The Morning Sixpack stays free because the news that shapes your life should not be hidden behind a paywall. Paid subscribers are not paying for access. They are helping fund the research, writing, and independent voice that goes into every issue. Become a paid subscriber and help keep smart, honest news analysis free for everyone.
Trump just racked up another nearly $2 trillion deficit, and with both parties promising more spending, fiscal responsibility remains a popular talking point and an unpopular governing strategy.
U.S. Budget Deficit Hits Nearly $2 Trillion as Washington Keeps Spending
The federal government posted a $1.993 trillion budget deficit for fiscal 2026, a 12% increase over the previous year and the largest shortfall since 2021. According to preliminary figures from the Congressional Budget Office, Washington spent $7.4 trillion while collecting just $5.4 trillion in revenue. Spending increased 6%, while revenue grew only 3%, widening an already enormous gap. The deficit is expected to exceed 6% of gross domestic product, compared with 5.8% in 2025—a level historically associated with wars, recessions, and national emergencies rather than a growing economy.
The real budget killer is increasingly the interest on money Washington has already borrowed. The federal government paid more than $1.1 trillion in net interest during fiscal 2026, an 11% increase that accounted for more than half the year’s deficit growth. Interest payments now consume more than $1 of every $5 collected in taxes, exceeding spending on either national defense or Medicare. With publicly held federal debt reaching approximately $32 trillion and surpassing 100% of GDP, rising Treasury yields threaten to make future borrowing even more expensive. And the recent jump in bond yields hasn’t fully worked its way into the government’s interest bill yet.
President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have implemented measures intended to reduce spending, including shrinking the federal workforce, curtailing clean-energy tax incentives, allowing certain healthcare subsidies to expire, and reducing food-stamp enrollment. But those savings have been offset by expanded immigration-enforcement spending, extended tax cuts, and additional tax reductions. Trump’s anticipated tariff windfall also fell short after the Supreme Court ruled that he exceeded his authority, forcing refunds and leaving net tariff collections below their 2025 level. Meanwhile, corporate tax revenue declined $70 billion, or 16%, partly because of expanded deductions for research, factories, equipment, and data-center infrastructure. Former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin summed up the government’s performance: “They didn’t make any real progress, so we just wandered along.”
With November’s midterm elections approaching, neither political party appears eager to make deficit reduction a campaign centerpiece. Trump has proposed sending $5,000 checks to adult American citizens if Republicans retain congressional control, a proposal costing more than $1 trillion, while also advocating a substantial increase in military spending. Democrats want to restore healthcare spending reductions enacted by Republicans and favor higher taxes on corporations and wealthy Americans. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Ron Johnson blames uncontrolled spending, while Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle argues that billionaires should shoulder more of the tax burden. The administration has discussed reducing the deficit toward Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s target of 3% of GDP, but its other proposals could push borrowing in the opposite direction.
The deeper problem is structural, with Social Security and Medicare growing faster than much of the federal budget as the population ages. Both programs enjoy broad public support, and Trump has pledged not to reduce promised benefits, leaving policymakers with difficult choices about taxes, spending, and borrowing. The national debt is approaching its post-World War II record relative to the economy, while interest costs continue consuming an increasing share of federal resources. November’s elections could produce divided government, potentially encouraging bipartisan fiscal restraint—or giving both parties opportunities to trade support for their preferred spending priorities. Either way, Washington faces a fiscal trajectory that budget experts increasingly describe as unsustainable, with little evidence that elected officials are prepared to make the changes necessary to reverse it.
