U.S. Antimony Books First $10M DOD Order Under “Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity” Contract
United States Antimony announced Tuesday that it has received a $10 million delivery order under its newly signed indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity sole-source contract with the US Defense Logistics Agency.
The order covers 315,000 lbs. of antimony metal ingots, which will be used to replenish the US National Defense Stockpile.
Shares were up more than 10% in response to the order, while at the same time Bloomberg reported UAMY’s CEO had purchased $613k in common stock at a price of $6.13/share, according to his Form 4.
Looking ahead, the company said it expects 2026 gross revenues of $100 million, compared with the $100.6 million forecast by two analysts polled by FactSet. UAMY also reaffirmed its 2025 revenue outlook of $40 million to $50 million, while three analysts polled by FactSet project $45.2 million.
Recall, as we noted last month, UAMY operates the only two antimony smelters in North America, and said it is positioned to begin immediate deliveries from its domestic facilities.
“It’s incredibly meaningful for all our employees to play such a strategic role in strengthening our nation’s defense readiness,”USAC CEO Gary C. Evans said in a statement last month.
The deal follows months of negotiations and reflects a partnership with the Department of Defense that accelerated in late 2024. It also highlights broader U.S. efforts to reduce dependence on foreign sources, particularly China, for critical minerals and strategic materials.
Antimony, a critical mineral which is used in munitions, batteries, flame retardants, and military-grade compounds, has been flagged by defense officials as a vulnerability in the U.S. industrial base.
The Trump administration has made domestic supply-chain resilience a policy priority. Trump has taken a series of executive and policy actions aimed at securing U.S. access to critical minerals, citing national security and economic independence.
Similar initiatives have supported other strategic sectors. The federal government has backed Intel with billions of dollars in CHIPS Act funding to expand U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capacity, while MP Materials has received Defense Department support to boost rare earth processing, reducing reliance on overseas supply chains.
Additional announcements are also expected relatively soon around nuclear fuel and uranium, another area where U.S. officials are seeking to strengthen domestic capability and reduce reliance on foreign suppliers.
Who is the census for? Or more importantly, who does Congress represent? If you answered “U.S. citizens,” you’re correct – or at least you should be.
At the start of each decade, the federal government tallies who’s living in the country and where, citizens and non-citizens alike. That census data determines how many seats in the House of Representatives each state receives, as well as its share of Electoral College votes for president. This whole process is mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, the part most focused on proper representation.
But representation for whom? Since 1790, anyone and everyone living within America’s borders, “excluding Indians not taxed.” That’s approximately 300 million Americans and 41 million non-citizens, the most in our nation’s history, nearly half of them living here illegally.
Non-citizens have never been allowed to vote in congressional elections. But they receive improper representation in Congress because the census fails to exclude them from the apportionment process, when all 435 House seats are divvied up between the 50 states and D.C. That’s dramatically inflated Democrats’ power in the House of Representatives as the non-citizen population has grown, at Americans’ expense.
Simply excluding 18.6 million illegal aliens – the most plausible estimate given by the Federation for American Immigration Reform – from the 2020 apportionment would shift eight House seats, mostly from blue to red and purple states. Removing all 41 million non-citizens would shift a stunning 22 seats the same way. In either case, these are districts that should represent U.S. citizens; instead, they’re brimming with non-citizens, and Democratic Party politicians prefer it this way.
Blue states, on average, report nearly double the percentage of non-citizen residents than red states: 6.3% to 3.7%. Of the top 20 states with the largest percentage of non-citizens, only six vote red or purple. Democrats also control seven of the 10 House districts with the most non-citizens; the other three are held by Republicans, either born in Cuba or who are children of Cuban immigrants. Those seats were, until recently, Democrat-controlled. I’ve documented more such revelations in my recent investigative report, “The Emerging Permanent MAGA Majority.”
Immigrants tend to flock to states with more job opportunities, which tend to be in states with big cities such as California and Texas, the states with the largest foreign-born populations. But as people have abandoned unlivable “progressive” fiefdoms for conservative southern states, this has turned the problem of representation inflation into a cynical opportunity to unfairly boost Democrat power.
To show this in action, imagine two congressional districts with equal populations of 760,000 residents, the national average. District A contains 700,000 U.S. citizens and 60,000 non-citizens. District B has 400,000 U.S. citizens and 360,000 non-citizens (some of them illegal aliens). Both districts elect one congressional representative, but District A’s congressman represents 360,000 more voters than District B.
As a result, a vote in District B is effectively worth twice as much as a vote in District A, because there are far fewer District A voters dividing up the same congressional seat.
Stacking blue districts with so many non-citizens lets a smaller electorate punch above its weight. This isn’t a mystery; it’s a core feature of Democratic electoral strategy. Take it from Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY), who admitted of illegal aliens in 2021 that “I need more people in my district, just for redistricting purposes.” Thirty-five percent of Clarke’s constituents are foreign-born, the 23rd-highest in Congress.
Counting non-citizens also artificially boosts the number of House seats in blue states, even as Americans flee Chicago and New York City for Phoenix and Jacksonville. Democrat-run states lost a net seven House seats between the 2010 and 2020 censuses, and would’ve lost three more seats had the Census Bureau not overcounted six blue states. In 2030, they could lose between six and nine House seats, according to recent projections.
