NewzIntel.com

Category: Trump

  • MIL-OSI Global: WHO is finalizing a new treaty that prepares for the next pandemic − but the US isn’t signing

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Nicole Hassoun, Professor of Philosophy, Binghamton University, State University of New York

    The 78th World Health Assembly is taking place in Geneva, Switzerland, from May 19-27, 2025. Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

    On March 20, 2025, members of the World Health Organization adopted the world’s first pandemic agreement, following three years of “intensive negotiations launched by governments in response to the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.” The U.S., however, did not participate, in part because of its intention to withdraw from the WHO.

    Global health experts are hailing the agreement as a historic moment.

    What does the agreement mean for the world, and how can it make everyone safer and more prepared for the next pandemic?

    The Conversation asked Nicole Hassoun, a professor at Binghamton University and executive director of Global Health Impact, to explain the pandemic accord, its prospects for advancing global health, and the significance of the U.S.’s absence from it.

    What will the pandemic agreement do?

    The accord will bolster pandemic preparation within individual countries and around the world.

    Countries signing onto the agreement are committing to improve their disease surveillance and grow their heath care workforces, strengthen their regulatory systems and invest in research and development. It encourages countries to strengthen their health regulations and infrastructure, improve communication with the public about pandemics and increase funding for preparation and response efforts.

    It also includes new mechanisms for producing and distributing vaccines and other essential countermeasures. Finally, it encourages countries to coordinate their responses and share information about infectious diseases and intellectual property so that vaccines and other essential countermeasures can be made available more quickly.

    The agreement will take effect once enough countries ratify it, which may take several years.

    Why isn’t the US involved?

    The Biden administration was broadly supportive of a pandemic agreement and was an active participant in negotiations.

    Prior to Donald Trump’s reelection, however, Republican governors had signed a letter opposing the treaty, echoing a conservative think tank’s concerns about U.S. sovereignty.

    The U.S. withdrew from negotiations when President Trump signed an executive order to withdraw from the WHO on the day he was inaugurated for his second term.

    Why could the lack of US involvement be beneficial for the world?

    The lack of U.S. involvement likely resulted in a much more equitable treaty, and it is not clear that countries could have reached an agreement had the U.S. continued to object to key provisions.

    It was only once the U.S. withdrew from the negotiations that an agreement was reached. The U.S. and several other wealthy countries were concerned with protecting their pharmaceutical industry’s profits and resisted efforts aimed at convincing pharmaceutical companies to share the knowledge, data and intellectual property needed for producing new vaccines and other essential countermeasures.

    Other negotiators sought greater access to vaccines and other treatments during a pandemic for poorer countries, which often rely on patented technologies from global pharmaceutical companies.

    While most people in wealthy countries had access to COVID-19 vaccines as early as 2021, many people in developing countries had to wait years for vaccines.

    How could the agreement broaden access for treatments?

    One of the contentious issues in the pandemic agreement has to do with how many vaccines manufacturers in each country must share in exchange for access to genetic sequences to emerging infectious diseases. Countries are still negotiating a system for sharing the genetic information on pathogens in return for access to vaccines themselves. It is important that researchers can get these sequences to make vaccines. And, of course, people need access to the vaccines once they are developed.

    Still, there are many more promising aspects of the agreement for which no further negotiations are necessary. For instance, the agreement will increase global vaccine supply by increasing manufacturing around the world.

    The agreement also specifies that countries and the WHO should work together to create a mechanism for fairly sharing the intellectual property, data and knowledge needed to produce vaccines and other essential health products. If financing for new innovation requires equitable access to the new technologies that are developed, many people in poor countries may get access to vaccines much more quickly in the next pandemic. The agreement also encourages individual countries to offer sufficient incentives for pharmaceutical companies to extend access to developing countries.

    If countries implement these changes, that will benefit people in rich countries as well as poor ones. A more equitable distribution of vaccines can contain the spread of disease, saving millions of lives.

    What more should be done, and does the US have a role to play?

    In my view, the best way to protect public health moving forward is for countries to sign on to the agreement and devote more resources to global health initiatives. This is particularly important given declining investment and participation in the WHO and the contraction of other international health initiatives, such as USAID.

    Without international coordination, it will become harder to catch and address problems early enough to prevent epidemics from becoming pandemics.

    It will also be imperative for member countries to provide funding to support the agreement’s goals and secure the innovation and access to new technologies. This requires building the basic health infrastructure to ensure shots can get into people’s arms.

    Nicole Hassoun has receive funding from the WHO and worked as a consultant for the UN.

    – ref. WHO is finalizing a new treaty that prepares for the next pandemic − but the US isn’t signing – https://theconversation.com/who-is-finalizing-a-new-treaty-that-prepares-for-the-next-pandemic-but-the-us-isnt-signing-256191

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A decade after the release of ‘The Martian’ and a decade out from the world it envisions, a planetary scientist checks in on real-life Mars exploration

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Ari Koeppel, Postdoctoral Scientist in Earth and Planetary Science, Dartmouth College

    ‘The Martian’ protagonist Mark Watney contemplates his ordeal. 20th Century Fox

    Andy Weir’s bestselling story “The Martian” predicts that by 2035 NASA will have landed humans on Mars three times, perfected return-to-Earth flight systems and collaborated with the China National Space Administration. We are now 10 years past the Hollywood adaptation’s 2015 release and 10 years shy of its fictional timeline. At this midpoint, Mars exploration looks a bit different than how it was portrayed in “The Martian,” with both more discoveries and more controversy.

    As a planetary geologist who works with NASA missions to study Mars, I follow exploration science and policy closely. In 2010, the U.S. National Space Policy set goals for human missions to Mars in the 2030s. But in 2017, the White House Space Policy Directive 1 shifted NASA’s focus toward returning first to the Moon under what would become the Artemis program.

    Although concepts for crewed missions to Mars have gained popularity, NASA’s actual plans for landing humans on Mars remain fragile. Notably, over the last 10 years, it has been robotic, rather than crewed, missions that have propelled discovery and the human imagination forward.

    NASA’s 2023 Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives Development document lays out the steps the agency was shooting for at the time, to go first to the Moon, and from there to Mars.
    NASA

    Robotic discoveries

    Since 2015, satellites and rovers have reshaped scientists’ understanding of Mars. They have revealed countless insights into how its climate has changed over time.

    As Earth’s neighbor, climate shifts on Mars also reflect solar system processes affecting Earth at a time when life was first taking hold. Thus, Mars has become a focal point for investigating the age old questions of “where do we come from?” and “are we alone?”

    The Opportunity, Curiosity and Perseverance rovers have driven dozens of miles studying layered rock formations that serve as a record of Mars’ past. By studying sedimentary layers – rock formations stacked like layers of a cake – planetary geologists have pieced together a vivid tale of environmental change that dwarfs what Earth is currently experiencing.

    Mars was once a world of erupting volcanoes, glaciers, lakes and flowing rivers – an environment not unlike early Earth. Then its core cooled, its magnetic field faltered and its atmosphere drifted away. The planet’s exposed surface has retained signs of those processes ever since in the form of landscape patterns, sequences of layered sediment and mineral mixtures.

    Layered sedimentary rocks exposed within the craters of Arabia Terra, Mars, recording ancient surface processes. Photo from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment.
    NASA/JPL/University of Arizona

    Arabia Terra

    One focus of scientific investigation over the last 10 years is particularly relevant to the setting of “The Martian” but fails to receive mention in the story. To reach his best chance of survival, protagonist Mark Watney, played by Matt Damon, must cross a vast, dusty and crater-pocked region of Mars known as Arabia Terra.

    In 2022 and 2023, I, along with colleagues at Northern Arizona University and Johns Hopkins University, published detailed analyses of the layered materials there using imagery from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and Mars Odyssey satellites.

    By using infrared imagery and measuring the dimensions of surface features, we linked multiple layered deposits to the same episodes of formation and learned more about the widespread crumbling nature of the terrain seen there today. Because water tends to cement rock tightly together, that loose material indicates that around 3.5 billion years ago, that area had a drying climate.

    To make the discussions about this area easier, we even worked with the International Astronomical Union to name a few previously unnamed craters that were mentioned in the story. For example, one that Watney would have driven right by is now named Kozova Crater, after a town in Ukraine.

    More to explore

    Despite rapid advances in Mars science, many unknowns remain. Scientists still aren’t sure of the precise ages, atmospheric conditions and possible signatures of life associated with each of the different rock types observed on the surface.

    For instance, the Perseverance rover recently drilled into and analyzed a unique set of rocks hosting organic – that is, carbon-based – compounds. Organic compounds serve as the building blocks of life, but more detailed analysis is required to determine whether these specific rocks once hosted microbial life.

    The in-development Mars Sample Return mission aims to address these basic outstanding questions by delivering the first-ever unaltered fragments of another world to Earth. The Perseverance rover is already caching rock and soil samples, including ones hosting organic compounds, in sealed tubes. A future lander will then need to pick up and launch the caches back to Earth.

    Sampling Mars rocks could tell scientists more about the red planet’s past, and whether it could have hosted life.

    Once home, researchers can examine these materials with instruments orders of magnitude more sensitive than anything that could be flown on a spacecraft. Scientists stand to learn far more about the habitability, geologic history and presence of any signs of life on Mars through the sample return campaign than by sending humans to the surface.

    This perspective is why NASA, the European Space Agency and others have invested some US$30 billion in robotic Mars exploration since the 1960s. The payoff has been staggering: That work has triggered rapid technological advances in robotics, telecommunications and materials science. For example, Mars mission technology has led to better sutures for heart surgery and cars that can drive themselves.

    It has also bolstered the status of NASA and the U.S. as bastions of modern exploration and technology; and it has inspired millions of students to take an interest in scientific fields.

    A selfie from NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover with the Ingenuity helicopter, taken with the rover’s extendable arm on April 6, 2021.
    NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

    Calling the red planet home?

    Colonizing Mars has a seductive appeal. It’s hard not to cheer for the indomitable human spirit while watching Watney battle dust storms, oxygen shortages and food scarcity over 140 million miles from rescue.

    Much of the momentum toward colonizing Mars is now tied to SpaceX and its CEO Elon Musk, whose stated mission to make humanity a “multi-planetary species” has become a sort of rallying cry. But while Mars colonization is romantic on paper, it is extremely difficult to actually carry out, and many critics have questioned the viability of a Mars habitation as a refuge far from Earth.

    Now, with NASA potentially facing a nearly 50% reduction to its science budget, the U.S. risks dissolving its planetary science and robotic operations portfolio altogether, including sample return.

    Nonetheless, President Donald Trump and Musk have pushed for human space exploration to somehow continue to progress, despite those proposed cuts – effectively sidelining the robotic, science-driven programs that have underpinned all of Mars exploration to date.

    Yet, it is these programs that have yielded humanity’s richest insights into the red planet and given both scientists and storytellers like Andy Weir the foundation to imagine what it must be like to stand on Mars’ surface at all.

    Ari Koeppel receives funding from NASA.

    – ref. A decade after the release of ‘The Martian’ and a decade out from the world it envisions, a planetary scientist checks in on real-life Mars exploration – https://theconversation.com/a-decade-after-the-release-of-the-martian-and-a-decade-out-from-the-world-it-envisions-a-planetary-scientist-checks-in-on-real-life-mars-exploration-255752

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Feenstra Votes to Pass President Trump’s “One, Big, Beautiful Bill”

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Randy Feenstra (IA-04)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Hull) voted to pass President Trump’s “One, Big, Beautiful Bill.”

    “Today, I proudly voted for President Trump’s ‘One, Big, Beautiful Bill’ to deliver historic tax cuts for American families, farmers, workers, and small businesses. This legislation also funds our border patrol agents, continues construction of the border wall, revives domestic manufacturing, unleashes American energy dominance, and kicks illegal immigrants off taxpayer-funded benefits,” said Rep. Feenstra. “More than 77 million Americans made clear at the polls that they want President Trump’s America First agenda codified into law, and our ‘One, Big, Beautiful Bill’ delivers on this promise. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, our families will see big tax cuts, American workers will have higher wages, our farmers will see relief from the death tax, and our small businesses and local manufacturers will grow and thrive. Iowa will lead the way to restore our economic might and revive our manufacturing dominance.”

    Feenstra-led and -sponsored provisions include:

    • An increase in the exemption on the death tax,
    • Support for small businesses to offer paid family and medical leave to their employees,
    • Flexibility for community banks to offer agricultural business loans at more affordable rates for farmers and rural businesses,
    • Investments in homegrown Iowa biofuels,
    • Tax provisions to help American businesses compete on a level playing field with foreign businesses,
    • Higher standard deduction for families and workers,
    • New $4,000 bonus deduction for seniors,
    • Increased child tax credit for families,
    • Permanent 23% deduction for qualified business income for small businesses,
    • Lower crop insurance costs for young, beginning, and veteran farmers,
    • Support for foreign animal disease prevention, mitigation, and response,
    • Prevention of administrative errors when distributing SNAP payments, ensuring nutrition assistance is fighting food insecurity, and,
    • Investments in watershed infrastructure and flood prevention.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Mann Votes to Advance President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Tracey Mann (Kansas, 1)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Tracey Mann (KS-01) voted to advance the One Big Beautiful Act. The bill fulfills priorities that Rep. Mann and President Trump campaigned on, including making the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, securing the nation’s borders, and reducing U.S. federal spending. The bill passed in the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 215-214. Rep. Mann released the following statement after the vote:

    “On November 5, 2024, 77 million Americans gave Washington, D.C. a mandate to get our country back on track,” said Rep. Mann. “Today, House Republicans delivered on that mandate by saving taxpayer dollars, securing our borders, investing in our nation’s defense, promoting hard work and the American dream, and most importantly, preventing Kansans from seeing an average tax hike of $2,200 next January. These are the commonsense policy solutions that the Big First District overwhelmingly voted for last November and I could not be prouder of what we were able to deliver for the country. I am hopeful the Senate will move quickly to get this bill over the finish line and look forward to President Trump signing it into law.”

