Authored by Chris Milton via The Daily Sceptic

The arguments in philosopher Thomas Nagel’s seminal 1974 essay ‘What is it Like to be Bat?‘ can help us answer the question of whether a human born with XY chromosomes and a male body can be, can become or can know what it’s like to be a woman, or can know what inhabiting the world is like for a woman. Nagel – who randomly chose bats from the list of mammals – began from the premise that if an organism has consciousness then there is something that it is like to be that organism, and his question was whether we could know “what is like for a bat to be a bat”.

Nagel’s essay argues for the wholly subjective character of experience, and how this subjectivity is dictated by differences in the physicality of beings. A creature shapes its Umwelt, or lifeworld, through its interactions with the world, and those interactions are determined by that creature’s body. Men and women inhabit similar yet profoundly different Umwelts. The qualia of sensation — meaning the instances of subjective experience, such as what it’s like to perceive a colour, to taste an apple or hear a baby cry — are different for each individual human. But these differences are also sexed. The last is a good example, as the female body — and therefore mind — responds to a baby’s cry in a radically different way to a man’s. But there are also large differences in the way they experience running for five hundred metres, the colour red, having a nipple touched, and innumerable other things (almost everything, in fact). There are qualia that each sex experiences that the other will never be able experience at all, but which help form their consciousnesses. A woman will never get an erection, and a man will never have a clitoral or vaginal orgasm, menstruate or give birth.

All of these ways of experiencing the world physically, along with our anticipations and memories of them, form a human being’s consciousness, its personality, its very being (or soul, if you like), who he or she is. If one, or even half a dozen of the physical particularities of a woman could be miraculously reproduced in a man (which they can’t), such as giving him the same muscle mass and bone density as a woman, a uterus, a clitoris or a brain that reacts in the same way to temperature or noise, he still wouldn’t be a woman physically, or anywhere near being one. Consciousness is a complex feature of evolutionarily determined biological systems, the latter radically different for men and women, such that even their spatial and temporal perspectives for experiencing the world are different.

For a man to become a woman everything, every molecule, would have to be changed, and a lifetime of memories implanted. Each moment-to-moment sequence of experience from the womb onwards grows coherently out of those that preceded it and determines those that follow it. Surgery is merely an in-real-life filter, advanced dressing up, and transitions someone towards nothing that meaningfully resembles a woman. To give one of hundreds of examples: men have no Cooper’s Ligament, which means that after HRT their breasts – which in any case are functionless – will be tubular and spaced very widely apart. Even the cells of men and women are biochemically different and determine, from before birth, many things, including how each sex fights particular diseases. Objective, unchangeable, sexed physical states partially determine subjective states; lopping off this or that part of the body or appending a functionless simulacrum of another will in no wise change the quality of those subjective states.

Every cell in our body has your male or femaleness inscribed within it. Even if it were possible to change your hormonal sex completely (which it isn’t) that would still leave your unalterable chromasomal sex, and your genetic sex, intact. There are many male and female brain circuits that behave very differently, sex-recognition is hard-wired into our brains, and the neurons have been identified that allow us ‘instinctively’ to discern a member of the opposite sex, however heavily disguised: this is why no trans people ever really ‘pass’.

So, a man can never become a woman physically, and thus cannot logically be or ‘identify as’ a woman, as you can only know what it feels like to be a thing if you are that thing. To argue otherwise, that there is another, ‘real’ self within us distinct from the bodily self, and that the mind and body are separate?, is philosophically centuries out of date – Locke’s empiricism first put pay to Cartesian dualism almost 350 years ago. “Mental states,” Nagel adds, “are states of the body, and mental events are physical events”: the ghost is the machine, the machine is the ghost. The hormonal impregnation of the foetus has a direct effect on neural circuits, creating a masculine brain and a feminine brain, which can be distinguished from each other anatomically and biochemically, and cannot be housed in the body of the other sex, it being determined by the sexed body. Let’s look at a passage of Nagel and replace ‘bats’ with ‘women’:

Even if [men] could transform over time into [women] their brains would not have worked as [women’s] brains from birth, and could therefore never have the mindset of a [woman]. … It is doubtful that any meaning could be attached to the supposition that I should possess the internal neuropsychological constitution of a [woman]. … Even if I could by gradual degrees be transformed into a [woman], nothing in my present condition enables me to imagine what the experience of such a future stage of myself thus metamorphosed would be like.

and,

To the extent that I could look and behave like a [woman] without changing my fundamental structure, my experiences would [still] not be anything like the experiences of [women].

It is then, the much vaunted ‘lived experience’ that militates against the possibility of transgenderism. Nagel goes on to give the example of trying to attain knowledge of what it is like to be blind or deaf (he could just as easily have substituted disabled, or schizophrenic), concluding that “the subjective experiences of a person deaf or blind from birth are not accessible to me… we cannot form more than a schematic notion of what it would be like”.

Nagel says that “the more different from oneself the other experiencer is, the less success you can expect in your guesswork”. So, men can come close to guessing what it is like to be woman. Men and women both experience hunger, sexual desire, boredom and aesthetic pleasure, but the way they experience those things is qualitatively different, and unalterably so. Nagel writes that “there are facts that do not consist in the truth of propositions expressible in human language”, and that “to deny the reality or logical significance of what we can never describe or understand is the crudest form of logical dissonance”. In other words, the subjectivity of other beings is ultimately ineffable and irreducible to language, and so the subjective experiences of men and women will always be unknowable for each other.

