Podcasts about Nafta

Mike Lomas and Glenn Wiggle open with a look at market stability and the quiet that has followed cuts to organizations they argue were funding street unrest, including commentary on fraud charges tied to Black Lives Matter leadership. The conversation turns to research integrity, with Glenn walking through recent guilty pleas from a vaccine researcher and a former senior advisor to Dr. Fauci, and the hosts arguing that funding structures create incentives to shape findings in both public health and climate science. They discuss the New York Times finally acknowledging the lab leak theory, and press the case for accountability over pandemic school closures and business shutdowns. From there, the hosts critique what they describe as misplaced public sympathy for criminal defendants, citing a viral video and a Texas sentencing case. The back half centers on trade, with clips from Prime Minister Mark Carney's White House meeting prompting a debate over reciprocal tariffs, the shift from NAFTA to USMCA, and the decline of private sector unions. Mike shares a client story about a Lockport manufacturer that grew from ten employees to a hundred after General Motors moved sourcing stateside. The episode closes with Trump's remarks on South Korean defense payments, Treasury action against Iranian money laundering, concerns about federal spending and the national debt, and a lighter Rochester-area story about a children's lemonade stand run by local teachers.00:00:00 Quiet Markets and the Money Behind the Riots00:02:50 Research Fraud and Conflicts of Interest in Science00:04:48 Fauci, COVID Accountability, and Guilty Pleas00:07:53 Lab Leak Origins and the New York Times Op-Ed00:10:33 Misplaced Sympathy, Social Media, and Soft Sentencing00:19:44 Canada Tariffs and the Carney White House Meeting00:23:34 From NAFTA to USMCA and the Decline of Private Unions00:29:04 How Tariffs Grew a Lockport Manufacturer00:33:41 South Korea Defense Payments and Iranian Money Laundering00:42:07 A Rochester Lemonade Stand and a Misspelled Sign

This week we talk about borders, trade wars, and belligerence.We also discuss Trump's tariffs, inflation, and nationalism.Recommended Book: Vulture Capitalism by Grace BlakeleyTranscriptThe US and Canada share the longest international border in the world, totaling more than 5,500 miles, or nearly 8,900 km. The specific details of this border have changed over the decades, but the current delineation was largely in place following the San Juan Islands water arbitration of 1872, which brought a 12-year joint military standoff between the US and Great Britain, known as the Pig War, to an end, and fed into a 1908 legal framework that relied on modern mapping of the entire frontier, which led to the precise cartography of the current international border between the US and Canada.Since then, after some issues with gold rush-era land rights were figured out in Alaska, and some treaties were signed regarding the disarmament of the Great Lakes, things have been pretty calm along this massive border. Trade hasn't always been the most efficient and free—the early 20th century in particular was pretty fraught in this regard, as Anti-Americanism raged through Canada. That led to a dismissal of a proposed lowering of trade barriers by the Canadian Liberal government in 1911, anti-American sentiment flogged by the Conservatives, who rode their slogan, “No truck or trade with the Yankees,” to a Canadian nationalism-powered victory.After the US entered WWI and the Allies tallied a victory, though, the US and Canada exchanged their first ambassadors, Warren Harding became the first US President to make an official visit the confederated Canada, visiting Vancouver in 1923, and things between these two countries were looking pretty good until 1930, when the US passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which was a protectionist trade act that, among other things, raised tariffs on incoming Canadian goods in order to protect competing American business interests; making the local offerings artificially more competitive than the stuff coming in from Canada, basically.The Canadian government hit back with their own higher tariffs and shifted more of their trade to other Commonwealth nations, which led to a decrease in trade between the US and Canada of about 75%; and this was happening during the Great Depression, which is why that Act was enacted, the US government was hoping to bolster their own economy, but instead of helping, it furthered those economic difficulties, because of that drop in trade and international custom—Smoot-Hawley is generally considered to have been an incredibly bad economic move, and US President Hoover signed it against the advice of senior economists, because it seemed politically expedient, US businesses were clamoring for advantages because they thought it would help them, but instead it worsened the Great Depression, and this Act is now taught as a cautionary example of why protectionist trade policies, while appealing in a nationalist sense, tend to be pretty bad, almost always, economically.US-Canadian relations improved a bit in the WWII-era, and into the early decades of the Cold War. By the late-1960s, the US had become Canada's largest export market, and that's why Nixon's 1971 decision to enact a 10% tariff on all imports, including those from Canada, hit the Canadian economy so hard. Overall US-Canadian relations soured during Nixon's time in the White House, in part because the Canadian government pivoted toward Europe, rather than kowtowing to the US' economic demands, and Nixon's belligerence in the face of that pivot didn't help matters.When US President Carter stepped into office, however, things improved for a while, and though there were serious bouts of stagflation in both nations through his time in the White House, American investment in Canada increased, and relations continued to be friendly leading into the 1990s, at which point the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA was signed, in 1994. NAFTA created a common market in North America, between the US, Canada, and Mexico, and that meant the $19 trillion or so in trade between the 470 million people or so living in North America by 2014, would be entirely or almost entirely without barriers, no tariffs or very small, focused tariffs.Though imperfect by many measures, NAFTA is generally considered to have been a major success, at least in terms of raw economic productivity in North America. And in 2020, is was replaced by the USMCA, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which is often called NAFTA 2.0, which is in many ways just a modernization of NAFTA that updates many of the earlier provisions and focuses more on digital trade and intellectual property than its precursor.In July of 2026, however, the US government announced that it would not be renewing the USMCA, after Canada asked the US and Mexico to renew it for another 16 years. The pact remains in effect until it expires in 2036, though it can also be renegotiated or replaced before that. The US Trump administration pointed at rising trade deficits between the US and both Mexico and Canada as the rationale for not renewing it, and at loopholes in the agreement that allowed other nations, like China, to send car components to Mexico and then essentially get Chinese vehicles into North American markets, benefitting from the agreement despite not being a signatory of it.What I'd like to talk about today is a new trade scuffle between the US and Canadian governments, and what it might mean for the two nations in the coming years if said scuffle becomes a more persistent trade war.—In July of 2026, US President Trump threatened to invoke a provision of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, that Act from 1930, the Great Depression, which was previously unused, to impose additional tariffs on Canada, despite the continued existence of the USMCA trade agreement.Stepping back a bit, in his second administration, Trump has unilaterally imposed all kinds of tariffs on pretty much everybody, arguing that those tariffs would bring in more money and thus allow him to lower taxes on the wealthy and on businesses while still bringing in enough to reduce the federal deficit. This claim wasn't backed by economists and the deficit has continued to increase at a record rate under his administration, but he's continued to try this approach and make these claims, regardless.The Supreme Court eventually stepped in to limit Trump's ability to impose tariffs in early 2026, saying that the Presidency doesn't have the power to create a bunch of tariffs and impose them on everyone, even when he points at the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as justification. That halting of Trump's tariffs seem to have helped temper inflation in the US a bit, but now Trump is now taking another approach to try to accomplish the same, invoking this 1930, Great Depression-era act to try to give himself broad tariff-applying powers, once more, despite that Supreme Court decision.As I mentioned in the intro, the application of Smoot-Hawley tariffs worsened the Great Depression, as the US applied all these tariffs on foreign goods to try to give its own industries an advantage, and that led to counter-tariffs from most of its targets. Within a few years, the people behind those tariffs were booted from office, and the bad taste it left in the US government's mouth is part of what led to the wave of trade liberalization that happened post-WWII—everyone was done with the heavily tariffed trade environment because it kind of sucked for everyone, so free trade was the name of the game for decades.Now at the time, even though the tariffs had a net-negative impact on the US, they didn't exactly crush the US because international trade only made up about 10% of the US economy back then. Today, about 25-27% of US GDP relies on international trade. So still not a majority by any means, and the global average is about 63%, so the US is more capable of undertaking this sort of trade barrier strategy than many other nations, but that's still a pretty substantial chunk of economic activity in the US that's impacted by such efforts.This declaration by Trump that he would be using this old Tariff act to apply new tariffs on Canadian goods arrived after trade negotiations between the US and Canada fell apart, reportedly mere minutes before a deadline, with both sides claiming to the press that the other side attempted to make a last-minute change that was untenable.After Trump announced that additional 50% tariff on certain goods, the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announce that he would be matching those tariffs, dollar for dollar—a move that's likely to hurt Canada more than the US, though many US industries, including those that are already hurting because of resource shortages that have been amplified by Trump's war with Iran and the consequent shut-down of the Strait of Hormuz, not to mention all the uncertainties that have arisen because of his other tariff threats, those industries and businesses will suffer more than most; the US auto industry, for instance, relies on goods that pass back and forth across the Canadian border several times before eventually ending up in US-made automobiles. The US construction industry is likewise reliant on Canadian lumber products.It seems like Canada has generally tried to work with the US government to come to a mutually beneficial and appealing compromise, but when that happens, the US then pushes for more, then blames Canada for fighting back when the US attempts to punish them for not just giving in. And this is something the Trump administration, and Trump himself, have become fairly notorious for, so it's a decent assumption, even though we don't know all the details here, yet, that this is what happened in this case, too.And as a result, it sounds like the US will apply 50% tariffs on about $20 billion worth of Canadian goods coming into the US, including things like honey, seeds, and agricultural products, and some types of furniture, clothing, and fabric.About 72% of all Canadian exports went to the US in 2025, and many of those exports, the ones to which this new tariff will be applied, will now be more expensive, because these costs are almost always passed on to the end-consumer, not just eaten by the business, which in some cases wouldn't be able to afford to eat those higher costs and stay in business. This is part of why these sorts of tariffs often increase inflation rates.Both sides of this conflict have publicly committed to not back down, and there's political hay to be made in sticking with that sentiment; the US is not terribly popular in Canada, or in many allied countries, right now, due to the antagonistic stance the Trump administration has taken toward those relations, so the Canadian government might actually benefit from taking a hard line against the US, here. Likewise, Trump's supporters might rally around his bullying of a neighboring nation, especially if the administration can successfully frame this as an effort to reduce the deficit or support US businesses, protecting them from foreign competitors are are unfairly competing.There's still a fair bit of fog of war on all of this, and we'll know a lot more within the next few weeks, both in terms of the details of what happened, and in terms of what's likely to happen next. Right now, though, it would seem that we could be headed for a new trade war between two of the world's most deeply intertwined wealthy economies, and that could lead to a lot of global economic disruptions as some of that trade is rerouted, and as inflation continues to spiral.Show Noteshttps://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-canada-us-trade-war-293908564c7a381ea58a61db6e9a8517https://apnews.com/article/canada-us-trade-tariffs-trump-857ef76b20a766e370d70176135b678ehttps://apnews.com/article/canada-us-trade-war-trump-carney-tariffs-4d18583fe52134ca8550652ad9772d2chttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/22/business/economy-trade-war-us-canada.htmlhttps://www.axios.com/2026/02/20/trump-tariffs-supreme-court-illegalhttps://access.heinonline.com/HOL/LandingPagehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreementdoi.org/10.1017%2FS0022050700019549https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Acthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_trade_relationshttps://www.axios.com/2026/08/22/us-canada-tariffs-trade-trump-carneyhttps://www.npr.org/2026/08/22/nx-s1-5941584/us-canada-tariffshttps://apnews.com/article/canada-us-trade-tariffs-trump-857ef76b20a766e370d70176135b678ehttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgvyy4x2mvohttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/22/world/canada/carney-trump-canada-tariffs.html This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

War is getting cheaper, supply lines are in danger, and the old order is cracking. Peter Zeihan explains why it's breaking and what North America can do.Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/1370What We Discuss with Peter Zeihan:War just got cheaper, not less lethal. A drone costing double-digit dollars can now pick its own target, fly hundreds of miles, and destroy gear guarded by $4 million interceptors. Ukraine fires hundreds a day, and the edge that made piloted systems king is shrinking by the week.America blew through half its Patriot interceptors in the Iran war and can build only about 70 a year — refilling the stockpile is a 15-year math problem. The result: a broad drawdown of US power across the Eastern Hemisphere, because we can no longer afford to defend it.The real crisis isn't losing cheap gadgets — it's losing the building blocks. Roughly 80% of the world's steel, copper, lithium, and cobalt is processed in China. Break that system before a replacement exists, and we lose the materials that make the things that make everything else.AI isn't floating safely above the mess. Its best chips lean on about 9,000 companies and 100,000 production steps, so one broken link stalls the whole thing. Stack that on China's demographic freefall — a white-collar generation apparently never born — and 'fragile' undersells it.The way through: deepen North American integration — lock in NAFTA with Mexico and Canada and rebuild industrial capacity at home. Mexico's plants are largely built and Turkey is rising fast. The path exists; it just takes the discipline to stop dismantling the fix first.And much more...And if you're still game to support us, please leave a review here — even one sentence helps! Sign up for Six-Minute Networking — our free networking and relationship development mini course — at jordanharbinger.com/course!Subscribe to our once-a-week Wee Bit Wiser newsletter today and start filling your Wednesdays with wisdom!Do you even Reddit, bro? Join us at r/JordanHarbinger!This Episode Is Brought To You By Our Fine Sponsors: Ground News: 40% off unlimited access Vantage subscription: groundnews.com/jordanBetterHelp: 10% off first month: betterhelp.com/jordanCash App: Get $10: Download app, use code Bitcoin10, and send $5 to a friend in the first two weeksK12: Learn more at k12.com/jordanSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Derbi je bil zelo gajsten in borben, tako na terenu kot na tribunah. Olimpija je odigrala najboljšo tekmo sezone, a tudi to ni bilo dovolj za zmago. Pri zeleno-belih sta najbolj izstopala »Kiki« Bendra in Jošt Urbančič, ki je dosegel svoj drugi gol v sezoni in ostaja edini strelec Olimpije.Pogovarjali smo se tudi o kolobocijah okoli kluba, o domnevnih finančnih malverzacijah in drugih neumnostih, ki razgaljajo vso bedo nemškega »režima«, na koncu pa smo se ozrli še v svetlo prihodnost, saj že v petek v Stožice prihaja Nafta.Ne preostane nam drugega, da še naprej gledamo in komentiramo Olimpijo na terenu in ob njem ter upamo, da bo ljubljeni vodja Delius končno sprejel dobronamerni nasvet Dragonsov, ki na imajo po novem na vsaki tekmi transparent: »Prodajte klub!«

In this prescient interview, Savage speaks with Pat Buchanan about issues that would become increasingly important in the years that followed, including China's growing economic power, national security, foreign ownership of American assets, cybersecurity, trade deficits, manufacturing losses, immigration, and American sovereignty. Savage argued that the proposed 3Com deal involving Chinese telecommunications company Huawei should be blocked on national-security grounds, questioned Goldman Sachs' influence in Washington, and urged Americans to apply the kind of public pressure that helped stop the Dubai ports deal. They also discuss the consequences of NAFTA and America's trade deficit with Mexico, and the loss of U.S. manufacturing. They issue a warning about the border, demographic change, and immigration. They chastise the Bush-era embrace of globalization and question whether America was sacrificing its sovereignty. 

Ralph welcomes Robert Reich (professor of Public Policy and former Secretary of Labor) to discuss his "Pledge to Make America Affordable Again." Then, Ralph speaks to Derek Shearer (former economic policy adviser and US Ambassador to Finland) about his recent work, "A Bold Economic Program for America."Robert Reich is Emeritus Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, including as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. Mr Reich has written eighteen books, including The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, The Common Good, Supercapitalism, and Coming up Short: A Memoir of My America. He is co-founder of Inequality Media, co-founder of the Economic Policy Institute, and co-founding editor of The American Prospect.Democrats have an opportunity now to talk to the working class about—and not just the working class, the middle class too—about prices, about affordability in ways that are terribly important and meaningful and that really could get prices down or at least stop the onslaught of inflation. And also that are very, very consistent with what we believe as Democrats, as progressives, as people who want to see the nation move back toward its pursuit of social justice.Robert ReichYou can bet that the right, the apologists for wealth in this country are going to say, “Oh, no, no, no, don't do that because wealthy people will leave the country!” I mean, what they always do reflexively is say, “If you do that, we'll leave.” And I say in California the same thing I would say about a national wealth tax—if they want to leave, let them leave. But they're not going to leave because there are so many advantages to staying in California in terms of: this is where a lot of the high tech talent actually is. This is where the infrastructure for high tech is already. The climate, as I talk to you, I'm looking at a beautiful day out here. You know, who wants to leave California? And if you are a billionaire, and you are just so intent on leaving California because of this one very, very minor tax, then frankly, goodbye.Robert ReichI am a believer, though, in the common sense of the American people. Now, if that makes me naive, if that makes me gullible, so be it. But I think at the end of the line, the bottom line here is that the American people will make a decision starting with the midterm elections coming up in just 96 days (something like that). And those elections are going to be critical in terms of trying to constrain Trump and the people, the sycophants and lapdogs behind him and Hegseth and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and all these people who are ripping the social contract to shreds. And I think that the one way that (this brings us back to my pledge, my affordability pledge for Democrats), I think one way the Democrats can be sure to get the House back and maybe even possibly the Senate in 96, 97 days, is to pledge to make America affordable again. And using these 10 particular steps that are widely, widely supported.Robert ReichDerek Shearer served as the US Ambassador to Finland from 1994 to 1997. Previously, he worked in government at the national, state, and local levels, including the founding board of directors of the National Consumer Cooperative Bank in 1978 and Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs in 1993. He is emeritus Chevalier Professor of Diplomacy and World Affairs at Occidental College and Diplomat in Residence at Occidental for 2025-26. During the 1992 presidential campaign, Ambassador Shearer was a senior policy adviser to Bill Clinton and helped to write the campaign's economic program, Putting People First. He has continued this policy work by co-authoring the comprehensive proposal A Bold Economic Program for America and exploring its political path forward in his recent article, Planning for the Day After Trump.The point of our program is not that it should be endorsed in its entirety. It's almost meant to be a discussion document to show what is possible—that this can be done. It doesn't require some dramatic change in the way the government operates. It just demands a change in priorities and some new lawsDerek ShearerYou can't get to those issues until you are actually in the government. And if we don't win back the House and at least have a shot at winning back the Senate, talking about these issues while Trump and the MAGA Republican Party controls the government (and might continue to control it), makes us feel good, but it doesn't change anything. What I've learned about the so-called leaders of the party is you don't really expect them to lead. They will follow when they see where the voters are going. And they'll also follow when they see if there is a Presidential candidate who takes off on these kinds of issues…I don't expect the leadership to lead on these issues. So I don't rail against them. Because what I'm doing (and I'm doing it with a lot of different people out there, including a lot of young people) is trying to find good candidates, provide them with economic ideas to run on, and then hope that we win back the House and that these kinds of then-elected officials who share our viewpoint become the Democratic Party. I mean, that's how you do these things. If we don't win these elections, then we're just kind of crying in the wilderness.Derek ShearerLet's Start the RevolutionTools for Displacing the Corporate State and Building a Country that Works for the PeopleIn his latest eye-opening exploration, political maverick Ralph Nader dissects the astonishing twists and turns of the 2020 presidential election, a race that left the nation on the edge of its seat. Although Joe Biden clinched victory with a substantial popular vote lead, Nader unveils the precarious nature of the outcome, where a mere 100,000 votes in key swing states could have catapulted Donald Trump back to the presidency. Get your copy here.News 8/7/26* This week, a new wave of Democratic primaries were held, most notably in the state of Michigan. In the closely watched Senate primary, which came down to a two-way race, Bernie Sanders-backed progressive Dr. Abdul El-Sayed emerged triumphant. Some have played up the fact that his opponent, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, overperformed relative to her polling in an attempt to downplay the significance of El-Sayed's victory. Yet, this narrative ignores the fact that Stevens enjoyed the backing of the Democratic Establishment and AIPAC, which gave her an 12-to-1 spending advantage according to Axios, and that she ran misleading ads that made it seem as though former President Barack Obama had endorsed her campaign. Viewed in this light, it is clear just how impressive El-Sayed's victory – statewide, in a must-win swing state for Democrats – is. El-Sayed will now face off against former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers in the general election.* In Detroit, the left scored another major win with the victory of Donavan McKinney. McKinney, a DSA member and Michigan state representative, won his primary race against incumbent Congressman Shri Thanedar in Michigan's 13th congressional district, the Detroit Free Press reports. Thanedar, a millionaire businessman, was a DSA member but left over disagreements over Israel. Thanedar fought hard to keep this seat, which he won in 2022, and was supported by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries despite many members of the Congressional Black Caucus supporting McKinney. Given that this is a heavily Democratic district, McKinney is essentially guaranteed a seat in the next Congress, bringing the number of DSA-backed House Members to an unprecedented high of seven. Moreover, between McKinney and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, the city of Detroit will now enjoy all DSA representation in Congress.* In Michigan's seventh congressional district, progressive climate activist and co-founder of the Sunrise Movement William Lawrence pulled out a win in his primary as well. NBC notes that Lawrence defeated his two more moderate opponents, retired Navy SEAL Matt Maasdam and former Ambassador to Slovakia Bridget Brink, in part by aggressively criticizing the construction of new AI data centers. Some have alleged that Lawrence received support from Republicans using dark money to boost his campaign because they believe him to be an easier candidate to defeat in the general election. However, the Hillary Clinton campaign's “pied piper” strategy to boost Donald Trump in 2016 proves that this is ever a risky strategy. Michigan's seventh district is seen as a critical battleground seat. Donald Trump won the district by just one single percentage point in 2024.* In more data center news from the Midwest, Hell Gate reports former New York City Mayor Eric Adams was in “Wisconsin Rapids—population 18,654—trying to convince residents that they should allow a real estate developer to build a data center in the heart of their town.” In a video of his pitch, the townspeople can be seen heckling, booing and shouting down the former Mayor, with attendees saying “You belong in prison!” and “You're here to steal our water!” Community activist Kaitlyn Federwitz is quoted in this piece saying “Our whole town does not want him here at all,” adding “We want our resources to be properly safeguarded, our farmers to be protected, our waterways protected.” The Wisconsin Rapids economy had been largely dependent on a local mill, which closed its doors in 2020; Federwitz spoke to this, arguing that “When the mill closed, we lost 900 jobs. We're aware we need jobs and industry in our city.” However, she added that the people of Wisconsin Rapids are “not willing to accept that a data center is the answer to that problem.”* In more news from the midwest, United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain has published a new op-ed in Newsweek contending that “Democrats Must Pick a Side: Billionaires or Working-Class.” Fain cited numerous examples of Democrats in powers betraying their working class supporters, from NAFTA to modern governors like Abigail Spanberger of Virginia vetoing collective bargaining rights for public-sector workers. He criticized Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer in particular for vetoing “nine bills restoring pensions, lowering health care costs, and restoring bargaining rights for public-sector workers,” after “Michigan Democrats fought an 18-month legal battle to force the bills to the governor's desk.” He claims that “When the courts finally ordered [the bills] delivered, Whitmer vetoed all nine the same day—without so much as a phone call to legislative leaders or the unions that helped elect her.” He ends this piece with a call for “every elected official and candidate to…[reject] corporate PAC money,” and “adopt a platform that addresses the needs of working-class people.” This clear-eyed, laser focus on the working class is what has put Fain into conversation for a 2028 presidential run by some on the populist left, particularly if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ultimately declines to run. A recent article in POLITICO quotes Bhaskar Sunkara, the 2020 Sanders surrogate and former vice chair of the Democratic Socialists of America, saying “If he's willing to run, [Fain] might be the best candidate for the left…Since he's progressive but very much says his egalitarian value system comes from his Christianity, [he] can speak in a moral language that can reach more independents than other candidates, and I think it would set a good precedent for labor.”* For the DSA left, all eyes now turn to Wisconsin, where Francesca Hong's campaign for the gubernatorial nomination continues to pick up steam. Just this week, per Wis Politics, Hong picked up the endorsement of the SEIU Wisconsin Healthcare and Service Workers. In their endorsement statement, SEIU Wisconsin called Hong “a longtime advocate and fighter for the working class,” who is “committed to building back strong labor protections by overturning Act 10 and so-called ‘Right-to-Work' laws, expanding Badgercare, and abolishing poverty wages in Wisconsin.” The union added that Hong's “support for a $20 minimum wage, adopting family-centered policies such as paid family leave and affordable child care, and enacting much-needed regulations on corporate monopolies make her the clear choice for all Wisconsinites, not just the wealthy.” Hong currently leads in the polls, despite the sitting Democratic Governor's attempts to boost her primary rival, David Crowley. Both Hong and Crowley have racked up labor support, though Crowley decidedly leads among the building trades and firefighter unions.* In St. Louis, the left experienced its biggest setback this cycle, with former Congresswoman Cori Bush losing her comeback bid against Congressman Wesley Bell by a large margin. Bush was ousted in 2024 as part of “a broader strategy by AIPAC to unseat Israel's sharpest critics in Congress, including the ‘Squad,' which Bush was a part of,” per the Missouri Independent. This piece notes that AIPAC spent over $8 million to oust Bush in that cycle and outside groups spent $7.2 million on Bell's behalf this year. Bell's official campaign outspent Bush's by a margin well over 10 to 1. Bush is the first candidate backed by National DSA to lose their race in 2026, which, while disappointing in this case, is a stunning testament to the track record of the group.* In a totally different part of the country, this week Julian Beaudion, the Democratic nominee for Senate in South Dakota, dropped out of the race. Beaudion cited personal hardships for himself and his family in his statement of withdrawal citing a recent house fire. However, many see this as an acknowledgement that the independent candidate in this race, veteran and former park ranger Brian Bengs, has a better chance of defeating incumbent Republican Senator Mike Rounds in a head-to-head matchup. This dynamic has been playing out in other states; Democratic Senate candidates have dropped out to clear the way for independents in Nebraska and Idaho already and there is immense pressure on the Democratic nominee in Montana to do the same. For his part, Beaudion will not endorse either candidate in South Dakota, according to KELOLAND News, but South Dakota Searchlight reports the South Dakota Democratic Party will not replace Beaudion on the ballot, giving the greenlight for Democrats to coalesce around Bengs in the general election.* In another primary election story, Lehigh Valley Public Media is out with a story on the strange dynamic emerging in Pennsylvania's 7th congressional district. According to this story, this race – between incumbent Republican Ryan Mackenzie and his Democratic challenger Bob Brooks, who seems to have done the impossible by getting Bernie Sanders and Josh Shapiro on the same side in a primary – has been upended by the entry of one Andrew Tupone. Mr. Tupone, a former Republican candidate, is running on the Green Party ballot line and claims to have “joined the Green Party this spring, drawn by its environmental policies on water conservancy and opposition to data centers, after growing disillusioned with both major parties.” Yet, apparently, “Green Party leaders warned in a statement this month that a wave of candidates may be posing as party members across the state.” Chris Robinson, a Green party spokesman, claims that “The party hasn't endorsed any congressional candidates in Pennsylvania and has never heard from Tupone.” Robinson adds that he “looked at [Tupone's] Facebook page, and he seems like he's a nice Republican.” According to LVPM, “a third-party candidate wouldn't need to move the needle much,” to influence the outcome of the election, noting that the current Congressman defeated the Democratic incumbent, Rep. Susan Wild by just 1 percentage point, in 2024, while “Tim Silfies, the last third-party congressional candidate to appear on a Lehigh Valley ballot, earned 8,011 votes, or 3 percent of the vote, in 2018.”* Finally, in more third party news, POLITICO reports several leading figures on the anti-MAGA right – including Congressman Thomas Massie, former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, and commentator Tucker Carlson – convened last weekend to “[sow] the seeds for a future third-party political organization…aimed at undercutting the Republican establishment.” This gang of three, joined by former Trump national security official Joe Kent, are particularly incensed by the president's intervention in Iran, with Greene writing “We said no more foreign wars and we meant it and supported Donald Trump because he made that promise. But he's betrayed us all.” This group is reportedly mulling a right-wing, third-party presidential campaign in 2028. While Carlson has declined to launch a presidential bid in the past, despite urging from within his circle, a sprawling new “10-point vision for America” he debuted during a recent stream implies that he is increasingly interested in articulating an alternative vision of right-wing politics from those espoused by Trump. This manifesto, as reported by Axios, includes everything from declassifying records on the JFK assasination and 9/11 to enforcing universal sobriety to “halting immigration until the effects of AI become clearer.” We will be watching closely to see if this effort moves forward or peters out as has been the pattern with other recent third party attempts.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

