From earlier tonight, this is Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Mama Hegseth"
Mr. Hegseth is a joke and so is the idiot Satan Trump. NEWSWEEK reports:
Trump has threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico unless the countries reduce the flow of migrants and drugs into the U.S. He defended his tariffs plan telling NBC News' Meet the Press on Sunday that the U.S. subsidizes Mexico for almost $300 billion a year, as well as Canada for around $100 billion annually.
So I’m sure those forgotten men and women are thrilled to know Trump has stocked his upcoming administration with enough billionaires and multimillionaires to, as The Guardian put it recently, “form a soccer team.”
Forbes reported in 2021 that President Joe Biden’s Cabinet had a net worth of about $188 million.
The Guardian puts the net worth of Trump’s gang thus far at more than $300 billion. If you believe in math, it's a staggering sum, about 2,000 times the wealth of those in the Biden administration.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:
Monday, December 9, 2024. Satan speaks and none of it is pretty as he plans to ship out entire families from the US (citizens and non-citizens), as his planned tariffs will tank the economy, how he will pursue revenge and much more.
-- "World Is On Fire," written by Sarah McLachlan and Pierre Marchand, first appears on Sarah's AFTERGLOW
Satan is coming. January 20th, he will be sworn in as president again. With all the reasons we already have to expect the worst, Michael Tomasky (THE NEW REPUBLIC) observes another issue:
It’s a fortunate thing that Bashar al-Assad’s regime collapsed before Tulsi Gabbard became our country’s director of national intelligence. A well-known Assad suck-up, Gabbard might have been able to feed this bloodthirsty tyrant—a man who killed 11,000 or so of his own people with bombs that, upon detonation, indiscriminately released thousands of pieces of metal shrapnel into the air to kill, maim, and disfigure anyone with the bad fortune to be nearby—with all the support he might have needed to stay in power for a few more years.
Assad’s demise is obviously a development to be celebrated. It’s great to see this ruthless authoritarian gone and Iran and Hezbollah weakened, which they are, at least for now. No, we can’t know who or what might fill the vacuum. It’s not like Syria is going to become a peace-loving democracy overnight, but it is nevertheless hoped that the Syrian people, who’ve known nothing but hardship and impunity, might eke out something of a sane and dignified existence. They certainly deserve nothing less.
While we whisper our hopes, however, some caution is definitely in order. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS, the group that toppled Assad, has been in control of most of Idlib province in recent years, and the 2020 State Department human rights report notes that the UN Commission for the Inquiry of Syria reported that year that HTS “routinely detained and tortured civilians” in territory it controlled. It’s a recurring lesson: One never knows if yesterday’s revolutionaries will round into tomorrow’s statesmen or tomorrow’s tyrants.
The main question here for Americans concerns the fact
that in six weeks, Donald Trump is going to be the president of the
United States. The surprising events in Syria serve as a harrowing
reminder that there’s a big, complicated world out there, and pretty
soon, Trump is going to be the single most powerful person in it—the
“horse in a hospital”
that comedian John Mulaney likened him to, though horses are far less
corrupt. And the weird, and worrying, thing is that even though Trump
was president before, we don’t really know all that much about his
foreign policy instincts because he was never really tested on foreign
policy in his first term.
Think about it. There were no major crises during Trump’s term. There were no 9/11 attacks, obviously, but even beyond that, there weren’t any major wars; Russia’s invasion of Ukraine came after he lost re-election. There was no big uprising like the 2014 Maidan Revolution, or the Tahrir Square and Arab Spring revolts of 2011. The Middle East was comparatively quiet, especially to those of us who recall to the fraught part of 2006 or the past year’s conflagration that followed in the wake of Hamas’s attacks in Israel. Assad’s butchery was an ongoing affair, but that’s not the same as a new broad regional conflict kicking off, which forces an American president to decide what moral face the United States is going to present to the world. Compared to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, Trump had it pretty easy—it even fell to Biden to keep the commitments to wind down the war in Afghanistan and honor the hideous commitments Trump made to the Taliban, much to Biden’s detriment in public opinion polling.
Imagine, for a moment, how much better the world might be, if topics like the above got serious exploration in the US news media -- newspapers, TV news reports, public affairs programming, blogs, social media and talk shows. Imagine that.
