Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

The inexorable decline of the American Empire has arrived at an Imperial Paradox. It must either fight a war and die, or not fight a war and yet still die.

Here are the options:

China

Neither South Korea nor Japan want anything to do with a war against China, leaving only the Philippines dumb enough to play along.

The US apparently pulled another brigade out of South Korea. They’ll pull out more in the future. They know damn well the North Koreans could easily conquer the entire peninsula if they chose to do so.

China and its local seas are a vast ocean away from America, and its capacity to defend its local seas is enormous and growing.

The Pentagon must understand it cannot sustain logistics in a war against China in the western Pacific. It simply cannot be done. Anyone who thinks otherwise must upgrade their proficiency in basic arithmetic.

Iran

In the context of a war against Iran, all the geography is against the US.

Iran is an exceedingly mountainous country that has, over the course of millennia, learned to use those mountains to defend itself against would-be conquerors.

They can field a satisfactorily well-equipped million-man army.

They have learned in the 21st century to burrow deep heavily fortified tunnels into their mountains.

Iran is also much more technologically advanced than most people understand. They have become impressively capable in terms of both offensive and defensive missiles. They pose a far greater challenge than the Yemeni have been over the past year and a half.

Indeed, they pose a “near-peer” challenge against US overseas power projection.

The US Navy could only operate at extreme risk in the southern Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Persian Gulf.

Every US base in the region is well within range of Iranian missile strikes.

The US Navy very demonstrably cannot secure seaborne logistics into the Persian Gulf. They lack both the sealift ships, and the ability to protect them.

They cannot even open the Bab-el-Mandeb!

Russia

From a geographic and logistical standpoint, the only remotely conceivable war is one in Ukraine against Russia.

The US at least has bases and forces already in place in the UK, Germany, Poland, Romania, Finland, and in Baltic chihuahua fantasy-land — and what has served until now as a reasonably secure logistics pathway into all those places.

Of course, whether or not such a condition persists long in a war scenario is another question altogether.

Because, you see, the Russians are now unquestionably the most formidable and battle-hardened military on the planet — at least in the context of a war fought on their doorstep.

So if you’re an empire that thinks it needs a war to reaffirm at least its short-term relevance and fading glory … well, these are your choices.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Reprinted with permission from imetatronink.
Subscribe and support here.

Indiana’s 2024 quarterly abortion reports were published by the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH) throughout the year and into early 2025. The state’s annual 2024 abortion report, an aggregate of the 2024 quarterly reports, was published in April 2025.

These reports showed that in 2024, brick-and-mortar abortions in Indiana decreased drastically from 2023. This drastic decrease was likely due to the state’s life-at-conception law being in effect for the entirety of 2024. The law’s exceptions allow abortions to be performed in the cases where a continued pregnancy would threaten the mother’s life or physical health, if the unborn child was conceived via rape or incest, or if the unborn child had a lethal fetal anomaly.

In what follows, Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) summarizes the information in the abortion report published by the state. The data published by the state does not include the total number of abortions obtained by Indiana residents out of state or the number of self-managed abortions on women outside of the healthcare system. The report also does not contain the number of mail-order abortion drugs obtained by Indiana residents prescribed by licensed abortion providers in other states under shield laws.

In a separate section, CLI will describe data provided by the Guttmacher Institute’s Monthly Abortion Provision Study that details the number of abortions obtained by Indiana women in other states in 2023. Guttmacher’s abortion estimates include the number of abortions obtained at brick-and-mortar facilities and those provided via telehealth and virtual providers in the United States.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Indiana’s statute code defines abortion as “the termination of human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus. The term includes abortions by surgical procedures and by abortion inducing drugs” (§16-18-2-1).

Abortion Totals and Trends

In 2024, there were 146 abortions reported in Indiana, down 97% from the previous year. Drug-induced abortions decreased by 99% and composed 25% of the total, as opposed to 61% in 2023 (Fig. 1). CLI estimates that Indiana’s 2024 abortion rate was 0.11 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44, a decrease of 97% from 2023 (Fig. 2).1 As of May 2025, three states have released 2024 abortion statistics, with two showing decreases in abortions from 2023 to 2024.

Four incomplete abortion reports were submitted to IDOH for abortions occurring in the fourth quarter of 2024. The state counted the abortions in the total number of abortions occurring in the state for 2024, but did not include the four abortions in any calculation related to demographics or percentages. For this reason, CLI added the four abortions to all demographic and percentage-based calculations as an “unknown” category.

