Salvador Dali Remorse, or Sphinx Embedded In Sand 1931
Interesting talk with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Who, also interesting, is a hedge fund man, not a central banker.
When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.
Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their… https://t.co/mHOHjXmyD3
— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) April 4, 2025
Treasury Sec Scott Bessent tells Tucker Zelensky lied to US officials’ faces 3 times about signing minerals deal.
Why? ‘You know who doesn’t sign that deal. Someone with their hand in the till.’
Unmissable, just to hear Bessent call Zelensky a 'vaudevillian.' Though I could… pic.twitter.com/X0cO9zIQ8t
— Margarita Simonyan (@M_Simonyan) April 4, 2025
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent:
"The bottom 50% of America has debt. They have credit card bills, they rent their homes, they have auto loans and we've got to give them some relief." pic.twitter.com/Y3uDPmjxOq
— The American Conservative (@amconmag) April 4, 2025
https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1908369961715704240
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reveals to Tucker Carlson the Federal Reserve has been pushing DEI, forcing regulatory policies and Climate Change
They’ve also been allowing bank executives to serve on their boards so they won’t regulate banks
This is a criminal enterprise pic.twitter.com/nIje8KOo4p
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2025
The blowing up of Nord Stream has become a global joke. Even the US Secretary of the Treasury laughs about some "Norwegian fishermen" bumping into the pipeline. pic.twitter.com/jukAlzjjup
— Alex Christoforou (@AXChristoforou) April 5, 2025
Full interview
Thanks @TuckerCarlson for a great conversation.
Economic security is national security. For the first time in decades, the American trading system will be fair to our workers again. We are revitalizing the American dream. https://t.co/Ecxk9HIPzi
— Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) April 4, 2025
Miller
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1908234227474104648
https://twitter.com/DerrickEvans4WV/status/1908322429358788785
Obama Tesla
Obama gave out 2.4 billion in loans to EV companies, including 465 million dollars to Tesla.
While every one of them folded, filed bankruptcy and robbed the taxpayer of the money, Elon Musk paid back the 465 million dollar government loan early, including the 20 million dollar… pic.twitter.com/OU3gQiLz9c
— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) April 5, 2025
Ursula
https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1908431783000993956
VDH
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1908535796438610335
EU
The EU explained truthfully. pic.twitter.com/bNIgtxRAAG
— Robin Monotti (@robinmonotti) April 4, 2025
“..poorer nations will be faster to lower import tariffs on USA goods because they have lower lobbying (bribe) income from corporations to govt. That’s what we should expect to see.”
• The First of Many – Vietnam Negotiates Zero Tariff Policy (CTH)
On March 27th, CTH shared the following: “Wealthy nations will attempt to maintain exports against President Trump tariffs by subsidizing their industries. Corporations have deeper pockets, and the politicians are used to the bribes, we call it “lobbying.” Therefore, the government responds by subsidizing the corporations [ie. the WEF business model]. How does the politics of opposition surface? …”Canada will subsidize their export industries, Germany will subsidize their auto industry, the EU will provide subsidies to their manufacturing powerhouses, and China will once again start subsidizing their manufacturing industry. Each of these nations will in turn, eventually, devalue their currency. However, poorer nations will be faster to lower import tariffs on USA goods because they have lower lobbying (bribe) income from corporations to govt. That’s what we should expect to see.” With the tariffs now triggered, it begins exactly as anticipated:
The economics of the thing is now colliding with the politics and the ideology, of the thing. Globalists are being confronted. The proverbial West will cleave according to their financial self-interest.The World Economic Forum (Build Back Better) model no longer views the USA as an ally. The MAGAnomic “Big Ugly” is underway. Countries will thrash and gnash their teeth; then surge in opposition, fail, then attempt to refoot and realign, then surge again and fail again. And so it will go… In 2019 Asia (ASEAN) was aligned as China was being confronted. The EU was the intended target for President Trump’s trade reset in term two as scheduled (2021-2025). However, COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting 2020 election threw a wrench in the plan. In 2025 the EU focus is now a priority. ASEAN nations quickly reassemble on the original terms of Trump T-1. For Trump T-2, China is quickly moved back into adversarial position and focus returns to the previously scheduled look at Europe.
Yes, the EU understand the agenda; they know what was planned then and put aside. In Trump T-2 there is no avoidance mechanism that can be deployed. The only play the EU has is defense. Europe is currently trying to arrange and coordinate a group of ideological allies to assist them. Those allies include Canada and to a lesser extent, Mexico. President Trump has shown a keen awareness of their best defense. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will not battle Donald J Trump. Factually, they all aligned their economic investment policy to gain from Trump confronting China. ASEAN countries will not battle President Trump; they will comply. Africa will try to walk a fine line between China and the USA. However, Africa will not confront President Trump directly and, if push comes to shove, they will likely not support China using their belt-and-road leverage to attempt transnational shipping as a tool for U.S tariff avoidance. [Insert a Trump-favorable Russia into this regional dynamic.]