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act:

    • Makes the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, protecting the average taxpayer from a 22% tax increase in January 2026
    • Eliminates taxes on tips, overtime pay, and car loan interest on American-made cars
    • Provides additional tax relief for seniors
    • Expands the 199A small business deduction to 23% and makes it permanent
    • Increases detention capacity for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and includes funding for ICE resources
    • Funds the completion of the border wall and invests in modern technology to assist with intercepting drugs and human smuggling at U.S. ports of entry
    • Invests $60 billion in strengthening the farm safety net by expanding crop insurance and updating reference prices
    • Closes loopholes in the law that allow states to waive work requirements for government assistance programs
    • Appropriates $12.5 billion to the Federal Aviation Administration for the modernization of air traffic control technology and infrastructure
    • Rescinds unobligated funds and eliminates Biden-era programs estimated to cost over $4 billion

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will now go to the U.S. Senate for further consideration.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congresswoman Tenney Applauds the Passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-22)

    Washington, DC – Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (NY-24) today voted in favor of the historic One Big Beautiful Bill Act to deliver on President Trump’s America First Agenda. 

    This legislation passed the House by a vote of 215-214 with one voting present. 

    “The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which passed the House today, puts America First by making permanent the Trump Tax Cuts, providing ICE and the Department of Homeland Security the funding they need to build the wall and hire more agents to secure our borders, unleashing American energy production, and restoring common sense and sanity in our government,” said Congresswoman Tenney.

    “House Republicans voted to prevent the largest tax hike in American History by preserving and expanding the 2017 Trump Tax Cuts. This legislation will now bring the most significant tax cut in American history, bringing an average of an extra $5,000 into our wallets. In addition, Americans earning between $30,000 and $80,000 will pay nearly 15% less in taxes. This legislation also includes President Trump’s promises of No Tax on Tips, No Tax on Overtime, and cutting taxes on Social Security recipients to benefit working-class Americans.

    “NY-24 is the largest agricultural district in the Northeast; the One Big Beautiful Bill protects family farms by preventing the 6,804 family farms in our district from seeing their death tax exemption cut in half. Main Street businesses are also the backbone of our district, and this legislation protects the 199A Small Business Deduction to ensure the 40,720 small businesses in NY-24 are not hit by a 43.4% effective tax rate.

    “This legislation also contains historic provisions to secure our borders and combat the migrant crisis by providing nearly $70 million to expand ICE detention centers, hire over 10,000 new ICE Agents, and finish the border wall. President Trump and House Republicans are also committed to protecting American family values and restoring sanity to federal policymaking. By including my legislation to end taxpayer funding for sex changes for children and repealing the Left’s Green New Scam, we are working to rid our federal government of waste, fraud, and abuse. 

    “Now, it is up to the Senate to unite around this legislation and get this One Big Beautiful Bill to the President’s desk to deliver on our promises to the American people. It was a great privilege to support this once-in-a-lifetime bill, and I am eager to see it signed into law!”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Anti-environmentalism is on the rise but it’s full of contradictions

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alastair Bonnett, Professor of Geography, Newcastle University

    Vadim Sadovski/Shutterstock

    Anti-environmentalism is gaining ground. Attacks on the net zero goal and hostility to conservation measures and anti-pollution targets are becoming more common. And, as recent election results have shown, these tactics are reshaping politics in Britain and across the west.

    Anti-environmentalism is a rejection of both environmental initiatives and activism. But despite its sudden rise and bold rhetoric, it is built on shaky foundations. The messages it offers are often contradictory and row against the tide of everyday experience.

    Take the US president, Donald Trump. He dismantled many environmental protections in his last term of office, and is now removing those that are left – including support for research that even mentions the word climate. Yet he told a rally in Wisconsin in 2024: “I’m an environmentalist. I want clean air and clean water. Really clean water. Really clean air.”

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    Some of the contradictions of anti-environmentalism reflect its departure from traditional conservatism. Although routinely identified as “conservative”, the populist anti-green politics of Republicans in the US and Reform in the UK, along with the AfD in Germany and National Rally in France, represent a radical challenge to the ideals of continuity and conservation that were once at the heart of conservatism.

    The Conservative Environment Network is an organisation which pitches itself as an “independent forum for conservatives in the UK and around the world who support net zero, nature restoration and resource security”. Much of this network’s work involves reminding people that important environmental protections, from America’s national parks to controls on pollution and climate change in Britain and elsewhere, were introduced by conservatives.

    But few on the right appear to be listening. A populist tide is washing this conservative tradition away, despite the fact that support for environmental protection remains very popular.

    Polling indicates that 80% of people in the UK worry about climate change. Public backing for the work of the US Environmental Protection Agency is also overwhelming, including among Republican voters.

    In part, this support reflects the fact that environmental damage is an everyday reality: unpredictable weather, the collapse of animal and insect populations, and a range of other challenges are not just on the TV, they are outside the window.

    In my research for a forthcoming book on environmental nostalgia across the world, I keep bumping into an irony. In western nations, voices from the right say they want their country back, yet appear hostile to environmental policies that would protect their country and ensure its survival.

    There are many reasons for this disconnect, including resentment against initiatives that require lifestyle and livelihood changes. However, the enmity and disengagement is more complicated than a simple rejection of nature.

    Many people – including Trump himself – claim they are environmentalists even when the evidence suggests otherwise. The signs and symbols of environmental care are knitted into every aspect of our commercial and cultural life: if wildlife could sue for copyright, there would a lot of rich bears.

    I argue that a distinction can be made between what I call “cold” and “hot” forms of environmentalism. The former values and mourns the loss of nature, but as a spectacle to be observed – a set of appealing images of flora and fauna – while the latter feels implicated and anxious.

    The former position allows people to claim they love nature yet be indifferent or even hostile to initiatives to save it. However, the line between cold and hot, or between anti- and pro-environmentalist, is neither fixed nor hard.

    Another quality of anti-environmentalism is that its beliefs are changeable, even quixotic. Climate change is an example.

    Reform’s leaders have long flirted with climate change denial. “Climate change has happened for millions of years,” explained former Reform UK leader Richard Tice in 2024, adding that “the idea that you can stop the power of the Sun or volcanoes is simply ludicrous”. Tice has not changed his views but later the same year, the party’s new leader, Nigel Farage, told the BBC that he was “not arguing the science”.

    Like other populist parties, Reform adopts a mobile position on the environment, moving between denying that climate change is happening or that humans are causing it, and the very different contention that anthropogenic climate change is real but that environmental targets are unreachable and unfair, given that other nations (China is often mentioned) supposedly do so little.

    A post-western paradox

    Researchers are only just starting to think about anti-environmentalism. One key analysis is environmental politics researcher John Hultgren’s The Smoke and the Spoils: Anti-Environmentalism and Class Struggle in the United States. This new book explains how Republicans managed to convince working-class voters that there is “zero-sum dichotomy between jobs and environmental protection, workers and environmentalists”.

    This kind of binary has also been found by contributors to The Handbook of Anti-Environmentalism, who identify and critique the stereotyping of environmentalism as middle-class and elite in several western countries.

    Yet the geographical focus of these pioneering works misses yet another of the paradoxes of anti-environmentalism: that although its rhetoric often accuses China and other non-western countries of doing little, there has been a significant environmental turn in both policy and public attitudes beyond Europe and the US.

    Environmentalism is becoming post-western. This is partly because the realities of environmental damage are so stark across much of Asia and Africa.

    Extreme temperatures and unpredictable rainfall are leading to food insecurity and community displacement. Environmentalism in the African Sahel and south Asia might better be called “survivalism”.

    And despite its continuing reliance on fossil fuels, China’s state-led vision of a transition to a conservationist and decarbonised “ecological civilisation” is positioning it as a global environmental leader.

    Stereotypes of environmentalism being primarily a western concern are crumbling. Because of this, along with the many contradictions that beset it, the rise of anti-environmentalism appears not only complex, but curious and unsustainable.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Alastair Bonnett 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. Anti-environmentalism is on the rise but it’s full of contradictions – https://theconversation.com/anti-environmentalism-is-on-the-rise-but-its-full-of-contradictions-256911

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Barry Moore supports President Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Reconciliation Bill

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Barry Moore

    Washington D.C. – Today, Rep. Barry Moore (AL-01) released the following statement after voting in favor of President Donald J. Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Reconciliation bill. This bill is a once in a generation opportunity to renew the Trump tax cuts and deliver on the promises made to the American people.

    “Today, House Republicans put America First and politics second and delivered real results,” said Moore. “The passage of President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill delivers a victory for hardworking families by extending the Trump tax cuts, fully funding border security, lowering energy costs, and investing in new defense technologies. I’m proud to have fought for this bill and to help President Trump deliver on the mandate set by the American people last November.”

    The reconciliation bill delivers:

    • A reversal of the spending insanity by securing $1.6 trillion in mandatory savings.
    • The largest tax cut in American history.
    • An extra $5,000 in the pockets of the American people.
    • Protection for Medicaid by removing 1.4 million illegals, eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse within the system.
    • Lower energy costs for American families while reversing the dangerous Biden-era anti-energy policies.
    • Permanent border security through funding President Trump’s border wall and empowering border officials with the resources they need.
    • An end to taxpayer-funded sex changes for minors by prohibiting Medicaid funding for transition procedures.
    • A once-in-a-generation opportunity to revolutionize our nation’s defense capabilities through historic investment in new technology.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Attorney General Alan Wilson joins national leaders at southern border to highlight strides made under TrumpRead More

    Source: US State of South Carolina

    (COLUMBIA, S.C.) – On Wednesday, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, alongside fellow Republican attorneys general and federal and state law enforcement leaders, held a press conference at the southern border in Yuma, Arizona. The group provided an update on President Trump’s immigration-border policy, the expanded 287(g) program, discussed the administration’s early successes in curbing illegal border encounters, disrupting drug and fentanyl trafficking, and expanding key immigration enforcement initiatives dubbed “Operation Tidal Wave”. 

    “For the last four years, we’ve been sinking under the weight of Biden’s weak border policies,” said Attorney General Wilson. President Trump is giving us the tools to fight back. Now, we’re not just bailing water, we’re taking control of the ship. From stopping deadly drugs at the border to backing local law enforcement with programs like 287(g), this administration is proving it puts the safety of our citizens above politics, and we’re proud to work with them.” 

    Attorney General Wilson emphasized the substantial strides made in just three months under the Trump administration’s renewed focus on border security and state-federal cooperation. 

    Key Takeaways: 

    • Expanding 287(g) in South Carolina: One of the most significant developments is the expansion of the 287(g) program in South Carolina. Under this federal initiative, local law enforcement is deputized to carry out certain immigration enforcement duties. Since President Trump took office, the number of participating sheriff’s departments in South Carolina has grown from 2 to 20, dramatically increasing the state’s capacity to identify and detain criminal illegal aliens. 
    • Fighting the Fentanyl Crisis:  With fentanyl flooding across the southern border, South Carolina is taking aggressive steps to protect its citizens. In addition to federal efforts, South Carolina just passed the Fentanyl-Induced Homicide Act, which allows anyone who distributes fentanyl or a fentanyl-related substance to be charged with homicide.  
    • Legal Leadership in Defending Border: In April 2025, the state led a 27-state amicus brief supporting President Trump’s authority to deport Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang members, a violent transnational criminal organization. In March 2024, South Carolina filed a brief supporting Texas’ right to enforce its own immigration law, defending the state’s ability to protect its borders against a challenge brought by the Biden administration. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Video: Syria: Sanctions eased, but economic recovery demands global support – Briefing | United Nations

    Source: United Nations (Video News)

    The Special Envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, today (21 May) “warmly” welcomed last week’s announcement by United States President Donald Trump on the cessation of sanctions on Syria, as well as similar steps recently announced by the European Union and the United Kingdom.

    Briefing the Security Council remotely from Damascus, Pedersen said, “I have long called for bold steps on sanctions, as have millions of Syrians in and outside the country.”

    The Special Envoy said there “are indeed historic developments,” which “hold major potential to improve living conditions across the country and to support the Syrian political transition,” as well as giving the Syrian people “a chance to grapple with the legacy of misrule, conflict, abuses and poverty from which they are trying to emerge.”

    Pedersen said, “we also know that Syria faces significant structural challenges, with an economy ravaged by over a
    decade of war and conflict, and a host of other destabilizing factors. Revitalizing a devastated economy will require from the interim authorities sustained actions including on overall economic reform and governance standards across the financial system, and this will need international support.”

    He also noted “alarm at renewed Israeli airstrikes in Syria in the reporting period, including during the violence in Druze areas and close to the presidential palace.”

    Such attacks, Pedersen said, “are unacceptable and must cease,” and Syria’s “sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity must be respected.”

    He said, “there are clearly diplomatic possibilities and these must be prioritized.”

    Also briefing remotely, the Geneva Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Geneva (OCHA) Director, Ramesh Rajasingham, said, “16.5 million Syrians need protection and humanitarian assistance. Over half of the population is food insecure. Nearly 3 million people face severe food insecurity.”

    Rajasingham noted that “more than 670,000 men, women and children have been displaced since November last year. This includes some 15,000 people displaced between 30 April and 6 May from Rural Damascus due to the violence in Druze-majority areas.”

    At the same time, he said, “since December, over 1 million internally displaced people have returned to their areas of origin, including some 330,000 people from camps in north-west Syria.”

    Highlighting the alarming funding situation, he warned that as of today, only 10 percent has been funded of the $2 billion needed to reach 8 million people from January through June of this year.

    United States representative John Kelley told the Council that President Trump pledged sanctions relief, will give Syrians, “a chance at greatness,” adding that Trump “wants to see Syria and the entire region thrive.”

    Kelley said, “that’s why he’s made a bold decision on Syria with the hope the new government will take this opportunity to rebuild and take the country from being a source of instability to a source of stability.”

    For his part, Syria’s representative Riyad Khaddour said, “today, we are witnessing the international community’s eagerness to embrace this pivotal moment re-opening its doors to Syria and engaging actively with it. This clearly culminated with the visit of the President of the United States to the region in which included key milestones and constructive decisions, most notably, President Trump’s courageous decision announced from Riyadh – a location of great symbolic significance – to lift sanctions on Syria.”

