Earlier this week, 38-year-old Justin Anthony Banta was arrested in Texas on charges of capital murder after allegedly dosing his pregnant girlfriend with “Plan C” (abortion pills), likely procured online.
“Operation Rescue has raised the alarm again and again about the abortion cartel’s ‘Virtual Back-Alley,’” says Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “Cash for pills and no questions asked.”
Banta is an IT employee with the Department of Justice. In September, his girlfriend told him she was pregnant. According to a press release from Parker County Sheriff’s Office, Banta “proposed to cover the cost of an abortion and suggested they order the ‘Plan C’ online.”
Banta’s then-girlfriend refused the offer, telling him she wanted to keep the baby.
HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!
The following month, on October 17, Banta’s girlfriend went in for a six-week ultrasound. The girlfriend reported her baby had a strong heartbeat and was said to be healthy. She met Banta at a coffee shop sometime after the appointment.
The very next day, she became extremely tired and experienced heavy bleeding. She sought emergency care but reportedly lost her baby on October 19, just two days after coffee with Banta. Later, she told police she believed Banta dosed her drink with abortion pills.
Detectives conducted an interview with Banta and collected his phone as evidence. Afterwards, investigators believe Banta accessed his phone remotely and performed a “reset,” deleting evidence related to the possible purchase or internet search of “Plan C.”
Banta was arrested on Friday, June 6, for capital murder and tampering with physical evidence.
“This is the perilous world the FDA created when it removed nearly all safety guards from the abortion drug, mifepristone,” says Newman. “Anyone can order these pills – an angry boyfriend like Banta, a sexual abuser trying to hide his crimes, even a vengeful, jealous co-worker. As it stands right now, there are no protections in place to prevent these abortion pills being obtained for nefarious purposes. The FDA has literally opened the door for forced abortions.”
Thanks to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the FDA has recently been tasked with conducting a complete review of mifepristone, focusing on the safety of the drug. No timeline has been announced for that review.
“This case raises another pressing question,” adds Newman. “This man will be tried for the intentional, seemingly pre-meditated murder of his own child in the womb, facing capital punishment for a capital crime. How is this intentional murder by a father any different than when a mother orders pills, knowing those pills will kill her child, and then ingests them of her own free will? The rise of the Virtual Back-Alley creates a devastating scenario where the mother becomes the abortionist in the privacy of her own home. She can plan the death of her child – the time, the means, and the location – from her phone. How long can we shield one parent for such a crime, while prosecuting the other parent?”
LifeNews Note: This article was originally published by Operation Rescue, a leading pro-life, Christian activist organization dedicated to exposing abortion abuses, demanding enforcement, saving innocent lives, and building an abortion-free America. The author, Sarah Neely, is Chief Operating Officer for Operation Rescue.
The post Man Faces Murder Charge for Killing His Own Unborn Child appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Get Back
June 11 2025
___________________________________
More Vids!
+BN Vids Archive! HERE!
___________________________________
Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459
Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 547, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com
Scroll Down For Comments
The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a reconciliation bill hailed as a significant pro-life victory, which will defund major abortion companies like Planned Parenthood and redirect support to women, children, and families.
The legislation is now waiting action in the U.S. Senate, where a critical vote is expected soon, according to Jennie Bradley Lichter, president of March for Life Action.
The bill, which also aims to save taxpayer dollars, includes measures that Lichter described as a “major pro-life victory” that would “defund Big Abortion and support women, children, and families across our nation.”
She credited grassroots efforts for the House passage, stating, “Thank you to all of you who contacted your U.S. Representatives and helped make this happen!”
But action is needed now to urge senators get the bill over the finish line – first with a vote in the full Senate without pulling the language to defund Planned Parenthood.
HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!
Lichter urged immediate action to ensure Senate support, emphasizing the bill’s potential to advance pro-life goals.
“Now, the fate of the bill and its pro-life provisions rest in the U.S. Senate’s hands, and a vote is just around the corner,” she said. “If it passes, you, me, we — the pro-life movement — will be one step closer to defunding Big Abortion — and saving countless lives.”
Highlighting the stakes, Lichter pointed to Planned Parenthood, which she called “one of the biggest players in Big Abortion.” She noted the organization is “actively rallying their pro-abortion activists to counteract your voice” and noted that Planned Parenthood “is singlehandedly responsible for ending the lives of over 400,000 children in 2022-2023 alone, all while receiving $2 million a day in taxpayer funding.”
Lichter called on supporters to contact their senators to back the bill, which she said carries “powerful pro-life and pro-family implications.” She stressed the need to counter pro-abortion advocacy, adding, “Our women and girls deserve better than abortion.”
The Senate vote’s outcome remains uncertain, with pro-life and pro-abortion groups intensifying efforts to sway lawmakers. The bill’s passage could reshape federal funding priorities, potentially redirecting resources away from abortion providers toward family-focused programs.
The post Action Needed to Urge Senate to Defund Planned Parenthood appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Authored by Rachel Acenas via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) on Monday announced his intent to resign from Congress before his term ends.
Green, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, revealed his plans to retire after the final vote on President Donald Trump’s massive budget package that has become known as the “big, beautiful bill.”
House Homeland Security Chair Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) speaks about U.S.-China Relations at an event hosted by the Hudson Institute in Washington on Dec. 17, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times
The Tennessee Republican originally announced his intent to resign at the end of the previous Congress, but changed his mind.
Green said that he wanted to ensure that Trump’s priorities, including the border security component of the reconciliation package, made it through Congress.
The congressman said that after he retires, he'll work in the private sector for an opportunity that was “too exciting to pass up.”
His next election would have been held in 2026.
“I am grateful to Speaker Johnson and House Leadership for placing their trust in me to chair the Committee on Homeland Security, lead the effort to impeach former Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and to pass H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act, the strongest border security legislation in history to ever pass the House,” Green said in a statement. “However, my time in Congress has come to an end.”
Trump’s mega policy bill passed the lower chamber in a narrow 215-214 vote.
The bill is now under consideration by the Senate. If the upper chamber makes any changes, the House must approve the Senate’s modified version before it goes to the president to sign into law.
Green’s delayed departure could help the GOP pass the massive budget package in the House since Republicans, with their already narrow majority, needed every vote.
There will be 219 Republicans and 212 Democrats in the House when Green’s resignation takes effect.
Green, 60, has served Congress since 2019. Border security has been a key focus of his congressional tenure.
In addition to overseeing the border security section of Trump’s bill, he also led the effort on the Homeland Security Committee to write the border security section of the Secure the Border Act.
Before leading efforts on Mayorkas’s impeachment, Green led the committee through a nearly year-long investigation into the causes, costs, and consequences of the border crisis, which resulted in a five-phase report that covered the whole investigation.
In addition to leading the Homeland Security Committee, the congressman also served as a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“It was the honor of a lifetime to represent the people of Tennessee in Congress,” Green said. “They asked me to deliver on the conservative values and principles we all hold dear, and I did my level best to do so.”
Green previously served as an Army surgeon and in the state Senate and is from Montgomery County. During his military service, he was deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
The congressman didn’t disclose any further details about what he will do in the private sector.
A special election will be held to replace him, but the timing of that election depends on when he leaves office. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee must call a special election within 10 days of the seat’s official vacancy.
Green’s seat is expected to stay Republican as Trump won his district by 22 points in the November 2024 presidential election.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
From NTD News
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Wisconsin’s health department is keeping in place its recommendation that pregnant women and all children receive one of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines, diverging from guidance by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
A health care worker prepares a COVID-19 vaccine in an undated file photograph. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
The Wisconsin Department of Health Services said on June 4 it is continuing to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for people aged 6 months and older.
Officials also said the state’s Medicaid would keep covering the vaccine for eligible members, including pregnant women.
“The current COVID-19 vaccine was thoroughly reviewed for safety and effectiveness and continues to be an important tool in preventing severe illness and death,” Kirsten Johnson, secretary of the department, said in a statement.
The CDC in late May stopped recommending that pregnant women receive a COVID-19 vaccine. The agency also now says that healthy children should only receive one of the shots after consulting with doctors and parents.
“Their decision should be based on informed consent through the clinical judgement of their healthcare provider,” a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the CDC’s parent agency, told The Epoch Times in an email at the time.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that the previous recommendations, which said that children should receive a vaccine regardless of prior vaccination and infection, were put into place “despite the lack of any clinical data to support the repeat booster strategy in children.”
Wisconsin officials said the changes “were not made based on new data, evidence, or scientific or medical studies” and that they were keeping in place the recommendations following an independent review.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services did not return a request for comment on Wisconsin’s move.
The Wisconsin Department of Health Services did not respond when asked for evidence the vaccines prevent severe illness and death.
The current versions of the vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax were cleared by federal regulators in 2024 based on animal data and antibody data from humans, rather than data from human clinical trials. The CDC then issued its recommendations, which were unchanged from the advice for previous formulations.
Data from CDC systems presented to the agency’s vaccine advisers in April pegged a dose of one of the currently available vaccines as providing 21 percent to 36 percent additional protection to adults when measuring emergency department and urgent care visits, and 42 percent to 48 percent additional protection for immunocompetent adults aged 65 and up when measuring COVID-19 associated hospitalizations.
No other states appeared to react to the recent CDC updates apart from Florida, which praised the narrowed recommendations. The move “is an important advancement for parents, physicians, and children across the country,” Dr. Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s surgeon general, said in a statement. He added that “ultimately, scientific evidence dictates that the use of these products should end for all populations.”
The American Pharmacists Association said on June 9 that it was not endorsing the updated adult immunization schedule. The group said that COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy “has been proven safe and effective” and that it views pregnancy as a condition that places women at higher risk of severe COVID-19.
