Authored by Rachel Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Former U.S. President Barack Obama said in a Feb. 14 podcast interview that aliens are real but that none are kept at the secretive Area 51 military base in the Nevada desert, later adding that he didn’t see any evidence indicating that extraterrestrials have contacted Earth during his presidency.

In the interview, when asked, “Are aliens real?” Obama replied, “They’re real, but I haven’t seen them—and they’re not being kept in [Area 51]. There’s no underground facility, unless there’s this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States.”

Obama became the first leader of the United States to affirm the existence of extraterrestrial life when questioned by progressive podcaster Brian Tyler Cohen in a video posted on YouTube.

After the interview went viral, Obama said on Instagram that he wanted to “clarify” his comments to Cohen, writing that he was “trying to stick with the spirit of the speed round” while speaking on the podcast.

“Statistically, the universe is so vast that the odds are good there’s life out there,” he wrote. “But the distances between solar systems are so great that the chances we’ve been visited by aliens is low, and I saw no evidence during my presidency that extraterrestrials have made contact with us. Really!”

In 2013, Obama was possibly the first U.S. leader to acknowledge the existence of Area 51, an Air Force base built during the Cold War, which has long been rumored to house extraterrestrials and unidentified flying objects (UFOs).

Cohen did not ask Obama a follow-up question on the issue. Instead, he asked the former president what his first question had been upon entering the White House. “Where are the aliens?” Obama joked in response.

Some critics, including British political commentator Calvin Robinson, said Cohen should have asked Obama for more information about aliens.

“When a former President of the United States says on the record there are aliens, YOU FOLLOW UP WITH RELEVANT QUESTIONS. You do not continue reading from your script,” he wrote on X.

The U.S. government first acknowledged Area 51’s existence in 2013 through a Freedom of Information request and has declassified documents detailing its history and purpose. The base has been a testing ground for a host of top-secret aircraft, including the U-2 in the 1950s and later the F-117 stealth fighter.

Trump Admin on Aliens

President Donald Trump has expressed skepticism about the existence of aliens, while acknowledging that “anything is possible.”

Trump addressed the subject in several media appearances during the 2024 presidential campaign. On a podcast with Lex Fridman, Trump said he would consider pushing the Pentagon to release additional UFO footage that many believe is classified.

“Oh yeah, sure, I’ll do that. I would do that. I’d love to do that,” Trump said, noting that public pressure to disclose records relating to UFOs is similar to that surrounding the John F. Kennedy assassination.

On Logan Paul’s “Impaulsive” podcast in June 2025, Trump said, “Am I a believer? No, I can’t say I am.”

“But I have met with people, serious people, that say there’s some really strange things flying around out there.”

Trump added that given the size of the universe, “Why wouldn’t there be something, somebody?”

Vice President JD Vance has expressed his personal enthusiasm, telling the “Ruthless” podcast in August 2025 that he is “obsessed with the whole UFO thing.”

“What’s actually going on? What were those videos all about? What’s actually happening?” Vance probed.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said last August that she believes aliens may exist and that the U.S. government holds classified information on the subject.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard in Washington on Dec. 2, 2025. Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

Gabbard pledged to share disclosures from ongoing investigations into UFOs amid growing discussion of the phenomena at the highest levels of government.

Pentagon Cases Unresolved

The Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) continues to investigate more than 1,600 reports of “unidentified aerial phenomena,” an official term that has largely replaced “UFOs.”

At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in November 2024, AARO’s director, Jon T. Kosloski, detailed cases the military believes it has solved—such as the widely circulated 2016 “GOFAST” video, now thought to show an object flying at 13,000 feet rather than right above the water—as well as other incidents which have so far defied explanation.

Previous presidents, including Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, have discussed their curiosity about alien life without confirming a belief in it.

Carter reported that he saw an unidentified bright object in the sky when he was governor of Georgia in 1969, although he later said it was likely a natural phenomenon.

A view of Area 51. Google Maps/Screenshot via The Epoch Times

Clinton said that he was curious about the possibility of extraterrestrial life and that he had asked aides to look into both Area 51 and the Roswell incident of 1947, which gave rise to much speculation about a government cover-up. After Air Force personnel recovered metallic and rubber debris near Roswell, New Mexico, the U.S. Army Air Forces announced that they were in possession of a “flying disc” before retracting the statement within a day.

Clinton said he was told there was no evidence of alien life in connection with the incident. In 1995, he joked about the Roswell incident, saying, “If the U.S. Air Force did recover any alien bodies, they didn’t tell me about it.”

The American public is increasingly convinced that aliens exist and have visited Earth, according to recent polls. More than half (56 percent) of Americans believe extraterrestrials definitely or probably exist, according to a 2025 YouGov poll.

