The global systemic transition to multipolarity is nowadays proceeding along a different trajectory than before due to recent shifts in the international system.
Up until this point, Trump 2.0 sought resource and military partnerships with Russia and India respectively that could decelerate China’s superpower rise, which would then make it the junior partner in any “G2”/“Chimerica” deal.
His Eurasian balancing act has failed, however, due to his arrogant and aggressive approach towards all three countries.
Ties with Russia took a hit after the Anchorage Summit following increasinglyconcerningreports about US plans to support NATO troops in Ukraine, thus spooking Putin into abandoning his country’s own Eurasian balancing act by pivoting to China.
With Russia pivoting to China via Power of Siberia 2 amidst the Sino-Indo rapprochement, the resource and military means for decelerating China’s superpower rise through partnerships with them were neutralized, thus leading to any “G2”/“Chimerica” deal now being in China’s favor instead.
President Xi Jinping accordingly espoused stronger rhetoric about reshaping the world order during his speeches at the SCO Summit and V-J Day, which prompted Trump to accuse him of “conspiring” against the US.
The interim Sino-US trade deal is now in jeopardy after he just threatened the imposition of 100% tariffs on China by 1 November or earlier depending on when China imposes its export controls on rare earth minerals.
Coupled with his dramatic accusation that Xi is “conspiring” against the US in collusion with Putin and Kim Jong Un, this could presage future military-strategic tensions, even if only indirectly via proxy. That would further destabilize Eurasia per the US’ traditional divide-and-rule stratagem.
In clockwise order, these could take the form of:
fomenting Color Revolution unrest in Mongolia in order to undermine Power of Siberia 2;
Japan, Taiwan, and/or the Philippines provoking an incident with China at sea in contested waters;
obstructing China’s access to rare earth minerals in Myanmar’s KachinState;
and/or sowing instability in Central Asia via NATO member Turkiye through the new TRIPP Corridor.
China’s response to these scenarios could be to arm Russia and even send troops to help it in Ukraine.
Xi saw how Trump mistreated his friend Modi despite him leading a state that could have joined the US’ anti-Chinese axis, while also watching how he’s betraying Putin in Ukraine after Anchorage, so he expects similar treatment if he agrees to a “G2”/ “Chimerica” deal.
He also knows that China now has a target on its back after the latest tariffs and Trump accusing him of a “conspiracy”. It’s therefore little wonder that Trump 2.0’s Eurasian balancing act, which was characterized by arrogance and aggression, has failed.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Defending Against Strained Grids, Army To Power US Bases With Micro-Nuke Reactors
As soaring demand for electric power threatens to rapidly overtake America’s supply, the US Army on Tuesday announced a plan to install nuclear microreactors at bases across the country. “What resilience means to us is that we have power, no matter what, 24-7,” said principal deputy assistant secretary of the Army Jeff Waksman after the program was unveiled at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting Warriors Corner panel.
Pursuant to what has been christened the “Janus Program,” the Pentagon is charged with bringing the first reactor online no later than September 30, 2028, and is currently identifying the first nine posts that will receive two reactors each. Those reactors will generate less than 20 megawatts of power, according to the Wall Street Journal. That’s comparable to the demands of a single, small town. In addition to preserving the installations ability to function in the face of overwhelmed grids, the reactors will also serve as a safeguard against cyberattacks and weather catastrophes. The program is empowered by Executive Order 14299, “Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security,” which was signed by President Trump in May.
The microreactors will be owned and operated by private companies that will be selected in 2026; the budget has yet to be disclosed. “The race today is to actually develop the capability. We are all trying to figure out who can turn these things on,” Isaiah Taylor, chief executive and founder of microreactor startup Valar Atomics, told the Journal. The Janus Program comes after six years of Army work with startup companies to develop microreactors for service around the globe. The Air Force has its own parallel program, with eight companies pursuing contracts to power USAF installations. Microreactors are roughly the same size as a shipping container, and are meant to be easily transportable and rapidly brought online upon arrival.
