Zero Hedge

Disney Shares Sink Most In Seven Months As Soft Earnings, Film Costs Drag Outlook

Disney Shares Sink Most In Seven Months As Soft Earnings, Film Costs Drag Outlook

Shares of Disney tumbled the most in seven months early in the U.S. cash session after the media company missed quarterly revenue expectations and warned that film-studio expenses will drag on the current quarter, particularly costs tied to major releases.

Disney posted uninspiring fourth-quarter revenues, flat at about $22.5 billion and below the Bloomberg consensus estimate of $22.8 billion. Adjusted EPS beat at $1.11 versus the $1.07 expected. The miss sent shares in New York down 8% in the cash session, the largest intraday decline since April 3. The company also warned about softening across its entertainment unit. 

Covid lows...

Here's the snapshot of the fourth quarter earnings:

Revenue: $22.46B (-0.5% y/y, miss vs. $22.83B est.)

Adjusted EPS: $1.11 (beat vs. $1.07 est.)

Entertainment Segment: 

  • Revenue $10.21B (-5.7% y/y)

  • Op. income $691M (-35% y/y, miss)

Sports Segment:

  • Revenue $3.98B (+1.7% y/y)

  • Op. income $911M (-1.9% y/y)

Experiences (Parks & Cruises) Segment:

  • Disney+ subs: 131.6M (+3% q/q, beat)

  • Domestic: 59.3M International: 72.4M

Hulu subs: 64.1M (+15% q/q, beat)

Average Revenue Per User

  • Disney+: $8.04 (up q/q, beat)

  • Hulu SVOD: $12.20 (slightly down)

  • Hulu Live TV: $100.02 (flat)

Disney's entertainment unit (streaming, film, and TV) faces several challenges:

  • Streaming: Q1 operating income forecast at $375M, below what analysts hoped for.

  • TV: Lower political ad spending will drag performance

  • Major film releases: Marketing and distribution for Zootopia 2 and Avatar: Fire and Ash will reduce Q1 earnings by $400M

  • Film releases: Marketing and distribution for ZoSports: Launch of full ESPN streaming helps, but timing of rights payments limits profit growth.otopia 2 and Avatar: Fire and Ash will reduce Q1 earnings by $400.

  • Avatar opens December 19, giving Disney minimal revenue inside the quarter.

Disney expects double-digit earnings growth in fiscal 2026, with most of that growth expected to materialize in the second half. 

2026 Outlook:

  • Operating cash flow: $19B (well above $16.86B est.)

  • Capex: $9B (vs. $7.88B est.)

Here is Goldman TMT specialist Peter Callahan's first take on Disney earnings:

DIS -6% in the pre (back to last weeks' levels)… stock had run a bit into print and the moving parts in qtr / guide underscore the debate around complexity relative to the "DD EPS" outlook that investors were debating into results (e.g. bottomline line strong, but moving parts on DTC and Parks) … conf call ongoing (started @ 830am) …  notables from print / GIR first take 

  1. EBIT missed on opex and DIS' F1Q26 guidance for DTC SVOD EBIT of $375M missed GS/consensus of $514/$523M, which when combined with DIS' F2026 $24B cash content spending outlook, suggests that DIS may be investing more in DTC in F2026 than we expected. 

  2. Experiences EBIT missed and the F2025 10-K disclosures suggest to us that there was weakness in domestic theme parks with F2025 attendance -1% yoy (implies F4Q25 -4% y/y) and per capita spending +5% (implies F4Q25 +3% y/y). As expected, DIS guided to $120M of dry dock expenses in F2026 (incl. $60M in F1Q26) and $160M in preopening expenses in F2026 (incl. $90M in F1Q26). Although we're encouraged by the reiterated F2026 outlook for Experiences +HSD% y/y, it was below our elevated expectations.

  3. DIS reiterated its DD% EPS growth guidance for F2026 (not including the benefit from the extra week) and for F2027 with all F2026 segment EBIT growth guidance also reiterated (Entertainment DD%, Experiences HSD%, Sports LSD%).

DIS: chart of Disney vs S&P5000 .. stock has been bouncing around / off the lows on a relative basis with bulls arguing the R/R is attractive from low-100s levels (vs bears argue too many moving parts in a complex macro backdrop)

Additional Wall Street reactions: 

  • Bloomberg Intelligence: Solid Q4 supports 19% FY2025 EPS growth, but guidance looks conservative; sees catalysts ahead, especially improved streaming margins.

  • Citi (Buy, PT $145): Revenue "a bit light," but weakness is mostly from linear TV, the least important business — seen as encouraging.

  • Seaport (Buy, PT $130): Revenue miss and outlook suggest content and marketing spend may exceed prior expectations.

  • Vital Knowledge: Calls the report "lackluster" with sales shortfall and inline operating income; Q1 looks pressured, but FY26–27 EPS outlook is encouraging.

  • KeyBanc: Says the quarter "appears negative," with soft DTC operating-income guidance and weakness in content raising concerns.

The question remains: how "woke" will Disney remain in the Trump era, where the Overton Window has clearly shifted center-right and parents are increasingly tired of globalist messaging embedded in children's shows and cartoon content?

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 11:10

California Cancels 17,000 CDLs Following Federal Audit

California Cancels 17,000 CDLs Following Federal Audit

Authored by John Gallagher via FreightWaves.com,

The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has cancelled 17,000 non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses following a federal audit of the state’s CDL program, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

In a press statement on Wednesday, DOT asserted that state officials admitted to illegally issuing the CDLs “to dangerous foreign drivers,” and that DMV sent notices to the license holders that their license no longer meets federal requirements and will expire in 60 days.

“After weeks of claiming they did nothing wrong, Gavin Newsom and California have been caught red-handed,” said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg. My team will continue to force California to prove they have removed every illegal immigrant from behind the wheel of semitrucks and school buses.”

FreightWaves has reached out to California’s DMV for comment.

FMCSA Chief Counsel Jesse Elison notified Newsom and his DMV in a September 26 letter that a sampling of the roughly 62,000 drivers in California holding unexpired, non-domiciled CDLs or commercial learner’s permits issued by the state revealed that 26% – which extrapolates to roughly 16,000 – failed to comply with federal requirements.

“Even more concerning is the fact that, for three of the transactions, the DMV was unable to provide documentation showing that it validated the drivers’ lawful presence documents before issuing a non-domiciled CDL,” Elison stated.

“Consequently, based on the documentation provided, it appears that the DMV issued a non-domiciled CDL to three drivers without validating their lawful presence.”

Duffy posted a statement on the day of Elison’s notification letter warning that “California must get its act together immediately or I will not hesitate to pull millions in funding,” starting at nearly $160 million in the first year and doubling in year two.

DOT reiterated on Wednesday that it “will continue to push California’s to revoke all illegal non-domiciled CDLs or pull $160 million in federal funds.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 10:25

California Cancels 17,000 CDLs Following Federal Audit

California Cancels 17,000 CDLs Following Federal Audit

Authored by John Gallagher via FreightWaves.com,

The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has cancelled 17,000 non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses following a federal audit of the state’s CDL program, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

In a press statement on Wednesday, DOT asserted that state officials admitted to illegally issuing the CDLs “to dangerous foreign drivers,” and that DMV sent notices to the license holders that their license no longer meets federal requirements and will expire in 60 days.

“After weeks of claiming they did nothing wrong, Gavin Newsom and California have been caught red-handed,” said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg. My team will continue to force California to prove they have removed every illegal immigrant from behind the wheel of semitrucks and school buses.”

FreightWaves has reached out to California’s DMV for comment.

FMCSA Chief Counsel Jesse Elison notified Newsom and his DMV in a September 26 letter that a sampling of the roughly 62,000 drivers in California holding unexpired, non-domiciled CDLs or commercial learner’s permits issued by the state revealed that 26% – which extrapolates to roughly 16,000 – failed to comply with federal requirements.

“Even more concerning is the fact that, for three of the transactions, the DMV was unable to provide documentation showing that it validated the drivers’ lawful presence documents before issuing a non-domiciled CDL,” Elison stated.

“Consequently, based on the documentation provided, it appears that the DMV issued a non-domiciled CDL to three drivers without validating their lawful presence.”

Duffy posted a statement on the day of Elison’s notification letter warning that “California must get its act together immediately or I will not hesitate to pull millions in funding,” starting at nearly $160 million in the first year and doubling in year two.

