May 022025
 


Piet Mondriaan New York City I 1942

 

Trump Acts on Signalgate, Fires Mike Waltz (Margolis)
China Assessing’ US Tariff Talks – Commerce Ministry (RT)
Trump ‘Blundered’ On China Tariffs – Medvedev (RT)
Trump Seeks Cooperation With Russia Instead of Confrontation (Sp.)
US Ready To Spend Another 100 Days On Russia-Ukraine Peace – Vance (RT)
US-Ukraine Deal ‘Important Step To End War’ – Rubio (RT)
US Rejected Ukraine’s Security Guarantee Demands – NYT (RT)
Kremlin On Minerals Deal: ‘Trump Has Broken The Zelensky Regime’ (ZH)
Trump Has Forced Ukraine To Sell Itself For Aid – Medvedev (RT)
Senate Republicans Block Rebuke Of Trump’s Tariffs (Pol.)
Trump’s Opposition (Victor Davis Hanson)
Europe Just Proved Trump Right About NATO (Green)
Why a Strong Euro is an Economic Disaster for the EU (Sp.)
Zelensky Sanctions Arestovich (RT)
EU Will Never Recognize Crimea As Russian – Kallas (RT)
Elon Musk Blasts Wall Street Journal’s CEO Search Report (ZH)
Going to Kashmir…Just To Find Alice in Wonderland (Pepe Escobar)

 

 


Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev speaks at the “Knowledge.First” event in Moscow, Russia, April 29, 2025.

 

 

https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1917740754081808589

Tulsi

90%

100

Dolls

Tulsi Fauci
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1917957407323705752
https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1917961395238309903

 

 

 

 

Waltz UN Ambassador, Secretary of State Rubio takes over National Security Advisor as well. Not perfect, but doable.

Trump Acts on Signalgate, Fires Mike Waltz (Margolis)

The Trump White House just sent a clear message: accountability matters. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, are out at the National Security Council, Fox News confirmed Thursday. Additional departures are expected, and President Trump is slated to speak on the matter himself. Waltz, a former Green Beret and Florida congressman, came under scrutiny after The Atlantic published a report detailing how Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg was erroneously included in a Signal group chat with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, discussing counterterrorism strikes against the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Though no classified information was divulged in the chat, Democrats pretended like the world had ended because of it and sought to use it to force the resignation or firing of anyone remotely connected to it. Their top target, of course, was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Waltz took responsibility for the inclusion of a journalist in the group chat, telling Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, “I take full responsibility. I built the group,” he said. “It’s embarrassing. We’re going to get to the bottom of it.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital earlier Monday when asked about reports claiming Waltz and others would be shown the door, “We are not going to respond to reporting from anonymous sources.”

Trump held a meeting with members of his cabinet on Wednesday following his 100th day back in office Tuesday, with Waltz attending the meeting. Following confirmation of Waltz’s ouster, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told Fox News, “The National Security Advisor Waltz is out. He’s the first. He certainly won’t be the last.” Neither Hakeem Jeffries nor any other Democrat leader ever demanded accountability from Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin—or anyone else—for the catastrophic Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021. The deaths of 13 American service members apparently weren’t a big enough deal to merit accountability in the Biden administration. Nor was there accountability later, when Austin vanished for a week in a hospital without telling the White House. Silence. No outrage. No consequences. Just business as usual in Biden’s unaccountable administration.

Wong served as Waltz’s principal deputy national security advisor, who was detailed in the Signal chat leak as the staffer charged with “pulling together a tiger team” in Waltz’s initial message sent to the Signal group chat in March, the Atlantic reported at the time. […] Trump told the media April 3 that a handful of other National Security Council staffers had been let go following the Atlantic’s report on the Signal chat leak, which characterized the Trump administration as texting “war plans” regarding a planned strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Whether you agree with this development or not, the Trump administration is willing to hold its people accountable. Compare that to Joe Biden’s disastrous handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal. In addition to the service members killed, billions in equipment were left for the Taliban, and our allies were blindsided. Yet not a single person in the Biden White House lost their job. No resignations. No demotions. No accountability. In fact, they patted themselves on the back and called it a success. That’s the difference. When President Trump sees a problem, he acts. He doesn’t protect insiders just because they’re part of the club. Accountability isn’t just a buzzword—it’s the standard. The swamp may not like it, and the media will no doubt spin it, but this is what leadership looks like.

Read more …

“..predict that formal talks will not be announced until after the US and China agree on the terms of a tariff deal privately.”

China Assessing’ US Tariff Talks – Commerce Ministry (RT)

China is “assessing” US overtures to begin tariff negotiations, the Commerce Ministry said on Friday. According to the ministry, senior US officials recently reached out to Beijing through third parties with proposals to start talks. Tensions between the world’s two largest economies have risen since US President Donald Trump imposed 145% tariffs on Chinese imports last month as part of a wider effort targeting over 90 trade partners. Most of the new tariffs were paused for 90 days – excluding China – while a baseline 10% remains in place. Beijing responded with 125% tariffs on US goods and export restrictions. The ministry said China has taken note of recent US messages and is evaluating the possibility of negotiations, adding that while Washington has expressed interest in talks, trust would be undermined if unilateral tariffs remain.

“The US has recently sent messages to China through relevant parties, hoping to start talks with China. China is currently assessing this,” the ministry stated. Trump previously suggested that the tariffs could “come down substantially” and spoke about the potential for a “fair deal with China.” He also claimed that his administration was “actively” engaging with Beijing and that he had spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping by phone. Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed on Fox News last week that Beijing was “reaching out” to Washington. China has denied this and accused the US of misleading the public.

In its statement on Friday, the Commerce Ministry reiterated that the US must show “sincerity” by canceling the tariffs if it wants meaningful dialogue. It added that China remains open to talks, but will not be pressured: “If we fight, we will fight to the end; if we talk, the door is open.” It stressed that Beijing will only agree to negotiations in good faith. “Saying one thing and doing another, or even trying to coerce and blackmail under the guise of talks, will not work with China,” the statement read. Analysts expect negotiations will begin soon, citing recent market volatility and the IMF’s downward revision of global growth forecasts due to trade uncertainty. Some observers, however, predict that formal talks will not be announced until after the US and China agree on the terms of a tariff deal privately.

Read more …

“..possesses enormous resources and a vast domestic market –factors that will enable its economy to withstand any amount of pressure..”

I don’t think so.

Trump ‘Blundered’ On China Tariffs – Medvedev (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s misplaced tariff policies are hurting America’s allies but will fail to tank the Chinese economy, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Thursday. In early April, Trump announced sweeping tariffs on most of America’s trading partners, citing what he said was an unfair trade imbalance. After backlash overseas and a negative response from the stock market, he suspended most new duties for dozens of countries – except China – for 90 days pending negotiations.In a tongue-in-cheek post on Telegram on Labor Day, Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, argued that Trump deserved an “exemplary labor” award for “starting the tariff battle.”

The US’s neighbors, as well as its allies in Europe, were “suffering” and “crying” from the duties imposed by Washington, he wrote. “They are all in a really bad position, facing the need to bow down in a ritual known as ‘kiss my ass,’” the ex-president quipped. “China, on the other hand, possesses enormous resources and a vast domestic market –factors that will enable its economy to withstand any amount of pressure. This is where Trump made a blunder,” he added. “Trump’s approval ratings have dipped, while the ‘deep state’ is vigorously resisting him,” Medvedev wrote.

Beijing responded to tariffs of up to 245% on its goods by imposing tit-for-tat duties on American imports. “Bowing to a bully is like drinking poison to quench thirst – it only deepens the crisis,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said this week, warning that China “won’t kneel down.” Trump has defended his policies, doubling down on claims that Beijing was engaged in unfair trade practices. “They deserve it,” he said, responding to a reporter’s question about whether his tariffs were tantamount to an embargo.

Read more …

“President Trump has a very different view of Russia from his predecessors.”

Trump Seeks Cooperation With Russia Instead of Confrontation (Sp.)

The first 100 days of US President Donald Trump’s second term in office have marked a profound shift toward searching areas of cooperation with Russia instead of confrontation, Rhode Island University Professor of Political Science Nicolai Petro told Sputnik. Trump officially took office as the 47th president of the United States on January 20. Upon entering the White House, the president and his team resumed direct contact with Moscow that has been cut off by their predecessors from ex-President Joe Biden’s team after the start of the conflict in Ukraine. “President Trump has a very different view of Russia from his predecessors. Rather than assuming that Russia’s interests must clash with American interests, he assumes that the two can find areas of cooperation, and that such cooperation has the potential to expand,” Petro said.

The expert described this as a “very profound shift” that is not shared by most of the American political elite and media, who continue to portray Russia as a threat to the United States. During the first 100 days of Trump’s second term, he had phone conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, while Russian and US officials held meetings in Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Part of the renewed diplomatic push also includes visits by US Special Envoy Steven Witkoff to Russia and by Russian Direct Investment Fund CEO Kirill Dmitriev to the United States. So far, the sides have been actively working on resuming the normal operation of their respective embassies while also discussing the issue of resumption of direct flights between the US and Russia.

Read more …

“We’ve got the peace proposal out there and issued, and we’re going to work very hard over the next 100 days to try to bring these guys together.”

US Ready To Spend Another 100 Days On Russia-Ukraine Peace – Vance (RT)

The Trump administration is prepared to dedicate another 100 days to mediating a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, US Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News in an interview published on Wednesday. He said the US has made progress by getting both sides to present their ideas for resolving the conflict. “We’ve got this first step,” the vice president said, reflecting on the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term. “We’ve got the peace proposal out there and issued, and we’re going to work very hard over the next 100 days to try to bring these guys together.” Vance noted that before the Trump administration got involved, Moscow and Kiev “weren’t even talking – not to each other, not to anybody. They were just fighting.”

He added: “Now, the work of diplomacy is to try to sort of bring these two sides closer together,” pointing to the “very big gulf between what the Russians want and what the Ukrainians want.” During last year’s election campaign, Trump vowed to end the conflict “within 24 hours” of entering the White House – which he later described as an “exaggeration.” Since taking office in January, he has pressed both sides to reach a ceasefire and has recently shown frustration over the lack of progress. Although Russia praised Trump and his team for better understanding its position than the administration of former President Joe Biden, Moscow insisted that any comprehensive ceasefire must include an end to Ukraine’s mobilization and a halt to foreign weapons deliveries.

Both sides accused each other of violating the month-long energy truce brokered by Trump in March, as well as last month’s 30-hour Easter truce. Moscow has demanded that Ukraine drop its claims to Crimea and four other regions, and abandon its NATO ambitions. On Thursday, Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, said Kiev had agreed to acknowledge Russia’s control over what it considers “occupied territories,” while stopping short of officially recognizing Russian sovereignty. However, Kiev has repeatedly stated that it will not cede any land to Russia.

Read more …

“According to Lavrov, “a [30-day] ceasefire in this situation is considered a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities.”

US-Ukraine Deal ‘Important Step To End War’ – Rubio (RT)

The natural resource deal signed between Washington and Kiev is an “important step” toward ending the Ukraine conflict, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed. The long-awaited agreement, which allows Washington to tap into Ukraine’s extensive mineral reserves in return for assistance with the country’s economic recovery, was signed on Wednesday. Notably, the document does not include any provisions for the US to offer security guarantees to Ukraine, despite this being “one of its initial goals,” as reported by Reuters. The New York Times indicated that the concept of security guarantees was dismissed by the US “early in the process.” In an X post on Thursday, Rubio thanked US President’s Donald Trump leadership, under which the deal was signed. Rubio called it “a milestone in our shared prosperity and an important step in ending this war.”

Negotiations for the agreement stretched on for several months, although both parties intended to finalize it during Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky’s visit to the White House in late February. The televised meeting led to a tense confrontation during which Trump accused the Ukrainian leader of ingratitude and “gambling with World War III.” This comes as Washington is in talks with Moscow over a possible peace deal that would end the Ukraine conflict. Multiple media sources indicate that the agreement put forward by Washington entails the US recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea. Additionally, the proposal reportedly includes a “freezing” of the conflict along the existing front line and an acknowledgment of Moscow’s control over significant portions of four former Ukrainian regions that voted to join Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a halt to all military operations against Ukrainian forces from midnight on May 7 until midnight on May 10, stating that this is being done for “humanitarian reasons.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pointed out that Russia considers the ceasefire “the start of direct negotiations with Kiev without preconditions.” Zelensky branded Moscow’s three-day truce declaration a “manipulation attempt,” saying he wanted an immediate 30-day ceasefire instead. According to Lavrov, “a [30-day] ceasefire in this situation is considered a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities.”