Democrat (61 percent) and Independent (59 percent) voters are more likely than Republicans (46 percent) to believe aliens exist, with 73 percent of Americans believing the government would hide evidence of UFOs if it had any, and just 13 percent thinking it would be transparent, according to the same survey.

Are Russia and China finally standing up to America’s addiction to regime change wars in the Middle East? They appear to at least be flashing some muscle in this incredibly tense moment, as the US deploys no less than two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers to the region.

Russia, China, and Iran have deployed naval vessels to the Strait of Hormuz for joint exercises this week, Russian presidential aide Nikolay Patrushev announced Tuesday, according to Anadolu and Iran state media. This comes as Iran’s elite IRGC Navy is already in day two of military drills in the vital oil transit point, having closed some sectors of the chokepoint.

In a fresh interview with Turkish media, Patrushev said Moscow is advancing a “multipolar world order on the oceans” to counter what he blasted as Western hegemony.

“We will tap into the potential of BRICS, which should now be given a full-fledged strategic maritime dimension,” he said. These fresh mid-February drills are being called Maritime Security Belt 2026.

It turns out Russian and Chinese warships have already been in the region as part of prior Iran-hosted drills, and without doubt they’ve lingered to keep a very close eye on developments after President Trump started threatening Tehran over its nuclear as well as ballistic missiles programs.

Also coming off last month’s BRICS naval drills in South Africa which were dubbed “Will for Peace 2026” – Chinese, Russian, and Iranian ships have in recent years showed deepened coordination and cooperation, in an increased number of joint drills.

“The Maritime Security Belt 2026 exercises in the Strait of Hormuz, where Russia, China, and Iran sent their ships, proved to be relevant,” he added.

If the US were to launch a ‘surprise’ attack on Iran, it remains unlikely that either Russia or China would come to Tehran’s direct aid and engage militarily with Washington.

However, it’s possible more Chinese and Russian ships would be sent to patrol flashpoint waters, making things more delicate and difficult in terms of US Navy maneuvering and firing.

Likely Moscow and Beijing would team up to issue a UN Security Council condemnation, and would seek to rally the globe against another Iraq-style war in the Middle East, with likely disastrous consequences for the whole region.

The second round of Iran-US talks wrapped up Tuesday in Geneva with mixed results. The Iranians have said the sides could be headed toward a new deal, and yet diplomats have admitted it was a heavy, and not very positive or amicable atmosphere. So things remain ultra-tense and charged, to say the least.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Democrats are scrambling to condemn Florida Rep. Randy Fine for his unapologetic defense of American pet ownership against radical Islamic demands to ban dogs as “unclean.”

The firestorm erupted after New York Muslim activist Nerdeen Kiswani declared, “Dogs definitely have a place in society, just not as indoor pets. Like we [Muslims have] said all along, they are unclean [“najis”].”

Kiswani later claimed, “Lmao at the Zionists frothing at the mouth at this, thinking they’re doing something. It’s obviously a joke I don’t care if you have a dog, I do care if your dog is shitting everywhere and you’re not cleaning it.”

In response, Fine laid out the stark choice: “If they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one.”

For context, this is the leader of one of the key mainstream Muslim groups that supported Mamdani. pic.twitter.com/zcIs4tVyly

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 15, 2026

pic.twitter.com/GVWZFm6D86

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 16, 2026

Democrats piled on Fine, with Rep. Ro Khanna calling it “Disgusting bigotry” and demanding, “Fine must be censured.”

Khanna doubled down: “Taking an alleged comment by one person and attributing it to everyone who shares that person’s faith is the definition of bigotry.”

Rep. Dan Goldman labeled it an “Islamophobic” comment that’s “incredibly damaging to Jews trying to combat antisemitism.”

Rep. Eric Swalwell insisted, “America is BETTER because of our Muslim community” and “we are WORSE when assholes like this guy spout hate.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez fumed, “This is genuinely one of the most disgusting statements I have ever seen issued by an American official,” adding, “Fine should be censured & stripped of committees.”

Fine’s opponent Jennifer Jenkins vowed, “I’m running to kick that bigot out of Washington.”

Rep. Bob Menendez complained, “This is what it looks like when Islamophobia and outrage are the only two items on your political agenda.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom barked, “Resign now, you racist slob.”

Leftist media figures like CNN’s Jake Tapper echoed, “Disgusting bigotry,” while New York Times’ David French called it “Absolutely evil.”

In a Newsmax appearance, Fine pushed back, stating “It’s not enough for Democrats to think anyone who wants to come here illegally should be able to do that. They also think they should be able to get whatever free stuff they want. Now they’re demanding that we change our values and how we live as Americans.”

A major Muslim leader in NYC is calling for dogs to be forbidden because they “bother some Muslims.”

If Mainstream Muslims make us choose between keeping our dogs and them going home, the choice is easy. pic.twitter.com/FvaLpYE0oB

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 17, 2026

Fine clapped back at all the Democrats calling for his censure.

