48 mins ago -Politics & Policy

Senate GOP embraces controversial tax cut strategy

Stef W. Kight

Senate Republicans are fully embracing the strategyof plowing ahead on President Trump's"one, big beautiful bill" by bypassing the parliamentarianon a crucial accounting matter.

Why it matters:Senate leadership and Trumpwant to make the 2017 tax cuts permanentwithout having to account for how much it would add to the deficit. Now, they're saying all they need is for Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) to decide that's what they're going to do.

• Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) backed the argument, laid out by Graham, thatRepublicans don't need the Senate parliamentarianto bless the current policy approach during Tuesday's Senate GOP lunch.

•Graham is expected to release the languageof the budget resolution as soon as Tuesday, according to GOP Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).

• Senate leadership wants to move forward with avote on the resolution this week.

Between the lines:There already have been early conversations with the parliamentarian about the current policy baseline idea.

•Democrats have been pushing back hardagainst the idea in their meetings with the parliamentarian, and there had been expectation of a bipartisan meeting on the topic on Tuesday.

• Republicans are now sayingthey don't need her input at all.

What they're saying:"We think the law is very clear and ultimately the Budget Committee chairman makes that determination," Thune told reporters after the lunch.

• "It's not a ruling by the parliamentarian. TheBudget Chair gets to decide which baselineto use," Barrasso said, echoing Thune.

•"The power resides in the chairmanof the budget committee," said Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) after the lunch. "That's precedent."

Zoom in:The parliamentarian will still be a crucial decision maker when it comes to the details of what gets put into the sweeping reconciliation package.

• The reconciliation processallows the Senate to get around the filibuster, but it can only be used for budget-related measures.

• The parliamentarian has long decided on what can be passed through that process.She notably ruled against Democrats' efforts to provide protection for DACA recipients and raise the federal minimum wage.

https://www.axios.com/2025/04/01/senate-budget-tax-cuts-current-policy-graham

Updated 2 hours ago -Politics & Policy

House votes to defy Mike Johnson in painful blow

Andrew Solender

The House voted Tuesday to defy House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) andforce a vote on allowing members who are new parents to vote by proxy for three months.

Why it matters: It's a brutal loss for Johnson, who poured considerable political capital into trying to snuff out Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's (R-Fla.) efforts.

• Luna launched what is called a discharge petition, which can force a vote on any measure without the support of leadershipif 218 House members sign on.

•Luna got the signatures— including a dozen Republicans — and the vote will have to happen by the end of the week.

• In a rare move,Johnson tied a provision killing the vote to unrelated Republican legislation prohibiting non-citizens from voting in federal elections.

By the numbers:A group of nine Republicans voted against Johnson, including Reps. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) who had signed onto Luna's petition, as well as Luna herself.

• Reps. Will Kiley (R-Calif.), Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), Max Miller (R-Ohio), Greg Steube (R-Fla.) and Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) also voted against Johnson's maneuver.

Between the lines: Johnson's tactics sparked considerable frustrationfrom some rank-and-file lawmakers who felt he was being too heavy-handed.

• Miller, asked about his vote, told reporters: "I would ask [Johnson] why he tried to do this."

Zoom out:The fight over proxy voting has been roiling Republicans for weeks, creating some serious internal divisions within the GOP conference.

•Burchetttold reporters that he was coaxedwith promises of votes on his bills if he backed off supporting Luna.

•Luna herself left the right-wing House Freedom Caucusafter the group tried to kill her discharge petition.

https://www.axios.com/2025/04/01/mike-johnson-anna-paulina-luna-proxy-voting

(Why was this so contentious with Johnson? He doesn't sound much different than McCarthy, blackmailing and bribing the members. Why didn’t he want parents to have proxy votes?)

4 hors ago

The ghosts of trade wars past

History, they say, may not repeat but it rhymes. America's periods of high tariffs dating back to the 1800s carry eerie similarities to today's trade war escalation.

Why it matters:The history of post-tariff higher prices and weaker economic conditions offers some perspective for what might happen in the months and years ahead. (Not true at all)

• Tariffs have historically resulted in retaliation, pain for agricultural interests, higher consumer costs, political backlash and currency chaos, according to a new briefing by a trade group that represents companies responsible for nearly all of U.S. footwear sales.

What they're saying:"Regardless of the era, the consequences of high tariffs and retaliations remain largely the same," Andy Polk, senior vice president of the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, tells Axios.

• "You could swap the names of the main actors and their quotes, justifications, and politics would remain basically the same."

• "Almost like a blind taste test, if you lay out the quotes, it would be hard to guess which person said what and when," adds Polk, who says he's a descendant of President Polk — who lowered tariffs in the mid-1800s.

Flashback:The 1890 McKinley Tariff imposed levies of roughly 50% on almost all imports, a policy aimed at protecting domestic industry from foreign industry.