    Khaddour said, “the new Syria is in sincere pursuit of becoming a state of peace and partnership, not a battleground for conflicts or a platform for foreign ambitions. The new Syria welcomes constructive cooperation initiatives based on mutual interests and mutual respect.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JJTPqnrGoE

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI USA: DHS Reacts to Activist Judge Ruling to Halt the Deportation of Barbaric Criminal Illegal Aliens Including Murderers, Rapists, and Pedophiles

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: DHS Reacts to Activist Judge Ruling to Halt the Deportation of Barbaric Criminal Illegal Aliens Including Murderers, Rapists, and Pedophiles

    WASHINGTON – DHS conducted a deportation flight to remove some of the most barbaric, violent individuals illegally in the United States

    All of these individuals had final orders of removal

      Now a federal judge in Massachusetts is halting their deportation and trying to force President Trump to bring these criminals back to American soil

    “This ruling is deranged

    These depraved individuals have all had their day in court and been given final deportation orders

     A reminder of who was on this plane: murderers, child rapists, an individual who raped a mentally & physically disabled person,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin

    “The message this activist judge is sending to victims and their families is we don’t care

    President Trump and Secretary Noem are working every day to get vicious criminals out of our country while activist judges are fighting to bring them back onto American soil

    ” 

    Below are the individuals ICE removed from American communities:  
    Enrique ARIAS-Hierro, a Cuban national, was arrested by ICE Miami on May 2, 2025

    His criminal history includes convictions for homicide, armed robbery, false impersonation of official, kidnapping, robbery strong arm

    He was issued a final order of removal on September 13, 1999

    Image

    On April 30, 2025, ICE Miami arrested Cuban national, Jose Manuel RODRIGUEZ-QUINONES

    He has been convicted of attempted first degree murder with a weapon, battery and larceny, cocaine possession and trafficking

    He was issued a final order of removal on December 4, 2012

    Image

    Thongxay NILAKOUT, a citizen of Laos, was arrested by ICE Los Angeles on January 26, 2025

    NILAKOUT is Convicted of first-degree murder and robbery; sentenced to life confinement

    He was issued a final order of removal on July 12, 2023

    Image

    On May 12, 2025, ICE Miami arrested Mexican national, Jesus MUNOZ-Gutierrez

    He is Convicted of second-degree murder; sentenced to life confinement

    He was issued a final order of removed on June 16, 2005

    Image

    Dian Peter DOMACH, a citizen of South Sudan, was arrested by ICE St

    Paul on May 8, 2024

    DOMACH is convicted of robbery and possession of a firearm, of possession of burglar’s tools and possession of defaced firearm and driving under the influence

    He was issued a final order of removal on July 19, 2011

    Image

    Kyaw MYA, a citizen of Burma was arrested by ICE St

    Paul on February 18, 2025

    MYA is convicted of Lascivious Acts with a Child-Victim less than 12 years of age; sentenced to 10 years confinement, paroled after 4 years

    He was issued a final order of removal on March 17, 2022

    Image

    Nyo MYINT, a citizen of Burma was arrested by ICE St

    Paul on February 18, 2025

    MYINT is convicted of first-degree sexual assault involving a victim mentally and physically incapable of resisting; sentenced to 12 years confinement

    MYINT is also charged with aggravated assault-nonfamily strongarm

    He was issued a final order of removal on August 17, 2023

    Image

    On May 3, 2025, ICE Seattle arrested Tuan Thanh PHAN, a Vietnamese national

    PHAN is Convicted of first-degree murder and second-degree assault; sentenced to 22 years confinement

    He was issued a final order of removal on June 17, 2009

    Image

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: 2 Israeli embassy staff killed in shooting in Washington D.C.

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

    Two staff members from the Israeli Embassy in the United States were killed in a shooting Wednesday evening near the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., according to U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem.

    “We are actively investigating and working to get more information to share,” Noem said in a post on social platform X.

    The shooting occurred near the Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum, known as the Capital Jewish Museum, according to media reports.

    Police identified the suspect as 30-year-old Elias Rodriguez from Chicago, Illinois. During an online press briefing, D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith said that the suspect shouted “Free Palestine” as he was taken into custody.

    Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yeshiel (Michael) Leite said at a press conference that the victims were a couple who had been preparing to get engaged. Embassy spokesperson Tal Naim Cohen confirmed that the two were shot at close range while attending a museum event.

    Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, said in a statement that his organization was hosting an event at the museum that evening.

    Cohen said Israeli officials had “full faith in law enforcement authorities on both the local and federal levels to apprehend the shooter and protect Israel’s representatives and Jewish communities throughout the United States.”

    “Harming the Jewish community is crossing a red line,” Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, said in a post on X. “We are confident that the U.S. authorities will take strong action against those responsible for this criminal act.”

    In response, U.S. President Donald Trump called for an end to the “horrible D.C. killings, based obviously on antisemitism” in a post on social platform Truth Social. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Scott Introduces Legislation to Expand School Choice

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for South Carolina Tim Scott
    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) introduced the High-Quality Charter Schools Act to expand school choice by implementing a tax credit for qualified charitable contributions to nonprofit charter school organizations.
    In communities across the country, the demand for high-quality charter schools far exceeds the supply, due to the initial start-up cost of opening a new charter school, which can cost anywhere from $2 to $20 million. This legislation would establish a 75% federal tax credit for charitable contributions to nonprofit charter school organizations with a proven track record of excellence to fund the expansion of high-quality charter schools. 
    “No matter their background, race or zip-code, every child deserves access to a good school. Millions of families—including thousands across South Carolina—choose charter schools for the high-quality education they provide. Building a stronger America starts in our classrooms, and the High-Quality Charter Schools Act invests in a future where every student has the keys to unlock the American Dream,” said Senator Scott. “President Trump is delivering on his commitment to putting families first—this is promises made, promises kept. Together with the Educational Choice for Children Act, this legislation brings parents, educators, and communities together in the fight to ensure every child has a fair shot at success.”
    “Millions of parents whose children have been trapped in failing schools have reason for hope today, thanks to Senator Tim Scott,” said Eva Moskowitz, CEO and President, National Strategy and Advancement and the Founder of Success Academy, the country’s highest performing charter school network. “With the High-Quality Charter Schools Act and the Educational Choice for Children Act, Congress has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put families first and deliver on the President’s promise of universal school choice. It’s hard to imagine a more meaningful policy than one that places parents, not bureaucrats, in charge; empowers American taxpayers, and unlocks private philanthropy to provide high quality schools for every kid that needs it.”
    “We are grateful to Senator Scott and Congresswoman Tenney for championing school choice and recognizing the value of high-quality public charter schools,” said Starlee Coleman, President and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. “By creating a tax credit to support the growth and expansion of charter schools with a proven track record of success, this legislation helps meet the overwhelming demand from families and ensures more students have access to great schools that meet their unique needs.”
    BACKGROUND
    As the co-chair of the Congressional School Choice Caucus and member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Senator Scott is a leading advocate in transforming the nation’s education system and ensuring every student has access to a quality education.
    Throughout his time in public service, Senator Scott has worked to broaden quality educational opportunities for all. Senator Scott led colleagues in introducing the Educational Choice for Children Act (ECCA) to expand education freedom and opportunity for students.
    Senator Scott recognizes the positive strides charter schools have made to shape education in South Carolina and around the nation, and help the next generation achieve their American Dream. To that end, Senator Scott introduced a resolution recognizing charter schools’ contributions to the academic landscape during National Charter Schools Week.
    The full text of the High-Quality Charter Schools Act can be found here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Interview with Michelle Grattan, Politics podcast, The Conversation

    Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

    Michelle Grattan:

    The Reserve Bank has given homebuyers a small bit of good news this week – a modest quarter of a percentage point cut in interest rates. Welcoming the rate cut, Treasurer Jim Chalmers sees the fight against inflation as at last being won, or at least largely so. In this term he wants to turn to finding ways to promote productivity in Australia, where we’ve been losing that battle.

    Meanwhile, most immediately, the Treasurer is fighting critics who are campaigning against his tax hit on those with more than $3 million in their superannuation accounts. The government plans to increase the tax on these accounts but, most controversially, to tax their unrealised capital gains.

    Jim Chalmers joins us today to talk about these issues.

    Jim Chalmers, we saw the Reserve Bank this week lower rates again. But the bank’s Monetary Policy Statement used the word ‘uncertain’ about the aspects of the future multiple times – many, many times. How are you planning for an uncertain economic environment to come?

    Jim Chalmers:

    First of all, Michelle, very good news that interest rates were cut for the second time in 3 months. That does reflect the progress that we’re making together on inflation.

    But it does also recognise this very uncertain global economic environment. The language that the Reserve Bank Governor used yesterday and that the Board used in their statement is not dissimilar to some of the things that I’ve been saying for some time now. The escalating trade tensions, the weakness in the Chinese economy, conflict in the Middle East and Eastern Europe – all of these things are casting a dark shadow over the global economy, and that has implications for us as well.

    But I think overwhelmingly this rate cut was about both kinds of inflation being within the target band. The Reserve Bank said that they were increasingly confident they were getting on top of things, that the upside risks to inflation were subsiding. And so that’s a very good thing. But also it recognises the international environment, as does the government.

    Grattan:

    Much of the uncertainty is coming from the Trump administration’s unpredictable tariff policy. The RBA has modelled 2 scenarios for tariffs, what it calls ‘trade peace’ and ‘trade war’, and Governor Bullock hasn’t ruled out a recession. What’s your reading of this?

    Chalmers:

    I think, first of all, the Reserve Bank is doing diligent work, looking at a range of scenarios from best case to worst case and central case, just like the Treasury does. We think through the various ways that this can play out.

    And I think it’s helpful to remember if you look at the Reserve Bank’s forecasts and the Treasury’s forecasts, neither the bank nor the Treasury is expecting our economy to shrink. In fact, in both instances the forecasts say that the economy will grow more strongly next year compared to the financial year that we’re about to finish.

    And so the bank and the Treasury expect our economy to continue to grow. Of course people think through the various scenarios. The international environment is casting a dark shadow over the global economy and our own economy. And that’s why it’s so important that the Australian economy has got the characteristics that you would want going into this volatility and unpredictability – the lower inflation, the higher wages, the low unemployment, the budget is in better nick than most countries around the world, we’re starting to see interest rates come down, the market’s expecting further interest rate cuts.

    And so we’re well placed and well prepared, but it is good, diligent work by the Reserve Bank, by the Treasury and others to think through what the best and worst‑case scenarios might be. But our central case, our expectation and our forecasts all reflect some degree of confidence that our economy will continue to grow, not shrink as other countries have.

    Grattan:

    Parliament doesn’t meet until July, but obviously you’ll be thinking ahead. What are your priorities when it sits again?

    Chalmers:

    I think the Prime Minister has made it really clear that one of the things we’re really excited about legislating is the cut to student debt. That will take some of the burden off graduates but it will also provide some cost‑of‑living help to students or graduates repaying a student debt. So that’s going to be a big priority.

    In my own portfolio, obviously we’ve got the changes to the super arrangements, we’ve got the standard deduction we announced during the campaign, we’ve got some payments reforms that we need to legislate. So it will be a really busy agenda, but I share the Prime Minister’s view that one of the big priorities when the parliament returns will be cutting student debt for millions of people.

    Grattan:

    On superannuation, you’ve had legislation which you haven’t got through to increase the tax on superannuation balances over $3 million. At the moment that’s 15 per cent, you want to take it to 30 per cent but also, and most controversially, you want to tax unrealised capital gains – that is gains that people haven’t actually cashed out. How is that fair?

    Chalmers:

    This is a modest change that we announced almost 2 and a half years ago now. We announced it at the beginning of 2023. We’re now in the middle of 2025. And what this change is about, it’s about making concessional treatment for people with very large superannuation balances still concessional but a little bit less so. And that will help us fund our priorities, whether it’s Medicare, the tax cuts and other priorities in budget repair. So it’s a modest change.

    In terms of the calculation of unrealised gains, that’s actually not unique in the system. There are other ways in the super system and more broadly that unrealised gains are calculated. Now, we did, I think, 3 rounds of substantial consultation on these changes in the last 2 and a bit years.

    And what we learnt throughout that consultation process is that nobody could propose to us a better way of making this calculation. Some of the alternatives would impose costs on everyone in the fund rather than just people over $3 million. And there are other options as part of that consultation as well.

    And so Treasury advises us that this is the best, simplest way to go about it. I know that people have views about it. I know that there’s a campaign in a couple of our newspapers about it. But this is all about making sure that it’s still concessional treatment, it only impacts about 0.5 per cent of people in the super system with very large superannuation balances. It makes the system a bit fairer, and it’s important in terms of the sustainability of the budget.

    Grattan:

    Just on the practicalities, if you or I have more than $3 million in our superannuation fund, how do you actually calculate this unrealised capital gains, given that the fund could include a farm, it could include a small business?

    Chalmers:

    It’s the value at the start versus the value at the end –

    Grattan:

    Of the financial year?

    Chalmers:

    Yeah, allowing for withdrawals and contributions. And, again, this calculation is made elsewhere in the superannuation system, the way that a number of the funds have to report makes this calculation. So the calculation is not new. And if you make a loss you can carry the loss forward. There’s a whole bunch of appropriate arrangements made in the calculation.

    Grattan:

    It sounds very complicated. You’d need a good accountant.

    Chalmers:

    Typically people with more than $3 million in superannuation have got access to pretty useful advice, that’s the first point. But, secondly, we did consult on this for some years, and this is the way that we propose to go forward.

    Grattan:

    One of the critics, one of the strongest critics, has been Paul Keating. Now, he would consider himself father of the superannuation scheme, right? He says that the non‑indexation of the $3 million just introduces bracket creep.

    Chalmers:

    First of all, I mean I think you know – you and I have spoken on a number of occasions over the years – you know the regard that I have for Paul, and I do talk to him from time to time, including about this issue. And I respect him too much to kind of relay or convey those private conversations –

    Grattan:

    – it would have been a lively discussion, I’d imagine.

    Chalmers:

    I think there’s a range of views, and Paul’s views, I think, are relatively well known on this. When it comes to indexation, I understand the argument. There are so many instances in the tax system where thresholds aren’t indexed, and from time to time governments take decisions to raise those thresholds. I’m anticipating that that’s what would happen here. Some of these calculations about what people’s liability would be in 40 years assume that the $3 million threshold never changes.