The group, which did not respond to a request for comment, said that it hopes future updates to the schedule are “based on scientific evidence” and that they are based on advice from the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
A subgroup of that panel said in the spring that they supported shifting the CDC’s universal recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines to a non-universal recommendation.
The panel, whose members were all later terminated by Kennedy, is scheduled to convene later in June to discuss matters including COVID-19 vaccination.
With active listings across the Mid-Atlantic region sitting at multi-year highs, the spotlight now turns to a sharp spike in canceled home listings, potentially signaling early signs of stress beneath the surface.
According to the latest data from Bright MLS, the leading Multiple Listing Service firm in the Mid-Atlantic area, 481 listings were canceled during the week ending June 8—the highest weekly total in five years. That figure represents a 39.8% increase from the same period last year and is up 32.9% from the previous week.
"Canceled listings see a five-year record high. There were 481 canceled listings in the service area for the week, which is a 39.8% surge over last year and is up 32.9% from last week. Canceled listings were most common in the Philadelphia metro area, where canceled listings were up 60.5% compared to the same week in 2024," MLS wrote in the weekly report.
Weekly canceled listings for MLS' coverage area.
What's happening in Philadelphia?
While new contracts held steady, with 6,924 signed across the region—a 2.4% increase from a year earlier—elevated mortgage rates, continued housing affordability crisis, and a potential slowdown in the economy could reflect growing uncertainty among both buyers and sellers.
Showing activity, often a leading indicator of buyer interest, has remained solid. There were 90,906 showings across the Bright MLS service area, up 2.5% from the same week in 2024, marking the third straight week of year-over-year gains. However, activity lagged in Maryland's Eastern Shore and the MD-WV Panhandle, where year-over-year showings declined.
Despite a steady pace of new contracts and showings across the region, the sudden surge in cancellations suggests sellers may be reevaluating market timing, while buyers appear increasingly cautious amid ongoing concerns over pricing and economic uncertainty.
A new Gallup poll has revealed that the percentage of surveyed Americans who say they are pro-life has risen two points since last year to 43%, a number that is consistent with past survey results over the last two decades. Experts say the numbers suggest that the efforts by the Democratic Party, pro-abortion activists, and the mainstream media to sway the American electorate towards widespread acceptance of abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision have been largely unsuccessful.
The survey, released Monday, was based on phone interviews of a random sampling of 1,003 American adults from every state and the District of Columbia from May 1-18. The results showed that the gap between men and women who say they are pro-choice has widened since Dobbs, with 61% of women and 41% of men identifying as such.
Gallup noted that the pro-choice position “jumped into a 16-point lead” in 2022 after the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and has remained ahead of the pro-life position since then. Still, the pro-choice position dropped to 51% this year compared to 54% last year. In addition, the percentage of Americans who say abortion should be legal “under any/most circumstances” dropped since last year, while the percentage who say abortion should be legal in “only a few/Illegal in all circumstances” rose since last year and is now almost even at 49% to 48%.
Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//
In terms of partisanship predicting views on abortion, Charlotte Lozier Institute scholar Michael New pointed out Monday that the Gallup results show that “Democrats have become more sympathetic to legal abortion, and Republicans have become less supportive. Interestingly though, this most recent Gallup survey found a short-term reduction in support for legal abortion among both Republicans and Democrats.”
Overall, the 43% of Americans who say they are pro-life is largely consistent with percentages in past Gallup polls stretching back 25 years. The number reached a low of 33% in 1995 and peaked at a high of 51% in 2009, with the percentage fluctuating up and down between 40 and 50% in the intervening years.
“[P]ro-lifers should take heart,” New, who also serves as an assistant professor at the Catholic University of America, observed. “This Gallup survey shows that since May of 2021, the percentage of Americans identifying as ‘pro-choice’ has increased by only two percentage points. While there have been gains in support for legal abortion among Democrats and independent women, Republicans have actually become more pro-life in recent years. The mainstream media spin that there has been a large gain in public support for legal abortion is simply incorrect. Despite an onslaught of negative media coverage about recently enacted pro-life laws, pro-life sentiment has actually remained remarkably durable.”
Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, emphasized that the poll results should compel the pro-life movement to redouble their efforts to witness to the culture.
“The Dobbs decision was not the end of abortion in America,” she told The Washington Stand. “The pro-life movement has considerable work to do educating Americans about the dignity of the unborn. This work starts in our homes with our own children, but then, we must continue it with our friends and neighbors. Those conversations are difficult to have at first, but sharing the truth in love is always worth it — regardless of the cost.”
“This poll should serve as encouragement for each of us to share the joy and blessing that children are with at least one person today,” Szoch concluded.
LifeNews Note: Dan Hart writes for the Family Research Council. He is the senior editor of The Washington Stand.
The post Three Years After Dobbs, Americans are Becoming More Pro-Life on Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Will New York become the 12th state to legalize assisted suicide? That decision officially rests in the hands of Governor Kathy Hochul (D).
On Monday, the New York State Senate passed the Medical Aid in Dying Act (MAID). The vote was 35-27, “with six Democrats — Senators April Baskin, Siela Bynoe, Cordelle Cleare, Monica Martinez, Roxanne Persaud, and Sam Sutton — voting against it,” the New York Post reported. If signed, MAID allows mentally competent adults with six months or less to live to request and self-administer medication for physician-assisted suicide.
State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal (D) hailed the legislation as “one of the great social reforms of our state.” The senator, who also co-sponsored the bill in the upper chamber, went on to claim, “This is about personal autonomy, this is about liberty, this is about exercising one’s own freedom to control one’s body.” Similarly, state Senator Rachel May (D) said MAID “isn’t about controlling the disease or controlling the pain, it’s about having control at the end of your life.”
But critics of the bill are raising ethical and practical concerns, arguing that the legislation, unlike similar laws in the 10 other states and D.C. where assisted suicide is legal, lacks critical safeguards. “Under the bill,” the Post added, “recipients would need approval from two doctors and a sign-off from two independent witnesses, after which they would receive a prescription for drugs they could use to take their life at a time of their choosing. Doctors also do not have to conduct a mental health screening for each patient, but may refer a patient for one under the legislation.”
ACTION ALERT: Tell Governor Kathy Hochul to veto the dangerous assisted suicide bill.
Questions linger as to whether there is any statutory waiting period that would serve in “establishing [a] clear chain of custody for the pills, mandating the doctor and recipient meet in-person, and requiring a disclosure that someone indeed used the drugs to take their own life.” This, Hoylman-Sigal claimed, is “rational.” However, opposition to the bill is fierce, with critics framing it as a dangerous step toward normalizing suicide.
National Review branded New York as the “state of death.” The New York Post called the legislation “monstrous.” Others described Monday’s decision as “a dark day.”
“For the first time in its history,” said Dennis Poust, executive director of the New York State Catholic Conference, “New York is on the verge of authorizing doctors to help their patients commit suicide. Make no mistake — this is only the beginning, and the only person standing between New York and the assisted suicide nightmare unfolding in Canada is Governor Hochul.” In a statement, The New York Alliance Against Assisted Suicide added, “The governor still has the opportunity to uphold New York’s commitment to suicide prevention, protect vulnerable communities, and affirm that every life — regardless of disability, age, or diagnosis — is worthy of care, dignity, and protection.”
Chairman Gerard Kassar of the Conservative Party of New York also urged Hochul to veto the “dangerous legislation.” As he put it, “This legislation is not about dignity — it’s about surrender.” Rather than “investing in pain management, mental health services, and real palliative care, the Democrat-led Senate wants to offer death as a substitute for support. It’s appalling.” He added, “The so-called ‘right to die’ becomes a duty to die when insurance companies realize it’s cheaper than treatment, or when an overwhelmed caregiver sees no alternative. There is nothing progressive about normalizing suicide. This isn’t a left vs. right issue — it’s right vs. wrong. Governor Hochul has a chance to stop this madness and draw a line for decency and life.”
Hochul, however, has yet to reveal her stance. Her office has only stated that she “will review the legislation,” leaving both supporters and opponents anxiously awaiting her decision. As lobbyists from both sides press their cases, the debate underscores profound moral and ethical questions about life, dignity, and compassion. In a comment to The Washington Stand, Family Research Council’s Mary Szoch put it bluntly: “Physician-assisted suicide is a false form of compassion — one that has no place in America.”
Szoch, director of FRC’s Center for Human Dignity, went on to explain, “Each of us must recognize that true compassion means a willingness to suffer with someone else — to be there every single step of the journey of life. Proponents of assisted suicide may believe that a person’s dignity can be lost if their capacity to live autonomously decreases. However, as Christians, we are called to witness to the truth that a person’s dignity is immutable because that dignity comes from being a son or daughter of Christ.”
LifeNews Note: Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand, where this originally appeared.
The post Kathy Hochul Should Stop New York From Becoming 11th State to Legalize Assisted Suicide appeared first on LifeNews.com.
After yesterday's mediocre, if solid, 3Y auction nerves were less on edge ahead of today's sale of $39BN in 10Y paper. And with good reason: moments ago the Treasury announced the result of today's benchmark auction and they were nothing short of stellar.
The auction priced at a high-yield of 4.421%, up from May's 4.350% but down from April's "freak out" 10Y sale when the bond priced at 4.465%. The auction also stopped through the When Issued 4.428% by 0.7bps, the 4th consecutive through in a row, if more modest than last month's 1.2bps, and certainly April's 3.0bps.
The bid-to-cover was a bit on the weak side, at 2.52, down from 2.60 last month, and the lowest since February; it was also below the six-auction average of 2.59.
The internals were solid, with Indirects almost unchanged from last month, as foreigners took down 70.6% of the auction, vs 71.2% last month. And with Directs awarded 20.5%, up from 19.9% in May and the highest since January, Dealers were left holding 9.0%, up ftactionally from 8.9% last month and the 3rd lowest on record.
