Back on April 14 when bond yields were soaring in the aftermath of Trump’s liberation day amid speculation that China or Japan were selling some of their US paper to stabilize their currency, a selloff which was compounded by the concurrent unwind of the massive $2 trillion basis trade, Treasury Secretary Steve Bessent appeared on Bloomberg TV to ease fears of a wholesale unwind of the US bond market. In the interview, among other things, Bessent revealed that he has breakfast with Powell every week, and also said that if the Fed does nothing, he might take matters in his own hands, and since the Treasury has a “big toolkit” one of the things it could do is “up the Treasury buybacks” (to prop up Treasuries, in lieu of QE). 

Six weeks later, with the Fed sidelined and unwilling to do anything to ease the plight of US treasuries which continue to trade at dangerous levels – the 30Y is flirting with a 5% level – it appears this is what Bessent has done.

At 2pm on Tuesday afternoon, the Treasury announced the results of its latest Treasury buyback operation (which some had likened to a QE lite because it effectively monetizes Treasuries in the open market, similar to the Fed’s POMO operations, and similar to stock buybacks). While the operation itself was not remarkable – the Treasury had been holding these these more or less weekly since April 2024 – the size of it was: at $10 billion, this was the largest Treasury buyback operation in history.

Here is a snapshot of all historical Treasury buybacks in the past year: the trajectory is clear.

And while the maturity range of the cusips accepted for buyback was of low duration, in the interval between July 15, 2025 and May 31, 2027, we are about to see sizable increases in the total buyback size of longer duration treasuries. 

Sure enough, tomorrow at 2pm, the Treasury will complete a buyback focusing on Treasuries maturing in the 2036-2045 interval, i.e., 10-20 year paper, and the maximum amount to be redeemed will be $2 billion, up 100% from the last such buyback on May 6, when the maximum amount to be redeemed was $1 billion. In fact, the last time there was a treasury buyback anywhere close to today’s amount was in mid/late April when Treasuries were tumbling and when someone had to step in and cushion their fall since Powell was nowhere to be found.

Which begs the question: with the political Federal Reserve – which had no qualms cutting rates two months before the election but refuses to do so now that core PCE has slumped to the lowest level since the covid crash, is Bessent finally stepping in to rein in the Treasury market, and is Yellen’s Activist Treasury Issuance strategy which dominated bond buying for much of 2023-2024, about to be replaced with Bessent’s Activist Treasury Buyback strategy until such time as the Fed finally does something. 

Authored by James Bovard via The Brownstone Institute,

Biden administration policy-makers hated you more than you knew. 

From the start of the Covid pandemic, I warned that the feds were vilifying anyone who failed to kowtow to the latest commands. In October 2023, I wrote: “Federal bureaucrats heaved together a bunch of letters to contrive an ominous new acronym for the latest peril to domestic tranquility. The result: AGAAVE—’anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism’—which looks like a typo for a sugar substitute. The FBI vastly expanded the supposed AGAAVE peril by broadening suspicion from ‘furtherance of ideological agendas’ to ‘furtherance of political and/or social agendas.’ Anyone who has an agenda different from Team Biden’s could be AGAAVE’d for his own good.” 

Vague, catch-all federal definitions became a Pandora’s box that permitted politicians to denigrate vast numbers of Americans as dangerous extremists. The House Weaponization Subcommittee warned in 2023 that “the FBI appears to be complicit in artificially supporting the Administration’s political narrative” that domestic violent extremism is “the ‘greatest threat’ facing the United States.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently declassified a December 13, 2021, report by the National Counterterrorism Center. Gabbard’s version had a more honest title than the original version: “Declassified Biden Administration Documents Labeling COVID Dissenters, Others as ‘Domestic Violent Extremists.”

What did it take for Biden’s Brain Trust to covertly condemn people? Simply warning that “COVID-19 vaccines are unsafe, especially for children, are part of a government or global conspiracy to deprive individuals of their civil liberties and livelihoods, or are designed to start a new social or political order.” After government lockdowns had destroyed millions of jobs, only the paranoid would fear the government would ever violate their liberties or subvert their livelihoods. No wonder that a top federal official told Newsweek in 2022: “We’ve become too prone to labeling anything we don’t like as extremism, and then any extremist as a terrorist.”

Biden policy-makers pretended that the surge in criticism of Covid policies was proof of the psychopathology of the president’s opponents. But in September 2021, Biden dictated that 100 million Americans working for private companies must get the Covid vaccine. The official counterterrorism report stated that it anticipated that “the threat will continue at least into the winter, as many of the new COVID-19 mandates in the U.S…are implemented, including US workplace vaccination policies that carry disciplinary or termination penalties.” The Supreme Court struck down most of that vaccine mandate as illegal in January 2022, but not before it had profoundly disrupted legions of lives and businesses, as well as American health care. 

The official report warned that “anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists…characterize COVID-19 vaccination and mask mandates as evidence of government overreach.” Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito characterized the Covid dictates as “previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty.” But that wasn’t “overreach” – it was simply public service. 