DOT reiterated on Wednesday that it “will continue to push California’s to revoke all illegal non-domiciled CDLs or pull $160 million in federal funds.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 10:25

New 2x Levered Energy ETFs Launched As Investors Scramble For Upside Amid Relentless AI Power Demand

New 2x Levered Energy ETFs Launched As Investors Scramble For Upside Amid Relentless AI Power Demand

In pursuit of the seemingly relentless retail bid, Tradr ETFs has launched four new single-stock levered ETFs today, adding fresh instruments to a market incessantly infatuated with leverage-focused products. Notably, these new products land squarely in the middle of the energy sector - and includes names that stand to profit generously once what we dubbed the "Next AI Trade" (i.e., powering up the armada of newly-built data centers) takes off - at a time when power demand has never been greater thanks to AI.

The new offerings track Bloom Energy, Celestica, Nano Nuclear, and Synopsys and trade under BEX, CSEX, NNEX and SNPX respectively.

As noted above, what makes this offering notable is that several underlying companies sit at the intersection of energy, computing, and the rapidly accelerating AI build-out. Bloom Energy and Nano Nuclear are direct plays on emerging power technologies, while Celestica provides critical hardware integration for data-center infrastructure. Even Synopsys, not an energy company itself, enables the semiconductor designs that underpin the compute side of AI’s energy-hungry expansion.

As a result of their disruptive nature, all 4 stocks have seen their short interest surge recently, with the short pile up in the names at or near all time highs, prompting some to speculate that the Tradr ETFs may have been launched to facilitate a levered squeeze.

The increasingly granular nature of these products creates abundant choice for traders but also underscores how saturated and niche the ETF landscape has become.

Leveraged ETFs have grown so prolific that the number of such products now rivals, and in some categories exceeds, the number of public companies they reference. The overall US ETF ecosystem has ballooned into thousands of funds, and leveraged equity ETFs alone have climbed into the hundreds, doubling their footprint over just a few years.

It's clear why Tradr has decided to focus on energy: global data-center electricity consumption is projected to soar over the next decade, with U.S. and international forecasts all pointing to steep increases driven by AI workloads. As we noted overnight, some $5 trillion is expected to be spent over the next 5 years on the rollout of the AI cycle. As power demand rises, grid constraints tighten, and energy prices trend higher, companies providing generation, efficiency, or data-center hardware become more tightly linked to the broader energy narrative.

The combination of swelling energy demand, a strained grid, and AI’s relentless need for compute has created a backdrop where volatility in energy-adjacent names is likely to remain elevated. The rapid growth in artificial intelligence and cloud computing is testing America’s electric grid and exposing the urgent need for new, always-available power.

The most recent example highlighted by Bloomberg was a case where Amazon has accused PacifiCorp, a Berkshire Hathaway–owned utility, of failing to deliver enough electricity for four planned data-center campuses in Oregon.

Another recent example highlighted by Bloomberg: First American Nuclear Co. plans to build self-sustaining reactors in Indiana to power data centers. The plant will begin with natural gas in 2028, then shift to a 240-megawatt liquid-metal fast reactor by 2032 that can reprocess its own spent fuel.

“Data centers are driving the demand for power,” said CEO Mike Reinboth.

As President Donald Trump pushes to accelerate AI infrastructure, power demand from computing is forecast to more than double in the US by 2035, according to BloombergNEF. Utilities and tech giants now depend on each other — but utilities worry about straining the grid and raising bills if the AI boom falters.

For traders who seek to capitalize on short-term swings in these areas, whether in emerging nuclear concepts, distributed generation, or data-center supply chains, single-stock leveraged ETFs offer a direct, amplified tool. But their daily reset mechanics and sensitivity to volatility mean the risks scale just as quickly as the potential reward, so use them sparingly and ideally during bursts of activity to leverage the momentum.

Either way, we predict they won't be the last of their kind...

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 10:05

New 2x Levered Energy ETFs Launched As Investors Scramble For Upside Amid Relentless AI Power Demand

New 2x Levered Energy ETFs Launched As Investors Scramble For Upside Amid Relentless AI Power Demand

In pursuit of the seemingly relentless retail bid, Tradr ETFs has launched four new single-stock levered ETFs today, adding fresh instruments to a market incessantly infatuated with leverage-focused products. Notably, these new products land squarely in the middle of the energy sector - and includes names that stand to profit generously once what we dubbed the "Next AI Trade" (i.e., powering up the armada of newly-built data centers) takes off - at a time when power demand has never been greater thanks to AI.

The new offerings track Bloom Energy, Celestica, Nano Nuclear, and Synopsys and trade under BEX, CSEX, NNEX and SNPX respectively.

As noted above, what makes this offering notable is that several underlying companies sit at the intersection of energy, computing, and the rapidly accelerating AI build-out. Bloom Energy and Nano Nuclear are direct plays on emerging power technologies, while Celestica provides critical hardware integration for data-center infrastructure. Even Synopsys, not an energy company itself, enables the semiconductor designs that underpin the compute side of AI’s energy-hungry expansion.

As a result of their disruptive nature, all 4 stocks have seen their short interest surge recently, with the short pile up in the names at or near all time highs, prompting some to speculate that the Tradr ETFs may have been launched to facilitate a levered squeeze.

The increasingly granular nature of these products creates abundant choice for traders but also underscores how saturated and niche the ETF landscape has become.

Leveraged ETFs have grown so prolific that the number of such products now rivals, and in some categories exceeds, the number of public companies they reference. The overall US ETF ecosystem has ballooned into thousands of funds, and leveraged equity ETFs alone have climbed into the hundreds, doubling their footprint over just a few years.

It's clear why Tradr has decided to focus on energy: global data-center electricity consumption is projected to soar over the next decade, with U.S. and international forecasts all pointing to steep increases driven by AI workloads. As we noted overnight, some $5 trillion is expected to be spent over the next 5 years on the rollout of the AI cycle. As power demand rises, grid constraints tighten, and energy prices trend higher, companies providing generation, efficiency, or data-center hardware become more tightly linked to the broader energy narrative.

The combination of swelling energy demand, a strained grid, and AI’s relentless need for compute has created a backdrop where volatility in energy-adjacent names is likely to remain elevated. The rapid growth in artificial intelligence and cloud computing is testing America’s electric grid and exposing the urgent need for new, always-available power.

The most recent example highlighted by Bloomberg was a case where Amazon has accused PacifiCorp, a Berkshire Hathaway–owned utility, of failing to deliver enough electricity for four planned data-center campuses in Oregon.

Another recent example highlighted by Bloomberg: First American Nuclear Co. plans to build self-sustaining reactors in Indiana to power data centers. The plant will begin with natural gas in 2028, then shift to a 240-megawatt liquid-metal fast reactor by 2032 that can reprocess its own spent fuel.

“Data centers are driving the demand for power,” said CEO Mike Reinboth.

As President Donald Trump pushes to accelerate AI infrastructure, power demand from computing is forecast to more than double in the US by 2035, according to BloombergNEF. Utilities and tech giants now depend on each other — but utilities worry about straining the grid and raising bills if the AI boom falters.

For traders who seek to capitalize on short-term swings in these areas, whether in emerging nuclear concepts, distributed generation, or data-center supply chains, single-stock leveraged ETFs offer a direct, amplified tool. But their daily reset mechanics and sensitivity to volatility mean the risks scale just as quickly as the potential reward, so use them sparingly and ideally during bursts of activity to leverage the momentum.

Either way, we predict they won't be the last of their kind...

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 10:05

Schumer Who? How Centrists Broke Ranks To End Shutdown As Democratic Rift Widens

Schumer Who? How Centrists Broke Ranks To End Shutdown As Democratic Rift Widens

The political breakthrough that ended the longest government shutdown in U.S. history did not come from the Oval Office or from the Senate’s top Democrat. Instead, it emerged from a quiet, late-night meeting in a nearly deserted Capitol, where a small band of centrist Democrats forged an agreement with senior Republicans - over the objections of their own leadership.

Moderate Democrat senators who cut deal to end the government shutdown: Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., top row from left, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., and bottom row from left, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. AP Photo A Quiet Meeting, a Major Shift

According to the Wall Street Journal, two nights before Halloween, with federal workers missing paychecks and food-assistance programs running dry, Sens. Angus King of Maine, Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire - each a former governor, slipped into Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s office after the chamber had adjourned. Joining Thune were Republican Sens. John Hoeven of North Dakota, also a former governor and veteran appropriator, and Susan Collins of Maine, along with Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama.

The group had grown impatient. Nearly a month into the shutdown, they saw little sign that President Trump or Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer would break the stalemate. “It was a group of people trying to solve a problem,” Mr. King said.