Overall, this was an impressive auction, coming at a time when the global surge in duration supply has made it very dangerous to sell debt (especially in Japan). But in the US, animals spirits are back right now, and the market is clearly buying anything and everything, which is why 10Y yields slumped to session lows, just north of 4.40% after the auction and the lowest in the past week.
House Republicans have advanced a bill that would roll back the federal government’s ability to fine or imprison peaceful pro-life advocates, while Democrats slurred its Republican sponsors as “terrorists” who want to “green light violence” and see women raped, abused, and killed.
On Tuesday, the House Judiciary Committee approved the FACE Act Repeal Act (H.R. 589) by a 13-10 vote. The legislation, introduced multiple times by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), would delete the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act — a Clinton-era law that prohibits blocking the entrances to any abortion facility, reproductive health office, or house of worship — from the books. The act, which would codify President Donald Trump’s executive orders on “Ending The Weaponization Of The Federal Government,” “Enforcing the Hyde Amendment,” and “Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias,” now moves forward for a vote before the full House.
Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//
“What the Biden-Harris administration did to peaceful pro-lifers like Mark Houck, Paul Vaughn, and Lauren Handy, among many others, can never be erased. The FACE Act is unconstitutional, and today’s committee vote on its repeal is an important step to restoring justice for the pro-life advocates who were targets of weaponized prosecutions and for restoring the rule of law for all,” Peter Breen, executive vice president and head of litigation at the pro-life Thomas More Society, told The Washington Stand. The Thomas More Society legally represented many of those charged and successfully petitioned President Trump to pardon 21 sidewalk counselors.
Pro-life advocates have long condemned the one-sided enforcement of the FACE Act, which Roy said Democratic administrations had “politicized and weaponized against people across this country, including people of faith” nationwide. “The Biden Department of Justice brought almost a quarter of all the FACE Act prosecutions, 24% of all charges targeting pro-life activists, in less than four years” while “turning a blind eye to the anti-life activists engaged in destroying, vandalizing, and even firebombing pregnancy resource centers and churches at the same time.”
Only 8% of Biden-Harris FACE Act cases were against those who vandalized pro-life pregnancy centers, he said. Studies show pro-life pregnancy resource centers are 22 times more likely to be attacked than abortion facilities. The Biden-Harris administration also declined to prosecute a single one of the 436 church attacks that took place in 2024 under the FACE Act.
Legal experts highlighted that, for the first time, the Biden-Harris administration charged peaceful pro-life advocates with violating both the FACE Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act’s ‘Conspiracy Against Rights’ felony provisions (18 U.S.C. § 241). Together, the charges could bring more than a decade in prison. “The previous administration weaponized the FACE Act to prosecute nonviolent pro-life Americans with the harshest sentences,” said Roy.
“Since 1994, 97% — I repeat that — 97% of FACE Act prosecutions have been against pro-lifers,” added Rep. Bob Odner (R-Mo.). The Biden-Harris administration particularly engaged in thuggish, intimidating behavior against peaceful pro-life activists,” including Mark Houck and Paul Vaughn. Odner described the disproportionate prosecution of Christian conservatives as the “intended effect of the FACE Act.”
For three decades, “the FACE Act was always intended as a cudgel against pro-life speech, with 97% of prosecutions brought by the DOJ over its 30-year history having targeted pro-lifers,” Breen told TWS. “Our clients — loving moms and dads, grandparents, priests, and nonviolent people of faith — have faced harsher charges and sentences than convicted drug dealers and fraudsters.”
“To ensure this never happens again and to protect the constitutional rights of peaceful pro-lifers to advocate against the injustice of abortion, Congress must repeal the FACE Act,” said Breen.
Some ‘Resistance’ from the Trump Administration against Repealing the FACE Act
Yet Roy revealed he had been “getting some resistance even from our own [Trump] administration” over entirely repealing the FACE Act, saying DOJ officials “will use it to defend churches more.” Likewise, Rep. Deborah Ross (D-N.C.) threatened, “If this bill comes out of committee,” she will tell “the rabbis and members of the Jewish community in my district” that “the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee no longer care about enforcing federal law when it comes to our synagogues.”
Still, Roy said he remained concerned about the general plague of “overcriminalization” and “the overempowerment of the Department of Justice … regardless of who’s in the White House.”
One Republican opposed the bill: Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) called himself pro-life and found the Biden-Harris administration guilty of “the abuse of this act.” But McClintock claimed the FACE Act “protects every person, pro-life or pro-abortion, in their right to assemble and express their views openly.”
“When this bill was drafted, great pains were taken to keep its enforcement balanced,” claimed McClintock, who said he wanted to see the act amended rather than repealed, because “the law itself is viewpoint-neutral.” He stated the law is “important to protect the pro-life [minority] in California.”
“I’m glad to hear you oppose this bill,” Nadler, one of the authors of the 1994 bill, told McClintock.
Roy remained steadfast. “Freedom is just an illusion when the government buries its own citizens under ridiculous and never-ending criminal laws,” Rep. Roy told TWS. “Almost any American could be indicted [and] charged from some crime, often without even knowing they had violated a law or regulation.” The Texas conservative’s comments came as his committee marked up another of his bills, the Count the Crimes to Cut Act of 2025, intended simply to come up with a formal list of all crimes in the federal register.
Democrats: Pro-life Advocates Are ‘Terrorists’ Who ‘Want’ Women to Be Raped, Abused, or Killed
Rather than debate the act’s history of lopsided legal enforcement, most of the committee’s Democrats maligned the motives of Roy and others who sought the punitive bill’s repeal.
“The only people in America who are asking for this legislation to be repealed are terrorists,” averred Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), who said opponents had “a sick obsession” with “telling women what to do with their bodies.” Said Trump does not support nonviolent protests, because he just sent Marines to oppose “protesters” in Los Angeles.
“This is a green light for more violence against women,” said Swalwell.
“We have people in this body who are essentially saying it is okay to harm, to hurt, maybe even to kill someone,” insisted Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.). After discussing a woman who was raped and assaulted by her male partner, she said, “If you want to repeal this, you’re saying it’s okay for that to happen to her.” She then claimed those who wanted to repeal the weaponized FACE Act had violated their faith, saying, “You cannot be a Christian and condone that kind of activity.”
“We’re considering this legislation for one reason: to green light violence against abortion care in this country. … The reason the FACE Act exists is because anti-abortion extremists refuse to renounce violence,” asserted Rep. Jesús “Chuy” Garcia (D-Ill.).
“There is only one reason” anyone would want to repeal the FACE Act, agreed Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.): “They want to see violent obstruction.”
Several Democrats — including the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) — dismissed concerns that a judge had jailed a 75-year-old grandmother who prayed peacefully at an abortion facility by citing a “fact-check” from Associated Press reporter Melissa Goldin, claiming the elderly Paulette Harlow had been arrested for a FACE Act violation, not prayer. Harlow allegedly blockaded the Washington Surgi-Center, where pro-life advocates discovered the bodies of five viable babies who had possibly been subjected to illegal late-term abortions by Cesare Santangelo. Media and social media “fact-checkers” have been documented misinforming the public about the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks, and natural immunity; the existence of Hunter Biden’s laptop; and abortion’s safety. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee who has handed down numerous pro-abortion opinions, sentenced Harlow to two years and dismissed concerns over Harlow’s age and ill-health, telling her husband that the 75-year-old should “make an effort to remain alive,” since pro-life beliefs are “a tenet of her religion.”
“No, you are not being arrested for praying. You are being arrested for making threats,” insisted Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.). “There is no evidence that there is selective enforcement here, that the FACE Act has been weaponized against abortion protesters.”
Nadler similarly decried “the slanders against the FACE Act.”
President Trump has taken executive action to protect pro-life advocates and end the weaponization of government rampant under his predecessor. In his first week in office, President Donald Trump fulfilled a campaign promise made at the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit and pardoned 23 pro-life advocates convicted of violating the FACE Act during the Biden-Harris administration. The president said they “should not have been prosecuted” and called their imprisonment “ridiculous.”
“This is a great honor to sign this,” said President Trump.
But pro-life advocates say executive actions turn on a dime with the change of administrations. For peaceful sidewalk counselors to rest easy, lawmakers must expunge the underlying law from the nation’s legal code.
“We are grateful for the House Judiciary Committee’s leadership on this crucial matter, applaud the passage of Rep. Chip Roy’s FACE Act Repeal bill, and urge Congress to send it to the president’s desk,” Breen told TWS.
LifeNews Note: Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.
The post Republicans Fight to Protect Free Speech Rights of Pro-Life Americans appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,
Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Brodksy said that Israel transferred US-made Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine but was contradicted by his Foreign Ministry. They were unconvincing though so ties with Russia might be harmed after its UN envoy warned of “certain political consequences” last summer if this happened. The region has changed since then after Hezbollah chief Nasrallah was killed, Assad fled Syria, and Iran resumed nuclear talks with the US, however, so such consequences might be limited.
After all, it’s no longer realistic to countenance the scenario of Russia arming Hezbollah, finally allowing Syria to use its S-300s to defend itself from attacking Israeli jets, or providing other forms of indirect support to the Resistance in its regional proxy war with Israel that’s now practically lost. Those were always far-fetched to begin with, but now they’re less likely than ever, thus suggesting that Russia will probably just file a formal complaint and at most flirt with designating Israel as an “unfriendly country”.
Nevertheless, the second possibility can’t be taken for granted seeing as how Israel is reportedly lobbying the US to keep Russia’s bases in Syria as a counterweight of sorts against Turkiye, and the recent Trump-Bibi rift could be taken advantage of to present Putin as a more reliable partner. Moreover, Israel still doesn’t formally comply with the West’s anti-Russian sanctions, yet its leadership might finally relent if Russia officially designates them as “unfriendly”, so the Kremlin will probably tread cautiously.