It is the EU and the workaround relationships they created within Mexico and Canada who will fight the global trade reset with ferocity. Everything in the geopolitical world of economic opposition to President Trump will center around Europe. PARIS, April 3 (Reuters) – “French President Emmanuel Macron called on Thursday for European companies to suspend planned investment in the United States after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping global tariffs on American imports. “Investments to come or investments announced in recent weeks should be suspended until things are clarified with the United States,” Macron said during a meeting with French industry representatives. The comments come weeks after French shipping firm CMA CGM announced plans to invest $20 billion in the U.S. to build shipping logistics and terminals, a plan that was hailed by President Trump at the time and mentioned again in his Wednesday speech unveiling the tariffs. French electrical equipment supplier Schneider Electric (SCHN.PA) said late last month it would invest $700 million in the country to support U.S. energy infrastructure to power AI growth.”
The EU judicial and intelligence services hit Marine Le Pen for a reason. Canada – Mark Carney, France – Macron, Ukraine – Zelenskyy, the EU Commission and Ursula Von der Leyen, all the way through NATO and into the German/Romanian elections and beyond, it’s all connected to the geopolitical dynamics of money, power and globalist economics. Stay elevated. Keep watching. President Donald Trump is a master at the big picture stuff. [ps. President Trump assigned every single one of those country specific tariff rates personally. Few understand why.]
Zero tariff
https://twitter.com/GeorgePapa19/status/1908212617036128400
“Cambodia proposes to negotiate with Your Honorable’s administration at the earliest convenient time..”
• Cambodian PM Offers To Reduce Tariffs, Negotiate With Trump (JTN)
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet wrote to President Donald Trump offering to drop tariff levels certain U.S. imports and negotiate. “Cambodia proposes to negotiate with Your Honorable’s administration at the earliest convenient time and wishes to request that your esteemed government consider postponing the above-mentioned tariff implementation,” he wrote on Friday. “I would like to inform Your Honorable President that the existing practice of Cambodia’s maximum tariff rate tops at 35%. In expression of our good faith and in spirit of strengthening our bilateral trade relations, Cambodia is committed to promote U.S. based product imports with an immediate reduction of 19 product categories from our maximum 35% tariff bound rate to 5% applied tariff rate,” he added.
He wrote that Cambodia “remains fully committed to engaging in constructive and productive dialogue with the U.S. government to further deepen our bilateral trade, so that both nations and peoples can enjoy the tangible benefits from these significant trade relations.” Many shoe manufacturers have located in Cambodia.
When the elections are over. That an unelected candidate will likely win.
• Here’s When Canada Will Cave on Trump’s Tariffs (Margolis)
I have no doubt that Canada will cave to Trump on tariffs. The question is: when? “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary expressed confidence that the ongoing trade tension between Canada and the U.S. would eventually lead to a resolution, and he even predicted when. In an interview with Yahoo Finance, O’Leary said he believes that while the current rhetoric surrounding tariffs might appear grim, there is a strong economic incentive for both nations to come to the negotiating table and reduce the barriers that have caused friction in recent years.
O’Leary emphasized the importance of distinguishing between the “noise” of political rhetoric and the underlying “signal” that points toward economic cooperation. While current tensions have made it seem nearly impossible for the two nations to agree on trade policies, O’Leary argued that a combined economic effort between the U.S. and Canada could pose a significant challenge to China. “If you combine those economies… it would be much stronger against China if there were no tariffs between Canada and the United States,” he said.
The logic behind this argument lies in the historical and economic interdependence of the two countries. According to O’Leary, Canada’s economy has been deeply tied to the U.S. for over a century, with 75% of Canada’s output sold to the U.S. for more than 120 years. Furthermore, 17 U.S. states consider Canada their top trading partner, while 28 states rank Canada as their second-largest partner. “It would be economic suicide not to work this out,” O’Leary stated, underscoring the critical importance of a favorable trade agreement for both nations. O’Leary predicted that Canada will wait until after Canada’s upcoming election, which is set to take place in about five weeks, before caving to Trump on tariffs. Until then, he sees no substantive progress taking place.
He speculated that the next leader of Canada will quickly prioritize resolving trade issues with the U.S. “That person will fly to Washington immediately and start negotiations, which I would call NAFTA III,” O’Leary remarked, referring to the possibility of a new trade deal similar to the USMCA (formerly NAFTA) that would replace the existing tariff policies. The potential resolution is also tied to Canada’s political dynamics. O’Leary pointed out that the current Canadian leadership has been distracted by the trade dispute and other domestic issues. He specifically criticized Mark Carney, the interim prime minister, for attempting to use the Trump trade issue as a means of deflecting attention away from Canada’s internal economic struggles. O’Leary implied that Carney’s leadership has only exacerbated Canada’s difficulties. “Maybe he’ll get elected; maybe he won’t. Nobody knows right now,” he said, adding that no meaningful changes will occur until after the election.
Let's take the Canadian situation. If you combine those economies, I'm not saying buying the country, but if you combine the economies, we would be much stronger against China. If there were no tariffs between Canada and the United States, they had a common currency, and they… pic.twitter.com/edTed5X6pA
— Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful (@kevinolearytv) April 5, 2025
In conclusion, O’Leary’s outlook suggests that, while the current trade situation between Canada and the U.S. is fraught with challenges, both countries stand to benefit immensely from removing tariffs and working together. The next Canadian leader, O’Leary believes, will be compelled to seek a deal with the U.S. once the political dust settles, which means that a breakthrough will likely occur soon after the election.
“Carney is basically saying, ‘I know I wiped out the economy… but don’t worry about that. Let’s just stay focused on the evil Trump south of the border.’”
