Russian Official Warns Trump Against Taking Control Of Panama Canal

A top Russian official on Tuesday warned the Trump administration against taking over the Panama Canal after the president stated in his inaugural address that he intended to regain control of the strategic waterway.

Since the election, President Donald Trump has mentioned on several occasions that the United States should reassert control over the canal, which was built by Americans and controlled by the U.S. government until the Carter administration. Panama’s president has said that his government will not give up control of the canal.

As Jack Phillips reports for The Epoch Times, Trump’s comments prompted a response from Alexander Shchetinin, head of the Latin American department at the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who said that Moscow expects the leadership of Panama and the Trump administration to respect the “current international legal regime of this key waterway” during any discussions about control of the Panama Canal, according to a translation of comments reported by Russia’s state-run news agency TASS.

“Russia has been a party to the protocol since 1988 and reaffirms its obligations to respect the permanent neutrality of the Panama Canal, advocating for keeping this international transit waterway safe and open,” Shchetinin said, adding that the canal legally belongs to Panama.

The Panama Canal links the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea and is considered one of the most important trade routes in the world. About 40 percent of U.S. container ships pass through the waterway, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The U.S. government built the canal in the early part of the 20th century, starting under the administration of President Theodore Roosevelt, after it took over construction in 1904. Under President Jimmy Carter, negotiations started on handing over the waterway to the Panamanian government by the end of the 20th century.

Trump has said that Chinese entities are operating the canal, which he said is unacceptable. In his inauguration speech at the U.S. Capitol on Monday, Trump again spoke about the canal.

“American ships are being severely overcharged ... and above all, China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” he said.

Responding to Trump’s earlier comments, Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino, in a video released on social media in December 2024, rejected arguments that the United States could reassert control over the canal.

“As president, I want to clearly state that every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjoining zone is Panama’s and will remain so,” Mulino said at the time. “The sovereignty and independence of our country is non-negotiable.”

Trump has also suggested that the United States could take control over Greenland, the world’s largest island located in the North Atlantic that is currently part of Denmark’s territory.

Speaking to reporters on Monday as he signed executive orders in the White House, the president said he believes Denmark will “come along” on the possible sale of Greenland to the United States.

“Greenland is a wonderful place. We need fair, international security, and I am sure that Denmark will come along, I think. It’s costing them a lot of money to maintain it, to keep it,” he said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 05:45

Thailand Could Be The Home Of The Next Luxury Yacht Boom

Thailand could be the next home for a luxury yacht boom after "wealthy residents of Thailand caught the sailing bug during the COVID-19 pandemic," according to a new Nikkei Asia report.

The enthusiasm wound up boosting marinas, yacht brokers, and related industries. Yacht traffic at Phuket, Koh Samui, and Pattaya surged 63% from 2022 to 2024, with over 2,000 trips through Phuket alone, according to the Ministry of Transport, the report says.

Recognizing the economic potential, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra attended the Phuket boat show on Jan. 12. The global luxury yacht market, valued at $8.75 billion in 2024, is projected to grow to $17.3 billion by 2032, with the Asia-Pacific leading growth due to rising incomes, maritime tourism, and government support.

Paetongtarn said at the show: "The government is ready to fully support luxury marine tourism to continue to grow more."

Lies Sol, a Phuket-based charter manager for yacht brokerage Northrop & Johnson told Nikkei: "The main aim is to get Thai people more familiar with yachting and let them grow into luxury yachts. Before you buy, why don't you charter and learn what is essential for you?"

The Nikkei report says that Thailand's Transport Ministry plans to lower the yacht charter license size requirement from 29 meters to 24 meters, increasing options for day trips and tours.

Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has reportedly used chartered yachts for private political meetings, including with Malaysia's Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

At the Phuket boat show, Thai buyers remained discreet, while Russian, Chinese, British, and Australian enthusiasts were prominent. Over 5,000 visitors attended the expo, showcasing 50 yachts, since its debut in 2023.

As the report notes, competition from Malaysia and Indonesia is strong due to tax exemptions and relaxed regulations, drawing yacht owners away from Thailand.

And while Thailand promotes yachting as a luxury lifestyle, fuel costs, environmental concerns, and limited infrastructure remain challenges. Despite this, rising local interest, a strong resale market, and regional collaboration to position the Andaman Sea as a global yachting hub indicate significant growth potential.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 04:15

US Sanctions Could Hit 1.5 Million Bpd Of Russian Oil Exports

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

• The outgoing U.S. Administration on January 10 imposed the most severe sanctions on Russia’s oil yet.

• Many of the vessels transporting Russia’s oil from the Arctic and Far East Pacific fields and production clusters to Asia have now been sanctioned.

• India’s refiners have stopped doing business with the Russian tankers and companies sanctioned by the U.S., a source at the Indian government told Reuters on Monday.

One week into the latest – and most aggressive yet – U.S. sanctions on Russian oil exports, the Asian buyers of Russian crude are scrambling for alternative supply, the price of oil has rallied, and analyses suggest that more than 1 million barrels per day (bpd) of Moscow’s export volumes could be severely constrained, at least in the short term.

The outgoing U.S. Administration on January 10 imposed the most severe sanctions on Russia’s oil yet, designating two major Russian oil companies, Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegas, as well as 183 vessels, dozens of oil traders, oilfield service providers, insurance companies, and energy officials.

Many of the vessels, specialized tankers, and shuttle tankers transporting Russia’s oil from the Arctic and Far East Pacific fields and production clusters to Asia have now been sanctioned. This puts around 1.5 million bpd of Russia’s crude flows from its Pacific and Arctic ports at risk, according to a Bloomberg analysis of the tankers now designated by the U.S.

Most of the flows from the Sakhalin projects require special ice-class tankers—all of these have been sanctioned. The storage tankers and specialized vessels servicing shipments, storage, and loadings at Murmansk are also under sanctions now. The Gazprom Neft fields on the Yamal peninsula will also find it much harder to export crude—the company itself has been sanctioned, as have all its seven ice-class tankers handling shipments at and through the Arctic Gates terminal.

In the Arctic and Russia’s Far East, the crude grades most severely hit by the sanctions are expected to be Sokol, Sakhalin, and ESPO, according to Bloomberg’s analysis.

The least affected shipments are likely to be those of the Urals crude grade from the Baltic and Black Sea, which are mostly going to India.  
Only a quarter of Russia’s shipments of Urals since October were carried on now-sanctioned tankers. That’s the smallest share of designated tankers of any Russian crude grade, Bloomberg’s analysis showed.

The sanctions are already roiling the market. India and China are racing to procure alternative supply while studying the wider implications of the U.S. sanctions on Russian oil deliveries six months from now.

The sanctions caught a few million barrels of crude oil en route to India in a precarious situation. There is a wind-down period until February 27 for parties to complete dealings with now-sanctioned entities and vessels. Indian state-held refiners are targeting to settle the payments for Russian oil in half the time they have taken so far, as part of efforts to complete the deals before the seven-week wind-down period in the latest U.S. sanctions ends.

India’s refiners have stopped doing business with the Russian tankers and companies sanctioned by the U.S., a source at the Indian government told Reuters on Monday.

India doesn’t expect major disruptions during the wind-down period until March.

But “Going forward, it's early days yet to anticipate the impact, how discounts shape up, if somebody is willing to sell below the $60 price cap,” a source with the Indian government told Reuters earlier this week.

Indian officials and refiners held emergency meetings to discuss the implications of the sanctions on the exports of its single largest crude oil supplier. China’s independent refiners have also held emergency meetings to discuss the fallout and a workaround for the sanctions, sources tell Bloomberg.

Fleet capacity to service Russian exports is expected to tighten significantly, according to Mary Melton, a freight analyst at Vortexa.

So far, U.S. sanctions on individual vessels have been very effective in limiting further employment in Russian trade, Melton said this week.

According to Vortexa, the most likely scenario for Russian crude exports going forward is that they will most likely face serious logistical difficulty due to the lack of available tonnage.

“In order to keep export volumes at the same level, Russia will be forced to sell crude below the price cap. At that point, Western vessel operators would be able to get involved to lift Russian crude,” Vortexa’s Melton noted.

However, greater adherence to the Russian price cap will depend on China’s stance on allowing sanctioned vessels to call in its ports, Vortexa reckons.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 03:30

BRICS Expands Footprint In The Global South

Indonesia was admitted as a full member of the BRICS group of major emerging economies on January 6, 2025.

As Statista's Felix Richter shows in the following chart, the bloc’s footprint in the Global South has continued to expand, growing its economic and political clout on the world stage, establishing a real counterweight to the Western-dominated G7.

Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates formally joined on January 1, 2024.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Speaking on the expansion of the BRICS, South African president Cyril Ramaphosa said at a press briefing:

“We shared our vision of BRICS as a champion of the needs and concerns of the peoples of the Global South. These include the need for beneficial economic growth, sustainable development and reform of multilateral systems.”

He also indicated that the addition of the six new members is just the beginning of the bloc’s expansion process.

“As the five BRICS countries, we have reached agreement on the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures of the BRICS expansion process, which has been under discussion for quite a while,” he said.

“We have consensus on the first phase of this expansion process, and further phases will follow.”

In August, the bloc had announced that it would be admitting six new members, including Argentina.