The preceding insight contextualizes why Israel waited until now to finally transfer some of its US-made Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine. Considering that the realistic range of Russia’s retaliatory options is now limited, Bibi likely calculated that the harm to bilateral ties will be manageable, ergo why Israel wouldn’t have much to lose by going through with this. As for why he did so, it might be an attempt to curry favor with US hawks, hoping that this can in turn mitigate the consequences of his rift with Trump.
This unnecessary zero-sum gamble didn’t reap any tangible dividends, however, as evidenced by the continued tensions in their ties. To the contrary, it revealed how desperate Bibi has become that he’d now risk harming ties with Russia with the expectation that this would then return Israel to the US’ good graces, which makes him look worse than before in the eyes of objective observers. The recent pressure has clearly clouded his thoughts otherwise he wouldn’t have done this.
Trump and his like-minded allies certainly took note of his calculations and might soon exploit them to the hilt, knowing as they do now how desperate Bibi has become and consequently sensing that they might now be able to extract more concessions from Israel than ever. This could take the form of getting Israel to agree to some level of Iranian nuclear enrichment as part of the deal that they’re negotiating with it instead of Israel unilaterally bombing Iran in the scenario that such a deal is reached.
Interestingly, while Israel’s transfer of some US-made Patriot missiles might harm ties with Russia, it might therefore worsen ties with the US even more if Trump makes politically unacceptable demands of Bibi after sensing how much weaker he’s become as a result of their recent rift. In response, Bibi will either capitulate at the expense of losing more support from his base, or he’ll defy the US at the expense of Israel’s national security if he goes through with bombing Iran but is then hung out to dry by Trump.
Finally some actual detail around what was actually agreed upon during yesterday's trade talks.
With questions swirling about the fate of Chinese rare earth exports to the US under the "framework", the WSJ reports that China is putting a six-month limit on rare-earth export licenses for U.S. automakers and manufacturers, giving Beijing leverage if trade tensions flare up again while adding to uncertainty for American industry.
Chinese negotiators agreed to the temporary restorations of the licenses after the latest round of intense talks with their American counterparts in London, aimed at upholding an interim agreement forged in Geneva last month.
In exchange, the U.S. negotiators agreed to relax some recent restrictions on the sale to China of products such as jet engines and related parts, as well as ethane, a component of natural gas important in manufacturing plastics.
According to people who consult with senior Chinese officials, Beijing wants to keep its chokehold on the supply of such critical commodities as leverage for future negotiations and when, not if, trade relations turns sour again.
During the London meetings, China agreed to approve rare-earth license applications for U.S. companies right away, pending the signoff of President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on the trade framework. The earliest an application could be approved is within a week of the two leaders officially signing off on the framework originally established in meetings last month in Geneva.
The WSJ source noted that as China approves the applications, the US will start to drop its countermeasures, including export controls on the jet engines and ethane.
In other words, the US now has six months to create its own rare earths supply chain or else Beijing will be able to use this trump card during the next negotations.
Trump said Wednesday that the deal with China to restore the trade cease-fire was done, subject to final approval from himself and the Chinese leader. “FULL MAGNETS, AND ANY NECESSARY RARE EARTHS, WILL BE SUPPLIED, UP FRONT, BY CHINA,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, without giving additional details on the Chinese commitment.
China’s grip on rare-earth exports has become a key point of leverage for Beijing in trade negotiations with the U.S. In the wake of the trade truce in Geneva in mid-May that was expected to ease the flow, Washington accused Beijing of slow-walking export licenses. Beijing, in turn, blamed the Trump administration for undermining the Geneva agreement.
As part of the trade framework, the temporary rare-earths licenses Beijing is expected to start issuing immediately will mostly involve elements used in manufacturing electric vehicles, wind turbines, consumer electronics and military equipment.
Authored by Connor O'Keefe via The Mises Institute,
One of the reasons the American political establishment really hates it when Trump is president is that his administration has a tendency to bring out and exaggerate dynamics at play in Washington, DC that the establishment would prefer to keep hidden.
One such example is the weaponization of media access.
Right at the beginning of this term, Trump’s team shook things up by announcing that, going forward, they would control which journalists were allowed into White House press briefings and would determine where each would sit.
Establishment journalists did little to hide their displeasure as the administration brought right-wing news sites, podcasters, and influencers to briefings that had always been reserved for “respectable” outlets. They characterized it as Trump shattering a decades-long tradition of media independence to prop up media figures loyal to him.
The anger with Trump’s shake-up came to a head when the administration banned the Associated Press (AP) from White House Briefings after the news wire service refused to call the Gulf of Mexico by its new official name, the Gulf of America.
As a result of that ban, which has mostly held up in court, many are trying to portray the president’s approach to the press pool as a brand-new form of authoritarianism that Trump has only recently introduced to Washington.
But that isn’t true. Granting, controlling, and revoking access to official briefings, restricted government facilities, and the sites of government activities has been one of the political establishment’s favorite tools of media control for over a century.
An urban legend says that the White House press pool was formed one night in 1900 when President Theodore Roosevelt noticed a group of reporters struggling to find sources outside in the rain and invited them into the White House.
The story is likely not true. But still, the imagery of a president inviting struggling journalists in from a cold rainy night and giving them access to the White House is perfect symbolism for the government’s approach to the press. It appears benevolent and, on the surface, seems to embody the democratic principle of transparency. But by bringing certain journalists in, excluding others, and retaining the power to revoke access, the government gained leverage and control over much of the press.
Not all presidents shared Roosevelt’s approach to media control. Woodrow Wilson, for instance, was famously unwilling to engage directly with reporters. And when his administration needed to crack down on anti-war rhetoric to ensure enough of the public would accept the American entrance into World War I, Wilson used strong-arm tactics like intimidation, suppression, and even imprisonment against journalists and media figures who continued to oppose the war.
But as the years went on and Americans grew increasingly horrified by the naked authoritarianism overtaking Europe, a new appreciation for Roosevelt’s approach took root. Unlike the regimes in Berlin and Moscow, the American political class came to understand that the key to good media censorship does not lie in muzzling the media “watchdogs” but in transforming them into lapdogs.
So, in the 1950s, President Eisenhower formally established the White House press pool as it is known today. Because of limited space, an “independent” organization called the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) was tapped to formally choose the rotating roster of outlets and journalists that would get access to briefings.
But the independence of this process was an illusion because the White House had complete control over which outlets were eligible to be chosen by the WHCA in the first place. And they would charge participating media organizations hefty fees when traveling with the president on government aircraft. This is presented as a way to protect the taxpayer, but it just so happens to ensure that only a few very wealthy corporate media outlets have been able to accompany presidents on trips.
Together with the government’s seizure of the airwaves, the selective access the White House granted through the press pool gave the federal government considerable control over which newspapers and broadcasters gained prominence in the American media landscape.
But there was still room to go. During the Vietnam War, White House officials grew frustrated that American journalists were roaming the country, writing stories that contradicted what officials were saying about the progress of the war.
So in 1991, when the US again found itself in a major war, the government did the media the “favor” of granting them access to an official, government-sanctioned media center near the Iraqi border where they were fed information officials wanted the public to know. Then, occasionally, some of those journalists would get to join American troops and tour specific areas on and around the front lines.
It became clear, though, that putting strict limits on what embedded journalists could do, say, or be told was unnecessary. The thrill of getting to ride around in armored vehicles with a bunch of heavily armed guys who were both interested by and working to protect the reporters as if they were VIPs was, as Peter Van Buren put it, “seductive.”
The government discovered that granting journalists the credentials to embed with US forces was an extremely effective way to effectively control the public’s perception of the war—all while appearing to embrace radical transparency. So, the approach was used heavily in the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Sometimes, the White House has combined its pooling and embedding approach to great effect, such as in 2003 when Mike Allen—then at The Washington Post—was brought along for President George W. Bush’s secret trip to Baghdad. Or, two decades later, when Wall Street Journal reporter Sabrina Siddiqui was tapped to accompany President Biden on his secret train ride to Kyiv in early 2023.
The press dutifully wrote accounts of the trips that were more obnoxiously dramatic than anything the White House communications teams could ever get away with. But that was the point. These were publicity stunts. The journalists weren’t there to observe the trips; they were the entire point of the trips.
Today, some of the most extreme examples of weaponized access are not coming from officials in Washington but from their allies in Kyiv and Tel Aviv. The Ukrainian government has been very quick to revoke the credentials of foreign journalists when their reporting either reveals things the government wants to remain secret or debunks aspects of the regime’s official narrative. And the Israeli government has banned any foreign journalists from entering Gaza unless they’re brought in by the IDF.
So it’s ridiculous to hear the legacy media, here in the US, trying to act like Trump is breaking tradition with his use of access and accreditation to control how the media is reporting on his administration. That has been one of the hallmarks of the political establishment’s strategy for controlling the public’s understanding of current events for many decades. The only reason why they suddenly see it as a problem is because, now, they’re not the ones benefiting.
The Louisiana legislature has passed a key pro-life bill aiming to crack down on illegal sales of abortion pills in the state so its abortion ban can truly protect unborn children.
The state legislature has signed off on House Bill 575 – which passed yesterday allowing women to sue anyone who “knowingly performed or substantially facilitated” an abortion for at least $100,000 in damages.
HB 575 by Reps. Lauren Ventrella and Julie Emerson empowers Louisiana citizens harmed by abortion to file lawsuits against abortion drug dealers who unlawfully sell abortion services, including predators and abuser.
Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//
With pro-abortion states like New York refusing to assist pro-life states like Louisiana in prosecuting illegal abortion pill sellers, this legislation would empower women injured by abortion pills to sue the sellers – which could help put them out of business or prompt them to stop selling abortion pills in the pro-life state for fear of legal accountability.