    Grattan:

    So why not do it at the start?

    Chalmers:

    I think we’re making it consistent with other areas of the tax system where the threshold is not indexed. I fully anticipate that governments of either, if not both political persuasions at some point in the future will change the threshold. And that’s why a lot of the calculations that you see reported in the media are based on a pretty unrealistic assumption about what the next 30 or 40 years will look like.

    Grattan:

    Now, you’ve got a problem of getting this through the parliament, which, with the new Senate, means getting it through the Greens. What are the chances of that happening, do you think?

    Chalmers:

    I’m not sure yet. We haven’t had that discussion with the crossbench. I think the final makeup of the Senate is not yet clear, and the parliament is not coming back in the next couple of weeks and so we’ve got time to have those discussions. No doubt the new Leader of the Greens, Larissa Waters, no doubt will appoint a Treasury spokesperson and we’ll engage with them in the usual respectful way to –

    Grattan:

    – what’s the main sticking point there, do you anticipate?

    Chalmers:

    Last time they wanted a lower threshold, last time it was in the parliament.

    Grattan:

    And you’re not up for that?

    Chalmers:

    Not something that we’ve been considering. And they’ve talked about indexation as well, the question you asked me about a moment ago. But, again, we’ll see who we engage with. We’ve got a bit of time. They’ll have a view. They know our policy. But those conversations haven’t begun.

    Grattan:

    Let’s turn to productivity. You’ve said that this will be a key focus during this term. But you’ve also noted that you need more than 2 terms to really get major progress here. Why does it take so long?

    Chalmers:

    The point that I’ve made about productivity is that this is a challenge that hasn’t just been hanging around the last couple of years, it’s been hanging around the last couple of decades.

    And if there was a quick fix for productivity, if there was some kind of switch that we could flick, somebody would have flicked it already. So it’s one of those economic objectives where there’s not the same kind of instant policy gratification that you might see in other indicators in our economy.

    I’ve tried to be upfront with people and say productivity was a big focus in the first term. Some of the changes that we made around strengthening and streamlining foreign investment and competition and the payments system, the changes we make in human capital, the announcements we’ve made about abolishing non‑compete clauses and a national regime for occupational licensing – those are all substantial reforms and they’re all about productivity.

    But what we’ve said is in the first term we focused primarily on inflation without forgetting productivity. In the second term we will focus much more heavily on productivity but being upfront with people that you don’t expect quarter‑to‑quarter, instant changes in the level of productivity in our economy from some of these medium‑term policies that we’re putting in place.

    So I’m working closely with the Productivity Commission on the next steps in our productivity agenda. We think productivity and the future of our economy will come from the energy transformation, from human capital and giving people the skills to adapt and adopt technology, the artificial intelligence revolution. It will come from making sure we get value for money in the care economy. And it will come from making our economy more competitive and dynamic.

    So on each of those fronts we’ve already done a heap of work. We’re looking for more reforms in those areas, working with the Productivity Commission to do that, but being upfront with people about how quickly we can turn around this problem that has been really one of the defining features of our economy now for decades.

    Grattan:

    There was, of course, in 2023 a Productivity Commission report which ran to some 9 volumes, I think, and had 70‑odd recommendations. And yet a lot of that hasn’t been done.

    Chalmers:

    There were 29 different reform directions in that report and we think that we are progressing in some form more than two‑thirds of them. And I know that’s not general accepted wisdom about that report, but more than two‑thirds of the 29 directives we are progressing in one form or another.

    The other thing is, of the 71 specific recommendations, we think about half of those – around 36 of those – involve state and territory governments either partly or fully. And so a bit of perspective on all of that.

    Specifically, we picked up and ran with some of their ideas on vocational education and training, cybersecurity, government data, skilled migration. So more of that report is being acted on than I think is broadly accepted. But if the point, the kernel of the question is, should we try to do more on productivity, I’ve already flagged that that will be a big priority.

    Grattan:

    The Productivity Commission has called for ideas from the public to improve productivity. And it’s now identified what it calls 15 priority reforms for further exploration. And one is to support business investment through corporate tax reform. Are you willing to even contemplate this? You’ve been quite shy about tax reform that’s robust.

    Chalmers:

    First of all, again, we actually progressed a whole bunch of tax reform in the first term – income tax reform, production tax credits, tax breaks for small business, tax breaks for build‑to‑rent –

    Grattan:

    Maybe it was the easy stuff.

    Chalmers:

    We changed the PRRT arrangements. That didn’t feel easy at the time.

    Grattan:

    Modestly.

    Chalmers:

    Multi‑national tax reform is no small thing. And so, again, a bit of perspective. We did half a dozen meaningful tax changes in the first term.

    When it comes to the consultation that the PC is doing, and I think it’s terrific that they’re doing that consultation, and that consultation reflects some of the asks that are put to us from time to time from the business community in particular, and I welcome that, too. Let’s have a proper, national conversation about that.

    When it comes to company taxes, I’m the only person in this, or Katy Gallagher and I are the only people in this that have to make it all add up. And so sometimes our constraints are fiscal.

    We’ve got to work out what we can afford to do in a world where we’ve got to fund these priorities – strengthening Medicare, investing in the care economy, some of the big pressures on our budget, defence. We’ve got to fund all of that. And so some of these proposals on tax reform which are costly to the budget need to be seen in that light as well.

    Grattan:

    Yes, but that doesn’t really go to the fundamental question, and that is whether you think it would be a good idea to have this on the agenda.

    Chalmers:

    I don’t have an ideological view about company taxes. I have an economic view. One of the things that’s good that Danielle Wood and the PC are consulting on is we’ve got this challenge in productivity and the thing that the economists call capital deepening – whether or not we have a deep and robust enough capital base.

    And so they’re consulting on whether tax has a role to play in that. I don’t have an ideological view about that. I’ve got a fiscal view about that, and I’ve got a view about where the productivity is going to come from in a modern economy like ours. I think it’s important that we don’t over focus on some of the areas that have been perennial parts to this conversation – scorched earth industrial relations, the headline company tax rate.

    These are parts of the productivity discussion, but they’re not the whole thing. Energy, human capital, competition and dynamism, care economy, AI and technology. I’m trying to have a broader conversation about how we get more productivity in our economy because in some of those areas, that have not been central enough to the national conversation about productivity, I think that’s where we might find that we can make the most progress.

    Grattan:

    But isn’t company tax important when we’re trying to compete internationally for investment?

    Chalmers:

    Again, it does get raised with me from time to time by investors, but it’s not the whole story, and often it’s not the main story. When international investors are weighing up whether to invest in Australia, they care about the stability of our laws, they care about our skills base, our human capital. They care about access to cleaner and cheaper energy. They care about how long it takes to get approvals.

    There are real areas here where there’s a productivity dividend if we get it right, where we become more attractive as an investment destination if we get it right. And that conversation, which I have relatively frequently with global investors and domestic investors, is not a conversation wholly and solely about company tax.

    Grattan:

    Just finally, Jim Chalmers, you like to indulge in some blue sky thinking from time to time, a bit of essay writing. You might have a little time over the winter break. What’s on your horizon in that regard?

    Chalmers:

    I’ve already had a discussion today with Katy Gallagher setting out what the rest of the year looks like and how that relates to some of these priorities that you’ve been kind enough to talk with me today about. I’m trying to do a bit more reading this term than what I did last term.

    Grattan:

    What are you reading?

    Chalmers:

    I just finished that Ezra Klein book called Abundance, which goes right to the core of some of these things you’re talking about. How do we think in a progressive way about making our economy more efficient and more productive. That Ezra Klein book called Abundance is a ripper. I am grateful to Andrew Leigh for suggesting it to me, and I’ve gotten through it now. So that kind of reading. I confess I’ve started the book about Joe Biden, the Jake Tapper book, as well.

    Grattan:

    About his health?

    Chalmers:

    About his health, yeah. And, like everyone, I send my best wishes to the Bidens after that news that we got earlier in the week about his health. So try to do a bit more reading.

    But I’m really excited about a new term, a new opportunity working closely with Katy to make sure we finish the fight on inflation, we make our economy more productive, we think more expansively about the big opportunities from AI and energy and some of these things that we’ve been talking about today. And I have been finding inspiration in trying to do a bit more reading this term so far than what I managed last term.

    Grattan:

    Jim Chalmers, thank you very much for joining The Conversation’s Politics podcast.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Peace talks between Russia and Ukraine may take place next week in the Vatican – Finnish President

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    HELSINKI, May 22 (Xinhua) — Technical-level talks involving Russia and Ukraine could take place in the Vatican as early as next week, Finnish President Alexander Stubb said in an interview with Yle TV on Wednesday.

    According to him, the talks will most likely involve representatives from the United States and European countries. The potential meeting is a positive step toward broader international participation in efforts to end the conflict in Ukraine, A. Stubb noted.

    “It is very likely that next week, for example, in the Vatican, a technical meeting will take place with the participation of Ukrainians, Russians, Americans and Europeans,” the president said.

    The Finnish leader emphasized the growing role of European countries in the peace process. “We are entering a phase where Europe will also be involved – and this is what we hoped for from the beginning,” he said.

    On Monday, US President Donald Trump held telephone talks with several European leaders, including A. Stubb. The head of the White House shared details of an earlier conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin and discussed with his interlocutors the ongoing negotiations, a potential ceasefire and steps to establish lasting peace in Ukraine. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: D. Trump Accuses South Africa of “White Genocide” at Meeting with S. Ramaphosa

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    SACRAMENTO, USA, May 22 (Xinhua) — US President Donald Trump on Wednesday got into a dispute with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa over conspiracy theories about “white genocide” in South Africa, which the South African leader strongly denied.

    During a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House, D. Trump accused South Africa of “white genocide” and an unfair land grab, and then showed materials allegedly proving his accusations.

    Ramaphosa, who was in Washington to improve trade terms and ease bilateral tensions, rejected Trump’s statement during the meeting. He rejected the claim that white South Africans are fleeing the country because of racist policies. According to the president, South Africa has a crime problem and most of the victims are black citizens.

    News outlets were shocked by Trump’s rudeness, saying that much of the information he presented during the meeting as evidence of “white genocide” in South Africa had been “repeatedly debunked.”

    “Almost all of the conspiracy theories presented at Trump’s meeting with South African President S. Ramaphosa today have been debunked, with some South Africans saying they believe the information is “propaganda from AfriForum,” an Afrikaner lobby group criticized for its white nationalist leanings,” CNN reported.

    The row between the US and South African presidents comes at a time of tense relations between the two countries, which worsened after Ramaphosa signed an expropriation law in January that Trump criticised for “discriminating” against the country’s white population. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • Trump confronts South Africa’s Ramaphosa with false claims of white genocide

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    U.S. President Donald Trump confronted South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on Wednesday with explosive false claims of white genocide and land seizures during a tense White House meeting that was reminiscent of his February ambush of Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

    South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world, but the overwhelming majority of victims are Black.

    Ramaphosa had hoped to use Wednesday’s meeting to reset his country’s relationship with the U.S., after Trump canceled much-needed aid to South Africa, offered refuge to white minority Afrikaners, expelled the country’s ambassador and criticized its genocide court case against Israel.

    The South African president arrived prepared for an aggressive reception, bringing popular white South African golfers as part of his delegation and saying he wanted to discuss trade. The U.S. is South Africa’s second-biggest trading partner, and the country is facing a 30% tariff under Trump’s currently suspended raft of import taxes.

    But in a carefully choreographed Oval Office onslaught, Trump pounced, moving quickly to a list of concerns about the treatment of white South Africans, which he punctuated by playing a video and leafing through a stack of printed news articles that he said proved his allegations.

    With the lights turned down at Trump’s request, the video – played on a television that is not normally set up in the Oval Office – showed white crosses, which Trump asserted were the graves of white people, and opposition leaders making incendiary speeches. Trump suggested one of them, Julius Malema, should be arrested.

    The video was made in September 2020 during a protest after two people were killed on their farm a week earlier. The crosses did not mark actual graves. An organizer of the protest told South Africa’s public broadcaster at the time that they represented farmers who had been killed over the years.

    “We have many people that feel they’re being persecuted, and they’re coming to the United States,” Trump said. “So we take from many … locations, if we feel there’s persecution or genocide going on,” he added, referring specifically to white farmers.

    “People are fleeing South Africa for their own safety. Their land is being confiscated, and in many cases, they’re being killed,” the president added, echoing a once-fringe conspiracy theory that has circulated in global far-right chat rooms for at least a decade with the vocal support of Trump’s ally, South African-born Elon Musk, who was in the Oval Office during the meeting.

    South Africa, which endured centuries of draconian discrimination against Black people during colonialism and apartheid before becoming a multi-party democracy in 1994 under Nelson Mandela, rejects Trump’s allegations.

    A new land reform law, aimed at redressing the injustices of apartheid, allows for expropriations without compensation when in the public interest, for example if land is lying fallow. No such expropriation has taken place, and any order can be challenged in court.

    South African police recorded 26,232 murders nationwide in 2024, with 44 linked to farming communities. Eight of those victims were farmers.

    Ramaphosa, sitting in a chair next to Trump and remaining poised, pushed back against his claims.

    “If there was Afrikaner farmer genocide, I can bet you, these three gentlemen would not be here,” Ramaphosa said, referring to golfers Ernie Els and Retief Goosen and billionaire Johann Rupert, all white, who were present in the room.

    That did not satisfy Trump.

    “We have thousands of stories talking about it, and we have documentaries, we have news stories,” Trump said. “It has to be responded to.”

    ‘THERE IS JUST NO GENOCIDE’

    Ramaphosa mostly sat expressionless during the video presentation, occasionally craning his neck to look at the screen. He said he had not seen the material before and that he would like to find out the location.

    Trump then displayed printed copies of articles that he said showed white South Africans who had been killed, saying “death, death” as he flipped through them, eventually handing them to his counterpart.

    Ramaphosa said there was crime in South Africa, and the majority of victims were Black. Trump cut him off and said: “The farmers are not Black.”

    Ramaphosa responded: “These are concerns we are willing to talk to you about.”

    The South African president cited Mandela’s example as a peacemaker, but that did not move the U.S. president, whose political base includes white nationalists. The myth of white genocide in South Africa has become a rallying point for the far right in the United States and elsewhere.