And then think instead about the topic that keeps getting forced down our throats instead: The United Healthcare CEO's death. I don't know his name, I don't care to learn his name. Seems like karma got him. One man, how many house of news?
One man already dead.
There are missing children that don't get this kind of attention on a local level -- children who've been kidnapped and who the clock is ticking on with a limted amount of time to be discovered before they will likely be dead.
What is this really about? Seems to me a bunch of rich owners of media outlets have determined the story of all time out of fear that this isn't an isolated murder but the first in a series of strikes against an oligarchy.
The man was killed. How is the information any different every day as this story consumers way too much time and space in the media? Do we not have trained investigators to work on this case in our country?
He was killed last Wednesday in all the days of nonsense chattering that have followed, no one knows anything else but it's being treated as more important than a missing child.
It clearly is not.
The man remains dead. The killer remains at large. How about we get some real news? As opposed to meaningless distraction?
The economy would be real news. From yesterday's ALL THINGS CONSIDERED (NPR):
SCOTT DETROW, HOST:
You never know if President-elect Donald Trump is bluffing, but when you have billions of dollars on the line, you have to take him seriously. So car companies took notice when Trump announced a plan for huge new tariffs in a social media post just before Thanksgiving. A 25% tax on imports from Canada and Mexico would have a major impact on the car industry, which depends heavily on cross border trade. NPR's Camila Domonoske, who covers the auto industry, and Andrea Hsu, who covers labor, have been talking to car companies and workers about the plan and join me now. Hey there.
CAMILA DOMONOSKE, BYLINE: Hi.
ANDREA HSU, BYLINE: Hey, Scott.
DETROW: So Andrea, I'm going to start with you. Getting back to this question, which we asked so many times for a four-year span, can Trump do this because, specifically, doesn't the U.S. have a free trade agreement with Mexico and Canada?
HSU: Yeah. Yeah, it's called USMCA. Trump himself signed it into law in 2020. It replaced NAFTA, and under this agreement, goods flow across the borders duty-free as long as they meet certain requirements. So when it comes to cars, those requirements have to do with how much of the vehicle was produced in North America and the wages paid to people building those cars. But there's no outside party like a court that can force a country into compliance. So if Trump issues an executive order imposing a 25% tariff, as he has threatened to do, we would just expect Canada and Mexico to retaliate with tariffs of their own. But I do want to reiterate here - we just don't know if he's actually going to follow through with this.
DETROW: Right. Camila, I want to get to the car companies' perspective on this. What would a 25% tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico mean for the car industry?
DOMONOSKE: Well, look, it's an increase in costs, and that's coming at a time when affordability for vehicles is a major concern for the auto industry. The average new vehicle right now costs almost $49,000, which is wild. It's a tremendous amount of money. If you look at how these tariffs would affect prices, one way is on finished vehicles. So that's your Toyota Tacomas that come from Mexico, Chrysler Pacificas that are made in Canada. They would get more expensive as the tariff is applied to them. But bigger than that, it would affect parts, and we have built an entire supply chain in the United States around the U.S., Mexico, and Canada working together to build these vehicles.
DETROW: Can you give me an example to help us understand that supply chain and how important and I guess fragile it is when it comes to all of this?
DOMONOSKE: Yeah, I'll take one example which is talking about wire harnesses.
DETROW: All right.
DOMONOSKE: So this is like the nervous system of a car, the wires that connect all the different electronic bits and bobs. And you don't want a giant spaghetti pile of wires at the bottom of a car like I have on top of my desk right now. So they connect these wires into bundles very precisely and neatly, right? It's a lot of labor. And what happens right now is you might have a wire or clips for those wires made in the U.S., shipped to Mexico to then be tied into these precise bundles and then shipped back into the U.S. to go into, say, a seat or another component before then they also go into the final car. Lots of parts of cars get built up like this in a series of steps that happen on different sides of these borders. So when you have concerns about tariffs and then retaliatory tariffs, the costs could really build. And this affects all car companies, not just ones that have plants in Mexico or Canada.
DETROW: Given all of this, though, Andrea, you know, the UAW has actually pushed for higher tariffs on cars in the past, right? Like, how - help us make sense of all of this.