However, the South American nation declared a formal rejection of the offer on 29 December, 2023 with Argentina’s President Javier Milei stating in a letter published by several media outlets that the membership “was not considered appropriate at this time.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 02:45

Taiwan: Will Xi Or Won't Xi?

Authored by Grant Newsham via RealClearDefense,

Chinese leader, Xi Jinping has been clear that he intends to get Taiwan – one way or another.

He has good reasons.

It would establish Xi as one of the immortals by accomplishing something Mao Tse Tung couldn’t. By taking Taiwan, China breaks through the first island-chain – the island nations stretching from Japan to Taiwan and on to the Philippines and Malaysia – that constrain China’s freedom of access to the Pacific and beyond. Break the chain and the PLA then gets easy access to the Pacific and potentially can surround Japan, cut-off Australia and move onwards.

These are operational advantages.

As important are the political and psychological advantages. Take Taiwan and Beijing has demonstrated the U.S. military couldn’t save the 23 million free people of Taiwan. Neither could American economic and financial pressure. And U.S. nuclear weapons didn’t stop China either.

In capitals all over Asia, the calculus will change, and many will cut the best deals they can and turn ‘red’ overnight rather than try to withstand Chinese pressure on their own. The United States will be finished as a Pacific power. And globally nobody will trust a U.S. promise of protection – explicit or implicit.

Can China Take Taiwan?

The recently released 2024 DOD China Military Power Report presents a grim picture of a rapidly developing Chinese military.

But the report assesses that while Taiwan is a prime target, the Chinese military just isn’t ready for operations against the island. 

No matter how much progress the PLA makes, it seems it’s never quite ready to attack Taiwan.

China experts can rattle off the reasons why a Chinese assault on Taiwan won’t be coming in the near future.

Here’s the bingo card of reasons. And why, perhaps, the arguments may not be all they seem.

1.  There are only two short windows during the year (April and October) when the weather is good enough for an invasion force to get across the Taiwan Strait.

When asked about this, a Taiwanese oceanographer noted: “Look at the ferry schedules. They run all year.”  And someone should have told Dwight Eisenhower about the weather in June 1944. He only needed 72 hours of decent weather to get across the English Channel.

2.  Only a tiny number of narrow beaches on Taiwan's west coast are suitable for an amphibious landing.

Amphibious forces sometimes don’t need much of a beach…or one at all…if you’ve hit the defender hard enough or deceived him. The U.S. Marines pushed a division across a beach about 200 yards wide in one day at Tinian in 1944. And amphibious operations include troops delivered by helicopter, airborne, and infiltrated in advance along with fifth columnists.

3.  PLA needs to seize a port -- and that'll never happen because 1) it's a port and Taiwan is presumably defending it; 2) The Chinese are not smart enough to have their fifth column, including organized crime, already in place to open up, say, Kaohsiung. 

The “barges” China is building can, in combination with redundant ships, be used to build breakwaters and other components of an artificial port.

4.  PLA hasn't got the 'lift' – enough ships - to take troops and equipment across the strait.

A Marine Corps University professor in the late 2010’s had a PowerPoint presentation making this case. He was counting the wrong ships. Add in ‘old’ amphibious ships and civilian ships and boats that were integrated under the ‘military-civil fusion’ doctrine and the PLA had plenty of lift. It’s got even more now. And the world’s second largest merchant marine has more than enough shipping to deliver up to six brigades and 60 days of supplies (particularly if they build an artificial harbor).

5.  Amphibious operations are the hardest, most complex military operation known to man.

This argument boils down to ’the Chinese just aren’t as smart as us.’  That’s mistaken and when it comes to amphibious operations read Toshi Yoshihara’s book on how they performed in the Chinese Civil War.

6. PLA can't do joint operations.

Look at recent exercises and ongoing training. They’re getting better. In fact, they’ve been doing joint training for going on two decades and intensely since Xi came to power 12 years ago. And you don’t have to be perfect. Just good enough to do a specific task in a specific place.

7.  PLA can't do 'joint logistics over-the-shore.' 

Once again, the Chinese aren’t smart enough and can’t possibly be our equals.

8.  The PLAN has aircraft carriers but they’re nowhere near our level.

Do you see a pattern? The Chinese aren’t intelligent or capable enough. Just as was said about the Japanese in 1941.  Remember, the PLA’s carriers will be operating within and along the edge of the First Island Chain and with the support of the PLAAF and PLA Rocket Force.

9.  PLA hasn't got combat experience.

Neither does the U.S. Navy, except against the Houthi Navy. And the rest of the U.S. military hasn’t fought a high-end opponent in decades.

10.  The PLA is corrupt.

Andrew Erickson at the Naval War College gets it right: “If Xi and the PLA were in the disarray that some myopically focused on their system’s chronic corruption imagine, there’s no way China’s military could be developing, deploying, exercising, and otherwise preparing in the ways that the CMPR chronicles.”

11.  Xi Jinping can't trust his generals and admirals.

Neither could Hitler or Stalin. One almost got to Moscow. The other took Berlin.

12.  The PLA is ‘restive’ and pushing back at Xi’s efforts to give himself total power.

Have we ever seen any real evidence that any PLA officer has “pushed back”? And on our side, how many U.S. Navy admirals pushed back against the systematic degrading of their service’s capabilities over the last 30 years? It was also said before 1939 that the Wehrmacht Generals – the elite of the elite – would never actually let ‘that Corporal’ run things.

13.  The Chinese can't innovate. They can only copy.

There’s ‘Chinese ingenuity’ just as there was ‘Yankee ingenuity.’ It works well enough, no matter who invented the thing improved upon. the PLA Strategic Rocket Force has been very innovative…anyone heard of the DF-21D, DF-26, and DF-17? Or the new Type 076 amphibious assault carrier that is going to carry and launch drones, fixed wing, and helicopters and put amphibious vehicles on the beach?

14.  PLA officers and NCOs won't take the initiative -- like ours will.

Maybe. But have you ever heard a Korean War vet say he wanted to fight the Chinese again?

15.  China won’t attack Taiwan until 2027, 2035, 2049.

It’s always some years off. Xi is said to have told his military to be ready to go against Taiwan by 2027. In fact, Hu Jintao in 2008 and Xi in 2013 ordered the PLA to be ready to take Taiwan in 2020. The shoe could drop at any time. Would Xi really tell us his attack date in advance? Remember that the British assessed in the 1930’s that Germany would not be ready to fight a war until 1943.

16.  China has so many one-child families that Xi wouldn’t dare attack.

The popular anger over families losing their only child would be too hard for Xi and CCP leaders to handle, it is argued. But make them ‘heroes of the revolution’ and provide a house and a handsome pension- and complain about it and disappear.

17.  Economic costs would be too high.

Tough, yes, but Xi is sanctions-proofing the country. And he’s telling his people to toughen up and get ready for what’s coming. What is never discussed is the economic benefits that taking Taiwan and establishing the PRC’s global domination over the global trading system would mean for the PRC. It is always viewed in the negative…but they don’t consider that Xi and the CCP see it as a step towards economic supremacy.

18.  The blow to China’s reputation will be too high.

As if the CCP cares about its reputation. If the CCP doesn’t mind the flack that comes from taking organs out of live prisoners and selling them, the criticism from taking Taiwan won’t move the needle much. Nor is there likely to be much. Who is still talking about the subjugation of Tibet or the strangling of Hong Kong?

19. Taiwan has a million reservists.

999,000 of whom get about four days training a year.

20.  Taiwan military and civilians will fight like tigers.

Maybe. But the Taiwanese may not be the Ukrainians or the Finns, especially if outside support doesn’t come quickly.

21.  Taiwan has mountains. Mountain combat is tough.

Just too hard for the Chinese, it seems. However, selected PLA brigades train in the mountains annually and unless there is a war with India, they might be deployed to Taiwan after the beaches are secure.

22.  Taiwan has cities. Urban combat is tough.

The Americans, the Russians, and many others have figured out urban combat. But it’s too hard for the Chinese?

23. The U.S. military has a qualitative superiority with its hardware, training, and experience.

The French thought 'elan' would overcome the German Maxim guns in 1914. It didn’t. They also had faith in the fact their tanks were superior in 1940. And these days, America’s technological superiority is eroding almost daily.

24.  The U.S. military calculated that taking Formosa from the Japanese in 1944/1945 would have been a herculean effort.

True. But perhaps Xi thinks it’s worth it for him. And what he thinks matters. And it probably is worth more to the PRC and Xi these days than Formosa was to the U.S. in 1944/1945. Also, let’s not forget that our invasion force had to travel 1200nm to the invasion beaches on Taiwan versus 120nm for the PLA. We only had carriers for air support for the first week. Again, the PLA has the full strength of the Eastern and Southern Theater Command Air Forces as well as the PLARF (PLA Rocket Force). We had nothing to compare to the PLARF in 1944-45.

25.  The American invasion of Sicily in 1943 was really hard...so the PLA can't possibly do an invasion of Taiwan.

Really. One fellow wrote a piece about this a few years ago.

26.  The Japanese will step in.

With what? And not if Japan’s business community and the ‘Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ ‘China club’ and the ‘political class’ China sympathizers have anything to say about it.

These are all practical articles of faith for a sizeable chunk of the U.S. China analyst community. And they create  ‘threat deflation’ - as retired U.S. Navy Captain James Fanell and Dr. Bradley Thayer call it - that justifies complacency.

