Category: Natural Disasters

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness

    Source: European Investment Bank

    EIB

    • EIB Group’s fresh financing in Greece last year amounted to €2.2 billion
    • Focus last year on energy supply, business growth and disaster management
    • Latest annual results bring EIB Group support in Greece over past five years to €14.5 billion

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) Group’s new financing in Greece amounted to €2.2 billion last year, with major support to bolster energy supplies, strengthen businesses and protect against environmental disasters in the country.

    The total for 2024 included €2.03 billion from the EIB and portfolio guarantees of €152 million from the European Investment Fund (EIF), which focuses on innovative and technology-driven small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as well as Small Mid-Caps in Europe.

    Top operations included loans of €390 million to natural-gas supplier DEPA Commercial to build solar parks, €150 million to power provider HEDNO to upgrade the grid, loans and guarantees of €550 million to domestic banks to expand financing for SMEs and Mid-Caps and €220 million to the government to bolster disaster management.

    Kostis Hatzidakis, Minister of Finance of the Hellenic Republic noted: “Greece’s relationship with the European Investment Bank is long-standing and strong. This was reaffirmed in 2024, with new financing reaching €2.2 billion. These funds will be used for investments in renewable energy sources, upgrades to the electricity grid, support for SMEs, and the purchase of firefighting aircraft and rescue equipment. The EIB was a valuable ally when Greece was cut off from the markets. It will remain a partner, but with a new approach. Going forward, priorities will focus on energy interconnections, research and technology, climate adaptation, and defense investments, as outlined in the EIB’s Strategic Roadmap”.

    “Our work in Greece is a testament to the transformative power of strategic financing,” said EIB Vice-President Yannis Tsakiris.In 2024, we reinforced our commitment to the country by supporting clean energy, climate resilience and critical infrastructure while strengthening SMEs, innovation, job creation and social cohesion.”

    The latest annual results bring total EIB Group financing in Greece over the past five years to €14.5 billion. The yearly average in the country since 2000 is almost €2.9 billion, which reflects an unusually high sum of almost €5 billion in 2021 as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

    The EIB Group’s support last year was almost 1% of Greece’s gross domestic product (GDP), the third-highest level among European Union countries behind only Croatia and Estonia. That means that EIB Group financing in Greece last year averaged €631 per inhabitant, making the country one of the biggest beneficiaries based on the size of the population and the economy. The funding is projected to catalyse investments in Greece of up to €6.6 billion – about 2.5% of its GDP.

    Energy supply

    The €390 million EIB loan to DEPA Commercial is for new photovoltaic (PV) parks in the regions of western Macedonia, Thessaly and central Greece. The sites will add approximately 800 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy – enough to power 278,000 households for a year.

    Also in the area of clean energy, the EIB last year provided a €195 million loan to supplier PPC Renewables to develop 580 MW of solar plants and 175 MW of battery storage. The moves will boost renewables capacity, grid stability and energy security.

    The €150 million EIB credit to HEDNO covers upgrades to Greece’s electricity-distribution network, improving grid reliability and facilitating integration of renewables.

    The EIB last year also took part in the creation of an EU “Decarbonisation Fund” for Greece that will channel €1.6 billion in revenue from the European emissions-trading system into sustainable energy and development projects on Greek islands. These include grid interconnections with the mainland and the phase-out of local power plants.

    Business boost

    The EIB last year allocated a total €702 million to strengthen SMEs and Mid-Caps in Greece. The support – 28% of the total – took the form of intermediated loans and guarantees.

    Top operations included €300 million guarantees to Eurobank and National Bank of Greece covering €600 million new loans to Mid-Caps. In addition, the EIB provided a €250 million loan to the National Bank of Greece to bolster green investments by Greek SMEs and Mid-Caps. The credit raised total EIB support for such investments in Greece to €1 billion.

    The EIF also showed its agility in supporting vital investments for both debt and equity. It signed €152m with several of Greece’s financial institutions for capped portfolio guarantees. They are expected to mobilise up to €1,8bn in financing for small and medium-sized enterprises, while making the Greek economy greener, and supporting innovation and the country’s digital transition.

    The EIF also signed a new €200 million equity mandate to support innovative companies in Life Sciences & Healthcare and Sustainability & Social Impact by improving their access to vital financing. Funded by Cohesion policy and national resources of the Hellenic Republic, the mandate will cover a financing gap in these sectors, supporting investments from pre-seed to growth stages based on market needs.

    Disaster protection

    The €220 million EIB loan last year to the Greek government is to buy fire trucks, rescue vehicles and aircraft needed to fight to natural disasters such as wildfires and floods, both of which have caused extensive damage in Greece in recent years. The credit also covers upgrades to essential disaster-management services.

    The financing forms part of a European climate-adaptation plan by the EIB Group and brings its total support for Greek civil protection and disaster preparedness to €595 million.

    EIB Advisory

    There were also key technical assistance projects delivered from EIB Advisory, a highlight being an agreement with the Athens Water Supply and Sewerage Company (EYDAP) to back its €2 billion, 10-year investment programme to ensure the Greek capital has a more resilient water supply and supporting investments in lignite-dependent regions such as Western Macedonia and Megalopolis in the Peloponnese, facilitating their transition to a future of clean energy.

    In December 2024, the continuation of advisory support by EIB advisors from the PASSA team to the Greek administration was approved. This support aims to ensure the smooth implementation of sustainable development and Just Transition projects financed by the EU.

    Background information

    EIB

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. Built around eight core priorities, , we finance investments that contribute to EU policy objectives by bolstering climate action and the environment, digitalisation and technological innovation, security and defence, cohesion, agriculture and bioeconomy, social infrastructure, important investments outside the EU, and the Capital Markets Union.  

    The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), signed nearly €89 billion in new financing for over 900 high-impact projects in 2024, boosting Europe’s competitiveness and security.  

    All projects financed by the EIB Group are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement, as pledged in our Climate Bank Roadmap. Almost 60% of the EIB Group’s annual financing supports projects directly contributing to climate change mitigation, adaptation, and a healthier environment.  

    Fostering market integration and mobilising investment, the Group supported a record of over €100 billion in new investment for Europe’s energy security in 2024 and mobilised €110 billion in growth capital for startups, scale-ups and European pioneers

    Approximately half of the EIB’s financing within the European Union is directed towards cohesion regions, where per capita income is lower than the EU average.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Video: Private Property Debris Removal (PPDR) Mission Process – Los Angeles Wildfires

    Source: United States of America – Federal Government Departments (video statements)

    The private property debris removal or PPDR Mission is taking place in Los Angeles in response to the wildfires that recently impacted the area. This video highlights the phase 1 and phase 2 operations conducted by the EPA and the USACE highlighting all the work that has been done so far and will be done in the future. And also highlights a survivor story who was amongst some of the first to get their property cleared of debris.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvgwcDs46C8

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI Video: Firefly Blue Ghost Mission 1 Lunar Landing (Official NASA Broadcast)

    Source: United States of America – Federal Government Departments (video statements)

    Watch live with NASA as Firefly Aerospace prepares to land their Blue Ghost craft on the Moon for the first time.

    Firefly’s Blue Ghost lunar lander is slated to touch down near Mare Crisium, on the near side of the Moon, no earlier than 3:45 a.m. EST (0845 UTC) on Sunday, March 2. Live coverage, jointly hosted by NASA and Firefly, begins at 2:30 a.m. EST (0730 UTC).

    Blue Ghost Mission 1 is part of NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative, which is sending science and technology to the lunar surface in preparation for NASA’s Artemis campaign, which will establish a long-term presence at the Moon. Blue Ghost is sending10 experiments and demonstrations to provide insights into the Moon’s environment and support future astronauts on the Moon and Mars.

    More info: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-sets-coverage-of-fireflys-first-robotic-commercial-moon-landing/

    Credit: NASA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SSjzdj-ONw

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: WFP and Republic of Korea boost food security and resilience for vulnerable families in Kenya

    Source: World Food Programme

    NAIROBI – The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has welcomed a contribution of US$5 million from the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) to improve food security and build resilience for vulnerable communities in Kenya’s arid and semi-arid regions.

    With below-normal rainfall forecasted for the upcoming March-May rainy season, strengthening early warning systems is critical to help communities and government anticipate and prepare for extreme weather events.  

    “The Republic of Korea’s commitment to supporting vulnerable families in Kenya is commendable,” said Lauren Landis, WFP’s Country Director in Kenya. “This contribution comes at a time when people in the arid and semi-arid regions face the risk of both droughts and floods, exacerbating food insecurity and increasing humanitarian needs. This project will equip communities with the tools and resources they need to prepare and build sustainable livelihoods.”

    The contribution will enable WFP to support more than 158,000 people like smallholder farmers, pastoralists, women, and youth, to restore degraded ecosystems, create economic opportunities, and strengthen early warning systems to provide accurate and timely forecasts in Baringo, Mandera, Samburu, Tana River and Turkana Counties. 

    “The Republic of Korea recognizes the urgent need to build resilience and food security in Kenya,” said Nam Sangkyoo, the Republic of Korea’s Deputy Ambassador to Kenya. “By partnering with WFP, we are empowering communities to break the cycle of crises and build a future where they can thrive.”

    The Republic of Korea is a longstanding supporter of WFP’s work in Kenya and this contribution is in addition to past investments like resilience projects supported by the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) and rice contributions for refugees from the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA). 

    #                 #                   #

    The United Nations World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization saving lives in emergencies and using food assistance to build a pathway to peace, stability and prosperity for people recovering from conflict, disasters and the impact of climate change.

    Follow us on X @wfp_kenya, @wfp_africa, @wfp_media 

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 19 February 2025 Joint News Release Mass polio vaccination campaign to continue in the Gaza Strip

    Source: World Health Organisation

    The emergency polio outbreak response in the Gaza Strip is continuing, with a mass vaccination campaign scheduled from 22 to 26 February 2025. The novel oral polio vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) will be administered to over 591 000 children under 10 years of age to protect them from polio. This campaign follows the recent detection of poliovirus in wastewater samples in Gaza, signaling ongoing circulation in the environment, putting children at risk.  

    Pockets of individuals with low or no immunity provide the virus an opportunity to continue spreading and potentially cause disease. The current environment in Gaza, including overcrowding in shelters and severely damaged water, sanitation, and hygiene infrastructure, which facilitates fecal-oral transmission, create ideal conditions for further spread of poliovirus. Extensive population movement consequent to the current ceasefire is likely to exacerbate the spread of poliovirus infection. 

    Two previous vaccination rounds in the Gaza Strip were successfully conducted in September and October 2024, reaching over 95% of the target. As poliovirus is found to remain in the environment, additional vaccination efforts are needed to reach every child and strengthen population immunity. The presence of the virus still poses a risk to children with low or no immunity, in Gaza and throughout the region.   

    In 2024, health workers faced significant challenges accessing certain areas of central, north and south Gaza, which required special coordination to enter during the conflict. In inaccessible areas such as Jabalia, Beit Lahiya, and Beit Hanoun, where humanitarian pauses for the vaccination campaign were not assured, approximately 7 000 children missed vaccination during the second round. The recent ceasefire means health workers have considerably better access now.   

