THE NEWS

Hurricane Polo weakened slightly to a Category 4 storm Wednesday, but maintained its major hurricane status.

“Definitely Doesn’t Work”: US Energy Sec Rejects Diesel Export Ban, Risks Creating Bigger Supply-Squeeze Later

President Trump will not be pleased…

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright has publicly opposed calls for a ban on US diesel exports, arguing on Wednesday that the measure would backfire by increasing gasoline and jet fuel prices.

“The blunt ​tool of banning diesel exports definitely doesn’t ‌work,” ⁠Wright said at an event in New York, as reported by Reuters.

Wright said restricting exports would leave refiners with excess diesel inventories, forcing them to cut refinery output.

Lower refinery runs, he warned, would tighten supplies of other fuels, ultimately driving up costs for consumers and businesses.

His comments put him at odds with President Trump, who signaled support for the idea on Tuesday as diesel prices surge to record highs in the US and Europe (and Treasury Secretary Bessent has been assigned to see “if it’s feasible.”

Trump’s comments already sent European pries for the fuel surging.

With flows from the region’s top supplier at risk, Bloomberg reports that European diesel’s premium to Brent crude jumped to more than $95 a barrel on Wednesday, a record in Bloomberg data going back to 2011.

Known as crack spread, the indicator has been keenly watched by central bankers as they seek to tame inflation. The equivalent measure in the US, meanwhile, weakened.

Trump’s threat comes as Europe is already grappling with the loss of diesel shipments from the Middle East, and Russian export curbs have tightened the global fuel market further. The US has become Europe’s main overseas supplier, with American exports of the workhorse fuel surging to a weekly record near 2 million barrels a day last month.

A key US oil industry group cautioned against the move, saying it could lower American fuel production and damage the global economy.

Of the 8 million barrels of diesel traded globally by sea each day, the U.S. supplies about 1.5 million of them – about 20%. An export ban would remove the single largest source of global diesel from the market, and the consequences could be catastrophic.

“Restricting exports is not a solution to high prices,” the American Petroleum Institute says.

“Removing US diesel from the market could instead result in reduced refinery runs, global economic damage and even higher US prices.”

Indeed, as Bloomberg macro strategist, Michael Ball, write this morning,while The White House may be able to engineer a brief drop in US diesel prices by limiting exports, it risks creating a bigger supply problem down the road.

With distillate stocks at seasonally record lows…

…the appeal is obvious with US diesel above $6.50 a gallon…

But a broad curb could strand as much as 1.5 million barrels a day, roughly 29% of US diesel output.

If enacted, Ball writes, the effects would be uneven across the US.

A surplus would build on the Gulf Coast, while pipeline, shipping and fuel-specification constraints limit how easily those barrels can reach tighter East and West Coast markets.

Bloomberg Intelligence estimates Gulf Coast storage could only absorb about three weeks of net diesel exports before constraints bite.

The global impact would be worse.

Kpler argues there is no real replacement for US export volumes, leaving Latin America and Northwest Europe particularly exposed and increasing competition for Indian barrels.

China could compound the squeeze as domestic inventories fall and the risk of renewed export curbs rises.

The response from refiners would create a negative feedback loop.

If trapped barrels crush margins, refiners are incentivized to cut runs and undertake maintenance.

S&P Global Energy estimates crude runs might need to fall by nearly 2 million barrels a day – more than 10% of the current production level – to clear the surplus.

That is the asymmetry: lower US diesel prices first, tighter global product markets follow, and potentially less US fuel supply later.

The more aggressive the restriction, the greater the risk that today’s price relief becomes tomorrow’s supply problem.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/23/2026 – 12:00

