Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu restated on Aug. 9 that Israel has rejected U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace’s plan for Gaza and will not withdraw until Hamas is fully disarmed.
Trump posted on Truth Social in July that an agreement had been reached for the complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza.
Trump said the agreement is part of his plan that will be implemented in phases. As disarmament takes place, Israeli forces would withdraw, while an International Stabilization Force and a new Palestinian police force would assume responsibility for security.
Gaza would ultimately be governed by a new Palestinian government working with the Board of Peace.
The Board of Peace is an international organization chaired by Trump that seeks to promote stability, establish lawful governance, and secure lasting peace in areas affected by conflict. Its founding members include the United States, Israel, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and more than 20 other countries committed to international peace-building efforts, according to its website.
Speaking at the start of a government meeting on Aug. 9, Netanyahu said disarmament must include all of Hamas’s weapons and must be genuine rather than “fictitious.”
He said Israel is discussing the issue with the United States and that some U.S. proposals are acceptable to Israel, while others are not.
Netanyahu also said Israeli forces would continue acting against threats to Israeli troops and civilians.
He rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state.
“As for the Gaza Strip: First and foremost, I wish to clarify the main point: As long as I am Prime Minister, a Palestinian state will not be established, neither in Gaza nor in Judea and Samaria,” Netanyahu said in a statement.
He also addressed Iran and Lebanon, pledging to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and saying Israel is conducting an important military operation in Lebanon aimed at eliminating threats.
Israel has been conducting operations in Lebanon.
Two Israeli reservists were killed and four others were seriously wounded during operations recently in southern Lebanon, according to the Israeli military. Lebanese authorities said an Israeli strike also killed one person and wounded 12 others in the town of Tibnin, Lebanon.
Israel gave an evacuation warning to residents before the strike.
The incidents come as the United States conducts talks aimed at reducing hostilities along the Israel-Lebanon border and advancing a broader peace agreement. U.S. officials said the discussions include the disarmament of Hezbollah and other Iran-backed threats, the redeployment of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon, and the implementation of a pilot zone process transferring security responsibilities to the Lebanese army.
“Narco-Socialist Rats Better Start Running”: Colombia’s Trump-Backed “El Tigre” Launches Major Offensive Against FARC
Trump-backed Colombian President Abelardo De La Espriella wasted no time putting his law-and-order agenda into high gear, launching a major military offensive against Marxist FARC dissidents days after taking office on Friday.
“The new government’s kinetic approach is already underway in southwestern Colombia,” local outlet Colombia One wrote on Sunday.
The report continued, “A military operation is currently unfolding against the FARC dissidents led by alias’ Ivan Mordisco’ in the department of Cauca. The combats are heavily concentrated in the rural area of El Tambo, where initial reports indicate that at least five members of the dissident structure have been killed.”
De La Espriella announced on Sunday evening that Colombia and the United States are strengthening their strategic alliance:
Colombia and the United States strengthen their strategic alliance. Following the inauguration of President Abelardo De La Espriella, the United States announced its intention to allocate USD 1 billion for a new security package for Colombia, which must be processed in coordination with the U.S. Congress. The new bilateral agenda seeks to bolster the capabilities of our Public Force, intensify the fight against drug trafficking and transnational crime, regain territorial control, and expand technological and intelligence cooperation. A new stage in the relationship between Colombia and the United States, based on shared objectives: security, prosperity, and defense of our nations
Colombia y Estados Unidos fortalecen su alianza estratégica.
Tras la posesión del presidente Abelardo De La Espriella, Estados Unidos anunció su intención de destinar USD 1.000 millones para un nuevo paquete de seguridad para Colombia, que deberá ser tramitado en coordinación… pic.twitter.com/cUN28Lg5em
— Presidencia Colombia 🇨🇴 (@infopresidencia) August 9, 2026
Footage of the offensive:
🚨 | URGENTE:
Avanzan los operativos para capturar o eliminar al criminal guerrillero FARC Alias Mordisco, no descansan los héroes de la patria, y menos, nuestro mandatario, el tigre Abelardo.
🚨 #ÚltimaHora | Máxima tensión en El Tambo, Cauca. Fuertes combates entre el @COL_EJERCITO y las disidencias de las FARC (frente Carlos Patiño) dejan al menos 5 criminales abatidos en la vereda El Recuerdo y el cerro Santana.
Esto es diciendo y haciendo: Comenzaron los operativos contra las Farc en Cauca. Las ratas narcosocialistas a correr y el glorioso Ejército a cumplir su deber constitucional.
