Submitted By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

I did not know refried beans are not, in fact, fried twice, but it still seemed like a decent working title for a report where we will highlight what we’ve learned on the topics we covered in last weekend’s Tariffs, AI and ProSec.

The Alaska Summit largely met Academy’s Geopolitical Intelligence Group’s cautious predictions. It didn’t end up with new, tougher sanctions, nor did it wind up with a ceasefire. It seems to have set the stage for Zelensky to meet with President Trump, maybe to set up a trilateral meeting in the future? Probably not going to matter much to markets unless we get some leaks that a lot more was agreed to behind the scenes than was let on at the press conference.

Academy had a busy Friday on Bloomberg TV (6:00 mark), Bloomberg Radio (9:45 mark), and Tom Keene’s Single Best Idea podcast. We covered a variety of topics with a lot of good feedback on our takes on both radio and TV (it helps when the news flow fits right into your narratives – the war in Ukraine, ProSec (Production for Security), the Fed, jobs, and inflation).

Let’s zip through a few things we learned this week that are impacting our outlook on the three main themes that we have been focused on.

Inflation

The only thing I’m “certain” about after the inflation data this week is that the data is confusing. Separate from all of our usual arguments and complains (Owners’ Equivalent Rent, etc.), it is extremely difficult to judge the “steady state” of the economy when corporations (and even individuals) have been altering their behavior to first get ahead of tariffs and then to deal with the evolving tariff rates. Teasing out what was pulled forward, or what was delayed, is extremely difficult. That “issue” also makes it even more difficult than usual to gain a lot of useful information from consumer spending. Academy did get a nice and a “fun” quote in the FT after the PPI release, which we view as a relatively 2nd tier report in terms of providing a lot of useful insight into the direction that inflation is headed.

Sad to say, but the assessment here is that we got some data, but it didn’t change peoples’ minds. You could cherry pick what you wanted to back almost any narrative. Most of us (I believe) are left with our inflation outlooks intact as the data just wasn’t compelling enough to change outlooks.

Electricity

We published a report on A “New” Interesting Chart – Electricity CPI Inflation. The response was quite extraordinary, and we have a deluge of material to go through that clients thought would be helpful in thinking about the electricity industry (trying to get away from the natural word association of energy = oil, to energy = electricity/power more broadly). This theme has implications for AI/Data Centers, but also possibly manufacturing as a whole. Not to mention the consumer element.

While this is something that we have been talking about for some time, it feels like we have underestimated just how important (even crucial) this is, and we haven’t done enough to figure out how great the opportunities are. Yes, a lot has been priced in (XLU, a utility ETF, is up more than QQQ YTD and over the past year), which as a contrarian by nature would give me pause, as it seems like this story might not even be close to being played out. My concern is that we thought we were thinking about this at the varsity level, but it may have been only at the JV or even freshman level. We are going to be spending more time digging into this for the opportunities and for the risks.

ProSec and Sovereign Wealth

Until someone gives us a better acronym or name for our National Production for National Security theme, we are going to try to get ProSec to catch on. It might be a losing battle (it really isn’t that catchy ), but we haven’t given up just yet.

The Intel news was the biggest news in this space on the week. The Intel CEO first seemed to be in the President’s doghouse last week, then moved to having an “interesting” story this week, then transitioned to a potential investment in Intel by the U.S. government.

• We continue to believe that the government will take action to spur domestic growth (and some element of control) over industries crucial to national security (chips, pharma, biotech, and many commodities, and more importantly, the processed or refined versions of those commodities).
  • The accelerated depreciation dovetails well with these attempts.
• MP organized an investment with funds from Department of Defense. They were also able to borrow at presumably favorable rates as part of the DOD’s efforts to get them more capital. This is an investment and if it turns out to be a good one, then the American public will benefit from this ownership (rather than via subsidies or other methods that largely accrue to the receivers).
• The “chatter” is that if an investment is to be made, it could possibly come from funds allocated to the CHIPS Act. While subsidies, etc. and other provisions of the CHIPS Act helped the company, little went to benefit the entire nation. The CHIPS Act also had a lot of rules about how companies could behave if they wanted the CHIPS Act money, something that dramatically slowed demand for that money. The intangible costs seemed high to many in the industry. An investment (and presumably a push on the debt side, like the MP deal) could provide capital that can be used more efficiently by the beneficiary, while at the same time, giving American taxpayers the possibility to benefit from the upside of the investment (if it turns out to be a good one).
• The “template” for what this administration wants to do on the ProSec side of things seems to be developing and could be very interesting.
  • The two deals (one that was done and one that is just in discussion) are interesting, but are a bit “ad hoc.” To truly develop the template, the government is likely going to need something akin to a Sovereign Wealth Fund to make these types of deals programmatic rather than a one off (if that is truly the direction we are headed).
    • I see no problem with a nation that is in debt having investments as part of the asset side of the equation.
    • To a large degree, investments (rather than subsidies or handouts) seem better for the taxpayer, but some of the latter are likely going to be required to enable this style on a greater scale – across many more areas of national security importance.

Expect positives in this arena and in the closely associated arena of DEREGULATION

More Than National Security

Last weekend we briefly discussed a more “altruistic” benefit (that the jobs in these areas will seem more “secure” to their holders). Letting those working feel more content (assuming job security makes most people more content as they have fewer things to worry about). Could it even have a “sense of pride” instilled into it?

Yeah, now we are going full “rose-colored” glasses, but there may be something to the “intangible” benefits of industry around security.

Too Much Control?

OK, just to prove that the T-Report hasn’t been replaced by a pod (attempted reference to Invasion of the Body Snatchers, where the ending with Donald Sutherland’s character turning on them still creeps me out), we need to bring up this subject, which is lurking in the background.

