It is a popular sentiment here that if he wanted to McConnell couldve convicted Trump and barred him from future office. I wanted to look into a what if scenario where he aggressively pursued conviction . I am by no means a DC insider if there is something wrong please correct me. Despite Trump’s attempt to end the American experiment by overturning the will of the American people McConnell allowed him to remain a force in republican politics. Saying all he did was not vote for the bill is underselling his complicity in protecting and abiding Trump's escape from justice.  Mitch McConnell did not put the senate in session  since the first order of business would have been the second trail of Trump. It's also worth noting that Mitch McConnell was only senate leader for this vital period because the Georgia senators of Ossoff and Warnock were not sworn in on January 3rd with the rest of the 117th congress but were only sworn in on January 20th.  His refusal to immediately start the senate trial did two things: first it let time pass, as the moment passed political polarization can step in and battle lines can form. As the horrors and shock of the insurrection grow farther political games start to creep in. At the moment a vote to convict might have been justified with their constituents as images and the rare rebukes of trump by conservative media are still fresh but now right wing media, free over whatever ills of trump they had, has poisoned the idea of conviction. The second is that it provides a legal justification for senators to hide behind or to legitimately be concerned with. The legal justification is that Trump is no longer in office and the senate has no jurisdiction over a private citizen.

In this scenario im giving GOP senators some benefit of the doubt in saying that jurisdiction concerns are legitimate so they impeach him prior to him leaving office so those concern are eased.

New Tally with justifications for senators changing votes

Our new starting point:

\-55 ,(remember GA has two lame duck senators)

\-57 ,This quickly goes back to the original number as McConnell and his protege John Thune change their vote. It's worth noting that among the non-conviction voter these two had the most clear anti trump statements.

\- 63, These senators listed the fact Trump was a private citizen as the main reason why they didn't impeach and were also very critical of him often saying he did do impeachable offenses (1). If McConnell is whipping votes he goes perfect with these senators since they are very sympathetic to his cause and dont need persuading. I put a rating on how likely I think they would vote to impeach if pressed. This is from looking at their statements post j6 and how close they are with senate leadership.

	John Boozman 7/10

	Shelly Moore Capito 9/10

	John Hoeven 9/10

	Jerry Moran 9/10

Rob Portman 10/10

Dan Sullivan 9/10

Now we reach an impasse, we need four more votes and there are tons of avenues towards these votes none of them easy. Avenues can be combined with others to effectively whip votes. I think it should be noted that a lot of these guys probably thought Trump was a political loser at the time and distancing themselves from him, although hurtful to them personally ,was good for the national brand.  They certainly don't want to be on the losing side of this vote. Voting against McConnell here would mean you are gonna be stripped of committee assignments in favor of those who did vote in favor. McConnell is putting his political life on the line for this vote and crossing him would incur his full wrath. With only four votes to go do you really wanna be the last onboard.

* Path 1 (2 votes) .Pressure the lame ducks.  Kemp and McConnell both put pressure on the now lame ducks senators Leoffler and Perdue  to vote for conviction. Positions in a future Kemp admin can be floated or positions in the RNC. Kemp solidifies his position as the post Trump standard bearer with Trump out of the way. Might be a little risky for Kemp if it leaks he helped but I think the MAGA base will mostly focus on McConnell. As for Perdue and Loeffler they can put out a statement that will earn them infinite praise from the press and any media job they want.           “We personally oppose the impeachment/conviction of president Trump, however the people of Georgia have spoken they have picked two senators that have made clear to us they would convict Trump if in office. The people of Georgia elected Osoff and Warnock to be their representatives and in this crucial time we feel, no matter our personal feelings, we should  vote as they would so that the people of Georgia can say their current representatives speak for them. “( for the record I don't actually believe they would think that it would be political cover for why they voted that way).

* Path 2  (8 votes). Appeal to leadership/old friends. McConnell appeals to senate leadership with a mix of sticks and carrots. He has personal relationships with a lot of these people so I think getting them to vote with them on this isnt out of the realm of possibility. For the more craven (Rick Scott) being on the winning side matters more than anything so if he sees that two or three of his colleagues have already decided to convict they would also vote to convict. \* signifies they have been in leadership together 9 years or more.
   * Todd Young 7/10
   * Joni Ernst 6/10
   * John Barrasso 7/10 \*
   * Mike Lee 6/10
   * Rick Scott 5/10
   * Roy Blunt 7/10 \*
   * Mike Crapo 5/10 (long time whip)
   * Richard Shelby 6/10 (retiring also abstained from vote creating j6 committee)

* Path 3. The persuadables/profiles in courage. People that are a mix of political opportunists looking to get Trump out of the way, people that can be bribed or manipulated, those who want to be on the winning team, and those who despite bending over to lick the boot of trump want to see him gone if it can cost them nothing personally.
   * Thom Tillis
   * Marco Rubio
   * Tim Scott
   * Jim Inhofe
   * James Lankford
   * Jim Risch (actually had his office trashed by the rioters)
   * Tommy Tuberville
   * Lindsey Graham (the only one on the list who actively supported trump after the insurrection but if conviction was likely he would flip in a heartbeat)

Out of all these paths McConnel would've had to go ¼ which isn't that hard given the circumstances. I was also very conservative in how I tallied votes. I took a lot of senators at their word that they thought charges did not meet the standard to conviction even when they were critical of Trump.  Getting one vote would have made it easier to get another vote and so on. After you get the four votes needed for conviction i  think 70-75 votes would've been a possibility.  If you have leadership ambitions or want to move up at all in the senate voting against this is career suicide.  As for political retaliation this is a man who lost a seat in Alabama during his first term in office. The Mitch machine vs whatever unpaid heritage foundation rejects Trump scraps can find is hardly a battle. Without the RNC machine to back him I doubt MAGA candidates find the same success especially with their figurehead out of the picture.

Sources

1- [https://www.justsecurity.org/74725/in-their-own-words-the-43-republicans-explanations-of-their-votes-not-to-convict-trump-in-impeachment-trial/](https://www.justsecurity.org/74725/in-their-own-words-the-43-republicans-explanations-of-their-votes-not-to-convict-trump-in-impeachment-trial/)

2

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th\_United\_States\_Congress#Leadership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th_United_States_Congress#Leadership)

Exploring Mitch McConnell "what if" moment (his failure to convict trump after J6)

It is a popular sentiment here that if he wanted to McConnell couldve convicted Trump and barred him from future office. I wanted to look into a what if scenario where he aggressively pursued conviction . I am by no means a DC insider if there is something wrong please correct me. Despite Trump’s attempt to end the American experiment by overturning the will of the American people McConnell allowed him to remain a force in republican politics. Saying all he did was not vote for the bill is underselling his complicity in protecting and abiding Trump&#39;s escape from justice.  Mitch McConnell did not put the senate in session  since the first order of business would have been the second trail of Trump. It&#39;s also worth noting that Mitch McConnell was only senate leader for this vital period because the Georgia senators of Ossoff and Warnock were not sworn in on January 3rd with the rest of the 117th congress but were only sworn in on January 20th.  His refusal to immediately start the senate trial did two things: first it let time pass, as the moment passed political polarization can step in and battle lines can form. As the horrors and shock of the insurrection grow farther political games start to creep in. At the moment a vote to convict might have been justified with their constituents as images and the rare rebukes of trump by conservative media are still fresh but now right wing media, free over whatever ills of trump they had, has poisoned the idea of conviction. The second is that it provides a legal justification for senators to hide behind or to legitimately be concerned with. The legal justification is that Trump is no longer in office and the senate has no jurisdiction over a private citizen.

In this scenario im giving GOP senators some benefit of the doubt in saying that jurisdiction concerns are legitimate so they impeach him prior to him leaving office so those concern are eased.

New Tally with justifications for senators changing votes

Our new starting point:

-55 ,(remember GA has two lame duck senators)

-57 ,This quickly goes back to the original number as McConnell and his protege John Thune change their vote. It&#39;s worth noting that among the non-conviction voter these two had the most clear anti trump statements.

- 63, These senators listed the fact Trump was a private citizen as the main reason why they didn&#39;t impeach and were also very critical of him often saying he did do impeachable offenses (1). If McConnell is whipping votes he goes perfect with these senators since they are very sympathetic to his cause and dont need persuading. I put a rating on how likely I think they would vote to impeach if pressed. This is from looking at their statements post j6 and how close they are with senate leadership.

John Boozman 7/10

Shelly Moore Capito 9/10

John Hoeven 9/10

Jerry Moran 9/10

Rob Portman 10/10

Dan Sullivan 9/10

Now we reach an impasse, we need four more votes and there are tons of avenues towards these votes none of them easy. Avenues can be combined with others to effectively whip votes. I think it should be noted that a lot of these guys probably thought Trump was a political loser at the time and distancing themselves from him, although hurtful to them personally ,was good for the national brand.  They certainly don&#39;t want to be on the losing side of this vote. Voting against McConnell here would mean you are gonna be stripped of committee assignments in favor of those who did vote in favor. McConnell is putting his political life on the line for this vote and crossing him would incur his full wrath. With only four votes to go do you really wanna be the last onboard.

Path 1 (2 votes) .Pressure the lame ducks.  Kemp and McConnell both put pressure on the now lame ducks senators Leoffler and Perdue  to vote for conviction. Positions in a future Kemp admin can be floated or positions in the RNC. Kemp solidifies his position as the post Trump standard bearer with Trump out of the way. Might be a little risky for Kemp if it leaks he helped but I think the MAGA base will mostly focus on McConnell. As for Perdue and Loeffler they can put out a statement that will earn them infinite praise from the press and any media job they want.           “We personally oppose the impeachment/conviction of president Trump, however the people of Georgia have spoken they have picked two senators that have made clear to us they would convict Trump if in office. The people of Georgia elected Osoff and Warnock to be their representatives and in this crucial time we feel, no matter our personal feelings, we should  vote as they would so that the people of Georgia can say their current representatives speak for them. “( for the record I don&#39;t actually believe they would think that it would be political cover for why they voted that way).