Vamos a ver cuánto tiempo se demoran los alcahuetas de los terroristas es salir a berriar por esas… pic.twitter.com/BRkSEqqyZ2
— Conservatism And Elegance 🇺🇲 (@ThayzzySmith) August 9, 2026
🚨🇨🇴| En este momento se desarrolla una fuerte ofensiva militar contra las disidencias de la guerrilla de las FARC de alias Iván Mordisco, en la Zona rural de El Tambo, Cauca. Al menos 5 disidentes abatidos. ¿Apoyas la MANO DURA de Abelardo de la Espriella contra los criminales? pic.twitter.com/ZftyMPSvua
¡ATENCIÓN COLOMBIA!
¡En Nariño se escriben páginas de gloria!
El valiente Ejército Nacional está librando duros y contundentes combates contra las estructuras criminales del ELN. Nuestros soldados, con coraje y profesionalismo, están golpeando con fuerza a quienes siembran terror…
Otro escuadrón de la JUNGLA acaba de salir de una extracción caliente en plena selva de coca. Por fin Colombia tiene un gobierno que no solo habla, sino que actúa. Golpea donde duele a los narcotraficantes y trabaja de verdad por los colombianos. Esto no es un operativo más: es… pic.twitter.com/bK5nx48I5p
Here’s our coverage of De La Espriella’s inauguration and the broader political realignment sweeping across the Americas, where a growing red wave has sent the region’s far-left and socialists into panic mode.
With Colombia strengthening ties with the Trump administration, El Colombiano’s Alberto Sierra wrote on X that FARC dissidents and other far-left terror networks could soon confront the uncomfortable reality of US-made MQ-9 Reaper in the skies. He effectively warned that there may soon be nowhere left to hide:
Take a good look at this machine. Because it represents more than just military technology.
It is the MQ-9 Reaper, one of the most advanced aerial surveillance platforms used in operations against armed organizations and criminal networks.
Colombia is preparing to incorporate this capability.
The difference?
Hours of surveillance. Real-time information. Tracking of movements. Identification of targets. Greater capacity to anticipate enemy operations.
In a country where the geography allowed armed groups to vanish among jungles, mountains, and rivers for decades, this changes the rules.
The goal is not to turn technology into propaganda. It is something much simpler: to make the State see.
Because whoever controls the information controls the initiative.
And when the enemy knows that it can be located even in the places where it once felt safe, its margin for maneuver begins to shrink.
○ Miren bien esta máquina. Porque representa algo más que tecnología militar.
Es el MQ-9 Reaper, una de las plataformas de vigilancia aérea más avanzadas utilizadas en operaciones contra organizaciones armadas y redes criminales.
“In just 24 hours, the Colombian army has captured and taken down several narcos, extortionists, and guerrillas, and now the left has come out crying about human rights—typical of lefties, defending criminals,” X user Escuela Austriaca de Economía said.
What is unfolding in Colombia appears to be part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to restore order across the Western Hemisphere after years in which socialist and Marxist governments allowed narco-terrorist networks to expand amid widespread lawlessness.
Election officials in Arizona and California won separate court victories Friday in disputes over voting rules, with a federal appeals court upholding key provisions of an Arizona voter-registration law and a California judge temporarily blocking a local election overhaul.
Arizona Voter Registration Law
In Arizona, an 11-judge en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled that voting rights organizations lacked standing to challenge two provisions that dictate how counties should maintain their voter rolls.
The Arizona law, enacted in 2022 as Senate Bill 1260, requires county recorders to cancel a voter’s registration after receiving confirmation from another county that the person has moved and registered there. Another provision makes it a felony to knowingly provide a “mechanism for voting” to someone registered in another state.
The Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans, Voto Latino, and Priorities USA sued the Arizona attorney general, secretary of state, and the state’s 15 county recorders in 2022, arguing that portions of the law violated federal voting law and constitutional protections.
The groups argued, among other things, that the cancellation provision could improperly remove eligible voters from the rolls and that the felony provision was vague enough to expose organizations conducting voter registration and education activities to prosecution.
A federal district court initially issued a preliminary injunction blocking the cancellation and felony provisions. A three-judge Ninth Circuit panel later reversed that order, finding that the organizations lacked standing to challenge the cancellation provision and were unlikely to prevail in their challenge to the felony provision.
The plaintiffs successfully sought review by the full court, but Friday’s en banc ruling reached the same conclusion.
The groups argued that they were forced to spend extra time and resources educating voters about the law and helping them cancel prior registrations. The court, however, concluded that this did not count as a concrete injury needed to prove standing.
“Because the organizations have not clearly shown that the cancellation provision affects or interferes with their voter-registration and voter-education efforts, they have not established an injury-in-fact,” U.S. Circuit Judge Anthony D. Johnstone wrote for the court.
The court also rejected the organizations’ request to block the felony provision pending the litigation.
“Although the stand-alone phrase ‘mechanism for voting’ arguably encompasses voter registration and education, the full text and statutory context of the Felony Provision show that it likely does not criminalize those activities,” Johnstone wrote.