This administration, to some extent, seems to be getting more directly involved in things that can have an immediate effect on the bottom line and the future of companies (or industries).

• Direct Investments. What control will be exerted? Will any special benefits be received? Can tariff policy be altered to help? What is the impact, if any, on competitors that don’t receive government investment?
• Special Export “Charges.” Paying a few to sell certain goods to certain countries may help balance corporate needs with national security interests. But that could also be a slippery slope.
• Industry or even company specific tariffs. It isn’t that difficult to see that while well-crafted policies can drive the turnaround in domestic manufacturing the administration wants, it could also become a very difficult world for CEOs to navigate.

I’m not lying awake at night worrying about this, but it is certainly something that causes my “Spidey- sense” to tingle.
We might not have addressed it, but it felt like the two previous sections needed a counterbalance.

Quick Crypto Corner

In our work, we’ve been thinking that Ethereum would benefit the most from the current push on stablecoins prompted by regulation and the GENIUS ACT. It is “modular” and can be part of many projects. Institutions seem to prefer it to Solana for example. It has a “use” case, very different than Bitcoin, which currently seems to have a “scarcity” and governments are back to the case of printing money.

We should continue to see active trading in crypto as new products are developed and launched. Products that provide ACCESS should continue to do well. Anything from stablecoins designed for various audiences (some stablecoins may wind up “specializing” in a certain type of investor, for example). Certain products have limited or no ability to pass on either interest from holdings or revenue/fees from “staking.” Solutions to those issues will likely be met with demand.

You see this in the ETF flows as well, where since the end of June inflows into ETH ETFs have outstripped inflows into Bitcoin ETFs, though both have done well.

Definitely an area of renewed excitement and growth as investors and companies try to take advantage of the landscape that this administration has created, not just the traditional crypto community, but also potentially new entrants – anything from startups to household names.

Expect more on this, and the “concept” we laid out in Crypto Privateers is getting more, rather than less, interest as people have taken Academy up on our offer to discuss or brainstorm what to do about crypto crime, especially from Nation State/Nation State-Sponsored criminals.

The Bond Market

Look for the bond market to continue to move towards pricing in 3, or maybe 4 cuts. One interesting thing about how the search for potential candidates is being conducted is that the market is exposed to interview after interview of prominent figures who are all advocating for rate cuts. I think that is an interesting approach and while inflation may make that difficult, my belief is that the job market will nudge the Fed along faster than is currently being priced in.

The long end will continue to struggle as it has to price in uncertainty about the quality of data or the willingness of the Fed, going forward, to treat data in the way it had been treated in the past. Not necessarily a bad thing as we try to ignore “garbage data” and focus on where the puck is going, not where it has been, but that could cause longer dated yields to remain stubbornly high, relative to front end yields.

Which leads me to what I think is the next obvious question – what will the Fed do if 10s (or 30s) stay higher than where the administration thinks they should be? The admin has had goals of getting 10s to a 3 handle, so couldn’t we see versions of Operation Twist done to achieve that goal? Lots to be done before we get to something like true yield curve control, but people seem so fixated on whether people would cut or not, and not interested enough on what future potential Fed picks would do with policy to impact the longer end of the yield curve. Seriously, if we want lower mortgage rates, the admin will need to do something on 10s and I expect cuts alone won’t get us there as the risk premium will grow.

Not sure I’m at the point of “pounding the table” that flatteners are interesting here, but I think that we may be getting to that point.

Equities

Largely unchanged from last week. Be careful on many of the high-flyers as a lot of good is priced in and there is some resistance, at least in the narrative, starting to develop. Look for companies that can benefit from ProSec to do well, and after the news around INTC this week, expect the search for those types of companies to intensify as it could be a catalyst to “unlock” value – which often seems difficult to unlock.

Finally, my fears remain that the smaller and less well-capitalized companies (many private) will have more difficulty navigating the tariffs, as much as I’d like to see them break out and take over the leadership of the market.

Bottom Line

The Central Banks may push back on cuts a bit at Jackson Hole, but I don’t think markets will believe it for long. It all still comes down to growth, what is priced in, and you have our thoughts on that.

For those in the corporate debt market, presumably it will be a bit slower in the last two weeks of August than it has been, but spreads are tight, demand is strong, and yields are at decent levels, so there may be very little rest this summer for corporate bond investors.

It is a bit scary how quickly Labor Day (and the “official” end of summer) is approaching since it hasn’t felt very quiet or dull at all!

President Trump has stated in the wake of the historic Alaska summit that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin had a productive meeting, but they were unable to reach an agreement on a ceasefire or peace deal for Ukraine. “We didn’t get there” on a ceasefire, Trump described. And yet there appears to be real momentum this time, coming out of Alaska.

Ukrainian President Zelensky is meanwhile set to arrive in Washington Monday to discuss peace in the Oval Office. Of course, talks didn’t go so well last time – and there’s likely to be persisting tensions – given that the conflict, as explained by Putin on Friday, would never have happened if Trump had been president, something which Trump himself has long asserted.

Trump had told European leaders in a post-summit call that he’s now seeking a trilateral summit with Putin and Zelensky as soon as next Friday, according to sources in Axios. “I think the meeting was a 10,” Trump said in a post-summit interview with Fox News. “In the sense, we got along great, and it’s good when two big powers get along, especially when they’re nuclear powers. We’re No. 1 and they’re No. 2 in the world.”

And yet Putin’s firm conditions make such a trilateral summit unlikely at such a near date – also given the Russian president has in the recent past made clear he would only meet with Zelensky if the two were ready to sign a deal, or essentially already at the goal line.

