Category: Education

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Interview of President Trump and Elon Musk by Sean Hannity, “The Sean Hannity Show”

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>Roosevelt Room

    11:48 A.M. EST

         Q    Mr. President, great to see you again.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.

         Q    How are you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you. 

         Q    Elon Musk.

         MR. MUSK:  Hi.

         Q    Great to see you. 

         MR. MUSK:  Thanks.  Thanks for having me.

         Q    I’ve been reading a lot about you.  I’ve got to start with this.  So, he’s working for free with DOGE.  He’s — he’s kind of put a lot of his life on hold, and you sued Twitter a number of years ago.  You just made him pay you $10 million?

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  That’s right.

         Q    That’s — that’s right.  (Laughs.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I sued — I sued from long before he had it. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.  (Inaudible.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  And, I mean, they really did a number on me, you know.  And I sued, and they had to pay.  You know, they paid $10 million settlement.

         Q    You’re okay with that?
        
         MR. MUSK:  I mean, I left it up to the lawyers and, you know, the team running Twitter.  So, I said, “You guys do what you think is the right — makes sense.”

         Q    I think it’s funny.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I think —

         Q    Because —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a very low — I was looking to get much more money than that.
        
         Q    So, you gave him a discount w- — in the lawsuit?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He got — oh, he got a big discount.  I don’t think he even knows about it.

         Q    He’s become one of your — if you read and believe the media — he’s become one of your best friends.  He’s working for free for you.  He’s —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I love the president.  I just want to be clear about that.  

         Q    You don’t care about that? 

         MR. MUSK:  I — no, I love the pr- — I —

         Q    You love the president? 

         MR. MUSK:  I think — I think President Trump is a good man, and — and he’s, you know — I — I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the way he said that.  You know, there’s something nice about.  (Laughter.)

         MR. MUSK:  No, it is.  I, you know —

         THE PRESIDENT:  It is.

         MR. MUSK:  Because, I mean, the president has been so — so unfairly attacked in the media.  It’s truly outrageous.  And I’ve sp- — at this point, spent a lot of time with the president, and not once have I seen him do something that was mean or cruel or — or wrong.  Not once. 

         Q    You know, I’ve known him for 30 years.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And I’ve never seen anybody take as much as he’s taken.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And we’ve discussed this.  And I’m like, “How do you deal with it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  Did have a choice?  (Laughs.)  I didn’t have a choice.

         Q    Well, you would say that to me.  I’m like, “What — what am I going to do?  Worry about it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing I can say.

         Q    And, you know — and then culminating in two assassination attempts, which resulted in your endorsement. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I was going to do it anyway, but that was —

         Q    That was it?

         MR. MUSK:  — a precipitating event, yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That speeded it up a little bit?

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.

         Q    The day of the assassination? 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nice.  I didn’t know that. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it just — it sped it up, but I was going to do it anyway.

         Q    Mr. President, with your indulgence, I’m convinced that people only know a little bit about Elon.  I don’t think they know everything about Elon, because as I studied for and prepared for this interview, I learned a lot about you that I didn’t know.  I think people will think about Tesla.  Democrats are demonizing you and — and trying to make the country hate you. 

         I just want people to understand you a little bit better, and the person that you’ve gotten to know and have now put a lot of trust in. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

         Q    And, you know, just — let’s go over a little bit of your bio, starting —

         MR. MUSK:  Ah, okay.

         Q    — with PayPal and how you became involved in Tesla and SpaceX and Neuralink —

         MR. MUSK:  This — this could take a while.

         Q    — and all these —

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, you know, I — I think the way you think of me is, like, I’m a technologist and I try to make technologies that improve the world and make life better.

         Q    You can show them your shirt.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, and that’s why, like, my t-shirt says “tech support” — (laughter) — because I’m here to provide the president with — with technology support. 

         And now, that — that may seem, like, well, is that a silly thing?  But actually, it’s a very important thing, because the president will make these executive orders, which are very sensible and good for the country, but then they don’t get implemented, you know?

         So, if you take the — for example, all the funding for the migrant hotels, the president issued an executive order: Hey, we need to stop taking taxpayer money and — and paying for luxury hotels for illegal immigrants —

         Q    It’s crazy.

         MR. MUSK:  — which makes no sense.  Like, obviously, people do not want their tax dollars going to — to fund high-end hotels for — for illegals.  And yet, they were still doing that, even as late as last week. 

         And so, you know, we went in there, and we were like, “This is in violation of the presidential executive order.  It needs to stop.” 

         So — so, what we’re — what we’re doing here is — is — one of the biggest functions of the DOGE team is just making sure that the presidential executive orders are actually carried out.  And this is — I just want to point out, this is a very important thing, because the president is the elected representative of the people, so he’s representing the will of the people.  And if the bureaucracy is fighting the will of the people and preventing the pres- — the president from implementing what the people want, then what we live in is a bureaucracy and not a democracy.

         Q    Yeah.  You — you’re both aware — you have to be keenly aware that the media and — and the punditry class — not that — you know, I think you’ve proven they have no power anymore, because they threw everything they had at you, and they didn’t win.  And that was, you know, the New York Times, Washington Post, three networks, every late-night comedy show, two cable channels — they — they just threw — they threw everything — lawfare, weaponization. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

         Q    And now I see they want you two to start — they want a divorce.  They want you two to start hating each other.  And they try — “Oh, President Elon Musk,” for example.  You do know that they’re doing that to you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, I see it all the time.  They tried it, then they stopped.  That wasn’t — they have many different things of hatred. 

         Actually, Elon called me.  He said, “You know they’re trying to drive us apart.”  I said, “Absolutely.” 

         You know, they said, “We have breaking news: Donald Trump has ceded control of the presidency to Elon Musk.  President Musk will be attending a Cabinet meeting tonight at 8 o’clock.”  (Laughter.)  And I say — it’s just so obvious.  They’re so bad at it. 

         I used to think they were good at it.  They’re actually bad at it, because if they were good at it, I’d never be president because I — I think nobody in history has ever gotten more bad publicity than me. 

         I could do the greatest things; I get 98 percent bad publicity.  I could do — outside of you and a few of your very good friends.  It’s, like, the craziest thing. 

         But you know what I have learned, Elon?  The people are smart.  They get it. 

         MR. MUSK.  Yeah.  They do, actually.  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They get it.  They really see what’s happening. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And at the end of this interview, I — what I would like is, I — I want people to know the relationship and know more about you. 

         What is the relationship, Mr. President?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I respect him.  I’ve always respected him.  I never knew that he was right on certain things, and I’m usually pretty good at this stuff.  He did Starlink.  He did things that were so advanced and nobody knew what the hell they were. 

         I can tell you, in North Carolina, they had no communication.  They were wiped out.  Those people were — you know, they had rivers in between — land that never saw water, all of a sudden, there was a river and a vicious — like, rapids.  People were dying all over.  They had no communication. 

         They said, “Do you know Elon Musk?”   And they didn’t really know I knew him.  I said, “Yeah.”  They said, “Could you get Starlink?”  It’s, like, the first time I ever heard of it.  I said, “What’s Starlink?”  “A communication system that’s unbelievable.” 

         Q    I have it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And he — yeah.  And he said — I called him, and I said, “Listen, they really need it.”  And he got, like, thousands of units of this communication, and it saved a lot of lives.  He got it immediately.  And you can’t get it.  I mean, you have to wait a long time to get it.  But he got it to him immediately. 

         And I said, “That’s pretty amazing.”  And I didn’t even know he had it. 

         We watch the rocket ships, and we watch Tesla.

         I think, you know, something that had an effect on me was when I saw the rocket ship come back and get grabbed like you grab a beautiful little baby.  You grab your baby.  It just —

         MR. MUSK:  Just hug the rocket. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’d never seen —

         MR. MUSK:  Everyone — right.  Everyone needs (inaudible) —

         Q    You hug the rocket.  You hug the rocket.

         MR. MUSK:  — (inaudible) rockets. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  No, but — and he said, “You know, you can’t really have a rocket program if you’re going to dump a billion dollars into the ocean every time you fly.  You have to save it.”  And he saved it.  First time —

         Q    That’s ever been done.
        
         THE PRESIDENT:  — I’ve ever seen that done.  Now nobody else can do it. 

         If you look at the U.S., Russia, or China, they can’t do it, and they won’t be able to do it for a long time.  He has the technology.  So, you learn — I wanted somebody really smart to work with me, in terms of the country — a very important aspect.  Because, I mean, he doesn’t talk about it.  He’s actually a very good businessman.  And when he talks about the executive orders — and this is probably true for all presidents: You write an executive order and you think it’s done, you send it out; it doesn’t get done.  It doesn’t get implemented.  They don’t implement it. 

         They — maybe they’re from the last administration — and they are, in some cases.  You try and get them out as fast as you can.  But I could — as soon as he said that, I said, “You know, that’s interesting.”  You write a beautiful executive — and you sign it and you assume it’s going to be done, but it’s not.  What he does is he takes it, and with his hundred geniuses — he’s got some very brilliant young people working for him that dress much worse than him, actually —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, the do.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — they dress in just t-shirts.  (Laughter.)  You wouldn’t know they have 180 IQ.

         Q    Wait.  Wait.  So, what — he’s — he’s your tech support?

         MR. MUSK:  I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  He is —

         MR. MUSK:  I actually virtually am tech support.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s much more than that.

         MR. MUSK:  I actually am tech support, though.  But that’s —

         THE PRESIDENT:  But he gets it done.  He’s a leader.  He really is a — he gets it done.  You get a lot of tech people, and you have people, they’re good with tech, but they — he gets it done. 

         You know, I said, in real estate, you had guys that would draw beautiful renderings of a building, and they’d draw the rendering, it would be great, and you’d say, “Great.  When are you starting?”  But they were never able to get it built.  They couldn’t get the finances.  They couldn’t get the approvals.  It would never get done.  And then you have other guys that are able to get it done.  You know, they could just get it done. 

         I was in real estate.  Same thing in this.  He gets it done. 

         So, when he said that — he said, “You know, when you sign these executive orders, a lot of them don’t get done, and maybe the most important ones,” and he would take that executive order that I’d signed, and he would have those people go to whatever agency it was — “When are you doing it?  Get it done.  Get it done.”  And some guy that maybe didn’t want to do it, all of a sudden, he’s signing — he just doesn’t want to bothered.

         Q    Does — do a lot of those executive orders have to be codified into law to — do you need the Republican Congress to follow up?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, and they will.  A lot of them will be.  Yeah.

         Q    They will?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Look, in the meantime, we have four years.  The beauty is, we have four years.  That’s why I like doing it right at the beginning.  Because an executive order is great.  I mean, the one problem — it’s both good and bad, because when they did all these executive orders, I’ve canceled most of them.  They were terrible.  I mean, we were going to go radical left, communist, okay?  It was crazy.  Their —

         MR. MUSK:  Really crazy.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — executive orders were so bad, if they ever got them codified, you’d never be able to break them.  So, the damage that Biden has done to this country — and it’s not even Biden; it’s the people that circled him in the Oval Office, okay? — but the damage they did to this country, in terms of, let’s say, open borders — you know, there’s so many things, but open borders, where millions of people poured into our country, and hundreds of thousands of those people are criminals.  They’re murderers.  They’re drug dealers.  They’re gang members.  They’re people from prisons from all over the world. 

         And we have a great guy, Tom Homan, and he is doing so incredibly.  You saw the numbers.  They’re down like 96 percent.

         Q    Ninety-five percent.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He is a phenomenal guy.  And Kristi Noem is doing an unbelievable job.  And he wanted her.  He said, “She’s so tough.”  And I said, “I don’t think of her as that way.  You know, she’s very nice.”  He said, “No, she’s so tough.”  And she is.  I see her with the horses.  She’s riding the horse.  Let’s — (laughter) — she’s great. 

         But the team we have is — is really unbelievable. 

         But those executive orders, I sign them, and now they get passed on to him and his group and other people, and they’re all getting done.  We’re getting them done.

         Q    Let me go back a little bit to your background, because —

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    — it’s beyond impressive.  You were the chief engineer, for example — you were an early believer in Tesla.  You became the CEO and — and then the chief engineer, which was phenomenal.  SpaceX, same thing, which is unbelievable. 

         I mean, you were the first company — private company to send astronauts successfully into — into space, first private company to send astronauts into orbit. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    That’s — that’s pretty deep. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s going to go into orbit soon.

         Q    Okay.

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, he’s going to go to Mars.  He’s going to fly on his —

         Q    Starlink.

         MR. MUSK:  At some point, yeah.

         Q    As in (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  But they say — they always ask me, like, “Do you want to die on Mars?”  And I say, “Well, yes, but not on impact.”  (Laughter.)

         Q    Star- — Starlink is in 100 countries. 

         This is going to be hard.  I feel like I’m interviewing two brothers here.

         MR. MUSK:  You go ahead. 

         Q    Starshield, which could be used for national defense. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it is already being used for national defense. 

         Q    Then you have a — what is it called?  Optimus, a part of Tesla.

         MR. MUSK:  They’re a robot, yeah.

         Q    A robotic arm.  Then you have an AI arm.  And then you have something that really fascinated me, and it’s called Neuralink. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You might help the blind to see and people with spinal cord injuries that they — that they can recover, where in the past — how close is that to becoming a success?

         MR. MUSK:  At Neuralink we’re — we’ve ha- — we’ve implanted Neuralink in three patients so far, who are quadriplegics, and it allows them to directly control their phone and computer just using their mind, just by thinking.  It’s like — so, we call this product Telepathy, so you control your computer and phone just by thinking, and it’s possible to actually control the computer and phone faster than someone who has working hands.

         Then the next step would be to add a second Neuralink implant past the point where these — the neurons are damaged, so that somebody can walk again and so the pe- — they can have full-body functionality restored.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you like Bobby, right?

         MR. MUSK:  I like Bobby, actually.  Yeah.  I — I supported Bobby Kennedy.  I think he — you know, he’s unfairly maligned as someone who is anti-science.  But I think he — he isn’t.  He just wants to question the science, which is the essence of the science — the scientific method, fundamentally, is about always questioning the science. 

         Q    Well, they didn’t tell us the truth about COVID.

         MR. MUSK:  Correct.

         Q    That’s for sure. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    And we learned a lot with the Twitter files.  And that just, then, raises a question.  You’re the richest man in the world.  You may not like that part. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    You’re pretty competitive.

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, it’s neither here nor there.

         Q    I’ve known you a long time.

         MR. MUSK:  I don’t think it matters.

         Q    But —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s why I became president.

         Q    — he’s on your team.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Well, that’s true.  He can’t top that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s good.  You know, I wanted to find somebody smarter than him.  I searched all over.  I just couldn’t do it.  I couldn’t.  I couldn’t.
        
         Q    You really tried hard.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I couldn’t find anyone smarter, right?  So, we had to — we had to, for the country.

         Q    But this is the thing —

         THE PRESIDENT:  So, we settled on — we settled on this guy.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, thanks for having me.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         Q    So —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m just trying to be useful here.

         Q    But this is the interesting — but this is where we are as a so- — a society.  And I — I hate to do this to you, but I’m going to do it anyway.  You’re doing all of these things.  At DOGE, nobody at DOGE gets paid a penny, correct?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, actually, some people are federal employees, so they do. 

         Q    Oh, okay.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  They’re (inaudible).  But it’s fair to say that the software engineers at DOGE could be earning millions of dollars a year and instead of earning a small fraction of that as federal employees.

         Q    Okay.  So, just —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And they’re very committed people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So — you’re — you’re committed to helping the blind see, people with spinal cord injuries recover. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You’re committed to getting to Mars.  You’re committed to rescue — you’re going to help rescue, next month, two astronauts that I think were abandoned.  They — they dispute that in an interview.

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are you — when are you getting them?

         MR. MUSK:  At the — at the president’s request, we — or instruction, we are accelerating the return of the astronauts, which was postponed, kind of, to a ridiculous degree.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They got left in space. 

         Q    They’ve been there.  They were supposed to be there eight days.  They’re there almost 300.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Biden. 

         MR. MUSK:  They were put —

         Q    Yeah.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they were left up there for political reasons, which is not good. 

         Q    Okay, it’s not good.  Now, if I had the weight and pressure of doing that successfully on my shoulders, I think I’d be, you know — but you — when we spoke before we did this interview, you were very confident.  You think this will be a successful mission. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we don’t want to be complacent, but we have brought astronauts back from the space station many times before, and always with success.  So, as long as we’re not complacent —

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are they — when are you going to launch?

         MR. MUSK:  I think it’s about — about four weeks to

    bring them back. 

         Q    About four weeks? 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  We’re being extremely cautious.

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You now have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Well, thanks to you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They didn’t have the go-ahead with Biden. 

         Q    What’s that?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He was going to leave him in space.  I think he was going to leave them in space.

         Q    Well, it’s like the (inaudible) —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He considered it a —

         Q    — growing up, lost in space. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, he didn’t want the publicity.  Can you believe it?

         Q    Unbelievable.  And so —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — I want to echo something that the president said and then ask an overarching question.  So, people in — get hit with Hurricane Helene, they have no communication with the outside world.  You come to the rescue.  You donated that, I believe?

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

         Q    You donated to the people of —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He saved a lot of lives.  In North Carolina, he saved a lot of lives. 

         Q    And California, after the wildfires?

         THE PRESIDENT:  California.  But, I mean, in North Carolina, where they were really in trouble, they had no communication, people were dying.

         Q    Nothing.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They were dying of starvation.  He saved a lot of lives in North Carolina.

         Q    Okay.  Now you’re going to rescue astronauts.  And now — again, you do — you do all of this — I would think liberals would love the fact that you have the biggest electric vehicle company in the world. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I used to be adored by the left, you know.

         Q    Not anymore.

         MR. MUSK:  Le- — less so these days.

         Q    He killed that, huh?

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, less —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I really (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, this — this whole sort of, like, you know — it was — they call it, like, “Trump derangement syndrome.”  And I didn’t — you know, you don’t realize how real this is until, like, it’s — you can’t reason with people. 

         So, like, I was at a friend’s birthday party in L.A., just a birthday dinner, and it was, like, a nice, quiet dinner, and everything was — everyone was behaving normally.  And then I happened to mention — this was before the election, like a month or two before — I happened to mention the president’s name, and it was like they got shot with a dart in the jugular that contained, like, the methamphetamine and rabies.  Okay?  (Laughter.)

         And they’re like, “Whyy?”  And I’m, like, “What is wrong — like, guys, like” — you just can’t have, like, a normal conversation.  And it’s like — it’s like they become completely irrational. 

         Q    He — he has no idea, if you’re friends with him —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — you pay a price.  You know, it’s like, I walk into a restaurant in New York, and it’s like half the room gets daggers and they want to —

         MR. MUSK:  The eye-daggers — eye-daggers level is insane.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, there was, like — I had, like, some — some invitation because — so, I got invited to, like, so- — basically, a big, sort of, damn — damn event like that was — but I’d received the invitation, like, the beginning of last year and then — and I still attended, even after I’d endorsed President Trump, and I didn’t realize how profoundly that would affect, you know, how I was received.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, I walk into the room and I’m getting just the dirty looks from — from everyone.  Like, if looks could kill, I would have been dead several times over.

         Q    But that was not — (laughter) — before Trump

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Before Trump: “BC” —

         MR. MUSK:  — ashes on the floor.  (Laughs.)

         Q    — or “BT.”  Before Trump, that never happened.  Right?

         MR. MUSK:  No.

         Q    No.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I just — doesn’t seem strange?  Like, what — what is up with this total, like, madness?

         Q    You’re smarter than me.  Can you — I actually think that there’s a level of irrationality.  It’s almost like a trigger and —

         MR. MUSK:  It totally triggers. 

         Q    And it’s like — look, I — I’ve been on TV — this is my 29th year.  I’ve been on radio 35 years.  I will — I’ve gone hard in the paint to — for candidates that lost.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And guess what?  I get over it.

         MR. MUSK.  Sure.  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    And I just keep doing my show, and I just — you know, I come back to fight another day.

         So, here’s the big — then this is the million dollar or billion dollar — I’m among billionaires — question.  So, you have all this going on and you stop, in a way — you’re still doing it — and you partner with him.  And this is what you get for it from the Democrats.  You get “nobody voted for Elon.”  Well, nobody voted for any of your Cabinet nominees.  Okay?  “People are dying because of DOGE cuts.”  I’ll give you a chance to respond to all that.  “What DOGE is doing is illegal.”  “Elon Musk is” — more street vernacular for a male body part.  “It’s a constitutional crisis.”

         MR. MUSK:  How c- — why — why are they reacting like this?

         Q    Well, first of all, do you give a flying rip?  Number one.  And —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I guess we must be — if we’re the target, we’re doing something right.  You know, if — like, they wouldn’t be complaining so much if they — we weren’t doing something useful, I think. 

         What — all we’re really trying to do here is restore the will of the people through the president.  And — and what we’re finding is there’s an unelected bureaucracy.  Speaking of unelected, there’s a — there’s a vast federal bureaucracy that is implacably opposed to the — the president and the Cabinet. 