The Week 3 showdown between LSU and Ole Miss in Oxford had everything going for it. Not only was it a contest between two arch-rivals, both ranked inside the AP Top 10, but it also featured a months-long build-up that had been brewing since the second Lane Kiffin left the Rebels last November to take over the Tigers.On paper, it very well may have been the most quintessential college football game of the 21st century. The matchup checked every box one could come up with, and at times felt like a drama unfolding on Netflix more than a real-life football game.The fact that it was decided by eight points, with the team that was left at the altar getting its revenge, and with the game coming down to a play with under one minute remaining was just the icing on the cake. When the final whistle sounded, it felt as if the college football world as a whole could finally take a breath after a four-hour slugfest coming off of 10 months of anticipation.CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGEThe TV ratings from the game reflect that college football fans were glued to what was unfolding in Oxford, but not quite like they were to a specific game just one week prior.ESPN shared that LSU-Ole Miss was Week 3’s most-watched game, with an average of 10.9 million viewers and a peak viewership of 13.7 million. The matchup outperformed the nearest competitor by a whopping 237%.THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!Those are huge numbers, and the game ranked eighth all-time across the ESPN network when it comes to regular-season games over the last 10 years.Ratings from Ohio State’s visit to Texas in Week 2, however, make the LSU-Ole Miss contest look like a preseason scrimmage.Texas’ stunning comeback to beat the Buckeyes averaged 14 million viewers, with a peak of 16.4 million. It was the most-watched Week 2 matchup on record, across all networks, and the most-watched regular-season primetime game since the 2012 Notre Dame-USC game.LSU has been among the strongest brands across the Southeast for well over a half century, and Ole Miss is turning into a modern-era blueblood, but this proves what most already knew, and that is that Texas and Ohio State are national brands in the most literal and legitimate of ways.Both games came down to the final minutes, both featured comebacks, and both were oozing with storylines and stars, but the Buckeyes and Longhorns are operating on a level of their own.

A Kappa Kappa Gamma member at Florida State University says the sorority’s transgender membership policy has left her questioning her decision to join the organization, arguing that it undermines the sense of sisterhood she expected to find.”As soon as I heard about it, I was honestly … disappointed,” FSU student Alexis Richards told “The Riley Gaines Show.””This is like the one thing where I feel this shouldn’t be happening,” she continued. “It’s like the protected sisterhood, and I never would have expected it to be infiltrated by biological men.”PARENTS DROP EYE-POPPING FEES ON SORORITY RUSH COACHES TO GET KIDS INTO ELITE COLLEGE GREEK LIFERichards said learning about the controversy surrounding the sorority’s membership policy made her consider what she would do if a similar situation unfolded at her own chapter.”What if this happened to FSU? I don’t want to be a part of that. I would be so uncomfortable, and I cannot imagine what those girls went through,” she said.Sorority alumnae returned to federal court last week, asking judges to revive their lawsuit against the organization after they alleged its national leadership improperly allowed a chapter to admit a biological male.The legal fight stems from 2022, when transgender student Artemis Langford joined the University of Wyoming chapter of Kappa Kappa Gamma. Plaintiff Allie Coghan told Fox News Digital that she hopes the appeal will establish a clear legal precedent that protects single-sex private spaces and keeps national organizations from overriding local member consent.Richards said the issue has forced her to reconsider assumptions she had when she first joined.”It definitely makes you rethink some of the joining a sorority,” she said.EXCLUSIVE: GOP REP INTRODUCES BILL TO BAR BIOLOGICAL MEN FROM JOINING DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”I never expected this to happen, so what else could happen?”The FSU student has since publicly challenged the organization over the issue, a decision she acknowledged was “a little nerve-racking.”Before speaking out, Richards said she sent her father her planned message and received a warning in response: “Buckle up.””I was, like, ‘I’m ready.’ I feel like I need to say something because I just feel like if I didn’t say anything, I would be doing like an injustice to myself, because I started speaking out more publicly about my views,” she told Gaines.”I was very involved with like Charlie Kirk and Turning Point, and I think after his assassination, that like woke up something inside of me where I’m like, ‘I’m not going to sit back and hope someone else does it for me. I’m just going to do it myself,’ and I think taking that first step is something that I genuinely am so proud of myself for doing because it’s scary.”Richards said the Kappa’s admission of biological males is something she hopes “never happens again,” adding that she hopes the issue can be contained now to prevent similar cases in the future.When reached for comment by Fox News Digital last week, Kappa Kappa Gamma said, “On Monday, Kappa Kappa Gamma defended in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Colorado, our right as a private organization to interpret Kappa Kappa Gamma’s bylaws.” The statement continued, “We will continue to vigorously defend against attempts by plaintiffs to use the judicial system to take away a private organization’s fundamental right to govern itself and cause lasting damage to our organization. We are confident the appellate court will uphold the decisive Wyoming federal court ruling and bring a swift resolution to this matter.”Fox News Digital’s Madison Colombo contributed to this report.