• Mr. Wonderful Destroys CNN With Masterful Defense of Trump Tariffs (Margolis)
Businessman and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary — also known as Mr. Wonderful — delivered a pointed and unapologetic defense of President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs on CNN Friday night, brushing aside media hysteria and market hand-wringing with characteristic bluntness. “You know, I try and focus on the signal, not the noise,” O’Leary said, cutting through the typical cable news panic. “Harris is not president. Trump is. And if you didn’t like him 12 years ago and don’t like him now, I get it. But that’s not the issue.” What is the issue, according to O’Leary, is trade fairness — something that has been ignored for far too long in favor of politically correct diplomacy that left the U.S. at a disadvantage. “Reciprocal tariffs… we’ve got 60 countries on the list,” he explained. “Already, you’ve heard from Thailand, Cambodia, the EU, and Sen. Kennedy in Louisiana calling for zero tariffs between Canada and the United States. The whole point is it’s a negotiation.”
The investor made it clear that Trump’s hard-nosed approach is how you get to free trade—by making it costly not to come to the table. “If you can get the zero tariffs, that’s the best outcome. That’s called free trade. That’s 50% of why these tariffs are put on.” Even when host Laura Coates challenged him over the economic pain some Americans feel from market instability, O’Leary didn’t flinch. “Yeah, I hate volatility,” he admitted. “But the market corrects all the time. It generally goes down 15 to 20%. It has proven over a hundred years plus — it’s a great buying opportunity.” Former White House official Anthony Scaramucci, now a regular Trump critic, tried to refute O’Leary’s stance by claiming that the tariffs weren’t actually reciprocal and calling the policy “arbitrary nonsense.” He argued that global trust in the Trump administration had eroded.
“The risk premium in the global markets has now gone up,” Scaramucci warned, adding that “they have no idea what they’re doing.” But O’Leary wasn’t buying it. Pressed on reports that big-name CEOs are preparing to freeze hiring or lay off workers due to tariff uncertainty, O’Leary said their concerns are overblown. “They shouldn’t be worried. At the end of the day, the opportunity is immense.” He also dismantled the idea that Trump’s trade stance is alienating allies, turning the focus back on Canada’s struggling leadership. “Carney in Canada… is not an elected official. He is a stop-gap measure. He has no mandate from the Canadian people,” O’Leary said. “His party wiped out the Canadian economy. It’s highly likely he won’t win the election.”
Kevin O'Leary defends President Trump's reciprocal tariffs with ease on CNN.
"The economy is just fine. Now maybe you don't like watching sausage being made. Obviously Trump doesn't care." pic.twitter.com/CtyLu5eDOP
— Thomas Hern (@ThomasMHern) April 5, 2025
Calling Carney’s anti-Trump rhetoric a diversion tactic, O’Leary argued that Canadians are waking up. “Carney is basically saying, ‘I know I wiped out the economy… but don’t worry about that. Let’s just stay focused on the evil Trump south of the border.’” “Canadians aren’t that stupid,” O’Leary added. “They figured out that their biggest trading partner is the United States… this will, too, just like a marriage — sometimes there’s a tiff. And you kiss and make up.” While others hyperventilate over style, O’Leary focused on substance and came out swinging with a calm, reasoned, and deeply pragmatic case for Trump’s trade agenda.
Once it’s banned: no value. Before that: a very valuable negotiating tool.
• China Delays Approval of TikTok’s US Asset Spin-Off Due to New Tariffs (Sp.)
Chinese authorities have not approved a deal to spin off TikTok’s US assets due to recently announced US tariffs on Chinese goods, Reuters reported, citing two sources familiar with the matter. The report said the deal was largely finalized by April 2, and would have involved spinning off the social media’s US operations into a new US-based company with a majority stake in it held by US investors. ByteDance’s stake in the deal would have been 20%.
The report said the deal has already been approved by TikTok’s existing and new investors, ByteDance and the US authorities. On Friday, US President Donald Trump revealed that he would sign an executive order allowing TikTok to continue operating in the United States for another 75 days as negotiations regarding its acquisition progress.Later in the day, ByteDance, the Chinese parent company of TikTok, said that it has been in discussions with the US government on a potential way forward to resolve the ongoing issue concerning the video app company operation in the United States. On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10% base tariff on all imports to the United States starting April 5, while higher, reciprocal tariffs on countries and territories with which the US has the largest trade deficits will take effect on April 9. NBC News reported on Friday, citing a person familiar with the talks, that Trump’s announcement of reciprocal tariffs disrupted a deal for TikTok’s US division that had already been approved by the Chinese government.
“The rhetoric in Europe just doesn’t match the reality,” Vance said. “And they start trying to throw presidential candidates and political leaders off the ballot.”
““[She’s] leading in some polls and [this is] over an incredibly minor charge that implicates, by the way, her staff not even Marine Le Pen herself.”
• Vance Warns Of ‘Greatest Threat To Europe’ (RT)
US Vice President J.D. Vance has taken aim at the EU’s leadership, warning that the bloc faces its greatest threat not from external powers like Russia or China, but from internal policy failures. Speaking in an interview with Rob Schmitt of Newsmax on Thursday, Vance voiced concerns about Europe’s approaches to migration, defense spending, and treatment of political opposition. “We have to appreciate that the greatest threat to Europe is not China or Russia,” Vance said. “The greatest threat to Europe is from within. It’s migration policies that destroy the fundamental cultural bedrock of Europe. It’s economic policies that make them less competitive.” Vance criticized what he described as a contradiction between European rhetoric and action, particularly in relation to Russia.