State Report Summary

In 2024, 95% of the abortions reported in Indiana were performed on state residents. Four abortions were performed on nonresidents, while the residency of four women who obtained abortions in Indiana was unknown. Two abortions were performed on girls under the age of 16, while 16% were performed on girls between the ages of 16 and 24. Just over half (52%) were performed on women aged 25 to 34, and 28% were performed on women between the ages of 35 and 45. Four abortions were performed on women whose ages were unknown.

Sixty-two percent of Indiana abortions were performed on white women and 25% on black women. Three abortions each were performed on Asian women and Pacific Islander/Native Hawaiian women. One abortion was performed on an American Indian/Alaska Native woman. The race of nine women who obtained abortions in Indiana was unknown, while two other women were of other, unspecified races. Eighty-four percent of Indiana abortions were obtained by non-Hispanic women, while 11% were obtained by Hispanic women. Five percent of the abortions in the state were performed on women of unknown ethnicity.

Three of the abortions in Indiana were performed on women with an eighth-grade education or less, and four on women who had attended but not completed high school. Twelve percent of Indiana abortions were obtained by women with a high school diploma or its equivalent as their highest level of education, and 36% were obtained by women who had completed some college but did not have a degree. Nineteen percent of abortions were performed on women with a college degree. The level of education was unknown for 23% of the abortions.

Fifty-one percent of the abortions reported in Indiana were obtained by unmarried women and 46% by married women. The marital status was unknown for four women. Thirty-six percent of Indiana abortions were performed on women with no living children, 29% on women with one child, and 32% on women with two or more children. Ninety-four percent of the abortions were obtained by women with no previous abortions, compared to 3% on women with one prior abortion and one abortion on a woman with more than one prior abortion. Thirty percent of the abortions were performed on women who had previously had a miscarriage.

Forty-two percent of the abortions reported in Indiana were surgically induced. Surgically induced abortions include suction curettage abortions, menstrual aspiration abortions, dilation and evacuation abortions, and other procedures, although the reports did not include the percentage of abortions performed by each specific procedure type. A quarter were drug-induced and 30% were performed via intracardiac injection. Five abortions were performed via unknown means.

All 146 abortions performed in the state in 2024 were performed at hospitals, as all were performed under the exceptions to the state’s life-at-conception law. Since freestanding abortion centers like Planned Parenthood or independent centers do not provide actual medical care, they were unable to provide medical care to women whose lives and/or physical health were threatened by continued pregnancies.2 Furthermore, all freestanding abortion centers in the state closed in August 2023 so abortions performed due to rape and incest or because the unborn child had a lethal fetal anomaly were also all performed in hospitals. However, Indiana’s reports did not break down the reasons for abortion by performing facility. Riley Health Maternity Tower performed 46% of Indiana abortions in 2024, while the Sidney and Lois Eskenazi Hospital performed 36%. Seven other hospitals and four unknown locations performed the remainder of the state’s abortions in 2024.

To see the breakdown of abortions by month in 2024, see the following table:

Additional Information Reported in 2024 Quarterly Reports

As previously mentioned, several changes occurred to Indiana’s abortion reporting requirements after quarter two in 2023, and several additional reporting requirements went into effect for all future abortion reports.

Three babies were reported to have been born alive during an abortion. In 2024, 64% of abortions were performed because the unborn child had a fetal anomaly, and 27% were performed because the mother’s life or physical health was at risk. Nine abortions were performed due to rape or incest while four were performed for unknown reasons.3

Another piece of information Indiana started providing in the last two quarters of 2023 was the number of reports submitted to the IDOH within the required 30 days for abortions performed on girls and women 16 and older, and within three days to the IDOH and Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS) for abortions performed on minors under 16. All but four reports (136) for abortions performed on women ages 16 and older were reported to the IDOH on time. Both abortion reports for girls under 16 were reported to both the IDOH and DCS on time. The timeliness of four reports was unknown.

Fifty-five percent of abortions in 2024 were performed via abortion drugs at eight weeks of gestation or later. Seven percent were performed via surgical abortion at eight weeks or earlier, while 35% were performed via surgical abortion after eight weeks of gestation. In 2024, 41 of 44 intracardiac injection abortions utilized an additional dilation and evacuation abortion, while one intracardiac injection utilized an mifepristone/misoprostol abortion to complete the abortion. Two intracardiac injections did not require a further procedure. One abortion was performed at or after 20 weeks post-fertilization age, and the required second attending physician was present during this abortion.

Abortion Complications

In 2024, 70 complication reports were filed, with information on 91 complications (patients can have more than one complication listed on a report).3 Fifty-nine percent of the complication reports were associated with drug-induced abortions, including four known to have resulted from mail-order abortions. Thirty-nine percent of complication reports involved surgical abortions, and 3% involved an unknown method.