    “I will say: apartheid, terrible,” Trump noted. “This is sort of the opposite of apartheid.”

    The extraordinary exchange, three months after Trump and Vice President JD Vance upbraided Ukraine’s Zelenskiy inside the same Oval Office, could prompt foreign leaders to think twice about accepting Trump’s invitations and risk public embarrassment.

    Unlike Zelenskiy, who sparred with Trump and ended up leaving early, the South African leader kept his calm, praising Trump’s decor – the president has outfitted the Oval Office with gold accessories – and saying he looked forward to handing over the presidency of the Group of 20 next year.

    Trump declined to say whether he would attend the G20 meeting in South Africa in November.

    Later in the meeting, Rupert, the business tycoon, stepped in to back up Ramaphosa, saying that crime was a problem across the board and many Black people were dying too.

    Following the meeting, Ramaphosa sought to focus on trade, telling reporters the two countries had agreed to discuss critical minerals in South Africa. His trade minister said the government had submitted a trade and investment proposal that included buying liquefied natural gas from the U.S.

    But the president also flatly denied Trump’s allegations about a wave of racial violence against white farmers.

    “There is just no genocide in South Africa,” he said.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI—Hagerty Joins Balance of Power on BloombergTV to Discuss Budget Reconciliation, GENIUS Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty

    WASHINGTON—Today, United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, joined Balance of Power on BloombergTV to discuss the budget reconciliation package, along with the GENIUS Act.

    *Click the photo above or here to watch*

    Partial Transcript

    Hagerty on the budget reconciliation package: “I’m from a no-tax state in Tennessee. There are real concerns about [State and Local Tax], but I realize that President [Donald] Trump broadened the tent to bring people together. So, I think we’re going to be negotiating on that and a number of other points. But one thing I’m going to be very clear about doing is not to try to get ahead of the people that are responsible for the negotiations here in the Senate. We met yesterday with Speaker [Mike] Johnson. He was very clear that he wants to work with us. I think we’ll have a good positive working relationship and try to find a way to make certain that we’re doing the absolute best we can for the American people, given the constraints that we have right now, and given the implementation challenges that the Executive Branch faces. But let’s say this: we’re all moving in the same direction. And importantly, I think we’re taking the message that we’ve got to move quickly. We need this done for the sake of the markets. We need this done for the sake of certainty. We need to see more capital investment commitments take place. That will beget more jobs, more economic activity, but it needs to happen soon. So, that sense of urgency is very real up here.”

    Hagerty on the urgency to pass the budget reconciliation package: “There are a number of elements at play. One of them has to do with this tax package and extending that, again, that’ll create a much more certain environment for commitments, capital commitments that will, again, beget more economic activity. That’s going to be positive. There’s also a focus on cutting spending. We’ve got to do that. But there’s another aspect of this that gets far too little play. And it’s not just cutting spending, it’s cutting the massive overhead that we have here that comes from regulation. And if you think about what happened in the prior four years into the Biden administration, the estimates are that the incremental cost of the Biden regulations amounts to $1.4 trillion a year of extra compliance cost on American businesses. We’re working very hard to trim those back to streamline regulations. And that impact is going to be very real as well. It’ll come to the bottom line. It will be reinvested in the economy. It will yield greater after-tax returns. All of this is going to be very positive. We just need to see it happen. And I think speed and timing are of the essence here.”

    Hagerty on opposition to the GENIUS Act: “[Senator Elizabeth Warren is] absolutely wrong. And what she’s doing is using a political argument to stir up controversy because she’s been focused on the Central Bank Digital Currency by its nature. This is decentralized. She’s been opposed to this from the beginning. She fought this in the Banking Committee, and after close to four hours of debate in the Banking Committee, she was able to hold four Democrats on her side. But five came over with me and voted for us to put this out of the committee. I see a lot of Democrats that see the benefit of this. And if you think about where we are today, the United States is relying on a payment system that was designed in the seventies and eighties. This is an opportunity to modernize our payment system, take us into the 21st century. We trade securities on an instantaneous basis. This would allow us to move currencies and payments at the same rate. It would be based on the U.S. dollar that will extend dollar dominance around the world. It will actually stimulate demand for U.S. treasuries, which given where we are right now, would be a very positive thing in the marketplace. It’s going to protect consumers. These ethics concerns that Senator Warren is raising are dealt with in the Constitution. I think this is just a red herring. It’s a distraction; she needs to focus on the core of this. And the fact is, I think she just doesn’t like the decentralized nature of it, which is exactly why it’s so powerful, and that’s why so many in the American public want to see this happen and bring the United States payment system into the 21st century.”

    Hagerty on potential amendments to the GENIUS Act: “This is a major piece of legislation that’s moving onto the floor. We have a large number of amendments to sort through, and my goal is to make certain that the stablecoin legislation passes and that we avoid a situation where it gets cluttered up or bogged down with a number of amendments that could be unrelated to this. So, we’re going through the process right now to evaluate all of this. Again, we probably have well over a hundred amendments to evaluate, but we will narrow this down and get through it. And I’m appreciative of the fact that Leader [John] Thune is navigating an open process here that’s going to bring us, I hope, to a very successful resolution. But we have had months to work on this bill. We’ve incorporated input from both sides of the aisle and a lot of input from the industry and from the Executive Branch. I feel very good about where we are. We’ve got a great work product right now, and I think we’re very close to seeing it come to final closure.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker Statement on Trump’s Efforts to Undermine Police Accountability

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement after the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division announced it is dismissing Biden-era police investigations and proposed consent decrees in Louisville, Minneapolis, and the closing of investigations and retraction of findings in Phoenix, Trenton, Memphis, Mount Vernon, Oklahoma City, and Louisiana: 
    “Today, Donald Trump’s Justice Department dismissed the civil rights cases against the Minneapolis, Louisville, and six other police departments without explanation or justification. In these cases, impartial investigators and people who work within these departments systematically reviewed evidence and documents and concluded that these law enforcement agencies had a pattern and practice of violating the constitutional and civil rights of the very people they swore to protect and serve.
    “Today’s decision to dismiss these charges without justification or evidence that changes have been implemented should be deeply concerning to all of us who prioritize public safety. Public safety is incumbent upon trust between police and the people they protect, and rolling back accountability mechanisms not only undermines this trust but also makes our communities less safe.
    “All of us who prioritize public safety must remain committed to measures that increase transparency, accountability, and professional excellence in our law enforcement agencies.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: DHS Reacts to Activist Judge Ruling to Halt the Deportation of Barbaric Criminal Illegal Aliens Including Murderers, Rapists, and Pedophiles

    Source: US Department of Homeland Security

    All eight of these heinous convicted criminals have final orders of removal 

    WASHINGTON – DHS conducted a deportation flight to remove some of the most barbaric, violent individuals illegally in the United States. All of these individuals had final orders of removal.  Now a federal judge in Massachusetts is halting their deportation and trying to force President Trump to bring these criminals back to American soil.  

    “This ruling is deranged. These depraved individuals have all had their day in court and been given final deportation orders. A reminder of who was on this plane: murderers, child rapists, an individual who raped a mentally & physically disabled person,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “The message this activist judge is sending to victims and their families is we don’t care. President Trump and Secretary Noem are working every day to get vicious criminals out of our country while activist judges are fighting to bring them back onto American soil.” 

    Below are the individuals ICE removed from American communities:  

    Enrique ARIAS-Hierro, a Cuban national, was arrested by ICE Miami on May 2, 2025. His criminal history includes convictions for homicide, armed robbery, false impersonation of official, kidnapping, robbery strong arm. He was issued a final order of removal on September 13, 1999.  

    On April 30, 2025, ICE Miami arrested Cuban national, Jose Manuel RODRIGUEZ-QUINONES. He has been convicted of attempted first degree murder with a weapon, battery and larceny, cocaine possession and trafficking. He was issued a final order of removal on December 4, 2012.  

    Thongxay NILAKOUT, a citizen of Laos, was arrested by ICE Los Angeles on January 26, 2025. NILAKOUT is Convicted of first-degree murder and robbery; sentenced to life confinement. He was issued a final order of removal on July 12, 2023.  

    On May 12, 2025, ICE Miami arrested Mexican national, Jesus MUNOZ-Gutierrez. He is Convicted of second-degree murder; sentenced to life confinement. He was issued a final order of removed on June 16, 2005.  

    Dian Peter DOMACH, a citizen of South Sudan, was arrested by ICE St. Paul on May 8, 2024. DOMACH is convicted of robbery and possession of a firearm, of possession of burglar’s tools and possession of defaced firearm and driving under the influence. He was issued a final order of removal on July 19, 2011.  

    Kyaw MYA, a citizen of Burma was arrested by ICE St. Paul on February 18, 2025. MYA is convicted of Lascivious Acts with a Child-Victim less than 12 years of age; sentenced to 10 years confinement, paroled after 4 years. He was issued a final order of removal on March 17, 2022.   

    Nyo MYINT, a citizen of Burma was arrested by ICE St. Paul on February 18, 2025. MYINT is convicted of first-degree sexual assault involving a victim mentally and physically incapable of resisting; sentenced to 12 years confinement. MYINT is also charged with aggravated assault-nonfamily strongarm. He was issued a final order of removal on August 17, 2023.   

    On May 3, 2025, ICE Seattle arrested Tuan Thanh PHAN, a Vietnamese national. PHAN is Convicted of first-degree murder and second-degree assault; sentenced to 22 years confinement. He was issued a final order of removal on June 17, 2009.  

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 05.21.2025 ICYMI: Sen. Cruz’s No Tax on Tips Passes Senate Unanimously — Coverage Roundup

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz
    Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, the No Tax on Tips Act passed the Senate by a vote of 100-0. The bill had been introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and co-led by Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.). It now heads to the U.S. House of Representatives for a vote.
    The No Tax on Tips Act exempts “cash tips”—cash, credit and debit card charges, and checks—from federal income tax by allowing taxpayers to claim a 100% deduction at filing for tipped wages.
    Here is what they are saying about the No Tax on Tips Act:
    FOX BUSINESS: Trump and Cruz’s ‘No Tax on Tips’ plan passes Senate with unexpected help from Dem
    “Sen. Ted Cruz’s “No Tax on Tips” plan, a concurrent campaign promise of President Donald Trump, got an unexpected boost late Tuesday when a Democratic supporter quickly got it passed through the Senate as a standalone bill.
    “Cruz’s bill, which Rosen signed onto, would exempt cash tips and card-charged gratuities from federal income tax via a 100% deduction come Tax Day.”
    SEMAFOR: Rosen and Cruz deliver a Senate surprise: Unanimous passage of a Trump priority
    “…The entire chamber signed off on Rosen’s attempt, and the Senate unanimously passed the legislation led by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that the Nevada Democrat has also long supported.…‘What we just saw is the Senate passing No Tax on Tips 100-0,’ Cruz said on the Senate floor. ‘And now we are sending it to the House of Representatives.’”
    NBC News: Senate unexpectedly passes the No Tax on Tips Act in a unanimous vote
    “‘Whether it passes free-standing or as part of the bigger bill, one way or another, No Tax on Tips is going to become law and give real relief to hard-working Americans,’ Cruz said on the floor. ‘So I’m proud of what the Senate just did, and I commend Democrats and Republicans, even at a time of partisan division, coming together and agreeing on this commonsense policy.’”
    DALLAS MORNING NEWS: Senate passes Ted Cruz bill to exempt tips from federal income tax
    “U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, authored the bill, which was approved by unanimous consent, meaning no senator objected to its passage. Cruz cast the show of bipartisan solidarity as a miracle and said the policy is now almost certain to pass the House and become law.
    “The exemption on tips will have a lasting effect on millions of Americans, Cruz said.”
    DAILY CALLER: Senate Democrats Join Republicans To Approve Major Trump Campaign Promise
    “Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s No Taxes on Tips Act would exempt tips from taxation under the federal income tax. The legislation’s passage delivers on a central pledge of President Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign to provide tax relief to tipped workers.
    “Cruz spoke shortly after Rosen to praise the legislation’s passage, which he called ‘commonsense, bipartisan tax reform.’”
    AXIOS: Senate passes “No Tax on Tips” in surprise move
    “It came as a genuine surprise to many in the chamber: The expectation was that at least one senator would object to passage of the measure. But when Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) asked unanimous consent to pass the bill, no lawmakers on either side of the aisle objected.
    “The No Tax on Tips Act was introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and sponsored by a bipartisan group of senators.”
    BACKGROUND:
    Sen. Cruz has consistently prioritized tax cuts and job access:
    Sen. Cruz helped enact historic tax reform in 2017, which gave a tax cut to virtually every taxpayer in America. It reduced taxes on small businesses, farmers, ranchers, and job producers, which has helped bring jobs to Texas.
    He has fought to make permanent the 2017 historic tax cuts for individuals.
    Sen. Cruz also helped pass the USMCA trade agreement, which was signed by President Trump, a decisive victory for Texas farmers, ranchers, businesses, and manufacturers.
    For his efforts to support Texas businesses large and small, Sen. Cruz received the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s prestigious “Spirit of Enterprise” award.
    To read the bill text, click HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: At Hearing, Shaheen Presses SBA Administrator on Support for Small Businesses Devastated by Tariffs, District Office Staffing Cuts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen
    (Washington, DC) – Today, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), a top member and former Chair of the U.S. Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, pressed Small Business Administration (SBA) Administrator Kelly Loeffler on the Trump administration’s failure to support small businesses facing economic upheaval in the wake of President Trump’s global trade war. Click HERE to watch the full exchange. 
    Key quotes from Senator Shaheen: 
    On staffing cuts at SBA district offices, Shaheen said, “I was concerned when I saw that the budget requests a 30 percent cut to staffing of district offices. Administrator Loeffler, in your confirmation hearing I asked you about ensuring that the district offices have the support and the staff they need. And at that time you said, ‘you have my commitment,’ I’m quoting you now. And you also said, ‘I can assure you we will put an emphasis on the field,’ but I can tell you that New Hampshire’s district office started with seven staff this year. Now they’re down to only three.” 
    Administrator Loeffler was unable to provide a timeline for filling the vacant positions. 
    On the Trump administration’s proposed elimination of the State Trade Expansion Program (STEP), Shaheen said, “This is a program that, again, has really made a difference for small businesses in New Hampshire where we do a lot of exporting and we’re trying to do it much better. So that again, is why I was surprised to see that that program got zeroed out in the budget request.” 
    On the impact of Trump’s trade war in New Hampshire, Shaheen said, “I visited a bakery in Derry, New Hampshire, that was started over 25 years ago. It was started to address sugar free baked goods. They do 85 percent of their business with Canada. They used to have 25 employees. Now they have two because the president’s tariffs have put them out of business.” 
    On support for small businesses impacted by Trump’s tariffs, Shaheen asked, “While I appreciate that [tariffs are] the president’s idea for how to help small businesses, we have a lot of small businesses in New Hampshire who are not being helped by those tariffs. And so, what I want to know is what SBA can do to help those small businesses to compensate for the impact that those tariffs are having on them?” 
    Administrator Loeffler did not respond.  
    Senator Shaheen is helping lead efforts in Congress to mitigate the harmful impacts of President Trump’s tariffs. In January, Shaheen introduced the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes on Imported Goods Act which would limit the president’s ability to leverage sweeping tariffs that increase costs for American consumers and families. Her effort to pass this bill by unanimous consent was blocked by Senate Republicans. In recent months, Shaheen has traveled across the Granite State to visit businesses including Chatila’s Bakery, C&J, DCI Furniture, Mount Cabot Maple, American Calan Inc. and NH Ball Bearings to hear directly from Granite Staters impacted by the administration’s tariffs. 
    A top member and former chair of the U.S. Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, Shaheen helped create STEP as a pilot program in 2010. The program was fully authorized by Shaheen’s small business trade amendment that was signed into law in 2016. Since its creation, STEP has awarded $235.5 million in grants and directly supported more than 13,000 small businesses’ international expansion and export growth.   