It's PID Radio's Throwback Thursday. This week, we present a 2008 interview with Jerome Corsi about his best-selling book The Late Great USA. Originally released February 10, 2008 OUR GUEST tonight appears regularly on national radio and television programs such as The Glenn Beck Program, The Savage Nation with Michael Savage, and Coast to Coast AM with George Noory. He's the author of several important books, including his most recent best-seller, The Late Great USA. Dr. Jerome Corsi writes regularly at WorldNetDaily about the North American Union and the manipulation of the U.S. dollar to force the adoption of a single North American currency. He believes, as we do, that the current mortgage crisis and the imminent meltdown of the stock market are just preliminary steps to forcing changes on Americans that will eliminate our sovereignty (at a tidy profit for those involved). Topics: • The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger With Mexico and Canada by Jerome Corsi• Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians by Jerome Corsi and Craig R. Smith• Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry by Jerome Corsi and John O'Neill•N.J. Parkway lease mirrors NAFTA superhighway plan•Economist: Expect Fed to lower Dow to 8,000•Real budget deficit: $4 trillion•Are our banks on life-support?•Half of gold in central banks gone?•Dozens of bank collapses are on the horizon•Arab nations eye control of U.S. companies•North American merger topic of secret confab•McCain aide touts ‘Mexico first' policy•US-backed Russian institutes help build Iran nuclear reactor Sharon's niece, Sarah Sachleben, is fighting stage 4 bowel cancer, and the medical bills are piling up. If you are led to help, please go to GilbertHouse.org/hopeforsarah. Follow us! X (formerly Twitter): @pidradio | @sharonkgilbert | @derekgilbert | @gilberthouse_tvTelegram: t.me/gilberthouse | t.me/sharonsroom | t.me/viewfromthebunkerSubstack: gilberthouse.substack.comYouTube: @GilbertHouse | @UnravelingRevelationFacebook.com/pidradio JOIN US IN ISRAEL (NOTE NEW DATES)! We will tour the Holy Land October 25–November 6, 2027 with an optional three-day extension to Jordan. For more information, log on to GilbertHouse.org/travel. Thank you for making our Build Barn Better project a reality! Our 1,200 square foot pole barn has a new HVAC system, epoxy floor, 100-amp electric service, new windows, insulation, lights, and ceiling fans! If you are so led, you can help out by clicking here: gilberthouse.org/donate. Get our free app! It connects you to this podcast, our weekly Bible studies, and our weekly video programs Unraveling Revelation and A View from the Bunker. The app is available for iOS, Android, Roku, and Apple TV. Links to the app stores are at pidradio.com/app. Think better, feel better! Our partners at Simply Clean Foods offer freeze-dried, 100% GMO-free food and delicious, vacuum-packed fair trade coffee from Honduras. Find out more at GilbertHouse.org/store/.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.wethefifth.comSo that's where these Genius Grants come from…-Most roads lead back to Prague for Matt Welch-about that letter…six paragraphs, $5 million in free publicity and Harper's back in the mainstream-It was NAFTA, not woke, that elected Trump. Or was it?-Illegal immigration is a wage issue-Who still believes free trade is the answer to everything?-Vietnam made …