It is of course possible that some combination of these reasons may dissuade Xi Jinping from attacking Taiwan. And nothing in war is easy – not least an assault across the Taiwan Strait.

But one imagines a similar ‘bingo card’ could have been created to demonstrate why the Chinese wouldn’t or couldn’t attack across the Yalu River into Korea in 1950. It’s equally dangerous to underestimate the PRC in 2025.

So, the United States has a choice: start acting like the threat to Taiwan (and to us) is immediate and not a couple years or more into the future – and move a lot faster.

Or, if that’s too hard, just read and re-read reasons 1-26 until you are lulled into a comfortable stupor. No points for guessing which one Xi would prefer.

Grant Newsham is a retired U.S. Marine officer and senior fellow at The Center for Security Policy, The Japan Forum for Strategic Studies, and The Yorktown Institute. He is the author of When China Attacks: A Warning to America.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 22:35

These Are The Airlines With The Most Flight Cancellations

Dealing with last-minute flight cancellations is incredibly frustrating for travellers, whether they’re flying back home for the holidays, travelling for work, or trying to make it in time for Taylor Swift’s highly-coveted Eras Tour.

Often times, cancellations are warranted due to unsafe flying conditions like dangerous weather, security concerns, or technical issues with aircraft.

However, some cancellations are within the airline’s control, such as those caused by staffing shortages, scheduling conflicts, or maintenance delays that could have been managed with better planning.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Kayla Zhu, shows the top 15 airlines with the highest flight cancellation rates and their total number of flights in 2024. The data comes from Cirium.

Which Airlines Have the Highest Cancellation Rate?

Below, we show the 15 airlines with the highest cancellation rates, their country of origin, and their total flights in 2024.

Dana Air had the highest cancellation rate among airlines tracked by Cirium, largely due to its suspension in April 2024 by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority following a runway incident. As of January 2025, the airline remains grounded pending safety and financial audits.

Most of the airlines with the highest cancellation rates are based in the Asia Pacific and Middle East and Africa regions, with only one North American airline (Cape Air) and one European (Ural Airlines) among the list.

In 2024, Ural Airlines was added to the European Union’s sanctions list for allegedly supporting Russia’s military operations in Ukraine by transporting military personnel and establishing a special ticket-selling scheme with the Russian ministry of defence.

Smaller airlines that connect remote or island areas—such as Air Seychelles, Winair (Caribbean), Air Austral (Réunion and Indian Ocean islands), and Cape Air (U.S. and Caribbean)—often face higher cancellation rates due to challenges related to weather, infrastructure, and operational complexities.

Indonesian airlines, such as Lion Air, Wings Air, and Batik Air, also grapple with similar challenges of operating across an archipelago of over 17,000 islands and frequent extreme weather conditions like monsoons and volcanic eruptions.

To learn more about the best airlines in the world, check out this graphic that visualizes the most punctual airlines of 2024.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 22:10

No Free Pass: The Unintended Consequences Of Presidential Pardons

Authored by Patrick Keeney via The Epoch Times,

A presidential pardon is not a get-out-jail-free card. Those who receive presidential pardons face two significant hurdles.

First, a presidential pardon only wipes the slate clean for federal crimes—it offers no shield against state or local charges. This gap in protection is precisely how Donald Trump found himself entangled in criminal cases across four jurisdictions: New York, Georgia, Florida, and the District of Columbia. Each of these jurisdictions operates independently beyond the reach of presidential clemency, underscoring the limits of federal immunity.

Secondly, presidential pardons leave the door open to civil penalties. Federal or state governments, as well as private parties, can pursue restitution or damages through civil courts, even in the absence of criminal penalties. Individuals who receive pardons may still face a range of lawsuits and financial claims, including those initiated by the federal government.

Ironically, receiving a pardon can heighten the risk of civil lawsuits and state or local prosecution. Pardons attract heightened scrutiny from the public and potential plaintiffs, including well-funded advocacy groups eager to pursue justice or restitution. Preemptive pardons, such as those issued by President Joe Biden, are especially prone to being viewed as implicit admissions of guilt, potentially intensifying the drive for civil litigation or state and local criminal prosecution.

Moreover, since federal crimes are adjudicated in Washington, D.C. - a jurisdiction famous for its Democratic leanings - the chances of securing a conviction would be considerably diminished. Paradoxically, President Biden’s pardons have opened the door for cases to be pursued in courts where political leanings and public sentiment might be less sympathetic to the accused.

But even if those pardoned avoid criminal charges, the U.S. government has robust mechanisms for recovering money or property obtained through illegal activities, such as bribery or fraud. These include civil remedies like claims of unjust enrichment, which allow the government or private parties to argue that an individual improperly benefited from unlawful actions and demand repayment.

For instance, under the legal doctrine of unjust enrichment, courts can compel individuals to repay funds acquired through unlawful means, ensuring that financial accountability can still be pursued despite the absence of criminal penalties.

Another potent tool at the government’s disposal is civil asset forfeiture. Unlike criminal forfeiture, which requires a criminal conviction, civil forfeiture targets the assets themselves rather than the individual. Moreover, unlike criminal law, where the government must prove its case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” civil forfeiture requires only a “preponderance of the evidence” to establish that the assets are connected to illegal activity. As a result, even individuals who have been pardoned can still have their assets seized if they are linked to the offences for which they were pardoned.

Civil forfeiture has been used extensively in cases involving bribery, fraud, and other financial crimes. For instance, if an individual received bribes to secure a government contract, the funds or property obtained through those bribes could be subject to forfeiture, even if the individual is no longer criminally liable.

The government’s arsenal also includes the False Claims Act (FCA) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), both of which can be applied in civil cases. The FCA, for example, allows the government to sue individuals or companies that defraud federal programs and to recover treble damages—three times the amount of the loss—plus additional penalties. Similarly, RICO enables civil lawsuits when illegal activities, such as bribery, are part of a broader pattern of corruption.

Individuals pardoned for offences involving government fraud or corruption may face these types of civil claims. The pardon does not shield them from such lawsuits, and the financial consequences can be devastating. In some cases, the government’s civil claims may dwarf the penalties the individual would have faced in a criminal court.

Another significant risk for those pardoned is the potential for restitution and disgorgement orders. Courts may require individuals to return any profits gained from illegal or unethical activities, even if they have been pardoned for those activities. For example, a business executive who paid bribes to secure a lucrative government contract could be forced to repay all profits earned from that contract, regardless of the pardon.

Numerous civil actions have been pursued against individuals who were previously pardoned. For instance, companies involved in international bribery under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act often face both criminal and civil enforcement actions, including demands to repay illegal profits. Public officials who accept bribes may be sued by state or federal governments to recover the funds.

President Biden’s unprecedented use of the pardon power has placed those pardoned individuals under a legal microscope. State and local officials can pursue criminal charges, while the distinction between criminal and civil liability ensures the slate is never entirely wiped clean. Moreover, the lower standard of proof in civil cases makes it easier for plaintiffs to succeed. Unlike criminal trials, where guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, civil lawsuits only require proof by a balance of probabilities, making the pardoned individuals vulnerable to financial judgments.

A presidential pardon is powerful but far from a free pass. By granting these pardons, President Biden may have inadvertently drawn attention to the recipients, signaling to potential plaintiffs, advocacy groups, and government agencies that now is the time to act. For those pardoned, the legal battles might only be starting.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 21:45

U.S. Auto Safety Regulators Probe Nearly 900,000 GM Vehicles For Engine Failure

Engine failures in almost 900,000 GM vehicles are being probed by the Feds, according to a new report from the New York Post.

U.S. auto safety regulators are investigating 877,710 General Motors vehicles with L87 V8 engines, including the popular Silverado, following 39 complaints of sudden engine failure.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said the failures occur without warning, posing a crash risk. The issue, linked to bearing failures, can cause the engine to seize or a connecting rod to breach the engine block.

The Post writes that the preliminary investigation covers several General Motors models, including the 2019-2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, 2021-2024 Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban, 2019-2024 GMC Sierra 1500, 2021-2024 GMC Yukon and Yukon XL, and 2021-2024 Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV.

In 2024, GM led U.S. auto sales with a 4.3% year-over-year increase, its best performance since 2019. The Silverado pickup was the second-best-selling vehicle in the country that year.

Last month we wrote that GM may pivot to more buybacks and a renewed focus on an end to end AI in its vehicles. 

Deutsche Bank analyst Edison Yu wrote in December that GM's move to integrate its Cruise division into its core business will be welcomed by investors as GM can reallocate resources to its aggressive share buyback plan, aiming to reduce share count below 1 billion by early 2025, and prioritize investments in Level 3+ and Level 4 autonomy, which have quicker monetization potential.

Yu also noted GM's pivot in Cruise’s technology strategy, with the company now leveraging end-to-end AI models rather than its earlier rules-based approach, signaling a significant evolution in its autonomous vehicle efforts.

Yu commented on GM's decision to acquire the remaining 10% of Cruise and integrate its development under GM's operations.

The move shifts focus from costly robotaxi commercialization to advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS), like Level 3 autonomy for consumer vehicles. GM cited the high cost of scaling robotaxis, potentially in the tens of billions, as a key reason for the pivot, deeming it a poor risk/reward investment.