Ironically, many of the immigrants who are unintentionally boosting Democratic seats hold traditional social views, yet they skew congressional representation toward the far left simply by living in blue cities. They’re moderates represented by radicals. They’re also “voting” without a vote.
This has been the logic governing Democratic strategy for nearly three decades: Encourage mass immigration, discourage border enforcement, and reward illegal aliens with U.S. citizenship. It’s why Democrats bet the farm on Hispanics building a permanent majority in Washington – never imagining that Donald Trump could convert millions of Hispanic voters into America First populists.
That’s good, but it isn’t enough to restore America’s greatness. We have to push further and end Democrats’ cynical exploitation of the census for good.
Conservatives are hawks on closing the border, but they’ve largely missed or ignored the injustice of counting non-citizens in the census. This isn’t good politics, nor is it ethical. States such as Idaho, Ohio, and Tennessee are robbed of congressional representation because California, New Jersey, and Texas house so many non-citizens. In other words, some states are punished for having a big population of Americans – including naturalized immigrants – while others are rewarded for attracting migrants, even if they entered illegally.
This is why it’s crucial to ask who the census is for, rather than how we’ve always done it.
The founding generation viewed the census with a very different priority than we do today: Building a nation rather than preserving one. They adopted an expansive definition of American citizenship, assuming that loyalists, British sympathizers, and other Tories would self-deport from the republic – as some 80,000 actually did. The 1790 census counted as citizens everyone who claimed the new identity of “American” and proved it by remaining within the nation’s borders after the war.
Article I, Section 2 counted three-fifths of indentured servants and black slaves, but excluded Indian tribes. Why the distinction? Because one group lived under U.S. jurisdiction while the other did not. The census was never fundamentally about collecting interesting demographic data, but apportioning congressional representation. It was already outrageous and hypocritical that slaves, denied citizenship and legal rights, still inflated the southern states’ seats in the House. Yet the principle was already clear: Representation belongs to those who owe allegiance to the United States Constitution, not foreigners under another sovereign power.
This is the same logic that limits voting rights to U.S. citizens. No one outside of woke Berkeley is offended that non-citizens cannot vote for our leaders, although a few blue states are trying to normalize it. In fact, bipartisan voters have approved recent Citizen-Only Voting Amendments in huge numbers in red and blue states alike.
Paul Jacob, who chairs Americans for Citizen Voting, the group behind these ballot initiatives, points out that voting and representation are inextricably linked. “Only citizens should be voting in our elections, and each state’s representation should be based on the number of U.S. citizens in the state. Not on how many illegal aliens they’ve let in,” he told me. “No longer can we allow states to grab extra voting power in Congress by counting their illegal population.”
To fix that, we don’t need to deport every single illegal alien (though we should strive for that). We simply remove them from congressional apportionment and let the process play out fairly. Call it a “Citizen Only Census,” a return to the Founders’ high regard for citizenship after decades of being dragged through the mud by Democrats. The simplest way to do this is to restore a citizenship, or place of birth, question to the 2030 Census. This was the case in all but one census from 1820 to 2000.
The first Trump administration tried to in 2019 and lost 5–4 in the Supreme Court, but only because the court ruled the Commerce Department hadn’t provided sufficient procedural justification. The high court did not rule that it’s unconstitutional. Quite the opposite, actually: “The Enumeration Clause [Article I Section 2] does not provide a basis to set aside the Secretary’s decision,” the justices explained.
President Trump’s first administration started late, used the wrong arguments, and still came within one vote of winning that fight. The takeaway is obvious: Start earlier with a better strategy. The court’s transformation since 2019 ought to encourage them. Originalists have gained control of two liberal Supreme Court seats, establishing a supermajority and raising hopes that the court would approve restoring the citizenship question if given a second chance.
That’s an opportunity patriots – and America itself – can’t afford to miss.
Israel Paying US Social Media Influencers $7,000 Per Post As Right-Wing Support Craters
Following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting in New York on Friday with a group of pro-Israel influencers, we learn that Israel is likely paying them a whopping $7,000 per pro-Israel social-media post in a desperate drive to bolster plummeting support of Israel among America’s young conservatives.
That’s the conclusion of Responsible Statecraft’s Nick Cleveland-Stout, based on analysis of a disclosure filed with the US Department of Justice as required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). While pro-Israel lobbying heavyweight AIPAC is notoriously exempt from FARA registration, the social media operation comes under the transparency law’s provisions because Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs is paying for it.
The best ‘conservative’ influencers Israel can buy?
Emily Austin participated in the Epstein binders hoax, and joined Netanyahu’s recent influencers meeting
Xavaier DuRousseau attended the secret Hamptons influencer summit with Bill Ackman, then junketed off to Israel pic.twitter.com/JLoGk3Jzfd
The influence campaign is being facilitated by Bridge Partners, a DC-based firm owned by founders Yair Levi and Uri Steinberg. “[Bridge Partners] has also enlisted the help of a former major in the IDF spokesperson unit, Nadav Shtrauchler,” writes Cleveland-Stout. “For legal counsel, Levi and Steinberg have turned to Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, a firm that previously worked for controversial Israeli spyware company NSO Group.”
