Narcan, the overdose-reversal drug hailed as a lifesaver, is now being weaponized against San Francisco’s drug users, , according to ABC 7.

The San Francisco Standard, in a report shared by ABC7 News, details how some residents frustrated with open drug use are allegedly using Narcan not to save lives, but to inflict harm.

“A couple of instances I heard was someone was sleeping in U.N. Plaza and they basically felt somebody putting this plastic nozzle up their nose and then they woke up to crazy withdrawals and the person was telling them that they couldn’t sleep in the plaza,” said SF Standard reporter David Sjoestedt. “And, the allegation is that this wasn’t somebody who thought they were overdosing, it was somebody who wanted them to move.”

Sjoestedt explained that Narcan can trigger immediate and severe withdrawal symptoms: “a lot of pain, anxiety, throwing up, and wild temperature fluctuations.” A UCSF health expert told the SF Standard that misusing the drug in this way should be considered assault.

ABC writes that the city’s Department of Public Health reaffirmed Narcan’s intended use: it should only be administered if someone appears to be overdosing. Using it to deliberately cause suffering, the department stressed, is “inhumane.”

And of course, the disturbing misuse of Narcan in San Francisco underscores a broader failure of the city’s liberal policies, which have poured resources into harm reduction without addressing the root causes of addiction, homelessness, and public safety. Instead of creating real solutions, officials have enabled an environment where even life-saving tools are twisted into instruments of cruelty—leaving both residents and vulnerable addicts caught in the chaos of a city unraveling.

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Beyond the Fed, My Droog

We will spend a few minutes on the Fed because it is pretty much obligatory ahead of the FOMC, though hopefully our view has been quite clear. Then we will touch on Russia/Ukraine as there have been some really interesting developments.

We got to cover a lot of topics that generated a lot of feedback on Wednesday morning on Bloomberg TV (Academy’s segment starts at the 6:45 mark).

The Fed

We laid out a bunch of hypotheticals in August on how We Would Drive Yields Lower. We started focusing attention on flatteners then. One of our August interviews got condensed into a smaller clip Focus On Long End of the Curve, Not Fed Cuts: Tchir.

Currently, according to WIRP, the market is pricing in 1.04 cuts at this meeting, 1.9 cuts in October, and 2.8 cuts by the end of the December meeting.

That seems a touch low.

We remain in the 75 to 100 bp cut camp for the year, so there is room to price in a higher probability of 4 cuts this year than the market currently has priced in.

For this meeting, we see a 0.00001% chance of no cuts (we guess there is always some possibility), but only a 60% chance of 25 bps, with a 40% chance of 50 bps. Actually, we only view it as a 25% chance, but this seemed like a good opportunity to dig up a fun report in the Wall Street Journal that we were involved with – How Do Pundits Never Get It Wrong? Call a 40% Chance. 

The market doesn’t seem to be prepared for a big shift to the dovish side. We think a bigger cut than 25 has a real shot, and that the dots could surprise with more cuts occurring sooner.

Our assumption is there are always some people who don’t have a strong opinion, and for ease, just adopt the consensus and/or the recommendation of the leader. So, Powell had what seemed like more support, or conversely, less obvious dissent than really existed.

With the tide changing at the Fed, and other voices gaining strength as we prepare for a new Chair, it seems reasonable to assume some of those who just followed along as hawks will now follow along as doves – impacting the messaging. Any mention of “additional” measures does not seem priced in at all.

It is probably too early to mention that things like another Operation Twist are on the table (Operation Twist is where the Fed sells shorter-term bond holdings to buy longer-maturity bonds).

The Treasury Department announced Increased Buybacks. This fits with our theme of a “tandem” approach to managing the yield curve. Where the Treasury and Fed work in conjunction with each other to complement their tools. This helps contain the longer end of the curve, and also likely generates some revenue to create lower deficits (I haven’t confirmed this, but to the extent they are buying bonds below par and retiring them, there should be an accounting gain).

Probably a touch early for Powell to address some non-traditional programs (though they now seem pretty standard), but even after recent flattening, you seem to be getting this potential option very cheaply. Though maybe he could admit that changes in short-term rates are not as effective (as a policy tool) as they once were.

Finally, we are seeing rate cut expectations increase, while curves flatten for two other reasons, which we’ve mentioned before:

• By having so many credible candidates for the Fed discuss their views, almost all being more dovish than Powell has been, it makes it seem less “egregious” or even “normal” to cut (we were in the “should cut in July camp” but that view has gone from potentially being accused of being politically motivated, to validated by the data).
• Cuts justified by weak economic data (jobs) do not force the curve steeper.

The corollary, or counterpoint, or outlet of this view is a weaker dollar. We could see a break below 90 on DXY. Given the administration’s desire to reduce imports and increase exports, a weaker dollar would likely be viewed (behind closed doors, because we “cannot” publicly say we have a weak dollar policy) as a feature and not a bug.

China Trade Talks

China has the upper hand in regards to controlling “usable” rare earths and critical minerals. They refine and process the vast majority of rare earths and critical minerals. Even as the U.S. starts getting access to the rare earths and minerals themselves, it will take years, heavy investment, and potentially a lot of deregulation, to be sufficient in producing the “usable” forms of these crucial components for so many products.

The U.S. has the upper hand in chips for AI and data centers, but China seems to be digging in their heels in this area to promote and develop their domestic chip industry – which is far behind but seems to be closing the gap in some segments.