Editor: Nearly $2 trillion in the red, $1.1 trillion just to pay interest, and politicians are campaigning on spending even more. Looks like the only thing bipartisan in Washington is the national credit card.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
The Pentagon plans to livestream its first military execution in 65 years, deciding that a firing squad needs an audience as well as a target. #Gross
Pentagon Plans to Livestream Fort Hood Shooter’s Execution by Firing Squad
The Pentagon announced Thursday that the December 3 execution of convicted Fort Hood mass murderer Nidal Malik Hasan will be livestreamed, marking an extraordinary departure from modern American military practice. Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist, was convicted of killing 13 people and wounding 32 others during a 2009 shooting rampage at the Texas military installation. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth revealed the administration’s intentions Wednesday, declaring that the execution would be public and that people would be able to watch. Pentagon officials subsequently confirmed the livestream plans, which would accompany the military’s first execution since 1961. The announcement has sparked questions about the legality, ethics, and motivations behind broadcasting a government-sanctioned killing.
Legal scholars are divided over whether televising a firing squad execution represents welcome transparency or a troubling transformation of capital punishment into public spectacle. Fordham University law professor Deborah Denno argued that allowing Americans to witness an execution could provide valuable insight into how the death penalty actually works, particularly following Tennessee’s botched lethal injection of Christa Pike. Villanova Law professor Brenner Fissell noted that firing squads can be faster and more reliable than lethal injections, which have faced complications involving drug availability and medical personnel. However, Fissell questioned the administration’s motivations, suggesting the method reflects Hegseth’s emphasis on military toughness and a culture of lethality. UC Berkeley law professor Elisabeth Semel raised concerns about human dignity, legal safeguards, and why the government itself would initiate such an unprecedented public display.
The decision also presents a striking contrast with President Donald Trump’s previous condemnation of public executions in Iran. Earlier this year, Trump cited concerns about Iranian authorities executing protesters while discussing potential military action against Tehran, which ultimately began February 28. Now his administration is preparing to broadcast an American execution, although the circumstances and legal systems involved differ considerably. When questioned about whether Hasan had made any final requests, Hegseth responded, “Don’t care. We’ll see him on Dec. 3.” The White House referred questions about the livestream to the Pentagon, while critics questioned whether the administration had adequately considered the broader legal and social implications.
Hasan’s crimes remain among the deadliest acts of violence committed on an American military installation. On November 5, 2009, the Army major entered a Fort Hood medical processing facility and opened fire on soldiers preparing for deployment, killing 13 and injuring 32. Hasan claimed he wanted to prevent American troops from fighting Muslims in Afghanistan, but a military judge prohibited him from using that justification as a defense during his 2013 trial. He represented himself, admitted to being the shooter, called no defense witnesses, and offered no closing argument. Hasan, who was paralyzed from the waist down after being shot by law enforcement, previously suggested that execution could allow him to become a martyr, raising uncertainty about whether he intends to challenge his scheduled death sentence.
Despite the Pentagon’s announcement, the December execution is not necessarily guaranteed to proceed as scheduled. Military law experts say Hasan could seek federal court review through a habeas petition, potentially delaying the execution for months or longer. Former military judge John Galligan, who has represented Hasan in civil matters, raised concerns that Hasan lacked access to legal counsel when informed of the execution authorization, although Army officials disputed that characterization and said appropriate efforts were made to contact attorneys. The last American military execution occurred April 13, 1961, when Army Pvt. John Bennett was hanged, while the military has not executed a service member by firing squad since World War II. Whether Hasan ultimately faces the firing squad on December 3 or pursues additional appeals, the administration’s decision to livestream the event has already reopened a contentious debate about capital punishment, government transparency, and the boundaries of public spectacle.
Editor: Nobody’s shedding tears for a mass murderer who killed 13 people. But there’s a pretty big difference between carrying out a lawful sentence and turning an execution into must-see TV. Justice doesn’t need a production crew.
NOTE: I (and many others, surely) predicted this when Running Man first came out.
Source: Associated Press
Overseeing botched executions in one state doesn’t disqualify you from running executions in another. In fact, Tennessee hired the guy and wound up with remarkably similar problems.