When asked by MSNBC why he caved, King said that trying to "stand up to Donald Trump" simply didn't work...

Schumer was informed of the dialogues, lawmakers said, but declined to participate. The Democratic leader believed time was on his side: that Trump would eventually feel compelled to negotiate and Democrats could secure a more favorable outcome - including an extension of expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies that had become the central Democratic demand.

The centrists, however, saw a riskier path. And with little progress from the White House, they proceeded.

A Deal That Divides

The negotiations produced a bipartisan agreement to reopen most of the government through Jan. 30 and fully fund several key programs, including food assistance, for a year. Thune pledged a December vote on extending the ACA subsidies, though he would promise no outcome.

To the centrists, the commitment - combined with the January funding deadline, which gives Democrats an opportunity to force another showdown - was enough. “We sat across from him, we looked him eye to eye,” Ms. Shaheen said, describing her trust in Thune’s assurances.

For many Democrats, it was not. Progressives and party activists erupted in anger, accusing the centrists of caving with little to show for it. Schumer, who voted against the measure, faced criticism from both sides: progressives for failing to keep the caucus unified, and centrists for resisting what many viewed as the only viable off-ramp.

Schumer’s allies counter that he held his caucus together longer than Republicans expected and that Democrats had successfully elevated healthcare costs as the defining issue heading into the midterms.

Internal Pressure Mounts

Centrists briefed Schumer regularly and agreed to his requests to delay any commitments until after Nov. 1, the start of Obamacare open enrollment, and then until after the Nov. 4 election. But as new Democratic electoral victories rolled in, many senators still preferred to hold firm.

That position became harder to justify as the shutdown’s effects escalated. Flight delays worsened. Federal workers missed multiple paychecks. Food-assistance and heating-aid benefits dwindled.

By Sunday, eight Democrats had peeled off, concluding that Trump would not enter negotiations anytime soon. “We were harming a lot of people in the service of a strategy that wasn’t working,” King said.

A Last-Minute Push

Schumer made his final bid on Friday: reopen the government in exchange for a one-year extension of the ACA subsidies. Republicans swiftly rejected it. Over the weekend, centrists renewed their push, bolstered by growing Democratic defections.

On Sunday, Schumer said he could not support a deal “that fails to address the healthcare crisis.” But the votes were slipping away. Republicans needed the support of Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to secure the necessary 60 votes. Britt, alongside GOP leadership and White House officials, worked with Kaine to add provisions reversing shutdown-driven federal layoffs and prohibiting new ones through January.

Kaine agreed. Late Sunday, the Senate advanced the measure 60–40, with no votes to spare.

Political Fallout

For Schumer, the episode marks another intraparty challenge. In March, he was criticized for voting with Republicans to avert a shutdown; now he is under fire for failing to maintain one. Still, Democrats credit him with elevating healthcare as a defining issue for the coming midterms.

On Monday, he framed the outcome as a Republican miscalculation. “Republicans now own this healthcare crisis,” he said. “They knew it was coming. We wanted to fix it. Republicans said no.”

Whether voters will see it that way - or whether the schism between Democratic factions widens - remains an open question. What is clear is that, in the end, it was the quiet work of centrists—not high-level brinkmanship—that forced the government back open.

On Tuesday Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) appeared on Fox News to tell the world that "no one really knows" who's in charge of Democrats on Capitol Hill - as Schumer "never" discussed the shutdown with him. 

Fetterman addressed an Axios report that confirms the above: Schumer privately pressured a group of moderate Democrats in mid-October to keep the government closed until Obamacare open enrollment on Nov. 1. 

When asked by co-host Lawrence Jones "Who is running the show now in the Democratic Party, in the Senate, in the House?” Fetterman replied: "No one really knows."

"It’s always a hard yes to keep our government open," Fetterman explained. "I mean, that’s my principle, because it’s wrong to shut our government down. And now we knew that we would put [at risk] those 42 million Americans for SNAP and paying our military and, you know, the Capitol Police. I mean, people have went five weeks without being paid. I mean, that’s a violation of my core values. And I think it’s [a violation of] our party’s [values] as well."

Schumer who? (h/t Capital.news)

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 09:25

Schumer Who? How Centrists Broke Ranks To End Shutdown As Democratic Rift Widens

Schumer Who? How Centrists Broke Ranks To End Shutdown As Democratic Rift Widens

The political breakthrough that ended the longest government shutdown in U.S. history did not come from the Oval Office or from the Senate’s top Democrat. Instead, it emerged from a quiet, late-night meeting in a nearly deserted Capitol, where a small band of centrist Democrats forged an agreement with senior Republicans - over the objections of their own leadership.

Moderate Democrat senators who cut deal to end the government shutdown: Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., top row from left, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., and bottom row from left, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. AP Photo A Quiet Meeting, a Major Shift

According to the Wall Street Journal, two nights before Halloween, with federal workers missing paychecks and food-assistance programs running dry, Sens. Angus King of Maine, Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire - each a former governor, slipped into Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s office after the chamber had adjourned. Joining Thune were Republican Sens. John Hoeven of North Dakota, also a former governor and veteran appropriator, and Susan Collins of Maine, along with Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama.

The group had grown impatient. Nearly a month into the shutdown, they saw little sign that President Trump or Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer would break the stalemate. “It was a group of people trying to solve a problem,” Mr. King said.

When asked by MSNBC why he caved, King said that trying to "stand up to Donald Trump" simply didn't work...

Schumer was informed of the dialogues, lawmakers said, but declined to participate. The Democratic leader believed time was on his side: that Trump would eventually feel compelled to negotiate and Democrats could secure a more favorable outcome - including an extension of expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies that had become the central Democratic demand.

The centrists, however, saw a riskier path. And with little progress from the White House, they proceeded.

A Deal That Divides

The negotiations produced a bipartisan agreement to reopen most of the government through Jan. 30 and fully fund several key programs, including food assistance, for a year. Thune pledged a December vote on extending the ACA subsidies, though he would promise no outcome.

To the centrists, the commitment - combined with the January funding deadline, which gives Democrats an opportunity to force another showdown - was enough. “We sat across from him, we looked him eye to eye,” Ms. Shaheen said, describing her trust in Thune’s assurances.

For many Democrats, it was not. Progressives and party activists erupted in anger, accusing the centrists of caving with little to show for it. Schumer, who voted against the measure, faced criticism from both sides: progressives for failing to keep the caucus unified, and centrists for resisting what many viewed as the only viable off-ramp.

Schumer’s allies counter that he held his caucus together longer than Republicans expected and that Democrats had successfully elevated healthcare costs as the defining issue heading into the midterms.

Internal Pressure Mounts

Centrists briefed Schumer regularly and agreed to his requests to delay any commitments until after Nov. 1, the start of Obamacare open enrollment, and then until after the Nov. 4 election. But as new Democratic electoral victories rolled in, many senators still preferred to hold firm.

That position became harder to justify as the shutdown’s effects escalated. Flight delays worsened. Federal workers missed multiple paychecks. Food-assistance and heating-aid benefits dwindled.

By Sunday, eight Democrats had peeled off, concluding that Trump would not enter negotiations anytime soon. “We were harming a lot of people in the service of a strategy that wasn’t working,” King said.

A Last-Minute Push

Schumer made his final bid on Friday: reopen the government in exchange for a one-year extension of the ACA subsidies. Republicans swiftly rejected it. Over the weekend, centrists renewed their push, bolstered by growing Democratic defections.

On Sunday, Schumer said he could not support a deal “that fails to address the healthcare crisis.” But the votes were slipping away. Republicans needed the support of Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to secure the necessary 60 votes. Britt, alongside GOP leadership and White House officials, worked with Kaine to add provisions reversing shutdown-driven federal layoffs and prohibiting new ones through January.

Kaine agreed. Late Sunday, the Senate advanced the measure 60–40, with no votes to spare.

Political Fallout

For Schumer, the episode marks another intraparty challenge. In March, he was criticized for voting with Republicans to avert a shutdown; now he is under fire for failing to maintain one. Still, Democrats credit him with elevating healthcare as a defining issue for the coming midterms.

On Monday, he framed the outcome as a Republican miscalculation. “Republicans now own this healthcare crisis,” he said. “They knew it was coming. We wanted to fix it. Republicans said no.”

Whether voters will see it that way - or whether the schism between Democratic factions widens - remains an open question. What is clear is that, in the end, it was the quiet work of centrists—not high-level brinkmanship—that forced the government back open.

