China’s export controls on key rare earth elements (REEs) — particularly rare earth magnets essential for EVs, smartphones, fighter jets, and missiles — triggered a sharp drop in shipments to U.S. firms earlier this summer, disrupting production lines, including ones at Ford Motor Company. Now trade data shows a rebound in Chinese exports. Still, with Beijing controlling 90% of global REE supply, Washington has recognized the urgent need to build an “ex-China” supply chain.

The latest data from Bloomberg shows that China sharply increased exports of rare earth magnets in June — including to the U.S. Those shipments jumped to 3,188 tons in June from 1,238 tons in May, with U.S. imports rising to 353 tons from just 46 tons. Despite the rebound, exports remain depressed. 

Beijing imposed REE restrictions in April on seven REEs that disrupted global supply chains and prompted President Trump to secure a trade truce. China has resumed shipments, but the volume is insufficient to meet all demand.  

The Trump administration has recognized that America’s heavy reliance on imported REEs poses a growing national security risk and is now urgently working to map out an “ex-China supply chain.” Earlier this month, Morgan Stanley’s metals and mining team outlined the coming REE revolution — and how investors can profit from it (read here). 

In addition to Morgan Stanley’s REE report, the current trends in the space include the Pentagon and Apple taking stakes in MP Materials. This is part of Washington’s re-shoring of REEs. 

Rare Earths and permanent magnets are required for key defense applications…

Recall that one year ago, in our April 2024 note titled “Next Big Mineral Trade Revealed by Morgan Stanley,” we identified MP Materials as “one company that stands to benefit” from the restoration of America’s rare earth supply chain. 

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

In Washington, Democratic politicians are calling for a congressional investigation, while in New York, the Writers’ Guild is asking New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) for a state probe. No, the issue is not the use of the autopen by Biden staff to carry out presidential functions or the crisis in public education. No, it is the cancellation of “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” by CBS.

The outrage over the show’s cancellation is the latest example of presumed entitlement from the left, which suggests that the government, universities, and corporations should subsidize their preferred news and entertainment. Call it the NPR syndrome.

I wrote this weekend about the withdrawal of the government subsidy for NPR and the outrage of its overwhelmingly white, affluent, and liberal audience. Democrats in Congress and NPR’s shrinking listeners were appalled that the American taxpayers would not be required to fund the overwhelmingly liberal outlet. It appears that they are entitled to such federal money even though NPR is dropping in both its audience and revenues.

The outrage of Democratic politicians is hardly surprising. Like NPR, The Late Night Show was used to amplify Democratic talking points. Some of those objecting the loudest were favored guests. Indeed, the show had long ago traded the comedic stylings of prior guests like George Carlin and Don Rickles for the knee-slapping standups of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Sen. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.).

As Joe Concha recently noted, Warren, 76, appeared 16 times during the show’s ten-year run.

He offered a funereal opening after Trump’s election:

Colbert turned his monologues into diatribes against Donald Trump, Republicans, and most everyone to the right of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., NY), another regular guest. Socialist Bernie Sander (I., Vt) was one of Colbert’s most frequent guests followed by figures such as CBS anchor Gayle King (14 appearnces), CNN anchor Jake Tapper (12 appearances), and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow (8 appearances). Note figures like Tapper had their own collapsing ratings but were still regulars for Colbert.

It did not matter that over half of this country is conservative or libertarian or that over 77 million Americans voted for Trump.

This cringeworthy video is effectively what the audience saw every night as Colbert sought to repackage comedy with orthodoxy:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren wrote on X that “America deserves to know if his show was canceled for political reasons.” She is right but an investigation is the last thing that liberals should want.

While many are pushing the false claim that the Late Show was a roaring success and number one among late night talk shows, the fact is that Colbert had run the show into the ground.

As Charles Gasparino discussed recently, the show was imposing “punishing losses — pegged between $40 million and $50 million a year” on Paramount at a time when the parent company was trying to sell CBS.

Their should be an investigation into Colbert’s firing, but not for the reasons Elizabeth Warren cites. The real question is why did CBS continue to platform Colbert — a political propaganda mouthpiece piece for the Democratic Party — that cost the network $40 million per year?… https://t.co/U24ybQdFDt

— Cameron Winklevoss (@cameron) July 19, 2025

Colbert publicly slammed his employer on the show in settling a case with Trump for $16 million.