Botched Executions, Secret Drug Supplies, and Cash-Filled Paper Bags: Inside a Prison System Gone Wrong
The former head of Tennessee’s prison system previously helped oversee three botched executions in Arizona, where an independent investigation uncovered disturbing problems involving execution drugs, unqualified personnel, and extraordinary secrecy. Frank Strada, who resigned as Tennessee’s corrections commissioner on October 3, had served as deputy director of Arizona’s prison system during three mishandled lethal injections. His resignation followed Tennessee’s failed September 30 execution of Christa Pike, who survived despite receiving two doses of lethal injection drugs. Republican Gov. Bill Lee subsequently suspended executions and ordered an independent investigation. The similarities between the two states’ execution failures have raised serious questions about whether Tennessee imported not just Arizona’s procedures, but its problems.
A retired federal judge investigating Arizona’s execution practices discovered that prison officials had allegedly turned to Wikipedia for guidance on lethal drug dosages and stored execution chemicals in an unlabeled Mason jar. Judge David Duncan, appointed by Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs in 2023, spent nearly two years reviewing records, interviewing approximately 50 people, and examining the state’s execution procedures. He found that pentobarbital, the controlled substance used in lethal injections, was kept in a refrigerator without proper identification or dosage information. When Duncan requested documentation establishing the drug’s expiration date, a prison official reportedly told him she had destroyed it. The investigation also revealed that execution personnel lacked appropriate experience, while doctors involved in the process allegedly received hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash delivered in brown paper bags.
The problems extended well beyond questionable recordkeeping. According to Duncan, Arizona’s execution teams frequently included corrections employees who lacked experience inserting intravenous lines and whose qualifications had not been independently verified. Officials refused to let him observe training sessions or interview the personnel responsible for administering lethal injections. Similar difficulties emerged in Tennessee, where execution teams repeatedly struggled to establish IV access during the failed executions of Tony Carruthers in May and Christa Pike in September. Witnesses described prisoners experiencing pain, bleeding, and repeated attempts to insert needles. Duncan ultimately concluded that Arizona’s secrecy made it nearly impossible to evaluate mistakes, improve procedures, or ensure executions were conducted competently.
The connections between Arizona and Tennessee became even more troubling when investigators compared the states’ execution protocols. After Strada arrived in Tennessee in 2023, the state abandoned its previous three-drug lethal injection procedure in favor of pentobarbital, the same drug used during Arizona’s troubled executions. Sections of Tennessee’s updated execution manual were nearly identical to Arizona’s, particularly instructions governing IV placement and administration. Tennessee officials insisted they followed established legal procedures during Pike’s attempted execution but declined to explain how much of their protocol originated in Arizona or what role Strada played in adopting it. Attorneys representing Tennessee death row prisoners say officials have also refused to disclose critical information about execution personnel, drug sourcing, manufacturing, storage, and potency.
Duncan’s investigation ended abruptly when Arizona Gov. Hobbs dismissed him before he could complete his work, saying he had not been up to the task and that her administration wanted to pursue a different direction. Duncan believes his removal was connected to the uncomfortable findings he uncovered, including his conclusion that the state’s lack of transparency made lethal injections fundamentally unreliable. Meanwhile, Tennessee faces litigation filed in March 2025 alleging that its execution procedures violate the state constitution because of secrecy and inadequate safeguards. The lawsuit preceded the failed executions of Carruthers and Pike, meaning attorneys had warned about potential problems before those incidents occurred. With Tennessee’s executions now suspended and another investigation underway, the central question is whether state officials will finally address the failures—or continue operating a system in which the public cannot meaningfully examine how the government carries out its most irreversible punishment.
Editor: Wikipedia for drug dosages, mystery chemicals in Mason jars, and doctors paid in paper bags. This isn’t a medical protocol. It’s a back-alley operation with a government seal on the door. And somehow, the guy overseeing it got hired to do it again.
Source: NPR
An ICE supervisor linked to a New York City shooting has a history of arrests that federal judges found unlawful. Judicial warnings aren’t much of a speed bump when you’re carrying a federal badge.