An alleged comment? IT WAS IN WRITING, POSTED TO X, AND SEEN MILLIONS OF TIMES BEFORE I RESPONDED.

Perhaps you should have read it before you started spouting off like an idiot.

As for quoting the Torah, you’re forgiven as it is not your faith, but in that same chapter –… https://t.co/t9TvjLemFq pic.twitter.com/eH1HW8h4cR

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 17, 2026

Islam is not a race, moron. It is a religion.

One where some of its New York leadership is calling for the abolition of dogs.

Good luck bringing that to California. @HarmlessYardDog for the image. https://t.co/pmgq35Dqx5 pic.twitter.com/aiMdPtTgmn

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 16, 2026

At least I know where the equator is. https://t.co/n3bIIyenNF pic.twitter.com/O2Lm3420sq

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 17, 2026

I’d think your New York constituents would want to keep their dogs. https://t.co/Ke567lEbKe pic.twitter.com/sZyF8rRRwt

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 17, 2026

He also hit back at media blowhards like Piers Morgan.

Piers, what is disgusting is a major NYC Muslim leader saying we must give up our dogs because “NYC is coming to Islam”

We will not be shamed into being conquered like the Europeans.

I choose my dog.

I know my first appearance on your show didn’t go well for you, but if you… pic.twitter.com/RYXXa4bOJt

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) February 16, 2026

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

Via American Greatness,

The independent journalist who exposed massive amounts of social service fraud in Minnesota is now calling out alleged voter fraud in California with the release of a new video of his investigation there.

Nick Shirley has released his latest video which chronicles voting irregularities in the Golden State where he says he uncovered inaccurate voter rolls, dead people casting votes, lax voter ID requirements and month-long election processes that cast doubt on election integrity.

🚨 California is the breeding ground for voter fraud in America, as millions of people vote with no ID, month-long election processes, inaccurate voter rolls, dead people caught voting, even a dog successfully registered to vote, and voter verification is all based on your… pic.twitter.com/7nOIZe5x9D

— Nick shirley (@nickshirleyy) February 16, 2026

Shirley, a 23-year-old Utah native, has had to hire round the clock security after he exposed extensive welfare fraud among the Somali community in Minnesota.

During his visits to addresses obtained through public voter rolls from the California Secretary of State, Shirley found numerous examples of lack of negligence regarding verification of voters in California elections.

Examples of suspected voter fraud included no voter ID and signature-only “verification” in order to vote, 125-year-old voters still active on voter rolls, dozens of voters registered at a single UPS Store/mail drop and a voter who successfully registered her dog to vote in 2021 and 2022.

In a post on X where he shared his latest video, Shirley stated:

Without any voter ID and negligence from the state government to update their voter rolls, California’s one-party state has created a complex system where fraud is inevitable in their voting process.

In June 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed suit against the Orange County, California Registrar of Voters for refusing to provide records of the removal of non-citizen voters from voter registration lists.

In response to Shirley’s latest video, California governor Gavin Newsom has sought to deflect criticism over allegations of social service and voter fraud by calling upon Shirley and other non-legacy media investigators to go after what Newsom calls “Trump’s massive fraud.”

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

There is a political instinct that I’ve developed over the last few decade or so: when both parties are shouting, it’s business as usual. When both parties go quiet, pay attention, because something ugly is probably getting passed or covered up, and the American taxpayer is likely footing the bill of consequences.

Few public controversies in recent memory have generated as much bipartisan distrust as the handling of the Epstein files. Republicans accused Democrats of failing to pursue full transparency while President Biden was in office. Now Democrats accuse Republicans of withholding or slow-walking the release of the complete records. The blame shifts with political control, but the underlying fact pattern remains the same: both parties have figures of influence whose names have surfaced in connection with Epstein’s orbit.

That reality complicates the politics of accountability and fuels public suspicion that neither side is entirely comfortable with full disclosure.

What should have been a straightforward matter of transparency, identifying networks of power, influence, and possible criminal complicity, has instead unfolded as a slow humiliating drip of redactions, procedural delays, partial disclosures and cagey congressional testimony. Each release seems to raise more questions than it resolves. These questions revolve around sex trafficking, exploitation, abuse of minors, coercion and manipulation, elite complicity, obstruction of justice, etc.

But the deeper damage taking place now is not only about the crimes associated with Jeffrey Epstein. It is about institutional response. If only one political party had meaningful exposure to the scandal, the other would likely have been far more relentless in demanding transparency. But this is different. Despite Democrats harping on the files now, they were quiet in the years prior to Trump’s second term and, because Epstein’s connections span media, finance, academia, and politics, the discomfort still appears bipartisan.

And that is precisely what unsettles me.