         And you look at, say, D.C. voting.  It’s 92 percent Kamala.  Okay, so we’re in 92 percent Kamala.  That’s a lot. 

         Q    Yeah.  They don’t like me here either. 

         MR. MUSK:  I think about that number a lot.  I’m like, 92 percent.  That’s, basically, almost everyone.  And so — but if — but how can you — if — if the will of the president is not implemented, and the president is representative of the people, that means the will of the people is not being implemented, and that means we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a bureaucracy. 

         And so, I think what we’re seeing here is the — sort of, the thrashing of the bureaucracy as we try to restore democracy and the will of the people.

         Q    You —

         MR. MUSK:  Is this making sense?  I mean — sorry.

         Q    Y- — no, of course it does.  I mean, to me, if you look at our framers and our founders — and you’ve really become a student of history, Mr. President, and we’ve ta- — we’ve had conversations both on air and off air — and if we talk about constitutional order or transformational change, nobody can argue that what’s happening here is going at the speed of light. 

         But however, what were the principles of our framers and our founders?  They wanted limited government, greater freedom for the people — and we’ll get to the specific cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse.  That — that is your goal, is it not?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And my goal was to get great people.  And when you look at what this man has done, I mean, it was something — I knew him a little bit through the White House. Originally, I’d see him around a little bit.  I didn’t know him before that, and I respected what he did.  And he fought hard.  You know, he was a — he was maybe questioned for a while.  He was having some difficulties.  It was not easy doing what he did. 

         I mean, how many people have started a car company and made it really successful and made a better car where it’s, you know, beating these big companies that that’s all they do is cars?  I mean, it’s really amazing the things that he’s done.

         But I didn’t know it as much then as now.  I mean, the fruits have sort of taken hold.

         But I wanted great people, and he’s a great person.  He’s an amazing person.  He’s also a caring person.  You know, he uses the word “care.” 

         So, they sign a contract in a government agency, and it has three months.  And the guy leaves that signed the contract, and nobody else is there, and they pay the contract for 10 years.

         So, the guy is getting checks for years and years and years, and he’s telling his family, obviously — maybe it was crooked, maybe he paid to get the contract, or maybe he paid that they didn’t terminate him.  But, you know, we have contracts that go forever, and they’ve been going for years, and they’re supposed to end in three months or five months or two years or something, and they go forever.  So, the guy is either crooked — you know, where he knew this was going to happen — or he’s crooked because he’s getting payments that he knows he shouldn’t be getting.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  But they’re finding things like that.  They’re finding things far worse than that.  And they’re finding billions — and it will be hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of fraud.  I say waste and abuse, but fraud, waste, and abuse.  And he’s doing an amazing job.

         And he attracts a young, very smart type of person.  I call them high-IQ individuals, and they are.  They’re very high Q and — high IQ.  And when they go in to see the people and talk to these people — you know, the people think they’re going to pull it over.  They don’t.  These guys are smart, and they love the country.  You know, there’s a certain something. 

         But he uses the word “care.”  So, people have to care.  Like, when I bought Air Force One —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — I negotiated the price.  It was $5.7 billion, and I got it — I got them down $1.7 billion.  Now they’re not building the plane fast enough.  I mean, they’re actually in default — Boeing.  They’re supposed to —

         Q    When is it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They’ve been building this thing forever.  I don’t know —

         Q    This is the new Air Force One?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — what’s going on.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  We don’t build the way we used to build.  You know, we used to build like a ship a day, and now to build a ship is, like, a big deal, and we’re going to get this country back on track.  We could do it, but so many things — it takes so long to get things built and get things done. 

         And a lot of it could be something we’ve been discussing.  The regulators go in and they make it impossible to build.  They make it very difficult to build anything, whether it’s a ship, a plane, or a building or anything.  And some of them do it because they want to show how important they are.  Some of them do it maybe because they think they’re right.  They use the environment to stop progress and to stop things.  It’s always the environment.  “It’s an environmental problem.”  It’s not an environmental problem at all.  But they do a lot of things. 

         And, by the way, speaking of that, Lee Zeldin is going to be fantastic in the position.  So important.  He could take 10 years to approve or disapprove something, or he could do it in a month.  You know, just as good.

         Q    Sure. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think you’re going to see some fantastic — a fantastic job done by him.  He’s a tremendous guy. 

         Q    Newt — you echoed something when I had just met you, and it was very similar to what Newt has been saying, that we’re — he brought this country to the dance.  This is the opportunity to be transformational, and to have, I would argue, a — the most consequential presidency if we — if we’d really dig down and do something that had never been done before, and that is get rid of this bureaucracy.  And I’m going —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — to get to specifics.  You say the same thing.  It’s not done yet. 

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    And what did you mean by that?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean the — w- — winning the election is really the opportunity to fix the system.  It is not fixing the system itself.  So, it’s an opportunity to fix the system and to restore the power of democracy. 

         And, you know, people — like, it’s funny how — how often it — you — when these attacks occur, the thing that they’re accusing the administration of is what they are guilty of.  They’re saying that things are — are being done are unconstitutional, but what they are doing is unconstitutional.  They are guilty of the crime of which they accuse us.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s always the first thing they do.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  “He’s in violation of the Constitution.”  They don’t even know what they’re talking — well, they know.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s absurd. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s just a con job.  It’s a big con job.  And they’re so bad for the country, so dangerous and so bad.

         And the media is so bad.  When I watch MSNBC, which I don’t watch much, but you have to watch the enemy on occasion, the level of arrogance and — and cheating and — they’re just horrible people.  These are horrible people.

         Q    They lie. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  These are horrible people. 

         Q    They tell conspiracy theories.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They lie, and they start up with the Constitution.  They couldn’t care less about the Constitution.

         CNN, likewise.  I mean, I watched them asking questions with, you know, the hatred with the — why — I said, “What are you asking the question with such anger?  You’re asking me a normal question.”  But you see the bias.  The bias is so incredible.  Those two are bad.

         PBS is bad.  AP is bad.  CBS is terrible. 

         I mean, CBS now — they changed an answer in Kamala.  They asked her some questions.  She answered them like, you know, a low-IQ person.  The opposite of him — the absolute opposite.  But she gave a horrible answer.  They took the entire answer out, and they put another answer that she gave 20 minutes later into the — in- — as the answer.  

         Q    It was part of her word salad. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard of that be- — I thought I heard of it all.

         MR. MUSK:  Right. 

         Q    That wh- — “60 Minutes” once — one — wanted to do an interview with me, and I said, “Live to tape.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly. 

         Q    They said, “No.”  And I said, “No” —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — “No deal.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  They can- —

         Q    Like, this interview will —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard — you know, I’ve seen where they take a sentence off or something and they’ll do — but they —

         Q    Sometimes you cut for time o- — 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  They took the entire — this long, terrible statement that she made and put another. 

         Nobody’s ever seen what’s happening.  And, you know, the people that do all this complaining, they’re very dishonest people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         Q    Yeah.  I — I’m going to, just for the sake of saving time —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    — because I could spend — and I’ve done this on radio and TV, I — I can spend an hour finding the outrageous amounts of money being spent abroad, like USAID.

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    And I do want to mention a couple, but I’m going to —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — scroll it and —

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, I guess, at a high level, I think it’s what the president mentioned earlier, which is that in order to save taxpayer money, it comes down to two things: competence and caring.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right. 

         MR. MUSK:  — and when — when president was shown the outrageous bill for the new Air Force One and — and then negotiated it down, if he had — if the president had not applied competence and caring, the price would have been 50 percent higher — literally, 50 percent higher.  The president cared.  The president was competent.  The price was not 50 percent higher as the result. 

         And so, when you add more competence and caring, you get a better deal for the American people. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  But we could take — we were talking about this yesterday.  I could take — give me thousands of bills — any — I could pick any one of them, and I could —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — take all thousand.  And let’s say it’s a bill for $5,000 — just $5,000, and it’s done by some bureaucrat.  And if he would say, “I’ll give you three.  I don’t want to pay you five.  It’s too high.  I’ll give you three.”  But they don’t do that.  If a guy sends in a bill for $5,000, they pay $5,000.  They expect to be cut.  Everybody expects to be cut.  When you send in a bill, you expect to be cut.  They send in the bill higher, for the most part.  This is true with lawyers, legal fees.  When they send in legal fees, you — I can cut — I wish I had the time, I would save so — but I could cut these bills in half — much better than half. 

         But you offer people a much lower number because you know they — they actually put fat — I’m not even saying it’s — it’s like a way of business.  They put more on because they expect to be negotiated.  When you send in a bill to the government, there’s nobody to negotiate. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You send it a bill for $10,000, and they send you a check back for $10,000.  If you would call them and said, “We’ll give you five.”  “No, no, no.  I need more than five.”  “We’ll give you a five.”  “I’m not going to pay any more than five.”  “Make it six.”  “No, I’m not going to make it six.”  And you’ll settle for $5,500.  You’ve just cut the bill almost in half, and it took, like, two minutes.  When did that stop?  But —

         Q    (Inaudible) the art of the deal?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — that’s caring.  No, it’s not even the art of the deal.  It’s caring.  He uses the word —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s competence and caring.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s caring. 

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s a certain competence, but I think it’s more caring. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — if you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  Actually, if you add either ingredient — either competence or caring — you’ll — you’ll get a better outcome.  But it stands to reason —

         Q    Right.  People don’t want to do this (inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK: — that’s the reason that if you don’t have competency and you don’t have caring, you’re going to get a terrible deal.  And the problem is that the American taxpayer has been — been getting a terrible deal, because — look at the last administration.  Can you — can anyone — can any reasonable person say that last administration was either competent or caring?

         Q    But they lied to us and said that Joe didn’t have a cognitive decline.

         MR. MUSK:  They fully lied. 

         Q    They said the borders were closed.  They said that the borders were secure.  They said that —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    You know, they said Obamacare would save —

         MR. MUSK:  They flat out lied. 

         Q    They flat out lied — 

         MR. MUSK:  It was insane.

         Q    — on many occasions. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    I tell my audience all the time: Don’t trust government. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So, the — I want — as I scroll this information, and it’s — it’s — I’ll scroll a lot more than I’ll mention to both of you, and this is the cost savings.  I want you — I want people at home to understand this part: The average American makes $66,000 a year. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    Okay?  We have $37 trillion in national debt. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    Now, all the money I’m about to mention and what we’re going to scroll on our screen — and all of this is going to foreign countries.  It is not being spent here in America —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — for better schools, law and order. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — I think the average taxpaying American should be mad as hell because their tax money is being poorly spent.

         Q    I’m mad.  It’s stealing from —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s a — it’s an outrage —

         Q    — our kids and grandkids.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, and the — and people —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of fraud, Sean.  A lot of fraud.

         Q    Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of kickbacks. 

         They’re sending money out.  They’re not that stupid.  These people aren’t that stupid.  They’re sending for transgender — something having to do with the opera, and they’re sending out $7 million —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Literally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — $7 million.  (Inaudible) —

         Q    You just stole my next line.  I can’t believe that. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s incredible. 

         Q    I was going to mention that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, but it’s incredible: $7 million.

         Now, you know they — they’re not so stupid.  They’re sending all this money.  They expect to get a lot of it back.  And that’s what happens.

         Q    Okay.  So, let’s go through it.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they’re — a bunch of —

         Q    So, for the average person at home —

         MR. MUSK:  — this stuff is round-tripping.  To the president’s point, they’ll — they’ll make it sound like it’s going to help some people in a foreign country, but then they — then they get kickbacks. 

         Q    All right.  Let me go to the ne- — to the fir- —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — to the second question first.  I want to know, because people like Joni Ernst, and — and House —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, Joni — Joni Ernst has been —

         Q    They tried to get —

         MR. MUSK:  — has tried for a long time, and she’s actually got a lot of good data.  Senator Ernst has been really helpful, actually.

         Q    Okay, but they — they actually hide what the real purpose of the spending is. 

         MR. MUSK:  That’s true.

         Q    In other words, they — and — and h- — this is a question: How did you decipher?  It will say, “Humanitarian blah, blah, blah in Serbia or Afghanistan.”  We’ve been giving money to China for crying out loud, which I think is nuts.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we’re giving money to the Taliban.

         Q    Money to the Taliban?

         MR. MUSK:  Like a lot.

         Q    All right.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  I’m like, for what?

         Q    But they —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I want to see pictures of what they did.

         Q    But they try to obscure it, and — and — but then you got to the bottom line, which is what I’m now scrolling on the screen —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — and that is: $20 million on a Sesame Street show in Iraq; $56 million to boost tourism in Tunisia and Egypt; $40 million to build schools in Jordan; $11 million to tell the Vietnamese to stop burning trash; $45 million for DEI scholarships in Burma; $520 million for consultant-driven ESG investments in Africa; DEI programs in Serbia; the president’s favorite — I’m sure you — you love that taxpayer money was spent on a DEI musical in Ireland or a chan- — transgender opera in Colombia or a —

         MR. MUSK:  If I could, like, it sounds like —

         Q    — transgender comic book in Peru. 

         MR. MUSK:  It sounds like — it sounds like how can these things be real?  But this is actually what was done. 

         Q    Okay.  The — I —

         MR. MUSK:  It — it sounds like a comedy sketch or something.  It’s like —

         Q    I have 20 pages of this.

         MR. MUSK:  Right.  It’s not — the list is a mile long.

         THE PRESIDENT:  The one thing you didn’t mention, the media.  The media is getting millions of dollars. 

        MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Now, they say Politico, which is a radical left —

         Q    Subscriptions. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  — you know, garbage magazine or — or program.  I guess they have magazine and they have some — some media of all types.  $8 million. 

         I hear the New York Times got a lot.  I hear they get subscriptions — where they have subscriptions but maybe the paper is not sent.  I have no idea if that’s true or not, but it’s — they call it subscriptions.  Lots of subscri- — to different media, not just the Times — maybe the Times, and maybe not the Times.

         Q    A million dollars in subscriptions is a lot.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well — but — but millions of dollars going to media that’s radical-left, crooked, dishonest media.

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, Reuters — this is actually really wild: Reuters got like — something like $10 million for something that was literally titled “mass disinformation campaign.” 

         Q    Well —

         MR. MUSK:  That was on the purchase order.  Well, I — I

    thought that was a little bold.  (Laughs.) 

         Q    I will tell you what was bold is when you released —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m like —

         Q    — the Twitter files.

         MR. MUSK:  — shouldn’t you at least try to call it something else?  (Laughs.)

         Q    The Twitter files — how they targeted him; how Twitter, at the time, worked closely with the FBI, the CIA; and, even before the release of Hunter’s very real laptop, they were feeding them disinformation.  That —

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    — you found all that out. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I think —

         Q    That’s called transparency, right?

         THE PRESIDENT:  The FBI has to be rehabbed.  The FBI —

         MR. MUSK:   Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  What’s happened with the FBI and the DOJ is just — their — their stock has gone way down.  I mean, their reputation is shot.

         Q    And intelligence.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think Pam is going to do great.  I think Kash is going to do great.  I think they have to do great or we have a problem. 

         But when you look at what they did, the raid of Mar-a-Lago — the raid of Mar-a-Lago — you look at what they did, their reputation is shot.

         Q    It is. 

         What — you were going to say, Elon?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, no, I was going to say that I think probably a — like, a lot of people still —

         Q    How — how did you find (inaudible)?

         MR. MUSK:  — still believe, like, the Russia hoax, even though you’ve done a lot to combat that.  The — you know, the — the Steele dossier was an incre- — a massive scam that was concocted by Hillary Clinton and her — her campaign.

         Q    She bought and paid it — for it —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — Russian disinformation. 

         MR. MUSK:  There was — it was — the — people still think the — the Russia hoax is real.  Like a lot of people s- — because they never — they never heard the counterpoint.  I mean — I mean, a bunch of people should be in prison for that.  That was a — that was outrageous election interference, creating a fake Russia hoax. 

         Q    How much — if you had to put a number on it, how much do you think you’ve identified waste, fraud, abuse, corruption at this point?  And again, we’ve been — we’re going to be scrolling this throughout the program. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, the — the overall goal is to try to get a trillion dollars out of the deficit.  And if we — if we — if the deficit is not brought under control, America will go bankrupt.  This is a very important thing for people to understand.  A country is no different from an individual, in that if an individual overspends, an individual can go bankrupt, and so can a country. 

         And — and the out- — the massive waste, fraud, and abuse that has been going on, which is leading to a $2-trillion-a-year deficit, that — that’s what the president was handed on Jan. 20th, a $2 trillion deficit.  It’s insane. 

         Q    For this fiscal year?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Two trill- — yeah.  We inherited it.

         MR. MUSK:  Two —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And inflation is back.  I’m only here for two and a half weeks. 

         Q    That was January —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Inflating is back —

         Q    — you were there for a week. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, think of it, inflation is back.  And they said, “Oh, Trump infla-” — I had nothing to do with it.  These people have — have run the country.  They spent money like nobody has ever spent.  They were — they were given $9 trillion to throw out the window — $9 trillion, and they spent it on the Green New Scam, I call it.  It’s the greatest scam in the history of the country.  One of them.  We have a lot of them, I guess.  But one of them.

         Q    Well —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Dollar-wise, probably —

         Q    — and DEI —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it is.

         Q    — and wokeism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    — and transgenderism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, that’s all part of it.  Yeah.

         Q    — and LGBTQ+.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And, by the way, not in America — other countries, not here. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  You know, the amazing thing is when you see, like, the teaching of DEI: $9 million.  How do you spend $9 million to teach no matter what it is?

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could teach physics. 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  Totally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could go to MIT for a lot less.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s (inaudible) expensive.  (Laughs.)  Expensive.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, the teaching —

         MR. MUSK:  Expensive BS.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — of DEI.

         Q    Well, I think it would be better spent on —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s a kickback.  It’s got to be a kickback.  Nobody is that — nobody could do that.  Nobody is —

         Q    Well, it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody is giving — to assess the dialog of an audience coming out of a theater: $4 million.

         Q    How much do you believe, Elon, you’ve identified in — in waste, fraud, abuse, corruption now?  And how much —

         MR. MUSK:  Well —

         Q    — do you anticipate you will?

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.  Well, the — I — I think —

    THE PRESIDENT:  One percent.

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, because it’s so massive.  It’s — this is —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — huge money.  Huge money.  Look —

    Q    So, what we’ve found now is one percent?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, we’ve j- — we’ve just gotten started here.

    THE PRESIDENT:  As good as they are, they’re not going to find some contract that was crooked — you know, crooked as hell.  And, I mean, there’s going to be so much that isn’t found.  But what is found — I think he’s going to find a trillion dollars.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I think so. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But I think it’s a very small percentage compared to what it is.  I mean, he could tell you about treasuries; he could tell you about a woman that worked for Biden that became a very wealthy woman while she was working for him.  Right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Yeah, I know who you’re talking about.

    MR. MUSK:  I mean, there are some strange situations where people — where, you know, someone’s working for the government earning $200,000 a year, and then, suddenly, they’re worth tens of millions of dollars within a few years.  Where’d the money come?

    Q    How’d they earn it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    They have a private company on the side? 

    MR. MUSK:  We’re just curious.  Like, can you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  While they were working.

    MR. MUSK:  Can you show us — because, like, in order to be worth tens of millions of dollars, you’d have to start a company, or you’ve got to get some kind — the compensation has got to come from somewhere.  So, how does a civil servant with — earning $200,000 a year suddenly, within a span of a few years, be worth tens of millions dollars?

    Q    W- —

    MR. MUSK:  So, I just want to connect the dots here. 

    Q    All right, s- —

    MR. MUSK:  Maybe there’s a legitimate explanation, but I don’t think so.  (Laughter.)

    Q    So, you know, and this gets to kind of the heart of where I am.  I — I looked at your work, and I look at this amount of money, and I get angry.  And I don’t get v- — I’m not an angry person. 

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    I don’t get angry.  I get a- — I get annoyed sometimes, but I don’t get angry. 

    And I did live paycheck to bay- — paycheck a part of my life.  And I think of, you know, the working men and women in this country that the — 56 percent of which cannot afford a $1,000 emergency after four years of Harris and Biden.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    Okay?  That is serious, you know, financial trouble.  Or they’re putting bare necessities on credit cards. 

    And I’m looking at this and I’m thinking, well, how much — when we — when all is said and done, we could have written a check or cut the taxes or fixed our schools —

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

    Q    — or deported these illegals that we keep finding, known terrorists, cartel members, gang members. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And — and we’re not doing it.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, the saddest thing is they don’t talk about the individual lines.  I could go on your show right now,  I could get a list that I have on the beautiful Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, and it’s got 40 points, and all they are is the heading of what this money is. 

    You don’t have to go deep into it, and you see it’s, you know, all different things and it’s so ridiculous. 

    I mean, normally, when you look for fraud, you’re looking for one thing out of a hundred.  Here, out of a hundred, 95 are going to be bad.  I mean, they’re — and they’re so obvious just by the heading.