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Energy Secretary Wright Testifies Before Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on FY2026 Budget Request

    Source: US Department of Energy

    WASHINGTON— U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright testified today before the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development on the Department of Energy’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget request.

    Earlier this month, Secretary Wright testified before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development to outline the Department’s priorities and provide an overview of the FY2026 request.

    The FY2026 Budget aligns with President Trump’s directive to restore American energy dominance and rein in bloated federal spending. It brings non-defense discretionary spending to the most disciplined level since 2017 and redirects more than $15 billion away from Green New Scam programs that drive up costs and weaken the U.S. energy system. For more details, view the budget toplines here.

    Secretary Wright’s opening remarks:

    Chairman Kennedy, Ranking Member Murray, and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you today as Secretary of Energy to discuss the President’s Fiscal Year 2026 Budget request for the Department of Energy. I want to commend this committee for its longstanding commitment to energy policy and to the mission of the Department.

    Energy is the backbone of civilization. It is the essential catalyst of human progress— enabling everything we do, everything. From the lights in our home, the heat in our homes, the process heat in our factories, and the innovation in our National Laboratories. I’ve dedicated my life to increasing access to energy and bettering human lives, and I’m thrilled to carry my work forward at the Department of Energy.

    My priorities for the Department are clear— to unleash a golden era of American energy dominance, strengthen our national security, and lead the world in innovation. A reliable and abundant energy supply is the foundation of a strong and prosperous nation. When America leads in energy, we lead in prosperity, security and human flourishing.

    America has the historic opportunity to secure our energy systems, lead the world in scientific and technological innovation; maintain and strengthen our weapons stockpile, and meet Cold War legacy waste commitments. The Department of Energy will advance these critical missions while cutting red tape, increasing efficiency, and unleashing innovation and ensuring we are better stewards of taxpayer dollars.

    The President’s Fiscal Year ’26 budget will ensure taxpayer resources are allocated appropriately and cost-effectively. This budget will return DOE to its core mission of advancing energy innovation and global competitiveness through research and development. We will invest DOE’s resources in sources and technologies that support affordable, reliable, and secure energy and provide a return on investment for the American taxpayers.

    Achieving this vision means fully leveraging the resources that have powered our country for generations. The United States is blessed with an abundance of coal, oil, and natural gas,

    Every one of these resources was unleashed through the world-changing power of American innovation. Our National Labs are the engine that drives research and development to expand our energy dominance. When it comes to our National Labs, we are undeniably capable of doing more with less. We can both increase efficiency and drive innovation. We will prioritize research that supports true technological breakthroughs and maintains America’s global competitiveness.

    We are also taking steps to accelerate innovation in commercial nuclear development. America must lead the commercialization of affordable and abundant nuclear energy. DOE is working to advance the rapid deployment of next-generation nuclear technology, including small modular reactors.

    I am proud to report that we have officially ended the previous administration’s reckless pause on LNG export permits and are returning to regular order for reviewing and approving new permits. DOE will also work to replenish the Strategic Petroleum Reserve— a national asset that protects our security in times of crisis.

    We are advancing President Trump’s pledge to lower the cost of living and expand consumer choice for all Americans by rightsizing DOE’s approach to home efficiency standards and regulations. This month, DOE proposed the elimination or reduction of 47 regulations – the largest deregulatory effort in history. Once finalized, these actions are projected to save the American people approximately $11 billion while restoring consumer freedom and lowering costs.

    The responsible stewardship and modernization of the nation’s nuclear weapons systems is paramount for the Department of Energy and this Administration. DOE is focused on addressing critical upgrades for the U.S. nuclear stockpile and maintaining our engine powerhouses for submarines and aircraft carriers. Both tasks will become even more crucial in the next few years.

    Our nuclear innovation is a nation that began with the Manhattan Project, and the next Manhattan Project is clearly AI. DOE has a significant role to play in driving AI innovation for scientific discovery and national security. Our agency has world-class, high-performance computing capabilities, including four of the world’s top ten supercomputers. 
    Harnessing our energy potential to power global AI leadership while meeting growing energy demand will be the challenge of our time. But America doesn’t back down from big challenges or big builds.

    As Secretary of Energy, I am honored by the responsibility to help meet the American people’s growing needs for energy and lead the world in energy development. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the committee today.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: US stocks close lower amid rising Treasury yields

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

    U.S. stocks ended lower on Wednesday as 20-year bond auction saw weak demand, and U.S. Treasury yields surged.

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 816.80 points, or 1.91 percent, to 41,860.44. The S&P 500 fell 95.85 points, or 1.61 percent, to close at 5,844.61, while the Nasdaq Composite lost 270.07 points, or 1.41 percent, ending at 18,872.64, its first negative day in three.

    Ten of the eleven major S&P 500 sectors closed in negative territory. Real estate and health care led the declines, falling 2.63 percent and 2.37 percent, respectively. Communication services was the only sector to post a gain, rising 0.67 percent.

    The downturn came as U.S. Treasury yields climbed, with the 10-year yield nearing 4.6 percent and the 30-year yield rising above 5 percent. Yields spiked further after the U.S. government’s 16-billion-U.S.-dollar auction of 20-year bonds received weaker-than-expected demand, resulting in a higher yield than markets had anticipated.

    In a client note published Wednesday, Piper Sandler’s chief investment strategist Michael Kantrowitz outlined important thresholds for the 10-Year Treasury yield and explained how movements around those levels could affect the stock market. “The path of rates will also be crucial for equities, particularly for relative performance,” Kantrowitz wrote. “Since 2022, equity markets have struggled when 10 yr rates moved above 4.5-4.75 percent and we are pushing up against that zone once again.”

    Meanwhile, investors kept a close eye on developments in Washington, D.C., where debate continues over U.S. President Donald Trump’s tax-and-spending bill. The proposed legislation would extend existing tax cuts and introduce new ones, but is projected to add roughly 3 trillion U.S. dollars to the federal deficit over the next decade.

    “The question now is, from a fiscal perspective, what will the tax bill look like, and will it undo all of the recent fiscal frugality by simply raising the debt level at a slower rate of pace? So I think that’s why the 10-year yield is moving higher — because investors are worried that we’re really not doing anything to slow the pace of inflation and to reduce the debt,” Sam Stovall, CFRA Research chief investment strategist, told CNBC in an interview.

    The bond-driven pressure on equities was compounded by disappointing earnings reports from major retailers. Target dropped 5.21 percent after slashing its annual forecast, citing reduced consumer spending and lower confidence. Lowe’s lost 1.68 percent after reaffirming its guidance, and TJX fell 2.89 percent after maintaining its outlook, assuming tariffs with China remain unchanged. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst: American Leadership is Back

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)

    WASHINGTON – Today on the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) reaffirmed that President Trump is showing the world that American leadership is back and echoed his strong message for Vladimir Putin to end Russia’s bloody war.
    “Russia’s aggression has already cost too many innocent lives, about 5,000 lives every single week. Too many innocent lives, folks, which is why I support President Trump’s efforts to get a peace deal done now,” said Ernst.

    Watch Ernst’s full remarks here.
    Ernst’s full remarks:
    “Last week, President Trump showed the world that American leadership is back.
    “He brought home the last living American hostage – delivering Edan Alexander from Iran-backed Hamas and reuniting him with his family after nearly 600 days.
    “He stood with our partners in the Middle East to strengthen the historic Abraham Accords.
    “And he delivered a strong message to Vladimir Putin: End the war.
    “Today, I stand in support of a sovereign Ukraine and echo the President’s call to Putin to stop this bloodbath that never should have happened.
    “This is an issue that not only affects a close partner under siege, but also the strength of the United States of America and the security of the free world.
    “Let’s be clear here folks — China is watching. So is Iran and North Korea. And of course, Vladimir Putin is watching, too.
    “They call it the ‘new axis of evil’ for a reason.
    “Mr. President, I personally witnessed and experienced the growth of the U.S.-Ukrainian relationship when I visited Ukraine in its waning days of Soviet control as part of an agricultural student exchange program.
    “This was in 1989, and I had the privilege of living with a Ukrainian family on a very small collective farm.
    “Now, as we got together, there were a number of us Iowa students on that exchange, and again, it was an agricultural exchange.
    “We came together, each of us with our families, in a group setting, one of the very first nights that we were on that collective.
    “And again, with the premise of an agricultural exchange, we were farming tomatoes, working with the cattle and the hogs.
    “Very small, small collective.
    “We came together, and the Ukrainians wanted to ask us questions.
    “So all of us American students, all of us from Iowa, we sat down with our Ukrainian families, and we expected to talk about agriculture.
    “Iowa agriculture versus Ukrainian agriculture.
    “And much to my surprise, the first question that came from our Ukrainian counterparts, was not about how we raise corn or soybeans in Iowa, it was not about the types of machinery that we used on our farm.
    “But the first question the Ukrainians asked us was: What is it like to be free? What is it like to be an American?
    “Because in 1989, those Ukrainians were living under Soviet socialist rule.
    “They could not travel without having the permission of their government.
    “My family did not have a telephone and if they wanted to use the collective manager’s telephone, they would have somebody listening in on the conversation.
    “They would have to know the purpose of the telephone call, who they were calling, why they needed to make a telephone call.
    “This was 1989, and I learned a lot from that exchange.
    “I saw Ukrainian people desperate to break free of socialist economic structures and authoritarian restrictions on freedom of movement, the ability to have your own employment, and on freedom of speech.
    “Two years later, Ukraine declared its independence from the Soviet Union and broke free.
    “Later, many years later, 2003, the United States was involved in the war in Iraq.
    “I was a soldier in 2003, during Iraqi Freedom.
    “So I was a transportation company commander permanently stationed in Kuwait.
    “My transporters ran convoys from the ports in Kuwait up to Iraq, delivering goods for our war fighters.
    “So I was on a little subcamp in Kuwait outside of Camp Arifjan. My soldiers and I lived on that subcamp. The other half of the camp was occupied by other forces.
    “Those other forces were Ukrainian soldiers. Ukraine is not part of NATO. They were not required to support the United States of America in Iraq, but Ukraine, of its own volition, sent their soldiers and not just as support elements, they were there as combat forces.
    “So again, I was a transporter. We ran convoys in Iraq.
    “The other half of that camp that I lived on, they were Ukrainian engineer forces. They did road clearing.
    “And I think back, how many American lives did those engineers save from their road clearing efforts, clearing bombs so they wouldn’t be detonated by my drivers?
    “Today, Ukraine is fighting its own war.
    “And I will remind everyone, the United States does not have forces involved in the Russia-Ukraine war. None. Zero. None.
    “Today, Ukraine fights not only for its own survival, but for the very principles the United States was founded on.
    “When America leads, the world is safer. When we disengage and when we retreat – like we saw for the last four years under the Biden administration – chaos fills the void.
    “Russia’s aggression has already cost too many innocent lives, about 5,000 lives every single week. Too many innocent lives, folks, which is why I support President Trump’s efforts to get a peace deal done now.
    “Vladimir Putin cannot keep tapping the United States of America along.
    “I vow to keep working with my colleagues to equip the president with all tools necessary to hold Russia accountable – including sanctioning Russia and its supporters – if they continue to drag out peace talks and carry on with the needless bloodshed, so this war that never should have started can come to an end.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Video: President Trump Welcomes The University of Florida Gators to The White House

    Source: United States of America – The White House (video statements)

    “We’re delighted to welcome the 2025 NCAA Basketball Champions, the University of Florida Gators, who brought home the third national title in program history and made Florida the only Division One program ever to win three national titles in both basketball and football.” –President Trump

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvhewZAoxRY

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Murray Slams Rubio’s Defiance of Congress & Federal Law, Says Trump Admin Has Undermined American Leadership and Caused Preventable Suffering

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Murray: “Secretary Rubio… you have overseen a systematic campaign to dismantle USAID, impound billions of dollars that this Committee actually provided, and unilaterally remake the Department of State—without the slightest bit of concern that you lack the authority to do that without Congress. It has created chaos, it’s caused preventable deaths across the globe, and it has undermined American leadership… what you have done is outright illegal.”

    Murray calls for bipartisan pushback: “Are we going to roll over as Trump tramples our laws, and undermines our U.S. leadership, burns down what we’ve spent decades building, and lets millions of people across the globe suffer and die? Or are we going to stand up, push back, assert our constitutional power of the purse? And to my colleagues on both sides: this is the moment to decide whether this Committee continues to be a powerful bipartisan force. A force that I think we’ve all been proud of for a very long time.”