Criticisms of Covid policies were turbocharged by the failure of the Covid vaccines. In early 2022, the effectiveness of the Covid booster shot had fallen to 31% – too low to have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Though most American adults had gotten Covid vaccines, there were more than a million new Covid cases a day in January 2022. Most Covid fatalities were occurring among the fully vaxxed. Studies showed that people who received multiple boosters were actually more likely to be hit by Covid infections.

So obviously, the Biden administration had no choice but to demonize any and all Covid critics. A confidential 2022 Department of Homeland Security report detailed pending crackdowns on “inaccurate” information on “the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines,” among other targets. A few months earlier, Jen Easterly, the chief of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, declared: “We live in a world where people talk about alternative facts, post-truth, which I think is really, really dangerous if people get to pick their own facts.” Plenty of Biden administration officials considered it “really dangerous” to permit people to assert that Covid vaccines were failing. 

The National Counterterrorism Center report noted: “The availability of a vaccine for all school-age children might spur conspiracy theories and perceptions that schools will vaccinate children against parents’ will.” In the same way that some states and many school systems have sought to enable children to change their gender without their parents’ knowledge or consent? The report also warned that “new COVID-19 mitigation measures – particularly mandates or endorsements of vaccines for children – will probably spur plotting against the government.”

The FDA knew that Covid vaccines sharply increased the risk of myocarditis – an inflamed heart – in young males but the Biden White House browbeat the agency into fully approving the Covid vaccine anyhow. New York Governor Kathy Hochul sought unsuccessfully to mandate vaccines for all schoolkids in the Empire State even though her State Department of Health reported in May 2022 that the Pfizer vaccine was only 12% effective for children during the Omicron surge. The Biden administration included Covid vaccines in the semi-mandatory regimen for young children despite the vaccine’s failure and perils. 

Portraying doubts on Covid policy as a warning sign of domestic violent extremism unleashed the FBI to target anybody who howled against mandatory injections or the near-total destruction of their freedom of movement. 

That report is also a reminder that “extremism” has always been a flag of political convenience. In Washington, anyone who doesn’t worship government is considered an extremist. How far did officialdom go in smearing the American people? 

In September 2022, President Biden made history with the first prime-time presidential speech with a backdrop inspired by the movie V for Vendetta and Nazi filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. Biden raved that his opponents were practically assassins waiting to finish off American democracy. A few hours before Biden’s speech, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre asserted, “When you are not with where the majority of Americans are, then, you know, that is extreme. That is an extreme way of thinking.” This is a definition of extremism that could put the federal crosshairs on practically anyone who visits this website.

Actually, the feds used definitions of extremism that extended far beyond Covid controversies and undermined the First Amendment. Biden’s FBI targeted conservative Catholics who preferred to hear the Latin-language version of the mass, claiming they were potentially violent extremists. An FBI analysis portrayed rosaries as extremist symbols. The Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) stretched its “suspicious behavior” definition, warning banks to track “‘extremism’ indicators that include…the purchase of books (including religious texts),” according to a House Judiciary Committee report. Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) complained that the federal government “urged large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression.”

That December 13, 2021, National Counterterrorism Center report may be only the tip of the iceberg of federal mischief. We may soon learn of more direct federal machinations to vilify, undercut, or silence Covid critics.

Biden-era crackdowns and the newly declassified report should spur Americans to ask: What if the government is the most dangerous extremist of them all?

An earlier version of this post was published at The Libertarian Institute

Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,

• Saudi Arabia’s past oil price wars in 2014–2016 and 2020 backfired, as U.S. shale producers became leaner and more efficient.

• Riyadh drained hundreds of billions in reserves and faced rising fiscal deficits without achieving its goal of crippling U.S. shale.

• The low breakeven cost resilience of the U.S. shale sector is not quite the same as it was before.

It is highly unlikely that anyone with even a modicum of intelligence has lost money in the past ten years or so by trading against the predictable thinking of those in charge of Saudi Arabia’s oil policy. Quite the reverse, in fact, with enormous profits available from the failures of the enormously well-flagged and exceptionally predictable strategy of the 2014-2016 and 2020 Oil Price Wars — launched by the Kingdom with the intention of destroying or disabling the U.S. shale oil sector, as analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order. As OPEC members and their toxic companion in the OPEC+ formation, Russia, mull keeping oil production on the high side of recent historical averages, the key question for the oil markets is — surely they are not going to launch another oil price war using the same strategy as failed twice before?