However, Colbert seemed more obsessed with pushing his political message than ratings.

Media companies are not in the habit of cancelling profit-making, successful shows, particularly not CBS which has just two prime time shows in the Top 15.

The fact is that Colbert was over paid and underperforming.

Colbert was reportedly pulling in between $15-$20 million as his show was losing $40 million a year. The show had over 100 staffers and cost $130 million to produce.

Advertisers had fled the show, clearly seeing Colbert’s shrinking audience as not a draw for spots. It is a pattern seen on the other largely left-leaning shows.

As Concha noted: “late-night shows on ABC, NBC, and CBS earned $439 million in ad revenue in 2018 combined, but just $220 million in 2024. That’s a 50% decline in less than seven years.”

In comparison, Greg Gutfeld had long trounced Colbert and the other late night shows with a relatively small staff and budget. Viewers were flocking to Fox for his content as the other late night show with a conservative perspective.

Yet, there remains the outrage. Liberal politicians and viewers seem to believe that they are entitled to shows, movies and news programs that maintain their echo chamber. Likewise, celebrities such as Rachel Zegler cratered their movies with controversial political declarations.

Now, despite losing tens of millions of dollars a year, liberals seem to believe that Paramount should subsidize an unfunny show with declining viewership. It is the same mentality of Washington Post writers who were outraged when their new editor told that that they were losing money and “people are not reading your stuff.” They expected billionaire Jeff Bezos to run the Post like a vanity project regardless of their losses or that they were primarily writing for each other. They were wrong just as Colbert was wrong.

Colbert believed that he could tailor his show to less than half of the country and bring in a slew of liberal politicians and media figures who were themselves losing elections and ratings. I cannot imagine why that business plan would fail.

Sarepta Therapeutics Inc. has refused a request from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to halt all shipments of its gene therapy Elevidys after three patient deaths, Bloomberg reported this weekend.

The FDA disclosed that two teenage boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, both unable to walk, died recently from acute liver failure after receiving Elevidys. In addition, a 51-year-old participant in a trial of a different Sarepta gene therapy targeting limb-girdle muscular dystrophy died last month, also of acute liver failure.

Bloomberg writes that following these events, FDA officials met with Sarepta and asked the company to voluntarily pause shipments of Elevidys, which accounts for more than half the company’s product revenue. “The company refused to do so,” the agency stated.

Sarepta, in its own statement Friday, defended its decision to continue distribution “based on our comprehensive scientific interpretation of the data, which shows no new or changed safety signals” in patients who are still ambulatory.

In June, the company had already suspended Elevidys shipments to non-ambulatory patients. According to Sarepta, boys who can still walk represent about 85% of those treated with the therapy since its launch.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said in an interview Friday the agency is reviewing whether Elevidys should remain on the market.

The most recent death involved a gene therapy using the same viral delivery platform as Elevidys, suggesting potential broader safety implications. “We think the risks of the FDA removing the drug fully from the market are now greatly amplified,” Baird analyst Brian Skorney wrote in a Friday note.

On Friday, at around 1:00 p.m. ET, Reuters reported—citing a source familiar with the matter—that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would request Sarepta to halt all shipments of Elevidys. By 1:30 p.m. ET, the news has been reported by Bloomberg.

The company had confirmed a third patient death linked to its gene therapy programs, this time involving a 51-year-old man who died in June from acute liver failure after receiving the investigational therapy SRP-9004 for limb-girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD).

The company confirmed the death to BioSpace and it was widely reported on Friday morning. Sarepta shares were lower by about 25% heading into the cash open and ultimately closed down more than 30%.

Like Elevidys—Sarepta’s approved Duchenne muscular dystrophy gene therapy—SRP-9004 uses an adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector, which the company has previously associated with fatal liver complications.

The death, which went unmentioned during Sarepta’s corporate restructuring update earlier last week, has drawn scrutiny from analysts.

“We think the LGMD patient death could amplify patient hesitancy to use commercial Elevidys and increase investor distrust since the company did not disclose the event on its call,” William Blair noted Friday.

Authored by Darren Smith via JonathanTurley.org,

The news and social media aggregation platform Reddit now requires its United Kingdom based users to provide age verification to access “mature content” hosted on its website.

Users must prove they are eighteen years or older to read or contribute such content.