GM aims to complete the restructuring by early 2025, leading to annual savings of over $1 billion, reducing Cruise's current $2 billion spend.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 21:20

How To Stop The BRICS Nations From Abandoning The Dollar

Authored by Patrick Barron via The Mises Institute,

The US government is aghast that there is a new grouping of nations that seeks to form an alternative to the US trade bloc and trade settlement system that uses the dollar. These nations have been driven to this extreme, time-consuming, and difficult project by clueless US leaders who have imposed sanctions on Russian assets (literally stealing them) and have denied Russia and other nations from using the SWIFT messaging system for trade settlement.

In this way, the US hopes to preserve the dollar’s premier status as the world’s reserve currency and its world leadership based upon the dollar and its military might.

I have a better, cheaper, and more peaceful way to accomplish these US goals (i.e., remove every incentive to leave). It’s as simple as that. At a minimum that means preserving the purchasing power of the dollar and ending the policy of confiscating the assets of other nations, even those with whom the US has serious disputes.

In other words, end coercion and begin real world leadership based on trust and fair dealing.

This will be a tall task, because what nation today would believe in America’s honesty, integrity, and commitment to international law? Nevertheless, it is the only way that the American-led West can find its place in a new world.

There is a new world coming and the US must be a part of it if it wishes to prosper well into the future and not just through the current election cycle.

Here’s a short list of actions that the US should consider adopting:

1. Return all stolen assets to Russia and other nations.

2. End blackballing Russia and other nations from using the SWIFT trade messaging system.

3. Turn the ownership and running of SWIFT to neutral hands, perhaps the Swiss or some combination of nations that cannot be sanctioned by America.

4. Stop inflating the dollar, which of course is the main cause of its loss of purchasing power, in order to balance an out-of-control budget.

5. Return all gold held in American vaults (the New York Fed/Fort Knox) to its rightful owners as quickly as possible.

6. Place the dollar on a true gold standard by shipping American gold to neutral hands where it can be exchanged on demand for dollars. In other words, make the dollar “as good as gold.” (This is the most difficult and contentious action, but it is the only way that the world will accept dollars in the future when there is an alternative through membership in BRICS.)

American attempts to preserve its leadership status in the world will fail unless it enacts reforms such as these, which really are nothing more than behaving in a legal and honorable way.

What American would not desire this? But who will believe that America will honor its commitments for the long term?

That is why the SWIFT messaging system and its gold reserve must be placed in neutral hands abroad.

We have destroyed our reputation and this is the price we must pay.

Otherwise, we will watch one former ally after another slip away to join BRICS, which is certain to adopt protective measures for its participants so that no one nation, no matter how large and powerful, can game the system for its own unearned advantage.

Real leadership is bestowed upon leaders by willing followers, not taken or preserved at the point of a gun.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 20:55

"Be A Good Democrat"... Or Else - NYC Mayor Says Biden Admin Tried To Silence Him Over Influx Of Illegals

Embattled New York City Mayor Eric Adams said that the Democratic Party “left” him and the working class behind, during an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that aired on Tuesday.

“People often say, ‘You don’t sound like a Democrat. You seem to have left the party,’” Adams told Carlson.

“No, the party left me, and it left working-class people.”

Throughout the interview, Adams tied his indictment on bribery and corruption charges to his decision to speak out against the illegal immigrant surge in New York City.

He claimed those who push back on “the norm” within the Democratic party get “demonized.”

As Katabella Roberts reports for The Epoch Times, Adams was indicted in September 2024 on charges of taking bribes and illegal campaign contributions from foreign sources.

The charges include accepting improper valuable benefits, including luxury international travel, from wealthy foreign businesspeople and at least one Turkish government official seeking to gain influence over him.

The indictment alleges that Adams not only accepted but also sought out illegal campaign contributions to his 2021 mayoral campaign.

The mayor has denied the allegations against him and pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Adams told Carlson that he felt there were people within the “orbit” of the Justice Department under the Biden administration who felt he was “not a good Democrat” after he raised concerns about the “onslaught” of migrants into the city and various failed border policies.

Those failed policies ultimately cost the city $6.5 billion in clothing, food, and accommodation for migrants, he said.

The mayor also said former President Joe Biden and his aides had “basically” told him to “be a good Democrat” when he raised concerns over the alarming number of illegal immigrants arriving in the city and the impact it was having on the ground.

“You know, one of [Biden’s] aids told me that, ‘Listen, this is like a gallstone, it’ll pass. It’ll hurt now, but it’ll pass,’” Adams said.

Adams Attends Trump Inauguration

Adams traveled to Florida last week to meet with then-President-elect Donald Trump, just days before the Republican was sworn into office for a second term.

In a statement issued shortly after his visit, Adams described the meeting as a “productive conversation” that focused on the city’s needs and how the incoming administration could play a role in improving the lives of New Yorkers.

The meeting came amid growing speculation that the mayor was seeking a possible pardon from the president for the corruption charges he is facing; something that Trump has signaled he is open to doing.

Adams insisted that he and Trump did not discuss the mayor’s legal case during their meeting in Florida.

On Monday, Adams also canceled various planned public appearances at Martin Luther King Jr. Day events across New York, opting instead to attend Trump’s inauguration.

Dozens of recently arrived illegal immigrants camp outside of New York's Roosevelt Hotel, which has been made into a reception center, as they try to secure temporary housing in New York City, on Aug. 1, 2023. Spencer Platt/Getty Images

That decision drew criticism from Brooklyn state Sen. Zellnor Myrie, who wrote on X that New Yorkers “deserve a Mayor who puts our city’s wellbeing above his own exoneration.”

Elsewhere, New York City Comptroller Brad Lander wrote on X: “Imagine if Mayor Adams applied the same focus to making our city safer and bringing down our cost of living as he does to getting himself a pardon.”

Adams defended attending Trump’s swearing-in ceremony in a statement on X, calling it a “sacred American tradition.”

“Our country has been through so much, and every president has the honor and responsibility to protect and lead the American people,” he said.

“On MLK Day, like Reverend Dr. King said, we must put partisan politics aside to do what’s best for our country.”

The Democrat added that he believes much can be achieved by working alongside the new Trump administration to “support our city’s values and fight for New Yorkers.”

Adams is seeking reelection in June.

A Manhattan judge has scheduled his legal trial to start in April.

*  *  *

Watch the full interview with Tucker Carlson below:

(0:00) Eric Adams’ Indictment Is Ridiculous
(6:04) How Biden Destroyed New York With Immigration
(17:27) What Do New Yorkers Think About the Illegal Immigrants?
(19:10) Pressing Adams on His Sanctuary City Policy
(22:36) How Illegal Immigration Is Fueling America’s Labor Crisis
(29:43) How to Clean Up New York
(37:55) Did Eric Adams Leave the Democrat Party?
(40:34) Will Adams Go to Jail?
(41:32) Adams’ Conversation With Donald Trump
(45:54) America’s Mental Health Crisis

Having been indicted by the Biden DOJ for political crimes, New York Mayor Eric Adams is sounding a lot like a Trump voter these days.

(0:00) Eric Adams’ Indictment Is Ridiculous
(6:04) How Biden Destroyed New York With Immigration
(17:27) What Do New Yorkers Think About the… pic.twitter.com/GZLofb2ZFv

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 22, 2025

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 20:30

Geography's Revenge

Authored by Christopher Roach via American Greatness,

Over the last few weeks, Trump has raised a lot of eyebrows by suggesting that our country should annex Greenland, invite Canada to join as the 51st state, and seek the return of the Panama Canal. Together, these remarks signal a break from prevailing norms and a plan to consolidate America’s dominant position in the Western Hemisphere.

Like much of what Trump does, it all seems cheeky, but only at first glance. Even if these maximalist positions do not prevail, they form an anchor for negotiations. Trump is actively seeking to expand U.S. influence over strategically significant regions within our immediate vicinity.

A new order is emerging where regions and their shifting balances of power are the dominant force in the world, rather than conflicts between mere nation-states. Among these competing regions, Europe, under the institutions of the EU, is becoming an economic and political force in its own right, often sidelining the U.S. Unlike NATO, we are not a member of the EU, and it provides space for Europe to assert its own collective interests as distinct from our own.

The BRICS consortium is also gaining power and becoming a viable node of international power, while China is making inroads to consolidate its own influence over Eurasia through its “Belt and Road Initiative.” China also maintains robust commercial ties with Africa and Latin America. Russia, of course, has been asserting its own sovereignty over the former Soviet Union in Georgia, Ukraine, and among the various Stans.

The U.S. is no longer as powerful as it once was in relative terms. We have done a lot on autopilot in recent years, continuing to assert our prerogatives as if the rest of the world has not taken notice of the humiliations in Afghanistan, Niger, and the Red Sea. Our adversaries and competitors are reevaluating things from a realist perspective, and we should as well, abandoning outmoded ideas about friends, enemies, and our own capabilities.

After the Cold War, for a time, we were the most powerful, but this led to a failure to set any priorities. National security strategy documents consisted of meaningless word salad without any intelligent effort to rank threats or connect one activity with another.

