — 288,000 metonitazene tablets and 81 litres of liquid protonitazene — represents the largest documented seizure of these substances in Canada on the public record.

Radio-Canada reported that the network is connected to Zone 43 — a Montreal street gang originating in the Montréal-Nord neighbourhood, Crips-affiliated, and engaged in a violent conflict with a rival Blood-affiliated group called the Profit Boys.

Vancouver Police arrested five Zone 43 members in June 2024 and seized more than 24 kilograms of drugs following a 14-month investigation into the gang’s expansion into British Columbia. VPD Organized Crime Section head Inspector Phil Heard described Zone 43 as posing “a very significant risk to the public,” noting the gang had been operating in Vancouver for several years and was actively seeking to take over drug lines and territory.

In B.C., Zone 43 reportedly operates in affiliation with the Wolfpack Alliance.

The Wolfpack is where the Mexican transnational architecture emerges and intersects with Ryan Wedding’s Sinaloa Cartel networks, a U.S. government source told The Bureau.

NEW: Ex-Olympian Ryan Wedding, accused of running a transnational cocaine trafficking operation, is escorted in handcuffs in Ontario, California. pic.twitter.com/S8yX96HAmm

— Fox News (@FoxNews) January 23, 2026

The source linked the Wolfpack and Wedding associates to what investigators have called the Falkland superlab, a large-scale drug production operation in British Columbia’s interior. Canadian law enforcement and expert sources have separately identified connections between the Wolfpack network and Canadian outlaw motorcycle gangs, Iranian organized crime, and the Sinaloa Cartel.

As reported previously by The Bureau, starting in the fall of 2022, pressure at the U.S. southern border began pushing Mexican nationals — and, by inference, cartel operatives — northward into the Canadian pipeline. From January to mid-October 2022, 7,698 Mexican asylum seekers took direct flights from Mexico City to Montreal, according to The Canadian Press. Nonprofit refugee assistance officials said most flew to Canada because they had learned of the Trudeau government’s visa-free policy and the availability of financial assistance while refugee claims were processed.

In their 2021 book The Wolfpack: The Millennial Mobsters Who Brought Chaos and the Cartels to the Canadian Underworld, journalists Peter Edwards and Luis Nájera established that the Sinaloa Cartel had developed solid control of cocaine shipments in and out of Canada, that the Arellano Félix organization held a foothold in western Canada — particularly Vancouver and Alberta — and that the Zetas were present in Canada through networks involving temporary migrant workers.

Asked in 2023 whether Canada’s importance to Mexican organized crime had increased in recent years, Nájera was direct: “I would say it has increased since criminal cells moved up north to settle and expand operations here. It is also strategic to have groups operating north of the U.S. border, close to key places such as Chicago and New York, and without the scrutiny of the DEA and rival groups.”

Don Im, a former senior agent in the DEA’s Special Operations Division, told The Bureau the Montreal seizure fits a pattern his unit began tracking at the end of 2019, when small clusters of nitazene overdose deaths began appearing in northern U.S. states — likely, he said, sourced from Canada but manufactured with Chinese precursor chemicals. The pattern intensified through the COVID years before a gradual decline, which Im attributes to cheaper Mexican-produced fentanyl flooding the market and displacing the Canadian supply.

That displacement, Im argues, may now be reversing.

With Mexican cartels disrupted by a wave of extraditions and leadership deaths, the fentanyl supply from the south is under pressure — and demand in the United States hasn’t gone anywhere. “Non-Mexican drug trafficking organizations in Canada are very likely picking up the slack and fulfilling the demand in the U.S. as addicts and local distributors in the U.S. are looking online,” Im said.

On the Chinese supply chain behind the nitazenes, Im was precise: Chinese companies have been designing and manufacturing synthetic drugs and precursor chemicals for at least 25 years, directed by the Chinese Communist Party to reduce dependency on Western pharmaceutical companies and incentivized by provincial governments to innovate and export. The result, in his assessment, was a perfect storm — Chinese synthetic precursors, Mexican cartel distribution networks, dark web and social media sales channels, and decades of indifferent Western drug policy — that produced what he called “the most deadly form of slow-motion weapon of mass destruction.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 20:05

Lululemon Founder Blasts Board Again Amid Stock Collapse

Lululemon Athletica founder Chip Wilson blasted the board in a fiery message to shareholders earlier and ramped up calls for activism as the athletic apparel retailer is set for a lost year, lagging behind competitors, losing market share, and entangled in multiple see-through-leggings quality-control controversies with customers.

The nearly 70% collapse in Lululemon's market capitalization from its late-2023 peak of $511 per share to the current $186 level, compounded by 1.5 months of quality-control issues involving see-through leggings making headlines, has compelled Wilson to publish yet another update for shareholders, urging much-needed change at the board level.

"In support of all shareholders, I am pursuing a campaign to catalyze a quantum of change that is sorely needed at Lululemon. To effect that change, I have pursued private, constructive dialogues with the Lululemon Board of Directors (the "Board") for the past few months. My attempts toward a sensible solution have not been reciprocated," Chip wrote in a message to shareholders on Friday.