    No additional polio cases have been reported since a ten-month-old child was paralyzed in August 2024, but the new environmental samples from Deir al Balah and Khan Younis, collected in December 2024 and January 2025, confirm poliovirus transmission. The strain detected is genetically linked to the poliovirus detected in the Gaza Strip in July 2024. 

    The upcoming vaccination campaign aims to reach all children under 10 years of age, including those previously missed, to close immunity gaps and end the outbreak. The use of the oral polio vaccine will help end this outbreak by preventing the spread of the virus. An additional polio vaccination round is planned to be implemented in April.

    The campaign will be led by the Palestinian Ministry of Health and implemented with support from the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and other partners. 

    Polio vaccines are safe and there is no maximum number of times a child should be vaccinated. Each dose gives additional protection which is needed during an active polio outbreak.   

    WHO, UNICEF, and partners welcome the recent ceasefire and urge for a lasting ceasefire that leads to long-term peace.  

     

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI: WTW and Cornell University partner to predict drought and prepare for water scarcity

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LONDON, Feb. 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company, announced today a new scientific partnership with Cornell University to quantify the risks of severe and sustained drought worldwide. This collaboration will provide an in-depth view of global exposure to drought risks and the potential effects of water shortages on business operations.

    Around two-thirds of the global population live in places that encounter water stress for at least part of the year. When water supplies are further diminished by drought, many communities experience reduced agricultural yield, energy production, and slower economic growth. The adverse effects of drought are more serious in low-income and middle-income countries and are particularly disruptive to agriculture-dominated areas of the developing world.

    Climate change has already increased drought risks in many regions, but unfortunately even the latest generation of climate models still underestimate the potential severity, duration, and correlation of future droughts. Under this new initiative, WTW and Cornell University will collaborate to identify geographical ‘hotspots’ for climate-amplified drought, produce more accurate estimates of drought risk, and create new tools and datasets to anticipate single and multi-year drought. At Cornell, the research is supported by the Atkinson Center for Sustainability and led by Prof. Toby Ault, a leading global expert in future drought under climate change.

    Scott St. George, Head of Weather & Climate Research for the WTW Research Network, said, “Water is essential to all industries, so no one can afford to have drought take them by surprise. We know climate change has already supercharged droughts in some places — witness the ongoing drought in the American Southwest, now in its third decade. Prof. Ault and his team at Cornell will provide us with a clear view of the real risk of drought and water scarcity. Those insights are absolutely critical for our clients’ operations and planning in water-dependent sectors such as food and beverage, energy producers, and waterborne transport.”

    “We’re excited to work with WTW to translate cutting-edge climate science into actionable insights for the insurance industry,” said Prof. Toby Ault, Associate Professor in the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University. “Our research has shown that traditional climate models often underestimate the risk of severe, prolonged droughts, particularly in regions already facing water stress. By combining our expertise in drought modeling with WTW’s industry knowledge, we can better prepare for the complex drought risks of the future.”

    About Cornell University
    Cornell University is an Ivy League and statutory land-grant research university located in Ithaca, New York. Founded in 1865, Cornell is consistently ranked among the world’s leading academic institutions, with strengths in atmospheric sciences, engineering, and environmental research. The university’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences is internationally recognized for its leadership work in climate science, drought research, and applied climatology.

    About WTW

    At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

    Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at wtwco.com.

    Media Contacts

    Sarah Booker
    Sarah.Booker@wtwco.com
    +44 20 3124 7671

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Plantings replace storm-affected trees

    Source: Scotland – City of Dundee

    Dundee City Council is undertaking a widespread programme to plant trees in city greenspaces replacing those affected by recent storms.

    This year, 6500 whips are to be planted at mostly storm-damaged areas including Templeton Woods and Camperdown Park, following the impact of Storm Éowyn and other recent weather-related events.

    The native species trees have been acquired through funding from charity Trees for Cities and, so far this year, over 2000 have been planted with the help of over one hundred volunteers.

    Climate, Environment & Biodiversity Convener Cllr Heather Anderson said: “Trees are so special and it’s always distressing when we lose trees to storms. However, this is a great initiative involving the whole community and hopefully these new plantings will thrive, and everyone involved will check on their growth over the coming years.”

    An event also took place recently at the city’s Baxter Park which saw the re-planting of same species trees through funding support from Trees for Cities. This initiative will see twenty trees planted at Baxter Park this year, with plans for a further twenty-three in 2026.

    Cllr Heather Anderson added: “Sadly, Baxter Park lost several of its grand trees in the storms of the last few years. Some of these were part of the original planting when the park was first created and gifted to the people of Dundee by the Baxter family away back in 1863.

    “With support from Trees for Cities, the Council’s Countryside Ranger Service have worked with the Forestry Section to support the community to undertake this planting to regenerate the tree coverage in this much-loved park.

    “Scouts and parents from 7th Scout Group Dundee planted the first tree, with support from Stobswell Forum and the Friends of Baxter Park. It’s been a truly collaborative effort.”

    More tree planting events will be taking place throughout 2025 with some open to volunteers from the public to take part. The details of upcoming plantings can be found on the Dundee Countryside Ranger Service’s Facebook page.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Flamingo Land accused of “distortion and disinformation” in mega-resort appeal

    Source: Scottish Greens

    Loch Lomond does not need a garish mega-resort

    Flamingo Land has been accused of “shifting the goalposts and using “distortion and disinformation” in its desperate bid to build a garish and widely opposed mega-resort on the shores of Loch Lomond.

    The application for a sprawling tourist resort on the southern shore of Loch Lomond at Balloch was unanimously rejected by the National Park’s board.

    This came after 155,000 people lodged their objections through a long-running campaign led by Scottish Green MSP Ross Greer. Objections also came in from the Woodland Trust, Ramblers Scotland, the National Trust for Scotland and environmental watchdog SEPA.

    The appeal has been slammed as “desperate” by Mr Greer, who has submitted a detailed response accusing the developer of distorting facts, shifting goalposts and making false assertions.

    Mr Greer said:

    “Flamingo Land’s appeal is based on distortion and disinformation. They are trying to shift the goalposts, bend the truth and misrepresent their own proposals. It is a desperate attempt to overturn the unanimous decision by the Park board to reject their application.

    “Our campaign to save Loch Lomond from Flamingo Land’s destructive proposals secured a record 155,000 objections. The National Park’s own expert planning officers even opposed it, as did Scotland’s national environment watchdog, SEPA and the Community Council.

    “The fact that Flamingo Land have come back with this outright nonsense shows the contempt they have for Balloch and Loch Lomond.

    “They have spent a decade trying to exhaust the community into submission, but they have lost at every step. I urge the Scottish Government to reject these catastrophic plans and end this sorry saga.”

    As Mr Greer documents in his objection, Flamingo Land’s appeal includes a number of errors and distortions:

    • Flamingo Land claims the National Park could have insisted the overall scale of the application be reduced. It is their responsibility as the applicant to reduce the size of their application, if that is what they think is necessary. Over the course of almost a decade they haven’t done this, they have just moved the pieces around the map. At no point during the planning hearing did they suggest a reduction in scale. Under planning law the Scottish Government must make a decision based on what Flamingo Land actually submitted, not a theoretical smaller application which they didn’t submit but seem to be suggesting now.
    • They are trying to use National Planning Framework policies on housing to argue in their favour, but this isn’t a housing development, it’s a tourist resort. Ross Greer’s submission states that this claim is outright misleading.
    • They claim the National Park’s assessment of the resort’s economic impact was ‘neutral’ when the Park report actually said ‘The scale of the development proposed with the identified risk of flooding, and reduction in the extent of woodland, is not compatable [sic] development in view of the National Park’s environment and economy.’ 
    • They are trying to claim an exemption from the flooding concerns which were fundamental to the National Park board’s rejection of their application, but still haven’t done the “further flood risk work” which SEPA say is required
    • They failed to update their Environmental Impact Assessment to reflect the (inadequate) flood mitigation proposals already included in the application. These mitigations would require groundwork in areas where their own testing found contamination close to the surface, creating a new risk.

    Flamingo Land’s plans included two hotels, a waterpark, over 100 woodland lodges, 370 parking spaces, a monorail, shops, restaurants and more on the proposed site at Balloch. Their own assessment shows that this would result in over 250 additional car journeys per hour on local roads at peak times.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Building Resilience in Education Systems

    Source: Asia Development Bank

    In 2022, a flood in Bangladesh shut down 5,000 schools, disrupting the education of 1.5 million students. The COVID-19 pandemic forced school closures across Asia for more than a year, causing significant learning losses and reducing students’ future earning potential. As disasters, conflicts, and other crises become more frequent and severe, education systems must develop strategies to minimize their impact.

    Building Resilience in Education Systems presents 13 chapters on strengthening education system resilience, written specifically for policy makers and practitioners. The book examines diverse contexts, the sources of school disruptions, and key lessons learned. Featuring insights from Asia, Africa, and Latin America, it underscores that while solutions will vary by country, every nation can leverage its resources to build a more resilient education system.

    “In a world where greater unpredictability is what is most predictable, this volume is timely. The losses from the recent disruptions to education systems can be lessened if the world learns from them what has worked and what has not—and why. This volume brings together an excellent set of rigorously prepared chapters that will facilitate this learning.”

    — Emmanuel Jimenez 
    Director General, Independent Evaluation Department, Asian Development Bank

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Schatz, Marshall Introduce Legislation To Improve Weather Forecasts, Help Communities Better Prepare For Extreme Weather

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Hawaii Brian Schatz

    U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) today introduced a bill to strengthen the collection of weather and soil moisture data, improving the accuracy of extreme weather warnings and agriculture forecasts. The Improving Flood and Agricultural Forecasts Act of 2025 codifies and expands the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Mesonet Program, an initiative that aims to fill gaps in local weather data that impact forecasting and disaster response, as well as supporting agriculture and other weather-dependent industries through improved data collection.

    “For Hawai‘i and other states vulnerable to floods, droughts, and severe weather, better data means better forecasts, better prepared communities, and faster emergency response times,” said Senator Schatz, a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. “This same data also helps farmers and ranchers navigate droughts.”

    “The mesonet and soil moisture monitoring probes are crucial tools for Kansans. Weather affects everything on the farm, and a deeper understanding of what’s happening above and below the ground provides farmers more certainty when making crop decisions,” said Senator Marshall. “Better weather data collection for Kansas also helps us predict wildfires and tornadoes before they arrive, which has the potential to save lives in cases of extreme weather. I’m proud to introduce this important, bipartisan legislation.”

    Mesonets are weather observation data networks crucial for forecasting weather, flood, fire, and agricultural impacts. The legislation would provide grants to states, Tribes, private entities, and universities to expand local weather observation systems. By authorizing and enabling NOAA to purchase local weather data, assess its quality and cost-effectiveness, and integrate it into key forecasting systems, the bill aims to improve disaster preparedness and agricultural production nationwide. The legislation builds on Schatz’s efforts to increase funding for NOAA’s Mesonet Program, which has supported a key soil moisture sensing network in Hawai‘i.

