Stack the Week Daily

Welcome to Stack the Week for Friday, July 17

The daily experiment continues. Thank you for the subscriptions, the feedback, the emails, and the notes. And the Apple podcast reviews are helpful. They introduce us to a wider audience.

Remember, this is a podcast too. Listen while you organize the new bookshelves, weed the garden bed or arrange briquets to get moving on that brisket that everyone loves so.

For paid readers, I’ve gone back in and put some thoughts about why I made some of the choices I did.

Okay, let’s start.

Iran Infrastructure Week

The Iran war is an infrastructure story today. U.S. bombing moved deeper into the systems civilians and markets depend on: bridges, ports, shipping routes, energy sites and drinking-water plants. The campaignis aimed at the physical network that lets Iran move troops, supplies and oil.

The chronic kink in the Strait of Hormuz is changing corporate behavior: According to the AP, Chevron is investing in Iraqi oil fields and a pipeline route that could bypass Hormuz. Remember the time when people used to talk about this war being over? Now companies are placing bets about a permanent condition where the Strait of Hormuz is up for grabs.

Iran answered by widening the target set on its side of the Gulf. One Iranian strike damaged a Kuwaiti power and desalination plant. In a dry Gulf country, desalination is not a side industry; it is the tap. Kuwait gets about 90 percent of its drinking water from desalination. The fire there was contained, but the point was made: modern Gulf water and power systems are now a part of Iran’s target list.

Iran also expanded the map, striking eastern Syria in its first attack on Syrian territory in this conflict, saying it aimed at a U.S. special operations command center. The conflict is spreading, which makes it harder to stop and increases the chances that more countries—and their soldiers, supplies, and economies—get pulled in.

I was unsatisfied about this Syrian bit. On the one hand, expanding the war and the downsides of that are kind of obvious, but I felt like there was something more to be said about an attack in Syria, but I just couldn’t figure out what that was by the time we got to publication hour.

Iranian officials say dozens have been killed and hundreds wounded in recent days. The United States is on its seventh straight day of attacks.

ICE Pressure

The Associated Press reports that David Brouillette, the ICE agent who killed Johan Guerrero, has a long history of violent, terrifying behavior and serious mental‑health struggles, raising the question of how someone with that record cleared ICE’s vetting, received a gun, and was sent into an armed immigration operation. Johan Guerrero was in the country legally, was not the target, and was shot while his wife watched.

I came across this interview while I was looking for how to pronounce David Brouillette’s name and came across this interview with his ex-wife. “How do you keep getting into these jobs when you’re around guns all the time.” It’s an extraordinary interview.

AP reports that Brouillette’s relatives warned supervisors about his instability and abuse, that he cycled through law‑enforcement and public‑safety jobs, and that he was removed from a volunteer fire department after disputes and refusal to follow orders—each a red flag that should have mattered in a federal background check.

Democrats have called for an investigation. That investigation is really about whether the pressure to deport has hardened into a machine that reliably produces human tragedy. Start with hiring and vetting. If ICE is expanding quickly, are standards slipping? Are background checks catching histories of violence, instability, misconduct, or bad judgment before people are armed and sent into volatile encounters, or has the system accepted risks it once would have rejected to meet the deportation quota?

Also training. These operations increasingly look less like civil immigration enforcement and more like fugitive work: vehicle stops, surprise encounters, families nearby, frightened people, split‑second decisions. If officers are not trained for de‑escalation, for mistaken identity and families in the line of fire, the policy is not only aggressive, it is careless.

This is mission creep on top of mission creep. Immigration enforcement moved away from focusing on “the worst of the worst,” the phrase that was meant to reassure voters that deportation would focus on the most dangerous people. Now it is shifting toward a more militarized posture in which civil enforcement begins to resemble street policing or tactical arrest work. ICE says it conducts more stops away from homes because agents often cannot enter without a warrant. But that limit is not a loophole to route around; it is the system drawing a line. Slowness, imposed by courts and standards, protects values, including that human life should have some value.

Voters wanted deportations, but that signal is not a license to do anything. They expect promises to be fulfilled inside American rules, which is why the language became “the worst of the worst” in the first place. Candidate Trump was pledging restraint. And finally there is a permission structure here. If officials describe immigrants as invaders, praise agents after deaths, attack judges and communities, and raise quotas instead of pausing after tragedy, agents learn something: that force will be defended first and examined later. Maybe.

The Burnham Age Begins

Andy Burnham was elected leader of Britain’s governing Labour Party on Friday, making him the country’s seventh prime minister in a decade. Though new traditions come slowly to a venerable political system, that pace of turnover almost begs for a new ritual in keeping with Britain’s love of ceremony: something like each time a new occupant checks bags at 10 Downing Street, he should pose for a photo next to the catapult that will eventually eject them from office. At least then the exits would start to match the drama of the arrivals.

The previous PM Keir Starmer resigned in June under months of pressure from Labour MPs who feared he would lose the next election to the hard-right Reform UK. Burnham hopes to forestall the fate that met his predecessors by rebalancing power. He earned the nickname “King of the North” as mayor of Greater Manchester, where he became a national figure by arguing that northern England deserved more power, money and respect. In his victory speech, he said Britain took a wrong turn in the 1980s, when political power became centralized and economic power was privatized.

His core promise is the biggest rebalancing of power Britain has ever seen: moving control over transport, housing, skills, spending and economic growth away from Whitehall—the shorthand for London’s central government departments—and toward regional leaders.

Burnham is trying to answer the same political disease that feeds populism all over the world: voters who think government happens somewhere else, for someone else. His immediate political task is to stop the nationalist Reform UK’s rise by convincing those voters that Labour can still hear them. His governing task is harder: prove that devolution is not a slogan, but a machine that can make life cheaper, fairer and more competent in the places that feel ignored.

This preceding paragraph is essentially the kind that I’d like to have in every item in the stack. What happened, why it happened and then this: why it matters beyond the narrow confines of the story.

Burnham’s first test is whether “power out of Whitehall” survives Treasury arithmetic. A high-debt, low-growth state can promise regions control over housing, transport, skills and growth, the question is whether it will also let them– or can let them– control enough money to make those promises real.

Gaza Funeral Strike

People gathered to bury one victim of the war. The war added more.

An Israeli strike hit a funeral in Gaza on Friday, killing at least seven people and wounding 22, according to Palestinian officials. The funeral was for a Palestinian killed in an earlier strike the same day.

The formal ceasefire agreed in October reduced the heaviest fighting, but it has not stopped killing in Gaza. Gaza’s Health Ministry says at least 1,123 people have been killed since the ceasefire took effect. Israel says its continued strikes respond to militant attacks and ceasefire violations; five Israeli soldiers have been killed over the same period.

Xi’s AI pitch

The next generation of AI will not just live inside chatbots that explain soccer offsides rules. It will make decisions in hospitals, schools, workplaces, police departments, banks, border systems, energy grids and media feeds. It will help decide which job applicants are interviewed, which medical scans get flagged, which neighborhoods get more patrols, which loans are approved and which power plants turn on when the grid is stressed.

That is why the real question for humans is not which company has the biggest models—or which company has the largest initial public offering—but who writes the rules that protect ordinary people. Neither the United States nor China, the world’s two biggest AI powers, offers a clear, trusted way to protect everyday rights while this technology spreads.

The incentives for dominance and profit often point away from those guardrails rather than toward them.

That was the backdrop for Xi Jinping’s speech at the World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai on Friday. He cast AI as a “symphony of international cooperation” and used the stage to launch the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, WAICO, an intergovernmental body headquartered in Shanghai and advertised as a way to help poorer and middle‑income countries catch up. In plain language, WAICO is meant to be a club for governments that want help using AI. Xi promised places in training programs for officials and engineers, AI‑powered weather‑warning tools for countries that face floods and storms, and centers where China would help regional groups apply AI to transport, agriculture, health and other fields.

The pitch is: we will help you learn this technology, we will share tools, we will not wrap everything in U.S.‑style national‑security restrictions. It sounds generous. Underneath the language, WAICO is an attempt to gain dominance under the cover of looking helpful. It is designed to put China at the center of global AI governance—shaping standards, making other governments rely on Chinese models and turning Beijing into the place countries go first when they want AI expertise.

Lettuce not go to Taco Bell

Cyclospora, the parasite that you’ve all learned about that gives people explosive diarrhea, does not appear in lettuce by magic. It arrives when human waste and food‑handling systems intersect and no one stops it.

On the farm, that usually means contaminated water or poor sanitation. Irrigation water, wash tanks or hydrocooling systems that are tainted with sewage or runoff carrying human fecal matter can deposit Cyclospora onto lettuce leaves. In the plant, workers with diarrhea or inadequate hand‑washing can spread the parasite onto ready‑to‑eat greens through direct contact with produce or food‑contact surfaces. Once the parasite is on shredded iceberg, normal rinsing and typical chlorine levels do not reliably kill it, because Cyclospora’s outer shell lets it survive routine washing.

Traceback teams followed the trail of this outbreak from sick patients to what they ate, where they ate it to the supplier who furnished the shredded iceberg lettuce used at Taco Bell restaurants in several Midwestern states. The CDC has tied 1,644 illnesses and 94 hospitalizations to a Taco Bell cluster. They ultimately traced the contaminated lettuce back to a single source, identified by people familiar with the inquiry as Taylor Farms, which said Friday it was pulling all iceberg lettuce from the region. Taco Bell said it was removing the lettuce nationwide.

The Taco Bell-linked outbreak is the traced restaurant cluster; the broader summer cyclospora count appears larger and may include unrelated cases.

Smoke Gets into Your Continent

Fire has become the atmosphere.

The center of the story is Ontario, where officials report 191 active fires as of Friday, 81 not under control and 21 newly ignited. Evacuations have been ordered in at least 15 communities, some of them remote and reachable only by air. Across Canada, more than 850 fires remain active, with 113 listed as out of control.

The smoke has moved into the United States. More than 100 million people in 18 states plus Washington, D.C. have been under air‑quality alerts. Washington has seen some of its worst pollution on record, with monuments disappearing into haze. Toledo, Milwaukee and Detroit saw readings above 500 on Thursday; air is considered hazardous above 300. Emergency rooms across the Northeast reported spikes in patients with breathing and heart problems.

The danger is PM2.5, the tiny particles that can slip into the lungs and bloodstream and worsen asthma, bronchitis, diabetes, heart disease and other conditions.

Republican politicians in Michigan and Ohio attacked Ontario’s handling of the fires. Ontario Premier Doug Ford snapped back that if U.S. politicians wanted to complain, they should send help, pointing out that Ontario has helped America in past crises, including California fires.

If It’s New to You

I didn’t want to go on at such length on this, as you could tell from the previous day’s item, but I couldn’t make it any shorter by publishing time.

Donald Trump is one of the most successful showmen in American political history. He was even able to turn the catastrophic failure of the January 6 attack into political success. On Thursday night, however, he lapsed into reruns in prime time.

He promised a major revelation about election fraud and foreign interference, then delivered a familiar argument with more official staging than proof. Trump’s central claim was that American elections are dangerously compromised. He argued that the 2020 election was corrupted by foreign interference, bad voting technology, noncitizen registration and a “deep state” cover‑up.

The largest claim involved China. Trump alleged that China interfered in the 2020 election, including by acquiring or compromising U.S. voter data. He framed this as a major national‑security scandal and suggested officials had hidden or minimized the threat.

He did not produce evidence that votes were manipulated or that any election outcome was altered. The allegation also left out context so basic it was either bad faith or confusion. Much of the “voter data” he was talking about is public: registration lists, names, addresses, party affiliation in some states. You have access to it too. As election expert David Becker put it on NPR, knowing who is in a class is not the same as knowing how they scored on a test; having a list of voters is not the same as having the power to change how they voted or how their ballots were counted.

Trump also claimed that U.S. intelligence or national-security officials suppressed the true scale of Chinese activity. This was the “deep state” portion of the argument: not just that China acted, but that American officials covered it up.

The same officials he now says hid foreign interference are the ones he publicly doubted when they found it. In Helsinki in July 2018, three days after the Justice Department indicted twelve Russian military intelligence officers for hacking Democratic emails, Trump stood beside Vladimir Putin and was asked whom he believed. He said Putin had denied it, and added: “I don’t see any reason why it would be.”

The president went on to describe vulnerabilities in electronic systems and suggested that machines could be compromised. But a vulnerability is not evidence of exploitation. Repeated audits, court cases, state reviews and Republican‑run examinations after 2020 did not show machine fraud.

Trump also cited a finding that large numbers of noncitizens appeared on voter rolls. But being flagged on a voter roll is not the same as voting illegally. It can reflect data errors, outdated records, naturalized citizens incorrectly flagged, duplicate entries or database mismatches. Even if some registrations were improper, he did not establish that those people voted, that they voted. The evidence that does exist shows in‑person voter fraud to be vanishingly rare.

Trump used these claims to push the Save America Act. He framed the bill as an obvious anti‑fraud measure, but the evidence he presented did not prove widespread fraud that would require that remedy.

The danger is not that Trump proved his case. He did not. The danger is that the presidency can make unproved claims feel official, and then use those claims to justify new voting restrictions, pressure state and local officials, mobilize federal agencies and threaten media companies. The speech failed as evidence, but it may still succeed as pressure.

The sharpest irony, as Sam Stein at The Bulwark pointed out, is that the intelligence report itself warned that foreign actors spread exaggerated claims about voting-system compromise to undermine confidence in American elections. Trump then went on television from the Oval Office and did nearly the same thing: inflated fragments into a story of national betrayal, not to prove what happened, but to make people doubt the system that counted the votes.

LHS 1140 b

One of the places out there in the great beyond that we already thought might be worth watching appears to have one of the basic conditions that make watching worthwhile.

Astronomers say LHS 1140 b shows the first strong hint of an atmosphere on a small world in the “habitable zone” of another star. In plain language, that means this planet sits at a distance from its star where temperatures could allow liquid water on its surface and, as you all know, where there is water means the possibility of cruise ships, which means the bacteria necessary for life coursing through the Lido deck. New data suggests LHS 1140 b is also wrapped in a real sky rather than being just bare rock. That makes it one of the best current candidates for a world that could support Earth‑like surface conditions.

LHS 1140 b has been on the books since 2017 as a promising planet. The new discovery is not the planet itself but the characterization of its atmosphere and interior. Early observations told us that it existed and roughly how big and massive it was. New data from Webb and careful reanalysis let scientists see how starlight changes as it passes through any air during a transit and how the planet’s mass and radius fit different interior models. That shift—from knowing “there is a planet there” to saying “this is probably a water world with a thick atmosphere”—is what turns an old entry in a catalog into a fresh piece of news. It does not mean we have spotted animals or forests; it means the planet has some of the basic ingredients that make life possible here, not proof that life exists there.

Scientifically, it shows that planets with Earth‑like temperatures and atmospheres may not be rare, and that we now have instruments good enough to tell a bare rock from a world with a sky at interstellar distances. That matters because it turns the search for habitable planets from guesswork into something more like engineering and survey work: we can measure, reject and refine candidates instead of just dreaming about them.

Could we visit? No, not with anything like current technology. LHS 1140 b is about 49 light‑years away. Mars is minutes away at the speed of light; this is decades of light‑travel time. At present spacecraft speeds, it would take tens of thousands of years to get there. For us, it is a world for telescopes and models, not trip adviser reviews.