ICE Agent at NYC Shooting Has History of Alleged Violence, Illegal Arrests, and False Statements
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervisor present at a shooting in New York City on Thursday has repeatedly been accused of excessive force, unlawful arrests, and providing inaccurate statements to federal courts. A WIRED investigation identified the agent as Brenden Cuni, a member of ICE’s National Fugitive Operations team who has participated in enforcement operations in New York and Minneapolis. The investigation followed a shooting in Manhattan’s Marble Hill neighborhood, where federal agents wounded a man identified by city officials as Oscar Belgal. New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani said agents surrounded Belgal’s vehicle, which contained a 5-year-old child, before opening fire. Witnesses reported hearing as many as seven shots, and Belgal was hospitalized with a reported neck wound, while the child appeared unharmed.
Cuni’s involvement in the operation has drawn scrutiny because federal judges have repeatedly challenged the legality and credibility of arrests connected to him. Video from the shooting scene showed a man wearing a yellow construction vest carrying an AR-15-style rifle, whom WIRED identified as Cuni through court records, social media, and other publicly available information. A law enforcement source confirmed that Cuni identified himself to New York police as an ICE agent, although the reporting does not establish that he fired the shots that wounded Belgal. The Department of Homeland Security said agents were attempting to apprehend an undocumented Dominican immigrant with a previous grand larceny conviction. Cuni, who joined federal law enforcement in 2018 and became an ICE supervisor in December 2024, has been named in multiple lawsuits involving allegations of violent arrests and improper enforcement tactics.
One particularly troubling case involves a 21-year-old Bronx resident who alleges that Cuni knocked him to the ground during an October 2025 arrest, breaking a tooth, before shocking him approximately six times with a Taser while he was handcuffed. The lawsuit also alleges that Cuni directed an ethnic slur at the man, while medical records documented injuries associated with Taser use. Another man arrested in Queens the following month alleged that agents tackled him and shocked him three times, although court documents do not identify which officer fired the Taser. In Minneapolis, Cuni led an ICE team during a confrontation with protesters that resulted in federal assault charges against one demonstrator. A judge dismissed those charges with prejudice, describing the evidence as weak and noting that video reviewed by federal officers failed to show the alleged assault. Activists also accused Cuni of participating in the forceful takedown of a pregnant woman during the confrontation, but WIRED could not independently verify that identification.
Federal court records raise additional questions about Cuni’s sworn statements and arrest documentation. In one case, Judge Gary Brown found that Cuni signed an arrest warrant claiming database searches had established a Bronx man’s undocumented status, even though the original searches produced no such evidence. ICE subsequently added the man’s information to its databases and searched again, prompting Brown to find the arrest and detention unlawful. In another case, Judge Brian Cogan ruled that the arrest of Fernando Fabian Chaglla was illegal after doorbell footage contradicted important portions of Cuni’s account. Cuni acknowledged handcuffing Chaglla before completing an administrative arrest warrant, while a database search had also revealed that the man possessed a federal work permit. Separately, government attorneys withdrew inaccurate sworn representations submitted by Cuni and other officials in a third federal case, including allegations that a detainee had missed required ICE appointments.
Despite those judicial findings and pending allegations, Cuni remained involved in federal immigration enforcement operations, including Thursday’s shooting scene in Manhattan. WIRED also identified an Instagram account apparently associated with Cuni that prominently features firearms, shooting-range activities, and tactical equipment, including a rifle resembling the weapon he carried during the Marble Hill operation. The account previously used the name “shooter.cuni” before changing to “shooter.914,” a reference apparently connected to the Westchester County area code. Cuni did not respond to WIRED’s multiple requests for comment, and the investigation does not establish whether he personally discharged a weapon during Thursday’s incident. Nevertheless, the combination of judicial findings, disputed sworn statements, excessive-force allegations, and his continued deployment raises serious questions about accountability and oversight within federal immigration enforcement.
Editor: When federal judges find your arrests unlawful, your paperwork unreliable, and your sworn statements contradicted by video, you’d think somebody might reconsider handing you a rifle and sending you back into the streets. Apparently, that’s not how performance reviews work at ICE.