California Court Blocks County Measure
Also on Friday, a California judge temporarily blocked Shasta County from implementing a voter-approved measure that would dramatically change how elections are conducted in the Northern California county.
Measure B, approved by about 56 percent of voters in June, would require government-issued photo identification for voter registration and in-person voting, restrict vote-by-mail and early voting, require ballots to be counted by hand, and establish a county voter-registration system separate from California’s statewide system.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber sued to block the measure, arguing that Shasta County’s status as a charter county does not mean it can adopt its own election rules conflicting with those of the state.
State officials had sought an expedited ruling, since election preparations were already underway for November and the county’s 116,000 registered voters needed certainty about how they would cast their ballots.
On Friday, Shasta County Superior Court Judge Benjamin Hanna sided with the state in granting the preliminary injunction, meaning the county will conduct the Nov. 3 general election under existing California election laws while the lawsuit proceeds.
A Shasta County official confirmed that the measure’s provisions would not be implemented unless the court issues another order.
“Following a preliminary injunction by the Shasta County Superior Court regarding a proposed amendment to the Shasta County Charter titled, Measure B, Voter ID, Hand-Counted Ballots, and Absentee Voting Limits Initiative, the election and voting policies described in Measure B will not be implemented for the November 3, 2026, General Election, unless further order of the court,” the county said in a statement.
Bonta welcomed the decision, saying it would provide clarity for voters ahead of the election.
“Today’s ruling prevents Measure B from taking effect while our litigation proceeds, providing certainty that the November election will be conducted under California’s established election laws,” he said. “We will continue fighting to permanently strike down the measure.”
Your Tax Dollars At Work: 20 Port Authority Workers, 17 Cops, Make Over $400,000
Apparently, one of the best ways to make $400,000 a year in the New York area is to work for the Port Authority, according to the NY Post.
Twenty Port Authority employees, including 17 cops, cleared $400,000 in total compensation last year as the agency’s payroll sailed past $1.2 billion. And much of the magic came from everyone’s favorite government money fountain: overtime.
According to payroll data obtained by the Empire Center for Public Policy, 323 employees collected at least $100,000 in overtime alone. Of those, 189 were Port Authority cops. Eight top earners managed to rack up more than $200,000 each in OT. Police Lt. Nicholas Federico won the unofficial jackpot. His $180,691 base salary came with another $215,717 in overtime, helping push his total compensation, including benefits, to $466,775.
Detective sergeants Dewan Maharaj and Robert Zafonte Jr. weren’t exactly eating ramen either. Both finished around $448,600, with Maharaj collecting nearly $148,000 in overtime and Zafonte adding about $139,000. The NY Post writes that the overtime crown belonged to chief maintenance supervisor Reginald Bowers, who piled up $231,916 in OT and finished with $421,041 in total compensation.
And this wasn’t just a few employees discovering the cheat code.
Of the Port Authority’s 8,356 workers, 5,711 received overtime last year. That’s 68% of the workforce. Altogether, overtime cost the agency $196 million, representing about 16% of its entire payroll.
Port Authority police accounted for $85 million of that OT bill. The agency’s 1,968 cops averaged $184,949 in pay, while 68 of its 100 highest-paid employees worked in the Police Department.
Perhaps the funniest comparison is at the top. Richard Cotton, who was actually running the Port Authority before retiring in January, earned $327,918. Ninety-four people working underneath him made more.
The Empire Center says taxpayers may get the privilege of paying for all of this more than once.
“Taxpayers are getting fleeced twice,” President Zilvinas Silenas said, arguing that taxpayers first fund the salaries and overtime and can later get stuck with pension costs influenced by those earnings. He also warned that rising payroll expenses could eventually show up in higher tolls and fees.
Which would be particularly charming considering those are already going up. The Port Authority raised bridge and tunnel tolls 3% in January while eliminating some off-peak E-ZPass discounts. PATH fares have also increased, with more hikes scheduled in the coming years.
The agency says the compensation reflects the enormous security demands involved in protecting airports, bridges, tunnels, rail systems and other critical infrastructure.
“Keeping the people we serve safe is non-negotiable and our highest priority,” spokesman Seth Stein said, noting that many Port Authority facilities remain potential terrorism targets. The agency also pointed out that it has added hundreds of police officers in recent years and said average police overtime actually declined 9% between 2024 and 2025.
So yes, overtime is apparently improving. It just happens to be improving at a place where hundreds of employees are still making six figures in overtime and 20 workers are clearing $400,000. Progress.
Much of the country is facing extreme heat and humidity this weekend. It makes it difficult to read and get ready for the week, let alone write something for this week, so we will keep this one short and focus on charts.