It is apposite here to recall the reasons for the failure of the two previous oil price wars since 2014. The first (2014-2016) was based on Saudi Arabia’s belief – shared by many in the oil market at the time, it must be said — that U.S. shale oil producers had a breakeven price point of US$70 per barrel (pb) of for the West Texas Intermediate benchmark. Therefore, the Saudis reasoned, if the price of oil was pushed below that level for long enough — by it and its fellow OPEC members dramatically increasing production while demand in the global market was predicted to remain around the same level for some time — then many of the new U.S. shale oil producers would go bankrupt. Any others would have to cease production at such uneconomic price levels and shelve future investment plans aimed at boosting their production even more. So confident was Saudi Arabia of the success of its strategy that shortly after the onset of the 2014-2016 Oil Price War, senior figures in its government and oil ministry it held a series of private meetings in New York to tell them in detail about the strategy it was to use and how well it would go, as also detailed in full in my latest book. At these meetings, the Saudis revealed that, far from looking to keep prices high – as had also been the usual inclination of OPEC for many years to boost the prosperity of member states – it was willing to tolerate “much lower” Brent prices “of between USD80-90 pb for a period of one to two years or even lower prices if necessary”. According to several sources at the New York meeting exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com at the time, the Saudis made it clear that it aside from destroying the then-nascent U.S. shale sector, the Oil Price War also aimed to re-impose a degree of supply discipline on other OPEC members.

In terms of the first objective, the initial signs augured well for a Saudi victory. The U.S. oil rig count in January/February 2015 saw its biggest period-on-period fall since 1991, and the gas rig count fell substantially at that time as well. According to industry figures as at the end of the first quarter of 2015, around one third of the 800 oil and gas projects (worth US$500 billion and totalling nearly 60 billion barrels of oil equivalent) scheduled for final investment decisions in that year were unconventional and were subject to possible postponement or cancellation. Over the year as a whole, output from the U.S. shale producers typically fell by by around 50%, forcing them to cut investment to approximately US$60 billion over the year, compared to the US$100 billion or so spent in 2014. Crucially, though, from around that point the U.S. shale sector reorganised into a meaner, leaner, lower-cost production machine that could – at that time – broadly survive and profit at WTI prices above around US$35 pb from above US$70 pb previously. They managed to achieve this mainly through the advancement of technology that enabled them to drill longer laterals, manage the fracking stages closer and maintain the fracks with higher, finer sand to allow for increased recovery for the wells drilled, in conjunction with faster drill times, as industry experts old OilPrice.com back then. These operations gained further cost benefits from multi-pad drilling and well spacing theory and practice. During this period, Saudi Arabia had moved from a budget surplus to a then-record high deficit in 2015 of US$98 billion and it had spent at least US$250 billion of its precious foreign exchange reserves over that period that even senior Saudis said was lost forever. Moreover, according to International Energy Agency estimates, OPEC member states collectively at least US$450 billion in revenues during the 2014-2016 Oil Price War.

The 2020 Oil Price War – using exactly the same overproduction strategy as before — failed less through the long-term effects of misjudging the effectiveness of the U.S. shale producers and more through the direct political intervention of its then first-term President Domald Trump. Given the potentially disastrous economic and political consequences for the U.S. and its sitting president of sharp and sustained rises in oil – and crucially, gasoline – prices, as also analysed in full in my latest book, Trump began by warning Saudi Arabia repeatedly that the U.S. would not tolerate any sustained threat to its shale oil sector (and, by extension, to its economy and its domestic political landscape) – in speeches and tweets and in the increasingly close-run legislative passage of the ‘NOPEC Bill’. He also directly warned Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud that the U.S. might withdraw U.S. military support for the Al Sauds, and by extension to Saudi Arabia, with the additional observation that: “He [King Salman] would not last in power for two weeks without the backing of the U.S. military.” With no sign by the end of March 2020 that the Saudis were going to cease the war, Trump clearly and specifically told de facto Saudi ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman over the telephone on 2 April that unless OPEC started cutting oil production – so allowing oil prices to rise above the danger zone for U.S. shale oil producers – that he would be powerless to stop lawmakers from passing legislation to withdraw U.S. troops from the Kingdom, according to a very senior source in the White House exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com a the time. Oil production consequently came back down again, and the 2020 war had ended.

As of now, the low breakeven cost resilience of the U.S. shale sector is not quite the same as it was before. The recent Dallas Fed Energy Survey suggests that it is around US$65 pb for new wells drilled, although for existing wells it is significantly lower. It is also true that the lifting cost of oil in Saudi Arabia has also risen since 2014 from around US$1-2 pb, but it is still only about US$3-5 pb now. However, the Kingdom’s 2025 fiscal breakeven price per barrel of the Brent crude benchmark is a minimum of US$90.9, according to IMF figures. Consequently, it can no better afford a major, sustained fall in oil prices now than it could in either 2014-2016 or in 2020. With Trump back in the White House, it is also no better off politically either. Indeed, with Republicans majorities in both houses, it is worse positioned to deal with the likely threats and actions that Trump would use against it if it went head-to-head with the U.S. again. Instead, according to a senior energy source who works closely with the U.S. Presidential Administration, Washington believes the Saudis will take a modulated approach to further oil production increases, in tandem with the U.S. “Oil prices at the lower end of recent historical averages suit the U.S. from an inflationary perspective, as long as they don’t go too low, and Washington has made this clear to the Saudis,” he said. In fact, these conversations were part of the dialogue that U.S. officials had with their Saudi counterparts during Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia on 13 May to sign a broad-based economic agreement between the two countries. “There are longer-term financial and security benefits for the Saudis in taking this softer approach, even if oil is below the number they want for their budget in the shorter-term, and to bridge the gap they will have no problem in borrowing more in the capital markets,” he concluded.