The Kremlin has still maintained that Zelensky doesn’t have legal legitimacy, given the cancelation of elections in Ukraine and extension far past his term expiration.

According to more from Axios, this is where things stand in terms of Putin’s demands, based on admin sources:

• They said Putin had demanded that Ukraine cede two of the four regions to which Russia has laid claim (Donetsk and Luhansk), and freeze the front lines in the other two (Kherson and Zaporizhzhia). Russia controls nearly all of Luhansk, but only about three-quarters of Donetsk.
• Putin presented his willingness to stop pushing forward in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as a concession, in exchange for Ukraine withdrawing from Donetsk, one source briefed on the call said. In reality, Russia hasn’t made any progress in those areas for some time.
• A Ukrainian source said the U.S. side had the impression Putin was willing to negotiate over the small slivers of the Sumy and Kharkiv regions under Russian control.

If it is accurate that Putin is only demanding full political recognition for the Russian Federation over just two of the territories, this suggests Moscow is willing to make compromise – or at least have substantial top level discussions – to end the war, thought Western pundits are still calling these ‘maximalist’ demands. The hawks certainly don’t want to entertain this.

That real negotiations involving Putin, Trump, and Zelensky are opening up based on these aggressive White House diplomatic moves is a very positive development toward final settlement – though plenty of immense hurdles remain.

For staters, with Zelensky headed back to D.C., his European backers are doing everything to ensure it is only Ukraine’s maximum demands which are recognized.

Rules-Based International Order: One set of rules for me, another set of rules for you pic.twitter.com/cTwp8TzVnJ

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) August 17, 2025

The popular X commentator Russian Markets points out the “Germans are in panic as Zelensky goes alone to meet Trump, so all the EU leaders together with NATO’s chief are preparing to answer the questions Trump will put to Zelensky. So, do you see who is truly at war with Russia?“

As it stands, Zelensky has repeatedly assured his population and allies that Ukraine won’t cede an inch of territory, and he’s still not even offered political recognition of Crimea as Russia’s.

What Russia could permanently come away with if a final settlement is reached on the Kremlin’s terms.

So a lot will be known by Monday after Zelensky’s Oval Office visit – given he’s going to have to bring some compromise to the table which is substantial, if there are hopes of finally ending the war. The question also remains: is Trump ready to exert the necessary pressure, and also push back against the hawks in Europe and in Congress?

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A health care system that operates hospitals and clinics in two states has agreed to pay more than $1 million to settle allegations it discriminated against religious employees.

Mercyhealth, which operates in Illinois and Wisconsin, reached the settlement after years of pre-litigation negotiations, following an investigation by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The probe found evidence that Mercyhealth engaged in discrimination by denying employees religious exemptions to its COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Mercyhealth also fired the workers, or lowered their wages, and discriminated against other workers by denying them a chance to even request religious accommodation, instead terminating them or withholding pay, according to the EEOC.

“At the start of my tenure as acting chair of the EEOC, I committed to focusing our agency’s resources to address the very real problem of religious discrimination, and this resolution is just the beginning,” EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas said in a statement. “This is an example of what our agency can accomplish when we work with employers to ensure that the doors of our workplaces are equally open to religious employees.”

If a settlement was not reached, then Mercyhealth could have faced lawsuits alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The law states in part that an employer cannot “fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

The settlement features back pay and damages to the workers and former workers who were affected. Mercyhealth has also agreed to re-distribute its policies, train personnel on how to handle religious accommodation requests, and report to the EEOC about the requests and decisions on system-wide vaccination programs.

A Mercyhealth spokesperson confirmed that a settlement was reached.

“Mercyhealth respects the religious beliefs and practices of its employees,” Kara Sankey, vice president of clinical operations and chief nursing officer for Mercyhealth, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement

Sankey said that the health system had lots of work to do during the COVID-19 pandemic, “while doing its best to protect the health and safety of its patients and employees and complying with federal rules requiring all hospital staff receive vaccinations.”

She added: “The balancing of these critical goals could not be achieved without the dedication of our doctors and staff in times of significant personal risk, and Mercyhealth appreciates the work and assistance of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in resolving these remaining disputes. The process permits Mercyhealth to demonstrate its long-held commitment to employee rights and to close another chapter in its work during the pandemic.”

In his quest to see ChatGPT dominate the LLM race, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is tapping veteran Democrat operatives “who are well-connected to the Democratic establishment” to grease the gears with California politicians in his quest to restructure and eventually go public, Politico reports.

The political insiders include “Bill Clinton’s former spin doctor Chris Lehane to Kamala Harris’ one-time bestie Debbie Mesloh and ex-Sen. Laphonza Butler,” who OpenAI has quietly hired to effectively lobby for the company. 

It’s a notable deviation at a time when much of Silicon Valley is more focused on staffing up to chase influence in Republican-controlled Washington. And it’s among the most aggressive pushes to date from a tech company into Sacramento and other corridors of power in a state that birthed the industry, yet where firms had long been reluctant to engage directly at the levels of other major sectors.

According to the report, OpenAI sees California as vital for its global ambitions – as well as a planned corporate makeover that California’s Attorney General can shut down. 

“Since the stakes are so high here for their profit, they’re willing to spend what it takes to get their way with the California attorney general,” said Orson Aguilar, president of the nonprofit LatinoProsperity and prominent critic of OpenAI’s business transformation plans within the state, adding “They’re bringing in some very big guns to make their case.”