The markets started and ended the week with a bang. We continue to keep a close eye on the stocks and sectors most affected by Situational UnAwareness (last weekend’s T-Report). The Nasdaq 100 had an insanely strong Tuesday, gave up some gains Wednesday and Thursday, only to claw back those gains on Friday, primarily after the weak employment report hit the tape (Houston We Have a Data Problem). At what point will we spend the money to totally revamp how we collect and process data? “Surveys” seem incredibly “old school” when so much real-time information is available. We will see if the worst is behind us on the AI spend story.
We continue to like buying the bonds being issued to fund data centers and AI. We’ve been writing about this with increasing frequency. It was almost amazing to see Alphabet do such a massive bond deal on a Thursday in August. The size of the order book is indicative of how prepared the market is to absorb the expected supply, which is why I think the surprise will be for a rapid move tighter than ongoing weakness (all we need is one company to discuss potentially slowing their spend given all the hurdles we have been writing about for the past few weeks).
We touched on a lot of these issues on Bloomberg TV on Thursday, in case you prefer to watch/listen, rather than read (our segment starts at the 1 hour 43 minute mark).
No Hikes For You
According to the Bloomberg WIRP function, the market went from pricing in a full hike in September, as recently as July 24th, and is now back below a 50% chance (which I think is still too high).
JOLTS was mixed. The employment component of ISM Services was below 50. ADP was better than NFP but left a lot to be desired (44k jobs). It is reasonable for the Fed to question the strength of the job market.
Inflation. Let’s examine Truflation a bit more closely.
We include “frozen” which is the time series as originally published with no attempt to revise it as more information is available. The “unfrozen” version is effectively a “revised” time series.
The pink line is 2.49%, because 2.49% rounds down to 2% if we are using only whole numbers (that may seem like “cheating” but I think Warsh, in particular, thinks more “in the vicinity” of 2% rather than 2.0%).
The beauty of this data is that it makes sense to me. Just a quick glance at this data seems to “jive” with what we’ve been experiencing (and notice it is all below 2.49%).
In this chart we explore the difference between Truflation and CPI.
Truflation was much higher for 2021 and 2022 than CPI. Honestly, that seems correct! While the barbaric way in which shelter is calculated for CPI played a big part, it is not entirely to blame. Now CPI is higher than Truflation. Why? Because maybe it is just catching up? Imagine if the Fed was focused on Truflation rather than CPI in 2021 and 2022. Would they have hiked sooner? Would they have continued with QE as long as they did? We will never know, but treating CPI as a “gold” standard and dismissing metrics like Truflation seems nonsensical to me.
This is also why I’d argue that we have an “affordability” issue more than an “inflation” issue. The problem isn’t so much in today’s price moves, it is that the price moves we were hit with back in 2021 and 2022 were not properly reflected in the data! (Yes, this is a hill I’m prepared to defend). Not saying Truflation is perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it is pretty easy to see a policy path that is very different than the one we’ve taken if they looked at more types of data.
I’ve always thought the Fed liked core PCE as their favorite metric, because it was almost always below 2%! It was “convenient” that their “preferred” metric was never above 2%. Literally, from 2008 to 2020 it was almost never above 2%. Maybe I’m being a bit too cynical, but I think the Fed liked to point to this measure because it gave them the flexibility to be more dovish, rather than because it was so much more useful, relevant, and accurate than other bits of inflation data we get.
If you can agree that other data might tell a good story and that this pedestal that Core PCE has been set upon doesn’t make sense, then maybe we should be cutting? It isn’t like Truflation Core is “always” below PCE (which is why we put in the nice green oval), but it is certainly much lower now! And the rate of decline (inflation) actually makes more sense to me than the PCE numbers. The large price shocks are behind us in the real world, but unfortunately they are still appearing in the data world the “old Fed” looked at. I am pretty sure I still have a HP-12C lying around (anyone on Wall Street from the last century knows how ubiquitous they were on trading desks), but I cannot remember the last time I thought about using it!
Warsh was basically put in charge to cut. He will deal with the hand he has been dealt (the renewed conflict in Iran isn’t helping), but his bias is to cut, not hike.
While it is unclear where we stand in Iran at the moment, it seems like we are on the verge of getting some sort of agreement between Oman and Iran to re-open the Strait in some capacity. It seems as though they are negotiating something that will be agreed to by the U.S.? It all seems a bit weird, and goes against the military successes, but it seems to be headed in that direction. If the Strait is opened AND the US encourages Iranian oil sales (like we did at the start of the MOU) then Warsh’s job of steering the Fed to a cut gets a lot easier (and the hawks may have to change their tune rapidly).
Bottom Line
The long end of the yield curve is likely to remain under some pressure as the global supply of sovereign and corporate debt continues to soar.
The front end will start pricing out fewer hikes. Probably far too early to price in cuts, but the hiking story is crowded, and I think wrong. It will require more people to break years of tradition and base decisions on the same set of data, regardless of being aware of the inherent flaws in the data!