Path 2  (8 votes). Appeal to leadership/old friends. McConnell appeals to senate leadership with a mix of sticks and carrots. He has personal relationships with a lot of these people so I think getting them to vote with them on this isnt out of the realm of possibility. For the more craven (Rick Scott) being on the winning side matters more than anything so if he sees that two or three of his colleagues have already decided to convict they would also vote to convict. * signifies they have been in leadership together 9 years or more.

Todd Young 7/10

Joni Ernst 6/10

John Barrasso 7/10 *

Mike Lee 6/10

Rick Scott 5/10

Roy Blunt 7/10 *

Mike Crapo 5/10 (long time whip)

Richard Shelby 6/10 (retiring also abstained from vote creating j6 committee)

Path 3. The persuadables/profiles in courage. People that are a mix of political opportunists looking to get Trump out of the way, people that can be bribed or manipulated, those who want to be on the winning team, and those who despite bending over to lick the boot of trump want to see him gone if it can cost them nothing personally.

Thom Tillis

Marco Rubio

Tim Scott

Jim Inhofe

James Lankford

Jim Risch (actually had his office trashed by the rioters)

Tommy Tuberville

Lindsey Graham (the only one on the list who actively supported trump after the insurrection but if conviction was likely he would flip in a heartbeat)

Out of all these paths McConnel would&#39;ve had to go ¼ which isn&#39;t that hard given the circumstances. I was also very conservative in how I tallied votes. I took a lot of senators at their word that they thought charges did not meet the standard to conviction even when they were critical of Trump.  Getting one vote would have made it easier to get another vote and so on. After you get the four votes needed for conviction i  think 70-75 votes would&#39;ve been a possibility.  If you have leadership ambitions or want to move up at all in the senate voting against this is career suicide.  As for political retaliation this is a man who lost a seat in Alabama during his first term in office. The Mitch machine vs whatever unpaid heritage foundation rejects Trump scraps can find is hardly a battle. Without the RNC machine to back him I doubt MAGA candidates find the same success especially with their figurehead out of the picture.

Sources

1- https://www.justsecurity.org/74725/in-their-own-words-the-43-republicans-explanations-of-their-votes-not-to-convict-trump-in-impeachment-trial/

2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/117th_United_States_Congress#Leadership


Dear Media, Don't Call Trump "Chaotic" or "Transactional." We're not Living in Trump 1.0 Anymore (Francis Fukuyama)

:francis_fukuyama: End History I Am No Longer Asking


National Nuclear Security Administration officials on Friday attempted to notify some employees who had been let go the day before that they are now due to be reinstated — but they struggled to find them because they didn't have their new contact information.

In an email sent to employees at NNSA and obtained by NBC News, officials wrote, “The termination letters for some NNSA probationary employees are being rescinded, but we do not have a good way to get in touch with those personnel.”

The individuals the letter refers to had been fired on Thursday and lost access to their federal government email accounts. NNSA, which is within the Department of Energy and oversees the nation's nuclear stockpile, cannot reach these employees directly and is now asking recipients of the email, “Please work with your supervisors to send this information (once you get it) to people’s personal contact emails.”

Trump administration wants to un-fire some nuclear safety workers but can’t figure out how to reach them

National Nuclear Security Administration officials on Friday attempted to notify some employees who had been let go the day before that they are now due to be reinstated — but they struggled to find them because they didn&#39;t have their new contact information.

In an email sent to employees at NNSA and obtained by NBC News, officials wrote, “The termination letters for some NNSA probationary employees are being rescinded, but we do not have a good way to get in touch with those personnel.”

The individuals the letter refers to had been fired on Thursday and lost access to their federal government email accounts. NNSA, which is within the Department of Energy and oversees the nation&#39;s nuclear stockpile, cannot reach these employees directly and is now asking recipients of the email, “Please work with your supervisors to send this information (once you get it) to people’s personal contact emails.”


Senator Rand Paul Reintroduces National Right to Work Act


Trump creates council for 'energy dominance,' boosts natural gas exports and offshore drilling

:asean: Association of Southeast Asian Nations


China rights monitors suspend work, lay off staff after U.S. aid freeze


Russian spokesman slanders Italian President and Prime Minister: Insulting the entire nation


Who will defend Europe?


A Vermont border agent’s death was the latest violence linked to the cultlike Zizian group


Europe will not take part in US-Russia talks with Ukraine, Trump envoy says


"Ok, Boomer"


Uganda military chief threatens to attack eastern Congo town of Bunia


How to torch 220 billion euros


Give me back jean claude, i miss dictators being bitch slapped


Despite U.S. insistence, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy refused to sign a draft agreement to hand over half of his country’s rare earth minerals to American companies in exchange for military support, according to two people familiar with the negotiations.

“The deal was not signed yet. Sides are discussing the details,” said a Ukrainian official familiar with the negotiations who was granted anonymity to discuss ongoing talks. “Lawyers are working on it. In their draft, the U.S. has described a very complicated way how they want to get 50 percent [of Ukraine’s rare earths].”

The official added that the U.S. scheme “might not work” as it could fall afoul of  Ukrainian law.

“So the Ukrainian side passed their draft version to [the U.S. side]. And they are working on it. While Ukrainians are working on American proposals,” the official said.

A person familiar with negotiations told POLITICO: “The Americans were not happy with the Ukrainian proposals.”

Another problem with the U.S. draft is that it reportedly has no real security guarantees for Ukraine except for the possible deployment of U.S. troops to protect the minerals if there’s a deal with Russia to end the war.

Ukraine balks at signing Trump deal to hand over its mineral wealth


Opinion | Their Target Is ‘the Very Core of Modern American Liberalism’


Javier Milei Backtracks on $4.4B Memecoin After 'Insiders' Pocket $87M


Zelensky warns the days of America’s guaranteed support for Europe are over


Zelenskyy: ‘The time has come’ for a European army


Wisconsin voters will return to the polls this spring for the first major election in a battleground state since the 2024 presidential race.

The April 1 contest for a seat on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court — which will determine the bench’s ideological balance for the second time in two years — has already drawn millions of dollars from big names on both sides of the political aisle, with the future of a bevy of hot-button issues related to abortion rights, unions and congressional maps at stake.

The seat is open after liberal Justice Ann Walsh Bradley announced last year she would not fun for a fourth 10-year term. The general election campaign quickly got underway after both sides quickly lined up behind a candidate and the primary was canceled.

The liberal candidate in the race is Susan Crawford, a state judge in Madison who worked earlier in her career in the administration of former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. She’ll face off against conservative candidate Brad Schimel, a state judge in Waukesha County who previously served as the state’s Republican attorney general.

For Crawford and Wisconsin Democrats, it’s most prominently reproductive rights.Schimel and Republicans, meanwhile, have accused Crawford of not being tough on criminals as a judge and have been digging in specifically on a handful of sexual assault cases she oversaw or was involved with. Crawford has also attacked Schimel in ads that focus on how the state’s Department of Justice allegedly mishandled the maintenance of thousands of rape kits under his watch as attorney general. Schimel has said there were problems with the backlogged tests, that they predated his tenure and that he helped fix existing problems in the unit that handles the kits.

Control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is up for grabs — again — in first big 2025 battleground race


Nepal's social media bill raises free speech concerns


UK is bigoted and Brexit is bad: The Government campaign to scare away migrants:  An expensive social media campaign funded by British taxpayers tells Albanian migrants why they shouldn't travel illegally to the UK


Labour’s Reformation - Under threat from the populist right, Keir Starmer is forging a hard new politics


[Translation] Turkish community: AfD specifically targets immigrants - and is well received


JD Vance breaks taboo by meeting with leader of Germany’s far-right party


How DOGE cutbacks could create a major backlash


https://www.yimbylaw.org/press/la-rezoning-lawsuit

GO GO YIMBY LAW!

YIMBY LAW - where have you been all my life?!


U.S. Army bars transgender people from enlisting, ends gender-affirming care services


The [discussion thread](https://neoliber.al/dt) is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^[](https://i.imgur.com/cu8BHQU.png)

## Links

[Ping Groups](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Ping History](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html) | [Mastodon](https://mastodo.neoliber.al/) | [CNL Chapters](https://cnliberalism.org/our-chapters) | [CNL Event Calendar](https://cnliberalism.org/events)

## New Groups

* [PALEO](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%PALEO&message=subscribe%20PALEO): Paleontology

## Upcoming Events

* Feb 18: [NYC New Liberals February Social](https://cnliberalism.org/events/nyc-new-liberals-february-social)
* Feb 19: [Atlanta New Liberals February Social](https://cnliberalism.org/events/atlanta-new-liberals-february-social)
* Feb 19: [Bay Area New Liberals February Happy Hour](https://cnliberalism.org/events/bay-area-new-liberals-february-happy-hour)
* Feb 19: [Twin Cities New Liberals February Meetup](https://cnliberalism.org/events/twin-cities-new-liberals-february-meetup)
* Feb 20: [RDU New Liberals February Social ](https://cnliberalism.org/events/rdu-new-liberals-february-social)

Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn&#39;t merit its own submission. If you&#39;ve got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

New Groups

PALEO: Paleontology

Upcoming Events

Feb 18: NYC New Liberals February Social

Feb 19: Atlanta New Liberals February Social

Feb 19: Bay Area New Liberals February Happy Hour

Feb 19: Twin Cities New Liberals February Meetup

Feb 20: RDU New Liberals February Social


“Styling, build quality and polish” were “frankly lacklustre”. The review in Car and Driver, a respected motoring publication, of a vehicle made by BYD on display at the Detroit Motor Show in 2009 was hardly encouraging for a car that its Chinese manufacturer hoped to start exporting to America in a few years.