    But they never mention that.  They only mention, “This is a violation of our Constitution.  This is a” — the word they give, you know, it’s like a sound bite — “constitutional crisis.”  It’s a new thing, “constitution-” —  But they never mention about where the money is going. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And when people hear that — I had a very smart man, John Kennedy — he’s actually a very smart man.  He said, “Sir, you should just go on television and just read the name of the topic that you’re giving all the money — just the topic that you’re giving this money to, and don’t say anything more,” and he’s right.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I’ll do it at some point, you know, when — 

    But they never talk about where the money is going.  They just talk about, “It’s a constitutional crisis.” 

    It’s so sad.  And honestly, I think they’re bad people.  I used to give them the benefit of the doubt, but you almost think they hate the country.  I think they hate the country.  They’re sick people. 

    Q    Remember, what they can’t — what they couldn’t accomplish at the ballot box, what they can’t accomplish legislatively, now they’re using the courts.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    And they c- — they’re trying to bury you in lawsuits.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  You know the good news, though?  They’ve lost their confidence.  They’re not the same people. 

    Q    I think you’re right.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re — they’re not the same people. 

    This election was brutal for them.  We won every swing state.  We won by millions and millions of votes.  We won everything.  We — all 50 states went up — all 50.  It’s never happened.

    Q    Popular vote. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Every one.  All 50 states went up. 

    They’ve lost their confidence.  I see it.  And they’re — they’re just swirling and twirling.  They don’t know what the hell is happening.  They’re much different.  They’re just as mean, but they’re not getting to the point.

    Q    Why do you invite them into the Oval Office nearly every day?

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the media — you’re talking about the media.

    Q    Yeah, your friends in the media.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The media — no, they’re — you know, the anger that — they ask questions so angry — a question — a normal question.  I give them an answer.  They — but they — I say, “Why are you so angry when you ask a question?”  Just a standard question.  And, I don’t know, there’s something —

    Q    They haven’t had a- — they haven’t been allowed in that office for the last four years, and here you’re giving them access. 

    Let me go to an area that I think is key, and — and you talked about this in recent interviews, and that is: We don’t need a Department of Education.  Okay.  And what some people are trying to do is stoke fears that, “Oh, my gosh, my kid is not going to get the money for education.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

    Q    Or “grandma’s Social Security and Medicare.”  This was a big promise of yours on the campaign trail.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  Yeah.

    Q    So, I really want to give you both an opportunity to assure the American people you will keep — that money will be allocated for students, but with higher standards.  For example, I would assume associated with monies given or vouchers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) so much and — and then Elon goes.  But, look, Social Security won’t be touched — 

    Q    Won’t be touched.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — other than if there’s fraud or something — we’re going to find it; it’s going to be strengthened — but won’t be touched.  Medicare, Medicaid, none of that stuff is going to be touched.  It’s just — 

    Q    Nothing.  I want you to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) don’t have to.

    Now, if there are illegal migrants in the system, we’re going to get them out of the system, and all of that fraud.  But it’s not going to be touched.

    School — I want to bring school back to the states, so that Iowa, Indiana — all these places — Idaho, New Hampshire — there’s so many places, the states.  I figure 35 really run well. 

    And right now, it’s Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, China — China, can you imagine? — has top — top schools.  We’re last. 

    So, they have a list of 40 countries.  We’re number 40.  Usually we’re 38, 39, but last time, we were number 40.  And what I say is you’ve got to give it back. 

    So, it doesn’t work. 

    I’ll tell you what we’re number one in: cost per pupil.  We spend more money than any other country by far — it’s not even close — per pupil.  Okay?  So, we know it doesn’t work. 

    So, we spend the most and we have the worst — right? — the worst result.  When we give that — when we give that back to Indiana, when we give that b- — back to Iowa and back to a lot of the states that run well — they run well, a lot of them — 35, 37, 38 — now, you’re going to have 10 laggards, but you’re going to have 5 real laggards, but that’s going to be okay. 

    Take New York — you give it to Westchester County, you give it to Suffolk County, you give it to Upstate New York, and you give it to Manhattan — but you give it to four or five subsections.  Same thing in California.  Los Angeles is going to be a problem, but you’re going to give it to places that run well.  We can change education

    Now, school choice is important, but that will get care — taken care of automatically. 

    We want to bring education back to the states.  You will spend half the number.  And I’m not even doing this —

    Q    So, you’re leaning more towards grants not vouchers, like to parents?

    THE PRESIDENT:  I’m not even — I’m not even doing this to save, but you will save.  It will cost you much less money.  You get a much better education. 

    If you go to some of these states, you’ll be the equivalent of Norway, Sweden, Denmark — places that really have a good school system.  You’ll have — those places will be the equivalent, and your overall numbers will get so much better. 

    Q    Do you want standards associated with the money?

    THE PRESIDENT:  The only thing I want to do from — from Washington, D.C., is make sure they’re teaching English, reading, writing —

    Q    Math and science.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and arithmetic.  Okay?

    Q    Science?  Science might help.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Okay.  A little science.  You know —

    Q    Computers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — you’re not going to have much of a problem with that, but that’s it. 

    Do you know, we have half the buildings — I mean, you look at Department of Education —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s empty.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Look at the real estate and the —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — the level.  For what?  To — to — I mean, for — what do they do?

    We have really bad educa- — the teachers — I love teachers.  I respect teachers.  And, by the way, there’s no reason why teachers can’t form a union.  They can do whatever they want to do, if it’s back in the states.  So, we’re not looking to hurt the teacher — I’m — I’m going to help the teachers.  I think the teachers should be incentivized, because a good teacher is like a good scientist, is like a great doctor.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s a valuable commodity. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I think they should be incentivized. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I’m totally for the teachers.

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    Q    I interview a guy a lot on radio.  He’s from Wichita, Kansas.  And he started —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    — as a medical doctor.  Started Atlas.MD, and he’s now — he’s rolled it out nationwide.  Concierge care, $50 a month, 24-hour access to a doctor. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    You know, they use a lot of telemedicine now as part of it — very innovative.  He negotiates directly with pharmaceutical companies.  People — if they have high blood pressure, they walk out with their medicine.  They have high cholesterol, they walk out with their medicine.  And they pay pennies on the dollar.

    You mentioned —

    THE PRESIDENT:  By the way, forms of that could be done.

    Q    Forms of that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Forms of that could be done.

    Q    Innovation. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  We got hurt when we didn’t get the vote on Obamacare.  I made Obamacare — I had a choice: I could let it rot and win a point, or I could do the best you could do with it.  And that’s what I did.  We did a great job with it, and we made it sort of work, but it’s lousy.  We could do so much better. 

    And when you say — you go to certain areas, they — they have doctors round the clock.  They have great medical care for a fraction of what we’re paying right now. 

    There are things we could do. 

    But, look, just overall, this man has been so valuable.  I hate to see the way they go after him.  They go after him.  It’s so unfair.  He doesn’t need this.  He wants to do this. 

    First of all, this is bigger than anything he’s ever done.  He’s done great companies and all, but this is much — you know, this is trillion — everything’s trillions, right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  The numbers are crazy.

    Q    To go back to my original point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He can save —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    But let me — give him his $10 million back.

    MR. MUSK:  Well — well — I — no.  So, people ask me, like, “What’s — what’s the — what’s the — what’s, like, the — what’s your biggest surprise in — in D.C.?”  And I’m like, “The sheer scale.”

    Q    It’s massive.  So, you love the challenge?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’ll never do anything bigger.

    MR. MUSK:  To the president’s point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing you can say, “He’ll

    never do anything” —

         MR. MUSK:  But, I mean, you do something slightly better, and you save billions of dollars for the American taxpayer — just slightly better.  Slightly.  (Laughs.)

         Q    When you say “tech support” —

         MR. MUSK:  You go one percent better, and it’s, like, you know, tens of billions of dollars saved to the American taxpayer. 

    Now, if I may address the point that you — the question you asked earlier, which is, you know, how do we assure people that —

    Q    They want to know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, how do we assure people that we’re going to do the right thing, that their — that their Social Security benefits will be there, that their — the medical care will be good and s- — and — in fact, how do we make it — ensure that there’s better medical care in the future?  How do we improve their benefits?  How do we make sure that their Social Security check goes further than it did in the past and not — it doesn’t get weakened by inflation?

    So, the — if we — if we address the — the massive deficit spending, the sort of — the — the waste in the government, then — then we can actually address inflation. 

    So, provided the economy grows faster than the money supply, which means you stop the government overspending and the waste, and the output of real useful goods and services exceeds the increase in the money supply, you have no inflation.

    Q    Yeah.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and you also drop the — the interest payments that people pay, because if the government keeps —

    Q    Way too high.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  The — the reason the interest payments are so high is because the — the national debt keeps increasing.  So, the — the government is competing for — to sell debt with — for — with — with the private citizens.  This drives up the interest rate. 

    So, if you have a — if you have a — if you cut back on the deficit, you actually have an amazing situation for people, because you get r- — you get rid of inflation and you drop the interest rates.  And that means people’s mortgage payments go down, their credit card payments go down, their car payments go down, their student loans go down.  Everything — their — their life becomes more affordable and they’re standard of living improves.

    Q    How quickly?  Because I think people are suffering now.  We’re still living under the Biden-Harris economy. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But, Sean, you have states right now —

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You have some states that operate that way.  They operate as well as any corporation.  They really operate well.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Florida.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They have surpluses.  They ha- — they don’t —

    MR. MUSK:  Texas is — has a surplus, for example.

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When they — when they look at New York and — and California and some of these places that should have an advantage — I mean, there’s a big advantage — or Pritzker does such a bad job in Illinois; it’s horrible how bad he is — and they don’t have that advantage. 

    You know, New York has stock exchange and a lot of things.  And California has the weather and the beautiful water and all the thing- —

    MR. MUSK:  California has — has great weather.  The most expensive weather on Earth.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  (Laughter.)  But — but —

    Q    I like Florida.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  But some states operate the way he’s talking about.

    Q    Efficiently.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When you go into some of these states, you’re going to find very little.  You’re going to find almost nothing.  They really operate well — big surpluses, low taxes.  And —

    Q    You know, my taxes went up the first time you were president, because you took away the SALT deduction —

    THE PRESIDENT:  I — well, I did.

    Q    — which, by the way, I thought was the right decision.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was the right decision — in fact, Reagan tried to do it — because it rewards badly run states.

    But at the same time, it’s a tough — it was — it’s tough for the states.  I mean, it really is tough for the states. 

    The sad part is it rewards really badly run states. 

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And Reagan tried to do it.  He was unable to do it.  I got it done. 

    Q    You got it done, and —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And now we’re going to give some back.

         Q    A little bit.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because you know what?  We’ve got to help them.

    Q    It’s only a little.

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ve got to help.

    Q    Because otherwi- — we’re encouraging people to elect high taxes, spen- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody had any idea it would be that devastating.  I did the right thing.  I got something that Reagan couldn’t do.  I got it done, where everybody is — are the same.  But you know what?  We’ve got to help them out.

    Q    Reagan had the Grace Commission, some of the best business minds in the country.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    And they came up with recommendations.  Congress adopted none of them, and none of them were implemented. 

    I’ve got to ask this question, because the media is obsessed about it: What — what if there is a conflict?  In other words, because you do business — it was funny, when it came out the other day, that there was going to be, I think, $400 million — billio- — I don’t know if it was millions or billions — a lot of money on Teslas that Joe Biden’s administration w- — did with Tesla, and —

    MR. MUSK:  I’m not familiar with that.

    Q    You’re not even familiar with it?  But —

    MR. MUSK:  I — I don’t think — are you talking about, like, the Inflation Reduction Act stuff or —

    Q    It was some — it was a purchase order of Tesla vehicles. 

    MR. MUSK:  Oh.  Oh, that was — that was incorrect.  There was s- — like, there’s some sort of — the media claim that there was, like, $400 million worth of Cybertrucks —

    Q    That was it.

    MR. MUSK:  — being bought by the DOD.

    Q    And that he gave it to you.

    MR. MUSK:  No — well, first of all, that was —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, actually, it was —

    MR. MUSK:  Th- — it was fa- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was Biden.

    Q    It was Biden.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know Biden wouldn’t give him much.

    MR. MUSK:  But — but it wasn’t even — it was fake news, six weeks to Sunday.  Tesla is not getting $400 million for Cybertrucks.  And the — and the — and this alleged —

    Q    That’s what it was, Cybertrucks.

    MR. MUSK:  This — yeah.  This alleged award occurred in December, before the president took office.  So, it’s — it’s fake on multiple levels.  There i- — Tesla isn’t getting $400 million.  And even if it — even if it was, which it isn’t, it was awarded during the Biden administration. 

    Q    Okay, but you’re — you — you —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s total fake news. 

    Q    There — there is —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s fake on, like — it’s like multiple leverals —

    Q    There is some integration —

    MR. MUSK:  — multiple layers of fake.

    Q    So, you’re — you’re tasked now — and I pray to God this is successful.  I really do.  I wish you Godspeed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    You know, “Godspeed, John Glenn.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s going to be, by the way.  I really believe it’s going to be.

    Q    But — but there —

    MR. MUSK:  Oh, yeah.

    Q    But there are legitimate areas —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because the country is going to do well beside this. 

    This is cutting.  We’re only talking about cutting. 

    We’re also going to make a lot of money.  We’re g- — we’re taking in so much money.

    Q    But what about his business?  What if — if there is —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Then we won’t let him do it.

    Q    — a contract he would otherwise get?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’re not going to let him do it.  He — if —

    Q    You’re not going to let him do it?

    THE PRESIDENT:  If he’s got a conflict — I mean, look — he —

    Q    Y- — now y- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s in certain areas — I mean, I see this morning — I didn’t — I didn’t know, but I said, “Do the right thing” — where they’re cutting way back on the electric vehicle subsidies.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re cutting back.

    Q    You’re losing —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not only cutting back —

    Q    It hurts you.

    MR. MUSK:  Correct.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Now, I will tell you —

    Q    You don’t care? 

    MR. MUSK:  Well —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s probably not that happy with it, but that would have been one thing he would have come to me and said, “Listen, you got to do me a favor.  This is crazy.”  (Laughter.)  But this was in the tax bill.  They’re cutting back on the subsidies. 

    I didn’t — I wasn’t involved in it.  I said, “Do what’s right, and you get” — and they’re coming up with the tax, but it’s just preliminary. 

         But I mean, if he were involved, wouldn’t you think he’d probably do that?  Now, maybe he does better if you cut back on the subsidies.  Who knows.  Because he figures — he does think differently.  He thinks he has a better product, and as long as he has a level playing field, he doesn’t care what you do —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — which he’s very — he’s told me that.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I haven’t asked the president for anything ever.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

    Q    And if it comes up, how — how will you handle it?  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  He won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I’ll — I’ll re- — I’ll recuse myself if it is a conflict.

    THE PRESIDENT:  If there’s a conflict, he won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, I wouldn’t want that, and he won’t want it.

    MR. MUSK:  Right.  And — and also, I’m getting a — sort of a daily proctology exam here.  You know, it’s not like I’ll be getting away from something in the dead of night. 

    Q    Welcome to D.C.  If you want a friend, get a dog. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I do have a dog, but I also have friends.  (Laughter.)  My dog loves me, poor little creature. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  You know the truth was —

    MR. MUSK:  I need to bring him to D.C.

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s — I know every businessman.  I know the — the good ones, the bad ones, the smart ones, the lucky ones.  I know them all.  This guy is a ver- — he’s a brilliant guy.  He’s a great guy.  He’s got tremendous imagination and scientific imagin- — far beyond — you know, you keep talking about a technologist and all, but you’re much more than a technologist.  You are that.  But he’s also a good person.  He’s a very good person, and he wants to see the country do well. 

    And I know a lot of great businesspeople, really great business people, but, you know, they’re not really, in some cases, very good people.  And I know people that would try and take advantage of the situation. 

    This guy is somebody that really cares for the country, and I saw that very early on.  I saw it, really, a long time ago when I got to know him.  He’s a very different kind of a character. 

    That’s why — you know who loves him: young people that are very smart and that love the country.  He’s got, like, a tremendous following, because that’s what he’s — he’s a good person.

    And he doesn’t need this.  He didn’t need this, and he’s doing this to help the country.  If I didn’t win this election, this country was — I don’t think it could have made it.  I don’t — I mean, we’re allowing criminals — millions of criminals into our country, where everything is transgender, it’s men playing in women’s sports. 

    I mean, none of this stuff — you could go — I could give you a hundred things.  It’s almost like they’re trying to destroy the fabric of — of the country, of the world, because the world was following us.  Now the world is following us out of this pit. 

    We’ve done a lot.  I’ll tell you what, in three weeks, we’ve done more — I think we’ve done more — in — in terms of meaningful, not just dollars — than maybe any president ever.  And a lot of people are saying that.

    Q    Shock — it’s been shock and awe. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, if we can keep it going at this level, this country is going to be at a level that it’s never seen before. 

    Q    You know one of the things you did that I really thought was pretty clever and smart and fair, and that was reciprocal tariffs. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, reciprocal. 

    Q    Ta- — I didn’t know India charged so much.  I didn’t know the European Union to charge them. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    Q    I didn’t know Canada was charging us.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Everybody.  Everybody.  Everybody but us.

    Q    Brazil, why?

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I was doing it — you know, I charged China tariffs.  I took in hundreds of billions of dollars, and I was doing that.  But when we got — we had the greatest economy in history.  But then we got hit with COVID, and we had to solve that problem, because I was doing it — and now I said, I want to come back and do the recipri- — because every country in the world almost — we have a deficit with almost every country — not every one, but just about, pretty close.

    And — but every country in the world takes advantage of us, and they do it with tariffs.  They makes — make it — it’s impossible for him to sell a car, practically, in, as an example, India.  I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I think —

    MR. MUSK:  The tariffs are like 100 percent import duty. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  The tariffs are so high —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — they don’t want to — now, if he built the factory in India, that’s okay, but that’s unfair to us.  It’s very unfair. 

    And I said, “You know what we do?”  I told Prime Minister Modi yesterday — he was here.  I said, “Here’s what you do.  We’re going to do — be very fair with you.”  They charge the highest tariffs in the world, just about.

    Q    36 percent?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, much — much higher.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s 100 percent on — auto imports are 100 percent.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, that’s peanuts.  So, much higher.  And — and others too.  I said, “Here’s what we’re going to do: reciprocal.  Whatever you charge, I’m charging.”  He goes, “No, no, I don’t like that.”  “No, no, whatever you charge, I’m going to charge.”  I’m doing that with every country. 

    MR. MUSK:  It seems fair.

    Q    Don’t you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  It does.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s like fair is fair.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody can argue with me.  You know, the media can’t argue — I said — they said, “Tariffs — you’re going to charge tariffs?”  You know, if I said, like, 25 percent they’d say, “Oh, that’s terrible.”  I don’t say that anymore —

    Q    Can I — (inaudible) —

    THE PRESIDENT:  — because I say, “Whatever they charge, we’ll charge.”  And you know what? 

         Q    They stop.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They — then they say, “Oh, that sounds fair.”

    MR. MUSK:  All the president is saying is that —

         Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  — it needs to be at a level playing field and — and fair and square.

    Q    Yeah.  And how does — how —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And we’re going to make a lot of money and a lot of businesses are going to come pouring in.

    MR. MUSK:  How can you argue with a fair and square situation?

    Q    Don’t — don’t you think most of them will look at the — the — for example, without America, China’s economy will tank.  They need our business. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  They do.  Everybody needs us. 

    Q    Everybody needs it. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know what?

    Q    Do- — don’t you think they’ll stop?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We only have so long left where we’re in this position.  We’re the bank, and the bank is getting smaller and smaller and smaller.  We — we’re the bank.  We got to do this now.  We can’t wait another 10 years and have a shell of a country left, because that’s what was going to happen.

    Q    Mr. President —

    THE PRESIDENT:  This country — if I didn’t win this election and have people like this man right here that really do care, because that’s the other word — if you don’t care, you could be the smartest guy in the world, it’s not going to matter.  But if we didn’t win this election, I’m telling you, we would not have had a country for very long.

    Q    How quickly —

    MR. MUSK:  May I say —

    Q    — do you balance the budget and — and when do we start paying down that debt?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, potentially, very quickly, between what he’s doing and with income coming in from tariffs and other things.  I mean, I hope we can — I don’t want to give a date, because then these people are going to say, “Oh, well, he didn’t make the date.”  But I think we can do it very quickly. 

    We would have never done it if this didn’t happen.  Never.  It would have never been — it would only get worse and worse, and ultimately, it would have exploded. 

    This country was headed down a very bad track.  And the whole DEI thing, that was — that was a trap.  That was a sick trap.

    Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, you know, we’ve destroyed that.  That’s gone.  That’s pretty much gone. 

    Q    I agree. 

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    We’re not — we’re not funding it. 