Neste novo episódio da série Termos Ambíguos, o verbete abordado é o “Globalismo”, que ganhou destaque durante o primeiro governo Donald Trump, ao ser contraposto ao patriotismo e à liberdade em seu discurso político. Desde então, passou a integrar o vocabulário de movimentos antiglobalistas, influenciando também o governo Bolsonaro. No entanto, o conceito é complexo e controverso, envolvendo diferentes interpretações, atores políticos e relações com questões contemporâneas, especialmente no contexto brasileiro. Para apresentar um debate sobre o termo, entrevistamos a Sonia Corrêa, o Fernando Brancoli e o Douglas Sanque, que foi também o autor do verbete no Termos ambíguos do debate político atual: pequeno dicionário que você não sabia que existia, disponível para download gratuito no site do Observatório de Sexualidade e Política. _________________________ Roteiro Ernesto Araújo: “Eu acho que o mais grave do globalismo é na mente, no pensamento. Eu acho que o globalismo é perigoso porque é sobretudo um sistema de pensamento, de anti pensamento. […] Tatiane Amaral:  Quem está falando aqui é Ernesto Araújo, ex-ministro de relações internacionais do governo Bolsonaro Sonora Ernesto Araújo: […] Eu vejo o globalismo muito como o processo pelo qual a ideologia marxista, a partir do começo dos anos 90 e sobretudo a partir dos anos 2000, ela penetra na globalização econômica e faz dela o veículo da sua propagação. Então, justamente através da globalização  começa a entrar com sua agenda em temas como ideologia de gênero, em temas como o ambientalismo distorcido, e outros. E começa sobretudo a controlar o discurso, a dizer o que você pode dizer e o que você não pode dizer, e cada vez o que você pode dizer é menos, ocupa um menor espaço. Então, eu vejo mais o globalismo assim, aquela ideia de que o marxismo descobriu que ele não precisa controlar os meios de produção econômica, quando ele pode controlar o meio de produção de ideias, que é o que já vinha acontecendo. E é através desse controle de ideias começa a capturar instituições e aí começa a partir dessas instituições tentar  agir para diminuir as identidades nacionais, e as identidades pessoais também. A fala pode até soar exagerada, parecer coisa de filme ou de teoria da conspiração… mas ela está se tornando cada vez mais presente em discursos políticos da ultradireita — seja no Brasil ou no mundo. E ela gira em torno de uma palavra: globalismo. Mas afinal, você sabe o que, de fato, é globalismo? Daniel Faria: Eu sou o Daniel Faria  Tatiane: E eu sou a Tatiane Amaral. E este é o sétimo episódio da Série Termos Ambíguos, uma parceria entre o Observatório de Sexualidade e Política e o podcast Oxigênio. Daniel: Juntos, vamos conduzir esta viagem pelo termo que tem estado cada vez mais presente nos discursos políticos globais e nacionais. Falei em viagem porque o termo se vincula a globo, a planeta, além de ser usado em muitos países. Mas também não deixa de ser uma viagem no sentido figurado mesmo, pois o termo como é usado pela extrema direita evoca um certo devaneio, ou até mesmo delírio.  Tatiane: O termo “Globalismo” é mais uma categoria acusatória fabricada pela extrema direita, assim como muitos outros espantalhos, alguns que a gente até já tratou aqui no Termos Ambíguos, como Ideologia de gênero, marxismo cultural,racismo reverso…  Daniel: A extrema direita usa esses e vários outros termos com objetivos específicos: Por um lado, eles querem provocar o medo e, sobretudo, a suspeita. De outro, criar confusão mesmo.⁠ No caso de Globalismo as confusões são muitas e muito sobrepostas, mas vamos tentar esclarecer algumas delas neste episódio. Tatiane: Pra começar, precisamos esclarecer que Globalismo não é a mesma coisa que Globalização. Eu sei que é confuso, mas vem comigo: Globalização é a denominação da transnacionalização intensificada de relações econômicas, culturais e sociais, que se registrou a partir do fim da Guerra Fria. Já o Globalismo pode ser descrito como uma desfiguração de globalização, que atribui a essas dinâmicas outros sentidos, em geral associados à dominação, a atores obscuros e à conspiração.  Daniel: No dicionário de termos ambíguos, que você pode encontrar aqui na descrição desse episódio o verbete escrito pelo Douglas Sanque, que vai aparecer na nossa conversa daqui a pouco, traça um histórico desse processo desde 1991, quando a União Soviética chegou ao fim e seus ex-membros foram integrados à nova ordem neoliberal global. É aí que se consolida a globalização, que foi uma integração via mercados ao redor do… Globo.  Tatiane: Esse movimento promoveu uma ampla abertura de mercados que intensificou a concorrência internacional. Nesse processo foram estimulados os acordos de livre comércio e a formação de blocos econômicos. Em tese, isso deveria favorecer todas as nações, mas vamo lá, né? A gente sabe que não foi bem assim. Claro que os países mais desenvolvidos e industrializados se deram melhor.  Daniel: Foi aí, no meio desse processo, que a União Europeia foi criada, a partir do chamado Mercado Comum Europeu. Foi esse mercado que ampliou a integração que era só, econômica para uma integração política e institucional. Após o fim da Guerra Fria, nos anos 90, a União Europeia se expandiu, incorporando países do Leste Europeu, que antes integravam a antiga União Soviética. Tatiane: Depois disso, foram surgindo blocos econômicos pelo mundo todo, como o Mercosul, por exemplo, que é o Mercado Comum do Sul, formado por Brasil, Argentina, Uruguai e Paraguai. Tem também o Nafta, um Tratado entre México, Estados Unidos e Canadá, assinado em 1994 e atualizado em 2020 como Acordo Estados Unidos-México-Canadá. Além disso, as Economias asiáticas também se fortaleceram nesse contexto, com destaque para os Tigres Asiáticos, formado por Taiwan, Coreia do Sul, Hong Kong e Singapura. Sem falar da China, que também ampliou muito suas relações comerciais internacionais nesse período.  Daniel: A Sonia Corrêa, coordenadora do Observatório de Sexualidade e Política e do projeto do Dicionário, já conversou com a gente em outros episódios do Termos Ambíguos, e dessa vez ela destaca um ponto importante desse processo da Globalização:a expansão do neoliberalismo. E ela lembra que o processo nunca foi tranquilo e nem poupado de críticas.  Tatiane: A Sonia comenta que o Neoliberalismo estava em expansão desde o final dos anos setenta. Com o fim da guerra fria e o desaparecimento do bloco soviético, todo esse espaço econômico passou a analisar (e sentir) os efeitos negativos da expansão do pensamento neoliberal nas desigualdades econômicas dentro dos países, ENTRE países e, mais especialmente, entre o NORTE e o SUL globais.  Daniel: Durante todo o processo, muitos acordos foram sugeridos, mas nem sempre as tentativas deram certo. Um bom exemplo foi a tentativa de implantação da Área de Livre Comércio das Américas, a ALCA, que integraria os mercados de 34 países das Américas, exceto Cuba, eliminando as tarifas e os impostos de importação. A proposta era de George Bush, então presidente dos Estados Unidos, mas não foi pra frente, justamente por causa da grande disparidade de recursos e poder entre os países. Tatiane: Vale a pena a gente dizer que quando os países começaram a entrar nessa chamada “economia global”, muita coisa mudou internamente também. Por exemplo, várias indústrias saíram da Europa e dos Estados Unidos e foram pra lugares como a China ou o México, onde produzir é mais barato, principalmente por causa da mão de obra. Ao mesmo tempo, a globalização também trouxe a privatização de serviços públicos, como saúde e educação, reformas nas leis trabalhistas desfavoráveis a trabalhadoras e trabalhadores, assim como dos sistemas de aposentadoria. Também ativou novas formas ainda mais agressivas de extrativismo. Tudo isso contribuiu para o aumento das desigualdades. E foi nesse clima que a categoria acusatória “globalismo” prosperou e se aproveitou da atmosfera de contestação à globalização para impulsionar seu projeto político que não tem nenhum compromisso com a superação da desigualdade.    Daniel: Autores e autoras, como a Wendy Brown, analisaram como a expansão da lógica neoliberal teve efeitos negativos sobre a política e sobre a nossa forma de pensar e sentir, provocando dinâmicas de erosão da democracia, como estamos vivendo agora. O historiador Quinn Slobodian, autor do livro Globalistas: o fim do império e o nascimento do neoliberalismo, entende que o projeto  neoliberal  tem  como objetivo criar instituições para proteger o capitalismo da ameaça que a  própria democracia representa. E essas novas instituições serviriam para reorganizar o mundo como um espaço de Estados-competidores. Tatiane: Mas o espantalho do “globalismo” não se aproveitou apenas da crítica progressista e da insatisfação real com a globalização. Ele também acionou suas próprias assombrações. Para entender isso é preciso voltar no tempo, lá pros anos 1940, ao final da II Guerra Mundial. Na verdade, vamos voltar até um pouco mais, com a ajuda da Sonia Correa. Sonia Corrêa: Bom, para compreender essa posição dos globalistas há um aspecto que não pode ser perdido de vista. Para a direita, a ultra direita norte americana desde o começo do século XX, pelo menos, foi avessa a uma ordem institucional transnacional. E essa ultra direita raiz, fez uma enorme oposição à adesão dos Estados Unidos à Primeira Guerra Mundial. Tiveram posições contra a Liga das Nações e certamente fizeram pressão contra a entrada dos Estados Unidos na Segunda Guerra Mundial. Ou seja, tem um DNA muito profundo aí na ultra direita norte americana, que é contrário a existência de uma ordem internacional de regulação global. É porque eles a veem como um contraponto ou uma possível ameaça à ordem hegemônica dos Estados Unidos como império. Eu acho que um outro aspecto a considerar que, se isso é, são as correntes de ultra direita norte americana e outras correntes, como por exemplo, a posição do Dugin, o intelectual russo sobre isso e talvez de segmentos das correntes européias. E tem a ver com um repúdio. Como essas forças fazem um repúdio à ideia da modernidade, os princípios liberais de democracia e direitos humanos. E há uma conexão também por esse lado, que é, digamos, mais filosófica e menos estratégica política.  Tatiane: Além da cooperação multilateral econômica, os países criaram também um sistema para prevenir novos conflitos bélicos e promover a paz. Sim, estou falando da Organização das Nações Unidas, a ONU.  Daniel: No contexto dos giros políticos à ultradireita que tem varrido as Américas e a Europa hoje, os discursos anti-globalistas fizeram da ONU um de seus alvos principais. Seus detratores a descrevem como um aparato de dominação que quer impor sua agenda aos estados nacionais. Ao fazer isso ofuscam o que é de fato a ONU.  Não sei pra você, mas até aqui essa história de globalismo continua bem confusa pra mim. Então, pra gente continuar destrinchando esse termo, falamos com o  Fernando Brancoli. Ele é professor do Instituto de Relações Internacionais e Defesa, da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro e adicionou elementos que nos ajudam a desarmar qualquer confusão que o termo globalismo possa provocar.  Fernando Brancoli: Bom, eu acho que um ponto interessante é a gente imaginar que o discurso antiglobalista, ele não é uma rejeição integral aos princípios da globalização, né? A gente está falando de uma reconfiguração seletiva no que seria uma espécie de dispositivo narrativo, né? Que separa, separaria, uma globalização boa para esses grupos de extrema direita, uma aproximação que permeia dimensões ligadas a interesses morais, econômicos, culturais e o que eles vão chamar muitas vezes de globalismo, né, que seria uma globalização ruim, que seria um conjunto de normas e procedimentos derivados principalmente do pós-guerra fria, que promoveria aí uma agenda ligada a valores liberais, a direitos sexuais, a direitos humanos, políticas ambientais, que de alguma maneira estariam violando então a soberania dos países, e na verdade tentando, dentro de uma teoria da conspiração bastante clássica, implementar uma agenda de uma espécie de camarilha internacional dos Illuminati e coisas parecidas, né? Tatiane: A professora de sociologia na Universidade de Oxford, Rita Abrahamsen, faz uma análise interessante sobre este tema do espaço transnacional. Pra ela a extrema direita é em si mesma global, ao mesmo tempo em que seus idealizadores ocultam de maneira muito hábil essa transnacionalidade. O Fernando também elaborou sobre essa dimensão oculta, o que nos ajuda a esclarecer uma outra confusão de que as vozes que propagam o fantasma do Globalismo reivindicam para si, como sujeitos nacionalistas ou soberanistas:  Fernando Brancoli: Muitas vezes a gente fala dessas redes antiglobalistas como se elas fossem necessariamente não transnacionais, o que não é verdade. O que elas estão fazendo é reconfigurando um pouco esse dispositivo narrativo. E acho que quem está acompanhando a gente talvez já tenha escutado essa história: “Ah, o Trump é um isolacionista”. Não necessariamente, né? A gente não está falando de uma antiglobalização de necessariamente fechamento completo das fronteiras. Você tem uma recalibragem dessa dinâmica, de um projeto novo de recentralização de poder. Então, sim, eu posso ter dinâmicas mais isolacionistas em alguma medida, construção de muros, expulsão de migrantes e refugiados, fechamento de trocas comerciais tipicamente liberais, mas ao mesmo tempo eu tenho aproximação para outros lados, né? Em que eu apoio ditaduras amigas, eu argumento que posso criar coletivos transnacionais de apoio a dinâmicas de moralidade. Então acho que esse paradoxo, no final das contas … Eu diria que é a grande força dela, que é criar essa espécie muito peculiar de uma internacional nacionalista.  Daniel: Fernando também recorre a uma metáfora  de verniz legitimador para explicar essa mistura paradoxal de discursos que juntam nacionalismo ou antiglobalismo para servir a interesses muito específicos:  Fernando Brancoli: Esse paradoxo é a grande força dentro desse processo. [03:30] A genealogia dessas dinâmicas já passa por think tanks dos Estados Unidos e a gente tem livros importantes acadêmicos já descrevendo como é que eles se expandiram pelo globo ao longo pelo menos nas últimas duas décadas, né? Então são grupos de pesquisa, são empresas que de alguma maneira promovem esse tipo de ideário. Tatiane: Pra entender melhor como esse paradoxo funciona, pedimos pro Fernando explicar como esses discursos colam, como eles têm aderência a uma massa bastante volumosa, que inclusive elege conscientemente essas figuras. Ao mesmo tempo em que batem no peito e dizem: “EU SOU patriota, EU VOU defender meu país”, entregam de mãos abertas a exploração das riquezas naturais brasileiras — como a Amazônia,os minérios e, agora, as Terras Raras do país — a uma potência imperialista como os Estados Unidos. Além disso, defendem intervenções externas, como a retirada forçada de um presidente, e apoiam movimentos extremistas que ameaçam o próprio país. Fernando Brancoli: Acho que essa aparente contradição, né, de uma internacional nacionalista, a ideia de como é que eu crio alianças entre partidos e grupos que são notadamente, introspectivos diante desse tipo de processo, eh, na verdade, é a maior força desses grupos. É a ideia de mobilizar esse paradoxo. E não se trata necessariamente de, uma dinâmica que vai gerar problemas na frente, eu vou tentar explicar porquê dentro desse processo. Acho que a primeira configuração é que sejam partidos de extrema direita no contexto brasileiro, sejam grupos não partidários, como, por exemplo, grupos evangélicos mais conservadores no contexto brasileiro, sejam grupos mega ortodoxos sionistas em Israel, ou seja, agora, o Partido Republicano nos Estados Unidos. Todos eles olham para o transnacionalismo como uma forma de ganhar poder e ganhar prestígio, então a gente tá falando de recursos que circulam nesse processo. A gente tem por exemplo grupos em Israel, grupos não tradicionais do Brasil como partidos ligados a lideranças religiosas e coisas parecidas que de alguma maneira olham para esse processo e veem a transnacionalização como uma ferramenta de ganhar poder e prestígio, seja simbólico ou material. Exemplo clássico que eu acho bastante interessante, parte importante dos grupos de extrema direita em Israel, dos mais ortodoxos, são financiados por capitalistas norte-americanos. Né? Isso não é uma teoria de conspiração, eles argumentam que essa grana seria interessante. Tem um trabalho interessante da Camille Rocha, né? Menos Marx e mais Mises, um livro fascinante em que ela descreve como é que os norte-americanos financiaram grupos liberais e anarco-capitalistas, sabe-se lá o que que é isso, no contexto brasileiro. Então, lembrar que esse transnacionalismo tem dimensões práticas muito claras, né? Daniel: Aqui, de novo fica claro que o transnacionalismo pode ter dimensões práticas, e que ele serve para alguns interesses. Ou seja, mesmo sendo nacionalista, dá pra ser transnacionalista quando você, ou o país, pode ter dividendos importantes. Brancoli usou o exemplo de Eduardo Bolsonaro para mostrar como contatos estratégicos com a ultra-direita ajudaram a movimentação para as taxações sobre produtos brasileiros e a suspensão de vistos para autoridades envolvidas na condenação do pai. Mas o professor dá outros exemplos, segundo ele mais simbólicos, como contatos pessoais, encontros ou declarações nos quais se aprende essa lógica transnacional.  Fernando Brancoli: Você tem encontro do Vox, por exemplo, que é o partido de extrema direita na Espanha, que eles têm uma sessão à tarde do último dia, que é para ensinar técnicas do que eles chamam engajamento digital. Em que você senta com lideranças políticas do globo inteiro numa mesa e te ensinam como é que você faz para, por exemplo, ter acesso mais interessante de pessoas, formar cortes e vídeos bacanas. Eu lembro que nos últimos 3 anos quem esteve lá foi o Nicolas, deputado é, federal de Minas, que é um cara, né, muito especializado em gerar cortes e coisas parecidas. Eu acho que ele já tinha uma capacidade de fazer isso, mas provavelmente ele aprendeu também nesse contexto. Repare como é que o transnacionalismo dentro dessa lógica gera esse tipo de prática. E por fim, o transnacionalismo, ele facilita algo que é muito típico de grupos autoritários que é a possibilidade de criar um mundo binário, né? De você criar um nós contra eles de maneira muito muito clara. Acho que, né, a gente que estuda relações internacionais, quem tem acesso, né, à imprensa, sabe que é muito difícil você criar uma narrativa muito clara de bonzinhos e malvados dentro de um contexto, né? Você vê nuances, você vê pessoas muitas vezes em busca da paz dos dois lados e coisas parecidas, né? Tatiane: E nessa disputa entre nós e eles, surgem dois pólos entre o bem e o mal. E quem é o bem? Quem é o mal? A ultra direita entende que está do lado do bem, de que quem defende a “família” e os valores tradicionais. Mas quem não defende a família, ou as famílias? A sua família? Os seus valores tradicionais, na sua tradição? E para quem está nesse campo da ultra direita, o mal é o socialismo, o comunismo, a esquerda. De novo aqui o Fernando:  Fernando Brancoli: Existe aqueles que do outro lado, que é o mal, que é o PT, o MST, o Foro de São Paulo e a Venezuela, que querem acabar com esses valores, querem destruir todos esses dessas menções. Aí repare como é que esses vetores se aproximam, né? Uma dinâmica de moralidade, uma dinâmica econômica, então vira um caldo complexo aqui dentro desse tipo de processo. Nós somos soberanos ainda, no caso brasileiro, estaremos tentando retomar essa soberania agora que foi roubada pelo PT e temos um governo aliado norte-americano que está tentando nos ajudar nesse processo.  Mas eu acho que esse paradoxo ele acaba sendo de alguma maneira articulado e promovido de maneira interessante. Ainda tem um paradoxo aqui, que é para você ser essencialmente nacionalista e mobilizar dinâmicas transnacionais. Mas acho que mesmo a tentativa de encontrar um meio-termo já facilita e já gera repercussões interessantes. E aí você tem em todo protesto no Brasil, cartazes em inglês, bandeiras dos Estados Unidos, bandeiras de Israel, você tem a a deputados fugindo para a Itália, onde seria supostamente, né, um lugar mais conservador. Ao que tudo indica a Zambelli não vai conseguir ficar por lá há muito tempo. Mas aí você tem o Eduardo Bolsonaro, né, indo para os Estados Unidos, você tem essas mobilizações, isso vai gerando repercussões e impactos e pelo menos são simbólicos gera mídia, a população fica engajada. Então, de alguma maneira tem algo interessante que a gente tá vendo e os manuais de ciência política e de relações internacionais estão todos passando mal por causa disso, que a esquerda tá se transformando por um lado numa defensora do multilateralismo. Daniel: Tem também a China se apresentando como defensora da OMC e contra tarifas praticadas pelos Estados Unidos. Isso também é uma mudança do contexto da esquerda, como disse nosso entrevistado.  A gente tem um deslocamento também, eu diria, do que vai ser o discurso progressista de esquerda ao longo dos próximos anos. A esquerda se apropriou mais de discursos ligados à proteção da indústria nacional, né, contra ALCA e o FMI, contra as empresas estrangeiras, e agora de alguma maneira a gente está vendo uma rearticulação desse tipo de processo. É, a gente está inaugurando uma forma nova de olhar para relações internacionais, em parte porque também está tendo uma rearticulação de como esses grupos de poder estão se configurando. Ninguém tem muita certeza para onde que a gente vai, mas acho que uma das certezas que a gente vai ter que os manuais de relações internacionais e ciência política vão ter que ser reescritos ao longo dos próximos anos, porque as coisas estão mudando de maneira bastante explícita, né? Muito. Tatiane: Sonia Corrêa diz que há duas saídas pra grande confusão que apresentamos aqui entre nacionalismo e globalismo. A primeira é o progressivismo internacionalista que remete para o internacionalismo histórico da esquerda, e a segunda é o que pode ser chamado de constitucionalismo de esquerda. Ela explica melhor do que se trata. Sonia Correa: O que importa é chamar a atenção para essa mélange de posições que requer clarificação, porque, de fato, a crítica do globalismo, ela chove num terreno fértil, que é a crítica do neoliberalismo e da ordem capitalista, não é? Ela ecoa nesse lugar. Ela move afetos, afetos legítimos de crítica. A racionalidade neoliberal e a ordem do capitalismo tardio. A diferença está como diz o Slobodan, em qual a saída? A diferença de visão ideológica é como você sai disso. Se você for para o campo do Dugin, que é a teoria da quarta transformação, é uma ordem. Uma proposição de um retorno a uma ordem de fato quase medieval, quer dizer centrada na terra, no território, numa cultura comum, numa ordem hierárquica. Se você olha para o campo da direita. Num certo sentido, Trump é a manutenção da ordem neoliberal e da racionalidade neoliberal extrema, demolição do Estado. Todo o poder às Big Techs. Aqui são os meus amigos Better Friend Ever, sob um invólucro, uma casca de nacionalismo extremado. Make American big again. Tatiane: Voltando um pouco atrás, no verbete para o Dicionário de Termos Ambíguos, e no tempo, Douglas lembrou da influência de Ernesto Araújo e de Olavo de Carvalho sobre o governo Bolsonaro, no sentido da adoção de uma posição antiglobalista. Vale lembrar que mesmo antes de ser eleito, Bolsonaro afirmava que a ONU não servia para nada e que iria tirar o Brasil do Conselho de Direitos Humanos. Em sua primeira aparição na Assembleia Geral da ONU em 2019, o ex-presidente fez a seguinte afirmação:  Sonora Jair Bolsonaro: “Não estamos aqui para apagar nacionalidades e soberanias em nome de um interesse global abstrato. Esta não é a Organização do Interesse Global! É a Organização das Nações Unidas. Assim deve permanecer!” Daniel: Douglas também escreveu no verbete que Ernesto Araújo afirmava que o caminho para reverter os efeitos negativos do globalismo seria adotar uma política pautada por deus, pátria e família. Com certeza vocês ouviram isso muitas vezes, né? Só pra lembrar, esse é o slogan da Ação Integralista, movimento fascista brasileiro da década de 1930, copiado do movimento fascista italiano.  Tatiane: Ainda segundo o verbete a espiritualidade cristã caracterizaria o ocidente e diferenciaria as nações ocidentais do materialismo asiático e do islamismo. Por outro lado, a família é definida como a célula basilar da nação, o apego à família  seria um traço fundamental do povo brasileiro o qual, nas palavras de Araújo, se vê hoje frontalmente atacado por “ideologia de gênero”, “gayzismo” e “abortismo”.  Daniel: O “globalismo”, na visão de Ernesto Araújo, seria um projeto de governo totalitário mundial, capitaneado pela China e com o apoio da Rússia. E nessa versão do antiglobalismo, existiria um complô entre as elites financeiras ocidentais e o Partido Comunista da China para a implantação de uma sociedade de controle. O ex-ministro ainda afirmava que a China controlava metade do parlamento brasileiro e toda a nossa agricultura, e queria controlar nossa Internet.  Tatiane: Bem, essa tentativa de controle da internet a gente já tá vendo que existe mesmo, mas não por acaso, esse controle não está na China, né? E além desta, qual outra afirmação, entre as muitas feitas aqui, parecem verdadeiras? E quais delas são pura fantasmagoria criada no meio das muitas confusões que esse termo cria? De quais fantasias ele depende para se manter? Bem, responder a tudo isso demandaria uma boa aula de muitas horas… Mas, podemos explicar aqui essa confusão entre os muitos alvos de ataque das vozes “antiglobalistas” Daniel: Mas nem todos os anti globalistas têm o mesmo inimigo. Há diferenças em relação aos alvos dos “antiglobalistas”. Nos Estados Unidos, por exemplo, Trump se utiliza do discurso “antiglobalista” para atacar as “elites liberais”, associadas ao partido democrata estadunidense. Já aqui no Brasil, Bolsonaro denunciava a “conspiração comunista” da qual participaria o PT, assimilando a visão “antiglobalista” ao discurso anticomunista. Douglas Sanque conta um pouco dessas forças globalistas. Tatiane: Douglas é professor na Universidade Estadual do Rio de Janeiro, a UERJ e é o autor do verbete sobre Globalismo do dicionário que estamos tratando aqui. Ele escreveu o verbete durante a pandemia do Covid-19, em pleno governo Bolsonaro, quando nele discursavam, pra não dizer doutrinavam, antiglobalistas assumidos como Olavo de Carvalho, professor e ideólogo de Bolsonaro, e Ernesto Araújo, que foi ministro de relações exteriores até 2021.  Douglas Sanque: Bom, em relação a essa noção de quem seriam as chamadas forças globalistas, primeiro, a ideia aqui é pensar que as forças globalistas teriam o objetivo de estabelecer um controle mundial, um governo global, totalitarista. E isso é, em alguma medida, uma perversão da ideia de aumento de influência que potências  econômicas sempre tentaram exercer de maneira mais ou menos ética. Mas não se tenta um governo global totalitário, assim inspirado naquela ideia de 1984 do George Orwell. O principal projeto globalista seria capitaneado pela China. Os chineses teriam essa ideia, teriam esse objetivo de longo prazo de controle mundial. Então, seriam as elites liberais do Ocidente que estariam nesse projeto junto ao Partido Comunista Chinês. Essa é a perspectiva, digamos, principal, que é adotada, por exemplo, pelo Steve Bannon e que guia o assim chamado antiglobalismo, ou o nacionalismo americano, que estaria combatendo essas próprias elites, representando o povo, o blue color, os trabalhadores e a classe média americana que, de fato, viu muita s perdas com o processo de desindustrialização dos Estados Unidos ao longo do século XX, e grande parte dessas plantas industriais foi para a China.  Tatiane: Claro que isso causou mudanças significativas na economia americana, que tem levado o país, de forma mais incisiva neste novo governo de Donald Trump, a criar estratégias de proteção econômica. Durante o governo Bolsonaro, quando o Olavo de Carvalho, exercia influência sobre ministros e filho do então presidente, tratou da versão caseira de teoria da conspiração, como nos conta Douglas. Douglas Sanque: O Olavo dizia que havia três projetos globalistas em curso. Em diferentes escalas e com diferentes objetivos. O primeiro seria esse tocado pela China, que tentaria ali uma ideia de governo global, mais ou menos nesses moldes que eu já mencionei. O segundo seria o projeto do Irã. O Irã também teria esse objetivo de governo global, a partir do espraiamento do islamismo, né? Na verdade, a ideia seria um governo global, totalitário islâmico e a principal força por trás desse projeto seria o Irã, que tem ali uma. População muçulmana xiita. Enfim, você tem uma pluralidade importante naturalmente no Irã, mas.    Daniel: O terceiro projeto seria tocado pelas elites financeiras ocidentais. Nessa perspectiva, representada por autores como o russo Aleksandr Dugin [DUGAN], a tentativa de estabelecer uma governança global teria origem no Ocidente, especialmente nos Estados Unidos, vistos como a principal expressão da modernidade ocidental. Nessa visão, esse projeto deveria ser combatido por forças tradicionalistas que defendem a preservação de identidades culturais próprias e de modos de vida considerados mais enraizados nas tradições locais e rurais. Douglas Sanque: Então você tem pensadores, como o Olavo de Carvalho, o Steve Bannon e o Dugin, e os líderes daqui que conseguiram ascender, com esse pensamento, ao poder nos seus países. O Putin na Rússia, o Trump nos Estados Unidos e o Jair aqui no Brasil. A questão é que, como esse pensamento tem muito pouca, digamos, base material, ele vai se moldando pra acomodar os interesses políticos dos líderes. Então a gente pode pensar, por exemplo, no Brasil como o Bolsonaro, se se elege em oposição a um projeto que seria de esquerda e que, na opinião deles, é comunista. A ideia de liberalismo econômico é uma ideia que faz sentido e que pode ser defendida. Os russos têm um papel curioso, porque em diversas situações eles são vistos ali como como uma espécie de braço ou de sócio minoritário dos chineses. Mas ao mesmo tempo, estive vendo, um entende que os russos deveriam estar nessa luta por conta de uma certa essência da identidade russa. É como, como sendo da Igreja Ortodoxa nós teríamos a mesma alma cristã. E tudo se opondo então ao materialismo que caracterizaria o projeto chinês De extirpar a religião da da vida em comunidade. Então a gente percebe que há uma certa coerência no pensamento do globalismo, no sentido de criar uma ordem global que separa muito claramente quem são os mocinhos e quem são os bandidos. Que coloca em uma nação específica. E normalmente é a China, a fonte de todo mal. E aí, contra isso, vale tudo. E nós estamos numa batalha aqui para salvar a nossa nação, para salvar as nossas tradições, para manter o nosso povo e por aí vai.  Tatiane: Pois é, as mudanças estão bastante evidentes e não sei se são para melhor. Desde que fizemos as entrevistas para este episódio, algumas coisas mudaram. O primeiro-ministro da Hungria, Viktor Orbán, um dos principais líderes da extrema-direita global, perdeu as eleições após 16 anos no poder. Estados Unidos e Israel estão promovendo uma grande guerra na Ásia Ocidental, atacando o Irã e o Líbano, sem contar o genocídio que Israel já vinha praticando na Palestina. Aqui na América Latina, os resultados das eleições presidenciais de 2026 em países como Colômbia, Peru e Chile não foram nem um pouco animadores. E neste ano também teremos eleições no Brasil, já com dois extremistas como candidatos: Ronaldo Caiado, pelo PSD, e Flávio Bolsonaro, herdeiro do legado do pai que foi condenado a 27 anos de prisão, e agora também envolvido em um processo de lavagem de dinheiro ligado ao Banco Master. A extrema direita vem ganhando espaço em muitos países, sempre colocando em risco a democracia e os direitos civis.  Daniel: Este foi o sétimo episódio da série Termos Ambíguos, realizada em parceria com o Oxigênio, a partir do material do Termos Ambíguos do debate político atual: Pequeno Dicionário que você não sabia que existia, coordenado pela Sonia Corrêa. Esse é um projeto do Observatório de Sexualidade e Política (SPW) e do Programa Interdisciplinar de Pós-graduação em Linguística Aplicada da UFRJ e contou com vários autores na produção dos verbetes. Tatiane: A apresentação do episódio foi feita pelo Daniel Faria, estudante do curso de Midialogia, na Unicamp, que foi também o editor do áudio desse podcast, e por mim, Tatiane Amaral, doutoranda pelo Programa de Pós-graduação em Relações Internacionais San Tiago Dantas e da equipe de Comunicação e Pesquisa do SPW, e editora do áudio desse podcast. As entrevistas foram feitas por mim e pela Stella Brucha Simões. O roteiro foi feito pela Simone Pallone, coordenadora do podcast Oxigênio e por mim. Daniel: A revisão do roteiro foi feita pela Nana Soares, da equipe de Comunicação e Pesquisa do SPW, por mim, pela Tatiane, e pela Sonia Corrêa. Tatiane: A principal referência para o episódio foi o verbete produzido por Douglas Sanque para o Termos ambíguos do debate político atual: pequeno dicionário que você não sabia que existia. Usamos também definições da Wikipedia para alguns conceitos.  Daniel: O áudio de Ernesto Araújo foi extraído de uma entrevista dada por ele ao Canal Poder Paralelo. A fala de Bolsonaro na Assembleia da ONU é uma reprodução do canal do jornal El País no YouTube.  Daniel: Você pode acessar os outros episódios da série Termos Ambíguos pelo site do podcast Oxigênio: www.oxigenio.comciencia.br ou pelas plataformas de áudio de sua preferência. Aproveite para indicar nossa série. Até mais!

The ratification of NAFTA—the North American Free Trade Agreement—in 1994 transformed Mexico in profound ways. Over the next thirty years it deepened and expanded the resource frontier across the country, disproportionately benefiting national and global elites. Mining activity exploded, and with it the socio‑ecological violence that follows large‑scale extraction. Anti‑extractivist struggles cannot be ignored—especially as Morena, the self-proclaimed progressive political party that holds power in Mexico after breaking seven decades of political duopoly in 2018, tries to navigate competing pressures. Morena's landmark program—the so-called “Fourth Transformation"—frames greater state involvement and control over strategic resources and royalties as a means to fund social programs and reclaim national sovereignty, though its policies and outcomes remain uncertain.This episode offers a closer look at extractivism in Mexico, tracing developments from the colonial silver boom to state‑led industrialization and from neoliberal open‑pit expansion to present-day state-led extractivism. Darcy Tetreault and Sol Pérez Jiménez join us from Mexico to offer granular historical knowledge and field‑based evidence, mapping how policy and capital have reshaped labor, land and water regimes. We discuss the deepening of resource frontiers, the persistence of elite mining interests, and the complex, contested forms of resistance—from legal reforms to grassroots refusal and struggle for territorial autonomy. Continental Shift is made possible by support from the Public Scholars Initiative at the University of British Columbia.

Another round of 50% tariffs are coming for a number of Canadian goods, ranging from dairy, hockey sticks to hair wigs. Prime Minister Carney has since agreed to intensify negotiations in the coming weeks. US President Trump's reason for the tariffs was to address what he calls Canada's "discrimination against and unreasonable and unequal treatment of U.S. commerce". Host Caryn Ceolin speaks to Joseph Steinberg, economics professor from the University of Toronto, to discuss whether or not the new duties should be interpreted symbolically, and how Canadian businesses should brace for impact. We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us:Through email at hello@thebigstorypodcast.ca Or @thebigstory.bsky.social on Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You weigh in with international trade lawyer and policy strategist Barry Appleton, former advisor to BC and Ontario on NAFTA. We also hear from CBC senior reporter Janyce McGregor who is following the premiers' meeting in Prince Edward Island.