“These guys on the one hand, their leadership I’m talking about, say that Russia is the biggest threat in the entire world,” he said. “Meanwhile, they buy billions and billions of dollars of Russian gas, and they spend 1% of their GDP on defense, while we’re spending three or four percent of our GDP.” He further argued that Europe’s political direction was straying from democratic norms, especially in how opposition figures are treated. “The rhetoric in Europe just doesn’t match the reality,” Vance said. “And they start trying to throw presidential candidates and political leaders off the ballot.” Referencing French presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen, Vance suggested the EU establishment was targeting her unfairly.
“[She’s] leading in some polls and [this is] over an incredibly minor charge that implicates, by the way, her staff not even Marine Le Pen herself. They’re trying to throw her in prison and throw her off the ballot. Look, that’s not democracy.” While reaffirming the US alliance with Europe, Vance expressed concern that ongoing internal issues could undermine the transatlantic relationship. “We want our friends to share our values. And the Europeans, they are absolutely 100% our friends. But that relationship, we’re just saying it’s gonna get stressed and it’s gonna get tested if they keep on trying to throw opposition leaders in jail and they stop respecting their own borders.” Vance made similar remarks in February when he told the Munich Security Conference that while Washington would make every effort to achieve a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, Europe has bigger problems.
“The real battle is one of mobilization. Eleven million voters chose the National Rally in the last election. Their voices must be heard..”
• Marine Le Pen and Her Party Refuse to Back Down (Sp.)
The National Rally (RN) party will continue serving as the voice of millions of French citizens who support RN parliamentary faction leader Marine Le Pen by fighting for her return to the presidential race in 2027 despite her recent conviction, Thierry Mariani, an RN party member, told Sputnik. On Monday, a Parisian court convicted Marine Le Pen of embezzling European Parliament funds by employing fictitious assistants for party members. She was sentenced to a five-year ban from running for public office, effective immediately, as well as to four years in prison, including two years suspended and the other two to be served with an electronic bracelet outside of jail.
“We will keep running and defending the voice of millions of French citizens. Right now, the fight is to ensure Marine Le Pen’s right to run in the presidential election. She remains our candidate as long as there is even a glimmer of hope. She is a fighter, and she’s confident she will win this battle,” Mariani said. He argued that the ruling raised questions about the motivations behind the legal proceedings and the broader implications for democracy in France. “If Marine is barred from running, it will mean that France has crossed into an anti-democratic regime,” the lawmaker stressed. Mariani insisted that Le Pen’s case was weaponized by her political opponents to undermine her candidacy.
“This is a politically motivated conviction! Originating from an administrative disagreement with the European Parliament, this case has been weaponized by our political opponents, who accuse Marine Le Pen of employing parliamentary assistants to do political work… which is precisely what they are supposed to do!” Mariani said. According to him, the timing of the ruling could be seen as an effort to sideline Le Pen and her party at the next presidential election. “And after ten years of waiting to be judged, the conviction conveniently comes just ahead of a crucial presidential election for France in 2027,” he pointed out.
According to the RN lawmaker, Le Pen remains resolute in her commitment to “fight to the end” as legal avenues are still open, with an appeal expected in spring 2026. The National Rally recognizes that the battle has extended beyond the courtroom, Mariani said. He said the party needed to continue mobilizing its voter base and ensuring that their voices are heard. “The real battle is one of mobilization. Eleven million voters chose the National Rally in the last election. Their voices must be heard,” Mariani concluded. Le Pen said she would appeal the ban on public office with France’s Constitutional Council and the European Court of Human Rights. She said she hoped the sentence would be overturned in time for the election.
Rubio need to talk to Lavrov.
• Clarity About Ukraine Peace ‘A Matter Of Weeks’ – Rubio (RT)
Russia’s stance regarding the potential peace settlement of the Ukraine conflict will be known in the near future, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed. During a March 18 phone call, Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to his US counterpart Donald Trump’s suggestion that both sides implement a 30-day halt on attacks on energy facilities. Since then, Moscow has repeatedly accused Kiev of violating the terms of the agreement. Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rubio reiterated that Trump wants to put an end to the Ukraine conflict. However, “you can’t end a war unless both sides agree,” Rubio stated. “We will know soon enough – in a matter of weeks, not months – whether Russia is serious about peace or not. I hope they are. It would be good for the world if that war ended, but obviously we have to test that proposition,” he said.
Rubio also claimed that the Ukrainian side had shown “a willingness to enter, for example, into a complete ceasefire to create space for negotiation.”However, the Russian Ministry of Defense stated on Saturday that starting from the morning of Friday, April 4, “the Kiev regime, contrary to all statements and commitments made by Zelensky to the American side regarding a 30-day cessation of strikes on Russian energy facilities, significantly increased the number of unilateral attacks using drones and artillery munitions against the energy infrastructure of Russian regions.”