Secondary tariffs on trade with Russia? We will delve into Russia next, but the idea that the U.S. may be close to getting Europe to place high secondary tariffs on China (after which the U.S. would follow suit) has gained a lot of traction. It seems difficult to believe that it will occur, but it would be incredibly disruptive. It seems like it would be very difficult to get China to negotiate in good faith on a bilateral deal if the U.S. is really pushing hard on this front (because China would not see the U.S. negotiating in good faith under these circumstances).

I find this chart mesmerizing as it seems so counter-intuitive from the news flow, yet it is real.

Every day we are inundated with “all-time high” headlines. We get a lot of coverage on our policies and the impacts they are (or are not) having here. We hear so little about China, clearly the country where policy should be focused.

Yet, since the election, FXI is up 60% versus 23% for QQQ. 34% versus 15% since the start of the year in favor of FXI. QQQ holds a slight edge since the post-Liberation Day lows (40% versus 38%). A portion of the return is related to FX, another portion can be attributed to positioning, but there is something about this chart that captivates me and makes me wonder how well we are doing as the globe tries to adapt to big changes in US policy. The chart would look worse if we focused on the Russell 2000 which hasn’t benefited as much as the Nasdaq 100 from the spending on AI and Data Centers.

Ra Ra Ras PUTIN

Thinking about some big changes in Europe this week got this song stuck in my head. Some of the lyrics seem to apply just as well to Putin as to Rasputin (most people looked at him with terror and fear). “There was a cat that really was gone. It was a shame how he carried on. In all affairs of state, he was the man to please. The demands to do something about this outrageous man became louder and louder.” I was shocked that this song was not a one-hit wonder, but we digress.

It also seems like a good time to channel some Clockwork Orange, my droog, as the violence and “aggro” have the potential to escalate – which unfortunately, may be a necessary step towards achieving peace.

Academy published a SITREP this week – NATO Jets Shoot Down Russian Drones Over Poland. This incident caused Poland to invoke Article 4 of the NATO treaty to prompt a formal discussion within the alliance. The SITREP analyzes the situation extremely well.

We’ve already addressed the “chatter” about actually, truly enforcing sanctions and we briefly addressed secondary tariffs against China (with India being the other target, and more likely to face some tariffs than China). Finally, after over 3 years, our quotes in Time Magazine – Sanctions on Russia Won’t Work may turn out to be incorrect. At the time, we argued that the willingness to truly enforce sanctions were low, therefore sanctions would be ineffective. We would turn a blind eye to strategies that would avoid sanctions (like some of the “stans” suddenly having massive trade with Europe – wonder where they were getting the stuff to sell? Or China and India not abiding by sanctions).

It is time to turn the screws on Putin economically.

When we argued, post-election, that President Trump could be successful in achieving a relatively quick cessation of hostilities, we laid out the carrots and sticks that would likely be needed on both sides.

We all know how the first Oval Office meeting between Trump and Zelensky went.

Ukraine seemed to be getting the stick, while Russia primarily got carrots. That has been changing over time. The new “circle” where the U.S. sells weapons to Europe which in turn “provides” them to Ukraine seems to be renewing the flow of equipment to Ukraine (without adding to the deficit woes of the U.S.).

There seems to be more willingness (if not encouragement) to allow the Ukrainians to implement pretty standard tactics (like hitting supplies and disrupting transit in Russia). Many of these tactics had been denied to Ukraine in the past.

With the Department of War and Peace Through Strength there is reason to believe that Ukraine will be able to do more.

This new system somewhat resembles the proxies we have been facing.

Did the U.S. supply the weapons? No. Not directly. 

Did the U.S. give permission for Ukraine to use the weapons they have, of U.S. origin, more effectively? No, but we didn’t say they couldn’t.

More carrots for Ukraine and a bit of a stick for Russia.

But that isn’t what we want to talk about.

Russia’s Frozen Reserves

Finally, the President seemed to encourage Europe to take steps to “take” some of Russia’s frozen reserves.

There is approximately $300 billion of frozen reserves.

The vast majority of this sits in the European Union as, according to Grok, over $200 billion (of euros) was frozen. Our understanding is that some of the $65 or so billion of USD reserves frozen are not fully controlled by the United States.

We’ve written about this multiple times as a key element to forcing any peace.

We also discussed our very strong view that the President was extremely reluctant to take or use Putin’s frozen USD reserves. There was a view in the admin that the U.S. didn’t have the law on its side. It is also possible, that at the time, the admin wasn’t willing to be too aggressive, as the President seemed to believe that his relationship with Putin would be enough to achieve peace, and threatening his reserves would not help their relationship.

We have heard from multiple sources that Putin fully expects to receive these reserves (it seems logical, that behind the scenes, some countries helping him the most, have helped him “monetize” these reserves, making their “freezing” less effective).

Well, Europe keeping a big chunk of the money would be a wakeup call for Putin.

It “solves” the issue of how Ukraine (or Europe) is going to afford the weapons they are buying from the U.S. $200 billion is one heck of a war chest.

• Europe in general, and Ukraine in particular have a stronger case for war reparations. Could it be as simple as Ukraine, in some international court, wins war reparations? But since Russia won’t pay, Europe would then provide the money from the funds? Not sure how this plays out, but Russia’s frozen reserves seem to be on the table for the first time and that is a big stick.
• Is there a chance that Putin has promised some of this money (once it was returned) to his backers? That seems plausible as they are running what was already an anemic economy on a wartime footing. Not going to say that could be akin to borrowing from a loan shark, but in the movies that rarely works out well. This could mean there is even more pressure on Putin to get the money returned than we know.

Threatening Russia’s frozen reserves may be the best thing I’ve seen in terms of pushing this conflict towards some sort of deal.

European Bond Rally?

Imagine if Europe is successful in keeping even $100 billion?