Egipt je bil prva afriška in arabska država, ki se je že davnega leta 1934 kvalificiral za nastop na nogometnem svetovnem prvenstvu, ki je takrat potekalo v Italiji. Tokrat je na mundialu sodelovalo 10 arabskih držav. Od najpomembnejše postranske teme k osrednji temi, ki poganja svet. Nafta. Poletje je čas dopustov. Kako nemirne razmere vplivajo na potovanja, turizem. Denimo v Egiptu, Dubaju?

"Governing on Fiction" Hosts: Darren Weeks, Vicky Davis Website for the show: https://governamerica.com Vicky's website: https://thetechnocratictyranny.com COMPLETE SHOW NOTES AND CREDITS AT: https://governamerica.com/radio/radio-archives/22671-govern-america-july-18-2026-governing-on-fiction Listen LIVE every Saturday at 11AM Eastern or 8AM Pacific at http://governamerica.net or on your favorite app. DISCLOSURE: AI used for top-of-the-hour newscasts and break bumper music.The masks are back as Canadian wildfires cover the Midwest in thick smoke and media blames "climate change". What role does proper forest management play in prevention and how does the Canadian government measure up? Global Fire Monitoring Center and the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code. JD Vance talks foreign influence, Epstein files, and more with Joe Rogan. Trump administration to renegotiate USMCA instead of repeal it, and more.

Ann Coulter. Beating the Anchor Baby Ruling with Roger Severino Beating the Anchor Baby Ruling w/ Roger Severino. UNSAFE with Ann Coulter Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/vlPxB4IPRWs?si=toAPwCef81ddqAWl Ann Coulter 2.86K subscribers Jul 10, 2026 UNSAFE w/ Ann Coulter - live on 07/09/2026 Ann Coulter opens with an urgent call for Donald Trump to veto the housing bill and its expansion of Section 8 housing, walking through what Section 8 did to Ferguson, Missouri, the landlords who profit, and Jared Kushner's Section 8 millions. She covers Graham Platner ending his Maine Senate campaign after his Reddit post mocking a wounded Purple Heart soldier, the rape revelation and the Totenkopf tattoo; Finland's Supreme Court convicting MP Päivi Räsänen over a 2004 church pamphlet on Christian teaching (and Rod Dreher's report that she can't transit Heathrow); Google AI falsely claiming New York Times coverage of the case; the cyclospora parasite outbreak and America's dependence on Mexican produce under NAFTA and USMCA; and The Atlantic's numbers on the death of reading, from the National Endowment for the Arts surveys to the reversing Flynn effect. Then the Heritage Foundation's Roger Severino — Project 2025 drafter, former head of civil rights at HHS, husband of Carrie Severino — details the plan JD Vance boosted for fighting the Supreme Court's anchor-baby ruling: closing the 14th Amendment territories loophole behind Chinese birth tourism in the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam, declaring birth-tourist parents persona non grata for life unless they renounce their child's citizenship, expedited deportation for the parents, requiring hospitals to report citizenship status of parents, making illegal-alien parents pay public school tuition to challenge Plyler v. Doe, and using tax law against returning anchor-baby 'sleepers' — the Al Capone treatment. Topics: housing bill, Section 8, Ferguson, Graham Platner, Maine Senate race, Päivi Räsänen, Finland hate speech, Google AI, cyclospora, Mexican produce, NAFTA, reading decline, Flynn effect, Roger Severino, Heritage Foundation, Project 2025, anchor babies, birthright citizenship, 14th Amendment, birth tourism, Northern Mariana Islands, Plyler v. Doe, deportation, JD Vance Watch live on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/AnnCoulter TikTok:   / realanncoulter   X (formerly Twitter): https://x.com/anncoulter Substack: https://anncoulter.substack.com/

AAM President Scott Paul spent 15 years hunting for a Western shirt actually Made in America. He never found one — because almost nobody was making them. Carter Baldwin was on the same hunt, going back to his college days in '90s Austin, and eventually decided to make the shirt himself. Brazos Fine Shirts is the result: 100% cotton, mother-of-pearl snap, made in the Los Angeles Garment District — and it took roughly six years, a career's worth of DTC marketing know-how, and one catastrophic run of 1,000 shirts with the snaps pressed on backwards to get there. Carter walks Scott through why a Western shirt takes 24 hand-cut pieces and can't be automated, how NAFTA hollowed out El Paso's garment district, and how Post Malone's stylist found the brand a month after launch.

Irānā pēdējā gaitā pavadīts ASV un Izraēlas uzbrukumā nogalinātais augstākais garīgais līderis Alī Hāmenejī. Ukraina sekmīgi bliež pa Krievijas naftas ražošanas un eksporta infrastruktūru, un sociālos medijus pāršalc video ne tikai ar degošiem rezervuāriem un rūpnīcām, bet arī milzīgām rindām pēc degvielas. Turcijas galvaspilsētā Ankarā šonedēļ norisinājās NATO samits, un mediji uzreiz atzīmēja, ka ASV prezidents Donalds Tramps tur devās sliktā noskaņojumā. Aktualitātes raidījumā Divas puslodes analizē Aizsardzības akadēmijas pasniedzējs Jānis Kapustāns un politologs Veiko Spolītis. Hāmenejī atvadās, karš turpinās Irānas galvaspilsētas Teherānas ielas nedēļas nogalē un pirmdien, 6. jūlijā, pildīja ļaužu pūļi, kuri pavadīja pēdējā gaitā 28. februārī ASV un Izraēlas aviācijas uzbrukumā nogalināto islāma republikas augstāko garīgo līderi Alī Hāmenejī. Vakar atvadu ceremonijas pārvietojās uz šiītu islāma svēto pilsētu Kumu, šodien, 8. jūlijā, tā turpinās Irākas šiītisma centros Nedžefā un Kerbelā, visbeidzot ceturtdien process noslēgsies ar apbedīšanu aizgājēja dzimtajā pilsētā Mešhedā. Pie Irānas mošejām tiek pacelti sarkani karogi, kas simbolizē mocekļa asinis, un kuriem tur jāplīvo tik ilgi, līdz šīs asinis nebūs atriebtas. Galvenais islāma republikas varas vēstījums šai grandiozajā pasākumā ir, ka valsts un sabiedrības idejiskie pamati paliek nesatricināmi par spīti vadoņa bojāejai. Novērotāji atzīmē, ka arī tēva bērēs publiski nav parādījies viņa varas oficiālais mantinieks Modžtaba Hāmenejī. Ir zināms, ka arī viņš cietis sabiedroto uzlidojumos, tomēr joprojām nav zināms, kāds ir viņa veselības stāvoklis un vai viņš vispār veic kādas varas funkcijas. Līdz ar to nav īsti skaidrs, kā šobrīd darbojas Irānas valsts varas sistēma, kur augstākajam garīgajam līderim ir noteicošā loma. Otra nozīmīgākā figūra šai sistēmā ir valsts prezidents, taču nākas šaubīties par pašreizējā valsts galvas Masuda Pezeškiāna reālo varas apjomu. Ir diezgan skaidrs, ka lielā mērā neatkarīgs savā rīcībā ir nozīmīgākais militārais spēks – Islāma revolūcijas sargu korpuss ar ģenerāli Ahmadu Vahidi priekšgalā. Visdrīzāk militāristi netika izprasījuši kādu centrālās varas akceptu, kad pirmdien ar raķetēm apšaudīja trīs tankkuģus netālu no Omānas krastiem. Par atbildi Savienoto Valstu gaisa spēki īstenoja triecienus mērķiem Irānas dienviddaļā, savukārt ASV Finanšu ministrija atjaunoja Irānas naftas un naftas ķīmijas produktu tirdzniecībai noteikto sankciju darbību. Irāna paziņojusi, ka tas ir agrāk panāktās karadarbības pārtraukšanas vienošanās pārkāpums, un ka tā neatsāks miera sarunas, kas šobrīd pārtrauktas uz augstākā līdera Hāmenejī bēru laiku, kamēr pastāv draudi no Savienoto Valstu puses. Benzīna nav, bet gaidiet uzvaras! Pēdējās dienās Ukraina turpinājusi sekmīgi graut agresorvalsts Krievijas naftas pārstrādes un eksporta infrastruktūru. Sestdien, 4. jūlijā, melni dūmu mākoņi pacēlās pār Somu līci, kad ukraiņu lidroboti aizdedzināja degvielas rezervuārus Ustjlugas un Visockas ostās un uzbruka Kronštates kara flotes bāzei un armijas poligonam pie Lugas. Savukārt naktī no svētdienas uz pirmdienu tika dots trieciens naftas pārstrādes rūpnīcai Jaroslavļā un uzstādīts jauns lidrobotu uzbrukuma tāluma rekords, sasniedzot lielāko Krievijas degvielas ražošanas uzņēmumu Omskā – Sibīrijā, apmēram divarpus tūkstošu kilometru attālumā no Ukrainas robežas. Krievijas atbilde ir jau ierastā – slepkavot Ukrainas mierīgos iedzīvotājus. 6. jūlija lidrobotu un raķešu trieciens Kijivai un tās apkārtnei laupījis dzīvību vismaz 26 cilvēkiem. Tāpat agresorvalsts pastiprināti uzbrūk degvielas uzpildes stacijām piefrontes zonā, kam gan ir apšaubāms efekts. Tikām Ukrainas triecienu rezultāti kļuvuši pamanāmi jau visā Krievijas teritorijā. Vismaz divās trešdaļās valsts reģionu ieviesti degvielas tirdzniecības ierobežojumi; dažviet, piemēram, okupētajā Krimā, tās pārdošana privātpersonām vispār pārtraukta. Pie uzpildes stacijām veidojas milzu rindas, kurās autovadītāji pavada reizumis līdz pat 12 stundām. Simtiem automašīnu īpašnieku pasūta savu spēkratu pārbūvi, lai turpmāk varētu darbināt dzinējus ar sašķidrināto gāzi. Nopietnas problēmas briest Krievijas lauksaimniecībā, jo nupat sākas labības pļauja, kam arī nepieciešama degviela. Uz šī drūmā fona Krievijas vadonis pagājušās nedēļas nogalē sarīkoja savai tautai uzvaras kaldināšanas šovu. Sestdien, 4. jūlijā, tika publiskots video no tikšanās kādā nenosakāmas lokācijas štābā, kur Putins, ģērbies aizsargkrāsas tērpā, uzklausīja ģenerālštāba priekšnieka Gerasimova un citu augstāko virsnieku ziņojumus. Kā varens militārs sasniegums tika piesaukta it kā notikusī Kostjantiņivkas pilsētas ieņemšana. Līdz karam šajā Doneckas apgabala pilsētā dzīvoja nepilni 80 tūkstoši iedzīvotāju, no kuriem tagad palikuši labi ja pāris tūkstoši. Karadarbība pārvērtusi pilsētu drupu kaudzē, tomēr arī to, kā izrādās, krievu spēki pilnībā nekontrolē, un armijas ģenerāļa Gerasimova ziņojums ir jau ierastā plātīšanās. Ko sola divas dienas Ankarā? Vakar NATO dalībvalstu vadītāji pulcējās uz organizācijas ikgadējo samitu, kas šogad notiek Turcijas galvaspilsētā Ankarā. Var teikt, ka norises vieta ir teju simboliska – apmēram viduspunktā starp divām šī brīža aktīvākajām karadarbības zonām: Ukrainu un Persijas līci. Apstiprinājās samita priekšvakarā izskanējušās prognozes, ka Baltā nama saimnieks Donalds Tarmps dodoties uz Ankaru nīgrā noskaņojumā. Vakar, 7. jūlijā, partneri saņēma no „papuča” Donalda praktiski visu domājamo pretenziju zalvi: viņš esot nemierā ar NATO, eiropieši joprojām negribot kā nākas ieguldīties pašu aizsardzībā un neesot arī nākuši palīgā militāri apstrādāt Irānu. Tas esot bijis pārbaudes tests, un partneri to neesot izturējuši. Dienasgaismā atkal tika izvilkta arī gribēšana pievākt Grenlandi, tā ka Dānijas premjerministrei Metei Frederiksenai atkal nācās atgādināt par savas valsts suverenitāti un to, ka arktiskā sala neesot izlikta pārdošanai. NATO ģenerālsekretārs Marks Rute savā uzrunā, kā ierasts, ar skaitļiem centās apliecināt, ka aizsardzības izdevumu kāpums notiek saskaņā ar ASV līdera vēlmēm.  Kas attiecas uz partneru aizsardzības tēriņiem, tad pagājušogad Hāgā definētās apņemšanās šogad sākušas materializēties konkrētos līgumos. Paralēli samita pamatprogrammai notiek aizsardzības industrijas forums – platforma, kurā tiek slēgti daudzpusēji iepirkuma līgumi un veidoti sadarbības projekti desmitu miljardu apjomā, liela tiesa no kuriem nonāks amerikāņu ieroču ražotāju kontos. Domājams, bez pārspīlējuma var sacīt, ka otra gaidītākā uzstāšanās forumā bija Ukrainas prezidenta Volodimira Zelenska runa. Spilgtākā un citētākā tās tēze: izlīdziet mums tikai ar pretgaisa aizsardzību – pārējo mēs jau varam paši. Pat ja tas ir zināms pārspīlējums, tad NATO tribīne ir īstā, no kuras atgādināt to, cik daudz Ukraina patiešām ir spējusi izdarīt. Šodien jānotiek samita gala deklarācijas parakstīšanai. Tās projektā, kuru jau iepriekš saskaņojuši alianses valstu vēstnieki, goda vietā likts apliecinājums, ka visas dalībvalstis paliek uzticīgas 5. panta principam – uzbrukums vienai no dalībvalstīm nozīmē uzbrukumu visām. Vai „papucis” no Baltā nama nesapiktosies vēl vairāk un pēdējā brīdī neizdomās deklarāciju tomēr neparakstīt – tā ir šodienas nozīmīgākā intriga. Sagatavoja Eduards Liniņš.  

Alberta's going it alone...at least for now. The province will be the initial proponent of a new pipeline to the West Coast, according to The Globe and Mail. Premier Danielle Smith says the province will foot the $14M bill for early engineering, planning, and regulatory legwork before handing it off to the private sector...but is that likely to happen? We discuss in this episode, including a surprise drop-in from National Observer columnist Max Fawcett (1:10:45) in an impromptu feature interview presented by Mercedes-Benz Edmonton West.  THIS EPISODE IS PRESENTED BY HANSEN DISTILLERY. NORTHERN EYES SEVEN-YEAR SHERRY CASK IS NOW AVAILABLE! HANSEN IS PROUDLY LOCAL, ALWAYS ORIGINAL. https://hansendistillery.com/ MBEW: https://www.mercedes-benz-edmontonwest.ca/ 00:01 | Real Talk is hitting the road! Our next episode will be Monday, July 6 from Studio Bell at the National Music Centre. Jespo and Johnny tee up those five special episodes, chat about a new solar tax in Alberta, and look ahead to the Canada-Morocco World Cup elimination game.  1:34:00 | Did you hear former PM Justin Trudeau's comments about Trump, NAFTA, and CUSMA in Finland? Let us know what you think about the current state of Canada-U.S. relations with a comment below or an email to talk@ryanjespersen.com.  SAVE on INTERNET, ELECTRICITY, and NATURAL GAS: https://parkpower.ca/realtalk/ REAL TALK'S LIVE STREAM IS PRESENTED BY CALIFORNIA CLOSETS. BOOK YOUR FREE CONSULTATION: https://californiaclosets.ca/ SIGN UP for YEGplus, CANADA'S FIRST AIRPORT REWARDS PROGRAM: https://yegplus.com/realtalk SAVE 10% on ONLINE MEN'S CLOTHING PURCHASES at THE HELM with promo code REALTALK: https://thehelmclothing.com/ SUPPORT INTEGRATED FIREFIGHTER-PARAMEDIC SERVICE IN ALBERTA: https://www.apffpa.ca/ FOLLOW US ON TIKTOK, X, INSTAGRAM, and LINKEDIN: @realtalkrj & @ryanjespersen JOIN US ON FACEBOOK: @ryanjespersen REAL TALK MERCH: https://ryanjespersen.com/merch SHOPPING FOR LUXURY CASUAL WEAR OR A CUSTOM SUIT? SAVE 10% ONLINE WITH PROMO CODE REALTALK: https://thehelmclothing.com/ RECEIVE EXCLUSIVE PERKS - BECOME A REAL TALK PATRON: patreon.com/ryanjespersen THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING OUR SPONSORS! https://ryanjespersen.com/sponsors The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the host and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Relay Communications Group Inc. or any affiliates.

Michael McAdoo is a Partner & Director, Global Trade & Investment; BCG Institute Fellow Montreal (was also part of the team that supported the original NAFTA agreement) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The title of Elizabeth Roberts' new book, In Praise of Addiction, is likely to catch your attention, maybe even set off some cognitive dissonance in your mind. But the University of Michigan's Elizabeth Roberts doesn't want you to be unhealthy or take up new habits that can hurt you and others, she just wants you to consider that maybe we haven't been looking at addiction with the clearest of eyes. Why are some substances and habits tolerated and others scorned, their users told by society to abstain and isolated until they do? In her time living in Mexico, she noticed a big difference between people who drank or did drugs to cut themselves off from society versus those who used substances to connect with one another. She offers her analysis on how this was impacted by NAFTA and the War on Drugs in Mexico and puritanism and capitalism in the United States. This is a complicated issue but it's pretty healthy to challenge assumptions and to take a look at how those assumptions came to be established in the first place. Thank you to all our listeners who support the show as monthly members of Maximum Fun. Check out our I'm Glad You're Here and Depresh Mode merchandise at the brand new merch website MaxFunStore.com! Hey, remember, you're part of Depresh Mode and we want to hear what you want to hear about. What guests and issues would you like to have covered in a future episode? Write us at depreshmode@maximumfun.org. Depresh Mode is on BlueSky, Instagram, Substack, and you can join our Preshies Facebook group.  Help is available right away. The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 988 or 1-800-273-8255, 1-800-273-TALK Crisis Text Line: Text HOME to 741741. International suicide hotline numbers available here: https://www.opencounseling.com/suicide-hotlines Help support this show and unlock bonus content! Become a member at https://maximumfun.org/joindepresh

Free trade was never actually free? That's the case Katherine Tai, Joe Biden's former U.S. Trade Representative, brings Bethany McLean and Luigi Zingales this week.  For decades, the economic consensus treated free trade as an engine for cheaper goods and faster growth. But, Tai argues, this system actually relies on ignored externalities, allowing multinational corporations to reap the benefits of zero regulation while workers and the environment absorb the costs. Zingales goes further, arguing the whole system isn't free trade at all, but something he calls “captured trade”. So who exactly is that trade free for and what exactly is it free from? Tai walks through the hidden machinery most people never see, and what she calls a plan for a worker-centered trade policy. Connect with us:

Does your guac come with a body count? Jessica Wynn peels back blood avocados, cartel taxes, and deforestation on this week's Skeptical Sunday.Welcome to Skeptical Sunday, a special edition of The Jordan Harbinger Show where Jordan and a guest break down a topic that you may have never thought about, open things up, and debunk common misconceptions. This time around, we're joined by writer and researcher Jessica Wynn!Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/1344On This Week's Skeptical Sunday:How a Los Angeles mailman's single grafted tree became the Hass — now 95% of the world's avocados — and how decades of slick marketing rebranded a suspiciously oily fruit into the "healthy fats" superfood clogging your Instagram feed.Why drug cartels muscled into guacamole after NAFTA opened the border in 1997 — discovering that "green gold" was safer than cocaine and nearly as profitable, then taxing every crate, shaking down farmers, and pioneering what economists call "narco-agriculture."How "blood avocados" hide their real cost — Michoacán's homicide rate more than doubling alongside soaring exports, journalists murdered for covering the trade, and indigenous families displaced while the violence stays invisible to anyone ordering a side of guac.What the environmental toll actually looks like: 700,000 acres of Michoacán forest cleared, arson weaponized as a legal loophole, monarch habitat collapsing, and roughly 300 liters of water drained for just two or three avocados — and the same pattern in Chile and Peru.Why the smartest move isn't a guilt-ridden boycott but better leverage — backing fair-trade and Pro-Forest certified growers, pushing retailers for real transparency, and remembering avocados swap easily for lentils, broccoli, and olive oil when you want a break.Connect with Jordan on Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. If you have something you'd like us to tackle here on Skeptical Sunday, drop Jordan a line at jordan@jordanharbinger.com and let him know!Connect with Jessica Wynn at Instagram (and Instagram!), and subscribe to her newsletters: Between the Lines and Where the Shadows Linger!And if you're still game to support us, please leave a review here — even one sentence helps! Sign up for Six-Minute Networking — our free networking and relationship development mini course — at jordanharbinger.com/course!Subscribe to our once-a-week Wee Bit Wiser newsletter today and start filling your Wednesdays with wisdom!Do you even Reddit, bro? Join us at r/JordanHarbinger!This Episode Is Brought To You By Our Fine Sponsors: SimpliSafe Home Security: 50% off + 1st month free: simplisafe.com/jordanThe Perfect Jean: 15% off first order: theperfectjean.nyc, code JORDAN15ZipRecruiter: Learn more at ziprecruiter.com/jordanFlyKitt: 15% off: flykitt.com, code JORDANSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

CannCon and Ashe in America wrap Chapter 5 and charge straight into Chapter 6 of G. Edward Griffin's The Creature from Jekyll Island, and the bailout game goes fully global. The World Bank's humanitarian branding evaporates completely as Griffin walks through country after country: Tanzania, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, all self-sufficient before the loans arrived, all economically wrecked after. Chapter 6 then lays out the international bailout game in four clean rules and names it what it is: a mechanism to perpetuate debt forever until nations surrender their monetary sovereignty to a world central bank. The Council on Foreign Relations gets formally introduced as the brain trust behind all of it, with members on record calling for the deliberate erosion of American wealth, sovereignty, and living standards. NAFTA, GATT, the EU, and the WTO get exposed as architecture for world government, not trade. And a Reagan cabinet meeting confirms what everyone suspected: nobody believed the loans would ever be repaid. The only thing that mattered was protecting the banks.

