The Morning Sixpack - November 7, 2025
Courts clash with Trump over SNAP aid, Musk lands $1T deal, layoffs surge, SCOTUS eyes same-sex marriage, US bombs another boat in the Caribbean
US Federal Government Shutdown, Day #38
The federal government has now gone so long without funding that major systems are beginning to crumble.
It’s getting ugly. First up: starting this Friday, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will force a 10 % cut in flights at 40 high-volume U.S. airports if the shutdown persists. The moves aren’t hypothetical—ramp-ups to 4 %, 6 %, then 10 % are already in motion.
Meanwhile, Congress still can’t agree on a deal. A “test vote” in the United States Senate is scheduled for Friday after fresh talks on a possible funding compromise—but nothing is locked in. And people on the ground? They’re already hurting. A federal judge ordered the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to fully fund food-aid benefits for some 42 million Americans by this Friday, blocking a plan to cut payments because of the shutdown.
Take the quote from the judge: “Without SNAP funding for the month of November, 16 million children are immediately at risk of going hungry.” (AP News) If you think this is just a political stalemate somewhere in D.C.—think again.
On the aviation side, controllers and TSA agents (over 63,000 of them) are working unpaid. Call-offs, fatigue, and “mass chaos” warnings from leadership are now real threats.
So why should you care? Because this kind of shutdown ripples into everyday business—think travel disruptions, consumer sentiment plunging, supply-chain havoc, starving people—and that hits every facet of the economy.
Editor: If you think this is just “politics as usual,” think again—when infrastructure hits the skids and basic safety nets falter, the cost isn’t just measured in news headlines. It hits everybody and everything—eventually.
Also—remember, this is a Trump-led shutdown. The GOP wants this. The cruelty, as they say, is the point.
Sources: Reuters, Reuters, and Good Morning America
Trump Administration Launches 17th Deadly Strike in “Narco-Terror” Campaign
The Trump administration’s latest military strike killed three people aboard a suspected drug-running boat—raising fresh questions about legality, accountability, and truth.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the Caribbean Sea attack Thursday, posting a brief 20-second clip on social media and vowing to keep “vessel strikes on narco-terrorists” going until what he called “their poisoning of the American people stops.” It’s the 17th such strike in the administration’s so-called anti-narcotics campaign, bringing the total death toll to at least 69.
President Trump continues to justify these operations by framing them as part of an “armed conflict” against drug cartels he claims are backed by foreign terrorist groups. The White House, however, has yet to produce evidence to support those claims—or any clear legal rationale for using lethal force against untried suspects in international waters.
Behind closed doors, Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio briefed a handful of congressional leaders this week, offering what they called “strategic clarity.” Republicans largely backed the effort or said nothing at all. Democrats, on the other hand, demanded oversight, calling the campaign a dangerous overreach that risks violating both U.S. and international law.
Meanwhile, Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would’ve reined in Trump’s authority to launch attacks on Venezuela—proof that for now, Congress is more interested in preserving executive muscle than balancing it. The strikes roll on, the questions pile up, and the Constitution keeps taking on water.
Source: Associated Press
Editor: The U.S. government says it’s not at war—but 17 strikes, 69 deaths, and zero accountability sure walk and quack like one. Turns out, “narco-terrorism” is just the latest magic word to justify doing whatever the hell they want on the high seas. Sounds a lot like “Weapons of Mass Destruction” talk.
Elon Musk Scores a $1 Trillion Payday—Tesla Bets the Farm on Its “Robot Army” Future
Tesla shareholders just handed Elon Musk a potential $1 trillion in stock, effectively betting the company’s future on his ego, AI dreams, and an army of dancing robots.
In a move that would make even Wall Street blush, more than 75% of Tesla shareholders approved the largest executive pay package in history—a 12-tranche plan that could give Musk control of up to 25% of the company if he hits a set of moonshot milestones. The deal aims to motivate Musk to transform Tesla from a car company into an AI and robotics powerhouse. As Musk put it, “What we’re about to embark upon is not merely a new chapter of the future of Tesla but a whole new book.”
The package ties Musk’s payout to targets like delivering 20 million cars, achieving a $50 billion EBITDA, and even selling one million humanoid robots. Tesla’s board framed it as a performance-based reward; critics call it a gold-plated blank check. Major institutional investors like CalPERS and Norges Bank voted against it, calling the stock award “astronomical,” while supporters like Charles Schwab said it “aligns both management and shareholder interests.”
Musk—already the richest man alive—warned he might abandon Tesla if the plan failed, a not-so-subtle hostage note that likely swayed some votes. With a current 15% stake, he stands to wield massive control if Tesla’s valuation rockets from its current $1.5 trillion to the projected $8.5 trillion mark within a decade. Meanwhile, Tesla’s car sales have slumped 13% this year, and Musk’s focus has drifted from vehicles to his pet projects at xAI and SpaceX.
Still, Tesla’s board insists this pay plan is about performance, not personality. Chair Robyn Denholm said, “What motivates him is doing things that others can’t do or haven’t been able to do.” Translation: when your CEO fancies himself Tony Stark, you just hope the suit doesn’t malfunction midflight.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Editor: So Musk could make $1 trillion for building a robot army, while millions of Americans can’t afford a Tesla tire rotation. The man is literally monetizing sci-fi—and shareholders are lining up to buy tickets to the show. Musk is an IRL Tony Stark—only more dastardly.
Layoffs Surge to Recession Levels as AI and Cost Cuts Reshape the Workforce
U.S. employers have announced more than 1.1 million job cuts this year—the kind of bloodletting usually reserved for a recession.