“Since the Manhattan Project, the Department of Energy and the Department of War have forged one of the defining partnerships in American history—advancing the science, engineering, and industrial capability that power our national security,” said Energy Secretary Chris Wright. “Under President Trump’s leadership, we’re extending that legacy through initiatives like the Janus Program, accelerating next-generation reactor deployment and strengthening the nuclear foundations of American energy and defense.”
The microreactor programs are all well and good for the armed forces, but what about the rest of us whose futures are jeopardized by soaring demand for AI data centers paired with glacial-paced plans for new nuclear capacity? As we wrote on Friday:
With nuclear power still years away, and with Goldman already warning of “price spikes and power blackouts“, the federal government or power grid operators must figure out a cost-effective, scalable energy solution to ensure power prices don’t continue spiraling out of control and proper grid stabilization occurs to ensure grid stability amid the AI arms race with China.
On Tuesday, the Defense Production Act Consortium held its first meeting, as that organization seeks agreements with U.S. nuclear companiesas part of an effort to rebuild the nation’s nuclear fuel supply chain. The DPA Consortium was created in accordance with President Trump’s Executive Order 14302, Reinvigorating the Nuclear Industrial Base, and will use the authorities of the Defense Production Act to coordinate industry efforts across the nuclear fuel cycle.
States are taking action to protect agriculture and waterways from harmful “forever chemicals” as they await federal regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Critics say this has resulted in inconsistent and inadequate regulations exposing much of the country’s soil, air, and water to contamination by the chemicals.
According to the EPA, it is working through a very complex problem concerning a huge category of chemicals.
“The agency is committed to working closely with our partners to take a fresh look at the risks and the tools available to support our rural and agricultural communities on this issue,” the EPA told The Epoch Times in a statement.
At issue are perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS are a group of more than 14,000 chemicals that have been used in stain- and water-repellent fabrics, nonstick cookware, food packaging, and firefighting foams since the 1940s because of their resistance to heat, oils, stains, grease, and water.
However, they do not degrade naturally and are almost impossible to destroy, earning them the “forever chemicals” appellation. According to the EPA, PFAS have been linked to cancer, reproductive issues, immune disorders, reduced vaccine response, hormonal issues, and weight gain.
In the early part of the 1970s, PFAS chemicals began to show up in soil to which biosolids had been applied.
Dredged as sludge from the bottom of wastewater treatment tanks and treated to reduce or eliminate harmful substances, biosolids have been sold or given to farmers as a low-cost fertilizer for more than 50 years.
An EPA draft assessment of two PFAS chemicals states that treated sewage sludge containing 1 part per billion of PFAS could pose a serious health risk.
An EPA statement reads, “The findings of the draft risk assessment underscore the importance of proactive federal and state policies to control and remove PFAS at their source.”
States face numerous challenges in dealing with PFAS, according to The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), a national nonprofit association of state and territorial environmental agency leaders.
These challenges include inadequate funding, a lack of technical expertise, and dependence on EPA commitments that appear to have been put on hold.
ECOS’s mission is to help state agencies protect health and the environment, according to its website.
State biosolids regulations vary. In Maine and Connecticut they are banned, while Alabama allows almost unfettered use.
Maine has taken one of the most aggressive postures toward PFAS chemicals in biosolids. A spokesman for the Maine Department of Environmental Protection declined to comment and directed The Epoch Times to the department website.
Maine’s biosolids battle began in 2016 when PFAS were found at a dairy in Arundel, about 81 miles south of the state capital, Augusta. State investigators determined that cattle grazing on land treated with biosolids consumed grass that had absorbed the chemicals from the treated soil. This resulted in the cattle producing contaminated milk.
They also determined that the chemicals had spread far beyond the dairy.