    ***WATCH: Senator Murray’s remarks and questioning***

    Washington, D.C. — Today, at a Senate Appropriations State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee hearing on the fiscal year 2026 budget request for the Department of State, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, called Secretary Marco Rubio out for flagrantly defying federal laws, ignoring Congress, undermining American leadership and our national security, and causing untold preventable suffering and death in his four months as secretary thus far.

    In opening comments, Vice Chair Murray said:

    “Secretary Rubio, I am deeply concerned that you have overseen a systematic campaign to dismantle USAID, impound billions of dollars that this Committee actually provided, and unilaterally remake the Department of State—without the slightest bit of concern that you lack the authority to do that without Congress. It has created chaos, it’s caused preventable deaths across the globe, and it has undermined American leadership.

    “As Ranking Member Schatz noted, what you have done is outright illegal. A complete violation of bipartisan appropriations laws, the Impoundment Control Act, and the Anti-Deficiency Act.

    “Within hours of taking office, President Trump halted all foreign aid—in flagrant defiance of the law. Now, under your watch, Secretary Rubio, that freeze was implemented with chaos and cruelty.

    “And then, you illegally shuttered USAID—placing everyone on leave, halting lifesaving work, literally locking people out of the building and out of their devices—even in dangerous corners of our world.

    “You paid people not to work, abandoned our partners across the globe, and chaotically recalled global staff—putting more than 1,600 Americans who served our country abroad in limbo.

    “And when you shut down the USAID payment system, you even refused to pay for services provided before the illegal freeze. You fought all the way to the Supreme Court against paying for services U.S. businesses already rendered, with funding that Congress already provided. And I know you know, Mr. Secretary, but you lost.

    “And I assume you need the reminder, because to this day, you have not made all the payments that are required by our nation’s highest court, and as a result American companies continue to layoff American workers. And, by the way, you do continue to lose in court—including just yesterday over your move to illegally replace U.S. Institute of Peace leadership, and in recent cases, over international broadcasting.

    “Now, eventually, Mr. Secretary, you sent Congress notice of your intent to collapse USAID into State. Only: you didn’t consult with this Committee—that’s required by law. It came without justification—also required by law. And it came long after USAID was reduced to rubble.

    “So, sadly disregard for our laws and values, to me, has sort of become a pattern of your tenure: revoking visas when someone writes an op-ed you don’t like, or reaching a secret deal to use taxpayer dollars to jail U.S. residents in a notorious foreign prison—no due process. Or pointlessly leaving food assistance to rot in storage. Actually, in Dubai, we now have 500 tons of high energy biscuits that expire in July—they’re bought, they’re shipped, they’re stored all at taxpayer expense. But you’ve condemned them to waste. And that’s one example of many. 

    “Now, another pattern that I am deeply worried about is transparency. We have pressed you for information. Our staffs have sent you countless emails and briefing requests so we can do our job here. There are hundreds of unanswered requests, and no effort to address them. And Mr. Secretary, that’s got to change.

    “Even your plan to reorganize the State Department came with no information on the 270 offices you are moving or eliminating, the proposed layoffs, or how USAID would be merged into State.

    “I won’t ask you whether impounding billions of dollars is legal. It is not.

    “I won’t ask whether it’s efficient to pay people not to work or fire them without even determining staffing needs.

    “And I won’t ask if cutting 91% of our counternarcotic and law enforcement programs makes us safer, abruptly abandoning agreements with allies makes us stronger, or ceding our global leadership to China makes us more prosperous.

    “Of course not—we know that.

    “We have worked together for years in a bipartisan way to advance U.S. interests and fund those programs. So, with respect to my colleagues, how long are we going to sit here and watch this silently?

    “Are we going to roll over as Trump tramples our laws, and undermines our U.S. leadership, burns down what we’ve spent decades building, and lets millions of people across the globe suffer and die? Or are we going to stand up, push back, assert our constitutional power of the purse?

    “And to my colleagues on both sides: this is the moment to decide whether this Committee continues to be a powerful bipartisan force. A force that I think we’ve all been proud of for a very long time. A force that is focused on safety, economic strength, and national security—focused on leading the world in research and development, and countering China and others with our soft power and our military power. 

    “Every single member of this committee knows what we are risking by letting this administration tear down so much.   

    “On USAID and other programs, we can always talk about how we can make things work better and other reforms. I don’t think any of us are opposed to any of those considerations—we have been doing that in a bipartisan way for a long time. But that is not actually what Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposes.”

    Senator Murray began her questioning by pressing Secretary Rubio on the secretive deal the United States inked with El Salvador to jail U.S. residents in the country’s notorious mega-prison, stating: “Will you share the text and details with my staff of your agreement with El Salvador and any other similar arrangements, including the funding details that we need to have?”

    Secretary Rubio ignored the question, defending his Department’s actions and falsely claiming he’s provided transparency to Congress, stating in part: “We’ve done nothing that’s illegal… We’ve answered questions repeatedly. We get hundreds of questions a day. We respond [to] them as quickly as possible.”

    “Mr. Secretary, I will tell you we are here because we need the information so that we can write our budget and in a bipartisan way move forward,” Senator Murray responded.

    “Well, you’ll have the information you need to write a budget,” Secretary Rubio interrupted.

    “Okay, so will we get the details on the El Salvador arrangement?” Senator Murray pressed.

    “Which El Salvador arrangement?” Secretary Rudio dodged.

    “Your agreement that you’ve made with them [to detain people the U.S. sends there],” Senator Murray pressed.

    “What agreement?” replied Secretary Rubio, in part, ducking the question.

    “The funding details, we have not gotten. We need to see what the costs are,” Senator Murray responded.

    Secretary Rubio again dodged the question, refusing to acknowledge an agreement or to confirm he’d share its details while confirming the U.S. has indeed paid El Salvador. He stated in part: “We’ve provided them law enforcement assistance. …. They have the right to spend that money any way they wish, but they did us a big favor…” He then falsely claimed the U.S. has not sent U.S. residents to El Salvador.

    Senator Murray pressed again: “I’m asking you whether we can see the details of the arrangements, including the funding details.”

    “I’m giving you the details. The arrangements are, we provide law enforcement funding to El Salvador, among other countries. How they choose to spend that money entirely is up to them,” Secretary Rubio deflected.

    Senator Murray moved on, “I’ll take that as a no. Can you give me the details on the 200 plus offices you’re proposing to eliminate? We need that. Can I get your commitment to giving us those?”

    “Sure, of course. That’s part of our reorg,” replied Secretary Rubio, who thus far has failed to provide the details to the Committee or Congress.

    “How about the details and justifications of your proposed rescissions from programs you claim are out of alignment with administration priorities. Are we going to get the details of that funding priorities?” asked Senator Murray.

    “On rescissions and empowerment, things of this nature? That’s obviously an OMB function, and I would talk to them about that, what’s going to go on with that money. I can tell you the contracts we canceled. And I can list to you the contracts we canceled and the rationale why, because I went through them myself,” replied Secretary Rubio.

    Senator Murray followed up, “Will you get those to us—like today?”

    Secretary Rubio did not provide a straight answer. Murray then pressed again on the need for transparency and more details, and Secretary Rubio ultimately committed: “Sure, you’re going to have all that information.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: “All Bets Are Off:” Padilla Blasts Senate Republicans for Going Nuclear on Senate Rules to Revoke California’s Clean Air Act Waivers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    “All Bets Are Off:” Padilla Blasts Senate Republicans for Going Nuclear on Senate Rules to Revoke California’s Clean Air Act Waivers

    WATCH: Padilla warns of the dangerous precedent Republicans would set if they ignore Senate Parliamentarian to bypass filibuster

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, blasted Senate Republicans for their attempt to go nuclear on the Senate rules and overrule the nonpartisan Senate Parliamentarian in order to bypass a filibuster and rescind California’s clean air waivers.

    This afternoon’s floor speech was the first of multiple speeches Senator Padilla will deliver if Senate Republicans proceed with their attacks on the public health, air quality, and environment for millions of Americans.

    “While it’s not too late to turn back at this moment, I think it’s important for all of my colleagues to know that I will be back here again and again and again throughout this process to make sure that everyone knows what these votes mean not just for the precedent and procedures of the United States Senate, but for the health of my constituents in California. And about the real threat to human life that comes when California is denied the ability to control toxic air and greenhouse gas emissions,” said Senator Padilla.

    Padilla spoke on the floor as Senate Republicans prepared to move forward with their cynical attempt to rescind California’s Clean Air Act waivers with a 50-vote threshold under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), bypassing the filibuster and its 60-vote requirement by overruling the Senate Parliamentarian. He called out Republicans’ hypocrisy after they staunchly defended the filibuster in 2022, and cited Majority Leader John Thune’s (R-S.D.) recent comments that overriding the Senate Parliamentarian is “totally akin to killing the filibuster.”

    Padilla made clear that “all bets are off” in the next Democratic Administration, where Democrats can go after agency actions they disagree with — from mining permits, to fossil fuel project approvals, to liquified natural gas export licenses, and more — if Republicans set this dangerous precedent. He also highlighted non-rule actions the Trump Administration could try to reverse, including vaccine approvals, broadcast licenses, and merger approvals when they don’t match their political agenda.

    Excerpts from Senator Padilla’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, are available below. Video of his remarks is available here.

    Key Excerpts:

    • As I said here yesterday, it’s not just why Republicans are willing to endanger the health of Californians. It’s how they’re doing it.
    • Republicans are trying to pass these bills to gut California’s Clean Air Act authority on a 50-vote threshold. They are plotting to overturn the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision. Plain and simple.
    • It’s a total 180-degree reversal from the majority. But in one way, they’re right. No, this isn’t the same as killing the filibuster. This actually goes way, way beyond that. First, they are doing more than going nuclear on the Parliamentarian. They are going nuclear on the Congressional Review Act itself.
    • Under this logic, the Trump Administration could send an endless stream of non-rule actions to Congress, going back to 1996. … Do we want to spend our days voting on every vaccine approval because Secretary Kennedy decides to send them to Congress?
    • And what about the next Democratic Administration? All bets are off. … Every agency action that Democrats don’t like — whether it’s a rule or not, and no matter how much time has passed — will be fair game if Republicans go through with this.
    • By voting to go nuclear on the CRA, they are ignoring the law – not just Senate rules but the text of the law. By voting to overrule the Parliamentarian, they are saying the rules are whatever Republicans say they are. The majority can tell themselves whatever they want. They can twist themselves into pretzels to try and justify their reckless actions. But despite their smoke and mirrors approach to confuse people, we are all going to see it today with our own eyes.
    • If this happens under a Republican majority, it will be pretty ironic. The party that claims to be the staunch defender of the filibuster threw the rules aside as soon as it was convenient. I have been honest in my views on the filibuster. I think it needs to change overall going forwards. But it was my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who fought so hard to keep it.
    • We’re in the minority today. But Democrats will be in the majority again one day. We will not forget what happened here. History won’t forget. And Mr. President, California won’t forget what’s at stake today, either. I yield, but I will be back.

    Senator Padilla has been outspoken in pushing back against Republican attacks on California’s Clean Air Act waivers. He has spoken on the Senate floor multiple times to sound the alarm on Senate Republicans’ consideration of moving forward with their plan to revoke California’s Clean Air Act waivers. Yesterday, Padilla placed a hold on the four pending Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nominees until Republicans stop their reckless attempts to overrule the Senate Parliamentarian. Padilla, along with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also led Democratic Ranking Members in strongly warning Majority Leader Thune and Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) of the dangerous and irreparable consequences if Senate Republicans overrule the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision on California’s waivers.

    Last month, Padilla, Whitehouse, and Schiff welcomed the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision that the waivers are not subject to the CRA. Padilla also joined Whitehouse and Schiff in blasting Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s weaponization of the EPA after the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) similar finding. Padilla and Schiff previously slammed the Trump Administration’s intent to roll back dozens of the EPA’s regulations that protect California’s air and water.

    Padilla’s full remarks, as prepared for delivery, are available below.

    Mr. President,

    Today on the Senate floor, we are expecting to see some outrageous attacks on California and the historic Clean Air Act.

    And while it’s not too late to turn back now, I want my colleagues to know: I will be back here again and again to make sure that everyone knows what those votes mean for the health of my constituents, and about the real threat to human life that happens when California is denied the ability to control our toxic air and greenhouse gas emissions.

    But before I do, I want Senators and the American people to fully understand what we are about to witness on the Senate floor. Put aside all the procedural back and forth. I’ll get to that in a few minutes. But overall, it’s very simple: Senate Republicans are preparing to vote to overrule the Parliamentarian.

    They want to do that in order bypass the filibuster, and gut the Clean Air Act. Now, as I stand here right now, those joint resolutions are subject to Rule 22 and the 60-vote filibuster threshold. They are subject to debate and amendments.

    In this moment, they are regular legislation, and are subject to the legislative filibuster. But after the majority is done with their power play, the status of these same bills, maybe later this evening, will be very, very different. All of a sudden they may be subject to expedited procedures! No amendments allowed! Limited debate!

    Again, as I said here yesterday, it’s not just why Republicans are willing to endanger the health of Californians. It’s how they’re doing it.

    In 1967, the Clean Air Act passed this body under regular order by a vote of 88 to 12. In 1990, the landmark Clean Air Act Amendments passed the Senate 89-11.

    But today, Republicans are trying to pass these bills to gut California’s Clean Air Act authority on a 50-vote threshold. They are plotting to overturn the Senate Parliamentarian’s decision. Plain and simple.

    Why is that significant? Well, the Majority Leader said it himself at the very start of this Congress, that when it comes to overriding the Parliamentarian: “That’s totally akin to killing the filibuster. We can’t go there. People need to understand that.”

    Fast forward to this week, and we’ve heard all sorts of excuses about why, all of a sudden, overturning the Parliamentarian isn’t akin to killing the filibuster. It’s a total 180-degree reversal from the majority. But in one way, they’re right! No, this isn’t the same as killing the filibuster. This actually goes way, way beyond that.

    First, they are doing more than going nuclear on the Parliamentarian. They are going nuclear on the Congressional Review Act itself.