Executive Director for Louisiana Right to Life, Benjamin Clapper, said the following after the Senate passage:
We applaud the Louisiana Senate for passing these two pro-life bills that continue Louisiana’s legacy of defending life and protecting women from the abortion industry. The reckless sale of abortion pills by out-of-state businesses have led to increased instances of women being coerced to have abortions. HB 575 and HB 425 strengthen laws to prevent coerced abortion and allow women hurt by abortion to seek justice.
Louisiana Right to Life is committed to a future where women and girls are safe from the predatory tactics of the abortion industry and can pursue justice for themselves and their families.
The post Louisiana Legislature Passes Pro-Life Bill Targeting Illegal Abortion Pill Sellers appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Goldman Sachs gaming analysts Minami Munakata and Haruki Kubota were spot on in forecasting the explosive popularity of Nintendo's newly released Switch 2, which shattered records with millions of units in sales in just four days.
Nintendo wrote on X late Tuesday night that it sold over 3.5 million Switch 2 consoles in just four days, surpassing the original Switch's first-month sales of 2.7 million back in 2017.
Switch 2 has become "the fastest-selling Nintendo hardware ever globally," the Japanese gaming company said. This strong sales momentum sets a strong pace toward the company's goal of 15 million units sold by March 2026.
#NintendoSwitch2 has sold over 3.5 million units worldwide in its first four days, becoming the fastest-selling Nintendo hardware ever globally. pic.twitter.com/JNrl3Z92pv
— Nintendo of America (@NintendoAmerica) June 11, 2025"We believe sales are tracking above our shipment assumption of 3.9 mn units in the April-June 2025 quarter, and also above the initial sales pace for the PlayStation 4 and PlayStation 5 (Exhibit 1, Exhibit 3)," Munakata wrote in a note to clients earlier.
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 3
The analysts also highlight a robust third-party game pipeline and a premium price of $79.99 for Mario Kart World as key drivers of stronger revenue...
We focus in particular on the strong pipeline of third-party titles for the Nintendo Switch 2 (in terms of both quantity and quality), and the higher selling price for the new Mario Kart World title (US$79.99), which is above prices for previous titles in the series. We expect to see an increase in per-console revenues (from content, services, peripherals, etc.) in the transition from the Nintendo Switch to the Nintendo Switch 2, similar to that seen in the transition from the PS4 to the PS5. Our FY3/26 operating profit estimate is 15% above the Bloomberg consensus. As seen during the PS4/PS5 transition, we believe Nintendo can maintain and expand user engagement, allowing it to secure higher margins from the first year of the successor console launch compared with the previous console launch (see our report here). We make no changes to our earnings estimates or our 12-month target price of ¥14,500, and we maintain our Buy rating.
Here's the third-party game pipeline:
Nintendo shares in Tokyo have hovered near ¥12,000 over the past six weeks, with upward momentum showing signs of exhaustion.
Our reporting so far:
Nintendo Shares Jump After Goldman Sees Switch 2 Unlocking Dormant Users
Nintendo Switch 2 Frenzy: "Selling Out" Across US Retailers As Tariffs Won't Impact Pricing
Goldman Thinks Nintendo's Switch 2 Will Blow Away Estimates, Sees No Supply Constraints
We've previously highlighted the gaming industry's long-running deflationary spiral—development costs have soared while retail prices stagnated. Now, however, an inflection point may be emerging as AAA games begin creeping toward the $100 mark.
By Michael Every of Rabobank
Yesterday’s UK labor market data were a clear story – and an ugly one. Yet the US NFIB survey summarized: “Although optimism recovered slightly in May, uncertainty is still high among small business owners. While the economy will continue to stumble along until the major sources of uncertainty are resolved, owners reported more positive expectations on business conditions and sales growth.” That’s still more ‘uh?’ for now.
In geopolitics, Russia warned it won’t end the Ukraine war until NATO pulls its troops out of the Baltic states. Whatever asset you look at, take a step back and think about that for a moment.
Is that a bluff – how can you know? Does it mean the EU surrendering those states back to Russian influence – and where afterwards? That’s the end of the EU as we know it, let alone the version that breezily states it wants to expand to Moldova, next to a Russian client state, and Georgia, next to Russia itself. Or it implies a permanent state of EU-Russia hostility --the latter not with “an economy the size of Italy”, but a war economy with a purchasing power parity of $7 trillion and a world of physical resources-- with profound implications for both sides socio-politically, economically, and financially.
Now think about what that implies for your asset again.
The US reportedly told Israel to end the Gaza war so it can try to get an Iran deal. Meanwhile, Israel attacked the Houthis by sea for the first time, seen as a warmup for Iran; and the head of US Central Command told the House Armed Services Committee he’d presented Defence Secretary Hegseth and President Trump with a "broad range of options" for military action against Iran if negotiations fail. So, keep an eye on those negotiations!
The US Ambassador to Israel stated the White House doesn’t fully back a Palestinian state under current circumstances: “Unless there are some significant things that happen that change the culture,” which are unlikely to occur “in our lifetime,” then “there’s no room for it.” Moreover, he added a Palestinian state doesn’t need to be in the West Bank/Gaza and could be created by taking territory from another country. This is as EU states such as Spain, Ireland, and France are pushing in the opposite direction, opening another transatlantic rift. It’s also as the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ, and Norway sanctioned two far-right Israeli government ministers, one of whom (the finance minister) responded by paralysing the Palestinian economy by freezing links between its banks and Israel’s.
In Asia, senior staff in the last Taiwanese administration were arrested for spying for China; and Pakistan accused India of manipulating the flow of the Indus River to disrupt its food security, against the backdrop of a potentially wobbly military ceasefire.
In geoeconomics, a federal appellate court ruled Trump’s IEEPA tariffs could continue as a full appeal will be heard at another court on July 31. US-India trade talks are reportedly going well; and the US and China agreed a “framework” to roll back recent export controls, so each side gets the key inputs recently cut off by the other - but that’s a pinkie swear not an FTA.
Summing things up, the Financial Times op-ed from Martin Wolf talks of ‘An ever-riskier world economy’ as “Trump’s tariff war brings with it unpredictability and a consequent loss of confidence.” Fair enough.
Yet, in recent FT fashion, it then argues the US is in the early stages of a “revolution” aimed at changing it into an “arbitrary dictatorship”, following yesterday’s op-ed from Edward Luce that the US is falling into “authoritarianism.” That will be seen as a pinkie paper swear by some. It certainly has far more significant implications than are being priced in by markets if it’s true; and for FT intellectual credibility if it isn’t.
The EU (again) proposed lowering the Russian oil price cap from $60 to $45, banning the use of the Nord Stream pipelines, and cutting another 22 Russian banks from SWIFT, demanding “an end to the war” – which Russia just made clear requires entirely different EU actions.
Europe also placed 62.4% tariffs on Chinese plywood – which is what cynics see its flat-pack plans for strategic autonomy and replacing the US as home to reverse assets and the reserve FX are made of.
As the potential sale of ports at either side of the Panama Canal and a slew of others to a consortium led by ocean carrier MSC sees concerns it may end de facto neutral treatment for all cargo, the Federal Maritime Commission was warned by the Seafarers International Union of the risks of the growing “dark fleet” registering and flagging outside regulatory oversight. In short, the ‘level playing field’ assumption in global trade is seeing larger and larger potholes ahead.
In politics, Poland’s PM is expected to win his no confidence vote but still won’t be able to govern with the new president in place; and as France saw another teacher murdered by a pupil, and Austria a school shooting that killed 10, the government is to ban social media for under-15s.
And as riots continue in LA and a curfew is to be imposed in parts of it, a Wall Street Journal op-ed runs: ‘Tom Cotton: Send in the Troops, for Real’ arguing, “When local police can’t restore order, the federal government has a duty to do so with a show of force.” That echoes his June 2020 op-ed in the New York Times that led to a staff revolt and a political hoo-ha. Today’s call isn’t getting much attention, especially in markets. Which, to be fair, aren’t paying attention to the riots either: as Bloomberg ‘sagely’ noted yesterday, ‘these kinds of things don’t have an impact on stocks (or bonds or FX)’.
Unless, of course, they aren’t noise against the backdrop of a globalized world order predicated on free trade and “because markets” but are a symptom of larger breakdowns and structural changes that shatter that order, and the markets based on it.
However, you’d need to look at far more than a Bloomberg screen in an air-conditioned, first-world city-centre office to know which way those fat tail risks really lie; but that takes up valuable time in which one could be counting beans or shouting “Rate Cuts!”
On which note, Treasury Secretary Bessent was just named by Bloomberg as a likely candidate for Fed Chair.
First, that’s a year before it’s even vacant, which is not how things used to work and suggests the risks of a Shadow Fed Chair emerging, with a remains-to-be-seen effect on markets. Second, it would be a successive switch from Treasury to Fed when we are constantly told these are sacrosanct positions which must co-ordinate but always remain fiercely independent of each other (“because markets”). Can even Bloomberg-screen readers spot a pattern there?
However, the Bessent story has since been shot down by the White House. Yet names like former Fed member Warsh --who’s given some jaw-dropping comments on central banking of late-- and Director of the National Economic Council Hassett -- who’d meet the Trump insider loyalty test-- haven’t been.
But, relax: everything is as it ever was and ever will be, everywhere.
Normal 0 false false false EN-CA X-NONE X-NONE This article was published by Compassionate Community Care on June 11, 2025.
By Kathy Matusiak Costa
Executive Director, Compassionate Community Care
A grieving family from Eastern Canada is speaking out following the unexpected decision of their elderly aunt to proceed with a scheduled Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) procedure at a hospital in British Columbia, just days after a fall that led to her admission into rehabilitation care.