Rubio stated that if Russia isn’t ready for peace, “we’ll have to re-evaluate where we stand and what we do moving forward about it, but we’ll be in no different a position than we are today or we were when he took office.” This week, Putin’s investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev visited Washington for talks with White House officials. Commenting on the results of the negotiations, he said that some progress was made and highlighted the parties’ understanding of how they can move towards finalizing the conflict. Still, Dmitriev warned that third parties were trying to derail normalization efforts initiated by Trump in February.
“..Trump is in no hurry to conclude what we will call “The Ukrainian Problem”, a sort of “quantum politics” puzzle, to add a touch of irony. The problem is simple to solve, but he keeps it complex because it suits him..”
• Washington Calls Kiev: The Plan Has Changed (Pacini)
Washington’s evolving position on Ukraine reflects a broader shift in U.S. foreign policy, particularly in its approach to security commitments. Trump’s story that he would end the conflict in 24 hours was fine for saying goodnight to the children, but for adults it never worked. However, the Kremlin has not underestimated this argument, and for some time now has been conducting parallel negotiations to agree on the resolution of some very delicate international issues (to which I will dedicate at least two of my next articles). Ukraine has been a thorn in the side of all of Europe, a move that was clear from the start, a move by the U.S. administration to destabilize the old continent, in particular to undermine the dominance of the United Kingdom and try to redefine the thalassocratic maps. But first things first.
Initially, after the 2014 Maidan revolution and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the United States framed its support for Ukraine as a principled stand against so-called “Russian aggression”, supporting Kiev with military aid, specific training and diplomatic support. Even then, it resembled NATO’s broader deterrence framework, in which U.S. commitments, while not formal security guarantees, were seen as a demonstration of American resolve. This was later confirmed by the facts. Over time, and especially under the Trump and Biden administrations, Washington’s position has increasingly aligned with a model of transactional delegation: allies and partners are expected to bear a greater financial burden in exchange for protection. This echoes a neo-feudal logic in which the hegemon offers selective security assistance, subordinated to its own interests and to the contributions of the “vassal”. After all, NATO was born for this very reason… at the behest of London, but with delegation to Washington.
Aid as an investment, not as a guarantee Problems arose when Russia – and the truly free world in general – decided not to fall into the classic input/output trap. Although Washington has provided Ukraine with significant military and financial aid, this support lacks the binding security guarantees that NATO membership would entail. This is a condition that is always requested by European leaders, whose interests are certainly more direct and immediate than those of a power that is several thousand kilometers away. The United States carefully avoids direct military intervention en masse, emphasizing that its assistance is conditional rather than absolute. This is a fact. If the presence of American soldiers in Ukraine since the beginning of the year 2000 is a known fact and confirmed by several sources, it is equally true that America has not cleared its own soldiers from the front line, leaving this burden and honor to its European cousins.
A sort of protection mechanism was therefore set in motion, based on the balance of costs and benefits, as is normal in a low-profile international war. The Biden administration, despite public rhetoric of “standing with Ukraine for as long as it takes,” has not moved without prolonged and exhausting negotiations, reflecting an evolving strategy in which security assistance is designed not to guarantee victory, but to sustain a controlled conflict without overextending U.S. commitments. In fact, the interest in this extension is mainly European: In short, it allows Germany to save itself from banking collapse and to save the Euro, which is now worthless, it allows France to save its own banks, which without the income from the colonies no longer function as before, and it allows the UK to keep the pound high in the skies of Europe, even if Anglo-Saxon realpolitik is no longer as old fashioned as it once was.
In recent debates on aid packages, U.S. lawmakers, particularly Republicans, have pushed for assistance to be conditional on Europe sharing the burden or Ukraine self-financing through assets held abroad. This suggests that Washington does not see Ukraine as a dependent client, but as a party that should “pay” for protection, similar to the U.S. position towards NATO allies under Trump. Unlike Cold War-era alliances, in which Washington’s security commitments were relatively clear, the Ukrainian situation demonstrates a more fluid model in which support is subject to political calculations. The United States deliberately avoids clarifying the final scope of its support, using ambiguity as a tool both to dissuade Russia and to put pressure on Kiev to accept Washington’s conditions. It is therefore logical that Trump is in no hurry to conclude what we will call “The Ukrainian Problem”, a sort of “quantum politics” puzzle, to add a touch of irony. The problem is simple to solve, but he keeps it complex because it suits him. Elementary, my dear Watson.
“..7,000 probationary workers were laid off in February but are being reinstated due to court orders..”
• IRS To Sack 25% Of Its Employees – WaPo (RT)
The US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) plans to eliminate around 20,000 jobs, The Washington Post reported on Friday, citing internal records and people familiar with the matter. The downsizing of nearly a quarter of the agency’s workforce comes as part of a broader White House cost-cutting campaign. Shortly after assuming office on January 20, US President Donald Trump launched a program to eliminate “wasteful spending” and bureaucracy across federal agencies. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), established by Trump and led by Elon Musk, has been pressing ahead with efforts to streamline federal operations in an attempt to cut $2 trillion in spending by 2026.
The IRS will reportedly eliminate its Office of Civil Rights and Compliance, dismissing around 130 employees from a division responsible for protecting taxpayers from discrimination in the tax code, audits, and investigations. The remaining staff of the office is expected to be transferred to other departments. “This action is being taken to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the IRS,” an email sent to employees cited by the newspaper reads. Over 4,000 employees reportedly accepted deferred resignation offers earlier this year, while an additional 7,000 probationary workers were laid off in February but are being reinstated due to court orders. At least some of those employees have been told they could return to work on April 14, according to the Post.
