Zerohedge

Epstein's Inbox Lays Out Gift Networks, PR Tactics, And Strange Habits Nearly two weeks ago the House Oversight Committee released a trove of over 18,000 emails related to Jeffrey Epstein. In response, Bloomberg dedicated a fleet of journalists to sift through them - with what we imagine was an effort to find dirt on President Donald Trump.  And while mentions of Trump are scant, the emails reveal a vast network of gifts spanning Epstein victims, recruiters, and associates.  Trump Stuff Donald Trump is mentioned a few times in the cache; he appears alongside Epstein and Maxwell at Mar-a-Lago in 2000, and in a 2003 New York Magazine–described dinner Maxwell arranged at Epstein’s townhouse with "barely clad models"; in a Sept. 14, 2006 email in which Maxwell sends Epstein a 51-name VIP list that includes Trump - to which Epstein replies “Remove trump,” with the list’s purpose unclear. On Aug. 23, 2007 Maxwell writes to Epstein that reporters likely “went to donald trump” as the Epstein investigation into his sex crimes intensified. And there's one message recounting Trump and Epstein’s real-estate rivalry over Abe Gosman’s former mansion (which Trump ultimately bought).  The correspondence, most active from 2005 to 2008, includes a 2007 accountant’s spreadsheet itemizing nearly 2,000 gifts, purchases and payments totaling about $1.8 million. Many entries bear Maxwell’s initials, “GM,” indicating she helped arrange them. The records log intended recipients ranging from political aides and financiers to assistants and women who later identified as victims. The spreadsheet does not confirm whether gifts were actually delivered or accepted. The emails also show Maxwell’s role was broader than she has publicly claimed. Circa 1990s: Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein had a brief romantic relationship, she has said. After that ended, she continued to work as his property manager. Source: SplashNews/Shutterstock She appears as a named director of one of Epstein’s revenue-generating companies, opened at least one foreign bank account using his address, and traded stock in a company in which they were both investors. The cache of documents also reveal two fertility procedures the pair discussed and timed in 2006 and again in 2007 - years after Maxwell has said her involvement “lessened considerably.” Just days after the raid, Maxwell sent Epstein detailed instructions on a sperm donation for a shared fertility treatment. “You can do the sample at home,” she directed, before adding that it “has to be within 90 mins of my procedure” and that “all the ejaculate must be collected.” -Bloomberg Gift Network Clinton orbit / political fixers Doug Band (former Bill Clinton aide): Maxwell and Epstein discussed buying him a $35,000 Audemars Piguet and how to present the note (“from you, from me, from us?” → “us”). Spreadsheet logs a $35,000 watch for “DB.” Bill & Hillary Clinton circle: Emails reference three meetings Maxwell had with “Clinton” (2006–2008) and show Maxwell promoting TerraMar through CGI; Band also hit Maxwell for a last-minute flight ask (he declined the free flight). Core financier / client network Leslie Wexner: Multiple ATV purchases totaling >$130,000 listed as gifts for Wexner; spreadsheet also shows Victoria’s Secret gifts to women (including a victim). Tom Barrack (real-estate investor): Spreadsheet itemizes an ~$11,000 Rolex for Barrack (Barrack’s rep denies he ever received a gift). Legal team / influence defense Alan Dershowitz: $71,000 Lexus of Watertown (MA) purchase—Dershowitz says it was part of legal fees and for his wife, who drove Epstein on visits. Draft “letter to friends” (appearing over Dershowitz’s name) for distribution to their social network to discredit allegations—Maxwell tasked with organizing dissemination. (Dershowitz says he doesn’t recall it.) Tech / science / VIP hospitality Sergey Brin & Anne Wojcicki: Maxwell encourages Epstein to host them on Little St. James for New Year’s 2006/07; Epstein later emails he’s on the island with Brin. Bill Richardson (then NM governor): His office asked Maxwell whether Epstein’s jet could be used for a Sudan peace mission (Epstein replied “have him call me today!!”). (Richardson used another donor’s plane per prior reporting.) Assistants / recruiters (many later described as victims) Nadia Marcinkova: Repeatedly appears; Epstein’s emails exhibit control/ sexual coercion dynamics. Gifts/expenses for assistants show up in the ledger. Natalya “Natasha” Malyshev: Emailed Epstein names, ages, photos; forwarded a pitch that a 19-year-old could “be rewarded” for recruiting classmates. Victims & family—pattern of “gifts” used for control Carolyn Andriano (testified at Maxwell’s trial): Victoria’s Secret gift entry Jan. 6, 2003 (she’d just turned 16). Johanna Sjoberg’s father: $10,000 entry (source notes this fit a broader pattern of manipulation). Unnamed victim: >80 entries totaling just over $75,000 for things like study abroad, Thai massage lessons, laptop, wires; “GM” initials appear beside many entries (Maxwell involvement). Other earmarks in the ledger (illustrated in the timeline graphic) $47,846 Steinway piano (recipient not named). $10,000 Christmas earrings; $3,328 laptops (victims/assistants); $3,725 study-abroad check; $93,115 ATVs; $1,200 Thai massage class; “Massage for Dummies” books; $496 lingerie shop gift card; $35,000 Audemars Piguet (also annotated above). (Ledger notes don’t prove delivery/acceptance; they log intent and internal accounting.) Recruiting Operation The emails and an internal ledger outline a recruiting system that began with “massages” and matured into a routinized pipeline run by Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein’s female associates. Palm Beach police described the entry point: teenage girls were brought to Epstein’s house, paid $200–$1,000, told to undress, and asked to perform sex acts. In the inbox and the ledger, Maxwell is not a bystander -her initials “GM” appear on hundreds of entries, and memos such as "JE gifts girls" mark purchases tied to outreach and retention. Sourcing & screening: Maxwell and selected associates identified prospects through social circles and schools. Emails from Natalya (“Natasha”) Malyshev to Epstein carried first names, ages and photos; one message proposed a 19-year-old who could “be rewarded” for recruiting classmates. Epstein responded that she was “too big,” adding instructions (“no nail polish”) if a meeting went ahead. Front-end recruitment via “assistant” roles: Victims describe being drawn in as helpers before sex was introduced. Johanna Sjoberg said Maxwell recruited her as an “assistant,” which she learned meant sex with Epstein; the ledger records $10,000 to her father, consistent with a broader pattern of leverage over families. Grooming & control mechanics: The spending file shows a cadence of small, frequent items - lingerie, “Massage for Dummies” books, classes, rent, electronics - that reinforced dependence. Examples include a $496 gift card at a New York lingerie shop for two assistants, $1,200 for a Thai-massage course, $3,328 for laptops to two young women listed as assistants/victims, a $3,725 study-abroad check, and multiple Western Union wires. Managing Fallout - and a Return to the Spotlight The emails show Maxwell remained deeply involved as the Florida probe escalated. In July 2006, after the FBI contacted one of Epstein’s pilots, Maxwell asked Epstein what to tell him; Epstein directed the pilot to call his lawyer. In August 2007, as federal negotiations intensified, Epstein kept Maxwell apprised: “did not go well ..2 years.” He signed a non-prosecution agreement on Sept. 24, 2007, and Maxwell wrote the same day: “I’m sad scared and depressed ..I can’t shake it.” *  *  * Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 14:45