At the heart of their campaign is OpenAI’s bid to change its business model, which is facing a lawsuit from Musk — the company’s co-founder turned rival — as well as an investigation by California Attorney General Rob Bonta. Central to the approach is sniffing out any potential whiff of Musk — a divisive figure to Californians and the omnipresent boogeyman in OpenAI’s righteous, dare they contend, underdog quest — when new criticisms arise, POLITICO’s reporting shows. -Politico

OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit – with the stated goal of ensuring human-like AI benefits all of humanity, while Altman and crew now believe that the only way to keep up with the industry’s explosive (and profitable) growth, is to restructure – a move which requires permission from Democrat regulators. To that end, Altman’s new fleet of Democrat lobbyists are messaging that the company can still be a force for good, while batting away accusations from critics who argue that OpenAI has put profit over mission. 

As leverage, OpenAI has hinted that if they don’t get their way they’ll simply leave the state. 

“That’s a question that folks should be thinking about because I do think that we want to be here,” said OpenAI’s chief global affairs officer, Chris Lehane. “So I’m hoping folks make the right decision.”

Politico interviewed two dozen people who have worked with OpenAI or its new political hires, as well as those who have demanded answers from the company’s controversial business moves. The outlet found that recent recruits have ‘drawn on tactics from the  campaign trail and from warding off political scandals,’ including raising doubts about critics, and roping in minority activists – such as Dolores Huerta, who co-founded the United Farm Workers with César Chávez. 

The Operatives

Chris Lehane

Lehane, known in Democratic circles as the “master of disaster,” built his reputation in the Clinton White House managing crises like the Monica Lewinsky scandal and later served as Al Gore’s press secretary. He went on to run billionaire Tom Steyer’s political operations before moving into tech at Airbnb in 2015.

Lehane popularized the phrase “vast right-wing conspiracy” when defending the Clintons. It referred to how the internet age has allowed fringe theories to pass up to the masses, but was often used by the politicians he represented to cast themselves as the victim of a shadowy cabal. -Politico

Now leading OpenAI’s political strategy, Lehane has modeled its global affairs team on a campaign operation, dividing staff into communications, policy, and field roles. His approach emphasizes shaping a public narrative alongside substantive policy.

Peter Ragone

A longtime ally of Lehane from the 1990s, Ragone is a political operative with deep ties to Gavin Newsom and Bill de Blasio. He worked damage control during de Blasio’s clash with the NYPD after the 2014 officer killings, and earlier helped Newsom weather scandal over an affair. Ragone also advised billionaire Rick Caruso’s failed LA mayoral run and is close to Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis. His interest in tech policy predates his work at OpenAI, where he now applies his political relationship-mapping skills.

Marisa Moret

Moret, formerly chief of staff to San Francisco’s city attorney when Kamala Harris was DA, has long worked alongside Lehane. She served as his deputy at Airbnb and now reprises that role at OpenAI. Her legal and political background complements Lehane’s campaign-style strategy, making her a key lieutenant in navigating both regulatory and reputational challenges.

Ann O’Leary

O’Leary, Newsom’s first chief of staff and co-director of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 transition, now works as an attorney at Jenner & Block. She is central to OpenAI’s legal defense in probes led by California AG Rob Bonta and Delaware AG Kathleen Jennings. Her role involves both regulatory navigation and opposition research, including drawing comparisons between OpenAI’s critics and Elon Musk.

Brian Brokaw & Dan Newman

This duo of consultants, both Newsom veterans, bring campaign and PR expertise to OpenAI. They’ve advised on controversial initiatives like the California Forever tech city project, and maintain ties with political heavyweights from Bonta to San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie. They also managed fundraising for Lurie’s successful mayoral bid. At OpenAI, they shape public messaging and help manage political headwinds around AI regulation and corporate scrutiny.

Laphonza Butler

Personally appointed by Newsom to replace the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Butler is a seasoned labor leader and political strategist. She previously advised Kamala Harris and consulted for firms like Uber and Airbnb, overlapping with Lehane and Moret. Now advising OpenAI, Butler brings her labor background, political connections, and campaign experience into the company’s growing political operation.

Debbie Mesloh

A longtime friend and political consultant to Kamala Harris from her San Francisco DA days, Mesloh is helping OpenAI navigate critics of its restructuring plans. She has engaged civic groups and, alongside Moret, previewed restructuring panels to community leaders, working to soften opposition and build support for OpenAI’s moves.

The Plan & The Opposition

According to the report, Lehane – who made waves teaching Silicon Valley how to play politics – will have to dance around the company’s nonprofit status. 

Lehane will tell you OpenAI wants to share its riches with California and grow there. Part of his mission is to lay out the stakes for the world’s fourth-largest economy if it leaves. He recently wrote directly to Newsom in a letter first reported by POLITICO, petitioning the state to change course on AI regulations or risk losing its place as the home of innovation.

OpenAI has heard pitches from state leaders across the U.S. looking to lure it away. Companies like Oracle and Musk’s Tesla, SpaceX and X Corp. have moved their headquarters to Texas while retaining a California presence. -Politico

He faces fierce opposition from none other than Elon Musk, along with respected California-based charities, a group of the company’s former employees, leading academics, Nobel laureates, and others – all of whom are lining up against the restructuring – and have cited concerns that OpenAI’s new corporate structure will put financial interests away from the company’s charitable mission, which began in 2015 when the company was founded by a nonprofit by a group, including Musk, who believed that this was the most responsible way to deploy such powerful technology. 

OpenAI originally set out last year to convert into a for-profit organization, but changed course in May amid scrutiny from state officials. The updated plan — to turn its for-profit arm into a public benefit corporation that the nonprofit controls as a stakeholder — is turning out to be no quick feat either and still requires the blessing of the attorneys general in both California and Delaware, not to mention key investor Microsoft.

