Berkshire Hathaway has sold its final stake in BYD, closing the book on a 17-year partnership that propelled the Chinese automaker into the global spotlight and delivered one of Warren Buffett’s most lucrative investments, according to Nikkei Asia.

Berkshire first bought 225 million shares in September 2008 for about HK$8 apiece, just weeks after Lehman Brothers collapsed. The deal gave Berkshire a 9.9% stake, which BYD’s founder Wang Chuanfu hailed at the time as a vote of “confidence” in the company’s future. The funds went toward batteries and EV development, fueling BYD’s global rise.

Buffett himself praised the automaker to shareholders, once describing its plug-in EV as “the future” and “amazing.” BYD became a fixture in Berkshire’s annual reports and at one point ranked among its largest equity holdings, alongside Coca-Cola and American Express.

Nikkei Asia writes that the payoff was immense for the man who always claimed to “never bet against America”. Berkshire disposed of most shares at over HK$200 before a recent stock split, compared to HK$113.5 last Friday, when news of the full exit emerged. A $230 million investment turned into billions in profit.

Buffett credited his late partner Charlie Munger with championing the bet. “Charlie twice pounded the table with me and just said, you know, ‘buy, buy, buy.’ And BYD was one of them, and Costco was the other,” Buffett recalled at Berkshire’s 2024 meeting.

Yet Buffett has long warned of the auto sector’s volatility. “Don’t count on us foreseeing who the winners will be, and don’t count on us for predicting when something will happen,” he said in 2024. A year earlier, he cautioned that even Henry Ford “owned the world” before losing money two decades later. “They’re not going to go away, and they look like a winner at any given time, but it doesn’t get you a permanent place.”

BYD itself faces mounting challenges. It ranked seventh globally in auto sales last year, ahead of Honda but behind Ford, yet is now under pressure from rising Chinese rivals and global scrutiny of low-priced EV exports.

The exit also reflects Berkshire’s shifting focus. Buffett sold out of PetroChina in 2008 amid controversy and later doubled down on BYD, but more recently pivoted to Japan’s top trading houses. With Munger gone and Buffett preparing to hand the CEO role to Greg Abel in January, Berkshire is entering a new era.

BYD acknowledged the moment on Monday. Li Yunfei, its head of PR, thanked Buffett and Munger for 17 years of partnership. The company has reason to be grateful: since Berkshire’s investment, revenue has jumped 37-fold to 777 billion yuan ($109 billion), while net profit climbed 25 times to over 40 billion yuan.

For Buffett, the BYD chapter is closed. For BYD, the challenge is whether it can keep its momentum in a tougher global market—without the backing of the “Oracle of Omaha.”

Buffett has long preached “never bet against America,” but when it came to cars, it seems even the Oracle of Omaha knew better than to bet on himself.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump told reporters on Friday that other former officials may be prosecuted after former FBI Director James Comey was indicted for allegedly making a false statement during a Senate hearing.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed criminal charges against Comey on Thursday, alleging that he made false statements and obstructed a congressional investigation.

“It’s not a list, but I think there will be others,” Trump told reporters as he was leaving the White House to partake in the Ryder Cup in New York.

He added that these people “were corrupt” and are members of the “radical left.”

“They weaponized the Justice Department like nobody in history,” he said. “What they’ve done is terrible. I hope, frankly, there are others because you can’t let this happen to a country.”

.@POTUS: “It’s not a ‘list’ but I think there will be others. I mean, they’re corrupt… Frankly, I hope there are others because you can’t let this happen to a country.” pic.twitter.com/oddvkFv0BJ

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 26, 2025

Trump has frequently criticized Comey’s handling of the FBI investigation into whether Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election. In 2017, he fired Comey as FBI director.

Since Trump returned to office in January, the DOJ has been examining Comey’s 2020 testimony, when the former FBI director denied that he had authorized disclosures of sensitive information to the news media.

“It’s a pretty easy case, because, look, he lied. … That was a very important question that he was asked, and he wanted to be specific, but … he didn’t think he’d get caught. That was a very important answer … it was a very good answer if he didn’t get caught, but he got caught lying to Congress,” Trump told reporters on Friday, referring to the charges against Comey.

