Zerohedge

67% Of Canadians Say Cost Of Living In Their Region Is Worst They've Seen Authored by Jennifer Cowan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), Nearly seven in every 10 Canadians are identifying the cost of living in their area as a major issue, according to a newly released survey. A person pushes a shopping cart through the produce section of a grocery store in Toronto, on Nov. 22, 2022. Carlos Osorio/Reuters An Abacus Data poll found that 67 percent of the 1,500 people surveyed earlier this month said the cost of living in their area is the worst they can ever remember it being. Another 21 percent say the cost of living is bad where they live, although they can recall periods when it was even more challenging. Only 11 percent say the cost of living is not bad, the survey said. A recent poll in the United States found that 46 percent of Americans say the cost of living is the most challenging they can recall, which suggests that Canadians are experiencing this pressure even more intensely, Abacus Data CEO David Coletto said in the survey report. Canadians polled also said the cost of living should be the federal government’s top priority. Sixty-two percent of people polled identified it as one of their top three issues compared to health care at 40 percent, and economic growth at 34 percent. Housing affordability was fourth on the list at 25 percent, followed by immigration and the Canada-U.S. trade relationship at 24 percent. Food and Housing Prices Top Concerns The cost of groceries play a major role in the cost of living and Canadians largely cited food prices as a contributing factor to the rising cost of living, Coletto said. “The most widely cited concern is grocery prices, selected by 81 percent of Canadians,” he wrote. “Food prices are the most universal and emotionally resonant cost because they are unavoidable and visible every week.” He noted that the concern rises sharply with age, from 61 percent of those in the 18 to 29 age group to 93 percent of those who are 60 and older. The survey results were released the same day as new data from Statistics Canada indicated an increase in food prices in November, following a similar rise in October. Food prices from stores experienced a year-over-year increase of 4.7 percent in November following a rise of 3.4 percent the previous month, StatCan said. Housing expenses, such as rent, mortgage payments, and property prices, was the second most-frequently cited cost-of-living issue, accounting for 50 percent overall. “Here the generational divide is clearer,” Coletto said. “Six in 10 Canadians under 30 cite housing as a major pressure, compared with fewer than four in 10 among those aged 60 and over.” While other costs were mentioned as a concern by those surveyed, they held less significance than food or housing costs. Still, utility bills, household item prices, health-care costs, transportation costs, insurance bills, and debt repayments are all on Canadians’ radar, the poll found. “While affordability is a shared concern, what people mean by affordability varies by life stage,” Coletto said. “Messages that treat the cost of living as a single problem risk missing the specific pressure points that different audiences feel most acutely.” Political Impact The increasing cost of living has been identified as the primary concern nationwide; however, this issue is especially pronounced in Atlantic Canada and Ontario, according to the poll’s findings. A significant majority across all age demographics said affordability should be a primary focus for the federal government, Coletto said. Younger Canadians tend to associate this issue with housing affordability, whereas older Canadians are more inclined to connect it with health care and Canada’s trade relationship with the United States. Many Canadians see affordability as a structural and global issue rather than merely the consequence of a single government’s choices, which mitigates blame, despite ongoing high levels of frustration, Coletto said. But he warned that could change over time. “For now, the cost of living remains a warning light rather than a red light for the Carney government,” he wrote. “But the intensity of feeling, combined with seasonal pressures and fragile household finances, means the issue is unlikely to fade quietly into the background.” Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 20:05

Trump Expands Travel Ban To Block Palestinians, Others From Entering The US President Donald Trump has once again expanded the U.S. travel ban, adding seven new countries and, for the first time, holders of Palestinian Authority passports to a growing list of nations whose citizens are barred from entering the United States. The move brings the number of countries facing travel restrictions to nearly 40, as the administration doubles down on its promise to tighten America’s borders and restore national security by strengthening control over who gets in—and who does not. The new ban applies to Syria, Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, and Laos, along with anyone traveling on a Palestinian Authority passport. The restrictions have no exceptions for individual circumstances.  Trump’s proclamation cites threats to the safety and stability of the United States as the justification. “It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security and public safety, incite hate crimes, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes,” Trump said in his proclamation. “The United States must exercise extreme vigilance during the visa-issuance and immigration processes to identify, prior to their admission or entry into the United States, foreign nationals who intend to harm Americans or our national interests. “ Trump added, “The United States Government must ensure that admitted aliens do not intend to threaten its citizens; undermine or destabilize its culture, government, institutions, or founding principles; or advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.” The inclusion of Syria comes in the wake of an attack earlier this week that killed two U.S. troops and a civilian. Syrian authorities identified the perpetrator as a security officer set to be dismissed due to “extremist Islamist ideas.” The attack reinforced long-standing concerns within the administration about the region’s volatility and the risk of infiltration by radicals. The addition of Palestinian Authority passport holders formalizes what had functioned as an informal ban for years.  