Changing the structure of its for-profit arm would also eliminate the current capped-profit model. -Politico

Meanwhile, OpenAI has until the end of the year if they want $20 billion dangled by SoftBank – which set the deadline, however California decisionmakers don’t seem to be in a huge rush – with Bonta having hired outside help to go through OpenAI’s financials for his investigation. Bonta’s office has met with OpenAI execs, including hief Strategy Officer Jason Kwon, head of U.S. and Canada policy Chan Park, deputy general counsel Che Chang and associate general counsel Nora Puckett, Politico continues.

OpenAI claims that the meeting was unrelated to the restructuring and said nothing further. 

Listening Tour?

As part of the lobbying strategy, OpenAI has been on a ‘listening tour’ to give people the impression they’ll still be responsible stewards of AI technology – with Lehane waxing poetic over listening to the other side.

“You can’t just be against everything,” he once told the AirBnB board. “You have to be for something.”

To this end, OpenAI earlier this year formed an advisory commission which includes former Newsom adviser Daniel Zingale – who has been crisscrossing California to hold meetings with different community groups to ‘listen’ (and gin up support). 

According to Politico, Lehane tapping Zingale (who is not an official employee) to chart a path forward for a multibillion-dollar nonprofit is just one more method to shift the public narrative in his favor. 

Read the rest here…

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has said he would do what he can to help secure the release of Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai, who has been imprisoned since late 2020 for his role in the city’s pro-democracy protests.

Speaking on Aug. 14 on Fox News Radio’s “The Brian Kilmeade Show,” Trump said he had urged China to free Lai during his previous administration and is willing to raise the issue again, should he meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in the future.

“I’m going to be bringing it up—I’ve already brought it up—and I’m going to do everything I can to save him,” Trump said, calling the self-made millionaire a “respected guy” and a “good guy.”

Lai, 77, was arrested in August 2020 in the aftermath of mass protests against Hong Kong’s national security law, widely seen as the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) attempt to clamp down on dissent and erode the city’s autonomy.

Lai is the founder of Apple Daily, a now-defunct tabloid newspaper long known for sensational headlines and paparazzi photographs. Yet during the height of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests, when many legacy outlets in Hong Kong amplified the CCP’s narrative, Apple Daily stood out as a rare voice openly critical of Beijing’s agenda and outspoken in its solidarity with the protesters. The company was forced to shut down in June 2021, after the authorities raided its headquarters, froze its assets, and arrested its senior editors.

Since his arrest, Lai has been charged with multiple offenses under the national security law, including conspiracy to “collude with foreign forces,” which could land him in prison for life. He also faces a charge under a colonial-era statute for conspiracy to publish “seditious material,” stemming from numerous Apple Daily op-eds carrying his byline.

Lai has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Lai’s trial on alleged national security offences has been repeatedly delayed. It was set to resume in Hong Kong later this month, but was postponed again because of his health condition.

On Aug. 14, a panel of three Hong Kong judges adjourned the proceedings to allow time for prison authorities to outfit Lai with a heart monitor and provide medication. This came after his lawyer reported he had suffered heart palpitations.

Trump, whose July 2020 order ended the United States’ historical policy of treating Hong Kong as a separate entity from China, acknowledged that the topic would be sensitive for Xi.

“You could also understand [Chinese leader] Xi would not be exactly thrilled by doing it,” he said on “The Brian Kilmeade Show.”

“It was a very nasty period of time in the history of China. I mean, it was a really nasty period of time with all of that being said.

“We’ll see what we can do … we’re going to do everything we can.”

Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, accused Lai of having been “a key orchestrator and participant in anti-China, destabilizing activities in Hong Kong.”

Lai has long rejected accusations of advocating separatism.

The British rule of Hong Kong, lasting from 1841 to 1997, holds a unique place in the so-called century of humiliation narrative the CCP forged to justify its authority. After the handover, the city retained significant autonomy and freedoms, but over the decades, Beijing has steadily encroached on those rights, portraying dissenters as separatists allegedly backed by “foreign forces.”

By Georg Rute of UtilityDive

Texas is preparing to cut off power to data centers during grid emergencies — a sign of just how strained the system has become.

Over the Fourth of July, deadly floods swept across central Texas, disrupting infrastructure and causing widespread outages. Meanwhile, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) has already seen multiple price spikes and conservation alerts — not because there wasn’t enough power, but because we couldn’t move it where it was needed.

These aren’t isolated events. It’s not just a Texas problem.

Just days after the shutoff planning was announced, the U.S. Department of Energy warned that blackout risks across the country could rise 100-fold by 2030.

All of this points to a deeper vulnerability: We’re still running the grid with tools and assumptions built for a different era — one with fewer storms, slower load growth and no massive data centers. 

Texas’s new normal demands smarter, faster and more adaptive grid operations. Long-term infrastructure investments are critical, but they won’t arrive in time to manage the next three summers.

Texas has made real progress in building new generation capacity, especially in solar, storage and wind. But the wires that carry that power haven’t changed. More importantly, the way we operate the grid hasn’t evolved to match the demands of either changing weather patterns or electrical load growth.

Texas generates far more power than the next 2 or 3 states COMBINED.

And we’re rapidly adding much MORE power.

Also our grid is more resilient than ever.

Since I signed power reform laws no Texan has lost power from the ERCOT grid.

We are best positioned for the future. https://t.co/kRopH5cGDk

— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) December 14, 2024

Now, surging demand from industrial expansion, electrification and AI data centers is doubling the strain. ERCOT’s own projections show that power demand in Texas may nearly double by 2030. And, other regions aren’t immune.

• The Midcontinent Independent System Operator recently green-lit a $22 billion transmission buildout to relieve rising congestion.
• The California Independent System Operator saw renewable curtailments surge nearly 30% last year.
• The PJM Interconnection anticipates 3% to 4% annual peak load growth through 2035 driven by data centers and expects up to 70 GW of demand over the next 15 years.
• Nationally, U.S. demand is projected to climb about 16% in five years — a pace not seen since the 1980s. 