Since then the global automotive industry has been overhauled. China has taken a decisive lead as the world’s biggest manufacturer of cars. Despite its unpromising start, BYD has surpassed Tesla as the world’s largest maker of fully electric vehicles (EVs) by volume (and is far ahead when plug-in hybrids are included). The company has assisted in wresting China’s car market from once-dominant foreign competitors. At the same time, it and other Chinese firms such as Chery, Geely and SAIC have turned their country into the world’s top exporter of vehicles, speeding ahead of Germany and Japan.

China’s carmakers now aspire to overthrow Volkswagen and Toyota at the pinnacle of the global car industry, says Pedro Pacheco of Gartner, a consultancy. Further expanding exports is central to that. The number of cars shipped abroad from China reached 4.7m last year, triple the amount three years earlier, according to Citigroup (around a third of these came from multinational brands with factories in the country). The surge is set to continue—in 2030 the bank reckons sales abroad will hit 7.3m.

That has led to much consternation among incumbent carmakers, with particular attention paid to the growing number of Chinese EVs on European roads. Yet the bulk of China’s car exports—nearly three-quarters last year—are powered by internal-combustion engines (ICEs). And most are aimed neither at western Europe nor America, but at the rest of the world.

Car-carrying vessels are departing China’s ports in ever greater numbers in part because the domestic market, where 23m passenger vehicles were sold last year, is neither as fast-growing nor as profitable as in the past. Chinese consumers once opted mostly for foreign brands, but these days domestic carmakers account for around three-fifths of sales in the country. As Harald Hendrikse of Citigroup notes, at home “the Chinese have won”.

Victory has come at a price, however. Creating a homegrown ev industry using subsidies and other government inducements has resulted in severe overcapacity. Chinese factories could perhaps turn out nearly 45m cars a year, equivalent to around half of all global sales, yet they operate at only 60% of that capacity, according to Bernstein, a broker. Oversupply has led to a vicious price war. Seeking an alternative outlet, Chinese carmakers have turned abroad. BYD, Geely and Great Wall have said that margins are five to ten percentage points higher on sales overseas.

As the incentive to export strengthens, however, the opportunities to do so are diminishing. Last year the EU imposed tariffs on Chinese-made evs to combat what it regards as unfair subsidies. Chinese brands’ share of ev sales in Europe grew from around 4% in 2021 to 10% in 2024, but may now climb to only 11% by 2030, according to Schmidt Automotive Research, a consultancy. If that door is slightly ajar, others are firmly shut. Tariffs of 100% imposed during Joe Biden’s presidency in effect bar Chinese evs from America (a further levy of 10% on Chinese goods recently imposed by Donald Trump will not have much additional impact). Fierce loyalty to domestic brands in Japan and South Korea and rocky diplomatic relations with India have kept Chinese carmakers at bay in those countries.
Switching lanes

Undeterred, these firms have shifted their focus to countries in South-East Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and even Africa. Although each is relatively small, taken together they account for 20m sales or more. Most are fast-growing, unlike rich countries or China, and do not have a big domestic industry that would lobby for protection. Emissions and other regulations are also not as strict, notes Felipe Munoz of JATO, another consultancy.

Opportunism has played a role in this. A shortage of chips during the pandemic prompted Western carmakers to concentrate on their priciest and most profitable vehicles in their biggest markets, rather than cheaper models better suited to developing countries. That left a gap for China to fill. Western sanctions helped, too. The biggest importer of Chinese cars is Russia. When Western carmakers pulled out after its invasion of Ukraine, the share of Chinese brands surged, from 9% in 2021 to 61% in 2023, according to Rhodium Group, one more consultancy. Sales of ice vehicles made up most of these. Russia, which has a car industry of its own, is not thrilled. In 2024 it introduced a hefty “recycling fee” on imported cars, in essence a tariff, to stall China’s advance.

Chinese carmakers are powering ahead elsewhere. They now have 8% of the market in the Middle East and Africa, 6% in South America and 4% in South-East Asia, according to Bernstein, up from almost nothing a few years ago. The take-up rate of EVs in these countries is lower than in rich ones, and most of the cars Chinese firms sell are ICE models. But, having established themselves, their long-term aim is to electrify these markets, which legacy carmakers still regard as their ice fiefs.
Chart: The Economist

Already evs are picking up speed in some unlikely places. In Latin America they now make up 6% of total sales, having doubled in 2024, according to BloombergNEF, a research firm. In Brazil, the world’s sixth-largest car market, it is nearly 7%, with nine out of ten EVs coming from Chinese brands. In Mexico EVs have hit 8% and in Thailand some 15% (by comparison, in America the share is 8%). The surge is set to continue. Overall, EVs will account for more than three-quarters of Chinese car exports in 2030, up from about a quarter in 2023, according to Citi.

Chinese carmakers will not only ship from home. They want to establish footholds by building factories abroad, to sidestep tariffs, avoid shipping costs and keep close to customers. BYD is in the vanguard. It is making vehicles in Thailand and Uzbekistan, with plants in Brazil, Hungary, Indonesia, Turkey and perhaps Mexico to follow. Others including Chery, Changan, Great Wall and SAIC all have overseas factories in operation or under construction. Chinese firms are expected to manufacture 2.5m cars abroad by 2030, according to Citi, about half in Europe and the rest in the developing world.

Some planned overseas factories may not materialise. There are suggestions that China’s government will force firms to slow foreign investment to keep facilities at home busy, as well as to protect Chinese technology from prying eyes. Even so, Rhodium calculates that if China’s carmakers get to 80% of their planned production in South America by 2027 they could win up to 15% of the market with locally made vehicles alone.

China’s carmakers are transforming into global enterprises by stealing business from incumbents in places they had taken for granted. That means a growing headache for Japanese and South Korean firms in Asia and the Middle East, as well as Western carmakers such as VW, General Motors and Stellantis (whose largest shareholder, Exor, is a part-owner of The Economist’s parent company) in South America. If Chinese competition abroad causes legacy firms to concentrate on protected markets like America and Europe, competitive pressure will increase there, too.

Building brands, signing on dealers and setting up service networks in smaller markets, even if it starts with ICE cars, will embed Chinese firms in these places. Elsewhere, it will be hard to distract car buyers from the allure of Chinese vehicles indefinitely. AutoExpress, a British motoring magazine, praises the BYD Seal, an electric saloon launched in Europe in 2024, for its “handsome, aerodynamic body and big power”, calling it a “very serious car”. How times have changed.

Chinese cars are taking over the global south


The current administration, summarized


A Marine vet thought he found a ‘home’ working at the VA. Now he’s one of 1,000 fired.


American democracy is doomed


The Trump administration has suggested to Ukraine that the United States be granted 50% ownership of the country’s rare earth minerals, and signaled an openness to deploying American troops there to guard them if there’s a deal with Russia to end the war, according to four U.S. officials.

Rather than pay for the minerals, the ownership agreement would be a way for Ukraine to reimburse the U.S. for the billions of dollars in weapons and support its provided to Kyiv since the war began in February 2022, two of the officials said.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent presented the proposal for the U.S. to own half of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a draft contract he brought to their meeting on Wednesday in Kyiv, according to eight U.S. officials briefed on the meeting.

After that meeting, Bessent said the draft of a U.S.-Ukraine rare earth minerals agreement reflected the president’s goal, but he did not provide details of what the administration had proposed.

Zelenskyy declined to sign the document when Bessent presented it during their meeting, saying he needed to study it and consult others about it, the eight U.S. officials briefed on the meeting said.

Trump officials pitch Zelenskyy on U.S. owning 50% of Ukraine's rare earth minerals


Three immigrants who won a restraining order against the federal government to avoid transfer to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba were deported this week on direct flights to Venezuela, according to court documents published Friday.

The three men were deported Monday, the day after a federal judge approved a temporary order blocking a possible transfer to Guantanamo Bay.

Venezuelan immigrants are being flown on a daily basis from a military base at El Paso, Texas, to Guantanamo as part of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Lawyers for the deported men said they were the target of false accusations of gang affiliation by the U.S. government that may expose them to harm.

US deports immigrants to Venezuela after judge blocked transfer to Guantanamo Bay


After Abortion Bans, Infant Mortality and Births Increased, Research Finds


Republican lawmakers are grappling with an effective response to President Donald Trump’s seeming readiness to bend to Russia’s demands on Ukraine’s future. Their reactions — which range from outright alarm to careful soft-pedaling — signal the challenges GOP policymakers face as they try to make sense of the administration’s actions and justify them to European allies.

The varied messages follow a call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump on Wednesday about negotiating a deal on terms that sounded favorable to Moscow, and without looping Ukraine in until afterward. Trump also floated allowing Russia back into the G7 this week and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told NATO members that Kyiv would need to face concessions — including the loss of its pre-war borders and long-sought NATO membership.

Hegseth on Thursday dialed back his comments on the Ukraine war, emphasizing “everything is on the table.” But Trump reiterated that Ukraine joining NATO was not “practical” and it was “unlikely” the country would return to its pre-2014 borders.

Vice President JD Vance, meanwhile, struck a strident tone on Russia. The vice president said in an interview Thursday with The Wall Street Journal that the U.S. has a wide array of options if Putin refuses to negotiate in good faith, such as “economic tools of leverage” and “military tools of leverage.” But he did not mention Ukraine or Russia in a blistering speech in Munich denouncing European governments.