The other countries - Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, and South Sudan - are plagued by weak institutions, Islamist militancy, and chronic instability. Laos was included due to authoritarian consolidation and close ties to China. Trump said all face “chronic vetting deficiencies” that pose risks to U.S. security. Partial restrictions also apply to countries including Nigeria, the Ivory Coast, and Senegal. While athletes will be allowed to enter for next year’s World Cup, no such guarantees have been made for fans or journalists.  Other countries - including Angola, Benin, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Antigua and Barbuda, and Tonga - are also facing new forms of limited travel restrictions. Trump had already banned the entry of Somalis. Other countries remaining on the full travel ban are Afghanistan, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Sudan, and Yemen. Trump last month made the ban even more sweeping against Afghans, severing a program that brought in Afghans who had fought alongside the United States against the Taliban, after an Afghan veteran who appeared to have post-traumatic stress shot two National Guards troops deployed by Trump in Washington. The White House acknowledged "significant progress" by one initially targeted country, Turkmenistan. The Central Asian country's nationals will once again be able to secure US visas, but only as non-immigrants. Trump has also all but ended refugee admissions, with the United States now only accepting South Africans from the white Afrikaner minority. A total of 39 countries now have a full or partial travel ban imposed. Trump’s travel bans have routinely triggered fierce resistance from Democrats. In 2017, his first ban, driven by terrorism concerns, was immediately smeared as racist because the affected countries were Muslim majority countries. That charge rang hollow, given that the list of countries of concern was developed under the Obama administration. The problem wasn’t the ban, it was who was implementing it. The same pattern played out at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, when Trump’s travel restrictions were attacked as xenophobic, only for governments around the world to adopt nearly identical measures shortly thereafter. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 18:50

AI Won't End Marketing, It Will Elevate It To Its Full Potential Authored by Mark Penn via RealClearMarkets, For decades, marketers have been chasing the holy grail of marketing – the perfect ability to get the right ad to the right person at the right time in an effortless fashion. Before AI, this was never really possible. We moved from radio advertising to linear TV to digital, each  time getting closer to the holy grail but missing the mark on truly effective marketing. Now with AI-based advertising, this perfect ability is finally possible.  Marketing used to be about brand building. The original intent of virtually all advertising  was to build a brand people would recognize and ask for when they went into the store – becoming a household name akin to Kellogg’s or Dove or Budweiser. The advent of radio  revolutionized reach beyond print ads, but brands were speaking to millions without much  insight into who was listening. Then came television. Brands could buy segments targeting  the sports fans or the teenagers, but they still couldn’t differentiate between the parent watching baseball who needed diapers and the college student who didn't.   Then came digital, promising cookies, search, consumer insights, and never-before-seen  targeting. The industry shifted from the era of brand building to the era of performance  marketing. Digital allowed marketers to pay for specific, measurable results – clicks, leads,  and conversions directly tied to ROI. No longer was it about marketing to the masses but  about precision. Indeed, today's CMO now has to evaluate the various channels and  decide on the right media mix for their audience. They have to ask themselves if they’re a Coke company or a diaper company. Are they speaking to 150 million people thirsty at  sporting events and festivals? Or are they selling to the 3 million women giving birth each  year, just 1% of the population?  Yet the era of performance marketing brings its own challenges. Marketers have too much  data and too little orchestration. They sit on billions of data points with consumer insights  but only use one-tenth of it, they use dashboards that don’t talk to each other, they build campaigns across disconnected systems, they trial and error strategies to find the optimal  media mix. They know generally who to target but lack the tools to execute efficiently  across each channel. The dream of the holy grail remains just out of reach. Enter AI. Suddenly a central platform orchestrating all of the different tasks of marketing – aggregating data, understanding the customer, creating content that resonates, deploying  targeted campaigns, collecting performance data, and adjusting strategy – is possible. AI is  the technology that finally lets marketers achieve true performance marketing and unlock virtually unlimited ROI. To paint a better picture, I’ll reference Star Trek’s USS Enterprise. The ship has a computer  capable of adapting and repairing itself. It holds complex conversations with the humans  on board. It controls advanced doors, lighting, shields, and weapons, and transports the  ship across time and space. It works as a collaborator to the captain and the core team on  the bridge.  