Natural Gas Is Not A Bridge To Tomorrow. It's The Superhighway Of The Future Authored by Gary Abernathy via RealClearEnergy, This article was originally published by The Empowerment Alliance and is re-published here with permission.  Over the years as it grew more powerful, the climate cult’s assault on fossil fuels typically left no room for compromise. Ending all reliance on anything but so-called renewables was the position that the energy industry and the government were expected to embrace, with various just-around-the-corner end dates arbitrarily set to bury the fossil fuel industry once and for all. But for the climate change zealots, one pesky fly in the ointment made such goals clearly unreasonable – natural gas. Instead of slowly and cooperatively dimming its flame until it was extinguished, natural gas by necessity has continued to flourish. Fracking technology made natural gas extraction easier and more affordable than ever. Its relative cleanliness compared to other fossil fuels made it more difficult for environmental extremists to reasonably rail against it. And industries realized that there was no more effective, reliable and affordable energy source for the electricity grid than natural gas. Of course, the most extreme environmentalists did not let the facts sway them, continuing to demand an immediate end to all fossil fuels. But those advocates of a move toward “green” energy who were interested in maintaining a level of credibility began to somewhat soften their stance. Demonstrating at least a slight grasp on reality, they began to refer to natural gas as a “bridge” to a renewable future. One example of such thinking came from Yale Climate Connections, an initiative of the Yale Center for Environmental Communication based at Yale University. In a 2016 article presenting the pros and cons of natural gas, climate journalist Bruce Lieberman advised, “Consider natural gas a ‘bridge’ fuel for a growing renewable energy economy,” and quoted a report from the Joint Institute for Strategic Analysis that noted that natural gas and renewable energy “can help contribute to a low-carbon, resilient, and reliable electrical grid by diversifying the electricity mix and hedging risk associated with market and policy uncertainties.” Lieberman, though, seemed skeptical that natural gas would keep pace with renewables to jointly account for future electricity generation shares. He pointed to California, where “the current oversupply of natural gas and a boom in solar, wind, and other renewable energy sectors ‘has depressed power prices and threatened the viability of natural gas plants,’” as he noted Reuters reporting at the time. Predictions of the demise of natural gas join a long list of inaccurate energy forecasts from a decade or more ago.  As we now know, natural gas has become even more important as the demand for affordable and reliable electricity grows. In Texas, for instance, the coming expansion of AI data centers has led to plans to develop private, dedicated gas plants to bypass existing grids and make sure electricity generation is reliable and uninterrupted. Poignantly, it is those very AI programs – powered by electricity from natural gas – which will help conceive of new energy technologies of the future. What’s becoming clear to everyone except the blindest ideologue is that natural gas is not a bridge to tomorrow. It’s the superhighway of the future. Natural gas will continue to lead the power surge of the 21st century, and, for at least the next few decades, “renewables” will at best augment natural gas or at times serve as a backup. Because the fact is, the current demands of our energy landscape require the use of natural gas, and the predicted future electricity demands make natural gas the essential energy driver not only in the U.S., but around the world. Whether someone can be considered a reasonable conservationist or a wild-eyed climate zealot can be determined by whether they insist on an all-or-nothing approach that will guarantee falling short of our energy needs, or balance their environment and climate concerns with the stark reality of our current and future energy requirements – choosing to support (even if grudgingly) the cleanest, safest, most abundant and effective energy resource in existence. No blueprint for meeting future energy demands that calls for eliminating or even minimizing natural gas can be considered a serious proposal. Wind, solar, and especially nuclear are good supplements for natural gas. But we’ve already crossed the bridge to tomorrow, with natural gas leading the way and fueling a future that is cleaner, brighter and filled with promise. Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter and columnist. He was a contributing columnist for the Washington Post from 2017-2023 and a frequent guest analyst across numerous media platforms. He is a contributing columnist for The Empowerment Alliance, which advocates for realistic approaches to energy consumption and environmental conservation. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Empowerment Alliance. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 13:45