Credit spreads should do well, though I like the AI/Data Center plays even more on an all-in yield basis than just spread. It is cheap and positioning has corrected itself to where the move to tighter spreads/lower yields seems to be the more likely path.
With chatter of investors looking to put money into the hands of the fund manager that ran Situational Awareness, those sectors could do well. I’m neutral there, as I think there is another round of AI “doubt” creeping into the narrative which will hurt valuations (while supporting the credit side of the story).
On the rest of the equity markets, I’m biased towards ProSec globally. Across the globe, energy, electricity production, smelting, processing, and refining will do well. I’m both surprised and happy that Australia committed to its first new refinery in 60 years! Each country (or region) will need to prioritize their efforts, but we see this happening.
Look for the government wallet to be used to direct these developments and projects. Not just by direct involvement in projects (which will happen) but also by putting conditions on what the government will buy, to the extent that it makes projects economical, where they otherwise wouldn’t be. Low cost is taking a back seat to National Security – globally!
The ProSec Hierarchy will vary across the globe. Some regions will need to focus on food and water. Others (Europe) will need to focus on military production. (I’d create an Airbus for Drones if I were Europe). Chips, AI, and compute will need to be prioritized. (I’m increasingly concerned that there is a danger of Cheap China Compute hitting us far sooner and harder than we’d previously thought!).
The President “kicked the hornet’s nest” on global supply chains. The intention was clearly to grow U.S. exports. That can happen, but increasingly, there is a “domestic” intent globally, providing a real opportunity in other markets that embrace that mantra!
With weather forecasts sounding right up Adrian Cronauer’s alley, it seems like a good time to conclude with the most useful advice I can give – Stay Cool My Friends!
Watch: ‘Privileged Idiot’ DSA Co-Chair Has Absolute Porridge For Brains
The Democrat party has been freaking out about the Democratic Socialists of late – despite striking similarities between their policies – because while Democrats are happy to sweet talk voters into socialist ideas that signal maximum virtue, they don’t actually want to enact policies that would make blue-city budgets even more dire than they are.
In short, the party is panicking because the voters they radicalized are electing radicals…
So what better way to let progressives see what they’re voting for? Trot out a co-chair of the DSA with maybe two brain cells to rub together, ask her simple questions, and watch her implode.
To wit: co-chair Megan Romer was given a softball interview by New Yorker editor David Remnick, in which he asked Romer “What does ‘taxing the hell out of them’ mean?” in regards to a core DSA position of ‘taxing the rich.’
Romer stumbled hard…
Romer: Uh, yeah, you know, again, I don’t have like a solid…
Remnick: But shouldn’t you? If you’re the co-chair of the DSA, shouldn’t you be more specific than ‘taxing the hell’ out of something? What exactly do you mean?
Romer: Um, that’s a good question. “So again, it’s democracy, right? And we have to look at what we have to spend and what we need. We don’t want to depend on the existence of millionaires because that means people are still getting exploited.”
Watch:
DSA Co-Chair Megan Romer says “We believe in taxing the hell out of millionaires.”
She then struggles to explain what that actually means:
Remnick: “What does ‘taxing the hell out of them’ mean?”
Romer: “Yeah. You know, again, I don’t have, like, a solid…”
“They went to campus and had their heads filled with junk and have never been challenged on any of this for their entire life, by anyone,” said commentator Stephen Miller, adding “An entire generation of privileged idiots.”
She was also asked the very loaded question about whether DSA believes Israel ‘has a right to exist.’
And instead of something about how Palestinians also have a right to exist, asymmetric warfare, or Israel using the US to fight a proxy war in Iran based on decades of being ‘two weeks away’ from a nuke – Romer once again failed to formulate anything resembling a response one might expect from a DSA honcho (or not, nevermind).
The New Yorker’s David Remnick asks DSA co-chair Megan Romer whether “Israel has a right to defend itself.” pic.twitter.com/UFNgcRiODN
Former CNN host Don Lemon has asked a federal judge to dismiss the charges brought against him in connection with an anti-immigration enforcement protest at a Minnesota church.
The January protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations interrupted a worship service at the church. Lemon, who was charged with violating federal civil rights laws, argued that he was not participating in the protest but was there only to document the events.
Lemon’s attorneys filed a motion on Aug. 7 claiming the indictment against their client was the result of “vindictive prosecution.” The filing called the charges “flagrant and blatant efforts to punish a journalist for his protected conduct warrant further discovery into the government’s motive and an evidentiary hearing.”
They cited President Donald Trump’s previous negative comments about Lemon as evidence of bias.
On Jan. 18, Lemon attended a protest at Minneapolis Cities Church at the height of ICE action in Minneapolis. He was arrested by federal agents in Los Angeles on Jan. 29.
