Skip navigation

Tag Archives: politricks

Trump targets states that voted for Harris in shutdown fight


Aaron Pellish-Politico

To be clear, the so-called “Grifter in Chief” is punishing everyone under the pretense of targeting Democrats, which is absurd on its own. Cuts affect everyone indiscriminately. This deliberate targeting of states and cities borders on fascism. MA.

Wed, October 1, 2025 at 2:48 PM CDT·2 min read

The White House is targeting Democratic states with its first wave of cuts to federal projects following the government shutdown, impacting billions of dollars in funding for energy and infrastructure in New York, California and elsewhere.

Russ Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said Wednesday the Trump administration is cancelling nearly $8 billion in funding for energy programs he characterized as part of “the Left’s climate agenda.”

The cuts will impact 16 states — all of which voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential election. Vought did not identify exactly which programs would be cut in the social media announcement.

Earlier Wednesday, Vought said the White House is withholding $18 billion in funds from New York City’s Second Ave. subway and Gateway tunnel projects, the latter which connects New Jersey and New York.

New York-area lawmakers reacted with fury to the infrastructure cuts earlier Wednesday.

“Political revenge. Clearly outlined by Trump, time and again. He sees the U.S. as Blue and Red, and Blue states are enemies,” George Latimer (D-N.Y.), who represents the New York City suburbs in Westchester County, wrote in a text message to POLITICO. “As he has said many times, he hates his enemies; he is the retribution. Has he announced any rescission of any projects in Florida or Texas?”

Vought has not publicly announced cuts that affected a state that backed Trump in 2024.

The moves reflect Trump’s intent to undermine programs benefiting Americans in blue-leaning states, while leaders from both parties work to negotiate a government funding agreement. Trump has suggested the shutdown could offer a pretense to cut programs he doesn’t like.

“We can get rid of a lot of things that we didn’t want, and they’d be Democrat things,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday ahead of the shutdown.

Top Trump allies have also indicated the strategy could serve as leverage to bring Democrats back to the negotiating table. Vice President JD Vance told reporters during Wednesday’s White House briefing that the administration is prioritizing funding for essential services and argued that programs like the New York infrastructure projects may suffer as a consequence.

“We want to do everything that we can to help the American people but when the Democrats shut down the government, we have to actually do a little triage to make sure the most critical and most essential services are provided,” Vance said.

When asked for comment on the cuts targeting blue-leaning states, a White House spokesperson pointed to press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s comments during Wednesday’s briefing.

“There are unfortunate consequences to a government shutdown, and the federal government is not receiving any cash at the moment,” Leavitt said. “The Office of Management and Budget has been tasked with looking over the receipts and looking over the budget of the entire federal bureaucracy.”

The Republican Shutdown Argument is a Giant Lie


No, Democrats aren’t trying to fund health care for “illegal aliens.”

Jonathan Cohn

Sep 30

Hey, guys. Earlier today, my colleague Mona Charen and I talked about President Trump’s speech before the generals and admirals, as well as the politics of the government-shutdown fight.

In today’s newsletter, I write about the likely shutdown and the main argument about health care that Trump and his allies are making. I am calling it a “lie,” which is not a phrase I typically use. I reserve it for instances when a claim seems fundamentally untrue and when the people making the claim know better—or, at least, should know better. I think this instance qualifies. Let me know in the comments if you agree.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY’S CLOSING ARGUMENT heading into the government shutdown is a big, brazen lie.

The lie is so big and so brazen that it’s almost not worth addressing, because doing so gives the claim far more credibility than it deserves.

But it’s become ubiquitous in Republican talking points, from the president on down. There’s also a chance some people will believe it, because it feeds into some common misconceptions about health care and immigration policy, as well as preconceptions of how the parties operate. And in a standoff that has been all about political leverage and public opinion, setting the record straight matters.

So let’s get to it.The claim is about what Democrats are demanding in exchange for their support on a spending bill that would keep the government open past midnight tonight, when funding runs out. Remember, Republicans control both the White House and Congress, but need Democratic votes in the Senate to approve a new spending measure.

The central Democratic demand is about health care: They want Republicans to extend a temporary Biden-era program that has lowered health insurance costs for more than 20 million Americans buying coverage through the Affordable Care Act. And they want Republicans to undo at least some of the dramatic Medicaid cuts that the GOP enacted over the summer, as part of Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Trump and Republican leaders have refused to negotiate. And after flailing about with a few different arguments—including a preposterous claim that Democrats just want to pad the profits of insurance companies—they have settled on a new line: that Democrats want to fund health care for “illegal aliens.”

I put the phrase in quotes because it’s the phrase Republican officials have used over and over again—literally eight times by Vice President JD Vance in one recent Fox News interview, as my Bulwark colleague Will Saletan observed the other day.

Vance made the claim yet again on Monday while standing outside the White House, following a failed negotiation session between GOP and Democratic leaders. At his side was House Speaker Mike Johnson, who’s been putting out the same message, including in a Sunday tweet saying that Democrats “want to give free health care to ILLEGAL ALIENS paid by hardworking Americans.”