HSU: Yeah, specifically higher tariffs on cars coming from Mexico and Canada that don't meet the strict requirements for North American-made parts and higher wages that I talked about - and this is all about protecting jobs. So let's say you have a car plant in Mexico that's making cars for the U.S. market, but the engines or the transmissions are not made in North America. Those cars can't come into the U.S. duty-free. The penalty is a 2 1/2% tariff. But the union is saying that's too low to be a deterrent. It might be cheaper for those carmakers to pay that tariff than it would be to source everything in North America. So the union would like tariffs that are high enough to compel companies to make, you know, cars, make parts ideally in the U.S. But, you know, raising that 2 1/2% tariff is very different from imposing a blanket 25% tariff on everything that's coming from Mexico and Canada.
DETROW: Any sense from the conversations you've had how workers think they'll be affected by all of this?
HSU: Well, I talked with Romaine McKinney. He's president of UAW Local 869 outside Detroit. His members work at Warren Stamping. They stamp all kinds of metal parts that are sent to plants in the U.S., but also to Mexico and Canada. And so they would feel the impacts of a trade war immediately. Maybe they'd have to slow production if orders slowed. But beyond that, McKinney stressed it's not just about cars or car parts. A 25% tariff, he says, would run up the prices of all kinds of consumer goods.
ROMAINE MCKINNEY: Whether that's fruit and vegetables or nuts and bolts - a 25% tariff will expeditiously run up the cost of operating your home. That is the bigger problem for us.
HSU: You know, he says autoworkers are middle-class Americans who are price-conscious consumers.
Satan showed up on NBC's MEET THE PRESS. Click here to stream on YOUTUBE -- and that's the extended interview -- both what was shown on TV and what wasn't. David Edwards (ROLLING STONE) notes:
In an interview that aired Sunday on NBC, host Kristen Welker pressed Trump on his campaign promise to do away with birthright citizenship.
"You've promised to end birthright citizenship on day one," Welker noted. "Is that still your plan?"
"Yeah, absolutely," Trump insisted.
"The 14th Amendment, though, says that, quote, all persons born in the United States are citizens," Welker pointed out. "Can you get around the 14th Amendment with an executive action?"
"Well, we're going to have to get a change," Trump remarked. "We'll maybe have to go back to the people. But we have to end it."
"Through an executive action?" the NBC host asked.
"Well, if we can, through executive action," Trump replied. "I was going to do it through executive action, but then we had to fix COVID first, to be honest with you. We have to end it."
So the thinks he can alter the Constitution by executive action? That may be the scariest thing he's said in some time. There is a process for altering the Constitution and it is not executive action nor has it ever been. But Satan thinks no rules apply to him. Jude Sheerin (BBC NEWS) adds:
On the subject of immigration, Trump told NBC he would seek through executive action to end so-called birthright citizenship, which entitles anyone born in the US to an American passport, even if their parents were born elsewhere.
Birthright citizenship stems from the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, which states that "all persons born" in the United States "are citizens of the United States".
"We're going to have to get it changed," Trump said. "We'll maybe have to go back to the people. But we have to end it."
Trump also said he would follow through on his campaign pledge to deport undocumented immigrants, including those with family members who are US citizens.
"I don't want to be breaking up families," he said, "so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back."
Rebecca Falconer and Russell Contreras (AXIOS) note:
Stephen Miller, the incoming White House deputy chief of staff for policy, on Sunday gave new details on the Trump administration's plan for what he called "the largest deportation operation in American history."
Why it matters: Miller made clear during his interview on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that deportations would be Trump's no.1 priority ahead of issues including making reforms to tax and trade and the debt ceiling.
- President-elect Trump has vowed to crack down on immigration and start mass deportations on Day 1 of his presidency, though the operation would be hard to achieve without major structural overhauls.
What they're saying: Miller said on Fox News that first, incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have "promised that they can get a full funding package for the border, the most significant board of security investment in American history ... to the president's desk in January or early February."
- That would mean a "massive increase" in Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers working on Trump's deportation operation and a "historic increase in border agents," with both getting a pay rise, Miller told Fox News' Maria Bartiromo.
- There would be "full funding for ICE beds, full funding for air and marine operations, full funding for all of the barriers and technology that you need to ensure there's never another got-away entering this country," Miller added.
Worth noting: Trump aides have previously said the president-elect would prioritize deporting dangerous criminals — something the federal government already does.