From the end of the Cold War to the present, seemingly archaic concerns for resources, strategic geography, and the enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine were dismissed as artifacts of a “revisionist” 19th-century mindset. As in much else, it turns out that our Founders were wise beyond measure. One of our enduring security advantages is separation from the rest of the world and protection by two huge oceans. Even in the nuclear era, the Atlantic and the Pacific protect our country from any conventional attack.

As President Monroe rightly perceived, these advantages would come to naught if Europe or other foreign adversaries could creep up to our doorstep by meddling with our neighbors, developing and expanding military bases through colonization, or otherwise hurting our good and dominant relations over the Western Hemisphere.

While not formally developing colonies, recent developments mimic their strategic impact. China has increased its infrastructure investments in Latin America, and Chinese companies now control the Panama Canal, one of the most strategically important locations on earth. The risk presented by a rising China, which was ignored during the Bush and Obama presidencies, is now taken for granted as an obvious geopolitical reality after Trump changed American policy.

This is an example of one of his great strengths: despite his alleged simplicity, he often perceives big truths that are lost on the experts. The big truth embedded in his recent remarks is that we live in a dangerous world with finite resources and must conduct ourselves accordingly. Thus, he sees that our friendships with EU and NATO countries are overrated and likely to be undone as the zero-sum game of securing supplies of natural resources and access to strategic geography gains momentum.

Talk of taking Greenland and Canada may alienate Denmark and the EU, but this is an unavoidable cost of renegotiating our relationships with these places in order to maintain military and commercial dominance over the Western Hemisphere. Greenland permits control of the North Atlantic. Canada has endless supplies of fossil fuels, to which the EU is seeking to gain preferred access. Trump is willing to strong-arm Europe on these issues because he knows that our interests are diverging.

Trump’s endorsement of a muscular foreign policy focusing on the Western Hemisphere may seem at odds with his broader America First position. But the reality is quite the opposite. America First foreign policy is not isolationist; rather, it sets priorities based on the big truths about the nature of the world as described above.

America First seeks to secure tangible goods that benefit actual Americans, such as safety, prosperity, access to resources and markets, and protection from foreign attack. This contrasts with abstract and utopian goals like “protecting democracy” or the reflexive continuation of yesteryear’s commitments, such as with NATO.

Our ancestors first conquered a land empire in furtherance of our national interest and at the exact moment that the frontier was conquered, they flexed their muscles against Spanish power in the Western Hemisphere. This was the first step to a truly global maritime empire. In recent times, the overseas maritime empire has predominated, while the heartland, our borders, and local issues that directly impact us, such as violence from Mexico’s drug cartels, have been completely neglected. Our legacy policy is not merely idealism but a suicidal anti-idealism, an America Last foreign policy.

The overseas empire is a plaything of the ruling class and the permanent bureaucracy. In addition to fulfilling their quest for meaning and significance, it redirects substantial national wealth to officials, along with the military-industrial complex, and innumerable lobbyists. It is not so clear that this activity does anything to benefit ordinary Americans.

What happens in our own backyard is more important than what happens in Eastern Europe, the South China Sea, and parts in between. Resources and their scarcity have always been important, and they will be more so in the future. We cannot do all the things all the time. Trump’s bid to shore up our naturally dominant position in the Western Hemisphere is a smart play.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 20:05

Our 101 Trillion Dollar Problem: This Is The Number One Tool The Elite Use To Enslave Us

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

Right now, a tremendous awakening is happening as people all over the world become educated about the tools that the elite use to enslave us to their system.  The number one tool that they use to enslave us is debt.  The financial powers of the world use it to enslave individuals, corporations and governments.  For thousands of years humanity has been taught the proverb that “the borrower is the servant of the lender”, and yet today billions of people around the globe have willingly made themselves servants of the money powers.  You see, when you borrow money from a financial institution, you not only have to pay that money back, but you also have to pay a significant amount of interest.  In fact, often the interest ends up being much more than the principal of the loan.  Thus the borrower ends up devoting a great deal of his or her labor to earning money for the lender.  Yes, there are times when it is necessary to borrow money.  But what we have been doing over the last 30 years goes far beyond “necessary” borrowing.  The fact that the U.S. government is now 36 trillion dollars in debt gets a lot of attention, but the truth is that state and local governments, corporations, and U.S. households have piled up enormous mountains of debt as well.

I want to show you a chart from the Federal Reserve that is hard to believe.

In the mid-90s, the total amount of debt in the system was about 20 trillion dollars, but now we have reached the 101 trillion dollar mark…

The word “insanity” does not even begin to describe what we have been doing to ourselves.

It takes a lot of really hard work to add 80 trillion dollars of debt in just 30 years.

Every time we pile up more debt, there is a winner and there is a loser.

Debt strips you of your freedom and slowly drains you of your wealth.  It puts the fruits of your labor into the pockets of others.

That is true for individuals, and it is true for a nation as a whole.

Getting others enslaved by debt is how the most powerful financial institutions in the world became so dominant.  It is one of the most profitable ways of making money ever invented.

What many people don’t realize is just how much interest they end up paying on some of their debts.

For example, if you go to mortgagecalculator.org, you can calculate the amount of interest that you will pay over the life of your home mortgage.  According to that calculator, someone with a $400,000 mortgage at an interest rate of 6.98% over 30 years will end up paying $556,102.18 in interest before the mortgage is finally paid off.

When those 30 years are over, you will have bought a house for yourself and you will also have bought a house for the bankers.

So what should we do?

We need to stop feeding the monster.

They are getting insanely wealthy by financially enslaving all the rest of us.

Unfortunately, many Americans find themselves deep in debt because the cost of living has been rising faster than our paychecks have.

One of the great joys that men in free societies have long enjoyed is the ability to earn an honest wage for an honest day of work.  In particular, the amazing capitalist engine that powered the U.S. economy for decade after decade greatly rewarded the incredible hard work and industriousness of the American people.  America was known as the land of opportunity, and we built the largest middle class in the history of the world by working incredibly hard.

Unfortunately, things have changed.

Thanks to globalization and extremely rapid advances in technology, the labor of U.S. workers is rapidly losing value.  Automation, robotics and AI have made many jobs obsolete.  In addition, American workers now must compete against workers from all over the world.  Global corporations often find themselves having to choose whether to build a factory in the United States or in the third world.  But in the third world workers often earn less than 10 percent of what American workers earn, corporations are often not required to provide any benefits to those workers, and there are often very few oppressive government regulations to contend with.

How can American workers compete against that?

The truth is that labor is now a global commodity.  It is exceedingly difficult for a worker in the United States to effectively compete with a desperate, half-starving worker in the third world that will work like mad for two dollars an hour.

But this is what we get for letting our politicians push “free trade” down our throats.

Most American workers had no idea that free trade would mean that they would suddenly be competing for jobs against workers in the Philippines and Malaysia.

But this is the cold, hard reality of globalism.

Of course the top executives at the big global corporations are certainly enjoying this new environment, because their salaries have soared.

In 1950, the ratio of the average executive’s paycheck to the average worker’s paycheck was about 30 to 1.

Now it is 268 to 1.

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

That is what globalism is all about.

The elite make out like bandits as they exploit third world labor pools, while the American middle class finds itself slowly being crushed out of existence.

Our system has been designed to funnel nearly all of the rewards to the very top.  Meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans are left wondering why things just don’t ever seem to work out for them.

If you talk to many Americans, they just can’t seem to figure out why they can’t make things work out even though they are working as hard as they can.  Millions of Americans have found themselves taking on second or even third jobs in a desperate attempt to provide for their families.

Sadly, things just keep getting worse with each passing year.

As I have discussed in previous articles, demand at food banks is at an all-time high, homelessness in the U.S. is at an all-time high, and homelessness in the U.S. is growing at the fastest pace ever recorded.

But there are elitists out there that are still attempting to claim that the U.S. economy is in great shape.

Of course most of us aren’t buying the propaganda anymore, and that is one of the primary reasons why the election turned out the way that it did.

We need to return to an economy where good workers are valued and where hard work is rewarded.

We need to return to an economy where having a large middle class is an important national goal.

We need to return to an economy where we build American businesses, where we hire American workers, and where we buy American products.

But unless the American people wake up, American workers are going to continue to be devalued.

And if you think that things are bad now, just wait until AI starts taking millions of our jobs.

Are we just going to sit back and let American living standards decline to third world standards, or are we going to do something about it?

Perhaps the greatest victims of the economic nightmare that is unfolding right in front of our eyes are our children.

The overall economic numbers are really bad, but when you examine the impact that this economy is having on children things get really horrifying.  Today, 16 percent of U.S. children live in poverty and 14 million U.S. children are on food stamps.

It has been estimated that approximately 50 percent of all U.S. children will be on food stamps at some point before they reach the age of 18.

We were once the most prosperous nation on the entire planet.

How could we let this happen?

Meanwhile, the rich have gotten even richer.

In 2009, there were 8 million millionaires in the United States.

Now there are 22 million.

If everyone was becoming wealthier, that would be great.  Unfortunately, the poor have been left with an increasingly smaller slice of the pie to divide among themselves.

At this point, the bottom 50 percent of Americans control just 2.5 percent of the wealth.

I have been ranting about all of this for over a decade, and yet conditions have just continued to deteriorate year after year.

We can’t have an economy that works for the top 10 percent but that sucks the life out of the bottom 90 percent.