Stanford University was caught red-handed using artificial intelligence to alter an image promoting its residential and dining offerings, replacing a Hispanic male student with a Black woman.The Stanford Review posted the original dining-hall photo — which shows an Asian woman, a White man and a Hispanic student — alongside the altered version on X.”We have reviewed the matter and confirmed that AI was used to alter the image in violation of university policy. Stanford’s AI policy  is clear: The use of AI in producing or altering images of Stanford people, events, research, facilities, or achievements is strictly prohibited,” a spokesperson for Stanford University said in a email to Fox News Digital.”Both the alteration and lack of disclosure in this case violate that policy. We are working with Residential and Dining Enterprises to provide additional training and ensure proper review of all materials,” the spokesperson continued.KEY TRUMP AGENCY PUTS TOP UNIVERSITIES IN CROSSHAIRS OVER ALLEGED RACE-BASED DORM PROGRAMSBilly Ramirez, who was removed from the photo, told the Stanford Review that he was “baffled” when he saw that he was cut out of the photo.”At first, I found it hilarious that they had used AI to completely change our appearances, including my race and gender,” Ramirez told the Stanford Review.”But after looking at the comparison, I was also upset because I don’t agree with Stanford making those choices about how we were represented,” Ramirez continued. “Seeing my identity changed and being left out of the picture made me feel, in a way, silenced and erased from a representation that was supposed to include me.”In addition to removing Ramirez from the photo, the appearances of the two students were also altered, making the Asian woman and White man’s faces thinner.FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY HIT WITH FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS INVESTIGATION OVER RACE, SEX-BASED SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMSThe controversy comes as Stanford faces scrutiny from the Trump administration over alleged race-based discrimination in both its admissions policies and a teacher-certification support program.SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTERIn April, the Trump administration opened a civil-rights investigation into Stanford over allegations that a teacher-certification program reserved full financial support for educators who identified as people of color. The Education Department said it is examining whether the program violated Title VI by conditioning access to benefits on race.And in March 2025, the Justice Department launched an investigation into Stanford along with several other universities over whether it was using diversity, equity and inclusion in admission decisions. The outcome of the Stanford admissions review has not been publicly announced.

Kaitlan Collins joins Fox News to discuss George Soros’ replacement agenda
A clip showing CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins discussing George Soros’ weaponization of the immigration crisis to push his mass migration agenda on Fox News over a decade ago has resurfaced amid CNN’s battle with the Trump administration over White House access.
Trump banned CNN, MS Now, and Politico from the White House last week, citing the “FICTION and LIES” they report. The three outlets have since filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration.
The newly resurfaced clip shows Collins, the face of CNN’s White House team, working as a Daily Caller reporter at the time. She started her career with the conservative news and opinion outlet, which was co-founded by Tucker Carlson, after graduating from the University of Alabama in 2014.
In a complete 180° turn, however, Collins joined CNN’s White House team in 2017 during Trump’s first term.
While discussing leaked memos related to Soros’s Open Society Foundations, Collins gave a background on Soros, describing him as a “foreign-born left-wing guy who essentially wants to change the nature of our country.” CNN would probably call you a White Supremacist for saying such a thing nowadays…
“In this data dump, one of the memos was about the refugee crisis, and they made three points,” she explained. “They think that they’ve been successful at influencing immigration policy across the world, they think that the refugee crisis is an opportunity to continue doing so, and they think the refugee crisis is the new normal.”
She continued, “And George Soros is this guy who is a staunch advocate for open borders. He wants people to be able to go wherever they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason, and for him, he sees this immigration policy, this crisis, as a vehicle to further his immigration agenda.”
WATCH:

Now, one would think George Soros pays her to push anti-Trump and pro-open borders propaganda. Did her values change, or does the other side just pay more?
Trump previously highlighted Collins’ conservative past during an Oval Office press conference in June, slamming her for supporting the Democrats’ abuse and weaponization of justice against Trump supporters.
“You should be ashamed of yourself. You used to be a conservative,” he said before humiliating her in front of the press corps. “She was a conservative from Alabama. Can you believe it? But CNN, in particular, CNN does such false reporting, but now they have new ownership, so maybe it will straighten it out. I doubt it, but it’s hard to straighten garbage out.”
“People have been abused by you and by others, and by the politicians, by the Dumocrats; they’re dumb people, they want to have open borders, they want to have transgender mutilation of your children, they want to have men playing in women’s sports, they want to have high taxes.”
WATCH:

The post WATCH: Clip of Kaitlan Collins Railing Against George Soros for Using Immigration to Replace Americans on Fox News Resurfaces appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

ABC’S “The View” co-host Sunny Hostin revealed on the liberal talk show Tuesday that she was a holdout juror on a case in a New York in the 1990s in which a man killed and dismembered his roommate, shocking her co-hosts as she argued, “I saw clearly that he was psychotic.”As “The View” discussed the Lindsay Clancy case, Hostin said she felt that Clancy was not criminally responsible. She said she also felt strongly about the holdout juror because she was once a holdout juror.Daniel Rakowitz was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disease or defect in 1991 after killing his roommate, Monika Beerle, with Hostin later identifying herself as the holdout juror who initially prevented the jury from returning a guilty verdict. Because the jury found Rakowitz “not mentally responsible” for the murder, according to The New York Times, he was sent to a state hospital in New York for the criminally insane. NBC New York reported in 2010 that Rakowitz would remain at the maximum-security Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center on Wards Island after he petitioned to be moved.LINDSAY CLANCY MISTRIAL DECLARED AFTER JURY DEADLOCKS IN KILLINGS OF HER THREE CHILDRENHostin, whose maiden name is Cummings and whose first name is Asunción, was quoted in a Feb. 23, 1991, New York Times report about the trial, which said, “Several jurors questioned afterward said one holdout juror was principally responsible for preventing them from returning a guilty verdict.””The View” co-host presented the article on the show while explaining the case. “That was me. It was because I saw clearly that he was psychotic,” Hostin said Tuesday during the show.LINDSAY CLANCY JUROR ADMITTED ‘REASONABLE DOUBT’ BUT STILL REFUSED INSANITY VERDICT, FOREPERSON SAYS”‘We don’t think he intended to kill her,'” said a juror, Asuncion Cummings. “‘But once he did, he dismembered her body in an effort to commit the perfect crime,'” the Times report read, quoting Hostin.”He did not mean to kill her, and once he killed her he panicked. He chopped up her body parts, yes, boiled her body parts, tried to commit the perfect crime,” Hostin said during the show on Tuesday, noting how much she believed in the insanity defense as her co-hosts appeared shocked. “And he fed her body parts to the unhoused.”LINDSAY CLANCY HOLDOUT JUROR MAKES NEW PROMISE AS LAWYER WARNS OF PUBLIC ATTACKSHer co-hosts appeared shocked, as Alyssa Farah Griffin asked, “You got this guy off?”Hostin added, “All that being said it was so clear to me in the jury room — we were sequestered for nine days, one juror threw a chair at me. They were so angry at me. But one by one, I picked them off. What about this, what about that? We ended up, all 12 unanimously, voting that he was not criminally responsible by reason of insanity.”The Times report from 1991 said Rakowitz, whom the report described as a “former mental patient,” eventually admitted to boiling Beerle’s body parts. He left her skull in the baggage room at the Port Authority Bus Terminal in New York City in a bucket of kitty litter.A witness, according to the Times, testified during the trial that Rakowitz had served soup to the homeless in Tompkins Square Park that contained a finger.When reached for comment by Fox News Digital, NewsBusters managing editor Curtis Houck said, “This is beyond parody. Absolutely breathtakingly stupid that she would not only admit to this but also act like it’s a badge of honor.”CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTUREHostin brought the conversation back to the Clancy case and the news that Clancy’s defense team was calling for an investigation into the holdout juror. Hostin called it “despicable.””The insanity defense is a real thing and I think this lawyer, you know, who is — wants the juror investigated. That’s going to have a chilling effect on juries. Jury duty is a duty. It is one of the most important things I think I’ve ever done in my life. It was extremely difficult but to investigate a juror for doing his or her duty is despicable,” she said.Hostin went viral on Monday after she said her children faced racism while attending “predominantly White” private schools.Hostin brought up the topic while discussing 1619 Project founder and The New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones, who recently admitted she regretted aspects of her decision to send her daughter to predominantly Black, high-poverty public schools in Brooklyn in an effort to challenge educational inequality.”I think that this is a decision broadly that all parents make when it comes to educating their kids, but… this is a very difficult decision for Black parents, in particular, because I made a very different decision,” Hostin said. “I sent my children to private schools, a predominantly White private school. So, while they didn’t suffer academically, they excelled, but it was a well-funded school, a private school, well-resourced school, they suffered a different type of pain.””There was psychological trauma, there was racism that they experienced,” she added. “They were bullied. There was, you know, trauma around their identity. My daughter wears a big afro, kids were trying to stick pencils in her hair. Boys were calling her butter face, meaning she looked good, but her face, and she is a beautiful girl.”While Hostin conceded that her children “did not struggle academically” as Hannah-Jones’ daughter reported, she expressed concerns about the “systemic problem” affecting predominantly non-White school districts.Media Research Center associate editor Nicholas Fondacaro told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that it was the latest example of Hostin viewing everything “from a prism of racism.”