And then there is Trump, who has been using the same line in conversations with reporters and on his own social media feeds. On Monday night, he even reposted an AI fake of a press appearance by the Democratic congressional leaders in which the fake Sen. Chuck Schumer says: “If we give all these illegal aliens free health care, we might be able to get them on our side so they can vote for us.” A digitally animated, sombrero-wearing, mustachioed Rep. Hakeem Jeffries looks on as mariachi music plays in the background.

If you’re not too busy gasping at what it says about the president’s state of mind that he’d post this, you might be wondering what on earth he and the Republicans are talking about when they claim Democrats want to fund health care for illegal aliens.

It’s a very good question, because people who are in the United States unlawfully cannot get federally funded health insurance. They cannot sign up for Medicaid. They cannot get federally subsidized coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplaces.

In other words, what Trump, Vance and the other Republicans are saying is just not true.

SO WHAT COULD THEY HAVE IN MIND with this claim?

It’s hard to be sure, because neither the White House nor Johnson’s office has put out material to substantiate their arguments, or responded to my queries asking for evidence. And when a reporter finally asked the president about it, during a press appearance in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump gave a rambling non-response that quickly veered into other immigration-related topics.

In the same press appearance, he said of the Democrats “they want to give incredible Medicare—the Cadillac Medicare—to illegal immigrants.” That’s also not true, in case you were wondering.

As best as I can tell, the Republicans who actually know what they are talking about are zeroing in on a small portion of federal health spending that’s in play as part of the shutdown debate. It’s funding connected either to the Affordable Care Act subsidies Democrats want to extend or to the GOP Medicaid cuts they want to roll back. And they are leaning heavily on a set of two flimsy assertions that appeared in an early September GOP press release and echo claims made by the Paragon Health Institute, an influential conservative think tank.

One of those assertions is about rules that opened up “Obamacare” subsidies to a small number of non-citizens, including some who are in the country because they have protected status. Republicans might not want these people to be eligible for those subsidies. But these people are not “illegal aliens.” They have permission to be in the United States.

The other main assertion is that people here unlawfully are tricking the system, and getting coverage even though they are not eligible. It’s an extension of another highly questionable argument Republicans have made repeatedly over the past few months, which is that many millions of people have been signing up for either Medicaid or subsidized Affordable Care Act insurance fraudulently.

The evidence for that claim is awfully shaky, for reasons you can read here and here and here and here. But even if it were true that millions of Americans were getting Affordable Care Act insurance through deception or error, there’s no reason to think that large numbers of undocumented immigrants would be among them.

For one thing, enrollment systems check citizenship status pretty carefully, by cross-referencing Social Security numbers with data from the Department of Homeland Security. People who apply as non-citizens—say, because they have protected status—must supply other forms of documentation to prove that they have permission to be here and that they qualify for one of the special exemptions allowing them to get coverage.¹

The system isn’t foolproof; no system is. Maybe some undocumented immigrants are going to the trouble of faking data, and maybe DHS is missing them. But most people in the United States unlawfully steer clear of government programs, precisely because they fear triggering deportation for themselves or loved ones.

“People who are immigrants are afraid, they’re not going to risk exposure,” Shelby Gonzales, vice president for immigration policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told me in a phone interview. “We’ve got problems getting people who are fully eligible, people who have been eligible for a long time, to trust that they can provide their information.”

That last part is well known to researchers and analysts. Immigrants legally eligible for federally funded benefit programs like Medicaid are actually less likely to get them than U.S. citizens. And during the first Trump administration, immigrants repeatedly told pollsters and journalists they were afraid to seek out public services—or even, in some cases, basic health care.

IF YOU REALLY WANT to give Vance and the Republicans the benefit of the doubt in a way they never do for their political adversaries—if you want to consider the most defensible part of their claim, for the sake of intellectual honesty—you could zero in on a single provision of the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB).

It’s a cut tied to a program called “Emergency Medicaid.”

Emergency Medicaid reimburses hospitals for emergency care they provide to immigrants not entitled to federally funded insurance. This includes people who are here lawfully but not eligible for federal programs. It also includes undocumented immigrants.

The OBBB reduces the federal contribution to Emergency Medicaid, saving about $28 billion in federal spending over ten years. If you squint hard enough, you could argue this is an example of the Republicans cutting funds that had been paying for health care of undocumented immigrants—and that Democrats want to restore that money, insofar as they have said they want to undo the legislation’s Medicaid cuts.

But here are a few other things to keep in mind:

That $28 billion over ten years represents less than 3 percent of the health care cuts within the OBBB and less than 1 percent of total Medicaid spending, according to data from the Urban Institute and KFF.

Only a portion of that money actually finances care for undocumented immigrants. Some of it finances care for people here legally but not yet eligible for Medicaid. An example would be people with work permits and those seeking permanent residency, who by law must wait five years before enrolling in Medicaid.