Read more …

“When America is your friend and your partner, your nation is going to be better off. And there is a security component just in our presence..”

US Rejected Ukraine’s Security Guarantee Demands – NYT (RT)

The US has rejected Ukraine’s request for security guarantees as part of a newly signed mineral resources agreement, the New York Times reported on Wednesday, citing sources familiar with the talks. The nine-page deal, signed the same day after months of negotiations and published on Thursday by the Ukrainian government, gives Washington preferential access to Ukraine’s mineral projects, including rare-earth metals. It also establishes a joint investment fund to support Ukraine’s post-conflict reconstruction. Despite its scope, the final agreement contains no formal pledge of future US military support, a key demand from Ukraine during negotiations. Instead, it vaguely mentions a “long-term strategic alignment” and promises US backing for Ukraine’s “security, prosperity, reconstruction, and integration into global economic frameworks.”

One source told the NYT that the US dismissed the idea of providing Kiev with explicit security guarantees early in the talks. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce defended the agreement, suggesting that US involvement alone offers implicit protection. “When America is your friend and your partner, your nation is going to be better off. And there is a security component just in our presence,” she told Fox Business. Analysts told the NYT that the deal could help secure US President Donald Trump’s continued interest in Ukraine now that he is directly invested, and will potentially open the door to further discussions on military aid and a ceasefire with Russia. Still, critics argued that without binding guarantees, the deal’s impact may be limited if the conflict continues.

Ukraine’s parliament is expected to ratify the agreement within two weeks. The US has framed the deal as a way for Ukraine to repay past military aid – estimated at $350 billion by Trump, though Kiev claims the figure is closer to $100 billion and that the support was unconditional. The debt repayment clause, however, was dropped from the final text. After signing, Trump said the US could “in theory” recover “much more” than $350 billion through the deal. Commenting on the deal, deputy head of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said the US has essentially “forced the Kiev regime to pay for American aid with minerals,” warning that all future military supplies will have to be paid “with the national wealth of a vanishing country.”

Read more …

“Now they will have to pay for military supplies with the national wealth of a disappearing country,”

Kremlin On Minerals Deal: ‘Trump Has Broken The Zelensky Regime’ (ZH)

The Kremlin has said that what the newly signed minerals deal between Ukraine and Washington does is effectively force Kiev to pay for all future military aid. “Trump has broken the Kyiv regime to the point where they will have to pay for U.S. aid with mineral resources,” Medvedev, a former Russian president and current deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, stated on Telegram. “Now they will have to pay for military supplies with the national wealth of a disappearing country,” he said of the Ukrainians. As of yet, the full contents of the newly inked deal, finalized and signed late in the day Wednesday, have not been revealed, but it gives the United States preferential access to new Ukrainian minerals deals and its natural resources like oil and gas, and will fund investment in Ukraine’s reconstruction.

But the Zelensky government was able to get something crucial dropped at the last minute. As CNN details, “Compared to earlier drafts, the final agreement is reportedly less lopsided in favor of the US and is not as far-reaching. It stipulates that future American military assistance to Ukraine will count as part of the US investment into the fund, rather than calling for reimbursement for past assistance.” President Trump’s initial reaction after the signing was seen in the following: Speaking Wednesday in a call with NewsNation, Trump said he made the deal to “protect” Washington’s contribution to the Ukrainian war effort. “We made a deal today where we get, you know, much more in theory, than the $350 billion but I wanted to be protected,” Trump said. “I didn’t want to be out there and look foolish,” he continued, voicing the administration’s longtime complaints that Zelensky only asks for “more and more” – and yet is still losing the war.

Meanwhile, the ceasefire process is still basically stalled, as neither side has backed off of their demands and conditions. President Zelensky has recently reiterated that he can’t even legally give up Crimea. However, Trump presidential special envoy for Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg has told Fox News that Ukraine is ready to make territorial concessions, but wouldn’t see any ceded territory as a permanent situion. “Not de jure forever, but de facto, because the Russians actually occupy that and they’ve agreed to that. They know that if they have a ceasefire in place, which means you sit on the ground that you currently hold, that’s what they’re willing to go to,” the envoy said. “You have your line set, and they’re willing to go there,” Kellogg emphasized. But it’s clear the Kremlin sees this as an issue of sovereignty and permanence, given President Putin has described the four annexed territories and Crimea as “ours forever”.

Read more …

“Trump has finally broken the Kiev regime into paying for American aid with minerals..”

Trump Has Forced Ukraine To Sell Itself For Aid – Medvedev (RT)

US President Donald Trump has forced Kiev to sell off Ukraine’s mineral wealth for continued military aid, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said. Washington and Kiev signed a long-anticipated deal on the joint extraction of Ukrainian natural resources on Wednesday, after months of contentious negotiations. Trump has advertised the agreement as a way to get back the roughly $350 billion he claims Washington has spent on support for Kiev in the conflict with Russia. The agreement does not mention security guarantees, which Ukraine previously insisted on. Instead, it focuses on future US aid, rather than paying back assistance provided to Ukraine in the past.

“Trump has finally broken the Kiev regime into paying for American aid with minerals,” Medvedev, who currently serves as the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said in a Telegram post on Thursday. “Now military supplies will have to be paid for with the national wealth of a disappearing country.” In February, Trump and Zelensky had a public spat in the Oval Office just as a deal was widely expected to be signed. After the meeting, the US president temporarily froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Kiev for around a month. The full text of the agreement signed on Wednesday has not been published, but available details suggest it is centered on a joint reconstruction investment fund. Ukraine is to contribute 50% of the revenue for new licenses for future resource extraction projects into the fund.

One potential difficulty with this deal is that as of now, Ukraine’s much-discussed rare-earths – highly sought-after metals used in high-tech production – are still largely untapped and need billions in investments to mine, the Washington Post wrote on Thursday, citing analysts. Additionally, a significant portion of the resources – according to old data from when Ukraine was a Soviet republic – is located in the Donbass region, a large part of which is now part of Russia, the WaPo said. In 2023, Forbes estimated Ukraine’s mineral wealth at roughly $15 trillion, with nearly half of this in Russia’s Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

Read more …

“Three Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting the tariffs”,

..and Trump still wins. Forget beating him in the Senate.

Senate Republicans Block Rebuke Of Trump’s Tariffs (Pol.)

Two absences in the Senate left supporters of the resolution short of a majority. A Democratic effort to rebuff President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs failed Wednesday, thanks to two absent senators. Senators voted 49-49 to reject the national emergency Trump used to impose tariffs of between 10 and 50 percent on many of the United States’ largest trading partners. It came on the same day the Commerce Department revealed that the economy shrank in the year’s first quarter, largely due to Trump’s trade policies. Three Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting the tariffs: Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul was a cosponsor of the resolution with Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat.

Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) were missing from the vote, leaving supporters of the resolution short of a majority. Whitehouse was absent because he was returning from the Republic of Korea, where he represented the U.S. at a conference on protecting the ocean from threats like climate change, pollution and overfishing. McConnell, the former Republican leader, missed several votes Wednesday. “The Senator has been consistent in opposing tariffs and that a trade war is not in the best interest of American households and businesses,” said David Popp, a spokesperson for McConnell. “He believes that tariffs are a tax increase on everybody.” The vote was largely symbolic: The House has approved a rule to block a vote on the resolution and Trump has threatened to veto such a measure if it makes it to his desk.

And after the resolution failed, Republican leaders immediately forced a vote to table, or kill, it for good, and this time they brought in reinforcements: Vice President JD Vance arrived on Capitol Hill to break the tie. Still, the resolution’s failure hands Trump a victory as his administration tries to maintain support for the aggressive tariff platform among increasingly nervous Republicans. Paul said he felt the vote was more about the debate than the result, because he knew it wasn’t likely to clear Congress. “Most Republicans are just going along with it, but many of them are quietly still on the other side of this,” Paul said. “They just aren’t willing to say anything yet. But I think if we went through another quarter of negative growth and or another scare in the marketplace, I think there will be more visible voices against the tariffs.”

Yet even lawmakers who defended Trump’s tariffs acknowledged the uncertainty that has come with Trump’s attempts to upend the global trading order, an effort that has tanked consumer sentiment in the U.S. and spooked many businesses and investors. “I appreciate that many of us in this chamber have heard from constituents concerned about the economic impact of the tariffs,” said Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), who chairs the Senate Finance Committee that oversees trade policy. “All of us are watching this issue closely and working with the administration to find ways to minimize its impact on Americans. We should also be working with the administration to address a shared objective: more opportunities for Americans in foreign markets and an end to discriminatory actions in foreign markets.”

Read more …

“..the media has taken it upon themselves to use the only strategy that the Democratic Party can come up with. And that is to attack Donald Trump..”

Trump’s Opposition (Victor Davis Hanson)

At the end of the 100 days of the Trump administration, let’s just review for a moment the opposition to it. And it’s actually, if you think about it, a tripartite, a threefold opposition: pollsters, the media, and the Democratic Party and the institutionalized Left. The pollsters have President Donald Trump down four or five points. But when you actually look at the Rasmussen poll or Mark Penn’s poll, a Democratic centrist, Trump is almost even. And then when you look with greater clarity at The New York Times poll that has him way down, you see that only 37% of the people polled voted for Donald Trump. But Donald Trump won by almost a point and a half. Don’t you think it should have been, I don’t know, 51%-49%? So, they were deliberately, in the case of The New York Times, under-polling Trump supporters.

The same was true with The Washington Post. They polled over 2,000 people, but only 840 were identified as Trump voters. Shouldn’t that have been half? So, what am I getting at? We’re getting right back to what happened in 2016 when the polls were completely wrong. The same thing happened in 2020 when they overestimated former President Joe Biden’s strength by four or five points. And then, even in 2024, the NPR poll had—on the last day of the election—they had then-Vice President Kamala Harris winning by four points. The Des Moines Register had Iowa lost to Trump by three points. He won it by 12. So, what the pollsters are doing—not that Trump hasn’t lost some to the controversy over the trade wars—but the pollsters are trying to create momentum, fundraising, and jazz up opposition.

Then we turn to the media. The media’s in a fight with the Democratic Left now because of the scandal of Joe Biden. The Democratic Left is saying, “Well, you were a journalist. If you thought he was demented or cognitively challenged, why didn’t you report it?” But the journalists are saying, “We couldn’t get close to him. He looked OK for us because you had him in such a guarded environment.” In truth, they’re both guilty. Do you remember those press conferences by then-White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre? Did anyone ever hear one question on those daily or three or four times a week press conferences? “Miss Jean-Pierre, is Joe Biden cognitively able to navigate himself to the podium? What is the nature of his cue cards? Have you had a Montreal Cognitive Assessment of him?” There was nothing. It was a combination of the Democratic Party, the Biden insiders, and the media.

And here’s another point, very quickly. The media has gained a lot of influence and power in the opposition because there is no opposition on the Democratic Party. So, in lieu of an alternate agenda, the media has taken it upon themselves to use the only strategy that the Democratic Party can come up with. And that is to attack Donald Trump. Now, what do I mean by that? If you look at the Democratic Party and the Left in general, they have boxed themselves in. On the one hand, they have no institutional power; no ability to pass legislation, losing the House and the Senate; no presidency, White House; no executive orders. Ultimately, all of the cherry-picked district and circuit judges will be overturned by a largely conservative Supreme Court.

In lieu of actual power, then you look at what is the alternative. Maybe the alternative is a 1994 Newt Gingrich Contract with America, an alternate agenda: Yes, we can do better on the border than you can. Yes, we have a better foreign policy with Iran. There’s nothing. There’s no shadow government. There’s not a young Bill Clinton ascendant. There’s no young Barack Obama. There’s nobody. There’s no leaders. There’s no agenda. Nothing. It’s nihilism. And so, let’s look at the third element. Do they have a good old days? Can they say, “Donald Trump ruined things”? “They were so good under Biden. The border was—we liked it open. Twelve million, we could have got 20 million illegal aliens. Let’s go back to that. We had a wonderful retreat from Afghanistan. Picture perfect. We can do it again. The Iran—the theater war in Ukraine and Iran, that wasn’t our fault. Maybe it was inevitable. We had a really good inflation—we had a little hyperinflation of 9%.”