The indictment alleges that Comey misled Congress by claiming he had not authorized anyone else to be an anonymous source in news reports about an FBI investigation.

Trump told reporters that the charges are “about justice really” and that “it’s not revenge.”

Comey, in a video posted on Instagram, said: “My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and I’m innocent. So let’s have a trial and keep the faith.”

Responding to criticism about the DOJ and FBI, FBI Director Kash Patel said on Friday morning that the Comey indictment was the result of “career FBI agents, intel analysts, and staff” who “called the balls and strikes” in the case.

Comey came under fire earlier this year when he uploaded a photo of shells that were arranged on the beach to read, “86 47.” There were public concerns that “47” was referring to Trump, who became the 47th president in his second term, while “86” is slang for “get rid of.”

*  *  *

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has revealed in an interview with Axios that he asked President Trump on Tuesday to provide Ukraine with Tomahawk missiles, which would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deep into Russia, even as far away as Moscow.

Zelensky made the dubious argument that this would force President Putin to the negotiating table to make significant compromise and end the war. Zelensky suggested that the Ukrainians might not even have to use the Tomahawks it was given, only that the threat alone could be enough to scare Putin.

The Ukrainian leader was responding to a question on “The Axios Show” on his view of the one thing Trump could do to allow Kiev to win the war. Zelensky responded: “I think President Trump knows.” He then said he conveyed “what we need” is “one thing.”

“By the way, we need it, but it doesn’t mean that we will use it. Because if we will have it, I think it’s additional pressure on Putin to sit and speak,” he continued, alluding to a long-range, precision-guided US missile.

Axios on Friday followed by publishing the following commentary:

Zelensky did not name that weapons system during his interview with Axios’ Barak Ravid, but he said that if Russia knew Ukraine had it, the pressure to talk would greatly increase.

A Ukrainian official and another source familiar with the Trump-Zelensky meeting confirmed it was the Tomahawk — a long-range, precision-guided missile.

If it happens, the Tomahawk would become by far the longest missile in the Ukraine’s arsenal. It can travel over 1,000 miles, compared to the nearly 200 miles of US-made ATACMS, the latter which has already been provided.

The Telegraph reviews:

Joe Biden, the former US president, rebuffed a similar request, which came as part of a 10-point “Victory Plan” presented by Mr Zelensky at the end of Mr Biden’s tenure in the White House.

The provision of the long-range missile was deemed too risky because it would be able to strike targets in Moscow and would be likely to be able to evade Russia’s most advanced air-defense systems, potentially escalating the conflict.

But in a sign of growing confidence for a more positive decision, Mr Zelensky told the Axios news agency that, during their meeting earlier this week, Mr Trump had said “we will work on it”.

Zelensky had also told Axios that Russian officials “have to know where their bomb shelters are,” adding: “If they will not stop the war, they will need it in any case.”

🚨 Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sends a warning to Russian officials on The Axios Show in an interview w/ @BarakRavid:

“They have to know where their bomb shelters are. They need it. If they will not stop the war, they will need it in any case.” pic.twitter.com/NKhlCN4Lrb

— Axios (@axios) September 25, 2025

The Wall Street Journal is reporting in follow-up that Trump is ‘open’ to the idea, but it’s anything but clear whether this is an accurate assessment of how Trump views it:

President Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky he was open to lifting restrictions on Ukraine’s use of American-made long-range weapons to strike inside Russia, but he didn’t commit to doing so during a meeting Tuesday, according to a senior U.S. official and a Ukrainian official.

During the sideline discussion at the United Nations, Zelensky asked Trump for more long-range missiles and approval to use such weapons to strike targets on sovereign Russian territory. Trump replied that he didn’t oppose the idea, though both officials said the president didn’t make any commitments to reverse a U.S. ban on such attacks.

It seems he’s already previewing what he intends to do with long-range missiles if he receives them: attack Moscow and government buildings. This would likely be the very thing that sparks WW3, and Trump would be wise to stay far away from sending Tomahawks or any other long-range system.

A former New York financier who managed money for George Soros has been arrested on charges spanning bank fraud to sex trafficking.