    The text of the bill is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell Votes NO On Advancing Lutnick for Commerce Secretary; Slams His Enthusiasm for Inflationary Tariffs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

    02.18.25

    Cantwell Votes NO On Advancing Lutnick for Commerce Secretary; Slams His Enthusiasm for Inflationary Tariffs

    In speech on Senate floor, Cantwell says Trump’s pick to lead the Dept. of Commerce will rubber-stamp tariffs, slow domestic chip manufacturing, and hang NOAA out to dry; Cantwell also stresses: “Now is not the time to cut FAA staffing”

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, voted against confirming Howard Lutnick, President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as Secretary of the Department of Commerce.

    In a speech delivered on the Senate floor, Sen. Cantwell urged her colleagues to follow suit.

    The next Secretary of Commerce will have to deal with a wide-ranging, growing list of issues, from trade and exports […], expanding broadband, weather forecasting, patent issues, export controls on A.I., and figuring out some of the most thorny issues related to how we move our country forward, generally, in commerce. So it’s fair to say that if the Commerce Secretary doesn’t get it right, the American people and our American economy pay the price. Unfortunately, I believe that Howard Lutnick, the President’s nominee, isn’t the right person for this job at this point in time,” Sen. Cantwell said.

    The Senate ultimately confirmed Lutnick 51-45.

    Earlier this month, Sen. Cantwell also voted against advancing Lutnick out of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and to the full Senate for consideration. At the time, she expressed her concerns with Lutnick’s support for President Trump’s proposed tariffs. She also pointed to Lutnick’s failure to commit to fully allocating the funds approved by Congress under the Cantwell-led CHIPS & Science Act, as well as his waffling on whether he’d protect NOAA – including NOAA’s crucial missions and functions, and the workforce delivering those services to the American people. Sen. Cantwell had previously questioned Lutnick on these topics in a committee hearing the week prior – video of that hearing is HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell on FAA and Aviation Safety:

    “I would just say this: now is not the time to cut FAA staffing,” Sen. Cantwell said on the Senate floor today. “It is critically clear to me that we need these air traffic controllers, and so we have to make these investments. We should be working together, right now, on aviation. The most important thing? Let’s work together for the benefit of the flying public to come up with the best solutions that we can implement in aviation safety. Taking a broad brush and just cutting people out of the FAA — when oftentimes they’re the people that are helping you get that safety — is not what we should be doing right now.”

    During her tenure as chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Sen. Cantwell sounded the alarm about the staffing shortage of air traffic controllers, need for more FAA safety inspectors, a series of aviation incidents and near-misses on and around runways, and the midair blowout of a door plug in January 2024. Last year, the Committee’s Aviation Subcommittee also highlighted FAA’s shortage of at least 800 airway transportation systems specialists – commonly known as technicians –  during a December 2024 hearing on “Air Traffic Control Systems, Personnel, and Safety”. Dave Spero, president of the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists (PASS), the union representing FAA technicians, testified about the importance of closing the shortage and boosting this segment of the FAA workforce in order to keep FAA’s air traffic control systems and equipment safely running.

    She led the passage of the FAA Reauthorization Act, signed into law in May 2024, which boosts controller staffing, ensuring a five-year commitment to maximum hiring and training to close the current staffing gap. The law requires upgraded safety technologies – giving controllers better visibility into runway traffic – to be installed at every large and medium airport nationwide. The law also includes stricter safety standards for aircraft operators and plane manufacturers, as well as provisions to put more FAA safety inspectors on factory floors.

    On Feb. 6, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter to Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy calling on him to ensure that Elon Musk stays out of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), citing Musk’s clear conflicts of interest.

    Sen. Cantwell on Tariffs:

    “In my conversations with Mr. Lutnick and before his Commerce Committee hearing, he made it very clear that he intends to be very enthusiastic about the President’s plans for tariffs,” Sen. Cantwell said today. My constituents want to see inflation come down, and they want us to lower costs, not increase them. Now that President Trump is teasing out even more tariffs in the coming days on autos, pharmaceuticals,  and semiconductors, it’s going to drive up costs for consumers […] We can’t afford inflation. We want prices to come down. Whether that’s on housing, or whether that’s on pharmaceuticals, or whether that’s on food prices, we know that tariffs can increase prices.”

    Earlier this month, Sen. Cantwell delivered a major speech on the Senate floor arguing that the president’s arbitrary tariffs would threaten domestic job creation and economic growth in an Information Age. She outlined a strategy focused on building coalitions, growing exports, and establishing principles to support innovation in the Information Age – video of that speech is HERE.

    In Washington state, two out of every five jobs are tied to trade and trade-related industries.  Combined, the state imported $1.21 billion worth of steel and aluminum last year – and the major industries and employers in Washington that rely on steel and aluminum include aerospace, shipbuilding, utilities, and electronics. When President Trump imposed steel tariffs in 2018, our trading partners immediately responded by imposing tariffs of their own on Washington products, especially agriculture, including cherries, apples, pears, and potatoes. Nationally, across all industries, the steel and aluminum tariffs resulted in a decrease in production worth about $3.4 billion per year, according to an ITC report.  More information on how President Trump’s proposed tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China would affect consumers and businesses in the State of Washington can be found HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell has remained a steadfast supporter of free trade to grow the economy in the State of Washington and nationwide. Sen. Cantwell was the leading voice in negotiations to end India’s 20% retaliatory tariff on American apples, which was imposed in response to tariffs on steel and aluminum and devastated Washington state’s apple exports. India had once been the second-largest export market for American apples, but after President Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum in his first term, India imposed retaliatory tariffs in response and U.S. apple exports plummeted. The impact on Washington apple growers was severe: Apple exports from the state dropped from $120 million in 2017 to less than $1 million by 2023.  In September 2023, following several years of Sen. Cantwell’s advocacy, India ended its retaliatory tariffs on apples and pulse crops which was welcome news to the state’s more than 1,400 apple growers and the 68,000-plus workers they support.

    Sen. Cantwell on Semiconductor Manufacturing:

    “We learned during the chips crisis that even the cost of a used car went up $2,000. That’s because chips were at a shortage — car industries, trucking industries couldn’t even get enough chips to make and ship cars, and then the consequence was even used cars went up $2,000. So we don’t want to recreate that again,” Sen. Cantwell said today. “We want a Commerce Secretary who is going to fight for the CHIPS & Science investment that’s already been made in the electronic manufacturing process in the United States and keep the semiconductor industry right here. But unfortunately, Mr. Lutnick, before the Committee, would not commit to standing by the commitments of the term sheets the Department of Commerce has already signed.”

    Sen. Cantwell was the main architect and key negotiator of the CHIPS & Science Act. In her position as Commerce chair, she was instrumental in securing the science R&D funding authorizations in the 11th hour of negotiations. A key component of the legislation is the Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program that was authored by Sen. Cantwell to strengthen U.S. economic and national security with investments in regions across the country. Earlier this month, the American Aerospace Materials Manufacturing Center (AAMMC) in Spokane was awarded $48 million from the program to establish the first-of-its-kind testbed facility in the United States focused on developing advanced thermoplastic materials – new types of lightweight, heat-moldable, and recyclable materials that can replace metal in aircraft parts. The AAMMC will serve as the nation’s hub for creating and testing these innovative materials that are essential for more rapidly building fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly aircraft. 

    Sen. Cantwell on NOAA:

    “When asked for the record, ‘Should NOAA be dismantled, as called for in Project 2025?’, Mr. Lutnick would only say he’ll figure it out once he’s confirmed,” Sen. Cantwell said today. “We needed a bigger commitment to NOAA. NOAA already supplies a big, important aspect of what we deal with, with weather forecasting, tracking extreme weather, hurricanes, wildfires, managing our fisheries, operating ships that conduct important charting for national security. Mr. Lutnick gave very tepid support for NOAA.”

    Project 2025 calls for NOAA to be “dismantled and many of its functions eliminated,” calling it part of the “climate change alarm industry.” NOAA provides critical services to the Nation including weather forecasts, extreme storm tracking and monitoring, tools to enable communities to adapt to sea level rise and climate change, supporting fisheries management, and conserving marine mammals and other protected species.

    Sen. Cantwell is a champion of NOAA and helped secure $3.3 billion in NOAA investments in the Inflation Reduction Act to help communities prepare for and adapt to climate change, boost science needed to understand changing weather and climate patterns, and invest in advanced computer technologies that are critical for extreme weather prediction and emergency response. Her Fire Ready Nation Act, bipartisan legislation to strengthen NOAA’s ability to help forecast, prevent, and fight wildfires, passed the Commerce committee unanimously earlier this month and now heads to the full Senate for consideration.

    Video of Sen. Cantwell’s speech on the Senate floor today is available HERE, and transcript HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cortez Masto, Rosen Express Concern, Demand Transparency Regarding Termination of Forest Service and Department of the Interior Employees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto

    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) sent two letters to the Trump administration regarding his recent decision to terminate several thousand employees at the United States Forest Service (USFS) and the Department of the Interior (DOI). The senators expressed deep concerns about the risks that these mass firings could have on the millions of acres of public lands in Nevada and demanded transparency about the projects the terminated employees had been responsible for.

    “The Trump administration has made the chaotic decision to fire thousands of hard-working federal employees who keep Nevadans safe from wildfires and protect their access to clean water,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “The federal government is responsible for managing over 80% of the land in Nevada, and our families deserve answers about how this decision will impact their communities.”

    “President Trump’s reckless firing of thousands of employees at the Department of the Interior and the United States Forest Service raises serious concerns about the impacts this could have on Nevada’s public lands,” said Senator Rosen. “I’m joining Senator Cortez Masto in pushing back and requesting more information from the Trump Administration to understand how this will impact ongoing projects across our state.”

    Nevada has the highest percentage of land managed by DOI – more than any other state. Specifically, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages over 60 percent (approximately 48 million acres) of Nevada’s land. Nevada is also home to prominent lands managed by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Additionally, the USFS manages approximately 5.9 million acres of land in Nevada, including some of our most cherished landscapes such as the Lake Tahoe Basin, the Ruby Mountains within the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, and the Spring Mountains National Recreation Area outside of Las Vegas. Many Nevadans rely on the services provided by Forest Service staff.

    The Senators asked that the following information about the terminated employees be made public:

    • The number of employees terminated.
    • A description of the position and responsibilities of each terminated employee.
    • A list and description of the projects to which each terminated employee was assigned.
    • A description of what information the terminated employees were provided.

    The letter to the USFS can be found here and the letter to the DOI can be found here.

    Senators Cortez Masto and Rosen are champions for Nevada’s great outdoor spaces and public lands. They passed critical legislation to permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which protects public lands in Nevada and across the U.S. They passed bipartisan, bicameral legislation to reauthorize the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act, and they delivered critical funding to protect Lake Tahoe in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Cortez Masto has introduced legislation to ban oil and gas development in Nevada’s beautiful and pristine Ruby Mountains.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Comanchero member arrested for firearms offences

    Source: South Australia Police

    Today, Wednesday the 19 February, following an investigation, Detectives from the Crime Gangs Task Force and Serious and Organised Crime Branch conducted multiple searches in the southern suburbs of Adelaide.

    Detectives were investigating members of the of the Comanchero Motorcycle Club, an Outlaw Motorcycle Gang, in relation to an alleged incident of aggravated affray, breach of firearms prohibition order and a firearms offence that allegedly occurred at Christie Downs last year.