So, there is no alternative good old days. They can’t say Donald Trump wrecked something because they had wrecked the country. So, what are we left with? We’re left with Donald Trump wore a blue suit at the Vatican funeral. Donald Trump is a fascist. No. According to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, he is a Nazi. No. According to former Vice President Al Gore, he is a Nazi. No. According to members of the Congress, is he deserving a polite conversation? You have to use the F-word. Or maybe it’s the S-word. It’s smutty mouth, potty mouth video. What is the one principle that ties them all together? We’re gonna talk about that in the next video. But it’s about fear that Donald Trump’s first 100 days are not as chaotic and bad as they tell us. But we might be on the cusp of something that will be very, very successful and will ensure Donald Trump has a successful presidency.

Read more …

“..Europe “would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine”…”

Europe Just Proved Trump Right About NATO (Green)

In a shocking-not-shocking exclusive report in The (UK) Times, Europe “would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine” as part of a postwar peacekeeping force. Defense Editor Larisa Brown “was given a rare insight into conversations between Europe’s defence ministers and military chiefs as they thrashed out plans for a ‘coalition of the willing’ force,” and the results are as disappointing as they are sobering. And you know how much I hate sobering. British defense chief Admiral Sir Tony Radakin asked European defense ministers “if they could put together a 64,000-strong force to send to [Ukraine] in the event of a peace deal.” Britain offered up to 10,000 personnel, but even then, “defence ministers across Europe said there was ‘no chance’ they could reach that number and that even 25,000 would ‘be a push for a joint effort.'” This is not your father’s NATO.

During the Cold War, the British Army of the Rhine stood watch in West Germany for half a century with a force of 50,000 men — and the promise of swift reinforcements almost as quickly as the balloon went up. Today, all of European NATO couldn’t put a peacekeeping force in Ukraine of half that size without wheezing like an asthmatic with a sinus infection hiking up Kilimanjaro. NATO was always a little fractured and weaker than it should have been. Unlike the Warsaw Pact on the other side of the Iron Curtain, NATO members were independent nations, each with its own priorities and needs. Paris could complain about American “hyperpower” all it liked, but we didn’t send in the tanks — like Moscow would have — when France withdrew its forces from NATO command and ordered NATO troops out of France in 1966. We just made do.

And while Washington was correct to ask for more “burden-sharing” from our allies during the Cold War, it wasn’t as though they didn’t take the Soviet threat seriously. The West German Bundeswehr consisted of 10 battle-ready heavy Panzer and Panzergrenadier divisions, plus another division each of airborne and mountain forces — for a total of 38 combat brigades. That was just the Field Army. The Territorial forces consisted of reserve troops — older men called up to defend their cities, towns, and homes — amounting to another 450,000 soldiers. But here’s the rub. West Germany raised those forces from a population of 60 million with a GDP of $1.6 trillion in today’s dollars. Unified Germany has 80 million people, a GDP of $4.7 trillion, and a military of three divisions that are understaffed, under-trained, and unfit for combat.

The balloon went up more than three years ago in Ukraine, and yet the only substantial-sized NATO member seriously rearming is Poland. Milblogger CDR Salamander nailed it yesterday: “Europeans expect hundreds of thousands of Americans to immediately deploy to Europe to defend them against a nation with the GDP of Texas and a population 1/4th the size of European NATO.” This is from countries that admit they could barely muster 25,000 troops for Ukraine, even if their national survival depended on it. So when President Donald Trump complains that European NATO isn’t pulling its weight, he isn’t trying to destroy the alliance, as his critics claim. He’s warning of an existential threat to the alliance’s purpose and its members’ existence — and that America’s patience with perennial laggards is not unlimited. Nor should it be. And Europe’s defense ministers just admitted that, too.

Read more …

“..zero growth and recession for 3 years running..”

Why a Strong Euro is an Economic Disaster for the EU (Sp.)

The euro has jumped in value almost 10% against the dollar since January. But before cheering at the thought of cheaper imports of Skippy peanut butter and Jim Beam whiskey, here’s what EU residents should know.
1. Stronger Euro = Weaker Exports
“For any country (or zone in the case of the euro) that is a strong exporter,” a strong currency “contributes to slowing exports and increasing imports, to the detriment of domestic production,” explains Jacques Sapir, veteran economist and director of studies at the Paris-based School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences.
2. Monetary Union Trap
Unlike ordinary nations, which can depreciate their currencies at will to restore exports’ appeal, eurozone members are trapped by the monetary union, which offers “quite limited” room to maneuver for big producers or tourism-based earners benefiting from depreciation vs everyone else.
3. Another Hit to Eurozone Economy in Rough Shape
The euro’s growing strength is bad news for a bloc already:
• facing zero growth and recession for 3 years running
• cut off from the source of its export competitiveness: cheap Russian energy
• facing brutal trade competition from the US and China.
4. Tariff-like Effects
“With the dollar depreciating by around 10% since mid-January, it is as if the US has imposed 10% customs duties on European products while subsidizing their exports to the eurozone by 10%,” Sapir says.
5. Tariff Wars Add to Uncertainty
“Major economic players abhor uncertainty…As long as these negotiations last, no one knows what the tariff levels will be and therefore how attractive the American market will be, whether for production or investment,” the economist says.

Read more …

If there are elections, he’ll run. If they let him.

Zelensky Sanctions Arestovich (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has announced sanctions against his former top adviser. Alexey Arestovich has frequently criticized both Ukraine’s leadership and its military strategy in its conflict with Russia. Arestovich was among several Ukrainians mentioned in a decree released by Zelensky’s office on Thursday. Penalties imposed include asset freezes, restricted trade and financial transactions, travel, and the revocation of state awards. Arestovich served as an adviser to the Office of the President of Ukraine between 2020 and January 2023. He resigned in controversy after claiming that a Russian missile hit a residential building in the city of Dnepr only because it had been downed by Ukrainian air defenses. Following public outrage and accusations that he had discredited the Ukrainian army, Arestovich backtracked, apologized, and submitted his resignation.

He has since become a prominent commentator on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, often presenting views that diverge from the official Ukrainian narrative. Last month, he suggested that Kiev should agree to cede land to Russia as part of a potential US-brokered peace deal, warning that any attempts to reclaim lost territories would only backfire. “Why should we give up four regions? So that in six months or a year we don’t lose another six or eight,” he said, referring to four former Ukrainian territories that in 2022 voted in public referendums to join Russia. Kiev has consistently refused to acknowledge any territorial losses, however..

Arestovich has also accused the Ukrainian leadership of corruption. He has claimed that Zelensky is personally involved in numerous graft schemes and that Kiev’s Western backers are well aware of his activities. He has also signaled that he wants to run for president of Ukraine. Zelensky, whose term expired last year, has refused to call new elections, citing martial law, which has been extended more than a dozen times. Addressing the sanctions, the ex-adviser predicted that the Ukrainian authorities would now try to limit his media reach by cutting off access to his YouTube channel from the country’s territory.

Read more …

War princess.

EU Will Never Recognize Crimea As Russian – Kallas (RT)

The EU has reaffirmed its refusal to recognize Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has stated. Officials in Brussels are reportedly concerned that a possible peace deal negotiated by Washington and Moscow to end the Ukraine conflict would entail the US recognizing Crimea as part of Russia. The peninsula voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation shortly after the 2014 Western-backed coup in Kiev. Speaking to the Financial Times on Thursday, Kallas, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, stated unequivocally, “Crimea is Ukraine,” underscoring that “no EU country would accept recognition of Crimea as Russia.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s suggestion that lifting sanctions imposed on Russia could be part of a peace deal has also alarmed EU officials, who fear it may prompt divisions within the bloc over maintaining its own sanctions regime, according to the FT. Kallas has warned EU states against following a US policy shift toward Moscow. She told the outlet that the EU is preparing a contingency plan to sustain economic pressure on Russia, should Hungary follow through on its threat to veto an extension of sanctions in July. She noted that this could include allowing national governments to adopt the sanctions individually or for Belgium to issue a decree to seize over $200 billion worth of Russian central bank assets frozen on Belgian soil.

Moscow has warned that seizing its assets would amount to “theft,” hinting at possible retaliatory measures against Western investments in Russia. The diplomat also emphasized that the EU could offer Ukraine financial support if the US withdraws, though military backing would be harder to replicate. “We are still working with the Americans and trying to convince them why the outcome of this war is also in their interest,” Kallas said. Last week, Moscow accused Brussels of obstructing US-Russian diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine conflict, working instead to prolong the hostilities. “Europe wants war, not talks,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Read more …

“WSJ’s Glazer and her co-authors chose to publish the story—despite receiving a denial from Tesla’s board before publication..”

Elon Musk Blasts Wall Street Journal’s CEO Search Report (ZH)

Tesla Chairwoman Robyn Denholm denied a Wall Street Journal report claiming the board had begun searching for Elon Musk’s successor, calling the story “absolutely false.” Musk echoed the rebuke, slamming the story as an “EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS” by the legacy media outlet. “Earlier today, there was a media report erroneously claiming that the Tesla Board had contacted recruitment firms to initiate a CEO search at the company,” Denholm wrote in a statement published on X via Tesla.

She emphasized, “This is absolutely false (and this was communicated to the media before the report was published),” adding, “The CEO of Tesla is Elon Musk and the Board is highly confident in his ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead.” Musk chimed in, calling the WSJ story by Emily Glazer, Becky Peterson, and Dana Mattioli “an EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS that the WSJ would publish a DELIBERATELY FALSE ARTICLE and fail to include an unequivocal denial beforehand by the Tesla board of directors.”

WSJ’s Glazer and others cited anonymous sources to indicate that slumping vehicle sales and DOGE-related backlash had damaged the brand, prompting the board to search for a new CEO. Here’s an excerpt: “Board members reached out to several executive search firms to work on a formal process for finding Tesla’s next chief executive, according to people familiar with the discussions. [..] The board narrowed its focus to a major search firm, according to the people familiar with the discussions. The current status of the succession planning couldn’t be determined. It is also unclear if Musk, himself a Tesla board member, was aware of the effort, or if his pledge to spend more time at Tesla has affected succession planning. Musk didn’t respond to requests for comment.[..]

Why WSJ’s Glazer and her co-authors chose to publish the story—despite receiving a denial from Tesla’s board before publication—underscores how legacy media spreads misinformation and disinformation. This is the landscape Musk—and top officials in the Trump administration—are navigating: a hostile leftist corporate media environment that pushes endless streams of misinformation and disinformation.

Read more …

“It’s as if the Anglo-Zionist axis is using Kashmir as a volatile lab for a series of live tests – including pushing nuclear powers to the brink of confrontation..”

Going to Kashmir…Just To Find Alice in Wonderland (Pepe Escobar)

Two overarching taboos reign on the – now shattered – collective West:
• Can’t define the Ukraine regime as Nazi.
• Can’t condemn the psychopathological Israeli genocide in Gaza.

The taboos happen to be inextricably linked to the Forever Wars deployed non-stop by the Empire of Chaos/Zionist axis. Lesser Hybrid Wars though – even carrying the horrifying prospect of turning nuclear – are allowed to come and go. Especially if they are part of the current war on BRICS, a sub-section of the war of factions of the West against the Global Majority. So let’s go to Kashmir – to the sound of Jimmy Page’s hypnotic riff. Both India and Pakistan are escalating the war of decibels. Turkey is offering weapons – to Pakistan. Iran offered a mediator role: no takers. The motive for the war is as dodgy as they come. An all-male tourist bus packing a bunch of merry tourists is roaming around Indian-held Kashmir. Passengers include a just married 26-year-old lieutenant of the Indian Navy – but without his wife (what kind of honeymoon is that?)

Another passenger is Nepalese. The bus is attacked by shady splinter goons loosely affiliated with the Salafi-jihadi Lashkar-e-Taiba outfit. The Empire has been all over the Indian front. The current US Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard was previously fully funded by Prime Minister Modi’s circles. Eyeliner-loaded VP J.D. Vance recently visited India – complete with family Taj Mahal photo op. Then Modi went to visit Saudi Arabia – invited by MbS. After the Kashmir bus terror attack, Hindutva fanatics went on a cyber-attack spree. The crude tactics spell out classic Divide and Rule. Double whammy: revamped weaponization of India, and destabilization of a key Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) China front: the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). A thing of beauty: splitting BRICS from the inside.