On Tuesday Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) appeared on Fox News to tell the world that "no one really knows" who's in charge of Democrats on Capitol Hill - as Schumer "never" discussed the shutdown with him. 

Fetterman addressed an Axios report that confirms the above: Schumer privately pressured a group of moderate Democrats in mid-October to keep the government closed until Obamacare open enrollment on Nov. 1. 

When asked by co-host Lawrence Jones "Who is running the show now in the Democratic Party, in the Senate, in the House?” Fetterman replied: "No one really knows."

"It’s always a hard yes to keep our government open," Fetterman explained. "I mean, that’s my principle, because it’s wrong to shut our government down. And now we knew that we would put [at risk] those 42 million Americans for SNAP and paying our military and, you know, the Capitol Police. I mean, people have went five weeks without being paid. I mean, that’s a violation of my core values. And I think it’s [a violation of] our party’s [values] as well."

Schumer who? (h/t Capital.news)

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 09:25

White House Says Trump Committed To $2,000 Tariff Dividend Payments For Many Americans

White House Says Trump Committed To $2,000 Tariff Dividend Payments For Many Americans

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump remains committed to paying $2,000 to many Americans from funds from tariff revenues, the White House said on Nov. 12, adding that officials are exploring how to make the president’s proposal happen.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump’s team is mulling implementation options for the dividend, which the president first mentioned over the weekend.

In a Nov. 9 post on Truth Social, Trump celebrated the tariffs, highlighting the funds they are bringing into the government.

He suggested using part of these funds to send a dividend of at least $2,000 to Americans, excluding those in high-income brackets, while also utilizing revenues to reduce the nation’s $37 trillion debt.

“We are taking in Trillions of Dollars and will soon begin paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT, $37 Trillion,” Trump wrote on social media.

“Record Investment in the USA, plants and factories going up all over the place. A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone.”

The president has also called critics of his tariff policies “fools.”

The Supreme Court heard arguments on the administration’s use of tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act and is set to rule on the case in the coming weeks or months. Trump has said he is confident in his administration’s arguments and is hopeful a decision will be made in his favor.

“I can’t imagine that anybody would do that kind of devastation to our country,” he said last week.

Trump has said the case is one of the most important in the nation’s history, highlighting that the tariffs are a “defensive mechanism for our country, as national security for our country.”

A 100 percent tariff on China led to a “wonderful deal for everybody, our farmers, as you know, with soybeans at levels that nobody’s ever seen before,” Trump told reporters last week.

“If we didn’t have the tariffs, we wouldn’t have been able to do that,” he said.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who attended the Supreme Court arguments regarding tariffs, said in recent statements that the dividend could be in the form of tax cuts rather than direct payments and limited to families making less than $100,000 annually.

“I haven’t spoken to the president about this yet, but ... the $2,000 dividend could come in lots of forms, in lots of ways,” Bessent told ABC News on Nov. 9.

“It could be just the tax decreases that we are seeing on the president’s agenda. You know, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security,” Bessent also said, noting that those items are “substantial deductions” that are presently “being financed in the tax bill.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 09:05

Coinbase Abandoning $2 Billion Deal For Stablecoin Company BVNK

Coinbase Abandoning $2 Billion Deal For Stablecoin Company BVNK

Coinbase Global has scrapped plans to acquire BVNK, a London-based stablecoin infrastructure startup, ending what would have been a roughly $2 billion deal — and one of the largest stablecoin-focused acquisitions to date, according to Yahoo Finance.

“We’re continuously seeking opportunities to expand on our mission and product offerings,” a Coinbase spokesperson said. “After discussing a potential acquisition of BVNK, both parties mutually agreed to not move forward.”

Yahoo writes that talks had reached late stages, with the firms entering exclusivity in October that prevented BVNK from seeking other buyers. The transaction had been expected to close later this year or early next, but it was not immediately clear why it fell apart.

BVNK provides stablecoin payment and settlement tools used for cross-border transfers — an increasingly competitive area for crypto exchanges and payment processors. For comparison, Stripe paid about $1.1 billion for stablecoin startup Bridge earlier this year; Coinbase’s offer would have nearly doubled that.

Coinbase Ventures is already an investor in BVNK, alongside Haun Ventures, Tiger Global, and the venture arms of Visa and Citi. BVNK last raised $50 million in December at a valuation of roughly $750 million.

The decision removes a near-term uncertainty for Coinbase, which remains a central player in the booming stablecoin market. BVNK, meanwhile, is expected to attract new suitors, with Fortune previously reporting that Mastercard had also shown interest.

Under the Trump administration, stablecoins have become a central pillar of U.S. digital asset strategy. The White House has framed them as tools to strengthen dollar dominance and modernize global payments, reversing the more cautious approach of the previous administration. Senior officials have argued that regulated, dollar-backed tokens could extend U.S. financial influence abroad while boosting innovation and private-sector leadership at home.

Recent policy moves have aimed to build a clear legal framework for stablecoin issuance and reserves, bringing the sector closer to mainstream finance. Supporters within the administration view stablecoins as critical infrastructure for faster, cheaper cross-border payments and as a foundation for U.S.-led digital financial systems. The shift has also fueled competition among exchanges, payment networks, and banks to capture the next wave of growth in dollar-linked tokens.

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 06:55

How Far Will Ukraine's Corruption Scandal Go?

How Far Will Ukraine's Corruption Scandal Go?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

A major scandal is rocking Ukraine after its National Anti-Corruption Bureau, which Zelensky unsuccessfully tried to subordinate over the summer, charged several important figures in connection with its investigation into a $100 million energy graft scandal. This includes Timur Mindich, Zelensky’s longtime business partner, who fled abroad as the authorities were closing after being tipp`ed off about his imminent arrest. He’s alleged to have also influenced the former Energy and Defense Ministers.

Speculation is now swirling that Zelensky himself either profited from this corruption or at the very least was aware of it but did nothing since it involved his close friend. This has in turn led to some wondering whether the US might demand that Zelensky step down or if it’ll work towards replacing him through other means. Tacit support for parliamentary efforts to remove him or various coup scenarios, such as a military one or a Color Revolution, are some of the possibilities being discussed on social media.

On the topic of parliament, former President Pyotr Poroshenko’s European Solidarity party already called for a new cabinet in an attempt to preempt the potential curtailment of European aid on this pretext. He’s also one of Zelensky’s fiercest rivals and could hypothetically replace him since he has experience running the country. That being said, regime change in Ukraine is extremely unlikely without the SBU’s backing, which has ruthlessly suppressed most expressions of political dissent over the past 3.5 years.

They have practically unlimited power under Zelensky too so there’s no reason for them to oust him. The US has also shown no interest in replacing him either, which would require some coordination with the SBU even if only demanding that they not interfere with the operation, despite a stream of reports from Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service over the years alleging that they’re actively preparing to do so. The only way that this will happen is if Trump approves, but he’s on excellent terms with Zelensky nowadays.

A large-scale Russian breakthrough along the front might make him reconsider if Zelensky defies whatever Trump demands of him in that event, such as immediate concessions of some sort aimed at stopping the advance and averting Ukraine’s full-blown collapse, but that hasn’t yet happened. It can’t be ruled out after Russia encircled Ukraine troops in three key areas, however, but Zelensky might have the political acumen to do whatever is then demanded of him in order to avoid enraging Trump.

After all, he’s certainly aware that this high-profile corruption scandal could be leveraged by the US for regime change purposes if it wants to, so he’s expected to be on his “best behavior” for the time being. This doesn’t mean that he’ll stop trying to manipulate Trump, such as what his government and their British co-patrons sought to do through the latest false flag provocation that Russia’s Federal Security Service just foiled, just that defying him isn’t likely since it could end with Zelensky’s removal.

With this insight in mind, Ukraine’s corruption will probably only go as far as a cabinet reshuffle since the SBU has no reason to support regime change against Zelensky (including by passively letting others carry it out instead of thwarting their attempt), nor does Trump (at least for now).

It still discredits him and his government even more than they already are, and the Europeans might curtail some funding on this pretext, but expectations that something significant might follow appear to just be wishful thinking.

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 06:30

A Tale Of Two Consumer Worlds - Captured In A Single Chart

A Tale Of Two Consumer Worlds - Captured In A Single Chart

Our extensive reporting across household income tiers reveals a widening divide across the economy, increasingly bifurcated into two separate worlds. 

At the top, affluent households are reaping the windfall of wealth generated by soaring AI-linked stocks. Meanwhile, middle- and lower-income consumers remain squeezed by persistent inflation, a softening labor market, and depleted savings.