When both political parties fail to press aggressively on something meaningful, especially something morally explosive, it often suggests that the issue cuts deeper than surface narratives allow. Bipartisan hesitation can signal overlapping vulnerability. Silence across the aisle is rarely accidental.

The horror here is not just what may have occurred in private circles of power, but the perception that the institutions tasked with accountability are reluctant to fully illuminate it. Justice delayed in cases involving elites feels less like procedural caution and more like reputational risk management. Whether or not that perception is entirely fair, it is corrosive.

Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs’ chief legal officer Kathryn Ruemmler announced her resignation after new emails with Epstein came to light, prompting internal pressure at the firm. British political figure Peter Mandelson resigned from the House of Lords and the Labour Party, and Scotland Yard has opened a criminal investigation into his ties with Epstein. In Norway, parliament has launched an external inquiry into prominent diplomats for their connections to Epstein, and police are investigating corruption allegations against former prime minister Thorbjørn Jagland and others.

🔥 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever

Across Europe, these disclosures have triggered formal probes, resignations, and institutional reviews that contrast sharply with the relative lack of accountability for high-profile figures in the United States, where calls for investigations and resignations have largely stalled. I mean, is Les Wexner really allowed to just walk around free at this point? How can that be possible? How are Kimbal Musk and Elon Musk allowed to remain on Tesla’s board? Why isn’t Bill Gates being hauled in front of congress?

I have long argued that Americans should apply the same “when both parties agree, the American public is getting screwed” scrutiny to monetary policy for a similar reason. It is one of the few areas where both major political parties display remarkable convergence. While they wage visible battles over cultural issues and tax rates, they tend to align on central banking frameworks, large scale liquidity interventions, and deficit tolerance. Like other cover-ups, that alignment deserves examination.

Monetary policy operates largely outside daily partisan warfare, yet it shapes purchasing power, asset prices, debt burdens, and wealth distribution. When balance sheets expand aggressively and markets are repeatedly stabilized during downturns, the effects are uneven. Asset holders often benefit first and most. Meanwhile, wage earners experience the lagging side effects such as inflationary pressure, higher living costs, and diminished purchasing power.

Supporters of Modern Monetary Theory argue that sovereign currency systems provide more fiscal flexibility than traditionally assumed. Critics counter that, in practice, repeated interventions risk entrenching a cycle in which gains are privatized and losses are socialized. When markets rise, the wealth effect accrues to those with substantial exposure. When markets falter, public backstops prevent collapse. The middle class absorbs the inflationary residue. And the wealth gap widens:

The structural similarity matters. When both parties avoid aggressive debate on a policy that materially burdens the average American, it raises the same instinctive question of what incentives are being protected. Monetary policy may not carry the visceral grotesqueness of the Epstein scandal, but it carries long term economic consequences that most Americans don’t know they are bearing, and don’t understand that they are being lied to about.

The comparison is not moral equivalence. It is structural parallel. In one case, alleged networks of power may be shielded by mutual hesitation. In the other, a financial architecture persists with limited democratic scrutiny because challenging it would destabilize shared political comfort. In both cases, bipartisan alignment dampens confrontation. Two forms of silence. Two different domains. Both revealing.

Foreign policy, particularly the authorization and funding of wars, has often followed a similar pattern. While domestic issues produce loud partisan divides, military interventions abroad frequently pass with overwhelming support from leadership in both parties. Public debate may flare at the margins, but institutional consensus tends to solidify quickly once action begins.

History shows that major military engagements, from post 9/11 authorizations to prolonged overseas conflicts, have often been backed by broad congressional majorities. The initial votes are decisive. The funding continues year after year. Only later, when costs mount and public opinion shifts, does meaningful dissent emerge. By then, strategic commitments and financial obligations are deeply entrenched.

Again, the pattern is not about moral equivalence between policy domains. It is about incentives. When both political parties converge quickly on matters involving immense money, immense power, or immense liability, scrutiny tends to narrow rather than widen. And when scrutiny narrows at the highest levels, the public’s role shifts from participant to spectator.

When both political parties fail to address something meaningful, when they close ranks instead of competing for exposure, the public should not assume the issue is trivial. More often, it suggests the truth behind the surface may be larger and more consequential than advertised.

Democracies depend not just on disagreement, but on adversarial pressure. When that pressure disappears, citizens are right to lean in, not tune out. When both sides go quiet, the story is rarely over. As the Epstein files are showing, it may simply run far deeper than we are being shown.

Now read:

• Today’s Epstein’s Records Destroy Official Narratives
• Our Liquidity Addiction Continues
• Do DOJ Docs Show Epstein Death Notice A Day Early?
• The Hijacking Of Bitcoin: Epstein’s Hidden Network
• Why America’s Two-Party System Will Never Threaten the True Political Elites

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier. I am an investor in Mark’s fund.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

New York City property owners are set to ‘enjoy’ the first property tax hike in more than two decades as part of a proposed solution by Mayor Zohran Mamdani to fill a roughly $5 billion budget gap, Bloomberg reports.