According to her niece, the woman had not suffered a serious injury—“she didn’t even break a bone”—and had only recently been told by doctors that she had arthritis. But the family was stunned to learn that she had already scheduled her euthanasia and was resolute in her decision to go through with it.
Canada’s unemployment rate rose to 7% in May — its highest in over eight years, excluding the pandemic — with just 8,800 jobs added, according to the Financial Post..
Full-time employment increased by 58,000, offset by a decline in part-time work. Private sector jobs grew by 61,000, while public sector employment fell by 21,000 due to fewer temporary hires after April’s federal election.
The Financial Post writes that manufacturing lost 12,200 jobs last month, contributing to a four-month decline of 55,000. Transportation and warehousing also shed 15,000 positions. Employment grew in wholesale and retail trade, utilities, finance, and real estate but dropped in manufacturing, public administration, and accommodation and food services.
Economists say the rise in unemployment is partly due to U.S. tariffs dampening hiring, with trade-sensitive regions like Windsor (10.8% jobless rate) and Oshawa (9.1%) hit hardest. Indeed Canada noted job postings have remained steady since February but are lower in trade-impacted areas.
“The impact of tariffs shows up in the industry pattern and regional unemployment pattern,” said Leslie Preston, senior economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank. “The manufacturing sector was down 12,200, as was transportation and warehousing (-15,000).”
Preston said manufacturing has lost a total of 55,000 jobs over the past four months.
Youth unemployment reached 20.1%, reflecting the start of the summer job market. The employment rate held steady at 60.8%, with total hours worked unchanged from April but up 0.9% from a year ago. Average hourly wages rose 3.4% year-over-year.
Bank of Canada policymakers are closely watching these developments, holding rates at 2.75% last week amid inflation concerns. In a note, Andrew Grantham, senior economist with the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, said: “We expect that the gradual rise in joblessness will continue into the second half of the year, with positive developments regarding U.S. tariffs and some further interest rate cuts from the Bank of Canada required to help stabilize conditions before year-end and bring a reduction in the unemployment rate again in 2026.”
Still, economists said the larger trend of the rising unemployment rate could mean further rate cuts by the Bank of Canada during the second half of this year, with the jobless rate expected to peak above seven percent.
The Satanic Temple (TST) in Iowa filed a complaint June 10 with the Iowa Office of Civil Rights, claiming that it is a religious group and that state officials discriminated against it by denying it permission to host a satanic event in the Iowa Capitol.
TST applied to hold a winter celebration in the Capitol in December 2024 in an attempt to educate Iowans about satanism and its beliefs, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, which filed the complaint on behalf of TST.
Mortimer Adramelech, a satanic minister of TST Iowa, claimed that he and his group are simply “seeking to exercise our right to freedom of religion.” The event would have included “satanic holiday carols,” DIY satanic ornaments, a Krampus costume contest, and a ritual.
REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.
State officials denied the application, stating that events involving violence, gore, or sexual themes are not permissible. TST claims that the event would not have included such content and would have remained family-friendly.
This is not TST’s first incident at the Iowa Capitol. In December 2023, the group placed a satanic display in the rotunda of the building, prompting Christian Navy veteran Michael Cassidy to destroy the figure, CatholicVote previously reported.
“I saw this blasphemous statue and was outraged. My conscience is held captive to the word of God, not to bureaucratic decree. And so I acted,” Cassidy said at the time. “The world may tell Christians to submissively accept the legitimization of Satan, but none of the founders would have considered government sanction of satanic altars inside Capitol buildings as protected by the First Amendment.”
In response to Cassidy’s actions, CatholicVote Vice President Josh Mercer explained that tearing down the statue was not a violation of TST’s First Amendment rights.
“The state of Iowa has every right to exercise its own government speech on its government property,” Mercer stated in 2023. “You do not have a First Amendment right to have every viewpoint represented.”
LifeNews Note: Hannah Hiester writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.
The post Iowa Refuses to Allow Satanic Temple to Host Ritual at State Capitol appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Of late, there have been several attacks on my writings and on me personally, in the vanguard of which has been the ex-satanist, ex-Catholic, now Eastern Orthodox writer Michael Warren Davis. The attacks are based on my occasional use of the term ‘magic’, for which Davis claims I must be embroiled in the dark occult, and that I am attempting to entangle others in its web. When I replied to Davis’s…
In the largest private-sector investment in Pennsylvania history, Amazon is plowing $20 billion into two data center campuses to boost its artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing capabilities, as the company looks to help solidify America's technological edge over competitors in China and elsewhere.
A data center owned by Amazon Web Services, front right, is under construction next to the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Berwick, Pa., on Jan. 14, 2024. Ted Shaffrey/AP Photo
The investment by Amazon Web Services (AWS) will create 1,250 high-skilled jobs spanning engineering, cybersecurity and network operations, the company said in a Monday announcement. It will also lead to thousands of construction jobs, and spur broader economic growth through demand for services and suppliers within the data center industry.
One campus will be located next to the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Salem Township, Luzerne County, while the other will be located in Falls Township, Bucks County, where a US Steel facility was formerly located.
"Amazon’s multi-billion-dollar investment in Pennsylvania reinforces our dedication to advancing AI innovation while creating lasting economic opportunities in the state," according to the company's chief global affairs and legal officer, David Zapolsky.
As the Epoch Times notes further, to help meet the demand for skilled workers, Pennsylvania will allocate $10 million toward workforce development programs tailored to data center construction and operations, including vocational training and community college partnerships, Shapiro’s office said in an announcement.
Speaking at a press conference in Berwick on Monday, Shapiro said the investment is a generational opportunity to transform Pennsylvania’s economic future, adding that Amazon’s announcement is “just the beginning,” with additional data center projects under consideration in the state.
“From coal and steel, to server farms and fiber optic cables, Pennsylvania is poised to power our future,” Shapiro said. “A future where America dominates the next frontier of AI and doesn’t cede this ground to China or any other nation.”
The announcement comes as the Trump administration intensifies efforts to counter China’s push for global tech supremacy. CIA Deputy Director Michael Ellis recently said that President Donald Trump’s intelligence team is prioritizing the denial of any strategic advantage to China—particularly in advanced technologies AI, semiconductors, and quantum computing.
Calling China an “existential threat,” Ellis said the CIA is focusing increasingly on the tech race. He said that a decisive technological advantage is essential to confronting the Chinese Communist Party’s malign actions against the United States.
The intelligence community’s latest threat assessment underscores these concerns, identifying China as “the most active and persistent cyber threat” to U.S. government systems and critical infrastructure.
In the event of a potential conflict with the United States—most notably over Taiwan—China is likely to carry out cyber offensives designed to paralyze U.S. command infrastructure, stir public confusion, and obstruct the swift deployment of troops, the report warns.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has ramped up efforts to defend U.S. interests from foreign cyberthreats.
Trump signed an executive order on June 6 aimed at overhauling cybersecurity policy, directing agencies to adopt secure software development practices, improve defenses against hijacking of network interconnections, and accelerate readiness for advanced cryptography.
Authored by Paul Bradford via American Greatness,
President Trump has made it clear that he will not let the United States fall behind in the global race for digital currency and blockchain innovation. After four years of Biden’s war on crypto, during which he weaponized agencies like the SEC to drive American innovators offshore, Trump is restoring order, sanity, and leadership in one of the most important financial frontiers of the 21st century.
The Trump administration’s success or failure here will determine whether the U.S. dollar remains the global standard. The president and the larger MAGA movement know it. So do millions of everyday Americans who want a financial system that works for them, not against them.
But as the Trump administration works to deliver on the president’s campaign promise, a surprising obstacle has emerged—not from Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, who’s made a career out of demonizing crypto, but from within the Republican Party itself.
At stake is the GENIUS Act, a bipartisan bill that would allow the private sector to create stablecoins pegged to the U.S. dollar.
You may not have heard of stablecoins before. They are essentially cryptocurrencies with stable prices as they are pegged to the value of something stable, unlike typical crypto.
As a relatively new financial instrument, creating stablecoins tied to the U.S. dollar represents a massive opportunity to extend the reach of American finance. Millions of people are already using stablecoins, and this number will only grow larger in the coming years. The Trump administration wants to make sure the ones they use are connected to the U.S. dollar, not the yuan or the Russian ruble. More global demand for the dollar will strengthen its value and allow Americans to purchase more for less.
President Trump wants to sign the GENIUS Act into law before the August recess (ensuring it will not go into effect after China’s stablecoin legislation does this summer).
Last week, Vice President JD Vance reaffirmed this by expressing the White House’s desire for the Senate to pass the bill clean. Because even a well-intentioned amendment can slow the process, fracture the coalition, and ultimately kill the bill.
This is where the problem lies. A couple of Republicans are not listening and are proposing amendments that could kill the bill.
One Republican senator wants to link the Sen. Dick Durbin-backed Credit Card Competition Act (CCCA) to the GENIUS Act. It’s no surprise his colleagues hate this bill, with one even saying he will pull his support for the stablecoin bill if this amendment passes—because it is a major government giveaway to big box stores like Walmart and Target.
The CCCA will use the force of government to mandate that card companies offer retailers at least two payment networks. That might not sound like a big deal, but it is because the high costs of this new regulation would force them to either raise prices or cut back on their consumer benefits programs. That is why The Point Guys, a well-known website that tracks reward points for travel, is opposing the bill, warning that it “has the potential to significantly negatively alter, if not completely eliminate, the world of credit card rewards that we know today.”
Another Republican senator, who said he plans on voting against the GENIUS Act anyway, wants to impose an obstructionist amendment that would cap the credit card interest rates at 10%. This similar “money grows on trees” legislative idea, endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), would just lead to companies having no choice but to approve fewer lower-income Americans for the credit, even if they desperately need it to stay afloat.