In 2022, Maine implemented Public Law 2021, banning the land application of biosolids. The law also mandates testing of all wastewater treatment plant effluent, farmland, drinking water, and any products or environmental matter that could be contaminated.
The law provides state assistance with cleanup and remediation to owners of contaminated land. It provides bottled water or filtration systems for those whose water is contaminated.
Maine’s response to PFAS contamination in biosolids could be a model for other states, according to Mya Heard, a researcher in Northeastern University’s PFAS Project Lab.
Maine took a three-pronged approach of legislative, scientific, and public policy angles, Heard wrote in a Maine Policy Review article.
“Future case studies on state PFAS governance will offer comparative analyses and can strengthen the case for an interdisciplinary approach that leverages multiple scales of governance,” she wrote.
Although Maine and Connecticut ban biosolids, the treated sewage sludge is still commonly used on farm fields around the country.
The EPA reports that wastewater treatment plants produce an average of 3.76 million dry metric tons of biosolids each year. Approximately 56 percent of this is disposed of by land application.
According to a report from the National Biosolids Data Project, 53 percent of the biosolids produced in the United States are applied to almost 18 percent of all farmland. The bulk of that is used to grow livestock feed.
Similar numbers are reflected in Alabama. In response to health concerns, nuisance odor complaints, and complaints about biosolids imported from other states, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management set new biosolids regulations in 2020.
The new rules established nutrient management planning and property line setback requirements for land application of biosolids. The rules are meant to reduce odors, protect the environment, and address complaints from neighbors.
Regina Allcorn lives on a 68-acre property in Etowah County, Alabama. The centerpiece of her family’s land is a lake.
Allcorn said her family cannot eat fish from the lake because they are contaminated with PFAS from neighboring land treated with biosolids.
She said she believes that biosolids distributors force landowners who do not use the sludge to live with contaminated water, foul odors, health problems, and an uncertain future.
“It’s your home and you shouldn’t feel that way,” she told The Epoch Times.
Alabama Department of Environmental Management spokesperson Lynn Battle declined an interview request but stated in an email to The Epoch Times that Alabama regulations are based on the most current science.
“As appropriate and based on new or revised EPA regulations and requirements regarding activities that impact our air, water, or land resources, [Alabama Department of Environmental Management] has and will continue to implement measures to ensure its programs address the issues as noted in any Federal regulation,” Battle wrote.
In a white paper titled “Processes & Considerations for Setting State PFAS Standards,” ECOS presented information from survey responses it had received from 43 states.
According to the ECOS, Alabama is one of 14 states that has no enforceable guidelines, although the state tests for PFAS and publishes its data. The other states are Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.
ECOS stated that in April 2024, the EPA set enforceable drinking water standards for only five of the more than 14,000 known PFAS chemicals.
“At this time, the U.S. has no federally enforceable PFAS standards for other PFAS or for these PFAS in other environmental media, leaving individual states to navigate various avenues for addressing contamination,” the paper states.
“Some states have established legally enforceable values for certain PFAS in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, soil, or air. Other states and regulatory agencies have opted for non-enforceable values.”
According to ECOS, most state activity focuses on drinking water. Some states also test wastewater treatment plant influent and effluent and compare those data sets with EPA guidelines.
Some states have laws prohibiting them from setting regulations more stringent than those set by the EPA. These states, including Alabama, are waiting to use the expected EPA standard as a guide.
A simple dietary adjustment could be a game-changer for heart patients. Increasing potassium levels cuts the risk of dangerous heart rhythms by nearly a quarter, according to new research.
Participants in the treatment group had their potassium levels raised to 4.5 to 5.0 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) through diet, supplements, and/or medication.
The treatment was conducted in patients who had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), which is a surgically implanted device larger than a pacemaker, a more common implantable device.
A pacemaker is a small, surgically implanted device that helps regulate a slow or irregular heartbeat by sending electrical impulses to maintain a steady rhythm. An ICD, on the other hand, monitors the heart and delivers an electrical shock to correct dangerously fast heart rhythms, which can prevent sudden cardiac arrest.
