Blog

Palestinians to South Sudan? A Recipe for Disaster 

It seems like the Israelis are giving serious consideration to taking compete control over Gaza and expelling the Palestinians. Remember Trump had suggested it and I blogged on it as well. Reports are that Libya, South Sudan and Syria have been contacted to take the Palestinians. I presume that these countries would receive significant bribes. I think it is a dumb idea. Why would any country take in a multitude of Palestinians who would in turn start fomenting discord? I know my blog has no influence but it would be better if as I suggested that you distribute them evenly among all the Arab countries except Jordan (which already has three million Palestinians). If the remaining 22 Arab countries took 136,363 Palestinians of the 3 million in Gaza then no country would have an outsized burden. I guess that makes too much sense.

What’s this about sending them to South Sudan? Obviously, the Israelis hate the Palestinians and are trying to condemn them to hell. Are the folks from Gaza subsistence farmers and herders? Is this some type of cruel joke to send them to a country plagued with famine and genocide? Dropping a few million or so people from Gaza into South Sudan is simply asking for trouble. Yet Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel recently visited the South Sudanese capital Juba and spoke with government officials. Hey, maybe she was just driving by and stopped in for tea. I really cannot fathom why South Sudan would take the Palestinians except for large personal bribes being paid to the country’s leading officials. 

So why not add to the misery of both the Gazans and the Sudanese? Both are used to fighting each other for food, so it will be a perfect match. There are thousands of refugees from South Sudan in Uganda, Chad, Malawi and Ethiopia. Maybe the Sudanese government says “well there is now plenty of room for the Palestinians now that three million Sudanese are sheltered elsewhere. These refugees are desperately seeking food after cuts in US aid. The Wall Street Journal reports that “At Uganda’s sprawling Kiryandongo refugee settlement, residents who had fled South Sudan attacked the mud-and-tarpaulin shelters of new arrivals from Sudan, stealing food, killing one and injuring almost 100, according to doctors and witnesses.” “During a four-day rampage last month, hundreds of South Sudanese refugees, armed with machetes and sticks, stormed a large, separate compound housing Sudanese newcomers.” South Sudan is obviously no paradise and a forced settlement of Palestinians would only add to the misery of both peoples.

Trump’s cutting off of African food aid is beyond heartless. It is devastating to many parts of the continent. “In May, the U.N. food agency ended food distribution to one million refugees in Uganda due to funding shortfalls, largely from U.S. cuts. The U.N. Refugee Agency said last week it expects to run out of emergency funds for Uganda next month. At that point it will be able to provide only $5 a month in blankets, sanitary pads, soap and other essentials to each refugee—about a third of what’s required, according to the agency.” “Chad, which hosts some 1.2 million Sudanese refugees, is facing a funding gap of nearly $280 million this year, according to the U.N. Refugee Agency. Refugees in the southern African nation of Malawi have been on half-rations since the month after Trump took office earlier this year and began closing down American aid programs.”

And this is where Israel wants to send those from Gaza? You can’t be serious. Israel probably knows that the majority of the Palestinians will not stay in South Sudan and will migrate elsewhere. But initially, they will increase the burden on relief efforts. Yes, I know there was a great deal of abuse in USAID but the cutting off of funds to those starving Sudanese refugees is beyond cruel. The photo above is of malnourished children in an orphanage in Sudan who are fed boiled leaves because there is little other food. There has got to be a special place in hell for those who would cut off food to these suffering people. 

If not for the accident of one’s birth.

Gerrymandering Redux

Ranker lists “The Most Gerrymandered Districts In America”

https://www.ranker.com/list/most-gerrymandered-districts-in-america/eric-vega

Gerrymandering is legal – except by race. By and large the courts stay out of it because the Constitution gives the power to the states. But this Supreme Court will likely rule that racial gerrymandering is also illegal – as they may do in the Louisiana case. Illinois gerrymandered two republicans out of their seats. Look at the map of Illinois district 4 and you can see what they were doing to make that district majority democrat. Would you believe that there were enough republicans in Massachusetts to make that legislature gerrymander to exclude the republicans entirely from their delegation? I really wonder what the House would look like if all states had to construct districts that were compact and contiguous with 761,000 residents? I personally hate districts that cut counties into separate districts.