The most frequently reported complication was incomplete abortion (retained tissue), with 51 cases reported. There were 11 cases of vaginal bleeding, eight infections, and four failed abortions. There were 10 uncategorized complications and one case each of psychological complications, uterine perforation, shock, a missed ectopic pregnancy, free fluid in the abdomen, and cervical laceration. One complication was labeled as an adverse event as defined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Women were admitted to the hospital in 11 cases, 42 complications resulted in surgical intervention, two complications required blood transfusions, and 21 complications were treated with medication. In five cases, other treatment was used, and an unknown treatment was utilized 10 times. Overall, 93% of the complication reports noted that the initial abortion provider was not the one who treated the woman’s complication(s).

The 2024 complication reports included information on the facilities where the patient presented with complications and the number of reports by the facility performing the abortion. Nineteen of the 26 facilities that treated women for abortion-related complications reported zero abortions in Indiana in 2024. Furthermore, the 2024 complication reports showed that 13 of the 146 abortions performed in the state were performed at hospitals that did not treat any complications. There were 13 complication reports stemming from abortions that were performed outside of Indiana (10 from Illinois facilities, one from a Michigan facility, and two from Planned Parenthood centers in unknown states). Six complication reports were from abortions performed in Indiana, while 51 complication reports resulted from abortions that were performed at an unknown location.

Half of the complication reports were for women aged 25 to 34, while 31% were for girls between the ages of 16 and 24. Nine reports were for women between the ages of 35 and 44, and three were for girls under the age of 16. Half of the complication reports were for abortions performed on African American women, and 31% were for white women. There was one report each for multi-racial and Asian women and no reports for American Indian/Alaska Native women. Race was not reported in 11 of the complication reports. Seventy-four percent of the complication reports were for abortions performed on non-Hispanic women, while three were for Hispanic women. Ethnicity was not reported in 15 of the complication reports.

Guttmacher Data4

Guttmacher estimated the number of abortions that were obtained by Indiana residents who traveled to other states to obtain an abortion. This data is only available for 2023, and it is important to note that Indiana’s life-at-conception law went into effect in August of 2023. Therefore, the number of Indiana residents who traveled out of state to obtain an abortion likely increased in 2024 when Indiana’s law was in effect for the entire year. However, it is helpful to list the 2023 data to show how Indiana women are still obtaining abortions out of state despite the state prohibiting almost all brick-and-mortar abortions. For the number of abortions obtained by Indiana women in various states according to Guttmacher, see the following table:

State Ranking

In CLI’s 2024 reevaluation of states’ abortion reporting requirements, Indiana was tied for fourth best. Since CLI’s original evaluation of abortion reporting requirements in 2016, Indiana has vastly improved their abortion reporting. Because the state has prohibited most brick-and-mortar abortions from being performed in the state, and many of the state’s reporting requirements cover topics associated with the abortions that are still performed, the only area of data collection left to improve upon (the mailing of abortion drugs into the state) may not be feasible given the legal landscape of shield laws.

1. National rates were calculated by the Guttmacher Institute. Indiana rates were calculated by CLI using the following formula: (total number of abortions performed in Indiana ÷ number of resident women ages 15-44 [based on most recent population estimates]) x 1,000. Rates may differ slightly from previous CLI articles due to revised population estimates. Population estimates were obtained from the CDC WONDER database. Estimates for 2005-2009 are intercensal estimates of the July 1 resident population. Estimates for 2010-2019 are Vintage 2020 postcensal estimates of the July 1 resident population. Estimates for 2020-2024 are Vintage 2023 postcensal estimates of the July 1 resident population. Estimates were produced by the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. Rates for 2024 were calculated using the Vintage 2023 postcensal estimates because 2024 population estimates have not yet been released by the CDC.
2. CLI is reporting on this information as it appeared in Indiana’s abortion report. However, it is important to note that the “life or physical health” cases described as exceptions to the state’s abortion law are not the same as elective abortions. They are descriptions of emergency medical care allowed under the state’s law to save the life or physical health of the mother. The state law differentiates these medical procedures from an elective abortion, which, when performed, has the sole intent of causing the death of an unborn baby.
3. Statistics on abortion complications reported here represent a minimal number of deaths and complications, as this data is collected in a non-systematic and non-verifiable way. As such, this data cannot be used to calculate either an accurate abortion mortality rate or an accurate abortion complication rate for the state.
4. The Guttmacher Institute notes that their monthly abortion totals by states are estimates and that each state’s estimate is within a range of uncertainty. Guttmacher also notes that their estimates do not reflect self-managed abortions or those obtained by women in pro-life states under shield laws. This information is updated as of April 24, 2025.