- An Axios review of the most recent immigration court records found that less than .5% of over 1 million cases last year resulted in deportation orders for alleged crimes other than illegal entry into the U.S.
Zoom in: After Trump has signed executive orders to "seal the border shut" and begin deportations, the senators would "move immediately" in the same timeframe "to the comprehensive tax reform package," Miller said.
January 20th, he will again take an oath to uphold the Constitution but clearly he won't mean it. He's too stupid to even understand the Constitution let alone uphold it.
He doesn't respect the rule of law -- or understand it. Bill Barrow and Will Weissert (AP) report on another aspect of the interview:
“Honestly, they should go to jail,” Trump said of members of Congress who investigated the Capitol riot by his supporters who wanted him to remain in power.
The president-elect underscored his contention that he can use the justice system against others, including special prosecutor Jack Smith, who led the case on Trump’s role in the siege on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump confirmed his plan to pardon supporters who were convicted for their roles in the riot, saying he would take that action on his first day in office.
As for the idea of revenge driving potential prosecutions, Trump said: “I have the absolute right. I’m the chief law enforcement officer, you do know that. I’m the president. But I’m not interested in that."
At the same time, Trump singled out lawmakers on a special House committee who had investigated the insurrection, citing Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo.
“Cheney was behind it ... so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee,” Trump said.
Asked specifically whether he would direct his administration to pursue cases, he said, “No,” and suggested he did not expect the FBI to quickly undertake investigations into his political enemies.
But at another point, Trump said he would leave the matter up to Pam Bondi, his pick as attorney general. “I want her to do what she wants to do,” he said.
Such threats, regardless of Trump's inconsistencies, have been taken seriously enough by many top Democrats that Biden is considering issuing blanket, preemptive pardons to protect key members of his outgoing administration.
On the threat he keeps floating, Yasmeen Hamadeh (THE DAILY BEAST) reports:
Former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney has clapped back at President-elect Donald Trump after he threatened to imprison her and other members on the congressional committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, Capitol riots.
In an interview on NBC’s Meet The Press that aired Sunday morning, Trump claimed that Cheney, along with a “committee of political thugs” deleted all the evidence from their investigation.
“Cheney did something that’s inexcusable, along with Thompson and the people on the un-select committee of political thugs and, you know, creeps,” the President-elect said, referring to Mississippi Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (the committee’s chairman). “They deleted and destroyed all evidence.”
[. . .]
“Here is the truth: Donald Trump attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election and seize power,” Cheney said. “He mobilized an angry mob and sent them to the United States Capitol, where they attacked police officers, invaded the building and halted the official counting of electoral votes. Trump watched on television as police officers were brutally beaten and the Capitol was assaulted, refusing for hours to tell the mob to leave.”
“Here is the truth: Donald Trump attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election and seize power,” Cheney said. “He mobilized an angry mob and sent them to the United States Capitol, where they attacked police officers, invaded the building and halted the official counting of electoral votes. Trump watched on television as police officers were brutally beaten and the Capitol was assaulted, refusing for hours to tell the mob to leave.”
Like Rebecca ("i support a pardon for liz cheney"), I support a pardon for Liz Cheney or anyone else that Satan might go after when he returns to the White House. He is a convicted criminal, a rageaholic, a raving idiot, and someone in the throes of early onset dementia.
Jonathan Capehart addressed Satan's vengeance in an MSNBC roundtable yesterday.
Last week, Senator Elizabeth Warren's office issued the following:
Washington, D.C. – Today, in response to the news that President-elect Donald Trump has named Billy Long to serve as Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) Commissioner, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the incoming top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, released the following statement:
“Billy Long’s nomination to lead the I.R.S is bad news for middle-class taxpayers and a win for ultra-wealthy tax cheats. He has zero relevant experience for this critical management role and this pick — along with the unprecedented firing of the current commissioner — should set off alarm bells about the weaponization of the tax agency. If he’s confirmed, taxpayers can expect longer wait times for customer service, a more complicated process to file taxes, and free rein for the rich and powerful to continue rigging the system at the expense of everyone else.”
###
The following sites updated:
-
-
-
The Border Has Eyes1 day ago
-
-
-
-
Hero of the week1 day ago
-
Idiot of the Week1 day ago
-
-
Satan Trump and his Nazi supporters2 days ago
-
Prissy Harrison Butker2 days ago