None of that, of course, legitimizes the ghastly Pakistani military, which have thrown in jail, on spurious charges, the man who was trying to bring Pakistan to respectability: Imran Khan. It’s up, once again, to the adults in the room, any room – Russia – to de-escalate. This could be ideally performed inside the SCO – where both India and Pakistan are members, side by side with Iran. Moscow chose to take the initiative, by itself. Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko met with both India’s Ambassador to Russia, Vinay Kumar, and Pakistan’s Ambassador to Russia, Muhammad Khalid Jamali. Russian terminology is essential: not only there was a call for both parties to “engage in constructive dialogue”. Moscow stressed, “we are ready to counter the global terrorist threat together.” The operative word is “global”. Delhi and Islamabad don’t seem to be getting the message – yet.

Kashmir as a volatile war lab An infernal machine is predictably on. It’s as if the Anglo-Zionist axis is using Kashmir as a volatile lab for a series of live tests – including pushing nuclear powers to the brink of confrontation. And all that dealt with casual insouciance – practically as a sideshow. Nothing coming from Sultan Erdogan and his intel apparatus could possibly be seen as trustworthy. In Syria, the MIT’s assets – the Headchopper Inc. congregated in Greater Idlibistan – ended up being installed in power in Damascus with their Zionist-friendly gang leader now posing as President. The comprador Yankee junta in Islamabad, for its part, may be facing the abyss – which in itself qualifies as auspicious news. In parallel, suspense accrues on whether Modi will show up for the Victory Day parade on May 9 in Moscow – and what he will tell his Russian hosts.

BRICS members Russia and Iran want the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) running smoothly to India sooner rather than later. The game gets even more complex when we see that the Iranian investigation is finally starting to consider that the horrendous explosion at the Shahid Rajaee port may have been an act of sabotage or an FPV strike. Extra pressure on China is a real motivator for setting up this war lab. Now Beijing not only needs to start worrying about an explosively renewed India-Pakistan front but also extra CIA/MI6 mischief pushing the Pak connection to Uighur Salafi-jihadis. There’s no chance in hell Delhi will really understand Beijing’s geopolitical predicaments. A perfect scenario for the Hybrid War gang. Meanwhile, at the BRICS front, at least there are some signs of rationality – coming, once again, from Grandmaster Lavrov.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1917807982898725100

Turns
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917896792856727785

https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1917586303337562559

Ice cream

Moore

Owl
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917882423162896621

Ants
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1917999523122622651

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

 

 

 

 

 

May 012025
 


Henri Matisse Open window, collioure 1905

 

‘We Are Just Getting Started’: Trump Hails His First 100 Days (DS)
Trump’s Counterrevolution at 100 Days (Stepman)
The First 100 Days: The Method Behind the Madness in Court Challenges (Turley)
Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Calculated, Not Chaotic (Trenin)
Zelensky Pleaded With Trump In Vatican – The Economist (RT)
Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukrainians of Trying To Kill Trump (RT)
Zelensky Openly Threatening Victory Day Terrorist Attack – Moscow (RT)
US Cannot Sign Peace Deal On Behalf of Kiev – Kremlin (RT)
US and Ukraine Sign Minerals Deal (RT)
Ukraine Willing To ‘De Facto Give Up’ Land To Russia – Kellogg (RT)
China Caves to Trump on Tariffs Again (Margolis)
Democrats’ Radical Changing of the Guard (Victor Davis Hanson)
Illegal Immigrants in My District Are Constituents: California Democrat (DS)
Massive Blackouts Is What Green Agenda Gets You (Karin Kneissl)
The Spanish Power Outage. A Catastrophe Created By Political Design (Lacalle)
Elon Musk, (Half of) a Grateful Nation Thanks You (Skeet)
China Steps Up Its Game in the Global AI Race (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

 

 

Tariffs not taxes

Bessent

Woke

ARO

Orban

Meta

FISA
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1917250091213292014

Fed

Fleury


Alberta

Rose

 

 

 

 

Let’s do a few “first 100 days” articles..

‘We Are Just Getting Started’: Trump Hails His First 100 Days (DS)

President Donald Trump declared it the “most successful 100 days” in American history. “They all want to come back to Michigan and build cars again. You know why, because of our tax and tariff policy,” Trump said in his remarks at the Macomb County Community College Sports and Expo Center in Warren, Michigan, to mark his 100th day in office. “I’m here in the heartland of our great nation to celebrate the most successful 100 days of any administration in the history of our country, and that’s according to many, many people,” Trump said. “Everyone is saying. We are just getting started.” Trump delivered a wide-ranging speech covering innumerable topics. “We are taking back our jobs and protecting American autoworkers and all of our workers. We are restoring the rule of law,” the president continued.

“We are ending the inflation nightmare, the worst that we’ve had probably in the history of our country,” Trump said. “Getting lunacy and transgender insanity the hell out of our government. We are stopping the indoctrination of our children, slashing billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse. And above all, we’re saving the American dream, we are making America great again, and it’s happening fast.” Trump asserted he is telling “incompetent deep state bureaucrats, ‘You’re fired. Get out of here.’” “We are ushering in the golden age of America,” he said. Trump asserted that border crossings had dropped “99.999%” since he returned to office. “The number of illegal border-crossers released into the United States is down. Listen to this, please: 99.999%,” Trump said, before making a joke about his border czar Tom Homan. “Three people got in. Three. And I got angry as hell at Tom Homan. How did you allow three, Tom?”

Trump issued executive orders to end the “catch and release” of illegal immigrants trying to sneak into the country; reinstated the “Remain in Mexico” policy for those seeking asylum here; designated MS-13, Tren de Aragua, and other gangs as foreign terrorist organizations; and greatly ramped up deportations. “You’ve seen a change at the southern border that Sleepy Joe said couldn’t happen,” Trump said, referring to his predecessor, the 46th president, Joe Biden. “I stand before you today and can report to you that we have achieved the safest border in American history.” Trump asserted if he hadn’t won the 2024 election, Democrats “would have imported the next round” of illegal immigrants. “It would have only been a matter of time before America became a Third World country.” The president also made a comparison to Democrats’ unwillingness to prosecute illegal immigrants, but their enthusiasm to prosecute him.

“They’re claiming that we’re not allowed to deport illegals, and they’re the ones who orchestrated an eight-year campaign to jail their political opponents,” including himself, he said. “That’s all they can do. Jail their political opponents.” Continuing a reference to his predecessor, Trump said, “Whoever operated the autopen was in charge.” Trump was referring to an autopen that appears to have been used by someone other than Biden in the Biden administration to sign off on several executive orders. The Oversight Project, a watchdog group, recently issued a legal memo asserting presidential pardons may be invalid if the president doesn’t sign them himself, since clemency is a responsibility the Constitution only grants to the president. On the economy, Trump also took a verbal swipe at Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell, who the president appointed during his first term.

“Interest rates came down, despite the fact that I have a Fed person who’s not really doing a good job. But I won’t say that,” Trump said. “I want to be very nice. I want to be very nice and respectful to the Fed. You’re not supposed to criticize the Fed. You’re supposed to let him do his own thing. But I know much more than he does about interest rates. Believe me.” Trump said he was the president of “the workers, not the outsourcers,” and the “president for Main Street, not Wall Street.” The president boasted about his tariffs—which have been controversial even among many Republicans. He noted, “In many cases, friends have abused us more than foes on trade.”
However, China is the biggest problem, he said. “China has taken more jobs from us than any country has ever taken from another country,” Trump said.

“That doesn’t mean we’re not going to get along. We’ll get along with China. Their tariff now is at 145%. That’s a big difference between that and zero. I think it’s going to work out. They want to make a deal. We’re going to make a deal. It’s not going to be a deal where we lose $1 trillion a year like they did with Biden.” Trump touted his executive order on election integrity that he signed this month. A U.S. District Court recently blocked part of that executive order. “I also signed an order to require proof of citizenship to vote in American elections. That was easy,” he said. “The Democrats fought me on that. Think of it. Why would they want no voter ID? Because they want to cheat. Why would they want no proof of citizenship? ‘We don’t want it. We trust everybody.’ No, they want to cheat. That’s what they do.”

The Trump administration has also dismantled federal mandates regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI for short. “I banned men from competing in women’s sports. They say that’s an 80-20 issue. No, I’d say it’s about a 97-3 issue,” the president said, referring to his ban on biological males who “identify” as females playing in girls and women’s sports. Trump also said he stopped the spread of DEI in the military academies. “I signed executive orders to abolish critical race theory and transgender insanity from our schools, and from our military,” Trump continued. “We fired the woke boards of visitors at our military academies. We have. We have great people running our military academies now.”

Read more …

“It’s clear that most of the federal apparatus, even including the FBI, is run and operated by partisan Democrats who, in many cases, are willing to use their power to punish or at least impede their domestic political enemies..”

Trump’s Counterrevolution at 100 Days (Stepman)

The first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term have been stunningly transformative, even as the Left has begun to mount some counteroffensives in the judiciary and in the media. For a president to be successful, he must apply principles that one might apply to warfare or sports. The early days of a presidency are about maintaining tempo—about keeping the ball moving on issues that the president was elected to promote. Any kind of slowdown usually means the president’s power to reform the system has come to an end, as this signals the natural shifting of the tide to the out-of-power party. On this end, Trump 2.0 has been one of the most successful early presidencies since FDR. This is Trump’s Dark New Deal, to borrow language from Elon Musk. He’s effectively flooded the zone with dramatic changes in policy that range from immigration to trade to foreign affairs and much more.

Whereas Trump’s predecessor was a virtually comatose upholder of an old regime, one that had become quite radical in its aims and tyrannical in its operation, Trump is a disruptor. He is pushing the envelope to an extent far beyond even his first term in office. This is Trump’s populist counterrevolution. Here’s a quick review of his more significant accomplishments thus far.

Border Secured On the border, the Trump effect has been stunningly effective. By making it known that the law will be enforced and then enforcing those laws, Trump has virtually solved the border problem overnight. Getting control of the border was one of the central planks of Trump’s message since he became active in politics, and he’s succeeded spectacularly. The Trump administration justly spiked the football on this issue Monday.

“Since President Donald J. Trump took office, he and his administration have ushered in the most secure border in modern American history—and he didn’t need legislation to do it,” read a statement from the White House. “President Trump has made good on the promises he made on the campaign trail to usher in an unprecedented era of homeland security.” The problem is now dealing with former President Joe Biden’s mess internally, which was always going to be the greater challenge. The Left’s commitment to open borders won’t abate even as the popular tide has turned against it. The Left has retreated to the dubious position of just wanting “due process” for the millions of people it brought here illegally, but that’s a tough case to make when the previous administration gleefully undermined the U.S. legal process for years to create this crisis.

Deep State Defanged The Trump administration’s actions against the administrative state, or the deep state, have been nothing short of remarkable. From the new Department of Government Efficiency to the State Department to even the departments of Energy and Education, Trump has taken aim at neutering the “fourth” branch of government. This has served two purposes. First, it’s restoring some level of accountability to our federal government that has over time become untethered from any kind of genuine democratic accountability. A mid-level career bureaucrat should not be dictating how the executive branch operates, nor should a government job be treated as an inviolable right. The Trump administration is using every tool it can to change that dynamic.

The second purpose is that by cutting loose large chunks of the administrative state, Trump is also severing the Left’s patronage networks. It’s clear that most of the federal apparatus, even including the FBI, is run and operated by partisan Democrats who, in many cases, are willing to use their power to punish or at least impede their domestic political enemies. To make matters worse, the federal government also distributes countless billions of dollars in grant funding to essentially left-wing activists in badly misnamed nongovernmental organizations. There’s a reason why the Left lost its collective mind when Trump dramatically curtailed the U.S. Agency for International Development, for instance. It knows that this strikes at not only its domestic power but also at its global ability to conduct social engineering.

DEI Regime Crumbling Given everything else that’s happening, Trump has quietly begun the process of dismantling the diversity, equity, and inclusion regime. The Left has essentially warped civil rights law to move away from shared notions of equality under the law. The Biden administration and its elite institutional allies used the prior four years to racialize our government and society based on their notions of who qualifies as an oppressor and who is oppressed. The result has been a massive backlash. Now, Trump is taking aim at DEI, not only eliminating it from federal departments but using civil rights law to ensure that any institution receiving government support will no longer be able to discriminate based on race. He is now using this to push Ivy League schools to drop their DEI programs or else lose billions of dollars in federal funding.

