'If not, I’m f–ked. And you don’t want me to be f–ked'

News What to Watch What to Watch and Read This Weekend: Romance, Paperbacks, and a Dog Who Deserves a National Holiday Plus: What does AI know about romance anyway? By Molly Templeton | Published on February 13, 2026 Photo: Warner Bros. Studios Comment 0 Share New Share Photo: Warner Bros. Studios My Friday the 13th blessing for you is this: May you live in a town where there are plentiful tattoo artists doing excellent Friday the 13th flash. (It’s a thing! It’s a neat thing.) And may you meet all the black cats in your neighborhood. (They’re good luck, I’m certain.) There are a bunch of movies coming out this weekend, as everyone loves an auspicious release date; there are very few new SFF books this week, but that’s okay, because we all have lots of older books we could be reading (don’t we? Just me? Okay, then). I hope you get a long holiday weekend, and I hope your community looks out for each other. Stay warm, hug your pals, and call your reps! Wuthering Heights, Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die, Crime 101… It’s a Very Weird Week for Movies (Complimentary) Every week is a weird week for movies if you look hard enough—there’s always some peculiar combination of things on screens somewhere!—but this week feels extra odd. It’s almost Valentine’s Day, so naturally Emerald Fennell’s Wuthering Heights arrives in a flurry of swooning and wall-licking. Reviews have been all over the place; Vulture has dug into the question of whether Heathcliff is white. (He probably isn’t.) But if swooning isn’t your bag, there’s also Sam Rockwell and company facing the AI apocalypse in Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die. Alternately, you can see Storm, the Hulk, and Thor do crimes in the blandly titled but quite polished-looking Crime 101. (The 101 apparently refers to the highway? This feels intentionally confusing.) Or, if you would prefer to stay home, the widely praised (and Oscar-nominated) Sentimental Value premieres on MUBI February 13th, and the Richard Linklater-directed Lorenz Hart biopic Blue Moon premieres on Netflix on February 14th.  If you just want to watch a lot of action, Predator: Badlands is now on Hulu. Honestly, it’s a wonder any of us ever stop staring at a screen. Romance Readers (and Writers) Deserve Better There’s a lot of talk lately about the “inevitability” of AI. I could go off on a whole tangent here about the purposefully over-general misuse of that term, but that’s not exactly my point at the moment. My point is Gita Jackson’s Aftermath article “No, AI Written Romance Novels Are Not Inevitable.” Jackson is responding to a dire New York Times piece with the title “The New Fabio is Claude.” The Times piece is about two “authors” (scare quotes mine) who use AI to “write books” (scare quotes also mine).  Jackson’s rebuttal is satisfying, pointing out the ways in which at least one of these writers wishes to hide the involvement of AI in her work, and how well (or not well) the writers’ “work” has actually been received. But it also made me think about how insulting the Times piece, and the writers quoted in it, were being toward romance readers. Romance readers are sharp, smart, and they take no shit. Romance writers are involved, passionate citizens. Remember how SFF readers used to be treated like we weren’t readers of “real” books? Romance is still getting that treatment—as the NYT article demonstrated. Enough already!  Happy Birthday, Gromit! As I write this, it is February 12th—which is apparently Gromit’s birthday. Thank you to Letterboxd for pointing out this very important holiday! For the uninitiated—if any of those still exist—Gromit is a very good boy. Perhaps the goodest boy. He is the dog companion of Wallace, with whom he stars in many shorts and features created by Aardman Animation. In the first Wallace & Gromit short, “A Grand Day Out,” the pair discover they are out of cheese, so they go to the moon. I mean, obviously: the moon is made of cheese, right? In subsequent adventures they face a nefarious penguin, a were-rabbit, and one of Wallace’s inventions.  You can watch Wallace & Gromit: The Complete Collection on Apple TV, and the assorted movies on other streaming platforms. Get yourself a slice of Wensleydale and settle in. Pour One Out for Your Favorite Mass-Market Paperback For your weekend reading, might I suggest revisiting your very favorite book—or series—that exists in mass-market paperback? The small format’s death knell has been sounding for a while, and got louder when the distributor Readerlink announced last summer that it would stop distributing mass-markets by the end of 2025. But it feels especially real right now. The Reactor social media manager has been buying up her favorite authors’ work in mass market. I’m rereading a favorite from my teen years, Jo Clayton’s Moongather, and marveling at how small and light it is. Even The New York Times is on it, writing what amounts to a eulogy: “Short, squat and printed on flimsy paper with narrow margins, it was the kind of book you’d find on wire racks in grocery stores or airports and buy for a few bucks. Those racks have all but disappeared.” You can still find them, of course, on the shelves of your local used bookstore or secondhand shop; in attics and basements around the country; on your own shelves, if you are a book collector of a certain type. (If you could see into my office right now, you’d see mass-markets double-stacked on a shelf behind me.) Read ‘em while you’ve got ‘em.[end-mark] The post What to Watch and Read This Weekend: Romance, Paperbacks, and a Dog Who Deserves a National Holiday appeared first on Reactor.