LifeNews Note:  The authors are researchers for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, where this article originally appeared.

The post Indiana Abortions Drop 97% After Abortion Ban Goes Into Effect appeared first on LifeNews.com.

March 31 marked the 20th anniversary of my sister Terri Schiavo’s death—a tragic moment reflecting the dangerous direction of our healthcare system and culture. Terri’s death was not natural; it was imposed. She simply needed food and water. That was it.

In response to my sister’s death, my family established the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network and a 24/7 National Crisis Lifeline to assist families in crisis who are fighting for the lives of their loved ones. Our mission is simple: upholding human dignity through service to the medically vulnerable.

Since its founding in 2005, the Life & Hope Network has advocated for and supported thousands of vulnerable patients and their families through its resources and trusted allies. The fight to protect the voiceless is critical. We must recognize that the U.S. healthcare system differs from the romanticized version portrayed on TV. Far too many families have faced struggles similar to ours since Terri’s passing and continue to be subjected to the same treatment.

Imagine that your son has been in a terrible car accident. You rush to the hospital, only to learn that he is in the ICU with a profound brain injury. Within days—or even hours—doctors begin discussing “brain death” and insist that there’s no hope for meaningful recovery. Then comes the most shocking part; they’ve set a deadline to withdraw life support—just one week.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//

This scenario isn’t made up; this was the experience of a real family that the Life & Hope Network recently helped. Sadly, this situation was not an isolated incident. We regularly receive calls from families blindsided by rapid decisions to terminate treatment, often just days after brain injuries occur.

Even when families plead for more time, hoping that their loved ones will show signs of improvement, hospitals can—and often do—override their wishes. Dr. Neil Wenger, a UCLA professor and director of the university’s ethics center, once explained: “If there is no resolution, then we have a policy where you can override a family.”

Furthermore, according to a 2005 report by the Robert Powell Center for Medical Ethics, “the laws of all but ten states may allow doctors and hospitals to disregard advance directives when they call for treatment, food, or fluids.”

That’s when we help. We advocate for families in crisis who are given no due process, no time, and no options. We fight to ensure that decisions prioritize the patient’s well-being and are grounded in compassion, dignity, and the possibility of hope.

To truly understand this issue, we must acknowledge the deeply rooted devaluation of life among the medically vulnerable. History offers chilling precedents. Under Nazi Germany’s Aktion T4 euthanasia program, more than 200,000 disabled individuals were killed based on their perceived lack of worth.

This wasn’t solely a German idea. The American eugenics movement, taught at hundreds of U.S. universities and supported by elites, preceded it by decades. Justice Clarence Thomas noted in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc. (2019) how American eugenics targeted not only certain races but also the disabled—those labeled “feeble-minded,” “deformed,” or “crippled.”

With the legalization of abortion in 1973, this worldview quietly persisted under the narrative of “choice.” Today, more than 50% of unborn children diagnosed with disabilities such as Down syndrome are aborted. The rationale? They don’t meet arbitrary standards of personhood.

The “personhood theory”—championed by bioethicists such as Joseph Fletcher and Peter Singer—claims that being human isn’t enough to warrant rights or dignity; one must possess cognitive traits such as self-awareness and rational thought to qualify as a “person.” Infants, the severely disabled, and those with Alzheimer’s or brain injuries often fall outside this definition.

Such ideas have dangerously shaped modern medicine. Bioethicist Wesley J. Smith warned in 2002 that bioethics has become a tool for deciding who deserves to live and informs policies that prioritize cost-saving over care.

Insurance companies, hospital administrators, and policymakers increasingly make decisions based on cost, not care. Patients are seen as budget lines instead of human beings. Hospitals impose DNR orders without consent, deny treatment under “medical futility” policies, and override families through ethics committee rulings.

Feeding tubes, once considered part of basic care, have been reclassified as “medical treatment,” creating a path to prematurely ending the lives of patients by ceasing “treatment.” Withdrawing feeding tubes against family wishes is currently legal in all 50 states. In my view, this quiet change in the classification of feeding tubes is the Roe v. Wade of the euthanasia movement. It enabled Terri’s death and continues to threaten countless other lives.

In a 2008 New York Times article titled “Terminal Options for the Irreversibly Ill,” Judith Schwarz, a Registered Nurse, cited more than one million deaths tied to decisions to withdraw life-sustaining care in U.S. hospitals annually.

Perhaps it’s sheer indifference, but most Americans seem to be completely unaware of what is happening behind the scenes in hospitals, nursing homes, and hospices nationwide, despite the growing number of warning signs.