In hour 2, Greg Kelly critiques what he perceives as a culture of victimhood and the decline of traditional toughness in modern America. He specifically targets the destigmatization of PTSD, arguing that the military and political figures have "glorified" mental illness to create a "warm bath of victimhood" that incentivizes weakness over resilience. Kelly weaves together various cultural grievances, ranging from the radicalism of the Democratic Party and the "scam" of the Jeffrey Epstein narrative to the economic fallout of globalist trade deals like NAFTA. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Australia tus thawj pwm tsav cov kev txo se rau tej roj tsheb, NSW tej tub ceev xwm tej kab lis kev cai, yuav muaj neeg poob hauj lwm txog 300 txoj ntawm Southern News Group, neeg ua hauj lwm pab zejzog thiab neeg puas cev cov kev hais kom tau nyiaj hauj lwm ntau tuaj ntxiv, tsoom fwv teb chaws Australia cov kev pov puag nws cov kev kho cov kev pab tej neeg puas cev, xeev Victoria tej ntaub ntawv tso cai siv phom, Japan tus ambassador ntawm Australia xav kom muaj kev sib raug zoo ntawm Japan thiab Australia tshaj qub ntxiv, Pakistan raug liam tias tau siv dav hlau tua Afghanistan 3 lub xeev, Trump cov kev tsis siv cov kev pom zoo lagluam NAFTA, Iran yuav tsis qhau hau rau Meskas, Australia koom lub rooj sab laj AUKMIN, Cob tsib cov dav hlau Yak 130, siv lub qhov tsua ntawm Khammuane ua kev ntoj ncig, Nplog tej nyiaj tshaj USD 500,000 tswj cov healthcare waste, tej xwm txheej tsis tiaj tus ntawm ciam teb Thaib thiab Cambodia, FIFA thiab tej visa mus saib World Cup 2026.

MacroVoices Erik Townsend & Patrick Ceresna welcome, Michael Every & Rory Johnston. They discuss all things Iran from geopolitics to inflation outlook to what it means for China to President Trump and Secretary Bessent's stablecoin statecraft ambitions. https://bit.ly/3RQ4ixB    

Is AI the next great labor shock — and are we about to repeat the mistakes of NAFTA? Aaron Renn talks with Brent Orrell, Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, about what AI is already doing to the workforce, why this time the disruption is hitting knowledge workers first, and why human formation may be the most valuable asset in an AI-infused world.Brent Orrell studies the future of work and AI at AEI and previously served for years at the U.S. Department of Labor. He is launching a National Commission on AI and the Future of the American Workforce.CHAPTERS:(00:00 Introduction)(00:55 Why AI Is the New NAFTA)(04:30 A National Commission on AI and Work)(07:30 The Labor Effects Already Happening)(12:20 How "Learn to Code" Became a Trap)(17:00 Adaptation: The Core Skill for the AI Era)(24:00 Why Human Formation Matters More Than Ever)(40:00 The Coming White-Collar Political Disruption)BRENT ORELL LINKS:

Chuck Todd opens with the latest from the Iran war's increasingly costly stalemate, arguing Trump doesn't actually want a deal — he wants the ability to declare an accomplishment without ever looking like he capitulated, the same trick he ran with NAFTA and the JCPOA where he ripped up agreements only to sign nearly identical ones under new names. June, Chuck warns, is when the energy shock will start showing up in domestic prices, every day Hormuz stays closed exponentially increases the damage, consumers may begin behaving irrationally and hoarding, and a single bad natural disaster on top of all this could trigger a genuine crisis. But the heart of the episode is Chuck’s meditation on a single phrase: character is destiny in politics. It's not whether character flaws exist — everyone has them — but when those flaws become public and start affecting the people you were elected to serve. Trump's character problems were on display long before he ever became president, but his defenders now include the exact same Rubios and Grahams who used to blast him as morally unfit. And the most uncomfortable part of Chuck argument for the Democratic base: the same progressives who mocked Trump supporters for excusing his behavior are now using essentially identical defenses for Maine's Graham Platner — who has been accused of sexting in 2023, behavior that isn't youthful indiscretion and isn't going away. Chuck argues political parties used to function as imperfect but real vetting organizations, that once voters become emotionally invested in a candidate they will defend literally anything, that running for office sometimes becomes a substitute for therapy rather than a vehicle for service, and that democracy itself depends on elected officials being able to separate their personal motivations from their public obligations — something Biden failed at when his family obligations led to those preemptive pardons. He notes the Bidens were genuinely beloved before the election but Biden's ambition did real harm to his party, his family, and his own legacy. Todd points to Pope Leo as a potential moral leader Americans seem desperate for at exactly the moment when neither party seems remotely interested in finding the best possible actors. He observes that Platner vs. Collins is starting to feel like a rerun of Trump vs. Clinton in 2016 — two candidates voters genuinely don't want to choose between — and closes with quick hits on Jill Biden's forthcoming memoir, the California gubernatorial primary (where Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer could finish in the top two), and the increasingly strange Los Angeles mayoral race in which Karen Bass appears to be deliberately ignoring Spencer Pratt because she would much rather face him in a general election than the genuinely formidable Nithya Raman. Then, Colorado Springs Mayor Yemi Mobolade — the independent who won a culturally conservative city by running as a true centrist who refuses to be boxed into either party — joins the Chuck Toddcast to make the case that quality-of-life governance still beats partisanship when voters are actually given the chance to choose it. Mobolade, who adapted his governing principles from Abraham Lincoln, argues that there's a genuine and growing appetite for leadership that isn't red or blue — but warns that working for unity is incredibly hard and tiring work that few politicians want to do anymore. He walks through Colorado Springs' fight to retain Space Command after Trump and Biden moved the headquarters back and forth between Colorado Springs and Huntsville, Alabama, and explains why he ultimately chose not to sue over the relocation (the decision was within the president's purview, and burning that bridge would have cost the city more than it gained). Mobolade describes hiring his own mayoral opponent Wayne Williams after the campaign — a move he calls part of his "radical collaboration" approach — and argues that mayors don't have the luxury of partisan posturing because their job is fundamentally about producing deliverables for actual residents who want safer streets, better services, and a higher quality of life. The conversation moves into the practical challenges facing every American mayor in 2026, with data centers emerging as the political pain point in nearly every community across the country. Mobolade describes calling an emergency meeting to develop a data center strategy for Colorado Springs, walks through the balanced-but-responsible-growth framework his team has settled on, and explains the tradeoffs honestly: residents are worried about quality-of-life impacts, but the tax revenue from data centers is exactly what cities need to fund essential services. Larger data centers in his city are now forced to pay impact fees to offset their costs, some are being placed on military bases for security purposes, and Mobolade is candid with residents that they cannot have the services they demand without the revenue base to pay for them. The conversation turns to Colorado Springs' housing shortage — the city has been named one of the best places for young people, but only if young people can actually afford to live there — and Mobolade discusses his work with HUD to expand supply, his belief that the country needs genuine innovation in finding cheaper ways to build, and his frustration with a Colorado political landscape that he says no longer has room for center-left and center-right voices the way it used to. His closing argument is the one that ties the whole episode together: the country needs more independent leadership, not because partisanship is bad in theory, but because the current version of it is incapable of delivering the basics that voters actually care about. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit two stories that occurred on the same day… the Tiananmen square massacre, and Poland’s first post-soviet elections. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Predict the action all the way through the finals. Sign up now for your twenty-five dollar bonus on https://fanduel.com/predicts Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 05:30 Iran war/ceasefire has settled into a costly stalemate 06:45 Trump doesn’t want a deal, just ability to declare an accomplishment 07:30 Trump doesn’t want to look like he capitulated 08:00 Trump ripped up other deals, then got same deals with new names 09:15 June will be when the impacts of energy shock show up domestically 10:30 Every day Hormuz remains closed exponentially increases the damage 11:30 Consumers may begin to behave irrationally, start hoarding 12:30 If a natural disaster hits during energy shock, it could be major crisis 13:45 Pulling out of WHO has exacerbated Ebola outbreak 15:00 We can’t foresee all negative impacts, we just know they’re coming 16:15 Character is always destiny in politics, it’s a matter of when people see it 18:00 Everybody has their own motivation for voting, character isn’t always important 18:45 People defending character flaws are a huge part of the problem 20:00 Rubio & Graham used to blast Trump’s character, now defend it 20:30 People criticizing Trump’s behavior are now defending Graham Platner’s 22:00 People run for office for a variety of reasons, and sometimes not good ones 23:15 Sometimes entering politics become a substitute for therapy 24:30 Character matters because it’s predictive 25:30 Trump’s character flaws did not stay private, they became public 26:30 Biden ran for office when his kids were in crisis 27:30 Biden’s family obligations competed with public ones, gave preemptive pardons 28:15 Democracy depends on elected officials separating personal & public 29:15 Political parties used to be vetting organizations, even if imperfect 30:00 Once people become emotionally invested in a candidate, they defend them 30:45 Character flaws don’t just disappear, they show up… and affect us all 33:00 Democrats in a difficult spot having to defend Graham Platner 33:45 Plater accused of sexting in 2023, these aren’t youthful indiscretions 34:45 Eric Swalwell’s indiscretions were ignored until they became too much to ignore 37:15 Platner can still win, Susan Collins has worn out her welcome 38:00 Progressives may have put blinders on for Platner 38:45 People who mocked support for Trump using same defenses for Platner 40:00 At some point credibility will matter to a majority of voters 42:30 Trump’s bad behavior has alienated 1/3rd of Republican voters 44:30 Trump is politicizing celebrating America 250…making it hard to celebrate 45:45 Trump’s character flaws were on display well before he became president 46:30 The Pope may become the moral leader Americans are desperate for 48:30 Parties don’t seem to be worried about finding the best possible actors 49:30 Platner vs. Collins feels like a rerun of Trump vs. Clinton in 2016 51:15 Jill Biden to release new memoir - Bidens seem insulated from public opinion 52:15 Before election, the Biden family was fairly beloved by most 52:45 Biden’s ambition did real harm to the party, family and their legacy 53:30 The Bidens are good people and people were willing to overlook their flaws 54:30 Xavier Becerra & Tom Steyer could finish in Top 2 spots in CA gov primary 56:30 Karen Bass has mostly ignored Spencer Pratt in LA mayoral race 57:00 Bass wants to face Pratt rather than Nithya Raman 1:07:00 Mayor Yemi Mobolade joins the Chuck ToddCast 1:08:30 The people care more about quality of life than partisanship 1:09:45 Adapted governing principles from Abraham Lincoln 1:10:45 Colorado Springs is culturally conservative, yet elected an independent 1:12:30 Ran as a true centrist, hard to box in his politics 1:13:45 There’s an appetite for leadership that isn’t red or blue 1:14:30 Trump & Biden moved space command back and forth from Co. Springs 1:15:45 The city fought hard to keep space command 1:16:30 Worked with the mayor of Huntsville to ensure smooth transition 1:17:30 Why did you decide not to sue over relocation of space command? 1:18:15 The decision was within the president’s purview 1:19:30 The city is safer now than when he took office 1:20:45 A mayor’s job is to produce deliverables for the people 1:22:45 There’s a lack of competition of ideas in Colorado politics 1:23:45 Have a good relationship with the governor and statehouse 1:24:30 People get too stuck in their partisan lanes 1:25:00 Working for unity is incredibly hard and tiring 1:27:15 There used to be room for center-left and center-right in Colorado 1:28:15 Hired his mayoral opponent Wayne Williams 1:28:45 Wayne ran a more traditional campaign, Yemi ran on different leadership 1:30:00 The goal was radical collaboration and the community embraced it 1:30:45 Data centers are a political pain point of every local community 1:31:30 Called an emergency meeting to discuss data center strategy 1:32:15 The sweet spot of data center policy is balanced but responsible growth 1:33:00 Residents are worried data centers will lower their quality of life 1:34:30 Data centers being placed on military bases for security 1:36:30 Larger data centers are forced to pay a fee to offset impact 1:40:00 Data centers bring in much needed tax dollars 1:41:00 The city budget needs the revenue to provide essential services 1:41:30 Residents want services but no data centers… can’t have it both ways 1:43:30 Colorado Springs also struggling with a housing shortage 1:45:30 Working with HUD to try to increase housing supply 1:46:15 Colorado Springs named one of the best cities for young people 1:47:45 Need innovation in housing construction, find cheaper ways to build 1:49:30 The country needs more independent leadership 1:50:30 ToddCast Time Machine - June 4th, 1989 - Tiananmen Square massacre 1:51:00 The image of a man standing in front of a tank is iconic 1:52:00 On the same day, Polish citizens were casting ballots in a post soviet election 1:52:30 One communist system responded with elections, another responded with force 1:53:30 The Chinese students protesting were easy to empathize with 1:54:15 At the time it felt like freedom was advancing and communism was retreating 1:55:15 The elections in Poland humiliated the communist government 1:56:00 Chinese leaders closely watched events in Europe 1:56:45 Protest movement in China was one of the largest in their history 1:58:15 Chinese government cracked down on reformers and protest movement 1:59:00 Martial law was declared and troops moved into Beijing 1:59:45 We don’t have an accounting of the total death toll of protestors 2:00:15 The image we all remember is “tank man” 2:00:45 The incorrect assumption was that China’s middle class would demand rights 2:02:00 China proved that their model could survive and remain durable 2:04:00 Tiananmen ultimately was the birth of the current bipolar world 2:05:00 Poland chose the ballot box, China chose the tank 2:05:30 Ask Chuck 2:05:45 Would you ever consider running for president? Colbert as a running mate? 2:09:00 Do you think Paxton heads into the general overconfident? 2:15:45 Could the “Wyoming Rule” be a more realistic step than expanding house? 2:18:45 Any lesser known founding fathers that deserve more credit? 2:23:45 Thoughts on the Catholic church as a source of moral authority? 2:27:45 Any advice for people needing to step back from news while staying informed?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd opens with the latest from the Iran war's increasingly costly stalemate, arguing Trump doesn't actually want a deal — he wants the ability to declare an accomplishment without ever looking like he capitulated, the same trick he ran with NAFTA and the JCPOA where he ripped up agreements only to sign nearly identical ones under new names. June, Chuck warns, is when the energy shock will start showing up in domestic prices, every day Hormuz stays closed exponentially increases the damage, consumers may begin behaving irrationally and hoarding, and a single bad natural disaster on top of all this could trigger a genuine crisis. But the heart of the episode is Chuck’s meditation on a single phrase: character is destiny in politics. It's not whether character flaws exist — everyone has them — but when those flaws become public and start affecting the people you were elected to serve. Trump's character problems were on display long before he ever became president, but his defenders now include the exact same Rubios and Grahams who used to blast him as morally unfit. And the most uncomfortable part of Chuck argument for the Democratic base: the same progressives who mocked Trump supporters for excusing his behavior are now using essentially identical defenses for Maine's Graham Platner — who has been accused of sexting in 2023, behavior that isn't youthful indiscretion and isn't going away. Chuck argues political parties used to function as imperfect but real vetting organizations, that once voters become emotionally invested in a candidate they will defend literally anything, that running for office sometimes becomes a substitute for therapy rather than a vehicle for service, and that democracy itself depends on elected officials being able to separate their personal motivations from their public obligations — something Biden failed at when his family obligations led to those preemptive pardons. He notes the Bidens were genuinely beloved before the election but Biden's ambition did real harm to his party, his family, and his own legacy. Todd points to Pope Leo as a potential moral leader Americans seem desperate for at exactly the moment when neither party seems remotely interested in finding the best possible actors. He observes that Platner vs. Collins is starting to feel like a rerun of Trump vs. Clinton in 2016 — two candidates voters genuinely don't want to choose between — and closes with quick hits on Jill Biden's forthcoming memoir, the California gubernatorial primary (where Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer could finish in the top two), and the increasingly strange Los Angeles mayoral race in which Karen Bass appears to be deliberately ignoring Spencer Pratt because she would much rather face him in a general election than the genuinely formidable Nithya Raman. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit two stories that occurred on the same day… the Tiananmen square massacre, and Poland’s first post-soviet elections. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Predict the action all the way through the finals. Sign up now for your twenty-five dollar bonus on https://fanduel.com/predicts Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 05:30 Iran war/ceasefire has settled into a costly stalemate 06:45 Trump doesn’t want a deal, just ability to declare an accomplishment 07:30 Trump doesn’t want to look like he capitulated 08:00 Trump ripped up other deals, then got same deals with new names 09:15 June will be when the impacts of energy shock show up domestically 10:30 Every day Hormuz remains closed exponentially increases the damage 11:30 Consumers may begin to behave irrationally, start hoarding 12:30 If a natural disaster hits during energy shock, it could be major crisis 13:45 Pulling out of WHO has exacerbated Ebola outbreak 15:00 We can’t foresee all negative impacts, we just know they’re coming 16:15 Character is always destiny in politics, it’s a matter of when people see it 18:00 Everybody has their own motivation for voting, character isn’t always important 18:45 People defending character flaws are a huge part of the problem 20:00 Rubio & Graham used to blast Trump’s character, now defend it 20:30 People criticizing Trump’s behavior are now defending Graham Platner’s 22:00 People run for office for a variety of reasons, and sometimes not good ones 23:15 Sometimes entering politics become a substitute for therapy 24:30 Character matters because it’s predictive 25:30 Trump’s character flaws did not stay private, they became public 26:30 Biden ran for office when his kids were in crisis 27:30 Biden’s family obligations competed with public ones, gave preemptive pardons 28:15 Democracy depends on elected officials separating personal & public 29:15 Political parties used to be vetting organizations, even if imperfect 30:00 Once people become emotionally invested in a candidate, they defend them 30:45 Character flaws don’t just disappear, they show up… and affect us all 33:00 Democrats in a difficult spot having to defend Graham Platner 33:45 Plater accused of sexting in 2023, these aren’t youthful indiscretions 34:45 Eric Swalwell’s indiscretions were ignored until they became too much to ignore 37:15 Platner can still win, Susan Collins has worn out her welcome 38:00 Progressives may have put blinders on for Platner 38:45 People who mocked support for Trump using same defenses for Platner 40:00 At some point credibility will matter to a majority of voters 42:30 Trump’s bad behavior has alienated 1/3rd of Republican voters 44:30 Trump is politicizing celebrating America 250…making it hard to celebrate 45:45 Trump’s character flaws were on display well before he became president 46:30 The Pope may become the moral leader Americans are desperate for 48:30 Parties don’t seem to be worried about finding the best possible actors 49:30 Platner vs. Collins feels like a rerun of Trump vs. Clinton in 2016 51:15 Jill Biden to release new memoir - Bidens seem insulated from public opinion 52:15 Before election, the Biden family was fairly beloved by most 52:45 Biden’s ambition did real harm to the party, family and their legacy 53:30 The Bidens are good people and people were willing to overlook their flaws 54:30 Xavier Becerra & Tom Steyer could finish in Top 2 spots in CA gov primary 56:30 Karen Bass has mostly ignored Spencer Pratt in LA mayoral race 57:00 Bass wants to face Pratt rather than Nithya Raman 1:05:00 ToddCast Time Machine - June 4th, 1989 - Tiananmen Square massacre 1:05:30 The image of a man standing in front of a tank is iconic 1:06:30 On the same day, Polish citizens were casting ballots in a post soviet election 1:07:00 One communist system responded with elections, another responded with force 1:08:00 The Chinese students protesting were easy to empathize with 1:08:45 At the time it felt like freedom was advancing and communism was retreating 1:09:45 The elections in Poland humiliated the communist government 1:10:30 Chinese leaders closely watched events in Europe 1:11:15 Protest movement in China was one of the largest in their history 1:12:45 Chinese government cracked down on reformers and protest movement 1:13:30 Martial law was declared and troops moved into Beijing 1:14:15 We don’t have an accounting of the total death toll of protestors 1:14:45 The image we all remember is “tank man” 1:15:15 The incorrect assumption was that China’s middle class would demand rights 1:16:30 China proved that their model could survive and remain durable 1:18:30 Tiananmen ultimately was the birth of the current bipolar world 1:19:30 Poland chose the ballot box, China chose the tank 1:20:00 Ask Chuck 1:20:15 Would you ever consider running for president? Colbert as a running mate? 1:23:30 Do you think Paxton heads into the general overconfident? 1:30:15 Could the “Wyoming Rule” be a more realistic step than expanding house? 1:33:15 Any lesser known founding fathers that deserve more credit? 1:38:15 Thoughts on the Catholic church as a source of moral authority? 1:42:15 Any advice for people needing to step back from news while staying informed?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Host: Lalo Solorzano and Trudy Wilson Guest(s): N/A Published: May 27, 2026 Length: 16:11 Presented by: Global Training Center Summary In this episode of Simply Trade, Lalo Solorzano and Trudy Wilson continue the Trudy's Trade Tips series with another practical discussion on USMCA. This time, the focus is on documentation, certification requirements, and why tariff classification is the foundation for making accurate free trade agreement claims. Trudy explains one of the biggest changes from NAFTA to USMCA: the old formal certificate of origin is gone. Instead, companies must ensure their USMCA certification contains the required minimum data elements, regardless of the format used. That flexibility can be helpful, but it also creates room for confusion when documents are unclear or incomplete. The conversation also highlights the importance of identifying the certifier, exporter, producer, and importer, along with product descriptions, classifications, origin criteria, blanket periods, and certification statements. Trudy and Lalo then explain why tariff classification must come before USMCA qualification. If a company does not understand the classification of the finished product and its components, it cannot properly apply USMCA rules of origin. This episode matters because USMCA savings are valuable, but only when claims are documented, supported, and correctly qualified. Main Topic / Discussion This episode focuses on the documentation requirements for USMCA and the importance of tariff classification in determining whether goods qualify under the agreement. Trudy explains that USMCA no longer requires the old NAFTA certificate format. Instead, companies must provide the required minimum data elements in whatever format they choose. This includes identifying the certifier, exporter, producer, and importer, along with the product description, tariff classification, origin criterion, blanket period, authorized signature, date, and certification statement. A key point is that documentation must be clear. If a shipment includes both USMCA-qualifying goods and non-qualifying goods, the paperwork must clearly identify which items qualify. Mixing unclear origin declarations with USMCA claims can create confusion and risk. The discussion then shifts to tariff classification. Lalo and Trudy emphasize that “all roads lead to the HTS.” USMCA qualification depends on understanding the classification of the finished product and the classifications of the components, parts, or ingredients used to make it. Without that foundation, companies cannot properly apply product-specific rules or determine whether a tariff shift has occurred. Key Takeaways • USMCA does not require the old NAFTA certificate form, but it does require specific minimum data elements. • Companies may use their own format for USMCA certification as long as the required information is included. • The certifier, exporter, producer, and importer must be clearly identified with the required contact details. • Documentation must clearly show which goods qualify for USMCA and which do not. • Tariff classification is the foundation for USMCA qualification. • Companies must know the classification of the finished good and the components used to make it. • Product-specific rules under USMCA depend on classification and often require analyzing tariff shifts. • Lalo and Trudy recommend understanding tariff classification before taking on USMCA qualification work. Resources & Mentions • Global Training Center • TruTrade Solutions • Lalo Solorzano on LinkedIn • Trudy Wilson on LinkedIn Credits Host: Lalo Solorzano – LinkedIn Trudy Wilson – LinkedIn Guest(s): N/A Producer: Lalo Solorzano

The rise of the far right is the defining political crisis of our time. But are we analyzing it correctly? Suzi speaks with David Ost about his book Red Pill Politics: Demystifying the Far Right from Fascism to Right-Wing Populism. David argues that by focusing on whether Trump, Orban, or Netanyahu is or isn't a fascist, we're missing the deeper question: what political species do fascism and right-wing populism share? And what does understanding that species tell us about why the left keeps losing workers it once counted as its core constituency? It's a sweeping comparative political analysis that argues fascism and today's right-wing populism are not separate phenomena but two expressions of the same underlying political species, that of the Red Pill (a loose acronym of Right-wing, Exclusionary Nationalist-Democratic, Populist Illiberalism). From the Boulanger Affair in 1880s France to Tucker Carlson, from Mussolini's syndicalist unions to Orban's welfare chauvinism, the radical right has won by offering workers something — economic recognition, belonging, enemies to hate — that the neoliberal center-left abandoned along with NAFTA and the Third Way. David ends with a diagnosis of the left's own failures and a prescription for what it would take to turn things around. Jacobin Radio with Suzi Weissman features conversations with leading thinkers and activists, with a focus on labor, the economy, and protest movements.