Vice President Vance: This bill must be allowed to pass clean without these distractions. It’s the only way we can beat China before the country’s stablecoin bill goes live in August. With a Republican senator already saying he will vote against the GENIUS Act because of one of these amendments, VP Vance is being proven right.
Democrats are the ones who are supposed to obstruct crypto innovation, not Republicans.
Democrats like Elizabeth Warren spent the last several years trying to suffocate digital innovation in the U.S. under the guise of “consumer protection.” Under Biden, regulators waged war on crypto through intimidation, rulemaking by ambush, and selective enforcement.
Trump has been dismantling that regime from day one. He fired Gary Gensler, repealed Biden’s hostile executive orders, and is replacing consumers’ fear and confusion over crypto with clarity and confidence. He even signed an executive order to create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (a digital Fort Knox of sorts), affirming the U.S. commitment to leading, not following, on crypto policy. It would be a shame if a couple of Republicans stood in his way.
Republicans should recognize what’s at stake. This isn’t just another bill. It’s our one shot to beat China at its own game. The alternative is letting political infighting and Beltway gamesmanship stall the president’s agenda, giving the People’s Republic the upper hand.
Trump is doing his job. Now it’s time for Congress to do what the people elected them to do—lead.
The American Medical Association (AMA)’s House of Delegates “overwhelmingly rejected” changing the organization’s longstanding position that physician-assisted suicide is incompatible with the healing role of the doctor, Patients’ Rights Action Fund (PRAF) reported June 9.
The AMA’s more than 600 voting delegates — who represent entities such as state medical associations, national medical specialty organizations, and professional interest medical associations — are meeting this week in Chicago, the organization’s website said.
The association has maintained its policy on physician-assisted suicide since 1994, according to PRAF, an organization dedicated to ending assisted suicide. PRAF reports that the House also greenlighted a report from the association’s trustees that keeps the language used to describe physician-assisted suicide clear. Advocates in favor of the practice often use euphemisms such as “aid in dying” or similar language, especially avoiding the word “suicide.”
LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news
In the AMA’s background reports document on its policy on physician-assisted suicide, it states that the House’s Council on Judicial and Ethical Affairs reviewed concerns on proper terminology and concluded that using the term “physician assisted suicide” “describes the practice with the greatest precision” and “clearly distinguishes the practice from euthanasia.” The council also noted that referring to physician assisted suicide as “aid in dying” or using the term “death with dignity” is too ambiguous because that could mean euthanasia or palliative care.
The AMA’s Code of Medical Ethics asserts in chapter 5 that “Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.” The code recommends physicians respect patient autonomy and provide good palliative care, rather than assisted suicide, when a patient is nearing the end of his or her life. The AMA also expresses sympathy for patients experiencing extreme suffering who decide death is better than living.
“However, permitting physicians to engage in assisted suicide would ultimately cause more harm than good,” the AMA’s code adds.
In the same chapter, the AMA also provides “the thoughtful moral basis for those who support assisted suicide.” In this section, the AMA emphasizes the importance of physicians’ conscience rights, although it also notes that their “freedom to act according to conscience is not unlimited.”
“Physicians are expected to provide care in emergencies, honor patients’ informed decisions to refuse life-sustaining treatment, and respect basic civil liberties and not discriminate against individuals in deciding whether to enter into a professional relationship with a new patient,” the AMA states, adding that in other instances physicians may be able to act in a way that both honors their conscience and their professional expectations.
The AMA also has policies for physicians to consider when following their consciences, stating under one bullet point that if they object to a certain treatment, physicians should refer patients to another physician that can provide it; and if the physician objects morally to referring the patient at all, “the physician should offer impartial guidance to patients about how to inform themselves regarding access to desired services.”
Overall, however, the AMA recommends under this section that the physician should either continue providing alternative care for the patient or “formally terminate the patient-physician relationship in keeping with ethics guidance.”
Catholic ethicist Dr. Kristin Collier, an associate professor of medicine at University of Michigan, posted on X June 9 thanking the expressing gratitude to the AMA for the vote to reject changing its policy on physician-assisted suicide. In the same thread, Catholic bioethicist Charlie Camosy also reacted, “This is amazing.”
LifeNews Note: McKenna Snow writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.
The post American Medical Association Overwhelmingly Rejects Assisted Suicide appeared first on LifeNews.com.
Israeli media has revealed that in a Monday phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump told the Israeli leader that he must permanently end the war in Gaza.
Trump is said to have conveyed that the conflict should end "the sooner the better"; however, there's been no indication that Trump is willing to use the major leverage he has of cutting off US military aid to enforce this.
Via Reuters
The Israeli military is heavily reliant on American weapons for the war's execution, as well as maintaining readiness against other regional threats like the Houthis out of Yemen or Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The phone call reportedly involved Trump conveying that bringing an end to Gaza operations would help him in nuclear negotiations with Iran, as well as achieving Saudi-Israeli normalization based on the Abraham Accords. These negotiations have been growing tougher, specifically over the question of if the Iranians can maintain any uranium enrichment at all.
In reference to reporting in Israel's Kan public broadcaster and Channel 12, "Trump also ruled out an attack on Iran as the White House seeks to rein in Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, according to the reports."
While admitting this week that the Iranians have become "much more aggressive" in negotiations which have taken place in Oman and Rome, Trump's latest statements have been a little less directly threatening in terms of the 'bomb Tehran' 'option'.
For example, here's how Trump responded to a NY Post question on the subject:
“Well, if they don’t make a deal, they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon,” Trump answered. “If they do make a deal, they’re not going have a nuclear weapon, too, you know? But they’re not going a have a new nuclear weapon, so it’s not going to matter from that standpoint.
“But it would be nicer to do it without warfare, without people dying, it’s so much nicer to do it. But I don’t think I see the same level of enthusiasm for them to make a deal. I think they would make a mistake, but we’ll see. I guess time will tell.”
Given the phone call with Netanyahu, it seems the president increasingly sees a Gaza truce deal as crucial to achieving broader stabilization in terms of US interests in the region.
There's also this interesting information via The Times of Israel:
Trump reportedly told Netanyahu that the so-called “Witkoff framework,” which would pause the war for some 60 days in exchange for about half of the hostages held by Hamas, will not suffice.
Meanwhile in Gaza the high death toll continues, amid a controversial plan for a US aid group to oversee humanitarian relieve. Al Jazeera is reporting Wednesday that at least 61 Palestinians, including 39 aid seekers, have been killed by Israeli forces across parts of the Gaza Strip since dawn.
Most Israeli captives still in Hamas' hands are feared dead, but there's widespread acknowledgement that possibly a dozen or more are still alive. Victims' family members in Israel have been pressing the government to achieve another prisoner swap.
New York lawmakers on June 9 passed a bill that would legalize physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults — legislation that has now reached the office of Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul.
According to the New York Post, the bill passed 35 to 27, with six Democrats voting against it: Senators April Baskin, Siela Bynoe, Cordell Cleare, Monica Martinez, Roxanne Persaud, and Sam Sutton.
The measure, known as the “Medical Aid in Dying Act,” would allow adults diagnosed with a terminal illness and a life expectancy of six months or less to request life-ending medication.
REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.
Approval would require the sign-off of the attending physician and a consulting physician and a written request witnessed by two adults who attest that the patient is acting voluntarily, according to AP News.
Democratic Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, the bill’s sponsor, framed the legislation as humane.
“It’s not about hastening death, but ending suffering,” he said during a lengthy Senate debate.
But the bill’s passage marks what many faith and pro-life leaders are calling a somber moment.
“This is a dark day for New York State,” said Dennis Poust, executive director of the New York State Catholic Conference, which strongly opposes the bill. “For the first time in its history, New York is on the verge of authorizing doctors to help their patients commit suicide. Make no mistake — this is only the beginning, and the only person standing between New York and the assisted suicide nightmare unfolding in Canada is Governor Hochul.”
According to the AP article, Sen. George Borrello, a Republican, voiced similar concern: “We should not be in the business of state-authorized suicide.”
The legislation, introduced nearly a decade ago, has long faced resistance. As CatholicVote previously reported, the state Assembly passed the bill April 29 amid intense debate. If Hochul signs it, New York would join 11 other states and Washington, DC, in allowing some form of medically assisted suicide.
LifeNews Note: Joshua Mercer writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.
The post Catholic Bishops Condemn Passage of New York Bill Legalizing Assisted Suicide appeared first on LifeNews.com.
China and the US have agreed to “a done deal” that includes rare earth exports from China and Chinese students attending colleges in the US, President Trump said on Wednesday, pointing to a potential breakthrough aimed at cooling trade tensions that had been reignited by mutual accusations of deal violations.
“Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval with President Xi and me,” Trump posted on Truth Social, as the negotiating teams from the two countries concluded talks in London from the past two days.
“Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China. Likewise, we will provide to China what was agreed to, including Chinese students using our colleges and universities (which has always been good with me!).
“We are getting a total of 55 per cent tariffs, China is getting 10 per cent. Relationship is excellent! Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Trump’s comments on Wednesday come a day after the US and China reached an agreement in London on implementing the terms of their tariff truce.
But, as Bloomberg notes, Trump's remarks included terms negotiators did not lay out, such as the immediate supply of critical minerals by China. He also said the US tariff rate would be a “total” of 55% — though the precise rate was not clear.
That figure includes a 10% baseline duty, a 20% charge tied to fentanyl trafficking and roughly 25% from preexisting levies from Trump’s first term as well as most favored nation rates, according to a White House official.
In a follow up post, Trump added to the readout, saying that "President XI and I are going to work closely together to open up China to American Trade. This would be a great WIN for both countries!"