UK regulator Ofcom stated “We expect other companies to follow suit, or face enforcement if they fail to act.” Internet content providers who fail to adopt such measures can face fines of up to eighteen million pounds or ten percent of their worldwide revenue, whichever is greater.

For continued violations or serious cases, UK regulators may petition the courts to order “business disruption measures” such as forcing advertisers to end contracts or preventing payment providers to provide revenue for the platforms. Internet service providers can be required to block access to their users.

Reddit announced a partnership with Persona to provide an age verification service. Users will be able to upload a “selfie” image or a photograph of their government issued identification or passport as proof of majority. The company stated the age verification is a one-time process and that it will only retain users’ date of birth and verification status. Persona proffered they would only retain the photos for seven days.

David Greene, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, called the UK’s Online Safety Act a real tragedy: “UK users can no longer use the internet without having to provide their papers, as it were.”

The rules come as no surprise given the regulatory over-reach of many European governments.

The canards of Protecting the Children or Online Safety provide indirect tools to deny access or curtail speech, tools too tempting or useful for pro-censorship politicians and officials.

In practice teenagers will easily discover ways to defeat or trick the verification process yet every rule conscious adult in the UK will be forced to self-identify and remove their privacy just to participate in a public forum or read information. I fail to see how an age verification system can distinguish age of majority or minority by an image that was taken of a teenager who is seventeen years, eleven months old or another who is eighteen years and one day. And what would stop a minor from uploading an image of their grandfather, or creating a fake image of a nonexistent person using generative AI? Just because the user logs in as a particular individual does not mean that the person viewing the content IS the actual user.

At some point it will become evident to policy makers in the UK and elsewhere that the present system of identification is too easily defeated and will then mandate that ‘proof beyond doubt’ be the standard for verification of age. Governments could then require everyone to “show papers” as Mr. Greene had feared, mandating that users be forced to be “accountable” for what they write as well as what they read: Thus creating apprehension in the minds of citizens who will be reluctant to engage in sharing of ideas or viewing content governments could later label as objectionable. They will be personally linked and identified with everything they read, and that might be a risk not worth taking.

Imagine if these types of standards were enacted decades ago in libraries. A person wishes to enter a library that contains a few books the state finds objectionable or having adult content. A gatekeeper at the main entrance requires each visitor to show their identification, after which the library looks over their shoulder for every book, every page, and every word they read, making a note of everything the visitor sees. Would you visit such a library?

Russian state media has broadcast new footage from a major drone production facility in Yelabuga, Tatarstan, where Iranian-designed Shahed-136 drones, rebranded by Russia as the Geran-2, are being manufactured. 

The defense ministry-produced video constitutes a very rare look inside one of Russia’s main secretive drone assembly plants, which plays a critical role in supplying UAVs for ongoing strikes in Ukraine. Suicide drones connected to the particular plant featured have been deployed literally in the tens of thousands across Ukraine over the course of the war.

In Russia, they showed what the factory in Alabuga looks like from the inside, which produces “Geraniums.”

It is claimed to be the largest long-range drone assembly plant in the world.

Earlier, Germany stated that soon Russians will be launching two thousand UAVs per day at… pic.twitter.com/140KIzvmoD

— East_Calling (@East_Calling) July 20, 2025

Situated roughly 1,700 kilometers from Ukraine’s border, the complex contains multiple assembly lines and hundreds of ready-to-deploy drones.

The footage shows drones being painted matte black, which is believed to reduce visibility during night operations and make them harder for Ukrainian air defense units to detect. These drones have increasingly been utilized in nighttime operations, and Russia has been sending hundreds nightly against Ukrainian cities.

One controversial aspect of the report is the apparent use of teenage labor for some aspects of the drone plant.

The facility employs teenage students from the nearby Alabuga Polytechnic College, which is located within the same industrial zone – as the drone factory allows students to gain some hands-on technical skills.