The current phase of the campaign runs from June to November, with a $900,000 budget for a stable of 14 to 17 influencers turning out pro-Israel content. Taking into account disclosed administrative costs and the campaign’s expectation that the group will produce 75-90 posts, Responsible Statecraft estimates each post will earn the influencers somewhere between $6,143 and $7,373. The individual influencers are not identified in the filings. However, given they are being paid by a foreign government to engage in political activity, the influencers seemingly have a duty to register as individual agents of the State of Israel.
Netanyahu candid public statements to influencers last week raised eyebrows, as they laid bare Israel’s drive to control social media discourse in the United States in a bid to shore up American support. “We’re going to have to use the tools of battle,” said Netanyahu. “Weapons change over time…the most important ones are in social media. And the most important purchase that is going on right now is…TikTok.”
NEW – Netanyahu mission-briefed American influencers today, stating TikTok is the “most important” weapon in securing Israel’s right-wing support: “Weapons change over time… the most important ones are the social media,” he said. “The most important purchase that is going on… pic.twitter.com/EeszHlcZmN
After pro-Palestinian content in the wake of the Oct 7 Hamas attacks catalyzed a long-simmering deep state drive to ban TikTok, the ban is being averted via TikTok’s transfer of an 80% stake to Oracle, Silver Lake, and Andreessen Horowitz. The new owners include significant backers of Israel.
Andreessen Horowitz has significant investments in the Israeli tech industry, where Ben Horowitz has worked to recruit from the ranks of elite Israeli military units. His father, David Horowitz, was a zealous supporter of Israel known for condemning pro-Palestinian activists as “Jew-haters” and allies of terrorists.
For the first time since the New York Times tested this question 26 years ago, Americans sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis pic.twitter.com/gdvNDypnKT
The Israeli social media push comes amid cratering support for Israel among Americans. The deterioration is strongest among Republicans who have long represented the cornerstone of Israel’s backing in the United States. That trend is even more pronounced among younger Republicans: An August Responsible Statecraftpoll found that just 24% of Republicans under age 35 sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians.
According to the FARA disclosures, Israel refers to the paid-influencer campaign as the “Esther Project.” That name closely resembles “Project Esther,” the Heritage Foundation proposal for the US government and pro-Israel groups to destroy the pro-Palestinian movement in the United States by declaring activists to be members of a “terrorist support network.” and using that as the pretext for deportations, lawsuits, job terminations, school expulsions and exclusion from “open society.”
After taking office, Secretary of State Marco Rubio quickly embraced the sinister tactic, using it to arrest and jail international students who’d engaged in pro-Palestinian activism. In the most infamous case, Rubio had federal agents chain and shackle a mild-mannered, female Tufts University child development student and lock her away in a crowded detention center in Louisiana pending deportation — all for merely writing a calm and measured op-ed in the student newspaper advocating the school’s divestment from Israel. In a blistering opinion issued Tuesday, a Reagan-appointed federal judge declared that such arrests and deportations violate the First Amendment and represent an “abuse” of power: “It is hard to imagine a policy more focused on intimidating its targets from practicing protected political speech.”
While that ruling is a victory for open discourse, there’s no such recourse for a TikTok algorithm that’s moving into the hands of Israel advocates.
In the wake of a federal government no longer serving as its obedient lapdog, the desperate lengths to which the climate cult goes to maintain its standing is increasingly imaginative.
Case in point: CNN recently reported that “for the first time, scientists have quantified the causal links between worsening heat waves and global warming pollution from individual fossil fuel and cement companies, pushing the boundaries of extreme weather event research in multiple surprising ways.”
In other words, the climate crusaders – apparently believing that it’s necessary to ratchet up the alarm factor in order to retain relevance – are now claiming the ability to pinpoint exact companies and actions that are allegedly leading to “worsening heat waves” – an interesting finding in the midst of one of the coolest Augusts and Septembers in much of the U.S. in recent years.
The study “encompasses 213 heat waves around the world from 2000 to 2023.” The conclusion? Wait for it – heatwaves “became much more likely and severe during that period, largely due to the burning of fossil fuels.” Shocking.
Accusations that fossil fuels are causing global warming, or cooling, or any weather pattern varying from what is claimed to be “normal,” are nothing new, of course. What’s new is that the study, published in the journal Nature, now claims to identify the specific culprits.
“Of the extreme heat events the researchers focused on, as many as a quarter of them would have been ‘virtually impossible’ without the climate pollution from any of the 14 biggest ‘carbon majors’ — the largest fossil fuel and cement producers responsible for the lion’s share of the world’s carbon pollution,” according to the report. The alleged “carbon majors” include industry giants ExxonMobil and Chevron, of course, along with nations such as the former Soviet Union.
“The study also found these companies are responsible for 50% of the increase in heat wave intensity since before humans started adding so much planet-warming carbon and methane pollution to the atmosphere,” according to CNN’s story.
Now we get to the kicker, the apparent practical application of such a specific report: “The conclusions may have far-reaching ramifications, including aiding those who seek in court to make oil and gas companies pay for climate change-related harm, a task that has proven extremely difficult in the U.S.”
Indeed, the radical climate movement has increasingly attempted to win court judgments against companies that provide our most affordable and reliable fuels. These “scientific studies” could provide left-leaning judges with a new justification to side with climate change zealots. One study co-author acknowledged that the conclusions provide another weapon in the legal arsenal.