UBS analysts, led by Jonathan Pingle, describe President Trump's economy as "a big bet on AI and upper-income households." So far, expansion is very narrow, with equity market wealth propping up upper-income households, while middle- and lower-income cohorts, who generally don't own stocks, are facing growing hardships. 

Pingle and the analysts warned, "If there is an equity bubble, and it bursts, for the real economy, look out below." 

This tale of two consumer worlds is brilliantly illustrated in Federal Reserve credit card delinquency data, which shows financial stress for lower-income households and even the U.S. average now topping Great Financial Crisis levels. Yet among the wealthiest households, those same signs of strain have yet to materialize.

However, there is good news from the analysts: "Our base case is that an equity market drawdown is avoided. Households suffer for the next two quarters." 

Pingle expects a $55 billion boost to disposable income in 2Q 2026 from retroactive tax relief in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). He said these "bumper refunds" should temporarily revive household spending in mid-2026, which is just in time for the midterm election cycle. 

The takeaway is that consumers are living in entirely different economic environments depending on their income tier. Lower-income households will receive temporary relief from the OBBBA tax cuts early in 2026, while the administration has effectively placed a massive bet on AI to sustain broader economic growth, which should ramp up in 2H 2026.

Incoming economic tailwinds:

We suspect the Trump administration will need to take more decisive action to strengthen the financial footing of lower-income households, or risk seeing some of these voters drift toward Marxist-aligned Democrats promising "free stuff" in exchange for votes in 2026.

How Trump and Bessent plan to deliver that relief remains unclear. There's been speculation about possible "tariff stimulus" checks, Trump's recent pledge to tackle soaring food prices, and renewed vows to overhaul the disastrous Affordable Care Act, which has become anything but affordable as premiums keep rising.

ZeroHedge Pro subscribers can read the full note in the usual spot. It's packed with more in-depth consumer data, detailed breakdowns, and charts that add more color about the consumer health.

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 05:45

Colombia Joins Britain In Suspending Intel-Sharing With US

Colombia Joins Britain In Suspending Intel-Sharing With US

Following the UK announcement it would not cooperate with the US military's 'illegal' actions targeting alleged drug boats off Venezuela, Colombian President Gustavo Petro is the latest to announced the suspension of intelligence sharing with the United States.

This development is less of a surprise, however, given Colombia's relations with Washington have been severely strained since nearly the start of the Pentagon's Caribbean adventurism which began in September.

via CBS

Petro made the announcement on X on Tuesday, vowing that intel-sharing would be blocked so long as these US operations continue.

"The fight against drugs must be subordinated to the human rights of the Caribbean people," Petro wrote, also following UN officials blasting the actions as tantamount to extrajudicial killings.

He confirmed the immediate end of "communications and other agreements with U.S. security agencies" - a relationship which has long focused on the 'war on drugs' in Latin America as well as counterterrorism. 

Already, amid a public back-and-forth spat, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on Petro, his family, and multiple cabinet members.

Like with Maduro in Caracas, the White House has accused Petro, his family and close officials of having ties to drug cartels - something which Bogota has vehemently denied.

The NY Times has noted that a rise in illegal drugs out of the country has been a trend which began before Petro took office, though the cocaine trade has continued to worsen under his leadership.

"The cultivation of coca, the base product in cocaine, has soared since Mr. Petro took office in 2022. It also soared under his predecessor, Iván Duque, a conservative and close ally of Washington Republicans," the publication writes. The NY Times reviews further:

Mr. Petro, a leftist, is one of few leaders in Latin America who have been vocal in their criticism of Mr. Trump’s decision to bomb boats carrying people his administration says are drug traffickers. The bombings have killed dozens of people, and Mr. Petro has said that Colombians have been among them and has accused the United States of committing murder.

Mr. Trump has responded by calling Mr. Petro “an illegal drug leader” and said that he would cut off aid to Colombia. About $377 million was designated to Colombia in the 2024 fiscal year, according to the Congressional Research Service. About a third of that money is meant for law enforcement and narcotics control.

But when it comes to the many decades-long so-called 'war on drugs' - there's plenty of blame to go around. The CIA has at times even participated in it at times, to raise funds for the Nicaragua Contras in the 1980s, for example.

On Tuesday Britain cited that it does not want to be complicit in ongoing US military strikes against alleged drug-trafficking boats, and this could lead to more US allies doing the same as the Pentagon build-up off Venezuela continues.

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 04:15

EU Should Tariff China To Kick Its Rare Earths Dependency

EU Should Tariff China To Kick Its Rare Earths Dependency

Authored by Anders Corr via The Epoch Times,

The European Union is planning a rare-earth element stockpile, mining, and refinement strategy to be more fully revealed in mid-November.

The plan is to use import substitution to counter China’s rare-earth export controls on seven rare earths imposed in April.

However, it could take 10 to 15 years for Europe to become fully independent of China’s rare-earth supply, by which time Russia’s war may have eaten further into Europe’s eastern boundaries. Until the European Union credibly threatens tough tariffs against China—on the order of 100 percent mooted in October by U.S. President Donald Trump—Beijing is unlikely to relent. EU tariffs would provide plenty of leverage, as the European Union has had a persistent trade deficit with China of approximately 300 billion euros to 400 billion euros annually since 2022.

China’s control of rare-earth elements amounts to a global licensing system that could give Beijing a chokehold on the European Union’s artificial intelligence (AI), defense, automotive, and other high-tech sectors. Unfortunately, it’s mostly too late for the EU to stockpile rare-earth elements, as China is already restricting rare-earth exports. Some of the European Union’s past imports of rare-earth elements were 98 percent sourced from China. It could take a dozen years to fully diversify rare-earth mining and refinement away from China, according to SFA Oxford analysts.

Meanwhile, Europe’s defense and auto industries are at the mercy of Beijing, which is normalizing the notion that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has global control over such a critical input to Europe’s defense and industry—and, by extension, the sovereignty and commercial power of Europe’s many free nations.

The CCP’s rare-earth controls have, for example, tripled the cost of some rare-earth elements on global markets and rendered European sanctions on China toothless. These include sanctions for Beijing’s support of Russia’s war machine, whose strikes are already straying from Ukraine over the boundary into Poland, Estonia, and Romania. European sanctions on China’s totalitarian form of government, territorial aggression, support for dictators and terrorists around the world, and human rights abuse are also weakened to nonexistent due to Beijing’s rare-earth move.

Fighter jets, missile guidance, and drones require rare-earth elements to operate. The effect of the CCP’s controls on these European production lines is likely classified. But in June, the European Association of Automotive Suppliers, or CLEPA, warned of risks to the auto supply chain due to Beijing’s export controls on computer chips.

“Chips are essential for vehicle electronics and up to 700 other critical components,” CLEPA said in a press release at the time. “The shortage has an ongoing effect on key electronic systems such as radar sensors, which alone consume around one million chips per week.”

In September, CLEPA noted that European auto factories had stalled due to a shortage of rare-earth elements. BMW and other major automakers faced disruptions to their supply chains. While BMW is scrambling to produce rare-earth-free motors, this only works on larger electric engines. Rare-earth elements remain necessary for small electric motors that power everything from windows to wipers.

European sanctions will remain toothless until Brussels shakes its dependence on China’s rare earths, not to mention other strategic imports. The CCP found Europe’s Achilles’ heel, which will make it vulnerable to the demands of Beijing on opening European markets to China and providing key European exports to Chinese companies.

Beijing seeks semiconductor fabrication machines from the Netherlands, for example, which will surely be part of the ongoing negotiations. Beijing will be pressing Brussels for not only AI-capable chips, but the machines that make the chips.

The European Union is also impeded in its response to the Chinese regime’s growing international aggression in places like Taiwan, Japan’s Senkaku Islands, the Philippines, and India’s Himalayas. The lack of power that the EU has in negotiations with Beijing due to the rare-earth controls will buy China time to build its military and global diplomatic support for an attack on Taiwan, which could give Beijing control over the key Taiwanese semiconductor factories—also known as fabs—necessary to make the CCP even more fearless of the West’s economic sanctions. This was something that the former Soviet Union never achieved, making the CCP a greater threat than the Soviets ever were.

In 2022, the European Union announced an import substitution regime for rare-earth elements called the Critical Raw Materials Act. It seeks to replace much of the rare earths from China through domestic production by 2030, including domestic fulfillment of at least 10 percent of the EU’s extraction needs, 40 percent of its processing, and 25 percent of its recycling. Domestic EU mining and refining could be scaled up in case of an emergency. The European Union would limit dependence on any single foreign supplier to 65 percent of EU needs, which is likely still too much. Another initiative, ReSourceEU, will diversify rare-earth supply chains to Estonia, Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan.