Another example of how Trump is blowing up DEI is his executive order ending “disparate impact” analysis from government policy. The disparate impact theory posited that any example of racial disparity, even unintentional, was assumed to be an example of discrimination. The policy has been used to threaten police departments and schools so that they will abandon good policies out of fear of being sued. Now, it’s the other way around. Colleges and corporations will now have to be more careful if they choose to discriminate.

Global Reset While Trump’s re-ascendance has dramatically changed domestic politics, he’s also monumentally reshaping the global chess board. Trump has pushed hard for peace in Eastern Europe, has put pressure on Iran and its proxies in the Middle East with the hopes of creating stability in the region, and more broadly reoriented American foreign policy to more strictly focus on U.S. national interests. He’s reviving the Monroe Doctrine with a focus on the Americas to both secure America’s doorstep and, more importantly, to keep China at bay. And while Trump’s tariff policies have perhaps sparked the greatest backlash, this administration has made it clear that the U.S. can’t continue to be addicted to cheap goods from a foreign country that often means to do us harm. Trump has at least started what should have begun long ago, which is the great decoupling from China.

The jury is still out on whether these moves will pay off. But the necessary pivot was a long time coming. In the age of increasing great power competition, Trump is clearly making moves to ensure that America continues to be the greatest power. What Trump has done across the board should be defined as the great pivot. In his first 100 days back in office, Trump has demonstrated that he’s a man leading a populist uprising—not just to break down an old system, but to rebuild it on a stronger foundation.

Read more …

“Trump knows that time is of the essence. If he is going to realign the markets and make progress on issues like deportations, he has to put points on the board before the midterm elections..”

The First 100 Days: The Method Behind the Madness in Court Challenges (Turley)

This is an administration in a hurry. Trump learned in his first term that you need to move as fast and as far as possible in the first two years of a presidential term. With the midterm elections looming, Trump knows that reforms may end and investigations and impeachments will begin if the Democrats retake the House in 2026. Despite some losses, the Justice Department has succeeded generally in reaffirming its authority to seek the reduction of government and to root out waste. It has also made real progress in other areas. Take the area of greatest success for the Trump administration: Immigration. One thing that was clearly established in the first 100 days is that the entry of millions of unlawful immigrants was a choice made by the Biden administration and the Democrats. They could have stopped most of these entries at any time, but elected to leave the southern border effectively open for four years as millions poured over.

In a matter of weeks, Trump effectively closed the border. In February, there were just 8,326 southern border encounters, down from 189,913 in February 2024. Daily encounters this week declined 97% from Biden. As many of us stated during the Biden administration, Democrats could have shut down the border, but clearly did not want to. Now with millions in the country, Democrats are calling for “pathways to citizenship” by arguing that there is no way to process so many illegals allowed in under Biden. In the meantime, the public overwhelmingly favors deportations and elected Trump on his pledge to carry out such removals. Polling shows that 83% of Americans support deportations of immigrants with violent criminal records and roughly half support mass deportation of all undocumented persons.

A new CBS poll shows that, after the first 100 days, 56 percent approve of President Donald Trump’s “program to find and deport immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally.” To carry out that policy, Trump is seeking to use new expedited systems. For the worst individuals, he has turned to the centuries-old Alien Enemies Act, a little-used act that presents a series of novel, unresolved questions. Even with this smaller subset of detainees, individual hearings and appeals could make Biden’s decision to allow millions into the country a permanent reality. Many immigrants have been given initial court dates that extend beyond the Trump term. Trump also pledged to reduce trade barriers for American exports and he is pushing existing laws to the breaking point on tariffs. He is right on the merits.

Even our closest allies impose unfair barriers to our goods and Trump sought to change the status quo with sweeping tariffs issued under his own authority. Democrats have challenged that authority in various courts and, again, there are good-faith arguments that must be hashed out in court. It is too early to tell how successful these cases will prove. However, a district court injunction (or even a dozen injunctions) a crisis does not make. The Supreme Court is about to hear arguments on limiting the use of national injunctions and some of these district court decisions are highly challengeable on appeal. There is no question that Trump is moving at a lightning speed and the Justice Department has to move at the same pace as the president.

There is also no question that it would better to slow down to avoid some of the unforced errors in the first 100 days. However, Trump knows that time is of the essence. If he is going to realign the markets and make progress on issues like deportations, he has to put points on the board before the midterm elections. Ronald Reagan lost 26 seats in the House in his first midterm, Bill Clinton lost 54, and Barack Obama lost a breathtaking 63 seats. The greatest problem for the Justice Department is that the White House and the political team appear to be largely dictating these moves. Political aides see these hills as worth dying on. Even if they lose in court, fighting to remove criminal aliens or to reduce certain foreign aid remains popular with voters.

Read more …

Dmitry Trenin is a research professor at the Higher School of Economics and a lead research fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Calculated, Not Chaotic (Trenin)

The first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second presidency have sparked a wave of commentary portraying him as a revolutionary. Indeed, the speed, pressure, and determination with which he has acted are striking. But this view is superficial. Trump is not dismantling the foundations of the American state or society. On the contrary, he seeks to restore the pre-globalist republic that the liberal elite long ago diverted onto a utopian internationalist path. In this sense, Trump is not a revolutionary, but a counterrevolutionary – an ideological revisionist determined to reverse the excesses of the liberal era. At home, Trump benefits from Republican majorities in both houses of Congress. Legal challenges to his policies – particularly on downsizing government and deporting illegal immigrants – have so far made little progress.

Accustomed to media attacks, Trump continues to hit back hard. The recent story alleging that top officials debated strikes on Yemen over Signal has not gained political traction. If anything, it reinforces Trump’s image as a president who acts decisively and without fear of scandal. Trump’s economic course is clear: re-industrialization, tariff protectionism, and investment in cutting-edge technologies. He is reversing decades of globalist integration, pressing allies to pool financial and technological resources with the US to rebuild its industrial base. Tactically, Trump applies pressure early, then offers retreats and compromises to lure competitors into negotiations favorable to America. This approach has been effective, particularly with Washington’s allies. Even with China, Trump is betting that Beijing’s reliance on the US market, and America’s influence over EU and Japanese trade policy, will yield strategic concessions.

In geopolitics, Trump embraces a realist doctrine grounded in great-power competition. He has defined his global priorities: secure North America as a geopolitical fortress from Greenland to Panama; redirect US and allied power toward containing China; make peace with Russia; and consolidate influence in the Middle East by supporting Israel, partnering with Gulf monarchies, and confronting Iran. In the military sphere, Trump is pursuing greater American strength by purging the armed forces of “gender liberalism” and accelerating strategic nuclear modernization. Despite his public peace overtures, he has continued airstrikes against the Houthis in Yemen and has warned of devastating retaliation against Iran should negotiations fail. His approach to Ukraine reflects strategic pragmatism.

Trump aims to end the war quickly, not out of sympathy for Russia, but to free US resources for the Pacific theater and to reduce the risk of escalation into a nuclear conflict. He expects Western Europe to assume more responsibility for its own defense. Importantly, Trump does not see Russia as a primary adversary. He views Moscow as a geopolitical rival, but not a military or ideological threat. Rather than pushing to sever Russia from China, he aims to re-engage Russia economically – in areas like energy, the Arctic, and rare earths – with the expectation that greater Western economic engagement will reduce Moscow’s dependence on Beijing.

In fact, outreach to the Kremlin has become the centerpiece of Trump’s foreign policy in his second term. His goal is not to divide Moscow and Beijing outright, but to lay the groundwork for a new global balance of power in which Russia has options beyond the Chinese orbit. In sum, Trump is not tearing down the American system but striving to restore it. His counterrevolution is aimed at reversing liberal-globalist distortions, reinforcing sovereignty, and returning realism to international affairs. It is this mission – not chaos or confrontation – that is defining his presidency.

Read more …

“..Ukraine is ready for an unconditional ceasefire, Russia is not, and Mr. Trump should not abandon a peace that only he can deliver.”

Zelensky Pleaded With Trump In Vatican – The Economist (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky tried to persuade US President Donald Trump during their brief conversation at the Vatican not to give up on his efforts to settle the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, according to The Economist. Trump and Zelensky got together for some 15 minutes on the sidelines of Pope Francis’ funeral on Saturday. The negotiations “produced a striking photograph of the two men sitting in St. Peter’s Basilica, locked in conversation as apparent political equals,” The Economist wrote on Tuesday. Ukrainian sources told the outlet that Zelensky used the discussions “to deliver a simple message: Ukraine is ready for an unconditional ceasefire, Russia is not, and Mr. Trump should not abandon a peace that only he can deliver.” Russia previously called the 30-day ceasefire demanded by Kiev “unrealistic,” stressing that talks can take place without a pause in the fighting.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned over the weekend that Washington could disengage from the peace process if it does not see rapid progress from Russia and Ukraine towards an end to the fighting. The mood in Ukraine is now “cautiously optimistic” because the officials in Kiev believe that “after months of threats and blackmail,” Trump has finally started “to respect” Zelensky, the Economist wrote. The talks at the Vatican became the first in-person conversation between the two leaders since their meeting at the Oval Office in late February, which devolved into a shouting match in front of the cameras. At the time, Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance accused Zelensky of being ungrateful for the American aid and not being interested in peace. The public quarrel resulted in the Ukrainian leader’s visit to the White House being cut short.

Following the meeting at the Vatican, Trump described Zelensky as “calmer,” saying that the Ukrainian leader now “understands the picture. And I think he wants to make a deal. I do not know if he wanted to make a deal [before]. I think he wants to make a deal.” On Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s readiness to engage in direct talks with Kiev without any preconditions. As for the ceasefire, Russia considers it “a precondition that will be used to further support the Kiev regime and strengthen its military capabilities,” he explained.

Read more …

“It’s very obvious that the Ukrainians were involved in the attempted assassination on the golf course in Florida..”

Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukrainians of Trying To Kill Trump (RT)

Ukraine was involved in a plot to assassinate US President Donald Trump during his 2024 reelection campaign, American journalist Tucker Carlson has claimed. In September 2024, pro-Ukraine activist Ryan Wesley Routh was arrested after setting up a firing position with a rifle near Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida. He was spotted by Secret Service agents before he could open fire and was detained following a brief manhunt. “It’s very obvious that the Ukrainians were involved in the attempted assassination on the golf course in Florida,” Carlson said on the Megyn Kelly Show on Tuesday. “That guy definitely had some contact with Ukraine, for sure,” Kelly replied. “He was in Ukraine!” Carlson stressed. Kelly said Routh was “asking them” for heavy weaponry, including rocket-propelled grenades. Carlson agreed and suggested that Kiev may have been involved in other assassination plots.

“I know for a fact there were others who were a target of assassination attempts by the Ukrainian government,” he claimed, without providing details. According to court documents from the Southern District of Florida, Routh – a convicted felon – attempted unsuccessfully to enlist in the Ukrainian army in 2022. Despite this, he allegedly worked to recruit foreign volunteers for the Ukrainian military. Prosecutors allege that Routh attempted to purchase either a rocket-propelled grenade launcher or a Stinger man-portable air-defense missile from a Ukrainian associate. “I need equipment so that Trump don’t [sic] get elected,” he wrote in one of the encrypted messages cited in the case. Both weapons systems have seen extensive use in the Ukraine conflict. “One missing would not be noticed,” Routh reportedly said in another message.

In 2022, Routh took part in a rally in Kiev in support of Ukraine’s Azov military unit, whose fighters were under siege by Russian forces in Mariupol at the time. The unit – which includes members with neo-Nazi and ultranationalist backgrounds – later stated that Routh “has never had any connection to Azov.” In a social media post earlier this month, the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., criticized officials in Kiev for failing to alert the US authorities about Routh’s attempts to obtain heavy weapons. The Florida incident came after a separate assassination attempt in July 2024, when a gunman opened fire during a Trump campaign rally in Pennsylvania. Trump was escorted from the stage after a bullet grazed his ear. One spectator was killed and several others were wounded. The shooter, later identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, was fatally shot by a Secret Service sniper.

Read more …

An attack by Nazis on a parade celebrating the defeat of nazis. How fitting.

“..if the two nations were to reach a peace agreement, Kiev’s secret services might embark on a decades-long campaign of assassinations against Russian officials.”