    MR. MUSK:  If — I really want to — I really want to emphasize to people that — this is a very important point — if we don’t solve the deficit, there won’t be money for medical care.  There won’t be money —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    MR. MUSK:  — for Social Security.  We either solve the deficit or all we’ll be doing is paying debt.

    Q    Nobody — 

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s got to be solved, or there’s no medical care, there’s no Social Security, there’s no nothing.  That’s got to be solved.  It’s not optional.  America will go bankrupt if this is not done.  That’s why I’m here. 

    Q    The president’s —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Europe takes advantage of us.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and I’d like to also just send a message — like, because, as the president said, like, this — there’s a lot of rich people out there.  They should be caring more about the country because — the reason they should be caring about — more about country is: America falls, what do you think is going to happen to your business?  What do — what do you think — do you think you’re be going to be okay if — if the ship of America sinks?  Of course not. 

    Like, what — what I’m doing here, what the president is doing is it’s just long-term thinking.  The ship of America must be strong.  The ship of America cannot sink.  If it sinks, we all sink with it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, you’re a —

    Q    This is what — this is what drives you? 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    This is important.  It says “tech support.”  So, you’re not trying to be president, as the media suggests.  You are really here because your heart and your passion is this.  And the president described you as being — this is the biggest thing you ever done.  Now you trying to bring sight to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  There could be nothing bigger.  There’s nothing —

    Q    You’re sending ships up to Mars — you know, spaceships up in the sky all the time —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts.

    Q    — and saving astronauts.  That’s pretty big. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts compared to what we’re talking about.

    Q    It’s peanuts?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    Do you agree with that?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, it’s esse- — it’s essential that America be healthy, that America’s economy be strong.  And — and if that — if — basically, like, my concern is like, if — if — America is the central pillar holding up Western civilization.  That pillar must be strong.  If that pillar falls, the whole roof comes crashing down.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to hide.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships going up.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to run.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nothing.  There’s nothing left. 

    Q    Why — why, if this is your goal, your motivation, you’re losing money in the process, you’re offeri- — you do all these nice things for people for free; you’re trying to solve, you know, blindness; you’re going to rescue astronauts; you help the people in North Carolina, California; you’re cutting money that was sent abroad that’s not helping the American people, then why the rage —

    MR. MUSK:  Actually, I think it was like —

         Q    But why this rage?

         MR. MUSK:  — it was not helping the American people and hurting people overseas, to be clear.

    Q    Why this rage against you now?  First, they hated him.  Now they hate both of you. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I think we’re seeing an antibody reaction from — from those who are receiving the — the wasteful and fraudulent money. 

    Q    They’re being exposed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    Nobody wants to be exposed when you’re corrupt. 

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll tell you a lesson I learned at PayPal.  You know who complained the loudest — the quickest and the loudest and with the most amount of righteous indignation?  The fraudsters.  That’s who complained first, loudest, and — and they would generally have this immense overreaction.  That’s how we knew there were the fraudsters.  That’s how we knew.  There’s a tell.

    Q    What di- — I’ve never — I’ve never met you before today.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And it’s nice to meet you, by the way.  Thank — thank you for doing this. 

    You guys are really friends.  I could s- — you guys — I could see you kicking up your shoes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, he doesn’t do this kind of thing.  And the way I figured that you’d get to know him is if I did it with him.  I said, “Come on, let’s do it together.”  He doesn’t do this. 

    I think he’s smarter not doing it, overall.  Because, you know, I mean, he’s done very well without doing it.  But he doesn’t feel it’s really worthwhile.  He wants the product to speak for itself, or whatever he does speak for itself.  But he views it as — you know, does it matter? 

    And I’m doing this with you today because I wanted to have people understand him.  And I think it’s very important — I disagree with him.  I think it’s very important that they do understand him. 

    He doesn’t need this.  He doesn’t need it.  Now, I happen to think it’s made him very popular.  I think it — he’s more popular now because there are so many people — you know, you’re talking about the radical left — they have the lowest ratings.  MSNBC is dying.  CNN is dying.  They’re all dying.  The New York Times is doing lousy.  The Washington Post is doing horribly.  They’re all doing badly because people don’t buy it anymore. 

    But I think it was important that he do this one interview.  You’ve been a very fair guy.  I think you were the right guy to do it.  If we could get some radical left guy — and he’d do just as well, frankly, because it’s all about common sense.

    Q    They would attack him —

    THE PRESIDENT:  But this — Sean —

    Q    — as being unconstitutional, not — a fascist. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  — to me this was a — it was important for people to understand, he’s doing a big job.  He’s doing a very thankless job.  He’s doing a thankless job, but he’s helping us to save our country. 

    Our country was in serious trouble, and I had to get the best guy, somebody with credibility, because if he were just a regular, good — very good, solid businessman, he wouldn’t have the credibility.  He’s got the best credibility for this. 

    And people also know he’s an honest guy.  He’s an honest guy.  He’s just a very, very smart guy who’s done amazing things.  And this will be the biggest thing he’s ever done, because, you know, his companies are all great.  But if this country goes bad — I guess where he is a little selfish is this.  He knows one thing and probably doesn’t think — but if his — if this country goes bad, his stuff is not going to be worth very much, I can tell you.

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I’d say, if the — if the ship of America sinks, we’re all go- — going down with it.  You know, this idea that people can escape to New Zealand or some other place is false.  If the central pillar of Western civilization that is America falls, the whole roof comes crashing down and there is no escape. 

    Q    It’s amazing, since you’ve been elected, to watch Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia — I — I was shocked at the statements that Vladimir Putin made about you.  I — I was shocked at the hostage release.  I was shocked that Venezuela had done it — had done it.  Zelenskyy wants a deal.  Putin wants a deal. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  All good statements.

    Q    King Abdullah was interested.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You mean by that all good statements.  Look, they respect the president of this country.  They respect — they did not respect the last president.  They laughed at him, and they laughed at our country, and he’s done great damage to our country. 

    Q    Have foreign leaders told you what they thought of Biden?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, they have, but I’d rather not say.  They — they have.  It’s not — it — look —

    Q    It’s the obvious. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He was not George Washington, let’s put it that way. 

    MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not the greatest. 

    Q    Sorry, if that’s (inaudible).

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s done a tremendous disservice. 

    Q    Will you be here —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, by the way, the Democrats have done a great disservice, and they ought to get their act together and use a little judgment, and they ought to work with us on straightening out this mess that — 

    Q    Who?  John Fetterman?

    THE PRESIDENT:  — a lot of people have —

    Q    Maybe?  Who — what Democrat is not radicalized? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Actually, you mention John.

    Q    John Fetterman. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s become the best voice in the Democrat party.  You know, I had lunch with him, and I thought he was terrific, but he’s a much different man than he was before he had this difficulty.  He used to be radical left, and I think he became much smarter, actually.  He’s really — he’s really a voice of reason. 

    But the Democrats have to get together.  They have to get their act together, because the stuff they — they talk about makes no sense.  It makes — none whatsoever.  And they must know it.  They must know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, like, the country has spoken very clearly and rejected the core tenets of the Demo- — Democratic Party.  The country voted t- — fo- — I mean, the country made the — America has made its vote clear.  The president won the popular vote decisively.  The Republicans won the House.  Repub- — Republicans won the Senate.  What more do you need?

    The Democratic Party needs to take a hard look in the mirror and — and change their ways. 

    Q    I think they went from shock, denial, into the depression stage of grief, and now they’re in the rage stage, where I anticipate they’ll stay for four years, and if they get the chance, they’ll want to impeach him 10 times.  Do you anticipate you’ll be here in four years?  My last question.

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll be as helpful as long as I can be helpful.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s a good question.  I mean, I was thinking about that just now.  I said, “I wonder how long he’s going to be doing it.”  You can’t get somebody like this.  He cares, and he’s brilliant, and he’s got energy. 

    You need energy, also, in addition to those other things.

    You know, I have a lot of guys that are very smart, but they have no energy.  They want to sleep all day long.  You need a lot of energy.  He’s got a lot of energy.  He’s doing a great job. 

    If there’s any conflict, he — he will stop it.  But if he didn’t, I’d stop it.  I’d see if there’s a conflict.  I mean, we’re talking about big stuff.

    But he’s under a pretty big microscope. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, seriously.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, everybody is watching him.  If there’s a conflict, you’re going to be reading about it within about two minutes after the conflict.

    MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  There — there’s — the possibility of me getting away with something is 0 percent — 0.0.  I — I’m scrutinized to a ridiculous degree. 

    And — and the other thing is that we — you know, what — what’s — you know what’s better than saying “trust — trust me” is just full transparency.  So, what we’re doing with — with the DOGE — DOGE dot — just go to DOGE.gov.  You can see every single action that’s being taken. 

    And now –and I want to be clear, we are going to make some mistakes.  We’re not going to be perfect.  Nobody bats a thousand.  But we’re going to fix the mistakes very quickly.  That’s what matters: not that you don’t make mistakes, but that you fix the mistakes very fast. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you’re going to ask the other side, when they talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis,” you got to a- — what are they paying for?  Where are those tax — because when you read off the list of things, it’s a big con job.  See, when they talk Constitution —

    MR. MUSK:  Totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a total con job.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They never talk — and I watch some of the shows —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s specifics — they avoid specifics.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, when you start talking about how did — how come they spent money on transgender here and transgender there —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and all the stuff in some country that nobody ever heard of, they don’t want to talk about it.  They just talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis.” 

    Q    It shocks the conscious.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The money is being squandered purposely — tremendous theft, tremendous kickbacks, everything — and we’re straightening it out.  And thank goodness.  I look up, and I say, “Thank you,” because I think if it went on for four more years, it would not be salvageable.  You wouldn’t be able —

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You wouldn’t be able to save it. 

    Q    You believe, too, that when you were in Butler, came within a millimeter being assassinated —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    The day you endorsed him, that was that day.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    But you had been planning on it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Pretty — I think everybody will never forget that iconic blood on your face.  “Fight, fight, fight.”  I actually was afra- — watching it and thought you might drop again.  You know, I didn’t know if it had hit you.  You can sometimes get up and then the blood starts to accumulate.  It was scary — pretty scary. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, th- — this is how you know someone’s true character, because everyone can say they’re brave, but the president was actually shot.  Okay?  Courage under fire.  “Fight, fight, fight,” blood streaming down the face.  That’s true courage.  You can’t fake that. 

    Q    Yeah.  Thank you both. 

         Mr. President, thank you, sir. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much. 

    Q    Appreciate it.  Elon, thank you for your time.  Really nice to meet you. 

                                  END                    1:01 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: ‘Ne Zha 2’ box office success ignites merchandise craze

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    “30 million achieved!” reads an announcement by FunCrazy, a creative toy brand, in its official Xiaohongshu post on February 16. The post, featuring an image of a Ne Zha collectible figure, marks a record-breaking milestone in less than a month: the co-branded crowdfunding campaign for the official movie “Ne Zha 2” merchandise surpasses 30 million yuan.

    Toys featuring Nezha, the main character from “Ne Zha 2,” are pictured at the workshop of a toy manufacturer in Xiangtan, central China’s Hunan Province, Feb. 8, 2025. (Xinhua/Chen Sihan)

    As the global earnings of “Ne Zha 2”, including pre-sales, hit a historic 12.319 billion yuan (about 1.72 billion U.S. dollars), its influence extends beyond the cinema to the shelves of both collectors and fans, marking a new chapter in the booming market for movie-related merchandise.

    Another example of Ne Zha’s IP value is evident in the collectible blind box series co-produced by Pop Mart and creators of the movie. Sales of the blind box series surpassed 10 million yuan within just eight days of the launch, while the first batch of products quickly sold out.

    In response to huge market demand, the brand has initiated pre-sales for subsequent batches of the blind box series, with shipping dates pushed back to late June. Pop Mart’s physical stores nationwide have largely sold out of them as well.

    However, for some eager fans, waiting for the pre-sale is simply not an option. On Goofish, a second-hand trading platform, the price of some in-stock blind boxes has already increased by more than three times.

    “I bought the full series of eight blind boxes as a birthday gift for myself. They’re so cute, and they even recreated the scene where Ne Zha and Ao Bing join forces to fight the villain,” shared by a movie fan on her Xiaohongshu post.

    The iconic scene from the movie added extra popularity to the merchandise. Many fans recreated the moment when the two protagonists, Ne Zha and Ao Bing, hold hands to battle the thunder in collectible figures and shared them on social media, boosting its viral spread.

    The massive success of Ne Zha’s merchandise sales highlights the growing economic impact of IPs. Beyond box office earnings, purchasing merchandise offers fans a tangible connection to the characters and stories, amplifying the value of an IP in today’s entertainment industry.

    Consumer demand for spiritual and cultural values is rising, with a shift from functional attributes to emotional and spiritual significance. Consequently, diverse IP derivatives have become key catalysts for driving market enthusiasm, said Jiang Duo, associate professor of the Communication University of China.

    “Ne Zha 2” is not the first cultural product to benefit from the spillover effect of the IP economy. In 2023, the Chinese sci-fi blockbuster “The Wandering Earth II” raked in a whopping box office revenue. A movie-related crowdfunding project was launched for merchandise.

    The project garnered over 433,000 orders and raised more than 100 million yuan, far exceeding the original goal of 100,000 yuan.

    Movie IPs are transitioning from being solely driven by box office revenue to exploring multiple sources of value, injecting more vitality into the cultural market. More and more Chinese companies are focusing on IP development and the cultural and creative industry. Their products are becoming much more sophisticated, and the expansion of offline channels plays a crucial role in supporting the development of the IP economy, said Jiang.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: Foreign firms to ramp up investment

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    This photo taken with a mobile phone shows the skyline during the early morning in Beijing, capital of China, Oct. 19, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]

    China’s sustained efforts to boost domestic demand and reinforce supply chain resilience, as well as drive businesses toward green and digital transformation, will pave the way for deeper global business collaboration in its market this year, said executives of multinational corporations on Monday.

    Despite the slowdown in global trade and investment growth in recent years, foreign companies remain steadfast in ramping up their investment in the Chinese market, they added.

    Lan Qingxin, a professor specializing in cross-border investment studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, said that as China embraces a new era of green and innovation-driven growth, global investors are increasingly focusing on digital solutions, supply chain optimization, high-end manufacturing, customized innovation and green businesses in the Chinese market.

    Noting the widespread adoption of the advanced large language model DeepSeek among domestic and overseas users, Chen Shihua, deputy secretary-general of the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, said that China’s ability to attract foreign investment will be further enhanced this year.

    DeepSeek, a two-year-old startup based in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province, has created the open-source LLM of the same name at a cost much lower than its foreign peers.

    Even though geopolitical tensions are rising, global demand remains subdued and certain countries have tightened investment regulations, China saw the establishment of 59,080 new foreign-invested companies in 2024, marking a 9.9 percent year-on-year increase, data from the Ministry of Commerce shows.

    Cummins Inc, a United States-based engine manufacturer, plans to increase its market share this year in key application sectors within China, including power generation equipment for data centers and high-tech manufacturing.

    “Together with local partners, we will also accelerate the innovation pace on the internal combustion engine system, including high-efficiency diesel, natural gas and hydrogen internal combustion engines,” said Nathan Stoner, vice-president of Cummins.

    Eager to seize more market share in China, Thai beverage company TCP Group, will commence operations of a production base in the Guangxi Zhuang autonomous region later this year to supply its popular energy drink Red Bull.

    The production base, set up with a total investment of 1.3 billion yuan ($179.2 million), will strengthen the supply chain network, empower upstream and downstream partners, and create another important link connecting the markets between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, said Saravoot Yoovidhya, CEO of TCP Group.

    “The rapid response capability and strong execution power of China’s supply chain enable us to quickly adapt to market changes and promptly adjust production and supply chain strategies to meet the diversified demands of markets worldwide,” he added.

    Yin Zheng, executive vice-president of Schneider Electric’s China and East Asia operations, said that as a major engine of global economic growth, China has a huge market, a strong industrial base and abundant innovation resources, while its cultivation of new quality productive forces provides an even stronger impetus for industrial transformation and upgrading.

    The French industrial conglomerate has continuously increased research and development investment in China and has established a series of world-class innovation institutes in China to support industrial upgrading and energy transformation.

    “We have been introducing innovative Chinese solutions and advanced products to the global market, expanding China’s impact and realizing the vision of ‘in China for the world’,” Yin said.

    According to a recent survey by the Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry in China, more than 58 percent of Japanese companies surveyed recognize China as a key market for their global operations, and they plan to maintain or expand their investment in the Chinese market this year.

    Several factors have influenced their investment decisions, including increasing demand and rising orders. The chamber said that Japanese businesses are also more confident about the Chinese market this year, driven by an improved business environment, a visa-free policy for Japanese citizens and government initiatives such as trade-in policies.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Feeding your baby butter won’t help them sleep through the night, whatever TikTok says

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karleen Gribble, Adjunct Professor, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University

    BaLL LunLa/Shutterstock

    Sleep is the holy grail for new parents. So no wonder many tired parents are looking for something to help their babies sleep.

    A TikTok trend claims giving your baby a tablespoon or two of butter in the evening will help them sleep more at night.

    As we’ll see, butter is just the latest food that promises to help babies sleep at night. But no single food can do this.

    So if you’re a new parent and desperate for a good night’s sleep, here’s what to try instead.

    Is my baby’s sleep normal?

    Babies need help to fall asleep, through feeding, movement (like rocking) or touch (like a cuddle or massage).

    Newborn babies also do not know night from day. Melatonin in breastmilk helps babies sleep more at night until they start to make this sleep-inducing hormone themselves. Bottlefed newborn babies do not have access to this melatonin. Regardless of how you feed your baby, it can take several months for them to develop a sleep pattern with longer stretches at night.

    Babies also sleep lighter than older children and adults. Light sleep helps ensure they continue breathing, protecting them from SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome). It also means they wake easily and often.

    The idea that babies should sleep deeply, alone and for long stretches, goes against their physiology. So “sleeping like a baby” usually means waking quite a lot at night.

    Yet, many parents have been asked whether their baby is sleeping through the night and is a “good baby”. The perception is that if a baby doesn’t sleep for long stretches at night, it must be “bad”.

    This may lead parents to say their babies sleep longer than they really do, setting unrealistic expectations for other new parents.

    Could feeding butter do any harm?

    The social pressure around baby sleep can add stress and anxiety for new parents. So the Tiktok trend about feeding babies butter may seem tempting.

    But giving babies any solid food before they are around six months old is not recommended. Babies’ digestive systems are not ready for solid food until they are around six months and feeding them before this can cause constipation or make them more likely to catch an illness. For this reason alone, you should not give your young baby butter.

    From about six months old, babies should be offered nutritious, iron-rich solid foods. Butter doesn’t fit this bill because it is almost all saturated fat. If butter replaces more nutritious foods, babies may not get the vitamins and minerals they need.

    Butter is just the latest food claimed to help babies sleep better at night.
    Pixel-Shot/Shutterstock

    Butter is the latest in a long line of beliefs about certain foods making babies sleep longer at night. It was once thought that adding cereal or crushed arrowroot biscuits in bottle of milk before bedtime would make them sleep longer. Research found this did not increase sleep at all.

    Similarly, there is no evidence that giving babies butter before bed makes them sleep longer.

    In fact, research shows the foods babies eat make no difference to night waking.

    What else can I try?

    Waking overnight doesn’t necessarily mean a baby is hungry. And stopping breastfeeds or bottle feeds overnight doesn’t necessarily reduce night waking.

    Your baby could be too hot or cold, or need a nappy change. But some babies continue to wake at night even without an obvious problem.

    The good news is, sleeping is a skill babies develop naturally as they grow.

    Behavioural sleep interventions, known as “sleep training”, are not very effective in increasing overnight sleep. In one study, sleep training did not reduce the number of night wakes and only increased the length of the longest sleep by about 16 minutes. Sleep training is especially not recommended for babies under six months.

    The good news is that babies do eventually get the hang of sleeping at night.
    Miljan Zivkovic/Shutterstock

    Look after yourself

    If you’re missing out on sleep at night, try to have small naps during the day while your baby sleeps. Ask friends and family to do some chores to allow you to nap.

    If your baby is crying and you find yourself getting overwhelmed it is OK to put your baby down somewhere safe (like a cot or baby mat) and take some time to settle yourself.

    If your baby’s sleep pattern changes significantly or they haven’t slept at all for more than a day, or if your baby seems to have pain or a fever see your doctor, or family and child health nurse, as soon as possible.

    Some helpful resources

    If you think your baby is not sleeping well because of a breastfeeding problem, the Australian Breastfeeding Association has a national helpline. The association can also advise on co-sleeping.

    The charity Little Sparklers provides peer support for parents, including someone to chat to, about baby sleep. It also has helpful resources.

    UNICEF has resources about caring for your baby at night. And the UK-based Baby Sleep Info Source (Basis) provides evidence-based information about babies and sleep.