That means more stress on an already-congested transmission system — one still being managed with decades-old assumptions about heat, wind and demand.

Those assumptions no longer hold. And in a hotter, stormier Texas, they’re becoming dangerous.

The case for operational intelligence

Utilities around the world are taking a different approach — one that doesn’t require waiting 10 years to build new lines. 

In Europe, software-based tools like hardware-free dynamic line ratings, or DLR, and hyperlocal weather forecasting are safely increasing the amount of power that can flow through existing lines. These tools don’t involve new hardware or major infrastructure. They use data — from satellites, LiDAR scans, and thousands of weather stations — to help operators see where and when extra capacity is available and plan accordingly.

I’ve helped implement this approach with national grid operators overseas. In Estonia and Finland, for example, we applied AI-driven DLR across 7,000 miles of transmission lines — many in hilly, forested regions like much of America. The result: up to 40% more capacity on lines that, by traditional standards, were considered maxed out.

The same physics apply here. A mild breeze — just four miles per hour — can cool power lines enough to boost capacity by 30%. But grid operators typically don’t have access to sufficiently accurate weather forecasts. As a result they assume the worst-case weather at all times, just in case. That means we’re leaving megawatts stranded every day, even during critical hours and emergencies.

Load flexibility shouldn’t be the only emergency tool

Demand-side management is essential. But we shouldn’t have to shut down critical infrastructure just to survive a summer heat wave. If we can increase visibility into grid conditions, forecast congestion earlier, and bring in more power from further away, we can avoid triggering firm load shed in the first place.

Shutting off industrial loads like data centers should be a last resort — not the default backup plan.

This isn’t a call to stop building new lines or power generators. We need them. But they won’t arrive in time to handle the surging load coming in the next few years. 

What we can do now is operate smarter with software-based operational intelligence — to reduce curtailment, ease congestion and lower consumer costs.

It’s not political. It’s practical. And it’s proven.

ERCOT has long served as a proving ground for U.S. grid innovation. But today, it’s also the canary in the coal mine. What Texas does next will shape how the rest of the country prepares for what’s coming.

The Israeli navy launched strikes on a key power plant near Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, on Sunday. The Israeli military claimed the facility was being used by Houthi forces but did not provide evidence.

The assault comes in the wake of the latest Houthi ballistic missile attack which targeted Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport, but which was reportedly intercepted and caused no damage or casualties.

Houthi-affiliated Al Masirah TV said the new Israeli assault caused damage to generators at the Hezyaz power station and triggered a fire, which was soon after successfully contained.

The Israeli military (IDF) described the attack as a response to ongoing Houthi missile and drone launches on Israel, which have persisted in parallel to IDF expanded operations inside the Gaza Strip.

A Sunday statement said Israeli forces “struck… deep inside Yemen, targeting an energy infrastructure site that served the Houthi terrorist regime” in an area of Sanaa, with without naming the specific site. These “strikes were conducted in response to repeated attacks” by the Iran-allied Shia militant group.

Israel has off and on for months bombed various parts of Yemen’s infrastructure, including the critical port of Hodeidah and the country’s main international airport.

These Israeli operations in Yemen have stepped-up after last spring the US withdrew from active Red Sea operations. Trump essentially declared mission accomplished, announced ceasefire, and called the US Navy away from the very costly (in terms of missiles and bombs expended) and risky mission.

Currently, Houthi leadership has still vowed to attack alleged Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. Foreign ships bound for Israeli ports have also been put on notice.

International shipping transit routes have long ago been forced to adjust, taking longer and costlier routes to avoid the Red Sea, and also to the financial detriment of Egypt and its Suez canal.

Neither Israel nor the Western allies have been able to do anything about this, and some observers have expressed awe that a group of largely poor Islamist militants in sandals have been able to inflict such punishment and an effective blockade on global shipping and Israeli and Western companies.

Israeli Chief of Staff: We will continue striking until Hamas is defeated, placing the issue of the hostages at the forefront of our priorities.

— First Squawk (@FirstSquawk) August 17, 2025

And given that Israel is actually expanding offensive operations into southern Gaza once again, and against Gaza City, the Red Sea conflict won’t wind down anytime soon. Ceasefire efforts based in Doha have clearly failed at this point.

Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

While federalizing the local police and deploying the National Guard in Washington, D.C., President Donald Trump has suggested he could flex his authority to fight violent crime elsewhere.

“We have other cities also that are bad, very bad,” the president said during an Aug. 11 press conference.

He listed Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles, Oakland, and Baltimore among the cities of concern.

Although homicide and other violent crimes have recently dipped across America, the numbers from big cities are still high—in some cases, higher than they were before surges one to two decades ago.

Trump’s power to deploy the National Guard outside the nation’s capital is also under debate. A federal judge is deciding whether his deployment of troops to Los Angeles was lawful.

Here is what you should know.

The President’s Powers

Trump federalized D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department after declaring a crime emergency.

He did so under Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, which lets him control the district’s police for up to 30 days without Congressional authorization.

He wants Congress to extend that power, suggesting a national emergency declaration could be a means of sidestepping the legislature if it does not act.

* * *

You can support ZeroHedge with the purchase of a high-quality, sharp, ZeroHedge Multitool.

There is no equivalent to the D.C. Home Rule Act in the other big cities Trump named. There, state and local authorities have control over law enforcement.

The National Guard is a trickier question.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer is assessing whether Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles and nearby municipalities violated the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA).

In Washington, the president has deployed the District of Columbia National Guard, which is under clear presidential control.

