Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

During a terse exchange, Elon Musk told the virulently leftist editor-in-chief of The Economist that civil war in Britain is inevitable on current trends – driven by rapid migration of people whose beliefs clash with Western civilisation.

In response, Zanny Minton Beddoes accused Musk of supporting the “far right,” and amplifying racists.

Musk called the coming confrontation a “reckoning,” rejected the racist smear, and turned the tables on an interviewer determined to paint secure borders and opposition to rape and murder as fringe extremism.

When the interviewer insisted she lived in Britain and called the claim “nonsense,” he shot back: “You live a very closeted existence!”

He expanded:

“If you have a large and growing, rapidly growing, group of people whose beliefs are antithetical to western beliefs, at some point there will be a reckoning.”

Musk described the prospect as inevitable and called it a “crying shame” that mainstream outlets refuse to recognise the threat to Western civilisation.

Pressed on whether he was racist or anti-Muslim, Musk answered directly:

“My partner is half-Indian and I have four children with her. One of them was named after a famous Indian physicist. So I would say I’m not racist.”

He continued:

“If people are coming to a country with antithetical views, I am against that. I’m against rape and murder, I’m against the imposition of rules and laws that are contrary to what we’ve come to accept in the West.”

The interviewer’s line of attack was clear.

She framed Musk’s support for parties defending borders and cultural continuity as backing for the “far right” and even “very fringe parties.”

Musk refused the frame.

“No, I support the NORMAL people,” he said. “What you call the far right FALSELY.”

He pointed out that the same positions – secure borders, safe cities, sensible spending – were mainstream only 10 or 15 years ago.

Speeches by Obama or Hillary Clinton on these subjects would today be denounced as Trumpian extremism by the “lunatic left.”

When Beddoes claimed people “loathe” him, Musk was unmoved, firing back “I don’t care, but the fact that, as you pointed out, a quarter billion people follow me is that I think a lot more people actually like me than don’t. And I think a lot more people hate you and the media more than you realize.”

?? Elon Musk just ENDED this snobby British reporter’s career !

Question “we started this conversation saying superlatives. It’s why people loathe you. Do you understand that?”

Musk “I don’t care, but the fact that, as you pointed out, a quarter billion people follow me is… pic.twitter.com/kCZ7OPk0jy

— J (@JayTC53) July 23, 2026

OOF. Feel the burn.

WATCH: Elon Musk DEMOLISHES a Reporter to Her Face For Calling Him ‘Far Right’, DARES Her to Keep it In The Interview: ‘DON’T CUT THIS’

“These are the NORMAL people”

“I would like to ADMONISH YOU and the Media”

Absolute Masterclass ? pic.twitter.com/Y481A616k4

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 23, 2026

The pattern is familiar. Positions once held by centre-left politicians are now labelled extreme so that any defence of Western norms can be pathologised. Musk called it out without apology.

She can’t comprehend what he’s saying. Fascinating. https://t.co/Uy7L0z4jYT

— ??? ??? (@antleary) July 23, 2026

Watching this woman made me glad I cancelled my subscription. You got time with world’s most brilliant man and just tried to lecture him. Nobody cares about your woke bullshit

— ClevelandRocks (@cavsfan1983) July 23, 2026

The full interview, spanning AI, Europe, politics and the rest, is available here (for now):

The Economist Elon Musk July 23rd 2026 pic.twitter.com/xti3kXcZFc

— Lord Withers (@_lordwithers) July 24, 2026

Musk’s warning with regards to Britain is not abstract theorising. It lands against a backdrop of UK government moves that look like quiet preparation for internal fracture.

Last year Professor David Betz of King’s College London warned that official talk of a Russian invasion threat was a convenient cover for hardening infrastructure and building a citizen’s militia against domestic conflict.

Low trust, political factionalism and demographic change, he argued, are pushing Britain toward civil strife.

Just days ago the UK government urged households to stockpile long-life food, water, medicines and wind-up radios while announcing the largest home-defence wargame in decades – Operation Albiston Shadow – again framed around hybrid Russian threats. Betz’s analysis remains the same: the real concern is internal, not external.

Musk’s latest comments connect those dots in plain language.

The UK has seen repeated outbreaks of disorder linked to migration failures – Southport, Southampton and beyond. Official responses have often appeared two-tier. At the same time, the state is stockpiling resilience messaging and running large-scale domestic defence exercises while insisting the danger is primarily Russian.

The academic critique from Betz and others is that this is politically safer language for a deeper problem: a society whose cohesion has been eroded by rapid demographic change and elite refusal to confront incompatible values.

Musk is simply saying the quiet part out loud. Large-scale importation of populations that reject core Western principles – equality under the law, free speech, protection of women and girls – creates friction that does not magically resolve. When media and political classes treat any discussion of that friction as “far right,” the pressure only builds.

Britain’s leadership can keep pretending the only threats come from Moscow or from citizens who notice the transformation of their own towns. Musk is not pretending. Neither should anyone else who values the civilisation that still, for now, allows such interviews to happen.

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.

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Struggle session

“. . .there is no saving the Left. There is only saving America from them.” — Sasha Stone

The polycrisis of 2026 whirls like a demon-infested storm overcoming this human project of ours like a medieval panorama of the world’s end. Everything is fraught, tilting toward hazard, menace, ruin. Even under a summer sun, the mind sees only darkness everywhere it looks.