Western commentators have seized on the youth labor aspect to the drone assembly plant…

“Kurchatov, Korolyov and Stalin live in your DNA.” Russian military TV showcases the giant Shahed drone production plant in Tatarstan, boasting that children after 9th grade are working there to help kill Ukrainians. pic.twitter.com/j7rbiFy9On

— Yaroslav Trofimov (@yarotrof) July 20, 2025

One regional media source lists the following specifications for the Geran-2 drones:

• Length: 3.5 meters

• Wingspan: 2.5 meters

• Weight: approximately 200 kilograms

• Warhead: up to 50 kilograms

• Engine: 50 horsepower two-stroke gasoline

• Range: up to 1,800 kilometers

• Cruising speed: 180–200 km/h (up to 300 km/h in descent)

• Maximum altitude: 4,000 meters

• Loiter time: 10–12 hours

The Alabuga facility began operations in 2023 and was designed for the large-scale manufacturing of the Geran-2, after Russia obtained and began mass deploying the Iran-made Shahed-136 drones from Iran. Likely, Ukraine is increasingly going to try targeting it with its own drones, but the plant is located extremely far from the front lines.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The offensive dimension of Trump’s new three–pronged approach to Ukraine involves the sale of American weapons to NATO who’ll in turn transfer them to Ukraine.

This aligns with what Trump told NBC several days prior to the aforesaid announcement.

According to Reuters’ sources, however, “Trump presented a framework – not a fleshed-out plan”, and some of the six countries that NATO chief Rutte mentioned will participate in this scheme allegedly only found out about it during that time.

Other reports then circulated about France, Italy, and Czechia’s refusal to participate on various pretexts ranging from their principled support for the European defense industry, which would struggle to fulfill its potential if EU countries buy more expensive US arms, to simple budgetary concerns.

The resultant ambiguity over the American-NATO arms arrangement for Ukraine that Trump announced accordingly raises questions about what’s really going on.

There are three likely explanations.

• The first is that there were innocent communication issues between the US, NATO, and the bloc’s individual members, but that’s difficult to believe since everyone just gathered for the latest NATO Summit less than a month ago. This arrangement was presumably discussed during that time. It would also contextualize their agreement to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, especially if the Europeans expected to purchase more expensive arms for transfer to Ukraine as part of this arrangement.

• The second explanation is that nothing concrete was agreed to, at least with all members, during that summit. This would account for why some of them were reportedly caught by surprise and others refuse to participate. In this scenario, Trump’s announcement would have been meant to pressure them into this profitable arrangement to “save face” since all but Hungary and Slovakia (which also won’t participate) have consistently claimed that they’ll support Ukraine “for as long as it takes”.

• And finally, the last possibility is that the analyzed media reports are part of a deception campaign along the lines of what Israeli media claimed that Trump and Bibi pulled off ahead of them bombing Iran. This version of events assumes that there’s much more agreement between NATO members behind the scenes than has been reported. The purpose of claiming otherwise would be to get Russia’s guard down ahead of what could be NATO’s rapid rearmament of Ukraine with American weapons.

Whichever explanation(s) one adheres to, more clarity will be forthcoming from Russian media reports, which will reveal the existence of these new arms on the battlefield or lack thereof ahead of the expiry of Trump’s 50-day deadline. If lots of US arms flood into Ukraine, then it’ll show that there was enough agreement and capacity to back up his threat. If not, then he might blame the Europeans for fumbling it, after which he might only impose some secondary sanctions but no longer militarily escalate.

Trump repeatedly said that the Europeans must step up since this conflict is waged on their continent. If enough prioritize other interests over supporting Ukraine “for as long as it takes”, however, then Trump likely isn’t going to have the US once again “lead from the front”, do the “heavy lifting”, and thus let them keep “freeloading” off of it since that would betray his planned reform of US-NATO relations. The Europeans’ compliance or lack thereof will therefore play a crucial role in the conflict’s future course.

In the latest ghastly tactic used to displace non-Jews from their West Bank villages and farms, Israeli settlers are accused of carrying out a bloody livestock massacre on Friday, using knives, sticks and guns to kill 117 sheep belonging to Bedouins. Settlers stole hundreds more, but Israel Defense Forces soldiers focused their intervention on restraining Bedouins who attempted to protect their property, witnesses say. 

“These sheep and animals were slaughtered and shot at,” Palestinian Minister Moayad Shaaban told Reuters. “They are using these tools to terrify these people to leave these areas, which have been inhabited for dozens of years.”

The horror unfolded in the pre-dawn darkness on Friday at the Arab al-Kaabaneh village in the Jordan Valley. Mahmoud Kaabneh told Middle East Eye that settlers first attacked his brother’s home, attempting to steal his donkeys. As the family emerged to thwart the assault, more settlers swarmed in, attacking homes and families. Next, they opened a sheep pen and stole some 350 animals. 