What does that do for their borrowing needs? For their borrowing needs for defense spending?

Part of the reason we have seen yields behave stubbornly across the globe is concerns about the amount of spending Europe needs to embark on to meet their commitments on military spending. (Japan has been a big problem too for global yields, but let’s just focus on the European contribution to higher global yields here). Btw, there is supposedly $37 billion in pounds that England might be happy to get their hands on.

They Didn’t Quit, They Wanted His Head

Wow, that song is really stuck in my head, but I cannot reiterate how profound Friday’s “nod” to go after Russia’s frozen reserves is. That along with Article 4 from NATO and an admin that does not seem afraid to be tougher on sanctions and tariffs (in no small part because it hurts the U.S. less than it hurts Europe to go in that direction) could pave the way for some real progress.

We always thought that this would be about balancing carrots and sticks with the two combatants, and that balance seems to be happening.

Look for American corporations to be given big advantages over corporations from other countries in any rebuilding efforts once peace is achieved. We believe this is an important goal for the administration as they feel we did not get enough of a head start/advantage after the Gulf Wars.

Bottom Line

Lower yields, flatter curves. In no small part because of global economic sluggishness, as the world adapts to a new trade order.

Peace between Russia and Ukraine, especially if it accompanies taking some of Russia’s frozen reserves, would help bonds, and we don’t think that is on anyone’s radar.

The equity grind continues. Good news is good. Bad news is good. No news is good. We did say last week that we thought there was a better chance of 5% downside before 5% upside. Even though we “only” got 1.6% this week on the S&P 500, we are still sticking with that view, though with yields coming down, potential surprises from the Fed, and what we see as an improvement in the odds of some peace in Europe, it is difficult to stick to that view.

Credit remains boring in a “good” way and crypto continues to benefit from this shift to easier monetary policy in the U.S., the momentum created by the GENIUS Act, and other regulatory actions.

Hopefully, you are reading this while enjoying some coffee and moloko as you prepare for what should be another interesting week.

A massive homeless encampment in Koreatown has grown into what neighbors describe as a “city” of its own — complete with a tennis court, garden, barbecue pit, and even illegally rigged electricity, according to the NY Post.

“The reason why people are sleeping here is because you leaders are sleeping on not taking initiative and action to clean this place up,” resident Daniel King told ABC7.

Neighbors say they’ve watched people pry open a streetlight, install a surge protector inside, and run extension cords across the street to power the camp. “Thank God it hasn’t rained in a while,” said Sangmin Lee. “It’s a fire hazard … then they run the cable across the street, and it’s a trip hazard for everyone.”

Lee also pointed out, “There’s a tennis court, there’s a garden where they’re growing stuff… There’s a barbecue pit.” Another neighbor, Max Smith, summed it up: “It’s a city in there. It’s crazy. It’s crazy.”

The Post writes that residents say the camp has created safety concerns, with one woman telling ABC7 she avoids walking her dog near the site after being approached by people from the encampment. An ABC7 crew was also threatened while reporting there.

City Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky said officials are hamstrung because the property is privately owned. “It’s over-bureaucratic. It’s the city at its worst, sort of not being able to get out of its own way,” she admitted.

The lot belongs to a Delaware-based LLC that has not responded to inquiries. Yaroslavsky said “No Trespassing” signs will soon go up, allowing police to act. Meanwhile, city agencies are ordering the owner to address trash and security issues, and Public Works will wrap the tampered streetlight to stop further power theft.

Mayor Karen Bass’ office said outreach teams have been sent to offer housing to the people living there.

And so, in true Los Angeles fashion, liberal leaders have managed to turn “housing the homeless” into letting them build a better-planned city than the one City Hall runs—complete with amenities, hazards, and zero accountability.

*  *  *

Looking for quick and easy Rancher-Direct suggestions before tonight’s ordering deadline? 

Steak Lover’s Bundle – the steaks, the whole steaks, and nothing but the steaks (top seller)

Elkins Texas Lasagna and Meatballs – clean, rich, satisfying comfort food

Authored by Thaddeus G. McCotter via American Greatness,

One of the left’s many irritating traits is its pedantic didacticism. Viewing themselves as morally and intellectually superior, they tend to view their lives as one long teachable moment to enlighten the rest of benighted humanity (i.e., non-leftists).

In so doing, however, they rarely take the time to educate themselves as to the inherent contradictions in their ideology, let alone endeavor to overcome the cognitive dissonance to hold such opposing ideas without feeling the need to reconcile them.

Consider the left’s chastisement that is oft leveled at dissenters from the preferred narrative: “You are not entitled to your own facts.” This is rich coming from this political tribe of postmodernists.

Creeping forth from the cesspool of Rousseau, who himself wrote in reaction and rejection to the Enlightenment, postmodernism is just one more justification of individual will and appetite employed to remove any Western civilizational claims and constraints upon licentiousness; and, unsurprisingly, a siren song that ultimately leads not to freedom but serfdom.

Per Britannica:

Postmodernism is largely a reaction against the intellectual assumptions and values of the modern period in the history of Western philosophy (roughly, the 17th through the 19th century). Indeed, many of the doctrines characteristically associated with postmodernism can fairly be described as the straightforward denial of general philosophical viewpoints that were taken for granted during the 18th-century Enlightenment, though they were not unique to that period.

Within this warped ideology of a fat and sassy political movement that has enough money to dabble in such folly, moral relativism, and the use of language through deconstruction and narrative engineering are critical (pun intended) to accomplishing their aims of recreating society in their preferred civilizational construct.