Authored by Arjun Singh via The Epoch Times,

A man from Romania has pleaded guilty to felonies after he made false reports to elicit tactical police responses—known as “swatting”—against a former U.S. president, several members of Congress, federal judges, and state officials.

“Swatting” derives its name from “Special Weapons and Tactics” (SWAT) teams that are organized by police departments across the world, who respond to particularly dangerous emergencies, such as terrorist attacks, mass shootings, and other weapons of mass destruction.

The phenomenon of “swatting”—i.e., falsely reporting such an emergency to elicit a SWAT response—has emerged in recent years as a means of intimidation or to drain national resources.

Several high-profile individuals have been the victims of such “swatting” in recent years, many of them due to Thomas Szabo, a 26-year-old resident of Romania and citizen of that country, who filed many such reports against senior U.S. government officials while outside the United States, which led to an internet group encouraging others to do so.

Szabo was extradited to the United States in 2024 and, on June 2 of this year, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that he had pleaded guilty to two felony charges for the acts.

“Beginning on Dec. 24, 2023, and continuing through early January 2024, subordinate members of Szabo’s group perpetrated a spree of swatting and bomb threats that included, as its victims, at least 25 Members of Congress or family members of Members of Congress; at least six then-current or former senior U.S. Executive Branch officials, including multiple cabinet-level officials … multiple members of the federal judiciary; [and] at least 27 then-current or former state government officials,” read a DOJ press release announcing the guilty plea.

The release also noted that Szabo threatened, in January of 2021, to detonate explosives at the U.S. Capitol and kill President-elect Joe Biden. The “former U.S. President” threatened by Szabo was not named in the release, though the phrase likely referred to Biden.

Szabo’s leadership of the unnamed group allegedly led to many subsequent incidents. The press release quotes a message to Szabo from one of his followers: “I did 25+ swattings today … creating massive havoc in [A]merica. $500,000+ in taxpayers [money] wasted in just two days.”

Szabo pleaded guilty to two felony charges: criminal conspiracy and the issuance of threats involving explosives. Both charges carry prison sentences of five and ten years, respectively.

“This defendant’s targeted and ruthless behavior put countless people in danger, including law enforcement, public officials, and ordinary citizens,” U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said.

“Swatting attacks, that is, falsely reporting an ongoing threat of violence at a victims’ home address for the purpose of provoking a police response there, drain precious resources and can result in major injury or even death. Anyone who hijacks police resources for senseless crimes like these will have to answer for their actions.”

The rise in “swatting” has occurred alongside the prominent depiction of such SWAT teams in film and television. A television series named “S.W.A.T.” ran for eight seasons from 2017 to 2025 and was influenced by the popular 2003 film, starring Colin Firth and Samuel L. Jackson, of the same name.

Liberal opposition leader Lee Jae-myung is projected to win South Korea’s presidential election, according to projections by broadcasters in the country on Tuesday. 

In a joint exit poll by KBS, MBC and SBS, Lee is at 51% of the vote, while his conservative rival Kim Moon-soo has just 39.3%. Another broadcaster, JTBC, puts Lee at 50.6%, while Channel A has him winning as well by a similar margin. 

Approximately 78% of South Korean voters participated in the snap ballot, which was called following the outster of former president Yoon Suk Yeol – who attempted to institute martial law on Dec. 3, 2024, only to back down six hours later amid parliamentary opposition and public protests. He is now on trial for insurrection. 

As the Epoch Times notes further, Yoon’s attempted martial law plunged Asia’s fourth-largest economy into months of political turmoil and led to the Constitutional Court eventually relieving him of the presidency in April.

Yoon denies the charges.

The chairman of Lee’s Democratic Party, Park Chan-dae, told broadcaster KBS the people had “passed a judgment like a scolding on the civil war regime,” after the exit polls were revealed.

During his campaign, Lee said he would amend the constitution to make it harder for future presidents to impose martial law, as well as vowing to take steps to tackle the country’s economic issues.

He also called for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate the Dec. 3, 2024, martial law incident to bring those responsible to justice; however, he said military officials who were reluctant to follow orders should be granted leniency.

Some 44.3 million South Koreans are eligible to vote in the election.

The election is run on a single-round, first-past-the-post system, with the winner simply being the candidate who gains the most votes.

Whoever is successful can hold the post for a five-year term and is not permitted to stand for reelection.

In South Korea, the president is head of state, head of government, and commander in chief of the nation’s armed forces.

Due to the removal of Yoon, the victor will be immediately sworn in on Wednesday, rather than going through the typical two-month transition period.

Update(1208ET): More details have emerged of what marks the third major Ukrainian sabotage bombing of the key bridge linking the Russian mainland to the Crimean peninsula, as the pace of the war heats up:

Ukraine said it attacked the Crimean Bridge with explosives as Russia closed traffic on the route linking the annexed Black Sea peninsula with the Russian mainland.