“The Israeli army was present with the settlers and did nothing,” Kaabneh said. “But when the residents tried to rescue the livestock, the soldiers attacked the Palestinians instead and chased us down. They arrested 20 men and beat them severely for four hours.”

When villagers later ventured out to search the surrounding area, they found 117 sheep had been killed by the settlers. “Some [were] slaughtered with knives, others beaten to death, and many left with deep wounds,” Kaabneh said. Video of a hillside strewn with sheep carcasses is circulating on social media. A handful of wounded, surviving sheep were treated by veterinarians, with some of them visibly in shock — shaking uncontrollably.

The settlers’ brutality achieved its desired effect on some residents of the village, including Tareq Kaabaneh, who told Reuters he’s moving on: 

“They were armed, they steal donkeys and sheep. In the night they come here and start shooting toward us. I am moving now from here, I want to protect my kids and my sheep, my livelihood … yesterday I was safe, but I don’t know what will happen to me tomorrow.”

Mahmoud Kaabneh fled his home after the attack, and said it’s the fifth time he and his family been displaced by aggressive settlers since their violence against natives skyrocketed in the wake of the Oct 7 Hamas invasion of Israel. 

“Each time we’re attacked, our children and women are beaten, our sheep stolen. Once, they took everything we owned – our homes, belongings – and we were left with nothing but the clothes on our backs.”

Friday’s assault was only the latest time the Arab al-Kaabaneh village was victimized by settlers. In an incident captured on video last September, swaggering stick-wielding settlers attacked the village’s primary school, chasing women and men alike. In an all-too-familiar story line, the IDF arrested the school’s headmaster, who needed hospital treatment. 

Video captured the moment Israeli settlers attacked students and teachers at the Arab al-Kaabneh Primary School in a village northwest of Jericho in the occupied West Bank. pic.twitter.com/Erg5SZSfPD

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) September 16, 2024

Settlers have long used a variety of violent tactics to intimidate non-Jews into fleeing their properties, including:

• Burning the cherished olive trees that are central to Palestinian life, both economically and culturally
• Preventing Palestinians from accessing their agricultural land 
• Vandalizing wells and other equipment
• Stealing livestock and personal possessions
• Bringing their own livestock to graze on Palestinian property
• Arson attacks on homes and vehicles
• Physical assaults

Settlers have recently unveiled a new tactic called “flag-based settlement,” where settlers will plant a flag of the State of Israel near the home of a Palestinian. “If the flag is disturbed or even blown over by the wind, settlers use it as a pretext to attack Palestinians,” reports Middle East Eye. An anti-settlement activist says settlers have also used tractors to smash homes and animal pens.  

In another development amid the sustained wave of settler violence, US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on Saturday visited the town of Taybeh — the last 100% Christian village in the West Bank. The ancient community — said by the Bible to be the place where Jesus went before his passion — has been besieged by violent settler attacks, including multiple arson attacks in recent weeks. In the latest incident, settlers set a fire next to the 1,500-year-old Byzantine church of St. George al Khader, and a cemetery. 

Huckabee condemned the endangerment of the church. “To commit an act of sacrilege by desecrating a place that is supposed to be a place of worship, it is an act of terror, and it is a crime,” he said, adding that his visit was meant to “express solidarity with the people who just want to live their lives in peace, to be able to go to their own land, to be able to go to their place of worship.” 

It was the second time in just a few days that the zealously pro-Israel Huckabee put a spotlight on settler violence. On Tuesday, he condemned the “terrorist” murder of a Florida-born-and-raised American citizen by settlers wielding sticks and clubs. Huckabee has long spoken approvingly of Israel’s occupation and settlement of the West Bank. For example, in one of his many trips to Israel over the years, Huckabee in 2017 said: 

“There is no such thing as a ‘West Bank,’ it’s Judea and Samaria. There’s no such thing as a settlement. They’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There’s no such thing as an occupation.”   

Now that his ambassador post is giving him a front-row seat to the settlement project — which victimizes Muslims, Christians and Americans alike — is there any chance Huckabee will start thinking differently? 

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

All of you Vietnam vets and draft resisters will recognize where this column’s headline is coming from. Oh yes, this ain’t the late 1960s anymore, so it’s time to revamp it – no AI needed – and expand it: from now on, be assured everyone in the wild, wild West will be forced to fight and/or endure three overlapping NATO wars.