This is all too little, too late, and insufficient, given that the free world does not have 10 to 15 years to wait for the European Union to become independent of Beijing’s threat to throttle Europe’s rare earth supplies. Tougher measures must be considered.

Tariffing EU trade with China at 100 percent is the kind of penalty that could force Beijing to back down on its rare-earth export controls immediately. That would give Europe the time it needs to develop its own rare-earth supply, and never again to hock its sovereignty at a pawn shop in Beijing.

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, 11/13/2025 - 03:30

'Sarajevo Safari': Italy Probes Claim That Wealthy Tourists Paid To Go To Bosnia To Snipe Civilians

'Sarajevo Safari': Italy Probes Claim That Wealthy Tourists Paid To Go To Bosnia To Snipe Civilians

Various reports including in The Guardian and European outlets have detailed one of the most shocking 'war tourism' stories in a long time. The reports claim people in the 1990s paid large sums of money to travel to the Balkans, where they didn't just observe the long-running Yugoslav wars, but picked up rifles and shot people for 'sport'.

Italian prosecutors are investigating the shocking allegations that wealthy foreigners paid many tens of thousands of dollars to act as "weekend snipers" and shoot civilians during the siege of Sarajevo in the early to mid-1990s.

Via Borgen Magazine

Travelers from Italy, the United States, Russia, and other countries allegedly went to Bosnia during the war to fire on residents of the besieged city "for entertainment".

They are said to have paid money to soldiers belonging to the army of Bosnian Serb warlord Radovan Karadžić, who was decades later convicted of crimes against humanity at the Hague.

Serbian authorities have vehemently denied the sensationalist allegations related specifically to the years-running siege of Sarajevo from 1992 to 1996 which took over 11,000 lives.

Prosecutors in Milan are now working to identify the Italian citizens allegedly involved. Statements indicated they will include potential charges of "premeditated murder aggravated by cruelty and vile motives."

There's reason for skepticism, however, given some of the specifics seem hard to believe and over-the-top, and given Balkan conflicts have notoriously been clouded in wartime propaganda and enduring historical falsehoods:

The Milan complaint was filed by journalist and novelist Ezio Gavazzeni, who describes a "manhunt" by "very wealthy people" with a passion for weapons who "paid to be able to kill defenseless civilians" from Serb positions in the hills around Sarajevo.

Different rates were charged to kill men, women or children, according to some reports.

While there have long been rumors of such things taking place, the current investigation into this in northern Italy is due largely to a prominent journalist who has has sought to revive a formal probe by submitting his own 17-page report to prosecutors:

Ezio Gavazzeni, who usually writes about terrorism and the mafia, first read about the sniper tours to Sarajevo three decades ago when Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported the story, but without firm evidence.

He returned to the topic after seeing "Sarajevo Safari", a documentary film from 2022 by Slovenian director Miran Zupanic which alleges that those involved in the killings came from several countries, including the US and Russia as well as Italy.

Radovan Karadžić

The reality is that for the bulk of the historic siege few people could move in or out of the city's environs or outskirts, and various layers of snaking checkpoints and barriers were erected and staffed also by foreign troops at times.

For example, the BBC concludes with a lengthy case for skepticism:

However, members of the British forces who served in Sarajevo in the 1990s have told the BBC that they never heard of any so-called "sniper tourism" during the Bosnian conflict.

They indicated that any attempts to bring in people from third countries who had paid to shoot at civilians in Sarajevo would have been "logistically difficult to accomplish", due to the proliferation of checkpoints.

British forces served both inside Sarajevo and in the areas surrounding the city, where Serb forces were stationed and they saw nothing at the time to suggest that "sniper tourism" was taking place.

One soldier described the allegations that foreigners had paid to shoot at civilians as an "urban myth".

The war was tragic and brutal enough to need no exaggeration, and this could in the end be an attempt of some prosecutors, journalists, and documentary film-makers to make a name for themselves by re-presenting rumors which makes for loud and curiosity-evoking headlines.

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 02:45

Germany Offers Afghans Taxpayers' Cash To Abandon Resettlement Pledges

Germany Offers Afghans Taxpayers' Cash To Abandon Resettlement Pledges

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

The German government has sent letters offering Afghan nationals taxpayer-funded cash incentives to withdraw from resettlement programs and either return to Afghanistan or move to a third country, as reported by the German Press Agency (dpa).

The letters, distributed via the German Society for International Cooperation (GIZ), offer several thousand euros in compensation and logistical support, such as transport, medical assistance, and three months of psychosocial care to Afghan nationals awaiting resettlement flights in their home country and neighboring Pakistan.

The federal interior ministry, cited by Welt, said the voluntary offer is meant to “give those who cannot expect to be accepted in Germany a future.”

Recipients were told that all local admission procedures must be completed by the end of 2025 and warned that “there is no guarantee all steps can be completed on time.” The deadline to accept the offer is Nov. 17, after which re-entry into the relocation process will not be possible.

Over 2,000 Afghan nationals are currently awaiting transfer to Germany under various protection and resettlement schemes. The current CDU/CSU-SPD coalition government suspended the previous administration’s admission programs for Afghans in May, but flights have continued to arrive since the Berlin Administrative Court ruled that the government must honor its previous commitments to admit an Afghan woman and her 13 family members in a landmark case.

The court found that previously issued admission approvals were legally binding and could not be revoked, ordering the Foreign Ministry to act immediately. While the government had the opportunity to appeal the decision, it withdrew its application in August, finalizing the ruling.

The interior ministry defended the financial incentive proposal, saying it targets those whose resettlement approvals were never finalized.

The various Afghan resettlement schemes were launched in 2021 after the Taliban retook control of the country. Applicants were required to travel to Pakistan for visa processing and security screening before entering Germany.

The government argues that the suspension of admissions is necessary due to “security and procedural concerns” fuelled by newspaper reports earlier this year that only one in eight Afghans admitted under special protection programs had undergone full security vetting before arrival. The report claimed that more than 31,000 Afghans and family members entered Germany without complete background checks.

The federal police union (DPolG) urged a total suspension of flights, citing identity-verification failures and terrorism concerns. “The current procedure, in which travel documents are issued despite identities not being fully verified, is highly risky and irresponsible,” said DPolG chief Heiko Teggatz in March.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 11/13/2025 - 02:00

Experts Doubt China's Claims On AI, Quantum Radar

Experts Doubt China's Claims On AI, Quantum Radar

Authored by Mike Fredenburg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Commentary

There is little doubt that China’s recent announcements on quantum radar and artificial intelligence (AI)-powered submarine detection, which collectively rip away the operational advantages of submarines and stealth aircraft, are aimed at discouraging any thought by any country to be actively involved in defending Taiwan. The announcements are also meant to demoralize Taiwan.

A U.S. Air Force fifth generation F-35A Lightning II stealth aircraft comes in to land in Lakenheath, England, on April 17, 2025. Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

However, while there is little doubt about the intent of the announcements, there is some room for doubt about their accuracy.

The first announcement involves a four-channel single-photon detector entering mass production in Anhui Province. This component is heralded as the cornerstone of quantum radar systems that will render U.S. stealth aircraft visible.

The second announcement describes a five-layer AI-enhanced ocean grid that was allegedly demonstrated during Joint Sea-2025 exercises with China and Russia. China claims this AI-enabled grid will turn the Western Pacific into a “transparent” sea where no submarine can hide.

On the face of it, these twin initiatives appear to be breakthroughs, but because of Beijing’s history of making exaggerated claims, a bit of healthy skepticism is warranted. Sure, they could be ready tomorrow or in just a few months. Still, with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping ordering China to be prepared to invade Taiwan in 2027, we should also examine the possibility that the announcements are more about creating fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the minds of those who might be inclined to help Taiwan than they are about actual, deployable military technology. With this in mind, we’ll briefly examine the claims to assess what level of credibility they warrant.

On Oct. 14, Science and Technology Daily, the official newspaper of China’s Ministry of Science and Technology, declared that China had achieved self-sufficiency and international leadership in quantum information components with the mass production of the “single photon catcher.” This matchbox-sized device detects single photons with 90 percent efficiency at negative 184 degrees Fahrenheit, reducing noise by 90 percent and shrinking the device’s size to one-ninth of what other countries have achieved.