Howard Rubin, 70, was taken into custody Friday morning at his home in Fairfield, Connecticut. According to a 10-count indictment unsealed in a Brooklyn federal court, Rubin is accused of sex-trafficking at least 10 women between 2009 and 2019 – luring them to various NYC hotels and a Manhattan penthouse with a soundproofed BDSM sex dungeon – where he restrained, beat, and shocked them with electricity, according to the US Attorney’s Office in Brooklyn. 

Rubin reportedly spent at least $1 million on said activities. He has also been charged with bank fraud related to false statements on financial documents during a civil lawsuit stemming from these activities.

“As alleged, the defendants used Rubin’s wealth to mislead and recruit women to engage in commercial sex acts, where Rubin then tortured women beyond their consent, causing lasting physical and/or psychological pain, in some cases physical injuries,” Brooklyn US Attorney Joseph Nocella said in a statement.

One of the West 57th Street penthouse bedrooms was soundproofed and painted red, and had a device that was used to shock or electrocute the women, the feds said. The room also had a cross and bed with restraints where the women would be bound and gagged, according to the authorities. -NY Post

Allegations against Rubin are not new, as he’s been on the radar since at least 2017. Among the alleged acts he paid $2,000 – $5,000 per session (via the NY Post);

• Rubin gagged, tied up and viciously abused the women – even punching one in the head, according to a 2017 lawsuit filed on behalf of two Playboy Playmates and another alleged victim. 

“I’m going to rape you like I rape my daughter,” he reportedly shouted during one of the alleged assaults. 

• In one session, he beat one of the women’s “breasts so badly that her right implant flipped.”

• One plaintiff was tied up, gagged and shocked with a cattle prod in her groin before Rubin allegedly raped her

Some of the women agreed to a safe word – that Rubin allegedly ignored. Others were gagged so they couldn’t object, and prosecutors say he would even continue if a woman passed out. 

• “I don’t care if she screams,” Rubin wrote one of two women who he said he planed to “abuse” for hours, the feds allege. 

Rubin also reportedly referenced Disney movies (like Jes Staley with Epstein), telling another alleged victim that rape was natural – referencing “Beauty and the Beast” (though in the movie Belle was clearly ready to have sex with Beast before he turned back into a human).

From 2009–2019; Rubin initially used luxury Manhattan hotels, then a leased the ‘sex dungeon’ penthouse. There were also encounters in Las Vegas. 

Personal Assistant

According to the indictment, Rubin’s personal assistant – Jennifer Powers, is also facing sex-trafficking charges tied to her boss’s proclivities. Powers Assisted Rubin from 2011–2019. Her role allegedly included recruiting women (often former Playboy models via social media or prostitution networks), arranging flights and accommodations (e.g., to New York airports in Queens), securing NDAs, procuring BDSM equipment, managing payments (sometimes structured to avoid $10,000 thresholds), and handling complaints/injuries (e.g., advising ice or bruise cream, minimizing Rubin’s behavior). Rubin funded her lifestyle – some $8 million from 2018–2023 – including rent, schooling, legal fees, and a Texas home mortgage he co-signed.

In one text exchange, Rubin allegedly texted Powers that he had a woman tied to his cross, to which Powers replied “I can only imagine what you did to her on that cross!!! Did you shock her p—y??”

Rubin reportedly replied that he did, but complained that his electrocution device was “losing strength.”

Bank Fraud

On June 3, 2020, Rubin emailed a signed financial statement to co-sign Powers’ mortgage, answering “No” to “Are you a party to any suit or unsatisfied judgments?” despite the ongoing Civil Case brought by the Playmates. 

Then on April 4, 2022, Powers emailed a renewed statement signed by Rubin which also did not disclose the lawsuit. 

Here’s lookin’ at you Howard, you (allegedly) sick fuck. 

*  *  *

ATTENTION: Buy some meat before free shipping goes away Sunday night… Several items already sold out.

Just the Steaks (10 lbs)

Filet Mignon and other goodies (11 lbs)

Ground Beef (on sale in addition to free shipping)

Texas Lasagna & Meatballs (comfort food, holy shit it’s good)

Beef, Chick & Pork Trio

Shares of Electronic Arts (EA) surged late in the US cash session after a Wall Street Journal report revealed that EA is finalizing a deal to go private, potentially marking the largest leveraged buyout (LBO) ever, not adjusting for inflation.  