“Courts are indicating a willingness to hold carbon majors accountable, but at the same time asking for more scientific certainty, and our study helps to close a part of that gap,” said Corina Heri, a study co-author and law professor at Tilburg Law School in Zurich.
It’s difficult to claim as coincidence the fact that the ramped-up effort to apply a shiny new veneer to rusty climate theories comes as the federal government is exponentially moving away from the grip of climate change fever.
The New York Times recently reported that Chris Wright, energy secretary in the Trump administration, has argued that “renewable energy projects developed with the aim of reducing fossil fuels were not beneficial to the United States.” Wright recently “defended the Trump administration’s decision to block a nearly completed $6.2 billion wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island by saying offshore wind increases electricity prices and by downplaying the jobs at stake.”
Speaking on Sept. 5 to the council on Foreign Relations, a Washington research organization, Wright said, “Climate change, for impacting the quality of your life, is not incredibly important. In fact, if it wasn’t in the news, in the media, you wouldn’t know.”
Adding insult to injury as far as climate zealots are concerned was a follow-up announcement by the Environmental Protection Agency that it will no longer require greenhouse gas emission reports “for thousands of coal-burning power plants, oil refineries, steel mills and other industrial facilities across the country,” as the Times reported. EPA head Lee Zeldin called greenhouse gas reporting “nothing more than bureaucratic red tape,” and said ending the program could save U.S. businesses $2.4 billion over the coming decade.
Naturally, the energy “experts” contacted by the Times disagreed with Wright’s assessment, and critics similarly assailed the end of greenhouse gas emission reporting, claiming it would seriously set back the fight against climate change.
It’s no wonder that those invested in the global warming movement (by whatever moniker it embraces in any given decade), once riding on easy street with the full backing of the Biden-Harris administration, are attempting to retrench and regroup with a new method to attack their favorite bogeyman – traditional, reliable, affordable energy – in sympathetic courtrooms.
But they may be running out of road, at least in the U.S. If the Trump administration continues to dismantle the statutory mechanisms that have kept the Climate Doom Squad alive, pretty soon there won’t be any far-flung climate regulations left to use as legal ammo – freeing up courts to concern themselves with issues grounded in fact, removed from politics, and more pertinent to average Americans.
Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter and columnist. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Empowerment Alliance or ZeroHedge.
Louisiana has issued a criminal arrest warrant for a California doctor suspected of mailing abortion pills to a patient in the state, in violation of state law, officials confirmed Sept. 29.
The state filed the arrest warrant on Sept. 19 for Dr. Remy Coeytaux, a Northern California physician, accused of violating the state’s abortion ban two years ago by providing abortion pills to a Louisiana woman.
The Louisiana arrest warrant came to light just days before California enacted new laws on Sept. 26, making the practice legal and shielding medical professionals and their attorneys from “adverse legal action.”
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill issued a statement on social media on Sept. 29 vowing to hold people accountable for distributing the pills in the state.
“On multiple occasions, I have raised concerns about the unlawful distribution of these pills in our State and the harm that it does to women,” Murrill stated.
“It’s dangerous, irresponsible, unethical, and illegal to distribute these pills to strangers in violation of the criminal laws of our State, without any relationship whatsoever to the individual who may ultimately be consuming them.”
Murrill added she would enforce and defend the state laws, including suing the governors whose shield laws claim to protect doctors and other medical professionals from criminal conduct in Louisiana.
The Louisiana patient, Rosalie Markezich, said her boyfriend used her email address to order drugs from Coeytaux in 2023 and gave her $150 to send to the out-of-state doctor. The patient said she had no other contact with the doctor, according to court filings.
Markezich said she didn’t want to take the abortion pills but felt forced into it. She also said “the trauma of my chemical abortion still haunts me” and that it would have never happened if telehealth prescriptions for the drug were prohibited, according to court documents.
Markezich and Murrill have also requested to join a lawsuit that seeks to order drug regulators to bar telehealth prescriptions to mifepristone, one of two drugs taken in combination to induce abortions.
The California doctor at the center of the Louisiana case, Coeytaux, has a medical degree from Stanford University and has been practicing and teaching medicine for nearly 30 years, according to his website. Coeytaux is a solo practitioner who has no employees.
Coeytaux did not immediately return a request for comment.
The case is the latest chapter in the abortion rights issue following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, sending the issue back to states in 2022. The Dobbs ruling has prompted new abortion laws in states.
Newsom Shields Abortion Providers
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new state law on Sept. 29 to shield health care providers, pharmacists, clinics, and hospitals from penalties for prescribing or dispensing mifepristone.
It also allows a pharmacist to dispense the drugs without including the patient’s name, the prescriber’s name, or the pharmacy’s name and address on the label.
Assembly Bill 260 also authorizes doctors to prescribe abortion drugs through virtual appointments and mail the pills out of state. The bill passed the Legislature on Sept. 10.
Newsom’s office did not immediately respond to Louisiana’s arrest warrant or to Murrill’s statements.
In an earlier press release, Newsom said he was proud to sign the bills.
“California stands for a woman’s right to choose,” Newsom said in a statement. “I’m proud to sign these bills to protect access to essential health care and shield patients and health care providers in the face of amplified attacks on the fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”
Newsom also signed Assembly Bill 1525, which helps shield attorneys from State Bar discipline for assisting other states with access to abortion services.