Our debt-based financial system needs to be fundamentally reformed, and it is time for us to demand action.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “Why” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 19:40

Democrats Can't Bully Their Way To A Free Pass

Authored by Kevin M. Spivak via RealClearPolicy,

I believe in restraint, tradition, decorum, and the precepts of our system of criminal justice: deterrence, punishment, and retribution. Turning the other cheek accomplishes none of these. Joe Biden’s last-minute pardons for his family, and his unprecedented preemptive pardons for members and staff of the January 6 Committee, Anthony Fauci, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Milley, underscore the necessity for Congress and Donald Trump’s Justice Department to perform their duties to investigate crime.

The Supreme Court made clear in Burdick v. United States (1915) that the “confession of guilt implied in the acceptance of a pardon” may be avoided only by rejecting it. In December, the Biden Justice Department advised a federal judge that January 6 defendants hoping for a pardon from soon-to-be President Trump “would first have to accept the pardon, which necessitates a confession of guilt.”

The Biden administration and its proxies engaged in the unrestricted, weaponized use of our justice system to take down the leading Republican candidate for president and his family, supporters and advisors, as well as Christians, conservatives, and pro-life activists. They censored, investigated, humiliated, intimidated, arrested, indicted, and jailed their political opponents using long-abandoned, novel, and manifestly flawed legal theories.

Democrats express horror that the Trump Justice Department might investigate whether laws were broken by officials who engaged in these tactics. They angrily assert that if the Trump administration exacts “retribution” it would endanger civil liberties and tear asunder the fabric of our justice system.

This reminds me of bullies who strike a classmate and then recoil, wag a finger at the victim, and warn him that he better not hit back.

After ignoring billions of dollars in damage and dozens of deaths caused by violent rioters on the left, the Biden administration terrorized and pursued nearly 1,600 Americans, many with only scant connection to the January 6 demonstrations, jailing some who never entered the Capitol. Trump advisors Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon were imprisoned for refusing to testify before the House January 6 Committee – the first such prosecutions in 65 years. FBI agents targeted parents for advocating conservative values at school board meetings, as well as pro-life advocates and Catholic churches.

The White House and Biden prosecutors coordinated an unconstitutional and unlawful attack on Trump and his supporters. Jack Smith was appointed as special prosecutor, despite never having received Senate confirmation as required by the Appointments Clause (Article II, § 2). He prosecuted Trump and his associates for keeping classified documents, though no other former president had ever been charged for doing the same, and used statutes intended for the Ku Klux Klan and for evidence-tampering and financial crimes to bring a lawless case against Trump for lobbying against ratification of 2020 election. The cases were dismissed, with the latter case decimated when the Supreme Court held that a president is immune from prosecution for official acts. Contrary to its policies, the Justice Department then issued scathing reports, in which Smith proclaimed that Trump would have been convicted. Who needs trials or juries?

Matthew Colangelo left the third-ranking position in the Biden Justice Department to concoct sham fraud cases against Trump in New York. Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump and his children liable for “civil fraud,” imposed a $455 million fine, and stripped Trump of his New York businesses, even though there was no fraud, victim, or losses. Colangelo, district attorney Alvin Bragg, and Judge Juan Merchan mangled New York law, convincing a jury to find Trump guilty of 34 felony counts for his private check stubs and legal payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels.

Hired by his lover, Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis, to lead an abusive Georgia RICO case against Trump and 18 others, Nathan Wade spent at least 16 hours in the White House developing the strategy. Democratic elected officials declared Trump an “insurrectionist,” and for the first time in American history, tried to throw a major party candidate off the ballot. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected this travesty.

More than 100 Trump family members, supporters, and advisors were indicted or targeted in these cases. At least 10 Trump lawyers face disbarment and other financially devastating discipline, including Rudy Guliani and John Eastman.

There is compelling evidence that many of these actions constitute conspiracies to injure, oppress, threaten, intimidate, and abuse power under color of authority, subjecting officials to criminal and civil liability pursuant to 18 U.S. Code §241 and § 245, 42 U.S. Code § 1983, and other federal and state laws and regulations.

Trump says that success will be his retribution. Attorney General nominee Pat Biondi testified during her confirmation hearing that she will not pursue retribution. Some commentators whom I greatly respect argue that to restore normalcy, the Trump administration should move on.

I disagree.

“Retribution” would mean doing what the Biden administration did – stretching laws to improperly pursue political opponents. I agree that that should never happen.

But anyone involved in the weaponization of our justice system who accepts a Biden pardon should be hauled before congressional committees, federal investigators, and grand juries so we can learn the truth. The pardon will strip them of their right to avoid self-incrimination. Any witness who fails to testify fully and honestly should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, perjury, and other appropriate crimes.

Other officials involved in lawfare who broke no laws that are traditionally prosecuted should be subject to appropriate discipline. But any official who broke laws that are historically prosecuted should be held to account for lives ruined, as well as the assault on democracy.

Doing this will restore normalcy.

Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including The American Mind, National Review, the National Association of Scholars, television, radio, and podcasts.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 19:15

Fetterman Votes With Republicans To Advance Hegseth, Says He Won't Switch To GOP

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) voted on Jan. 21 with Republicans to advance the nomination of Pete Hegseth, President Donald Trump’s choice for defense secretary, but said that he will not switch to the Republican Party.

Sen. John Fetterman arrives at the Capitol ahead of the inauguration of Donald Trump, on Jan. 20, 2025. Julia Demaree Nikhinson/Getty Images

Fetterman was the only member of the Democratic Party to join Republicans in passing a motion to proceed with Hegseth’s nomination. Every other Democrat who voted, as well as the two independents in the Senate, voted against advancing the nomination.

Fetterman’s vote was not required to move the nomination forward because Republicans hold 53 seats in the 100-member chamber, and a simple majority was needed. However, the vote marks the latest instance in which Fetterman has taken a position that differs from many members of his party.

Fetterman met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago recently, appearing to be the only lawmaker from the Democratic Party to do so. He has also said he would vote for Trump’s nominee to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, joined Trump’s social media website, Truth Social, and attended Trump’s inauguration.

Fetterman said in a new interview that he will not be switching parties or even leaving the Democratic Party.

“If they think, ‘oh, it’s going to be like a Manchin or a Sinema play,’ that’s just not true, and that’s not going to happen,” Fetterman told Semafor. “It’s not gonna happen.”

Fetterman said that he has informed leaders of the Democratic Party that his party affiliation and his membership in the Senate Democratic caucus is not going to change.

Former Sens. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), during the most recently completed session of Congress, left the Democratic Party to become independents.

Neither senator caucused with Republicans, although they each cast some votes with the GOP.

Fetterman said on Truth Social before Trump was sworn in that it was “appropriate and the responsibility of a U.S. Senator to have a conversation with President-elect Trump’s nominees.”

He added later: “My votes will come from an open-mind and an informed opinion after having a conversation with them. That’s not controversial, it’s my job.”

The Jan. 21 full Senate vote followed a party-line vote by the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 20 to advance Hegseth’s nomination to all senators.

The final vote on Hegseth is expected in the coming days.

Other Democratic Party senators have expressed opposition to the nomination.

“The Secretary of Defense is one of the most important roles for keeping our country safe and we need someone who is ready to step into the job and succeed on day one. Pete Hegseth doesn’t bring the kind of experience that prepares someone to do this massive job,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) said this week.

Republicans, on the other hand, have said they still support Hegseth.

“The President’s pick for Secretary of Defense, Mr. Hegseth, has impressive academic qualifications, conducted himself very well in the Senate Armed Services hearing, and has a commendable record of service in uniform. He assured me he will surround himself with a strong support team,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said in a statement. “I will vote for his confirmation.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 17:00

This Transition Is Already A Huge Historical Marker

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

There is plenty of time ahead for the peanut gallery to discuss the ins and outs of the daily goings-on with the new Trump administration. There will be good and bad, and everyone is free to call out which is what and can do so for fully four years.

For now, we pause to consider the historic nature of what is taking place in our times and be grateful that we are all around to watch it unfold. And we should consider the lessons it offers for our own lives.

 

There is the obvious data point that President Donald Trump is only the second nonconsecutive second-term president after Grover Cleveland. That’s interesting but hardly scratches the surface of the significance of this presidency.

 

Anyone who prophesied two years ago that Trump would be taking the oath of office would have likely been considered a lunatic.

The whole of corporate media was railing against his legacy. The historians were writing him off. Google was gaming its search results to shame anyone who still defended him. Big tech and nearly the whole of academia were united in loathing. The sneering on late-night television was the only consistent theme.

Meanwhile, the big guns were coming for him personally with indictment after indictment. There is warfare and there is lawfare but the desire to destroy is the same. There was talk of confiscating Trump Tower and even jail. The revenge fantasies were out of control, while his attorneys’ fees were sky-high, millions upon millions of dollars.

There was no power center in the United States or really the world that was not overflowing with loathing and brutal attacks, including every attempted extortion and smear.

It is impossible to not give Trump personal credit for seeing his way through a series of threats and attacks that would have broken even the strongest character. Somehow he managed to get through it all with his physical and mental well-being not only saved but even strengthened.

How did he sleep? How did he keep his spirits high? How did he see the light at the end of this long, dark tunnel? It’s unfathomable.