Emergency Medicaid doesn’t go to individuals. It’s a direct subsidy to hospitals and (in some states) outpatient providers, for care they provide.

A lot of the money is spent on truly emergency services like resuscitating somebody from a heart attack or delivering a baby that hospitals and clinics are obligated to provide, thanks to a 1980s law, signed by Ronald Reagan, that prohibits denying care to people who need stabilizing or life-saving treatment.

One other thing to note is that the cut does not apply to Florida, Texas, and eight other states that have refused to expand Medicaid as part of the Affordable Care Act. So this is a cut that largely spares some of the biggest red states, which could be a byproduct of GOP philosophical priorities lining up with those states’ choices, GOP leaders wanting to protect politically friendly states, or both.

As Georgetown research professor Edwin Park told me: “Emergency Medicaid is about reimbursing providers, especially hospitals, and the Emergency Medicaid provision is actually more about further increasing the cost-shifts to expansion states by lowering the match for Emergency Medicaid reimbursements.”

Add it all up, and even the most expansive, generous reading of the Emergency Medicaid argument wouldn’t come close to validating claims by Trump, Vance, and the other GOP leaders.

“Republican talking points have consistently featured claims that Democrats are trying to provide health care to undocumented immigrants, but this debate isn’t about that,” Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, told me. “Democrats are looking to restore health coverage for citizens and lawfully present immigrants. It is those groups that will bear the brunt of cuts to Medicaid and the ACA.”

To be perfectly clear: Not a single Democrat has talked about wanting to fund care for people in the United States unlawfully. Instead, what Democrats have said is they want to undo Medicaid cuts projected to leave nearly 10 million Americans uninsured—and extend a temporary Biden-era initiative in order to avoid a jump in health insurance premiums expected to affect 20 million more.

You might agree with that. Or not. You might think tying this to the shutdown makes sense. Or not. But you can say one thing about Democrats’ underlying claims that you definitely can’t say about the Republican counterpart: They are telling the truth. The challenges of setting up that verification in real-time was one of the reasons the Obama administration had such a hard time setting up the HealthCare.gov website—and why its rollout in late 2013 was such an infamous

China Floods the World With Cheap Exports After Trump’s Tariffs


Bloomberg News

Tue, September 23, 2025 at 1:43 AM CDT·9 min read

2.9k

China is hurtling towards a record $1.2 trillion trade surplus.

(Bloomberg) — President Xi Jinping’s export engine has proved unstoppable during five months of sky-high US tariffs, sending China toward a record $1.2 trillion trade surplus.

With access to the US curtailed, Chinese manufacturers have shown they aren’t backing down: Indian purchases hit an all-time high in August, shipments to Africa are on track for an annual record and sales to Southeast Asia have exceeded their pandemic-era peak

That across-the-board surge is causing alarm abroad, as governments weigh the potential damage to their domestic industries against the risk of antagonizing Beijing — the top trading partner for over half the planet.

While so far only Mexico has hit back publicly this year — floating tariffs as high as 50% on Chinese products including cars, auto parts and steel — other countries are coming under increasing pressure to act. Indian authorities have received 50 applications in recent weeks for investigations into goods dumping from nations including China and Vietnam, according to a person familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified as the information isn’t public. Indonesia’s trade minister pledged to monitor a deluge of goods, after viral videos of Chinese vendors touting plans to export jeans and shirts for as little as 80 US cents to major cities caused an outcry.

For all the pain, the chances of more meaningful action are limited. Countries already embroiled in tariff negotiations with the Trump administration appear reluctant to take on a separate trade war with the world’s second-largest economy. That’s giving Beijing breathing room from US levies at heights economists previously predicted would halve the nation’s annual growth rate.

“The subdued response is probably informed by ongoing US trade negotiations,” said Christopher Beddor, deputy China research director at Gavekal Dragonomics. “Some countries may not want to be seen as contributing to a breakdown in the global trading system. Some may also be holding back on tariffs against China in order to offer them as concessions to the US during their own trade negotiations.”Officials shielding their economies from Beijing are treading carefully. South Africa’s trade minister has advised against punitive tariffs on Chinese car exports — which nearly doubled this year — and is instead seeking more investment. Chile and Ecuador are quietly imposing targeted fees on low-cost imports, after Chinese e-commerce giant Temu’s monthly active users in Latin America soared 143% since January. While Brazil has threatened more aggressive retaliation, this summer it gave China’s biggest electric car maker, BYD Co Ltd, a tariff-free window to ramp up local production.