Roughly 750,000 federal workers are furloughed without pay, with “essential” employees forced to keep working – for now, without a paycheck. Active-duty military service members could soon see missed salaries if the impasse drags on, raising real-world stakes far beyond Capitol Hill.
How long will it last? According to Polymarket, most people think it will last two or more weeks.
History suggests shutdowns rarely succeed. Republicans’ 2013 gambit to undo Obamacare collapsed. Democrats’ 2018 standoff over DACA died out. Even the drawn-out 2018-2019 shutdown under President Trump produced little more than frustration and missed paychecks.
This time is no different. Lawmakers failed to agree on competing stopgap bills: Republicans pushed a “clean” continuing resolution into November, while Democrats tied funding to extending Obamacare subsidies and blocking cuts to Medicaid (illegals included). Both measures failed in the Senate Tuesday, leaving the government shuttered.
Democrats Spitting Mad
Senate Democrats rejected a Republican stopgap measure to fund the government at current levels through Nov. 21, insisting on an extension of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies (illegals and all) – and limits on the administration’s practice of withholding federal funds.
“They’re in charge. They have to convene a negotiation. They haven’t done that,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said Tuesday. “The fact that they aren’t even here in the House of Representatives is proof that they’re not serious about it.”
“Trump has to actually be willing to negotiate and make a deal,” echoed Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA). “He wrote a book about making deals. He played a character on a TV show who taught people how to make deals. And he hasn’t really done that as president, but this is his opportunity to do that.”
Republicans counter that Democrats are holding the government hostage. “We’re not going to discuss and negotiate it while they’re holding the hostage of the federal government,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said Tuesday morning on CNBC. “Release the hostage, and we will have that conversation about how we can keep these exchanges up and going.”
Red Wedding Time?
Meanwhile, President Trump and OMB Director Russ Vought are openly threatening to use the shutdown as a vehicle for sweeping government changes – from layoffs to budget cuts that would never pass Congress otherwise. “A lot of good can come from shutdowns,” Trump mused Tuesday.
Democrats call this intimidation. But if Trump follows through, the pressure on Senate moderates could mount quickly. Already, three Democrats – Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto, Angus King, and John Fetterman – have defected to back the GOP’s funding measure.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has so far held his caucus together, but defections hint at deeper vulnerabilities. Thune is betting that the longer the shutdown drags on, the more centrist Democrats will peel away. He needs at least eight crossovers to reach 60 votes.
At a press conference Tuesday night, Schumer avoided drawing a hard line, pledging only to “fight as hard as we can for [Americans’] health care” – a softer stance than promising to hold out indefinitely.
Shutdown Impacts Across Government
Federal workforce: Millions furloughed or working unpaid; food inspectors and park rangers affected. Contractors unlikely to get back pay.
National parks & travel: Parks technically open but mostly unstaffed; law enforcement and fire suppression remain; FAA and TSA deemed essential but unpaid.
Defense & military: Over a million troops working without pay; new contracts halted; elective care at military facilities postponed; overseas operations continue.
Taxes: IRS funded short-term with special reserves; nearly all employees reporting for now.
Health care: Medicare and Medicaid payments flow, but HHS, NIH, and CDC furlough large portions of staff; biomedical research and prevention programs curtailed; FDA maintains recalls but scales back inspections.
Veterans Affairs: Benefits and medical appointments continue; hotlines, regional offices, and counseling programs suspended.
Energy & environment: Drilling and mining permitting continues; EPA enforcement inspections largely paused.
Food safety & nutrition: USDA meat inspectors on duty but unpaid; FDA inspections slowed; WIC nutrition program may run out of funds within days.
Financial regulation: SEC and CFTC reduced to skeleton crews; rulemaking and most enforcement work halted.
Tech regulation: FTC litigation and consumer complaint center suspended.
Cyber defense: DHS’s CISA furloughing two-thirds of staff; only critical cybersecurity operations remain active.
Beyond Washington, Americans are already feeling the sting: national parks shuttered, Social Security and Medicare services slowed, permits delayed, phones at federal agencies left unanswered. The Bureau of Labor Statistics confirmed it will withhold this week’s jobs report – data that could move markets.
Public anger has historically proven one of the most potent forces for ending shutdowns. A downturn in stocks or a wave of constituent backlash could tilt the balance faster than negotiations alone.
The Outlook: Prolonged Standoff
Federal paydays loom next week, with service members scheduled for Oct. 15. Pentagon officials suggest they could redirect funds from the $150 billion “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” pot to cover military salaries — a move that would enrage Democrats.
The most plausible way out would be Trump deciding to strike a deal — but at the moment, that outcome looks remote. Punchbowl News think that means Trump shifting course and endorsing a deal to restore funding. For now, Washington is locked in familiar gridlock – high stakes for families, a test of moderates’ resolve, and the looming risk that the shutdown lasts far longer than anyone expects.
WASHINGTON—The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) arrested 670 individuals and seized nearly 77,000 kilograms of narcotics during a five-day operation targeting a Mexican drug trafficking organization, according to an agency statement on Sept. 29.