The idea that someone, by adopting the outward and trivial indicators of femininity, can suddenly thereby have access to that knowledge is preposterous. Men can only guess, and approach knowledge through empathy, imagination and the testimonies of women themselves. “Nobody has yet devised,” Nagel writes, “an objective phenomenology not dependent on empathy and imagination — that could describe, at least in part, the subjective character of experiences in a form comprehensible to a being incapable of having those experiences.”

Men and women are restricted by the resources of their own sexed minds, their consciousnesses made sexed by their sexed bodies. To deny that they are sexed is not only contra accepted biology, as well as common sense, it would also completely undermine the discipline of evolutionary biology.

The belief that ‘trans women are women’ makes a belief in magic seem sophisticated, because belief in magic or miracles explained effects for which causes could not (yet) be identified, but there was at least an observable effect to be explained. Likewise, when people believed erroneously that the world was flat, they did so because the world looked flat. With trans women, there is no such observable effect. What you have before you after saying the magic formula ‘trans women are women’ is visibly still a man. At best, after the surgical removal of his genitalia, a man will have a crude cavity, its position and its condition of being a hole with a surgically fashioned ‘clitoris’ being the only things it has in common with a woman’s vagina, and yet it is the only part of a woman’s reproductive system that it’s even possible to crudely mimic. This is why the word ‘trans’ itself is inadmissible, as there isn’t a transition towards or into anything.

The feeling inside that one is male or female is biologically determined, the idea of ‘being in the wrong body’ has no concrete, observable, provable basis: ‘male’ and ‘female’ are ‘assigned’ at birth, or rather conception, but by Nature, not by a doctor or midwife. One cannot move from the fixed point of being male or female and back again, so the idea of gender fluidity, of being non-binary is illogical, impossible, mad. A big difference between men and women lies in their reproductive organs, in their potential reproductive roles, and in the reproductive apparatus that produces sperm or eggs, so that ultimately many social determinations regarding gender are biologically determined. This is why, until very recently, sex and gender were used interchangeably: for there to be a third gender, there would need to be a new, third reproductive function, and new organs to go with it. Arguments that sexual dimorphism can be overcome or does not exist are pure Lysenkoism, and matters of ideology, not science. Gender theorists wanted to separate sex and gender, but it simply can’t be done.

To have given this matter philosophical consideration is to have given it way more than its due, and to have accorded the adherents of trans ideology more respect than they are due, and has necessitated the bracketing of matters such as the data showing that it is in part a social contagion, that its are roots in pornography and autogynephilia, that it’s funded by a small group of trans billionaires, that it’s a multi-billion dollar business, and that its explosion amongst the young is closely tied to social media, beginning with MySpace and Tumblr, then via Instagram, YouTube and TikTok.

The one thing that trans ideology has done more than anything else, that will outlast it, is to have made a nonsense of the idea of human progress, other than technological-scientific progress. It is perhaps the most profound manifestation of human credulousness and stupidity in history, outdoing even the witch craze of the 17th century. It is more egregious than any previous superstition or mass insanity because it is has come well after the end of the age of superstition and the advent of Enlightenment. The ‘truths’ of science have always been subject to suspicion and revision, but trans ideology has never had its Hegelian ‘moment’ of temporary truth that was later abandoned as more information came to light. Quite the opposite: it is wholly retrogressive, an attempt to replace biological knowledge with magical thinking, a regression to something lower even than pseudoscience.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Annual electricity power generation from utility-scale solar projects is predicted to exceed output from coal for the first time ever in 2026 on grids run by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).

This year, solar power generation within the ERCOT-run grids, which cover most of the state, is expected to be 78 billion kilowatt hours (BkWh), 30 percent higher than the 60 BkWh generated by coal, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in a May 13 statement, while adding that solar generation has been steadily increasing within ERCOT.

For 2027, annual solar generation is projected at 99 BkWh, a 50 percent lead over coal’s 66 BkWh.

“Natural gas remains the dominant source of electricity generation in ERCOT, accounting for an average 44 percent of electricity generation from 2021 to 2025,” the agency said.

However, “solar’s share of the generation mix has increased from 4 percent to 12 percent in those years, while coal’s share has decreased from 19 percent to 13 percent,” it said.

This year, roughly 40 percent of total solar capacity additions nationwide are forecast to occur in Texas.

One of the projects expected to come online this year is the Tehuacana Creek 1 Solar and battery energy storage system, which, at 837 megawatts, could be the largest solar photovoltaic project to go online in the state in 2026.

There are currently no plans to construct new coal plants in ERCOT, the EIA said.

As for nationwide trends, a January report from the EIA predicted the combined share of solar and wind power in America’s total electricity generation to rise from 18 to 21 percent during 2025–2027.

In contrast, “the three main dispatchable sources of electricity generation (natural gas, coal, and nuclear) accounted for 75 percent of total generation in 2025, but we expect the share of generation from these sources will fall to about 72 percent in 2027,” the agency said.

Power Outage Risks

The July 2025 Resource Adequacy Report from the Department of Energy warned that the risk of power outages in the United States could jump 100-fold by the end of this decade, driven by the retirement of firm power plants and load growth.