The LBO is being led by a consortium of private-equity giants, such as Silver Lake, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund is expected to announce the transaction as soon as next week. 

EA (known for FIFA/FC, Madden NFL, The Sims, and other top gaming franchises) shares jumped 15.5%, hitting record highs. Please note that EA has not yet confirmed the details of the story.

If gains are held through the end of the cash session, today’s 15.5% would be the highest since February 08, 2019.

EA’s market capitalization pre-WSJ report was around $42.8 billion. The deal could value EA at around $50 billion. 

WSJ provided some context about the potential LBO transaction: 

Assuming a deal comes together, it is likely to rank as the largest leveraged buyout ever, not adjusting for inflation. The largest to date was the 2007 purchase of Texas utility TXU by a group of private-equity firms for around $32 billion, which doesn’t include assumed debt, according to Dealogic.

Massive leveraged buyouts all but disappeared after a number of them performed poorly in the wake of the 2008-09 financial crisis. A group of private-equity firms made a big splash in 2021 when they agreed to buy medical-supply company Medline Industries for more than $30 billion.

Two decades of “EA SPORTS – It’s in the game.” 

. . . 

Authroed by Athan Koutsiouroumbas via RealClearPennsylvania,

Electric bills may be the pivotal issue of Pennsylvania’s 2026 Midterm.

Don’t believe me? 

Just look eastward in New Jersey.

A near majority of digital ads are focused on defining who is to blame for New Jersey’s escalating electric prices in a heated, competitive race for governor. Just as many likely run on television.

The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, incumbent U.S. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, is blamed for backing the status quo, resulting in skyrocketing electric bill rate hikes.

Projecting toughness as an executive, Sherrill points the finger at utility companies and campaigns on declaring an electric bill emergency.

As the New Jersey blame game continues through the fall, it is unlikely that anybody will point out that the Garden State gets much of its energy from Pennsylvania in the first place. 

Through the miracle of fracking, Pennsylvania has transformed itself into an energy juggernaut.  Without Pennsylvania’s ability to make more energy than it currently consumes, states like New Jersey would likely face rolling brownouts on the coldest and hottest days of the year.

However, Pennsylvania’s ability to export electricity is about to change. 

Quietly this month, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission released a report validating what a handful of insiders already know: Pennsylvania’s energy demand is expected to double in the next three years. 

It does not take an economics degree to understand that doubling demand while keeping supply unchanged is a recipe for disaster. Meanwhile, there is no planned construction for any new baseload electric generation in Pennsylvania. 

As a gas-fired power plant can take up to five years to build while nuclear power plants can take nearly a decade to construct, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and the rest of the Mid-Atlantic states are poised to be in a world of pain.

Pennsylvania’s Gov. Shapiro may have reached his breaking point, announcing at a meeting of the Mid-Atlantic’s grid operator that if a plan does not materialize fast to bring new generation online, he intends to remove Pennsylvania from the regional grid.

It is the utility equivalent of “going nuclear.”

Within a matter of hours, Pennsylvania’s powerful executive mainstreamed what was once considered a fringe policy.  Seceding the Keystone State from the regional power grid of the Northeastern United States would be like the United States withdrawing from NATO. 

With 86% of likely voters concerned about their electric bill, Gov. Shapiro is wise to get ahead of the issue. Finger pointing can only get incumbents so far before even greater rate hikes take effect next year. If Pennsylvania wants to avoid crisis, policymakers must move beyond blame and act.

Fortunately, there is some low-hanging fruit. The process Pennsylvania uses to gauge pending energy demand is severely broken. In a little-noticed hearing in the Pennsylvania state legislature, a stunning admission came to light: Pennsylvania’s electric utilities may be double – and even triple – counting the number of data centers and other large energy projects projected to come online in the Commonwealth.

The rise of data centers deploying artificial intelligence is what has driven newfound energy demand not only in Pennsylvania, but nationwide.