As a patient advocate, I’ve seen how families are pressured into ending care prematurely. Justifications rest on vague prognoses of “low chance of meaningful recovery,” but new research challenges these assumptions.

A groundbreaking Journal of Neurotrauma (2024) study tracked nearly 1,400 TBI patients. Forty percent of those who received extended care recovered with some level of independence. Similar findings in JAMA Neurology (2021) and the American Academy of Neurology (2022) urge decision-makers to delay end-of-life decisions by at least 30 days post-injury. Countless cases show that recovery is possible with care and time. Yet the system turns a blind eye to this evidence.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed how medical authority can be misused. Governors such as Andrew Cuomo ordered COVID-positive patients into nursing homes, leading to thousands of deaths. Media coverage was minimal. Group homes for the disabled suffered similar neglect. These tragedies underscore how expendable the vulnerable are perceived to be.

My family experienced this firsthand. When Terri’s feeding tube was removed, law enforcement stood at her bedside to prevent us from giving her even a sip of water or lip balm. Officials banned cameras under the guise of privacy—but we know the truth: they didn’t want the public to see what death by dehydration really looks like.

Dehydration affects everyone, regardless of whether they have a brain injury. As Claire Maldarelli explains in her article “This Is What Happens to Your Body as You Die of Dehydration” (Popular Science, 2017), the body responds to water loss by triggering survival mechanisms: reducing urine output and sweating, increasing heart rate, and eventually shutting down non-essential organs. Without rehydration, this process leads to organ failure and, ultimately, death—regardless of a person’s medical condition or history.

Hydration is essential for survival, no matter an individual’s mental capacity. And as my family witnessed in my sister’s case, the suffering is excruciating.

Twenty years later, the question remains; how did we reach the point where an innocent, disabled woman could be legally starved and dehydrated to death?

Terri’s death was not just a tragedy; it was a warning. We are told to trust the healthcare system. Popular media depicts doctors doing everything they can to save lives. But in reality, a culture of death has infiltrated the very institutions meant to protect us. Life is no longer valued for its own sake; its value is weighed against cost, convenience, or ideology.

This isn’t just about Terri. It’s about all of us. It’s about the path we’re on. We must reject the personhood theory, fight policies that treat starvation as care, and build a culture that respects every life—regardless of ability, prognosis, or perceived worth.

The lessons from Terri’s death remain urgent. Her story must never be forgotten.

LifeNews Note: Bobby Schindler and his family work as patient advocates, establishing the non-profit Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network in honor of his sister, Terri. Click here to learn more about the Life & Hope Network.

The post They Killed My Sister Terri Schiavo, We Can’t Let That Happen to Other People Like Her appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Just one day after the House passed the reconciliation bill to defund Planned Parenthood, there is concern Senate Republicans – including pro-life lawmakers – could derail the bill.

Republicans, who control the Senate with a 53-47 seat majority, should be able to get the bill through the chamber on a majority vote. But that’s only if GOP senators stick together and support the legislation.

Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska are two pro-abortion Republicans who could kill the bill straight up with their votes against it if other portions of the legislation don’t attract them enough. Both have taken issue over the legislation’s position on Medicaid

But pro-life Republican senators may also balk at the legislation if other parts of it unrelated to defunding America’s biggest abortion company aren’t satisfactory.

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri is one of the most stalwart pro-life members of the Senate, but he also opposes any Medicaid cuts and the bill would need to provide him such assurances before he would commit to voting for it.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky opposes the bill as it stands, which is not surprising for the uber conservative lawmaker from Kentucky. He said he could vote for the reconciliation bill if a provision to raise the debt ceiling were removed from it.

Thom Tillis of North Carolina has also said he wants changes made to the bill. However, any changes will mean the House has to sign off on the measure again and it merely passed the lower chamber by 1 vote – making it a potential obstacle if Republicans don’t stick together and sign off on any Senate changes.

Trump urged the Senate, in all-capital letters, to get the bill to his desk “as soon as possible!”

“This is arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!” he posted on social media.

The fragile outcome of the vote is a reminder to pro-life Americans to call and email senators and urge them to vote for the reconciliation bill. For the first time since Roe v. Wade, there is a real chance to defund Planned Parenthood and we can’t let that slip through our hands.

In the House, the bill passed 215-214. Two Republicans voted against the bill — Reps. Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson — and another, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, voted “present.” Rep. Andrew Garbarino and Rep. David Schweikert missed the vote.

“We’re going to get it [to Trump’s desk] by Independence Day, July 4th,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said Thursday regarding the budget bill.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to help fight abortion, please donate to LifeNews.com!