Source: WIRED
Trump wanted a Nobel Peace Prize. Instead, the committee gave it to a human rights lawyer who helped accuse Israel of genocide and spent her career defending the international courts his administration has been attacking. That’s going to leave a mark.
Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Gaza Genocide Investigator as Trump’s Campaign Against International Courts Intensifies
South African human rights lawyer Navi Pillay won the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for her decades of work advancing international law and holding governments accountable for human rights violations. The 85-year-old former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has served on several international courts, including the International Criminal Court and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Most recently, she chaired a UN commission that concluded Israel committed genocide in Gaza, a finding the Israeli government strongly rejected. The Norwegian Nobel Committee honored Pillay for promoting peace and international law at a time when international judicial institutions face mounting political pressure. The committee’s announcement emphasized the importance of preserving a rules-based international order rather than allowing powerful nations to operate without legal constraints.
The award comes amid an escalating confrontation between President Donald Trump’s administration and the International Criminal Court, making Pillay’s selection particularly significant. Trump has imposed sanctions on ICC judges and prosecutors, urged countries to withdraw from the court, and reportedly considered broader penalties following the court’s decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister. The Nobel Committee warned that international law is increasingly being undermined by governments prioritizing political and military power over established legal frameworks. Although its citation did not mention Trump or Israel, the committee stressed that attacks on international institutions threaten global stability and peaceful coexistence. ICC President Tomoko Akane welcomed the award, describing it as especially meaningful during a period of profound challenges to international justice.
Israel reacted angrily to Pillay’s selection, with its ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Daniel Meron, calling the decision disgraceful and accusing Pillay of promoting antisemitism. Israeli officials have consistently rejected the UN commission’s genocide findings, arguing that its investigations are politically motivated and unfairly target the country. Pillay, however, has defended the commission’s conclusions and continued advocating accountability for alleged international crimes. She learned of her Nobel victory while attending a legal conference in Nuremberg, Germany, in the same building associated with the historic post-World War II trials of Nazi leaders. Addressing those gathered to celebrate, Pillay referenced her Gaza investigation and joked that she might share the prize with Trump if the audience applauded more enthusiastically. The remark drew laughter and appeared to reference last year’s Nobel laureate, Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, who presented her Nobel medal to Trump in January.
Pillay’s career stretches back to apartheid-era South Africa, where she became the first woman to establish a law practice in Natal in 1967 and later the first non-white woman appointed to the country’s High Court. Born into a family of Indian Tamil heritage in Durban, she defended Nelson Mandela and other opponents of apartheid before moving into international human rights law. She subsequently served as a judge on major international tribunals and led the UN’s human rights office from 2008 to 2014. Her work has included cases involving genocide, war crimes, and the responsibility of governments to protect civilians. Pillay currently serves as a judge in proceedings before the International Court of Justice concerning allegations of genocide against Myanmar. The Nobel Committee praised her consistent commitment to legal accountability, recognizing a career devoted to confronting abuses regardless of the governments involved.
The committee’s chairman, Jørgen Watne Frydnes, said the selection was intended to remind the world that international law remains essential to maintaining peace, particularly as judges and courts face sanctions and political intimidation. Analysts at the Peace Research Institute Oslo cautioned against interpreting the award as a direct rebuke of Trump, describing it instead as a broader endorsement of international legal institutions. Pillay dedicated the honor to survivors of international crimes and the lawyers, judges, and human rights advocates who work to prevent perpetrators from escaping accountability. She also reminded world leaders of their legal obligations to protect human rights and avoid war. Pillay becomes the fifth South African Nobel Peace Prize recipient, joining Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, Desmond Tutu, and Albert Luthuli. The prize, worth approximately $1.2 million, will be formally presented in Oslo on December 10.
Editor: Trump has spent years telling anyone who’ll listen that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. The committee gave it to a woman whose life’s work involves holding powerful people accountable under international law. No, they didn’t mention Trump by name. They didn’t really have to.
Source: Reuters
Wars are disrupting fuel supplies, diesel is hitting record prices, and American oil refiners are making money hand over fist. Turns out global chaos is a pretty lucrative business model—if you’re on the right side of the pump & Trump.