Thune Moves Forward With 'Nuclear Option' To Confirm Trump's Nominees Authored by Joseph Lord and Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) on Sept. 8 announced that Republicans will take the “nuclear option” in the Senate to allow for faster confirmation of nominees by the president. “Democrats have made President Donald Trump the first president on record to not have a single nominee confirmed via voice vote or unanimous consent, and they are forcing time-consuming votes on noncontroversial nominees who go on to be confirmed by large bipartisan margins,” Thune wrote in an op-ed published in Breitbart on Sept. 8. To get around Democrats’ moves to block Trump’s nominees, Thune has moved to change the rules in the Senate. On Sept. 9, lawmakers voted to move forward with a resolution introduced by Thune to allow for the consideration of 48 executive nominees en bloc—the first step toward expediting Trump’s nominees similarly in the future. Here’s what to know... What Is the ‘Nuclear Option’? The “nuclear option” in the Senate describes a situation in which the majority party changes procedures in the Senate during the middle of a congressional session. This is possible because such rules can be changed by a simple majority vote—meaning that a majority party at any time has the power to change or amend the rules as long as enough of its members are on board with the plan. Since President Barack Obama’s time in office, both parties have made use of the nuclear option. In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) invoked the nuclear option to allow lower court judges to be confirmed by a simple majority vote. Later, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) changed the rules to allow Supreme Court justices to be confirmed by a simple majority. Such changes to the rules are considered precedent-setting, and the other party tends to take advantage of such precedents when it returns to power. Why Are Republicans Considering It? Historically, the nuclear option has been used to overcome perceived obstruction or other procedural hurdles placed by the opposition party, and this case is similar. Since Trump returned to the White House, Senate Democrats have withheld unanimous consent and required voice votes on the president’s nominees, dragging out the process. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a former senator, is one of the only civilian nominees who has not faced such delays in the Senate. Although they’re out of power in Washington, Democrats have, in recent months, taken steps to slow the confirmation of Trump’s executive appointees. This has included taking their full allotted time to speak for each individual nominee—a divergence from norms in Washington, where lawmakers have historically confirmed dozens or hundreds of lesser nominees through unanimous consent voice votes. The situation has been ongoing since before lawmakers left for their monthlong August recess. In his op-ed, Thune described this as “delay for delay’s sake.” He said Republicans would consider a rules change based on one developed in 2023 by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Angus King (I-Maine), who caucuses with Democrats. The GOP rule change, like the one proposed by Klobuchar and King, would increase the number of nominees that the Senate can consider en bloc, or in a single vote. Thune warned that many key slots in the executive branch will remain empty if the Senate doesn’t speed things up. “No party should be able to weaponize the confirmation process the way that Senate Democrats are doing now,” the South Dakotan wrote. Trump, for his part, has called on Senate Republicans to do whatever it takes to confirm his nominees. In late July, the president proposed canceling the coveted August recess to continue considering his nominees. In an Aug. 6 post on Truth Social, he urged Republicans to pursue changes that would expedite the confirmation of nominees in the face of Democratic opposition when they returned. Lawmaker Reactions Reactions have largely broken down along partisan lines. Republicans have upheld a rule change as necessary to overcome hurdles they say were put in place by Democrats. Democrats, meanwhile, spoke critically of the possibility of a rules change. In comments to The Epoch Times on Sept. 10, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) supported a rule change, although he acknowledged that it would “set a precedent.” “[But] we have to do something or we’re not gonna get anybody confirmed,” Tuberville said. ​​“We’ve never had anybody that didn’t give any voice votes whatsoever to the majority. We’ve got to do something to have somebody working and filling these positions. So I’m all for it.” Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah), a freshman senator seen as one of the most moderate voices in the GOP caucus, was also supportive of the move. He noted that all 53 Republicans had supported the move on Sept. 9. Asked by The Epoch Times whether a rules change could undermine precedent, Curtis said Democrats were “[undermining] precedent by doing what they did.” The same sentiment was expressed by Thune during comments on the Senate floor on Sept. 10, during which he said the change would restore “Senate precedent” and “what was once understood to be standard practice.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), one of the leaders of Democratic opposition to the rule change, said Thune’s proposal was too broad. “It has no guardrails. They can use this for judges, for cabinet officials. They can move 100 nominees at a time. It’s a pretty stunning application of advice and consent,” Murphy told The Epoch Times. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has defended the slow pace of confirmations. “Historically bad nominees deserve a historic level of scrutiny by Senate Democrats,” he wrote on X. Thune and Schumer were unable to reach an agreement to move forward with the issue before the August recess. According to Trump, Democrats at the time were demanding the release of about $1 billion in federal funding and sought promises from the administration not to rescind additional funds, in exchange for allowing the quick consideration of the president’s nominees. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 13:05

Fact-Checking Newsom's 'Clean Energy' Claims Authored by Edward Ring via American Greatness, In a recent guest op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal, California Governor Newsom claimed that “Clean Energy Powers California’s Economic Growth,” a claim that is transparently false. Aggressive “clean energy” mandates, paired with perpetually escalating restrictions on conventional energy sources, are the reasons Californians pay the highest prices in America for gasoline and electricity, and nearly the highest prices of any major state for natural gas. Along with ignoring the fact that affordable energy is fundamental to economic growth and California has the least affordable energy in America, Newsom makes grossly incorrect statements. In the subhead of his op-ed, he writes, “More than two-thirds of the state’s electricity is from sources such as solar, wind, and geothermal.” This isn’t even close to accurate. The California Energy Commission reports in-state electricity production by source. The most recent data is for 2023, and in that year, wind, solar, and geothermal energy accounted for a mere 31 percent of California’s total in-state electricity production. Even when adding nuclear and hydroelectric power, California’s total “clean” energy only accounted for 54 percent of the electricity generated in the state. Newsom goes on to write that “climate change has made our summers hotter,” and that 2024 was the warmest on record. He boasts that “rapid deployment of clean energy and battery storage” got Californians