Postmodernists deny that there are aspects of reality that are objective; that there are statements about reality that are objectively true or false; that it is possible to have knowledge of such statements (objective knowledge); that it is possible for human beings to know some things with certainty; and that there are objective, or absolute, moral values. Reality, knowledge, and value are constructed by discourses; hence, they can vary with them. This means that the discourse of modern science, when considered apart from the evidential standards internal to it, has no greater purchase on the truth than do alternative perspectives, including (for example) astrology and witchcraft. Postmodernists sometimes characterize the evidential standards of science, including the use of reason and logic, as “Enlightenment rationality.”

In consequence, for those who boast about speaking “truth to power,” there is no truth, only power. Language, then, is deemed a crucial tool of the powerful imposing power upon the powerless in a society:

Part of the postmodern answer is that the prevailing discourses in any society reflect the interests and values, broadly speaking, of dominant or elite groups. Postmodernists disagree about the nature of this connection; whereas some apparently endorse the dictum of the German philosopher and economist Karl Marx that “the ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class,” others are more circumspect. Inspired by the historical research of the French philosopher Michel Foucault, some postmodernists defend the comparatively nuanced view that what counts as knowledge in a given era is always influenced, in complex and subtle ways, by considerations of power. There are others, however, who are willing to go even further than Marx.

“Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your colloquialisms!” Today’s postmodern leftists regard themselves as chic for wrapping themselves in the threadbare “will and appetite” arguments of Rousseau that have lured radicals from Robespierre to Pol Pot. This is repackaged radicalism for the entitled and ignorant among us, whose disorder and ennui are periodically placated by ordering around other people—Postmodernism: The New Coke of ideologies.

So, you ask, why do relativists who do not believe in objective truth claim you are not entitled to your own facts?

It is a means of censoring dissent to impose their views upon others.

If “truth” is relative, subjectively posited, and dependent upon language, the political “discourse” must be tightly constricted to prevent alternate narratives expressed by the erstwhile dominant power structure within a society from surviving and reviving. Such is the essence of Herbert Marcuse’s “liberating tolerance,” as Roger Kimball noted in City Journal over two decades ago: “Back in the 1960s, then-famous Marxist philosopher and guru of radical students Herbert Marcuse advocated the Orwellian principle of ‘liberating tolerance’—‘intolerance against movements from the Right, and toleration of movements from the left….’”

We need not look far to find the bitter instances of such leftist liberating intolerance: their Russia-gate subversive smear campaign to undermine a duly elected president; the COVID cover-up of its origins and the coercion of entire populations to comply with its less than scientific public “health” directives; the outright lies about Hunter Biden’s laptop and President Biden’s mental competence, etc. All these deceits had been proclaimed as truths by the left, and despite all evidence, many are still firmly believed. Moreover, as for those who questioned these lies and were ultimately proven correct, the left had long ago claimed to have “debunked” these dissenting voices and dismissed them with the trope, “You are not entitled to your own facts.”

The cognitive dissonance of the postmodern left prevents them from recognizing both their hypocrisy and the ineluctable end of their ideology: authoritarianism or worse. In sum, they cannot recognize that they are what they claim to oppose—or, perhaps they do, which is why they unfairly and incessantly project it upon others?

Suffice to say, however, as an American with a God-given, constitutionally recognized, and protected right to free speech and the inherent right to the freedom of conscience, you are entitled to your own facts, because no person or institution has or can have the legitimate power to tell you what you must say or think in our free republic.

Thus, this is the case whether or not you actually believe in facts and are open-minded enough to critically think and revise said facts in the face of new evidence. Though that certainly helps improve the overall health of our free republic. For the benefit of the postmodern left, let us remind them that there is nothing more dangerous than a censor who seeks to control the language to control the minds of others, by any means at their disposal.

A recent incident in Polish airspace involving at least three Russian drones has inspired hysteria in greater Europe (stoked by EU politicians and the media).  The event, which involved what appear to be Russian reconnaissance drones, is similar to previous incidents of purported Russian UAVs shot down after crossing into NATO skies.  No attacks, no casualties and no clear intent of invasion. 

However, the presence of these drones in Polish skies, even if their flight path was only meant to take them to Ukraine, is enough to fuel European calls for possible escalation.  The EU and UK continue to insist on deployment of “peace keeping” troops to intervene in the Ukraine war, with France, Germany and Britain suggesting boots on the ground to reinforce the now faltering Ukrainian front lines. 

The Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asserts that the drone incursion is part of a Russian plot to “test NATO reactions without triggering a full scale war”.  The Polish claim that at least 19 drones were involved in the incursion and that the devices had traveled “hundreds of miles” before they were intercepted.  Only three to four drones are confirmed to have been shot down. 

This means that either Poland has possibly the worst air defenses in NATO, or, the reported number of drones is greatly inflated. 

“The drones didn’t reach their targets and there was minor damage to property, nobody was hurt. If it happened in Ukraine, by Ukrainian definitions, that would be regarded as a 100% success,” Silorski said.  But the drones had no ordnance attached and there is no evidence that they were targeting anything or anyone.

As President Donald Trump noted, the crossing into Poland was more likely a mistake.  This response has angered the Europeans, who are desperate for US involvement in the war. 

Poland’s response has set the country on “high alert”.  Troops have been reinforced and the border with Belarus has been closed.  The government is now sponsoring voluntary military training for civilians.  Open to the public, the training has attracted over 20,000 recruits including Polish mothers, who say they want to “protect their children”.

The idea is logical enough, though the deployment of women for front line combat is generally an act of desperation rather than sound strategic policy.  It is interesting that a country which practices strict gun control and eligibility requirements for citizens is suddenly so interested in using those citizens as a militia reserve against a hypothetical Russian invasion.  Ukraine suffered from similar restrictions on its citizens before they were invaded and this stunted their defensive capabilities.   