Goldman Sachs general counsel Kathy Ruemmler has resigned after documents released by the U.S. Justice Department last month showed Ruemmler accepted gifts from late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and advised him on how to address media inquiries regarding his crimes. Ruemmler previously served as White House counsel to former President Barack Obama, before leaving her post in 2014. She also formerly served as associate counsel to former President Bill Clinton, according to news reports and her Goldman Sachs bio. “As one of the most accomplished professionals in her field, Kathy has also been a mentor and friend to many of our people, and she will be missed,” Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon said in a statement. “I accepted her resignation, and I respect her decision.” Ruemmler told the Financial Times that she would exit the Wall Street firm on June 30, saying: “I made the determination that the media attention on me, relating to my prior work as a defence attorney, was becoming a distraction.” According to the Tri-City Herald, Ruemmler served as principal associate deputy attorney general in Obama’s Justice Department before entering the White House as principal deputy counsel in 2010. She became White House counsel in 2011, serving in that top role until 2014. Ruemmler worked at Latham & Watkins LLP before becoming part of the leadership at Goldman Sachs, among the top executive officers of the Wall Street firm. Ruemmler referred to Epstein in emails as “Uncle Jeffrey” and received gifts from him including wine and a handbag, the documents show. Epstein also called Ruemmler’s cell phone when he was arrested on July 6, 2019, among other calls he made that night, according to two documents that cited notes from law enforcement officials. A separate note by the Federal Bureau of Investigation cited Epstein as saying on the same day: “Is this about sex trafficking. Is this about underage.” The author of the FBI document, who was not named, said Epstein also made utterances including: “Oh this is bad, this is pretty bad.” Ruemmler had a large number of communications with Epstein from 2014 to 2019, even after the disgraced financier’s 2008 guilty plea for procuring a person under the age of 18 for prostitution, the documents showed. These communications included advising Epstein on how to respond to a media inquiry in 2019 concerning the alleged special legal treatment he received because of his connections, the emails show. “I was a defense attorney when I dealt with Jeffrey Epstein,” Ruemmler said in a statement to Reuters on February 3. Reuters contributed to this report. The post Former Obama WH Counsel Resigns From Goldman Sachs After Epstein Disclosures appeared first on The Daily Signal.