through the summer of 2024 without blackouts. This is a half-truth at best. As reported in CalMatters, a left-leaning site that covers California politics, in 2023, in order to “shore up California’s straining power grid,” Newsom delayed the planned closures of three natural gas-powered generating plants that together contribute 2.2 gigawatts to California’s electricity grid. In 2022, Newsom delayed the planned 2025 closure of California’s last major nuclear-powered generating plant, Diablo Canyon, preserving another 2.2 gigawatts of baseload electricity. Furthermore, no fact check of Newsom’s WSJ op-ed would be complete without questioning his claim that 2024 was “the warmest on record.” This is something we hear all the time. It is a statement meant to foment fear and discourage dissenting opinions. But is it true? Los Angeles County, a place where an estimated 27 percent of all Californians live, has kept temperature records since 1878. If you plot the average annual temperature, you will see a trend suggesting that overall, in Los Angeles County, it is not quite three degrees Fahrenheit hotter in the 2020s than it was in the 1880s. The trend isn’t smooth. In the 1930s, average temperatures were comparable and in some years hotter than in the 2020s. But there’s a major factor that politicians and biased activists conveniently ignore: the urban heat island effect. Consider this animated map showing urban development in Los Angeles County over the past century. The area of paved surfaces today is easily ten times more extensive than it was in the 1930s. According to no less an authority than Cal EPA, the urban heat island effect can raise average temperatures by between 4 and 9 degrees Fahrenheit. By that logic, it’s cooler in Los Angeles County today than it was a century ago. It’s pavement, not greenhouse gas, that’s caused a modest rise in temperature. Returning to Newsom’s dishonesty regarding energy, and to be fair, California’s sunny weather and lowering costs for photovoltaic arrays and stationary, utility-scale battery storage have allowed the state to develop an impressive renewable electricity capacity. But what stabilized the grid in 2024 was 4.4 gigawatts of natural gas and nuclear-powered electricity that, were it not for Newsom’s intervention, would have already been taken offline by the environmentalist fanatics who run the state. Even during afternoons in late summer when peak demand frequently draws over 40 gigawatts from California’s grid, 4.4 gigawatts offers a share that spells the difference between stability and crash. Newsom’s epic mistake, one that California’s extreme environmentalist bureaucracy and state legislature would make even if the governor were as pragmatic as he claims, is to destroy California’s conventional energy industry before “renewables” are able to compete in an unsubsidized environment with the energy sources they seek to displace. Electricity use still only constitutes a fraction of California’s total energy consumption. The data is unequivocal. According to the US Energy Information Administration, Californians in 2023 derived 30 percent of their energy from natural gas and 47 percent from petroleum. Even that total, 77 percent, understates the contribution from “combustibles” because it doesn’t take into account the quantities of coal- and natural gas-generated electricity that Californians have to import from out-of-state sources. Californians aren’t anywhere close to ending their dependence on natural gas and oil, and yet, despite possessing some of the richest reserves of natural gas and oil in the world, California imports 74 percent of its crude oil and over 90 percent of its natural gas. That’s probably going to get worse. Thanks to Newsom and the state legislature’s ceaseless, unending regulatory assault on its in-state oil drilling and refining industry, the state’s petroleum infrastructure is on the brink of collapse. Newsom has been frantically backpedaling in the face of a looming gasoline supply crisis, as two oil refineries have announced plans to shut down within the next 12 months. The entire climate crisis agenda may be based on completely false premises. A new peer-reviewed study released in July 2025, authored by five top climatologists for the U.S. Department of Energy, challenges the alarmist narrative. Concerning this study, U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said, “Climate change is real, and it deserves attention. But it is not the greatest threat facing humanity. As someone who values data, I know that improving the human condition depends on expanding access to reliable, affordable energy.” Dr. Judith Curry, one of the scientists who participated in writing the study, has just released a response to the torrent of indignant criticisms it generated. She exposes most of these criticisms as political and not scientific. What challenges to the entire climate alarm industry at this level portend for Newsom and the religious zealots who worship at the altar of climate alarm is a new era, characterized by robust debate instead of bureaucratic bludgeoning à la “the science is settled” mode. Will this save California? It would take an awful lot of soul-searching, and it would require standing up to powerful special interests. Because it isn’t just energy that the climate alarm industry has undermined in California. It’s all development, everywhere. From timber harvests to management of water resources to approving or denying building permits for new homes, “climate impact” statements are used by regulators and litigators to stop projects in their tracks. Perhaps the biggest irony is Newsom’s recent embrace of the “abundance movement.” Newsom is joined in this new fad by a huge faction of progressives who appreciate its value as a distraction from most of their pet issues, which have turned them into a laughingstock and a menace. But “abundance” policies coming from progressive climate warriors are doomed to fail. The only abundance they will champion is renewable energy, “infill” high-density housing, and water rationing. This fatally limited approach will not enable abundance in any form, much less lead to lower prices for these essentials. Typically, the fact checkers at the Wall Street Journal scrupulously review all assertions made in a piece they intend to publish, including any from guest writers submitting opinion pieces. That Newsom was allowed to make so many factually incorrect assertions, along with numerous errors of omission, is a disappointing lapse by one of America’s last remaining credible sources of mainstream news. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 12:25