Zelensky Openly Threatening Victory Day Terrorist Attack – Moscow (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has openly threatened to target the Victory Day parade in Moscow on May 9, according to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. Russia has announced a unilateral three-day ceasefire next week to coincide with the celebration commemorating the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. Kiev has rebuked the move, instead demanding an immediate unconditional 30-day truce. On Tuesday, Zelensky described targeting Russian “pressure points” to push the country “towards diplomacy” as he reiterated the ceasefire call. “They are now concerned that their parade is in jeopardy and rightly so,” he remarked, referring to the event scheduled for May 9 in Red Square. “What they should worry about is that this war continues.”

Zakharova reacted on social media on Wednesday, asking what kind of truce Kiev can offer, given that the Zelensky government “is literally planning terrorist attacks on air.” She added that boasting about such intentions “is exactly what typical terrorists do.” Officials in Kiev claim that the offer of a unilateral suspension of hostilities by Russia is “not real” and merely aims to pressure Ukrainian forces into granting their adversaries a respite during the Victory Day festivities. Ukrainian nationalist figures who were allied with Nazi Germany during World War II are treated as heroes by the current government. Those who commemorate Adolf Hitler’s defeat on May 9 — rather than May 8, as observed in Western Europe and the United States — face harassment in Ukraine for perceived disloyalty.

The prospect of striking Red Square while President Vladimir Putin and foreign dignitaries observe the parade is being actively discussed in Ukrainian media. MP Roman Kostenko, secretary of the country’s parliamentary Defense Committee, stated in an interview on Tuesday that Kiev possesses the necessary weapon systems for such an operation, asserting that planning it “would not be difficult.” The same lawmaker recently suggested that if the two nations were to reach a peace agreement, Kiev’s secret services might embark on a decades-long campaign of assassinations against Russian officials.

Read more …

“..urging the Ukrainian government to lift its ban on direct negotiations..”

US Cannot Sign Peace Deal On Behalf of Kiev – Kremlin (RT)

Russia values US mediation in the Ukraine conflict and hopes for its success, but it cannot sign a peace deal with Washington as a stand-in for Kiev, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has stated. Moscow is therefore urging the Ukrainian government to lift its ban on direct negotiations. US President Donald Trump’s administration is advocating a compromise resolution to the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, warning that a lack of progress could lead to a US withdrawal from the peace process. On Wednesday, Peskov reiterated that Ukraine’s willingness to make concessions is crucial to a favorable outcome. ”A peace deal should be done with the Ukraine, not with America,” he remarked in English during a press briefing, answering a question from a foreign journalist. He reminded the media that Russian President Vladimir Putin remains open to direct discussions with Ukraine, adding, “Unfortunately, we haven’t heard any statements in this context from Kiev, so we don’t know whether Kiev is ready or not.”

Previously, Moscow urged Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to rescind his 2022 order banning direct negotiations with Russia as long as Putin remains in office. Peskov expressed gratitude toward the Trump administration for its diplomatic efforts, and observed that while Washington’s desire for a swift resolution is understandable, a peace deal is “too complicated to be achieved overnight.” Trump has previously criticized Zelensky for publicly opposing aspects of the US truce proposal, which were reported in the media. In an interview with ABC News this week, he claimed that Russia “would have taken all of Ukraine” if he had not been in office. Separately, US Vice President J.D. Vance has argued that Kiev lacks a viable path to reverse its misfortunes on the battlefield against Russia. Peskov stated that Russia prefers a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict, having pursued that path before resorting to military action after its overtures were rebuffed.

Read more …

Are there any rare earths there at all?

US and Ukraine Sign Minerals Deal (RT)

Washington and Kiev have signed a minerals deal granting the US access to developing Ukraine’s natural resources, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian Economy Minister Yuliya Sviridenko announced on Wednesday. The agreement comes as Ukraine seeks security guarantees from Washington as part of a potential peace deal with Moscow that US President Donald Trump is working to negotiate. The deal sees the establishment of the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. “President Trump envisioned this partnership between the American people and the Ukrainian people to show both sides’ commitment to lasting peace and prosperity in Ukraine,” Bessent said in a statement. The full text of the agreement has not yet been released. Sviridenko said the fund will be jointly managed by Ukraine and the US “on a 50/50 basis,” and that “neither side will hold a dominant vote.”

She said that 50% of the revenue from new licenses in the fields of critical materials, oil, and gas will be directed to the fund. Full ownership and control remain with Ukraine,” the Ukrainian minister added. “It is the Ukrainian state that determines what and where to extract. Subsoil remains under Ukrainian ownership – this is clearly established in the Agreement.” According to Sviridenko, the deal does not alter privatization processes or the management of state-owned companies. She said that the oil and gas giant Ukrnafta, as well as Energoatom – the operator of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants – will remain under government ownership. While the Biden administration approved large aid packages for Ukraine, including the supply of advanced weaponry, the current US president has focused on shifting the burden of assistance to Kiev’s European supporters.

In February 2025, the US went so far as to halt all military support to the country following a tense Oval Office meeting between US President Donald Trump, US Vice President J.D. Vance, and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. According to various estimates, Washington has provided at least $170 billion to Kiev. The White House insists those expenses should be compensated via access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, including rare earth elements critical to high-tech industries. Negotiations between the two countries over a minerals agreement have been underway since the early days of Trump’s return to office. A preliminary memorandum of intent was signed on April 17, but the US president has publicly criticized the delay in finalizing the deal. In a post on Truth Social on April 25, he accused Zelensky of being “three weeks late” in signing it and demanded that it be completed “immediately.”

Although the minerals agreement does not explicitly include US security guarantees for Ukraine, it is described as ‘an expression of a broader, long-term strategic alignment and a tangible demonstration of the United States of America’s support for Ukraine’s security, prosperity, reconstruction and integration into global economic frameworks’, according to the Financial Times. Zelensky said last week that Kiev hopes to receive long-term security assistance from Washington, similar to the US-Israel model. Meanwhile, Trump declined to clarify whether the US would continue to provide military aid to Ukraine if a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow is not reached. “I want to leave that as a big, fat secret, because I don’t want to ruin a negotiation,” he said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday.

Axios reported last week that Washington had given Kiev what President Donald Trump called a “final offer” to resolve the conflict. The United States has expressed mounting frustration over the lack of progress in the peace negotiations. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that Washington may withdraw from the talks entirely if they stall. In February, Reuters cited estimates from two Ukrainian think tanks stating that about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources are now under Russian control. According to the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development (CIRSD), between 50% and 100% of the lithium, tantalum, cesium, and strontium deposits claimed by Ukraine are located in territories currently controlled by Russia.


Read more …

“..they’re willing to give up the land… not de jure – forever – but de facto because the Russians actually occupied it..”

“..without formally recognizing Moscow’s sovereignty over them..”

Ukraine Willing To ‘De Facto Give Up’ Land To Russia – Kellogg (RT)

Kiev has agreed to acknowledge Russia’s control over Crimea and four other regions – without formally recognizing Moscow’s sovereignty over them – according to US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg. During an interview on Wednesday, Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum asked Kellogg whether the US could accept Moscow’s demand that Ukraine renounce claims to territories it considers under Russian occupation. “Partially, yes,” Kellogg replied. “Look, the Ukrainians, Martha, have already said—they’re willing to give up the land… not de jure – forever – but de facto because the Russians actually occupied it. They’ve agreed to that,” he said. “They told me that last week.” Kellogg added that Ukraine wants a ceasefire that would mean “you sit on the ground that you currently hold.”

The envoy said he met with Ukrainian officials in London on April 23 and that they had agreed to “22 concrete terms” presented by the US, including a 30-day comprehensive ceasefire. He urged Moscow to “pick up on” the proposal. Russia, however, has maintained that a full ceasefire would require Ukraine to halt its mobilization campaign and stop accepting military aid from abroad. President Vladimir Putin further demanded that Kiev withdraw troops from the Russian territories it still claims. Moscow has accused Ukraine of repeatedly violating the 30-day “energy truce” brokered by Trump in March, as well as last month’s 30-hour Easter truce.

Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine and join Russia shortly after the 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Kiev. The Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, along with the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, followed suit after referendums in 2022. Ukraine and the European Union have consistently stated that they do not recognize the five regions as Russian territory. The agreement proposed by Washington reportedly includes US recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, freezing the conflict along the current front line, and acknowledging Moscow’s control over large parts of the four other former Ukrainian regions. The deal would also reportedly block Ukraine from joining NATO and initiate a phased removal of sanctions imposed on Russia.

Read more …

“..we are the deficit country,” Bessent said. “They sell almost five times more goods to us than we sell to them. So the onus will be on them to take off these tariffs. They’re unsustainable for them.”

China Caves to Trump on Tariffs Again (Margolis)

The communist regime had desperately slapped this tariff on U.S. ethane earlier this month in a failed attempt to counter Trump’s brilliant Liberation Day tariff offensive. Obviously, it couldn’t sustain the tariff — China depends on American ethane for its survival, gobbling up about half of our total ethane exports annually, according to federal energy data. The reality is that major Chinese manufacturers like Satellite Chemical, SP Chemicals, Sinopec, Sanjiang Fine Chemical, and Wanhua Chemical Group can’t function without American ethane from powerhouse U.S. suppliers Enterprise Products Partners and Energy Transfer. Ethane is just the latest addition to a growing list of American products that China has quietly exempted from its retaliatory tariffs in the ongoing trade war with the United States. This is what winning looks like. Just last week, Chinese officials began rolling back tariffs on American semiconductors. They’ve also quietly removed duties on pharmaceuticals and aircraft engines.

So much for the hysterical predictions that Trump’s trade policies would wreck the U.S. economy — it turns out that all that doom and gloom should have been reserved for China, which has realized the hard way that it needs the United States more than the United States needs China. News of China lifting tariffs on U.S. ethane comes on the heels of a warning from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who made it clear that Trump’s trade strategy is hitting Beijing where it hurts. “I think that over time we will see that the Chinese tariffs are unsustainable for China,” Bessent told reporters from the White House on Tuesday. “I’ve seen some very large numbers over the past few days that show if these numbers stay on, Chinese could lose 10 million jobs very quickly. And even if there is a drop in the tariffs that they could lose 5 million jobs.” “So remember that we are the deficit country,” Bessent said. “They sell almost five times more goods to us than we sell to them. So the onus will be on them to take off these tariffs. They’re unsustainable for them.”

“Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary has long advocated that Trump leverage America’s dominant economic position while we still have it. “We have to squeeze heads while we’re the largest economy on earth,” he told Fox Business last week, noting that the U.S. accounts for 39% of global consumption and 26.1% of world GDP. “Squeeze while you can, otherwise you’ll never get this opportunity again.” O’Leary also noted that Xi Jinping doesn’t face voter backlash the way American leaders do, but he still has to contend with millions of restless workers if exports dry up. “He can use his own currency to print money and pay these people for doing nothing, then he gets hyperinflation. Saw that movie in Venezuela. We have leverage,” he warned. Trump’s hardball approach is doing exactly what it was meant to do. While Biden spent four years appeasing Beijing, Trump’s tariffs are showing China who’s really in charge. It’s a vindication of what conservatives have been saying all along: the only thing China’s communist regime respects is strength.

Read more …

“..the party tried—in a very anemic fashion—to move to the center, where they knew the votes were. But this new cohort is saying, “You lost the election because you didn’t go far left enough..”

Democrats’ Radical Changing of the Guard (Victor Davis Hanson)

There was some news lately that Sen. Dick Durbin from Illinois—he was the author, remember, of the DREAM Act. He was a hardcore liberal. You could even say he was left of center. He’s stepping down. He’s in his 70s. And there’s a changing of the guard. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in some polls, is running—I cannot believe it—behind Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for his upcoming senatorial bid by 20 points and more in a primary. And then, as a force multiplier, I just saw Rep. Nancy Pelosi, she was at a public event. I think she’s 85, turning 86. She was as incoherent as former President Joe Biden. So, what’s Victor trying to say? We’re watching a changing of the guard, both due to aging—and we see that with Joe Biden, and the Biden generation is over with, and Nancy Pelosi. And then the next cohort in their 70s, the septuagenarians, they’re terrified.