Apocalypse now, it seems like.

You almost can’t blame the doomers, the black pill-ers, lost in their transports of dread.

But I tell you, we will get through this.

Is it a surprise that the IRGC has a death wish for its host, Iran? They’ve been advertising it loudly for half a century, yearning for martyrdom, the bliss of paradise, marriage to multiple perfumed virgins, all the pomegranates you could ever want, and perpetual dreamtime beside a gently burbling fountain in the palace of eternity. Trouble is, to get there you must have your head blown off.

That’s exactly what the IRGC is asking for, though the millions of ordinary Iranians probably have their doubts about the ask. They are hostages of the IRGC regime, which refuses to just stop being a problem for the world. Mr. Trump’s proffer for Iran still abides: become a normal nation, sovereign and all, only without atom bombs. Let ships sail through Hormuz unmolested. Sell your oil, make some money, trade with the other fellas across the Persian Gulf, have a nice civilized life with all the refinements of age-old Persian culture, even with its Islamic overlay. Be happy!

The USA does not seek to occupy Iran, steal its resources, subjugate its people, force them to buy Minnie Mouse plush toys, play baseball, eat Jimmy Dean sausage for breakfast, strum banjoes, or wear cowboy hats. Just stop projecting violence and discord all over the Middle East.

You can’t make us, the IRGC says. Yes, we will, the USA replies. And so it goes. Next up: bridges and power plants. Plus, every ship you damage, we’ll deduct the cost of repair from your frozen assets held in our banks. This is where things stand after the thirteenth night of strategic bombing against the IRGC’s launch sites, drone factories, missile storage caverns, and shoreline military installations. Iran prepared assiduously for this death-scene for decades, building hidey-holes here, there, and everywhere. But every time they launch something now, our satellites mark the coordinates, and boom, now there’s one less hidey-hole.

Iran’s currency, the rial, has an exchange rate against the US dollar of about 1,900,000 to one dollar. There is hardly a functioning economy left. The people are flat broke. Everyday life must be hell now. Could be the IRGC was getting tons of munitions and material for free from China, but days ago we blew up the railroad bridge at Aq Tekeh-Khan that was China’s main connection to Iran, so that’s over with.

You must doubt that Russia is capable of sending arms to Iran at this point. Russia needs every drone and missile it can fabricate now that Ukraine is sending drones clear into Moscow and St. Petersburg on a regular basis. Of course, that war is being stoked by NATO, which perforce includes the USA. A bill (H.R. 2913 — the Ukraine Support Act) that would furnish $1.3-1.8 billion in direct security, military, and reconstruction assistance for Ukraine plus $8 billion in loans was passed by the House in June, but languishes in the Senate. President Trump has threatened to veto it, as running counter to the administration’s preference for negotiations with Russia to end the Ukraine War rather than extend it.

These two conflicts must seem intractable for now, but the mojo driving them has clear and present limits.

If the USA does not underwrite Ukraine’s war effort, then that leaves the EU nations, who are increasingly broke, and for all their idle talk are really incapable of mounting a major arms production campaign.

The UK especially is skating on thin ice these days as Mr. Trump methodically cancels its long-running command and control of global finance through the City of London (as its “Wall Street” is called). In fact, it looks as if the floundering UK — with dopey Andy Burnham rolling in as Britain’s seventh Prime Minister in a decade — has passed the ball of globalist leadership to its forward striker (and all-purpose fixer) Mark Carney the Prime Minister of Canada.

Carney, who was previously chief of the Bank of England, has played a series of losing games against President Trump the past year, while Mr. Carney is busy wrecking the Canadian economy for the sake of the globalist “green” flimflam, a sustained high volume of third world immigration, and outlandish DEI activism that includes giving vast tracts of real estate back to Canada’s First Nations people, their Indians. Carney has also very actively played footsie with the CCP to a degree that is seriously pissing off Mr. Trump. Among all the other shocks and surprises upcoming, you might imagine him having to send the 82nd Airborne up to Ottawa to inform PM Carney that there will be no globalist seat of operations in North America.

Yes, things are getting that strange. And then, continuing the clean-up operation south of our border, there is Cuba to straighten out. Cuba is obviously next. Our patience with that failing state’s communist export project is particularly thin, now that the Democratic Party here is entertaining Marxist-Leninist dreams of glory.

On top of all that, we have serious concerns with the financial markets and the widening income inequality that drives the younger generations’ yen for “socialism” (free rent, free medicine, free stuff).

Financialization concentrates and compounds wealth while the salary-mule class stagnates, suffers, goes broke, and nurses its grievances.

We’re pushing into the season of financial train wrecks. AI has cornered all the free capital in the land — for something that appears to be an existential menace as much as any potential economic benefit — and it is wildly perverting the equity market. The bond market groans under the debt burden and the impossibility of fiscal prudence. Capitalism that can’t self-correct invites financial and political violence.

It’s probably a greater threat to us than the faraway wars, bad as they are. Mr. Trump, Secretary Bessent, and others in charge surely know this — that the American ownership class has become tiny, and that the cure for that is getting the vast dis-owned, forsaken middle-class back into businesses that they will own, in an economy based on production of real goods, not on playing games with money.