    Karleen Gribble is a volunteer breastfeeding educator and counsellor with the Australian Breastfeeding Association, a member of the Public Health Association of Australia and the World Public Health Nutrition Association.

    Naomi Hull is the National Coordinator of the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative – Australia and is on the Executive of the Infant and Toddler Foods Research Alliance. Naomi is a volunteer breastfeeding counsellor with the Australian Breastfeeding Association, and a member of the International Lactation Consulants Association, the Lactation Consultants of Australia and New Zealand, the Public Health Association of Australia and the World Public Health Nutrition Association. Naomi receives funding from a RTP Stipend Scholarship from the federal government.

    Nina Chad has been the Infant and Young Child Feeding Consultant for the World Health Organization since 2021. She is a member of the Public Health Association of Australia, the World Public Health Nutrition Association and the Australian Breastfeeding Association.

    ref. Feeding your baby butter won’t help them sleep through the night, whatever TikTok says – https://theconversation.com/feeding-your-baby-butter-wont-help-them-sleep-through-the-night-whatever-tiktok-says-249699

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Senator Coons joins CBS’ ‘60 Minutes’ to discuss the Trump administration’s efforts to abolish USAID and other agencies

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, CBS News’ 60 Minutes aired a segment on Sunday featuring U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), where he discussed the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle our foreign aid apparatus and warned that it’s a “dress rehearsal” for the administration’s attacks on other essential parts of the federal government.

    Shortly after taking office, President Trump signed an executive order freezing all foreign aid. Soon after, nearly all USAID personnel in the U.S. and abroad were put on paid administrative leave. Judges have temporarily halted Trump’s efforts to dismantle USAID and freeze federal funding, but whether funding will start flowing again remains unclear. 

    “You’re principally reporting on what’s happened to USAID. It’s a dress rehearsal,” Senator Coons said to 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley.

    Senator Coons said that USAID is not the only agency on the chopping block. Elon Musk, head of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has already begun to dismantle other agencies and entire departments of the federal government.

    “Next up is the Department of Education. They’re gonna take it down next. They’re already talking about getting into and going after the Department of Labor, the Veterans Administration, the Department of Defense, the Social Security Administration. Why?” said Senator Coons

    A video and transcript of Senator Coons’ segment are available below.

    WATCH HERE.

    Senator Coons: You’re principally reporting on what’s happened to USAID. It’s a dress rehearsal.

    Chris Coons is a Democratic senator from Delaware — a member of the Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Relations.

    Senator Coons: Next up is the Department of Education. They’re going to take it down next. They’re already talking about getting into and going after the Department of Labor, the Veterans Administration, the Department of Defense, the Social Security Administration. Why?

    Scott Pelley: Do you believe you have a sense of what DOGE is doing?

    Senator Coons: No. I think DOGE is an unelected, unofficial, small group of young ‘tech bros’ who are charging into different federal agencies, getting into their core computer systems, doing things with them that at least I don’t know the full details of, copying and downloading reams of data. 

    Scott Pelley: What does it matter that DOGE has access to U.S. government computer systems?

    Senator Coons: What matters is that the U.S. government has information about you, about me – our Social Security information, our Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefit payments, things that matter to us, obviously – our tax filings. And if they have access to it and control it, they can change it.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: Frenchman to donate album on Japan’s war atrocities

    Source: China State Council Information Office 2

    Frenchman Marcus Detrez was leafing through an album of photos depicting his grandfather’s fulfilling life in Shanghai in the 1930s when a picture thrust him into appalling moments of war.
    A sharp contrast to scenes of tranquil lakes and bustling food stalls on the streetside, the photograph shows a civilian, whose head has been completely blown off, lying on the ground.
    The chance discovery made in the garage of his family home in 2021 put the 26-year-old on a truth-seeking journey that offered further evidence of the wartime atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers during China’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-45), as well as the resilience of local residents — which is all documented in a collection of 622 photographs.
    Detrez, accompanied by two friends, arrived in Beijing on Saturday to donate the photos to China. They also plan to visit Shanghai to see venues shown in the pictures.
    “I was very shocked when seeing the horrible pictures of the war with corpses and bombings. My mom told me the story of my grandfather, his life in Shanghai, his struggles, the Japanese invasion and the war crimes he witnessed,” Detrez said during an interview with China Daily on Tuesday.
    Detrez has spent his spare time researching the topic and attempting to learn more about his grandfather’s experiences in Shanghai as a business owner and a witness of and fighter against the brutalities of war.
    The first group of pictures uncovered by Detrez in the garage totaled about 170. In December, he and his family members found hundreds more related pictures.
    “We’ve been discussing what we should do with these pictures, and finally we decided to donate them to China,” he said.
    The pictures are now stored in a leather, handheld briefcase — the same one that his grandfather used when traveling back from China many decades ago.
    As he opened the suitcase and sorted through the pictures in waterproof covers and envelopes, Detrez appeared unfazed by some of the graphic, bloody images.
    But he said he has had many sleepless nights since finding these pictures, and his senior family members have been traumatized for many years by the memories.
    “We’ve been carrying a heavy (emotional) burden,” said Bastien Ratat, one of Detrez’s friends assisting with the donation.
    But they have persisted, driven by a desire to spread awareness about the truth of a part of history that they believe is not fully understood by the world.
    Ratat, who is also from France, explained that in his home country and many parts of the world, China’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression is known as the Sino-Japanese war.
    “There is a big difference because it was a war where the Chinese people were under attack, and resisted and defended themselves,” he said. “For Detrez’s grandfather, a foreigner in Shanghai, his world had suddenly changed and he had to be resilient to protect his family and his friends, including Chinese friends.”
    Despite the fact that looking at these pictures is a painful experience, Detrez said it is important to confront and reflect on such historical events.
    “As human beings, we have made some mistakes, and we should make sure that we learn from that,” he said. “I hope that we can tell the truth and inspire the future generations. If we don’t tell the truth, if we deny the truth, we just go into a big war.”
    After finishing his trip in China, Detrez, a language teacher, said he plans to establish an association in France to promote awareness about the wartime atrocities suffered by the Chinese people and foster people-to-people friendship between China and France.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: China ramps up efforts to fight crimes related to cultural relics

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    China stepped up efforts over the past year to combat crimes related to the excavation, theft, trafficking and destruction of cultural relics, solving more than 940 cases and recovering 16,000 antiques, the Ministry of Public Security said.

    Among those cases, more than 60 involved intentional or negligent destruction of cultural relics and damage to historical sites, the ministry said in a statement Monday night.

    The ministry oversaw seven major investigations into looting and trafficking of cultural relics last year, spanning provinces including Shanxi, Jilin and Anhui. The operations led to numerous arrests and the recovery of more than 4,800 antiques, according to the statement.

    The police also recovered stolen national cultural relics from abroad, including gilt bronze door knocker-holders from the Warring States Period (475-221 BC) and bronze Buddhist statues from the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644).

    Last year, authorities established a long-term working mechanism with the National Cultural Heritage Administration to enhance collaboration on information sharing, case consultations and antique identification, the ministry said. Public security authorities have also contributed to discussions on amending the Cultural Relics Protection Law.

    To strengthen efforts to retrieve stolen relics, the ministry has expanded the use of its online platform for tracking lost antiques, publishing 763 related notices last year. Chinese police have also coordinated with Interpol’s database of stolen artwork, adding information on an additional 400 missing relics.

    “We will maintain a high-pressure crackdown on crimes involving cultural relics,” the ministry said, urging police to step up inspections and enhance security at cultural sites and museums to protect historical and cultural heritage.

    Public security departments conducted more than 100,000 patrols around cultural relics and museums nationwide last year. They also collaborated with relics authorities on more than 7,000 joint law enforcement inspections, identifying over 8,000 potential risks, according to the ministry.

    “Like other crimes, cultural relic offenses are increasingly high-tech, intelligent and networked,” said Liu Weijun, a professor at the People’s Public Security University of China, in an article published in Zhejiang province’s legal journal Research on Rule of Law.

    The number of cultural relics cases filed by Chinese police remains relatively small, Liu said, but “the crackdown must be severe and ongoing because antiques are irreplaceable and nonrenewable.”

    In 2024, China passed an amended Cultural Relics Protection Law, which increases penalties for damaging antiques and promotes the establishment of museums, parks and memorials to highlight the value of immovable relics. The law takes effect on March 1.

    Authorities have also tightened scrutiny over livestreaming and short-video content related to ancient tombs since last year, after some streamers and content creators were found to have broadcast or posted inappropriate or illegal material involving tomb explorations.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-Evening Report: With billions in ‘profit’ exempt from tax, changes to NZ’s charity rules are long overdue

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ranjana Gupta, Senior Lecturer, Accounting Department, Auckland University of Technology

    Jirsak/Shutterstock

    The profit made on every breakfast bowl of weet-bix is tax exempt, giving Sanitarium Health Food Company, owned by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, an advantage over other breakfast food companies. But this could be about to change.

    Under current rules, New Zealand’s charities are allowed to run businesses as long as the profits are not for personal gain. This means the government gives up millions in tax revenue from charities across the government.

    In December, Finance Minister Nicola Willis proposed revising the tax rules for charitable organisations. The changes are set to be announced with this year’s Budget. According to Willis, there was about NZ$2 billion of “profit” in the charitable sector that was not subject to tax.

    My new research – to be published later this year – looks at the integrity and fairness of the taxation framework that gives exemptions to charitable organisations competing directly with the for-profit sector.

    Striking the right balance between supporting legitimate charitable activities and preventing the abuse of tax concessions is crucial for ensuring a level playing field in the tax system.

    My study shows the tax exemption system in New Zealand, as it stands now, is not really fair and equitable. And it is past time for this to change.

    For the public benefit

    Under New Zealand’s charity law, a charitable organisation must operate for the public benefit and relieve the government of its burden to provide welfare services and assist disadvantaged people.

    A paper prepared by the Tax Working Group, an advisory group that looked at New Zealand’s tax system between 2017 and 2019, estimated 30% of registered charities were likely to have some sort of trading activities, such as second-hand stores.

    To be eligible for tax exemptions, any gains from businesses must be reinvested in the organisation’s charitable activities.

    The traditional justification for granting charitable organisations tax concessions is that they are dedicated to the greater good of society. The concessions are also meant to offset the disadvantages charities face in accessing capital.

    But by treating the producers of identical goods and services differently, there is a risk of compromising horizontal equity principles – basically the idea that taxpayers in similar positions should pay similar amounts of tax.

    There are concerns for the tax system’s integrity when charitable organisations shift their focus from providing a public good to providing private or unrelated goods (commercial activities).

    In these cases, it is clear that tax breaks should be limited.

    When governments offer tax breaks, they forego tax revenue. Governments end up having to raise money from other sources to meet their total tax collection targets, such as increasing tax rates on non-exempt firms, items and individuals.

    Taxing unrelated activities

    Overseas tax systems take a different view of exemptions for charities, offering examples for New Zealand to follow.

    In the United Kingdom, for example, charities cannot undertake commercial trading activities unrelated to their charitable purposes while claiming exemption from income tax. This ensures fair competition between commercial activities.

    In the United States, “unrelated business income” is subject to tax, restricting concessions to ensure the tax regime matches conventional tax policy or social welfare policy.

    In Australia, commercial trading unrelated to the charity’s core purpose is not allowed.

    Ensuring transparency

    To ensure greater transparency over who gets an exemption, the financial statements of all charities in New Zealand should also be filed on the Charities Register. These statements should be publicly available.

    Charities also need to become more responsible and equitable in their operations. There needs to be stricter regulation, and compliance measures should be implemented. These would prevent tax exemption misuse that benefits a specific group or individuals.

    The time for reviewing charitable purposes is long overdue in New Zealand, particularly given the UK and Australia have set out their concepts of charitable purposes in recent years.

    Ranjana Gupta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. With billions in ‘profit’ exempt from tax, changes to NZ’s charity rules are long overdue – https://theconversation.com/with-billions-in-profit-exempt-from-tax-changes-to-nzs-charity-rules-are-long-overdue-249575

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI China: Dunhuang in China’s Gansu embraces new development

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Dunhuang in China’s Gansu embraces new development

    Updated: February 19, 2025 09:43 Xinhua
    An aerial drone photo shows the mingsha mountain and crescent spring scenic spot in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Nov. 23, 2024. Around 2,000 years ago, Dunhuang was a key hub on the ancient Silk Road. Chinese silk and tea passed through this gateway en route to other countries, while agricultural products such as grapes, carrots and pomegranates made their way into China. Known for its breathtaking landscapes and historical significance, Dunhuang holds a treasure trove of ancient Buddhist relics and art. In recent years, Dunhuang has leveraged its cultural tourism resources and vigorously attracted visitors and scholars from around the world who are keen to delve into its historical significance and witness its modern cultural revival. Once served for thousands of years as a meeting point of the East and the West along the ancient Silk Road, Dunhuang has now revived to embrace new development. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists watch a fulldome digital movie in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Sept. 4, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    An aerial drone photo taken on April 25, 2023 shows the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province. [Photo/Xinhua]
    This photo taken on July 16, 2024 shows a view of the site of Yumen Pass in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists visit the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, June 7, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Visitors ride camels at the mingsha mountain and crescent spring scenic spot in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Feb. 4, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
    A teacher guides students to sing a song with characteristics of Dunhuang at a primary school in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, April 26, 2023. [Photo/Xinhua]
    A tourist tries out VR device to experience virtual tour of the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Sept. 22, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    A performance featuring traditional Dunhuang music and dance is staged during the 7th Silk Road (Dunhuang) International Cultural Expo in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Sept. 20, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists visit a night market in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, March 16, 2023. [Photo/Xinhua]
    People read books at a bookstore in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, April 21, 2022. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists try out VR devices to experience virtual tours of Dunhuang in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, July 22, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    This photo taken on Feb. 12, 2025 shows a statue in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists purchase souvenirs at a night market in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, May 10, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Rangers patrol along the Great Wall at the site of Yumen Pass in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, July 16, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Envoys take a selfie at the Mogao Grottoes in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, June 7, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists visit the site of Yumen Pass in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Sept. 4, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    Tourists visit the 7th Silk Road (Dunhuang) International Cultural Expo in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, Sept. 21, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]
    An aerial drone photo taken on June 14, 2023 shows the scenery along Danghe River in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province. [Photo/Xinhua]
    A staff member stitches mural images on a computer at the Dunhuang Academy in Dunhuang, northwest China’s Gansu Province, April 25, 2023. [Photo/Xinhua]

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed, Magaziner Join RI Education Leaders to Warn RIers About Trump’s Plan to Dismantle the U.S. Department of Education

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    ***WATCH***

    CRANSTON, RI – In an effort to stand up to President Trump’s proposal to slash education funding and shutter the U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Senator Jack Reed and U.S. Representative Seth Magaziner rallied with educators from across Rhode Island.  The lawmakers stressed the need to continue investing in public schools and ensuring all children have access to a high-quality education in a safe and healthy environment.

    The U.S. Department of Education’s mission is to support students, schools, and communities. The department conducts important research and administers funding to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

    After winning office, President Trump said that he would like to shutter the U.S. Department of Education “immediately.”

    Though education is largely under state and local control in the U.S., the U.S. Department of Education was created to provide critical guidance, support, protections, and funding for students, teachers, and public education across the nation. 

    While the standalone federal department does not control what is taught in U.S. schools, its responsibilities include:

    • Administering billions in federal funding to almost every public school;
    • Providing and monitoring federal financial aid for postsecondary education, including Pell Grants and student loans;
    • Collecting data on schools;
    • Disseminating research;
    • Focusing national attention on educational issues, and;
    • Prohibiting discrimination and upholding civil rights.  

    According to the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE), the state receives approximately $275 million in federal funds to support public education, including $65 million for ‘Title I’ programs that serve low-income students and families, $60 million to support students with disabilities, $48 million to help feed students, and $11 million for career and technical education. Additionally, in 2024, more than $95 million in Pell Grants flowed to Rhode Island students and families to help pay for college.

    Senator Reed said that the Trump Administration should be focused on improving public education and helping students succeed. Instead, Trump’s proposed plans to cut key programs and dismantle critical supports for teachers would have a disastrous effect on Rhode Island families and would hurt public schools and school departments throughout the state.

    “Education is the foundation for our nation’s competitiveness and the prosperity of our communities.  It is essential for a strong society and a brighter future for America.  We can’t afford to leave anyone behind.  But that’s what the Trump Administration is suggesting they will do,” said Senator Reed.  “President Trump and the Republicans in Congress have declared war on public education.  It’s clear that their actions will have devastating impacts on our students and families.”

    Reed continued: “We stand with educators. We stand with students and families. And we will fight Trump, Elon Musk, and his DOGE wrecking crew, who are intent on demolishing educational opportunities and our future.”

    Senator Reed and Congressman Magaziner were joined at the event by Rhode Island Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, Angélica Infante-Green; Rhode Island Commissioner of Postsecondary Education, Shannon Gilkey; Rhode Island College President Jack Warner; Executive Director of the National Education Association of Rhode Island, Mary Barden; President of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers, Maribeth Calabro; and Executive Director of Rhode Island KIDS COUNT, Paige Parks.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed Works to Nix “Carried Interest” Tax Loophole & Make Wall Street Pay Its Fair Share

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC –In an effort to restore fairness to the tax code, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) is seeking to close the “carried interest” tax loophole, which lets private equity firms and Wall Street managers at investment partnerships pay a lower tax rate on their income than most American workers.

    Reed is teaming up with U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) to introduce the Carried Interest Fairness Act (S. 445).  Their legislation would ensure that income earned by investment managers of private equity, venture capital, and hedge funds is taxed at the same rate paid by the vast majority of Americans.  The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that ending the loophole could reduce the federal deficit by $13 billion through 2034.

    Under the current system, fund managers get paid up to two percent of assets as a regular fee, plus twenty percent of the fund’s profits.  The managers pay regular income tax on the two percent, but when it comes to their share of the profits, which is called “carried interest,” they usually pay only the lower long-term capital gains tax rate.  In a sense, they are converting income from labor into capital gains.  So even though the investors are putting up the fund’s capital and taking the risk, the fund managers are able to treat their part of the fund’s earnings as a capital gain, subject only to a top capital gains tax rate at 20 percent compared to the top federal income tax rate of 37 percent for the wealthiest Americans. 

    “Americans feel the system is fixed against them, and this big, fat loophole sure seems that way. This commonsense legislation would close a glaring loophole in the tax code and restore a key measure of fairness so that wealthy fund managers pay the same rate as regular working Americans.  It would end preferential treatment for Wall Street elites and prevent these wealthy executives from paying lower rates than their salaried employees.  Everyone has a right to earn their pay, but there shouldn’t be a special set of tax breaks just for the wealthy and well-connected.  Congress needs to close this loophole, simplify the tax code, and enact other sensible reforms that will strengthen our economy,” said Senator Reed, a senior member of the Senate Banking Committee.

    “Wall Street investors should not be paying less in taxes than Wisconsin firefighters, teachers, and small business owners. But right now, the wealthiest Americans are gaming our tax system to get out of paying their fair share, passing their tax burden onto working Wisconsinites,” said Senator Baldwin.

    Despite President Donald Trump previously pledging “we will eliminate the carried interest deduction and other special interest loopholes…”  during the 2016 election, his 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act “failed to eliminate [the] key deduction used by wealthy investment firms that Trump had vowed to kill,” leading PolitiFact to rate this a “Promise Broken.”

    In 2017, Senate Republicans rejected an amendment to the Trump tax bill by Senator Baldwin to close the carried interest loophole.

    In 2022, Senator Reed and the majority of his Democratic colleagues pushed for a provision to eliminate the carried interest loophole as part of the Inflation Reduction Act.  But with a 50-50 split in the U.S. Senate, the measure was stripped out of the underlying bill after then-Senator Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) objected to its inclusion.

    In addition to Baldwin and Reed, the Carried Interest Fairness Act is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Ed Markey (D-MA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Peter Welch (D-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Mazie Hirono (D-HI).

    Companion legislation has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA-03).

    The legislation is endorsed by Communications Workers of America, Americans for Tax Fairness, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Public Citizen, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Alliance for Retired Americans, Americans for Financial Reform, Take on Wall Street, Patriotic Millionaires, 20/20 Vision, Community Catalyst, Main Street Alliance, American Federation of Government Employees, Small Business Minority, Economic Policy Institute, and the National Women’s Law Center.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Vibes are something we feel but can’t quite explain. Now researchers want to study them

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ash Watson, Scientia Fellow and Senior Lecturer, UNSW Sydney

    Shutterstock

    When we’re uncomfortable we say the “vibe is off”. When we’re having a good time we’re “vibing”. To assess the mood we do a “vibe check”. And when the atmosphere in the room changes we call it a “vibe shift”.

    In a broad sense, a “vibe” is something akin to a mood, atmosphere or energy.

    But this is an imperfect definition. Often, we’ll use this term to describe something we feel powerfully, but find hard to articulate.