If it can indeed operate only at that temperature and still achieve good results, it is a significant achievement, as the United States has developed high-performing single-photon detectors, of which we are aware, that operate at negative 458 degrees Fahrenheit to negative 452 degrees Fahrenheit.

But given that there is no detailed, peer-reviewed scientific paper documenting this, we don’t really know just how good China’s single-photo sensor is. China is also making claims that its quantum radar has a range of 62 miles. If true, this is significantly better than U.S. quantum radar, which is limited to 6.2 miles.

However, a truly effective and militarily useful quantum radar should have a range of hundreds of miles, making a 62-mile range of limited practical value, given that more conventional anti-stealth radar, etc., already can detect stealth craft at 62 miles. And there is no independent verification of these major advances in physics, material science, and engineering. However, as previously noted, there is room for some healthy skepticism.

Though China does publish loads of valid research, including research on quantum technology, it also leads the world by a large margin in retractions of scientific papers, with more than 32,000 academic papers retracted, with seven out of the ten top institutions with the most retractions being Chinese.

As documented in Retraction Watch’s database, reasons for retractions include validity of data or results (more than 24,000 retractions), false/forged authorship (180) of data, dubious images (4,300), fake peer review (6,200), ethics, etc. And there have been 150, 680, 23, and 10 papers retracted involving quantum technology, AI, radar, and sensor fusion, respectively.

A case study of a retracted paper on Chinese research integrity dives into the potential reasons why China is publishing so much flawed and fraudulent research. Given all of this, it is at least possible that research papers published to support Chinese claims could be flawed.

In the United States, MIT, Raytheon, and many other research entities are working on developing quantum radars. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, is working on developing Robust Quantum Sensors. Getting ranges beyond 6.2 miles has not been possible to date, given decoherence as a key issue. No one is making any predictions about when militarily deployable quantum radar with ranges of hundreds of miles will become possible. And there are no claims to support China’s implied claim that a military-grade quantum radar can be deployed in a matter of a few years.

However, when it comes to quantum sensing—a key requirement for quantum radar—the consulting firm McKinsey and Company has suggested we could see limited commercial adoption for short-range applications by the early to mid-2030s. But these applications avoid the biggest problem with quantum radar, maintaining coherence over long range. Hence, most Western experts are highly skeptical of China’s claims.

However, China’s claims of using AI and the sensor fusion of sonar, magnetic anomaly detection, salinity sensors, etc., as reported in the South China Morning Post, to detect submarines is a horse of a different color. It is much more plausible than its quantum radar claims. Indeed, using AI in such a fashion is so obvious that, given the hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayers’ spend on the military each year, it would be downright scandalous if the United States did not have something similar in the works.

Still, while there are no extremely difficult scientific/engineering hurdles standing in the way as there is with quantum radar, we should not just take China’s word that it now has an AI-powered submarine detection network that is fast enough and well-trained enough to allow it to detect real U.S. submarines 95 percent of the time.

Nevertheless, if China has been able to detect its own subs and Russian subs as they might have done during recent joint exercises, then with the right training data, it should provide a boost in detecting U.S. subs. But given just how dynamic and complex the underwater environment is, experts such as those cited in this Deutsche Welle piece are dubious of the 95 percent claim. So while the precise claim of 95 percent is questionable, the concept behind the technology is valid. Consequently, China’s claim in this case cannot summarily be dismissed.

There is no doubt that the timing of these two announcements is to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt into the mind of China’s competitors and to demoralize Taiwan, but that does not mean the claims are false. However, our brief examination of the two separate claims reveals that while an AI-powered submarine detection network is very possible and cannot summarily be dismissed as mere information warfare/propaganda, China’s claim of being able to deploy a game-changing quantum radar in the next few years is highly improbable and is likely more propaganda than an immediate threat.

Bottom line, paraphrasing President Ronald Reagan, when it comes to communist China: don’t trust, and always verify.

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 Wed, 11/12/2025 - 22:35

Trump Pens Letter Urging Full Israeli Pardon Of Netanyahu In Corruption Cases

Trump Pens Letter Urging Full Israeli Pardon Of Netanyahu In Corruption Cases

Just as he previously strongly hinted he would do, President Donald Trump has penned an official letter asking the Israeli president to grant a full pardon to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his ongoing major corruption trial.

Trump wrote, "I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been a formidable and decisive War Time Prime Minister, and is now leading Israel into a time of peace." 

"While I absolutely respect the independence of the Israeli Justice System, and its requirements, I believe that the ‘case’ against Bibi, who has fought alongside me for a long time, including against the very tough adversary of Israel, Iran, is a political, unjustified prosecution," Trump continued in the letter.

This is being widely viewed, especially by the domestic opponents of the Netanyahu government, as a brazen attempt to intervene in Israel's judicial system. Trump has tried a similar intervention against the ongoing prosecution of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro.

Trump said in the letter that US-Israel relations stand strong at a "historic time, as we have, together, just secured peace that has been sought for at least 3,000 years."

The Israeli president's office confirmed Wednesday, "This morning, President Isaac Herzog received the attached letter from U.S. President Donald Trump, calling on him to consider granting a pardon to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu."

Recent reports and statements out of the White House indicate Netanyahu came under unprecedented pressure from Trump to accept the historic Gaza ceasefire deal, which has held for a little over one month. Trump's lobbying for dismissal on Netanyahu's behalf could be part of quid pro quo connected with achieving the celebrated truce.

"Now that we have achieved these unprecedented successes, and are keeping Hamas in check, it is time to let Bibi unite Israel by pardoning him, and ending that lawfare once and for all," Trump wrote.

The trial began in May 2020 and has been going on-and-off throughout wars and major geopolitical shifts in the Middle East, including the conflicts with Iran, Lebanon, Yemen, and Syria. 

The trial focuses on three corruption cases - including charges of fraud and breach of trust, as well as charges of bribery. The allegations range from illegally receiving expensive gifts based on political favors, to quid pro quo agreements with some Israeli media sources for more favorable coverage, to authorizing telecom-related regulatory decisions to benefit friends and allies.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 22:10

Cloned Foods Are Coming To A Grocer Near You

Cloned Foods Are Coming To A Grocer Near You

Authored by Sylvain Charlebois via The Epoch Times,

Cloned-animal foods could soon enter Canada’s food supply with no labels identifying them as cloned and no warning to consumers - a move that risks eroding public trust.

According to Health Canada’s own consultation documents, Ottawa intends to remove foods derived from cloned animals from its “novel foods” list, the process that requires a pre-market safety review and public disclosure. Health Canada defines “novel foods” as products that haven’t been commonly consumed before or that use new production processes requiring extra safety checks.

From a regulatory standpoint, this looks like an efficiency measure. From a consumer-trust standpoint, it’s a miscalculation.

Health Canada argues that cloned animals and their offspring are indistinguishable from conventional ones, so they should be treated the same. The problem isn’t the science—it’s the silence. Canadians are not being told that the rules for a controversial technology are about to change. No press release, no public statement, just a quiet update on a government website most citizens will never read.

Cloning in agriculture means producing an exact genetic copy of an animal, usually for breeding purposes. The clones themselves rarely end up on dinner plates, but their offspring do, showing up in everyday products such as beef, milk, or pork. The benefits are indirect: steadier production, fewer losses from disease, or more uniform quality.

But consumers see no gain at checkout. Cloning is expensive and brings no visible improvement in taste, nutrition, or price. Shoppers could one day buy steak from the offspring of a cloned cow without any way of knowing, and still pay the same, if not more, for it.

Without labels identifying the cloned origin, potential efficiencies stay hidden upstream. When products born of new technologies are mixed in with conventional ones, consumers lose their ability to differentiate, reward innovation, or make an informed choice. In the end, the industry keeps the savings while shoppers see none.

And it isn’t only shoppers who are left in the dark. Exporters could soon pay the price too. Canada exports billions in beef and pork annually, including to the EU. If cloned-origin products enter the supply chain without labelling, Canadian exporters could face additional scrutiny or restrictions in markets where cloning is not accepted. A regulatory shortcut at home could quickly become a market barrier abroad.

This debate comes at a time when public trust in Canada’s food system is already fragile. A 2023 survey by the Canadian Centre for Food Integrity found that only 36 percent of Canadians believe the food industry is “heading in the right direction,” and fewer than half trust government regulators to be transparent. Inserting cloned foods quietly into the supply without disclosure would only deepen that skepticism.

This is exactly how Canada became trapped in the endless genetically modified organism (GMO) debate. Two decades ago, regulators and companies quietly introduced a complex technology without giving consumers the chance to understand it. By denying transparency, they also denied trust. The result was years of confusion, suspicion, and polarization that persist today.