FIRST ON FOX: As President Donald Trump prepares to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping about the future of artificial intelligence, two top House Republicans are warning that the Chinese Communist Party is “throwing gasoline on the fire” by undermining America’s effort to build out AI infrastructure.In a new letter disclosed to Fox News Digital, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., and House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party Chairman John Moolenaar, R-Mich., asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and IRS Chief Executive Officer Frank Bisignano to determine whether money has been funneled from overseas through America’s charitable system to block the data centers needed for the U.S. to compete with China.Specifically, they raised questions about hundreds of millions of dollars that American-born communist tech tycoon Neville Roy Singham pumped into nonprofits and organizations that are now among the leading organizations fighting data center development throughout the country. Recipients of Singham’s largesse include the Party for Socialism and Liberation and the ANSWER Coalition, both self-described pro-China communist groups. Earlier this month, activists from both groups carried signs in a Chapel Hill, N.C., protest, merging anti-Trump sentiments with support for communist Cuba and opposition to data centers and AI development, including the message, “SHUT IT DOWN!””Under no circumstances can we allow an adversary, and our most serious competitor in AI infrastructure, to weaponize our own tax code and harm an emerging American industry,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter, sent on Tuesday.FROM AUSTIN TO NEW YORK, PRO-CHINA NETWORK FUELS WEEK OF ANTI-US PROTESTS AS XI MEETS TRUMPThe lawmakers allege that influence operations linked to China are exploiting tax-exempt organizations, nonprofit networks and social media campaigns to fuel opposition to the data centers needed to power America’s AI industry.The lawmakers urged the agencies to investigate whether tax-exempt organizations connected to the network have operated for the “private or political benefit of foreign-aligned interests” and whether donor-advised funds and intermediary entities were used to “launder the origin of foreign-directed money into American advocacy.”A Fox News Digital investigation found that Singham funneled $285 million since 2017 to six U.S. nonprofits, including his wife Jodie Evans’ group, CodePink, through two shell corporations and a donor-advised philanthropy fund run by Goldman Sachs, which said it closed the Singham account in 2024.The nonprofits have functioned with tax-deductible status while actively involved in promoting communist regimes such as China, coordinating street protests and fomenting anti-American rage. They have denied being part of any foreign influence operation, and Singham hasn’t responded to requests for comment.Smith said China is helping fuel opposition to American artificial intelligence infrastructure by giving a base to Singham as he funds U.S. nonprofit groups involved in anti-data-center protests.”This is the Chinese helping throw the gasoline on the fire,” Smith told Fox News Digital. “The American people need to know that this is not just an organic movement.”Smith said Americans have legitimate concerns about data centers, including their effect on electricity costs and water usage. But he said foreign-backed organizations shouldn’t be allowed to exploit those concerns to slow U.S. technological development.Smith said that “the Chinese want to stall and slow down the advancement of AI in the United States because they want to win the AI war.””Tax exempt is a privilege. It is not a right,” Smith said. “We need to make sure that we’re not subsidizing tax dollars to help create hostility and unrest in our country.”Smith also called for greater transparency regarding the flow of money among organizations connected to Singham. He added that the broader issue extends beyond the tax code and could include questions about compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act violations. “Transparency is the biggest thing,” he said.PROBE INTO ‘SUBVERSIVE’ ANTI-AI SINGHAM NETWORK IS ‘ENORMOUS,’ FORMER TREASURY ADVISOR SAYSMoolenaar said organizations presenting themselves as grassroots opposition groups are actually advancing the Chinese Communist Party’s agenda in the U.S. “Groups that portray themselves as grassroots are really more AstroTurf — very fake — being funded by entities that are working in partnership with the Chinese Communist Party,” Moolenaar told Fox News Digital.”The concern is that they are manipulating the messaging and opposition to different American investments, whether it’s data centers or other technological advances, trying to turn the American people against these technologies so that China would be able to have dominance in this area,” he said.Moolenaar pointed to the use of grassroots organizations, community groups, propaganda and online bots.”We don’t want foreign entities of concern — countries that may be opposed to American