He did so while keeping them under Title 32 duty status. That shields the president from allegations of violating the PCA. It also leaves them under local authority as they back up the police who are making arrests.

Trump highlighted other possible solutions involving Congress, which is currently in its August recess.

“We’ll count on the Republicans in Congress and the Senate to vote” to end no-cash bail, he said, referencing a legal reality in many cities and states that have drawn his ire.

Illinois, Chicago’s home state, eliminated cash bail in 2023. Los Angeles County did so too for almost all offenses. New York State made a similar change in 2019.

“Maybe they’ll self-clean up, and maybe they’ll self-do this and get rid of the cashless bail thing and all of the things that caused this problem,” Trump said.

Chicago

Although his local authority outside Washington may be limited, Trump has floated interventions against crime outside the capital.

The Second City seems to be first in his mind.

“If we need to, we’re going to do the same thing in Chicago,” he said during his Aug. 11 press conference.

The Chicago Police Department recorded 573 homicides in 2024, more than any other U.S. city. That is down from 620 in 2023.

Shootings and the number of shooting victims also fell, though both still numbered in the thousands. Vehicular hijackings have declined, too.

There were 188 homicides during the first half of 2025, marking a 32 percent decrease from the same period in 2024.

Chicago’s homicide rate stood at more than 21 per 100,000 in 2024.

That homicide rate, though high, has trended down from even higher rates during the 1990s.

Yet, rates were lower than today during the 2000s and early 2010s, according to an analysis from the University of Chicago Crime Lab.

An Illinois Policy Institute analysis found that the arrest rate for homicides has also fallen, declining from 42 percent a decade ago to 27 percent from June 2024 through June 2025.

New York City

“I’m going to look at New York in a little while,” Trump said.

Though rates and numbers differ, New York City’s violent crime trends resemble Chicago’s.

Homicides and other serious felonies have recently trended down, but, in some cases, remain higher than they were 10 or 15 years ago.

In 2024, for example, there were 382 murders and non-negligible manslaughters in the Big Apple, according to city data on crime complaints.

That is below a recent peak in 2021, which saw 488 such cases, and well below much higher totals decades ago, like in 2000, when there were 673 murders and non-negligible manslaughters.

Yet, 2024’s figure tops the numbers for 2013 through 2019, the start of Bill de Blasio’s mayoralty. Those totals dipped as low as 292 in 2017 before surging to the recent 488-murder peak during his last year in office.

As of Aug. 10, the New York Police Department had recorded 188 murders in 2025—down 23.6 percent from the same period in 2024. Robberies and felonious assaults were also down relative to the same period, while rape was up 21.6 percent.

In 2024, there were 29,461 felonious assaults in the city, up from recent years and from troughs as low as 16,284 in 2008. Rape was also up, with 1,748 incidents that year as compared to 1,455 in 2023.

Los Angeles, Baltimore, and Oakland

“Hopefully L.A. is watching,” Trump said during his press conference.

He also referenced another California city, Oakland, and nearby Baltimore, saying the two are “so far gone.”

Federal Bureau of Investigation data show 264 homicides in Los Angeles in 2024.  That’s down from 327 in 2023 as reported by the Los Angeles Police Department.

In 2013, there were 251 murders in the city.

Los Angeles recorded a major decline in murders during the first half of 2025. Mayor Karen Bass touted a trend that suggests numbers could hit lows in 2025 not seen in 60 years.

In 2024, Oakland witnessed 81 murders and non-negligent manslaughters, according to FBI data. The city saw 120 murders in 2023 as recorded by the Oakland Police Department in its end-of-year report.

The 2024 figure is comparable to lows from the late 1990s and early 2000s, as recorded in an analysis from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. During the early 1990s, Oakland regularly had more than 140 homicides.

During the first half of 2025, Oakland recorded a 21 percent decline in homicides relative to the first half of 2024.

Baltimore saw 201 homicides in 2024, down from 260 in 2023, according to the Baltimore Police Department. Last year’s total is on par with numbers from a decade ago.

The 2024 numbers give it a homicide rate of more than 35 per 100,000, making it one of America’s deadliest large cities.

Charm City’s midyear report in 2025 recorded 68 homicides, down from 88 over the same period in 2024.

Ahead of the planned Monday meeting between President Trump and Ukraine’s Zelensky in the Oval Office, which will also have the attendance and participation of a growing list of European and NATO leaders, there’s increasing talk of seeking American-supported “Article 5-style” security guarantees for Ukraine as part of any broader peace deal with Russia.

According to CNN, citing a senior European official, the proposed plan wouldn’t involve NATO directly – and would effectively remove the question of membership in the military alliance – but would aim to offer Ukraine protections similar to NATO’s collective defense clause.

The specifics of the proposal remain undisclosed and unclear, and there’s also the practical reality and major hurdle of just how such ‘guarantees’ would be enforced.

The Kremlin would likely balk at such a condition, given Russian leadership has said it would never allow any Western troop deployment or NATO-style force in Ukraine.

There has actually for years throughout the grinding war been talk among European capitals of the idea of deploying a “reassurance force” in Ukraine.

One thing that all the Western allies agree on at this early stage is that the initiative would never get off the ground without the United States officially backing and supporting it. And yet if the European leaders going to the White House lobby hard for this, it’s almost certain this would break the negotiating process with Russia.

For Moscow, assurance of permanent Ukrainian neutrality remains a top priority, and so talk of an Article-5 style system which would ‘protect’ Ukraine in the instance of future Russian attacks is likely to a complete non-starter as an option.

But it’s especially the hawks which are pushing this, and likely Moscow is going to see it as simply NATO placing its security blanket over Kiev under a different guise, or just under the cover of differing semantics.