Dick Durbin’s terrified of being in a primary. And so is Chuck Schumer. He took the dignified way out. Chuck Schumer will probably fight to the very end and be humiliated by AOC. Who are these people? Well, “the squad,” remember, traditionally was Rep. Ilhan Omar, the Somalian who allegedly had married her brother to gain citizenship access to the United States. There was Ayanna Pressley. She was the radical African American congresswoman. We had, of course, AOC, who was a prominent member. And we have also, in addition, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, she was a member of the squad, she was the Michigan pro-Hamas congresswoman. Then we had the Democratic National Committee. And we had Ken Martin who won the DNC chairmanship. He’s very much to the left.

And really to the left is his subordinate, David Hogg, the vice chairman. He was a survivor of the Parkland shooting, remember, in 2018. And he transmogrified into anti-Second Amendment. But then he got even more and more and more radical. I don’t think he’s ever really done anything except raise money. But here’s my point. We’re watching a metamorphosis of the Democratic Party that is out of power. The old guard: Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin—that old guard did not deliver the 2024 election. And they lost the House. They lost the Senate. They don’t have a majority in the Supreme Court. They lost the popular vote. They lost the Electoral College. So, in the eyes of the Democratic youth, they’re discredited.

But here’s the key. They didn’t lose the 2024 election because they were too far—they didn’t go far left enough. They lost it because former Vice President Kamala Harris and her supporters tried to move her from her hard left. And can I make a parentheses here? She had the most left-wing voting record in the U.S. Senate—to the left of Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. And she couldn’t even move a little bit to the center, although she tried. She said, remember that she was for fracking and she wanted the border wall and she was for deportation? That was all untrue.

But the point I’m making is, the party tried—in a very anemic fashion—to move to the center, where they knew the votes were. But this new cohort is saying, “You lost the election because you didn’t go far left enough. And maybe we represent 20% of the Democratic registered cohort, but we’re young. And we’re charismatic. And we’re dynamic. And we’re gonna take this party, in the 2026 midterms and the 2028, to victory. And we’re gonna do it by a socialist agenda. And a radical, radical, new, new, new green deal. And an open border. And a trans banner on every campaign event. That’s who we are. And a disarmament. And we’re gonna raise taxes on the billionaires.” And that’s their message. It has no public support.

So, even though they think they’re charismatic and they’re youthful, we get back to the old proverb of the 80-20 paradigm. The Republican Party has been on the 70% to 80% of where the people are on the border, on foreign policy, on the economy, on social and cultural issues. These people—these Jacobin French revolutionaries—they’re pulling 20% to 30% on this issue. I’ll leave you with a final thought. The Republicans are not afraid. They’re not afraid of the squad and the Jacobins and this new cohort, the David Hoggs of the world. But you know who’s terrified of them? Dick Durbin, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer, because they don’t know how to handle them. They’re part of themselves. It’s an incestuous relationship. And they’re saying to them, “But we’re the old guard.” And they’re saying, “You may be the old guard, but we’re going to guillotine you and get rid of you. And we’re coming in with a revolutionary fervor they’re terrified of.”

Read more …

Let’s all invent our own laws..

Illegal Immigrants in My District Are Constituents: California Democrat (DS)

Rep. Norma Torres said at a Wednesday press conference that every taxpayer in her district—including illegal immigrants—is her constituent. Torres, D-Calif., held the event to promote her Fairness to Freedom Act, which would require the government to pay for the legal defense of any immigrant facing deportation who cannot afford counsel. “Everyone living in my district is my constituent, and I am there to serve and be a public servant for them,” Torres said, when asked by The Daily Signal whether she considers immigrants without legal status to be among her constituents. “Everyone who pays taxes is a constituent of all members of Congress, including immigrants who have filed for a tax ID and are denied any benefits,” she added.

In the midst of the recent controversy over Maryland Democrat Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s meeting with Kilmar Abrego-Garcia, the Salvadoran national deported from Maryland to an El Salvador prison, White House adviser Stephen Miller said that Van Hollen was confused about Abrego-Garcia’s status. “Senator Van Hollen seems to be under the very confused impression that this MS-13 terrorist is his constituent,” Miller said on Fox at the time. “He is [Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele’s] constituent. … He is President Bukele’s resident. He is not a ‘Maryland man’ … . He is an illegal alien from El Salvador … .” At the press conference, Torres laid out her legislation as a way to prevent deportations. “We all know that the system is designed to leave people in the dark without legal support so they can be railroaded through the system and taken out of our country,” she said.

“But the Fairness to Freedom Act says, ‘Enough is enough’—if a detainee doesn’t get counseled in time, the deportation proceedings must be terminated with prejudice.” Torres was joined by fellow Democrat Reps. Robert Garcia of California and Pramila Jayapal of Washington state. Jayapal boasted that they were “three of the less than two dozen naturalized citizens to serve in the United States Congress … and so we know how tough the system is to navigate.” Jayapal also mentioned that “decades of research clearly shows that immigrants with representation are 10 times more likely to obtain relief from deportation … and detained immigrants with representation are three-and-a-half times more likely to be granted bond, enabling their release.”

But Garcia and Torres both voted against the Laken Riley Act in January, which requires that illegal immigrants charged with theft or violent crimes be detained. Jayapal did not vote on the legislation, which was named after a Georgia nursing student slain by an illegal alien. It passed the House on Jan. 22, two days after it passed the Senate, in both cases with large bipartisan majorities. On Jan. 29, it became the first bill signed into law by President Donald Trump at the start of his second term. Torres, Garcia, and Jayapal all voted against the SAVE Act, which would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. That bill passed the House 220-208 on April 10, with just four Democrats voting in favor. It has yet to receive a vote in the Senate.

Read more …

Dr. Karin Kneissl is Austria’s former minister of foreign affairs.

“The issue is transmission, not generation, of energy..”

Massive Blackouts Is What Green Agenda Gets You (Karin Kneissl)

It was probably the weather that triggered the ten-hour breakdown of all utilities on the Iberian Peninsula earlier this week. It was also the weather that has turned Germany into Europe’s top CO2 emitter. There are days when the sun does not shine, and the wind does not blow. And then the backup is coal in the absence of nuclear power or natural gas (from Russia). An even bigger threat to the grid, however, stems from overproduction of electricity due to too much sun and wind. Both Spain and Germany proudly point out their statistics in terms of power generation based on huge onshore and offshore wind farms and extensive photovoltaic panels, often constructed on precious arable soil. Spain and Portugal are champions of green energy in the EU, and were sourcing 80 percent of their electricity from renewables just before the outage hit on Monday.

The larger underlying problem is in transmitting rather than generating electricity. Large parts of the existing grids in the EU were constructed in the 1950 and 1960s, when it was fairly easy to build infrastructure in the post-war towns. When Angela Merkel announced her ambitious energy transition, Peter Altmaier, the head of the Chancellor’s office announced the building of several thousands of kilometers of “electricity highways” (Strom Autobahnen). The slated budget was one trillion euros. But that budget was never established and nobody in Merkel’s government calculated the years for administrative planning and implementation.

So, the new grid was never built, neither in Germany nor elsewhere. The current grid is not made for to absorb constantly increasing volumes. The “electrification” of all forms of energy production and consumption, above all in mobility, poses a serious problem for the stability of the existing grids. Electric vehicles were supposed to replace cars with the traditional internal combustion engines. The hype surrounding the electric car has already died down. Customers simply refrain from buying an electric car. But the ambitious green agendas rarely take into account serious investments and above all solid timeframes for an enlarged electrical grid.

The European electrical grid stretches from Türkiye across the European continent to North Africa. Its technical name is Continental European Synchronous Area, and it is vulnerable. It is fed with an alternating current with a frequency of approximately 50 Hertz. In case of an overload, as probably happened on Monday in Spain, the risk is high that the frequency is destabilised. In order to pre-empt a power cut, since power plants will automatically shut down, the overload is sent abroad. Some voices claim that the Iberian Peninsula lacks interconnectors, while others warn against more interconnectors since this would only put the entire grid at risk, a domino blackout across more than 30 countries.

In 2012, the Austrian writer Marc Elsberg published his thriller “Blackout.” The plot describes a fictional 13-day power outage and the ensuing total breakdown of life as we know it. In the well-researched book, the blackout is caused by a cyber-attack. Many commentators eagerly suggested that one was behind the real-world crisis on Monday. Apparently, no one is ready to discuss the problem with the grid and green deal ambitions. Attending energy conferences for years and teaching the topic of geopolitics of energy, I often wondered about the romantic fantasy models that Brussels officials and other climate experts presented. For the last 15 years, we witness an inflationary concept of “energy transition” or even worse, zero-carbon economy. Throughout the entire EU we have seen a focus on climate change. The approach lacks a solid energy policy, one which covers security in supply, affordability, and investments into grids.

I expected a major blackout to happen in Germany, rather than on the Iberian Peninsula. The so-called energy transition declared by the Angela Merkel government in spring 2011 did not deliver at all. In the first quarter of 2025, instead of more electricity from wind and sun, more electricity was generated from coal and gas. Easter week also showed why the so-called energy transition is causing problems. Despite the record expansion of wind and solar power, renewables are producing less electricity than at any time since 2021. Compared to the first quarter of last year, the amount of electricity produced by renewables in the same period this year fell by 16 percent.

The wind was not particularly strong in February and March. Electricity production from offshore wind turbines fell by a total of 31 percent, while production on land fell by 22 percent. As a result, electricity production from coal, oil, and gas had to be drastically increased. The logical consequence: CO2 emissions have risen dramatically. Electricity in Germany was dirtier than it had been since the winter of 2018.

However, it is not only in the medium term that the energy transition is not doing what its supporters believe it should. Easter week exemplifies all the problems associated with the plan to switch Germany’s energy production to mainly wind and solar. On a sunny Easter Sunday, for example, the five million or so solar installations in Germany produced far more electricity than would have been needed to cover demand during the holiday. However, electricity must be consumed exactly when it is produced, otherwise the electricity grid may be disrupted. This applies both nationally and to the local electricity grids on site and the regional capacities of the weather-dependent energy sources.

Read more …

The decisions have been made by politicians who think any energy source can be seamlessly replaced with any other energy source.

Because … well, energy is energy, right? This is going to hurt.

The Spanish Power Outage. A Catastrophe Created By Political Design (Lacalle)

On April 23rd, I participated in a conference at the European Parliament on the future of nuclear energy with experts from all over Europe, where I warned that, with the current energy policies, blackouts will be the norm, not a coincidence. The shortsighted and sectarian policy of the activists who populate the government has led us to the worst blackout in the history of Spain. We have been without communication or electricity for nearly eleven hours. This blackout, with the immediate collapse of fifteen gigawatts of power in the system, is the consequence of a policy that penalizes base energy, key to providing stability to the system, and plunders the energy sector. Governments have been dedicated to closing nuclear power plants, making them unviable with abusive and confiscatory taxation; penalizing investment in distribution with absurd regulations; imposing a volatile and intermittent energy mix; and burdening energy with elevated taxes and administrative delays. What could go wrong? Everything.

And it happened. Renewable energies, while essential in a balanced energy mix, cannot provide safety and stability due to their volatility and intermittent nature. That’s why it is essential to have a balanced system with base-load energy that operates all the time, such as hydropower, nuclear, and natural gas as backup. Destroying access to nuclear energy with unnecessary closures and confiscatory taxation has been part of the fundamental causes of the disaster and the blackout. Last week, they had to close the remaining nuclear power plants because their taxes are so high that they cannot cover their fixed costs. They have destroyed nuclear plants’ economics by political design. Moreover, those plants would have provided stability to the grid if national and regional governments, which use nuclear and hydroelectric power as cash cows for their revenue-hungry policies, had prioritized supply security over energy sectarianism.

There is much more. Spain and Portugal produce electricity with more than 60% solar and wind energy. Hydraulic, nuclear, and combined cycle gas plants must cover the shortfalls in solar and wind production, which is intermittent. There is no possibility of having a stable and secure system with a continuous supply if the electrical grid is not balanced to avoid a total blackout. According to Euronews, France sometimes produces too much electricity, leading the network operator RTE to disconnect solar or wind sites. The consumer pays taxes to cover the operator’s losses. This procedure prevents a general blackout of the grid.” In Spain, the president of Red Eléctrica, Beatriz Corredor, whose experience in energy is more than scarce, has never given a message or coordinated actions to prevent blackouts that were happening more frequently recently. We have been experiencing sporadic supply cuts to the industry for years, and just a week ago, the Chamartín station had a severe supply cut episode.