Agents sought to dismantle the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, designated as a foreign terrorist organization in February with an executive order from President Donald Trump for its role in orchestrating illegal drug distribution.
“Let this serve as a warning: DEA will not relent,” agency administrator Terrance Cole said in a statement.
“Every arrest, every seizure, and every dollar stripped from [the cartel] represents lives saved and communities protected. This focused operation is only the beginning—we will carry this fight forward together until this threat is defeated.”
The cartel operates across the globe in at least 40 countries, with tens of thousands of individuals helping produce, manufacture, and distribute dangerous narcotics, according to the DEA.
Cole said the operation, which ran from Sept. 22 through Sept. 26, involved collaboration between DEA agents in 23 domestic and seven foreign divisions, a Department of Homeland Security Task Force, other federal agencies, and state and local law enforcement partners.
Investigations led to the seizure of nearly 100 kilograms of fentanyl—enough to kill about 50 million people, by the agency’s calculations.
More than 1.1 million counterfeit pills were seized, along with more than 6,000 kilograms of methamphetamine, almost 23,000 kilograms of cocaine, and 33 kilograms of heroin.
Photos from the agency’s Atlanta office show tables piled high with confiscated packages filled with seized narcotics. Another image shows roughly 300,000 counterfeit pills, pressed in a variety of colors, seized in New York.
Approximately $19 million in cash and currency was recovered, and the agency estimated the value of assets impounded at nearly $30 million.
Also confiscated were 244 firearms, officials said.
Hundreds of cartel members and associates were detained, but the group’s leaders have eluded capture.
The U.S. Department of State is offering a $15 million reward for information that leads to the apprehension of co-founder Nemesio Rubén Oseguera Cervantes, known as El Mencho.
Oseguera Cervantes was indicted in the United States in 2017, and again subsequently on multiple occasions, for conspiracy to commit drug trafficking crimes.
According to the State Department, he has also allegedly been involved in assassination attempts on Mexican government officials.
Among other groups that have been designated foreign terrorist organizations by the federal government are the Noreste cartel—previously known as Las Zetas—the Sinaloa cartel, Tren de Aragua, and Mara Salvatrucha, better known as MS-13.
The terrorist designations “expose and isolate” suspects and provide law enforcement with more leverage to investigate and disrupt transnational criminal networks, according to the State Department.
Reddit Plunges On New Traffic Data Suggesting ChatGPT “Massively Reduced Citations”
Reddit shares are sinking in New York premarket trading, and if the losses hold into the cash session, it would mark the steepest decline in six months. The drop comes after new Similarweb data indicated that ChatGPT has either scaled back or completely stopped using Reddit as a source for answer generation. Who would have ever guessed that relying on Reddit posts to generate chatbot answers was a brilliant idea?
Several X users are citing Similarweb data that shows Reddit’s collapsing web traffic. This includes one X user by the name of “Bert Tian” who states:
$RDDT US Website DAU (source @Similarweb ) has dropped sharply after ChatGPT massively reduced Reddit citations — traffic is now even close to early-year levels.
Multiple data vendors are all picking up the shift in ChatGPT citation patterns. Reasons still unclear, but one guess is that ChatGPT may be limiting web search for free accounts as a cost-cutting move to push monetization.
Tian posted an image showing Reddit’s U.S. daily active users on a 30-day average, indicating that around September 11 was the point when Reddit sources cited by ChatGPT dropped sharply.
Tian was quoting another X user by the name of “Andrea Bosoni,” who pointed out:
Apparently ChatGPT is not using Reddit much anymore for their answers. I guess they realized that what random people say can’t be considered a trusted source after all. You can all stop spamming it with your fake brand mentions now.
TryProfound blog cited a dataset between August 2024 and June 2025 that showed Reddit accounts for 11.3% of ChatGPT’s citations within its top 10 most-cited sources.
Reddit shares dropped as much as 13% in premarket trading. If losses hold through the cash session, this would mark the largest decline since early March.
So, ChatGPT relies heavily on Wikipedia and Reddit… enough said. That’s why Elon Musk revealed on Tuesday his plans to launch “Grokpedia.”
The manufacturer of Tylenol was keeping tabs on research into the drug and neurodevelopmental issues such as autism, and concluded in 2018 that evidence of a link between them was becoming significant, according to newly disclosed documents.
In a Feb. 8, 2018, email obtained by The Epoch Times, Rachel Weinstein, director of epidemiology at Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Janssen, wrote, “The weight of evidence is starting to feel heavy to me.”
Weinstein was emailing Jesse Berlin, Johnson & Johnson’s global head of epidemiology, about a review that concluded that nine studies suggested that use of acetaminophen—the active ingredient in Tylenol—by pregnant women was linked to autism and other neurodevelopmental issues in the women’s children.
Weinstein said that Janssen had been discussing with a neurologist about how acetaminophen could be beneficial.
“But now we’ve added the studies in prenatal exposure and neurodev [sic] outcome,” she said.
Berlin wrote that he read the review and that “there appears to be some specificity of the association.” While he took issue with how some papers did not analyze other drugs, “at least one study looked separately at specific indications and the association didn’t go away,” he said.
Johnson & Johnson was the maker of Tylenol for years. In 2023, a newly created company called Kenvue took over the Tylenol brand and other consumer brands.