On Sunday, more and more European leaders have confirmed they will be joining Ukrainian President Zelensky on his trip to the White House on Monday.

According to a BBC list, the below top officials have confirmed they will be attending:

• UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer
• Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni
• German Chancellor Friedrich Merz
• Finnish President Alexander Stubb
• French President Emmanuel Macron
• Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte
• European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen

This comes after most leaders on this list have strongly complained that Europe and even Ukraine have been left behind, and cut out of the negotiating process. They back Zelensky who says all decisions taken without direct Ukrainian participation are ‘stillborn’ on arrival.

President Trump’s hope is that this swiftly moving process of talks which started with Putin in Alaska on Friday will lead to a final, and permanent peace settlement to end the war. But much of the entire Western establishment – whether government officials or the mainstream press – seems to want this process to fail…

The bourgeois press thinks the real problem with Putin is that he just needs a good therapist pic.twitter.com/T56qpm3Cnk

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) August 17, 2025

Trump said on social media on Saturday, “President Zelenskyy will be coming to D.C., the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon. If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people’s lives will be saved. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Authored by Joakim Book via BitcoinMagazine.com,

As energy costs soar and grids destabilize, European innovators are turning to Bitcoin mining at home as a decentralized solution — blending heat, profit and power independence in one sleek radiator…

Maximilian Obwexer had a problem. 

He was heating his home in Austria with conventional heating oil, and it was expensive. A tinkerer by nature, and a former engineer having worked on hydropower plants, he was trying to find a better way to heat his home. 

After many rounds of experimentation and having delved down the Bitcoin (mining) rabbit hole, three years ago he founded a company devoted to the effort. His company, 21energy, makes well-balanced, sturdy, and incredibly beautiful (and incredibly quiet!) miners for home use. The early models of Ofen 1 boasted up to 10 TH/s, while the premium model could reach, at top speed and making plenty of noise, 40 TH/s. Having scaled up production, hiring 12 new employees only this year and launching the new Ofen 2 (35-42 TH/s), the Bitcoin heater comes in the style of a conventional radiator — powered by Bitcoin. And yes, you can solo mine with this bitcoin heater… or join whichever pool you think is best.

“Bitcoin heaters are decentralized grid balancing — at home!” he proclaimed on stage in Helsinki on Friday before hundreds of curious faces in the audience at the inaugural Nordic Bitcoin conference BTCHel. Refreshingly, he spent most of his presentation not selling his excellent products or explaining his story in bitcoin, but on the many troubles afflicting the European grid.

Europeans are beholden to foreigners for importing energy. Its current electricity producers — legacy coal, gas and hydro — are increasingly asked to turn off their supply to the grid, in favor of the ever-more present wind turbines and solar panels. Fossil-fuel-based generation produces CO2 emissions as well as particles in the immediate environment, but its proposed replacements push dynamic and uncontrollable electricity generation onto the grid. At peak supply, even renewable energy providers are asked by grid management to curtail or wind down production; there is simply nobody to take the excess electricity, nowhere to put it

This is obviously bad in that it wastes potential electricity that could have been used, but even worse is that it makes the investment calculations for renewable energy investors worse. Not unrelated, households in Europe pay exorbitant rates for their electricity… and on top of that, heating in general is quite expensive.

When you put all of those aspects together, it’s like the old world is screaming out for Bitcoin mining. Obwexer agrees, “It’s a no-brainer — even if you don’t like or understand Bitcoin,” he tells me, standing next to his shiny green booth and radiators keeping the Expo hall in Helsinki real toasty. 

Indeed, a large portion of his client base are “solar guys” — devoted climate change activists wanting to do something hands-on to de-fossilize their own energy use. While it’s not exactly the first group you think about being interested in Bitcoin, “The economics just make sense,” Obwexer tells me. 

In a recent podcast interview with Knut Svanholm and Luke de Wolf, two of the co-organizers of BTCHel, Obwexer remarked that “Finland is really at the forefront of bitcoin heating and bitcoin district heating”:

“Europe needs Bitcoin mining so badly, with the high volatility in the electricity grids… we don’t have to fear the politicians too much, because… they already wrote it down — they just don’t see that they wrote Bitcoin mining everywhere.”

On stage in Helsinki, he showed one of the most important graphs in the entire economics and energy debate, which underlines precisely how crucial energy is for the well-being and flourishing of a society. “If you want a clean, rich, healthy society you need a lot of power.”

via: Todd Moss, Eat More Electrons

Up next for Obwexer and his team at 21energy is contributing to flexible load shedding on a grid level. Putting mobile miners in a truck and take production pressure off, e.g., hydro plants, is a perfect use case for Bitcoin mining: Instead of being asked to ramp down production because of an overloaded grid, they can divert the electricity stemming from their water flow to Bitcoin miners — which also changes their response time from minutes to seconds.

Meet 21energy next week at #BTCHEL – the First Large-Scale Bitcoin Conference in the Nordics! ⚡

📍 Join us at our booth and meet our team
🔥 Learn how we transform electricity into warmth & Bitcoin
🎤 Don’t miss talks from Harald, Maximilian & Lukas on Bitcoin mining,… pic.twitter.com/juBRMGWvWh

— 21energy (@21energy_com) August 7, 2025

In general, using purpose-built or rebuilt Bitcoin miners for heating your home is the most obvious way to decentralize mining — especially since home miners are much less susceptible to the cutthroat economics of Bitcoin mining that, e.g., large mining farms are.

While solving several real-world energy problems at once, Obwexer and his team at 21energy are doing precisely that — “From Tyrol to the World.” 

“I am super bullish on Bitcoin mining in Europe,” Obwexer concluded.