    It’s true that the Parliamentarian does not make law. Under the Constitution, the House and the Senate set their own procedures, limited by the requirements set in the Constitution. 

    For the good of order, and a functioning democracy, we have all come to rely on the Parliamentarian to call balls and strikes and set the rules of the road.

    But the Congressional Review Act is a law. And it says that all points of order are waived during a CRA resolution. And that’s what we are debating right now. An actual CRA resolution relating to hydrogen fuel.

    Now, I oppose this resolution, but at least it is following the law and Senate procedure. But what is about to happen is going to be against the law. And against Senate procedure.

    As I understand it, we are going to go nuclear twice. First we are going to go nuclear and overturn the rule on points of order during a CRA. Which is in the law!

    Then Republicans plan to go nuclear a second time, to throw out the rulebook and use the CRA against any agency action that an agency submits. No questions asked.

    So like I said, this goes way beyond the filibuster. And let’s play this out a bit.

    Under this logic, the Trump Administration could send an endless stream of non-rule actions to Congress, going back to 1996, including: vaccine approvals, broadcast licenses, merger approvals, and any number of government decisions that apply to President Trump’s long list of enemies.

    All it would take is a minority of 30 Senators to introduce related bills, and the Senate would be bogged down voting on agency grocery lists all day.

    Do we want to spend our days voting on every vaccine approval because Secretary Kennedy decides to send them to Congress?

    And what about the next Democratic Administration? All bets are off. Mining permits. Fossil fuel project approvals. LNG export licenses or offshore leases. IRS tax policies. Foreign policy. Every Project 2025 or DOGE disruption.

    Every agency action that Democrats don’t like — whether it’s a rule or not, and no matter how much time has passed — will be fair game if Republicans go through with this.

    So, let’s step back. Republicans are admitting that they don’t have the votes to pass these California resolutions under the Senate Rules that the Parliamentarian says apply — so why not throw out the rule book altogether!

    By voting to go nuclear on the CRA, they are ignoring the law – not just Senate rules but the text of the law. By voting to overrule the parliamentarian, they are saying the rules are whatever Republicans say they are.

    The majority can tell themselves whatever they want. They can twist themselves into pretzels to try and justify their reckless actions. But despite their smoke and mirrors approach to confuse people, we are all going to see it today with our own eyes.

    The majority is going to go nuclear to bypass the filibuster rule and pass a bill – for the first time in Senate history. It has happened for nominations before. It has happened on few procedural questions before. But it has never happened to pass a bill – or three bills. Never.

    If this happens under a Republican majority, it will be pretty ironic. The party that claims to be the staunch defender of the filibuster threw the rules aside as soon as it was convenient.

    I have been honest in my views on the filibuster. I think it needs to change overall going forwards. But it was my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who fought so hard to keep it.

    Well, there is about to be a new precedent in the record, unless we step back at the last minute.  And it will stand as a guidepost going forward.

    We’re in the minority today. But Democrats will be in the majority again one day. We will not forget what happened here. History won’t forget.

    And Mr. President, California won’t forget what’s at stake today, either. I yield, but I will be back.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Schiff Urge Justice Department Watchdog to Open Investigation into DOJ’s Role in Unconstitutional Qatar Airplane Scheme

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla, Schiff Urge Justice Department Watchdog to Open Investigation into DOJ’s Role in Unconstitutional Qatar Airplane Scheme

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) joined Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in demanding an independent investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Inspector General into the Attorney General and the Department of Justice’s involvement in President Trump’s unconstitutional acquisition of a $400 million luxury plane from the Qatari government.

    The request for an inquiry cites new reporting that the U.S. government has accepted the plane from Qatar and that President Trump actively solicited the luxury aircraft from Qatar’s government. At Attorney General Pam Bondi’s confirmation hearing, Senator Padilla and his Democratic Judiciary Committee colleagues raised concerns about Bondi’s previous work as a foreign agent for the government of Qatar and how that might influence her work as Attorney General.

    “These reports raise the troubling possibility that the Department, and Attorney General Bondi personally, were integral to this scheme by crafting a legal justification to enable the President to circumvent the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, federal bribery and ethics laws, and Congress in order to acquire one of the largest foreign gifts in our history,” wrote the Senators.

    “Given today’s announcement and the fact that the Department’s leadership has effectively politicized the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which, under normal circumstances, would investigate professional misconduct by Department attorneys, it is imperative that your office undertake an independent and comprehensive investigation,” continued the Senators.

    The request to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz was sent by Padilla, Schiff, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai’i), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

    Last week, Senator Padilla joined 26 other Senators in cosponsored a resolution condemning President Trump’s acceptance of a luxury airplane gift, valued at $400 million, from the government of Qatar. According to reports, Trump intends to designate the plane as Air Force One while in office and transfer it to a foundation for personal use following the end of his term.

    Full text of the letter is available here and below:  

    Dear Inspector General Horowitz:

    We write to request that you open an inquiry into the facts and circumstances surrounding the Department of Justice’s involvement in facilitating President Trump’s effort to acquire a luxury airplane from Qatar, including the actions of Attorney General Pam Bondi. The Department of Defense confirmed today that it is accepting the plane as a gift from the government of Qatar. Given today’s announcement and the fact that the Department’s leadership has effectively politicized the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which, under normal circumstances, would investigate professional misconduct by Department attorneys, it is imperative that your office undertake an independent and comprehensive investigation.

    New revelations suggest that President Trump or senior administration officials actively solicited this foreign gift by initiating outreach to Qatar regarding the Boeing 747-8 plane in its possession, and, contrary to claims by President Trump and his associates, by proposing to Qatar that the transfer be in the form of a gift or donation, as opposed to a government-to-government sale. The reporting also raises questions as to whether the administration disclosed to the Qatari government that the Department of Defense would ultimately relinquish the plane and transfer it to President Trump after leaving office, potentially through his presidential library.

    Public reports suggest that Attorney General Bondi played a crucial role in providing cover for such a gift by issuing a legal memorandum to White House Counsel David Warrington that “concluded it would be ‘legally permissible’ for the donation of the aircraft to be conditioned on transferring its ownership to Trump’s presidential library before the end of his term.” Under this scheme, the Department of Defense would serve as a clearinghouse to launder the plane on President Trump’s behalf, while bearing the enormous financial cost to retrofit the aircraft to meet necessary security and counterintelligence standards and requirements for Air Force One.

    These reports raise the troubling possibility that the Department, and Attorney General Bondi personally, were integral to this scheme by crafting a legal justification to enable the President to circumvent the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, federal bribery and ethics laws, and Congress in order to acquire one of the largest foreign gifts in our history. We are particularly concerned that elements of the Department, such as the Office of Legal Counsel, were enlisted to develop such a justification and produce one or more memoranda to allow the White House to claim that such a transfer is lawful. Among other concerns, these new revelations raise key questions regarding whether Department lawyers had a full understanding of the facts to render a complete and accurate legal opinion, or were directed to assess the legality of such a transfer based on incomplete, selective, or shaded details.

    Attorney General Bondi’s personal involvement in this scheme requires particular attention. During her confirmation hearing, Attorney General Bondi committed under oath to “consult with the career ethics officials with the Department [of Justice]” to “make the appropriate decision” with respect to matters pertaining to Qatar, given her previous registration as a lobbyist for Qatar under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The aforementioned solicitation of a $400 million gift from the Qatari government presents a plain conflict of interest that undermines the public’s trust in Attorney General Bondi’s ability to provide impartial legal advice.

    Moreover, your office is uniquely positioned to conduct such an inquiry. During Attorney General Bondi’s tenure, the Department has removed senior career ethics officials and kneecapped offices responsible for overseeing ethics and professional misconduct, including the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which was established 50 years ago in response to ethics abuses and serious professional misconduct by senior Department of Justice officials during the Watergate scandal. We have well-founded concerns that OPR is no longer able to fulfill its mandate since the Department’s political leadership removed OPR’s career lead, Jeffrey Ragsdale, who had served in the role since 2020. OPR’s absence as an oversight check on the Department’s senior leadership further reinforces the need for your office to undertake an independent investigation, including into Attorney General Bondi’s actions and whether she consulted career ethics officials as she pledged to do.

    Such an investigation would complement parallel oversight requests by Members of Congress, including a request that the acting Inspector General of the Department of Defense investigate the Department of Defense’s involvement in this scheme, questions to the Secretaries of Defense and the Air Force regarding the cost and operational security of retrofitting such a plane, and letters to Attorney General Bondi regarding her role.

    The Department of Justice has a long and storied history of rooting out and combatting corruption without fear or favor that is now at risk. In this moment, the responsibility of the Office of Inspector General to “detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct” in the Department has never been more important. Your office has a solemn obligation to hold the Department to account, especially given the credible concerns that it has been used to justify and enable unconstitutional acts and corruption at the highest levels of government.

    Thank you for your prompt attention to this important request.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Trump confronts South African president with conspiracy claims

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

    U.S. President Donald Trump confronted visiting South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on Wednesday with conspiracy theories on “white genocide” in South Africa, which Ramaphosa firmly denied.

    During their meeting in the Oval Office, Trump accused South Africa of “white genocide” and unfair land seizures, and then unexpectedly presented a video and a stack of printed news articles which he said proved his allegations.

    Ramaphosa, who arrived in Washington in hopes of improving trade terms and easing bilateral tensions, rejected Trump’s assertions during the meeting. He refuted the notion that white South Africans are fleeing the country due to racist policies. He said there was crime in South Africa and the majority of victims were Black.

    News outlets were shocked by Trump’s rudeness, saying most of the information that he used during the meeting to try to prove that “white genocide” was happening in South Africa had “repeatedly been disproven.”

    “Of the laundry list of conspiracy theories brought out at Trump’s meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa today, almost everything has been debunked. Some South Africans have said that they believe that the information is ‘AfriForum propaganda’ — a White Afrikaner lobby group criticized as being a White nationalist group,” the CNN reported.

    The clash came at a time of strained relations between the two countries. Since Ramaphosa signed the Expropriation Act into law in January, Trump has criticized the land reform law for “discriminating” against the country’s white people.

    In recent months, Trump has repeatedly criticized South Africa, most notably by canceling the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief funding and claiming that a “genocide” against white South Africans is underway, an allegation denied by the South African government.

    In March, the United States expelled then South African Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool, further straining their relations. The expulsion came after Rasool addressed a webinar organized by the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection, commenting on the Trump administration.

    “What Donald Trump is launching is an assault on incumbency, those who are in power, by mobilizing a supremacism against the incumbency at home and I think I’ve illustrated abroad as well,” Rasool said during the webinar.

    U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday that Trump would not participate in the upcoming meeting of the Group of 20 (G20) leaders in South Africa later this year.

    “We decided not to participate in this year’s G20 hosted by South Africa, either at the level of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or at the level of the president, and this was largely due to some of these issues that they put on their agenda and which, as we think, they do not reflect the priorities of this administration,” Rubio told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

    South Africa has pushed back against the Trump administration’s accusations, saying the executive order of freezing aid “lacks factual accuracy and fails to recognize South Africa’s profound and painful history of colonialism and apartheid.”

    “We are concerned by what seems to be a campaign of misinformation and propaganda aimed at misrepresenting our great nation. It is disappointing to observe that such narratives seem to have found favor among decision-makers in the United States of America,” said the country’s Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation in a statement in February. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Congressman Krishnamoorthi Speaks with Illinois Food Distributors and Farmers on Reckless Trump Tariffs

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (8th District of Illinois)

    SCHAUMBURG – This weekend, the Chicago Sun-Times highlighted Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi’s (D-IL) recent tour of Illinois food distributors and farms, where he spoke to business leaders, farmers, and distributors who are feeling the negative impacts of President Donald Trump’s reckless trade war. During his April 24 tour, Congressman Krishnamoorthi visited Testa Produce in Chicago and Kindred Farms in Atlanta, Illinois, to speak about how President Trump’s tariff policies are causing higher prices for families and stretching the bottom lines of small and local agricultural and business producers.

    “We’re not going to grow bananas in the U.S. or coffee. But it feels like food is being used as a weapon,” Congressman Krishnamoorthi said. “It shouldn’t be used as a weapon, especially when everybody needs it.”

    Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s comments were echoed by local agricultural and business leaders, who spoke in detail about how the tariffs are shrinking margins, inflating input costs, and throwing a wrench into supply chains.

    “Many customers are wondering how this will all end. I don’t have answers for them,” Peter Testa, CEO of Testa Produce, said. “There’s mass confusion.”

    “We’re just out here, caught in the crossfire,” Ron Kindred, owner of Kindred Farms and chairman of the Illinois Soybean Association, said. “[Tariffs] drive the price of everything up.”

    Illinois is the number one soybean-producing state in the country, with over 60 percent of the soybeans exported to countries such as China and Taiwan. However, price volatility and retaliatory tariffs put in place during President Trump’s first term cost U.S. agricultural producers $27 billion worth of lost exports in 2018 and 2019 alone, according to reporting by the Sun-Times.

    Congressman Krishnamoorthi has continued to call attention to the issues agricultural producers are facing in the wake of President Trump’s trade war since his state tour in April, using his position in Congress to help lead efforts to have these dangerous and irresponsible policies reversed for the betterment of small businesses and working families in Illinois.

    WHAT THEY’RE READING:

    Chicago Sun-Times: Illinois food businesses in the crosshairs of trade war Trump says will boost U.S. manufacturing

    • President Donald Trump says his tariffs will reshore U.S. manufacturing, yet food businesses, including those in Illinois, are especially hard hit by his trade war since supply chains are tied to local agricultural conditions and can’t easily be shifted, say business leaders and officials.

    • Food buyers such as Testa Produce are unsure whether to buy now or to wait, in case Trump rolls back his tariffs. That makes planning and budgeting very difficult, Testa said during Krishnamoorthi’s visit to the food distributor.

    • “Fresh produce trade is uniquely complex, shaped by seasonal and regional factors that require a well-functioning market for year-round availability,” the International Fresh Produce Association said last month in a statement. Broad application of tariffs as a “blunt tool disrupts markets, raises consumer costs and places unnecessary strain on growers and producers across the supply chain,” the association added.

    MIL OSI USA News –