“He’s put a pretty extreme option on the table, which is a combination of raising property taxes and taking money from reserves and relying on some pretty aggressive revenue projections to boot,” said NYC Comptroller Mark Levine. 

The pitch, set to be unveiled Tuesday afternoon during Mamdani’s preliminary budget proposal, comes one day after Governor Kathy Hochul vowed to kick in another $1.5 billion in additional aid to the city for the current fiscal year and next. Hochul has also committed $510 million for future years to help plug holes in the budget. 

Update: Mamdani has laid out two paths; raise taxes on the ultra-wealthy and most profitable corporations, or ‘balance the budget on the backs of working people using only the tools at the City’s disposal.’

Today, I’m releasing the City’s preliminary budget. After years of fiscal mismanagement, we’re staring at a $5.4 billion budget gap — and two paths.

One: Albany can raise taxes on the ultra-wealthy and the most profitable corporations and address the fiscal imbalance between…

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) February 17, 2026

Mamdani says that the state should step up even more. Last week, he called on state lawmakers Wednesday to approve a 2 percent personal income tax increase on the city’s wealthiest residents as well as a hike in the corporate tax rate in a bid to close a multibillion-dollar budget gap. Of note, Hochul and the legislature must approve any tax changes.

While Mamdani is handcuffed in many ways when it comes to raising revenue, raising property taxes is something he can do as part of the annual budget process. Homeowners, meanwhile, just had their assessed values jump 5.6%, which will bring the city an additional $325.8 billion – which is separate of Mamdani’s plan. 

Mamdani’s own rhetoric about the size and scope of the city’s budget situation has shifted. Earlier this month, just two weeks after describing the city’s $12.6 billion budget deficit as the city’s largest since the Great Recession, Mamdani revealed the hole had actually shrunk by $5 billion, because of higher tax revenue, propelled by personal income tax growth and Wall Street bonuses.

Even threatening to raise property taxes could prove a political lightning rod for Mamdani, after campaigning to reform that system, which has been criticized for overburdening lower- and middle-income residents. The last time the city increased property tax rates was under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the early 2000s. –Bloomberg

Meanwhile last month Mamdani said NYC is facing a $12.6 billion deficit over the next two years, which he blamed on his predecessor, Mayor Eric Adams, whose administration he says underbudgeted for various expenses such as cash assistance, rental assistance for homeless residents, special education and overtime costs. In FY 2025, NYC took in over $33 billion in property tax revenue. 

Mamdani during his campaign promoted progressive reforms to fund proposals such as free public transit, rent stabilization and housing programs, universal child care, and a $30 minimum wage, leading to his upset win over more moderate Democrats.

He called for a 2 percent surcharge on high earners on the campaign trail.

Estimates suggested it could create approximately $4 billion annually to support increased public services and affordability programs, as well as offset costs for broad social investments while not saddling middle- and low-income residents.

For the second time in a week, a transgender person has exploded in a display of spectacular, bloody violence. The latest incident unfolded on Monday in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, where a 56-year-old man reportedly wearing a dress shot four of his family members and a family friend at a high school hockey game. Police say Robert Robert Dorgan (aka Roberta Esposito) killed the mother of his children and one of their kids before taking his own life.

Dorgan’s son was reportedly playing in the game that was underway his murderous rage unfolded. Video captured Pawtucket’s Dennis M. Lynch Arena as it transitioned from spectator event to deadly madness. As some 15 shots ring out in progressively more rapid sequence, players and fans gradually grasp the reality of what is happening — first ducking for safety and then fleeing the arena any way they can. After a several-second delay, one final shot can be heard: apparently fired by Dorgan into his own head: 

🚨 BREAKING UPDATE: A man kiIIed his wife and shot at least two of his children at a hockey game in Rhode Island, per Fox News

This is absolutely HORRIFIC

The shooter is deceased along with his wife, but the kids are reportedly hospitalized.

Pray for these kids tonight 🙏🏻 pic.twitter.com/hdVTwxbd9D

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 16, 2026

Police say a bystander intervened to stop Dorgan’s attack. That hero was able to disarm Dorgan, but the trans shooter had a second firearm in reserve, which he retrieved and used to kill himself. “[The bystander] interjected in this scene, and that’s probably what led to a swift end of this tragic event,” said Pawtucket Police Chief Tina Goncalves. In this alternate video, Dorgan can be seen descending the arena steps before opening fire and then being engaged by the bystander: 

Closer slow‑motion footage of the Rhode Island ice hockey shooting.