The good news for pro-life Americans is that the measure includes language to defund Planned Parenthood and Big Abortion. The abortion giant just announced that it killed over 420,000 babies in aboritons in its most recent year and mamade over $2 billion.

Nearly all committee Republicans voted against an amendment brought by pro-abortion Democrat Rep. Lizzie Fletcher to strike the language that would prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funds, even through Medicaid payments. Republican Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Gabe Evans did not vote on the amendment.

March for Life Action president Jennie Bradley Lichter celebrated the vote.

“Today, March for Life Action welcomes the House of Representatives’ passage of a strong pro-family reconciliation package that supports mothers and their children, and stops spending taxpayer dollars to subsidize Big Abortion. As this bill advances to the Senate, we express our sincere thanks to President Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson, and other House leaders, for their bold pro-life leadership. Their commitment and common-sense negotiations ensured critical resources will be used to benefit American families instead of padding the pockets of the deadly Big Abortion industry.”

The reconciliation process, which allows legislation to pass the Senate with a simple majority, offers Republicans a rare opportunity to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business. Pro-life groups argue that taxpayer dollars, even if not directly funding abortions, indirectly subsidize Planned Parenthood’s operations, which include killing over 390,000 babies every year.

Pro-life advocates emphasize that community health centers, which outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics and provide comprehensive care without abortions, can absorb patients if funding is redirected.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch pro-life advocate, has signaled that defunding “big abortion” is a priority in the reconciliation bill, which also addresses Trump’s agenda on taxes, border security, and energy.

The Hyde Amendment already prohibits federal funds from directly paying for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life. However, Planned Parenthood receives approximately $700 million annually through Medicaid reimbursements and Title X grants. Pro-life leaders argue this funding frees up resources for Planned Parenthood’s abortion operations.

The reconciliation bill, which allows legislation to pass with a simple majority in both chambers, is seen as a critical opportunity to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business. The abortion company received nearly $700 million in taxpayer funds in its 2022-2023 fiscal year, killing 392,715 babies in abortions, according to its annual report.

Meanwhile, Representative Mary Miller (R-Ill.) is waging a fierce campaign among her Republican colleagues to make defunding Planned Parenthood a non-negotiable piece of the final proposal.

Miller sent a passionate letter to Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, obtained by Breitbart News. In it, she urged Guthrie to “use every legislative option available to cease all federal funds going to Planned Parenthood,” exposing the organization’s deep entanglement in abortion and transgender treatments. “Abortions and transgender treatments have exploded in clinics across the country,” she wrote.

Citing the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Miller highlighted that “abortions made up 97.1% of Planned Parenthood’s pregnancy services from 2021-2022, performing nearly 400,000 abortions.” She also underscored the crisis in her home state, noting, “In 2023, my home state of Illinois performed 72,143 abortions, the most in our history since the state started reporting abortion totals in 1973.” Miller laid bare Planned Parenthood’s financial empire, stating, “Due to a lack of decisive Congressional action, Planned Parenthood has become a federally funded health network with private assets valued at $2.5 billion. Recent numbers show that Planned Parenthood received nearly $700 million in taxpayer revenue from 2022-2023.”

Her letter concluded with a call to action: “It is essential that we protect taxpayer dollars and stop funding this organization. President Trump has already issued an Executive Order that implements such a plan. Therefore, I urge you to do everything possible to ensure Planned Parenthood never receives another penny of taxpayer dollars.”

Speaking to Breitbart, Miller doubled down, declaring, “Planned Parenthood is a multi-billion-dollar abortion business that continues to receive millions in federal funding.” She praised Trump’s leadership, stating, “President Trump had it right when he issued an Executive Order to cut off taxpayer dollars from abortion providers like Planned Parenthood,” and insisted, “it’s time for Congress to make that policy permanent. I urge the Energy and Commerce Committee to ensure that not another dime of American tax dollars goes to this murder-for-profit organization.”

The post Senate Republicans Must Stick Together to Defund Planned Parenthood appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Dear President Putin, There Is No Possibility of a Great Power Agreement

Foreign Affairs, May 23, 2025

Make Moscow Pay

The Case for Seizing Russian Assets to Fund Ukraine’s Defense

Russian foreign affairs commentators such as  Fyodor Lukyanov are dreamers who have no idea of what is afoot: https://www.rt.com/russia/617970-lukyanov-trump-russia-ukraine/ 

Lukyanov should read what Trump policymakers are saying and stop reading tea leaves.

The Daily Caller reports that Trump did the Unthinkable–He defended white people

The leader of the free world hosted the president of the Republic of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, as the United States plans to grant expedited refugee status to 59 white South Africans. 