“These documents show we were doing exactly the right thing,” a spokesperson for Kenvue told The Epoch Times in an email. “We have continuously evaluated the science, and there is no credible evidence that taking acetaminophen causes autism.”
‘Difficult Options’
Dr. Jørn Olsen of Aarhus University in Denmark and other researchers in 2014 released an observational study that determined maternal acetaminophen use during pregnancy was linked to a higher risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder-like behavioral problems or hyperkinetic disorders in their children.
Weinstein, in an email, told Olsen that the study had strengths but wondered whether the researchers had tried assessing any association between other drugs pregnant women take, such as aspirin, and the disorders. Olsen, in a brief reply, said the researchers planned to look at those drugs in future studies.
Weinstein forwarded the email to the company’s consumer medical safety division.
“Recall that we have ruled out the possibility of conducting a database study of our own because other existing databases would be underpowered to detect the same effect that the Danish study found, due to the lack of a large enough database,” she wrote in her email.
She asked whether the question for the company was whether there was a willingness to support Olsen “up to a reasonable amount with the provision that the investigator has final say on publication but the sponsor can review and comment on the manuscript prior to publication.”
Weinstein told Berlin that there were several options, including funding Olsen. They could also try to replicate Olsen’s study, conducted in Denmark, with Norwegian data on prescriptions and diagnoses, and by including other drugs.
“The outcome of such a study is unknown. We could end up confirming the Danish findings, for example,” she said.
She later drafted a note to Olsen that initially said Johnson & Johnson would be happy to work with him on additional research. Berlin in response proposed revisions. But Weinstein then told Berlin she was having second thoughts on engaging Olsen.
“Do we really need to stick our neck out and make this offer? Would we be surprised if the new analyses confirmed or did not confirm the existing studies?” she asked.
Berlin responded: “I’m trying to think through what we would do based on what we learn. I don’t have a huge problem abandoning this, if that’s where we end up after talking.”
Weinstein, who is now retired, could not be reached for comment. Berlin, now a professor at Rutgers University, did not respond to a request for comment.
Internal slides from around the time of the emails, obtained by The Epoch Times, stated that the company declined to pursue a collaboration with Danish researchers in part because executives were unsure about “the value to pregnant consumers,” who might be presented with “difficult options” such as “don’t use anything if you have a fever.”
Lawyer: ‘Irresponsible’
The emails came to light in lawsuits brought by women who say they should have been warned by Johnson & Johnson and retailers about the risks of neurodevelopmental problems associated with acetaminophen products.
The women have pointed to papers such as a 2020 prospective study in Canada that found an increased risk of ADHD among children born to women who used acetaminophen while pregnant.
“Drugmakers have a legal and ethical obligation to continually investigate the safety of their products. Yet despite recognizing the heavy weight of the scientific evidence years ago, Kenvue scientists made a deliberate decision not to ’stick our necks’ out to commission further research,” Ashley Keller, senior partner at law firm Keller Postman, which is representing the women in multiple cases, told The Epoch Times via email.
“The reason for that irresponsible choice is obvious. The company didn’t study the question for fear they would not like the answer. But pregnant moms deserve answers, and protecting a multi-billion dollar drug franchise is no excuse for ostrich-like corporate misbehavior.”
The emails were first reported by the Daily Caller and drewtheattention of the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Government officials recently warned the public that Tylenol use during pregnancy may be associated with autism in children born to the mothers.
‘We Have Been Looking at It’
Weinstein said in a 2023 deposition that it would be unethical to run a randomized, controlled trial seeking to figure out whether there was a link between in utero acetaminophen exposure and neurodevelopmental problems. It would be good to do “more tightly controlled” observational studies, or research utilizing sources such as medical claims databases, she said.
Weinstein also said that Johnson & Johnson had been tracking literature on the topic for nearly a decade, including epidemiological, safety, and preclinical studies.
She said that the company has “essentially done a systematic review,” or an analysis of strong studies on the matter.
She said the company would be publishing the review but did not know when.
Internal slides from 2018, obtained by The Epoch Times, described the results of a company analysis of 16 studies regarding prenatal exposure to acetaminophen and neurodevelopmental disorders.
The slides stated that individual observational studies “show a somewhat consistent association of increased occurrence of neurodevelopmental outcomes with prenatal exposure,” with strengths including some studies being prospective. Limitations included researchers measuring children at different ages, such as 18 months and seven years.
A 2022 internal Kenvue slide deck stated that 12 studies featuring clinically diagnosed endpoints were analyzed. The studies were “too limited in methodological or analytical design to draw conclusions regarding a causal relationship between prenatal acetaminophen use and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children,” and therefore, if acetaminophen is used as directed, it is safe to use during pregnancy, the slide deck stated.
A review coauthored by Kenvue scientists and funded by Kenvue was published by Critical Reviews in Toxicology in February.
The authors of the review said that they reviewed preclinical studies and determined that the data “demonstrates no consistent evidence of adverse effects following developmental exposure to acetaminophen at therapeutic and/or non-systemically toxic doses on the structure and function of the nervous system, including neuroanatomical, neurotransmission, and behavioral endpoints.”
Labeling Change
Other documents labeled the effort to study the matter Project Cocoon, stated that Weinstein was involved, and listed as the mission of the project “to protect acetaminophen.”