War number 1

It’s Europe v. Russia, of course. Not proxy anymore: hot ‘n nasty, direct. Considering the advanced rottenness of the whole Ukrainian front, new fronts are already proliferating: the South Caucasus; clandestine ops in the Baltic Sea; MI6 recruiting frenzy across Central Asia; fresh terrorism ahead in the Black Sea, especially Crimea.

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson succinctly nailed it: we are already on WWIII. Actually we are already deep in the extended preamble to WWIII. Circus Ringmaster in D.C. and the billionaires/donor class behind him are of course clueless. Re-reading Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace – is an absolute must like never before. History does (italics mine) repeat itself. Yet this ain’t 1914 or 1935; now nuclear weapons may come into play.

The Kremlin and Russia’s Security Council are very much aware of the high stakes. In his recent interview to Kommersant, Sergei Shoigu even rolled out some key NATO numbers to stress the threat Russia faces: over 50,000 tanks and armored vehicles; over 7,000 combat aircraft; over 750 warships; 350 military and civilian satellites; an immense offense (italics mine) budget.

Well, what sly Shoigu did not say is that when push comes to shove, it only takes Mr. Khinzal, Mr. Sarmat, Mr. Zircon and Mr. Oreshnik to deliver a few strategic business cards to paralyze the whole NATO machinery in a matter of minutes.

War number 2

It’s the Empire of Chaos v. Iran in West Asia, with Eretz Israel as much as proxy as a lead actor.

The Circus Ringmaster – whose only “strategy” is to concoct shady deals to enrich himself and shysters in his close circle – dreams of an Israeli-centric West Asia, a toxic crossover of the Abraham Accords 2.0 with the IMEC corridor, creating, as Alastair Crooke defined it, “a business-led West Asia, centered on Tel Aviv (with Trump as its de facto ‘President’), and via this business connectivity corridor, be able “to strike further beyond – with the Gulf States penetrating into BRICS’ south Asian heartland to disrupt BRICS connectivity and corridors.”

Using the Arabs against BRICS won’t cut it even with MbZ in the UAE and MbS in Saudi Arabia, who have both realized the business scam will only work if there is real peace in Gaza; some sort of humanitarian solution for the Palestinians; and rebuilding the Gaza strip.

The death cult in Tel Aviv will never allow any of the above: their plan is to kill them all, steall all their land, and eradicate their culture. And as the genocide goes on – totally legitimized by the NATO sphere – the death cult keeps bombing anything in sight, perpetrating the balkanization of Syria, and expanding Eretz Israel.

War number 3

It’s NATO against China. Already decided in the latest summit in The Hague, side by side with the continuing war on Russia.

Yet actually the scam is much bigger: it’s NATO’s war on BRICS.

That was announced, casually, by that unspeakable Dutch mediocrity that makes former slab of Norwegian wood Stoltenberg sound like a quantum physics star. NATO’s Secretary-General Rutti Frutti actually threatened India, China and Brazil directly, and ordered them to “call Putin” to prevent “Daddy” Trump from unleashing his next Tariff Temper Tantrum (TTT).

Beijing is hardly breaking a sweat. China humiliated the Circus Ringmaster by not backing down one inch in their trade/tariff war. Russia humiliated the Circus Ringmaster by not being coerced into a pathetic “ceasefire” – as in allowing NATO to re-arm. Iran humiliated the Circus Ringmaster by not signing an unconditional surrender. The Houthis humiliated the U.S. Navy – now that’s one for the military annals – by forcing the Circus Ringmaster into a ceasefire after $1billion in failed bombing.

Lula in Brazil is about to humiliate the Circus Ringmaster by affirming Brazilian sovereignty in the face of an all-out trade and financial war (Trump even threatened to tax the popular Brazilian digital payment system, PIX). If slapped with 50% tariffs, Lula said Brasilia will slap the Empire of Chaos back under a reciprocity law.

The whole Circus Ringmaster shtick, with each plot twist draped in several layers of hubris and empty bluster, only accelerates the BRICS/Global South high-speed train, now increasingly being shaped as a geoeconomic, geopolitical and geo-strategic alliance of trans-continental proportions, reaffirmed at the Rio summit.