Running a marketing campaign in the age of AI is a lot like running the bridge of Star Trek’s  USS Enterprise. It takes a team of talented people with different skills aided by an  incredible suite of technology that enables marketers to do tasks they could never do before in terms of creating content, targeting audiences, and managing client relationships – all at record speed.   This holy grail central marketing platform built on AI has to be (1) omnipresent – connecting  all of the tools, data, capabilities, and people in one place; (2) anticipatory – capable of  predicting consumer behavior and suggesting actions based on the goals of the marketer  or the client; and (3) adaptive – constantly responding to performance results, changes in  strategy, or external macro shifts.  What can brands do now that they couldn’t before? Take the Mark Penn pen company as  an example. Say my pen company sells various types of pens and I want to sell different  products for different occasions – engraved fountain pens for birthdays and graduations,  custom ballpoint pens for events and corporations, gel pens for everyday, multi-color use. In the age of digital, I would find the aunts and uncles of graduating students, the event  planners, the artists and designers. Then I’d run a campaign on social media for a rainbow  pack of my gel pens, another on a news platform for my ballpoint pens, and maybe an OOH  campaign in stationery and campus stores for my fountain pens.  But with the holy grail of marketing, I can now take all of the data that I have – most of  which may appear irrelevant to my pen company – and identify all the other people who  may be interested in my pens: the homeowners celebrating a new house, the  entrepreneurs taking their company public, the legal offices and the bookworms who do  everything on paper. I can figure out which pen is most attractive to which person. And  then I can then take my previous fountain, ballpoint, and gel pen campaigns and create AI  marketing agents that build custom campaigns for each of these segments. The AI agents deploy creative, manage spend, and learn in real time which messages resonate with  which audiences.   It’s a whole new world of marketing deployment that can harness every source of  information and run campaigns in a seamless, virtually perfect way that was impossible  before. This isn’t some abstract idea – it's becoming reality. Stagwell is building this industry-first  AI-driven platform for marketers in a groundbreaking partnership with Palantir, pairing  Palantir’s Foundry with Stagwell-owned agency Code and Theory’s orchestration level  software and The Marketing Cloud’s proprietary data sources and solutions. The platform  allows large enterprises to sift through tens of millions of records in a central hub to  identify, segment, and better understand audiences, then create agents to implement  complex marketing processes at scale like audience alignment optimization or campaign  management. The partnership is already seeing client adoption of the early MVP model.  The holy grail of marketing is coming. In order for marketing to evolve into the next phase,  this AI-driven platform has to become as commonplace as Windows or iOS. Brands need  to integrate the holy grail into their marketing tech stacks in order to make full use of the  sea of consumer data available, centralize targeting in a simple and efficient way, and  create agents that will run campaigns across all of the use cases to reach all of the people.  And to those who say AI will end marketing – it won’t. It will supercharge it. Remember that  even with every possible tool of the future on deck the Enterprise, it still has a captain and  a core team steering the ship. The holy grail of marketing won't replace human creativity – it will deploy creativity in the most effective way where AI and marketers can work as  collaborators to deliver outstanding results. For the first time in history, marketers have the  power to truly deliver the right ad to the right person at the right time. Mark Penn is chairman and CEO of Stagwell (NASDAQ: STGW). Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 17:40

Vance Fires Back At Media Smear: "I Only Believe In The Conspiracy Theories That Are True" Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news, In a brazen attempt by legacy media to sow discord within the Trump administration, Vanity Fair dropped a so-called “exclusive” interview with White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, cherry-picking her words to paint Vice President JD Vance as some wild-eyed “conspiracy theorist.” But Vance didn’t back down—he turned the tables, reminding everyone how many “conspiracies” turned out to be stone-cold facts suppressed by the deep state and their press lapdogs. This latest media ambush highlights the relentless efforts to undermine the Trump Administration, but as usual, it backfired spectacularly when Vance delivered a masterclass in exposing the hypocrisy. The drama kicked off with Vanity Fair’s multi-part interview series on Wiles, where she casually noted that Vance has “been a conspiracy theorist for a decade.” Framed amid broader comments on the administration’s inner workings, the outlet spun it as internal friction, even dragging in digs at other figures like tech innovator Elon Musk as an “odd duck” and claiming President Trump has “an alcoholic’s personality.” Predictably, the corporate press pile-on followed, with outlets like The Washington Post