The crisis was not only a disaster due to the shortsighted energy policy of the current and previous governments. It was a disaster due to the inaction of the Ministry of Defence. Similar to the recent floods, our security forces exhibited astonishment at their lack of mobilization. Trains and elevators blocked thousands of travelers for hours, while the army stood by, waiting for orders. Six days ago, the government, left-wing parties, and many media outlets celebrated that Spain’s power grid ran entirely on renewable energy for a weekday for the first time. Bravo. A week later, a massive blackout in Spain, Portugal, and parts of France. France quickly restored electricity because it has the largest nuclear fleet in Europe. In Spain, the government maintained a confiscatory taxation system that prevented nuclear plants from operating, resulting in nearly eleven hours of darkness and no communication.

Red Eléctrica reported that the cause was a “strong oscillation in the electrical grid” that “forced the Iberian Peninsula to disconnect from the European system”. The collapse was immediate and long-lasting. It was the longest power outage in the history of Spain. The recovery efforts were in vain as they attempted to restore frequency control and stability with a system dependent on volatile and intermittent renewables. A system without physical inertia, provided by baseload energies that operate all the time—nuclear and hydroelectric—makes it impossible to stabilise the grid in the face of supply disruptions. When the collapse occurred, the Spanish electrical grid had almost 80% renewable generation, 11% nuclear, and only 3% natural gas. There was practically no base generation or physical inertia to absorb the shock that was generated.

For years, experts have issued warnings. Experts from around the world have been accused of being mouthpieces for invented lobbies when they warned of the risk to the system from overloading with renewables and eliminating or limiting base-load energies. In 2017, the European Network of Transmission System Operators warned that the increase in renewables would raise the risk of cascading failures if urgent investment was not made in synthetic inertia and storage technologies. Moreover, even if investment is made in storage, hundreds of experts warned about the additional burden with the electrification of the mobile fleet. Despite the warnings from energy companies and operators, the European Commission maintained its bet on renewable development that was poorly planned and worse executed. This included a New Green Deal that ignored the importance of networks and backup and seemed designed by school activists.

The Spanish government wanted to present itself as the top student of that so-called ecological sectarianism, which ignores copper and lithium mining, the importance of backup, and system stability. What have they achieved? They have created a disaster that has the potential to repeat itself.

Read more …

“.. that his efforts were met with violence and terrorism from illiterate, middle-aged children who would better credit the theory of evolution by slithering around on their bellies.”

Elon Musk, (Half of) a Grateful Nation Thanks You (Skeet)

After months of vandalism and arson on Tesla dealerships and physical attacks on Tesla owners by deranged leftists (with the full support and active encouragement of Democrat leaders), Elon Musk has announced his intention to “significantly” cut back his role with DOGE. This is a shame, as he has done more good for this country in those few short months than the entire wretched bureaucracy has done in the last half century. One hopes that Musk’s announcement is more to calm the more, ahem, incendiary of leftist lunatics and less of an actual reduction in influence. But either way, the Left will have won an important victory. And by doing so, they will have again shown that organized, widespread, and persistent violence is their most effective (and preferred) method of imposing their political will.

Musk, as you know, is responsible for revolutionizing the auto industry with his production of electric vehicles. For the cult of the Left, which howls incessantly and destroys art and throws tantrums in the middle of the street during rush hour about how climate change is the greatest threat the planet has ever faced, one would think that the man who gave America zero-emission vehicles would garner a bit more adulation. One would think.Musk is responsible for opening up Twitter to free speech after years of government-encouraged censorship that reigned under the submissive Jack Dorsey. One would think that leftists who dread “fascism” around every corner would breathe a sign of relief at the foremost social media company refusing to toe the narrative of the ruling political party like they do in, you know, actual fascist countries. One would think.

Musk is responsible for using Starlink to provide the entire country of Ukraine with internet and communications, starting during the opening months of the Russian invasion and continuing to the present day. For the Ukraine hawks in the Democrat party, one would think that the man who singlehandedly kept Ukraine’s communications running (including its military and weapons systems) would receive a bit more ideological wiggle room on issues most people would agree are more bipartisan, such as cutting American funding for poppy seed (heroin) production by the Taliban. One would think. Musk is responsible for using SpaceX to rescue two astronauts whom our government abandoned at the International Space Station for nine months after NASA equipment proved incapable of functioning. Why did NASA not launch a rescue mission before Musk? Because NASA officials said it had neither the budget nor the operational need to send a rescue craft for them.

The Crew Dragon shuttle that Musk used to rescue the astronauts costs between $100 million and $150 million per flight. Expensive for you and me, but in terms of the government budget? A mere drop in the bottomless bucket. NASA’s budget in 2024 was $24.875 billion. If my personal budget were $24.875 billion, believe you me, I could find $150 million in there somewhere to rescue two of my fellow human beings whose predicament was my fault to begin with. I wouldn’t do this out of “operational need,” but it is because that is what, at a bare minimum, any decent, responsible person would do. One would think that in life-or-death circumstances, when our own government officials refuse to do the job we literally pay them billions of dollars to do, people would celebrate when an Evil One Percenter steps up and privately funds the rescue mission rather than squandering his fortune on more yachts. One would think.

It’s not democracy that dies in darkness. It’s astronauts whose rescue is actively impeded and then downplayed if the rescuer’s political ideology doesn’t conform entirely to the Left. As Clive Irving of the New York Times sneered, “So what if Elon Musk rescued the astronauts?” The only logical way a leftist could still be mad after all this is if they actually didn’t care about the environment, if they actually didn’t care about Ukraine, if they actually didn’t care about protecting free speech against government fascism, rescuing astronauts left floating in space, or cutting government waste to make the entire operation more effective and, hence, more reputable.

Gee, it’s almost as if these alleged concerns were all just public posturing and virtue signaling and that their true colors showed when DOGE set about cutting USAID’s debauched pet projects, such as transgender activism in Latin America and feeding al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria. It’s almost as if the Left was actually motivated not by youthful idealism or passion for “social justice” but by an envious nihilism bred in the putrid swamps of their spiritually vacuous ideology. It’s almost as if they take a smug, sadistic pleasure in all of us doing worse rather than some of us doing better. Huh. If one were a cynic, one would think…

Because even beneath his DOGE cuts to worthless leftist narcissism, their hatred of him reflects something deeper and primordial. Elon Musk represents everything that is anathema to the Left. He is an immigrant who rose from a turbulent, chaotic childhood to become one of the world’s most successful self-made billionaires. His story reflects the moral and pragmatic superiority of the West. And his stunning productivity contrasts with the stunning uselessness of the activist class. The necessity of Musk reflects like a mirror the vulgar dispensability of his detractors. The world needs more Elon Musks and a lot less bureaucrats, DEI officers, and hyphenated studies professors. They know it. And they hate him for it.

Just this week, a non-verbal man with ALS was able to communicate on social media due to the research that Elon Musk’s Neuralink conducted. This is game-changing medical technology that hopefully will help not just people suffering from ALS, but from all paralyzing disabilities. The advancements this research created are nothing short of miraculous. During this same week, a man was caught and arrested in Mesa, Ariz., for burning a Tesla vehicle at a dealership in the middle of the night. The 35-year-old arsonist spray-painted the word “THEIF” on the wall of the dealership. This misspelling is his. And there you have it, folks. There is America in a nutshell. One half gives kudos to a successful, self-made, hardworking immigrant who champions free speech, environmentally-friendly vehicles, space rescue missions, tangible aid to wartime allies, groundbreaking medical advancements, and ending the massive corruption and waste in the government.

The other half hates him for reasons they neither comprehend nor can properly articulate using monosyllabic words exceeding four letters. Whatever happens over the course of the next four, ten, or fifty years in this country, let it be known here and wherever possible that WE are the half of the nation that is grateful to Musk for all he’s done, not just with DOGE but with everything else mentioned above. Let our grandkids’ history books tell how he tried to pull us back from the brink. And let future generations feel shame at the depravity of our age, that his efforts were met with violence and terrorism from illiterate, middle-aged children who would better credit the theory of evolution by slithering around on their bellies.

Read more …

Pepe’s doing a crash course.

China Steps Up Its Game in the Global AI Race (Pepe Escobar)

Late next month, Huawei will be testing its new powerful AI processor, the Ascend 910 D, even as by early May the previous 910C will start to be mass-delivered to scores of Chinese tech companies. These serious breakthroughs are the next chapter of Huawei’s drive to counter Nvidia’s global monopoly in GPUs. The Ascend 910D is supposed to be more powerful than Nvidia’s extremely popular H100. Huawei is pulling no punches in its race to manufacture a new generation of processors. Huawei has collaborated with SMIC – China’s largest semiconductor foundry – to apply Deep Ultraviolet Lithography (DUV) on what was previously only possible on EUV (Extreme Ultra-Violet technology). Once again, Huawei and SMIC defied the proverbial American “experts” with creative engineering solutions.

Huawei arrived at fabricating 5nm chips with DUV even as the process is more expensive than with EUV. If Huawei had access to EUV they would be already manufacturing 2-3nm chips. That will come, in short time, as both China and Russia, under permanent US high-tech blockade, must by all means develop their own EUV technology. Shanghai geeks are convinced that Huawei will switch on 6G networksbefore the end of the decade. Their current breathless drive is not just aimed at the smartphone front – where Huawei is peerless; the new Huawei Mate 70 Pro + is by far the absolute top smartphone in the world, running on Harmony OS. Huawei is looking at cloud computing, AI and enterprise servers – and to become no less than the core player in the AI infrastructure race.

Earlier this month, Huawei introduced the CloudMatrix 384, a system connecting 384 Ascend 910C chips. The tech word in Shanghai is that this configuration, under certain conditions, and of course consuming much more power, already outperforms Nvidia’s flagship rack system – which is powered by 72 Blackwell chips. Meanwhile, Huawei’s Kirin X chip is targeting the PC market, offering stiff competition to Apple, AMD, Intel and Qualcom while Harmony OS plus removes the necessity of using US software such as Microsoft and Android. Shanghai geeks swear that China essentially doesn’t need to beat Nvidia or other US chips developers. After all, China already has the largest consumer market in the world – by volume and by value. If a parallel tech universe is the likely result of the Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT), so be it. China already controls over 60% of the global gadget consumer market.

Kirin X may not – yet – match the power of Nvidia’s H100 GPUs. But Huawei chips are already the real deal for every Chinese company which is following the new Beijing-defined direction to reduce any reliance on American technology. All of the above naturally brings us to the enormous AI elephant in the (digital) room: Nvidia. A recent book, The Thinking Machine: Jensen Huang, Nvidia, and The World’s Most Coveted Microchip, is quite helpful to track not only the personal story of CEO superstar Huang, a Taiwanese who played the American Dream to the hilt and became a tech multi-billionaire, but Nvidia’s enviable tech accomplishments. Huang does not interpret AI as emergent machine superintelligence, and firmly dismisses any direct analogy to biology. For this all-round pragmatist, AI is merely software – running on hardware that his company sells for a fortune.

Still, Nvidia has ventured into virgin territory way beyond the American biz-tech Valhalla, complete with holding the most valuable stock on the planet: arguably, when it comes to AI, Nvidia unveiled a new phase of evolution. It’s crucial to understand how Huang sees China. It is indeed a key market for his AI chips – and he wants to keep selling them in droves. Trump’s tariffs though make sure that won’t happen. And that’s what moved Huang to ditch his proverbial leather jackets and don a crisp business suit for a strategic visit to Beijing, where he affirmed the sacred importance of the Chinese market, whatever the new Trump-dictated gimmicks By 2022, the China market represented 26% of Nvidia’s business; this year, it has fallen to 13%, because of euphemistic “technology export controls”.

The problem is the US government, already by 2022, under the previous automatic pen administration, had blocked sales to China of advanced A100 and H100 chips. Nvidia started selling modified versions – and even after the ban chips continued to arrive in China. By June 2023, it was easy to find A100s for double their price in the black market in Shenzhen. Huang is convinced that “no AI should be able to learn without a human in the loop” – even as he admitted, two years ago, that “reasoning capability is two or three years out”. Translation: according to Huang AI will start thinking for itself within the next few months.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Ladapo

Lymphocytes

Colon c

Fertility vaccine

Florida

Shit
https://twitter.com/jomickane/status/1917218825474548024

 

 

 

 

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.