The break from the Trump administration’s line by Wicker — an ally who was instrumental in securing Hegseth’s Senate confirmation — underscores a long-running tension in the party. While Republicans and Democrats have backed arming Ukraine against Russia’s invasion, support has started to flag in the GOP ranks. Trump and Vance have opposed additional funding pushed by the Biden administration and campaigned on negotiating a swift end to the war.

The administration’s comments brought much stronger responses from across Europe. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Trump’s insistence that Ukraine won’t join NATO was “clumsy.” French President Emmanuel Macron called Trump’s leadership an “electroshock” and warned a “peace that is a capitulation” would be “bad news for everyone.” Democrats chided Trump and his team for suggesting the U.S. could potentially cut a deal without Kyiv at the table. Other GOP lawmakers came straight out in defense of Trump.

Republicans struggle with unified response to Trump's plan for Ukraine peace talks


Mark Norman: Canada's relationship with the U.S. can't be saved


On Thursday, as Republican hard-liners celebrated a concession they won from party leaders to force deeper spending cuts as part of the GOP’s sweeping policy push, centrists expressed deep alarm about the trajectory of the massive legislation that will include border security, energy, defense and tax provisions.

The emerging fault lines are many: GOP members in high-tax blue states are concerned that the plan doesn’t leave enough room to expand the state and local tax deduction. And Senate Republicans and some House hard-liners aren’t ready to give up on a competing two-bill plan.

Rep. David Valadao, who represents a heavily Democratic district in central California, is also among the Republicans from high-tax blue states who worried the latest budget plan doesn’t provide enough room to sufficiently expand the SALT deduction, with more than a dozen votes at stake.

It’s also far from certain how the House GOP plan will play in the Senate, which has a long history of heavily editing tax plans sent across the Rotunda. There’s roughly 40 provisions that expire at the end of this year, and Trump has a slew of tax cuts he wants on top of that, with lawmakers in both chambers prepared to do battle over their favorite perks.

House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), whose committee is tasked with shouldering more than half of the proposed spending cuts, has acknowledged that some changes to Medicaid might not be able to pass the House. That includes so-called per-capita caps, a major cost-saver that would convert the program from an open-ended entitlement to a population-based grant to states. But conservatives say the White House has been open to some Medicaid reforms, and House GOP leaders have been in close contact with administration officials.

GOP leaders’ decision to include a $4 trillion debt ceiling hike in the budget blueprint is adding a further complication. Lifting the federal borrowing limit is deeply controversial among Republicans, and several GOP members, including Reps. Tim Burchett of Tennessee and Thomas Massie of Kentucky, have never voted to do so.

Other ultraconservative members are finding reasons to be skeptical. Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, said he doubted a key economic assumption budget writers used to claim that their plan wouldn’t add to the national debt.

Sweeping safety-net cuts have GOP centrists questioning Johnson’s budget


Republican lawmakers are pushing back against sweeping cuts to the federal government launched by President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, as their downsizing crusade begins to hit GOP constituents.

A growing number of GOP lawmakers are trying to intervene with the Trump administration and are weighing legislation to circumvent the changes. But with the Department of Government Efficiency and the Office of Management and Budget moving at a rapid clip and flouting federal law to carve up the government, the lawmakers face monumental challenges in getting the White House to spare their constituents from the ax.

The fight illustrates how efforts by DOGE and OMB to slash the federal bureaucracy are poised to create conflicts with industries and interests that Republican lawmakers hold dear. The confrontation is also the latest test of Capitol Hill’s power in the second Trump era, and a new front for lawmakers who have a direct say over federal spending.

The White House is standing behind the cuts and urging Congress to codify them, raising doubts about the extent to which Republicans on the Hill can soften the blow. It’s an awkward position for GOP lawmakers who have otherwise voiced support for DOGE.

When it comes to government waste, Republican lawmakers are beginning to see things differently as constituents in red states speak out. Many are waiting to see if the courts strike down some of DOGE and OMB’s actions, according to a senior Republican Hill aide granted anonymity to discuss party dynamics.

Trump’s cuts hit red states, triggering GOP pushback


Trump officials fired nuclear staff not realizing they oversee the country’s weapons stockpile, sources say


What's happening with the anti-HIV program PEPFAR? It depends whom you ask


58% of Koreans support removing Yoon from office, survey finds


Trump says he would not mind if Nippon Steel took minority stake in U.S. Steel


Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is summoning his caucus for a rare Saturday conference call ahead of a potential reconciliation "vote-a-rama" next week.

Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) budget package includes some $175 billion in border security spending, presenting a potential political minefield for Democratic senators.

But Schumer also wants to look for opportunities to force Republicans to play defense by offering his own amendments to make them squirm.

Senators want to discuss where they should stick together in opposition to the GOP and when they can allow their members to break ranks, according to people familiar with the matter.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) might call Graham's budget package to the floor next week, which would lead to a "vote-a-rama" — in which senators can offer amendments for some 50 hours to score political points.

The budget process will allow Democrats to go on record defending policies that Trump and Republicans plan to cut.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Schumer have been strategizing on how to draw attention to the GOP's proposed tax cuts and their efforts to trim spending from entitlement programs like Medicaid.

Senate Democrats try to regroup ahead of GOP budget barrage

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is summoning his caucus for a rare Saturday conference call ahead of a potential reconciliation &quot;vote-a-rama&quot; next week.

Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham&#39;s (R-S.C.) budget package includes some $175 billion in border security spending, presenting a potential political minefield for Democratic senators.

But Schumer also wants to look for opportunities to force Republicans to play defense by offering his own amendments to make them squirm.

Senators want to discuss where they should stick together in opposition to the GOP and when they can allow their members to break ranks, according to people familiar with the matter.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) might call Graham&#39;s budget package to the floor next week, which would lead to a &quot;vote-a-rama&quot; — in which senators can offer amendments for some 50 hours to score political points.

The budget process will allow Democrats to go on record defending policies that Trump and Republicans plan to cut.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Schumer have been strategizing on how to draw attention to the GOP&#39;s proposed tax cuts and their efforts to trim spending from entitlement programs like Medicaid.


Quantitative analysis: US humanitarian interventions are utilized for the purpose of
preserving liberal norms and moral values rather than for pursuing national interests.


The Trump administration’s campaign to slash the federal civil service hit one of the crown jewels of global public health on Friday. Members of the Epidemic Intelligence Service, a legendary training program run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, were warned on Friday morning that they were about to be fired, two people with knowledge of the meeting told STAT.

The 135 members of the two-year program were informed that many would be hearing of their dismissals by late in the day. But by late Friday afternoon, none had yet received a notice of their firing, one of the sources said.

It is believed there will be a small number of exceptions: people who are in the Public Health Service and military officers who had been on the CDC staff before entering the program. Those two groups make up only a quarter of the current roster of EIS officers.

The EIS, as it is known, is the world’s premier training program for applied epidemiology. Many public health leaders at the CDC and elsewhere in the world are graduates of the EIS, which was established in 1951 by the CDC’s then-chief epidemiologist Alexander Langmuir, in part because of Cold War era concerns about the threat of germ warfare.

EIS officers make up the frontline in public health emergencies, both in the United States and abroad. When a difficult disease outbreak hits, when state health departments need assistance tracing the source of foodborne illnesses, EIS officers are dispatched. They were among the first responders when letters laced with anthrax were mailed to legislators and news outlets around the country in 2001. They were even portrayed on the big screen: In the 2011 Steven Soderbergh movie Contagion, about the start of a pandemic, Kate Winslet’s character was an EIS officer sent to investigate the unnerving new disease that an American businesswoman had unwittingly transported to Minneapolis.

EIS officers are hired under Title 42, a mechanism that allows the federal government to bring in the best and the brightest, in some cases paying them at rates higher than the typical public sector wages. It offers workers fewer job protections, however, making Title 42 workers easier to fire.

CDC cuts expected to devastate Epidemic Intelligence Service, a ‘crown jewel’ of public health


Seventh attorney resigns after refusing to dismiss case against NYC Mayor Eric Adams


The voters aren’t stupid. The voters are delusional


EVs and datacentres driving new global ‘age of electricity’, says watchdog


Is corporate America already souring on Trump? | Optimism at the prospect of tax cuts and lighter regulation has given way to anxiety over trade policies


Stephen A. Smith for President


Rwandan-backed M23 rebels enter Bukavu in eastern DRC


A few House Republicans are pledging to bring up impeachment articles against federal judges who have blocked Trump administration actions, including those of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), backing up tech billionaire Elon Musk’s call for a “wave of judicial impeachments.”

Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) said he is drafting articles of impeachment against Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York, who in a ruling last weekend temporarily restricted Musk and DOGE aides from accessing a Treasury Department payment system.

Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) is working on an impeachment resolution against Rhode Island District Judge John McConnell Jr. over his ruling halting the Trump administration’s freeze on federal funding.

And Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), chair of the House Oversight Delivering on Government Efficiency Subcommittee, pledged in a hearing this week while referencing Engelmayer that “We will hold this judge and others who try to stop the will of the people and their elected leaders accountable.”

House GOP leaders have not weighed in on the calls to impeach the judges — and the chances of such an effort succeeding in their removal is close to zero.

It would take near-unanimous support from House Republicans to impeach a judge if Democrats do not support the measure, and support from Democrats would be required to clear the two-thirds threshold to convict on impeachment articles in the Senate.

House Republicans plot impeachment against judges blocking Trump, DOGE


Why does seemingly every group or demographic refuse to believe that Trump would act as he said he would?


TSMC Considers Running Intel’s US Factories After Trump Team Request


JD Vance hits out at Europe’s ‘threat from within’


The Trump administration slashed funding for Affordable Care Act navigators, which help people sign up for ObamaCare coverage on the law’s exchanges, by 90 percent.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) on Friday announced health insurance navigators will receive just $10 million per year over the next four years. Navigators received $98 million in 2024.