Medvedev Warns MAGA Of 'Left-Wing Banderite Scum' After Charlie Kirk's Assassination Russian officials have been highlighting Charlie Kirk's past commentary on Ukraine in wake of his horrific assassination on Wednesday at Utah Valley University. The Turning Point USA founder had long heaped criticism on US and Western policy of funding Ukraine's military to the tune of billions, at one point calling out President Zelensky as "an ungrateful capricious child." For this reason he came under severe criticism by Ukrainian and pro-Kiev pundits. 🇺🇦The Center for Countering Disinformation led by Zelensky's friend had labeled Charlie Kirk, who was shot today, as “an American blogger spreading pro-Russian narratives in the West.” pic.twitter.com/qgUprBtL8a — Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) September 10, 2025 The Kremlin is now highlighting this soon after his death. For example, former Russian president and current deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council Dmitry Medvedev quickly connected Kirk's murder to what he called "a variety of left-wing liberal scum who support Banderite" Kiev. This is a reference to Nazi Ukrainian nationalist Stepan Bandera, who was formative in hardline Ukrainian nationalist movements in the 20th century world wars era - and deemed a national hero by the Ukrainian government. His legacy is also condemned by multiple European and human rights institutions as representing antisemitism.  Medvedev issued a statement to social media urging Americans mourning Kirk's death - and especially those in the MAGA movement - "to realize that by supporting Ukraine, they're supporting murderers." Political crimes and assasinations have been carried out lately by a variety of left-wing liberal scum who support Banderite Kiev. Fico, Kirk. Who's next? Maybe it's time for the MAGA team to realize that by supporting Ukraine, they're supporting murderers. — Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) September 10, 2025 "Political crimes and assassinations have been carried out lately by a variety of left-wing liberal scum who support Banderite Kiev. Fico, Kirk. Who's next?" - he said in reference to the almost fatal May 2024 shooting of Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico. Kirill Dmitriev, Putin's chief negotiator with the Trump team and head of Russia's sovereign wealth fund, reposted a video montage on X that showed leftists "in full celebration mode over Charlie Kirk getting shot." Dmitriev described "voices of light" cannot be silenced. He also reposted a message from Elon Musk, among a series of Kirk-related posts, stating: "The Left is the party of murder." Musk had also in the past agreed with Kirk's biting criticisms of US/NATO policy toward Ukraine, and the risks of WW3.  https://t.co/pTdC0ojHOa — Kirill A. Dmitriev (@kadmitriev) September 10, 2025 Online commentators have widely speculated that Kirk could have been targeted by a foreign intelligence service, at a moment the manhunt is still underway and motive for the killing remains anything but clear. Kirk had complex and nuanced views on a host of issues ranging from Israel to Ukraine to the Epstein saga. Ukrainian propagandists working for Zelensky are openly rejoicing over the death of Charlie Kirk and expressing sympathy for the detained killer. Among them are Serhii Sternenko and Ihor Lachenkov (“Lachen,” “Toronto Television”). These are state propagandists currently funded… pic.twitter.com/m3d8U56Igp — Myroslav Oleshko (@oleshkomyroslav) September 11, 2025 For example, he has said multiple times that Epstein was at the center of an intelligence operation to blackmail powerful leaders. All of this has fueled the rampant speculation and theories surrounding his death. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 12:05

A Dark Day By Michael Every of Rabobank The main news this morning is not that US PPI was -0.1% m-o-m vs. 0.3% consensus --PPI does not include tariffs, if that’s your focus-- but that Trump ally and conservative influencer Charlie Kirk was assassinated at an event in Utah. I hope I'm wrong. But tonight feels like some sort of invisible line has been crossed that we didn't even know was there. The last time I felt like this was 9/11 when it was clear, without knowing the how and the what, that the world was about to change forever. Like the… — Konstantin Kisin (@KonstantinKisin) September 10, 2025 Kirk’s mantra was always that peaceful public discussion was the best way to prevent political disagreements from spilling into violence. Regrettably, his death has already seen celebration from the extreme end of the opposite political camp, the inability to hold a minute’s silence in the House of Representatives, and claims ‘Israel did it’ from the further right. President Trump gave a televised Oval Office address saying a crackdown on “far left political violence” looms. Regardless of your politics, it’s a dark day for those hoping western societies can hold together through multiple conflating challenges via rational policy debate. URGENT. FYI. After Charlie Kirk, on the sky app there are people asking for the next person to be targeted. These include JK Rowling, Matt Walsh, Trump, Ben Shapiro, Libs of TikTok, Elon Musk, and Andy Ngo. I took as many screenshots as I could. pic.twitter.com/CnZmmJAjvh — Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙‍♀️🦉🐈‍⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) September 11, 2025 That’s as Nepal’s finance minister was attacked by an angry mob, barely escaping with his life; angry crowds started fires outside the French interior ministry; European Commission President von der Leyen’s State of the Union address yesterday was peppered with heckling; London Underground remains paralyzed by a week-long tube drivers’ strike as the UK sees spontaneous efforts to raise the Union Jack or national flags; and things remain tense in many other countries. To say the agitated global public is not ready for a recession and unemployment is an understatement – as recession fears rise; nor are they ready to stomach austerity – as belt-tightening is flagged; and they won’t accept more inflation – as Aussie consumer inflation expectations jump back from 3.9% to 4.7% and we all wait for US CPI. If so, what does the economic policy toolkit tell our finance ministries and central banks to do – apart from increase their personal security? The ECB walk that razor’s edge today, the Fed next week. It's not a coincidence that gold continues to power to fresh all-time highs even if long bond yields are for now following the US lower post-PPI, especially as the international situation isn’t helping calm nerves. The Israeli press accused Qatar of helping Hamas hide the results of its recent attack in Doha (which is what all neutral negotiators do?). ‘Poland ‘closer to military conflict than at any time since WW2’ as Nato allies weigh response to Russian drones’, says the Guardian. One view is that Russian drones recently entering Polish airspace were a probing tactic to test western readiness. Von der Leyen spoke of building a “drone wall” yesterday – but does Europe build drones? Indeed, as @FRHoffmann1 notes: “Imagine being Europe’s uncontested