Over an average follow-up of 3.3 years, patients who maintained higher potassium levels experienced significantly better outcomes, according to the results recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The main goal was to see if the approach could reduce episodes of dangerous heart rhythms, hospitalizations, or death.
Key Study Findings
The study focused on patients with implanted ICDs. Patients started the trial with normal and low baseline levels of potassium at 4.3 mmol/L or lower.
The patients then raised their potassium levels either through diet, supplementation, or medication. Raising and maintaining a high-normal potassium level of 4 to 5 mmol/L had a 24 percent reduction in risk of serious heart rhythm problems.Potassium is needed to create heartbeats, therefore low potassium levels can lead to irregular heartbeats.
A major outcome was that there were fewer emergency interventions from implanted defibrillators—15.3 percent in the higher-than-normal potassium group versus 20.3 percent in the control group.
Hospitalizations for arrhythmias and heart failure were also less common among those with higher potassium levels.
Regarding safety, hospitalizations due to very high or very low potassium levels occurred in 1 percent of both groups, and deaths were reported in 5.7 percent of the high-normal group compared to 6.8 percent in the controls, a difference that the researchers didn’t consider statistically significant.
Dr. Carolyn Lam, a cardiologist and senior consultant at the National Heart Centre Singapore, who pioneered the first Women’s Heart Clinic in Singapore, and was not involved in the trial, told The Epoch Times that the findings apply specifically to patients who have implanted defibrillators, are at high risk of ventricular arrhythmias, and have a starting potassium that is not higher than 4.3 mmol/L.
Lam said that potassium levels have a “U-shape relationship” with health outcomes, meaning that both high and low levels can lead to adverse events.
“Thus, it is important that patients know their potassium levels before simply applying these results to themselves,” she said.
What The Findings Mean for Patients
Although the study was conducted only in patients who already had an ICD, Professor Henning Bundgaard, senior author of the study, said in a statement that the findings may be applicable to many patients, especially those who have cardiovascular disease associated with a high risk of ventricular arrhythmia.
Dr. Ian J. Neeland, an associate professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University and director of University Hospitals Center for Cardiovascular Prevention, who was not involved in the trial, said that patients should discuss strategies with their doctor to keep potassium levels in the high-normal range. Patients should be sure to take drugs that help the body hold onto potassium, he said, which includes Spironolactone and eplerenone, according to current guidelines for patients with implanted cardiac devices.
Some foods that increase potassium include bananas, raisins, prunes, broccoli, potatoes, and tuna.
Neeland added that patients should also alert their doctor if they develop any conditions that could acutely lower their potassium levels, such as diarrhea or vomiting.
“They should work with their doctor to find the best strategies to keep potassium in the high-normal range,” he said.
Blockchain data showed stablecoin issuer Paxos both minted and burned 300 trillion tokens of the PayPal USD stablecoin within 30 minutes, leaving many crypto users scratching their heads.
This prompted much amusement and confusion across social media…
In a Wednesday X post following the mint and burn, Chaos Labs founder Omer Goldberg said Aave would be temporarily freezing trades for PayPal USD after an “unexpected high-magnitude transaction” of minting and burning the stablecoin.
Ethereum blockchain data showed Paxos minting 300 trillion of the US dollar-pegged stablecoin at 7:12 pm UTC and then burning the entire amount 22 minutes later by sending it to an inaccessible wallet.
PYUSD, pegged 1:1 to the US dollar, makes the supply of the burned coins worth about $300 trillion.
The stablecoin has a market capitalization of more than $2.3 billion at this writing, making it the sixth-largest coin behind Tether’s USDt, USDC, Ethena USDe, Dai and World Liberty Financial USD (USD1).
In a Wednesday X follow-up post, Paxos said it had “mistakenly minted excess PYUSD as part of an internal transfer.”