CMS said the cut will allow the exchanges to focus on more effective strategies to improve outcomes and to reduce premiums for people who don’t qualify for subsidies. The health agency justified the cut by noting navigators enrolled only 0.6 percent of plan selections on the federal exchange during the open enrollment period — at a cost of $1,061 per enrollment.

Experts pointed to federal data showing that navigators were much more effective in enrolling people in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) last year, as they likely have more ties to lower-income communities. They helped enroll about 290,000 people in Medicaid and the CHIP.

Navigators aren’t private insurance brokers. They are paid through user fees, not by private plans, and don’t recommend specific plans or policies to consumers. The decrease in funding will save a total of $360 million through Aug. 26, 2029, according to CMS.

The Trump administration similarly cut ACA navigator funding every year during his first term and cut advertising to HealthCare.gov by 90 percent. When enrollments dropped, the administration said it was evidence that the law was failing.

Trump administration slashes funding for ObamaCare outreach program


Free speech dispute over New Hampshire bakery mural heads to trial


Vance says US has economic and military ‘tools of leverage’ if Russia doesn’t push for peace with Ukraine, WSJ reports


President Donald Trump has upended the political landscape in Canada, where many people are increasingly worried about an economic and cultural takeover by the U.S.

Rising anxiety across the country has disrupted the political trajectory of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, a populist who until very recently appeared to be on a glide path to the prime minister’s office. And “America First” tariffs have achieved what many Canadians thought impossible — reversing the downward spiral of Justin Trudeau and his three-term Liberal government.

Canada’s recoil from Trump 2.0 is forcing Poilievre to revamp his messaging and campaign strategy.

His comments continue to rile up America’s nicest neighbors. Ordinary Canadians have been trading notes on random acts of patriotism — returning U.S. products to stores, canceling Netflix subscriptions and announcing plans to avoid American food chains.

A challenge for the Conservatives is trying to walk the line between conservative Canadians who don’t support Trump and the minority of conservative Canadians who are MAGA supporters, said Kurl.

Trump 2.0 derails Pierre Poilievre’s glide path in Canada


‘Open Season’: Local Republicans Rush to Out-Trump Trump on Immigration


Can Trump invoke the Alien Enemies Act? | Trump wants to fit a round, troubled, 227-year-old law into the square hole of illegal immigration. What, if anything, stands in his way?


A chastened Eric Adams appeared Friday alongside Trump border czar Tom Homan on the president’s favorite morning talk show to project what the New York City mayor said was a united front against violent criminals without legal immigration status.

But the “Fox & Friends” interview conveyed another painfully obvious message: Adams is beholden to Trump. And the president’s deportation agenda and the mayor’s fate are now inextricably linked.

In the 20-minute rollercoaster TV interview, Adams vacillated between a grim countenance and awkward chuckles while Homan pressured him and the Trump-boosting Fox hosts grilled him. The mayor’s face even fell mid-laugh as he appeared to process a barely veiled threat from Homan — the man the president has entrusted to carry out his immigration orders in the country’s biggest “sanctuary city.”

“If he doesn’t come through,” Homan said, “I’ll be back in New York City, and we won’t be sitting on the couch. I’ll be in his office, up his butt, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?’”

Adams, a cop-turned-politician now facing reelection, has long prioritized targeting violent undocumented offenders, but he announced Thursday he would loosen sanctuary laws following a closed-door visit with Homan that came just days after the Trump Justice Department issued an order that criminal corruption charges against the mayor be dropped.

Adams’ fraud case now sits at the center of the first large-scale show of defiance within the Department of Justice during Trump’s second term. A top Manhattan prosecutor resigned in protest of Washington’s directive that she move to dismiss Adams’ case “without prejudice.” Several deputies quit as well.

Trump border czar crows that New York City mayor must do his bidding

A chastened Eric Adams appeared Friday alongside Trump border czar Tom Homan on the president’s favorite morning talk show to project what the New York City mayor said was a united front against violent criminals without legal immigration status.

But the “Fox &amp; Friends” interview conveyed another painfully obvious message: Adams is beholden to Trump. And the president’s deportation agenda and the mayor’s fate are now inextricably linked.

In the 20-minute rollercoaster TV interview, Adams vacillated between a grim countenance and awkward chuckles while Homan pressured him and the Trump-boosting Fox hosts grilled him. The mayor’s face even fell mid-laugh as he appeared to process a barely veiled threat from Homan — the man the president has entrusted to carry out his immigration orders in the country’s biggest “sanctuary city.”

“If he doesn’t come through,” Homan said, “I’ll be back in New York City, and we won’t be sitting on the couch. I’ll be in his office, up his butt, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?’”

Adams, a cop-turned-politician now facing reelection, has long prioritized targeting violent undocumented offenders, but he announced Thursday he would loosen sanctuary laws following a closed-door visit with Homan that came just days after the Trump Justice Department issued an order that criminal corruption charges against the mayor be dropped.

Adams’ fraud case now sits at the center of the first large-scale show of defiance within the Department of Justice during Trump’s second term. A top Manhattan prosecutor resigned in protest of Washington’s directive that she move to dismiss Adams’ case “without prejudice.” Several deputies quit as well.


Trump fires hundreds of staff overseeing nuclear weapons: report


Poland’s Solidarity trade union endorses opposition presidential candidate


Trump official’s demand in Adams case forces Justice Dept. showdown | A crisis at the department over the Eric Adams case is an early test of the criminal justice system’s resilience against a retribution-minded president and his appointees


Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline: Algeria, Nigeria, and Niger Sign Agreements to Accelerate Project Implementation


New traces of tear gas found on Ukraine battlefield by chemical weapons watchdog


The Louisiana Department of Health “will no longer promote mass vaccination” according to a Thursday memo written by the state’s top health official and obtained by The Associated Press.

A department spokesperson confirmed Louisiana Surgeon General Ralph Abraham had ordered his staff to stop engaging in media campaigns and community health fairs to encourage vaccinations, even as the state has experienced a surge in influenza.

Abraham’s announcement occurred the same day vaccine skepticRobert F. Kennedy Jr. was sworn in by the U.S. Senate to serve as President Donald Trump’s health secretary.

In a separate letter posted on the department’s website, Louisiana’s surgeon general decried “blanket government mandates” for vaccines and criticized the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s COVID-19 vaccination push. Individuals should make their own decisions about vaccinations, Abraham said.

The department will still “stock and provide vaccines,” according to Abraham’s memo.

In liberal New Orleans, the city council passed a resolution Thursday vowing to continue supporting vaccination efforts.

Louisiana to end mass vaccine promotion, state's top health official says


The new chair of the Federal Trade Commission is putting his commissioners on notice that he thinks President Trump has the right to fire them if he wants to.

Andrew Ferguson, who replaced Lina Kahn on Jan. 20, is the first head of an independent agency to embrace a controversial legal theory that could dramatically reshape the federal bureaucracy.

Ferguson, a former solicitor general for the Commonwealth of Virginia, is filing a motion on Friday to formally change the FTC's legal position.

He is seizing on a letter sent to Congress this week by the acting solicitor general that the Trump Justice Department will seek to overturn a 90-year old Supreme Court decision known as "Humphrey's Executor."

The new Trump approach holds that the heads and other board members can be fired based on the president's "will."

Scoop: New FTC chair endorses Trump's ability to fire commissioners of independent agencies

The new chair of the Federal Trade Commission is putting his commissioners on notice that he thinks President Trump has the right to fire them if he wants to.

Andrew Ferguson, who replaced Lina Kahn on Jan. 20, is the first head of an independent agency to embrace a controversial legal theory that could dramatically reshape the federal bureaucracy.

Ferguson, a former solicitor general for the Commonwealth of Virginia, is filing a motion on Friday to formally change the FTC&#39;s legal position.

He is seizing on a letter sent to Congress this week by the acting solicitor general that the Trump Justice Department will seek to overturn a 90-year old Supreme Court decision known as &quot;Humphrey&#39;s Executor.&quot;

The new Trump approach holds that the heads and other board members can be fired based on the president&#39;s &quot;will.&quot;


Trump says TikTok deadline could be extended

:place-22: r/place '22: Neoliberal Battalion


‘A human rights disaster’: immigrants sent into Guantánamo black hole despite no proof of crime


Poland urges unity on Ukraine after Trump-Putin talks


Tariffs will “blow a hole” in the US auto industry, says Ford CEO


US retail sales slumped 0.9% in January, down much more than expected


How Machiavelli can Help us understand Trump's Autocratic Ambitions


How India became an unexpected role model for Europe


House Republicans are putting cuts to Medicaid at the top of their list of budget cuts to help pay for their wide-ranging agenda that spans tax cuts, energy production and border security.

Republicans are eyeing changes to how much the federal government, as opposed to states, will contribute to Medicaid expenditures, an amount called the federal medical assistance percentage, or FMAP. The House Budget Committee on Thursday considered a plan that would instruct the Energy and Commerce Committee – which has jurisdiction over Medicaid – to find $880 billion in savings over the next 10 years.

Possible changes that Republicans are floating include capping Medicaid spending on a per capita basis at a potential savings of $900 billion per year; rolling back the enhanced federal matching rate for ACA expansion states to save $561 billion; and lowering the 50 percent floor for the traditional Medicaid population, for a savings of up to $387 billion.

The GOP’s budget reconciliation bill is designed to move much of President Trump’s legislative agenda through special rules that sidestep a Senate filibuster. The bill could add trillions to deficits without off-setting tax hikes or spending cuts to pay for it.

Asked during an interview on C-SPAN Tuesday what a Republican re-envisioning of U.S. health insurance programs would look like, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the Freedom Caucus, responded: “Re-envisioning is [to] block granting dollars to the states. Let them decide how it wants to be allocated. [And it’s] getting illegals off any federal program, including Medicaid.”