    A 36-year-old southern suburb man, a member of the Comanchero Motorcycle Club, was arrested and charged with a number of serious offences including aggravated affray, breaching a firearms prohibition order and possessing a prescribed firearm. The man has been refused bail and will likely appear in the Christies Beach Magistrates Court tomorrow (Thursday 20).

    Further searches of houses associated with the investigation resulted in the seizure of approximately $14000.00 cash, ammunition, prescribed hydroponic equipment and half a kilogram of dried cannabis.

    Anyone with information is asked to contact Crime Stoppers at www.crimestopperssa.com.au or phone 1800 333 000 – you can remain anonymous.

    CO2500007149

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Marine Corps Commanders in the Pacific Talk Strategy

    Source: United States INDO PACIFIC COMMAND

    The conference focused on key strategic and operational topics, including an overall theater intelligence update, anti-access/area denial (A2AD), posture initiatives, the MARFORPAC Campaign Plan, fires integration with the joint force, and updates on I and III Marine Expeditionary Forces. Leaders also discussed Marine Corps installation updates and resourcing strategies to enhance regional security and operational readiness.

    The conference reinforced the Marine Corps’ dedication to sustaining a strong regional presence, improving interoperability with joint and allied forces, and bolstering overall security and stability in the Indo-Pacific. By refining operational concepts and ensuring Marine Corps units are synchronized in strategy, capabilities, and readiness, MARFORPAC ensures that Marine forces are prepared to respond rapidly to emerging threats while supporting U.S. and allied interests in the Indo-Pacific.

    U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Pacific is the largest operational command in the Marine Corps. It comprises two-thirds of the Marine Corps’ active-duty combat forces, collectively known as the “Pacific Marines.” Pacific Marines serve as an expeditionary force-in-readiness. They operate as air-ground-logistics teams and are forward positioned and actively employed throughout the Indo-Pacific every day. Pacific Marines live and work alongside the joint force and like-minded allies and partners to prevent conflict, respond to crisis, and if the Nation calls, to fight and win.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Security: Annual Washington, Thai exchange expands disaster response topics

    Source: United States INDO PACIFIC COMMAND

    “This is the fourth year of this subject matter expert exchange, which continues to foster team building and knowledge sharing between the Washington National Guard and the Royal Thai Army,” said Col. Amanda Doyle, the exchange lead.

    The exchange aimed to enhance knowledge sharing and capability development between the two organizations. This iteration focused on equipment demonstrations, organizational structures, communication strategies, fire line tactics, CBRNE response, and emergency medical operations. The lessons learned will help the Royal Thai Army participants refine tactical-level wildland firefighting operations, emergency medicine triage and assessment, and CBRNE response while shaping future training initiatives.

    “After each instructional module, facilitators provided participants with opportunities for open discussion, fostering a deeper understanding of disaster response concepts and best practices,” Doyle explained. “ The dialogue between facilitators and participants was reinforced through hands-on exercises designed to demonstrate and elaborate on disaster response techniques and strategies.”

    This engagement built upon the success of previous exchange events, validating the receipt of critical safety information and updates to emergency response protocols. Another objective was to enhance collaboration and interoperability between disaster response teams, bridging gaps and strengthening partnerships to ensure effective humanitarian assistance and disaster response operations.

    The long-running exchange successfully met its objectives while also offering U.S. personnel valuable insight into Thailand’s wildfire environment, response procedures, and the Royal Thai Army’s role in wildland firefighting, medical operations, and CBRNE response. Thai personnel gained insight into the Washington National Guard’s mission, tactical wildfire response strategies, hand crew organization and training, and its collaborative relationship with the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

    “The success of this exchange sets the stage for future engagements in other regions of Thailand, enhancing the capacity for joint disaster response operations and fostering a stronger partnership,” Doyle said. “The robust discussions of best practices, shared by both, provided increased awareness and understanding of techniques and processes used in Thailand and Washington state.”

    This was the fourth exchange of this type, and discussions have already begun regarding future engagements, including expanding the scenarios and duration of the training.

    MIL Security OSI

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

    Source: The White House

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

    11:48 A.M. EST

         Q    Mr. President, great to see you again.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.

         Q    How are you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you. 

         Q    Elon Musk.

         MR. MUSK:  Hi.

         Q    Great to see you. 

         MR. MUSK:  Thanks.  Thanks for having me.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Q    I think it’s funny.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I think —

         Q    Because —

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

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

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

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

         Q    You don’t care about that? 

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

         Q    You love the president? 

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

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  It is.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Q    That was it?

         MR. MUSK:  — a precipitating event, yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That speeded it up a little bit?

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.

         Q    The day of the assassination? 

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

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

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Ah, okay.

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

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

         Q    — and all these —

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

         Q    You can show them your shirt.

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

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

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

         Q    It’s crazy.

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

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

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         What is the relationship, Mr. President?

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

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

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

         Q    I have it.

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

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

         We watch the rocket ships, and we watch Tesla.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Just hug the rocket. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’d never seen —

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

         Q    You hug the rocket.  You hug the rocket.

         MR. MUSK:  — (inaudible) rockets. 

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, the do.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  He is —

         MR. MUSK:  I actually virtually am tech support.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s much more than that.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Q    They will?

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

         MR. MUSK:  Really crazy.

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

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

         Q    Ninety-five percent.

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

         But the team we have is — is really unbelievable. 

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    That’s — that’s pretty deep. 

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

         Q    Okay.

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

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

         Q    Starlink.

         MR. MUSK:  At some point, yeah.

         Q    As in (inaudible) —

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

         Q    Star- — Starlink is in 100 countries. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  You go ahead. 

         Q    Starshield, which could be used for national defense. 

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you like Bobby, right?

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Correct.

         Q    That’s for sure. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    You’re pretty competitive.

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

         Q    I’ve known you a long time.

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

         Q    But —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s why I became president.

         Q    — he’s on your team.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) —

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

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

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

         Q    But this is the thing —

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

         MR. MUSK:  Well, thanks for having me.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         Q    So —

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

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

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

         Q    Oh, okay.

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

         Q    Okay.  So, just —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And they’re very committed people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  They got left in space. 

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Biden. 

         MR. MUSK:  They were put —

         Q    Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

    bring them back. 

         Q    About four weeks? 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  We’re being extremely cautious.

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You now have the go-ahead.

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

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

         Q    What’s that?

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  He considered it a —

         Q    — growing up, lost in space. 

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

         Q    Unbelievable.  And so —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

         Q    You donated to the people of —

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

         Q    And California, after the wildfires?

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

         Q    Nothing.

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

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

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

         Q    Not anymore.

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

         Q    He killed that, huh?

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, less —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I really (inaudible) —

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Before Trump: “BC” —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  No.

         Q    No.  So —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  It totally triggers. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And guess what?  I get over it.

         MR. MUSK.  Sure.  Yeah, yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         Q    You —

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

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

         Q    When is it —

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

         Q    This is the new Air Force One?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — what’s going on.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

         Q    Sure. 

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    And what did you mean by that?

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  It’s absurd. 

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

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

         Q    They lie. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  These are horrible people. 

         Q    They tell conspiracy theories.

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

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

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

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

         Q    It was part of her word salad. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Right. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — “No deal.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  They can- —

         Q    Like, this interview will —

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

         Q    Sometimes you cut for time o- — 

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — scroll it and —

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right. 

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, exactly.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         Q    (Inaudible) the art of the deal?

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s caring. 

         Q    Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  I — if you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible.)

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

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  They fully lied. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    You know, they said Obamacare would save —

         MR. MUSK:  They flat out lied. 

         Q    They flat out lied — 

         MR. MUSK:  It was insane.

         Q    — on many occasions. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — for better schools, law and order. 

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

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

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

         Q    — our kids and grandkids.

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

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

         Q    Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of kickbacks. 

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

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Literally.

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s incredible. 

         Q    I was going to mention that.

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

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

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

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

         Q    So, for the average person at home —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

         Q    They tried to get —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  That’s true.

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

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

         Q    Money to the Taliban?

         MR. MUSK:  Like a lot.

         Q    All right.  So —

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

         Q    But they —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

         Q    — transgender comic book in Peru. 

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

         Q    Okay.  The — I —

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

         Q    I have 20 pages of this.

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

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

        MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

         Q    Subscriptions. 

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

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

         Q    A million dollars in subscriptions is a lot.

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

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

         Q    Well —

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

    thought that was a little bold.  (Laughs.) 

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

         MR. MUSK:  I’m like —

         Q    — the Twitter files.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    — you found all that out. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I think —

         Q    That’s called transparency, right?

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

         MR. MUSK:   Yeah.

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

         Q    And intelligence.

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

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

         Q    It is. 

         What — you were going to say, Elon?

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

         Q    How — how did you find (inaudible)?

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

         Q    She bought and paid it — for it —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — Russian disinformation. 

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

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

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

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

         Q    For this fiscal year?

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

         MR. MUSK:  Two —

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

         Q    That was January —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Inflating is back —

         Q    — you were there for a week. 

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

         Q    Well —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Dollar-wise, probably —

         Q    — and DEI —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it is.

         Q    — and wokeism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    — and transgenderism —

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

         Q    — and LGBTQ+.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could teach physics. 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  Totally.

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, the teaching —

         MR. MUSK:  Expensive BS.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — of DEI.

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

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

         Q    Well, it —

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Well —

         Q    — do you anticipate you will?

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  One percent.

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly.

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

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I think so. 

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

    Q    How’d they earn it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    They have a private company on the side? 

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  While they were working.

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

    Q    W- —

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

    Q    All right, s- —

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And — and we’re not doing it.

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

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Exactly.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

    Q    I think you’re right.

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

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

    Q    Popular vote. 

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

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

    Q    Yeah, your friends in the media.

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  Yeah.

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

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

    Q    Won’t be touched.

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

    Q    Nothing.  I want you to —

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

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

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

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

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

    So, it doesn’t work. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Q    Do you want standards associated with the money?

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

    Q    Math and science.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and arithmetic.  Okay?

    Q    Science?  Science might help.

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

    Q    Computers.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  It’s empty.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Look at the real estate and the —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s a valuable commodity. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I think they should be incentivized. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

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

    You mentioned —

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

    Q    Forms of that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Forms of that could be done.

    Q    Innovation. 

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

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

    There are things we could do. 

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  The numbers are crazy.

    Q    To go back to my original point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He can save —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’ll never do anything bigger.

    MR. MUSK:  To the president’s point —

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

    never do anything” —

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

         Q    When you say “tech support” —

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

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

    Q    They want to know.

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

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

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

    Q    Yeah.

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

    Q    Way too high.

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

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

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

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

    Q    Yeah.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Florida.

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

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

    Q    Yeah.

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

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

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

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

    Q    I like Florida.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

    Q    Efficiently.

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  I — well, I did.

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

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

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

    The sad part is it rewards really badly run states. 

    Q    Yeah.

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

    Q    You got it done, and —

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

         Q    A little bit.

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

    Q    It’s only a little.

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ve got to help.

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Q    That was it.

    MR. MUSK:  — being bought by the DOD.

    Q    And that he gave it to you.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, actually, it was —

    MR. MUSK:  Th- — it was fa- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was Biden.

    Q    It was Biden.

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

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

    Q    That’s what it was, Cybertrucks.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  It’s total fake news. 

    Q    There — there is —

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

    Q    There is some integration —

    MR. MUSK:  — multiple layers of fake.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    You know, “Godspeed, John Glenn.”