• Several nations, including Canada, retaliated with tariffs on agricultural goods. The briefing cites a go-to expert on trade history, Douglas Irwin, whose book notes that Canada created stronger trade ties with Britain.

• Many economists had expected Canada would be so economically damaged that it would join the United States — a parallel to President Trump's "51st state" rhetoric.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff, which raised the average tariff to almost 60%, resulted in higher sugar prices for the American public, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, while tariffs on imported eggs soared, the briefing notes.

• The Trump 1.0 trade war in 2018 resulted in higher prices from a slew of consumer goods, including washing machines, clothing and furniture.

The intrigue:Rather than shy away from the history, Trump has openly admired former President McKinley for his trade policy. The 1890s were indeed a time of rapid industrialization.

• "President McKinley made our country very rich through tariffs and through talent," Trump, who recently restored McKinley's name to the nation's highest mountain peak, said last year.

• McKinley ultimately regretted imposing such high tariffs.

"We had no real income taxso tariffs were the main source of revenue, but it was a rather small federal government at the time," UC Davis economics professor Christopher Meissner, who wrote a recent paper on tariffs and manufacturing in the Gilded Age, tells Axios.

• But now "it's not necessarily the most efficient way of raising revenue to meet a modern economy's objectives," Meissner adds,noting that tariffs "would never" cover America's revenue needs.(We’ll see about that.)

What to watch:The embrace of trade protectionism might be too strong to completely reverse — one difference from years past.

• Trump's tariffs from 2018 held over into the Biden administration, though it's unclear what happens in a post-Trump era: The White House has already imposed more tariffs than in the entirety of Trump's first term.

https://www.axios.com/2025/04/01/trump-tariffs-canada-trade-war

When there are so many elites and globalists opposed to tariffs, you know they will be good for Americans.

Watch: Tuscaloosa City Councilman kicks down opponent’s yard sign

Sherri Blevins April 1, 2025

The runoff election for the Tuscaloosa City Council District 1 seat has taken a dramatic turn in recent days.

Security footage obtained byTuscaloosa Patchshows current District 1 Councilor Matthew Wilson kicking over a campaign sign belonging to his opponent, Joe Eatmon.

The video, taken just before 4 p.m. on the Saturday before the election, depicts Wilson carrying one of his own campaign signsbefore approaching and repeatedly kicking Eatmon’s sign, leaving it flat on the ground.

The incident is showcasing some poor political sportsmanship in the district and drawing reactions from voters.

Eatmon expressed frustration, stating that the incident reflects poorly on Wilson’s character and suitability for office. According to ABC 33/40 News, while the video has garnered major attention online, Eatmon has stated that he does not plan to press charges. Instead, he urges residents to focus on voting today.

Wilson has not issued any public comment regarding the video.

The campaign between Wilson and Eatmon has been contentious, leading up to the runoff. Wilson, seeking a second term on the council, received 38% of the vote in the March 4 municipal election, while Eatmon earned 31%. Que Chandler, who finished third with 30%, later endorsed Eatmon.

Eatmon has also accused Wilson of repeatedly removing his campaign signs. Reports from Tuscaloosa Thread indicate that the recent video incident was part of a larger pattern of alleged vandalism.

Despite the controversy, both candidates remain focused on winning today’s vote. Voters in District 1 are encouraged to make their voices heard by casting their ballots before the polls close. With both candidates calling for community involvement, turnout could play a decisive role in determining the district’s representation.

https://yellowhammernews.com/watch-tuscaloosa-city-councilman-kicks-down-opponents-yard-sign/

1:24

1 Apr, 2025 17:34

European group demands Russian assets stay frozen

The EU should also apply more sanctions on Russia, the bloc’s top diplomat has said

Russian assets frozen over the Ukraine conflict should remain immobilized until the hostilities are over, a group of EU nations and the UK said on Monday, calling for additional sanctions on Moscow.

The joint statement by the EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas, and foreign ministers of Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK,issued new threats against Russia and expressed readiness to “apply further pressure [on Russia] using all tools available, including by adopting new sanctions.”

“We reiterate that Russia’s assets should remain immobilized until Russia ceases its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates it for the damage caused,” the document reads, referring to the roughly $300 billion in assets belonging to Russia’s central bank that has been frozen by the West since 2022.

The assets are primarily EU, US, and UK government bonds held in a Brussels-based securities depository. Moscow has called the asset freeze “theft.”

The statement comes after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen refused to consider lifting sanctions on Russia as long as the Ukraine conflict continues. She also rejected a US-Russia-proposed maritime truce between Moscow and Kiev in the Black Sea put forward by the administration of US President Donald Trump.