All that led, of course, by what I have been describing as the new Primakov triangle: the new RIC, Russia, Iran and China, complete with their interlocking strategic partnerships. Quite a few top Chinese academics not by accident are also starting to conceptualize the emerging, “post-West” environment with two new “I”s in BRICS: Iran and Indonesia, not India, should be at the heart of BRIICS.

Meanwhile, in Europe, Tricontinental analysis has noted how the – warmongering – German BlackRock chancellor has pledged “€650 billion over the next five years toward military spending in order to reach the [NATO] 5% target by 2035”. That means Berlin being forced to raise “about €144 billion per year”, via, what else, austerity and debt, translated into massive extra taxes on German consumers.

That, in a nutshell, is the “program” for the whole, fragmented, collective West in the near future: austerity for everyone (except the 0.01%); and NATO Wars, not Diamonds, Forever.

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

A Biden administration effort to electrify the U.S. Postal Service has produced just 250 electric mail trucks in over two years—far behind schedule and slammed by Republicans as a multibillion-dollar “boondoggle.”

The nearly $10 billion project aimed to roll out 35,000 battery-powered USPS vehicles by September 2028, with $3 billion funded through President Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), according to the NY Post.

But despite $1.7 billion already spent, only a small portion of the fleet exists, prompting Republicans to push for canceling the remaining $1.3 billion in funding.

“Biden’s multi-billion-dollar EV fleet for the USPS is lost in the mail and more than $1 billion is postmarked to order more,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa).
“I am working to cancel the order and return the money to the sender, the American people.”

Wisconsin-based Oshkosh was awarded $2.6 billion to build the trucks. Yet as of late 2024, just 93 had been delivered—far short of the 3,000 expected. Production has been plagued by engineering issues, including airbag calibration failures and leaks so bad water poured out of the trucks.

“This is the bottom line: We don’t know how to make a damn truck,” one insider told The Washington Post.

The Post wrote late last week that a 2022 attempt by an Oshkosh executive to warn USPS about the problems was blocked by superiors. Former Postmaster General Louis DeJoy reportedly distanced himself from the delays.

“I’m in the parcel delivery business, not the vehicle manufacturing business,” he told colleagues.

By mid-2025, Oshkosh’s factory was producing only one truck per day—far below its projection of 80. The cost per vehicle: $77,692 for 28,195 units. USPS says it has ordered 51,500 Next Generation Delivery Vehicles (NGDVs), including 35,000 battery electric models. To date, just over 250 electric NGDVs have been delivered.

USPS also ordered 9,250 Ford E-Transit EVs, nearly 8,000 of which have arrived.

“Modernization of the Postal Service’s delivery fleet is part of the organization’s $40 billion investment strategy,” a USPS rep said.

The new trucks are meant to replace aging Grumman Long Life Vehicles from 1987, which are noisy, costly, inefficient, and known to catch fire.

Despite Biden’s goal for a fully electric USPS fleet by 2026, the project has stalled. In a February 2025 report, the Government Accountability Office listed USPS as “high risk,” citing its inability to fund its services.

USPS lost $9.5 billion in fiscal year 2024. Former President Donald Trump proposed merging it with the Department of Commerce.

“[USPS has] been just a tremendous loser for this country… We want to have a post office that works well and doesn’t lose massive amounts of money,” he said.

Now, new Postmaster General David Steiner, appointed in July 2025, inherits the troubled program just as USPS approaches its 250th anniversary.

Authored by Arthur Schaper via American Greatness,

Former District Attorney, California Attorney General, US Senator, and Vice President Kamala Harris will make her big announcement this summer. Not about seeking a second, er, third bid for the White House in 2028. It’s all about 2026. Will she or won’t she run for California governor?

California Democratic Party brass are weighing whether to give her another chance. Newsom’s polling keeps going down, while Kamala has seen a bump. Unlike the rest of the country, Californians are willing to work with the woke, broke, or joke of a Democratic Party. Trump Derangement Syndrome also lingers on in the Left Coast, and we won’t know whether Los Angeles (or even San Francisco) has learned their lessons. Voting for Kamala is one way to stick it to Trump and his agenda.