“This was an internal technical error,” said Paxos.
“There is no security breach. Customer funds are safe. We have addressed the root cause.”
PYUSD maintained its dollar peg following the news, but its price briefly dropped by about 0.5%, according to data from Nansen.
PYUSD price immediately after the mint and burn. Source: Nansen
$300 trillion is more than twice the Gross Domestic Product for every country on earth, according to data from the International Monetary Fund.
Biggest burns in crypto history
Some of the most significant token burns include cryptocurrency exchange OKX sending more than 65 million OKB to an inaccessible address in August in an effort to keep the supply at 21 million.
The project behind the Bonk memecoin burned about 1.7 trillion BONK in December 2024, but the coins were only worth about $50 million at the time.
Tesla Reportedly Places Large Humanoid Parts Order As Goldman Outlines Profit Implications
There’s no exact release date for Tesla’s Optimus robot, but mass production could begin as early as 2026, according to a new report from Sina News. Media outlets in China reported that Tesla has placed a $685 million order for linear actuators from Sanhua Intelligent Controls, with deliveries expected to start early next year. Elon Musk has said he plans to have millions of these robots operating in Tesla factories by the end of the decade.
The report reinforces what we’ve known all along: Musk’s Tesla remains years ahead of both EV rivals, legacy automakers, and robotics firms. As Goldman analysts highlight in a note on Tuesday, the next profit frontier for the auto industry lies in humanoid robotics – and Tesla is already leading that race.
Analysts led by Mark Delaney predicted that humanoid robot production will be a powerful new profit growth engine for autos, both as a product line and as a means to reduce labor costs. This is especially relevant for Tesla, whose Optimus robot is being developed for factory floors and the consumer market.
Last month, Elon Musk suggested that humanoids could represent up to 80% of Tesla’s future value.
“There is the potential over time for humanoid robots to drive incremental profitability for autos and industrial tech companies, both as a new product to sell and as a contributor of lower costs,” Delaney wrote in a note. “This is particularly relevant for Tesla, which is developing the Optimus robot for both internal use and to sell to external customers.”
The analysts noted that Tesla will benefit on two fronts: deploying Optimus internally for labor savings and selling externally with a cost edge from its EV-derived expertise in power electronics, AI navigation, and manufacturing scale:
2030E EPS impact: +$0.10 – $3.00 (50 K–1.5 M units, $40–60 K ASP, 10–15% EBIT margin + subscription income).
The delivery of actuators for Tesla’s humanoid robots early next year suggests not only that production will ramp up in 2026 but also that America’s love affair with automation is accelerating. The downside, of course, is mass job displacement. With AI accelerating across industries, one has to question what “labor shortage” the Biden-Harris regime was addressing when it facilitated an illegal alien invasion of 10-15 million third-worlders, many untrained for the digital economy. These are precisely the jobs that AI/robots are poised to eliminate. So was mass immigration really about filling jobs, or about political control in future elections? Short answer: Political control.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) vowed to sue California after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law on Oct. 10 a ban on the sale of one of the most popular gun brands in the state.
California’s Assembly Bill 1127 doesn’t name Glock Inc. in the legislation but directly applies to the company’s firearms by prohibiting the sale of semi-automatic handguns that can be easily converted to fully automatic. That ban covers models, such as Glocks, that use a cruciform trigger bar.
The ban, which will go into effect on July 1, 2026, applies to several pistols but will have an outsized effect on Glocks.
John Commerford, NRA-Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) executive director, stated the gun-rights group would file litigation against Newsom’s decision, calling it a violation of civil rights.
“Our message to Governor Newsom is simple: we will see you in court,“ Commerford said in a statement, ”Gavin Newsom and his gang of progressive politicians in California are continuing their crusade against constitutional rights. Once again, they are attempting to violate landmark Supreme Court decisions and disarm law-abiding citizens by banning some of the most commonly owned handguns in America. This flagrant violation of rights cannot, and will not, go unchecked.”