    As journalist and cultural critic Kyle Chayka described in 2021, a vibe is “a placeholder for an unplaceable feeling or impression, an atmosphere that you couldn’t or didn’t want to put into words”.

    Being able to understand the subtleties of social interactions – that is, to “feel the vibes” – is extremely valuable, not just for our social interactions, but also for researchers who study people.

    What’s behind the rise of vibes? And how can sociologists like myself unpack “vibe culture” to make sense of the world?

    A history of vibes

    The nuance and complexity of vibes makes them an interesting cultural trend. Vibes can be very specific, but can also totally resist specificity.

    Australians (and fans of Australiana) will remember the iconic line from the beloved 1997 film The Castle: “It’s just the vibe of the thing… I rest my case.”

    While it may seem like a recent cultural development, vibe isn’t the first example of cryptic language being used to express an ambiguous thing or situation. There are similar concepts with long histories, such as “quintessence” in Ancient Greek philosophy and “auras” in mysticism.

    More recently, vibes rose in popularity through music including 1960s rock, epitomised by the Beach Boys (“pickin’ up good vibrations”) and Black American rap vernacular from the 1990s, such as in the song Vibes and Stuff by A Tribe Called Quest (“we got, we got, we got the vibes”).

    ‘Vibes’ rose in popularity through music including 1960s rock and 1990s Black American rap.
    Shutterstock

    While we don’t know when the term was first used as it is today, it seems to have taken hold in the 1970s.

    I trawled the online archive of The New Yorker and found an early mention of vibes in a 1971 report about communes in New York City.

    One interviewee spoke about the “vibration of togetherness” that drew them to the commune. Ending the day on the subway, the author Hendrik Hertzberg (now a senior editor at the magazine) “just sat there and soaked up the good vibes”.

    New uses and meanings have emerged in the years since.

    Vibes today

    As vibe is used in more ways, its meaning becomes expanded and diffused. A person or situation can have good vibes, bad vibes, weird vibes, laid-back vibes, or any other adjective you can imagine.

    Language is a central part of qualitative research. While new phrases and slang can be casual and superficial, they can also represent broader, more complex concepts. Vibe is a great example of this: a simple term that refers to something potent yet ephemeral, affecting yet ambiguous.

    By paying attention to the words people use to describe their experiences, sociologists can identify patterns of social interactions and shifts in social attitudes.

    Perhaps vibes work like a heuristic – a mental shortcut – but for feeling rather than thinking.

    People use heuristics to make everyday decisions or draw conclusions based on their experiences. Heuristics are, in essence, our common sense. And “vibes” might be best described as our common feeling, as they speak to a subtle aspect of how we collectively relate and interact.

    Sociologists have long studied complex common feelings. Ambivalence, for instance, has been a focus in research on digital privacy. Studying when and why people feel ambivalent about digital technology can help us understand their seemingly contradictory behaviour, such as when they say they are concerned about privacy, but do very little to protect their information.

    Ambivalence reveals how people make decisions via small, everyday compromises – moments and feelings that may be overlooked in quantitative research. A qualitative approach can help us to align policies with people’s real-world behaviours.

    Researchers react

    Then again, it’s difficult to study something people find hard to articulate in the first place. Asking participants to rank the “vibes” of something in a survey doesn’t quite work.

    So researchers are finding new ways to feel the vibe: to see what participants see, to feel what they feel and get a deeper understanding of their lived experiences.

    For instance, such study could provide insight into how senior clinicians make important decisions amid uncertainty. We already know making decisions in complex situations involves more than logic and rationality.

    In one Australian study published last year, researchers assessed how vibes have become part of online advertising algorithms. The researchers analysed the social media feeds of more than 200 young people, using the concept of vibes to show how advertising models attune to individuals and social groups.

    Such approaches can complement, or even update, tried-and-tested research methods, expanding on what we know about human relationships and experiences.

    Ash Watson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Vibes are something we feel but can’t quite explain. Now researchers want to study them – https://theconversation.com/vibes-are-something-we-feel-but-cant-quite-explain-now-researchers-want-to-study-them-247907

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Yes, Australia needs new homes – but they must be built to withstand disasters in a warmer world

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Francesca Perugia, Senior Lecturer, School of Design and the Built Environment, Curtin University

    Australia’s housing crisis has created a push for fast-tracked construction. Federal, state and territory governments have set a target of 1.2 million new homes over five years.

    Increasing housing supply is essential. However, the homes must be thoughtfully located and designed, to avoid or withstand natural disasters such as bushfires, floods and cyclones.

    Recent severe weather, including floods in Queensland and severe storms in north-east Victoria, underscore the growing vulnerability of Australian homes. As climate change worsens, the risk becomes ever-greater.

    Our new research examined how disaster risk informs housing location and design in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. We spoke to planners, developers, insurers and housing providers, and found crucial problems that leave communities exposed.

    Getting to grips with disaster data

    Australia’s towns and cities are increasingly affected by natural disasters. The consequences extend beyond physical destruction to social, psychological and health effects. Disasters also harm the economy.

    Despite this, government housing policies and strategies often fail to adequately focus on natural disasters.

    Accurate, up-to-date information is crucial when seeking to protect new homes from natural disasters. Informed decisions typically require three types of data:

    • foundational: relating to vegetation, landscape features, weather, climate change and building characteristics such as height and materials

    • hazards: the risks of different disaster types such as historical flood data, maps of bushfire-prone areas and the recurrence of cyclones

    • vulnerability: the potential and actual impacts of natural disasters such as building damage, fatalities and injuries, displacement, psychological and health impacts and insurance losses.

    Our research, for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, examined how data could be better used and shared to plan and deliver new housing and protect Australians from disasters.

    What we did

    We started by identifying what data was available in Australia for bushfire, flood and cyclone risk.
    Then we examined who owned and managed the data and how it was, or wasn’t, shared.

    The next step was to explore how decision-makers use the data to assess disaster risks for new housing. This involves interviews, workshops and questionnaires with:

    • government planning agencies (both state and local government)

    • housing providers (public and not-for-profit/community housing)

    • housing and land developers (private and public)

    • banks and insurers.

    What we found

    Overall, we found data on disaster risk was fragmented and inconsistent across multiple agencies, and not regularly updated.

    Decision-makers in state and local planning agencies often cannot access accurate information about disaster risk. This means they lack the power to restrict housing in areas prone to bushfires, floods or other extreme events.

    Flood hazard data is particularly problematic. One planner from Queensland described it as “patchy, of variable quality and currency and not always open source” – the latter meaning it was hard to access.

    Many households only learn about their disaster risk when discovering their homes are uninsurable or premiums are prohibitively high. Others become aware of the problem when premiums rise with an existing insurer.

    A community housing provider told us:

    I think the way people are finding out about risk now is by their insurance policies going up. That’s the market reality. When they get an increase in their insurance policy next year, that will wake them up that they are actually in a high-risk area.

    Data held by emergency service agencies and insurers is mostly inaccessible to planners, developers and households due to privacy and commercial sensitivities.

    However, this information is crucial. Government agencies should establish protocols to enable data-sharing while protecting privacy and commercial interests.

    Lack of transparency for homebuyers

    A recent report suggested only 29% of Australian home buyers know the disaster risks associated with the homes they live in.

    Disclosure statements are required by the vendor (seller) when marketing their house or land for sale. These vary between states and territories and, in most cases, do not compel the owner to reveal all known risks.

    For example, in Victoria, a vendor is required to disclose whether the land is in a designated bushfire-prone area, but not whether it is exposed to flooding.

    What’s more, a vendor motivated to sell a house is probably not the best source to provide accurate, impartial information about its exposure to disaster. This is better left to an independent entity such as a local council.

    Thorough investigations into a home’s disaster risk is usually at the discretion of the buyer.

    Making this information readily available to prospective homebuyers prior to purchase would allow more informed consumer decisions. It would also pressure governments and housing suppliers to address disaster risks.

    Where to next?

    Australia urgently needs a national framework to ensure data on housing and disaster risk is comprehensive, current and embedded in housing development decisions.

    The federal government’s Digital Transformation Agency could establish and implement this system, with input from state and local governments.

    Technology known as “spatial digital twins” could also vastly improve how disaster risk is assessed and communicated. These tools enable users to pull together and arrange large amounts of data, to visualise it in the form of models.

    For example, a spatial digital twin could combine real time flood sensor data with historical flooding patterns to predict and visualise flood risks before they occur. Federal and state governments are already investing in such technology.

    Australia’s push to increase housing supply must be matched with a commitment from governments to ensure the homes are safe, resilient and sustainable in the face of our changing climate.

    Addressing the housing crisis isn’t just about numbers – it’s about making sure homes are built in the right places, with the right protections, for the long-term safety of communities.

    Francesca Perugia
    receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI)

    Courtney Babb receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) and is a member of the Greens (WA).

    Steven Rowley receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute and the Australian Research Council. He is a member of the Housing Industry Forecasting Group in Western Australia

    ref. Yes, Australia needs new homes – but they must be built to withstand disasters in a warmer world – https://theconversation.com/yes-australia-needs-new-homes-but-they-must-be-built-to-withstand-disasters-in-a-warmer-world-249702

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner Joins Rosen, Scott in Introducing Antisemitism Awareness Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) joined Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Tim Scott (R-SC) in introducing the Antisemitism Awareness Act, legislation to address antisemitic sentiment and actions on college campuses.
    In the year following the October 7th attack, the Anti-Defamation League reported 1,400 antisemitic incidents on campuses across the nation, all-time high, with 73 percent of Jewish students reporting they had witnessed or experienced some form of antisemitism.
    “In the wake of the horrific October 7th terrorist attack perpetrated by Hamas, we have seen growing rates religious discrimination across the country. This legislation aims to address the alarming rise of antisemitism on college campuses, and help investigate these reprehensible acts.” Sen. Warner said.
    The Antisemitism Awareness Act would require the Department of Education to take into consideration the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The IHRA definition has been used to clarify and identify the various manifestations of antisemitism. Since 2018, the Department of Education has used the IHRA definition when investigating Title VI violations.
    In addition to Sens. Warner, Rosen, and Tim Scott, the Antisemitism Awareness Act is sponsored by U.S. Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), James Lankford (R-OK), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Rick Scott (R-FL), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Susan Collins (R-ME), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), John Barrasso (R-WY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Chris Coons (D-DE), Katie Britt (R-AL), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), John Cornyn (R-TX), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), John Boozman (R-AR), John Fetterman (D-PA), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Gary Peters (D-MI), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Deb Fischer (R-NE), and Steve Daines (R-MT).

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ne Zha 2: the ancient philosophies behind China’s record-breaking new animated film

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Yanyan Hong, PhD Candidate in Communication and Media Studies, University of Adelaide

    IMDB

    On the surface, Ne Zha 2: The Sea’s Fury (2025), the sequel to the 2019 Chinese blockbuster Nezha: Birth of the Demon Child, is a high-octane, action-packed and visually stunning animated spectacle, full of hilarious moments and thrilling fight scenes.

    But beneath all that, it’s something much deeper: a bold re-imagining of Chinese traditional mythology, cultural history and philosophies.

    Unlike Hollywood’s classic hero’s journey, Ne Zha 2 is rooted in Chinese thought, weaving together ideas from Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Mohism, Legalism and more.

    Through the story of a baby-faced warrior god who battles demons, it channels centuries of Chinese tradition into something refreshing, relevant and undeniably global.

    The film’s success speaks for itself. Directed by Yang Yu (aka Jiao Zi), Ne Zha 2 has shattered multiple global box office records, pulling in more than US$1 billion in China in just one week.

    It has entered the top 10 highest-grossing films of all time, and has become the highest-grossing animated film – outperforming Inside Out 2 (2024).

    But what makes Ne Zha 2 so compelling beyond its visual spectacle? At its heart, it’s an inspiring story about identity, free will, self-determination and rebellion – ideas that resonate far beyond China.

    A child hero forged in myth and philosophy

    Ne Zha is a rebellious deity in traditional Chinese folklore – a boy born with immense superpower, who defies both divine and social expectations.

    Most people who know of Ne Zha will trace his legend back to Fengshen Yanyi, or Investiture of the Gods, a Ming Dynasty novel that blends mythology with historical elements.

    Ne Zha’s true origins, however, trace back to India.

    “Ne Zha” is a shortened transliteration of the Sanskrit Nalakuvara (or Nalakūbara), an Indian mythological figure who appears in Buddhist and Hindu mythology.

    As Buddhism spread to China during the Tang Dynasty, Ne Zha evolved from an intimidating guardian deity into the rebellious, fire-wheeled warrior we know today.

    In Ne Zha 2, this “fighting spirit” against authority and hierarchy is taken even further, turning the story into a deeper philosophical exploration of morality, fate, self-worth and power.

    Good and evil – a Daoist perspective

    One of the most thought-provoking aspects of Ne Zha 2 is how it challenges the idea of good and evil.

    In Daoist philosophy, evil and good, often known as Yin and Yang, are not absolute, but are rather shifting, interconnected forces.

    Through its two protagonists: the “Demon Pill” (Ne Zha) and his noble dragon prince buddy, “Spirit Pearl” (Ao Bing), the film beautifully reflects this Daoist idea of balance and self-discovery.

    Their merging further blurs the line between hero and villain and brings to life a core concept from the 2,400-year-old text Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching), written around 400 BC by Chinese philosopher Laozi (also called Lao Tzu).

    Laozi emphasises that righteousness and villainy aren’t always what they seem. “When the world knows beauty as beauty, there arises ugliness,” he says.

    Those we assume to be noble may turn out to be dark inside, while those deemed evil might be fighting for what is right.

    Ne Zha’s character in the film embodies this Daoist philosophy. Echoing the Xisheng Jing, The Scripture of Western Ascension, he declares, “My fate is up to me, not the Heaven.”

    He is the demon child who is willing to die fighting for his own destiny, proving that even the smallest, most underestimated individual can change the world.

    Beyond family bonds: rebirth of Confucianism

    In one scene, Ne Zha is struck by the “heart-piercing curse”, a brutal spell that covers his body in ten thousand thorns, causing unbearable pain and keeping him under control by targeting his heart. Ne Zha’s human mother, Lady Yin, clings to him as his thorns pierce her skin – yet she refuses to let go.

    It’s a moment of heartbreak, parental love and inner awakening. As his mother takes her final breath, in Ne Zha’s grief, his body shatters into a million pieces. And then, he is reborn.

    This is the film’s emotional climax, in which the so-called demon child awakens to “Rén” (benevolence), a core Confucian virtue.

    Confucianism teaches that true morality isn’t imposed by rules but arises naturally from within. Ne Zha doesn’t just seek revenge, he awakes to fight for those who have been oppressed, embracing his identity with unwavering resolve.

    But perhaps the most profound transformation comes from the dragon prince Ao Bing. As the last hope of his people, burdened by centuries of expectation, he finally makes a choice, not for legacy, not for his ancestors, but for himself.

    In this moment, his once-imposing father Dragon King releases his grip: “Your path is yours to forge.”

    The weight of tradition gives way to something new, reflecting a changing China where younger generations are defining their own paths.

    Wisdom of Legalism and Mohism

    Beyond Daoist and Confucian ideals, Ne Zha 2 also weaves in Legalist reform and Mohist resistance. These philosophies challenge rigid hierarchies (or in Ne Zha’s case, “divine order”) and advocate for collective justice.

    Across Ne Zha’s three major trials and the climactic celestial-demon war, a brutal truth emerges: those deemed unworthy – whether groundhogs, mystical beings, or ordinary humans – are sacrificed to uphold the elite’s rule.

    Take the small groundhogs. Dressed in patched clothes, surviving on pumpkin porridge. They’ve never harmed anyone. Yet, they are mercilessly crushed in the name of celestial balance.

    Then there’s Shiji Niangniang, or Lady Rock, a recluse who harms no one. She indulges only in her own beauty and speaks to her enchanted mirror. Yet the heavens brand her a demon, sealing her fate.

    A similar cruelty befalls the Dragon Clan and the people of Chentangguan, all caught in a war where they are mere pawns on a celestial chessboard.

    Even the last battle is not just Ne Zha’s fight, but a battlefield showing the Chinese spirit of collectivism. Dragons, shrimp soldiers, crab generals, octopus warriors, humans and millions of goblins stand side by side to rewrite destiny.

    The celestial-demon war itself plays out like a lesson in Sun Tzu’s Art of War, which states that “All warfare is based on deception.” War is about strategy, resilience and the unstoppable will to rise.

    Ne Zha carries the weight of Eastern cultural essence: Daoist balance, Confucian ethics, Mohist resistance, Legalist reform and the strategic wisdom of The Art of War. It is a truly Chinese story, igniting next year’s Oscar buzz and sparking a global awakening to Eastern culture.

    Just as Ne Zha is reborn in flames, so too does Chinese animation rise, not by breaking from its past, but by forging a bold future.

    Yanyan Hong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Ne Zha 2: the ancient philosophies behind China’s record-breaking new animated film – https://theconversation.com/ne-zha-2-the-ancient-philosophies-behind-chinas-record-breaking-new-animated-film-249850

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Boozman, Scott, Rosen Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Combat Antisemitism on College Campuses

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
    WASHINGTON––U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR), Tim Scott (R-SC) and Jacky Rosen (D-NV) introduced the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would direct the U.S. Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism when investigating antisemitic acts on campus. 
    This bill ensures the Education Department has a clear definition of antisemitism when determining whether an antisemitic incident on campus crosses the line from free speech into harassing, unlawful or discriminatory conduct. 
    “Disturbing acts of antisemitism and violence increased on college campuses in the wake of Hamas’ deadly attack on Israel, it is more important than ever for universities to fulfill their responsibility to provide students with a safe learning environment,” said Boozman. “University leaders should move swiftly to hold individuals who take part in abhorrent, antisemitic behavior accountable and I am proud to support this commonsense legislation that gives them clear guidance and federal support.”
    “In the continued aftermath of the October 7th attacks on Israel by Hamas and Iran, we have seen college campuses across our nation become hotbeds of antisemitism where Jewish students’ rights are being threatened,” said Scott. “It’s critical the Department of Education has the tools and resources it needs to investigate antisemitism and root out this vile hatred wherever it rears its ugly head. There can be no equivocating when it comes to the issue of anti-Jewish violence and harassment.” 
    “Antisemitism is on the rise across the nation, particularly on college campuses, and Congress has a responsibility to do everything in its power to fight back against this hate,” said Rosen. “I’ll keep working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get this bill passed and signed into law.” 
    The Antisemitism Awareness Act is also cosponsored by Senators James Lankford (R-OK), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Rick Scott (R-FL), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Susan Collins (R-ME), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Mike Crapo (R-ID), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Katie Britt (R-AL), Ron Wyden (D-OR), John Cornyn (R-TX), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Mark Warner (D-VA), John Barrasso (R-WY) and Gary Peters (D-MI).
    Further, the Antisemitism Awareness Act is endorsed by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Christians for United Israel Action Fund, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee and the Jewish Federations of North America. Here’s what they are saying: 
    “Since Hamas’s October 7th attack on Israel, there has been a dramatic increase in antisemitism on college campuses. We continue to see university administrators show they have little understanding of how to identify antisemitism. The Conference of Presidents urges swift passage of AntisemitismAwareness Act,” said COO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations Stephanie Hausner.
    “Advancing this legislation is important in making American campuses safe and welcoming for all. We must defeat the vile cancer of antisemitism and defining it under US law is a critical step in that righteous effort,” said Christians for United Israel Action Fund Chairwoman Sandra Hagee Parker.
    “As Anti-Defamation League data shows, antisemitism is at crisis levels in the United States, creating the urgent need for decisive action. The AntisemitismAwareness Act makes clear that antisemitism, including anti-Zionist harassment, has no place in our schools or society and, importantly, reinforces the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism as a critical tool for the U.S. Department of Education,” said Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.
     “According to American Jewish Committee’s upcoming State of Antisemitism in America 2024 Report, three in ten American adults are either unsure of what antisemitism means or never heard the term. This number jumps for young Americans (ages 18-29): 41% of young Americans are unsure of what antisemitism means or never heard the term, while, at the same time, young American Jews (ages 18-29) are more likely to have experienced antisemitismin the past year than Jews ages 30 and older. These numbers show why it is critical to have a clear understanding of what antisemitism is and why it matters for American society because to even begin to solve the problem of antisemitism, there must be clarity about what it is and what it isn’t. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism is a clear and concise description of antisemitism in its various forms. AJC has supported efforts by both Republican and Democratic Administrations to use this definition at the Department of Education when investigating Title VI complaints,” said CEO of American Jewish Committee Ted Deutch.
    “This bill provides a clear framework for identifying antisemitism, offering concrete examples to help distinguish between constitutionally protected speech and targeted attacks against Jewish individuals. Congress must act now to send a strong message that antisemitism has no place in our society,” said Jewish Federations of North America Vice President of Government Relations Karen Paikin Barall.
    Congressmen Mike Lawler (R-NY-17) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ-05) are leading companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    Click here for full text of the legislation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Boozman, Blackburn, Duckworth Work to Encourage Domestic Violence Recognition, Reporting

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
    WASHINGTON––U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) joined Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) to introduce the bipartisan Supporting the Abused by Learning Options to Navigate Survivor (SALONS) Stories Act to promote domestic violence awareness and response training for cosmetologists and beauty professionals. 
    One in four women will be a victim of domestic violence in her lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Violent Death Reporting System data indicates three women were victims of homicide by an intimate partner every day from 2018-2021. The SALONS Stories Act preserves states’ autonomy in setting their cosmetology standards while incentivizing lifesaving support for abused and at-risk patrons.
    “Domestic violence often goes underreported because victims are unable to confide in others and the signs of mistreatment can be difficult to identify,” said Boozman. “Cosmetologists, who routinely build trust and close familiarity with their clients, can help break down those barriers. Encouraging more states follow this example and adopt programs that help them recognize signs of domestic violence can bring victims one step closer to the resources and support needed to escape dangerous, abusive situations.” 
    “Domestic violence is a tragic epidemic in the United States, impacting millions of women every year who often suffer in silence,” said Blackburn. “Given their close relationship with their clients, beauty professionals have the unique opportunity to be a first line of defense against domestic violence by identifying the signs of abuse and helping victims and survivors escape dangerous situations. The SALONS Stories Act would help save the lives of vulnerable and isolated women across the country, and the nation should follow Tennessee’s lead by equipping cosmetologists to recognize and support victims of domestic violence.”
    “Victims of domestic violence often don’t know where to turn or who to talk to, but they do often continue going to their salons—which puts beauty professionals in a unique position of potentially being among the first people who can recognize signs of abuse,” said Duckworth. “How they handle these critical moments could be life-saving.”
    The SALONS Stories Act provides grants to states that have implemented initiatives requiring cosmetologists to undergo free and easily accessible domestic violence awareness training while preserving states’ autonomy in setting their cosmetology standards. Arkansas, Tennessee and Illinois have passed legislation requiring cosmetology students to complete training on recognizing the signs of domestic violence. The Arkansas law, passed in 2017, serves as a model for the nation, providing free, accessible training to cosmetologists.
    The legislation is also cosponsored by Senators Susan Collins (R-ME), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH).
    The SALONS Stories Act is endorsed by the Professional Beauty Association, National Network to End Domestic Violence, the National Domestic Violence Hotline and YWCA USA.
    Click here for full text of the legislation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Improving university pathways for Queensland’s Western Downs

    Source: Australian Ministers for Education

    Federal Assistant Minister for Education and Regional Development, Anthony Chisholm will officially open a new Regional University Study Hub in Chinchilla today, which will be known as the Country Universities Centre (CUC) Western Downs.