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

    Q    But — but there —

    MR. MUSK:  Oh, yeah.

    Q    But there are legitimate areas —

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

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

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

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

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

    Q    — a contract he would otherwise get?

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

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

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

    Q    Y- — now y- —

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re cutting back.

    Q    You’re losing —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not only cutting back —

    Q    It hurts you.

    MR. MUSK:  Correct.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Now, I will tell you —

    Q    You don’t care? 

    MR. MUSK:  Well —

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

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

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

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  He won’t be involved. 

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  You know the truth was —

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Q    Shock — it’s been shock and awe. 

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, reciprocal. 

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    Q    I didn’t know Canada was charging us.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Everybody.  Everybody.  Everybody but us.

    Q    Brazil, why?

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  The tariffs are so high —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

    Q    36 percent?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, much — much higher.

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  It seems fair.

    Q    Don’t you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  It does.

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

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

    Q    Can I — (inaudible) —

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

         Q    They stop.

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

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

         Q    (Inaudible.)

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

    Q    Yeah.  And how does — how —

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  They do.  Everybody needs us. 

    Q    Everybody needs it. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know what?

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

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

    Q    Mr. President —

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

    Q    How quickly —

    MR. MUSK:  May I say —

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

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

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

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

    Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

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

    Q    I agree. 

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

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

    Q    Nobody — 

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

    Q    The president’s —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Europe takes advantage of us.

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

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

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, you’re a —

    Q    This is what — this is what drives you? 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts.

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

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

    Q    It’s peanuts?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    Do you agree with that?

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships going up.

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nothing.  There’s nothing left. 

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

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

         Q    But why this rage?

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

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

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

    Q    They’re being exposed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Q    They would attack him —

    THE PRESIDENT:  But this — Sean —

    Q    — as being unconstitutional, not — a fascist. 

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

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

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

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  All good statements.

    Q    King Abdullah was interested.

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

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

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

    Q    It’s the obvious. 

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

    MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not the greatest. 

    Q    Sorry, if that’s (inaudible).

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s done a tremendous disservice. 

    Q    Will you be here —

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

    Q    Who?  John Fetterman?

    THE PRESIDENT:  — a lot of people have —

    Q    Maybe?  Who — what Democrat is not radicalized? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Actually, you mention John.

    Q    John Fetterman. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    But he’s under a pretty big microscope. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, seriously.

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

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

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Totally.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

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

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

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

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

    Q    It shocks the conscious.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

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

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

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

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

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    But you had been planning on it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

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

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

    Q    Yeah.  Thank you both. 

         Mr. President, thank you, sir. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much. 

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

                                  END                    1:01 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: Hamas: Ready to implement next phases of Gaza truce deal

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    Aid trucks wait to enter Gaza at the Egyptian side of the Rafah border crossing on Jan. 19, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    Hamas reaffirmed on Tuesday its willingness to implement the second and third phases of the Gaza ceasefire agreement.

    Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem said in a statement that the group had agreed, at the request of a mediator, to double the number of Israeli hostages to be released, demonstrating its commitment to the deal.

    Qassem rejected Israeli demands for Hamas to leave Gaza, calling them part of a “psychological war.” He stressed that Hamas would not accept Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that the group disarm and its leaders be expelled from Gaza.

    Separately, Israel’s public broadcaster reported that Netanyahu had officially decided to begin negotiations for the second phase of the ceasefire deal and informed the Security Cabinet of his decision.

    MIL OSI China News

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

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Offers Relief to Missouri Businesses, Nonprofits and Residents Affected by November Storms

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)announced that low‑interest federal disaster loans are available to Missouri businesses, nonprofits and residents affected by the severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds and flooding that occurred Nov. 3‑9, 2024. The SBA issued a disaster declaration in response to a request received from Gov. Mike Kehoe on Feb. 14, 2025.

    The disaster declaration covers Pulaski County.

    Businesses and nonprofits are eligible to apply for business physical disaster loans and may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace disaster-damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets.

    Homeowners and renters are eligible to apply for home and personal property loans and may borrow up to $100,000 to replace or repair personal property, such as clothing, furniture, cars, and appliances. Homeowners may apply for up to $500,000 to replace or repair their primary residence.

    Applicants may also be eligible for a loan increase of up to 20% of their physical damages, as verified by the SBA, for mitigation purposes. Eligible mitigation improvements include strengthening structures to protect against high wind damage, upgrading to wind rated garage doors, and installing a safe room or storm shelter to help protect property and occupants from future damage.

    SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to eligible small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries, and private nonprofit (PNP) organizations that suffered financial losses directly related to the disaster. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are available for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the small business or PNP did not suffer any physical damage. The loans may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills that could have been paid had the disaster not occurred.

    The loan amount can be up to $2 million with interest rates as low as 4% for businesses, 3.625% for nonprofits and 2.563% for homeowners and renters, with terms up to 30 years. Interest does not begin to accrue, and payments are not due until 12 months from the date of the first loan disbursement. The SBA sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition.

    SBA has established a virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center (DLOC) where customer service representatives will be on hand to answer questions about SBA’s disaster loan program, explain the application process and help individuals complete their electronic loan application. Applicants may call or email as indicated below.

    Virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center
    Monday – Friday
    8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. PT
    FOCWAssistance@sba.gov
    (916) 735-1531

    The SBA encourages applicants to submit their loan applications promptly. Applications will be prioritized in the order they are received, and the SBA remains committed to processing them as efficiently as possible.

    To apply online, visit SBA.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    The deadline to return for physical damage applications is April 21, 2025. The deadline to return economic injury applications is Nov. 18, 2025.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI China: China reaffirms support for two-state solution

    Source: China State Council Information Office

    A worker prepares the truck loaded with Chinese aid at the warehouse of Jordan Hashemite Charity Organization in Zarqa, Jordan, on Feb. 18, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    China reaffirmed its firm support for the two-state solution as the only realistic path to resolving the recurring cycles of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, China’s envoy to Egypt and the Arab League said in Cairo on Monday.

    Speaking at the Fourth Meeting of the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution held in Cairo, Ambassador Liao Liqiang expressed deep concern over the situation in Gaza and urged the international community to push for full implementation of the ceasefire agreement, according to a statement released by the Chinese embassy.

    Liao emphasized that Gaza is an integral part of Palestinian territory and that future arrangements for the enclave should respect the will of the Palestinian people, adhere to international law and UN resolutions, and address the concerns of regional countries.

    The meeting discussed the role of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and Israel’s restrictions on its operations. Liao reiterated China’s support for UNRWA’s work in post-conflict Gaza, saying any actions targeting or hindering the agency are detrimental to a political settlement.

    He called on the international community to utilize platforms like the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution to build consensus and promote a comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the Palestinian issue.

    Egypt’s foreign ministry, in a statement after the meeting, reiterated its commitment to the two-state solution, stressing that an independent Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital is the only way to achieve lasting peace.

    UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini highlighted the agency’s crucial role in maintaining the ceasefire and providing essential services to Palestinian refugees, calling for urgent international support to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

    UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process ad interim Sigrid Kaag underscored the importance of a comprehensive political solution.

    The meeting brought together representatives from 35 countries and various regional and international organizations.

    MIL OSI China News

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Getting to grips with disaster data

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    What we did

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

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

    • government planning agencies (both state and local government)

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

    • housing and land developers (private and public)

    • banks and insurers.

    What we found

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

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

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

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

    A community housing provider told us:

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

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

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

    Lack of transparency for homebuyers

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Where to next?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: Orca Energy Group Inc. Announces Independent Reserves Evaluation for Year End 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORTOLA, British Virgin Islands, Feb. 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — February 19, 2025 – Orca Energy Group Inc. (“Orca” or the “Company” and includes PanAfrican Energy Tanzania Limited (“PAET“) and its other subsidiaries and affiliates) (TSX-V: ORC.A, ORC.B) announces the approval of its Independent Reserves Evaluation as at December 31, 2024. All currency amounts in this news release are in United States Dollars ($) unless otherwise stated.

    INDEPENDENT RESERVES EVALUATION
    The Company’s conventional natural gas reserves as at December 31, 2024 for the period to the end of the primary 25-year term of the production sharing agreement (the “Songo Songo PSA“) with the Tanzanian Petroleum Development Corporation (the “TPDC“) have been evaluated by independent petroleum engineering consultants McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd. (“McDaniel“), an independent reserves evaluator, in accordance with the definitions, standards and procedures contained in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook (“COGE Handbook“) and National Instrument 51-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities (“NI 51-101“). The Songo Songo PSA expires upon the expiry of TPDC’s Songo Songo licence in respect of the Songo Songo gas field (the “Songo Songo Licence“) in October 2026. The preparation date of the independent reserves evaluation prepared by McDaniel is February 18, 2025 and the effective date of the evaluation is December 31, 2024 (the “McDaniel Report“).

    All of the Company’s reserves are located in Tanzania. Reserves included herein are stated on a Company gross reserves basis unless noted otherwise. Company gross reserves are the total of the Company’s working interest share in reserves.

    The Company’s Board of Directors has reviewed and approved the McDaniel Report. Additional reserves information required under NI 51-101 is included in Orca’s reports relating to reserves data and other oil and gas information under NI 51-101, which will be filed on its profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. The following discussion is subject to a number of cautionary statements, assumptions, contingencies and risks as set forth in this news release.

    HIGHLIGHTS

    • Total Proved (“1P”) Gross Company conventional natural gas reserves at year ended December 31, 2024, were 40.2 billion standard cubic feet (“Bcf“) compared to 85.0 Bcf at year end 2023, representing a 53% decrease.
    • Total Proved plus Probable (“2P”) Gross Company conventional natural gas reserves at year ended December 31, 2024, were 41.5 Bcf compared to 93.9 Bcf at year end 2023, representing a 56% decrease.
    • The Company estimated gas sales of 26.7 Bcf in 2024, representing a decrease of approximately 15% compared to year end 2023. The reduction in Gross Company 1P reserves from year end 2023 to year end 2024 was primarily attributed to 26.7 BCF of production in 2024 and 18.1 Bcf of negative technical revisions. The technical revisions were primarily due to lower forecasted gas sales to the end of the license (October 2026) attributed to increased hydro power in Tanzania and the removal of Proved Undeveloped reserves due to the unsuccessful well intervention on SS-7.
    • Net present value of 1P future net revenue discounted at 10% was $61.8 million at year end 2024, compared to $108.4 million at year end 2023, representing a 43% decrease.
    • Net present value of 2P future net revenue discounted at 10% was $64.7 million at year end 2024, compared to $118.7 million at year end 2023, representing a 45% decrease.
    • The 43% reduction in net present value of 1P future net revenues from year end 2023 to year end 2024 was primarily attributed to lower reserves at year end 2024 and the associated 33% reduction in the number of years outstanding on the current Songo Songo Licence.
    • The following tables outline the Company’s conventional natural gas reserves as at December 31, 2024 and the net present value of future net revenue attributable to such reserves as evaluated in the McDaniel Report utilizing McDaniel’s forecast price and cost assumptions to the end of the Songo Songo Licence term in October 2026.
      Company Gross Reserves   Company Net Reserves
      Conventional.