Former Vice President Kamala Harris, a California resident and former attorney general of the state, was the most recent high-profile person to admit to owning a Glock when she revealed the information in October 2024 while running for president.
“I have a Glock and I’ve had it for quite some time. My background is in law enforcement, so there you go,” Harris said during an interview, adding she had fired it at a shooting range.
The Gun Owners of California organization, a statewide Second Amendment-rights group, also promised litigation over the law.
“Gavin Newsom just signed AB 1127, banning the most popular handgun in America, and the same one Kamala Harris bragged about carrying. You couldn’t make this hypocrisy up if you tried. Lawsuit time, again,” the group wrote on Facebook hours after Newsom signed the measure.
The law, authored by Assemblymembers Jesse Gabriel and Catherine Stefani, both Democrats, allows the state to fine anyone selling, transferring, delivering, or offering the firearms up to $1,000 for a first offense and up to $5,000 and suspension or revocation of a dealer’s license for a second offense. It also allows for a dealer to be cited with a misdemeanor and mandatory revocation for a third offense.
The bill does not apply to police, sheriffs’ departments, marshals’ offices, district attorneys, highway patrol, justice or corrections departments, or military or naval forces in the state.
“The increased prevalence of automatic weapons across the nation is deeply concerning,” the bill’s authors stated in a legislative analysis.
The new law will seek to protect communities from mass shootings and gun violence by preventing the easy conversions, they stated.
Vet Voice Foundation, which supported the bill, said that what it regards as do-it-yourself machine guns are a growing threat to public safety.
“Fully automatic machine guns have been illegal under federal and state law for decades, but they can be made at home by attaching a tiny piece of plastic commonly known as a ‘Glock switch’ to a convertible pistol,” the group stated in the legislative analysis. “Glock has known about this problem for years, but has not taken responsibility for its easily convertible products and instead has refused to take serious action to fix its design.”
The California chapters of Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action, both members of Everytown for Gun Safety, applauded Newsom’s decision to sign the bill, saying he and lawmakers are putting the safety of California communities above gun industry profits.
“For decades, reckless gun makers have profited off our tragedies. Today, California forces these gun makers to decide: fix your pistols or don’t sell in this state,” the group stated in a social media post.
Trump Warns If Hamas Doesn’t Disarm, ‘We Will Disarm Them, Maybe Violently’
With the Israeli hostages now released and hundreds of Palestinian prisoners being returned from Israeli prisons, officials look to the next phases of the Trump-brokered peace deal, which the consensus is will be the hardest. It involves the disarming of Hamas and establishing future governance of the Gaza Strip.
On Tuesday, President Trump made clear that Hamas would be required to disarm under the deal, warning that if the group refused to do so voluntarily, the US would intervene, possibly through force – though in characteristic fashion his comments were left ambiguous, and reporters were left wanting to know more.
“If they don’t disarm, we will disarm them, and it will happen quickly and maybe violently,”he told reporters, emphasizing that Hamas would have no choice. When pressed on how he intended to carry out such action, Trump declined to provide details, saying, “I don’t have to explain that to you… They know I’m not playing games.”
The Pentagon has already deployed up to 200 troops to Israel where they are assisting in terms of operational oversight of the ceasefire. Trump’s words hint that it could be a short step to take some of these troops are embed them in Gaza, to assist the IDF in finally disarming Hamas.
Hamas has already reasserted control over areas previously vacated by Israeli forces and has gone on an execution campaign against alleged collaborators and criminals. Dozens have been reported killed in the last couple days.
President Trump noted that Israel had armed certain gangs and militias as part of its anti-Hamas strategy. “They took out some very bad gangs – really bad people – and that doesn’t bother me,” Trump said, appearing to offer some rare positive commentary on Hamas. “That’s fine. Those were very bad gangs.”