Firm power refers to power that can be generated at all times, such as via coal, natural gas, and nuclear power. Intermittent sources, such as solar and wind, are dependent on factors like weather to generate power.

According to the report, “104 GW of firm capacity is set for retirement by 2030. This capacity is not being replaced on a one-to-one basis, and losing this generation could lead to significant outages when weather conditions do not accommodate wind and solar generation.”

Crackdown on Solar, Wind Projects

The Trump administration has taken various actions against renewable energy projects.

In July 2025, the Department of the Interior announced it would implement policies to end the special treatment accorded to “unreliable” energy sources. The department’s first measure called for identifying policies in favor of solar and wind projects, and halting support for energy supply chains controlled by foreign rivals.

In August 2025, the Department of Agriculture stopped funding all programs for solar or wind projects on farmland.

Some of the Trump administration’s policies have been successfully challenged.

In April this year, a federal judge blocked the administration’s efforts to cease approvals for wind and solar energy projects in a case filed by a coalition of renewable energy groups. The court issued a preliminary injunction blocking five actions, including a legal opinion that had slowed approvals for solar and wind projects.

The judge said that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that various agencies violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how these agencies make policy decisions.

“This is an undeniable victory for members of our coalition and the broader clean energy industry, as well as American households and businesses,” the plaintiffs said in a joint statement.

Meanwhile, the United States set a new record for total energy production last year, outputting 107 quadrillion British thermal units, 3.4 percent higher than the previous record in 2024. This is the fourth straight year the country has set a record for total energy output.

Natural gas was the top source of energy, followed by crude oil, coal, natural gas plant liquids, renewables, and nuclear power.

Natural gas output grew by more than 4 percent in 2025 from 2024. Coal power generation rose by 4 percent, which followed two years of declining production. Renewable energy output increased by 3 percent.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. forces seized around 2,500 pounds of cocaine and 105 pounds of marijuana in two separate maritime operations involving foreign nations.

In one operation, the Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF) South and the Drug Enforcement Administration identified a drug runner from Colombia transporting narcotics. Forces from the Dominican Republic interdicted the vessel, while USS Billing secured the jettisoned cargo, JIATF South said in a May 12 post on X. Around 326 kilograms (approx. 718 pounds) of cocaine and 105 pounds of marijuana were prevented from entering American communities.

Earlier, in a May 7 X post, JIATF South said that forces from Panama intercepted a vessel near the city of Colon on May 1 under the guidance of the task force. The Panamanian forces fired warning shots, detained two smugglers, and took custody of 799 kilograms (approx. 1,761 pounds) of cocaine.

JIATF leverages its member nations’ capabilities to identify and monitor drug trafficking activity in maritime and air domains. The task force aims to interdict and seize illicit narcotics to disrupt their shipments, and diminish or destroy the transnational criminal organizations running these activities.

In a May 5 statement, the United States Coast Guard said it had interdicted a drug vessel off the coast of Haiti together with the United States Navy, taking into custody roughly 3,200 pounds of marijuana valued at roughly $3.8 million. One person was taken into custody and transferred to Haitian authorities.

Eighty percent of “interdictions of U.S.-bound drugs occur at sea. This underscores the importance of maritime interdiction in combatting the flow of illegal narcotics and protecting American communities from this deadly threat,” the Coast Guard said.

“Detecting and interdicting illicit drug traffickers on the high seas involves significant interagency and international coordination.”

Health Impacts, Legal Actions

According to a March 2024 post by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the short-term physiological effects of cocaine intake include higher body temperature and heart rate, dilated pupils, constricted blood vessels, and increased blood pressure. People may feel paranoid, irritated, restless, and experience muscle twitches and vertigo.

“Regularly snorting cocaine can lead to loss of sense of smell, nosebleeds, problems with swallowing, hoarseness, and an overall irritation of the nasal septum leading to a chronically inflamed, runny nose. Smoking crack cocaine damages the lungs and can worsen asthma,” the post said.

“Cocaine damages many other organs in the body. It reduces blood flow in the gastrointestinal tract, which can lead to tears and ulcerations. Many people who use cocaine chronically lose their appetite and experience significant weight loss and malnourishment. Cocaine has significant and well-recognized toxic effects on the heart and cardiovascular system. Chest pain that feels like a heart attack is common and sends many people who use cocaine to the emergency room.”

Other risks include stroke, seizure, bleeding in the brain, neurological problems, and Parkinson’s disease.

As for marijuana, short-term effects include anxiety, sleepiness, confusion, and an impaired ability to concentrate and remember. If marijuana is smoked, then blood vessels can be damaged. People may also hallucinate and suffer from paranoia, according to a March 2024 post by Health Canada.

Long-term effects include harm to memory, intelligence, and the ability to think and make decisions. The lungs may suffer from infections, bronchitis, and increased mucus buildup. Effects tend to be worse if marijuana use started during early adolescence.

The Trump administration has taken various legal actions against drug traffickers.

On May 13, the Drug Enforcement Administration announced that two illegal immigrants and two convicted felons were sentenced to prison for being part of an international drug trafficking and money laundering group whose operations stretched from Atlanta to Mexico.

The four accused were sentenced to prison terms ranging from five years and five months to 15 years.

“These defendants forfeited their freedom by choosing to poison our community and enrich narco-terrorists abroad,” U.S. Attorney Theodore S. Hertzberg said.