missile prime with €4.9bn in revenue and a €37bn order backlog in 2024 and taking more than 3.5 years of war to present a “concept” (not a product) that replicates some basic lessons of Ukraine's experience. If I sound snarky, it’s because I mean to”, as MBDA presents a “concept” of a new cruise missile called Crossbow. Meanwhile, ‘Mistral is stirring up a storm in European tech’ says the FT, noting the ASML deal connects two EU tech companies but the capital available is still a fraction of that offered in the US. Then again, who says this is a Eurocentric action rather than one the US also wants to see? After all, a US geoeconomic trade bloc is very clearly forming, and Europe is in it. For example, Mexico’s economy minister says the country is looking to apply tariffs as high as 50% on cars, auto parts, steel, and textiles from China and other countries. That’s the ‘Fortress USMCA’ with an external tariff set by the US we had predicted back in April. Logically, if the UK and Europe can sell to the US with only a 10% or 15% tariff respectively, they will also soon be pressured to adopt the same external tariff vs. China and others. Of course, Europe is already there on EVs at least. However, might we soon see more action given ‘China eyes C919 jet breakthrough as Malaysian airline confirms talks to buy aircraft’ (SCMP), where “If the deal is struck, it would mark the first overseas order for the Chinese passenger jet.” Following the US and EU having transferred their aerospace know-how to China, if you think it isn’t capable of doing to Airbus and Boeing what it’s done to autos then you presumably think free trade is the solution to all problems and cannot understand why everything is falling apart everywhere all at once; or you think it isn’t because bond yields are slightly lower than a week ago. Regardless, no aircraft and no autos are no basis for any kind of military industrial base. It’s also not a coincidence that NASA just blocked Chinese nationals with US visas from working on its space programs over national security concerns. Of course, the US is using tariffs to try to ensure it does still make things, some of which the supreme court will soon rule on. There, the WSJ argues: “If the court sides with Trump, it could hand the president sweeping fiscal authority long the purview of Congress. It could enable the president, by simply invoking an emergency with some foreign element, to justify almost any revenue measure in response: not just tariffs, but other taxes, too.” That’s as Commerce Secretary Lutnick again said the US should take a chunk of universities' patent revenue. The trend seems clear. However, Europe is reportedly unlikely to hike tariffs on India and China to 100% to pressure Putin as the US has floated, showing that economic statecraft is toothless when you revert to think “because markets.” In which case there is only political statecraft (a deal Europe doesn’t want to make with Putin) or military statecraft (so more war). On which note, the Russian ruble is slumping, but taken by some as a sign that despite lower oil prices Moscow is all-in on the war option: a cheaper ruble means more local FX per oil barrel to pay for arms. That’s not any kind of “concept”, just cold, hard logic. Which our public debates are lacking. To try and fill a small part of that idea gap, please see here for our latest Global Strategy report on where US ‘Grand Macro Strategy’ now stands, and where we think it might head next. To say that markets aren’t ready for what that implies is also an understatement. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 11:25

Machinists Union, Boeing Reach Tentative Deal To End Strike In St. Louis Area Boeing Defense and a machinists union have reached a tentative deal to end a five-week-long strike in the St. Louis area, union officials said on Sept. 10. Workers at Boeing’s St. Louis facilities produce F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets, the T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and various advanced weapons systems for the US military. “The five-year tentative agreement includes improvements to general wage increases and restores a signing bonus,” the union said in a Sept. 10 post on X. As Melanie Sun reports for The Epoch Times, Boeing’s latest contract proposal comes after continued negotiations since Aug. 4, when about 3,200 union members in the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District 837 went on strike over conditions in a previous offer. That contract was turned down by 67 percent of the members, who are among those assembling Boeing fighter jets at facilities in Berkeley and St. Charles in Missouri, and Mascoutah in Illinois. Members are demanding higher wages, which they say are needed to support their families. “IAM District 837 members build the aircraft and defense systems that keep our country safe,” Sam Cicinelli, Midwest territory general vice president for IAM, said in an Aug. 3 statement. “They deserve nothing less than a contract that keeps their families secure and recognizes their unmatched expertise.” Boeing Defense Vice President Dan Gillian announced the new offer in a statement on Wednesday. “We’ve found a path forward on a five-year contract offer that grows wages by 45 percent on average,” he said. “It remains the best deal we’ve ever offered to IAM 837, and we encourage our team to vote yes so we can get back to work building amazing products for our customers.” The deal includes a 24 percent general wage increase over five years and a $4,000 ratification bonus, among other terms. The previous August offer was a four-year contract for a 20 percent wage increase and a $5,000 bonus, alongside medical, pension, and overtime benefits. The new deal increases average pay by 45 percent from $75,000 to $109,000, according to the company. The previous deal would have raised compensation by 40 percent on average. Amid the deadlock, Boeing on Sept. 4 announced plans to hire replacement workers. Gillian said that output for some programs at the sites had slowed due to the union’s strike, but non-union employees had continued with some production. Gillian said that the new deal assures all workers of another year of raises, “So, I feel good about the offer.” The IAM said a vote on Boeing’s new five-year contract offer has been scheduled for Friday. If the contract is approved, workers would start returning Monday evening, and production would be back to normal in about a week, Gillian told reporters on Wednesday. A seven-week strike by IAM District 751 members in Washington and Oregon ended with a contract from Boeing that included a 38 percent wage increase and a $12,000 signing bonus. Boeing has struggled financially in recent years, and the company’s safety culture has been the subject of increased scrutiny following multiple high-profile tragedies. In June 2025, a Boeing Dreamliner operated by Air India crashed, killing at least 260 people. Crashes involving Boeing 737 Max aircraft in Indonesia in 2018 and Ethiopia in 2019 killed 346 people. In January 2024, the door plug of a Boeing 737 Max 9 detached mid-flight, depressurizing the cabin and forcing an emergency landing. Boeing reported on July 28 that its losses had narrowed in the second quarter of fiscal year 2025. The company posted a loss of $611 million, down from $1.44 billion over the same period the previous year. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 10:20