Agents planted mines on underwater supports and detonated them on Tuesday, the Ukrainian Security Service, known as the SBU, said in a statement on Telegram. The SBU said the operation took place over several months and left the bridge in an emergency condition, which couldn’t be independently verified.

Ukrainian intelligence over the weekend was busy blowing up other civilian bridges inside Russia as well, resulting in the deaths of seven people, and scores more casualties, as we detailed.

“The bridge was originally shut for more than three hours starting in the morning local time, and then again for almost two-and-a-half hours, the news agency said,” according to Bloomberg. “Maritime passenger transportation was suspended in Sevastopol, the city’s road and transport infrastructure authority said, also without explaining what prompted the interruption, according to Interfax.”

There are emerging reports that unmanned maritime vehicles may have been involved:

Ukrainian USV hit by Russian Lancet during today’s attempted breach near the Crimean Bridge.

The USV lost propulsion after the strike. pic.twitter.com/KBXGIEsdIm

— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 3, 2025

Meanwhile, the million dollar question remains: was all of this sanctioned behind the scenes by the Trump administration, or are we really to believe Washington was kept out of the loop on all this latest escalation which could put the US/NATO on the path to nuclear-armed confrontation with Russia?

Steve Bannon and many others have some questions of the US administration…

It started with a warning.

Ukraine wiped out 40% of Russia’s bombers in a surprise strike—and Steve Bannon says the U.S. is now on the brink of getting dragged into World War III.

But the media shrugs. The public sleeps.

Then Bannon went nuclear—calling for two brutal… pic.twitter.com/xsiW5KjQPx

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 3, 2025

* * * 

For the third time since the Russia-Ukraine war started, a large explosion has damaged the bridge connecting Russia’s mainland to Crimea. 

Ukraine’s security service (SBU) has quickly claimed responsibility, describing that this time it was an underwater explosive attack, possibly facilitated with an unmanned submarine, which left the structure which goes from the Russian city of Krasnodar in the east to Kerch in Crimea “in disrepair”.

Video was soon after published of the explosion of what the SBU called the “badly damaged” bridge after support columns were blown up.

“The Security Service of Ukraine carried out a new unique special operation and struck the Crimean Bridge for the third time – this time underwater!” the SBU declared on Telegram.

“Today, at 4:44 a.m., without any civilian casualties, the first explosive device was detonated,” the statement said. “The underwater support pillars were severely damaged at the seabed level — aided by the equivalent of 1,100 kg of TNT. As a result, the bridge is effectively in an emergency condition.”

BREAKING: Kerch bridge pic.twitter.com/7unanrrzQU

— Pekka Kallioniemi (@P_Kallioniemi) June 3, 2025

Russia since confirmed that traffic on (alternatively called) Crimea Bridge was temporarily suspended as a result of the damage and emergency situation. But the 12-mile bridge, Europe’s longest, was reportedly quickly reopened after hours.

“RIA Novosti, a Russian state news agency, reported that the bridge was briefly closed for several hours on Tuesday,” the NY Times writes. “An app that is widely used in Russia to track traffic on the bridge showed that it was open again as of midafternoon.”

🚨 Russian Lancet drone takes out one of the Ukrainian sea drones near Crimea — per Russian war reporters

Video captures the moment of destruction pic.twitter.com/IRykNjNCc5

— RT (@RT_com) June 3, 2025

Several attacks on the $3.7 billion, iconic bridge have occurred throughout the war, including an October 2022 truck bombing on the bridge, which killed and wounded civilians.

That attack took at least ten months to repair, but there was another attack nearly a year after the first one, which utilized maritime drones hitting support pillars.

This comes two days after Ukraine’s ‘Operation Spider’s Web’ which reportedly took out some forty Russian combat aircraft, among them strategic bombers, in Kiev’s most ambitious and provocative operation to date.

Ukrainian intelligence is really on a roll, but the world awaits a likely devastating ‘shock and awe’ style attack by Moscow, which is apparently exercising patience as it readies the inevitable retaliation. Likely, ‘command HQ’ centers are going to be targeted in the coming days.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump vowed to place “large-scale fines” on California after a transgender athlete competed in a girls’ high school track and field event and won gold.

“A Biological Male competed in California Girls State Finals, WINNING BIG, despite the fact that they were warned by me not to do so,” Trump wrote on the social media platform Truth Social on Tuesday, telling Gov. Gavin Newsom that “large scale fines will be imposed.”

The president did not provide more details about the fine.

The president’s comment was made days after he wrote that he may withhold federal funding if California doesn’t comply with an executive order he signed months ago, which bans transgender athletes from competing in women’s and girls’ sports. The order specifically directs federal agencies to cut off funding to states that refuse to enforce the ban, although some states have yet to comply.