A BYD Brazil factory under construction in Camacari, Brazil in January. Photographer: Tuane Fernandes/Bloomberg

Beijing is using both diplomatic charm and economic threats to prevent countries from taking outright retaliation. Earlier this month, China’s president rallied BRICS nations to forge a united voice against protectionism during a leaders’ call of the bloc, while Commerce Ministry officials have warned Mexico to “think twice” before acting, making clear such steps will have recriminations. Adding to the risks, Trump is pressuring NATO nations to impose tariffs up to 100% on China over its support for Russia.   Chinese officials say their trade with the world is within reasonable bounds and that Beijing isn’t out to dominate global markets. “When there’s demand from abroad, China exports accordingly,” Vice Finance Minister Liao Min said in July. The state-run People’s Daily newspaper on its social media account last month hit back against Western criticisms of “dumping,” arguing that China’s exporters don’t sell below cost. If Trump does corral other countries to gang up on China, it’ll make dealing with internal challenges such as a prolonged property crash and an aging population harder, according to Chang Shu and David Qu of Bloomberg Economics. “Beijing will likely hit back with reciprocal tariffs immediately, but that risks alienating partners at a time when it critically needs allies,” they said. “Over time, it may also encourage firms to localize production in partner countries.”

While Chinese exporters are defying the odds, surging trade isn’t making them richer — or helping the nation’s domestic issues. Profits at industrial firms fell 1.7% in the first seven months, as manufacturers trying to reduce overcapacity at home under Xi’s “anti-involution” drive slashed prices to sell more overseas. That’s only worsening China’s sticky deflation, on track for its longest spell since the country began opening up in the late 1970s.

The export explosion could also undermine Beijing’s efforts to rebalance its economy toward stimulating consumption — defying foreign officials such as US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has urged Beijing to make boosting the Chinese consumer a pillar of its blueprint for the next half-decade. China’s policy document outlining those plans will be in focus in the coming weeks at a key Communist Party meeting.

For Xi, the risks might just be worthwhile. Showing the world China doesn’t need the US consumer strengthens his hand going into a high-stakes meeting with Trump at a summit in South Korea. The world’s biggest economies are still hashing out a possible trade deal, with a 90-day pause on tariffs as high as 145% currently keeping the peace.

China Shock 2.0

Even before Trump stunned the world with America’s steepest tariffs since World War II in April, emerging markets at risk of shedding millions of manufacturing jobs were worried about a glut of Chinese goods. Indonesia’s previous president threatened a 200% tariff to protect local industry, while Brazil has hiked duties on Chinese steel. Even Vietnam took temporary action against Chinese online retail giants that undercut local sellers.

Ultimately, it’s been hard for foreign leaders to protect their economies from China’s vast fleet of factories.

“Protectionism from the US and other countries has turned into a paper tiger because Chinese exporters are extremely competitive,” said Arthur Kroeber, head of research at Gavekal Dragonomics. They “can absorb some of the tariff hit and also have plenty of workarounds through transshipment and relocating late-stage production to lower-tariff countries.”

China’s trade surplus last year was almost $1 trillion and is on track to exceed that in 2025, based on Bloomberg calculations.

Cambodia’s central bank governor Chea Serey was candid about the balancing act smaller economies reliant on Beijing are having to perform. “We do import a lot from China,” she told Bloomberg Television earlier this month, when asked about Chinese dumping. “We also rely a lot in terms of foreign direct investment from China.”

While a rise in shipments to Vietnam suggests some goods destined for US shores and other places are being re-routed to bypass Trump’s wall of tariffs, that’s only part of the picture. Demand for China’s world-beating, high-tech innovations helped drive much of the recent traffic. Rising sales to wealthy markets in Europe and Australia also indicate Beijing simply found new buyers for many products.

India shows how Trump’s redrawing of the global trade map is benefiting Beijing in new ways. Exports to China’s neighbor hit a record $12.5 billion last month, driven largely by Apple Inc.’s suppliers rapidly shifting output of iPhones to India from its Asian neighbor. Those companies, however, still depend on parts and tooling made mostly in China.

In July, Chinese firms shipped almost $1 billion worth of computer chips to India and billions of dollars more worth of phones and parts, according to data released by Beijing. That puts exports on track to exceed last year’s record, with the value of shipments so far this year almost as large as the whole of 2021.

“China has performed better than expected in the first half,” JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s chief India economist Sajjid Chinoy told Bloomberg Television. “Some of this is the fact that China has very cleverly found other export markets, including Europe, which has been a key hedge to slowing exports to the US.”

Read more on Chinese trade:

  • China Exports to US Slump 33% But Trade Surplus Heads for Record
  • China Pours Exports Into Africa Faster Than Anywhere Else
  • A Chinese E-Commerce Glut Is Meeting Resistance in Latin America

Shanghai’s Yangshan Deepwater Port in May.Photographer: Qilai Shen/Bloomberg

A weaker currency gave China another edge. The yuan has depreciated along with the dollar against currencies such as the euro. Macquarie Bank previously estimated the yuan’s real effective exchange rate — which accounts for inflation differentials between a nation and its main trading partners — was at the weakest level since December 2011.

And the Federal Reserve’s rate cut this month could drag the dollar and possibly the yuan down further, boosting both global demand and also the competitiveness of Chinese exports.

For all the consternation around the world, the glut of goods cascading from China won’t be easy to stop. Chinese electric car exports have continued to power ahead despite steps by the US and Canada to curb them with punitive tariffs and bans.