I don’t care what your politics are: If you cannot see this example of steadfastness and courage as inspiring, there is something wrong. Is there anything wrong in your life to compare? It’s doubtful. He made it through and so can you. If nothing else is true, his personal example of courage in the face of grave danger is exemplary.

He had plenty of competitors for the Republican nomination, and they were right to challenge him, not based on a lack of respect but simply because of their own confidence that they could do the job. But at this stage of history, Trump was already legendary and approaching a status of personal grandeur that no one could match. Thus did he get the nomination and his competitors defer.

Panic among mainstream opinion makers ensued once again. The unthinkable happened: the first assassination attempt. It’s impossible to look at the circumstances surrounding that quarter-inch miss and not feel a sense of awe.

It’s difficult to explain without taking recourse to divine intervention. Equally remarkable was Trump’s response, not to cower and collapse but stand and assure the people for whom he felt responsibility that he was alive. And he used that precious and catastrophic moment to rally the people with immortal words, fist in the air.

Will that moment go down in history? It became obvious in the days following that the powers that be did not want it to do so. Within a week or so, it was hard to find information about this at all, as the major national media simply stopped talking about it. That left it to the masses of regular people who simply could not suppress their astonishment at what transpired.

Alternative media swung into action as did the meme makers and the merchants with shirts, cups, and posters. There was to be no burying this event.

Our times are absolutely desperate for examples of masculine heroism. The culture has been nearly purged of such, from movies to television to music. What Trump did was countercultural in every sense of the term: It went against the grain and disturbed the powers that be. This event became a mighty symbol of cultural renewal, a template for an entire generation to understand the sacrifices that are often necessary for success.

Behind the scenes, the Trump loyalists were hard at work, mostly in private by design, and with one focus: Get him to a second term. How in the world could they have confidence that this was possible? It comes down to one word—math. They knew what the whole of mainstream culture denied, namely that the results of the 2020 election were not mathematically possible.

Trump actually won more popular votes than he did four years earlier. The difference was the implausible appearance of 15 million to 20 million votes for his opponent that could not have reflected the choices and behaviors of real people. To right this wrong—or at least expose it—they attempted to use the courts, but the challenges were rejected on grounds of standing, as if voters themselves have no right at all to challenge what, for appearances, looked like voter fraud.

Team Trump knew that the numbers did not add up, and so they plotted a return.

It broke down to three steps.

No. 1: They would work with states that were willing to tighten voter registration laws and crack down on mail-in balloting that everyone on the planet knows is more susceptible to fraud. They would recruit monitors. They would empower a grassroots movement to be vigilant against illicit balloting. And they would encourage early voting among the base. They knew that blue states would not cooperate, but they counted on a cultural movement to shame attempts to game the system.

No. 2: They would fire up the most disenfranchised group in the United States about whom no one seems to care, namely men younger than the age of 35. This is a group that had long lost any hope in elections and has been wholly overlooked by cultural elites. To reach them, Trump went on many podcasts, including Joe Rogan’s and many others. He knew he already had their support, but he needed something else: for them to register and actually vote. That’s a big ask, but it worked.

No. 3: The need to create a mass cultural movement that was larger and more powerful than the mass media. It needed hats, songs, rallies, and meetings. To this end, he flew all over the country to hold rallies at which he did what he does best, extemporaneous stand-ups talking about the events of the day, filled with humor, fun, and fury. These became massive events, with people lining up for a mile outside the venue, waiting in all weather for 12 hours and longer.

By the end of the campaign, there was not a single indoor venue in America that could hold all the people who lined up to see Trump speak in any town or city in this country. That is an amazing accomplishment, never before seen in our history. The result was precisely what was planned, a mass movement that competed with or even outpaced the smearbund working to defeat him.

Again, this was the plan all along, although it was never announced. It was like clockwork. The people least surprised on Election Night were all associated with Team Trump. They had mapped it out for years. As part of their planning, they deployed a method that has never before been seen in U.S. politics: absolute security of all information. No one associated with this group spoke to the press for four years.

It’s been the same for the transition. It has been privately financed to keep the prying eyes of the administrative state away from understanding and thus subverting what it is they have been planning. This is why nearly every pick for the Cabinet and agency heads has been a shock but for those whom the team released early as a deliberate trial balloon.

One must stand in admiration of all this, not just the administrative sophistication of the campaign and transition team but also the courage it required to follow through on all these plans despite the terrible odds. This alone is for the ages.

Now we are at the moment that is the real test: the time of governing. We are in for some huge surprises, of that I am sure. The national media has been locked out and understandably so. Some of what will unfold in the coming days, weeks, and months I will like and some I will not. I’m sure you will say the same. That’s the way the real world works. We have plenty of time to argue about this or that.

Let’s just take a moment to appreciate that we have this opportunity at all. Against all odds, Trump is president again. Let that be a lesson to all of us. Nothing is written that moral courage cannot overcome. That’s true in politics, and it is true in our own lives.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 16:20

Biden's Big Blemish: Wages Didn't Keep Up With Inflation

The largest blemish on Joe Biden’s economic legacy is the fact that, despite robust growth, low unemployment and a roaring stock market, many Americans felt worse off during his presidency than they did before. One of the reasons behind this seeming disconnect is simple and it has to do with inflation, disinflation and wage growth, or the lack thereof.

Shortly after Biden took office in January 2021, inflation began to surge. The Covid-19 pandemic and the supply-chain crisis that followed, combined with generous stimulus spending and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 had created a perfect storm of inflationary pressures that resulted in prices climbing faster than they had since the early 1980s. And despite inflation coming down notably from its mid-2022 highs, prices have not come down – at least on the aggregate.

That’s because bringing down inflation, i.e. disinflation, is not to be mistaken for falling prices, which would be deflation.

While (moderately) rising prices are no problem per se and actually wanted in a functioning economy, hence the Fed’s 2-percent inflation target, inflation becomes a problem if it outpaces wage growth for a protracted period of time. As Statista's Felix Richter shows in the chart below, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, this has been the case in the U.S. from April 2021 to April 2023, when prices increased faster than nominal wages did for 25 consecutive months, at least on a year-over-year basis.

You will find more infographics at Statista

That resulted in an actual decline in real wages as nominal wage growth still hadn’t fully caught up with price increases by December 2024.

As the chart shows, nominal average hourly earnings grew from $29.93 in January 2021 to $35.69 in December 2024 – a 19.2 percent increase.

During the same period, prices, as measured here by the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) climbed 21.0 percent, leading to a 1.5 percent decline in real wages.

That means adjusted for price increases, people went from $29.93 an hour to $29.49 an hour during the Biden years.

Considering that these are average earnings, it’s fair to assume that many people suffered considerably larger and actually noticeable declines in real wages, leading to the widespread frustration with the Biden economy.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 15:45

Trump Doubles-Down On Plan To Return American Education 'Back To The States'

Authored by Jack Roberts via Campus Reform,

President Trump has reinforced his intent to bring education “back to the states.”

In a pre-inaugural speech made at a rally in Washington, D.C. on Sunday, Trump outlined various policies he hopes his second administration will achieve in the near future.

On the topic of education, Trump highlighted Education Secretary nominee Linda McMahon, whom he called “fantastic.”

”And a very special woman, Linda McMahon, is going to be our future Secretary of Education, which we’re going to be giving back to the states,” Trump remarked.

“Let the state run education.”

Trump also said how he told McMahon, “if you do a great job, you will put yourself out of a job. Because you’re going to be sending it back to the states.”

In his announcement of McMahon in November, Trump reiterated his desire to decentralize the American education system.

”Linda will use her decades of Leadership experience, and deep understanding of both Education and Business, to empower the next Generation of American Students and Workers, and make America Number One in Education in the World,” the then president-elect wrote at the time.

“We will send Education BACK TO THE STATES, and Linda will spearhead that effort.”

Trump also called McMahon, who served as the administrator of the Small Business Administration during his first term, a “fierce advocate for Parents’ Rights.”

”As Secretary of Education, Linda will fight tirelessly to expand ‘Choice’ to every State in America, and empower parents to make the best Education decisions for their families,” he added.

In the 2024 Republican platform, the party pledged to fight to ”ensure safe learning environments free from political meddling, and restore Parental Rights.” Included in the plan were efforts to advance “Universal School Choice,” combat Critical Race Theory and “Gender Indoctrination,” as well as “Return Education to the States.”

”We are going to close the Department of Education in Washington, D.C. and send it back to the States, where it belongs, and let the States run our educational system as it should be run,” the platform states.

”It is our goal to bring Education in the United States to the highest level, one that it has never attained before!”

Abolishing the Education Department has been a core tenet of Republican presidential campaigns dating back to Ronald Reagan in 1980, who said that education “is the principal responsibility of local school systems, teachers, parents, citizen boards and state governments.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 15:25

ABC, NBC, CBS Back In Hot-Seat After New FCC Chair Reinstates Complaints

The new chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Brendan Carr (R), will overturn an 11th hour decision by the outgoing Democrat chair - and will reinstate three complaints against major media outlets related to bias in the 2024 US election.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr

Last week, outgoing Chair Jessica Rosenworcel (D) tossed four pending petitions against ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX News - which she said sought "to curtail freedom of the press."

And by 'freedom of the press,' Rosenworcel meant the freedom to deceptively edit a Kamala Harris '60 Minutes' interview to make her appear fit for office, freedom to help Harris in her debate against Trump, and freedom to prop Harris up with a (not funny) appearance on 'Saturday Night Live.'