EU officials say the drone event is an “aggressive, reckless act” and is “part of a serious escalation by Russia,” only reinforcing the bloc’s “support and resolve to support Ukraine.” The problem, though, is a matter off logistical realities. 

Europe’s contributions to NATO defenses are minimal and the vast majority of military spending has long been covered by US taxpayers.  Europe’s ability to manufacture the weapons needed to fight a prolonged conflict with Russia is next to nil and the means to supply their forces with enough equipment and resources to engage in an attrition war does not exist.   

The US military is the only force with the resources to manage a long term war in Ukraine, which is why the EU continues to demand that the Trump Administration commit to escalation.  European officials have been encouraging Volodymyr Zelensky’s ambitions to take back lost Ukrainian territory with talk of potential EU troops.  This has extended the life of the war and sabotaged efforts to organize diplomatic talks.  

Currently, Russian forces are surging on the Eastern front and Ukraine is facing the loss of the entire Donbas region.  Central Ukraine is also at risk as Ukrainian troop strength dwindles.  Analysts outside of typical western propaganda networks argue that Ukraine is facing a total loss unless a resolution is achieved in the near future.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Over the past several years, Democratic leaders and their allies in the legacy media have relentlessly labeled conservative figures like Charlie Kirk as “fascists,” creating a toxic atmosphere that dehumanizes political opponents and implicitly justifies extreme actions against them.

Kamala Harris, for instance, repeatedly called Donald Trump a “fascist” during her abysmal 2024 campaign, a term echoed by commentators on MSNBC and CNN who painted Kirk and his Turning Point USA organization as threats to democracy.

This rhetoric, amplified through social media cesspits such as Reddit and Bluesky, portrays conservatives not as ideological rivals but as existential dangers that must be eradicated. In the case of Kirk’s assassination, we now have it confirmed that the 22-year-old suspect Tyler Robinson was found with Antifa literature and used ammunition inscribed with sick scrawlings about Kirk being a “fascist”, directly tying his motives to the very narratives pushed by leftist outlets.

These individuals are directly responsible for radicalising young people into political violence and murder. They will be JUDGED. pic.twitter.com/q4P4SgtV0Q

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) September 12, 2025

Robinson acted in a climate where such vilification has been normalised, turning words into deadly inspiration.

This inflammatory language from Democrats hasn’t just stayed at the top; it has trickled down, encouraging foot soldiers to embrace political violence as a moral imperative.

From Antifa-linked riots in cities like Portland to targeted harassment of conservative speakers on campuses, the left’s tolerance—and at times, endorsement—of disruption and aggression has emboldened individuals like Robinson.

Snapshot of a demonic uprising. https://t.co/kLkOU9BcID

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) September 12, 2025

Democratic figures have downplayed or justified such acts, framing them as resistance against “fascism,” while failing to condemn the radical elements within their base. The result is yet another sick young man radicalized enough to, albeit in the most cowardly fashion possible, commit murder.

This isn’t isolated; it’s the culmination of years of unchecked rhetoric that positions violence as a tool for “social justice.”

@StephenAtHome fueled the hate.
He made it OK for mentally ill POS to assassinate people they hate.@colbertlateshow was a Democrat hate fest not entertainment.
He condoned and promoted these ghouls. pic.twitter.com/OkP34TVU10

— Ireene Almayda (@IreeneAlmayda) September 12, 2025

I’m so sick of this both sides bs!!

They are the violent ones.

They can’t hide behind platitudes anymore.

— AmericanPapaBear (@AmericaPapaBear) September 12, 2025

We need more moments like this where @bennyjohnson shuts that bullsh*t down.

Cuomo was not ready for this absolute spanking. pic.twitter.com/v1SeLRHJPb

— Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) September 12, 2025

It is NOT a “both sides” issue.

No assassination attempts on Biden.
No assassination attempts on Kamala.
No assassination attempts on AOC.
No assassination attempts on any other prominent voice on the political left.

No violence from pro-Israeli crowds.
No arrests on the…

— 𝐀η𝐓 (@AntSpeaks) September 11, 2025

Shockingly, in the wake of Kirk’s murder, everyday professionals—teachers, university professors, aides to elected officials, and medical workers—have openly celebrated the tragedy on social media, exposing the deep rot of hatred fostered by this ideology.

Reports detail educators from Massachusetts to Florida mocking Kirk’s death, with posts like “America became greater” leading to firings and leaves of absence. Universities have terminated staff for cheering the assassination, while others, like Clemson professors, face backlash for justifying it.

You know who has absolutely noticed all the Democrats celebrating Charlie’s assassination?

The next assassin.

— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) September 12, 2025

These aren’t fringe radicals; they’re the people shaping young minds and providing public services, revealing how pervasive the left’s divisive poison has become.

No. I don’t think I will be turning down my rhetoric. I don’t think anyone on the right should. https://t.co/vjmdJBxigc

— Aetius (@AetiusRF) September 11, 2025

Parents are now pulling kids from schools, and donors are reconsidering support, as the mask slips on an education system riddled with ideologues who glorify violence.

CEO of Bluesky needs to be hauled before Congress, prosecuted for inciting mass murder, their computers seized, and the site shut down.

Why is Bluesky allowed to continue operating? https://t.co/nn3VUV7hS4

— Peachy Keenan (@KeenanPeachy) September 11, 2025

Ultimately, those responsible for this rhetoric and its fallout—Democratic leaders, media enablers, and the celebrants—will face judgment not just in the court of public opinion, or through history’s unyielding lens, but at the mercy of The Almighty that Kirk so often and eloquently spoke of.