In the first seven months of this year, carmakers such as Nio, BYD and Xpeng Inc. exported more than $19 billion worth of electric-powered vehicles, about the same as in the same period last year, with Europe being the largest market even after the EU imposed tariffs last October.

China’s in a better position than many other countries to find alternative markets to the US, according to Adam Wolfe of Absolute Strategy Research. Its analysis shows there’s almost a 50% overlap between what China sold to the US and what it exports to BRICS nations, suggesting much of what America no longer buys can be shipped to other markets.

“China’s shown this ability to move into other markets and get market share abroad and that probably continues,” said Wolfe. “I don’t know that China is going to see a contraction in exports over the rest of the year.”

–With assistance from Shruti Srivastava, Philip Heijmans, Claire Jiao, Haslinda Amin, Linda Lew, Ntando Thukwana, Andy Lin and Alex Vasquez.

(Updates with details on China’s trade surplus this year.)

©2025 Bloomberg L.P.

 View comments (2.9k)

Award to Trumplelstilskin below: “Heads Up Their Asses” aka HUTA!

‘Dangerous as hell’: Ted Cruz compares FCC chair’s threats against ABC to mob tactics


Please note Ted Cruz for all of his MAGA adherence is finally speaking the facts! MA

Michael Williams, CNN

Fri, September 19, 2025 at 4:28 PM CDT·4 min read

9.2k

GOP Sen. Ted Cruz on Friday denounced Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr’s threats to pull ABC’s broadcast license as “unbelievably dangerous” and compared some of his rhetoric to “mafioso” tactics.

In an episode of his podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz,” released on Friday, the Texas Republican said he was “thrilled” Jimmy Kimmel was pulled off the air by ABC over his comments about conservative influencer Charlie Kirk. But he said he strongly disagreed with the government policing speech, asserting it could come back to bite conservatives when Democrats retake power.

“I hate what Jimmy Kimmel said. I am thrilled that he was fired,” Cruz said. “But let me tell you: If the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you, the media, have said. We’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like,’ that will end up bad for conservatives.”

Though Carr’s comments have drawn widespread condemnation on the left, Cruz’s remarks represent one of the strongest denunciations of the threats against broadcasters by an elected conservative. Cruz also chairs the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which has broad authority over the F

“Going down this road, there will come a time when a Democrat wins again – wins the White House … they will silence us. They will use this power, and they will use it ruthlessly. And that is dangerous,” Cruz said.

Asked later by reporters on Capitol Hill if the Commerce Committee will hold hearings into the matter or investigate Carr if he continues in the same vein, Cruz left the door open to the possibility.

“There’s no doubt the Commerce Committee has oversight, authority and responsibility over the FCC, and when the Democrats had the majority, they did not engage in oversight … We will do our job and engage in oversight.”

President Donald Trump has also vaguely threatened to pull networks’ licenses if they air overwhelmingly negative coverage of him, though Cruz did not rebut the president’s remarks directly on the podcast.

Trump offered praise for Carr when pressed on the scathing remarks from the Texas Republican. “I think Brendan Carr is a great American patriot. So I disagree with Ted Cruz on that,” he said.

The president also continued to lament what he described as “dishonesty” from network broadcasts that are critical of him.

Cruz played recent remarks Carr made on far-right podcaster Benny Johnson’s podcast, in which the FCC chairman threatened to take action against broadcasters who don’t “find ways to change conduct” the government considers disagreeable.

“I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or you know, there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” ABC pulled Kimmel’s show off the air indefinitely the day after Carr made those comments.

Responding to Carr’s comments, Cruz said: “No, no, no, no, no.”

“Look, look, I like Brendan Carr,” the senator said. “He’s a good guy. He’s the chairman of the FCC. I work closely with him. But what he said there is dangerous as hell.”

“He says, ‘We can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way.’ And I got to say, that’s right out of ‘Goodfellas.’ That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, ‘nice bar you have here. It’d be a shame if something happened to it.’”

Cruz later added: “I think it is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying, ‘We’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off air if we don’t like what you’re saying.’”

“And it might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel,” the senator said. “But when it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it.”

CNN’s Morgan Rimmer and Betsy Klein contributed to this report.

This story has been updated with additional details.

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com

Sad,Sad,Sad!


The past 10 years has provided a poor path to the United States we would all like to live in. The multiple wars where the “leaders” have all wanted to show their strength by defeating “enemies “in other countries. These actions have all been expensive in human life and money. Now we have a literal moron who has done nothing in his life other than swindle and steal his way to riches on the backs of anyone who gets in his way. Unfortunately, the national climate has allowed this ascension to the top job in the country with almost unchecked power.

The Legislature is so obsessed in having the ability to make the “rules”, they have forgotten what their jobs entail. The “stump” rhetoric is forgotten once the office is gained and too often the party line takes over for better or worse. Looking at some of the changes in the country from school curriculums to national themes, one should appreciate the gravity of an informed* voter base. There have been assassination attempts and successes that highlight the effect of the far sided opinions of our politics. The Post WWII national attitude of victory over tyrants has stagnated in a “them vs Us” aura that taints all of the progress made since the 1950’s .