A day earlier, he said Hamas had received “approval” for such operations, adding that with nearly two million people returning to devastated neighborhoods, instability was a major concern. “We want it to be safe. I think it’s going to be fine. Who knows for sure,” said Trump.
Hamas has been rounding up rival armed groups which sought to undermine the group’s power…
Meanwhile, the future of the deal still has a high degree of uncertainty, given Hamas leaders have reiterated that their armed wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, will not surrender its weapons until an independent Palestinian state is established. However, this is a goal which the Netanyahu government has clearly rejected.
Hamas and Israel could yet further clash given the IDF has been ordered to destroy the miles and miles of tunnels which exist under Gaza, and which have formed key infrastructure for Hamas command bunkers and their foot soldiers’ movements.
A La Niña advisory has officially been issued by the Climate Prediction Center, signaling a possible precedent for winter across the United States.
Conditions emerged at the end of September and were favored to persist through December 2025 into February 2026.
The opposite of the weather phenomenon called El Niño, La Niña refers to when the water temperatures of the central and eastern Pacific Ocean around the equator are cooler than average. That cooling can impact global weather patterns thousands of miles away.
While it is expected to remain relatively weak, this year it is expected to have an effect on winters in the United States, especially regarding this year’s snowfall.
Here’s what La Niña conditions could look like for the United States this year.
North-South Divide
One of the most noticeable effects that La Niña could have on the United States is a moisture divide between the northern and southern states of the Lower 48.
To the north, colder and wetter conditions are generally expected, while the southern states are expected to experience a warmer and drier winter.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) seasonal outlook showed most of the United States was predicted to face above-average or near-above-average temperatures through October, November, and December. An area of the southern Rocky Mountains, particularly New Mexico, and most of New England are expected to experience relatively warmer temperatures.
The northwest, meanwhile, was predicted to have near-average temperatures.
NOAA noted that those temperature changes have already begun to show up.
“From mid-August to mid-September, below-average heights and temperatures were evident over the eastern U.S. Starting in mid-September, above-average heights and temperatures dominated the eastern U.S.,” NOAA reported on Oct. 14. ”From early September to mid-October, below-average heights and temperatures prevailed over the eastern North Pacific Ocean and parts of the western U.S.”
Rain and Snowfall
La Niña is also expected to bring changes to precipitation across the country, particularly snowfall. Much of the northwest from the Cascades in Washington State across the upper Midwest through New England will tend to see an increase in snowfall.
NOAA’s seasonal outlook indicated that much of Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Idaho are expected to see above-average levels of precipitation, while states in the southern Rockies, like New Mexico and Colorado, are expected to see below-average precipitation.
Several areas of the Rocky Mountains, including the Salt Lake City Area, have already reported significant amounts of early snowfall, and more is reported to be on the way.
The Weather Prediction Center reported heavy snow was to develop over the Sierra Nevada Mountains on Oct. 14 and Oct. 15.
However, that snow is coming in as part of a low-pressure system coming off the ocean and into California. The Weather Prediction Center issued a slight risk of excessive rainfall over parts of Southern California, noting that urban areas, roads, small streams, and low-lying areas could be vulnerable to flash flooding. Additional showers and thunderstorms were also expected to hit parts of the Southern Rockies also bringing heavy rain and risks of flash flooding.
During La Niña, the Southern Rockies historically tend to get below-average amounts of snowfall, as well as parts of the Ohio Valley.
That being said, Michelle L’Hereux, lead scientist of NOAA’s team responsible for studying La Niña and El Niño, said that, based on multi-factor computer models from NOAA and Columbia University, this La Niña impact is not likely to be very strong at all, suggesting temperatures and precipitation levels should remain closer to average.
“There is a three-out-of-four chance it will remain a weak event,” L’Heureux said in an email. “A weaker event tends to exert less of an influence on the global circulation, so it’s possible there will be surprises ahead.”