    Natural Gas

      Conventional.

    Natural Gas

      MMcf   MMcf
    Proved      
      Developed Producing 40,244   28,020
      Developed Non-Producing  
      Undeveloped  
    Total Proved 40,244   28,020
    Probable 1,224   803
    Total Proved plus Probable 41,469   28,823

    Net Present Value of Future Net Revenue of Gas Reserves

        Before and After Future Income Tax Expenses Discounted at   Unit Value
          Before and
    After Tax at
    10%
        0 %   5 %   10 %   15 %   20 %   $/Mcf
    ($’000)                        
    Proved                        
    Developed Producing   67,574     64,549     61,824     59,357     57,112     2.21
    Developed Non-Producing                      
    Undeveloped                      
    Total Proved   67,574     64,549     61,824     59,357     57,112     2.21
    Probable   3,160     3,016     2,887     2,769     2,663     3.60
    Total Proved plus Probable   70,735     67,565     64,710     62,126     59,775     2.25

    Notes:

    1. During the third quarter of 2015, The Petroleum Act, 2015 (the “Act“) was passed into law by Presidential decree. The Act repeals earlier legislation, provides a regulatory framework over upstream, mid-stream and downstream gas activity, and as well consolidates and puts in place a single, effective and comprehensive legal framework for regulating the oil and gas industry in Tanzania. The Act also provides for the creation of an upstream regulator, the Petroleum Upstream Regulatory Authority. The mid and downstream petroleum as well as gas activities are proposed to be regulated by the current authority, the Energy and Water Utilities Regulatory Authority (“EWURA“). The Act also confers upon on the TPDC the status of the National Oil Company, mandated with the task of managing the country’s commercial interest in the petroleum operations as well as mid and downstream natural gas activities. The Act vests TPDC with exclusive rights in the entire petroleum upstream value chain and the natural gas mid and downstream value chain. However, the exclusive rights of TPDC do not extend to mid and downstream petroleum supply operations. The Act does provide grandfathering provisions upholding the rights of the Company under the Songo Songo PSA as it was signed prior to the passing of the Act.
    2. On October 7, 2016, the Government of Tanzania issued the Petroleum (Natural Gas Pricing) Regulation made under Sections 165 and 258 (1) of the Act (the “Natural Gas Pricing Policy“). Article 260(3) of the Act preserves the Company’s pre-existing right with TPDC to market and sell natural gas together or independently on terms and conditions (including prices) negotiated with third party natural gas customers. To date, the Natural Gas Pricing Policy has not impacted the Company’s ability to market and sell natural gas at prices freely negotiated with natural gas customers. The future impact of the Natural Gas Pricing Policy, if any, cannot be determined at this time.
    3. On January 16, 2018, Orca sold (the “First Swala Transaction“) 7.933 percent of the Class A common shares (7,933 Class A common shares) of its wholly owned subsidiary PAE PanAfrican Energy Corporation (“PAEM“), a Mauritius registered Company and sole shareholder of PAET, a Jersey registered Company, to a wholly owned subsidiary of Swala. The Songo Songo PSA is held by PAET. While Swala had no management or control of PAEM and no shareholding in, or management or control of PAET, the McDaniel Report was previously prepared based on Orca’s ownership of 92.07 percent of PAET’s gross reserves. On July 21, 2023, the Company repurchased (the “Second Swala Transaction”) the 7.933% shares in PAEM eliminating Swala’s interest in the reserves. Accordingly, the 2024 McDaniel Report is prepared based on Orca’s ownership of 100% of PAET’s gross reserves.
    4. “Company Gross Reserves” are the total of the Company’s working interest share in reserves before deduction of royalties owned by others and without including any royalty interests of the Company.
    5. “Company Net Reserves” are the total of the Company’s working interest share in reserves after deducting the amounts attributable to royalties and Profit Gas owned by others (as defined in the PSA), plus the Company’s royalty interests in such reserves.
    6. Company Gross and Net Reserves are based on the Company’s 100 percent ownership interest in the reserves following the Second Swala Transaction.
    7. Under the terms of the Songo Songo Production Sharing Agreement with TPDC and the Government of Tanzania (“PSA“), the Company is required to pay Tanzanian income tax, but this is recovered by the Company through the profit sharing arrangements with TPDC. Where income tax is accrued, the Company’s revenue will be grossed up by the tax due and the tax will be shown as a tax in the Company’s accounts. However, the income tax has no material impact on the cash flows emanating from the PSA and accordingly it has not been identified as a separate cash flow stream in the analysis of the net present values.

    McDaniel employed the following gas sales, pricing and inflation rate assumptions as of December 31, 2024 in estimating the Company’s reserves data using forecast prices and costs. The Company received an average gas price of $4.67/Mcf in 2024 and $4.22/Mcf net of the transportation tariff imposed by Songas Limited as determined by the energy regulator, EWURA.

        Songo Songo gas prices  

    Year

    Brent crude

    $/bbl

    Proved

    $/Mcf

    Proved plus probable

    $/Mcf

    Annual inflation

    %

     
               
    2025 76.50 5.15 5.20 2  
    2026 78.03 5.25 5.32 2  
               

    Note:   Brent price forecast based on the McDaniel January 1, 2025 price forecast.

    The price of gas for the Industrial sector is based on a formula related to discounts to heavy fuel oil prices and includes caps and floors. This has been reflected in the above pricing.

    Orca Energy Group Inc.

    Orca is an international public company engaged in natural gas development and supply in Tanzania through its subsidiary PAET. Orca trades on the TSX Venture Exchange under the trading symbols ORC.A and ORC.B.

    For further information please contact:

    Jay Lyons                                
    Chief Executive Officer                        
    +44 (0)20 8434 2754                        
    ir@orcaenergygroup.com                 

    For media enquiries:
    Celicourt (PR)
    Mark Antelme
    Jimmy Lea
    Orca@celicourt.uk
    +44 (0)20 8434 2754

    Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Service Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    Abbreviations

    bbl cubic meters
    Mcf thousand cubic feet
    MMcf million standard cubic feet


    Forward Looking Information

    Certain information regarding Orca set forth in this news release contains forward-looking information and statements as defined under applicable securities laws (collectively, “forward-looking statements” or “statements“) that involve substantial known and unknown risks and uncertainties. The use of any of the words “plan”, “expect”, “prospective”, “project”, “intend”, “believe”, “should”, “anticipate”, “estimate” or other similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions “may” or “will” occur are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are only predictions and actual events or results may differ materially. Although the Company’s management believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, it cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievement since such expectations are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties and contingencies. Many factors could cause Orca’s actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Orca.

    In particular, statements relating to “reserves” are deemed to be forward-looking statements, as they involve the implied assessment, based on certain estimates and assumptions that the resources described exist in the quantities predicted or estimated, and that the resources described can be profitably produced in the future. Additional forward-looking statements in this news release include statements regarding: expectations regarding demand for natural gas and the implications of decreasing demand; expiration of the Songo Songo PSA and the Songo Songo Licence and pending extension of the Songo Songo Licence and Songo Songo PSA; reserves and future net revenue from the Company’s reserves; assumptions regarding the increased demand for hydro power in Tanzania; and assumptions regarding gas sales, pricing and inflation rates.

    These forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to risks and uncertainties regarding or associated with: drilling wells, including the costs of drilling and whether development drilling results in commercially productive quantities of oil and gas; the terms of Orca’s future petroleum contracts, including potential obligations to drill wells and declare discoveries in order to retain Orca’s exploration and production rights; Orca’s local operational dependence and focus of its existing contracts; Orca’s future control over the Songo Songo Licence areas and facilities, including its status as operator thereof, and the timing and extent of costs in association therewith; estimations of reserves and the present value of future net revenues derived from them; Orca’s dependency on its management and technical team; Orca’s business plan including the additional capital required to execute such plans; commercializing Orca’s interests in any hydrocarbons produced from future licence areas; Orca’s ability to access appropriate equipment and infrastructure in a timely manner; the exploration and production of oil and natural gas, including but not limited to drilling and other operational and environmental risks and hazards; severe weather including but not limited to tropical storms and hurricanes; disagreements with TPDC regarding the Songo Songo PSA; the political and economic circumstances in the countries in which Orca operates; disputes with the Government of Tanzania; technological development; activism against oil and exploration and development; limitations on insurance coverage; Orca’s operations in a litigious environment; global populism; Orca’s future capitalization which may include additional indebtedness; acquisitions and the integration of any target entity or business into Orca’s current business; cybersecurity and data breaches; impacts of pandemics; share price volatility and dilution; Orca’s controlling shareholder and its control over key decision making as a result of its control of a majority of the voting rights attached to Orca’s issued and outstanding securities; Orca’s status as a holding company that’s ability to declare and pay dividends and purchase its own securities is dependent upon the receipt of funds from Orca’s subsidiaries by way of dividends, fees, interest, loans or otherwise; the impact of general economic conditions, including global and local oil and gas prices; industry conditions including changes in laws and regulations, and changes in how they are interpreted and enforced; competition; lack of availability of qualified personnel; risks related to obtaining required approvals of regulatory authorities; risks associated with negotiating with governments and other counterparties; fluctuations in foreign exchange or interest rates; risks and uncertainties associated with obtaining an extension to the Songo Songo PSA and related Songo Songo Licence or successfully renegotiating them; changes in income tax laws or tax rates; ability to access sufficient capital from internal and external sources; associated with the failure of counterparties to perform under the terms of their contracts, including collectability of Orca’s receivables from such parties; reduced global economic activity as a result of global pandemics, including lower demand for natural gas and a reduction in the price of natural gas; prolonged deficiency in Tanzania’s official reserve and foreign exchange losses; political instability and the impacts of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the Israel-Hamas conflict, conflicts in the Middle East and related actions; and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company. Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive.

    Although the forward-looking statements contained in this news release are based upon assumptions which management believes to be reasonable, Orca cannot assure investors that actual results will be consistent with these forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements included in this news release, as there can be no assurance that the plans, intentions or expectations upon which the forward-looking statements are based will occur. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve numerous assumptions, known and unknown risks and uncertainties that contribute to the possibility that the predictions, forecasts, projections and other forward-looking statements will not occur. With respect to forward-looking statements contained in this news release, Orca has made assumptions regarding, among other things: continued and timely development of infrastructure in areas of new production; obtaining an extension to the Songo Songo PSA and related Songo Songo Licence on terms acceptable to Orca; accuracy of estimates of Orca’s reserves volumes; the impact of any pandemics or political conflicts on the demand for and price of natural gas, volatility in financial markets, disruptions to global supply chains and the Company’s business, operations, access to customers and suppliers, availability of employees to carry out day-to-day operations, and other resources; future commodity prices and commodity price fluctuations; availability of skilled labour; availability of transactions to facilitate Orca’s growth strategy; growth of demand and consumption of natural gas in Tanzania and throughout Africa; the impact of increasing competition; conditions in general economic and financial markets; effects of regulation by governmental agencies; receipt of partner, regulatory and community approvals; future operating costs; effects of regulation by governmental agencies; that Orca’s conduct and results of operations will be consistent with its expectations; current or, where applicable, proposed industry conditions, laws and regulations will continue in effect or as anticipated as described herein; and other matters. There are a number of assumptions associated with the development of the evaluated areas, including continued performance of existing wells, future drilling programs and performance from new wells, the growth of infrastructure, well density per section, and recovery factors and development necessary involves known and unknown risks and uncertainties, including those risks identified in this news release. Orca believes the material factors, expectations and assumptions reflected in the forward-looking information are reasonable but no assurance can be given that these factors, expectations and assumptions will prove to be correct.