amplifying the narrative as if it exposed chaos in the White House. Wiles wasn’t having it. She fired back on X, slamming the piece as a “disingenuously framed hit piece” that omitted “significant context” to craft a “chaotic and negative narrative” about the team steering America back on track. President Trump himself stood firm, defending his chief of staff against the smear campaign. President Trump is backing White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles after her explosive remarks in a Vanity Fair interview. @rachelvscott reports. pic.twitter.com/VVPC2EymmU — Good Morning America (@GMA) December 17, 2025 Speaking in Pennsylvania, Vance faced a reporter from The Washington Post head-on about the “conspiracy theorist” label. Far from dodging, he owned it with precision, listing “theories” that proved prophetic while mocking the media’s complicity in real cover-ups. “Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist, but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true,” Vance declared. He added, “And by the way, Susie and I have joked in private and in public about that for a long time.” Vance didn’t stop there. He rattled off examples that hit like truth bombs: “For example, I believed in the crazy conspiracy theory back in 2020 that it was stupid to mask three-year-olds at the height of the COVID pandemic, that we should actually let them develop some language skills.” Then he hammered the Biden cover-up: “I believed in this crazy conspiracy theory that the media and the government were covering up the fact that Joe Biden was clearly unable to do the job.” And on the weaponization of justice: “And I believed in the conspiracy theory that Joe Biden was trying to throw his political opponents in jail rather than win an argument against his political opponents.” Wrapping it up, Vance delivered the knockout: “So, at least on some of these conspiracy theories, it turns out that a conspiracy theory is just something that was true six months before the media admitted it.” VANCE: "Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist, but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true. On some of these conspiracy theories, it turns out that a conspiracy theory is just something that was true six months BEFORE the media admitted it." ? pic.twitter.com/2hu0VwJVC4 — TheBlaze (@theblaze) December 16, 2025 Vance is spot on. The media spent years dismissing legitimate concerns as right-wing paranoia. CNN’s Jake Tapper, for example, labeled questions about Biden’s cognitive decline a “right-wing conspiracy” before going on to release his own book about Biden’s decline. Remember how they ridiculed the COVID lab-leak theory until even their own “experts” admitted it was plausible and probably the most likely scenario? And don’t get us started on the Russia collusion hoax they peddled to sabotage Trump’s first term. At its core, this episode underscores the ongoing battle against leftists and their media enablers, who label any inconvenient truth a “conspiracy” to maintain control. The term ‘conspiracy theorist’ now just basically means someone who is right. Vance’s response serves as a reminder that questioning the narrative isn’t fringe; it’s essential to reclaiming freedoms. Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 17:00

It's Affordability, Stupid? Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness, The recent Democratic cry of “affordability” is ironic in many ways. The left-wing narrative of Trump hyperinflation was one of desperation and came only after previous memes had failed to resonate. The 2025 generic “dictator,” “fascist,” and “Nazi” smear points never helped the left much. Nor did the nihilist government shutdown over the “Obamacare crisis” work other than perhaps to depress fourth-quarter GDP. Nor did the earlier spring 2025 melodramatic predictions of an impending “Trade War,” “Recession,” and stock-market “Meltdown resonate.” Nor did the “Gestapo,” “SS,” and “Nazi” ICE smears become effective talking points. The “illegal orders” and “unconstitutional use of force” in destroying narcotraffickers’ shipments in transit of lethal drugs were mostly empty rhetoric. Then the Democrats got smart and remembered how Trump had won in 2024. He ran and triumphed on pointing out that gasoline had gone sky-high under Biden, who drained the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, put federal oil and gas lands off-limits, and wasted hundreds of billions on green subsidies. Biden entered office with Trump’s national gas average of $2.39 a gallon and promptly doubled it to $5—until it settled down to a four-year average of $3.35-40 a gallon. That was roughly 35-40 cents higher than the present $3.00 Trump national average. Biden’s four-year inflation had cumulatively hit 21.5% and it climbed much higher when staples like key foods, insurance, housing, energy, cars, etc., were tabulated separately. Trump thundered that he had left Biden with a 2020 near-historically low 1.2-4% inflation rate—and then Biden’s four years had more than quadrupled it to an average of 5.2% per year. In any case, in the 2024 campaign, the case was made that Biden had added $8 trillion to the national debt while making staples unaffordable to the middle class. Trump easily won on that economics/affordability issue. The affordability case was seemingly closed, given that the Democrats never had an answer for Biden’s misery indices and thus turned to the other smears mentioned above. But then a funny thing happened. Trump had entered office with a monthly inflation rate of 3%, but did not somehow immediately lower it. And the rate remains. After ten months of Trump’s tenure, it was still at the same 3%. Yet suddenly, the left cried, “Affordability!” Apparently, Trump was culpable because in months he had yet to undo all the damage Biden had