In March, a 26-year-old Mexican national illegally residing in Houston was sentenced to 12 years in federal prison for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The FBI on Thursday said it is offering a $200,000 reward for information leading to the capture and prosecution of a former U.S. Air Force counterintelligence specialist who defected to Iran in 2013 and was later charged with revealing classified information to the Iranian regime.

The bureau said in a statement that Monica Witt served in the military from 1997 to 2008, then worked as a government contractor until 2010. She later defected to Iran in 2013.

In 2019, she was indicted by a grand jury in Washington on espionage charges, including transmitting national defense information to the Iranian regime, the FBI said.

After she defected, according to the indictment, she later provided information to Iran and put “sensitive and classified U.S. national defense information and programs” at risk, according to the statement.

The information she provided to the Iranian regime endangered American personnel and their families stationed abroad, the FBI said.

Witt is also accused of performing “research on behalf of the Iranian regime to allow them to target her former colleagues in the U.S. government,” the bureau added.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which has launched attacks on U.S. assets in the region and recently attacked commercial shipping vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, has benefited from her defection to Iran, it added.

“Monica Witt allegedly betrayed her oath to the Constitution more than a decade ago by defecting to Iran and providing the Iranian regime National Defense Information and likely continues to support their nefarious activities,” Daniel Wierzbicki, special agent in charge of the FBI Washington Field Office’s Counterintelligence and Cyber Division, said in a May 14 statement.

Even though she defected years ago, the special agent added that the FBI has “not forgotten and believes that during this critical moment in Iran’s history, there is someone who knows something about her whereabouts.”

“The FBI wants to hear from you so you can help us apprehend Witt and bring her to justice,” Wierzbicki said.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has said that she defected after being invited to two all-expense-paid conferences in the country that the DOJ says promoted anti-Western propaganda and condemned American moral standards. Before that, Witt had been warned by the FBI about her activities, but she told agents that she would not provide sensitive information about her work if she returned to Iran, prosecutors said.

It wasn’t immediately known why the FBI was bringing attention to Witt’s case on May 14.

The United States and Iran have been at war since Feb. 28. Tehran recently submitted proposals to Washington to end the conflict, which were rejected by the United States. This week, Iran allegedly attacked several ships in the region. A UK maritime agency said a ship was seized near the Strait of Hormuz and moved to Iran on May 14.

U.S. President Donald Trump on May 14 said that his patience with Tehran is running out and that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had agreed during talks in Beijing that Iran must move to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway through which about a fifth of the world’s oil passes on a normal day.

Anyone with information about Witt or her whereabouts is urged to contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI. Tips can also be submitted to local FBI offices, the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate, or sent via tips.fbi.gov, according to the law enforcement bureau.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Chinese President Xi Jinping from May 19 to 20, just days after US President Donald Trump concluded his state visit to Beijing, the Kremlin has announced.

In a Telegram statement, Russia’s Foreign Ministry unveiled that Putin would travel to China “at the invitation” of Xi Jinping, marking the 25th anniversary of the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation between Russia and China.

The readout indicates the two leaders will discuss expanding their countries’ “comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation” and exchange views on “key international and regional issues.”

“Following the talks, they are expected to sign a Joint Statement at the highest level, as well as a number of bilateral intergovernmental, interdepartmental and other documents,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

Putin is also scheduled to meet Chinese Premier Li Qiang to discuss economic and trade cooperation. While all of this was likely in the planning stages long ago, the timing and symbolism sends a resounding message, at a moment when ironically Trump’s China trip ended notably without any major breakthroughs on trade, or without resolving any aspect of the Iran war or Hormuz Strait crisis.

South China Morning Post notes additionally of the timing:

It will be the first time that China has hosted the leaders of the two powers in the same month outside a multilateral setting, a reflection of Beijing’s efforts to manage ties with both countries and position itself as a pivotal power amid an increasingly fractured world order.

Putin’s visit will also make China the first country to host all four leaders of the other permanent members of the UN Security Council within months of each other. France’s Emmanuel Macron visited Beijing in December followed by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in January.

However, Putin is a more frequent visitor to Beijing in recent years, and per SCMP: “Sources said Putin’s visit would not likely feature that scale of pomp, as Chinese officials had been busy with the Trump trip.”

But it will be a meeting among allies, and not rivals, after President Xi’s “no limits” alliance pledged with Putin just before the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Trump wanted to feel important after Xi invited him to Zhongnanhai, so he asked if any other world leaders had been there.

Xi told him it was rare… but that Putin had visited several times. pic.twitter.com/TwEJGwtM1m

— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) May 15, 2026

“Following the talks, they are expected to sign a Joint Statement at the highest level, as well as a number of bilateral intergovernmental, interdepartmental and other documents,” the ministry’s statement said.

Submitted by Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

Pakistan has negotiated the passage of vessels laden with Qatari LNG out of the Strait of Hormuz in a diplomatic feat that no other energy buyer has managed so far in the Iran war.

Pakistan, which was the mediator of the U.S.-Iran talks and is passing messages from one to the other, appears to have used well its close ties with both Qatar and Iran to negotiate the successful imports of two tankers with Qatari LNG.

Pakistan has relied on Qatar’s term LNG supply for years, but the war in the Middle East has led to the shutdown of Qatari LNG production and exports.