There is so much to be done and we can get it done if we screw our heads back on.

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

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

When I first heard the term “financial repression,” I thought it had to be a joke.

Why would governments and central banks use a term with such a negative connotation? Even people who are financially illiterate can understand that financial repression is a bad thing.

Simply put, financial repression is a strategy governments use to reduce their debt burden by manipulating interest rates below inflation.

It allows them to borrow in dollars and repay in dimes.

Here’s how the IMF describes it, emphasis mine:

“Financial repression includes directed lending to government by captive domestic audiences (such as pension funds), explicit or implicit caps on interest rates, regulations of cross-border capital movements, and (generally) a tighter connection between government and banks.”

More from the IMF:

“High public debt often produces the drama of default and restructuring.

But debt is also reduced through financial repression, a tax on bondholders and savers via negative or below-market real interest rates.

After WWII, capital controls and regulatory restrictions created a captive audience for government debt, limiting tax-base erosion.

Financial repression is most successful in liquidating debt when accompanied by inflation.”

For example, if inflation is 9% and governments fix interest rates at 4%, there is an ongoing 5% wealth transfer from the lender to the borrower. And that transfer compounds over time.

I think financial repression is how the US government will try to manage its otherwise impossible debt situation.

Consider this.

Among the biggest expenditures for the US government are so-called entitlements like Social Security and Medicare.

It’s unlikely any politician will cut entitlements. On the contrary, I expect them to continue growing.

That’s because tens of millions of Baby Boomers—about 22% of the population—will enter retirement in the coming years. Cutting Social Security and Medicare is a sure way to lose an election.

With the most precarious geopolitical situation since World War 2, National Defense—another large expenditure—is unlikely to be cut. Instead, defense spending is all but certain to increase. President Trump has proposed increasing it from $917 billion to $1.5 trillion. The ongoing war with Iran guarantees military spending has nowhere to go but up, way up.

Different types of welfare programs also make up a considerable part of the federal budget and are unlikely to be cut.

In short, efforts to reduce expenditures will be meaningless unless it becomes politically acceptable to make chainsaw-like cuts to entitlements, national defense, and welfare, while also reducing the national debt enough to lower interest costs.

In other words, the US would need a leader who—at a minimum—returns the federal government to a limited Constitutional Republic, closes the 800 military bases abroad, ends entitlements, kills the welfare state, and repays a large portion of the national debt.

However, that is a completely unrealistic fantasy.

It would be foolish to bet on it happening.

In any case, don’t count on increased tax revenue to offset these increases in federal expenditures.

Even if tax rates went to 100%, it still wouldn’t be enough to stop the debt from growing.

According to Forbes, there are around 902 billionaires in the US with a combined net worth of about $6.8 trillion.

The US federal government spent around $7 trillion in FY 2025, and will almost certainly spend a lot more in FY 2026 and beyond.

Even if the US government confiscated 100% of billionaire assets through a wealth tax, it wouldn’t cover even a single year of current federal spending.

And even after confiscating all billionaire wealth, the US government would still have to borrow more than $200 billion to cover FY 2025 spending.

Here’s the bottom line: increasing taxes, even to extreme levels, isn’t going to change the trajectory of this unstoppable trend—even slightly.

The truth is, no matter what happens, the deficits will not stop growing, nor will the debt needed to finance them.

In short, it’s politically impossible to even slow the federal spending growth rate, let alone cut it.

That means issuing ever-increasing amounts of debt is the only way to finance continuously expanding budget deficits.

The ever-growing interest expense on the ever-growing federal debt compounds the problem. It adds to the deficit, which must be financed with even more debt, which creates even more interest expense.

So what options does the US government have to deal with this impossible situation?

In my view, the US government has no choice but to implement financial repression.

The idea is to stealthily confiscate wealth from bondholders without causing too much alarm.

Financial Repression

There are many flavors of financial repression.

Capital controls. Mandates forcing banks, pension funds, and insurance companies to buy government bonds. Regulations that make government debt appear “safe” or “risk-free” on institutional balance sheets. Yield curve control. Interest rate caps. Restrictions on moving money abroad.

And countless other policies designed to trap capital inside the system and push it toward government debt.

For example, many countries have forced private retirement funds into unwanted government debt. I have no doubt the US government would do the same under pressure.

They could try to sell it to a scared and financially ignorant public as a safety measure—a way to help people protect their retirement savings by moving them into “safe” Treasuries amid a stock market collapse.

They could sell it with patriotic lies and push War Bonds, as they have done in the past.

They could mandate that a certain amount—say, 25%—of all new contributions to private retirement accounts must consist of Treasuries. For your own good, of course.

They could even forcibly convert existing assets held in retirement accounts into government bonds.

No matter the method, the result is the same.

The government needs to borrow enormous amounts of money at artificially low interest rates.

So it creates rules, incentives, and restrictions that force or pressure savers and institutions to finance government deficits on terms they would never voluntarily accept in a free market.

That is the essence of financial repression.

It’s no wonder financial repression is so attractive to politicians.

It allows them to reduce the real value of the debt without admitting they defaulted, without officially raising taxes, and without making the politically impossible spending cuts that would otherwise be required.

And they can do it while perhaps not even 1 in 100 people truly understand what is happening.

Financial repression will not arrive with a public announcement. It will come through policies that appear reasonable, temporary, and even protective—while quietly eroding the value of your savings and limiting your financial freedom.

This is only one part of a much larger crisis now taking shape. Read our free report to understand the forces driving it, the risks they pose to your wealth and personal freedom, and the three strategies you can use right now to prepare.

Neocon war hawks thought that Iran’s defense capabilities could be obliterated through shock and awe style heavy bombing raids, such as during the opening days and weeks of Operation Epic Fury, but just like pretty much every other assumption about how things would go in the little Iran “excursion” – they are once again proven wrong.

Several fresh reports from both American and Israeli sources say that Iran is rebuilding damaged and destroyed facilities at much faster-than-expected pace. This is despite the well over 20,000 US-Israeli strikes carried out at the height of the war.

Analyzing the latest satellite imagery assessing the damage, The Wall Street Journal writes that the Islamic Republic has “quickly rebuilt infrastructure damaged during the U.S. and Israeli bombing campaign over recent months, from missile bases nestled deep inside mountains to bridges, ports and production facilities, according to Israeli and Western officials and a review of satellite imagery.”

The publication says that this is a significant factor in explaining how the Iranians have managed to maintain their grip on the Strait of Hormuz and thus serious economic and political leverage.

Everything from roads to bridges to tunnel entrances have also be restored at surprising speeds, which also suggests the US bombings have had a rallying effect among civic workers and the broader population in support of the nation and the government.

WSJ offers but one example as follows: “Near Kangavar, in western Iran, satellite imagery from Planet Labs in March showed two tunnel entrances and an access road damaged by airstrikes aimed at blocking access to an Iranian missile base. Within weeks, imagery from Airbus revealed a neatly paved road leading to freshly excavated entrances.”

Israeli media too has listed out the following further examples:

Kangavar Missile Base: Attacked in early March; satellite images show an access road was destroyed, but a newly paved road was built weeks later to bypass the damage.

Bandar Anzali Port: Despite Israel claiming significant damage in March to the IRGC-linked port, command center, and shipyard – early July images show active reconstruction underway.

Tehran Missile Plant: Recent imagery documents active rebuilding efforts at a missile production facility near the capital.

This is causing US and Israeli officials to revisit strategy concerning potential future major bombing campaigns over Iran.

It was in April that the US and Israel began ramping up attacks on bridges and rail lines to cripple Iran’s national transport network. Israel especially adopted attacks against key civilian infrastructure as a battle tactic, in hopes that eventually there would be a groundswell of anti-Tehran anger domestically, leading to government overthrow. Of course, regime change has never happened, and is proving an illusive Neocon fantasy. 

Finally have a moment to comment on this.

Iran is a country of over 90 million people, with high educational attainment and strong motives for self-defense.

The real surprise in this story is that U.S. and Israeli officials seem surprised that Iran is rebuilding so quickly.

— Rosemary Kelanic (@RKelanic) July 24, 2026

President Trump himself had also at the time repeatedly threatening to bomb bridges, power plants, and other infrastructure to send Iran “back to the Stone Age.”

Iranian officials say multiple damaged rail lines and bridges have been restored in record time – sometimes within 40 to 96 hours – using domestic engineering teams. The ceasefire which was declared on April 8, but which is now defunct, was used as a time of rapid rebuilding – something which even US officials have acknowledged. 

One of the main macro drivers this week remains the Gulf energy shock, as chokepoints from the Strait of Hormuz to Bab el-Mandeb are disrupted. Turmoil in the Black Sea between Russia and Ukraine is also sending chills through commodities desks.

Related energy coverage:

• RBC Commodities Chief Warns “War Entering Dangerous Phase” As Chokepoint Chaos Risks Oil Above 2008 Peak

Brent crude is back above $100 a barrel, while WTI has reached $92, pushing Treasury yields higher, tightening financial conditions and weighing on duration-sensitive and consumer-facing stocks.

At the start of the week, AAA data showed that while prices vary across states…

… the national average for regular gasoline had exceeded the politically sensitive threshold of $4 per gallon.

And going higher…

JPMorgan’s head of Global Commodities Research and Strategy, Natasha Kaneva, told clients that Brent should average about $94 a barrel if the conflict is contained to one month, with each additional month of disruption adding roughly $7 to $8 as global inventories shrink.

Kaneva warned that a three-month disruption could lift Brent to around $114, while a 1 million barrel-per-day recovery in Chinese imports would add another $3 to fair value.

Related:

• Three Levers China Is Pulling To Weather Gulf Energy Shock; How Long Can Beijing Hold Out?

Under her base case, Brent averages $86 in Q3 and $80 in Q4, allowing gas prices to fall from just under $4 in August to about $3.30 by year-end.

However, she noted that another month of disruptions across the maritime chokepoints would push pump prices toward $4.20, while a two-month extension could lift them above $4.50.

Kaneva also pointed out that the $4.20 and $4.50 thresholds are where the Trump administration would likely face intensified political pressure to negotiate with Iran.

In the previous round of escalations, negotiations were initiated once US gasoline prices reached $4.20 and became materially more urgent as prices neared $4.50 (Figure 10). Oil may be a global commodity, but political tolerance for high energy prices remains overwhelmingly domestic

Separately, gasoline above $4 represents a line in the sand at which working-poor consumers begin trading down at convenience stores and gas stations, while broader sentiment shifts to the downside, which only means the political pressure heats up for Trump when gas prices rise north of $4.

Authored by Rachel Roberts via The Epoch Times,

A judge in Florida has ruled President Donald Trump must hand over financial records sought by the BBC for its defense against his $10 billion defamation lawsuit.

The U.S. president is suing the corporation over an episode of “Panorama” that edited together different sections of his speech on the day of the Capitol breach in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

The BBC reported that Judge Enjoliqué Lett granted a motion by the corporation’s legal team to compel the release of financial records held by the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, created to manage his businesses while he is president.

‘Partial Success’

The judge’s ruling at Tuesday’s opening hearing in Miami can still be appealed, but the BBC said it amounts to a “partial success” in its attempt to force Trump to provide evidence for his claim that he suffered financial loss due to the Panorama edit.

The defamation case is currently at the discovery phase, where both sides must provide documents, internal or otherwise, that could form part of their evidence.

The corporation has produced 87,000 pages of documents, according to the BBC’s lawyers, who said Trump’s legal team had released a “sham production” of 735 pages, which they said were “news articles” and other material “pulled from the internet.”

Charles Tobin, counsel for the BBC, said this meant the discovery process had been “entirely one-sided.”

‘Fishing Expedition’

Trump’s legal team accused the BBC of a “fishing expedition” with subpoenas designed to “harass” former officials.

Alejandro Brito, counsel for Trump, described the BBC’s “sweeping” requests for documents as “oppressive.”

He opposed the BBC’s requests for records of Trump’s conversations with aides relating to the events of Jan. 6, as well as subpoenas issued to federal agencies and former officials.

The BBC said that the president’s lawyers focused on a letter of apology sent from the corporation’s chairman, Samir Shah, to Trump in November last year, describing it as a “concession” and “admission.”

Shah wrote in the letter that the Panorama episode in question had “unintentionally created the impression … that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”

The judge’s decision opens the door for the BBC to peruse the finances of more than 400 companies owned by the Trump family trust.

President Donald Trump looks on during a rally in Washington, on Jan. 6, 2021. Jim Bourg/Reuters

A spokesman for Trump’s legal team told The Epoch Times via email: “The formerly respected and now disgraced BBC defamed President Trump by intentionally, maliciously, and deceptively doctoring his speech in a brazen attempt to interfere in the 2024 Presidential Election.

“The BBC has a long pattern of deceiving its audience in coverage of President Trump, all in service of its own leftist political agenda. President Trump’s powerhouse lawsuit is holding the BBC accountable for its defamation and reckless election interference just as he has held other fake news mainstream media responsible for their wrongdoing.”

Motion to Dismiss

The BBC has sought to have the entire case dismissed, arguing the documentary was not broadcast in the United States. The court has yet to rule on this, but Judge Altman denied the broadcaster’s application to stay the discovery phase of the lawsuit.

In court documents released on March 17, lawyers for the BBC argued that the lawsuit could have a “chilling effect” on “robust reporting on public figures and events.”

The BBC’s flagship “Panorama” program came under scrutiny last November over an episode broadcast on Oct. 28, 2024, a week before the U.S. presidential election.

Through cutting and splicing together different sections of his speech, the documentary created the impression that Trump had encouraged violence at the Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, according to critics and Trump’s legal team. Protesters had gathered in Washington to show they disputed the result of the 2020 presidential election, won by Joe Biden.

The BBC’s 34-page legal document cited a “lack of personal jurisdiction” and a “failure to state a claim” among the grounds to dismiss the lawsuit.

Lawyers for the broadcaster argued that Trump’s subsequent election victory in 2024 demonstrates that no serious reputational harm was caused by the “Panorama” broadcast.

(Left) Former CEO of BBC News Deborah Turness at an event in London on Oct. 13, 2022. (Right) Former BBC Director-General Tim Davie at the BBC World Service in London on April 28, 2022. Leon Neal/Getty Images, Hannah McKay/Pool/AFP via Getty Images

Trump is unable to sue the corporation in England, as the statute of limitations for defamation is only one year. His lawyers filed the claim in the southern district of Florida, where the statute of limitations is two years, in December last year.

The BBC argues that the state of Florida has no jurisdiction because Trump cannot demonstrate that the corporation “purposefully aimed the documentary at Florida” and that it was clearly made for the UK audience.

BBC iPlayer is geo-blocked in the United States, although Trump’s lawyers have argued that it could be accessed by Americans using a virtual private network.

The BBC is funded by a license fee that is supposed to be paid by every UK household that watches live television, although the number of people purchasing a license has fallen in recent years, leading to cutbacks.

BBC Director-General Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness both resigned in November following the scandal over a leaked internal report highlighting apparent bias at the corporation, including the “Panorama” edit.

Matt Brittin, a former Google senior executive, took over as the corporation’s director-general in May.

Another large warehouse and logistics hub for major online Russian retailer Wildberries has been targeted and struck by Ukrainian drones.

This is the third time in a week the company widely considered to be the ‘Russian Amazon’ has seen its warehouses go up in flames. At least eight of its shipping facilities have been attacked overall this month. Wildberries co-founder Tatyana Kim confirmed the fresh attack on company facilities Friday morning:

Kim, Russia’s wealthiest woman, said Wildberries facilities in St. Petersburg and the surrounding Leningrad region, as well as in annexed Crimea, were hit overnight. Fires broke out at several locations, though Kim said “parts” of the warehouses were saved.

While Kim said none of the company’s employees were injured, Leningrad region Governor Alexander Drozdenko wrote in a post on Telegram earlier in the morning that three people were hurt during the attack in his region.

Operations at these facilities have been halted, while all personnel a the impacted warehouse in Crimea have been evacuated.

The St. Petersburg attack resulted in especially dramatic scenes of a huge smoke plume stretching high into the atmosphere, and even visible from space, NASA satellite imagery showed.

It was just last week that the company’s warehouses in central Russia were struck, which killed eight people. In the face of the Kremlin calling the attacks acts of terrorism and war crimes, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has claimed that the hubs were “involved in providing the Russian army with drone components, navigation equipment and other gear.”

The Wildberries facilities have been increasingly targeted amid broader nightly drone waves out of Ukraine, with a separate Friday attack in the Kirov region killing at least six people.

NBC News has noted, “Wildberries, whose banking arm had sanctions imposed on it by the European Union this week over its financial contribution to the Russian budget, plays a central role in Russia’s consumer economy.”

“Its targeting by Ukraine appears to be part of Kyiv’s attempts to ensure ordinary Russians feel the impact of the war which has raged on Ukrainian territory for more than four years,” the report adds.

The company says it is working around the clock to restore service to areas impacted by the warehouse attacks. 

Stunning footage of Wildberries hub fully on fire from earlier this week in Krasnodar:

Clear view of the entire Wildberries hub in Krasnodar fully engulfed in fire. https://t.co/PcQN5uFauU pic.twitter.com/I8jn0BAtAM

— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) July 22, 2026

Reuters has reviewed that “Together with smaller rivals, Wildberries and Ozon sell goods and services worth the equivalent of 8.5% of Russia’s gross domestic product. They provide jobs for 4 million people, or more than 5% of the country’s workforce.”

The key takeaway heading into the weekend is that maritime chokepoint chaos has spread from the Strait of Hormuz to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, while fighting across the Black Sea has intensified between Russia and Ukraine. The widening disruptions have prompted several institutional desks this week to warn that a potential squeeze on physical commodity markets could send prices from energy to agricultural goods higher.

“The Middle East conflict has escalated, putting a substantial squeeze back into commodity markets,” Paul Bloxham, HSBC’s chief economist for Australia, New Zealand and global commodities, wrote in a note on Friday morning.

Bloxham continued, “Traffic through Hormuz has almost stalled again, and the disruption has spread to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the key access point for the Red Sea, for Saudi oil going to Asia and Europe-Asia trade through the Suez Canal.”

Bloxham warned that with Brent trading above $100 a barrel and strategic petroleum reserves being rapidly depleted worldwide, energy markets face a mounting risk of a “super-squeeze.”

His message was blunt: “It’s not over yet,” adding, “Hormuz, Mandeb, oil at 100 … it’s getting worse. “

Here’s more:

The Brent oil price has risen sharply, to over USD100/b recently; European and Asian gas prices are more than 40% m-o-m; refined product prices, like jet fuel and diesel are surging; urea prices are up 13%; and wheat prices are at a three year high – all on supply constraint concerns. With inventory rundown having been a key adjustment factor preventing much bigger prices spikes earlier in the conflict, and stocks now much lower, concerns about ‘tank bottom’ levels and non-linearities are expected to come back into focus. It’s a ‘super-squeeze’. And it’s not over yet.

Bloxham also highlighted the market mechanics that prevented Brent from spiking even higher a few months back, including US strategic reserve releases and China’s reduction of oil imports and SPR.

But he warned that these buffers are finite and can suppress the price shock for only so long:

As we have actively written about over the past few months, a key reason that commodity prices – particularly oil – did not spike higher earlier has been active reduction of inventories, particularly with the US release of strategic reserves and in China, where oil imports have been drawn down (see ‘Better, but the Hormuz disruption is not over yet’, 25 June 2026; and ‘Hormuz is reshaping commodity markets’, 25 May 2026).

However, the challenge is that inventory reduction can only provide an offset for so long.

At some point, concerns about stocks falling to critical levels may show up in non-linearities in markets (see Hormuz still closed: Beware Strait non-linearities, 28 April 2026). However, even with a deep-dive looks at measured stocks and supply pathways, it is hard to be definitive about when reserves will reach these critical levels. Commodity markets are highly adaptable, and when the demand is there, flexible markets often find a way to deliver. Aggregate price benchmarks also only go so far. In the face of acute supply shocks, commodity markets tend to fragment, with many different prices for the same products in different locations and for different delivery times (see More fragmentation as Hormuz blockage continues, 13 April 2026).

That said, the longer the disruption is in place – and the recent escalation suggests it is, indeed, going on for longer – the more likely it becomes that commodity prices will spike higher, in non-linear ways, as stocks are depleted.

A growing list of institutional commodity desks, including Goldman Sachs, RBC Capital Markets and JPMorgan, has warned that the expanding maritime chokepoint crisis is entering a more dangerous phase.

Helima Croft, RBC’s head of global commodity strategy, cautioned that the “war enters a dangerous phase with the Red Sea and critical infrastructure at risk.“

These desks have raised their near-term Brent forecasts as the disruption spreads. Goldman commodities strategist Daan Struyven warned that Brent could exceed $120 a barrel in the fourth quarter if the Hormuz crisis persists.

Related:

• Oil’s Next Move Hinges On Three Variables
• The Oil Time Bomb: How To Play It

With the US national average for regular gasoline now above $4 a gallon, the energy shock has crossed a politically sensitive level (again), which could increase pressure on the Trump administration to pursue a diplomatic off-ramp.

Authored by Peter Tchir via Academy Securities,

With weakness in chips and AI the prior week, that was a major topic of conversation, as was the escalation in Iran (please see Academy’s Geopolitical Analysis for the latest on Iran and geopolitics more broadly).

Two key themes from last weekend’s From Trinkets to Compute seem to be playing out:

Cheap Chinese Compute

Most importantly, the story of Cheap Chinese Compute is garnering staying power. While DeepSeek may have been a one-off, the story is increasingly about China delivering Cheap Compute. We have seen China flood/control markets in the past. I didn’t see it coming in compute (at least not yet), but it might be here?

• China doesn’t have to deal with NIMBY, but they do make a lot of chips (generally lower quality, but a lot), and have been ramping up all forms of electricity production and storage for years. The U.S. is finally getting on board with this ProSec™ theme, while the rest of the world is only starting to wake up to the need and potential opportunity that adopting a ProSec™ mindset delivers.

• On the less “savory” side are “allegations” (and I’m being polite here) that a lot of the Chinese compute trains by “distilling” from existing models (inundating existing models with requests, to somewhat “copy” their answers) rather than training their models from scratch. It is a big cost advantage and time saving mechanism.

Earnings

Less important was my flipping from “earnings will matter” to “earnings might not matter.”

We don’t really spend a lot of time on single stock earnings. It isn’t our “thing” in general. But we do follow the earnings. What we can say so far on this front is that when the earnings and announcements hit the tape, they seem very strong. The instant reaction in the media (and social media) tends to support the strength of the results. Then the stocks seem to drift lower (in some cases worse than drift). 

The earnings bar seems to be set incredibly high, so far.

This is concerning when trying to determine the direction of the next leg.

Braggawatts

I’m not sure how I missed the term Braggawatts, but it caught my attention when my friends at ZeroHedge sent out a tweet that used the term.

The Next Phase Of Shrinkflation: Rolling Blackouts https://t.co/dYmR3d7Kn9

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 20, 2026

• Basically, braggawatts is a term used to express skepticism over how much in the data center and AI space can be physically constructed (i.e., in the real world) versus all the existing announcements and expectations of future announcements.

  • From access to chips, to water, to electricity, to getting all of the various state and local regulatory approvals, the argument is that a lot more compute has been announced than can be completed within the timeframe of the announcements.

  • This is consistent with some anecdotal evidence of cost and time overruns on projects (that is something we were hearing about more frequently than in the past).

If braggawatts are real (we need to explore this more):

• This should be good for credit spreads in the sector. The logical conclusion would be to announce fewer new projects and prioritize existing projects.

• Would be bad for the “picks and shovels” in the AI / Data Center industry.

Simple ROI.

To a large degree, return on investment analysis surrounding AI and the AI spend has been minimal in my view.

• On the one side you have a “build it and they will come” mentality (often the “only” risk has been described as not building enough, fast enough – which hardly encourages traditional scrutiny of costs versus revenue).

• On the other side, no CEO in their right mind would say anything other than that they were launching AI initiatives within their firm to capture efficiencies. The cost of compute has gone up. Actually, let me rephrase that, companies are being charged a cost of compute more in line with the cost of producing the compute than they were before. While the cost of providing compute seems to be increasing (shortages, etc.) part of what users are seeing is that the price that was subsidized to encourage use and to create moats (to the extent moats can be created and held) is being subsidized less. Increasing, and we’ve been writing about this for months, we are moving from “we have to try AI, or be left behind” to “we’ve been using AI, now let’s analyze the cost benefit of that.” Is that why some of the token utilization charts are showing declines from the peak?

If I’m right and some of these forces connect, it could bring pressure to bear on the space. That is “fine and normal.” What concerns me is how much money has flown into passive vehicles in the space, and how many leveraged products there are in the space. Not just the very large SOXL (which is index based) but also a lot of individual stocks in this have leveraged ETFs. 

I fear that this is a risk that can and will accentuate moves to the downside (just like it does on the upside).

Bottom Line

The escalation in Iran is not good for my view on potential rate cuts. While my outlook on inflation wasn’t entirely dependent on the free flow of oil (including more oil that had previously been sanctioned), it helped a lot.

On the AI front, I’m positive on credit spreads, but remain vigilant on valuations. The recent reaction in markets to what seemed like strong earnings releases only accentuates that concern.

The latest little peace overture by Washington widely reported Thursday night was apparently a big nothingburger, as on Friday the Iraqi prime minister’s office has denied a New York Times report claiming that Iran rejected a US ceasefire proposal delivered to Tehran by Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi.

The fresh statement from the prime minister’s office said what was published in the Times was “entirely unfounded” and had “no relation to reality.” The statement underscored the temporary nature of the proposal and that it was the “only offer on the table” and still left the question of control over the Strait of Hormuz unresolved – and so Tehran was uninterested.

It’s also the reality that Tehran wants to see Trump sweat and impose economic and political costs particularly ahead of the midterms in November, where Congressional Republicans must face voters over failing to rein in Trump’s Iran war. The Iranians continue to openly voice this, for example in the following from the parliament speaker:

They wanted to punish Iran.

Punished themselves with triple-digit oil instead.

10/10 strategy👏👏👏 pic.twitter.com/w80f1Xzuvk

— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) July 23, 2026

Meanwhile, in what is becoming a brutal, nightly routine, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has wrapped up its 13th consecutive wave of airstrikes against Iran. The Pentagon said it targeted military command centers, drone storage facilities, communication networks, and coastal surveillance sites. 

Iranian state media reported overnight into Friday heavy explosions rocking major hubs across the country, including Khorramabad, Jask, Ahvaz, Bandar Abbas, and the strategic outpost of Qeshm Island. Iranian media further said a US missile strike left four dead and five injured in the key industrial and transportation hub of Ahvaz.

As the bombs fall, Tehran is still signaling that military pressure won’t force a cheap surrender – with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi lashing out at the US escalation, warning that “mindless aggression” will only see Trump pay a “heavier price” for a deal to end the war.

Iranian retaliation on US-linked sites in the Gulf have continued at the same steady pace, with on Friday Bahrain’s military having intercepted “several treacherous Iranian air attacks” – according to the general command of the Bahrain Defense Force.

The Bahraini military further denounced Iran’s “systematic hostile approach” and “criminal attacks targeting civilians”. The statement emphasized, “The general command emphasises that the deliberate use of missiles and drones to target civilians and private property constitutes a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.”

Throughout the morning the Iranian military’s targets also included locations in Jordan, Kuwait, and northern Iraq. Sky News is reporting that “Explosions were also heard near a base hosting the US in Iraq, near the Erbil International Airport.”

Fox feeding its Boomer audience some Freedom Viagra with a helping of war crimes on the side:

Fox News discussion about Iran’s infrastructure:

“What do you think we might hit first?”

“I don’t know if we’ll hit it first, but the Damavand plant supplies 40% of Tehran’s electricity.” pic.twitter.com/VpYVT2X4lI

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) July 23, 2026

But Fox News also reports the results of its latest poll which finds 56% oppose the ongoing American military action against Iran, including 40% who “strongly” oppose. “Disapproval of President Donald Trump’s handling of Iran hit a record high in July,” Fox writes.

“A majority of voters oppose U.S. military action, and nearly two thirds think the conflict will last at least a year,” the report says.

 This as The Wall Street Journal does an entire investigative report which should be laughably obvious to any careful observer to what’s been going on and the deepening quagmire the US is getting itself into:

As the war in Iran enters its fifth month, Trump is increasingly frustrated that a conflict he once thought would be over in a matter of weeks has dragged on with no end in sight, administration officials and others close to the president said.

Some of Trump’s advisers now worry that the war—which has resulted in higher prices, falling approval ratings and the deaths of more than a dozen U.S. servicemembers—is consuming his presidency and damaging Republicans’ already dim prospects in the coming midterm elections.

Alarmingly, the WSJ noted that Trump seems in “revenge mode” against Tehran, and apparently sees no other options than to try and keep bombing his way out of it. Of course, this script has been written many times – not only during the “Global War on Terror” and this millennium’s “forever wars” – but going all the way back to the Vietnam war.

NBC: The four service members being flown from the Middle East to Dover Air Force Base were 28-year-old Angel S. Rampersad of New York, 30-year-old Michael Emmanuel Swinton of North Carolina, 25-year-old Tyler James Feehan of Hawaii and 19-year-old Isabella Gonzales of Texas.

The war is said to be taking a heavy “toll” on Trump and his top officials. According to more of what’s also been glaringly obvious for anyone who has had a shred of independent thought:

The war is splitting the conservative coalition over which Trump once had an iron grip, worrying some Republicans close to the White House. Longtime Trump allies such as Fox News host Laura Ingraham have used their platforms to express concerns about how the war might affect Republicans in November’s midterm elections. On Monday, she said the “clock is ticking” to the midterms.

“Netanyahu has led us into a horrible conflict filled with lies,” Steve Bannon, a longtime Trump adviser, said. “People can see with their own eyes what’s going on.”

While this part about Netanyahu is true, it is ultimately President Trump who made the decision, after for years prior – and especially on the campaign trail – articulately spelling out that attacking Iran and starting new Mideast wars would be one of most idiotic foreign policy moves a president could make.

Trump on Thursday said he would take funds from Iran to pay for damage inflicted on US bases and assets throughout the war. Iran responded in the following…

Seizing another nation’s assets to pay for unrelated future claims is an incendiary precedent.

Those who celebrate or profit from such funds should remember: once governments normalize confiscation, no one’s assets are safe. Ensuing chaos will not be pretty or peaceful.

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 24, 2026

Perhaps the utter folly of Operation Epic Fury has finally begun to dawn on the president. WSJ also observed that “Last month, the president was so excited at the prospect of signing the memorandum of understanding with Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz that he was dismissive of Republican allies who said the Iranians would never stick to the agreement, according to a senior administration official. He wanted it to be over, Trump told them.”