inflicted over four years, despite the fact that Trump’s inflation was already 2.2 points less than the Biden four-year yearly average—and headed downward. But the public was exhausted by high prices and wanted Trump not just to lower dramatically the average Biden inflation rate but also to reduce the Biden 21.5 aggregate inflation and to do so immediately. The Trump team did not believe anyone would believe this yarn for a number of reasons. One, no one could credibly believe that the party responsible for hyperinflation could dare to blame its successor for not immediately, in ten months, cleaning up the mess that Democrats had wrought over four years. Two, Trump had enacted a series of dramatic initiatives that may soon not only lower inflation but could create a veritable boom from some $10 trillion in promised foreign investment. More deregulation, extended tax cuts, and additional reductions are in the big beautiful bill. The administration has been fast-tracking new federal fossil fuel leasing, pipeline construction, and incentives for greater production of oil and gas, and massive natural gas exports. The borders are closed. Two million illegal aliens have left the U.S., lessening social welfare costs and increasing labor opportunities for U.S. citizens. By year’s end, some $200-300 billion in 2025 tariff revenue will be collected, coupled with increased domestic opportunities for U.S. business expansion. So, apparently, the Trump administration thought that the public was aware that mid- to long-term remedies were underway that would fuel the economy in mid-2025. Thus, did they assume “affordability” was not yet really an issue and needed little explanation, given the good news to come was already self-evident? Or, they were so consumed with foreign affairs—and indeed, dramatic successes abroad—that they thought such good news would naturally become force multipliers of the implicitly bright economic forecasts. Indeed, efforts to end the Ukraine war, the elimination of the immediate threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb, and a ceasefire in the Middle East were in sharp contrast to the prior four years, when two theater wars broke out on Biden’s watch after the disastrous misadventure in Kabul. Finally, all Israeli hostages who were still alive returned. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran’s military have all suffered terrible damage. Each month, there seems to be a new announcement of more favorable trade agreements with major commercial partners. Once dismal military recruitment is now at a historic high. There is not a reduction but a veritable end of all illegal immigration. Trump tried to fashion cease-fires in wars all over the world: the Congo-Rwanda, India-Pakistan, Cambodia-Thailand, Azerbaijan-Armenia, and Ethiopia-Egypt. So why did Trump people not see the left gaining some traction on the affordability issue? The administration has so far not fully absorbed three realities. One, their likely successful economic stimuli and reforms will not kick in fully until mid-2026. So they needed to argue for a little more patience or to explain in detail exactly how, why, and when the economy will correct the Biden catastrophe. Two, they did not pound home enough the difference between Trump’s economic legacy in 2020, the ensuing Biden four-year failure, and now his own ten-month new efforts to build upon what he had once accomplished. Third, even foreign successes, ironically, can detract from the economy. True, good coverage of a Trump ascendant abroad helped him at home. But when the economy is demagogued as “unaffordable,” Trump’s attention overseas is used as proof that he doesn’t care about those at home. In other words, in an election cycle, a presidential Nobel Peace Prize is worth less than a one percent inflation rate. There is a year left before the midterms. If the Democrats win the House, they will stall the entire Trump agenda. They will impeach him in their first month. And they will subpoena and wage lawfare against all major Trump appointees in hopes of either bankrupting them or putting them in jail. Obviously, to continue the MAGA counter-revolution, all emphasis should be on the economy. Every policy initiative should be discussed in terms of its economic utility, from ending illegal immigration to recording oil pumping to foreign investment. Detail matters. Trashing Biden is far less effective than comparing the actual data of his four-year averages with Trump’s own first-term stats so far: gas prices, the inflation rate, illegal entries, deportations, foreign investment, and other economic indicators. Foreign policy must be presented in domestic and preferably economic terms: blowing up a narco-trafficking boat saves thousands of lives. Providing NATO leadership offers leverage with the far more hostile EU—as in “decide whether as Europe-NATO you wish for an American presence, or as Europe-EU you do not like us and wish us gone—but not both.” What is the dollar effect of deportation on job growth and higher wages for Americans, or on vastly reduced entitlement costs? In sum, the economy is already better than Biden’s yearly averages. Events are in play that will create substantial national wealth soon, which will make the middle class better off. And successes abroad translate to an enhanced economy at home. But all that in a unified fashion has to be hammered home rather than assumed. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 16:20