One slide stated, “Courage: We don’t need a label change.”
The label of Tylenol has long stated, “If pregnant or breastfeeding, ask a health professional before use.”
In 2017, one document showed that the company changed its internal label to add, “This product should not be used during pregnancy or lactation unless the potential benefit of treatment to the mother outweighs the possible risks to the developing fetus/nursing infant.”
When asked in a 2023 deposition about whether the change means doctors could give patients guidance on potential risks of developmental outcomes, Leslie Shur, Johnson & Johnson’s director of pharmacovigilance, replied, “and the risk of, in the case of fever … of not treating.”
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Sept. 22 that it has started the process to change the label for Tylenol and other acetaminophen-containing products “to reflect evidence suggesting that the use of acetaminophen by pregnant women may be associated with an increased risk of neurological conditions such as autism and ADHD in children.”
Regulators said a causal relationship has not been established and noted that acetaminophen is the only over-the-counter drug available to treat fevers in pregnancy.
The FDA in 2014 had decided to take no regulatory action, following advice from reviewers. In 2016, FDA reviewers said, “With growing evidence for adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes being associated with in utero [acetaminophen] exposure, even in the absence of proof of a causal relationship, it would be appropriate for FDA to bring this issue to the attention of consumers and health care providers through one of the communication avenues available to the agency.”
Reviewers in 2019 said data indicated that prenatal acetaminophen exposure “is not necessary completely benign for the fetus” and “it would be desirable for the agency to communicate this message to healthcare providers and pregnant women, considering that acetaminophen is so commonly used by women during their pregnancies, and that many perceive acetaminophen to be risk-free.”
Court Cases
U.S. District Judge Denise Cote dismissed the federal multidistrict litigation over acetaminophen in 2024, after finding that experts offered by the plaintiffs misrepresented the results of studies.
The case was appealed and is set for oral argument before an appeals court on Nov. 17, after being delayed from a date in early October.
Keller and other attorneys in a recent filing alerted the court to the government’s move to update Tylenol’s label. The filing noted that government officials quoted one of the plaintiffs’ witnesses, Dr. Andrea Baccarelli, dean of the faculty at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, who said that, in his expert opinion, “there is a causal relationship” between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders.
“Expert opinion that is sound enough to persuade every Senate-confirmed federal scientist easily clears Rule 702(d)’s bar,” or the rule governing expert witnesses in litigation, they wrote. Attorneys for Kenvue told the court that statements from the government and Baccarelli “confirm that the existing evidence does not support a causal relationship.”
In California, a state judge in May turned away a similar case, concluding that evidence on the link between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and autism is “profoundly uncertain and conflicting.”
The judge also wrote that slides and other internal documents showed “candid internal discussion,” which she described as “positive corporate behavior.”
China Halts All New BHP Iron Ore Cargoes As Traders Brief Goldman On Situation
Bloomberg reports that China Mineral Resources Group has temporarily halted purchases of all dollar-denominated seaborne iron ore cargoes from BHP Group vessels.
The trade suspension follows failed talks between CMRG (the world’s largest iron ore buyer) and BHP (the world’s largest listed miner) and builds on earlier restrictions targeting BHP’s Jimblebar blend fines. CMRG has now barred mills from taking Jimblebar cargoes at ports or purchasing them in the yuan spot market, forcing some steelmakers to source ore elsewhere.
“Would China have done this a decade ago, when it heavily depended on imports? No way,” Panmure Liberum analyst Tom Price wrote in a note, adding that the difference now is that Chinese steel demand is sluggish and new supplies from the giant Simandou mine in Guinea are near.
The suspension highlights Beijing’s efforts to exert greater influence in global iron ore markets, shifting power away from global miners (BHP, Rio Tinto, Vale) toward China’s steel industry.
Goldman analyst James McGeoch spoke with traders to gather more insight into the situation.
Here’s what McGeoch told clients earlier:
Press is reporting that “China” halts purchases of “ALL” BHP iron ore ore, traders tell me they see two agendas:
Commercial term improvement (the majority of the friction, like 90%) and
a desire to shift some sales to RMB denomination (10%).
Brief background: I wrote the below last Monday “last week it was reported (19 Sept) that Chinas CMRG halting some BHP product link, at the time we understood it related to Jimblebar fines, these acct for c.14mt annually. There is 2mt reported at port, which would be the number to focus on right now. Traders tell me BHP won’t sign a discounted supply deal, so the games begin as CMRG gets bigger. RIO as I understand recently signed a deal floating price deal to year end. Until Simandou comes on and the mkt rebalances those tonnes everyone is nervous and China smells that fear, CMRG is doing exactly what people believe it was designed for….”… This may be a misplaced comment, however its always been my personal impression that BHP’s MOU is to be the best producer, let the mkt clear at the most efficient price. Its black and white. CMRG is introducing shades of grey and BHP are holding the line….
Making sense of the iron ore market, McGeoch published a few charts for clients:
Iron Ore does tend to trend higher into year-end
Singapore iron ore futures rose about 1% to $104 a ton. BHP shares in London fell 2%.
Last month, BHP reported annual profit that slid to the lowest level in half a decade, as dismal demand from China’s sluggish economic recovery weighed on iron ore prices and prompted a cut in capital and exploration spending.