It remains unclear if the current downsizing includes the staff already targeted earlier this year, the outlet noted, adding that the IRS employed around 100,000 people as of January. In March, employees at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) told the Post that the Department of State had fired up to half of the institute’s 600-person staff. Some employees were reportedly offered severance packages or extended health insurance in exchange for signing waivers of their right to sue. USIP was founded by Congress in the mid-1980s with the declared goal of promoting conflict resolution worldwide. At the same time, Reuters reported, citing an internal memo, that all remaining jobs at the US Agency for International Development (USAID) would be eliminated in July and September. USAID missions worldwide would reportedly be closed, and the agency’s remaining functions would be folded into the State Department.
Do they have a legal right to conspire against politicians?
• Hundreds of Law Firms Oppose Trump Order Against Perkins Coie (DS)
More than 500 law firms led by former Barack Obama solicitor general Donald Beaton Verrilli Jr. came out on Friday against an executive order targeting the firm that represented Hilary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2016. President Donald Trump issued an order targeting Perkins Coie’s access to government contracts, buildings and security clearances in early March, prompting the firm to sue the administration. “The Executive Order at issue in this case, and the others like it, take direct aim at several of the Nation’s leading law firms and seek to cow every other firm, large and small, into submission,” over 500 law firms argued in an amicus brief supporting Perkins Coie. Trump has issued several orders against major law firms with ties to Democrats that limited their ability to do business with the government.
Some, like Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, the firm that hired former Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, have struck deals to provide pro bono services to the administration in exchange for Trump dropping the orders. Others like Perkins Coie have challenged the orders in court. “On the basis of almost-decade-old allegations, the Executive Order subjects an entire firm, as well as its clients and personnel, to draconian punishment—including the revocation of its attorneys’ security clearances, the potential loss of clients that contract with the United States, and denial of access to federal buildings and facilities,” the law firms’ brief continues. “Such disabilities would threaten the survival of any law firm.”
District Court Judge Beryl Howell temporarily blocked parts of the order involving the firm’s government contracts and access to government buildings in March. She denied the Trump administration’s effort to disqualify her from the case due to “partiality” against the president on March 26, writing their strategy was “designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system.” Several legal advocacy groups with different ideological leanings, including left-wing groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and others like the Foundation For Individual Rights and Expression, also joined a brief in support of Perkins Coie on Thursday.
“If allowed to stand, these pressure tactics will have broad and lasting impacts on Americans’ ability to retain legal counsel in important matters, to arrange their business and personal affairs as they like, and to speak their minds,” the organizations wrote. The Department of Justice argued Wednesday that the order is “within the bounds of established executive authority.” “The Executive Order directs agencies to do what they should already be doing, declines to contract with entities who act inconsistently with valid social policies regarding discrimination, and calls for the lawful examination of security clearances and government access of employees of Plaintiff’s firm,” the DOJ stated in a filing.
? You tell me.
• Judge Orders Trump Admin to Return Alleged MS-13 Gang Member to the US (Heine)
A federal judge ruled Friday the U.S. government acted illegally when it deported an MS-13 gang member to El Salvador and ordered that he must be returned to the United States.“This was an illegal act,” said U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland, an Obama appointee. She gave the administration until 11:59 p.m. Monday to free Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a citizen of El Salvador, from the El Salvadoran prison where he is being held, and return him to the United States where he is not a citizen. Abrego Garcia, 29, was among the hundreds of illegal immigrants—a large percentage of them MS-13 and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua gang members —expelled from the U.S. to El Salvador last month.
Although the Trump administration acknowledged in court records earlier this week it made an “administrative error” when it deported Garcia without an interview, the fact remains that he has no legal status in the United States. Garcia crossed the border illegally in 2012 by his own admission, and claimed he had to flee El Salvador as a teenager to escape gang violence when he was detained in 2019. Both the original immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals found there was sufficient evidence that Garcia was a member of MS-13 and, as such, a danger to the public. According to USA Today, “Garcia was pulled over by federal immigration agents near his home in Beltsville, Maryland, on March 12 and arrested.” Three days later, he was expelled and sent back to El Salvador even though he had won a court order six years earlier barring his removal.
Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, and their 5-year-old son, who are both U.S. citizens, sued the government demanding his return. During a hearing on Friday, Xinis ripped into Justice Department lawyers over Abrego Garcia’s arrest and questioned the government’s claim it could not get him back. If federal authorities were able to strike terms and conditions for his placement in El Salvador, “then certainly they have the functional control to unwind the decision – the wrong decision,” she said. The judge questioned the government’s claim that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13. “In a court of law, when someone is accused in such a violent and predatory organization, it comes in the form of an indictment, complaint, a criminal proceeding that has then a robust process so that we can assess the facts,” she said. “I haven’t heard that from the government.”
In response to the ruling, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested on X that the judge take it up with the president of El Salvador. “We suggest the Judge contact President @nayibbukele because we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador,” she wrote. Bukele, meanwhile, responded to the judge’s order on X with a gif of a confused bunny.