With a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security all but guaranteed, many senators are leaving for a security conference in Europe without having passed a bill to fund the agency. When the clock strikes midnight on Friday, the agency’s funding from a previous two-week stopgap extension will expire. With no sign of consensus, the Senate has left town and Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., are leading a bipartisan delegation to the annual Munich Security Conference. The group, per a press release from late Thursday night, includes Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Joni Ernst of Iowa, and Steve Daines of Montana.  The Democrat section of the delegation is made up of Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia, Chris Coons of Delaware, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Jacky Rosen of New Mexico, Peter Welch of Vermont, Andy Kim of New Jersey, and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan. The trip comes after the Senate on Thursday failed to pass a homeland security agency funding extension, with nearly all Democrats voting against advancing it.  Since the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, Democrats have demanded to codify their policy wishes for the agency, such as forcing immigration enforcement agents to obtain judicial warrants to carry out deportations and prohibiting the use of masks by agents. Senate rules require a 60-vote threshold to proceed to a final vote on the funding measure. In the 52-47 vote on Thursday, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., was the only Democrat to vote to advance it. Fetterman explained his decision to split with Democrats on X Thursday, saying, “I want to make the same changes that every other Democrat wants to make on ICE [Immigration Customs Enforcement], but ICE already has $75 billion in funding from the big, beautiful bill, that I did not vote for.” Shutting DHS down has zero impact and zero changes for ICE. ICE already has $75B in funding from the BBB that I did not vote for.But it will hit FEMA, Coast Guard, TSA and our Cybersecurity Agency.As a Democrat, I can’t vote to shut down critical parts of our government. pic.twitter.com/QYasx0LwCo— U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) February 12, 2026 Fetterman added of Democrats’ refusal to back a funding extension, “what it will shut down is important parts of DHS, whether that’s FEMA, whether that’s the Coast Guard… the cyber security agency in our nation. All of these are shut down.” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters on Thursday that the Senate would still recess next week but he has told senators to “be available to get back here if there’s some sort of a deal they [Democrats] strike.” Graham and Whitehouse’s offices did not immediately respond to a request for confirmation from The Daily Signal on whether any of the senators’ travel plans had changed. The post DHS Shutdown Coincides With Senators’ Trip appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In November, a War Room clip exposed two Sharia courts in Texas, operating for years and handling hundreds of cases. While legal if both parties agree, Muslim women often face strong pressure to use Sharia courts over county courts. Under strict Sharia, women inherit less, divorce is difficult, and testimony counts for less. Refusal can lead to honor-based abuse—shaming, threats, beatings, or rarely, “honor killings.” Texas sees hundreds of unreported cases annually. For many women, signing is survival, not consent. On Nov. 19, Gov. Greg Abbott called for investigations. Three months later, and there have been no charges. Arbitrations continue quietly, and no woman has spoken out. Fear keeps these stories hidden. On Nov. 18, Abbott became the first governor to label the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim Brotherhood as foreign terrorist groups. The move blocks them from buying land, state funds, or public contracts. Cy-Fair ISD cut ties, nonprofits halted grants, and CAIR sued for defamation. On Jan. 28, Abbott asked Attorney General Ken Paxton to revoke their nonprofit status. The groups are still active, and while the crackdown is real, it has mostly been symbolic so far. The East Plano Islamic Center’s 400-acre housing project, now called “The Meadow,” faced a fraud lawsuit on Dec. 5. Construction has stopped, but developers continue to submit plans. The project is currently stalled, but it could start again if the lawsuit is unsuccessful or takes a long time to resolve. The issue spread beyond Texas. On Dec. 9, Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis gave CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood the same terrorist label. CAIR sued. Nationally, Trump signed an executive order on Nov. 24 against Brotherhood chapters. On Jan.13, the Treasury and State Department targeted Muslim Brotherhood branches in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, freezing assets and criminalizing support. Texas now has federal support but no nationwide Sharia ban. In Congress, Texas Republican Reps. Chip Roy and Keith Self launched the Sharia-Free America Caucus on Dec. 18. It now has 35 members from 18 states, including Sen. Tommy Tubberville, R-Ala. The caucus is working on bills to limit immigration for people who follow Sharia and to deport those considered security risks. At a press conference on Feb. 4, Texas was called “ground zero.” No laws have passed yet, but support is increasing as the midterms approach. On Jan. 9, about 700 people, including lawmakers and activists, attended the “Save Texas from Radical Islam” dinner, organised by Patriot Mobile, War Room, and American Freedom Alliance. War Room host Steve Bannon described the situation as an “invasion,” Glenn Beck warned about a political takeover, and Geert Wilders mentioned European “no-go zones.” Glenn Story emphasised defending God-given rights, Karen Siegemund highlighted transatlantic parallels in the threat from radical Islam and I called for the church to engage in this fight. After the event, Bannon started weekly WarRoom Texas broadcasts. The dinner helped turn local worries into action across the state. State Rep. Brian Harrison, a Republican, called for hearings to ban Sharia law and close loopholes. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick put it on the Senate agenda. No hearings are scheduled, and the legislature won’t meet again until 2027 unless a special session is called. On Feb. 5, Paxton filed a wide-ranging lawsuit against CAIR chapters in Austin, Houston, and Dallas-Fort Worth, along with Muslim Brotherhood affiliates. The lawsuit seeks to ban their operations, property ownership, and recruitment. It mentions past Hamas connections from the 2008 Holy Land Foundation case. After years of little action against CAIR, this move comes as the primary election season begins. And on Feb. 10, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government held a hearing chaired Roy to examine whether political Islam and Sharia law conflict with the U.S. Constitution, focusing on alleged efforts to establish Sharia-based institutions and potential federal law violations. Testimonies from witnesses like Robert Spencer and Krista Schild highlighted Sharia’s incompatibility with American principles and organized pressure against critics in Texas, while discussions touched on immigration reforms to bar Sharia adherents. Following the hearing, Self announced the expansion of the Sharia-Free America Caucus to 38 Republican members from 18 states, including representatives like Roy, Mary Miller, and Andy Biggs, with the group aiming to safeguard constitutional governance. Muslim organizations such as CAIR condemned the proceedings for promoting anti-Muslim rhetoric, and Democrats argued it stoked unnecessary fears about a religious minority. Despite the moves to curb Sharia law in the last three months, Kerr County arbitrations continue. There’s no law banning Sharia—only plans announced. No woman has received state protection from honor-based coercion. Lawsuits continue, projects are paused, and the problem remains unresolved. Texas is leading the way. The question now is whether this impetus will turn into real legislation or fade away as just election-year talk. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Three Months In: Is Texas Winning the War Against Islamists? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division is suing Harvard, accusing the university of unlawfully withholding admissions data necessary to help the government determine if race-based discrimination is occurring. In Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College in 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that colleges cannot consider race in the admissions process. The Justice Department wants to determine if Harvard has complied with the decision. “Harvard has failed to disclose the data we need to ensure that its admissions are free of discrimination — we will continue fighting to put merit over DEI across America,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said. The lawsuit aims to compel Harvard to produce documents related to any consideration of race in admissions. The administration accuses Harvard of repeatedly delaying or outright refusing to produce pertinent data and documents requested by the DOJ. These include individualized applicant admissions data, admissions policies, and correspondence related to race; ethnicity; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and the Students for Fair Admissions ruling. “The Justice Department will not allow universities to flout our nation’s federal civil rights laws by refusing to provide the information required for our review,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Providing requested data is a basic expectation of any credible compliance process, and refusal to cooperate creates concerns about university practices.” Harvard, which benefits from federal funding, allegedly violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by failing to comply with the request for sufficient document production for compliance review, the suit says. “By failing to make timely and complete document productions or otherwise permitting the DOJ to access Harvard’s applicant-level admissions data, Harvard breached a material term of DOJ federal financial assistance,” the DOJ says. “If Harvard has stopped discriminating, it should happily share the data necessary to prove it,” Dhillon stated. The lawsuit comes amid continued negotiations between Harvard and the Trump administration. President Donald Trump is now seeking a $1 billion settlement with Harvard University because the school has “dragged its feet” during months of negotiations. Harvard and the Trump administration have engaged in a legal battle for months after the president pulled $2 billion in federal funding and removed the university’s ability to enroll international students. Trump said he took action over Harvard’s alleged failure to curb antisemitism, and its DEI practices. “This has been an ongoing negotiation and frankly, a frustrating negotiation for the president and the administration because we want a deal,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in response to a question from The Daily Signal, “and it’s very unfortunate that Harvard has dragged its feet.” I asked @PressSec why @POTUS is now seeking $1 billion from Harvard. Harvard is "dragging its feet," she said, "frustrating" the president. ?"The president wants a justified deal to correct for that criminal behavior that took place on their campus."@DailySignal pic.twitter.com/qXP5A3lKCA— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) February 5, 2026 The post Harvard Sued for Stonewalling on Race-Based Admissions appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Part of the Breakdown We're Not Supposed to Mention

Don't Tell Me Pizzagate Is Real...

Americans want to help people in need, but when government does that, about 500 billion taxpayer dollars get stolen. It’s how the system is designed, says the United Council on Welfare Fraud’s Andrew McClenahan in this new video. “You’re measuring success by the amount of money you put out.” Because of that, government agencies rarely check whether their handouts go to the right people. Minnesota is just the latest example. Government officials didn’t uncover that fraud -- YouTuber Nick Shirley did. I say to McClenahan, “It’s weird that a kid did what government investigators couldn’t do.” “Articles back in 2018 talked about millions of dollars in suitcases being flown out of Minneapolis,” he replies. “But it took a 20-year-old with an iPhone to go in there and expose it on Twitter.” After Shirley publicized the fraud, the White House froze billions in welfare payments. Progressives didn’t like that. “What they are doing is creating confusion, chaos, trying to intimidate people,” complains Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). “There is no reason for them to fully stop funding these programs. The only reason they’re doing that is for PR purposes.” Minnesota’s Gov. Tim Walz was hardly better. “This is on my watch. I am accountable,” he said. But he did nothing about the fraud. During the pandemic, President Joe Biden said: “My message to those cheats out there is this: You can’t hide. We’re going to find you!” But they didn’t. Of the hundreds of billions stolen in 2024, the Department of Justice barely recovered $2.9 billion. Is there nothing we can do to stop fraud? “Sure, you can!” says McClenahan. “It takes less than a second to verify things with data connections these days.”      But government rarely uses modern data connections. Elon Musk, when he ran DOGE, complained that government records weren’t computerized. Many agencies doled money out without even saying what the money was for, or where it went! He calls government recordkeeping a “time warp.” “They’re relying on rules and regulations written for pen and paper,” says McClenahan. Poor recordkeeping makes fraud easier. Some people openly brag about it. During President Donald Trump’s first term, a rapper wrote a song about stealing benefits that Trump rushed out for pandemic relief: “I gotta shout-out to Donald Trump. I just might swipe me a lump sum.” That was in California. There’s lot of fraud there. The state gave phone subsidies to 94,000 accounts of dead people. “Everybody knows that the United States is the easiest game in town,” says McClenahan. Some stolen funds go to alleged terrorists. “We literally rang the dinner bell for the whole world, and they answered,” he says. “These are American programs,” I point out. “People in other countries aren’t eligible.” “But if you’re not checking to see where somebody lives, where they’re applying from, who they are, you’re not going to find them!” says McClenahan. In addition, many state politicians don’t try to find fraud. Handouts mostly come from the federal government, so local politicians reason: “People in other states pay, but my taxpayers collect! Why make a big effort to stop that?” Trump recently gave investigators more access to state data, so fraud could be better tracked. But some states don’t want to reveal that data. “They’re actively suing the government!” complains McClenahan. Whenever government gives handouts, it creates bad incentives. Before our government started welfare payments, Americans were steadily lifting themselves out of poverty. When welfare checks began, progress continued for several years but then stopped. Handouts have taught some people to stay dependent! What should be done? McClenahan says to verify eligibility first. That way you prevent fraud before money goes out. And no one should get benefits without trying to work. “You’ve got to be looking for a job, volunteering or at least getting job training. The best welfare program is a job.” Every Tuesday at JohnStossel.com, Stossel posts a new video about the battle between government and freedom. He is the author of “Government Gone Wild: Exposing the Truth Behind the Headlines.”

While ABC World News Tonight noted “a strong new jobs report tonight, the U.S. adding 130,000 new jobs in February, more than double the number expected,” and NBC Nightly News announced "We have good news on the economy" (the CBS Evening News made no mention, while CNN didn’t know what to think), PBS stood out as the Debbie Downer of the lot Wednesday evening. Under the online heading: “Revised economic numbers inject uncertainty into jobs market,” the News Hour reached back into last year to make a negative point against the Trump economy. One would never suspect the existence of those sparkling new job figures from PBS's glum assessment, as the co-anchors greeted the good news with sour grapes. Co-anchor Amna Nawaz: The U.S. economy opened 2026 on better footing, with the latest jobs report showing employers added 130,000 jobs in January. And the unemployment rate edged down to 4.3 percent from 4.4 percent in December, a stronger-than-expected result for last month. Co-anchor Geoff Bennett: But the data also had newly revised figures that paint an even weaker picture of last year's performance. The U.S. economy added just 181,000 net jobs last year, about 400,000 fewer than initially reported, and far from the 1.4 million jobs added in 2024. This all comes as some corporations like Amazon and UPS are announcing tens of thousands of layoffs. To break down all these numbers. And what it all means for the U.S. economy, we're joined now by Harry Holzer, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University. He's a former chief economist for the Department of Labor…..So we should say 130,000 jobs added is not a strong number. Not long ago, that number would have been reported as underwhelming. Why have the goalposts shifted? His guest slightly, politely dissented. Harry Holzer, Professor of Public Policy, Georgetown University: Well, because job growth all of last year was so weak. So compared to a lot of the weakness we saw in 2025, 130,000 is a pretty good number. So relative to that. But another misleading thing about that, and this has been true for a while, almost all of the job creation is limited to a few key sectors, like health care, social assistance, and, this month, construction and professional services. There were other sectors that actually had job loss. Bennett: And what are those? What sectors remain under pressure? Holzer: Last month, we saw declines in information technology, in financial services, and continuing declines in the federal government, federal government because of DOGE activities and other cutbacks. Federal government shed about 300,000 workers last year…. He says that like it’s a bad thing! Bennett: And the revisions to last year's numbers are also striking. Just 181,000 jobs were added in 2025. That's about 14 percent of the gains that we saw in 2024. What does that say about the underlying strength of the economy? Bennett got the response he surely wanted, with Holzer blaming Trump policies for any weakening. Holzer: ….There was so much uncertainty. The policy environment was so chaotic, tariffs and immigration cuts and things like that. I think employers face less consumer demand in the market, and they just had so much uncertainty about what was going to happen month to month that they cut way back…. Bennett vigorously talked the economy down. Bennett: You could argue we're not in a recession, but for a lot of workers and Americans generally, it might feel like one. Claudia Sahm, the former Fed economist, she noted that the 181,000 jobs you mentioned earlier in an economy of 158 million is basically nothing. And then you have the Fed Governor Chris Waller -- he's a Trump appointee -- he mentioned in his dissent that the recent payroll gains do not remotely look like a healthy labor market. Is this a cyclical cooling or is something more structural happening beneath the surface here? A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 2/11/26 7:09:57 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: The U.S. economy opened 2026 on better footing, with the latest jobs report showing employers added 130,000 jobs in January. And the unemployment rate edged down to 4.3 percent from 4.4 percent in December, a stronger-than-expected result for last month. Geoff Bennett: But the data also had newly revised figures that paint an even weaker picture of last year's performance. The U.S. economy added just 181,000 net jobs last year, about 400,000 fewer than initially reported, and far from the 1.4 million jobs added in 2024. This all comes as some corporations like Amazon and UPS are announcing tens of thousands of layoffs. To break down all these numbers. And what it all means for the U.S. economy, we're joined now by Harry Holzer, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University. He's a former chief economist for the Department of Labor. Thanks for being here. We appreciate it. Harry Holzer, Professor of Public Policy, Georgetown University: Thank you. Nice to be here. Geoff Bennett: So we should say 130,000 jobs added is not a strong number. Not long ago, that number would have been reported as underwhelming. Why have the goalposts shifted? Harry Holzer: Well, because job growth all of last year was so weak. So compared to a lot of the weakness we saw in 2025, 130,000 is a pretty good number. So relative to that. But another misleading thing about that, and this has been true for a while, almost all of the job creation is limited to a few key sectors, like health care, social assistance, and, this month, construction and professional services. There were other sectors that actually had job loss. Geoff Bennett: And what are those? What sectors remain under pressure? Harry Holzer: Last month, we saw declines in information technology, in financial services, and continuing declines in the federal government, federal government because of DOGE activities and other cutbacks. Federal government shed about 300,000 workers last year. They dropped another 33,000 to 34,000 last month. Geoff Bennett: And the revisions to last year's numbers are also striking. Just 181,000 jobs were added in 2025. That's about 14 percent of the gains that we saw in 2024. What does that say about the underlying strength of the economy? Harry Holzer: Well, the economy weakened in 2025. There was so much uncertainty. The policy environment was so chaotic, tariffs and immigration cuts and things like that. I think employers face less consumer demand in the market, and they just had so much uncertainty about what was going to happen month to month that they cut way back. Of course, the other factor was less immigrant -- fewer immigrants coming into the market, and therefore fewer workers available for being hired. Geoff Bennett: And there's been a surge in corporate layoffs, as we mentioned. The global outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas released a report that said layoffs were 118 percent higher compared with January of 2025. What kind of warning sign does that send? Or is this a normalization after pandemic era overexpansion? Harry Holzer: I think, for the tech sector, for companies like Amazon, some of it is normalization and that's been going on for a few years already. But some of it is they have invested very heavily in A.I. with the idea that they're going to -- that's going to save them on labor costs and they want to start seeing the returns on that investment. So they're announcing some cutbacks. More broadly, we're not seeing an enormous number of layoffs, but they are a bit higher, certainly relative to a year ago and even relative to last month. You see some uptick in layoffs. Most of the decline has been new hiring, rather than layoffs, but it's something to keep an eye on. Geoff Bennett: Yes. You could argue we're not in a recession, but for a lot of workers and Americans generally, it might feel like one. Claudia Sahm, the former Fed economist, she noted that the 181,000 jobs you mentioned earlier in an economy of 158 million is basically nothing. And then you have the Fed Governor Chris Waller -- he's a Trump appointee -- he mentioned in his dissent that the recent payroll gains do not remotely look like a healthy labor market. Is this a cyclical cooling or is something more structural happening beneath the surface here? Harry Holzer: We're not sure yet. And that's why from one month to the next, we keep watching the numbers closely. I think both of those comments are basically accurate, just very, very little new hiring going on, for the reasons that I have already said, because businesses face so much uncertainty. There was a drop-off in consumer demand. Normally, when new hiring drops that much, you see the unemployment rate go up by more than this small uptick to 4.3 percent. There again, the drop-off in immigration means the labor force is shrinking as well. Fewer new workers are entering the labor market to find jobs. So the good news there is that unemployment doesn't go up that much. The bad news is that it causes other problems for the labor market, less GDP growth, perhaps more inflation, things like that. Over the long term, our pool of scientific talent will drop if immigrants are scared to come here. So there's a pretty big downside for that as well. Geoff Bennett: Harry Holzer, thanks so much for sharing your insights. Harry Holzer: Thank you.