La Mesa 2 - Lunes 25.06.26 - Unión de Vendedores de Nafta pide revisar incentivos by En Perspectiva

Chris Paul is joined by his good friend Josh Capps, a literature professor and screenwriter from Louisiana, sitting in for Burning Bright. The two break down Warren Beatty's 1998 political satire Bulworth, which Beatty wrote, directed, and starred in opposite Halle Berry, Oliver Platt, Don Cheadle, Isaiah Washington, and a nearly silent Sean Astin. Josh argues the film sits on a fascinating cultural crux point. He thinks 1998 was the pivot year when Hollywood shifted toward heavy programming, citing The Truman Show, Deep Impact, Armageddon, and The Siege all landing in the same window. The guys dig into Bulworth's opening confession that political assassinations are just a normal Tuesday for a senator with a fixer on speed dial, the eerie parallel between Bulworth dropping the mask once he had a hit out on himself and the way Trump later dispensed with the political pretense entirely, and Aaron Sorkin's fingerprints on the worst Halle Berry monologues about NAFTA and manufacturing. They also wander through the rise of West Coast rap as a marketing tool aimed at young kids, Public Enemy's 1994 song calling out a fake World Health Organization pandemic, the hierarchy of corporate political influence, and the difference between memory and story.

Recorded live at the Morgan Stanley and MUFG Japan Summit, our Global Chief Economist and Head of Macro Research Seth Carpenter led a discussion on Asia's exposure to the energy shock and Japan's bullish outlook.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Seth Carpenter: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Seth Carpenter, Morgan Stanley's Global Chief Economist and Head of Macro Research. And on today's episode, we're bringing you a live taping direct from Morgan Stanley and MUFG's Japan Summit to discuss the macroeconomic overlook. And, in particular, Japan's moment: reflation, reform, and the case for a structural re-rating. I am joined by Chetan Ahya, our Chief Asia Economist; Takeshi Yamaguchi, our Chief Japan Economist; Jonathan Garner, our Chief Asia and EM Equity Strategist; Koichi Sugisaki, who is our Head of Japan Macro Strategy; and Sho Nakazawa, who is our Japan Equity Strategist. Seth Carpenter: I will say we have just collectively published our mid-year outlook. So twice a year, Morgan Stanley Macro Research puts together our forecast. We take the time to debate with each other, to pressure test our views on the outlook for the next year and a half to two years. And I have to say this version of the outlook process may have been the most difficult one that I can remember. And in no small part because one of the key fundamental drivers of the outlook globally for growth, for inflation is oil, oil prices. And the swings there have been pretty dramatic. And so, as a result, we put a lot of effort into not just our baseline forecast, but also scenarios and the ways in which our baseline forecast could be wrong. But Chetan, let me start with you. Tell us a little bit about the exposure in Asia to, to the energy shock. Chetan Ahya: So Seth, you're right. Asia is one of the more exposed part of the world. But I would say that we've been surprised in the way this energy shock has been managed. One is, of course, at the global level, two big swings happened. US exports increased dramatically by 3.8 million barrels per day. Just to give you perspective, global consumption of oil is about 100 million barrels, so it's simple math in terms of how big this number was. And then China parallelly also reduced its imports by 3.5 million barrels. So, we had a 7 million barrel swing from a global oil demand balance perspective.And, secondly, as far as gas is concerned, that is where actually we were more concerned about Asia because Asia was very dependent on Middle Eastern gas. And on that front, China single-handedly has bailed out the region. So, China cut its gas imports by about 45 percent, and that had at least avoided the shortages that we were worried about. We can manage oil prices, but shortages is something very difficult to manage. So that's at the global level. And within the region, what every economy did is to switch to an alternative source of fuel, whether it is electricity generated through coal or other renewable sources. And particularly that happened in China and India, which are the two big importers of fuel in the region.And then additionally, what we also saw is that everybody managed the fuel price increase quite well. So, on an average, if I look at the stats as of today, only about 25 to 30 percent of the underlying fuel price increase has been passed on to the consumer. So, the governments are taking it, so there is a burden on the fiscal front that is building up. But as far as the consumers are concerned, this has been a help, and therefore you have not seen a big spike in inflation across the region. Seth Carpenter: Okay. So, a lot of comments about Asia in general. Let's go more specific to here in Japan. And so, Yamaguchi-san, you were an early adopter of the Japan reflation view. If we go back a year, two years, three years, you were probably more optimistic, more bullish about growth in the market than consensus. More recently, you've been a little bit more cautious about where growth is going. And so, can you tell us a little bit first why you're a bit more cautious now relative to where I suspect the market is? And then when it comes to the energy shock, how do you see it playing out with the Japanese economy? And should we worry about it derailing this whole reflation trade? Takeshi Yamaguchi: We think Japanese underlying economic fundamentals remain resilient in the sense that, you know, nominal GDP recovery will continue as a trend. But for this year, I think there's a, you know, short-term slowdown, both in terms of real GDP growth and nominal GDP growth, due to the terms of a trade shock. So far, you know, thanks to the government energy subsidies and Japan's relatively large strategic oil reserves, the direct impact on households has been limited. But we are already seeing a big increase in producer prices in the April data. It jumped to 4.9 percent {year-over-year], and we expect this producer price index will continue to go up due to the higher oil prices, but also because of the NAFTA-related supply side, you know, disruptions in areas, you know, such as, you know, construction materials, plastic products, and industrial solvents and so on. That said, we still believe that, you know, underlying economic fundamentals remain resilient in the sense that there's a structural labor shortage. So, wage growth may somewhat slow, but still I think a solid, you know, base up increase will continue next year, especially among young workers. Also, I think this structural tight labor market [is] encouraging companies to step up labor-saving investment. And, I think, together with government's initiatives for domestic investment, I think, domestic CapEx will also likely remain resilient. So, this year for nominal GDP growth, we expect, you know, slightly negative growth due to the terms of trade loss. But the next year, we are expecting above 4 percent nominal GDP growth. So, the overall, you know, story remains unchanged despite the short-term headwinds. Seth Carpenter: Okay. So fundamental story remains unchanged. We're pretty optimistic, but it's a matter of long term versus short term Jonathan, let me turn to you. Equity markets are generally optimistic, I would say, these days, but there is a bit of a divergence between views on equities here in Asia, between Japan on the one hand, and EM overall. In the mid-year outlook, you have expressed a preference for Japanese equities over EM. Can you talk a little bit about that view? Why that preference? Are there sectors or specific stocks that matter more? How are you thinking about this sort of allocation across equity markets for you in Asia? Jonathan Garner: So, certainly, as Seth indicated and Chetan and Yamaguchi-san said, it's really an environment where the sector call, particularly the CapEx, super cycle call should drive portfolios. And that naturally leads you in Asia more to North Asia, where Japan is very richly endowed in beneficiaries of the CapEx super cycle. And obviously markets like Korea and Taiwan, and much less so to South Asia, where the larger markets are much more populated by consumer and services stocks. So, in our portfolio, we're essentially overweight capital spending, underweight the consumer. And when you look at the Japan market, one of the things that my colleague Daniel Blake has done a lot of work is, is the sort of thematic exposures that exist within our coverage. The four core Morgan Stanley research themes of multipolar world, AI, tech diffusion, future of energy and societal shifts, they map into about 75 percent by stock number of our coverage for the Japan market, and they're quite nicely distributed across the stock coverage. Obviously, some stocks have more than one aspect to them. And that is highly advantageous and much more advantageous than in fact any other large market. Europe of course, doesn't have AI, tech diffusion, or it largely lacks the beneficiaries, the upstream beneficiaries. The US has legacy, sort of, software service, business models and consumer exposure. Now, it's not to say that all is sort of rosy in the garden. There are large auto OEMs here in Japan where the earnings numbers are challenged. So, it's all about the kind of the dispersion that's going on within the portfolio. But just on the base case targets, 4300 for topics, that's set by Nakazawa-san and myself. It's about 12 percent upside in the base. In the two weeks since we published the report, EM has fallen back somewhat, so there's about 8 percent upside to our EM target. But on a kind of risk-adjusted bull-bear skew, bear in mind that EM is much more skewed in terms of the earnings drivers of that market. Essentially, if you strip Korea and Taiwan out, there's no earnings growth in EM right now. You would ultimately have to favor Japan. So, Japan should be at the core of any Asia portfolio at the moment. Seth Carpenter: And can you just give us a little insight as to what you're seeing about how the market is or maybe is not pricing the threat from the energy shock? What are you seeing in equity markets, top line, down into sectors? Do you think there's enough concern? Do you think there's room for that to get, sort of, rerated just on the energy shock situation? Jonathan Garner: So, what you're seeing is that anything that is consumer-related is really struggling in terms of revisions. I think there are six different subcomponents of the consumer that we can track. Every single one of them has downgrades. And the upgrades are in energy, upstream energy, which isn't that well represented in Japan. There are a couple of names. In materials, really across the board. In semis and IT across the board, and broadly, tech hardware. And then in the defense capital goods space. And that dispersion in revisions within the Japan market or within Asia as a whole is something that I've never seen before.It does maybe to some extent question the resilience of the consumer in terms of the way that the numbers are being downgraded. So, I'll just leave that hanging a little bit. Seth Carpenter: Alright, thank you very much to my colleagues. And this is where I have to shift back into podcast mode to say thank you for listening. And if you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please share it with a colleague or friend today. Thank you very much everybody. Voice: That was Part 1 of a special two-part episode from Morgan Stanley and MUFG's Japan Summit. Join us tomorrow for Part 2 of the conversation.

Resumen de noticias de LA NACION de la mañana del 14 de mayo de 2026

Joe Galarza is a Los Angeles-based muralist, musician, and community educator whose practice engages Indigenous identity, political resistance, and the social role of art. Introduced through the East L.A. punk scene, Galarza traces his early influences from heavy metal illustration to anarchist thought, and later to Indigenous-led movements shaped by land struggles, NAFTA-era organizing, and Zapatista philosophy. The conversation examines art as a tool for education and collective questioning, with Galarza reflecting on his work with incarcerated youth, mural practices that preserve oral histories, and the persistence of colonial structures in contemporary life. Throughout, he situates his work within a broader commitment to community, emphasizing the responsibility of artists to engage with systemic injustice while remaining accountable to the histories and territories they inhabit.    

Kenny and Mike are joined by director Theo Avgerinos and cast / contributor Rev. Dr. Jason Coker for a discussion of Rising Hope, a documentary film about the struggles and hope exerpienced by the residents of several towns in the Mississippi Delta. The film examines the rich history, decline, struggles that depleated the area of it's wealth and many of its residents, but not the hope of those who are determined and build a new narrative for the region and people.  The film does not shy away from many of the causes of the regions decline including systematic racism and well as the effects of the NAFTA trade agreement. Faith Issues: Faith and hope are interwoven throughout the film and history of the region. In depicting the deternimation, courage and faith of residents the film can inspire others facing difficulties to not be defined by what is lacking but by what is present and the possibilities that grow out of determination, community and working together. Rising Hope echos the teaching in Hebrews 11 that faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 

Despite the historical energy disruption from the Iran conflict, stocks are back to record highs. Our Global Head of Fixed Income Research Andrew Sheets and our Head of Commodity Research Martijn Rats discuss different views and fundamentals driving markets.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley.Martijn Rats: I'm Martijn Rats, Head of Commodity Research at Morgan Stanley.Andrew Sheets: Today: oil, oil inventories, and the price at the pump.It's Wednesday, May 6th, at 2pm in London.Martijn, it's great to talk to you. We remain in this very unique market where on the one hand, the energy market is severely disrupted. On the other hand, we're making new all-time highs in the stock market. And part of this debate is a creeping sense that maybe the energy market is just a lot more resilient than many people initially thought.So, let's just jump right into it. As you look at the current state of the world, the state of things, how are you seeing the energy market at the moment?Martijn Rats: There are definitely two views in the market. I would say commodity specialists, oil traders, people that trade oil and gas equities for a living, tend to focus on the size of the supply shock. And it is neither hyperbole nor disputed that the size of the supply shock is the largest in the history of the oil market. We have the statistical data to back that up. That is not a controversial statement.But at the same time, the other view in the market, generally held by your generalist investors who invest across many markets. They tend to focus on the likelihood or possibility that this supply shock might also be uniquely short. It was there all of a sudden, from one day to the next, the strait was closed. It felt a bit man-made, so to say. It was an outcome of a political decision, and that can also be undecided. And so, this is – the to-ing and fro-ing in the market is; on the one hand, this shock is very, very large. But the other hand it may also be very, very short.Now we went into this supply shock, arguably well-prepared. In the sense that during the course of like late 2024, all of 2025, and the very early part of 2026, we were telling a story of oversupply surplus. And on top of that, given the military buildup was going on in January and February, a lot of countries in the Arabian Gulf – Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait – visibly put out a lot of oil at sea.So, in the oversupply of 2025, we put oil in storage in lots of places that we can't always see. But that seems very likely. Oil in the water was very, very high. So, we have been living off these buffers, and that has helped. And then, yeah, at any point in time, there were good enough reasons to assume that on a timeframe of a couple of weeks, this would largely be resolved. We would eat into these buffers, draw some inventory.And it has been hard for the market then to really capitalize the size of the supply shock and say, "Yeah, really oil prices need to spike very, very high." And in that sense, we're left with this significant supply shock, but we haven't taken out the highs that we saw in 2022, for example.Andrew Sheets: So maybe a way to think about this, right, is that if we imagined all of that oil as sitting in a big tank. We've kind of stopped a lot of the flow into the top of the tank as the Strait of Hormuz has remained closed. But oil's still able to drain out of the bottom, kind of, like normal because that tank is being drained. Those inventories have been drawn down. Maybe that's a quite a crude analogy, to forgive the pun.But how long can that last? I mean, if we think about these inventories, if we think about the speed of which they're being drawn down; and I think that's an important point that you mentioned, that these inventories were unusually high going in. But they're obviously not unlimited.Where does that stand? And I guess, you know, what is the limit of that? How long can those inventory draws last?Martijn Rats: Yeah, yeah. To say that this is the billion-dollar question would be understating it, Andrew. It's also a unusually complicated question to answer in the sense that it depends very heavily on the region, on the product that you're looking at. Jet fuel in Europe, NAFTA in Asia, you might see something sooner. But other products in other regions, you know, might take longer.We often don't really know where the operational limitations of inventories are. Globally, we see something like 8 billion barrels of oil in some form of storage. That is an enormous amount. We can't draw that down to zero because a lot of that is there for operational, like working capital type reasons. Just to facilitate the operations of the industry. Is the floor seven? Is the floor six? These things are hard to answer.Andrew Sheets: You've got to have some oil in the pipeline to make the pipeline flow…Martijn Rats: Exactly, exactly. You can't operate a refinery if you don't have at least some storage right next to it. It just doesn't work. So, these things are hard to know. But I would say that we are eating through these buffers very, very re-rapidly now. Oil on water has largely normalized and is no longer elevated.We are seeing very large inventory draws across every data point that we have on refined products. Refined products are universally drawing. On crude, the data is more patchy. But we are seeing large inventory draws now coming through in the United States. I would say – and this is partly having worked with this data for a long time and sort of developing some market feel rather than very analytical spreadsheets, so to say. But I would say that if the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz does not resume on the sort of next four to six weeks, we will get very, very tight by June, early summer.And, well, look, I mean, from there, it's simply… You know, if you then were to forecast. You know, project forward from there on. It would be getting tight by August, September. But of course, that's done under the assumption that the flow remains impaired over that period, which I would say most market participants would not assume at the moment.Andrew Sheets: And another point that comes up sometimes, at least in my conversations, is, ‘Oh, but, you know, maybe Venezuelan oil is going to be coming online.' There's more investment. The U.S. seems very focused on increasing oil output in Venezuela. You know, can that match in any sense the scale of what we've had disrupted here?Martijn Rats: No, that is a complicated issue in the sense that, you know, growing oil production takes time. It takes capital, it takes equipment, it takes a lot of people. Venezuela at the moment, produces a bit more than a million barrels a day. I'd have to say, like, relative to the size of Venezuela's production, the last two monthly data points have actually come in better than expected. But you're talking about 100,000 barrels a day, 200,000 barrels a day, that sort of thing. Relative to a supply shock that is 13-14 million barrels a day.The fastest ever single amount of production growth of any country in any year was 2018. U.S. shale with natural gas liquids included grew 2 million barrels a day in a single year. But yeah, even that…Andrew Sheets: So, 2 million barrels relative to 14 million barrels lost is…Martijn Rats: Yeah, exactly.Andrew Sheets A drop in the bucket. Martijn Rats: And that had a huge run-up of several years of putting the infrastructure in place to do that. I mean, it…. You don't turn it on a dime either. So no, that remains difficult.Andrew Sheets: So, you know, maybe a dynamic to close with is actually another way that I think people care about the oil price, you know, besides their portfolio – which is they drive.And, you know, you had a great stat in your report that one out of every 11 barrels of oil that's produced ends up in an American car. And the U.S. is a big producer. Its inventories have been drawing down. There are clear signs that the U.S. is exporting a lot of energy, and as a result, gas prices are also going up in the U.S.So, you know, what… If you could just talk a little bit about the move in gasoline and maybe, you know, I think this could be a good segue into this idea of distillates into, kind of, parts of refined product. And how those prices can deviate or not from the barrel of oil we often talk about. And then even just more generally, kind of what is the price at the pump that people might need to think about as you head into the summer – assuming, you know, this conflict is still somewhat uncertain.Martijn Rats: Yeah. So, the United States is very interesting at the moment. In the sense that the regular discourse about the United States is that the United States is energy independent because it is a net oil producer. And at the most aggregate level, that is correct. But that doesn't mean that the United States is not connected to the rest of the world from an oil market perspective. I would say actually it's the opposite.The U.S. oil market is deeply connected to the rest of the world. It is a net exporter because there are very large imports, and there are very large exports, and it just happens so that the exports are a little bit bigger than the imports. So, it's a net exporter.But flows in both directions exist for every product – for crude, for diesel, for gasoline. So, the U.S. should be the last place to have physical disruptions because the supply is close to home. But in the end, it's so connected; that in the end, there's only one global oil price – and we all pay it, including in the United States.Now, because of the deficits at the moment, in Asia, to [an] extent in Europe, there is a very large pool on oil from the United States, and we're seeing that across the board. Crude oil exports were 4 million barrels a day, at the start of the year. They're now running sort of 5.5, even 6 million barrels a day. So, there's a lot of crude being pulled out of the United States. That is partly also the SBR release, the release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But the export's very, very large.Another product where that is also happening is in gasoline. Now, the gasoline market in the United States has a degree of complexity to it in the sense that the U.S. is a big importer of gasoline in the East Coast and the West Coast, but then a big exporter from the Gulf Coast.Andrew Sheets: Hunh! Okay. Yeah.Martijn Rats: Net-net, it's an exporter, but in the East Coast and the West Coast, big, big importer. Now, in Europe, for example, we are normally long gasoline, short diesel. We export our surplus to the U.S. East Coast. But, at the moment, it's tight in Europe, so we're not exporting that much gasoline. So, imports in the United States have dropped a lot.At the same time, Asian customers, Brazilian customers, Mexican customers [are] pulling a lot of gasoline out of the Gulf Coast. And as a result, the net exports are unusually high for this time of the year. On top of that, the Strait of Hormuz issue has tightened the diesel market so much relative to the gasoline market that it is favorable for refineries to maximize their diesel output over their gasoline output.Andrew Sheets: Hmm. And these are decisions you can make in terms of how you crack that barrel in a refinery and split it up.Martijn Rats: Yeah, exactly. Within a relatively narrow window, but you can make tweaks that are significant. Now, normally, we're going into this summer driving season, refineries switch from what we call max diesel to max gasoline. At the moment, they are not doing that.Andrew Sheets: Mm.Martijn Rats: So, you have low gasoline production, and you have large net exports of gasoline. Over the last 11 weeks already, we have seen a very significant, very significant decline in gasoline inventories in the United States. And prices have risen at the pump. The nation's average is now $4.50 per barrel, as of reports this morning.The summer driving season has yet to start. That can become $4.70, $4.80. That can become $5. Above $5 is historically a point where people get, yeah, worried about demand destruction. And it has a real impact.Andrew Sheets: Well, Martijn, I think this remains such an important and interesting story. And even if, you know, it can seem sometimes like the market has moved on to other things, clearly there are a lot of other factors driving the equity market. It remains pretty historic, pretty significant, and pretty complicated. Also, something that I think, you know, affects the day-to-day spending and lives of a lot of people out there.So, Martijn, again, thank you for taking the time to talk.Martijn Rats: Thank you.Andrew Sheets: And thank you, as always, for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