Republicans are also considering establishing work requirements for Medicaid. An expansion of the Child Tax Credit failed to pass last year because it didn’t include work requirements, among other reasons. Certain groups of people in the Republican proposal wouldn’t have to work in order to get health coverage through Medicaid, including pregnant women, primary caregivers, people with disabilities, and full-time students.

Republicans put healthcare cuts front and center to advance agenda


Polish Eurovision hopeful placed on list of “extremists” by Belarus


51% of Japanese feel relations with South Korea are "good": survey


Will Elon's Team of Elite Math Twinks Tell Him That You Can't Close a $1.8 Trillion Budget Gap By Eliminating a $0.04 Trillion Agency?


Only About 40% Of The Cruz "Woke Science" Database Is Woke Science


Calvin Klein blacklisting sends chill through US business in China


Trump Has Us Talking About Trade Again. That’s a Win


In the Pentagon they must surely be on high alert. On February 9th President Donald Trump declared that it would soon become the target for Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Accusing it of “hundreds of billions of fraud and abuse”, Mr Trump will unleash his insurgents, fresh from feeding foreign aid into the woodchipper. Their work could not be more important, or more risky.

That is because America’s armed forces face a real problem. Not since the Soviet Union launched Sputnik and built huge tank formations at the height of the cold war have America’s military vulnerabilities been so glaring. In the killing fields of Ukraine America is being out-innovated by drone designers; in the seas and skies off China it is losing its ability to deter a blockade or invasion of Taiwan.

The stakes are all the higher because the Pentagon is a place where MAGA ideology meets reality. Mr Trump’s foreign policy is transactional: this week he said he had begun talks with Russia on the future of Ukraine. But it is built on the idea that peace comes through strength, and that is possible only if America’s forces pose a credible threat. And what if DOGE goes rogue in the Pentagon? If Mr Musk causes chaos or corrupts procurement, the consequences for America’s security could be catastrophic.

The problems are clearest in the struggle to turn technology into a military advantage. The drones over Ukraine are upgraded every few weeks, a pace that is beyond the Pentagon’s budgeting process, which takes years. American and European jammers in electronic warfare cost two or three times as much as Ukrainian ones, but are obsolete. Many big American drones have been useless in Ukraine; newer ones are pricier than Ukrainian models.

Another problem is that America’s defence industry has been captured. At the end of the cold war the country had 51 prime contractors and only 6% of defence spending went to firms that specialised in defence. Today, just five primes soak up 86% of the Pentagon’s cash. Wary of driving more primes out of business, the department has opted for a risk-averse culture. Contracts are typically cost-plus, rewarding lateness and overspending. The resulting lack of productivity gains helps explain why building warships in America costs so much more than it does in Japan or South Korea.

Behind this is the nightmare of budgets. Two-year delays are aggravated by congressional squabbling. Pork-barrelling politicians waste money by vetoing the end of programmes. They guard their control over spending so jealously that, without congressional permission, the Pentagon cannot as a rule shift more than $15m from one line to another—too little to buy even four Patriot missiles. When the Pentagon proposed diverting just 0.5% of the defence budget to buy thousands of drones under its “Replicator” initiative in August 2023, winning approval took almost 40 congressional meetings.

Pentagon angst is as old as the military-industrial complex. Past secretaries of defence, including Bob Gates and the late Ash Carter, were philosopher kings next to their new and manifestly unqualified successor, Pete Hegseth. And yet the defence bureaucracy has always seemed to come out on top.

There are two reasons why this moment may be different. One is that the time is ripe. Not only is the threat to American security becoming clear, but a new generation of mil-tech firms, including Anduril, Palantir and Shield AI, is banging on the Pentagon’s doors. Indeed, Palantir is now worth more than any of the five prime contractors.

More controversially, Mr Musk is eager to crack heads together, an enthusiasm which stems partly from the second reason to hope: his experience elsewhere. In the 2010s, to escape the ignominy of paying for rides to the International Space Station on Russian spacecraft, NASA put fixed-price contracts to provide such services out to tender. Boeing offered something called Starliner; Mr Musk’s SpaceX offered Crew Dragon at a much lower cost. Crew Dragon has been a huge success. Starliner has yet to fly a successful mission (and has left Boeing having to absorb billions of dollars of budget overruns).

From 1960 to 2010 the cost of getting a kilogram into orbit hovered at around $12,000; SpaceX rockets have already cut that by a factor of ten, and promise much more. Helsing, Europe’s only defence unicorn, takes a similarly nimble approach to development, continually updating its systems with data from the front lines.

Mr Musk’s task is big and complex. American weapons need more AI, autonomy and lower costs. Where possible, they should be made from cheap off-the-shelf parts that ride on advances in consumer tech. The Pentagon should foster competition and risk-taking, knowing that some schemes will fail. A decade ago Carter set up a unit for innovation, but it was often seen as a threat. The Pentagon needs more of them. It should also listen to combatant commanders, too often drowned out by politics. Hardest of all, Mr Trump will have to get congressional Republicans to give the Pentagon a freer rein to spend and innovate.

Reforming the Pentagon is much harder than other parts of government. America cannot focus on preparing for war in 2035 if that involves lowering its defences today. It cannot simply replace multi-billion-dollar submarines and bomber squadrons with swarms of drones, because to project power to the other side of the world will continue to require big platforms. Instead America needs a Department of Defence that can revolutionise the economics of massive systems and accelerate the spread of novel systems at the same time.

Mr Musk and his boss are conflicted. If Mr Trump prefers sacking generals for supposedly being “woke” or disloyal, he will bring dysfunction upon the Pentagon. If Mr Musk and his mil-tech brethren use DOGE’s campaign to wreck, or to boost their own power and wealth, they will corrupt it. Those temptations make it hard to think that this administration will succeed where others have failed. But the hope is that they will. America’s security depends upon it.

Will Donald Trump wreck or reform the Pentagon?


Russian drone struck Chernobyl reactor shell, but radiation levels normal, Zelenskyy says


Can Friedrich Merz save Germany—and Europe?


The Gautreaux Project, the largest racial desegregation initiative in US history, enabled thousands of Black families to move into white neighborhoods from the late 1970s to the 1990s. Being raised in these neighborhoods increased children’s future lifetime earnings and wealth.


Lee Jae-myung’s policy flip-flops are too drastic and frequent


The [discussion thread](https://neoliber.al/dt) is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^[](https://i.imgur.com/cu8BHQU.png)

## Links

[Ping Groups](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Ping History](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html) | [Mastodon](https://mastodo.neoliber.al/) | [CNL Chapters](https://cnliberalism.org/our-chapters) | [CNL Event Calendar](https://cnliberalism.org/events)

## New Groups

* [PALEO](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%PALEO&message=subscribe%20PALEO): Paleontology

## Upcoming Events

* Feb 18: [NYC New Liberals February Social](https://cnliberalism.org/events/nyc-new-liberals-february-social)
* Feb 19: [Atlanta New Liberals February Social](https://cnliberalism.org/events/atlanta-new-liberals-february-social)
* Feb 19: [Bay Area New Liberals February Happy Hour](https://cnliberalism.org/events/bay-area-new-liberals-february-happy-hour)
* Feb 19: [Twin Cities New Liberals February Meetup](https://cnliberalism.org/events/twin-cities-new-liberals-february-meetup)
* Feb 20: [RDU New Liberals February Social ](https://cnliberalism.org/events/rdu-new-liberals-february-social)

Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn&#39;t merit its own submission. If you&#39;ve got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

New Groups

PALEO: Paleontology

Upcoming Events

Feb 18: NYC New Liberals February Social

Feb 19: Atlanta New Liberals February Social

Feb 19: Bay Area New Liberals February Happy Hour

Feb 19: Twin Cities New Liberals February Meetup

Feb 20: RDU New Liberals February Social


Japan main opposition party pushes PM to rework budget plan


Trump says US has approve extradition of suspect in 2008 Mumbai attacks to India


Europe must respond to Trump ‘electroshock’, says Macron


The House Budget Committee voted to approve a budget resolution along party lines, 21-16, after a marathon markup. In order to rally enough Republican support to push the measure over the finish line, GOP leaders placated fiscal conservatives by tweaking the blueprint that will ultimately allow them to pass a massive bill tackling tax cuts, border security, defense spending and energy policy — all while sidestepping the Senate filibuster.

The changes to the budget resolution, if adopted by both chambers, would force Republicans to cut more spending in exchange for tax cuts. It could curtail their ability to deliver on Trump’s most prominent campaign-trail promises, like nixing taxes on tips, while also alienating swing-district Republicans uncomfortable with slashing safety net programs like SNAP food assistance to low-income households.

A floor vote on the fiscal blueprint is House GOP leaders’ next challenge in the arduous process of unlocking the filibuster-skirting power of reconciliation. The budget measure would allow the House’s tax panel to come up with tax cuts that increase the deficit by up to $4.5 trillion over a decade, while ordering other committees to cut enough from mandatory spending programs to reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion.

So on Thursday, Democrats on the Budget Committee spent more than seven hours peppering their GOP colleagues with amendments that would nix the committee orders included in the fiscal blueprint. They also branded the GOP plan “the Republican ripoff” and noted that it allows for a $3.3 trillion increase in the deficit over a decade.

The panel defeated all 32 amendments Democrats offered, including several proposals aimed at stopping Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency from slashing federal funding and accessing federal systems that contain sensitive information about Americans. Democrats also proposed amendments aimed at protecting funding for in-kind food assistance programs, Meals on Wheels and other initiatives funded through block grants to states for social services.