Morally, they stand condemned for sowing division that reaps death, betraying the principles of a free society. The blood on their hands won’t wash away. Accountability, first through elections, lawsuits, and societal termination, and finally through eternal damnation is assured and inevitable.

*  *  *

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

The Trump administration has sounded the alarm on what we’ve openly described as “civil terrorism” –  revolutionary left-wing political violence – following the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In a sign of urgency, the White House requested an extra $58 million in security funding for the executive and judicial branches, according to a Bloomberg News report.

Here’s the threat landscape:

• Kill-List Risks: Kirk’s assassination should be interpreted by America First leaders and thought leaders as the potential beginning of a sequential campaign of targeted political violence. The message is obvious: revolutionary armed Marxist radicals won’t stop at Kirk. 

• Overnight Federal Response: The FBI disclosed, as per Axios, that agents have opened investigations into leftist groups believed to have had prior knowledge of the attack. No names were released, but the admission marks a significant concern among investigators. Hence, the White House’s move to request $58 million security boost. 

• Organized Conspiracy In Kirk’s Assassination? GPS-based research flagged by analyst Tony Seruga suggests as many as a dozen co-conspirators may have been involved – raising the odds of a coordinated network rather than a lone-wolf incident.

More detail on the White House’s request for a $58 million security boost for top officials (via Bloomberg):

The request to include the extra funding in an upcoming stopgap bill comes ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline when the current federal spending law runs out. Punchbowl News first reported on the funding request.

The administration also signaled support for expanding resources to safeguard lawmakers, though it left the specifics of that decision to the legislative branch, the outlet reported.

Further detail from Axios’ report on federal and state law enforcement honing in on radical leftist groups that may have been involved in Kirk’s assassination – or at least had prior knowledge of the plan:

Between the lines: Federal and state law enforcement officials also are examining leftist groups in Utah to see whether they had knowledge of the alleged shooter’s plans beforehand, or if they lent material support to him afterward.

One of those groups eliminated its social media profile after the shooting, Axios has learned.

Latest profiling of the Kirk’s alleged shooter:

• Charlie Kirk Assassination Suspect Lived With Transgender Partner, Discord Denies Use

• Alleged Kirk Assassin A “Radical Left ANTIFA-Adjacent Creep” Wrote “Hey Fascist” On Bullet Casing

Before the assassination of Kirk, we had already assessed and warned of an emerging radical leftist threat environment with potential threat risks to the Trump administration, America First leadership, and individuals holding any opposing viewpoints to those of the left. There were some indicators of escalation visible well in advance, suggesting that the attack on Kirk could be part of a broader wave and a new era of civil terrorism, versus what was previously thought as an isolated event:

• America Has A “Transtifa” Problem

• The Transgender Shooter, The Socialist Rifle Association, And The Alarming Rise Of Far-Left Militancy

• The Protest-Industrial-Complex Isn’t Peaceful, It’s “Civil Terrorism”…

The Axios report did not provide names of the radical leftist groups under investigation in Utah. Still, there is suspicion surrounding multiple groups, including “Armed Queers Salt Lake City” and the “Socialist Rifle Association.”

Seamus Bruner, the Director of Research at the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), where he works closely with investigative author Peter Schweizer, provided more color on Armed Queers Salt Lake City… 

🚨 ARMED QUEERS OF SALT LAKE CITY ORGANIZED EVENT IN SAME CITY AS LANCE TWIGG??? Saint George, Utah is a relatively small town (<100k pop.). Lance Twigg (roomie/bf of alleged Kirk assassin) says he lives there, per Facebook. Voyage Utah article says AQ of SLC had an event there… https://t.co/7WOpOTGTH0 pic.twitter.com/RZXxN0itKY

— Seamus Bruner (@seamusbruner) September 14, 2025

Armed Queers had an obsession with “No Kings” protest and the 50501 movement … 

And guess who funds No Kings? As per Schweizer’s reporting:

“New Schweizer team investigation reveals how ‘No Kings’ and its partners bagged $114.8 million from the Arabella dark money network and how these professional protest organizations use tax dollars as a force multiplier.”

Are you beginning to see how the Democratic Party’s dark-money-funded NGO network operates?

“We cannot be led by those who wish for America to be like it once was; instead, we must assert that America must be no more,” Armed Queers wrote in a Substack post. 

In other words, Armed Queers could be part of an emerging domestic terrorism threat that the FBI warned earlier this year called “Nihilistic Accelerationism.” 

Further down the rabbit hole on Armed Queers, this one appears to be the Salt Lake City branch, which organized a rally in 2023 with a number of radical leftist groups.

What stands out as most alarming is the Armed Queers chapter’s coordination with the Party for Socialism and Liberation, a communist political organization linked to Neville Roy Singham in China, raising the question of whether foreign influence is driving domestic chaos through such groups.

And what do we have here. Cuba link?

Also, research analyst Tony Seruga wrote on X, “I have been told this morning by an FBI analyst reviewing the reams of GPS data, there very well may be dozens of co-conspirators.”

I have been told this morning by an FBI analyst reviewing the reams of GPS data, there very well may be dozens of co-conspirators. https://t.co/DYn7b58dtR

— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) September 14, 2025

Civil terrorism expert Jason Curtis Anderson of One City Rising comments on the threat landscape emerging that America First leaders should urgently understand : 

One of the hardest parts of confronting rising left-wing extremism is that even those who care about the issue often don’t understand how it operates. That’s not their fault—it’s extraordinarily complex. The revolution against the West spans thousands of organizations that may not be formally linked but marching in unison toward the revolution. 