interests — using our system against the American people and trying to manipulate them,” Moolenaar said.He said the lawmakers are seeking greater transparency into the organizations’ funding and tax-exempt status, including whether their political activity violates federal rules.”When you see them actively speaking out against American interests and realize that groups like CodePink are aggressively funded by this network, that raises serious concerns,” Moolenaar said.The chairman said China’s influence efforts exploit the openness of American society.”The Chinese Communist Party always has the goal of dividing Americans, manipulating and getting their propaganda out,” he said. “They don’t have the freedoms that we enjoy, and they try to exploit our freedoms and use that against us.”China remains both a major trading partner and a strategic competitor, Moolenaar said, but the United States must avoid becoming dependent on Beijing.”They are a serious adversary,” he said. “They are a trading partner, which is true, and we need to have a relationship with them,” Moolenaar said. “But at the same time, we do not want to be manipulated, we do not want to become more dependent, and we certainly do not want to be under their thumb.”POWER COUPLE OF CHAOS: HOW A TYCOON AND ACTIVIST BUILT A ‘REVOLUTIONARY BASE’ AT THE HOUSE OF SINGHAMThe lawmakers noted that a bicameral group of congressional committees, including the Ways and Means Committee, the House Select Committee on the CCP and the Senate Intelligence Committee, has been examining how influence operations linked to the CCP allegedly exploit America’s tax-exempt sector to “sow discord and undermine our democracy.””The CCP consistently identifies political issues under public debate in our country and seeks to corrupt those debates,” Smith and Moolenaar wrote in their letter. The CCP, they added, seeks to “heighten divisions between Americans and to degrade our civic processes.”The lawmakers specifically pointed to opposition campaigns targeting the construction of data centers, which are critical to the nation’s AI infrastructure.A June report from OpenAI identified two clusters of ChatGPT accounts likely originating in China that were used in covert influence operations targeting U.S. debates over AI and technology policy. One campaign, dubbed “Data Center Bandwagon,” generated social media comments and images claiming that data-center construction was raising electricity prices for average families. OpenAI said it found no evidence that the operation achieved meaningful breakout beyond its own activity, but said it demonstrated how foreign operators can exploit existing local concerns to amplify distrust.CHINESE BOT FARM CAUGHT RED-HANDED TRYING TO INFLUENCE HEATED AI DATA CENTER DEBATEThe lawmakers also cited a report from the Bitcoin Policy Institute that identified 21 campaigns against data centers led by the Party for Socialism and Liberation across 14 states. The report said those campaigns contributed to 10 data-center moratoria, a permanent data-center ban and four rejected or scrapped projects, representing nearly $23.68 billion in proposed investment.The Party for Socialism and Liberation and the ANSWER Coalition are supported by the Singham network, and a Fox News Digital investigation has traced links between prominent activism against data centers by the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the ANSWER Coalition and other organizations in the Singham network, including BreakThrough News, the People’s Forum, Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and CodePink.”Our tax code should not be used as a shield for foreign money waging a disinformation war on American AI infrastructure,” Smith and Moolenaar wrote. “This is yet another shocking and dangerous example of how malign foreign actors are funneling dollars into the United States to further CCP interests.”LAWMAKERS SAY THEY ARE STANDING AT THE GATES AGAINST ‘TROJAN HORSES’ PROMOTING MALIGN FOREIGN INTERESTSThe lawmakers asked Treasury and the IRS to determine whether tax-exempt organizations supporting the network have violated the requirements of their status.Their request includes examining whether organizations operating under Section 501(c)(3) have acted for the “private or political benefit of foreign-aligned interests,” rather than for genuine charitable purposes. They also asked whether donor-advised funds and intermediary entities were used to “launder the origin of foreign-directed money into American advocacy.”The letter follows earlier oversight by the Ways and Means Committee and the House Select Committee on the CCP into the tax-exempt sector and organizations allegedly connected to Singham’s network.The lawmakers emphasized that opposition to data centers is a legitimate subject for public debate but said Americans should know whether foreign adversaries are attempting to influence those debates through nonprofit organizations, social media campaigns or covert funding channels.”The American people deserve to know which actors adversarial to the United States are trying to undermine these decision-making processes,” they wrote.