What Does Dr. Copper Say? Authored by Richard Woolnough via BondVigilantes.com, We’ve spent nearly two decades on this blog exploring the economic outlook, and history shows that this is especially relevant for active bond managers. Currently, risk markets are priced for a benign economic scenario. Credit spreads are historically tight, equity valuations are elevated, and interest rates are on a downward path as central banks unwind tight monetary policies to keep growth on track. The global economy appears healthy, and markets seem to have rediscovered their appetite for risk. But as always, we believe it’s worthwhile to explore alternative diagnoses. Just as one might consult a doctor for a second opinion in life, we can do the same in economics: by turning to Doctor Copper. Doctor Copper is simply the ratio of the price of copper divided by the price of gold. Copper, an industrial metal, reflects economic activity, while gold is traditionally viewed as a store of wealth. The theory goes: when the economy is strong, the ratio is high; when it’s weak, the ratio is low. When we chart the effectiveness of this diagnostic tool over time, we find that it has merit. Source: M&G, Bloomberg The chart suggests that previous declines in the Doctor Copper ratio have often aligned with periods of economic slowdown or recession. While investors remain optimistic, the copper-to-gold ratio is signalling a more cautious view. Whenever the ratio has reached levels this low, it was consistent with a slowdown or even a recession. With the ratio trending lower again, it’s worth considering whether this indicator is once more highlighting risks that broader markets may be overlooking. Could this decline be a sign of the Markets’ Risky New Appetite (MRNA)? Or is it a reminder to trust the traditional economic wisdom of Doctor Copper? Either way, something is different this time, and it might be worth paying attention. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 09:30

Remembering 9-11: "That Feeling That We Were Really All One People" Authored by Susan D. Harris via The Epoch Times, Next year will be the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. Most folks who were adults at that time remember it like it was yesterday. Many of us have also had years when we’ve felt like distancing ourselves from the anniversary commemorations. Even for those not directly impacted, memories of that day—and the days that followed—still bring back traces of a trauma we’d never felt before. A feeling of insecurity we’d never experienced. Perhaps actor Tony Danza summed it up best when he said “I don’t like revisiting how I felt.” In some ways the trauma seems to deepen with time, as new layers of grief emerge–like memories of loved ones who shared those moments but are now gone. This year I decided to crack open the door and look back, if only for a little while. In doing so, I came across some videos I’d never seen before–interviews with celebrities of that time period discussing where they were on 9-11. Ten years after the attacks, producer and director David P. Levin released his documentary “When Pop Culture Saved America: A 9-11 Story.” Originally produced for A&E Networks, it explored how entertainment, comedy, and music helped Americans cope and rebuild in the months that followed. Levin spoke with numerous celebrities for the documentary, later posting extended interviews on his “Pop Goes the Culture” YouTube channel. Tony Danza told a riveting, highly emotional story about his role as host of the 75th Miss America Pageant, which was set to be held in Atlantic City, New Jersey, on Sept. 22—not long after the attack. Pageant organizers had called him to let him know they were thinking of canceling the event. Danza, a Brooklyn native, argued passionately against it, saying, “You can’t let these guys disrupt our lives.” Ultimately, the contestants themselves voted that the show must go on, and officials asked Danza to write a speech befitting the circumstances. As he wrote his monologue, heart heavy with grief and the added weight of having to inspire a nation, the tears flowed. Unable to come up with a proper conclusion, he reached an impasse. Danza’s son, who had read a draft of his father’s speech, came to his assistance. “When is the last time you said ‘The Pledge of Allegiance’?” he asked. That was it. Danza realized that was the ending he needed. On the night of the pageant, emotions were high and security was tight. Danza was so stressed he was afraid he’d mess up the Pledge of Allegiance. As he concluded his speech and began to recite the pledge, he became aware of strange noises. “I began to hear a weird sound ... bang, bang bang, bang,” he said. Pausing, he tried to identify the noise. His mind whirled as he remembered the risks and beefed-up security. The “bangs” increased. He finally realized the source of the noise: “It was the people jumping to their feet to say the pledge with me! And they had just refurbished the convention center and those seats were popping back [up], ‘pop, pop pop, pop ...’ It was the wildest feeling of all time. ... Then I said, ‘Are you ready for Miss America?’ And they went nuts!” Other compelling stories came from interviews with “Frasier” stars Jane Leeves (Daphne Moon) and Peri Gilpin (Roz Doyle). Leeves, who had been at home in Los Angeles with her husband and 8-month-old baby when the planes hit the twin towers, said she went into survival mode. “I thought, ‘I’d better go to the supermarket and stock up on stuff.’” She said she remembered an eerie silence when she arrived at the store. “It was so quiet,“ she said. ”I mean there were lots of people there; the music wasn’t playing; everybody was walking around sort of solemnly being very polite to each other. ... It was just an eerie feeling.” Like the rest of us, Leeves said she was glued to her television. “I don’t think I turned my television off that first few days because ... I was just wanted information. I just wanted to know we were safe, you know? I felt if I turned the TV off, I would miss something. I would miss, you know, some sort of warning.” Peri Gilpin’s husband was in New York. She was sound asleep in Los Angeles when he called to tell her to turn on the TV, explaining that he was in lower Manhattan because the World Trade Center had been struck by an airplane. Not yet realizing the enormity of the situation, he and his friends–who included a newspaper photographer–were