He and eight other defendants were charged with one count of “conspiracy against the right of religious freedom at a place of worship” under 18 U.S. Code § 241 in February of this year.
The defendants are also charged with one count of injuring, intimidating, or interfering with the right of religious freedom at a place of worship under 18 USC § 248.
Together, the charges carry a fine of up to $20,000 and a maximum of 10 1/2 years in prison.
Lemon pled not guilty in February, denying any wrongdoing. The YouTube creator argued that the protests were an exercise of the demonstrators’ federally protected rights and were not in violation of any laws.
Federal prosecutors announced in early June that dozens of anti-immigration enforcement protesters who interrupted the Minnesota church service will not face state criminal charges.
However, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is continuing to pursue criminal civil rights charges against 39 people, including Lemon.
Footage of the event shows demonstrators in the aisles, chanting anti-ICE slogans, and the indictment alleges they hindered those in the church from exiting, even allegedly harassing children.
Demonstrators were seen chanting “Justice for Renee Good,” referring to a woman fatally shot by federal agents in connection with anti-ICE protests.
The DOJ eventually charged dozens in connection with the church protest. St. Paul City Attorney Irene Kao commented on the decision not to charge some of the protesters, saying a review of the footage and other evidence available to criminal prosecutors caused her office to determine that not all those involved should be prosecuted under Minnesota statutes.
“Current evidence is insufficient to meet that standard for criminal charges under Minnesota state statutes,” Kao said, adding that the decision not to prosecute “should not be interpreted as an endorsement of unlawful behavior or public disorder.”
The decision not to charge some of the protesters was criticized by one of the pastors of the church where the protest took place.
“According to the St. Paul City Attorney’s logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, a cathedral, or a temple, intimidate the families and children inside, and shut down their religious gathering. Just call it a ‘protest,’” Cities Church lead pastor Jonathan Parnell said in a statement.
Lemon’s livestream was at the center of the investigation, and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon responded to the video on X, quoting Lemon, saying that a house of worship isn’t a forum for public protest.
“It is a space protected from exactly such acts by federal criminal and civil laws!” Dhillon, who leads the Office of Civil Rights, said in a Jan. 18 post. “You are on notice!”
The DOJ did not immediately respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.
Kamala Harris is again promising the radical wing of her party that she will pack the Supreme Court. Pete Buttigieg and others have done the same to pander to the extreme left. These calls are increasing among Democratic leaders despite a recent poll showing that the Court remains the more popular institution vis-à-vis Congress, and that the majority of Americans agree with its major decisions.
The Marquette Law School poll shows that the Court remains slightly underwater in popularity (47% favor, 53% disfavor), but it is still much more popular than Congress or the two political parties. Moreover, that popularity is increasing, not decreasing, as a result of recent decisions. It was at 44% in 2025.
The mantra to pack the Court is premised on the false claim that the Court is ideologically robotic and partisan. That claim has always been disconnected from the actual voting record of the Court. Forty-four percent of cases are decided unanimously by the Supreme Court. When nearly unanimous cases (8-1 and 7-2) are included, that figure jumps to over 60 percent.
The liberal justices themselves have pushed back on the Democratic narrative. Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor have all contradicted these claims. Justice Kagan recently spoke publicly on these claims, “rejecting claims that the high court’s conservative majority is in President Donald Trump’s corner.”
The most recent poll shows that Americans agree with most of the major decisions in the last year.
The poll highlights a disconnect with the logic of court packers.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has called for packing the Court because it does not follow her views and those of “widely held public opinion.”
I have pushed back on that rationale given the Court’s function to be a countermajoritarian institution. However, this poll even challenges the flawed rationale for court packing.
Even the most controversial decisions break at around fifty percent.
Notably, the opinion that Harris repeatedly denounces as an attack on democracy (barring racial gerrymandering) is supported by a majority of the country.
Yet, Democratic leaders and the far left continue the false claim that the Court is out-of-step with America and captured by the Administration. The reason is simple. The DSA and far left are threatening establishment candidates. They are throwing institutions such as the Supreme Court to the mob in an attempt to use them to regain power. It is not just tragic but pathetic. These establishment figures are unlikely to be safe from the mob. Hakeem Jeffries can call the Supreme Court “illegitimate” and brandish a baseball bat on social media, but the mob is still chanting “you’re next” when he appears on the screens at rallies.
For its part, the far left knows that the full agenda of changes that it wants to make to our constitutional system cannot occur without control of the Supreme Court. Law professors and deans are joining them in calling for the trashing of our Constitution and “radical changes” to our system. They will need control of the Court to achieve many of those changes.
So the American people may support the Court and favor its decisions, but it still needs to be packed with a liberal majority.