Without Qatar’s LNG, Pakistan has been reeling from an intensifying energy crisis with power outages and fuel rationing.

Thanks to a bilateral Pakistan-Iran agreement, two vessels carrying Qatari LNG arrived in Pakistan in recent days after successfully passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

The first LNG cargo that successfully cleared the chokepoint earlier this month was bound for Pakistan.

“Qatar-linked LNG movement through Hormuz showed a limited but significant restart,” maritime intelligence firm Windward said on Thursday in an analysis on the five weeks of ceasefire.

The Al Kharaitiyat on May 9 became the first Qatar LNG cargo to clear the Strait of Hormuz since Iran closed it on February 28, headed for Pakistan. Another Qatari LNG cargo arrived in Pakistan this week after clearing the chokepoint earlier in the week.

“Pakistan will continue to coordinate closely with Qatar to ensure uninterrupted LNG supplies,” Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Petroleum, Ali Pervaiz Malik, said on Thursday during a meeting with Qatar’s Ambassador to Pakistan, Ali bin Mubarak Al-Khater.

“Pakistan’s preference is to secure supplies from friendly brotherly countries through necessary approvals, without risking any loss of life or property,” the Pakistani minister said, adding that “efforts are underway to secure additional gas supplies in view of national energy requirements.”

Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClearPolitics,

Seven candidates vying for California’s governorship squared off Thursday in their fifth and final debate, with frontrunner Xavier Becerra facing down an onslaught of attacks from the right and the left over his policy record, a campaign fraud scandal, and what rivals described as a deceptive flip-flop on healthcare policy.

“This is what happens when you take the lead in polls,” remarked the former Biden Health and Human Services secretary after several heated attacks from his rivals.

Becerra’s recent surge to the top of the pack and his record spanning more than three decades in office made him a top target, continuing a theme from the last few debates over the last month.

An Emerson College poll released Wednesday showed Becerra as the top choice of just 19% of voters, compared to 17% each for Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Tom Steyer – a razor-thin margin that underscores just how volatile and wide open this race remains with just a few weeks of voting left in the primary. Another 12.1% of respondents still remain undecided.

The debate, co-hosted by the San Francisco Examiner and CBS News California, focused largely on affordability as poll after poll shows Californians sounding the alarm and voting with their feet. UC Berkeley researchers recently found that California lost a net 150,000 residents in 2025, concluding that the state’s affordability crisis is likely responsible for the exodus.

Fraud Scandal Clouds Campaign

The debate came on the same day Becerra’s former political adviser, Dana Williamson, pleaded guilty to three felonies tied to a scheme to steal $225,000 from one of his campaign accounts. The connection runs deep in California Democratic circles – Williamson most recently served as Gov. Gavin Newsom’s chief of staff. Two other Becerra associates – former chief of staff Sean McCluskie and Sacramento lobbyist Greg Campbell – pleaded guilty last year.

Republican candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, did not mince words, pointing to reports that new evidence shows McCluskie informed Williamson that he had told Becerra about the scheme to use funds from a dormant campaign account to pay for his wife’s employment.

“You shouldn’t be in this race; you should be preparing your criminal defense,” Hilton told Becerra as the audience erupted in gasps.

Steve Hilton takes aim at Xavier Becerra (British-ly):

“We learned today that Xavier is implicated in this corruption scandal…that he knew about illegal and improper payments from his campaign account to his former chief of staff…You should be preparing your criminal defense.” pic.twitter.com/Hlgazh86Jd

— Brendan Hartnett (@BrendanHartnett) May 15, 2026

Becerra took issue with Hilton’s assertion that the talk show host lacks a law degree – at which point Rep. Katie Porter interjected that she is a lawyer and backs her GOP rival’s legal analysis. Just because Becerra isn’t implicated in the charging document doesn’t mean he won’t be in the future, she argued.

“You know that does not preclude an indictment from being issued against you,” Porter said. “We do not know what Dana Williamson said about your involvement.”

Katie Porter continued to rail on fellow Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra about a perceived lack of details for using state tax revenue to fund proposed projects at the final California governor’s primary debate. pic.twitter.com/tXkrCtxBnR

— CBS Sacramento (@CBSSacramento) May 15, 2026

Steyer also posted on X.com Thursday that Becerra “likely broke state law, and now he’s at the center of an ongoing criminal investigation.”

Becerra pushed back, insisting he “did nothing wrong” while repeatedly citing a U.S. Department of Justice spokesperson who stated that “no candidate running for governor has been implicated” in the scheme.

Becerra’s Single-Payer Flip-Flop

Becerra, who served as California attorney general after Kamala Harris, also found himself on the defensive over allegations that he privately told California’s largest medical lobbying group that he opposed single-payer healthcare – directly contradicting his public position.

Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer confronted Becerra on stage, noting that the California Medical Association’s president claimed Becerra told doctors in a private meeting he was “very clearly” not supportive of the policy. The group subsequently endorsed Becerra and donated the maximum allowable amount to his campaign.

“So, are they lying?” Steyer pressed, repeatedly questioning whether Becerra was willing to tell one thing to powerful interest groups behind closed doors while publicly endorsing the opposite position.

Housing Crisis Takes Center Stage

California’s housing emergency was a top focus during Thursday’s debate. The state needs roughly 2.5 million more homes to meet current demand, according to a 2025 state housing assessment, while the median home price has topped $800,000 – double the national median – and asking rents are approaching a $2,900 average statewide, the highest in the nation.