Data centers and hyperscalers appear to be venue shopping for the most electricity and the fastest interconnection to the grid. These potentially inflated figures, fed to the regional grid operator responsible for managing the electricity supply for Americans in more than 13 states, have contributed to sharply revised projections for energy demand.

The byproduct is voters are already paying the price for higher energy demand that may not exist. 

The Pennsylvania Legislature should compel action.

First, it should mandate a full audit of pending data center projections submitted by electric utilities.

Second, it should direct the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to revise how future demand is counted and reported to ensure that only substantiated projects are used in demand forecasting.

And third, it should insist on transparency from the regional grid operator about how those projections influence price-setting and capital deployment.

As far as actions the grid operator can take, it should take every step to approve all viable projects currently in the queue to get interconnected to the grid. Many of these projects have languished for years, for no clear reason.

With focus and resolve, these issues can be resolved by the end of the calendar year. 

These reforms will paint a clearer picture of exactly what policymakers need to tackle in spring 2026 ahead of the midterms. 

Failure to do so may result in candidates learning that their re-election was contingent on the electric bill, stupid. 

It’s a rare occasion when a far-left media source actually admits that the “right wing”  is correct about anything.  Though, when it comes to most issues the political left is often wrong, and when they do finally admit it it’s usually attached to a piece of propaganda arguing that conservatives are also “still wrong” even though they were right.

This frustrating lack of humility among progressives has become a part of their mythos; it’s almost expected that leftists always double down on their ignorance.  The trait is not as charming as they seem to think it is, but the rest of the world has learned to navigate around it and still get things done.

One area where progressives have been absolutely spurious in their arguments is the mass deportation issue.  Either they lie about the “need” for mass immigration or they lie about the supposedly negative effects of sending illegals back home.

The ongoing narrative among Democrat politicians is that mass immigration is necessary to reinforce the US economy.  They claim that without migrants (legal and illegal), the system will essentially collapse as labor shortages cripple agriculture, manufacturing, housing construction and basic services. 

Keep in mind that millions of migrants have self deported since Trump took office, border encounters have plunged by 95% and hundreds of thousands of illegals have been deported (over 2 million illegals total in the past 250 days).  Yet, there has been no disruption of services or agriculture and many companies that once hired illegals (for 30% less wages) are now forced to hire American workers and pay a fair wage.  The claims of a national economic breakdown without migrants is proving more and more incorrect with every passing month.   

So, where are the negative effects of deportations?  Are there any?  Politico, using Washington DC as a microcosm, admits that wealthy elites are the most effected group when it comes to the loss of migrant labor. 

As conservatives have been pointing out for decades, the only beneficiaries of mass immigration are rich coastal Democrats hiring illegals on the cheap as well as corporations unwilling to pay American employees a normal wage.  As Politico notes:

“It’s a longstanding MAGA critique of mass immigration: the idea that the status quo amounts to a lifestyle subsidy for the class of Americans who frequent upscale eateries, get their kitchens renovated and hire nannies, landscapers or cleaning ladies.  And, for better or worse, a month of unprecedented immigration enforcement in Washington seems to be bearing out that critique…”

“However catastrophic the impact on targeted capital-area immigrants has been, the highest-profile local economic impact of the blitz so far has been on restaurants, food delivery services, home-improvement contractors, even moving companies — precisely the industries that cater to the capital’s elites. That’s a consumer base unlikely to garner much political sympathy in the broader country…”

The outlet, of course, still tries to qualify the leftist assertion that one day soon (just you wait) the US economy will be hobbled by a lack of labor.  Most of these claims are based on limited examples backed by zero evidence.  That said, if US labor markets did suffer a shortage in one sector or another after hiring all the Americans they can find, then it’s a simple matter of allowing just enough legal foreign labor in to get that work done. 

There is no justification whatsoever for open borders and unchecked caravans of migrants from the third-world.  This kind of immigration is rooted in political and social sabotage and has nothing to do with saving the American economy.  In truth, mass immigration is a method of “wealth redistribution” often promoted by the Marxist left.  It is designed to destroy the economy by making everyone equally poor. 

It should be noted that wages in the US are currently rising faster than inflation since Trump took office, and it’s likely that deportations are a contributing factor.