    Management has included the above summary of assumptions and risks related to forward-looking information provided in this news release in order to provide investors with a more complete perspective on Orca’s current and future operations and such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. Orca’s actual results, performance or achievement could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, these forward-looking statements and, accordingly, no assurance can be given that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will transpire or occur, or if any of them do, what benefits Orca will derive. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this news release and Orca disclaims any intent or obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or results or otherwise, other than as required by applicable securities laws. The forward-looking statements contained in this news release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

    Oil and Gas Advisory

    The Company’s conventional natural gas reserves as at December 31, 2024 disclosed herein were evaluated by McDaniel in accordance with the definitions, standards and procedures contained in the COGE Handbook and NI 51-101. The McDaniel Report had an effective date of December 31, 2024. The Company’s conventional natural gas reserves as at December 31, 2023 disclosed herein were evaluated by McDaniel in accordance with the definitions, standards and procedures contained in the COGE Handbook and NI 51-101. Such report had an effective date of December 31, 2023.

    Additional reserves information required under NI 51-101 are included in Orca’s reports relating to reserves data and other oil and gas information under NI 51-101, which are filed on its profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

    This news release contains estimates of the net present value of Orca’s future net revenue from the Company’s reserves. The net present value of future net revenue attributable to the Company’s reserves is stated without provision for interest costs and out of country general and corporate administrative costs, but after providing for estimated royalties, production costs, development costs, other income and future capital expenditures. It should not be assumed that the undiscounted or discounted net present value of future net revenue attributable to the Company’s reserves estimated by McDaniel represent the fair market value of those reserves. Such amounts do not represent the fair market value of the Company’s reserves. The recovery and reserve estimates of the Company’s conventional natural gas reserves provided herein are estimates only and there is no guarantee that the estimated reserves will be recovered. Actual reserves may be greater than or less than the estimates provided herein.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Welch Provides Opening Remarks at NOFA’s Winter Conference 

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
    BURLINGTON, VT — U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) delivered remarks to a gathering of over 300 organic farmers and food businesses at the Northeast Organic Farmers’ Association of Vermont’s (NOFA-VT) annual winter conference this weekend.  
    “Vermont was an early pioneer of organic farming, and our organic farmers and producers remain crucial to our economy. Last year, I was proud to work across the aisle and secure bipartisan provisions in the Farm Bill to support Vermont’s organic industry. But thanks to Elon Musk’s influence, Republicans removed crucial funding for organic programs from the bill at the eleventh hour,” said Senator Welch. “Finding common ground to protect people and industries under threat from the Trump Administration, like our organic farmers and producers, will be vital in the days ahead. I’ll do everything I can to find common ground to support and strengthen our organic farms in Vermont. 
    As Ranking Member of the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Rural Development, Energy, and Credit, Senator Welch has led efforts to support Vermont’s organic farms and the transition to organics.  
    Senator Welch has introduced several bills to support Vermont’s dairy, organic, and specialty crop farmers; strengthen rural development and infrastructure; increase energy efficiency and renewable energy adoption; improve access to nutrition; strengthen our local food systems and expand markets; and make our communities more resilient to flooding—all of which were included in the Senate’s draft Farm Bill text during the 118th Congress, the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act. Senator Welch plans to reintroduce many of these bills and policy provisions in the 119th Congress. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Structure fire – Bloomfield Street Alice Springs

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    Northern Territory Fire and Rescue Service (NTFRS) responded to a significant fire on Bloomfield Street in Alice Springs this morning.

    At 2:24am, NTFRS received reports of multiple grassfires impacting three backyard sheds along Bloomfield Street. Several career and volunteer firefighting units swiftly responded and immediately worked to bring the fire under control.

    An evacuation of impacted properties was initiated while firefighters worked to extinguish the fires.

    NT Police and St John Ambulance attended the scene and assessed several people for smoke inhalation. No one was taken to hospital.

    A NTFRS fire investigator and NT Police are working together to determine the cause of the fire.

    Anyone with information is urged to make contact with police on 131 444.

    Media contact:

    Rickie Abraham

    8923 9803
     

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Long Beach Man Who Was Getaway Driver in Fatal Armed Robbery of Victim Dealing Marijuana in Inglewood Pleads Guilty to Federal Charges

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    LOS ANGELES – A Long Beach man pleaded guilty today to federal criminal charges for his role in the March 2021 murder of a victim in Inglewood during a marijuana deal.   

    Mateo Paul, 22, pleaded guilty to one count of interference with commerce by robbery (Hobbs Act) and one count of brandishing and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence. Paul has been in custody since November 2023.

    “This defendant’s recklessness led to a victim’s violent death and the prospect of a life sentence in federal prison,” said Acting United States Attorney Joseph T. McNally. “When local and federal law enforcement work together – as we did in this case – we can bring severe punishment for perpetrators of violent gun crime.”

    According to his plea agreement, in March 2021, Paul and co-defendants Leandrew Raglin, 22, of Lancaster, and Iysis Elanore Smith, 22, of Inglewood, agreed to rob a marijuana dealer at gunpoint. They devised a plan to lure the dealer via a social media application to a meeting location, where they would ambush him at gunpoint and steal his marijuana.

    On March 15, 2021, Smith approached the vehicle occupied by the victim. While Smith distracted the victim, Paul and Raglin parked behind the victim’s vehicle. Raglin then exited the vehicle Paul was driving, approached the passenger side of the victim’s car and opened fire, repeatedly wounding the victim in the passenger seat. Raglin then walked around to the driver’s side of the vehicle and opened fire, fatally wounding the victim in the driver’s seat of the vehicle, according to court documents.

    Raglin’s brandishing and discharge of the firearm fell within the scope of Paul’s criminal agreement and could reasonably have been foreseen to be a necessary or natural consequence of the unlawful agreement, the plea agreement states.

    United States District Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha scheduled a June 27 sentencing hearing, at which time Paul will face a statutory maximum sentence of life in federal prison.

    Raglin has pleaded not guilty to the charges in the indictment against him in this case and is scheduled to go to trial on May 19. The criminal charges against Smith are still pending. Both defendants face potential life sentences.

    An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    The FBI and the Inglewood Police Department investigated this matter.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Chelsea Norell of the Violent and Organized Crimes Section and Gregg E. Marmaro of the International Narcotics, Money Laundering, and Racketeering Section are prosecuting this case.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hickenlooper, Bennet Press Trump Admin on Treatment of Federal Employees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper
    Blanket buyouts and layoffs threaten Colorado’s 40,000 federal employees and raise potential for severe delays in federal services
    Hickenlooper and Bennet: “Our federal workers keep Colorado, and America moving.”
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet sent a letter to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) pushing the Trump administration to respond to concerns regarding OPM’s blanket buyout offer to federal employees. The senators argue that the buyout threatens severe delays and pauses to ongoing federal services in Colorado including health care for veterans, childcare for underserved families, and access to national parks.
    “In Colorado alone, there are more than 40,000 federal workers across agencies and areas of expertise. Such a sweeping reduction of the workforce could have a devastating impact on the programs that our constituents rely on,” the senators wrote.
    “…While every administration has the right to review and make changes to the executive branch personnel, doing so without a strategic plan, without appropriated funds, and without adhering to workers’ legal protections, is a misleading overreach. Further, these changes will likely lead to workforce shortages and talent gaps that delay timely and effective service to our constituents,” they continued. 
    In late January, OPM sent an e-mail to over two million federal workers offering them the opportunity to resign in exchange for their full pay and benefits. According to OPM, an estimated 75,000 federal employees have accepted the buyout offer.
    The senators’ letter raises questions about the legality and legitimacy of the Trump administration’s offer. The OPM promised full pay and benefits to employees who accepted the offer, but Congress has not appropriated funding to make good on that commitment. Given the lack of clarity, federal employees across Colorado have received confusing instructions or no guidance at all from their supervisors.
    The buyout offer is part of a larger Trump administration initiative to drastically reduce the size of the federal workforce. Last Tuesday, Trump signed an executive order paving the way for “large-scale” layoffs and pauses in hiring. In accordance with the executive order, the Department of the Interior fired 2,300 employees, and the Department of Veterans Affairs fired 1,000.
    Last week, Hickenlooper pushed the Department of the Interior to resolve looming staffing shortages at the National Park Service following news that the Trump administration had fired thousands of National Forest Service and National Park Service workers. 
    Full text of the letter is available HERE and below.
    Dear Acting Director Ezell:
    The State of Colorado’s federal workforce is essential to ensure that the work we do, in Congress and in the Executive Branch, benefits our constituents. We are deeply concerned about the implications of the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM’s) January 27th Memorandum on Agency Return to Office Implementation Plans and the agency’s subsequent “Fork in the Road” e-mail, issued January 28. This offer was accepted by over 75,000 federal employees as of the February 12th deadline. Given the decision by the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts to uphold OPM’s offer, it is critical that this process is transparent and that OPM works in earnest to prevent delays or pauses in federal services.
    Historically, under the Chief Human Capital Officers Act of 2002, OPM could not pay more than $25,000 per person in a lump sum payment for resignations. OPM currently includes this policy on its website. Under OPM’s deferred resignation plan, the federal government will be responsible for paying billions of dollars in salary and benefits to employees that would be doing important work, had they not been chased away by the administration’s offer to resign.
    Despite OPM’s guidance about how agencies implement the new return-to-work and deferred resignation offer, we continue to hear from Coloradans who received confusing instructions or no guidance at all from their supervisors. Colorado’s federal workforce consists of workers who provide unique services across the state. For many of our workers, remote work and telework policies have been in place long before COVID-19. Workers are also increasingly skeptical that this deferred resignation offer will not actually allow them to continue receiving their full salary and benefits or protect them from future federal employee layoffs.
    In Colorado alone, there are more than 40,000 federal workers across agencies and areas of expertise. Such a sweeping reduction of the workforce could have a devastating impact on the programs that our constituents rely on. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs (V A) Health Administration comprises more than 7,000 workers in Colorado. While the VA has taken steps to minimize impacts related to veterans’ direct care, mass resignations could delay administration of other VA services like veterans’ disability or burial benefit payments. Denver, Colorado also houses one of 12 regional Head Start offices that helps ensure that our more than 8,000 Head Start children in Colorado receive high-quality child care. Just as importantly, our four national parks, 11 national forests, eight wildlife refuges, and 65 national conservation lands all depend on the federal employees who keep these areas safe, well-maintained, and welcoming to Coloradans and visitors from around the world.
    A highly skilled and stable workforce is key to making our government efficient and effective. However, under OPM’s offer, roughly 3 percent of federal employees will exit the workforce in just a matter of days. Further, the Trump Administration set a goal to see an initial 10 percent reduction across the federal workforce. While every administration has the right to review and make changes to the executive branch personnel, doing so without a strategic plan, without appropriated funds, and without adhering to workers’ legal protections, is a misleading overreach. Further, these changes will likely lead to workforce shortages and talent gaps that delay timely and effective service to our constituents.
    We question whether the Administration can achieve its goal of streamlined and efficient service to Colorado–and the nation–while making such sweeping changes to the federal workforce. To ensure transparency in this ongoing process, we ask that you answer the following questions:
    How many federal workers nationally and based in Colorado accepted OPM’s resignation offers and from which agencies? Which agencies had the highest concentrations of resignations?
    Will OPM and relevant agencies ensure employees continue receiving their contractually obligated salaries, and benefits, including any previously negotiated Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA), through September 30, 2025? If not, why not?
    Have senior agency staff since been consulted about the next steps to implement resignation processes? How soon should workers expect to receive specific information about their agency’s expectations for workers who accept the resignation offer?
    How does OPM plan to work with agencies to prevent delays to constituent services in the event of future workforce shortages these resignations may cause? Has OPM submitted guidance to each agency about preserving mission-critical staffing for services like health care and child care facilities, care for the elderly or veterans’ affairs?
    Consistent with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, workers are protected against retaliation if they a) choose to exercise their right to appeal, file a complaint or grievance against their agency; b) testify in support of another worker’s appeal, complaint or grievance process, c) cooperate or disclose information to an Inspector General or other federal entity responsible for internal investigations; or d) refuse to obey an order that would require that they violate a law, rule or regulation. Will OPM adhere to these protections for workers? How will you continue to enforce these protections?
    Many federal workers are protected by union–negotiated collective bargaining agreements, which are legally binding. Does OPM acknowledge and agree to adhere to these bargaining agreements and the agreed upon protections for workers?
    Our federal workers keep Colorado, and America moving. We implore you to implement these resignations thoughtfully and to take every step to prevent unintended harm to our constituent services. We look forward to hearing from you by Monday, March 10, 2025.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley, Colleagues Demand Answers About Elon Musk and DOGE’s Access to Disaster Victims’ Personal Data