The candidates offered sharply different prescriptions. Becerra has campaigned on an insurance rate freeze and said he would declare a state of emergency to cut through the red tape strangling new construction, while Villaraigosa pledged to streamline the permitting and ordinance bottlenecks that have made building in California so costly and slow.

Porter focused on the mental health dimension of the homelessness crisis, calling for stronger care courts to get people off the streets and into treatment. Bianco defended his office’s practice of arresting homeless individuals, arguing that Riverside County pairs enforcement with meaningful mental health services.

And Mahan – whose work on housing and homelessness in San José has been cited by several of his rivals as a model – took the opportunity to turn the tables on Becerra, noting pointedly that the frontrunner still cannot explain how he would actually pay for his housing plan.

Gas Prices and Energy Policy

With California’s average gas price surpassing $6 a gallon Thursday, Hilton made the case for expanding domestic oil production off the state’s coast – a proposal long supported by the Trump administration but rejected by all the California Democrats in the race.

“The price is the highest in the country because instead of getting oil and gas from our own oil production here in California, we are shipping it 7,500 miles in giant supertankers, spewing out carbon emissions,” Hilton said. “In the name of climate, we are increasing carbon emissions. We need some common sense here.”

The candidates were sharply divided on energy policy, with the fault lines falling largely along partisan and ideological lines. Becerra noted that he has sued oil and gas companies in the past as state attorney general. Steyer, meanwhile, focused on accelerating the shift away from fossil fuels and criticized oil companies’ pricing practices, arguing that energy companies are “overcharging us dramatically” and that California should restructure the market and expand alternative fuel sources, including importing refined fuel if necessary.

When asked whether they support reopening California to offshore drilling, all the Democrats said no, while Hilton and Bianco said yes.

Abortion Extradition Becomes Flashpoint

One of the debate’s sharpest exchanges centered on whether a California governor should hand over a state doctor to Louisiana to face criminal prosecution for prescribing abortion medication across state lines.

Extradition would require Newsom’s approval – something he said he won’t do. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul rejected a similar Louisiana extradition request last year, setting up an ongoing interstate clash over abortion enforcement.

Both Hilton and Bianco said they would – a position that puts them squarely at odds with California’s current leadership and its sweeping reproductive health shield laws.

“This is not about abortion rights,” Hilton argued. “This is about one trying to undermine another state’s laws. We have a federal system.”

Becerra Denies Fraud – Despite $267 Million Scheme Exposed Last Month

Perhaps the most jarring moment of the night came when Becerra was asked how he would combat Medicare fraud as governor. Rather than offering a substantive plan, Becerra appeared to deny that fraud in California has been proven – a stunning claim given that just last month, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced charges against 21 suspects and the dismantling of a major hospice fraud scheme that defrauded the state of $267 million.

Becerra’s remarks seemed more focused on deflecting blame onto the Trump administration than addressing the very real fraud happening on California’s watch.

“Trump is now trying to deprive California of another billion dollars in health care for Medi-Cal,” he said. “He doesn’t have the right to do that. You still have to prove the fraud – he’s taking money, even though he hasn’t proven in court what’s been done.”

The Frontrunner Newsom and Others Won’t Endorse

Perhaps more telling than anything said during the debate is what prominent Democrats are refusing to say outside of it. Gov. Gavin Newsom, former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and Rep. Pete Aguilar all awkwardly declined to endorse Becerra this week despite his frontrunner status – and, given that Williamson served as Newsom’s chief of staff, the governor’s silence carries particular weight.

The reluctance of high-profile Democrats to throw their weight behind their own party’s leading candidate suggests either a lack of confidence in Becerra’s ability to close the deal – or, more cynically, a calculated decision to keep their distance until the full scope of the scandal becomes clear.

Becerra Repeats Pledge To Fight Trump

If you closed your eyes Thursday night, you might have thought Donald Trump was on the ballot for California governor. Becerra invoked Trump’s name more than any other candidate on stage – cramming references to Trump into a single 60-second answer six times.

The Trump fixation produced some of the night’s more eyebrow-raising moments. While defending his tenure as HHS secretary, Becerra turned to Hilton and boasted that he had worked to expand healthcare coverage to 300 million Americans – “far beyond what Donald Trump, your daddy, gave us.” Hilton, however, declined to take the bait, coolly noting he had no interest in “silly name-calling.”

When asked whom he would support if he failed to make the November ballot, Becerra – like most of his Democratic rivals – said he would back any Democrat on stage. But he quickly added that he could never support any Trump-endorsed candidate, taking a direct shot at Hilton.

“Because we would have a Donald Trump look-alike in the governor’s office,” he said, “and we can’t afford to do that.”

In California, tarring Republicans with the Trump label is a well-worn and successful path to victory. But Becerra’s over-reliance on it during the debate renewed questions about his ability to think on his feet and whether he has the energy and vision to carry a grueling general election campaign. He came across as notably flat throughout much of the evening, repeatedly falling back on the talking point that he sued the Trump administration more than a hundred times during his tenure as California’s attorney general.

While those lawsuits produced some court victories, repeatedly falling back on them doesn’t suggest someone looking to provide bold and innovative solutions to California’s crises.