Transparency shouldn’t be optional in a democracy that prides itself on science-based regulation. Even if the food is safe, and current evidence suggests it is, Canadians deserve to know how what they eat is produced.

The irony is that this change could have been handled responsibly. Small gestures like a brief notice, an explanatory Q&A, or a commitment to review labelling once international consensus emerges would have shown respect for the public and preserved confidence in our food system.

Instead, Ottawa risks repeating an old mistake: mistaking regulatory efficiency for good governance. At a time when consumer trust in food pricing, corporate ethics, and government oversight is already fragile, the last thing Canada needs is another quiet policy that feels like a secret.

Cloning may not change the look or taste of what’s on your plate, but how it gets there should still matter.

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 Wed, 11/12/2025 - 21:45

Move Over Mamdani, Seattle Set To Elect Socialist Mega-Karen Mayor

Move Over Mamdani, Seattle Set To Elect Socialist Mega-Karen Mayor

Self-avowed socialist Katie Wilson is on the brink of winning Seattle's mayoral race in what is the latest sign that the Democrat Party is shifting even further to the left.



As of Tuesday, Wilson pulled ahead of incumbent Bruce Harrel by a mere 1,300 votes. Wilson overtook Harrel with the help of mail-in ballots, which have favored the socialist by wide margins, according to King County Elections.

"Kate Wilson won 61.23% of the 6,121 ballots counted today," said local political consultant Crystal Fincher. "I'm comfortable calling this race for Wilson now.”

Politico reports:

Ms. Wilson, who describes herself as a socialist, centered her campaign on housing affordability and economic inequality—themes that echo New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani's progressive platform. She proposed a capital gains tax to generate revenue, stronger tenant protections, and expanded public transit.

The message resonated in a city where median home prices have soared beyond the reach of many residents. Ms. Fincher noted a generational divide over economic concerns. "There's a disconnect between what younger people are going through in day to day life today," she said.


Despite Wilson’s all-but-certain victory, some Washington state Republicans are licking their chops over a socialist running Seattle.

Washington State Republican Chairman Jim Walsh believes Wilson "would be very bad for Seattle, but very good for the Washington state Republican Party.”

However, Wilson isn’t declaring victory just yet, telling reporters, “We’re going to wait for all of the ballots to be counted, but I think we won this race.”

Some are comparing Wilson to Zohran Mamdani, whose nine-point demolition of Andrew Cuomo in the New York mayoral race has thrust City Hall into the hands of a 34-year-old democratic socialist whose policy agenda threatens to upend the city’s fragile post-pandemic fiscal equilibrium and accelerate the exodus of capital and talent.

Mamdani's radical platform. such as fare-free transit, city-run grocery stores, rent freezes on all stabilized units, and a 2% “mansion tax” on residences above $5 million, would add at least $18 billion in annual spending, according to preliminary estimates from the Independent Budget Office.

Ahead of taking office, Mamdani is already attempting to repair his relationship with President Donald Trump, telling local media that good relations “will be critical to the success” of the city, and said that he plans to call the president soon.

“I will be proactive in the work that I do, and I think that is because the responsibility I hold to 8.5 million people being their mayor,” Mamdani said. “It is important that you are open to working with anyone, no matter what disagreements you may have. And, I’ve said this when it pertains to President Trump, that President Trump wants to speak about lowering the cost of living or delivering cheaper groceries like he ran on, I’m there to have that conversation.”

In a recent interview with Fox News Channel host Bret Baier, Trump warned that Mamdani was off to a “bad start” by targeting him repeatedly in his victory address.

“It was a very angry speech, certainly angry toward me,” Trump told Baier. “I think he should be very nice to me. You know, I’m the one that sort of has to approve a lot of things coming for him. So, he’s off to a bad start.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 21:20

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince May Provide Boost To US Nuclear Industry

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince May Provide Boost To US Nuclear Industry

Authored by Steffan Szumowski via The Nuclear Review

I recently enjoyed a conversation with an American energy industry executive who has lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for a number of years. He provided some unique insight into the US nuclear industry's potential opportunities with Saudi Arabia.

When the future King of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) visits the White House on November 18th, he will bring with him a number of major agreements and business deals. Among these may be the long-awaited US-Saudi Nuclear Energy Cooperation Agreement (referred to as a "123 Agreement", the section of the Atomic Energy Act that governs US technology transfer to international partners). That agreement, under discussion for over a decade, appears to be close to finalization and may lead to significant business for US nuclear companies.This pact would enable the transfer of US nuclear technology, materials, and expertise to Saudi Arabia, facilitating Riyadh's civil nuclear program that aims to build at least two large pressurized water reactors (PWRs) on the Arabian Gulf under a new holding company, the Duwayhin Nuclear Energy Company (DNEC).

DNEC submitted a site license application to the Saudi Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission (NRRC) in May 2022 for its flagship Duwaiheen Nuclear Power Plant on the Gulf coast, targeting an initial capacity of 2.8 GW. Observers note that 2.8 GW matches the output of two of KEPCO's AP-1400 reactors, the same built across the border in UAE, leading many to speculate that the Koreans have been in the lead for supplying the Saudi's nuclear plant technology.

The associated tender for the two Duwaiheen plants, launched in 2022, has faced multiple delays. Initially slated for bids in April 2024, the deadline shifted repeatedly and still remains pending. Analysts have understood it to be the Saudi's intention to delay selection until after a 123 Agreement is signed in order to enable US companies to bid on the project and to ensure that the Saudi program has a nod of approval from the US.

If President Trump and MBS complete a 123 Agreement, it could manifest in a multibillion-dollar windfall for US firms (similar to the recent nuclear investments announced by Japan and South Korea), positioning them as frontrunners for the first two DNEC large scale reactors and in the long term capture a large share of the nascent Saudi nuclear market. This would mark a major departure from the UAE's program where KEPCO was the big winner and US firms like Westinghouse and Holtec have only a fraction of the total market. If Riyadh, as likely desired by the Trump administration, is able to direct contracts preferentially to American partners, eschewing rivals like KEPCO, Russia's Rosatom or China's CNNC, key beneficiaries emerge.

Westinghouse, owned by Brookfield and Cameco, stands to dominate with its AP1000 design. With Trump administration nudging, Westinghouse could supplant KEPCO's apparent lead and flip the script from how the Emirati program developed (where KEPCO led and Westinghouse followed as a tech and services provider). In fact, Korean news agencies reported last month that US officials have pressured the Korean government for KEPCO to take a back-seat in the Saudi program and act in a supporting role for AP1000 deployment at Duwaiheen.

Another likely winner is Bechtel, the privately-held American construction giant that is closely tied to Westinghouse's AP1000 projects. Bechtel is one of the largest American players in the Saudi market, having been there since the 1940s and serving as a trusted construction partner in the Kingdom. Bechtel is the most likely winner of EPC contracts if the Saudis choose to buy American. Some characterize Bechtel's structure and leadership in Saudi Arabia as a "dream team" for the development of American nuclear projects in Saudi Arabia.

Other companies to watch include Holtec, who has done well in UAE and has developed a reputation as a reliable partner in spent fuel management. X-energy stands out among new nuclear companies, as well. Their Chairman, Kam Ghaffarian, is well respected in Saudi Arabia for the success of his space company, Axiom, who launched two Saudi astronauts into orbit in 2023, including the first woman Saudi astronaut. Ghaffarian could turn that goodwill into business for X-energy's Xe-100 SMR design and their TRISO-X fuel project.

Broader implications ripple outward: US exporters gain market share in a region eyeing 20 GW of nuclear by 2030, hedging oil volatility and exporting high-skill jobs. For Saudi, it means technology transfer, local content mandates (jobs and contracts for Saudis and Saudi companies) and further energy independence, reducing 30% of domestic oil burn and making that oil available for exports (and revenue).

Risks of the 123 Agreement not happening persist. Continued back-and-forth over Saudi enrichment and fuel cycle desires have long slowed progress. Some analysts believe those issues have been resolved or deferred. Additional risk could come from Congress that, although not required to approve a 123 Agreement, could take action to review or stall the agreement, derailing follow-on opportunities for US business. But, a November signing would signal thawed ties and increasing interest in how US nuclear companies can gain international market share via Saudi Arabia, the world's energy powerhouse.

With MBS's visit looming, stakeholders should watch closely: a deal struck could impact nuclear-related commodities and US nuclear order books.

Tyler Durden Wed, 11/12/2025 - 18:25

Pages