walking toward the site of the buildings to see what was going on. After the second plane struck, Gilpin lost contact with her husband for about an hour as he ran through the streets to escape the infamous thick cloud of dust and rubble. He finally got a call through to let her know he was OK. Both Leeves and Gilpin became emotional when discussing the death of their colleague, who was a passenger on one of the hijacked airplanes. David Angell was a cocreator, executive producer, and writer for “Frasier.” A key figure in sitcom television history, he also cocreated “Wings” and wrote for and produced the iconic show “Cheers.” He had 37 Emmy nominations and 24 wins. David Angell and his wife, Lynn, died on American Airlines Flight 11, which hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center on that sunlit morning. While it seems like it should get easier to attend commemorations and discuss the events of that day, for many of us it still holds disturbing nuances. Tony Danza said: “What’s so hard about talking about this is that you never feel like you did it justice. You never feel like you were able to convey ... how you felt, and how you want people to understand how you felt. That’s why it’s so much easier to not [talk about it].” He concluded that it was “[his] generation’s Kennedy assassination.” Then, mixing philosophy with humor he added: “It’s too bad that ... we couldn’t keep a grasp of that incredible spirit that we had right afterwards. ... Unfortunately, in L.A., we made a big sacrifice ... we put flags on our cars and stopped giving each other the finger for a couple of days. “But you know, we had that feeling that we were really all one people–that we were in it together. It was really something.” Click here to see Pop Goes the Culture TV’s playlist “Remembering 9-11.” Highlights include interviews with Ray Romano, Patricia Heaton, Jackie Mason, Mookie Wilson and many more. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 09:00

US Consumer Prices Rise More Than Expected In August From Services Not Tariffs Following yesterday's cooler-than-expected PPI (MoM deflation), expectations for this morning's Consumer Price Inflation were for the further acceleration. Headline CPI rose 0.4% MoM (hotter than the 0.3% expected, lifting prices up 2.9% YoY - the highest since January... Source: Bloomberg CPI rose 0.4% in August, after rising 0.2% in July; over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 2.9% before seasonal adjustment. The index for shelter rose 0.4% in August and was the largest factor in the all items monthly increase. The food index increased 0.5% over the month as the food at home index rose 0.6% and the food away from home index increased 0.3 percent. The index for energy rose 0.7% in August as the index for gasoline increased 1.9% over the month. The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.3% in August, as it did in July. Indexes that increased over the month include airline fares, used cars and trucks, apparel, and new vehicles. The indexes for medical care, recreation, and communication were among the few major indexes that decreased in August. The all items index rose 2.9% YoY in August, after rising 2.7% in July. The all items less food and energy index rose 3.1 percent over the last 12 months. The energy index increased 0.2 percent for the 12 months ending August. The food index increased 3.2 percent over the last year. Core Services were the big driver of the increase, not driven by tariff pressures... Source: Bloomberg Core CPI rose 0.3% MoM as expected, lifting prices more than 3% YoY for the first time since February... Source: Bloomberg Core Services also dominated the rise in core CPI... Source: Bloomberg More details on the core CPI print which rose 0.3% in August, same as July: The shelter index increased 0.4% over the month, and was the largest factor in the all items monthly increase The index for owners’ equivalent rent rose 0.4 percent in August and the index for rent increased 0.3 percent. August rent inflation up 0.34% MoM, highest since Dec 24; but up 3.49% YoY, lowest since Dec 2021 August shelter inflation up 0.39% MoM, highest since Jan 25; but up 3.63% YoY, lowest since Oct 2021 The lodging away from home index rose 2.3 percent over the month. The index for airline fares increased 5.9 percent over the month, after rising 4.0 percent in July. The used cars and trucks index rose 1.0 percent in August and the apparel index rose 0.5 percent. The index for new vehicles rose 0.3 percent over the month and the index for household furnishings and operations increased 0.2 percent. The recreation index and the communication index both declined 0.1 percent in August. The medical care index decreased 0.2 percent over the month, following a 0.7-percent increase in July. The index for dental services decreased 0.7 percent in August and the index for prescription drugs declined 0.2 percent. The physicians’ services index increased 0.3 percent over the month, while the hospital services index was unchanged. It looks like auto costs are starting to tick up again. New vehicles rose by 0.3% while used cars and trucks rose by 1.0%. But the real sting was in motor vehicle maintenance and repairs, which jumped by 2.4%.  When we look at some import-exposed categories: Household furnishings are up 0.1% on the month, the least since March, and appliances within that category are up 0.4%, the most since June. A sort of mixed reading there. Apparel (clothing) is up 0.5%, the largest gain since February, so, an acceleration there. Video and audio products are up 0.5%, which is the smallest rise since May. At least looking at these categories, there’s no overall broad story of acceleration in inflation pressures.  Interesting, SuperCore CPI slowed in August to 3.52% YoY... Source: Bloomberg Transportation Services were the biggest driver of the rise in SuperCore CPI... Source: Bloomberg Comparing CPI to PPI shows that there is no margin pressure on firms and could suggest price pressures being passed through to end users... Source: Bloomberg Together with August PPI, the CPI report suggests that the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, the core PCE deflator (due out Sept. 26) will edge up to 3.0% for August year over year... All of this is to say, while the overall inflation numbers are in line with what economists had expected, within the details there are pockets of price pressure.  We highlighted auto repairs and airline tickets earlier, but take a look at fruit and vegetable costs: up 1.6% on the month. Motor fuel rose by 1.8%, while tobacco costs rose 1.0%, and food-at-home jumped 0.6% on the month, the biggest gain in almost three years.  To be clear, the overall number won’t hold the Fed from cutting, but it’s clear there’s inflation pressure in some corners of the economy.  ...not enough to scare The Fed from its rate-cutting path. Tyler Durden Thu, 09/11/2025 - 08:42