    The new university hub provides dedicated support for students across the region to access and complete a tertiary education.

    CUC Western Downs was one of the 10 new Regional University Study Hubs announced in March 2024, and is one of 12 regional hubs across Queensland to be funded through the Australian Government’s Regional University Study Hubs Program.

    This hub, right in the centre of Chinchilla, will bring tertiary education closer to home for students who would otherwise have to travel over 150kms each way to attend university, or move away from their hometown.

    With only 10.8 per cent of people in the Western Downs region have a bachelor’s degree or higher, the new hub will help more students pursue a tertiary education while remaining near the support network.

    The hub is also expected to provide support for local First Nations students, with 7.6 per cent of the Chinchilla population identifying as First Nations.

    Increasing the number of study hubs in regional and outer-suburban communities was a priority action of the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report, and contributes to the government’s target of helping 80 per cent of the country’s workforce attain a university degree, or TAFE qualification, by 2050.

    Further information on the program, including a list of funded hubs, can be accessed here.  

    Quotes attributable to Minister for Education, Jason Clare:

    “Today, almost one in two young people in their 20s and their 30s have a university degree. But not everywhere. Not in the outer suburbs and not in regional Australia.

    “The Universities Accord makes it clear that we need more people from the regions and outer suburbs to get a university qualification.

    “The evidence is that where University Study Hubs are established, university participation goes up, and that’s why we’re doubling them right across the country.

    “Bringing university closer to where you live will encourage more people, who otherwise might decide not to go to university at all, to give it a crack.”

    Quotes attributable to Assistant Minister for Education and Regional Development, Anthony Chisholm:

    “CUC Western Downs is a great example of how these study hubs help regional, rural and remote students achieve academic success.

    “Almost half of students who have studied at one of these hubs are the first in their family to attend university and as someone who was the first in their family to attend university, this is fantastic to see.

    “Only 20.5 per cent of young people across regional Queensland have university a degree. Creating new hubs across our state makes attaining a degree easier – no matter where students live.

    “Regional University Study Hubs open up new opportunities for students from these areas, and by tailoring university offerings to the needs of regional communities, we’re engaging more students and levelling the playing field regardless of where students live.”

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Leader Of One Of Newark’s Largest Open-Air Drug Markets And Last Of 26 Defendants Sentenced To 168 Months’ Imprisonment

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    NEWARK, N.J. – a Newark, New Jersey man was sentenced today for his role as the leader of an expansive drug trafficking organization that distributed significant quantities of drugs and used firearms to protect their drug operation in Newark, New Jersey, Acting U.S. Attorney Vikas Khanna announced.

    Shaheed Blake, a/k/a “Sha Gotti,” a/k/a “Sha,” a/k/a “Bruh,” 41, was sentenced to 168 months’ imprisonment followed by 5 years’ supervised release by U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin in Newark, New Jersey.  He was the last among his 25 co-defendants to be sentenced in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey in Newark. 

    Blake’s 25 conspirators were previously sentenced as follows:

    • Anderson Hutchinson was sentenced to 168 months’ imprisonment;
    • Jabaar Blake was sentenced to 163 months’ imprisonment;
    • Jason Colon was sentenced to 144 months’ imprisonment;
    • Keyenn Rodgers was sentenced to 150 months’ imprisonment;
    • William Teal was sentenced to 132 months’ imprisonment;
    • Brian White was sentenced to 120 months’ imprisonment;
    • Todd Garrett was sentenced to 84 months’ imprisonment;
    • Anthony Bowens was sentenced to 88 months’ imprisonment;
    • Dorrell Blake was sentenced to 84 months’ imprisonment;
    • Daquan Lockhart was sentenced to 90 months’ imprisonment;
    • Aldoray McClain was sentenced to 72 months’ imprisonment;
    • Sharif Davis was sentenced to 72 months’ imprisonment;
    • Roger Thomas was sentenced to 70 months’ imprisonment;
    • Lamont Pugh was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • David Rogers was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Hanif Yarrell was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Aaron Watson was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Marquise O’Neal was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Jaleel Metz was sentenced to 66 months’ imprisonment;
    • Bernard Brown was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Jesse Scott was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Rasheem Langley was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Shadesasha Ford was sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment;
    • Linwood Lyles was sentenced to 42 months’ imprisonment; and
    • Andrew Knox was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment.

    This case was the result of a long-running wiretap investigation led by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Newark Police Department.

    According to the documents filed in this case and statements made in court:

    Defendants were members and associates of a Bloods-affiliated gang that called itself the “CKarter Boys,” a play on “the Carter”—the name of the drug distribution building in the 1991 film New Jack City.  As Bloods members, the CKarter Boys used the letters “CK” to signify “Crip Killer,” a sign of disrespect to their rival street gang, the Crips.

    The investigation revealed that the organization’s leaders—Blake and Anderson Hutchinson, a/k/a “Murda Rah”—operated a massive drug market that flooded the streets of Newark with heroin and crack cocaine 24 hours per day, seven days per week.

    Blake, Hutchinson, and members of their organization sold heroin and crack cocaine to customers out of two neighboring houses near the Newark-Irvington border.  These drug dens were located in the heart of a residential community, just two blocks from the Thurgood Marshall Elementary School, a public school serving children from Pre-K to Fifth Grade.  On average, just one of these locations, which Blake controlled, generated approximately $10,000 per day in revenue from narcotics sales, and, on at least one occasion, revenue exceeded $13,000 in a single shift.

    One of the abandoned residences was virtually impenetrable due to the organization’s efforts to fortify the structure by boarding up all doors and windows. The defendants gained access to the residence through a second-floor window by way of a ladder that conspirators then brought inside the residence.  Once inside the abandoned residence, the defendants would sell heroin and crack cocaine through a small hole that was cut out on a first-floor outer wall, allowing customers to purchase narcotics in exchange for cash, similar to a restaurant’s drive-through window.  In a backyard shed, the defendants stored narcotics, a communal cell phone that was used to operate the business, multiple firearms, and several boxes of ammunition.

    The investigation resulted in charges against 26 defendants, including Blake, two other leaders, middlemen who assisted with transporting drugs and drug proceeds, distributors, and suppliers.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Khanna credited special agents of ATF, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge L.C. Cheeks, Jr. in Newark, and members of the Newark Department of Public Safety, under the direction of Director Emanuel Miranda, with the investigation. He also thanked the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office, the Essex County Sheriff’s Office, the New Jersey State Police, the Irvington Police Department, the Union County Prosecutor’s Office, the Belleville Police Department, the West Orange Police Department, the Livingston Police Department, the Nutley Police Department, the Orange Police Department, and the Verona Police Department.

    The CKarter Boys were prosecuted as part of the Newark Violent Crime Initiative (“VCI”).  The VCI was formed in August 2017 by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office, and the City of Newark’s Department of Public Safety for the sole purpose of combatting violent crime in and around Newark.  As part of this partnership, federal, state, county, and city agencies collaborate and pool resources to prosecute violent offenders who endanger the safety of the community.  The VCI is composed of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the ATF, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) New Jersey Division, the U.S. Marshals, the Newark Department of Public Safety, the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office, the Essex County Sheriff’s Office, New Jersey State Parole, the Essex County Correctional Facility, New Jersey State Police Regional Operations and Intelligence Center/Real Time Crime Center, New Jersey Department of Corrections, the East Orange Police Department, and the Irvington Police Department.

    This case is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at https://www.justice.gov/OCDETF.

    The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Desiree Grace, Chief of the Criminal Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Olta Bejleri and Jake A. Nasar of the Criminal Division in Newark.

                                                               ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth, Durbin Help Unveil Bill to Raise Minimum Age to Buy Assault Weapons

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth

    February 14, 2025

    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – On the seventh anniversary of the tragic shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today joined U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) in announcing legislation to raise the minimum age to purchase assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines from 18 to 21, the same age requirement that already applies to purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers.  Individuals under 21 have used assault weapons in some of the most devastating school shootings in U.S. history, including the mass shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

    “Congress cannot sit by and do nothing while gun violence remains the number one killer of children in America,” said Duckworth.  “As we remember the 17 lives cut short at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, we must honor their memory with action.  The Age 21 Act is commonsense gun safety legislation that would help prevent mass shootings and do more to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of those who would seek to harm themselves or others.  If Republicans were truly ‘pro-life,’ they would support our bill and help us save lives.”

    “Gun violence continues to shatter families and communities throughout America.  Our existing laws allow far too many guns to fall into the wrong hands.  That is why I’m signing onto the Age 21 Act, which prohibits the sale of assault weapons, handguns, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and related ammunition to individuals under the age of 21,” said Durbin.  “This legislation is one of many steps we must take to address the gun violence epidemic across the United States.”

    Gun violence is a national crisis, claiming over 46,000 lives in 2023 — the third-largest number of gun-related deaths in American history.  Assault weapons, originally engineered for military combat to maximize damage, are frequently used in mass shootings because of their ability to inflict catastrophic harm in mere seconds.  More than 85 percent of deaths in public mass shootings involving four or more fatalities were caused by assault rifles.  Furthermore, shootings involving assault weapons or large-capacity magazines result in more than 2.5 times as many people being shot compared to incidents involving other firearms. 

    The bill’s restrictions on the sale of assault weapons, handguns, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and related ammunition to individuals under the age of 21 would apply to both federally licensed and private sellers.  Additionally, the legislation would bar most individuals under 21 from possessing these items, with limited exceptions for specific circumstances such as service in law enforcement or the armed forces.

    In addition to Durbin, Duckworth, and Padilla, the Age 21 Act is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

    The Age 21 Act is endorsed by organizations including Brady: United Against Gun Violence, March for Our Lives, Giffords, Newtown Action Alliance, and Everytown for Gun Safety.

    Durbin and Duckworth are fierce advocates for common-sense gun safety legislation that would help save lives.  Durbin and Duckworth were strong supporters of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which cracks down on straw purchasing and gun trafficking, expands background checks for buyers under 21 years of age, takes steps to close the “boyfriend loophole,” supports state red flag laws, and offers billions in funding for counseling, mental health, and trauma support for victims of gun violence. Durbin and Duckworth are also continuing to push for the Assault Weapons Ban and additional gun safety measures.

    While Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Durbin held a full committee hearing on public safety and gun safety laws in a post-Bruen America; filed an amicus brief in opposition to legal challenges in U.S. v. Rahimi, in which the Supreme Court ultimately ruled to uphold a ban on firearm possession for domestic violence offenders; condemned the Supreme Court decision in Garland v. Cargill, which ruled a bump stock does not convert a rifle into a machine gun; and introduced legislation to curb firearms trafficking enabled by weak American gun laws, among other efforts.

    A one-pager on the bill is available here.

    Full text of the bill is available here.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Requires Transparency for the American People About Wasteful Spending

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    PROMOTING TRANSPRENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a memorandum requiring radical transparency regarding wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars by the federal government.
    It requires all departments and agencies to disclose details about terminated programs, cancelled contracts, and discontinued grants to the fullest extent allowed by law.
    PUTTING AN END TO WASTEFUL SPENDING: By signing this memorandum, President Trump recognizes that the American people have a right to see how the federal government has wasted their hard-earned wages.
    The United States government has wasted taxpayer dollars on programs, contracts, and grants that do not serve the American public’s interests.
    For too long, taxpayers have subsidized ideological projects overseas and domestic organizations engaged in actions that undermine the national interest.
    The Biden Administration spent billions on electric vehicle charging stations, yet only a fraction were completed.
    The Trump Administration recently canceled a Biden-era $50 million environmental justice grant to an organization that believes “climate justice travels through a Free Palestine.”
    Numerous USAID grants have come under review, including $1.5 million to “advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities.”
    The Biden Administration gave nearly $4.6 million to help foreign groups promote LGBT projects like drag shows and pride parades. 
    The Trump Administration found $20 billion parked at a financial institution by the Biden Administration to fund partisan pet projects.
    President Trump’s Department of Education canceled $881 million in unnecessary contracts that were not benefiting students, including a $4.6 million contract just to coordinate Zoom and in-person meetings.
    President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has already recovered $1.9 billion in taxpayer funds “misplaced” by the Biden Administration.
    The Government Accountability Office released a report last year estimating that the federal government “could lose between $233 billion and $521 billion annually to fraud.”
    KEEPING HIS PROMISE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: President Trump campaigned on a promise to return power back to the American people by “cleaning out the Deep State, firing rogue bureaucrats and career politicians, and targeting government corruption.”
    President Trump recently signed a memorandum to stop last-minute collective bargaining agreements issued by the Biden Administration designed to constrain the incoming Trump Administration from reforming government.
    President Trump created the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to bring accountability and transparency to federal spending, ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and effectively.
    President Trump launched a 10-to-1 deregulation initiative, ensuring every new rule is justified by clear benefits for taxpayers.
    The Trump Administration is aggressively investigating Biden-era programs that wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on inefficient and politically-driven projects, including canceling unnecessary government contracts and grants that do not serve the national interest.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Solving the Child Care Shortage: Governor Shapiro and Lt. Governor Davis Lead Roundtable on 2025-26 Budget Proposal to Expand Child Care Workforce with Community Leaders, Parents, and Families in Allegheny County

    Source: US State of Pennsylvania

    February 18, 2025Pittsburgh, PA

    Solving the Child Care Shortage: Governor Shapiro and Lt. Governor Davis Lead Roundtable on 2025-26 Budget Proposal to Expand Child Care Workforce with Community Leaders, Parents, and Families in Allegheny County

    Governor Josh Shapiro and Lt. Governor Austin Davis hosted a roundtable at the YMCA Child Development Center at Duquesne University to highlight the Governor’s 2025-26 proposed budget, which builds on his efforts to make child care more accessible and affordable. Over the past two years, Governor Shapiro has taken steps to lower child care costs, and this year’s budget proposal focuses on expanding the child care workforce to ensure more Pennsylvania families can access the care they need.

    Governor Shapiro, Lt. Governor Davis, Second Lady Blayre Holmes Davis, and key stakeholders, including President of the YMCA of Greater Pittsburgh Amy Kienle, CEO of Partner4Work Robert Cherry, child care workers and teachers, and parents participated in the roundtable. Leadership from the Greater Pittsburgh YMCA, Duquesne University, Early Learning Investment Commission (ELIC), and the General Assembly also attended. The discussion focused on the Governor’s proposed budget investments to address workforce challenges, reduce costs, and increase access to quality child care for Pennsylvania families.

    “My budget prioritizes workforce development to tackle shortages in critical sectors like child care,” said Governor Shapiro. “With 3,000 unfilled child care jobs across Pennsylvania, too many families are struggling to find safe, affordable care – forcing parents out of the workforce and making it harder to get ahead. That’s why I’m proposing a $55 million investment to provide child care workers with at least $1,000 in recruitment and retention bonuses, strengthening our workforce and helping to solve this problem.”

    Speaker list:
    Governor Josh Shapiro
    Lt. Governor Austin Davis
    Second Lady Blayre Holmes Davis
    Amy Kienle, President/CEO, YMCA of Greater Pittsburgh
    Robert Cherry, CEO, Partner4Work
    Tracey Spear, Child Care Center Director
    Amanda Eadie, Teacher & Duquesne Student
    Hana Naghamouchi, Teacher & Duquesne Student

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australian LGBTIQ+ politicians were hit with vile online abuse at the last federal election. The coming campaign could be even worse

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Stephenson, Deputy Director, Global Institute for Women’s Leadership, Australian National University

    Newly published research has found clear evidence that openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer+ (LGBTIQ+) Australian politicians were disproportionately targeted with personal abuse on social media at the last federal election. Given global trends, it’s unlikely to be any different this year.

    Simply logging off is not an option for candidates, who need to communicate with voters. As a result, some politicians will continue to face risky online visibility.

    Since Elon Musk acquired Twitter/X, hate speech has surged, particularly for public figures such as parliamentarians.

    So what do these trends mean for queer candidates ahead of this year’s election? And why does it matter for the next generation of politically engaged young people?

    Queer politicians targeted

    We analysed more than 100,000 tweets across the Twitter profiles of eight openly queer politicians and candidates (Penny Wong, Julian Hill, Nita Green, Tim Wilson, Janet Rice, Rachael Jacobs, Claire Garton, Stephen Bates) during the 2022 federal election campaign. We compared them with eight other politicians (Zoe Daniel, Graham Perrett, Lidia Thorpe, Anthony Chisholm, Barbara Pocock, Simon Birmingham, Deborah O’Neill, David Shoebridge) in the same period.

    We suspected that political hopefuls who publicly identified as LGBTIQ+ may have experienced greater levels of abuse and harassment. But what we found surprised us.

    The level of online intimidation was roughly the same for queer and non-queer politicians. However, the type of abuse differed significantly.

    Queer politicians endured highly personal harassment that specifically targeted their gender or physical appearance. They suffered nasty queer-specific slurs, transphobic messages and ableist language. Essentially, nothing that was related to their policies or politics.

    Meanwhile, straight, cisgender politicians received harassment that was typically political in nature. More of it focused on their party or platform. It wasn’t as personal (with the exception of Thorpe, who received high levels of racist abuse). While overtly hostile, for straight politicians in general much of the harassment received might be considered an unavoidable part of the democratic political process in the social media age.

    Our research provides a useful retrospective of some of the vitriol that proliferated during the last election.

    One such event began with YouTube commentator Jordan Shanks breaking a salacious story of repeated sexual misconduct by staffers in Canberra, purportedly in MPs offices and in the parliamentary multi-faith prayer room.

    Our data tracked the way queer male politicians were wrongly affiliated and tagged in the scandal. They were unfairly accused and ridiculed. The unfounded attacks were non-partisan, involving politicians from across the major parties. This indicated a single point of commonality – their sexuality.

    Liberal MP Tim Wilson, who had no involvement in the scandal, received over 2000 tweets explicitly mentioning the incident. Many were overtly homophobic, using terms such as “toy boy”, “rentboy”, “parasite” and “prayer room pervert”.

    How it puts off politically engaged young people

    The data indicates that queer politicians face a double bind. The personal hate they experience negatively impacts them as individuals and also distracts from genuine political debate. Trolling, hate speech, and a prohibitive online environment stymies open and constructive political dialogue.

    Furthermore, identity based harassment discourages queer people from pursuing political careers in the first place. Or staying in politics once they’ve experienced the hate. It erodes their sense of safety when engaging in public discourse and undermines the foundations upon which democracy is built.