Afrikaners, a white minority group in South Africa, own the majority of the farmland in the country due to Apartheid-era laws, which have since been overturned. For years, the Afrikaners have spoken about having their farms raided or burned down and their people murdered and raped by black South Africans seeking vengeance. Ramaphosa signed a law in January allowing government seizure of farmland without compensation for purposes of equitable redistribution.  

The South African majority party — along with U.S. Democrats and media outlets — has downplayed the racial targeting of white South Africans.  

During Wednesday’s meeting, Trump asked his staff to dim the lights and proceeded to host a movie night with the South African president. He played a video comprised of clips of a South African minority party calling for the genocide of the Boers — a term referring to the minority whites in South Africa — and farmers as their supporters chanted along. A later clip showed a line of white crosses along a roadside that represent the lost lives of about a thousand white farmers. 

After forcing Ramaphosa to watch the video, Trump sparred with NBC reporter Peter Alexander, who tried to change the subject to Qatari’s gifting of a jet to the president. Trump angrily shamed him for not wanting to talk about the plight of white South Africans. He held a stack of printed news articles about the vicious murders and attacks, holding up each one to the press as he described what happened to the story subjects.  

“Death, death, horrible death,” he rattled off.  

Trump then turned his ire to Ramaphosa, who condemned the chants heard in the video from the minority political party.  

“What you saw, the speeches that were being made … one, that’s not government policy. We have a multiparty democracy in South Africa that allows people to express themselves, political parties, to various policies,” Ramaphosa said. 

Trump was undeterred.  

“But you do allow them to take land,” he said, adding, “When they take the land, they kill the white farmer, and when they do, nothing happens to them. Nothing happens to them.” 

“How do you explain that?” Trump demanded to know. 

CNN cut away from the video Trump played during the meeting and numerous mainstream media outlets called the claims of genocide “false,” insisting that the murders weren’t as widespread as Trump claimed. Their reaction was reminiscent of ABC News anchor Martha Raddatz telling Vice President J.D. Vance, “The incidents were limited to a handful of apartment complexes,” in response to migrant gang takeovers in Aurora, Colorado. 

Nonetheless, it was an important moment of Trump standing up to foreign leadership. This administration has been very clear that they won’t tolerate being taken for a ride, especially on their home turf. 

Trump also told off a dumbshit media whore: https://thepostmillennial.com/youre-a-disgrace-trump-blasts-nbc-reporter-for-asking-about-qatari-jet-during-meeting-on-white-persecution-in-south-africa

Are there any Democrat judges who are not actively anti-American?

https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1925197730223145088 

Wicked Biden Judge Threatens CRIMINAL SANCTIONS on Trump Officials, Orders Admin to Maintain Custody of Child R*pists and Murderers Allegedly Deported to South Sudan – Trump DHS Responds with FIRE (VIDEO)

Satan’s Chosen People

https://www.facebook.com/OurPalestineAnonymous/videos/former-israeli-mk-moshe-feiglin-on-channel-14-this-morningevery-child-every-baby/721871836951828/ 

Israeli doctor compared killing Palestinians in Gaza to ‘eliminating cockroaches’

https://greenwald.locals.com/post/6954289/israel-pretends-to-let-food-into-gaza-as-more-allies-condemn-atrocities-witkoff-proposes-impossible 

The short answer is that the Bank of Japan (BOJ) is letting the market set yields. For years, the BOJ has run an extremely loose monetary policy, including capping yields at extremely low levels and negative interest rates. Limited economic growth and disinflation made such a policy possible. However, inflationary pressures and a weak yen have prompted the BOJ to shift its stance. Policy normalization started in 2023, when the BOJ allowed 10-year JGB yields to rise above 1% for the first time in over a decade.

Today, 10-year and 30-year bond yields are 1.60% and 3.20%, respectively. They better reflect expectations of continued tighter monetary policy as inflation lingers above the BOJ’s 2% target. Moreover, the yen’s persistent weakness, exacerbated by low interest rates versus the U.S., forces the BOJ to encourage higher interest rates to stabilize the currency.

Japan’s improving economy and higher inflation lead many to anticipate that the BOJ may entirely abandon interest rate caps and negative interest rates. Additionally, with public debt exceeding 250% of GDP, concerns about long-term fiscal sustainability are percolating. Consequently, these factors add to the upward pressure on yields.

The risk to US and global stock and bond investors is that higher Japanese yields and a stronger yen force a reversal of the yen carry trade. If you recall, we saw what that may look like in August 2024.