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
    February 18, 2025
    Washington D.C.—U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley said today they have joined Senate colleagues to demand answers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator, on the potential security breach created by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has reportedly accessed the sensitive personal data of disaster victims. 
    The senators in their letter to Cameron Hamilton, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the FEMA Administrator also sought more information on the procedures FEMA follows to protect data from misuse, and if DOGE’s unaccountable agents complied with federal law.
    “The United States has suffered from a growing number of natural disasters over the past several years—from severe flooding in Vermont and hurricanes in North Carolina, to catastrophic wildfires in Hawaii and California. In order to register for federal disaster assistance and receive help rebuilding their communities, our constituents have provided their personally identifiable information to FEMA. They did not do so with the expectation that their sensitive information would be turned over to unvetted, unaccountable DOGE agents,” the senators wrote. 
    “Mr. Musk has stated his desire to eliminate waste at FEMA. We agree the country must examine and thoughtfully consider reforms to the operation of FEMA. Our constituents have experienced first-hand the frustrating bureaucracies that hinder the federal disaster recovery process. Congress must take steps to equip FEMA and communities with the tools needed to better assist disaster victims after the storm has passed. We stand ready to work with anyone willing to fix it,” the senators continued. “But such reforms do not require, or come close to justifying, the invasive measures DOGE has reportedly undertaken.” 
    “When disaster strikes, Americans should have confidence the government will safeguard their data, regardless of the Administration at the helm. Reports indicate you have breached that trust—perhaps in violation of federal privacy law,” the senators concluded.
    In their letter, the senators requested responses to the following questions to understand the scope of that breach and the extent of FEMA’s compliance with federal law: 
    Please provide a complete list of individuals authorized by FEMA to access disaster victims’ data and records during the period between January 20, 2025, and February 14, 2025. Please indicate whether those individuals are employees of FEMA, the White House, DOGE, or another federal agency and specify the agency. If the individuals are not federal employees, please indicate that in your response.  
    What are the individuals specified above authorized to do with disaster victims’ data and records, and what types of data were obtained?  
    What procedures does FEMA follow to protect disaster victims’ data from misuse? Are DOGE-affiliated individuals required to follow those procedures?   
    How many Americans’ personally identifiable data has been accessed by DOGE-affiliated individuals? What vetting did these individuals undergo prior to their being granted access to FEMA systems? 
    The letter was led by U.S. Senators Peter Welch, D-Vt., and Alex Padilla, D-Calif. In addition to Wyden and Merkley, the letter was co-signed by U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. 
    Full text of the letter is here.

    MIL OSI USA News

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

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

    IMDB

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A child hero forged in myth and philosophy

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Good and evil – a Daoist perspective

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Beyond family bonds: rebirth of Confucianism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Wisdom of Legalism and Mohism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sullivan, Colleagues Introduce Resolution Honoring the 80th Anniversary of Iwo Jima

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Alaska Dan Sullivan
    02.18.25
    WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) and the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee (SVAC), introduced a resolution with his Senate colleagues recognizing the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Iwo Jima, which began on February 19, 1945, and lasted until March 26, 1945. 
    “Eighty years ago, the brave Marines who stormed the beaches of Iwo Jima turned the tide of the Pacific Theater in one of the greatest displays of valor and sacrifice in our military’s history,” Senator Sullivan said. “It is an honor to introduce this resolution with my colleagues to recognize the members of the U.S. military who fought in Iwo Jima and inspired enduring peace and allyship between the United States and Japan. The United States, and our military members in particular, has done more to liberate humankind from tyranny and oppression than literally any other force in history. Hundreds of millions of people have been liberated because of our military and our country—and Iwo Jima was a proud part of that legacy.”
    Specifically, the resolution:
    Honors the Marines, Sailors, Soldiers, Army Air Crew, and Coast Guardsmen who fought bravely on Iwo Jima;
    Remembers the brave servicemembers who lost their lives in the battle;
    Encourages Americans to honor the veterans of Iwo Jima; and
    Reaffirms the bonds of friendship and shared values that have developed between the United States and Japan over the last 80 years.
    The resolution was cosponsored by Senators Todd Young (R-Ind.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Coons (D-Conn.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Angus King (I-Maine), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
    Full text of the resolution can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Welch Lead Push to Demand Answers About Elon Musk and DOGE’s Access to Disaster Survivors’ Personal Data

    US Senate News:

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

    Padilla, Welch Lead Push to Demand Answers About Elon Musk and DOGE’s Access to Disaster Survivors’ Personal Data

    Senators: “When disaster strikes, Americans should have confidence the government will safeguard their data, regardless of the Administration at the helm”

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) demanded answers from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) reportedly accessed sensitive personal data of disaster survivors.

    Senators Padilla and Welch led 10 of their colleagues from disaster-impacted states in sounding the alarm on DOGE’s potential security breach. This breach is particularly concerning as Californians request federal disaster assistance following the devastating Southern California fires last month.

    The Senators also requested more information on the procedures FEMA follows to protect data from misuse, and questioned whether DOGE’s unaccountable agents were in compliance with federal law.

    “In order to register for federal disaster assistance and receive help rebuilding their communities, our constituents have provided their personally identifiable information to FEMA. They did not do so with the expectation that their sensitive information would be turned over to unvetted, unaccountable DOGE agents,” wrote the Senators.

    “When disaster strikes, Americans should have confidence the government will safeguard their data, regardless of the Administration at the helm,” continued the Senators. “Reports indicate you have breached that trust—perhaps in violation of federal privacy law.” 

    In their letter, the Senators also expressed that while Congress must better equip FEMA and communities with the tools needed to cut through red tape and quickly assist disaster victims, these reforms “do not require, or come close to justifying, the invasive measures DOGE has reportedly undertaken.” 

    In addition to Senators Padilla and Welch, Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter.

    The Senators requested responses to the following questions to understand the scope of the breach and the extent of FEMA’s compliance with federal law: 

    • Please provide a complete list of individuals authorized by FEMA to access disaster victims’ data and records during the period between January 20, 2025, and February 14, 2025. Please indicate whether those individuals are employees of FEMA, the White House, DOGE, or another federal agency and specify the agency. If the individuals are not federal employees, please indicate that in your response.  
    • What are the individuals specified above authorized to do with disaster victims’ data and records, and what types of data were obtained?  
    • What procedures does FEMA follow to protect disaster victims’ data from misuse? Are DOGE-affiliated individuals required to follow those procedures?   
    • How many Americans’ personally identifiable data has been accessed by DOGE-affiliated individuals? What vetting did these individuals undergo prior to their being granted access to FEMA systems? 

    Senator Padilla has fought relentlessly to secure and protect Southern Californians’ access to desperately needed disaster relief aid. In the immediate aftermath of the Los Angeles fires, Padilla and Senator Schiff led 47 bipartisan members of the California Congressional delegation in successfully urging President Biden to grant Governor Gavin Newsom’s request for a major disaster declaration to expedite timely relief to Los Angeles County residents impacted by these disasters. Last month, Padilla delivered remarks on the Senate floor urging his Republican colleagues and President Trump to provide essential disaster recovery aid to California without conditioning it on the passage of partisan legislation. He also sharply rebuked the order from President Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to freeze all congressionally approved federal grants and loans, including disaster relief for Californians, and raised the alarm on OMB Director Russell Vought’s record of withholding federal disaster aid.

    Full text of the letter is available here and below:

    Dear Mr. Hamilton,

    We write with serious concern about reports that Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) has obtained access to sensitive information at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), including the personal data of thousands of disaster victims.

    The United States has suffered from a growing number of natural disasters over the past several years—from severe flooding in Vermont, Minnesota, and Connecticut and hurricanes in North Carolina, to catastrophic wildfires in Hawai’i, California, New Mexico, and Oregon. In order to register for federal disaster assistance and receive help rebuilding their communities, our constituents have provided their personally identifiable information to FEMA. They did not do so with the expectation that their sensitive information would be turned over to unvetted, unaccountable DOGE agents.

    Mr. Musk has stated his desire to eliminate waste at FEMA. We agree the country must examine and thoughtfully consider reforms to the operation of FEMA. Our constituents have experienced first-hand the frustrating bureaucracies that hinder the federal disaster recovery process. Congress must take steps to equip FEMA and communities with the tools needed to better assist disaster victims after the storm has passed. We stand ready to work with anyone willing to fix it.

    But such reforms do not require, or come close to justifying, the invasive measures DOGE has reportedly undertaken.

    When disaster strikes, Americans should have confidence the government will safeguard their data, regardless of the Administration at the helm. Reports indicate you have breached that trust —perhaps in violation of federal privacy law.

    To understand the scope of that breach and the extent of your compliance with federal law, we request responses to the following items by no later than February 28, 2025:

    1. Please provide a complete list of individuals authorized by FEMA to access disaster victims’ data and records during the period between January 20, 2025, and February 14, 2025. Please indicate whether those individuals are employees of FEMA, the White House, DOGE, or another federal agency and specify the agency. If the individuals are not federal employees, please indicate that in your response.

    2. What are the individuals specified above authorized to do with disaster victims’ data and records, and what types of data were obtained?

    3. What procedures does FEMA follow to protect disaster victims’ data from misuse? Are DOGE-affiliated individuals required to follow those procedures?

    4. How many Americans’ personally identifiable data has been accessed by DOGE affiliated individuals? What vetting did these individuals undergo prior to their being granted access to FEMA systems?

    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News