Democrats also argued that GDP would plunge as migrants exit the workforce.  What they didn’t mention is that around 60% of illegal immigrants sign up for one or more government welfare subsidies once they enter the country.  Many of these subsidies are directly or indirectly counted in GDP calculations, meaning the more of your tax dollars the government spends, the higher GDP goes. 

The more migrants a nation takes in, the more welfare they absorb and the healthier GDP appears, but it’s all a facade paid for by legal citizens. 

The illegal immigration issue is a major loss for Democrats and the leftist media.  So much so that they are, begrudgingly, forced to admit that maybe conservatives were right all along.  So far, the only Americans being inconvenienced by deportations are the wealthy 1% and companies that were breaking the law with their hiring practices.  Sounds like a good trade.   

Authored by Gary Abernathy via The Empowerment Alliance,

Do you ever wonder why mainstream news stories seem so one-sided in their “climate change” coverage, promoting the most radical theories while ridiculing so-called “climate deniers?” Similarly, have you ever pondered how judges who are not scientists or climate experts render opinions favorable to the climate cult while citing scientific “facts” and “evidence” to bolster their verdicts?

Two back-to-back reports in early September provide some answers, each revealing how deeply climate change forces have infiltrated both our news and judicial establishments.

For decades, CBS News – the storied broadcast home of icons like Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite – was long regarded as the gold standard for television journalism. The “Tiffany Network’s” reporting might sometimes be controversial, but it was always considered deeply researched and proudly independent. CBS News prided itself on its unassailable integrity – “And that’s the way it is,” Cronkite assured us every evening when he signed off.

When it comes to reporting on climate news, those days are gone. For some climate-related stories, CBS News has of late been partnering with Climate Central, a nonprofit that bills itself as “policy-neutral” and “independent,” but acknowledges on its on website that it “uses science, big data, and technology to generate thousands of local storylines and compelling visuals that make climate change personal and show what can be done about it. We address climate science, sea level rise, extreme weather, energy, and related topics.”

In early September Fox News reported, “Last month, CBS News published a story about melting glaciers that also aired on ‘Sunday Morning.’ Ben Tracy was the correspondent on the segment, with his byline at the top of the article. A disclaimer at the bottom read, ‘Story produced by Chris Spinder, in partnership with Climate Central. Editor: Chris Jolly.’” Fox News noted that another CBS News article in July, “also tied to an on-air segment with Tracy, included the disclaimer that the story was ‘produced in partnership with Climate Central.’”

In fact, Tracy and Spinder “work for Climate Central. Only Jolly is a current CBS News staffer, according to his LinkedIn page.” So much for fair, balanced and independent journalism.

On its website, Climate Central boasts of its influence on news organizations, noting that through its “Partnership Journalism” program, it “contributes data, science and data reporting, editing and guidance to joint features coverage informed by new climate data.” The site provides links to page after page of “news” stories on which it has “partnered,” ranging from alternative energy outlets to traditional news agencies.

While its guidelines claim that its “partners” make “most final editorial decisions,” Climate Central adds that “we… insist upon scientific accuracy and context. If we can’t reach agreement on the science in a story, we agree in advance that we will halt the project.” CBS News agreed to that?

While it may not be shocking that far-left (formerly mainstream) news agencies are “partnering” with outside climate groups to produce their stories, more disturbing is the notion that our courts might be subject to such influences. And yet, a day before the Fox News story on CBS came a report from National Review revealing just that.

“An ‘educational’ program that aims to convince judges to side with climate activists in state and federal cases has already reached more than 2,000 judges nationwide,” the magazine reported. “The program, called the Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), began under the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) in 2018. Its objective, according to ELI, is to ‘make available to federal, state, and local judges the basic science they need to adjudicate the climate litigation over which they preside.’”

The article notes that the House Judiciary Committee recently opened a probe of ELI “to examine its distribution of climate-change education programs aimed at influencing both state and federal judges to rule in favor of plaintiffs in climate-related cases.”

ELI insists it is politically impartial and denies engaging in efforts to sway judges. But American Energy Institute CEO Jason Isaac told National Review, “This congressional inquiry is a necessary and welcome development. For too long, the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project has operated behind a veneer of neutrality while quietly advancing a coordinated effort to influence judges in climate-related litigation.”