It has been a punishing week for Becerra – a gaffe with a reporter that went viral, a guilty plea from a former aide in the campaign money scandal, and now a debate performance that failed to seal the deal. Whether voters ultimately care about any of these individual stumbles remains to be seen, but taken together, they paint a picture of a frontrunner who is treading water rather than pulling away.

Big Promises, Thin Plans

The debate’s sharpest back-and-forth on policy substance may have come when candidates turned their fire on what they characterized as Becerra’s chronically vague economic platform. At one point, Porter held up her notebook on stage and pointedly demanded that Becerra explain how he would actually generate the revenue to pay for his proposals – a theatrical move reminiscent of the whiteboard moments that went viral during her time in Congress.

As previously stated, Mahan piled on, noting that Becerra had not even released a comprehensive housing plan until just one week ago.

Becerra’s response was telling. Rather than laying out a concrete revenue strategy, he pointed to Newsom’s revised May budget, released Thursday, as a model for how he would handle fiscal matters. He then pivoted, as he has done repeatedly throughout the campaign, to his legal battles with the Trump administration.

“We fought, and we won,” he said. “We’re going to do the same thing again.”

It’s a line that plays well with the Democratic base but does nothing to answer the fundamental question Porter was asking: How, specifically, does Becerra plan to pay for anything?

Steyer had a mixed night of his own, making some forceful, clear points and positioning himself as the field’s leading progressive change agent, particularly on energy policy and moving California away from fossil fuels.

But he also delivered several convoluted answers that failed to land, leaving undecided voters with little new to work with. His debate performance, like Becerra’s, was unlikely to dramatically reshape the race – though with just two points separating them in the latest polling, even a slight shift in momentum could prove decisive.

The debate’s most memorable moment may have come during a discussion of California’s struggling public education system. Steyer, perhaps unknowingly, handed Hilton the perfect setup when he invoked a familiar adage: “There’s an old saying: If you keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome, that’s insanity.”

Hilton didn’t hesitate. “Then don’t vote Democrat.”

Final statements from the final California governor’s primary debate.

On the debate stage were Democrats Xavier Becerra, Matt Mahan, Katie Porter, Tom Steyer, and Antonio Villaraigosa, and Republicans Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton. pic.twitter.com/kjeTEdZsnL

— CBS Sacramento (@CBSSacramento) May 15, 2026

Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics’ national political correspondent.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned Saturday that the United States would face mounting economic fallout from its “war of choice” against Iran, as both sides appear settled into a long game of waiting to inflict the most severe economic and political damage on the other.

In a post on X, Araghchi said Americans would bear the escalating financial costs of the conflict with Tehran. “Put aside gas price hike and stock market bubble. Real pain begins when U.S. debt and mortgage rates start to jump,” he wrote in English. This isn’t the first time Iranian officials and state media have tried to directly appeal to the American public.

Araghchi also pointed to growing economic strain inside the United States, saying auto loan delinquencies had already climbed to their highest level in more than 30 years. “This was all avoidable,” he added, framing the start of the conflict as Trump’s ‘war of choice’ in the Middle East.

Of course, the Pentagon has a big card to play too, as on Saturday US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that four vessels in the Hormuz area were “disabled to ensure compliance.”

In an official statement it said that that since the imposition of a naval blockade on Iranian ports, 75 commercial vessels have been redirected and four others disabled to “ensure compliance”.

There is no doubt the US naval blockade is putting immense economic pressure on the Iranian government, society, and the energy sectors as crude shit-ins loom, or are in progress…

The internal Iranian regime narrative has shifted markedly in the past 72 hours. Multiple officials have now openly acknowledged Iran’s structural gasoline deficit, war-damaged energy infrastructure, and the urgent need for consumption management.

Fuel shortages and tightened…

— Miad Maleki (@miadmaleki) May 16, 2026

One Saudi-funded source alleges of the tightening hardship situation inside Iran:

Fuel shortages and tighter rationing are pushing drivers across Iran into a growing gasoline black market, with citizens describing long lines at gas stations and sharply inflated prices in messages sent to Iran International.

The accounts describe growing frustration over restricted access to subsidized gasoline and arbitrary limits imposed by operators, leaving many motorists dependent on costly unofficial sales.

…Iran uses a subsidized fuel quota system controlled through electronic fuel cards. Every private vehicle receives a monthly gasoline allocation at discounted prices, while extra consumption is charged at higher rates.

One citizen was cited in the same report as complaining: “One day there’s quota left on your card, the next day it says your quota is finished. They even steal the few drops of gasoline they give people.”

The standoff drags on, amid reports the Trump administration is mulling resumption of the bombing campaign:

“There is no military solution to anything related to Iran”

Iran’s FM Abbas Araghchi emphasizes that the country will resist any aggression or pressure.

Follow Press TV on Telegram: https://t.co/LWoNSpkJSh pic.twitter.com/YecgTUMuon

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) May 15, 2026

However, US and Gulf media reports about the economic and political crisis inside Iran have often been somewhat exaggerated, in ‘hopes’ of anti-regime sentiment being stirred enough for some kind of new anti-government uprising. But that has yet to come, after months of war launched by the US and Israel. It seems Washington is still pinning its hopes on exactly this.

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on officially becoming the next Federal Reserve chair. Unfortunately for him, he may have just accepted the worst job in global finance at the worst possible moment.