My gratitude goes out to the brave men who tried to stop the shooter. pic.twitter.com/ts4UuVO35g

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) February 17, 2026

Citing court documents, WPRI reported that Dorgan’s gender confusion figured in a series of domestic discord spanning years: 

In early 2020, Dorgan went to the North Providence Police Department and reported he had recently undergone gender-reassignment surgery and that his father-in-law wanted him out of their North Providence home because of it.

Dorgan told police that his father-in-law, who shares the same surname, threatened to “have him murdered by an Asian street gang if he did not move out of the residence,” according to court documents. Dorgan, who said he had lived at the home for seven years, told police that the father-in-law told him, “there’s no goddam [sic] way a tranny is going to stay in my house.”   …

Around the same time, Dorgan’s then-wife Rhonda Dorgan filed for divorce. Under grounds for divorce, Rhonda initially wrote, “gender reassignment surgery, narcissistic + personality disorder traits.” Those reasons were then crossed out and replaced with “irreconcilable differences which have caused the immediate breakdown of the marriage.”

In the aftermath of Monday’s shooting, a visibly shaken adult woman leaving the Pawtucket Police Deparment told reporters, “My father was the shooter. He shot my family, and he’s dead now…He has mental health issues…He’s sick. He’s very sick.”  

A high-volume X account named “Roberta Dorgano” has been widely speculated as belonging to Robert Dorgan, and features a profile photo that seemingly matches other images of the shooter.

The same account shows right-wing and potentially antisemitic leanings. Many posts seemingly support the effort to declassify the Epstein files, and others showing appreciation for libertarian-minded Rep. Thomas Massie, who has led that campaign. In a post responding to a video of Rep Jamie Raskin struggling to answer a question about Democrats’ relative prior disinterest in the Epstein files, the account replied “(((raskin))),” using a triple-parentheses punctuation that’s often used on social media to highlight the fact that a given individual is Jewish. Other posts and reposts imply an interest in decreasing illegal immigration, but one has the account replying “fu loser” to a post by border czar Tom Homan. Others show interest in possible voting-machine abuse that disadvantaged President Trump. The account once replied “handcuffs anyone?” to a post about the intelligence community’s promotion of the Russiagate hoax.  

On Monday, Pawtucket’s Dennis M. Lynch Arena was hosting a Senior Night event featuring five hockey teams: a Coventry-Johnston co-op squad, St. Raphael Academy, Providence Country Day School, North Providence and North Smithfield. Dorgan’s son was reportedly a senior on the North Providence team. Another player, Silas Core of the Coventry High Knotty Oakers, told WCVB that he and his teammates sought refuge in a locker room: “We barricaded the locker room with our bodies. We were all pressing up against it, and everybody was worried about our parents and everybody.”  

On Saturday, the account ominously warned against the consequences of ridiculing transgender people: “keep bashing us. but do not wonder why we Go BERSERK.” 

keep bashing us. but do not wonder why we Go BERSERK

— Roberta Dorgano (@Tgirlcuda) February 15, 2026

The reason they go berserk is because transgenderism is a clear and undeniable mental illness often coupled with narcissism and elements of sociopathy.  Studies show that up to 50% of all transgenders have been prescribed psychotropic medications at least once while 75% receive some form of psychotherapy.  Around 80% of trans patients have been diagnosed with secondary disorders and a high rate of narcissism.

There have been no significant studies beyond the 2011 Swedish cohort study on transgender criminality and no significant studies on their likelihood of violence.  This is largely due to the political stigma attached to any objective analysis that might paint transgenderism in a negative light. 

Just as the progressive media often tries to hide the trans identity of criminal suspects, the psychological community is also politically motivated to hide the unhinged nature of gender dysphoria. This lack of serious investigation needs to change before trans perpetrated killings become an epidemic.   

Despite Dorgan’s frothing social media frenzy to defend transgenders as mentally sound and peaceful, he only ended up proving the critics correct.    

The fact that he didn’t just decide he was a woman, he decided he was a Latina woman https://t.co/WZrldAamwt pic.twitter.com/afIh6Z7aw3

— Oilfield Rando (@Oilfield_Rando) February 17, 2026

The latest trans-inflicted bloodshed quickly followed a mass shooting in remote Tumbler Ridge, Canada. There, an 18-year-old biological man in a dress killed his mother and half-brother at home before slaughtering five students and an education assistant at a secondary school where he was formerly a student. Media outlets and Wikipedia have described the shooter as female. Speaking to reporters, officials called him a “gunperson.” 

The violent episodes come as a sea change is underway where gender-transitions are concerned — and specifically, those administered on children. In a recent legal landmark, a New York jury found a psychologist and a surgeon liable for malpractice after they convinced a 16-year-old girl to lop off her breasts. It was the first medical malpractice case involving a de-transitioner to reach a verdict. Soon after, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons broke ranks with other medical organizations, recommending that member physicians refrain from performing gender transition surgeries on anyone under age 19.