Of the two Republican amendments offered Thursday, both were adopted. One, the compromise that won the House Freedom Caucus endorsement of the resolution, would shrink the amount of tax cuts Republicans can enact if they don’t cut $2 trillion in spending at the same time. The other would ensure Republicans include the text of the REINS Act in their final reconciliation bill. That measure, a perennial favorite of congressional Republicans, would curtail federal rule-making across government.

House Republicans advance their budget after appeasing hard-liners


In interview with The Wall Street Journal, vice president says Ukraine must have ‘sovereign independence

Vance Wields Threat of Sanctions, Military Action to Push Putin Into Ukraine Deal


After delay, CDC releases data signaling bird flu spread undetected in cows and people


Two new federal lawsuits challenge Trump, and DOGE on constitutional grounds


How a meeting with Donald Trump Jr. led Canada's premiers to an $85,000-a-month lobbying firm


Cambridge, Massachusetts Ends Single-Family Zoning, Paving Way for More Housing


“I’m a businessman. He’s a businessman,” says Premier François Legault, who points out that aluminum tariffs are at odds with a U.S. manufacturing renaissance.

Quebec to Trump: Let’s make a deal


Trump administration tells federal agencies to fire probationary employees


Donald Trump's Gen Z popularity plunges (+19 after election to -18 today)


The National Park Service is the latest agency to remove references to the transgender community in line with President Trump’s executive order mandating that the country only recognize two genders.

The agency’s web page dedicated to the Stonewall National Monument in New York deleted “transgender” and “queer” from the LGBTQ+ acronym previously displayed on the site. Instead it now reads “LGB” for lesbian, gay and bisexual, a move first reported Thursday by The New York Times.

“Before the 1960s, almost everything about living openly as a lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) person was illegal,” reads a small excerpt at the top of the website. “The Stonewall Uprising on June 28, 1969 is a milestone in the quest for LGB civil rights and provided momentum for a movement.”

Transgender reference removed from National Park Service’s Stonewall website

:feynman: Fusion Shitmod, PhD :genderfluid:


Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Britain for the first time on Thursday, marking the restart of a diplomatic dialogue mechanism that has been paused for nearly seven years.

Wang had talks with Britain's foreign minister and national security adviser and briefly met with Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

The top Chinese diplomat's visit restarts the U.K.-China Strategic Dialogue, which has been frozen since 2018 over human rights abuses in Hong Kong, spying allegations and China's support for Russia's war in Ukraine.

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said that discussions would involve "areas of bilateral economic cooperation" and security issues such as the war in Ukraine.

In the meetings, Wang said that cooperation was increasingly urgent, given the current state of global affairs.

Wang's visit is another step in the new British labor government's effort to improve its relations with China.

As British diplomats met with Wang, a small group of demonstrators gathered outside the Chinese Embassy to protest his arrival and Chinese human rights violations.

Chinese diplomat visits UK, restarts dialogue

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Britain for the first time on Thursday, marking the restart of a diplomatic dialogue mechanism that has been paused for nearly seven years.

Wang had talks with Britain&#39;s foreign minister and national security adviser and briefly met with Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

The top Chinese diplomat&#39;s visit restarts the U.K.-China Strategic Dialogue, which has been frozen since 2018 over human rights abuses in Hong Kong, spying allegations and China&#39;s support for Russia&#39;s war in Ukraine.

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said that discussions would involve &quot;areas of bilateral economic cooperation&quot; and security issues such as the war in Ukraine.

In the meetings, Wang said that cooperation was increasingly urgent, given the current state of global affairs.

Wang&#39;s visit is another step in the new British labor government&#39;s effort to improve its relations with China.

As British diplomats met with Wang, a small group of demonstrators gathered outside the Chinese Embassy to protest his arrival and Chinese human rights violations.


Panama has received the first U.S. flight carrying deportees from other nations as the Trump administration takes Panama up on its offer to act as a stopover for expelled migrants, the Central American nation’s president said Thursday.

“Yesterday a flight from the United States Air Force arrived with 119 people from diverse nationalities of the world,” President José Raúl Mulino said Thursday in his weekly press briefing. He said there were migrants from China, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan, among others, aboard.

The president said it was the first of three planned flights that were expected to total about 360 people. “It’s not something massive,” he said.

The migrants were expected to be moved to a shelter in Panama’s Darien region before being returned to their countries, Mulino said.

Asked later Thursday why Panama was acting as a stopover for these deportations, Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Ruiz Hernández said that it was something the U.S. government had requested. He also said the U.S. government was paying for the repatriations through U.N. immigration agencies.

Since Mulino entered office last year, Panama has made dozens of deportation flights, most funded by the U.S. government.

US deports 119 migrants from a variety of nations to Panama


Opening Remarks by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at Ukraine Defense Contact Group (As Delivered)


Trump's metal tariffs may impact Brazil, leading to lower prices and higher unemployment


Trump Offers F-35 Jet to India in Push for More Defense Deals


White House announces blanket tariffs on effectively the whole world. 175 out of 194 countries have VAT on the US


Danielle Sassoon and Other Officials Resign After Order to Drop Eric Adams Case


Senate Republicans introduced a pair of bills on Wednesday aiming to strip the country of its electric vehicle (EV) tax credits and instead replace it with an obligatory $1,000 tax payment to be used for repairing roads.

Barrasso worked alongside Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to craft the Eliminating Lavish Incentives to Electric (ELITE) Vehicles Act, which would rid the nation of a $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit.

Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) co-sponsored the effort, in addition to seven other Republican senators.

Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) also introduced the Fair SHARE Act on Wednesday, which proposes a one-time fee of $1,000 on all-electric vehicles at the manufacturer level and at the point of sale to contribute to the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). It supports the maintenance of essential infrastructure and is funded by a federal excise tax on fuel.

Under the Biden administration, the federal government invested in electric vehicle charging stations and promoted credits to encourage consumers to use transportation methods that run off clean energy free of pollution.

In stark contrast to former President Biden’s efforts, the Trump administration has frozen electric vehicle charging funds and has warned against a major switch from traditional gas-fueled cars to charged modes of travel, despite Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s proximity to the president.

Senate Republicas propose bills to kill EV tax credit, add road repairs tax


Whenever we argue about "electability," "what the Democrats need to do" etc you need to keep in mind that the median swing voters are not committed centrists but people like this


NATO is in disarray after the US announces that its security priorities lie elsewhere


Trump’s Brit ally Nigel Farage: Ukraine should join NATO


How immigration is straining U.S.-India ties—And how to rebuild them - Niskanen Center


Trump gave Zelensky his personal number and said he can call him directly


Trump says Russia should be readmitted to G7


Senators Say Bessent Misled Them on DOGE’s Treasury Access


Listening to the latest Infill: A YIMBY Podcast with one of those involved with generating this policy agenda for the Democratic party and figured you all would be interested in it. Nice to see more supply side policy being pushed to for the Democrats to adopt in the future, I feel like what they're pushing aligns well with this group but would also deliver a pretty substantial change for little to no cost to the tax payers.

Here's the Spotify podcast link for anyone interested as well. https://open.spotify.com/episode/1DCj7GS0kLENncq529D6Cs?si=kBnCaOR9RTCvX0j_vIKKhA

A Democratic Cost of Living Agenda

Listening to the latest Infill: A YIMBY Podcast with one of those involved with generating this policy agenda for the Democratic party and figured you all would be interested in it. Nice to see more supply side policy being pushed to for the Democrats to adopt in the future, I feel like what they&#39;re pushing aligns well with this group but would also deliver a pretty substantial change for little to no cost to the tax payers.

Here&#39;s the Spotify podcast link for anyone interested as well. https://open.spotify.com/episode/1DCj7GS0kLENncq529D6Cs?si=kBnCaOR9RTCvX0j_vIKKhA


Mark Carney won’t rule out calling early election if he wins leadership, as NDP memo warns candidates to prepare


Defense stocks drop after Trump says Pentagon spending could be halved


President Donald Trump said Thursday that he wants to restart nuclear arms control talks with Russia and China and that eventually he hopes all three countries could agree to cut their massive defense budgets in half.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump lamented the hundreds of billions of dollars being invested in rebuilding the nation’s nuclear deterrent and said he hopes to gain commitments from the U.S. adversaries to cut their own spending.

While the U.S. and Russia hold massive stockpiles of weapons since the Cold War, Trump predicted that China would catch up in their capability to exact nuclear devastation “within five or six years.”

Trump said he would look to engage in nuclear talks with the two countries once “we straighten it all out” in the Middle East and Ukraine.

Trump in his first term tried and failed to bring China into nuclear arms reduction talks when the U.S. and Russia were negotiating an extension of a pact known as New START. Russia suspended its participation in the treaty during the Biden administration, as the U.S. and Russia continued on massive programs to extend the life-spans or replace their Cold War-era nuclear arsenals.

Trump wants denuclearization talks with Russia and China, hopes for defense spending cuts


A federal judge Thursday blocked parts of two executive orders issued by President Trump that collectively seek to restrict gender-affirming care.

U.S. District Judge Brendan Hurson at the conclusion of a hearing found a group of transgender teens and LGBTQ organizations that sued were likely to prevail on all of their claims that the orders are without authority and amount to illegal and unconstitutional discrimination.

It adds to a series of court orders across the country in recent days temporarily blocking Trump’s actions, ranging from orders restricting birthright citizenship to transferring incarcerated transgender women to male facilities to Trump’s firing of the head of a whistleblower office.

Under Hurson’s new ruling, various federal agencies are temporarily prohibited from withholding or conditioning funding based on a health care facility providing gender-affirming care anywhere in the country.

The plaintiffs — a group of transgender teens, their parents and two organizations, PFLAG and GLMA — raised alarm that hospitals across the country quickly moved to cancel appointments after Trump issued two executive orders as part of what his administration has called a crackdown on “gender ideology.”