DOD Flirting With Aviation Disaster: 2nd Near-Collision With USAF Tanker Off Venezuela Just one day after almost killing everyone aboard a passenger jet, the US Air Force narrowly dodged another near-disaster off the coast of Venezuela -- this time with a business jet. For many, the two frightening incidents intensify a perception that the administration's militarism against Venezuela is as reckless as it is unwarranted and unconstitutional. Within a day of each other, two midair disasters nearly unfolded off Venezuela involving USAF refueling tankers, like this KC-45 Pegasus (USAF Photo) For those who missed our reporting on the first near-disaster, on Saturday, a JetBlue Airbus A320 heading to New York's JFK Airport from the Caribbean island of Curaçao was forced to take evasive action when the pilots suddenly found themselves staring down an approaching USAF refueling tanker at the same altitude and only two or three miles away. "It was an air-to-air refueler from the United States Air Force...We had to stop our climb and actually descend to avoid hitting them," the JetBlue pilot told air traffic controllers. "They don't have their transponder turned on. It's outrageous." (A transponder is a device that helps make aircraft appear on the radars of controllers and other aircraft.) The controller replied, "I don't have anything on my scope." Here's a reconstruction of that incident, overlaying radar and audio:  Now comes news that, on Saturday, the passengers and pilots on a Dassault Falcon 900EX business jet heading to Miami from Aruba had their own brush with death via an Air Force tanker. In this case, an air traffic controller alerted the Falcon pilot and directed him to a new course: "Turn right heading 020. An unidentified traffic, 12 o'clock, closing 10 miles, level not known."   After spotting the aircraft, the rattled Falcon pilot informed the controller. "We just got that traffic. I don't know how we didn't get an RA for that," he said, referring to a Resolution Advisory, a command generated by an on-board Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS). "They were really close -- and you turned us into them." The controller explained that the unidentified craft "keep[s] turning irregular."  As it climbed out of Aruba, a Dassault 900EX like this one was almost destroyed by a KC-46 tanker operating off Venezuela Trying to gather as much information as possible about the unidentified craft, the controller asked the Falcon pilot if he could discern its altitude or type. "Somewhere around 26 [thousand feet]. We were climbing right into him.. It was big, maybe like a triple-7, [767], something like that. It was a wide-body." It's not clear how CNN confirmed it was an Air Force tanker, but Russ Niles at AvBrief.com similarly concluded that it appeared to be a KC-46 tanker. While there's no indication of how many were aboard the Falcon 900EX, it's typically configured to carry 10 to 14 passengers.   In November, the Federal Aviation Administration warned US carriers about potential dangers from "heightened military activity" at "all altitudes" in and around Venezuela. “Threats could pose a potential risk to aircraft at all altitudes, including during overflight, the arrival and departure phases of flight, and/or airports and aircraft on the ground,” the FAA said in a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). In response, several airlines cancelled flights in and out of Venezuela.  Seeking to rein in the administration's widening military activity around Venezuela, resolutions are advancing in both the House and Senate that would bar the Pentagon from engaging in hostilities there without congressional approval. The House version, may be voted on as early as Thursday, counts Republicans Thomas Massie, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Don Bacon among its cosponsors. Republican Rand Paul helped introduce a similar measure in the Senate, saying, “The American people do not want to be dragged into endless war with Venezuela without public debate or a vote. We ought to defend what the Constitution demands: deliberation before war.” At the urging of long-hawkish Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump has ordered many aggressive moves in and around Venezuela:  Attacking boats purported to be carrying illicit drugs, killing at least 95 people. Compounding the controversy over using the military to summarily execute alleged drug offenders who likely weren't even heading to the United States, at least one of the strikes included subsequent fire on survivors clinging to the wreckage.  Ordering a "total and complete blockade" of all sanctioned oil tankers going into and out of Venezuela. That order on Tuesday came after last week's interception and seizure of a tanker near the country's coast, which prompted supertankers bound for Venezuela to make U-turns.   Repeatedly threatening land warfare, recently telling reporters that, following on the boat attacks, "very soon we're going to start doing it on land too."  Flying B-52 bombers near the coastline and F-18 fighters deep inside the Gulf of Venezuela.  Reportedly authorizing covert operations to overthrow President Nicolas Maduro, seemingly betraying his campaign promises to be a "peace president" and to resist the Deep State's long-running obsession with regime change.    Blockading Venezuela and changing its government was never even mentioned by Trump 2024. Trump instead vowed no regime-change wars. But the Cuban community in which Rubio was raised long craved using the US to take over Venezuela and then Cuba. And it makes Trump feel tough. https://t.co/kAeHi98Enj — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) December 17, 2025 Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 15:20