“The current crisis was far from inevitable. Politicians made consistently bad choices. In doing so, they fostered a crisis of confidence in political institutions, empowered anti-system candidates, and produced a new Cold War as dangerous as the last.” — Ian Shapiro The fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 was a moment of extraordinary euphoria. Fukuyama even described it as the end of history. But what seems to have really fallen in November '89 was the vitality of democracy. Almost forty years later, we have Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and, perhaps most worrying of all, Keir Starmer. Callous and inept politicians are breaking our democratic world. Our job is to put it back together. That's the thesis of a new book by Ian Shapiro — Sterling Professor of Political Science at Yale. In After the Fall, Shapiro argues that it's politicians who have created today's crisis of democracy. His pivotal moment is 2008 rather than 1989. The global financial crisis was the inflection point — the moment at which the corruption of the neoliberal order became self-evident, when elites bailed out the banks and we see the birth of left and right wing illiberal populism. The roots go back before 2008. Clinton's greatest failure, Shapiro argues, was not NAFTA or welfare reform. It was Russia. Yeltsin wanted to join NATO. Even Putin, in his early years in power, acknowledged that Russia considered itself European. George Kennan, Brent Scowcroft and Richard Nixon warned that expanding NATO eastward would create a new enemy. Clinton ignored them all. So history repeated itself in the form of Versailles rather than the Marshall Plan. So how to raise ourselves up after this fall? What road to take? Maps, Shapiro suggests, aren't always helpful. The New Deal had no GPS algorithm. FDR invented it on the fly. What democratic governments need now, he insists, is massive investment in physical, technological, and labor market infrastructure. Charismatic leaders matter. But the ideas matter more. We need politicians who take risks. Otherwise we'll be saddled with Keir Starmer and our current crisis of extraordinary dysphoria. Five Takeaways •       2008, Not 1989, Was the Inflection Point: The fall of the Wall in 1989 produced euphoria. The real break came nineteen years later. The 2008 financial crisis exposed the neoliberal model, undermined the supremacy of the US-led world system, and — crucially — left behind a large population that would subsequently be mobilizable by political entrepreneurs. Elites bailed out the banks and returned to business as usual. They didn't realize that business as usual was over. From 2008 you can draw a straight line to 2016, to Brexit, to Trump, to every anti-system surge that followed. •       We Repeated the Mistake of Versailles: After World War II, the Marshall Plan invested in the defeated powers — Germany, Japan — and folded them into the new security and economic architecture. After World War I, Versailles punished Germany, and Keynes predicted the results. After the Cold War, the victorious West chose Versailles over Marshall. Yeltsin wanted to join NATO and the EU. Even early Putin said Russia considered itself European. Kennan, Scowcroft, Nixon all warned that expanding NATO eastward would create a new enemy. Clinton ignored them. We created the enemy we warned ourselves about. •       Politicians Broke the World — Not Capitalism, Not Culture: Shapiro's subtitle is precise. The crisis of democracy was not caused by inevitable economic forces or cultural shifts. It was caused by specific bad decisions by specific politicians at specific moments of choice. Clinton on NATO expansion. Bush on the Iraq War and the refusal to build a genuine rules-based international order after 9/11. Obama on the financial crisis response. These were decisions, not fates. They could have been made differently. Which means the current situation is not irreversible — and that future decisions can be made better. •       Starmer as Exhibit A: Having Power Without Ideas: Shapiro's prescription for what democratic governments need: a policy agenda. His cautionary tale: Keir Starmer. Starmer came into office with a massive parliamentary majority — he could have passed legislation that attracted 50 or 60 backbench no votes and still won. He had nothing to pass. Tiny step left, tiny step right, reverse, repeat. His comparison: Trump's main policies came out of Project 2025 — put together not by Trump himself but by people who created the ramp he ran on. Without a ramp, even a charismatic leader stumbles. Without ideas, power is squandered. •       The New Deal Had No Blueprint: FDR Made It Up: The lesson for what comes next. The New Deal — the last great democratic reconstruction — was not designed in advance. Roosevelt made it up as he went along, trying things, abandoning what didn't work, building a coalition of extraordinarily unlikely bedfellows. What democratic governments need now, Shapiro argues, is massive infrastructure investment: physical infrastructure, tech infrastructure, labor market infrastructure. The CHIPS Act model. Incentivize business to retrain the workforce for the tech revolution and the green transition. Chancellor Merz in Germany has just borrowed half a trillion euros for this. Without it, there will be another Trump. And another. And another. About the Guest Ian Shapiro is Sterling Professor of Political Science and Global Affairs at Yale University and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of After the Fall: From the End of History to the Crisis of Democracy — How Politicians Broke Our World (Basic Books, May 5, 2026), Uncommon Sense, The Wolf at the Door (with Michael Graetz), and many other books. He lives in New Haven, Connecticut. References: •       After the Fall: From the End of History to the Crisis of Democracy — How Politicians Broke Our World by Ian Shapiro (Basic Books, May 5, 2026). •       Episode 2881: Adrian Wooldridge on The Revolutionary Center — the companion episode on the crisis of liberalism that Shapiro's book diagnoses. •       Episode 2895: Glyn Morgan on The Rise and Fall of American Europe — the international dimension of Shapiro's argument about the post-Cold War missed opportunities. •       Episode 2880: Gal Beckerman on How to Be a Dissident — on the tradition of resistance that Shapiro's “roads not taken” argument implicitly invokes. About Keen On America Nobody asks more awkward questions than th...

Plus: The Bank of Canada governor says he's encouraged by the federal government's efforts to insulate the economy against future shocks, a new poll shows most Canadians are not comfortable with the direction of the national economy, Alberta marks a somber anniversary, Habs fans are preparing for Game 6, and one year later and two Nova Scotian kids are still missing. We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us: Through email at hello@thebigstorypodcast.ca  Or @thebigstory.bsky.social on Bluesky

The USMCA review is fast approaching, uncertainty is building across the automotive industry, and leaders are asking a critical question: Is the agreement that binds North America together at risk?Colin Bird, the Consul General of Canada in Detroit, United States, brings clarity. This is not a collapse or a dramatic reset. It is a built-in review designed to test whether the agreement still works in a world that has fundamentally changed. The environment that shaped USMCA no longer exists. Supply chains are strained, global competition is intensifying, and China has accelerated ahead in the EV space.The real issue is not whether the agreement survives. The issue is whether North America can operate effectively under pressure. July 1 is not a breaking point. It's part of a process meant to ensure the agreement stays relevant while the industry evolves at speed.Colin makes it clear that the real danger comes when North America starts putting up barriers within its own system. The automotive supply chain has been built over decades to operate seamlessly across borders. When tariffs or policy decisions disrupt that flow, it does not just impact one country. It makes the entire region less competitive at a time when global players are moving fast.This episode is about what matters now: certainty, coordination, and competitiveness. The industry doesn't need more noise or political posturing. It needs alignment. Because if North America wants to win, it must act as one integrated system, not three separate countries.Themes Discussed in this EpisodeWhat the USMCA “review” really meansWhy July 1 is not a cliff, but a checkpointThe risk of disrupting a deeply integrated supply chainHow tariffs and policy decisions can backfire on North AmericaWhy China's EV acceleration changes everythingThe critical role of certainty and predictability for investmentWhat leaders must focus on to stay competitive globally

This one is a preview of something I've been wanting to do for a long time — a class on the history of Christian social ethics that's actually useful for the moment we're in. Cornell West calls Gary Dorrien the greatest living Christian social ethicist, and after spending any amount of time with him, you understand why. Gary and Aaron Stoffer joined me to give people a taste of what's coming in Theology for Troublemakers, and what they gave us was a genuine history lesson that landed like a live wire. We started with Gary's own formation — a rural Michigan kid who never took a school book home until second semester senior year, who walked into a Catholic church and couldn't stop staring at the figure on the cross, who read a biography of King in ninth grade three times and went looking for the theologians King mentioned in the public library and found none of them. That kid became one of the most important social ethicists of our time. From there we moved into Norman Thomas's warning — that American populism always surges toward a dictator who scapegoats the vulnerable — and what the left's recurring failure to build cross-racial, multi-issue coalitions has to do with where we are now. Gary named the nineties as the most demoralizing decade of his life: TINA, triangulation, NAFTA, three-strikes, welfare gutted, and a Democratic Party that treated its progressive base as something to prove it could overcome. He was not gentle about Clinton, or Obama, or the way purity politics has consistently kneecapped the left's ability to organize. He was hopeful, carefully, about cooperatives, about DSA's organizing culture in New York, and about the strange opening the current moment creates for public theology. The class runs the whole history — from the Black Social Gospel and the new abolitionists to the Christian realists to Yoder and Dorothy Day — and Aaron frames it all in terms of what congregations can actually do with it. Go to homebrewclasses.com. This is the class for right now. You can WATCH the conversation on YouTube⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠UPCOMING ONLINE CLASS - Theology for Troublemakers: Christian Social Ethics from the Margins⁠⁠⁠⁠ The injustices we face are immense — but they are not unique. Previous generations confronted the same powers with theological conviction and strategic brilliance. The question is whether we'll learn from them. This 6-week online course, led by Dr. Gary Dorrien and Dr. Aaron Stauffer, recovers the radical tradition of Christian social ethics — from Reverdy Ransom and Reinhold Niebuhr to James Cone and the Welfare Rights Movement — and asks what faithfulness demands of us right now. Weekly lectures, live Q&A conversations, guest lecturers, and an online community included.

The Trump administration is reviewing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which comes up for renewal this year. The USMCA replaced NAFTA, was an economic cornerstone of President Donald Trump's first term, and accounts for more than $4 billion worth of cross-border trade. Thing is, it didn't live up to its promises of spurring manufacturing jobs. What might come next? But first, we dig into the anxiety that comes with surviving multiple rounds of layoffs.

The Trump administration is reviewing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which comes up for renewal this year. The USMCA replaced NAFTA, was an economic cornerstone of President Donald Trump's first term, and accounts for more than $4 billion worth of cross-border trade. Thing is, it didn't live up to its promises of spurring manufacturing jobs. What might come next? But first, we dig into the anxiety that comes with surviving multiple rounds of layoffs.

Our analysts Andrew Sheets and Martijn Rats discuss why a prolonged disruption of oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz would be unprecedented—and nearly impossible for the market to absorb.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley.Martijn Rats: I'm Martijn Rats, Head of Commodity Research at Morgan Stanley.Andrew Sheets: Today on the program we're going to talk about why investors everywhere are tracking ships through the Strait of Hormuz.It's Wednesday, March 11th at 2pm in London.Andrew Sheets: Martijn, the oil market, which is often volatile, has been historically volatile over the last couple of weeks following renewed military conflict between the United States and Iran.Now, there are a lot of different angles to this, but the oil market is really at the center of the market's focus on this conflict. And so, I think before we get into the specifics, I think it's helpful to set some context. How big is the global oil market and where does the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz fit within that global picture?Martijn Rats: Yeah, so the global oil consumption is a little bit more than a 100 million barrels a day. But that splits in two parts. There is a pipeline market and there is a seaborne market. And when it comes to prices, the seaborne market is really where it's at. If you're sitting in China, you're buying oil from the Middle East, all of a sudden, it's not available. Sure, if there is a pipeline that goes from Canada into the United States, that doesn't really help you all that much.Andrew Sheets: So, it's the oil on the ships that really matters.Martijn Rats: It's the oil on ships that is the flexible part of the market that we can redirect to where the oil is needed. And that is also the market where prices are formed. The seaborne market is in the order of 60 million barrels a day. So, only a subset of the 100 [million]. Now relative to that 60 million barrel a day, the Strait of Hormuz flows about 20 [million]. So, the Strait of Hormuz is responsible for about a third of seaborne supply, which is, of course, very large and therefore, you know, very critical to the system.Andrew Sheets: And I think an important thing we should also discuss here, which we were just discussing earlier today on another call, is – this is a market that could be quite sensitive to actually quite small disruptions in oil. So, can you give just some sense of sensitivity? I mean, in normal times, what sort of disruptions, in terms of barrels of oil, kind of, move markets; get investors' attention?Martijn Rats: Yeah, look, this is part of why this situation is so unusual, and oil analysts really sort of struggle with this. Look normally, at relative to the 100 million barrels a day of consumption, we care about supply demand imbalances of a couple of 100,000 barrels a day. That becomes interesting.If that, increases to say 1 million barrel a day, over- or undersupplied, you can expect prices to move. You can expect them to move by meaningful amounts. We can write research; the clients can trade. You have a tradable idea in front of you. When that becomes 2 to 3 million barrels a day, either side, you have major historical market moving events.So, in [20]08-09, oil famously fell from over 100 [million] down to something like 30 [million], on the basis that the oil market was 2-2.5 million barrel day oversupplied for two quarters. In 2022, we all thought – this actually never happened, but we all thought that Russia was going to lose about 3 million barrel day of supply. And on that basis, just on the basis of the expectation alone, Brent went to $130 per barrel. So, 2-3 [million] either side you have historically large moves. Now we're talking about 20 [million].Andrew Sheets: And I think that's what's so striking. I mean, again, I think investors, people listening to this, they can do that arithmetic too. If this is a market where 2 to 3 million barrels a day have caused some of the largest moves that we've seen in history, something that's 20 [million] is exceptional. And I think it's also fair to say this type of closure of the Strait [of Hormuz] is something we haven't seen before.Martijn Rats: No, which also made it very hard to forecast, by the way. Because the historical track records did not point in that direction, and yet here we are. The historical track record – look, you can look at other major disruptions historically.The largest disruption in the history of the oil market is the Suez Crisis in the mid-1950s that took away about 10 percent of global oil consumption. This is easily double that. So really unusual. If you look at supply and demand shocks of this order of magnitude, you can think about COVID. In April 2020, for one month, at the peak of COVID, when we're all sitting at home. Nobody driving, nobody flying. Yeah, we lost very briefly 20 million barrels a day of demand. Now we're losing 20 million barrels a day of supply. So, look, the sign is flipped, but it's in the same order of magnitude. And yeah, these are unusual events that you wouldn't actually, sort of, forecast them that easily. But that is what is in front of us at the moment.Andrew Sheets: So, I think the next kind of logical question is if shipping remains disrupted, and I'd love for you to talk a little bit about, you know, you're sitting there with satellite maps on your screen tracking shipping, which is – a development. But, you know, what are the options that are available in the region, maybe globally to temporarily balance this supply and create some offset?Martijn Rats: Yeah. So, like of course when we have a big disruption like this one, of course the market is going to try to solve for this. There are a few blocks that we can work with. I'll run you through them one by one, including some of the numbers. But very quickly you arrive at the conclusion that this is; this puzzle – we can't really solve it.Like in 2022, the market was very stressed. We thought Russia was going to lose 3 million barrels a day of supply, but we could move things around in our supply demand model. Russia oil goes to China and India. Oil that they buy, we can get in Europe, we can move stuff around to kind of sort of solve a puzzle.This puzzle is very, very difficult to solve. So, through the Strait of Hormuz, 15 million barrels a day have crude, 5 million barrels a day of refined product, 20 million barrels a day in total. What can we do?Well, the biggest offset, is arguably the Saudi EastWest pipeline. Saudi Arabia has a pipeline that effectively allows it to ship oil to the Red Sea at the Port of Yanbu, where it can be evacuated on tankers there. That pipeline has a capacity of 7 million barrels a day. We think it was probably already flowing at something like 3 million barrels a day. So, there's probably an incremental 4 [million] that can become available through that. That's the biggest block, that we can see of workaround capacity, so to say.After that the numbers do get smaller. The UAE has a pipeline that goes through Fujairah that's also beyond the Strait of Hormuz. We think there is maybe 0.5 million barrel a day of capacity there. Then you're basically, sort of, done within the region, and you have to look globally for other sources of oil.If there are sanctions relief, maybe on Russian oil, you can find a 0.5 million barrel day there. Here, there and everywhere. 100,000 barrels a day, 200,000 barrels a day. But the numbers get…Andrew Sheets: It's still not… So, if you kind of put all of those, you know, kind of, almost in a best-case scenario relative to the 20 million that's getting disrupted.Martijn Rats: If you add another one or two from a massive SPR release, the fastest release from SPR…Andrew Sheets: That's the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.Martijn Rats: Yeah, exactly. Earlier today, we got an announcement, that the IEA is proposing to release 400 million barrels from Strategic Reserve across its member countries. That is a very large number. But – and that is important. But more important is how fast can it flow because the extraction rate from these tanks is not infinite. The fastest ever rate of SPR release is only 1.3 million barrels a day. Now, maybe the circumstances are so extraordinary, we can do better than that and we can get it to 2 [million]. But beyond that, you're really in very, very uncharted territory.So maybe in the region, work around sanctions relief, SPR release, we can probably find like 7 million barrels a day out of a problem that is 20 [million]. You're left with another 13 [million]. The 13 [million] is four times what we thought Russia would lose. So, you're left with this conclusion: Look, this really needs to come to an end.Andrew Sheets: And the other rebalancing mechanism, which again, you know, when we come back to markets and forecasting, this is obviously price. And, you know, you talk about this idea of demand destruction, which I think we could paraphrase as – the price is higher so people use less of it and then you can rebalance the market that way.But give us just a little sense of, you know, as you and your team are sitting there modeling, how do you think about, kind of, the price of oil? Where it would need to go to – to potentially rebalance this the other way.Martijn Rats: Yeah, that price is very high. So, what it's a[n] really interesting analysis to do is to look at the historical frequency distribution of inflation adjusted oil prices.You take 20 years of oil prices. You convert it all in money of the day, adjusted for inflation, and then simply plot the frequency distribution. What you get is not one single bell curve centered around the middle with some variation around the midpoint. You get, sort of, two partially overlapping bell curves.There is a slightly larger one, which is, sort of, the normal regime. Lower prices, 60, 70, 80 bucks. There's a lot of density there in the frequency distribution, that's where we are normally. What's interesting is that actually, if you go from there to higher prices, there are prices that are actually very rare in inflation adjusted terms.Like a [$] 100-110. In nominal terms, we might feel that that has happened. In inflation adjusted terms, these prices are extremely rare. They are way rarer than prices that live even further to the right. [$]130, 140.The oil market has this other regime of these very high prices. If you go back in history, when did those prices prevail? They always prevailed in periods where we asked the same question. What is the demand destruction price? And yeah, to erode demand by a somewhat meaningful quantity, yeah, you end up in that regime. These very high prices, like [$]130. And it's… It's not a gradual scale. You sort of at one point shoot through these levels and that's where you then end up.Andrew Sheets: It's quite, quite serious stuff.Martijn Rats: Well, yeah. Also, because we can casually say in the oil market, ‘Oh, demand erosion has to be the answer.' But we don't erode demand in isolation. Like, you know, diesel is trucking. Yeah, jet is flying. NAFTA is petrochemicals.Andrew Sheets: These are real core parts of economic activity.Martijn Rats: It's all GDP.Andrew Sheets: So maybe Martijn, in conclusion, let me give you a slightly different scenario. Let's say that the conflict goes on for another couple of weeks, but then there is a resolution. Traffic goes back to normal. Walk us through a little bit of what that would mean. You know, kind of how long does it take to get back to normal in a market like this?Martijn Rats: Yeah. So, if you say, weeks, I would say that is an uncomfortable period of time actually.Andrew Sheets: Feel free to use a slightly different scenario.Martijn Rats: If you say days. Let's say next week something happens, the whole thing comes soon to end. Look, then we will have logistical supply chain issues. But look, we can work through that.There is at the moment somewhat of an air pocket in the global oil supply chain. There should be oil tankers on their way to refineries for arrival in April and May that currently are not. So, we will have hiccups and things need to be rerouted and we draw on some inventories here or there, but… And that will keep commodity prices tense, I would imagine. The equity market will probably look through it.We'll have a month or six weeks, not more than two months, I would imagine of logistical issues to sort out. Look, of course, if that, you know, doesn't happen, then we're back in the scenario that we discussed. But yeah, look, that that's equally true. If it's short, we can sort of live with a disruption.Andrew Sheets: It's fair to say that this is a situation where days really matter, where weeks make a big difference.Martijn Rats: Oh, totally. Look, the oil industry has built in various, sort of, compensatory measures, I think. You know, inventories along the supply chains. But nothing of the scale that can work with this. I mean, this is truly yet another order of magnitude.Andrew Sheets: Martijn, thank you for taking the time to talk.Martijn Rats: My pleasure.Andrew Sheets: And thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today.Important note regarding economic sanctions. This report references jurisdictions which may be the subject of economic sanctions. Readers are solely responsible for ensuring that their investment activities are carried out in compliance with applicable laws.