One would think that California is moving in the right direction, though. I have mocked Newsom’s not-so-subtle intentions for president, and even in California, there has been increased movement to the right in terms of common sense on crime. Better people are getting elected locally, but California’s district attorneys, sheriffs, and mayors are non-partisan offices. Statewide constitutional offices, however, still carry the party label, so voters draw partisan conclusions. Californians have not welcomed the Republican brand yet, although there is improvement. For 2026, one poll suggested that 48% of Californians were willing to elect a Republican for governor.

Only 48%, though? It’s a terrible thought to consider, but have Californians not suffered enough? What is the matter with this state? Maryland, Massachusetts, and even Vermont have elected Republican governors in the last ten years. Are they still feeling burned because of Schwarzenegger? He didn’t live up to all the conservative hype, but he did some good.

Maybe voters are still suffering the hangover from Governor Pete Wilson and Prop 187 in 1994, which ruined everything for Republicans. However, President Trump has adopted a Pete Wilson-style stance on stopping illegal immigration, and he is following through on those commitments and getting higher approval ratings. Trump lost California to Harris, but she didn’t crack 60%. Californians are tired of illegal immigration, crime, corruption, $8 a gallon gas, boys in girls’ sports, and the public-school perversion, too.

There is a chance for a Republican to break through.

Will Kamala Harris do the full Richard Nixon? He ran for president in 1960 and lost; then he ran for governor in 1962 and lost again. Harris lost her primary bid in 2020, lost the general election bid in 2024, and will possibly lose in 2026. Republicans have a shot at the Sacramento top spot.

The self-assured gaslighting from Democrats is heartening for our cause. Congressman Ro Khanna (D-East Bay somewhere crazy) suggested that Harris can fix the problems piling up in California.

Sure, Ro.

Harris’ speeches are nothing but a pile-up of platitudes and pablum. She burned through $2 billion of campaign funds, lost all swing states, and even the popular vote (not that it matters, since we are a republic, not a democracy). During the 2024 campaign, I was struck by the number of California Democratic incumbents who were debating their Republican challengers, even in my little assembly district in the South Bay. Adam Schiff debated Steve Garvey for the US Senate, too, though the polling indicated that Schiff was going to shiv the voters with his win in the US Senate. Why did they all debate?

Kamala was dragging down the ticket, based on the Democrats’ own internal 2024 polling. Some reports exposed that she was never ahead of Trump, despite the initial reported polling bump when she bumped Joe Biden off the ballot. Could she strike out again and drag the Democratic ticket across the Golden State? The left-wing Resistance has reared its confused head, and they want to stick it to Trump and the Republicans. However, if Trump’s positive numbers hold and he fulfills key promises on border security, crime, and the economy, the lingering failures of the Biden regime could sting and stink up Kamala’s campaign.

One thing’s for sure: if she jumps in, she all but clears the field on the Democratic side. Harris’s biggest Democratic challenger is former Congresswoman Katie Porter, who has burned bridges with the California Democratic establishment because she challenged Feinstein while she was still alive. Porter has pissed off the progressives as a performative politician rather than a purposeful policymaker since she claimed “rigged elections” against Adam Schiff during the 2024 US Senate primary, echoing the “MAGA talking points” about Election 2020. The intersectionality factors are clearly in Harris’s favor: she’s female, black, Asian-Indian (depending on which cameras are rolling), and has no redeeming leadership qualities whatsoever, i.e., the perfect diversity hire.

Republicans must coalesce around one candidate as well. So far, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco has announced having won two county-wide races, taking a stand on statewide issues, standing up for parental rights, and enacting shall-issue for concealed carry weapons permits in his county. Steve Hilton, a Fox News pundit with broad appeal and media savvy, has also jumped into the race. For Republicans to capitalize on this opportunity, they need to focus on key issues that have propelled recent conservative victories across the state. In 2020, voters rejected efforts to repeal Prop 209, which had ended affirmative action in hiring and college admissions. Voters have rejected school bonds and minimum wage hikes, yet supported a restored crackdown on crime. Republicans should not run from Trump, but they can’t coast on him either. They should tie every negative from the Biden regime to Kamala’s incompetence. Word has it that since some high-up Democrats like Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi loathe the woman, key Democratic Party leaders won’t roll out the red—or rather blue—carpet for her campaign, either. James Carville said it best: “These fundraisers are burnt,” and they won’t want to burn more of their hard-earned campaign cash on crappy Kamala.

All of this can help the GOP retake the California governor’s mansion. But will it be enough?