It is well past time to start thinking in a normal manner where everyone can have their opinion with fear of retribution. It is the responsibility of each of us to sort the facts from the “crap” by broadening our intake of information. There is no” one size fits all” in information but like the everchanging view inside a kaleidoscope we must adapt and accept the information as it appears but with a dose of common sense.

Trump has bought $100 million in bonds since taking office. His portfolio is poised to get a boost if the Fed cuts rates.


By William Edwards

Aug 26, 2025, 4:45 AM CT

New disclosures show that President Trump has bought roughly $100 million of bonds since starting his term.

These purchases could gain from Fed rate cuts, benefiting Trump’s portfolio value.

The president has been pressuring the Fed for months to lower interest rates.

While President Donald Trump has grabbed headlines for his meme-stock holdings and forays into crypto, he’s also been steadily amassing a large stake in good, old-fashioned bonds.

This is according to a US Office of Government Ethics filing from August 19, which showed that Trump has made more than $100 million in bond purchases since starting his second term. The purchases span state, municipal, and corporate bonds with a wide range of maturity dates and yields.

While administration officials have said the transactions are managed completely independent of Trump, it’s still relatively unprecedented for an active president to be making these types of moves at all. He’s the first commander-in-chief in more than 50 years to not at least have personal holdings put into a blind trust while in office.

Given that bond prices normally rise when yields fall, any decline in the latter would increase the overall value of the president’s portfolio. Those yields are likely to decline if the Federal Reserve cuts rates — something Trump has not-so-subtly been imploring it to do for months.

A few caveats: The purchases make up a small portion of Trump’s net worth, which Forbes estimates at around $6 billion. It’s also unclear how Trump’s bond-purchase activity compares to previous periods when he wasn’t in office.

Overall, it’s difficult to know the exact degree to which Trump would benefit from reductions in the fed funds rate. The benchmark rate impacts short-duration yields the most, while factors like inflation impact longer-duration bonds more. Price action on long-duration bonds specifically in response to rate cuts can also be hard to measure because long-term rates can move in advance of cuts.

Trump has called for the central bank to slash rates by 300 basis points, to the 1.25%-to-1.5% range. He has repeatedly pressured Fed Chair Jerome Powell to cut rates. But Powell has run his own race and stuck to the Fed’s internal calculus, even going as far as to say the potentially inflationary effect of Trump’s tariffs was part of the FOMC’s decision to keep rates unchanged at recent meetings.

Trump’s bonds — and the bond market overall — may not have much longer to wait for another rate cut. Investors are currently pricing in an 84% chance of a 25-basis-point reduction at the September Fed meeting, following a weak July jobs report that saw large downward revisions.

For his part, Powell appeared to open the door to a September rate cut during remarks at last week’s Jackson Hole Symposium. Upon the release of his prepared statement, stocks soared instantly, while government bond yields tumbled.

Trumplestilskin:Dollymop!


I am hoping the many people who reelected the current oval office resident are paying attention since they are most responsible for the extreme changes in our Democracy! The notion that he would make America Great Again is more like making America “Grate”. since he was played by the Russian strongman that he so wanted to emulate, the silence is deafening except for his sycophantic mouthpieces who in many cases shoot from the lip. If we are to survive this abominable administration, we must show up during the next election and get some real representatives who are brave enough to hold the line against his eccentricities.

There is no greater power than the power of a well-informed voter. Party is not a factor in these elections as all politicians lie! We can only determine who to elect by what they do. e.g. Ted Cruz who leaves town when crucial votes are needed- definitive no reelection!

The current atmosphere is reminiscent of the reconstruction era and the resulting mismanagement afterwards. Gold paint does not impart value to the object painted it just covers the dirt! Lest we forget the events of 1939 when one man convinced his countrymen that they were the superior race and we should govern all others. This brought about a massive buildup of war material which enriched the lives of the then downtrodden German populace while the “leader” plotted war plans on his neighbors. During that time a Russian dictator was busily committing pogroms and other crimes on their populace, these two menaces joined forces and began their “conquest” of the rest of Europe but notably the Russians did not actively join the “war” against Europe immediately but eagerly participated (against Germany) when the German warlord attacked his country.

All of this to show that we have a weak leader whose rhetoric is stronger (albeit) irrational than his abilities to deliver while having his every random thought published and often acted upon by his Cadre of staffers lead by the modern version of Joseph Goebbels (aka) Stephen Miller. It is within our power (voters) to make a correction in the upcoming election.

They’re worried’: Texas Republicans ‘They’re worried’: Texas Republicans admit they may have screwed up redistricting plan.