Welcome back to Impact Theory with Tom Bilyeu! In this electrifying continuation of his conversation with geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan, Tom dives into the forces shaping the next era of global power. From the much-debated Thucydides' Trap and the real state of China's future to America's political and demographic crossroads, this episode is a masterclass in understanding the seismic shifts rocking our world. Peter Zeihan makes a compelling case for why China's rise might not be the threat many fear, citing geopolitical bottlenecks, demographic crises, and internal political strife. The conversation then takes a sharp, honest look at America's own challenges—from aging demographics and political party chaos to the hard realities of reindustrialization and immigration reform. Along the way, Tom Bilyeu and Peter Zeihan examine the impact of social media on truth, the lessons (and perils) of historical mass migrations, and whether technology can rescue countries facing population decline. Get ready to have your assumptions challenged and your worldview expanded with practical insights on what's really at stake for the future of nations. Whether you're interested in economics, politics, or the fate of entire civilizations, you won't want to miss this wide-ranging, thought-provoking discussion! Website: https://zeihan.comFree Newsletter: https://zeihan.com/newsletterTwitter: https://twitter.com/PeterZeihanYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZeihanOnGeopolitics What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business: join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER:  https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business: see if you qualify here.:  https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox: sign up here.: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Quince: Free shipping and 365-day returns at https://quince.com/impactpod Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Ketone IQ: Visit https://ketone.com/IMPACT for 30% OFF your subscription order Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code IMPACT at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/impact Blocktrust IRA: Get up to $2,500 funding bonus to kickstart your account at https://tomcryptoira.com Netsuite: Right now, get our free business guide, Demystifying AI, at https://NetSuite.com/Theory Huel: High-Protein Starter Kit 20% off for new customers at https://huel.com/impact code impact Thucydides' Trap, China collapse, U.S. global power, demographic decline, Xi Jinping purges, Chinese military, First Island Chain, U.S. Navy, Japanese alliances, one-child policy, population overcount, industrialization, Han Chinese, civilizational collapse, warlords, agricultural dependence, U.S.-China relations, globalization, reindustrialization, NAFTA, industrial policy, political chaos, American demographics, immigration reform, labor shortages, party realignment, social media impact, media regulation, assimilation, European immigration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome back to Impact Theory with Tom Bilyeu! In this electrifying continuation of his conversation with geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan, Tom dives into the forces shaping the next era of global power. From the much-debated Thucydides' Trap and the real state of China's future to America's political and demographic crossroads, this episode is a masterclass in understanding the seismic shifts rocking our world. Peter Zeihan makes a compelling case for why China's rise might not be the threat many fear, citing geopolitical bottlenecks, demographic crises, and internal political strife. The conversation then takes a sharp, honest look at America's own challenges—from aging demographics and political party chaos to the hard realities of reindustrialization and immigration reform. Along the way, Tom Bilyeu and Peter Zeihan examine the impact of social media on truth, the lessons (and perils) of historical mass migrations, and whether technology can rescue countries facing population decline. Get ready to have your assumptions challenged and your worldview expanded with practical insights on what's really at stake for the future of nations. Whether you're interested in economics, politics, or the fate of entire civilizations, you won't want to miss this wide-ranging, thought-provoking discussion! Website: https://zeihan.comFree Newsletter: https://zeihan.com/newsletterTwitter: https://twitter.com/PeterZeihanYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZeihanOnGeopolitics What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business: join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER:  https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business: see if you qualify here.:  https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox: sign up here.: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Quince: Free shipping and 365-day returns at https://quince.com/impactpod Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Ketone IQ: Visit https://ketone.com/IMPACT for 30% OFF your subscription order Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code IMPACT at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/impact Blocktrust IRA: Get up to $2,500 funding bonus to kickstart your account at https://tomcryptoira.com Netsuite: Right now, get our free business guide, Demystifying AI, at https://NetSuite.com/Theory Huel: High-Protein Starter Kit 20% off for new customers at https://huel.com/impact code impact Thucydides' Trap, China collapse, U.S. global power, demographic decline, Xi Jinping purges, Chinese military, First Island Chain, U.S. Navy, Japanese alliances, one-child policy, population overcount, industrialization, Han Chinese, civilizational collapse, warlords, agricultural dependence, U.S.-China relations, globalization, reindustrialization, NAFTA, industrial policy, political chaos, American demographics, immigration reform, labor shortages, party realignment, social media impact, media regulation, assimilation, European immigration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to Impact Theory with Tom Bilyeu! In this episode, Tom sits down with geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan for a fascinating deep dive into the tectonic shifts shaping our world order. Together, Tom Bilyeu and Peter Zeihan unpack why the global landscape is changing—and why it isn't just about any single political figure, but rather the collision of long-standing trends in trade, demographics, and national priorities. You'll hear Peter Zeihan break down how the post–World War II system, built on American-led security and global cooperation, is unraveling amidst demographic decline and shifting alliances. They explore why the current moment might be unlike anything we've seen since the Black Plague, what happens when countries are forced to become economic generalists again, and why U.S. leadership is facing a critical test. Plus, Tom Bilyeu presses Peter on what this means for America's future, global productivity, and the hard choices ahead. Whether you're a geopolitical buff or just eager to understand how economics truly drives world affairs, this episode will challenge your assumptions and give you the tools to see the present—and the future—in a whole new light. Stay tuned for this thought-provoking conversation. Follow Peter Zeihan:Website: https://zeihan.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/PeterZeihanLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-zeihan-1a8176/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZeihanonGeopolitics What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business: join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER:  https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business: see if you qualify here.:  https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox: sign up here.: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Quince: Free shipping and 365-day returns at https://quince.com/impactpod Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Ketone IQ: Visit https://ketone.com/IMPACT for 30% OFF your subscription order Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code IMPACT at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/impact Blocktrust IRA: Get up to $2,500 funding bonus to kickstart your account at https://tomcryptoira.com Netsuite: Right now, get our free business guide, Demystifying AI, at https://NetSuite.com/Theory Huel: High-Protein Starter Kit 20% off for new customers at https://huel.com/impact code impact global security, US foreign policy, trade, demographics, Cold War, NATO, globalization, manufacturing, K-shaped economy, world order, American alliances, post-World War II system, containment, economic sanctions, Iraq War, war on terror, US industrial base, economic models, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), tariffs, Trump administration, supply chain, deglobalization, NAFTA, regional globalization, policy experts, Cuban workforce, Colombia infrastructure, technological stagnation, demographic collapse, China-US relations Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to Impact Theory with Tom Bilyeu! In this episode, Tom sits down with geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan for a fascinating deep dive into the tectonic shifts shaping our world order. Together, Tom Bilyeu and Peter Zeihan unpack why the global landscape is changing—and why it isn't just about any single political figure, but rather the collision of long-standing trends in trade, demographics, and national priorities. You'll hear Peter Zeihan break down how the post–World War II system, built on American-led security and global cooperation, is unraveling amidst demographic decline and shifting alliances. They explore why the current moment might be unlike anything we've seen since the Black Plague, what happens when countries are forced to become economic generalists again, and why U.S. leadership is facing a critical test. Plus, Tom Bilyeu presses Peter on what this means for America's future, global productivity, and the hard choices ahead. Whether you're a geopolitical buff or just eager to understand how economics truly drives world affairs, this episode will challenge your assumptions and give you the tools to see the present—and the future—in a whole new light. Stay tuned for this thought-provoking conversation. Follow Peter Zeihan:Website: https://zeihan.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/PeterZeihanLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-zeihan-1a8176/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZeihanonGeopolitics What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... STARTING a business: join me here at ZERO TO FOUNDER:  https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show SCALING a business: see if you qualify here.:  https://tombilyeu.com/call Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox: sign up here.: https://tombilyeu.com/ ********************************************************************** If you're serious about leveling up your life, I urge you to check out my new podcast, Tom Bilyeu's Mindset Playbook —a goldmine of my most impactful episodes on mindset, business, and health. Trust me, your future self will thank you. ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en Twitter: https://twitter.com/tombilyeu YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu Quince: Free shipping and 365-day returns at https://quince.com/impactpod Shopify: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial period at https://shopify.com/impact Ketone IQ: Visit https://ketone.com/IMPACT for 30% OFF your subscription order Incogni: Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code IMPACT at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/impact Blocktrust IRA: Get up to $2,500 funding bonus to kickstart your account at https://tomcryptoira.com Netsuite: Right now, get our free business guide, Demystifying AI, at https://NetSuite.com/Theory Huel: High-Protein Starter Kit 20% off for new customers at https://huel.com/impact code impact global security, US foreign policy, trade, demographics, Cold War, NATO, globalization, manufacturing, K-shaped economy, world order, American alliances, post-World War II system, containment, economic sanctions, Iraq War, war on terror, US industrial base, economic models, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), tariffs, Trump administration, supply chain, deglobalization, NAFTA, regional globalization, policy experts, Cuban workforce, Colombia infrastructure, technological stagnation, demographic collapse, China-US relations Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureTrump started to put all the pieces together starting back in 2017. He was setting the stage to remove NAFTA but he was not able to because congress put roadblocks into the legislation, so he transitioned it into the USMCA and now he has trapped Canada in it. Trade deals are power of the US, the US has the leverage and the [CB] knows it.  The [DS] along with Biden, Obama and Clinton are pushing the insurgency in this country. Walz believes he has the upper hand making a deal with Trump but this is going to backfire on him and Frey. The people in MN are already upset. The D’s believe they can shutdown the government and use the DHS funding to do it. But the OBBB is funding ICE so this is going to fail. Trump has the leverage and he weakening the [DS] every step of the way. The root cause is being exposed to the country.   Economy Big Picture: President Trump and Trade Using the Art of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Canada and the EU take trade and economic positions seemingly against U.S. interests. Simultaneously Mexico modifies all their trade positions to come into alignment with the USA. Yesterday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced Mexico will no longer ship oil to Cuba.   When President Trump was asked about Prime Minister Mark Carney creating a new trade agreement with China, President Trump responded that he didn't care – it was irrelevant to him.  Yet, simultaneously inside the USMCA President Trump has the power to veto any trade agreement between Mexico or Canada and a non-member nation. So, why didn't President Trump care?  Easy, because in President Trump's mind there's not going to be a USMCA; so, he really doesn't care if Canada runs to violate it.  In real terms, Canada doing bilateral deals with other countries, especially deals potentially detrimental to the USA, only strengthens his position on dissolving the USMCA. If Canada violates the terms and spirit of the USMCA, it makes dispatch of the unliked trade agreement even easier.  Canada is helping President Trump remove the congressional justification they could use to block him.  If Canada is violating the USMCA (CUSMA), Congress is kneecapped from interference. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/2015924180160594345?s=20 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2015949123648909631?s=20  more than officially reported. Furthermore, China officially bought an additional 0.9 tonnes in December, pushing the total gold reserves to a record 2,306 tonnes. This also marked the 14th consecutive monthly purchase. In 2025, China's total reported gold purchases reached +27 tonnes. Assuming official purchases were 10% of what China is actually buying, this suggests China acquired +270 tonnes of physical gold in 2025. China is stockpiling gold like we are in a major crisis.    2025. Why hasn’t the Korean Legislature approved it?   Because the Korean Legislature hasn’t enacted our Historic Trade Agreement, which is their prerogative, I am hereby increasing South Korean TARIFFS on Autos, Lumber, Pharma, and all other Reciprocal TARIFFS, from 15% to 25%. Thank you for your attention to this matter!   DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Political/Rights DOGE https://twitter.com/alx/status/2015969948674203731?s=20 Geopolitical  War/Peace Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda  https://twitter.com/VASenateGOP/status/2015208669336813823?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2015208669336813823%7Ctwgr%5E5081d9eb1b9220fa690d082571ec929c4f0248cc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2026%2F01%2Fvirginia-democrats-now-seeking-double-their-own-pay%2F   pocket to line their own. TOTAL CON JOB! True. The Department of Justice did withdraw its request for arrest warrants against Don Lemon and four other individuals involved in the disruption of a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, following a federal magistrate judge’s refusal to approve the related criminal complaints and an appeals court’s rejection of the DOJ’s emergency bid to compel the warrants.  While prosecutors could potentially pursue charges through alternative means, such as a grand jury, the specific action of withdrawing the warrant request aligns with the reported events https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/2016208255677067439?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricBrakey/status/2015578832070123856?s=20 https://twitter.com/JayTownAlabama/status/2015584436230717786?s=20 According to recent data from the Giffords Law Center, the following 16 jurisdictions (15 states plus the District of Columbia) have explicit prohibitions on carrying firearms at demonstrations, protests, or licensed public gatherings. These restrictions vary by state, with some banning both concealed and open carry, while others target only one or apply under specific conditions (e.g., only for participants or permitted events). Note that laws can change, and some states have exceptions like for enhanced permit holders. State/Jurisdiction Concealed Carry Prohibited? Open Carry Prohibited? Notes Alabama Yes Yes Arkansas Yes No Applies only to participants in permitted demonstrations; enhanced CCW permittees are allowed. California No Yes Open carry banned generally. Connecticut No Yes Open carry banned generally. District of Columbia Yes Yes Florida No Yes Open carry banned generally. Hawaii Yes Yes Illinois Yes Yes Louisiana Yes No Applies to permitted demonstrations or parades. Maryland Yes Yes Mississippi Yes No Applies to permitted demonstrations or parades. Nebraska Yes No Applies at “political rallies” and fundraisers. New Jersey Yes Yes New York Yes Yes North Carolina Yes Yes Washington No Yes   https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2015928285436203305?s=20 https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2016211395273011469?s=20  gets disarmed… then shot. DHS is already tracking violent agitators who assault or obstruct officers (you know, felonies). Tom Homan pushing to make these interferers “famous” via database – names, faces, employers notified. The same crowd screaming “police state” will ignore he already assaulted officers once and walked   https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2016235731602067586?s=20 https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/2016177515845283911?s=20   nation that tramples the 4th Amendment and tolerates our neighbors being terrorized. The people of Minnesota have stood strong — helping community members in unimaginable circumstances, speaking out against injustice when they see it, and holding our government accountable to the people. Minnesotans have reminded us all what it is to be American, and they have suffered enough at the hands of this Administration. Violence and terror have no place in the United States of America, especially when it's our own government targeting American citizens. No single person can destroy what America stands for and believes in, not even a President, if we — all of America — stand up and speak out. We know who we are. It’s time to show the world. More importantly, it’s time to show ourselves. Now, justice requires full, fair, and transparent investigations into the deaths of the two Americans who lost their lives in the city they called home. Jill and I are sending strength to the families and communities who love Alex Pretti and Renee Good as we all mourn their senseless deaths.   https://twitter.com/RyanSaavedra/status/2015985227798139267?s=20 https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/2015918587609772148?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2015971665906110549?s=20 https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/2016220055973855403?s=20     https://twitter.com/Recon1_ZA/status/2015778411650732184?s=20   It’s a rapid, involuntary reaction mediated by the brainstem, involving muscle tension, elevated heart rate, and adrenaline release. That repetitive exposure from them fatigues neural pathways but sustains heightened arousal, diverting cognitive resources from higher-order tasks to basic threat monitoring. It is an acute stressor, activating the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and sympathetic nervous system, which releases cortisol and adrenaline. Long exposure to this stuff impairs prefrontal cortex function critical for decision making. Pair this with the sheer annoyance, these tactics are a low-tech escalation of protest disruption, rooted in documented physiological responses to noise. In layman’s terms, they’re putting these officers on edge and triggering them to act. Pretti and Good was exactly what they wanted. It’s usually someone else who ends up dying and not the instigator. This is a great example. Watch the guy at the rear strike an officer against the head with an object. These officers, already on edge, are very likely to react to something like that. When someone ends up getting hurt, they’re all innocent. These events aren’t random. These are organised tactics. 80% of the people protesting aren’t aware that they’re being used by their own team as cannon fodder to generate outrage. https://twitter.com/DataRepublican/status/2015620564787105892?s=20   Tending the Soil on Chuffed. More about Tending the Soil later. What to know: the campaign is hosted by Chuffed and the first donation came from Jonny Soppotiuk, a Canada-based community organizer who is part of Chuffed leadership and specializes in fundraising. He is most likely a central figure in raising money. So, yeah. Starting to look like foreigners are playing a key role in all of this. That’s not all. I’ve put together a spreadsheet of 4000+ donors and their possible identities. https://twitter.com/davidson_f14299/status/2015874164679442499?s=20  Machine that's been running this country for decades. She's tied into the donors, the nonprofits, the consultants, the media networks — all the gears that keep the Machine turning. And look at what she just did. She tweeted out that webpage directing people to donate through a foreign‑operated platform. That's not some innocent little share. That's the Machine signaling to its own network — money pipelines, global partners, and political messaging all moving in sync. She knows exactly what she's amplifying and who benefits from it. And this isn't new for her. Look back at Russiagate. Her campaign funded the Steele dossier — the spark that set off years of investigations, headlines, and division. Even after the whole thing fell apart under scrutiny, the chaos it created was already locked in. That's how the Machine works: it doesn't need accuracy, it just needs momentum. And she's been one of the people who knows how to generate that momentum better than anyone. So where does she sit in the Machine? Right in the core. Not elected. Not accountable. Still pulling levers through the same networks she helped build. She's not operating inside the Machine — she's one of the people who designed the damn thing. And that's why her name keeps showing up. Not because she holds office. But because the Machine still runs on the structures she put in place — and every time she boosts a link, a cause, or a narrative, you can see those old gears turning all over again.  https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/2015963638096429102?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2015941282237972649?s=20     President Trump's Plan  And we back you WHOLEHEARTEDLY in making it happen https://twitter.com/TriciaOhio/status/2015939758858371393?s=20   https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2015858856430055491?s=20   professional. He will continue to lead Customs and Border Patrol throughout and across the country — Mr. Homan will be the main point of contact on the ground in Minneapolis.” Hakeem Jeffries Backs Impeachment Push Against Kristi Noem House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his leadership team voiced support Tuesday for impeaching Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem. Nearly 150 House Democrats have sponsored articles of impeachment against Noem, first unveiled by Democratic Illinois Rep. Robin Kelly on Jan. 14, but Jeffries had not previously backed the impeachment push. Jeffries vowed Tuesday that House Democrats will launch impeachment proceedings against Noem if President Donald Trump does not fire her. Source: dailycaller.com https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2016203259900317988?s=20   https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2016218361844174956?s=20   Minnesota State Patrol has now been activated. They could have done this the whole time, but it wasn't until after the call between Walz and Trump, and the discovery of the Signal groups involving Minnesota government officials, that this happened.   https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2015868419187544417?s=20 https://twitter.com/derrickvanorden/status/2015808200495312963?s=20 Counterinsurgency may be defined as ‘comprehensive civilian and military efforts taken to simultaneously defeat and contain insurgency and address its root causes'. Defeat refers to actively dismantling the insurgent group’s capabilities—through kinetic operations (e.g., raids, airstrikes) to kill or capture leaders, disrupt supply lines, and degrade their fighting strength. Contain means preventing the insurgency from spreading or escalating. This could involve securing borders, isolating insurgent areas, or using psychological operations (psyops) to undermine their recruitment and propaganda. The “simultaneously” part stresses that these aren’t sequential steps; they happen in parallel. You can’t just “contain” without addressing threats, nor can you defeat an insurgency if it keeps regenerating in new areas. Key challenge: Insurgents often blend into the civilian population, making it hard to target them without collateral damage, which can create more enemies. 3. Address Its Root Causes Insurgencies don’t arise in a vacuum; they’re often driven by underlying issues like political exclusion, economic inequality, corruption, ethnic tensions, or lack of basic services. The definition insists that long-term success requires tackling these “root causes” to prevent resurgence. This might include reforms such as land redistribution, anti-corruption drives, inclusive governance, or economic development programs. Without this, military victories are temporary. For instance, historical cases like the Malayan Emergency (1948–1960) succeeded partly because British forces combined military action with resettlement programs and political concessions that addressed Malay grievances against colonial rule. Broader Context and Principles Population-Centric Approach: Modern COIN doctrine, influenced by thinkers like David Galula or modern adaptations, views the local population as the “center of gravity.” The goal is to protect civilians, gain their trust, and separate them from insurgents—often summarized as “clear, hold, build” (clear insurgents from an area, hold it securely, and build sustainable institutions). Challenges and Criticisms: COIN is resource-intensive, time-consuming, and politically fraught. It can lead to prolonged conflicts, human rights abuses, or mission creep. Critics argue it sometimes ignores cultural contexts or over-relies on foreign intervention, as seen in Vietnam or Iraq. Success Factors: Effective COIN requires unity of effort (coordination between allies), intelligence-driven operations, and adaptability. Metrics for success go beyond body counts to include governance improvements and reduced violence. In essence, this definition portrays counterinsurgency as a balanced, enduring campaign that blends force with reform to not just suppress rebellion but eliminate the conditions that sustain it.    https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2015886441063055779?s=20 patriots need all the support they can get!  Background on the “Big Beautiful Bill” and ICE Funding In 2025, Republicans passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (often referred to by President Trump as the “Big Beautiful Bill”), which allocated approximately $75 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) over four years. This funding was separate from annual appropriations and effectively tripled ICE’s budget, providing a multi-year “slush fund” for immigration enforcement, including deportations.  This bill was part of Trump’s broader immigration agenda and bypassed traditional yearly funding processes, allowing ICE to operate independently of short-term congressional battles. Current Shutdown Threat and Democrats’ Strategy Democrats, led by figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sens. Patty Murray, Chris Murphy, and others, have vowed to block the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill in the Senate. This bill includes $64.4 billion for DHS overall, with about $10 billion specifically for ICE in the current fiscal year.  Why the Shutdown Won’t Defund ICE Even prominent Democrats like Sen. Murray acknowledge that a shutdown or continuing resolution (short-term funding patch) won’t restrain ICE. The agency can draw from the $75 billion already secured via the Big Beautiful Bill, allowing operations to continue uninterrupted under Trump’s “law-and-order” immigration crackdown.  A shutdown would primarily affect non-ICE parts of DHS (e.g., TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard) and other bundled departments, forcing some federal workers to go without pay while ICE remains funded and operational.  Republican Position and “Upper Hand” The White House and GOP leaders like Speaker Mike Johnson are not yielding, insisting on passing the full package without decoupling DHS funding. They view Democratic threats as ineffective since ICE’s core operations are protected by the prior bill.  The House has already passed the DHS bill with some Democratic support, putting pressure on the Senate. Republicans are framing this as Democrats prioritizing protests over essential services, giving the GOP leverage in negotiations.    https://twitter.com/AwakenedOutlaw/status/2015946190219837842?s=20   themselves, and engage in thoughtful discourse and/or express outrage against the wholesale ridiculousness of not allowing the government to do its job and protect us…and they do so for months on matters that most would never have otherwise engaged in AND would otherwise slip out of the news cycle quickly.    The Supreme Court ends up taking the case and rules (correctly) in favor of his administration. Piece by piece through this process, legal precedence is secured. Which, as it turns out, was deemed necessary to help secure the future of our Republic writ large. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. This implies that we are directly involved in an educational process, if you will, as we all progress through the realignment. Advantage: America’s future https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi/status/2015932965528764622?s=20   violent agitators. The DOJ went to court. We got a temporary stay. NOW, the 8th Circuit has fully agreed that this reckless attempt to undermine law enforcement cannot stand. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of Trump admin allowing ICE agents to arrest, detain, pepper-spray or retaliate against violent anti-ICE rioters, in Minneapolis, without probable cause   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");