American and Chinese officials concluded marathon negotiations on Tuesday, agreeing to revive the flow of sensitive goods, such as critical minerals, and implement the terms of last month’s deal in Geneva, which saw both sides lower tariffs. That deal included a 90-day pause on very high tariffs both nations implemented on each others’ imports that amounted to a de facto trade embargo. It’s unclear whether that deadline, which expires in August, remains in effect.
Trump’s latest post followed a rocky stretch in bilateral ties, marked by a fraying trust between the world’s two largest economies. But a phone call between Xi Jinping and Trump last week helped fuel a sense of cautious optimism ahead of the London talks. The two negotiating teams finished their latest round of talks by announcing they had agreed “in principle” to a “framework” that each side would bring home for review by their respective leaders, as the world’s two biggest economies attempt to get their trade-war ceasefire deal signed in Geneva last month back on track.
In an official statement released by Xinhua on Wednesday afternoon, Beijing said the two sides “made new progress in addressing each other’s economic and trade concerns” during the “candid and in-depth” dialogue.
Vice-Premier He Lifeng, who led the Chinese delegation, said that “China does not want a trade war, but it is not afraid of one”, according to the statement.
“The two sides should resolve economic and trade differences through equal dialogue and mutually beneficial cooperation. China is sincere in economic and trade consultations, but it also has its principles,” He was quoted as saying.
In London, China’s delegation was led by Vice-Premier He Lifeng. Lutnick, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer led the US side in what was described as “the first meeting of the China-US economic and trade consultation mechanism”.
“The two largest economies in the world have reached a handshake for a framework,” said US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who was with the US delegation.
Unlike the first round of trade talks last month in Geneva, neither side immediately published official statements following the meetings this time.
In mid-May, both sides agreed in Switzerland to roll back the tariffs imposed this year. US tariffs on Chinese goods were reduced to 30 per cent from 145 per cent, while Chinese tariffs on US imports were lowered to 10 per cent, for 90 days. Analysts had earlier estimated that the effective US tariff was about 20 per cent at end of last year, bringing the total effective rate to about 50 per cent, excluding some sectoral tariffs.
Tensions escalated dramatically in the days leading up to last week’s presidential phone call, with both sides accusing each other of violating the 90-day trade truce they had agreed to in Geneva. On the call, just days ahead of the London talks, Xi and Trump agreed to push forward with negotiations aimed at resolving their ongoing economic disputes.
Since last month, the US said it would block and revoke visas for Chinese students, particularly “those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields”, according to the US Department of State.
China’s recent export restrictions on crucial rare earth elements through tighter licensing and curbs also rattled sectors across the globe as China dominates the supply chain.
The NY Post has published a new Trump interview focused on apparently stalled Iran nuclear deal efforts which resulted in a surge in oil prices.
The President said in the interview he's getting "less confident" about ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran, soon after which oil rose as well as benchmark treasury yields and gold, as investors weigh the possibility of US-Iran nuclear talks falling apart.
Trump was asked whether he thinks the Islamic Republic will agree to shut down its nuclear program. "I don’t know. I did think so, and I’m getting more and more — less confident about it," he responded.
"They seem to be delaying, and I think that’s a shame, but I’m less confident now than I would have been a couple of months ago," Trump continued. "Something happened to them, but I am much less confident of a deal being made."
Then the question was raised by the Post, "what happens then?" To which Trump responded:
“Well, if they don’t make a deal, they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon,” Trump answered. “If they do make a deal, they’re not going have a nuclear weapon, too, you know? But they’re not going a have a new nuclear weapon, so it’s not going to matter from that standpoint.
“But it would be nicer to do it without warfare, without people dying, it’s so much nicer to do it. But I don’t think I see the same level of enthusiasm for them to make a deal. I think they would make a mistake, but we’ll see. I guess time will tell.”
On the question of China's influence on Tehran, Trump described, "I just think maybe they don’t want to make a deal. What can I say?” he said. “And maybe they do. So what does that mean? There’s nothing final."
Via AFP
On Tuesday Trump acknowledged in a Fox News interview that Iran is becoming "much more aggressive" in these negotiations. And the day prior he had told reporters that the Iranians are "tough negotiators" and sought to clarify that he would not allow Tehran to enrich uranium on its soil, after some recent contradictory reports suggested the White House had backed off this demand.
Washington is awaiting a formal response from the Islamic Republic, which is expected to submit a counter-proposal in the coming days, just ahead of an expected sixth round of indirect talks with the US in Muscat, Oman, slated for Sunday, June 15.
* * *
More geopolitical headlines via Newsquawk:
June 10, is the anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s declaration of war against the national-security branch of the U.S. government. To be sure, he didn’t call it that. He simply was delivering a speech at the June 10, 1963, commencement exercises at American University. The speech has gone down in history simply as JFK’s “Peace Speech,” but in essence it was a declaration of war against the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA.
JFK delivered his speech at the height of the Cold War, the period of time in which the United States was supposedly gravely threatened by a worldwide communist conspiracy that was supposedly based in Moscow, Russia. The communists were coming to get us, U.S. officials said. There could never be either a negotiated peace or peaceful co-existence with the communist world, they claimed. This had to be a war to the finish.
The Cold War sometimes turned hot. There was the Korean War in the early 1950s, when the U.S. government intervened to protect the right of South Korea to secede from the rest of the nation rather than being forced to be part of a communist nation. By June 1963, thousands of U.S. military advisors were in Vietnam for the same reason.
The irony is that Russia’s communist regime had just recently been America’s ally and partner in World War II. The two nations had worked together to defeat Nazi Germany. But as soon as the war was over, U.S. officials told the American people that they could not rest because they now faced a new official enemy that was arguably more dangerous and threatening than Hitler and the Nazis. That new foe was Soviet Russia, communism, and the Reds.
In fact, that was the justification for converting America’s federal governmental structure from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, one in which a major part of the U.S. government acquired omnipotent, totalitarian-like powers, including the power of state-sponsored assassinations.
When JFK became president, he was pretty much a standard Cold Warrior, one who had bought the official line about how the United States was in grave danger of being taken over by the Reds. That was why he approved the CIA’s plan to use CIA-trained Cuban exiles to invade Cuba and oust the communist regime that had taken over the island. Like other Cold Warriors, Kennedy was convinced that a communist regime 90 miles away from American shores proved that the communist threat was getting ever closer to the United States.
After the U.S. failure at the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy realized that he had been hoodwinked by the CIA, which had assured Kennedy that the invasion could succeed without U.S. support. It was a lie. The CIA figured that Kennedy would have no choice but to provide the support once the operation was in danger of going down to defeat. Kennedy was livid and vowed to dismantle the agency. By the same token, the CIA was equally livid, convinced that Kennedy was a coward, an incompetent, and a traitor.
After the Bay of Pigs disaster, tensions with the Pentagon began increasing. Convinced that a communist regime in Cuba posed a grave risk to the United States, the Pentagon began pressuring Kennedy to initiate a full-scale invasion of the island. At the same time, convinced that the Reds were expanding in Southeast Asia, the Pentagon pressured Kennedy into sending thousands of troops into Vietnam.
Kennedy’s settlement of the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the antipathy of the U.S. military establishment toward Kennedy to the surface, especially since the settlement assured the Russians that there would no longer be any more U.S. invasions of Cuba. That meant that Cuba would now permanently serve as a grave threat to U.S. “national security.” The Joint Chiefs of Staff considered the settlement to be among the worst defeats in U.S. history. They compared the settlement to Neville Chamberlain’s capitulation to Hitler at Nuremberg. Like the CIA, they were convinced that Kennedy’s cowardice, incompetence, and treason posed a grave threat to “national security.”
For his part, it was after the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the world came to the brink of nuclear war, that Kennedy achieved a monumental “breakthrough.” He came to the realization that the Cold War was nothing more than one great big racket. He decided to move America in a totally different direction than the one that the national-security branch was leading America. Kennedy’s vision consisted of ending the Cold War and establishing peaceful and friendly relations with Russia and the rest of the communist world. That vision, needless to say, was anathema to the U.S. national-security establishment.
JFK set forth his vision for America in his Peace Speech at American University. It was essentially a declaration of war against the national-security branch of the federal government and its vision entailing a permanent Cold War, periodic hot wars, and, of course, ever-increasing budgets for the military-industrial complex.
The war between the executive branch and the national-security branch of the federal government was on. Over the fierce objections of the national-security establishment, Kennedy entered into a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Russians. He endorsed the idea of a joint trip to the moon, which, of course, would have meant sharing rocket technology with the Reds. He ordered a withdrawal of troops from Vietnam. On the day he was assassinated, he had a secret emissary having lunch with Fidel Castro.
But Kennedy would discover what Chile’s democratically elected president Salvador Allende would discover ten years later. In a war between the executive branch and the national-security branch of a government, the former is no match for the latter. Both Kennedy and Allende would discover that truth on two fateful days in the histories of their two nations: November 22, 1963, and September 11, 1973, when both presidents ended up dead.
Reprinted with permission from Future of Freedom Foundation.
A 'disappointing' CPI print (cooler than expected) has promoted a surge higher in the market's expectation for rate-cut...
Source: Bloomberg
Prompting a surge higher in EVERYTHING.
Stocks spiked...
Treasuries were aggressively bid with 10Y yields sdown 5bps...
Source: Bloomberg
The dollar fell...
Source: Bloomberg
Helping gold to accelerate...
Source: Bloomberg
Goldman said that this would be a materially dovish print (<0.25% MoM for Core CPI) would prompt the bond market to add back at least 2x 25bp rate cuts (it already has) and for Equities to react positively (up 2-2.5%) to the bull steepening that likely ensues.
What excuse will Powell come up with next to NOT cut?