A concise overview looks like this:

• Political Orgs: The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the primary political arm, with the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) close behind. PSL is part of the Neville Roy Singham network and serves as their vehicle for running political candidates.

• Militant Anarchists: A growing militant wing trains in weapons and self-defense, including groups such as Antifa, the Socialist Rifle Association, Armed Queers, Behind Enemy Lines, and Unity of Fields.

• Climate Activism: Billions have flowed into climate-activist organizations, many of which increasingly employ anarchists.

• Social & Racial Justice Groups: Since the rise of BLM, billions—public funds included—have supported the social and racial justice groups that regularly advocate for burning down the country.  

• Civil-Rights & Legal Orgs: Legacy anti-Western activists (“movement lawyers”) staff these groups, suing governments, police, and schools while training allies to push limits without triggering terrorism charges.

• Foreign Interest Groups: Beyond the Neville Roy Singham network, other foreign powers, including the CCP, maintain domestic footholds.

• Funding: Much of the money for this revolutionary activity comes from the progressive NGO ecosystem—Open Society Foundations, Tides, Ford, Rockefeller Brothers, Arabella Advisors, and the broader dark-money network.

Until the federal government understands the entire scope and crafts an all-encompassing strategy to dismantle it, they will continue to play whack-a-mole and deal with the symptoms instead of the virus.

Welcome to the age of civil terrorism – fueled by what appears to be a radical leftist dark-money NGO network, potentially with foreign influence. Most importantly, the White House’s response signals that this threat is very real. President Trump and Stephen Miller both declared war on these radical leftist groups in recent days (read here).

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Office Depot has fired an employee at its Portage, Michigan, store after the worker refused to print a poster for a vigil honoring conservative influencer Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated this week while speaking at Utah Valley University.

The company announced the dismissal in a statement on Sept. 13, expressing regret over what it called “unacceptable and insensitive” conduct that violated company policy.

Office Depot said it had apologized to the customer, launched an internal review, and reinforced training to ensure “respect, integrity, and customer service are upheld at every location.”

The incident came to light in a video posted online by attorney and GOP activist Matthew DePerno, who said that the Kalamazoo County Republican Party ordered the poster, but when picking it up, an Office Depot staff member said they would not print it because it was “political propaganda.”

In the video, the employee—who identified as the manager on duty—said, “We don’t print political propaganda.” When pressed on what specifically made the poster political, the manager replied, “Because he’s a political figure and I don’t have to.”

Today at 2:24 PM, the Kalamazoo County Republican Party #KGOP placed an order for a poster of #CharlieKirk for a vigil tonight. At 5:30 “Beryl” the print supervisor (guy on left) called and said they are refusing to print the poster because it is “propaganda.” Hey @officedepot… pic.twitter.com/pKHAQ2OQda

— Matthew S. DePerno, Esq. (@mdeperno) September 12, 2025

DePerno later said the group went to FedEx, where staff printed the poster free of charge.

Michigan Republicans reacted to the incident, with Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) calling the refusal “shameful,” writing on X that the poster order was paid for and that the only reason that it was rejected was “because it was in memory of Charlie Kirk.”

Michigan Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt, a Republican, also weighed in, praising Office Depot for firing the individual who refused to print the poster, which was intended for an event at Bronson Park in downtown Kalamazoo on Friday evening.

Assassination of Kirk

Kirk’s death has sparked memorials across the country, as well as an outpouring of condemnation of political violence.

Kirk, 31, was the founder of Turning Point USA and a prominent conservative voice on college campuses. He was shot in the neck while addressing a crowd at Utah Valley University in Orem on Sept. 10. A suspect, Tyler Robinson, has been arrested. Authorities have not publicly identified a motive in the attack.

The killing has prompted condemnation across the political spectrum and around the world. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) called it “an attack on the American experiment,” warning that violence aimed at silencing speech threatens the nation’s very identity.

“It is an attack on all of us,” Cox said at a Sept. 12 press conference. “It is an attack on our ideals.”

In Washington, a group of House Republicans is pressing congressional leaders to create a select committee to investigate what they describe as “a coordinated assault by the radical left on the rule of law.”

In a Sept. 11 letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and more than a dozen colleagues urged a probe into the “money, influence, and power” behind political violence.

“The patterns are undeniable: we are witnessing a sustained breakdown of law and order, fueled not by chance, but by anti-American ideology,” the lawmakers wrote.

They called for a committee with subpoena power to trace funding networks tied to nongovernmental organizations, donors, media outlets, and public officials.

*  *  *

Reminder: Reserve your order by tonight for Wednesday delivery

Authored by Ciaran Lyons via CoinTelegraph.com,

Galaxy Digital’s Alex Thorn says the market is “underpricing” the odds of a US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve forming this year, though others are skeptical.

There is a high likelihood that the United States government will form the highly anticipated Strategic Bitcoin Reserve by the end of this year, says Galaxy Digital’s head of firmwide research, Alex Thorn.

However, other industry executives are less confident.

“I still think there’s a strong chance the US government will announce this year that it has formed the strategic Bitcoin reserve (SBR) and is formally holding BTC as a strategic asset,” Thorn said in an X post on Thursday.

“Market seems to be completely underpricing the likelihood of such an announcement,” Thorn added.

Several developments hint that the plan is moving forward

While US President Trump signed the executive order officially establishing the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and US Digital Asset Stockpile in March, a formalized strategic plan has not been confirmed yet. 

Source: Alex Thorn

However, several recent developments suggest that the plan is still progressing.

On Tuesday, US lawmakers introduced a bill directing the US Treasury to examine and produce a report on the feasibility and technical considerations of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.