Hollywood actor Mel Gibson has stepped into New Zealand’s debate over gene-technology laws (Credit: GE Honesty)
Hollywood icon Mel Gibson has recorded a direct message to the people of New Zealand as Parliament considers the biggest rewrite of the country’s gene technology and environmental laws in nearly 30 years.
The Braveheart director and President Trump’s Special Ambassador to Hollywood is not mincing words about the stakes.
In a video message shared by GE Honesty now circulating among Kiwi farmers, organic producers, and medical-freedom activists, Gibson tells New Zealanders their Parliament is moving on legislation that would reshape how genetic modification, gene editing, and related biotech are regulated, including what can enter farms, animals, and the food supply.
Gibson names the Gene Technology Bill plus companion changes to the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act.
Those changes, he says, would replace the existing framework, create a new regulator, introduce “risk-based approvals,” and exempt certain technologies labeled low-risk.

Mel Gibson:
“Hello, New Zealand. Your Parliament is considering some of the biggest changes to your country’s biotech and environmental laws in nearly 30 years. The GeneTech Bill, along with proposed changes to the HSNO and the ACVM Acts, would completely reshape how gene tech is regulated.
“The changes would replace the current GE framework, create a new GE regulator, and introduce risk-based approvals and exempt some tech that’s considered low-risk.
“Supporters believe these reforms could help advance science, medicine, and agriculture, but critics warn these changes could reduce public oversight and limit consultation on decisions affecting your food, farms, and environment.
“Whatever your view, it’s important to understand what’s at stake. Read the bills, ask questions, contact your MP, and make sure your voice is heard before a decision is made. Because if the rules change, you’ll all live with the consequences.
Now, I’m sorry to have to stick my beak in, but I love you guys down there, and I’m just sending out a message. Thank you.

WATCH:

Thank you Mel Gibson for shining a light on an issue most New Zealanders haven’t even heard about.
THREE BILLS ARE REWRITING THE RULES AROUND GENE TECHNOLOGY, GMOs, AGRICULTURAL BIOTECH AND WHAT CAN ENTER THE NZ FARMING SYSTEM.
GENE TECHNOLOGY BILL
HSNO AMENDMENT… pic.twitter.com/Uc1aAHXww5
— GE Honesty (@GEHonesty) September 20, 2026

GE Honesty posted the video with a blunt campaign message: the bills are rewriting what can enter New Zealand farms, animals, and the food system “without widespread public awareness or informed consent.”
Once a genetically engineered organism is released, the group notes, it cannot be recalled. Genetic contamination cannot be undone.
Farmers, organic producers, exporters who sell “clean, green” New Zealand, and parents who want to know what is on the dinner table all have skin in the game.
According to the group:
“Put simply, the rules governing what enters NZ farms, animals and our food system are being overhauled rapidly – without widespread public awareness or informed consent. These Bills remove or weaken long-standing safeguards designed to protect human health, our environment and rate-payers.
New experimental biotechnologies haven’t suddenly become safer.
If anything, as gene technology, synthetic biology and AI become more powerful and complex, now with brand new risks and unknown consequences – we need MORE scrutiny, stronger safeguards and greater transparency, not less.
And once a GE or GMO organism is released into the environment, you can’t simply recall it. Genetic contamination can’t be undone.
For farmers and organics that raises serious questions around contamination, liability and protecting GE-free production.
For consumers, it’s about choice, traceability and knowing what’s in our food.
For NZ exporters, it’s about protecting the trust, reputation and premium markets we’ve spent decades building.
For parents, it’s about preserving natural, healthy food for our children, and generations to come.
If you care about this please share this to help inform other kiwis what’s at stake.
You have a voice. Make sure you use it.
Get informed. Contact your MP. Demand they STOP these bills.
KEEP GE IN THE LAB, NOT OUR FOOD.”

The post Mel Gibson Warns New Zealanders Their Government Is Rewriting the Rules on Gene-Altering Technology That Could Affect Food, Farms, and the Environment appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The United States criticized a newly proposed law in Australia that would give users the ability to opt out of social media algorithms.