Chip's core issue with the board is the lack of brand, creative, and marketing expertise, creating a disconnect between the yoga-maker's product and brand strengths and the board's ability to translate those into durable margins and long-term shareholder value.

He noted that the board ignored a reform framework in December that included three independent director candidates, adding that when the board finally responded more than 70 days later, the "response was weak and insufficient."

Chip continued, "While we have proposed changing three directors, our strong feeling is that more than three directors should be replaced."

In the third week of January, Chip blasted the board in a social media post over its "operational failure" involving the "Get Low" line, which was pulled from the e-commerce website for several days due to see-through quality issues before being brought back online. He said at the time that this came months after the failed launch of the "Breezethrough" leggings.

At the start of the year, UBS analysts led by Jay Sole warned that 2026 was shaping up to be a lost year for Lululemon.

 

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 19:40

Soaring Electricity Demand Meets Gas Turbine Shortage

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

• AI-driven power demand is surging far faster than expected, but a shortage of heavy-duty gas turbines is creating a bottleneck.

• Turbine makers like Siemens, GE Vernova, and Mitsubishi are ramping up production, but expansion projects could take up to 5 years.

• Without enough gas capacity, AI growth could slow or grids may turn back to coal, potentially delaying coal plant retirements.

The surge in electricity demand in the world’s AI hotspots has prompted a comparable surge in the demand for reliable supply. That surge was not expected. There are not enough gas turbines to secure that supply. This means the AI revolution would either have to slow down, or the grid would have to increase its reliance on coal.

Natural gas has in recent years been marketed as a so-called bridge fuel between coal and oil, on the one hand, and wind and solar, on the other. When it became clear that “bridge” is in fact its own country of low-emission baseload generation, natural gas became the object of vilification from activists, to the point that some claimed it was even more harmful for the atmosphere than coal. Then came the AI race.

As Big Tech majors rush to expand their artificial intelligence capabilities and applications, demand for electricity is going through the roof. That jump, however, comes after decades of modest to no growth, reflected in gas turbine makers’ flat production.

Now, they are having to boost this really fast, really high. In the meantime, those with the insatiable electricity demand are having to make do with alternatives—including repurposed jet fuel engines.

Siemens Energy, one of the world’s top three gas turbine makers, earlier this month reported that its gas services business had seen a record quarter in orders, with a total of 102 new turbines in the backlog.

As much as 40% of these new orders came from the United States, and another 35% came from Europe. The report came after Siemens announced plans to invest $1 billion in grid equipment production.

GE Vernova, another turbine major, will be spending $600 million on turbine manufacturing capacity expansion, with an annual target of up to 80 heavy-duty turbines, equal to some 20 GW in generation capacity.

The company announced those plans a year ago, saying, “These strategic investments and the jobs they create aim to both help our customers meet the doubling of demand and accelerate American innovation and technology development to boost the country’s energy security and global competitiveness.”

Mitsubishi, the third Big Turbine manufacturer, said last year it would double its turbine production capacity in response to soaring demand.

The company’s chief executive noted that “We were working towards boosting production capacity by 30%, but that’s not enough to meet growing demand. Fulfilling those orders is our top priority.”

Yet all these plans take time to materialize, and industrial electricity consumers need it now, so they are converting jet engines to gas turbines. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that the conversion of jet engine turbines to power generation turbines was a growing business enjoying a lot of investor interest. One such converting company, FTAI Aviation, had seen its shares gain 42% since it announced this new business, which takes just 30-45 days to convert a Boeing 737 jet engine into a power generation gas turbine.

Time is of the essence for the AI racers. The waiting lists for the big turbine makers are years long. But they need the electricity now because if momentum lets up, investors will flock out, or such appears to be the general perception in the AI space. Still, the turbine supply constraints may affect that momentum, according to some analysts.

“In the five-year period to 2030 that will supposedly be critical for the development of advanced AI, gas-fired plants will make a significant contribution to meeting increased US power demand,” Wood Mackenzie’s Vice Chair for the Americas, Ed Crooks, wrote in a recent opinion piece.

“But the availability of equipment, particularly heavy-duty gas turbines, is likely to remain a constraint on electricity supply growth, despite the new capacity being added by manufacturers,” Crooks also said.

He noted that the current wait time for new gas turbines was five years. This is definitely not fast enough for AI data center operators. Aircraft jet engines converted into gas turbines cannot be a complete substitute due to their much smaller capacity. And this means that either Big Tech loses momentum in AI, or it gets electricity right now, from somewhere else.

That ‘somewhere else” could be solar, for instance, at least according to pro-transition analysts. Yet even those analysts admit that this choice would also involve major investment in batteries—and backup generation capacity. To cut out the middle man, so to speak, tech companies may simply opt for the most readily available baseload capacity besides natural gas: coal. And this means that plans for the retirement of coal power plants are likely to be revised, according to Wood Mac.

Even with all that baseload generation, the AI racers may have to revise their own growth plans because there will not be enough electricity to go around, simply because of the physical laws of the world we all inhabit. And this, in turn, means that the race’s momentum will inevitably slow at some point.

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/27/2026 - 19:15