While it’s only right that this turning away from insanity starts with children, Monday’s carnage seemingly shows a need for a broader rethinking of transgenderism across all ages.  

Bayer stock jumped the most in three months after the company announced a $10.5 billion settlement push to settle current and future cancer lawsuits over its Roundup weedkiller. The news was first reported by Bloomberg. 

The German chemical giant proposed a $7.5 billion class-action settlement through cases filed in state court in Missouri designed to resolve Roundup suits that already have been filed and potential claims that could be filed over a 20-year period.

Bayer also announced $3 billion in settlements of existing U.S. cases in which former Roundup users blame the herbicide for causing their non-Hodgkins lymphoma, it reported.

The company has paid about $10 billion to settle most of the Roundup lawsuits that were pending as of 2020, but failed to get a settlement covering future cases. New lawsuits have continued to pour in since then. Plaintiffs have said they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other forms of cancer due to using Roundup, either at home or on the job.

Roundup, which was acquired by Bayer, is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States

The class settlement aimed at resolving current and future claims that Roundup weedkiller caused non‑Hodgkin lymphoma is an important addition to its Supreme Court case, Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said on Tuesday.

“We are entering into the settlement because it is an important addition to the case before the Supreme Court, thereby minimising the legal risks as comprehensively as possible,” he said. “Both elements are necessary independently of each other and reinforce each other,” he added.

Bayer stock surged on news of the settlement.

Talk of space-based data centers has suddenly become a major conversation on Wall Street. One key driver is Elon Musk’s merger of SpaceX with his AI venture, xAI, aiming to eventually build “orbital data centers” at scale.

With a potential IPO later this year, the space industry – first in low-Earth orbit, then on the moon – will be center stage for years to come.

Goldman analysts, led by Andrew Lee, hosted a webcast titled “Space – Datacentres Opportunity and Telecom Risk,” featuring Justin Hotchkiss (Associate Partner), Gregor Eichler (Principal), and Federico Torri (Partner) from TMT consultancy Altman Solon.

The webcast conversation looked ahead to a future in which space-based data centers could become a reality.

Goldman’s telecom analysts and tech consultants discussed two major ideas:

1. Space data centers: Not yet deployed, but could become a reality in the near term. The advantages are low-cost solar power in space, easier cooling, no property costs, and no permitting issues. One big hurdle is the need for cheaper rocket launch costs and a lightweight cooling system. If launches drop below $200/kg and cooling hardware is very light, the cost could start to look similar to building on Earth.

2. Satellite connectivity for telecoms: It already exists, but investors are overreacting to the idea that satellites will “replace” traditional telcos. Satellites (especially LEO networks like Starlink) have limited capacity, variable service quality, and challenging economics for serving many everyday urban customers. They’re most useful where building cell towers or fiber is expensive: rural, sparsely populated, higher-income areas. Think of Starlink and other LEO networks as complementary to telecoms.

A major technological leap is underway in space-based communications. Data centers in space are likely to become a reality within this decade, thanks to SpaceX’s Starship rocket. Goldman’s webcast suggests that Starlink and other LEO constellations should be more complementary than competitive to telcos for the foreseeable future.

Lee noted:

In the longer term, space data centres appear an increasingly likely reality. More relevant today, our conversation suggests the extent of investor concerns on satellite competition to telecoms and towercos are overstated – as we wrote in our 2025 satellite/telco report.

Satellite technology is more likely to be complementary rather than competitive to telcos due to satellite capacity constraints, service quality restrictions, and inferior economics for the majority of geographies. Telcos can leverage satellites to extend their own network coverage into rural areas where terrestrial build-out is costly.

Investing world impacts:

This would imply modest downside risk to towerco growth if rural connectivity is partially rerouted via satellites.

For towercos including Cellnex and INWIT, some of this satellite risk is already priced into their shares, but we do not see a catalyst for a re-rating in the near term.

For telcos including TMUS (majority owned by DT), where satellite risk to its broadband growth has pressured the share price, we see scope for a rerating as investor concerns over satellite risk abate over time and ongoing consensus upgrades continue.

We retain our bullish view on European telcos as laid out in our recent report – select Buy ideas include BT, Nordics, DT, KPN. We outline our key takeaways from the satellite webcast below.

The big question is: At what point does Starlink start to challenge them directly?

Professional subscribers can read the full note on our new Marketdesk.ai portal​​​​.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

A Material Shift

It was that 2026 rarity of a genuinely ‘quiet day’ on Monday with the US out for Presidents’ Day and much of Asia already on holiday for Lunar New Year. However, despite China staying out for the rest of the week, things are likely to shift to a higher gear from today onwards.