Turning to experts for fact-based background information is standard practice in the news media. But openly “partnering” with issue-based organizations to produce stories is a violation of the trust between journalists and news consumers. Likewise, when courts are “informed” by “educational” materials from outside groups representing a certain point of view, the fairness and independence that is the foundation of our judiciary system is seriously undermined.

The House Judiciary Committee’s efforts are a good start, but rather than worrying about things like former President Biden’s use of the autopen or other dead-end probes, Congress should more fully investigate the efforts of climate activists to influence the American people through our media and influence judicial decisions in our courts.

While it’s good that these conflicts have been brought to light, it is not unreasonable to suspect that these entanglements may only represent the tip of the iceberg – an iceberg that even the most radical climate zealot should admit is far from melting.

Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter and columnist. He was a contributing columnist for the Washington Post from 2017-2023 and a frequent guest analyst across numerous media platforms. He is a contributing columnist for The Empowerment Alliance, which advocates for realistic approaches to energy consumption and environmental conservation. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Empowerment Alliance.

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

Donald Trump just visited the United Nations to offer a customary annual presidential address.

Before he arrived, there were reports that UN staffers had joked about shutting down the escalator to chastise Trump for cutting out aid to some UN programs.

Upon arrival, as if on cue, Trump was met by a series of mysterious coincidences.

As soon as he and First Lady Melania mounted the escalator, it suddenly froze—forcing them to walk up.

Other escalators worked fine. Shortly afterward, the supposedly broken escalator was just as mysteriously running again.

When Trump went to the podium, his teleprompter mysteriously quit—and his alone.

As he delivered his speech from a text, the amplification in parts of the assembly was mysteriously lowered to near imperceptible levels.

Despite UN denials, all three “accidents” were too closely tied to Trump to be coincidences.

But they remind us that the left-wing hatred of the president has gone global—even after two near-successful assassination attempts.

The House of Representatives recently offered a resolution honoring the life and legacy of the conservative organizer Charlie Kirk, murdered by a leftist assassin.

The left both feared and hated Kirk. Why?

He had been singularly successful in redirecting youth’s natural rebelliousness against the status quo onto the ruling, ossified liberal establishment.

Kirk was winning over a new generation of young Americans to be counter-culturalists and counter-revolutionaries.

He urged them to question the entire left-wing orthodoxy of higher education, the corporate media, and popular culture—the ruling institutions that the baby boomers had enshrined as the current establishment.

His singular success may be why the terrified left attacked him as much after death as they had while he was alive.

The House effort had followed an earlier bipartisan unanimous resolution honoring a Democratic Minnesota state legislator and her husband, recently murdered by an anti-abortionist assassin.

But unlike that earlier commemoration unanimously passed by all Democrats and Republicans, Kirk’s resolution was variously opposed by over 118 Democrat House members.

The new radical Democrats who increasingly control the party, such as Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Jasmine Crockett, were vocal in smearing the resolution.

But they went well beyond voting no by gratuitously slandering the late Charlie Kirk as an inveterate racist and all-around toxic person not worthy of any commemoration.

The common denominator to all their hateful outbursts was their venomous ignorance, given that they either never referenced anything Kirk actually said and wrote or quoted him inaccurately.

The race-obsessed Crockett whined that “only two Caucasians” had opposed the resolution commemorating Kirk’s life.

But this was another lie, since the majority of Democrats expressed their opposition either by voting no (58), abstaining by voting present (38), or by not voting at all (22).

Thus, contrary to Crockett’s trademark racist ranting, the majority of Democratic House members who opposed the resolution included far more than “two Caucasians.”

And even if she were honest, in her racialized world of hatred, would it have been more racist if only “two Caucasians” had opposed the resolution or if the vast majority of the Hispanic and Black caucuses in bloc fashion had overwhelmingly and disproportionately condemned and denigrated Kirk and the resolution?

This increasing coarseness of the left follows its recent canonization of the murderer Luigi Mangione.

The left-wing media also suffocated news stories about the horrific, lethal throat-slitting of immigrant Irenya Zarutska by 14-time felon DeCarlos Brown.