Department of Homeland Security Spokeswoman Tricia Ohio told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum Friday that Garcia was “involved in human trafficking.” “He’s actually a member of MS-13 and was involved in human trafficking,” Ohio insisted, arguing that he needed to be “locked up” either in the U.S. or in El Salvador. She added that MS-13 “is a gang that rapes, maims, and kills Americans for sport” who “should not be on U.S. soil.” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem also told Newsmax Friday that Garcia was a “gang member and violent criminal” who didn’t belong in the United States.
“..radical judges” will “soon learn that denying” President Trump his “constitutionally granted authorities is a gross infringement of the law and will not stand on appeal.”
• The Clash Between Trump and Activist Judges Is About to Go Nuclear (Margolis)
As President Donald Trump attempts to enact the agenda that Americans elected him to do, a serious showdown is brewing with federal judges who have taken it upon themselves to challenge his directives. Officials close to the administration are signaling that activist judges who oppose Trump’s orders may soon face accountability for their rogue decisions after yet another activist judge blocked its efforts to remove intelligence agency employees connected to DEI programs. The administration warned that “radical judges” will “soon learn that denying” President Trump his “constitutionally granted authorities is a gross infringement of the law and will not stand on appeal.”
U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga, a President George W. Bush appointee in Virginia, issued the preliminary injunction on Monday ahead of a 5 p.m. deadline issued by CIA Director John Ratcliffe for the agents to resign or be fired, allowing them to appeal and stay on the federal payroll. The injunction was part of a lawsuit filed by more than a dozen intelligence agents from the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence who were found to be involved in, or working on, DEI programs in the department. “The plaintiffs face termination without any suggestion of wrongdoing or poor performance,” Trenga said after the ruling, according to Politico. “Simply requiring the government to follow its regulations is a minimal burden.”
The employees, who were abruptly placed on administrative leave in January, were facing termination as part of the Trump administration’s effort, supported by Elon Musk, to eliminate DEI-related programs and initiate a large-scale government overhaul. Musk also visited the CIA headquarters on Tuesday to discuss his government efficiency program. The 19 unnamed employees behind the lawsuit claimed last month that their involvement in DEI programs was part of “temporary assignments” and that they also carried out other duties as intelligence officers. They also insisted that “poor performance” had nothing to do with their termination. The Trump administration has repeatedly argued that federal district judges have overstepped their authority by issuing nationwide injunctions. These instances of judicial activism have sparked outrage among administration officials, who argue that the courts are abusing their power.
“These radical judges will soon learn that denying the Chief Executive his constitutionally granted authorities is a gross infringement of the law and will not stand on appeal,” Trump administration spokesperson Harrison Fields told Fox News Digital. Several U.S. District Court judges have issued nationwide injunctions against key Trump policies that were well within the authority of the president. More nationwide injunctions have been issued against the Trump administration than any other in history due to left-wing organizations forum-shopping for judges whom they know will rule how they want without any regard to the U.S. Constitution. “Ending the bigotry of DEI and ensuring the federal government runs efficiently might be a crime to Democrats, but it’s in line with the law,” Fields added.
“..history zigs and zags and there are times of conflict and there are times of stupidity and there are times of danger.”
• Obama Lashes Out At Trump (RT)
Former US President Barack Obama has said that he is “deeply concerned” by the policies that the country’s current leader, Donald Trump, has pursued since the start of his second term in office. During his speech at Hamilton College in New York State on Thursday, Obama criticized the Trump administration’s protectionist economic policies, attempts to tackle federal spending, clampdown on immigration, and treatment of the media. He denounced the sweeping tariffs imposed by Trump earlier this week on the majority of US trading partners, saying: “I do not think what we just witnessed… is going to be good for America.”
However, the 63-year-old Democrat stressed that the tariffs are just one policy, and that he is “more deeply concerned with a federal government that threatens universities if they don’t give up students who are exercising their right to free speech,” referring to actions taken against pro-Palestinian demonstrators. The Trump administration’s pressure on law firms and its decision to bar AP journalists from accessing the Oval Office reflect “a kind of behavior [that] is contrary to the basic compact we have as Americans,” the former president said.
“Imagine if I had pulled Fox News’ credentials from the White House press corps. It is unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me or a whole bunch of my predecessors,” he argued. The former president concluded his message by saying that “history zigs and zags and there are times of conflict and there are times of stupidity and there are times of danger.” Trump slammed Obama at the height of the race for the White House last year, calling the former president “a jerk” and saying that he “divides this country” by campaigning for then-Democratic contender Kamala Harris.
“..how dare Obama imply that he was somehow held to a high standard that Trump is not..”
• Obama’s Masterclass in Gaslighting (Margolis)
Allegedly, Barack Obama was going to take a step back from meddling in politics after the 2024 election, but he spoke at Hamilton College this week, and, of course, he had to weigh in on the new Trump administration. His stunning display of historical revisionism and self-righteous indignation would be comedic if it weren’t so dangerous to our republic. “Uh, let… Imagine if I had done any of this,” Obama pontificated to his adoring audience, playing his favorite game of hypotheticals while conveniently ignoring his own track record. “Let, let, let me just… I, I, I just wanna be clear about this. I- i- i- ima- imagine that… Imagine if I had pulled Fox News’ credentials from the White House press corps.”
His lack of comfort talking about this is obvious from his stammering. “Ima- i- i- i- i- imagine if I had, had said to law firms that were representing parties that were upset with policies my administration had initiated, that you will not be allowed into government buildings. We will punish you economically for dissenting from the Affordable Care Act or the Iran deal. We will ferret out students who protest against my policies. It’s unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me or a… whole bunch of my predecessors.” Just watch how uncomfortable Obama is pushing this nonsense. It’s like he knows he’s full of it:
Obama is back to whine about Trump: "Imagine if I had done any of this."
"It’s unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me."
The Obama administration weaponized the IRS against conservatives, spied on a Fox News… pic.twitter.com/RID0eoZ9om
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) April 5, 2025
Seriously, how dare Obama imply that he was somehow held to a high standard that Trump is not. We all remember his presidency, the scandals and corruption that the mainstream media ignored and his own party pretended didn’t happen. Let’s talk about what’s really “unimaginable.” The Obama administration was under a dark cloud of scandal from even before he took office. Obama was implicated in trying to sell his Senate seat. He had wanted Valerie Jarrett to take his place in the Senate and would have given Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich a cabinet position for doing so, but she ultimately declined the Senate seat to become Obama’s top White House advisor. Blagojevich went to prison for his role in the scandal. Obama did not.
And then there’s Obama’s Justice Department labeling Fox News reporter James Rosen as a criminal conspirator and potential spy. Or when it secretly seized phone records from Associated Press journalists. Apparently, those memories have conveniently slipped from the former president’s mind. The breathtaking hypocrisy doesn’t stop there. Obama’s sudden concern for press freedom and government overreach would be more convincing if his administration hadn’t been the most hostile to press freedom in modern history, weaponizing the Espionage Act against journalists and their sources with unprecedented aggression. Let’s not forget the IRS targeting scandal, where conservative groups were systematically harassed and delayed in their nonprofit applications. Or Operation Fast and Furious, which resulted in the death of a border patrol agent and was subsequently covered up. And who can overlook the massive NSA surveillance program that spied on countless American citizens?
But perhaps Obama’s most egregious abuse of power was his administration’s orchestration of the Russia collusion hoax against Donald Trump — a campaign of political persecution that makes Watergate look like a parking ticket. Secret meetings in the dying days of his presidency laid the groundwork for the DOJ’s continued harassment of Trump, all based on charges that have been thoroughly debunked. The cherry on top? When 47 inspectors general wrote to Congress about the Obama administration’s systematic obstruction of justice, in which the administration blocked their access to information needed for proper investigations. That’s not speculation or partisan rhetoric; that’s documented fact. So while Obama plays “what if” games at cushy college speaking engagements, the rest of us remember what actually happened during his eight years in office. His performance at Hamilton College wasn’t just tone-deaf; it was a masterclass in gaslighting the American public. The next time Obama wants to lecture anyone about governmental overreach or abuse of power, he should first take a long, hard look in the mirror. His administration wrote the book on it.
“Since 2014, the New York Times has published more than five-hundred articles about RT alone..”
• US Research Highlights RT’s Role In Media Landscape (RT)
The New York Times published over 500 RT-related articles over the course of a decade, research published by Johns Hopkins University this week has claimed. The Russian multimedia organization RT has faced unparalleled levels of scrutiny and limitations imposed by Western nations in recent years. Actions directed against the broadcaster escalated between 2022 and 2024. According to the review, RT, as well as Chinese national broadcaster CCTV, “tend to dominate both popular and scholarly discourse about propaganda.” “Since 2014, the New York Times has published more than five-hundred articles about RT alone, while the vast majority of articles about propaganda published in top political science journals explore the effects of media run directly by the state,” the review stated.
Washington imposed new sanctions against RT in September, with then US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accusing it of engaging in “covert influence activities” and “functioning as a de facto arm of Russian intelligence.” The head of the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC), James Rubin, told reporters that the “broad scope and reach” of RT was one of the reasons many countries around the world did not support Ukraine. The GEC itself was closed in December 2024. Also in September 2024, RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan and three other senior RT employees were sanctioned by the US over alleged attempts to influence the 2024 presidential election. Moscow branded the crackdown on Russian media, including RT, “a declaration of war on free speech.”
In March, the former head of RT America, Ben Swann, called on US President Donald Trump to drop restrictions that his predecessor Joe Biden imposed against several Russian media outlets, including RT and Sputnik.
https://twitter.com/Lauria1960/status/1908501373420777902
1996
Incredible clip from 1996. Nancy Pelosi on tariffs and the trade deficit with China.
"On this day, your member of Congress could have drawn the line to say to the President of the United States, do something about this US-China trade relationship that is a job loser for the… pic.twitter.com/DFlQ9wWSKh
— MAZE (@mazemoore) April 3, 2025
Indivisible
They will be https://t.co/RboNItSxCe
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 5, 2025
CORLEO
Meet the new Kawasaki CORLEO a four-legged robot that humans can ride.
Some ask why?
Some say why not? pic.twitter.com/cPgPqgYF9u
— Brian Roemmele (@BrianRoemmele) April 5, 2025
TRee
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1908475436113314274
Dragonfly
Dragonflies fun facts
– Just one dragonfly can consume over 100 mosquitos in a day
– Dragonflies can fly backwards
– They have nearly 360° vision
– Their wings inhibit bacterial growth due to their natural structures
– They're actually beautifulpic.twitter.com/m59Xm1g8VR— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) April 5, 2025
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
Home › Forums › Debt Rattle April 6 2025