The RBA minutes this morning, which explained why rates were hiked 25bps, stated “the latest forecasts produced by the staff were materially stronger than those produced in August and November.” One would hope so, but why were those forecasts stronger? Far more useful is the repeated mention of “material shift” – higher. That’s the case in Australia and world-wide; but not in the way the RBA meant it. We are no longer in a world in which RBA references to (and models of) “aggregate demand” and “aggregate supply” have much relevance. Yes, demand exists. Yes, supply does too. But neither are “aggregate”. Both are now very starkly variate.

The IMF just warned Australia that it’s 5% deposit scheme for first-time home buyers will push up housing inflation and should be scrapped – as others warn it’s already too late to do so. The RBA had warned of the same thing months ago too yet now seems surprised it might have shifted their forecasts and Overnight Cash Rate. That’s as the Fed is also set to loosen bank capital requirements to try to encourage more mortgage lending, and at lower rates – though it has to be said that the US bank share of such lending has declined from 60% to 35% since 2003, arguing some reversal could be warranted in the market.

Beyond such traditional macro stories, raw materials are again of supreme importance and, as in the past, linked to national security. Demand is vast; yet supply is limited in terms of natural availability and the ‘unnatural’ outcome of China dominating their processing. There is nothing aggregate about this. You have something or you don’t. A machine minus one key widget won’t work, so is worthless. Equally, a gun minus a bullet renders you defenceless. So, what price will you pay for what you need?

This is linked to AI, which ‘Anthropic in Venezuela’ shows is about national security. Indeed, the EU Parliament just blocked its MEPs from using AI tools over cyber and privacy fears – though these are perhaps not the high priority targets for foreign intelligence services that they think they are. While politics is hardly a synonym for productivity, should the EU military drop AI, it will be left even further behind the US. Should the EU private sector drop AI too, it would only widen a productivity gap between it and the US and China. If Europe still wants in on any front, that only increases the global urgency to get raw materials and electricity flowing at as cheap a price as possible. What’s the correct interest rate for that?

Yet things are not all inflationary: quite the opposite. As China rolls out its latest agentic AI, Qwen 3.5, and Wall Street smashes firms that suddenly may not have a viable business model, a recent summit in India saw experts warn that the country needs to take immediate action to manage the AI threat to the vast number of services sector jobs it’s created. They offer that “more training” can help the country avoid being left with “obsolete skills” – but is that true? The possibilities opened up by AI could arguably see white collar jobs destroyed at a scale and pace that no political economy is prepared for, let alone a stock market. What’s the correct interest rate for that?

These are, in both the literal and the metaphorical sense of the term, material shifts. Central bank thinking is, as usual, struggling to keep up. The Fed’s Barr speaks on AI and the labor market today, and Daly on AI and the economy: they both wrote those speeches themselves, right?

Meanwhile, US talks with Iran continue today against a backdrop of the IRGC carrying out naval exercises in the Strait of Hormuz. It needs to be repeated that the US continues to surge military power into the region daily: it remains to be seen if that will see Tehran bend or not. Oil prices are up around 1.3% this morning as the market starts to get twitchy.

Russia-Ukraine peace talks continue in Geneva, as Lithuania warned against a ‘hollow” Article 5-like guarantee being offered to Ukraine, Finland warned that Russia is reinforcing its nuclear and Arctic assets near its border, the UK press speaks of Europe creating a deterrent with tactical nukes as if this is a cost-free and risk-free exercise, and Ukraine, in the background, reportedly made its fastest battlefield gains in 2.5 years.

Also note an unconfirmed report Russia allowed limited dollar trading for the first time in years. That follows the Bloomberg story last week that Moscow is prepared to offer the US a major economic deal. As noted here many times before, the geopolitical and geoeconomic landscapes are one and the same, and our financial architecture merely sits on top of it. Likewise:

• Trump said he’ll make a decision soon on whether to sell the planned $20bn package of arms to Taiwan or not – there will be regional, if not global, consequences either way.

• The EU floated that 70% of EVs must be made in there to qualify for state aid, with similar rules for aluminium: that’s a material shift towards either Gaullism or Trumpism. Yet as the Economist claims that ‘Russia’s economy has entered the death zone’, the Ukrainian press reports EU companies are keeping Moscow’s war machine running via their exports to its auto sector.

• The Eurogroup president said a new Franco-German-led ‘E6’ format to push ahead with deeper structural reforms will only be “temporary”, as Ireland, which was left out, is pushing back. Does that imply that a vanguard group form new structures and then other EU members can then join at their leisure, or will they have to go through some form of a new ‘accession’ process to qualify for this inner sanctum? That’s another material shift.

• Canada’s natural resources minister is going to Poland to promote Canada’s nuclear energy expertise. That’s as the Financial Post notes, ‘We need to wake up’: Atlantic Canada a microcosm of the problems facing the rest of the country’, and shares ‘David Rosenberg: Memo to Mark Carney: Don’t bring a butter knife to an economic gun fight.’

The same can be said about central bank models.