“THIS IS NOT FAIR, AND TOTALLY DEMEANING TO WOMEN AND GIRLS. Please be hereby advised that large scale Federal Funding will be held back, maybe permanently, if the Executive Order on this subject matter is not totally adhered to,” Trump told Newsom and California officials on May 27.

On Feb. 5, Trump signed the Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports executive order which bars educational institutions that receive federal funding from allowing transgender athletes to compete in women’s and girls’ sports.

“It is the policy of the United States to rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy,” the order states.

While Trump’s post on Truth Social did not name anyone in particular, a transgender athlete, AB Hernandez, won gold in the girls’ triple jump and high jump at the California state championships over the past weekend. The California Interscholastic Federation had said that it would allow one extra competitor in three events featuring Hernandez.

Some people in the crowd of the competition wore pink bracelets and held signs that stated, “Save Girls’ Sports” to protest against Hernandez’s participation, according to photos from the event.

Earlier this week, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, said in a letter posted online that public school districts in California must tell the agency they won’t adhere to the California Interscholastic Federation’s rules on “gender identity participation.”

“Knowingly depriving female students of athletic opportunities and benefits on the basis of their sex would constitute unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause,” Dhillon said in the letter.

“Scientific evidence shows that upsetting the historical status quo and forcing girls to compete against males would deprive them of athletic opportunities and benefits because of their sex.”

A recent AP-NORC poll found that about seven in 10 U.S. adults think transgender athletes should not be allowed to participate in girls’ and women’s sports at high school, college, or professional levels. That view was shared by about 9 in 10 Republicans and roughly half of Democrats.

The Epoch Times contacted Newsom’s office for comment Tuesday.

Newsom earlier this year told conservative host Charlie Kirk that allowing transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports is “deeply unfair,” breaking with much of the Democratic Party.

“I think it’s an issue of fairness. I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness. It’s deeply unfair,” he said in March. “I’m not wrestling with the fairness issue. I totally agree with you.”

It seems Dmitry Medvedev has once again said the quiet part out loud. The deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council and former president has said Tuesday that Moscow is engaged in peace talks with Ukraine in order ultimately to ensure a swift and complete Russian victory.

“The Istanbul talks are not for striking a compromise peace on someone else’s delusional terms but for ensuring our swift victory and the complete destruction of the neo-Nazi regime,” the Russian official, who has long been known for his hawkish outspokenness, stated.

“That’s what the Russian Memorandum published yesterday is about” – in reference to the set of demands presented. The Monday Istanbul talks lasted a mere hour, but resulted in agreement for another swap of 1,000 POWs, and the return of some 6,000 deceased bodies recovered from the battlefield.

One key thing that Medvedev also addressed is the coming reprisal for Sunday’s ‘Operation Spider’s Web’ which saw Ukraine penetrate deep inside Russia with drone strikes on five Russian airbases:

Medvedev added, in an apparent response to Ukraine’s weekend strikes on Russian strategic bomber bases, that Moscow would take revenge. “Retribution is inevitable,” he said.

“Our Army is pushing forward and will continue to advance. Everything that needs to be blown up will be blown up, and those who must be eliminated will be.”

In Istanbul, the Russian delegation had handed over a long awaited ceasefire proposal, which contains a full outline for permanent settlement. We earlier featured the following Moscow demands from the document as follows:

• Crimea, Donbass, Kherson, Zaporozhye internationally recognized as Russian 
• Ukraine doesn’t join NATO or any military bloc 
• Ukraine holds elections
• Withdraws troops from new Russian regions 
• BANS Nazi propaganda

Without doubt, the Zelensky government is going to reject these conditions, particularly the sticking point about territorial concessions. Kiev has already rejected the offer of a two or three day short ceasefire.

Sunday’s massive drone attack, which destroyed many advanced, expensive aircraft such as long-range strategic bombers – some parked at airbases very far away from the Ukraine border – was meant to given Zelensky leverage in further negotiations.

President Zelensky’s reaction to the Russian delegation’s stance after Monday’s talks:

“Arrogant people”: Zelensky on the behavior of the Russians during today’s negotiations. pic.twitter.com/TNfeRYJXIJ

— WarTranslated (@wartranslated) June 2, 2025

As geopolitical blog Moon of Alabama lays out, the brazen operation was by design meant to influence talks at a moment Ukrainian losses kept mounting fast:

Days before negotiations towards an and of the conflict the operational tempo of the war in Ukraine has increased.

During the last week of May the Russian forces took 18 settlements and over 200 square kilometer. During the last 24 hours at least another 3 settlements have changed hands. The Ukrainian army is no longer capable to hold its defense lines. Its situation is deteriorating day by day.

On Saturday a Russian missile attack hit a Ukrainian military training camp. It killed or wounded about 100 soldiers. It was the second time the camp had been hit.

Certainly, Ukraine has at least shifted the global conversation in the sense that Europe is again rallying behind Kiev, and now there’s strong pressure on the White House to ‘just go with it’ and allow the Ukrainians to keep up the escalation game on Russia.