Tom Boggioni-Raw Story

State Representative Matt Morgan (R-TX) holds a map of the new proposed congressional districts in Texas, during a legislative session as Democratic lawmakers, who left the state to deny Republicans the opportunity to redraw the state’s 38 congressional districts, begin returning to the Texas State Capitol in Austin, Texas, U.S. August 20, 2025. REUTERS/Sergio Flores

Less than 24 hours after Texas Republicans shoved the redistricting plan across the finish line over Democratic objections, some GOP lawmakers are having a bit of buyer’s remorse that they may have gained some seats in U.S. House of Representatives but put others in play.

According to conservative journalist David Drucker, the plan was to give Republicans a shot at picking up an expected five House seats in the 2026 midterms, but the map, as now written, may put some other districts in play.

During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” the Dispatch journalist was prompted by host Joe Scarborough with, “One of the main consequences I see from gerrymandering is you get the people in the safe seats, and I won’t even mention their names, but you get people in the safest seats, they say the most, especially in the Republican side, they say the most outrageous things, and they raise a ton of money. The more insulting, the more outrageous, the more vulgar, the crazier, the more insane they sound, because they’re safe in their district, the more money they raise nationwide, the more their profile goes up.”

According to Drucker, “Well, we’ve seen that over the past decade and a half, at least, because all the action, Joe is in the primaries, right? I mean, how often are we discussing a topic here? And you guys ask me, what do Republicans think, and my answer is usually they don’t want to rock the boat ahead of primary season, because the only place they’re going to have a competitive race is in a Republican primary.” After discussing the dilemma Democrats are facing, he added,” Look what’s happening now with the gerrymandering of seats … on the one hand, we could, in the short term have some more competitive districts, right? If you look at that Texas map, some is dark red, a lot of it is shaded light red. And that means if this atmosphere goes against the president and his party next year, I’ve had Republicans in Texas tell me they’re worried [that] instead of gaining five seats, you can have ten competitive seats, and you could end up losing seats

Trump bought more than $100 million in bonds since January, filings show


NBC News

Steve Kopack

1.7k

President Donald Trump has purchased at least $103 million worth of corporate and municipal bonds since he took office in January, according to new filings from the Office of Government Ethics.

The documents, released late Tuesday, show that Trump began the bond-buying spree one day after he was sworn in on Jan. 20 and that it includes debt sold by companies, local governments and entities that could be directly affected by his sweeping agenda. All told, Trump made about 690 purchases from Jan. 21 through Aug. 1.

The active trading by a president of the United States is unprecedented, and it puts Trump in a direct position to benefit — or lose out — if any of the entities that own the bonds he has purchased succeed or fail. It’s also another example of Trump’s pursuing business endeavors and transactions to increase his wealth in office.

“Ultimately, the president is not involved in these transactions,” a senior administration official told NBC News. “They’re managed completely independently of him.”

On Jan. 21, Trump purchased a bond belonging to the New York Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. A week later, he purchased another handful of bonds over consecutive days. Those bonds belong to various municipal hospital facilities, airports, regional development funds and school districts from Florida to Alaska.

The filings do not provide exact purchase amounts but instead show a broad dollar range for each transaction. The filings did not show any sales by Trump.

Trump’s buying continued at a steady clip for months, including bonds from megabanks Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Citigroup worth at least $100,000 apiece.

Trump’s direct ownership of bonds from three of the country’s banking giants also comes as he considers an eventual replacement of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and weeks after he nominated one of his top aides, Stephen Miran, to a seat on the Fed’s board. The Fed can directly affect a bank’s profit by lowering or raising interest rates, along with myriad regulatory actions. As a Fed governor, Miran would have a direct say in many of those actions.

Trump purchases also included at least $500,000 of bonds apiece from chipmaker Qualcomm, mobile provider T-Mobile USA, Home Depot and UnitedHealth Group, the country’s largest private health insurance company.

The filings also show that Trump bought at least $250,001 of Meta’s bonds. CEO Mark Zuckerberg attended Trump’s inauguration and donated $1 million to the event.

Likewise, Trump’s ownership in hundreds of municipal bonds puts him in line to benefit when those municipal entities pay back the debt, and it comes when the administration has been tightly controlling the distribution of funds from the federal government to local and regional governments.

Trump’s net worth is around $5.5 billion, according to the Forbes Billionaires List, up a staggering $3.2 billion since last year.

Typically, presidents divest their financial assets before or shortly after they enter office, but Trump has rejected that precedent and retained most of his empire since his first term.

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

The Mystery of the Strong Economy Has Finally Been Solved


The Atlantic

Story by Rogé Karma • 14h • 5 min read

The Trump economy doesn’t look so hot after all. This morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released revised data showing that, over the past three months, the U.S. labor market experienced its worst quarter since 2010, other than during the first year of the coronavirus pandemic. The timing was awkward. Hours earlier, President Donald Trump had announced a huge new slate of tariffs, set to take effect next week. He’d been emboldened by the fact that the economy had remained strong until now despite economists’ warnings—a fact that turned out not to be a fact at all.

After Trump announced his first sweeping round of “Liberation Day” tariffs, in April, the country appeared to be on the verge of economic catastrophe. The stock market plunged, the bond market nearly melted down, expectations of future inflation skyrocketed, and experts predicted a recession.