American Oil Refiners Hit Record Profits as Global Wars Send Fuel Prices Soaring
America’s largest oil refiners are headed for extraordinary third-quarter profits as wars in the Middle East and Ukraine disrupt global fuel supplies and push diesel prices to historic highs. Valero Energy, Marathon Petroleum, and Phillips 66 are expected to surpass their already near-record second-quarter earnings, benefiting from a worldwide shortage of refined petroleum products. JPMorgan analysts project Valero could generate $8.95 billion in pretax earnings for the quarter, a 50% increase over the previous three months and 24% above its previous quarterly record in 2022. Marathon’s earnings per share could increase more than sevenfold compared with the same period last year, while Phillips 66 is also expected to break its previous refining earnings record. The companies will report their results in late October and early November, but investors have already rewarded them handsomely.
The profit explosion comes from a widening gap between what refiners pay for crude oil and what they charge for finished fuels, an industry measure known as the “crack spread.” While crude oil prices have increased, diesel and other refined fuel prices have climbed considerably faster, allowing refiners to earn significantly more on every barrel they process. At Valero’s Gulf Coast operations, that margin expanded to an average $47.11 per barrel during the third quarter, compared with $30.28 in the previous quarter. The surge reflects a tightening global market as renewed fighting involving Iran damages Middle Eastern energy infrastructure, Ukrainian drone attacks cripple Russian refineries, and Asian countries reduce fuel exports. With approximately 12.1% of global refining capacity offline as of September, American refiners have become critical suppliers to a world scrambling for fuel.
The financial rewards have been enormous for investors, even as consumers and businesses struggle with higher energy costs. Shares of Valero, Marathon, and Phillips 66 have more than doubled during 2026, with all three reaching record closing prices Thursday. Together, the companies have added approximately $224 billion in stock-market value this year, dramatically outperforming the S&P 500’s 13% gain. Meanwhile, average U.S. diesel prices recently reached a record $6.53 per gallon, increasing transportation costs across an economy heavily dependent on trucking, shipping, agriculture, and construction. Ukraine’s attacks on approximately 15 Russian refining facilities since late July have knocked nearly 2 million barrels of daily processing capacity offline, further tightening supplies. Analysts expect those facilities to take considerable time to recover, potentially keeping American refining margins elevated well into 2027.
The Trump administration is now pressing oil companies to increase refining capacity as soaring fuel prices become a political liability ahead of November’s midterm elections. White House officials met with industry executives last month to explore ways to expand production, including potentially restarting two recently closed California refineries operated by Phillips 66 and Valero. Those facilities, located near Los Angeles and Benicia, previously represented almost 20% of California’s refining capacity. However, reopening them would involve substantial logistical challenges, and analysts warn that restoring operations could take months. Building entirely new refineries would require multibillion-dollar investments and years of development, making companies reluctant to commit money to projects that might not become operational until today’s unusually profitable market conditions have disappeared.
Trump has publicly criticized major oil companies for making excessive profits and suggested they should return some of their windfall to American consumers. His administration hopes that increased shipping through the Strait of Hormuz will help relieve supply shortages, although U.S. Navy escorts have primarily focused on crude oil tankers rather than vessels transporting finished fuels. Industry analysts believe refiners are unlikely to undertake major expansion projects despite their enormous earnings, largely because executives view the current supply disruptions as temporary. That leaves a difficult situation for policymakers: global conflicts are creating extraordinary profits for domestic fuel producers while American drivers and businesses pay increasingly expensive prices. Unless damaged foreign refining capacity returns or additional supplies reach the market, those elevated margins could persist into next year, leaving oil companies with little financial incentive to change course.
Editor: Diesel hits $6.53 a gallon, oil refiners pocket record profits, and Trump tells them they’re making too much money. Meanwhile, the companies aren’t eager to expand production because that might actually bring prices down. Capitalism is working exactly as designed—just not necessarily for the guy filling up his truck.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
The Morning Sixpack Archives: