The National Anti-Illegal Mining Operations Secretariat (NAIMOS) has announced that reports of illegal mining and encroachment within the Atewa Range Forest Reserve are receiving urgent attention, with decisive action expected following reconnaissance operations in the area.

In a statement issued on Tuesday, September 15, 2026, NAIMOS said it had taken note of recent media and public reports concerning alleged illegal mining activities and encroachment within the protected forest reserve.

The development follows concerns raised by A Rocha Ghana and other stakeholders at a joint press conference on Monday, September 14, over the current state of the Atewa Range Forest Reserve.

NAIMOS promises decisive action

According to the Secretariat, it has already conducted reconnaissance operations within the forest enclave and is working with relevant security and state agencies to determine the next course of action.

NAIMOS said the planned intervention will be guided by verified intelligence and further operational assessments, with the aim of achieving maximum results.

The Secretariat stressed that the protection of Ghana’s forest reserves, water sources and other ecologically sensitive areas remains a critical component of the national fight against illegal mining, commonly known as galamsey.

‘Concerns will not be ignored’

NAIMOS has assured the public that concerns surrounding the Atewa Range Forest Reserve “will not be ignored”, reaffirming its commitment to protecting Ghana’s natural resources.

The Secretariat said it would continue working to ensure that illegal mining activities do not undermine critical forest reserves, water bodies and communities that depend on these natural resources.

It also commended civil society organisations, traditional authorities, local communities and members of the public for their vigilance and encouraged them to continue providing credible information to support the fight against illegal mining.

The statement was signed by Paa Kwesi Schandorf, Spokesperson for NAIMOS.

By Angel No Lie | KPD Online | September 16, 2026

WASHINGTON — The cost of borrowing in the United States has climbed to levels not seen since the years preceding the global financial crisis, with the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yield briefly rising above 5% this week.

The 10-year yield reached approximately 5.04% on September 15, its highest level since July 2007, according to market reports. The move has put renewed attention on the cost of financing the U.S. government’s large debt burden as well as borrowing costs faced by households and businesses.

The increase comes amid a broader global bond sell-off, higher energy prices and renewed concerns about inflation and government borrowing.

Treasury yields move sharply higher

The 10-year Treasury is closely watched because its yield influences a wide range of borrowing costs throughout the U.S. economy, including mortgages, corporate debt and other long-term loans.

The U.S. Treasury’s official daily yield data showed the 10-year rate at 4.97% on September 14, while the 30-year Treasury stood at 5.34%.

The following day, market trading pushed the 10-year yield above the 5% threshold.

The rise represents a significant change from earlier in the year. Axios reported that the 10-year yield had increased by roughly one percentage point since the end of February, while the 30-year fixed mortgage rate had reached 7.08% by September 11.

30-year borrowing costs remain particularly elevated

The longer-dated Treasury market has already been under pressure for several months.

The 30-year Treasury yield reached 5.34% in August, its highest level since 2007, according to Bloomberg data cited by Advisor Perspectives. It had remained above 5% on dozens of trading days during 2026.

On September 15, the 30-year Treasury yield was around 5.37%, according to market data, before easing slightly the following day.

5

Why are borrowing costs rising?

Several forces are pushing Treasury yields higher simultaneously.

1. Inflation concerns

Investors have become increasingly concerned that higher energy prices could keep inflation elevated.

Oil prices have risen sharply amid the continuing conflict involving Iran and disruptions to global energy markets. Reuters reported that the global bond sell-off has been driven partly by inflationary pressures and geopolitical uncertainty.

Higher expected inflation can lead investors to demand greater yields on long-term bonds because future interest and principal payments will have less purchasing power.

2. Heavy government borrowing

The United States continues to carry a debt load of roughly $40 trillion, while large budget deficits require the Treasury to issue substantial quantities of government securities.

The combination of heavy issuance and higher yields means the government’s interest bill can rise as existing debt matures and is refinanced at more expensive rates.

Recent analysis from the Peterson Foundation noted that the 30-year Treasury yield had already reached 5.27% at the end of July, its highest closing level since 2007.

3. Investors are demanding more compensation

Treasury bonds have traditionally been regarded as among the world’s most important safe-haven assets. But investors can still demand higher yields when they perceive greater inflation, fiscal or supply risks.

The recent move is part of a much broader international bond sell-off. Reuters reported that 10-year government bond yields in several major economies have also reached multi-year highs.

What does a 5% Treasury yield mean?

A Treasury yield of 5% does not mean that every American borrower suddenly pays 5% interest.

Instead, it is a benchmark that helps determine pricing across financial markets.

For example:

• Mortgages: Long-term Treasury yields influence mortgage rates.
• Corporate borrowing: Companies generally pay a premium above comparable government borrowing rates.
• Consumer loans: Higher market interest rates can feed into the cost of credit.
• Government finances: New Treasury debt and refinanced debt can become more expensive.
• Investment returns: Higher Treasury yields can make government bonds more attractive relative to some riskier assets.

The impact therefore extends well beyond the bond market.

Mortgage rates feel the pressure

The housing market is among the areas most directly affected.

According to Axios, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate reached 7.08% on September 11, moving alongside the rise in Treasury yields.

Higher mortgage rates can reduce the amount prospective buyers can afford to borrow, while increasing financing costs for homeowners refinancing or purchasing property.

For illustration, a $400,000 30-year mortgage at 7% carries a substantially higher monthly principal-and-interest payment than the same loan at 5%.

The Federal Reserve faces a difficult environment

The surge in long-term yields comes as markets focus on the Federal Reserve and its next interest-rate decision.

Investors are balancing two competing forces: economic activity and inflation on one side, and the possibility that elevated borrowing costs could weaken demand on the other.

The rise in energy prices complicates that calculation because expensive oil can simultaneously increase inflation while reducing consumers’ purchasing power.

Reuters reported that investors have been watching the Federal Reserve closely as the bond sell-off continues.

5

A warning sign for government finances

The rise in long-term Treasury yields is particularly important for Washington because the federal government must continually refinance maturing debt.

When interest rates remain elevated for an extended period, more newly issued debt is priced at higher rates.

That does not mean the entire U.S. debt stock immediately becomes more expensive. Much of the outstanding debt was issued previously at fixed rates. The financial effect builds progressively as older securities mature and are replaced.

The concern is therefore less about a single day’s yield and more about how long elevated yields remain in place.

Global bond markets are also under pressure

The U.S. move is part of a worldwide increase in long-term borrowing costs.

Reuters reported that the average 10-year government bond yield across the G7 had risen to around 4.285%, its highest level since the global financial crisis era. Yields in Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom have also risen significantly.

That means the U.S. is not experiencing an isolated Treasury-market event.

Instead, investors are reassessing inflation, government borrowing and interest-rate expectations across major economies.

What happens next?

The immediate direction of Treasury yields will depend on several factors, including:

Inflation: Evidence that price pressures are easing could reduce pressure on long-term yields.

Oil prices: A sustained energy-price shock could keep inflation expectations elevated.

Federal Reserve policy: Changes in expectations for short-term interest rates can affect longer-term bond yields.

Government borrowing: The amount of Treasury debt coming to market will remain important.

Investor demand: Strong demand at Treasury auctions can push yields lower, while weaker demand can have the opposite effect.

Key figures

The Treasury’s official data recorded the 10-year yield at 4.97% and the 30-year yield at 5.34% on September 14, before the subsequent market move above 5% in the 10-year maturity.

The bigger picture

The jump in Treasury yields is more than a headline about the bond market. It is a signal that the price of money across the U.S. economy is becoming more expensive.

For the federal government, sustained high yields could increase the cost of servicing newly issued debt. For businesses, financing becomes more expensive. For households, mortgage and other borrowing costs can rise.

At the same time, higher Treasury yields can provide savers and investors with greater returns on relatively low-risk government securities.

The key question for markets is therefore not simply whether the 10-year Treasury yield has crossed 5%, but whether it remains at that level or continues rising.

For now, the breach marks the highest 10-year U.S. Treasury yield since 2007 and comes during one of the most significant global bond-market sell-offs in years.

Sources: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Reuters, Financial Times, Axios, Congressional and market-data reporting.

Image note: For commercial publication, use properly licensed editorial photographs or U.S. government images and retain the photographer/agency credit.

By Angel No Lie | KPD Online | September 16, 2026

WASHINGTON — A new Pentagon inspector general report has confirmed that the U.S. military’s war with Iran has produced strategic shortages in some munitions inventories and exposed bottlenecks in the American defense-industrial base responsible for replacing them.

The findings were contained in the first Lead Inspector General report on Operation Epic Fury, the U.S. military’s designation for the conflict. The report was released September 14 and covers operations through June 30, 2026.

According to the report, the United States spent an estimated $33.4 billion on the operation between February 28 and June 30, including approximately $22.3 billion on munitions. The inspector general said that expenditure had resulted in strategic inventory shortfalls and revealed production bottlenecks affecting the ability to replenish weapons.

What the Pentagon watchdog found

The report identifies several areas where the defense-industrial base faces difficulty increasing production quickly.

Among the persistent constraints are:

• Solid rocket motor production
• Availability of high-grade explosives and propellants
• Recruitment of skilled manufacturing workers
• The time required to expand production capacity
• Procurement and production lead times for sophisticated weapons

The Pentagon is working to streamline procurement and production processes and to stockpile critical materials and components, according to the inspector general. However, the report cautions that expanding the industrial base requires significant lead time.

The findings do not mean that the U.S. military has run out of ammunition. Rather, they indicate that inventories of certain weapons have fallen below levels considered strategically desirable and that rebuilding them will take time.

Advanced missile inventories under pressure

The issue is particularly significant for expensive precision weapons and missile-defense interceptors.

The Congressional Budget Office, in a separate report released September 15, estimated that the United States had spent about $38 billion on the conflict through August 1. CBO estimated that replacing expended munitions would cost approximately $21.7 billion, including about $13.1 billion for interceptors and $7.3 billion for land-attack cruise missiles.

CBO also said the United States had used between one-half and two-thirds of its inventory of certain interceptors since June 2025, taking into account both the Iran conflict and other operations. It estimated that rebuilding those inventories could take at least five years.

The assessment is particularly relevant to systems such as Patriot and THAAD interceptors, which are designed to defend against ballistic and other missile threats, as well as long-range weapons including Tomahawk cruise missiles.

4

War has also damaged U.S. military infrastructure

The inspector general’s report goes beyond weapons inventories.

Iranian attacks damaged or destroyed hundreds of buildings and other structures at U.S. military installations across the Middle East, according to the watchdog’s assessment. Facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman and Jordan were among those affected.

The report also recorded damage to U.S. diplomatic facilities in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, with reported damage of approximately $184 million.

Military equipment was also lost or damaged. The report documented damage involving aircraft including F-15E fighters, an F-35A, KC-135 refueling aircraft and helicopters, while up to 30 MQ-9 Reaper drones were reported destroyed or damaged.

8

A broader cost is emerging

The munitions shortage is part of a wider financial and logistical burden.

The CBO’s September 15 assessment put the Defense Department’s cost of the conflict at approximately $38 billion through August 1. It said monthly costs could run between roughly $2 billion and $3 billion, depending on the intensity of combat.

CBO also noted that its estimate does not include every federal cost associated with the conflict and that the Defense Department did not provide requested information to the budget office, meaning the estimates carry uncertainty.

The report’s assessment of the munitions drawdown is therefore separate from the Pentagon inspector general’s June 30 accounting: the IG reported $33.4 billion in costs through June 30, while CBO subsequently estimated approximately $38 billion through August 1 using its own methodology.

Pentagon response and continuing debate

The findings have generated renewed debate over the condition of America’s weapons stockpiles.

President Donald Trump has publicly maintained that the United States has substantial weapons supplies and that production is being increased. Pentagon officials have also disputed descriptions suggesting that the U.S. military is unable to conduct required operations. Reuters reported that a Pentagon spokesperson said the military had what it needed to conduct strikes when directed.

The inspector general’s finding is more specific: certain inventories have experienced strategic shortfalls, while the defense industry faces constraints in replacing them.

Those positions are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A military can retain the ability to conduct current operations while simultaneously having inventories below desired levels or facing a lengthy process to restore them.

Why the findings matter

The reports raise questions about how quickly the United States can rebuild sophisticated weapons inventories after a high-intensity conflict.

The issue is particularly important because many advanced weapons cannot simply be replaced by increasing orders overnight. Production depends on specialized factories, components, explosives, propulsion systems, skilled labor and lengthy manufacturing and testing processes.

CBO’s assessment indicates that the consequences could extend beyond the Iran conflict, because lower interceptor inventories reduce the margin available for responding to another major missile threat while production catches up.

At the same time, the Pentagon says it is working to accelerate procurement and expand production capacity.

Key figures

The bottom line

The Pentagon inspector general’s report provides the clearest official confirmation so far that the Iran conflict has drawn down U.S. munitions inventories and exposed weaknesses in the capacity to rapidly replace some advanced weapons.

It does not establish that the U.S. military is incapable of continuing operations. Instead, it documents a different problem: the gap between wartime consumption and the speed at which the defense industry can rebuild certain inventories.

The Pentagon’s challenge now is to replenish those stocks while maintaining current military commitments and addressing the industrial bottlenecks identified by its own watchdog.

Source documents: The primary reference for this report is the Department of War Office of Inspector General’s Operation Epic Fury Lead Inspector General report to Congress, covering the period through June 30, 2026. Official Pentagon Inspector General report The Congressional Budget Office’s subsequent cost assessment was published September 15, 2026. Congressional Budget Office — Estimating the Cost of Combat Operations Against Iran

Image note: For publication, use properly licensed editorial or U.S. government/DVIDS photographs and retain the original photographer/agency credit.

Three individuals have petitioned the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to investigate allegations that an unidentified woman may have appeared in Parliament while holding herself out as then Dome-Kwabenya Member of Parliament, Sarah Adwoa Safo, during parliamentary proceedings in November 2021 and March 2022.

The petition, dated September 15, 2026, was submitted by Emmanuel Mawanye Kotin, Edwin Godwin Buckman, also known as Ebo Buckman, and Dr Ramzi Inusah.

The petitioners are seeking what they describe as a formal and impartial investigation into the identity of the woman shown in video footage and photographs associated with the parliamentary sittings of November 30, 2021, and March 29, 2022.

The petition was addressed to the Director-General of the then Bureau of National Investigation (BNI), now operating as the National Intelligence Bureau, with copies sent to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Inspector-General of Police, Speaker of Parliament, Clerk to Parliament and Controller of the Ghana Immigration Service.

According to the petition, the disputed sittings involved Parliament’s consideration and approval of the 2022 Budget Statement on November 30, 2021, and the passage of the Electronic Transfer Levy (E-Levy) Bill, 2022 on March 29, 2022.

The petitioners say video footage and still photographs circulated publicly during and after the November 2021 sitting, prompting some observers to question whether the woman occupying or associated with the Dome-Kwabenya parliamentary seat was actually Adwoa Safo.

Adwoa Safo, however, subsequently rejected the allegation and maintained that she was personally present in Parliament on the dates in question.

The petitioners stress that they are not presenting the allegation of personation as a fact. Rather, they want investigators to determine the identity of the woman in the disputed material and establish whether any criminal, security or parliamentary wrongdoing occurred.

They also acknowledge that Adwoa Safo’s denial is material evidence and should be considered fairly alongside the allegation.

A key concern raised in the petition is that, to the petitioners’ knowledge, the competing claims have not been resolved through a publicly reported forensic examination of the original video footage alongside Parliament’s contemporary attendance, access and security records.

They argue that an authoritative investigation could either clear Adwoa Safo and Parliament of what they describe as a continuing allegation or, if the allegation is substantiated, establish whether there were security failures, unlawful access, falsification of official records or assistance by other persons.

The petitioners also acknowledge the considerable time that has passed since the events occurred.

They argue, however, that the passage of time should not replace institutional fact-finding with speculation. They want investigators to determine what records were created, whether those records still exist and, where records have been destroyed, when and under what authorised retention or disposal policy that occurred.

The petition refers to Article 104 of the 1992 Constitution, which governs the determination of questions in Parliament and the applicable quorum.

The petitioners state that the mere presence of a non-member in the Chamber would not automatically invalidate a parliamentary decision.

They argue that any constitutional consequence would depend on evidence showing that the person was counted as a Member of Parliament, participated in a vote, affected the quorum or numerical result, or caused an official record to falsely reflect the presence or vote of the elected Member.

They further clarify that they are not asking investigators to declare the parliamentary proceedings invalid, noting that any such constitutional determination would be for a court with the appropriate jurisdiction.

The petition also refers to Section 134 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), which concerns personation.

It states that applying the provision would require proof of all the statutory ingredients, including the identity assumed by the person, the accused person’s knowledge and the intention required by law.

Depending on the evidence, the petition says, investigators could also uncover possible aiding and abetting, unlawful access, falsification or use of official records, or another offence.

The petitioners therefore want the facts investigated first and the appropriate legal characterisation determined from the evidence rather than beginning with a predetermined criminal charge.

The petition also recognises constitutional protections relating to parliamentary proceedings.

It cites Article 115 of the Constitution concerning parliamentary speech, debate and proceedings, as well as Parliament’s authority over contempt under Article 122 and the Speaker’s control of the Chamber and parliamentary records.

The petitioners say their complaint is not intended to challenge protected parliamentary speech or debate.

Instead, they say it concerns the alleged physical assumption of a Member’s identity by someone who may not have been a Member.

They have therefore asked investigators to work formally with the Speaker and Clerk to Parliament and obtain relevant parliamentary records through lawful processes that respect parliamentary privilege and institutional autonomy.

The petition makes a distinction between the proposed investigation and previous legal proceedings concerning the E-Levy.

It notes that Supreme Court proceedings challenging the passage of the Electronic Transfer Levy involved a different parliamentary sitting and issues concerning quorum and proof.

The petitioners say they are not seeking to reopen those proceedings or invalidate the E-Levy legislation, which has since been repealed.

Instead, their request is limited to the alleged personation during the November 30, 2021 proceedings and the March 29, 2022 sitting at which the E-Levy Bill was passed, as well as any criminal, security or institutional responsibility arising from the alleged conduct.

The petition identifies several specific matters for investigation.

Investigators are being asked to establish:

1. The true identity of the woman shown in the original parliamentary video and photographic material from November 30, 2021 and March 29, 2022.
2. Whether Adwoa Safo was physically present in Parliament at the relevant times and whether she entered through an authorised access point.
3. The provenance, completeness and authenticity of the disputed recordings, including whether publicly circulated copies were edited, compressed, mislabelled or taken from another date.
4. The relevant Hansard, Votes and Proceedings, division or voting records, attendance registers, accreditation records, CCTV recordings, official broadcast footage, access-control logs and security occurrence books.
5. Whether the woman shown spoke, voted, was counted for quorum, signed any record, used a Member’s access credentials or otherwise participated in parliamentary business.
6. Whether any parliamentary official, Member, security officer or another person can identify the woman or explain her entry, presence or movements.
7. Whether anyone knowingly facilitated, authorised, encouraged, concealed or subsequently falsified a record connected to the alleged conduct.
8. Whether relevant records still exist and, if they do not, the applicable retention policy, date and authority for their destruction or disposal.
9. Whether the evidence establishes personation or another offence, security breach, contempt or misconduct, and identifies anyone responsible.

The petitioners are asking for a preliminary assessment, followed, if the evidential threshold is met, by a formal criminal investigation.

They are also seeking formal liaison with the Speaker and Clerk to Parliament to ensure the lawful preservation, identification and production of relevant records.

Other requests include:

• Forensic authentication and comparison of the original recordings with publicly circulated copies.
• Interviews with Adwoa Safo and relevant Members of Parliament.
• Interviews with parliamentary officials, security personnel, media personnel and other identifiable witnesses.
• Investigation into possible facilitation, unlawful access, falsification of records, concealment or related criminal conduct.
• Referral of matters falling exclusively within Parliament’s disciplinary or contempt jurisdiction to the Speaker.
• Referral of any prosecutable offence to the Attorney-General in accordance with the law.
• Written acknowledgement of the petition and, subject to lawful confidentiality requirements and the rights of affected persons, communication of the eventual outcome to the petitioners.

The petitioners say they are prepared to provide complete, unedited copies of relevant recordings and documents in their possession.

They have also offered information concerning the source and chain of custody of the materials and requested an opportunity to make a formal statement and identify the specific portions of the material on which the petition is based.

They stressed that the investigation should be conducted without a public presumption of guilt, arguing that the public interest is served both by clearing a person who has been wrongly accused and by ensuring accountability where credible evidence establishes wrongdoing.

The petition was signed by: Emmanuel Mawanye Kotin, Edwin Godwin Buckman (Ebo Buckman), Dr Ramzi Inusah

Copies of the petition were also directed to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Inspector-General of Police, Speaker of Parliament, Clerk to Parliament and Controller of the Ghana Immigration Service.

The petition includes a schedule of proposed annexures covering the disputed video footage, still images, source and publication records, official parliamentary broadcast recordings, Hansard and Votes and Proceedings, a statement or interview from Adwoa Safo, witness information and any recent material that prompted the petition.

It also lists links to recordings identified as relating to the parliamentary proceedings of November 30, 2021 and March 29, 2022.

Sarfo

By Angel No Lie | KPD Online
Published: September 15, 2026

The ceremony was held on September 14, 2026, at the Peacock Theater in Los Angeles and hosted by actress Mariska Hargitay. The Television Academy says the 78th Emmys recognized television programming and individual achievements from the 2025–26 season.

Widow’s Bay dominated the comedy field, ultimately collecting 14 Emmy Awards, a record for a comedy series in a single year. The Pitt, meanwhile, won Outstanding Drama Series for a second consecutive year.

The biggest moments of the night

One of the evening’s most historic performances came from Matthew Rhys, who won Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series for Widow’s Bay and Outstanding Lead Actor in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie for The Beast in Me.

The double victory makes Rhys the first male performer to win lead acting Emmys across comedy, drama and limited-series categories.

Jean Smart also made Emmy history. She won Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series for Hacks for the fifth consecutive time, becoming the first woman to win the acting award for every season of a series. Her career total reached eight acting Emmys, tying her with Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Cloris Leachman.

For drama, Noah Wyle won Lead Actor for The Pitt, while Rhea Seehorn collected her first Emmy for Lead Actress in a Drama Series for Pluribus.

Full Winners and Nominees

Outstanding Drama Series

Winner: The Pitt

Nominees:

• The Diplomat
• The Gilded Age
• A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms
• Paradise
• The Pitt — WINNER
• Pluribus
• Slow Horses
• Your Friends & Neighbors

Outstanding Comedy Series

Winner: Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Abbott Elementary
• The Bear
• Hacks
• Margo’s Got Money Troubles
• Nobody Wants This
• Only Murders in the Building
• Shrinking
• Widow’s Bay — WINNER

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series

Winner: Noah Wyle — The Pitt

Nominees:

• Sterling K. Brown — Paradise
• Gary Oldman — Slow Horses
• Mark Ruffalo — Task
• Rufus Sewell — The Diplomat
• Noah Wyle — The Pitt — WINNER

Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series

Winner: Rhea Seehorn — Pluribus

Nominees:

• Carrie Coon — The Gilded Age
• Chase Infiniti — The Testaments
• Keri Russell — The Diplomat
• Rhea Seehorn — Pluribus — WINNER
• Zendaya — Euphoria

Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series

Winner: Tom Pelphrey — Task

Nominees:

• Patrick Ball — The Pitt
• Billy Crudup — The Morning Show
• Shawn Hatosy — The Pitt
• Gerran Howell — The Pitt
• Jack Lowden — Slow Horses
• Tom Pelphrey — Task — WINNER
• Carlos-Manuel Vesga — Pluribus

Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series

Winner: Allison Janney — The Diplomat

Nominees:

• Taylor Dearden — The Pitt
• Fiona Dourif — The Pitt
• Allison Janney — The Diplomat — WINNER
• Katherine LaNasa — The Pitt
• Sepideh Moafi — The Pitt
• Julianne Nicholson — Paradise
• Karolina Wydra — Pluribus

Comedy Categories

5

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series

Winner: Matthew Rhys — Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Yahya Abdul-Mateen II — Wonder Man
• Steve Carell — Rooster
• Matthew Rhys — Widow’s Bay — WINNER
• Jason Segel — Shrinking
• Martin Short — Only Murders in the Building

Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series

Winner: Jean Smart — Hacks

Nominees:

• Quinta Brunson — Abbott Elementary
• Ayo Edebiri — The Bear
• Elle Fanning — Margo’s Got Money Troubles
• Lisa Kudrow — The Comeback
• Jean Smart — Hacks — WINNER

Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series

Winner: Stephen Root — Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Colman Domingo — The Four Seasons
• Paul W. Downs — Hacks
• Harrison Ford — Shrinking
• Nick Offerman — Margo’s Got Money Troubles
• Stephen Root — Widow’s Bay — WINNER
• Michael Urie — Shrinking
• Tyler James Williams — Abbott Elementary

Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series

Winner: Kate O’Flynn — Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Dale Dickey — Widow’s Bay
• Hannah Einbinder — Hacks
• Janelle James — Abbott Elementary
• Kate O’Flynn — Widow’s Bay — WINNER
• Michelle Pfeiffer — Margo’s Got Money Troubles
• Megan Stalter — Hacks
• Jessica Williams — Shrinking

Limited or Anthology Series

Outstanding Limited or Anthology Series

Winner: DTF St. Louis

Nominees:

• All Her Fault
• The Beast in Me
• Beef
• DTF St. Louis — WINNER
• Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie

Winner: Matthew Rhys — The Beast in Me

Nominees:

• Riz Ahmed — Bait
• Jason Bateman — Black Rabbit
• Charlie Hunnam — Monster: The Ed Gein Story
• Oscar Isaac — Beef
• Matthew Rhys — The Beast in Me — WINNER

Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie

Winner: Sally Field — Remarkably Bright Creatures

Nominees:

• Claire Danes — The Beast in Me
• Sally Field — Remarkably Bright Creatures — WINNER
• Carey Mulligan — Beef
• Sarah Pidgeon — Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette
• Sarah Snook — All Her Fault

Supporting Actor in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie

Winner: David Harbour — DTF St. Louis

Nominees:

• Jason Bateman — DTF St. Louis
• Richard Gadd — Half Man
• David Harbour — DTF St. Louis — WINNER
• Richard Jenkins — DTF St. Louis
• Charles Melton — Beef
• Nick Offerman — Death by Lightning

Supporting Actress in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie

Winner: Linda Cardellini — DTF St. Louis

Nominees:

• Linda Cardellini — DTF St. Louis — WINNER
• Dakota Fanning — All Her Fault
• Laurie Metcalf — Monster: The Ed Gein Story
• Joy Sunday — DTF St. Louis
• Youn Yuh-jung — Beef
• Constance Zimmer — Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette

Directing and Writing

Outstanding Directing for a Drama Series

Winner: Saul Metzstein — Slow Horses

Nominees:

• Salli Richardson Whitfield — The Gilded Age
• Hanelle M. Culpepper — Paradise
• Noah Wyle — The Pitt
• Vince Gilligan — Pluribus
• Saul Metzstein — Slow Horses — WINNER
• Salli Richardson-Whitfield — Task

Outstanding Directing for a Comedy Series

Winner: Hiro Murai — Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Randall Einhorn — Abbott Elementary
• Christopher Storer — The Bear
• Andrew DeYoung — The Chair Company
• Lucia Aniello — Hacks
• Mary Lou Belli — The Ms. Pat Show
• Hiro Murai — Widow’s Bay — WINNER

Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series

Winner: Vince Gilligan — Pluribus

Nominees:

• Peter Ackerman & Debora Cahn — The Diplomat
• Valerie Chu — The Pitt
• Kirsten Pierre-Geyfman & R. Scott Gemmill — The Pitt
• Vince Gilligan — Pluribus — WINNER
• Will Smith — Slow Horses
• Brad Ingelsby — Task

Outstanding Writing for a Comedy Series

Winner: Katie Dippold — Widow’s Bay

Nominees:

• Quinta Brunson — Abbott Elementary
• Tim Robinson & Zach Kanin — The Chair Company
• Michael Patrick King & Lisa Kudrow — The Comeback
• Lucia Aniello, Paul W. Downs & Jen Statsky — Hacks
• Anthony King — Jury Duty Presents: Company Retreat
• Katie Dippold — Widow’s Bay — WINNER

Reality, Variety and Other Major Awards

Outstanding Reality Competition Program

Winner: The Traitors

Nominees:

• Dancing with the Stars
• RuPaul’s Drag Race
• Survivor
• Top Chef
• The Traitors — WINNER

Outstanding Variety Series

Winner: The Late Show with Stephen Colbert

Nominees:

• The Daily Show
• Jimmy Kimmel Live!
• Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
• The Late Show with Stephen Colbert — WINNER
• Saturday Night Live

Outstanding Television Movie

Winner: Remarkably Bright Creatures

Nominees:

• Heads of State
• Miss You, Love You
• People We Meet on Vacation
• Remarkably Bright Creatures — WINNER
• Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan: Ghost War

Outstanding Animated Program

Winner: South Park

Nominees:

• Bob’s Burgers
• Rick and Morty
• The Simpsons
• Smiling Friends
• South Park — WINNER
• Star Wars: Visions

Outstanding Live Variety Special

Winner: The Apple Music Super Bowl LX Halftime Show Starring Bad Bunny

Other nominees:

• 83rd Annual Golden Globes
• 68th Annual Grammy Awards
• 97th Academy Awards
• 78th Annual Tony Awards

Outstanding Pre-Recorded Variety Special

Winner: The Muppet Show

Nominees:

• Dave Chappelle: The Unstoppable …
• The Muppet Show — WINNER
• Nikki Glaser: Good Girl
• Taylor Swift | The Eras Tour | The Final Show
• Wicked: One Wonderful Night

Guest Acting Winners

Guest Actress, Drama: Shailene Woodley — Paradise

Guest Actor, Drama: Ernest Harden Jr. — The Pitt

Guest Actress, Comedy: Betty Gilpin — Widow’s Bay

Guest Actor, Comedy: Rob Reiner — The Bear

The Creative Arts Emmys also recognized numerous technical and behind-the-scenes achievements across television. The Television Academy held the Creative Arts ceremonies on September 5 and 6, ahead of the September 14 Primetime telecast.

The Night’s Biggest Winners

4

Widow’s Bay

The Apple TV+ series was the undisputed breakout winner, taking 14 awards, including Outstanding Comedy Series, Lead Actor for Matthew Rhys, Supporting Actor for Stephen Root, Supporting Actress for Kate O’Flynn, Writing for Katie Dippold and Directing for Hiro Murai.

The Pitt

The medical drama successfully defended its Outstanding Drama Series title. Noah Wyle also repeated his Lead Actor victory, giving the series another major Emmy night.

Jean Smart

Smart’s fifth consecutive comedy-actress Emmy for Hacks was among the ceremony’s most significant records. She became the first woman to win the acting award for every season of a series.

Matthew Rhys

Rhys had perhaps the most extraordinary individual night, taking home two lead acting awards for two different productions. His wins came for Widow’s Bay and The Beast in Me.

DTF St. Louis

The HBO limited series captured the top limited-series prize and several acting and creative awards, including wins for David Harbour and Linda Cardellini.

A changing television landscape

The 2026 Emmys reflected a television industry increasingly dominated by streaming platforms alongside traditional broadcasters. Established productions such as Hacks, The Pitt and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert shared the spotlight with newer titles such as Widow’s Bay and Pluribus.

The evening also provided recognition for television veterans while creating new milestones for performers including Rhys, Smart, Seehorn and Wyle. Michael J. Fox received the Bob Hope Humanitarian Award for his philanthropic work.

The complete official 2026 Emmy nominees-and-winners database is maintained by the Television Academy.

Editor’s note: This report is independently written and organized for news-portal publication. Award results have been cross-checked against the Television Academy and multiple contemporaneous reports, including AP and The Guardian.

Image note: Images shown above are sourced from current 2026 Emmy coverage/search results. Publication should use properly licensed editorial photographs before commercial reuse.