But the crisis never came. Trump walked back or delayed his most extreme threats, and those that he kept didn’t seem to inflict much economic damage. Month after month, economists predicted that evidence of the negative impact of tariffs in the economic data was just around the corner. Instead, according to the available numbers, inflation remained stable, job growth remained strong, and the stock market set new records.

The Trump administration took the opportunity to run a victory lap. “Lots of folks predicted that it would end the world; there would be some sort of disastrous outcome,” Stephen Miran, the chair of Trump’s council of economic advisers, said of Trump’s tariffs in an interview with ABC News early last month. “And once again, tariff revenue is pouring in. There’s no sign of any economically significant inflation whatsoever, and job creation remains healthy.” A July 9 White House press release declared, “President Trump was right (again),” touting strong jobs numbers and mild inflation. “President Trump is overseeing another economic boom,” it concluded.

The seemingly strong data spurred soul-searching among journalists and economists. “The Economy Seems Healthy. Were the Warnings About Tariffs Overblown?” read a representative New York Times headline. Commentators scrambled to explain how the experts could have gotten things so wrong. Maybe it was because companies had stocked up on imported goods before the tariffs had come into effect; maybe the economy was simply so strong that it was impervious to Trump’s machinations; maybe economists were suffering from “tariff derangement syndrome.” Either way, the possibility that Trump had been right, and the economists wrong, had to be taken seriously.

The sky’s refusal to fall likely influenced the Trump administration’s decision to press ahead with more tariffs. In recent months, Trump has imposed 25 percent tariffs on car parts and 50 percent tariffs on copper, steel, and aluminum. He has threatened 200 percent tariffs on pharmaceuticals. Over the past week, Trump announced trade deals under which the European Union, Japan, and South Korea agreed to accept a 15 percent tariff on exports to the United States. Finally, this morning, he announced a sweeping set of new tariffs, a sort of Liberation Day redux, including a 39 percent levy on Switzerland, 25 percent on India, and 20 percent on Vietnam. These are scheduled to take effect on August 7 unless those countries can negotiate a deal.

Then came the new economic data. This morning, the BLS released its monthly jobs report, showing that the economy added just 73,000 new jobs last month—well below the 104,000 that forecasters had expected—and that unemployment rose slightly, to 4.2 percent. More important, the new report showed that jobs numbers for the previous two months had been revised down considerably after the agency received a more complete set of responses from the businesses it surveys monthly. What had been reported as a strong two-month gain of 291,000 jobs was revised down to a paltry 33,000. What had once looked like a massive jobs boom ended up being a historically weak quarter of growth. 

Even that might be too rosy a picture. All the net gains of the past three months came from a single sector, health care, without which the labor market would have lost nearly 100,000 jobs. That’s concerning because health care is one of the few sectors that is mostly insulated from broader economic conditions: People always need it, even during bad times. (The manufacturing sector, which tariffs are supposed to be boosting, has shed jobs for three straight months.) Moreover, the new numbers followed an inflation report released by the Commerce Department yesterday that found that the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of price growth had picked up in June and remained well above the central bank’s 2 percent target. (The prior month’s inflation report was also revised upward to show a slight increase in May.) Economic growth and consumer spending also turned out to have fallen considerably compared with the first half of 2024. Taken together, these economic reports are consistent with the stagflationary environment that economists were predicting a few months ago: mediocre growth, a weakening labor market, and rising prices.

The striking thing about these trends is how heavily they diverge from how the economy was projected to perform before Trump took office. As the economist Jason Furman recently pointed out, the actual economic growth rate in the first six months of 2025 was barely more than half what the Bureau of Economic Analysis had projected in November 2024, while core inflation came in at about a third higher than projections.

The worst might be yet to come. Many companies did in fact stock up on imported goods before the tariffs kicked in; others have been eating the cost of tariffs to avoid raising prices in the hopes that the duties would soon go away. Now that tariffs seem to be here to stay, more and more companies will likely be forced to either raise prices or slash their costs—including labor costs. A return to the 1970s-style combination of rising inflation and unemployment is looking a lot more likely.

The Trump administration has found itself caught between deflecting blame for the weak economic numbers and denying the numbers’ validity. In an interview with CNN this morning, Miran admitted that the new jobs report “isn’t ideal” but went on to attribute it to various “anomalous factors,” including data quirks and reduced immigration. (Someone should ask Miran why immigration is down.) And this afternoon, Trump posted a rant on Truth Social accusing the BLS commissioner of cooking the books to make him look bad. “I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,” he wrote. “She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.” He then went on to argue, not for the first time, that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell should be fired for hamstringing the economy with high interest rates. These defenses are, of course, mutually exclusive: If the bad numbers are fake, why should Trump be mad at Powell?

In these confused denials, one detects a shade of desperation on Trump’s part. Of course, everything could end up being fine. Maybe economists will be wrong, and the economy will rebound with newfound strength in the second half of the year. But that’s looking like a far worse bet than it did just 24 hours ago.