Meanwhile, on July 31, Cointelegraph reported that Trump’s crypto liaison confirmed that the administration is still keen on a strategic Bitcoin reserve, despite only briefly mentioning it in its recently published crypto policy report.

Not all crypto market participants agree it will happen so soon, however. CoinRoutes’ former chairman, Dave Weisburger, said it is more likely to happen in 2026.

Some Bitcoiners fear that the US stalling could push them behind

Weisburger added that he has “made the point many times that this administration is too smart to announce ANYTHING until AFTER they accumulate to their initial target.”

Some prominent Bitcoin advocates worry that the US could fall behind if they delay accumulating Bitcoin any further.

Jan3 founder Samson Mow told Magazine in June that the US “has to start” acquiring Bitcoin this year, or risk other countries beating them to it. “The risk is that the US is front-run by Pakistan,” he said.

On Wednesday, Kyrgyzstan, a key emerging player in Central Asia’s crypto market, advanced a bill to establish a state cryptocurrency reserve.

Meanwhile, on Aug. 6, Indonesian Bitcoin advocate group, Bitcoin Indonesia, said they recently met with Indonesian officials to discuss how the strategy could drive economic growth in the country.

The US State Department has warned Americans against travel to six nations; Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia over what it described as a high risk of “wrongful detention.” 

All six nations are currently listed as “Level 4: Do Not Travel” – the most severe of the four travel advisory levels in the State Department.

Before you travel, review our travel advisories for your destination at https://t.co/yR0YJrH1NO pic.twitter.com/sjFi0jFZ6U

— Department of State (@StateDept) September 10, 2025

Afghanistan has the added bonus risk of kidnapping, according to an earlier advisory from Jan. 13.

“Multiple terrorist groups are active in Afghanistan and U.S. citizens are targets of kidnapping and hostage-taking,” the January memo reads. 

Of note, the US Embassy in Kabul suspended its operations in 2021, meaning Washington DC is unable to provide emergency or consular services to Americans in the country.

“U.S. citizens should not travel to Afghanistan for any reason,” reads the advisory. 

In Burma, the risks include arbitrary enforcement of local laws, the potential for civil unrest, and armed conflict, according to the new advisory issued May 12. The country is ruled by a military regime that deposed elected officials in a 2021 coup, the Epoch Times reports.

“Wrongfully detained U.S. nationals have been held in prison for years, often in poor conditions and without fair and transparent treatment or consistent access to U.S. Embassy officials or their families,” said the department.

In Iran, Washington currently does not have consular or diplomatic relations, said a March 31 advisory.

Americans face “serious dangers” in Iran and could be detained simply for having a U.S. passport, it said.

“Iranian authorities continue to unjustly detain U.S. nationals without warning or any evidence they committed a crime. This includes dual U.S.-Iranian nationals, students, journalists, business travelers, academics, and individuals with U.S. military or government experience,” the advisory said.

Detained Americans may be subjected to psychological torture and even sentenced to death, the advisory said.

With regard to North Korea, U.S. passports cannot be used to travel to the nation unless specially validated by the secretary of state, which is only granted under limited circumstances, said the department’s April 29 advisory.

There is a risk of wrongful detention, it warned.

“The Government of the North Korea has subjected U.S. citizens to arbitrary entry and exit bans, expulsions, arrests, and other actions. The U.S. government cannot guarantee your release,” the department said.

As for Russia, its ongoing war in Ukraine poses dangers to Americans traveling to Moscow, according to a May 8 advisory issued by the State Department, highlighting a risk of harassment and wrongful detention by Russian security officials.

All U.S. consulates have suspended operations in Russia, and the U.S. embassy has limited ability to assist Americans in case they are detained by local authorities, it said.

“Russian security services have arrested U.S. citizens on false charges. They have denied them fair treatment and convicted them without credible evidence,” said the department.

In Venezuela, the U.S. Embassy had suspended operations since March 2019, said a May 12 advisory by the State Department. In addition to being wrongfully detained, Americans may also be subjected to torture while in detention, it warned.

“Security forces have detained U.S. citizens for up to five years without respect for due process,” the department said.

“According to former detainees, as well as independent human rights organizations, detainees have been subjected to torture and cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment, including severe beatings, prolonged restraint in stress positions, and waterboarding.”

Trump’s Executive Order

The State Department’s advice to avoid traveling to the six nations comes days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Sept. 5 aimed at strengthening efforts to protect Americans from being wrongfully detained abroad.

The order empowers the secretary of state to designate a foreign nation as a “State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention” if they are involved in such detention of Americans, according to a Sept. 5 White House fact sheet.

The state secretary is authorized to take necessary actions, such as sanctions and export controls, to deter and respond to such wrongful confinements, it said.

“[The president’s] new Executive Order delivers unprecedented action to protect Americans from wrongful detention abroad,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a Sept. 6 X post.

“Designating State Sponsors of Wrongful Detention sends a clear message: If you attempt to use an American as a bargaining chip, you will face severe consequences.”

American citizens are captured by foreign forces often for the purposes of hostage diplomacy, a form of negotiating with the U.S. government.

According to a post from the Foley Foundation, an advocacy for American hostages and wrongful detainees held abroad, more U.S. citizens were wrongfully detained in the 10 years between 2015 and 2024 than in the prior decade.

“At one point in 2024, at least 54 Americans were held hostage or wrongfully detained overseas in 17 countries,” it said.

“The Foley Foundation assessed the majority of them (83%) as wrongfully detained. At least 17 Americans were released from captivity last year, the vast majority (47%) through prisoner exchanges.”