The Justice Department contested the plaintiffs’ arguments, also insisting that the case was premature and should wait for additional guidance. The judge rejected those arguments, going as far as to call the government’s position “disingenuous” at one point.

Judge blocks Trump’s gender-affirming care executive orders nationwide


Putin has waited for this moment for 3 years, as Zelensky is left in the cold


Senate confirms Brooke Rollins to lead USDA


US eggs prices hit a record high of $4.95 and are likely to keep climbing


‘Today is the big one’: Trump announces sweeping reciprocal tariffs


More Democrats Favor Party Moderation Than in Past


Donald Trump’s ‘reciprocal tariffs’ to not impact India: Anonymous White House Official Says


Court reinstates historian fired from state body over involvement in website critical of its president


Statement from NYC Comptroller Lander on the Trump Administration’s Illegal Reversal of FEMA Funding | Musk has taken money Congress allocated to NYC out of the city's banks.


China’s construction of coal-fired power plants reaches highest in a decade


The world should call Trump's bluff on tariffs | You can't keep giving the bully your lunch money


Since Trump’s ‘emergency,’ what is actually happening on the border? | Bored troops are standing watch, shelters have emptied from McAllen, Texas, to Tucson, Ariz., and border patrols speed through miles of frontier, finding no one in sight


Democratic Sen. Tina Smith will not run for re-election in Minnesota


The State Department is placing a $400 million contract to build armored electric vehicles on hold, a spokesperson told The Hill on Thursday.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk’s Tesla appears to have been a likely recipient of the contract, which originated from the Biden administration. The agency’s procurement forecast for the year shows the planned contract for “armored Teslas” with an anticipated award date of Sept. 30.

However, the State Department spokesperson said the solicitation for the contract “is on hold and there are no current plans to issue it.”

The Biden administration had asked the agency to “explore interest from private companies to produce armored electric vehicles,” according to the spokesperson. The department opened up a public request for information to gauge interest and heard from only company, they noted.

The request for information, which is now marked as inactive on the General Services Administration website where it was posted, sought information on “Contractors’ capability to produce high quality and armored electric vehicles.”

Amid reports that Tesla was poised to receive the contract, Musk said in a post on his social platform X, “I’m pretty sure Tesla isn’t getting $400M. No one mentioned it to me, at least.”

State says $400 million armored EV contract on hold


India Central Bank Intervenes to Curb Speculative Rupee Bets


Canada’s Conservatives Crash With Onset of Tariff War:
With elections upcoming, the Conservatives had started measuring the drapes, but didn’t anticipate America’s new president shattering their country’s politics.


Ukraine’s Daunting Choice: Trading Its Land and People for Future Security


Hardline conservatives and House GOP leadership struck an agreement on the conference’s budget resolution shortly before a key vote on Thursday, putting the measure on a path to advance out of committee if it holds.

According to House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.), the agreement — which still has to be approved by the House Budget Committee — would allow Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), the chair of the Budget committee, to “adjust the dials” and increase the cap on the deficit impact of the tax portion of the package of Trump’s priorities if additional spending cuts are made in other areas. It would also give teeth to a $2 trillion deficit reduction target outlined in the bill that was key for fiscal hawks.

Arrington released a budget resolution on Wednesday that outlines a $1.5 trillion floor for spending cuts across committees with a target of $2 trillion, a $4.5 trillion cap on the deficit impact of the Republicans’ plan to extend President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, and $300 billion in additional spending for the border and defense.

Under the agreement, which will be brought up in the form of a manager’s amendment, Arrington would be able to adjust the spending cuts floor and tax impact cap when crafting the budget reconciliation package. Harris said “the traditional mechanism of a reserve fund” will enable those changes to allow the chairman to “adjust the dials.”

For example, with the deficit reduction floor set at $1.5 trillion and a target of $2 trillion, if committees find $2.5 trillion in reductions, Arrington can allow Ways and Means to design policies that raise its deficit increase allowance from $4.5 trillion to $5 trillion — enabling the committee more flexibility to address Trump’s demands for tax cuts.

Importantly, Harris said the amendment would also require the budget chairman to lower deficit increase allowances for the tax portion if that $2 trillion target is not reached, meaning the allowance for tax cuts and other priorities would be curtailed.

Hardliners, leadership strike deal on budget resolution ahead of key vote


More than 270,000 Syrian refugees have so returned to the country since the fall of Assad


Bro where did the silver linings go that used to be a thing


Munich car attack jolts German election as politicians amp up migration rhetoric


President Donald Trump’s wish list for acquiring new U.S. territories and making deals includes areas with a major feature in common: access to critical minerals.

In recent weeks, the president has suggested a minerals-for-aid “deal” with Ukraine, drawing pushback from Russia. He’s repeatedly suggested the U.S. will acquire Greenland, a mineral-rich Danish territory, possibly by force. And he has said Canada could become the 51st state — which Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said should be taken seriously, noting Trump was interested in Canadian minerals.

Trump is the latest president to take on an old challenge: China controls processing of critical minerals like cobalt, lithium and nickel, as well as rare earth elements needed to make military and energy equipment. The U.S. has moved to chip away at China’s dominance over supply chains but has trailed efforts like China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which has built out infrastructure in developing countries to access minerals.

At the same time, U.S. companies have warned that China’s unfair market practices, including flooding the market with cheap products, have made it difficult if not impossible to compete.

And Trump’s “America First” push isn’t occurring in isolation. It’s complicated by the complex and often fraught positions of his billionaire tech adviser Elon Musk, who has myriad ties to China through his position as CEO of Tesla. Tesla, for example, has in recent months fought efforts to impose higher tariffs on Chinese graphite, a key ingredient in electric vehicle batteries.

Thibault Denamiel, a fellow in the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Economics Program, said many of Trump’s moves seem to be part of a “negotiating tactic” and that there’s a clear interest among his administration to put energy at the forefront of foreign policy. But Denamiel also cautioned against reading too much into Trump’s every word.

Trump puts energy on front lines of ‘resource war’


Longtime vaccine critic Robert F. Kennedy is now the nation’s top health official, after the Senate Thursday voted almost entirely on party lines to confirm him atop a department of nearly 100,000 employees that run 13 agencies.

The 52-48 confirmation vote brings to a close a contentious three-month confirmation fight that served as a significant test of the Republican Party’s loyalty to President Trump.

Only Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) cast a GOP vote against Kennedy’s confirmation, after previously bucking his party on Trump’s defense secretary and national intelligence director.

The final vote was essentially a formality, after the Senate Finance Committee last week sent Kennedy’s nomination to the floor on a party-line vote.  The full chamber on Wednesday voted 53 to 47 along party lines to end debate and advance the nomination.

Four Republicans would have needed to break with their party and vote with every Republican for Kennedy’s nomination to fail. Instead, only one did.  Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who have stood up to Trump previously and opposed Pete Hegseth’s nomination to lead the Pentagon, this week said they would support Kennedy despite their lingering concerns over his stance on vaccines.

Senate confirms RFK Jr. as health secretary; McConnell lone GOP dissenter


India and France plan to develop small modular nuclear reactors


Dispelling myths: Reviewing the evidence on zoning reforms in Auckland. "In our view, there is remarkably robust evidence that zoning reforms increased housing supply and reduced rents in Auckland."


Polish FM and NATO chairman discuss eastern flank and Baltic security


United Methodists join suit against Trump policy | UMNews.org


What Trump’s Global Order Could Look Like: We Are All Mercantilists Now


China’s Plateauing Fuel Use Is Without Precedent, IEA Says


Ukraine’s British allies cry "appeasement" as Trump talks to Putin


Ukrainian stocks surge on Warsaw exchange amid talk of peace plan


Trump executive order leads to $100 energy bill hike for hundreds in Alabama


Brazil's Lula voices concern about food prices but sees inflation 'under control'


Feds seized $80 million in FEMA funds given to NYC to house migrants


Silicon Valley’s Macho Makeover Was a Warning, Not a Trend

:meirelles: Every day I wake up Brazillian 🤦♂


'Today is the big one - reciprocal tariffs': Trump’s cryptic post before meet with India's PM


Ukraine hits ex-president Poroshenko and other oligarchs with sanctions

:charlixcx: Stop trying to make "ordoliberal" happen


America’s military supremacy is in jeopardy


True?


At least 20 injured after car hits group of people in Munich | Germany


Polish justice minister suspends prosecutor investigating claim government led coup d’état


Hamas said Thursday it would release three more Israeli hostages as planned, paving the way toward resolving a major dispute over the ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Hamas had threatened to delay the next release of captives, accusing Israel of failing to meet its obligations to allow in tents and shelters, among other alleged violations of the truce. Israel, with the support of U.S. President Donald Trump, had threatened to renew its offensive if hostages were not freed.

There was no immediate comment from Israel on Hamas’ announcement, but it should allow the ceasefire to continue for now, though the future of the truce remains in doubt.

Hamas said its delegation held talks in Cairo with Egyptian officials and was in contact with Qatar’s prime minister about bringing into Gaza more shelters, medical supplies, fuel and heavy equipment for clearing rubble — its key demand in recent days. It said in a statement that the mediators had pledged to “remove all hurdles.”

Shortly after the announcement, Hamas spokesman Abdul Latif al-Qanou confirmed to The Associated Press by phone that three hostages will be released on Saturday.

Hamas says it will free 3 more hostages as planned, paving the way to resolve ceasefire dispute


The Phantom Terrorists: Searching for Islamic State in Syria


Christopher Clark · A Degree of Light-Heartedness: Merkel’s Two Lives


German election 2025: How party and campaign financing works


Analysis: US relations with Europe will never be the same after Trump’s call with Putin | CNN Politics


More than 100 sites across England bid to become "new towns"


Post-Chevron DOGE: Is This the End of Federal Regulation?


Here’s why some people still evade public transport fares – even when they’re 50 cents