The Climate Prediction Center publishes monthly statements on the status of La Niña. The next one will be posted around Nov. 13.
Overthrow: Trump Authorizes CIA Covert Ops Targeting Venezuela’s Maduro
It is easy to imagine that there’s been CIA infiltration into Maduro’s Venezuela for a long time, but covert operations there are now becoming an “open secret” – as fresh Wednesday reporting in the New York Times indicates. “The Trump administration has secretly authorized the C.I.A. to conduct covert action in Venezuela, according to U.S. officials, stepping up a campaign against Nicolás Maduro, the country’s authoritarian leader,” the Times writes.
Already the Pentagon has been engaged in what could be interpreted as more overt acts of war in regional waters – the targeting of boats off Venezuela accused of being engaged in narco-smuggling operations. Clearly anti-Maduro operations are picking tempo, and ratcheting the temperature.
At this point after five instances of drone attacks on these boats, at least 27 people have died. The Trump administration has alleged the drug traffickers are operating with the blessing and oversight of socialist strongman Nicolas Maduro, which Caracas vehemently rejects.
The US military has further maintained a significant military build-up in the Caribbean, including some 10,000 troops, over several weeks. According to more details from the new NY Times report:
The new authority would allow the C.I.A. to carry out lethal operations in Venezuela and conduct a range of operations in the Caribbean.
But the below part is somewhat surprising and alarming, given the unpredictable and dangerous implications of the CIA acting “unilaterally”:
The agency would be able to take covert action against Mr. Maduro or his government either unilaterally or in conjunction with a larger military operation. It is not known whether the C.I.A. is planning any operations in Venezuela or if the authorities are meant as a contingency.
But the development comes as the U.S. military is planning its own possible escalation, drawing up options for President Trump to consider, including strikes inside Venezuela.
What is the end-goal here?
Many observers have speculated that it is nothing short of regime change in the Latin American nation known for having the world’s largest proven oil reserves, estimated at over 300 billion barrels.
The NYT actually provides a blunt answer in agreement with the regime change assessment:
The Trump administration’s strategy on Venezuela, developed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, with help from John Ratcliffe, the C.I.A. director, aims to oust Mr. Maduro from power.
Mr. Ratcliffe has said little about what his agency is doing in Venezuela. But he has promised that the C.I.A. under his leadership would become more aggressive. During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Ratcliffe said he would make the C.I.A. less averse to risk and more willing to conduct covert action when ordered by the president, “going places no one else can go and doing things no one else can do.”
Below: F-16s reportedly scramble from Venezuela’s El Libertador Air Base in response to US B-52 bombers nearby…
VENEZUELA scrambles F-16s
Responds to US B-52 bombers nearby
F-16s reportedly scramble from El Libertador Air Base in Arabia
And yet it must be remembered that Trump has constantly touted himself as the “peace” president who solves wars and doesn’t start them.
But now, as the NY Times says, there is a highly classified presidential finding which seems to authorize government overthrow in Caracas.
President Trump at the start of this month formally notified Congress this week that the US was entering a “non-international armed conflict” with drug cartels. Trump’s rationale for the attacks on drug boats in his memo to Congress stated that the cartels are “non-state armed groups” whose actions smuggling drugs “constitute an armed attack against the United States”.
The sight of U.S. B-52 bombers in Venezuelan airspace is a major escalation. Trump’s warmongering has nothing to do with the “war on drugs” & all to do with regime change to plunder Venezuela’s oil. This reckless push for war is a criminal act of international aggression. pic.twitter.com/tHxB6HjpwT
In particular the administration has essentially declared war on the Tren de Aragua cartel, and says it is cooperating with the Maduro government, which Caracas has rejected, and so the presence of the cartel’s members in the US is a “predatory incursion” by a foreign nation. In this way he’s trying to cast this as an ‘America First’ policy, and yet if bombs start falling on yet another foreign country which has not militarily attacked the United States, few Americans are likely going to buy it.