Violent attacks on Immigration and Customs Enforcement centers and individual officers are now routine and more praised than condemned by the left.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is emblematic of this fury and frustration of the new, obsessive-compulsive left.

His state is in free-fall.

Huge deficits, unfunded mandates, and the highest housing costs, gas prices, and income taxes in the nation force hundreds of thousands of residents yearly to leave.

California’s electricity and gas are likewise the costliest in the U.S.

The poverty rate is over 20% of the population.

A third of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California. Nearly half of its homeless do too.

Newsom neglects all these existential challenges and instead seeks to outdo his leftist wannabe presidential rivals.

Shortly after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Newsom tweeted an implied threat last Saturday to Homeland Security Director Kristi Noem, warning her that she was “going to have a bad day today. You’re welcome, America.”

He had also earlier threatened the president with violence, “We are going to fight back and we’re going to punch this bully in the mouth.”

And Newsom had earlier extended that warning to half the nation of Trump supporters: “I’m gonna punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.”

The only mystery about the new obsessive-compulsive left is whether their vulgarity, violence, and crudity trickle top-down from the uncouth Democrat elite—or rise bottom-up from thuggish Antifa, BLM, and the rioters who attack ICE and Tesla dealerships, and disrupt Charlie Kirk’s funeral services.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his Friday speech before the UN General Assembly spent a lot of time hailing and thanking President Trump and the US for bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities last June. But at the same time he lashed out at the leaders of France, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and other countries for “unconditionally” recognizing a Palestinian state.

He declared that Israel is intent of finishing the job regardless, saying “Victory over Hamas will make peace possible with nations throughout the Arab and Muslim world.” He continued, “Our victory would lead to a dramatic extension and expansion of the historic Abraham Accords, which President Trump brokered between Arab leaders and myself five years ago.”

But that’s not quite accurate, as the raging Gaza war and especially the Israeli strike on Doha which targeted Hamas negotiators have actually eroded regional trust in the Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia has definitely put its normalization path on pause.

“I want to thank President Trump for his bold and decisive action,” the Israeli leader told the assembly. “President Trump and I promised to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And we delivered on that promise.”

Palestinian officials who were present, along with many other officials, actually walked out near the start of Netanyahu’s speech.

Interestingly, Netanyahu’s speech and visual prop and map he held up at one point seemed a review of all the regime changes in the Middle East. “We removed an existential threat to Iran, to Israel, rather, and a mortal threat to the civilized world. We lifted a dark cloud that could have claimed millions and millions of lives. But, ladies and gentlemen, we must remain vigilant,” he said.

Syria was also overthrown, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah assassinated last year. Recall too that Netanyahu was key in arguing that the Bush administration must invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein.

“We must not allow Iran to rebuild its military nuclear capacities. Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium. These stockpiles must be eliminated,” we added, saying that Trump more than any other leader understood this “common threat”. This suggests Israel could be gearing up for more military action against the Islamic Republic.

NEW: Cheers erupt at the UN as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recalls the country’s pager operation against Hezbollah:

“Remember those beepers? The pagers? We paged Hezbollah… and believe me, they got the message.” pic.twitter.com/I1RT11HyV3

— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 26, 2025

“They [the leaders] did so after the horrors committed by Hamas on Oct. 7,” Netanyahu said. “Horrors praised on that day by nearly 90% of the Palestinian population.

“Let me say that again. Nearly 90% of Palestinians supported the attack on Oct. 7. It’s not supported only. They celebrated it. They danced on the rooftops. They threw candies. That’s both in Gaza and in Judea, Samaria – the West Bank, as you call it.”

He went on: “And it’s just the way they celebrated another horror. 9/11 they danced on the rooftops. They cheered. They threw candy.”

As an important reminder…

That’s when he again lambasted countries, including in Europe, which are supportive of a Palestinian state. “It’s a very clear message. Murdering Jews pays off,” he said. “Well, I have a message for these leaders. When the most savage terrorists on Earth are effusively praising your decision, you didn’t do something right. You did something wrong, horribly wrong. Your disgraceful decision will encourage terrorism against Jews and against innocent people everywhere. It will be a mark of shame on all of you.”