According to the report, Carr will reinstate the claims against ABC, NBC and CBS - filed by the Center of American Rights - but not the one against Fox, which sought to block Fox Corp's local Philadelphia division's renewal of their license over claims of 2020 election fraud.

A source told Newsmax that Carr will put the ABC, NBC, and CBS cases back into pending or active status. The move means the complaints against the three networks can be adjudicated on their merits.

The source added that Rosenworcel could have prevented the FCC from reversing course had she acted a few weeks earlier. That could have prevented Carr from overturning his predecessor's decision. -Newsmax

In other FCC news, Carr is ready to rock on Trump's executive order ki9lling diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the federal government.

In a post on X, Carr said he's "ending the FCC's promotion of DEI and will focus our work on competently carrying out the FCC's statutory mission," adding that the agency will no longer promote DEI in their strategic plans.

Yesterday, President Trump issued an Executive Order to end the government’s promotion of DEI.

Today, as Chairman of the FCC, I am ending the FCC’s promotion of DEI and will focus our work on competently carrying out the FCC’s statutory mission. pic.twitter.com/jH8uhpdz12

— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) January 21, 2025

In a statement released by the FEC, Carr explained that "Promoting invidious forms of discrimination runs contrary to the Communications Act and deprives Americans of their rights to fair and equal treatment under the law.

"It also represents a wasteful expenditure of taxpayer resources. Nonetheless, the FCC joined other private and public sector institutions in promoting discriminatory DEI policies during the Biden administration. The FCC did so by embedding DEI in its strategic priorities, budget requests, advisory groups, rulemaking proceedings and many other components of its official work."

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 15:05

Energy Department Ends LNG Export Pause Following Trump Order

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) revoked on Jan. 21 a Biden-era regulation that restricted LNG exports, paving the way for capacity additions in the sector and strengthening America’s energy industry.

In January 2024, the federal government temporarily paused the approval of LNG exports to nations without a Free Trade Agreement with the United States. At the time, the administration cited issues such as the impact of LNG exports on greenhouse gas emissions and rising energy costs for Americans as reasons for the pause.

The DOE announced that effective Tuesday, it is ending the pause as part of restoring the “Trump energy dominance agenda.”

With the reversal in policy, the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management has been directed to resume the consideration of pending export applications. The agency’s decision follows the direction laid out by President Donald Trump in his “Unleashing American Energy” executive order signed on his first day in office.

The Biden administration’s moratorium on exports had negatively impacted several American LNG projects, including those in Texas and Louisiana. These projects are now in a better position to move forward, potentially adding another 100 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) to U.S. export capacity.

The United States is already the world’s largest LNG exporter and shipped 88.3 million tonnes of superchilled gas in 2024. This year alone, three new plants should add nearly 50 MTPA to U.S. capacity.

Before the Biden administration halted new permit approvals, the government had already given the green light to projects that would increase U.S. LNG capacity to 200 MPTA from around 90 MTPA. Those projects were not affected by the moratorium.

New permits issued by the new government would likely increase export capacity from 2030 onward because it takes several years to build LNG plants.

LNG is used residentially for cooking, heating, and generating electricity. Commercially, it is used for manufacturing paints and fertilizers.

In July 2024, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that halted the LNG pause after 16 states, led by Louisiana, brought a lawsuit against the policy. The complaint argued that the DOE violated federal laws by taking such action.

Judge James Cain Jr. from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, who issued the injunction, observed that in Louisiana, the LNG market added $4.4 billion a year to the economy and accounted for 18,000 jobs.

If pending projects were canceled as a result of the LNG pause, Louisiana stood to suffer harm, the judge said, calling the DOE decision “completely without reason or logic.”

The Biden administration later challenged the ruling, filing an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Benefitting America

Gillian Giannetti, senior attorney at environmental advocacy Natural Resources Defense Council, criticized Trump’s decision to allow more LNG export approvals, calling the move “deeply misguided.”

“Expanding LNG production deepens our reliance on fossil fuels at a time when we urgently need to transition to clean energy,” Giannetti said. “LNG operations contribute to dangerous climate pollution, harm public health, and increase energy costs for American families—all while locking communities near those facilities into decades of environmental and economic risks.”

Trump’s decision was welcomed by Charlie Riedl, executive director of the Center for LNG, who said that LNG exports are a “vital geopolitical tool” that helps balance the country’s trade deficits.

The exports also reduce global emissions and ensure the energy security of America’s allies, he said.

“We will work with the Trump administration to counter the negative impacts of the pause and return to normal order,” he said.

Sempra Infrastructure's computer rendition of the Port Arthur LNG facility in Southeast Texas. Courtesy of Sempra Infrastructure

Paul Everingham, CEO of the Asia Natural Gas & Energy Association, cited a study by Wood Mackenzie that states Asia’s LNG demand is expected to almost double by 2050 while the United States is forecast to account for a third of the global LNG supply by 2035.

Asia’s demand growth and America’s ability to meet it were “contingent” on the LNG pause being lifted and supply being available in the coming decades, Everingham said.

“Today’s issuing by President Trump of an order to resume processing of LNG export approvals will enable key projects to proceed and give decision and policy makers in Asia the certainty they require to make long-term decisions about energy,” he said. “Emerging economies in Asia seek to switch out high-emitting coal use for more gas-fired power as they pursue sensible and well-planned growth in renewable energy sources. The resumption of LNG export approvals in the US will help make this a reality.”

Trump’s “Unleashing American Energy” executive order stated that “burdensome and ideologically motivated regulations” in recent years have negatively affected America’s ability to make use of its abundant energy and natural resources, inflicting higher costs on citizens, reducing job creation, and weakening national security.

“It is thus in the national interest to unleash America’s affordable and reliable energy and natural resources. This will restore American prosperity,” the order stated.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 14:40

Pentagon Reportedly Deploying 1,500 Active Duty Troops To US-Mexico Border

President Donald Trump's extraordinary move to restore national security began on Monday with a series of executive orders on immigration. By Tuesday, Border Czar Tom Homan confirmed that large-scale raids targeting criminal illegal aliens were underway. Now, the Pentagon is reportedly preparing to deploy more than a thousand active-duty troops to secure the southern border in the coming days, following four years of a wide-open border facilitated by globalist Democrats in the Biden-Harris regime.

AP News, in typical fashion, citing anonymous US officials, reported that Acting Defense Secretary Robert Salesses is preparing to sign a deployment order for 1,5000 active-duty troops. These troops would support border agents by assisting with logistics, transportation, and the construction of barriers. 

"Troops are prohibited by law from doing law enforcement duties, but that may change," AP's Pentagon reporter Tara Copp noted. 

However, she said, "Trump has directed through executive order that the incoming secretary of defense and incoming homeland security chief report back within 90 days if they think an 1807 law called the Insurrection Act should be invoked. That would allow those troops to be used in civilian law enforcement on US soil." 

Active duty forces could begin deployment to the southern border by the end of the week. There are currently no active-duty troops there. The latest figures show about 2,500 National Guard and Reserve members are positioned along the southern border. 

On Monday, Trump told the American people during his inaugural address, "I will declare a national emergency at our southern border. All illegal entry will immediately be halted, and we will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places in which they came."

The move to secure the border and protect the American people from the illegal alien invasion facilitated by open-border globalist Democrats has been widely expected. 

Here's a recap of Trump's executive orders on immigration (courtesy of NBC News):

• End birthright citizenship for future children born to mothers who are in the United States unlawfully or temporarily unless the child's father is here legally and permanently

• Direct federal agencies to identify countries that do not provide sufficient information on their nationals and to bar those nationals from entry to the US.

• Send the military to the border by declaring a national emergency

• Halt all refugee admissions into the United States until policy "aligns" with US interests

• Designate cartels and migrant gangs MS-13 and Tren de Aragua as foreign terrorist organizations

• Restrict federal funds from sanctuary cities and potentially take legal action against them

• Require immigrants unlawfully in the United States to register and be fingerprinted

• End the CBP One program and the parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans

• Deny public benefits to unauthorized immigrants

• Reinstate the "Remain in Mexico" policy

During Trump's first term, more than 7,000 active-duty troops were stationed across the border in Texas, Arizona, and California. If the AP story is correct about the first tranche of 1,500 troops preparing for deployment, then there is the possibility that those numbers will be ramped up in the coming weeks, if not months.  

The American people gave Trump a mandate: Restore national security. 

Far-left Democrats are losing their minds on Trump's massive immigration shift. With leftists corporate media primarily fixated on huge deportation costs.

So we ask these pro-open border folks: What price do you put on national security?

This illegal alien invasion had consequences: American lives were lost.

Every politician that defends open borders, sanctuary cities, and oppose deporting illegal aliens from Joe Biden on down are responsible for Laken Riley’s death.

Rest in Peace Laken. Our government let you down. pic.twitter.com/FZISS96eoA

— Ryan James Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) February 24, 2024

Once the southern and northern borders are secured, the American people must hold accountable the politicians, non-profits, federal agencies, staffing companies, corporations, and others involved in facilitating the migration invasion that has undermined national security. The most effective way to ensure accountability is at the ballot box in the next election cycle. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/22/2025 - 14:20