‘An epic failure’: Russia reels from surprise Ukrainian attack on bomber fleet

While the effect on Russia’s nuclear capacity is likely to be limited, the attack could affect day-to-day operations in Ukraine, say analysts.
w/ @NastyaStognei @fabrice_deprez
Graphics: @BobHaslett pic.twitter.com/q4pfSRaJ8L

— Christopher Miller (@ChristopherJM) June 3, 2025

Of course, this is highly dangerous, and Putin has never been one to blink first – but is likely to unleash painful retaliation on Ukraine, including the likelihood of bombs away on the capital.

Meanwhile, there’s been uncharacteristic silence out of the White House. Trump has indicated that he’s still open to the possibility of an in-person meeting involving both Zelensky and Putin at the same table, but this scenario is slipping away by the day, as the war tempo picks up pace.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

TACO Tuesday(?)

As always at turning points – more so with under-funded and/or politicized stats services – data show a Mexican stand-off or are a salsa confusion. There was a huge reduction in the US trade deficit for April from $162.3bn to $87.6bn; monthly personal income gains in 2025 so far of 0.5%, 0.8%, 0.7%, and 0.8% vs. 0.4% average in 2024 (0.3% excluding a bumper 1.3% in January that year); the Q2 Atlanta Fed GDPNow forecast is up to 4.6% q-o-q annualised, reversing the Q1 dip…

… yet the US ISM survey saw a weaker 48.5 headline and the import sub-index at 39.9, the lowest since 2009, with export orders 40.1, a five-year low. On the other hand, China’s Caixin manufacturing PMI this morning was 48.3 vs. 50.7 expected. So, who’s el pollo loco?

The latest market acronymic giggle is Trump Always Chickens Out (TACO) on trade wars: so, lay back, enchilada out, and wait for the return of neoliberal business as usual. But don’t burrito your head in the sand like a guacamole – that isn’t going to happen. Neomercantilism is here to stay.

The ‘We ♥ Free Trade’ EU just used its International Procurement Instrument for the first time to freeze Chinese medical devices out of its public procurement markets for five years unless China opens its market to EU equivalents. That’s economic statecraft with muscle, underlining that there are lots of tools in the mercantilist toolkit besides tariffs.

While the US extended its tariff pause on some Chinese goods to August 31 –more restocking is needed– and Trump and Xi will “likely” speak this week, says the White House, China has the US over a barrel on rare earths… for now. Yet that won’t be the case forever because rare earths aren’t rare, and no major economy will stay reliant on a rival: supply chains *will* shift locally or geopolitically. Moreover, Trump posted if the courts rule against his IEEPA tariffs it would threaten US “economic survival.” That puts the “International” and “Economic” and “Emergency Powers” into the IEEP Act which Congress passed to let presidents decide on such matters.

Friday saw under-reported tensions between two Chinese automakers as a BYD executive slammed as “alarmist” comments by the Great Wall Motor chief that the industry was “unhealthy” and drawing a parallel to failed property developer Evergrande without naming names (or talking about 35% price cuts). If you want to shout, “Because markets!” perhaps look in that direction? But, of course, geopolitics will get in the way: Chinese EVs are clearly winning market share globally even if individual companies may not be thriving – so, green light go. 

More broadly on geopolitics and trade, last year’s Israeli pager and walkie-talkie attacks on Hezbollah showed finished goods could be weaponized. Ukraine’s ‘Pearl Harbour’ Operation Spiderweb now shows false cargo containers holding cheap drones can destroy a staggering amount of assets and there’s nothing to prevent it in the current global trading system. 

Are we going to screen every container and every truck? Too slow and expensive. Will we screen those from some countries? That’s still slow and expensive and says geopolitical bifurcation – and note who makes all the containers. Are we going to reinforce critical infrastructure and military assets? With what money? Or are we just going to pivot back to “When rate cuts/When no tariffs?”

Meanwhile the latest Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Turkey lasted an hour and saw an agreed prisoner exchange but no ceasefire or likelihood of peace. 

At the same time, the EU’s Von der Leyen and US Senator Graham discussed an 18th package of sanctions targeting Russia’s energy revenues, banks, and lowering the crude oil price cap – Graham is pushing even more aggressive US sanctions legislation. The tail risks to markets should be clear there as the EU continues to escalate vs Russia on many fronts; though that’s also as Poland’s PM Tusk will call a confidence vote to reassert his authority after an opposition presidential election victory – which won’t stop gridlock ahead; and a German court overruled Chancellor Merz’s recent closure of the border to new asylum seekers, which could see the far right AfD move even higher in the opinion polls.

The UK’s Strategic Defence Review, which PM Starmer claims will bring the country to “war-fighting readiness”, proposes a Kids Army —”closer engagement with school leavers to help retention crisis” as the Telegraph puts it— and is seen full of aspirations not deliverables; as politicians make a last-ditch attempt to block the treaty handing the British Chagos Islands housing the Diego Garcia airbase to Mauritius via first time use of constitutional legislation.