    In a follow-up study of 98 politically engaged, young gender and sexuality diverse people, we found that online violence and a lack of workplace safety were some of the biggest barriers for them in considering a career in politics.

    The upcoming election

    We expect the personal harassment of queer politicians will continue to escalate across multiple platforms, including X, Facebook and Instagram.

    For instance, we have seen a sharp rise in anti-LGBTIQ+ hate and extremism across the United States. Online spaces are likely to become even less safe for queer politicians in 2025, than they were in 2022.

    Big tech is making it easier for abuse and harassment to flourish in the online world.

    Musk has fired 80% of engineers responsible for content regulation on X. He has also liked transphobic tweets and deemed the words “cis and “cisgender ” to be slurs, that were subsequently banned on X.

    Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg has also removed protections that prevented hate speech on Facebook.

    More users are deserting X due to the malicious content and lack of safeguards. But with a closely integrated social media environment, online violence can follow politicians across platforms, both social and legacy. There is no escaping the bile.

    Demanding better of online platforms

    Social media regulation is difficult. Tech giants have already threatened to withdraw their services from Australia over laws that would force them to pay for news content.

    Online platforms may claim to only be the “messenger”, but the reality is that design features like anonymity and business decisions like removing content moderation will cause even more harm.

    Until a critical mass of countries demand better protections, some individuals, including queer politicians, will always be at a disadvantage in this asymmetric online war.

    Elise Stephenson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Elise is part of research projects funded by the eSafety Commissioner on combating online violence. The research quoted in this article received funding from the Gender Institute at the ANU.

    Gosia Mikolajczak collaborates with Women for Election on a project funded by the Australian Government Office for Women, aiming to increase the number and diversity of women running for public office. She has previously worked on an Australian Research Council Linkage project that examined gender inequalities in local government in Victoria.

    Blair Williams and Jack Hayes do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Australian LGBTIQ+ politicians were hit with vile online abuse at the last federal election. The coming campaign could be even worse – https://theconversation.com/australian-lgbtiq-politicians-were-hit-with-vile-online-abuse-at-the-last-federal-election-the-coming-campaign-could-be-even-worse-250039

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Funding to support indigenous students to catch up, keep up and finish school

    Source: Australian Ministers for Education

    The Albanese Labor Government will invest a further $35 million in two programs to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.

    The Clontarf Foundation will receive $33.6 million to support up to 12,500 First Nations boys and young men to continue their schooling education in 2026.

    The Clontarf Foundation encourages boys and young men to improve their confidence, school engagement, year 12 attainment and post‑school pathways.

    It provides in-school support, as well as before and after school activities.

    The program has an established record in improving student engagement, through increased attendance, retention and overall academic performance. 

    In 2023, the Clontarf Foundation reported that 836 young men completed Year 12, and 86 per cent of young men who completed Year 12 in 2022 remained in jobs or further education 12 months after leaving school.

    As part of the Albanese Labor Government’s commitment to Closing the Gap, a further $1.5 million will be provided to the MultiLit program under the Scaling Up Proven Primary Reading Programs. 

    MultiLit delivers phonics-based programs that support primary school students to catch up in reading and early literacy. 

    This funding extension will allow MultiLit to continue to deliver its programs across Australia in 42 regional and remote primary schools with a majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students until the end of the 2026.

    Quotes attributable to Minister for Education, Jason Clare:

    “I want more kids to catch up, keep up and finish school.

    “The work the Clontarf Foundation is doing for young Indigenous boys is great. They are increasing attendance rates and helping more Indigenous students finish school and go on to TAFE or university.

    “MultiLit is evidence-based and helping more Indigenous students in rural and remote Australia read and write.”

    Quotes attributable to Minister for Indigenous Australians, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy:

    “It’s essential that our First Nations students get the support they need to complete year 12 and move into meaningful jobs or study after school.

    “With a strong focus on school attendance, relationship building, academic outcomes and participation in society, Clontarf Foundation is helping young men develop the skills they need for life.

    “For over two decades, MultiLit have been delivering data-driven programs to help First Nations students improve their reading and writing skills.”

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: FedCare expands mental health supports to benefit local community

    Source: Federation University

    After a successful 2024, Federation University Australia’s training clinic, FedCare Psychology, is excited to announce new and extended partnerships to expand capacity and enhance essential psychological support to the greater Ballarat region.

    New schools including Daylesford Primary School, Delacombe Primary School, Our Lady Help of Christians and Ballarat Christian College will join the 12 primary and secondary schools already undertaking FedCare’s school outreach program while FedCare’s partnership with St Patrick’s College will be extended to increase assessment services.

    A partnership with the Ballarat and District Aboriginal Corporation (BADAC) will include a new clinical registrar position, and a new funded clinical placement, a huge win for the local Indigenous community while FedCare’s pilot partnership with the Grampians Health Assessment clinic has been extended for a further 12 months.

    In 2024 over 70 provisionally registered psychologists studying Federation’s Master of Psychology (Clinical) completed placement at the state-of-the-art psychology clinic at the university’s Mount Helen Campus to provide low-cost mental health support services.to the community with 6654 sessions to 940 clients.

    Federation University’s Master of Psychology (Clinical) course is now one of the largest clinical training programs in Australia, reflecting the university’s dedication to bolstering the mental health sector through education and practical training.
    For more information on Federation’s Master of Psychology (Clinical) course, please visit https://study.federation.edu.au/course/DYL9.

    Quotes attributable to Federation University Associate Professor, Head of Clinical Services and Programs, Psychology | Institute of Health and Wellbeing, Megan Jenkins 

    “FedCare Psychology remains committed to training postgraduate students to grow a sustainable mental health workforce in rural and regional Victoria. Our Master of Psychology students do an outstanding job representing the University and provide much-needed mental health services.” 

    “Traditionally, FedCare has had strong demand for psychological services for children and adolescents, including assessment services to support the development of learning plans for school-aged children, but recently we have seen increased demand for FedCare’s low-cost, high-quality services in adults. Federation is proud to support the health and wellbeing of the communities we serve.” 

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Justice Department Sues to Shut Down Atlanta-Area Return Preparers

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    The Justice Department filed a complaint today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia seeking to bar three Atlanta-area tax return preparers from owning or operating a tax return preparation business and preparing federal tax returns for others, as well as to require the defendants to disgorge the fees they received for fraudulently prepared returns.

    The civil complaint was filed against Mabika Ilunga; Simon Ilunga; Simon Ilunga Jr.; Mabilus Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service; Big Cheez Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service and SN Tax Services Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service. According to the complaint, the defendants prepared and filed tax returns that falsely understated their customers’ federal income tax liabilities by fabricating, among other things:

    • Businesses and related business expenses and losses;
    • Education and qualified electric vehicle credits;
    • Unreimbursed employee business expenses and
    • Dependents and filing status.

    The defendants fabricated these items to inflate their customers’ refunds and increase their eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit.

    According to the complaint, the defendants prepared thousands of tax returns for 2020 through 2023, and already prepared over 400 returns between the start of the 2025 filing season and today’s filing. The complaint alleges that the IRS reviewed income tax returns for 34 of the defendants’ customers and found that returns for 33 of those customers had errors that required an adjustment, often included without the customers’ knowledge or consent. As a result, the complaint alleges that the defendants have cost the United States lost tax revenue as well as the time and resources necessary to investigate the false returns. The complaint further alleges that the defendants harmed their customers who could potentially face large income tax debts and may be liable for penalties and interest.

    The Justice Department’s Tax Division made the announcement.

    Return preparer fraud is one of the IRS’ Dirty Dozen Tax Scams and taxpayers seeking a return preparer should remain vigilant. (More information can also be found here.) The IRS has information on its website for choosing a tax preparer, has launched a free directory of federal tax preparers, and offers information on how to avoid “ghost” tax preparers, whose refusal to sign a return should be a red flag to taxpayers. The IRS also has a checklist of things to remember when filing income tax returns in 2025.

    In addition, IRS Free File, a public-private partnership, offers free online tax preparation and filing options on IRS partner websites for individuals whose adjusted gross income is under $84,000. For individuals whose income is over that threshold, IRS Free File offers electronical federal tax forms that can be filled out and filed online for free. The IRS has tips on how seniors and individuals with low to moderate income can get other help or guidance on tax return preparation, too.

    In the past decade, the Tax Division has obtained injunctions against hundreds of unscrupulous tax preparers. Information about these cases is available on the Justice Department’s website. An alphabetical listing of persons enjoined from preparing returns and promoting tax schemes can be found this page. If you believe that one of the enjoined persons or businesses may be violating an injunction, please contact the Tax Division with details.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Health and Business – The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners Partners with Tribal to Transform Learner Management

    Source: Tribal Group

    Wellington,  February 5, 2025 – Tribal Group, a leading provider of education technology, is delighted to announce its partnership with The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners (the College). Following an extensive evaluation process, the College has selected Tribal’s ebs learner management system to assist the transformation of their learner experience and streamline operations as part of Te Kāpehu Whetū, their programme for mapping operational needs and identifying suitable tools.

    The College identified the need for a more robust, future-proofed system following their commitment to delivering seamless training experiences to support the next generation of specialist general practitioners and rural hospital doctors.

    Toby Beaglehole, College Chief Executive says, “The change in our system was essential to accommodate our organisation’s growth and future needs. Te Kāpehu Whetū represents our continuous improvement approach to finding the right tools that align with our processes and support our vision for the future.”

    A Rigorous Selection Process

    The College’s search for a new solution began in 2022. After conducting desktop research and gathering recommendations from other organisations in the New Zealand tertiary education and membership sectors, Tribal ebs emerged as an option due to its intuitive functionality and deep integration capability.

    “We needed a solution that was not only advanced in its core capabilities but also came from a provider deeply embedded in the education sector. Tribal stood out not just for its extensive experience but for its ability to future-proof our organisation through ongoing R&D and sector insights,” said Mr Beaglehole.

    The partnership will see Tribal ebs become the central system supporting the College’s learner journeys, from application through their training and into Fellowship, while integrating seamlessly with their other systems.

    Delivering Modern, Learner-Centric Solutions

    The learner and staff portals within Tribal ebs were major factors in the College’s decision, offering intuitive user experiences with powerful behind-the-scenes functionality. The system will also automate many of the College’s operational processes.

    Steve Exley, Tribal’s General Manager in New Zealand, added, “We are proud to partner with the College and support their journey towards a more robust system that enhances their operations and the services they provide. This collaboration signifies the strength of Tribal ebs in the tertiary education sector, particularly here in Aotearoa New Zealand.”

    A Broader Impact on the Tertiary Education and EdTech Sectors

    This collaboration highlights the increasing need for future-ready solutions within the tertiary education sector. The College’s adoption of Tribal ebs not only showcases the adaptability of the platform but also underscores Tribal’s deep commitment to addressing the diverse needs of education organisations, particularly in New Zealand and the wider Asia-Pacific (APAC) region.

    The partnership also celebrates Tribal’s launch of advisory services in APAC, reinforcing its presence and expertise in education technology throughout the region.

    “This partnership with Tribal  enables  us to leverage new technology to enhance our educational infrastructure. By integrating Tribal ebs, we are laying the groundwork for a future-ready institution that aligns with our strategic goals to nurture new generations of specialist GPs and rural hospital doctors,” concludes Mr Beaglehole.

    Mark Pickett, CEO of Tribal Group, remarked, “Our collaboration with the College reaffirms Tribal Group’s commitment to delivering solutions that address the intricate needs of educational institutions. By providing a comprehensive and adaptable learner management system, we are committed to fostering innovation and operational excellence within the College, ensuring they remain at the forefront of medical education.”

    Next Steps for the Partnership

    The College has already initiated workshops with Tribal’s implementation team, and the first project milestone—go-live for applications for the 2026 intake of general practice and rural hospital trainees—is set for March 2025.

    About Tribal

    Tribal Group plc is global leader in education technology, offering solutions that empower institutions to improve efficiency, innovate processes, and enhance the learner experience. Working with Higher Education, Further and Tertiary Education, schools, Government and State bodies, training providers and employers, in over 55 countries; Tribal Group’s mission is to empower the world of education with products and services that underpin learner success.

    About The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners  

    The Royal New Zealand College Of General Practitioners is New Zealand’s largest medical college with a membership of over 6,000 GPs, rural hospital doctors, and registrars.  The College sets standards for general practice in New Zealand, providing research, assessment, ongoing education, advocacy and support for general practitioners and general practice. They advocate for equity, access, and sustainable healthcare and believe fundamentally that regardless of who or where they are, every New Zealander should have access to their own GP.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Justice Department Sues to Shut Down Atlanta-Area Return Preparers

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    The Justice Department filed a complaint today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia seeking to bar three Atlanta-area tax return preparers from owning or operating a tax return preparation business and preparing federal tax returns for others, as well as to require the defendants to disgorge the fees they received for fraudulently prepared returns.

    The civil complaint was filed against Mabika Ilunga; Simon Ilunga; Simon Ilunga Jr.; Mabilus Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service; Big Cheez Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service and SN Tax Services Inc. doing business as Metro Insurance and Tax Service. According to the complaint, the defendants prepared and filed tax returns that falsely understated their customers’ federal income tax liabilities by fabricating, among other things:

    • Businesses and related business expenses and losses;
    • Education and qualified electric vehicle credits;
    • Unreimbursed employee business expenses and
    • Dependents and filing status.

    The defendants fabricated these items to inflate their customers’ refunds and increase their eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit.

    According to the complaint, the defendants prepared thousands of tax returns for 2020 through 2023, and already prepared over 400 returns between the start of the 2025 filing season and today’s filing. The complaint alleges that the IRS reviewed income tax returns for 34 of the defendants’ customers and found that returns for 33 of those customers had errors that required an adjustment, often included without the customers’ knowledge or consent. As a result, the complaint alleges that the defendants have cost the United States lost tax revenue as well as the time and resources necessary to investigate the false returns. The complaint further alleges that the defendants harmed their customers who could potentially face large income tax debts and may be liable for penalties and interest.

    The Justice Department’s Tax Division made the announcement.

    Return preparer fraud is one of the IRS’ Dirty Dozen Tax Scams and taxpayers seeking a return preparer should remain vigilant. (More information can also be found here.) The IRS has information on its website for choosing a tax preparer, has launched a free directory of federal tax preparers, and offers information on how to avoid “ghost” tax preparers, whose refusal to sign a return should be a red flag to taxpayers. The IRS also has a checklist of things to remember when filing income tax returns in 2025.

    In addition, IRS Free File, a public-private partnership, offers free online tax preparation and filing options on IRS partner websites for individuals whose adjusted gross income is under $84,000. For individuals whose income is over that threshold, IRS Free File offers electronical federal tax forms that can be filled out and filed online for free. The IRS has tips on how seniors and individuals with low to moderate income can get other help or guidance on tax return preparation, too.

    In the past decade, the Tax Division has obtained injunctions against hundreds of unscrupulous tax preparers. Information about these cases is available on the Justice Department’s website. An alphabetical listing of persons enjoined from preparing returns and promoting tax schemes can be found this page. If you believe that one of the enjoined persons or businesses may be violating an injunction, please contact the Tax Division with details.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: Capital Southwest Announces Leadership Changes

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Michael Sarner to Succeed Bowen Diehl as President & Chief Executive Officer
    Chris Rehberger Promoted to Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer & Secretary
    Tabitha Geiger Promoted to Chief Compliance Officer

    DALLAS, Feb. 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Capital Southwest Corporation (“Capital Southwest” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: CSWC), an internally managed business development company focused on providing flexible financing solutions to support the acquisition and growth of middle market businesses, announced today that Chief Financial Officer Michael Sarner has been appointed by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) to succeed Bowen Diehl as President and Chief Executive Officer of Capital Southwest. Mr. Sarner has also been appointed to serve on the Board. Both appointments are effective February 17, 2025. Mr. Diehl will continue to serve the Company in an advisory capacity for at least another year.

    In addition, Chris Rehberger has been promoted from Executive Vice President of Finance and Treasurer to Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer & Secretary of the Company, and Tabitha Geiger has been promoted from Deputy Compliance Officer to Chief Compliance Officer of the Company, effective February 17, 2025.

    “On behalf of the Board, we want to both acknowledge and celebrate Bowen’s long career at Capital Southwest,” said David Brooks, Chairman of the Board. “We greatly appreciate the leadership he has provided to Capital Southwest over the past decade and we wish him the very best. Succession planning has always been a priority for the Company, and Michael, Bowen and the Board are all in agreement that it is time to transition the leadership of Capital Southwest. Michael and Bowen have both been fully immersed in the strategy and operations of the Company, which will make this a smooth transition.”

    “I couldn’t be more optimistic about the future of Capital Southwest under Michael’s leadership. He has worked tirelessly by my side over the past decade building a best-in-class BDC and, together with the rest of our leadership team, I am confident the firm has the right team to continue executing Capital Southwest’s strategy going forward,” said Bowen Diehl. “I am very proud of what we have built here together and I am grateful for having had the opportunity over the past ten years to lead Capital Southwest’s transformation into a BDC with one of the most robust business models in the industry. While stepping down is clearly bittersweet, succession planning is an important part of a company’s evolution, and I very much look forward to supporting Capital Southwest in any way that Michael and the team find helpful, in the short term as an advisor, and in the long term as a fellow shareholder.”

    Mr. Sarner joined Capital Southwest in 2015 and brings more than thirty years of financial, treasury and BDC experience to his new role. He has been instrumental in planning and executing on both the corporate and capitalization strategy for Capital Southwest, raising over $2 billion in both debt and equity. In addition to serving as Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Sarner also served as the Company’s Chief Compliance Officer and Secretary. He also has served on the Investment Committee for the entirety of his time with Capital Southwest. Previously, he spent fifteen years at American Capital in a variety of financial roles, including Executive Vice President and Treasurer.   

    “I’m honored to be entrusted with Capital Southwest’s future,” said Michael Sarner, President and Chief Executive Officer. “The Company is well-positioned for growth with a strong and cohesive leadership team – including Chris with whom I’ve worked closely with for the past two decades. I look forward to fostering the growth of the entire Capital Southwest team, as well as providing leadership for the Company with a renewed vision for the future.”

    Mr. Rehberger joined Capital Southwest in 2015 and has twenty years of experience in corporate finance roles within the BDC space. Mr. Rehberger additionally spent ten years in corporate finance roles at American Capital working alongside Mr. Sarner. Mr. Rehberger earned a bachelor’s in commerce with a concentration in finance from the McIntire School and a master’s from the Darden School of Business, both from the University of Virginia.

    Ms. Geiger has almost a decade of experience. Previously, she spent eight years in compliance consulting with IQ-EQ, where she was responsible for implementing and overseeing compliance programs for private equity, venture capital and hedge fund managers. Ms. Geiger earned a BS in Agricultural Communications and Journalism from Texas A&M University and her JD from South Texas College of Law. She is licensed to practice law in Texas.

    About Capital Southwest
    Capital Southwest Corporation (Nasdaq: CSWC) is a Dallas, Texas-based, internally managed business development company with approximately $1.7 billion in investments at fair value as of December 31, 2024. Capital Southwest is a middle market lending firm focused on supporting the acquisition and growth of middle market businesses with $5 million to $50 million investments across the capital structure, including first lien, second lien and non-control equity co-investments. As a public company with a permanent capital base, Capital Southwest has the flexibility to be creative in its financing solutions and to invest to support the growth of its portfolio companies over long periods of time.

    Media Relations Contact:
    Lauren DiGeronimo
    laurend@trailrunnerint.com

    Investor Relations Contact:
    Michael Sarner
    msarner@capitalsouthwest.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Hassan and Cornyn Reintroduce Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Against Child Identify Theft

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Maggie Hassan

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and John Cornyn (R-TX) reintroduced bipartisan legislation to help parents protect their children from identity theft.

    “New parents have enough to juggle without having to jump through hoops to protect their children’s financial future,” said Senator Hassan. “Identity theft can be especially damaging to children because they may not be aware that their identity was stolen until they become adults. This bipartisan bill will streamline the process for parents to protect their children’s credit file by freezing it.”

    “Children are easy targets for identity theft, leaving them vulnerable to years of undetected fraud,” said Senator Cornyn. “By streamlining the process for parents to freeze their children’s credit files, our bill would help protect families from financial damage and identity theft.”

    “TransUnion welcomes the opportunity to help parents protect their children’s financial well-being with this legislation,” said TransUnion. “We are proud to be a partner in every parent’s mission to safeguard their children and help them build for a bright future.”

    Studies show that nearly one million children a year are victims of identity theft, costing families nearly $1 billion annually as criminals can use the identities to open up credit cards and make transactions in a child’s name. The best way to protect against this form of identity theft is for parents to freeze their children’s credit file. However, today the process can be cumbersome, requiring parents to contact each of the three major credit bureaus individually.

    The Credit Freeze for Kids Act will allow parents to contact only one of the agencies to freeze their children’s credit file and then require the notified credit bureau to inform the other credit bureaus of the freeze within three days.

    MIL OSI USA News