October’s data from Challenger, Gray & Christmas paints a grim picture: layoffs soared 183% from September, hitting their highest October total since 2003. Massive cuts at UPS, Amazon, and Target drove the surge, signaling that corporate America’s love affair with “efficiency” has entered its ruthless phase. “We’re entering new territory with these layoffs,” said John Challenger, the firm’s CEO. “When you see companies making cuts of this size, it does signal a real shift in direction.”
The top two culprits? Cost-cutting and artificial intelligence. Tech, retail, and warehousing sectors are taking the hardest hits, as companies replace people with algorithms and automation. Over 141,000 tech jobs have been slashed this year alone—a 17% jump from 2024—as businesses trim payrolls before AI trims their relevance.
The Federal Reserve, once laser-focused on inflation, is now watching the labor market flinch. Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged that “a significant number of companies” are slowing hiring or actively cutting jobs, even as the Fed’s recent rate cut tries to keep the economy from skidding. Meanwhile, with the government shutdown blocking official jobs data, Wall Street and Main Street alike are flying blind.
Still, official unemployment sits at 4.3%—for now. But if this trend continues, the economy’s so-called “soft landing” could end with a thud. Workers like 52-year-old software developer Scott Boggs are already feeling it: “It’s been much harder to find viable openings than the last time I was laid off,” he said after losing his job to—you guessed it—an AI screening bot.
Source: The Washington Post
More: Shutdown means another missed jobs report
Editor: Corporate America just discovered a new way to say “you’re fired”—it’s called “AI integration.” And once again, workers get to pay the price for Wall Street’s next productivity buzzword.
And—in six months, economists will look back, say this is a recession (it’s always backward-looking), and some of us will wonder how we took the “envy” of the world and pissed it down the drain. One word: Trumpism.
Judge Orders Trump Administration to Fully Fund SNAP as Shutdown Drags Into Record Territory
A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to immediately deliver full food benefits to 42 million Americans after it tried to cut off funding during the historic government shutdown.
U.S. District Judge John McConnell ruled Thursday that the administration’s plan to issue only partial Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments violated a previous court order. “This is a problem that could have and should have been avoided,” McConnell said, blasting the White House for ignoring his directive and attempting to shift blame to funding constraints. The judge gave the administration until Friday to make full November payments to states.
The Trump administration had argued that redirecting money to SNAP would endanger child nutrition programs. Justice Department attorney Tyler Becker said the government “reasonably interpreted the order.” McConnell rejected that claim outright, calling the administration’s position “arbitrary and capricious.” He added pointedly, “Contrary to the defendants’ argument, 28 million children are not at risk of going hungry should this transfer occur.”
The ruling follows two lawsuits challenging the administration’s attempt to halt SNAP benefits amid the now 37-day shutdown—the longest in U.S. history. One suit, filed by a coalition of cities and advocacy groups, resulted in Thursday’s order. Another case, brought by 25 Democratic-led states, is being heard separately in Boston. “Today is a major victory for 42 million people in America,” said Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, which represents the plaintiffs. “The court could not be more clear—the Trump-Vance administration must stop playing politics with people’s lives.”
The decision comes as millions of Americans brace for reduced services and pay delays caused by the shutdown. Senate leaders are expected to vote Friday on a potential path forward, but after 14 failed attempts to reopen the government, optimism is in short supply. For now, families can at least count on food assistance that should never have been in jeopardy to begin with.
Source: The Hill
Editor: It says everything about this administration that feeding 42 million people required three federal judges’ intervention. When you need a court order just to keep Americans from going hungry, you’re not governing—you’re holding the country’s most vulnerable hostage.
Supreme Court Weighs Bid to Overturn Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
The Supreme Court is quietly entertaining an appeal that could reopen one of the most settled social issues of the century—nationwide same-sex marriage.
The justices will review a petition from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky clerk who famously refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after Obergefell v. Hodges legalized such unions in 2015. Davis, who was jailed for contempt after defying court orders, now wants the justices to erase that precedent entirely while also escaping a $360,000 judgment for damages and attorney’s fees.
Her lawyers have built their case around the writings of Justice Clarence Thomas, who remains the only sitting justice openly calling for Obergefell to be overturned. Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito—both dissenters in the 2015 decision—have been more cautious, with Alito recently clarifying that while he believes the decision was wrong, he isn’t calling for its reversal. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court later, has said precedent can be revisited when wrong but hinted that same-sex marriage, unlike abortion, may be too deeply woven into American life to undo.
Davis’s case represents more than a personal crusade—it’s a political grenade. She became a right-wing folk hero in 2015 for citing her faith as justification for denying licenses, prompting her jailing and a swift legislative fix removing clerks’ names from Kentucky marriage licenses. Since losing her reelection bid in 2018, she’s tried to reframe her legal losses as a constitutional test of “religious liberty.”
The Supreme Court could announce as soon as Monday whether it will hear the case. If the justices pass, the ruling that legalized same-sex marriage will stand. If they don’t, America’s culture wars could be right back where they were a decade ago—with millions of families’ marriages suddenly up for debate again.
Source: Associated Press
Editor: Kim Davis wants to rewrite history because she lost a job, an election, and a court case. Some people move on; others keep auditioning for martyrdom. The Supreme Court has bigger things to do than relitigate love. BUT—you can bet your ass more than a few SCOTUS “justices” will side with this menacing bitch.
What are they going to do? Nullify millions of marriages? Yes, they will.