Harris and Buttigieg consider trashing the Supreme Court to be a small price to pay for their own election.
Trump Says “We Are Low Keying It” With Iran As Options For Walking Away Have Drastically Narrowed
Iran’s IRGC is holding the line, reiterating that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen to international shipping only after the United States accepts all of its conditions, which we outlined previously. Also, on Saturday Iran’s army spokesman Amir Akraminia statedthatIran’s new protocols in the Strait of Hormuz are “irreversible” and shall not be thwarted by the US. “The United States has no choice but to accept the existing situation; otherwise, it will incur costs far greater than those it has faced in the past,” Akraminia said. “The United States has no choice but to accept the existing situation; otherwise, it will incur costs far greater than those it has faced in the past,” Akraminia had added.
On Sunday, a fresh report in The Wall Street Journalstates the obvious – that President Trump has fewer and fewer options and is being squeezed, with any opportunity to declare ‘victory’ and make swift exit more elusive than ever, given Washington would have to make huge compromises, including lifting sanctions and paying war compensation to Tehran. Nearly six months ago when the war started, many non-interventionist critics accurately predicted that the current quagmire and catch-22 the US now finds itself in is precisely where things would end up.
“For weeks, President Trump had been laying the groundwork to declare victory in the Iran war should Tehran fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, even floating the idea privately to senior aides that he’s willing to walk away without a nuclear deal, U.S. officials said,” WSJ writes.
“But that scaled-back objective became more difficult when Iran insisted Saturday on its highest price yet for permitting the free flow of traffic in the waterway, seeking billions of dollars in U.S. payments, the removal of American troops from the region and an end of the U.S. naval blockade, among other things,” the report adds.
In a parallel vein to this scaled-back, lower grade conflict, President Trump has freshly told Axios in a brief interview that “We are low keying it” in the Persian Gulf. This comes after a week ago he called off ‘planned’ ‘harder’ attacks on Iran, which may have been just a bluff all along. Tehran didn’t blink, and it continues to press for maximal demands – as if to put ‘maximum pressure’ right back on Washington.
“We are only semi-negotiating with them. We are just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact they have no money,” Trump claimed. According to more from Axios:
He stressed that Iran “is in very bad shape” economically and has no money to pay its troops. The U.S. naval blockade has exacerbated the Iranian regime’s economic crisis, Trump said.
At the same time, Trump said that with oil down to slightly over $75 a barrel, U.S. consumers are feeling less pain from the war.
Ironically, this is simply a return to administration talking points which defended the early days and weeks of a war that officials constantly touted would be ‘swift’ and limited.
The US hope was that Iran and its economy would just collapse from within, the masses would take to the streets, and the government of the Ayatollah would be overthrown. This has proven delusional time and again.
Instead, what we see happening is Washington being forced to move its bases back from front line areas in the Gulf, and officials including Trump himself constantly retreating from stated goals, objectives, and red lines. This is on display once again in the Sunday Axios interview:
Axios acknowledges that the new list of Iranian demands have gone from being the prerequisite for a nuclear deal to a prerequisite to opening the Strait. Trump now says the US is “low keying it” and focusing on economic pressure. In other words: the Strait will not be opening. https://t.co/AweQabOB8Wpic.twitter.com/3TMsxXcfh7
In the meantime, there have been various op-ed moments throughout the conflict where The Wall Street Journal has cheer-led Operation Epic Fury. But now that political desperation has set in, and the Iranians smell blood in the water – knowing they can play hardball and extract a bigger cost from the US – even the WSJ has been forced to drastically change its tune:
Iran’s ability to essentially choke off the waterway through sporadic missile and drone attacks has proven to be powerful leverage for the country, stalling commercial traffic and roiling global oil markets. Trump has declared repeatedly in recent weeks that the Strait of Hormuz was already fully open, but each of those promises has proven premature.
Now, with less than three months until the midterm elections and the price of gasoline still much higher than it was before the war started in late February, Trump has been looking for ways to tell the American public that the war is won.
It will be quite the spectacle if eventually a desperate Trump White House is forced to lift sanctions and hand over some form of war compensation. WSJ notes further, “One major complication for the Trump administration is money.”
“Iran is seeking billions of dollars in war reparations in addition to an agreement to unfreeze the country’s assets around the world,” the report adds. “Trump has said the White House wouldn’t allow any taxpayer money to go to Iran, although a deal appears unlikely without the U.S. unfreezing some assets, possibly with conditions attached.”
Trump should have listened to the non-interventionists and he wouldn’t have put himself and the American people in this mess. American troops would not have been caught so flat-footed and directly in harm’s way (given what was clearly lack of proper US military planning and preparedness for Iran to fight back as fiercely as it did), and hundreds of Iranian civilian lives – including massacred schoolgirls – would have been sparred.
A financial journalist once offered simple advice: “Lie to people who want to be lied to, and you’ll get rich…Tell the truth to those who want to be lied to, and you’ll go broke.”
That axiom appears to have been taken to heart by radical Democratic candidates who this week issued transparent denials of past outrageous comments. Their calculus is clearly that the last thing that voters want to hear is the truth about their past views.
Certain cultural touchstones are considered inviolate in some states, such as beef in Texas.
In 2022, Talarico said he was reducing his meat consumption as part of climate-related efforts.
Texas Democratic Senatorial candidate James Talarico was roasted after a video surfaced of his calling to reduce meat consumption and “I am proud to say that our campaign has officially become a non-meat campaign. We are only buying vegan products from our local vegan businesses.”
The backlash was so great that Talarico has been eating whole cows to prove that he is not all-hat and no cattle.
Obviously, lying about your positions is hardly a phenonmon confirmed to the far left.
Many Republican candidates have also made painfully transparent pivots. However, the spins this week threaten to knock the planet off its axis.
In Wisconsin, Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong seems to be coasting to a primary win despite radical views such as defunding police.
In an episode of “Pod Save America,” Hong was asked about her 2020 statements declaring “police exist to uphold white supremacy” and “I support defunding the police as a first step towards abolishing the police.”
Hong responded with a convoluted spin:
“My views have only become stronger in that I’m serious about public safety and I will not abolish the police.”
Hong’s views on Thanksgiving takes the axiom to a whole new level. Hong previously stated:
“Cancel Thanksgiving. Should have done this in 1621. If it takes a worldwide pandemic for us to realize we should stop celebrating colonialism and the original superspreader event that killed Indigenous folx and women so be it.”
That did not go over well in Wisconsin, only slightly better than coming out against cheese.
Hong did not deny her 2021 statement for weeks, including when confronted on CNN by host Kaitlan Collins. Asked directly if she still hated Thanksgiving, Hong seemed to morph into Chauncy Gardner from Being There with her now much-ridiculed “I’m a chef” response, stating that, as a chef, she works to “bring more people to the table.”
Hong seemed to morph into Chauncey Gardner from Being There in offering non-sequiturs of being a “very serious gardener.”
When that interview fell flat, Hong decided to lie and claim that she was just joking in 2021 and “loves” Thanksgiving, her now “favorite holiday.”
No one reading her quote or her later interviews would believe that it was a joke. It was not a joke for weeks until her responses became a joke.
Abdul El-Sayed skipped the transitional period and went straight to the lie in his controversy this week when a video surfaced of his saying how he hates the iconic Mackinac Island.
Growing up in Chicago, one of my favorite things was to go with my family to the island, which is the quintessential small American town. I actually have never met anyone who hated Mackinac Island…until now.
In the video, El-Sayed states “I hate Mackinac so much. It’s funny cause, like, if we win, this is gonna be, like, the summer home. Every time I’ve ever come here I’ve hated it.”
El-Sayed was clearly informed that declaring that you despise the most popular tourist location in Michigan is not a vote getter. So, El-Sayed simply told his supporters what they wanted to hear: you cannot believe your lying eyes and ears.
His campaign issued a bizarre statement that sought to turn the controversial into his being opposed to the elite and privileged class, saying that he was actually Mackinac Policy Conference which is simply an annual nonpartisan forum for public policy discussions.
El-Sayed claims that he was referring to conference as being like a summer home for governors. He maintains that he was referring to a conference as the entire island.
El-Sayed knows that it does not matter. He could have claimed that he was referring to hating Mackinac Island Pizza Company. It does not matter. His supporters do not want the baggage and he simply needed to unload it
With the election in November, the next predictable step will be for Hong to join El-Sayed on Mackinac Island for a public Thanksgiving dinner. Talarico will be on hand to carve the bird with enthusiasm.
The real problem is that these individuals spent years throwing red meat (or, in the case of Talarico, tofu) to the far left. These statements were not considered extreme or controversial until they found themselves speaking to a wider audience. Then they sounded just crazy.
Moreover, some lies are unlikely to register with voters who may prefer to live in delusion. The fact that the Mamdani markets will ultimately sell the most expensive produce in New York is an inconvenient fact that is best ignored.
The model for far-left politicians appears to be Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger who ran as a moderate and then governed from the far left. Spanberger, for example, pledged not to gerrymander districts to eliminate all Republican districts and then immediately moved to do so. Many voters likely did not believe her on gerrymandering, taxes, or other broken pledges before the election. They just needed her to say it. So, you might have to visit Mackinac or feign enjoyment at Thanksgiving or barbeques for a few weeks. Then you can do a Spanberger.
Abraham Lincoln may have said “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”
However, the fact is that you do not have to fool all of the people all of the time, just enough to win over the course of a few weeks.