What To Watch Today

Earnings

• No notable earnings reports

Economy

Market Trading Update

Yesterday, we discussed the back drop to bonds. We also added to our longer-duration bond holding in portfolios due to the deep oversold condition. However, there is a rather large, and glaring mistake, between the current narrative that "deficts" are causing yields to rise. The problem is that we have been running deficits for more than 40-years, and deficits today are lower than they were 5-years ago. But therein lies the key has to why rates are currently higher than they were in 2020.

As shown, correlation between deficits and rates makes sense. The reduction in the deficit since 2020 has been a function of stronger growth and less debt issuance. As deficits decline, and economic growth strengthens borrowers are able to ask for more yield. Conversely, when economic growth is declining sharply, and deficits increase due to increased debt issuance, yields fall. You can see this correlation in the chart below.

As discussed yesterday, in the short-term narratives drive yields along with massive short-positioning and NO central bank interventions. When the Federal Reserve and the Treasury begin to intervene to control the rise in yields, which they will to protect financial stability, the reversal in yields will be rather sharp. However, that could be months or quarters away.

In the mean time, we will have to take advantage of swings in the bond market to increase returns from our fixed income holdings. Currently, as shown, longer-duration bonds are deeply oversold and due for a reflexive rally. What causes that rally? Who knows, but some headline will emerge suggesting lower inflation or slower economic growth and yields will respond accordingly.

As shown, TLT is currently trading 3-standard deviations below the mean which suggest a rally to 88 (the mean) is possible which is a decent short-term trade setup.

In the mean time we get to clip a 4.5% coupon while we wait for a short-term gain.

The 20-Year Auction Was Not As Bad As Its Headlines

• The Terrifying Implications From Today's Dismal 20-Year Auction- Twitter/X
• The U.S. just held a 20-year Treasury bond auction, and it went terribly- Twitter/X
• 20-Year Treasury Auction Goes Badly - Barrons

Social and traditional media made Wednesday's 20-year auction out as one of the worst Treasury auctions ever. We, however, would categorize it as tepid. Let's review a few facts and let you make up your own mind.

For starters, the 20-year Treasury is an orphan bond of sorts. The demand and supply of 20-year bonds are not as large as the more liquid 2-year, 3-year, 5-year, 10-year, and 30-year bonds. As such, the reduced liquidity and smaller auction sizes tend to lead to more volatile auction results.

The Tweet of the Day shows that the "tail" on the auction was 1.2 bps. Thus, the auction rate was 1.2 bps higher than where it was trading prior to the auction. The graph shows that a +/- 1bps result is somewhat normal.

Consider that indirect bidders, predominantly central banks, took 88% of the auction. Direct bidders, the backstop for auctions, took a relatively low 8%. In other words, the auction did not need the largest banks to support it. The graph below shows that the direct bidder allotment was on the low side of recent auctions.

Indeed, the auction could have been better, but the media exaggerates the outcome to feed their current bearish bond narrative.

The Role of Bonds in a Well-Balanced Investment Portfolio

When building a strong and diversified portfolio, most investors focus heavily on stocks. But bonds play an equally important role—especially when it comes to managing risk and providing consistent income. Incorporating bonds into your investment portfolio can lead to more stable investment strategies and long-term financial resilience.

Whether you’re just beginning to invest or looking to rebalance your asset allocation, understanding how bonds work and how to use them effectively is key to building a well-rounded portfolio.

READ MORE...

Tweet of the Day

“Want to achieve better long-term success in managing your portfolio? Here are our 15-trading rules for managing market risks.”

Please subscribe to the daily commentary to receive these updates every morning before the opening bell.

If you found this blog useful, please send it to someone else, share it on social media, or contact us to set up a meeting.

The post Why Are Yields Surging In Japan? appeared first on RIA.

On May 18, 2025, the news broke that Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., the 46th president of the United States and one of the most recognizable Catholic figures in modern American political life, was diagnosed with advanced, metastatic prostate cancer. The cancer, classified with a Gleason score of 9—aggressive and spreading to his bones—is no trivial diagnosis. Though still hormone-sensitive and…

Source

Sounds like sedevacantism…

Pope St. Gregory I on the Church just before the Antichrist: ‘Words of Doctrine are Silent, Miracles Removed’

Cutout of Pope Saint Gregory the Great by Francisco de Goya (1746-1828)

The American author, historian, former White House speechwriter, and scholar Joshua Charles appeared on an episode of Life Site‘s ‘Faith and Reason’ podcast with John-Henry Westen on Mar. 26, 2025, entitled, “End times prophecies [of] the Church fathers revealed”. Charles is a recent convert (2019) who espouses a recognize-and-resist type of traditionalism.

Yesterday, a 5-minute extract from the episode was published on YouTube with the no less intriguing title, “The Antichrist: Warnings from the Early Church”.… READ MORE