Australia’s former chief of army General Leahy said it must take urgent action vs. global risks being exacerbated by the US-China trade war and called for significantly more funding for defence now and well into the future, adding, “The almost total lack of consideration of defence matters during the recent election campaign and the current focus on a far-off distant, enormously-expensive force demonstrates how willing our politicians are prepared to tolerate risk. This is an abrogation of the primary responsibility of our elected representatives to provide for the defence and security of the nation and the safety of our servicemen and women. Those who wear Australia’s uniform place great trust in those who task and equip them. This trust is not being honoured.” Putting up minimum wages by 3.5%, as the government just announced, and bringing in a 15% tax on unrealised capital gains for superannuation over $3m from July, encouraging people to buy houses to save instead, may not be the ‘what GDP is for’ ticket the General is thinking of. 

Then again, neither are rate cuts that don’t help channel liquidity into the armed forces, but again traditionally flow to already vastly expensive housing. There, the RBA minutes today showed the Bank could have gone 50bps at its last meeting to help protect the economy from tariff fall out –like a rising A$ vs. the US$ and higher inflation?– but instead opted to cut 25bps, against a backdrop of low unemployment, above-target inflation, and a sea of already asset-rich housing speculators waiting at the starting line like sprinters, in order to remain “predictable” to markets in times of rising uncertainty. Let’s just say that there was never any uncertainty that the RBA would be anything other than predictable in that predilection.  

Less predictable, President Trump denied an Axios report to post that he would never allow Iran the ability to enrich uranium, while Iran told the US it will continue talking but won’t stop enriching (to near weapons grade, according to the IAEA). What Israel will do remains unclear. The fat tail risk isn’t.

The FT’s Gideon Rachman op-eds that Trump always chickens out on foreign policy too, listing all the wars he didn’t start despite bellicose rhetoric, before then concluding “it’s rarely a good idea to mock a bully,” and that countries who think the US won’t ultimately act should keep quiet. In which case, shouldn’t some op-ed writers too?

Nuclear stocks moved higher in premarket trading after Meta Platforms signed a power contract with Constellation Energy for emissions-free nuclear energy from the Clinton Clean Energy Center in Clinton, Illinois. 

The parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp announced that it has entered into a 20-year power purchase agreement (PPA) with Constellation Energy for 1,121 MW of emissions-free nuclear energy from the Clinton plant, which is expected to begin in 2027 and support its operations in the region. 

“Our data centers enable these innovations, housing the infrastructure that brings these technologies to life – and we prioritize operating our data centers efficiently, matching our electricity with 100% clean and renewable energy and exploring emergent energy technologies,” Meta wrote in a press release.

Here’s a summary of the PPA:

Meta’s 20-year agreement with Constellation, starting in 2027, secures the continued operation of the Clinton Clean Energy Center, delivering 1,121 MW of emissions-free nuclear power. The deal adds 30 MW of new capacity, enables exploration of further nuclear development, preserves 1,100+ jobs, and generates $13.5 million annually in tax revenue—all without state subsidies or additional ratepayer support.

The Clinton plant was slated for closure in 2017 after years of financial losses, despite being one of the best-performing nuclear plants in Illinois. Clinton’s retirement was prevented by the Future Energy Jobs Act, which established a Zero Emission Credit program that provides financial support to the plant through mid-2027. Constellation’s agreement with Meta will help revive the power plant with a market-based solution that replaces the ZEC program. The PPA will also enable Clinton to deliver power to the local grid, providing grid reliability and low-cost power to the region through the 2030s, while fulfilling the contract with Meta.

In markets, uranium stocks are moving higher. Constellation shares are up as much as 13%, nearing record highs. 

Likewise, Microsoft recently secured a PPA with Constellation that allows for the restart of Three Mile Island Unit 1. The PPA is based on a 20-year contract that will fuel Microsoft’s data centers in the region. 

The broader theme is twofold: the AI data center boom and ‘powering up America’ through the revival and expansion of the nation’s nuclear power capacity. 

The White House wants to deploy 300 GW of net new nuclear capacity by 2050 and have 10 large reactors under construction in the U.S. by 2030. 

We’ve been covering the “nuclear ESG theme” since December 2020—well ahead of the curve—and continue to provide readers with the latest developments in this investing trend that major banks are now rushing to embrace:

• Goldman Names “Top Tactical Play” In Nuclear Theme Ahead Of Uranium Structural Deficit Explosion

• Trump’s “Nuclear” Order And How To Profit: All You Need To Know About The Coming Nuclear Energy Transition

Recently speaking to industry insiders—particularly those on the financing side of AI data centers—describe to Zero Hedge the current buildout as a “sprint” expected to continue through President Trump’s second term.

While not a direct play, there is a critical indirect angle tied to defending data centers and nuclear plants on U.S. soil—as the world fractures into a dangerous bipolar state, a trend set to accelerate through the 2030s. This is why we launched our “Hemispheric Defense” theme—where Goldman has identified one standout firm leading the charge.

Recall what former Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently warned about: the AI race could escalate to include sabotage or even attacks on data centers in the event of a conflict.