Warsh was narrowly confirmed this week in the most partisan Fed chair vote in modern history, inheriting a central bank that has spent years under political attack while gliding straight into a macroeconomic minefield. Inflation just accelerated to a three-year high. Oil is higher amid Middle East tensions. President Trump is openly demanding lower rates. And now the bond market appears to be losing patience, pushing yields dramatically higher to end the week last week.

Friday was a perfect preview of the mess waiting for him.

On Friday, most investors spent the day staring at falling tech stocks as the S&P 500 dropped 1.24% and the Nasdaq fell 1.54%, but that wasn’t the real story. The real story was happening in Treasuries, where the 30-year yield ripped above 5.1% as investors digested hotter inflation data from earlier in the week and the growing realization that rates may need to stay higher for longer than Wall Street has been pricing in.

That’s where things get dangerous. Stocks can correct 5% and CNBC can fill airtime with “buy the dip” segments. Bond markets are different. When yields rise this fast, they tighten financial conditions everywhere at once. Mortgage rates stay elevated, corporate borrowing costs rise, commercial real estate refinancing gets uglier, and the federal government’s own interest expense starts ballooning.

And this is happening while the consumer is already showing cracks. Auto loan delinquencies are sitting near 2008 levels. Credit card delinquencies are hovering around financial crisis highs. Consumers are increasingly relying on high-interest debt just as inflation continues squeezing real wages.

That inflation problem is exactly what makes Warsh’s situation so miserable. CPI is still running at 3.8%. PPI is at 6%. Oil just moved above $100. This is not an environment where the Fed can casually ride in with emergency rate cuts or restart quantitative easing without risking another inflation wave.

Which is particularly awkward because Kevin Warsh has spent years arguing that the Fed became far too involved in financial markets and should shrink its $6.7 trillion balance sheet faster. He’s repeatedly pushed the idea that the central bank should stop acting like a permanent market backstop and return to more traditional monetary policy tools.

Very noble. Very disciplined. Very “markets need to stand on their own two feet.” And now he may be taking over just as markets are testing whether he actually means any of that.

Because it’s easy to give speeches about moral hazard when stocks are ripping higher, volatility is low, and everyone is pretending the economy is fine. It’s a little harder when the bond market starts throwing furniture around, long-term yields keep climbing, and every corner of the economy begins feeling the pressure at once.

Again, higher Treasury yields don’t just hurt speculative tech names—they ripple through everything. Housing activity slows as mortgage rates remain elevated. Corporate refinancing becomes more expensive. Commercial real estate gets squeezed even harder. Private equity exits dry up. Government interest payments balloon. Suddenly everyone from first-time homebuyers to Treasury officials starts having a very bad week.

And then there’s the stock market, which continues behaving like none of this applies to it. The Shiller P/E ratio is sitting around 42x—deep into “what could possibly go wrong?” territory. That kind of valuation only works if inflation cools quickly, rates fall, earnings remain strong, and liquidity stays abundant. In other words, it requires basically everything to go right at the exact moment a lot of things are going wrong.

That’s what makes this such a brutal setup for Warsh, as I wrote here: This Rally Ends In Panic.

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

If he lets yields continue climbing, he risks a broader market repricing, rising defaults, housing weakness, and credit stress that spills into the real economy. If he cuts rates too aggressively or restarts bond purchases, he risks pouring gasoline on inflation that is already running too hot. If he does nothing and tries to wait it out? Markets may decide for him.

That’s the problem with bond markets. They don’t care about academic framework. They don’t care about your carefully worded press conferences. And they definitely do not care about your long-term policy vision when they think inflation, deficits, and fiscal credibility are deteriorating in real time.

Just ask Liz Truss how quickly bond investors can humble policymakers.

So genuinely, good luck, Kevin. No sarcasm there. He’s walking into a non-enviable situation where inflation is sticky, consumers are weakening, stocks look euphoric, geopolitical tensions are driving oil prices higher, and the bond market may be on the verge of becoming the biggest source of instability in the entire financial system.

That’s not a soft landing, it’s a stress test disguised as a promotion. And while everyone else keeps obsessing over whether Nvidia is down 4% on a given day, Warsh should be staring directly at the Treasury marketl, because that’s where his real problems are about to begin.

With Waymo robotaxis now operating in 11 major U.S. markets, these fully autonomous Jaguar I-PACE SUVs are becoming increasingly visible to everyday folks. This wider rollout means more public encounters and more viral footage capturing robotaxis in the wild.

One such incident occurred in a northwest Atlanta neighborhood this week, where residents told local media outlet WSB-TV that more than 50 empty Waymo SUVs flooded their tiny street.

“It’s almost every little cul-de-sac in our area, so I think it’s a problem,” one neighbor on Battleview Drive told WSB’s Steve Gehlbach.

The Battleview resident said, “I think yesterday morning we had 50 cars come through between 6 and 7.”

It’s not just Battleview; other residents in the area say empty robotaxis have been repeatedly circling their streets in growing numbers over the past several weeks.

Residents told the local outlet that the robotaxis are not picking up passengers, raising concerns that the activity is excessive and potentially dangerous, especially for families with children nearby.

Expect more stories like this as robotaxi deployment ramps up nationwide. We have provided readers with enough context about robotaxi deployments (see here and here).

Just wait until local resistance movements, similar to data centers, begin …