During recent talks in Riyadh, Moscow and Washington discussed reviving the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which would potentially include the removal of Western sanctions on Russian agriculture and fertilizer exports.

Speaking to French broadcaster LCI on Friday, von der Leyen insisted the restrictions “will remain in effect until a just and lasting peace is established in Ukraine.” After the conflict is over, the “sanctions might be removed,” she added.

The EU’s stance on the potential revival of the grain deal clearly shows the bloc does not want to contribute to the “efforts that Moscow and Washington are making”towards peace, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

“The lifting of sanctions from our banking institution, which deals with settlements related to agricultural products, is an integral part of the Black Sea initiative.And if European countries do not want to go down this path, then this means that they do not want to go down the path of peace,” Peskov said last week.

https://www.rt.com/news/615098-europe-russian-assets-freeze/

(I just realized something, these two War Hawk Hags, Kallas and Baerbock, have been pushing war with Russia for years, along with anger, criticism, etc. to first Russia,but in major way to President Donald J. Trump. AndI believe that they are trying out for Ursula von der Leyen’s job at the EU. They are all the same personality, really ugly hags in side and threats to anyone that they will go to war with any country. Yep, bet Ursula is training and coaching them to be another her, or two more of her. Posting next a warning to Trump from Baerbock, arrogant and entitled bitch. How can either one of them be diplomats or foreign ministers? They are hideous.)

>>22853064

21 Feb, 2025 17:23

Germany issues warning to US

Europe should make it clear to President Trump that failure to back “liberal democracies” will come at a price, Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has insisted

Europe should not hesitate to put pressure on the US if it fails to fall in line with “liberal democracies,” German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said on Friday. The diplomat made the remark following talks between the US and Russia that excluded representatives from the EU and Ukraine.

Speaking at a campaign rally in Potsdam on Friday, the Green politician stated,“We’re increasing pressure on the Americans [so they know] they have a lot to lose if they don’t stand on the side of Europe’s liberal democracies.”(You are fucking out of your mind woman!)

With respect to EU-US relations, Baerbock warned against drawing any precipitous conclusions, remarking that “nothing has been decided there.” (she talks like a tyrant but don't form any conclusions, even though she is a tyrant war monger.)

“No one can decide about war and peace for the Ukrainians or us Europeans, and this is the clear German stance,” she insisted. Baerbock alsowarned against forcing Kiev into a “phony peace” or “capitulation,” which she said would only invite further “war and violence.”

A rift has opened up between Washington and Brussels since US President Donald Trump took office last month. Trump has taken a tougher stance on trade with the EU by threatening tariffs and demanded that its European-NATO partners boost spending on collective defense.

Addressing Munich Security Conference attendees last Friday, US Vice President J.D. Vance delivered a sobering speech to Europe’s political elites, suggesting that the biggest threat the continent is facing is one coming from within – the erosion of democracy.

”In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat,” the official stated, concluding that “if you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you.” The speech sent shockwaves across governments, with leaders,including Germany’s Olaf Scholz, scrambling to rebuke Vance’s assertions.

The fallout was further highlighted when Washington and Moscow held high-level talks in Saudi Arabia this week without bothering to invite EU representatives. This perceived slight prompted an outpouring of anguish and indignation on the continent.

Trump blasted Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky this week, branding him a dictator without elections, but a number of European leaders have rejected the US president’s assertion that he lacks legitimacy.

In an interview with Fox News on Friday,Trump said he sees no point in having Zelensky involved in peace talks with Russia. He also insisted that French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer “haven’t done anything” to put an end to the bloodshed in Ukraine for the three years since it started.

https://www.rt.com/news/613126-germany-us-russia-ukraine/

I think it was Baerbock that Rubio cancelled a meeting with when he went to Germany because of her constant criticism of Trump.

>>22853171

I know, I'm sure was shaking in his boots.

That woman if she is a she, is odious and stupid, she has made statements that Scholz had to correct her on. She is so excited to get a war, its weird. Once a Nazi, always a Nazi.

1 Apr, 2025 10:10

‘No elections are being prepared’ – Zelensky ally

David Arakhamia, the head of the ruling faction in the Ukrainian parliament, has dismissed reports of plans to hold a snap vote

Ukraine has no plans to hold a national election yet, a top Ukrainian lawmaker has said, dismissing reports that Vladimir Zelensky is planning a snap vote to catch the opposition off guard.

The Ukrainian leader’s term expired last May but he refused to hold an election, citing martial law.

Russia deems Zelensky “illegitimate”and insists that the only legal power in Ukraine now lies with the parliament. Russian President Vladimir Putin has proposed placing Ukraine under a temporary UN-led administration to organize new elections.

Speaking to Suspilne on Monday, David Arakhamia, the head of Zelensky’s ruling Servant of the People faction in parliament, dismissed a report by The Economist, which cited unnamed government sources as saying“serious preparations are now underway for Zelensky to go before the electorate for a second time, and quite soon.”