Ford To Lay Off 1,600 Workers As Kentucky EV Battery Plant Pivots To Data Center Storage Ford will lay off all 1,600 workers at its newly built electric-vehicle battery plant in Glendale, Kentucky, as it pivots away from EV production and converts the facility to make battery-storage systems for data centers, utilities, and renewable-energy developers, according to WDRB. The company said Monday it plans to begin shipping battery energy-storage systems from plants in Kentucky and Michigan in late 2027, calling the move a shift toward “higher-return opportunities,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Ford estimates the transition away from its EV strategy will cost $19.5 billion and disclosed that it has lost about $13 billion on EVs since 2023. “Instead of plowing billions into the future knowing these large EVs will never make money, we are pivoting,” CEO Jim Farley told the Journal. In a video message to employees, Michael Adams, CEO of BlueOval SK—the former Ford–SK On joint venture—said the move would mark “the end of all BlueOval SK positions in Kentucky.” Workers will continue to receive pay and benefits for 60 days, though no firm layoff date was given. Ford said it plans to hire about 2,100 workers for the revamped facility and that displaced employees will be eligible to apply. WDRB writes that the Hardin County project was originally pitched as a $5.8 billion investment to supply batteries for Ford’s EVs, including the F-150 Lightning. But slowing EV demand, excess capacity, and changes in emissions policy forced a rethink. Ford recently canceled production of the electric pickup and paused work on a second battery plant next door, which remains unfinished. Industry analysts say the problem goes deeper than demand. “They built the wrong kind of battery and the wrong chemistry for that here in Kentucky,” said WSJ automotive reporter Chris Otts, adding that retooling the plant requires a full overhaul and years of lead time. Ford and SK On formally ended their partnership last week. Ford will take full ownership of the Kentucky plants, while SK On will run a nearly completed Tennessee facility focused on similar energy-storage products. Under Ford’s revised plan, the Glendale site is expected to operate at just 23% of its original planned capacity when production begins in 2027. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said the state is renegotiating its incentive agreement with Ford and prioritizing support for displaced workers through job fairs and other resources. Republican state lawmakers representing the area said they would closely monitor Ford’s commitments as the project shifts toward grid-scale energy storage. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 14:40

Shell Oil Sued Over "Causing Typhoon" In Philippines In Major Test Case Authored by Chris Morrison via DailySceptic.org, A massive ‘lawfare’ claim backed by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth has been filed in the UK’s Royal Courts of Justice claiming that Shell Oil played a part in a devastating typhoon in the Philippines in 2021. At the centre of the case is a Green Blob-funded weather ‘attribution’ study that claims Typhoon Rai, also known as Odette, was made significantly worse due to human caused climate change. The study has been recently published and is heavily linked to academic institutions funded by the green billionaire investor Jeremy Grantham. The action has been filed by a number of survivors of the Philippines storm that caused considerable damage in parts of the Philippines in late 2021. It claims financial compensation as well as “injunctive relief to curb Shell’s destructive activities”. Typhoons are not unknown in this part of the world, but recent evidence suggests there has been little change in the overall trend over the last 100 years. Numbers and intensity of storms rise and fall over shorter periods but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has seen little evidence that humans have recently caused the trend to get worse. In fact, a recent paper published in Nature found “robust declining trends in the annual number of tropical cyclones at global and regional scales during the 20th century”. The paper was titled: ‘Declining tropical cyclone frequency under global warming.’ The key attribution paper in the Shell case uses a standard technique measuring the outputs of two computer model simulations. This imagines an atmosphere where humans have emitted carbon dioxide by burning hydrocarbons and one where there is no such contribution. To say the process is controversial would be an understatement. It cannot count as scientific work under the Popperian principle since the results are unable to be tested and are unfalsifiable. The field of weather attribution is dedicated to grabbing media headlines and providing ammunition for lawfare cases. If the Shell case ever gets to court, it will be interesting to see how weather attribution claims stand up to forensic cross examination. Shell could call on the services of the distinguished science writer Roger Pielke Jr., who has noted that he can think of no other area of research “where the relaxing of rigour and standards has been encouraged by research in order to generate claims more friendly to headlines, political advocacy and even lawsuits”. Pielke suggests that the rise of individual event attribution studies coincides with frustration that the IPCC cannot say that the frequency and intensity of most types of extreme weather have increased in an era where humans are using oil and gas. In his view, they offer “comfort and support” to those focused on climate advocacy. The Typhoon Rai attribution paper is written by four academics from the University of Sheffield and Imperial College London. Both universities have financial links with Jeremy Grantham. The fourth author Nathan Sparks works at the Grantham Institute at Imperial. The Philippines’ Category 5 Cyclone Rai caused widespread damage across the southern-central part of the country, with compounding effects of extreme rainfall, high winds and storm surges. It is claimed that a “multi-method, multi-model probabilistic event attribution” found that wind speeds of landfalling storms like Rai had become 70% more likely due to humans emitting ‘greenhouse’ gases. Looking of course at you in particular Shell Oil. Lawsuits and lawyers thrive on precise numbers so “multi-method probabilistic” modelling along with “compound event attribution theory” produces the conclusion that human-caused climate change “has likely more than doubled the likelihood of a compound event like Typhoon Rai”. As noted, it will be interesting to see how all this modelling stands up to examination in a civil law court. The less charitable might note that this probabilistic guff would not last five minutes in a criminal court where hard and conclusive evidence, such as DNA, fingerprints, confessions and observations, is generally considered a basic requirement to secure a conviction. The Rai civil lawsuit has been filed under Philippines tort law in the London Courts due to the domicile of Shell in the UK. The case is backed by three large activist groups who are thought to be covering the legal and organisational costs. Greenpeace is providing advocacy, research and mobilisation support, while Legal Rights and Natural Resources Centre, the local member of Friends of the Earth International, is said to be handling local legal coordination matters. Also involved is a local grouping under the banner of Philippine Movement for Climate Justice. Shell is accused of being responsible for producing 2% of global fossil fuel emissions that have directly contributed to human-caused atmospheric warming. For good measure, Shell is said to have known about the alleged risks for decades, a common claim made by activists that will no doubt be tested in any future court hearing. The mainstream rules around ‘settled’ climate science, where discussion is effectively banned in the interests of promoting the Net Zero fantasy, are unlikely to apply in the London High Court. The Shell litigation is an important test case. Activists have spent years seeking financial support and recognition for their pseudoscientific claims that they can measure a chaotic and non-linear atmosphere. Such is the level of refinement and expertise that they claim, many people believe they are able to pin the blame for individual weather events on humans. Most mainstream media hype their alchemistic pronouncements without question, but it will be interesting to see how the attribution claims stand up to the attention of m’Learned Friends in a combative court forum. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 13:40

Solid 20Y Auction Stops Through After Jump In Foreign Demand With stocks selling off again, and with capital - especially tech capital - scrambling for a flight to safety, it should hardly surprise anyone that today's 20Y auction was strong.  Pricing at a high yield of 4.798%, this was almost 10bps higher than the 4.71% stop in November (when the auction tailed by 0.2bps), and stopped through today's When Issued 4.799% by 0.1bps, the 6th stop through in the past 7 auctions.  The bid to cover jumped from 2.41 in November to 2.67, just above the 2.65 recent average.  The internals were also solid, as foreigners (aka Indirects) took down 65.2% of the auction, the highest since July; and with Directs awarded 22.2%, a bit below the 25.3% recent average, Dealers were left holding 12.6%, up from 11.4% in November and above the six-auction average of 11.0%. Overall, this was a solid auction, which is what one would expected today, and while yields moved lower by about a basis point on the news, the reaction was to be expected. The big question is what happens to both issuance and yields if and when the AI trade continues to blow up and Trump decides to shift their existential risk to the balance sheet of the US taxpayer, similar to what happened in 2008 when it was banks, not AI companies, that were seen as Too Big To Fail. Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 13:17

Fani Gets Frothy In Epic Meltdown Over Payments To Lover Fulton County DA Fani Willis - who botched her 2020 election case against President Trump and others after it emerged that she was paying her lover, Nathan Wade, to help prosecute the case - had a complete meltdown on Wednesday in an appearance before a special Georgia Senate committee examining her prosecution of President Trump.  When presented with documents showing how much her office paid Wade, she became hostile and combative with legislators - saying "I don't review those documents, so you're asking me to look at documents that I haven't, for the first time..." "What I can tell you is I allowed Mr. Wade to bill 160 hours a week," adding that Wade whipped her office staff into shape.  "He got there before them, he left after him... he was a leader to the team... and for that, him like me - has been threatened thousands of times," Fani continued.  "You have something to investigate as a legislature, investigate how many times they called me the N word. Why don't you investigate them writing on my house. Why don't you investigate the fact that my house has been swatted if you want something to do with your time that makes sense" When she was asked to look at the screen showing payments to Wade, Willis said "I can't talk to you about documents I don't approve and don't review."  Watch: Fani Willis loses her damn mind when presented with documents showing how much money her office paid her lover Nathan Wade during the witch hunt against President Trump: "Why don't you investigate how many times they called me the n word?" pic.twitter.com/luC6E5rORM — Greg Price (@greg_price11) December 17, 2025 Of note, Willis has resisted attempts to compel her to testify and was a no-show last year when she was subpoenaed. Her attorneys argued that the panel lacked constitutional authority to force her to appear, while the Senate committee issued a new subpoena after legislators passed a law explicitly laying out their subpoena powers.   Tyler Durden Wed, 12/17/2025 - 12:40