It also claimed that Zelensky held a meeting last month to instruct aides to prepare for a snap election this summer, potentially following a ceasefire with Russia.The idea is reportedly to hold the election as early as July, in hopes that “a short timetable would let him run unopposed.”

Arakhamia dismissed the report. “No elections are being prepared, no preparations are being made.All parliamentary parties and groups have agreed that elections should be held six months after the lifting of martial law. And in principle, our position has not changed since then.”

According to current Ukrainian law,parliamentary elections should be held 60 days after the end of martial law, and presidential elections should be held within 90 days. May 5 is the deadline for a parliamentary vote to extend martial law, which expires on May 8.

Oleg Didenko, the chair of Ukraine’s Central Election Commission, said the timeline is not enough to adequately prepare for the election, stressing thatthe country needs to amend its electoral laws before calling a vote.(So they are going to change the law so Zelensky can get elected again, or bring in a puppet Zelensky?)

Last week, Putin proposed placing Ukraine under a temporary UN-led administration to organize new elections, saying this would help restore constitutional legitimacy. He added that any deals with the current leadership in Kiev could become void as “other leaders might come tomorrow.”

Arakhamia’s comments come afterSteve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East and a key figure in the Ukraine conflict settlement,said in March that Kiev had in principle agreed to hold elections,though he did not specify a timeline.

https://www.rt.com/russia/615081-no-elections-being-prepared-zelensky-ally/

Zelensky is never going to leave, according to his ex aide, he knows he will die if he doesn’t stay in office. Why are Ukrainians so creepy looking?

31 Mar, 2025 09:14 (Good opinion and something to think about)

Trump’s deal window: Will Moscow seize the moment?

Washington is ready to talk; Russia should write the script

The diplomatic process surrounding the Russia-Ukraine conflict has taken a cautious step forward. The recent agreements reached in Riyadhmay not yet constitute a breakthrough, but they represent the most significant diplomatic achievement since the grain deal of summer 2022.

Skeptics will note that the latest understandings lack firm guarantees. Indeed, Russia, the US, and Ukraine continue to differ in both the language and substance of their respective statements.Some argue that Moscow has no reason to rush. The military situation continues to shift in Russia’s favor, while political pressure mounts on the Ukrainian leadership. The assumption is that time is on Russia’s side, and that a slow, deliberate dialogue – backed by growing leverage on the battlefield – is the smarter path to eventual negotiations.

But this wait-and-see approach is not without risks.

US President Donald Trump, unlike his predecessors,is a man who views foreign policy through the lens of transactions. He wants a deal – and quickly. If there is no visible movement toward a ceasefire, there is a real danger that an impatient and unpredictable Trump may lose interest in the process entirely. In one recent interview, he even suggested that Russia has a pattern of stalling, citing past negotiations that have yielded limited results.

If the Trump administration begins to believe that Moscow is dragging its feet, the possibility of a US-Russia summit will fade, and larger bilateral initiatives – such as sanctions relief or the unfreezing of reserves – could be shelved.This is precisely the scenario that opponents of US-Russia détente in both Washington and European capitals are hoping for.

Of course, implementing a ceasefire also brings complications. If it fails to evolve into a broader peace settlement,Russia could be left with yet another frozen conflict, constantly at risk of reigniting. But these risks may be worth taking.

If Trump does succeed in brokering a ceasefire, it will make his administration – and Trump personally – responsible for ensuring that the process does not unravel. This could be an opportunity for Moscow: To expect Washington to lean heavily on Kiev and follow through on securing a lasting peace.

Washington is reportedly aiming for a ceasefire by Easter (April 20). This seems overly ambitious. Even the more symbolic target of Victory Day (May 9) may be difficult to meet. But achieving substantive progress by the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in June (18-21) is realistic.

With senior American business leaders likely to attend – and possibly US officials such as Special Envoy Steve Witkoff or Secretary of State Marco Rubio – Russia may find the ideal stage to showcase progress.And if negotiations continue smoothly, even a personal visit from Trump to St. Petersburg cannot be ruled out.

https://www.rt.com/russia/615000-trumps-deal-window-kortunov/

By Andrey Kortunov, Ph.D. in History, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council, RIAC member

(I’d love to see PDJT go to Russia and spend a lot of time with President Putin, and enjoy the living shit out of it. Plus it will cause exploding heads all over Europe and it would be well worth it.)

The only three presidents since FDR thathaven't visited Russia, is Jimmy Carter, PDJT and dumb old goofy Joe Bidan. The freakin DS prevented him from going there.

Look at how many times Clinton, GHWB and GWB went to Russia, they look like they were Putin's Puppets.