“The federal judiciary’s position on purely political gerrymandering was clarified in the 2019 Supreme Court case Rucho v. Common Cause. The Court declared that claims of partisan gerrymandering are “non-justiciable political questions,” meaning the issue is outside the authority of federal courts to resolve. The Court argued that the Constitution does not provide a “limited and precise standard” for courts to determine when partisan advantage in redistricting goes too far.”

But what about racial gerrymandering? “While federal courts will not intervene in cases of purely political gerrymandering, the legal landscape changes when race is the predominant factor in drawing district lines. Racial gerrymandering is illegal under federal law, prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These protections are designed to prevent states from drawing maps that dilute the voting power of racial minorities.”

This is why the Louisiana case is so important.

As to the districts, here are a few of the most gerrymandered in the country. My favorite is Maryland District 3.

The Trump-Putin Pact: Part 2

I have come to the conclusion that I am an obvious thinker. Much of what I write appears a bit later in the media and I know that they are not likely reading my blog or Knoxville Focus articles. The latest case was when I mused that Trump’s meeting with Putin could be about China not Ukraine. The Europeans and the Ukrainians were not invited to Alaska. I had wondered why Trump was going so easy on Russia with the tariffs. He has not conjured up his imaginary reciprocal tariffs on Russia, yet he put a 10% tariff on Ukraine. Didn’t he say that if Russia didn’t accept a cease fire that he would put REALLY REALLY BIG TARIFFS on Russia? Well where are they? He’s got 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, 50% tariff on Brazil (what’s that going to do to coffee prices?) and a 39% tariff on Switzerland yet nothing on Russia. Hum. I am surprised that those Russia hoax multitudes haven’t hoped on that one yet.

I actually think that the reason that Trump has gone soft on Russia with the tariffs is the same reason why it was Putin only at the summit in Alaska. He wants an alliance with Russia to counter China. Russia is not our main adversary in the world. China is. Russia is essentially a backward third world country with mineral and oil wealth. It is only a power because of oil, natural gas and nuclear weapons. But it scares the Europeans. Trump can eliminate that threat by aligning with Russia. Trump and Rubio have talked about opening up Russia for business once the war in Ukraine is over. Now wouldn’t that be interesting to have a free trade deal with Russia while imposing tariffs on the rest of the world?

Then there is the counter to China militarily. An alliance would affect Chinese lusting after Upper Manchuria and Siberia. An alliance would free Russia from the grip of the Chinese economically. Russia has been forced to literally beg the Chinese to buy their oil, support them militarily and prop up their economy. The Chinese are not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing this to make Russia their vassal. The Russians know this but in today’s world, what can they do about it? They can form an alliance with Donald Trump.

It never made much sense to me that immediately after World War II our allies became our enemies and our enemies became our friends. The German and Japanese armies were among the most barbaric, brutal and sadistic forces in world history. What the Germans inflicted on the Jews and the ethnic peoples of Europe and what the Japanese did to the Chinese were beyond barbaric and cruel. Yet when the fighting ended we embraced those peoples and almost instantly converted the Russians and the Chinese to our enemies. Yes I know that Stalin and Mao were also mass murderers so we likely had little choice if indeed we wanted to forge alliances in Europe and the Far East. But the times they are a’changing. Europe is in serious decline and puts up with the US only because they refuse to adequately defend themselves against the Russians. Why spend their money when they have us with our hundreds of bases and thousands of troops? Actually, they should welcome a US-Russia alliance because it would remove the threat of Russian military action against NATO.

It is obvious that Trump (and Vance) have no respect for the Europeans. When I wrote the piece “Bye Bye Europe” in the Knoxville Focus on May 17^th, some readers accused me of being a racist. Yet those critics never addressed what I wrote in the article – that Europe was in a state of decline and was being supplanted by countries outside that continent. I stated that the EU when first formed had GDP equal to the US. Now it is 60% of ours. The Europeans have decided to become poorer by embracing green energy. The have opened their countries to a massive influx of immigrants who refuse to be assimilated into the various European cultures. They are weighted down by social spending that stifles incentives. Europeans want to work less, produce less and complain more. Again, the future belongs elsewhere. But where?

Personally I would look to have alliances with those countries with the strongest economic freedom because economic freedom is the backbone of capitalism. Yet those countries are few and far between. In the interim there is Russia with its energy stores and rare earth mineral riches. A pact with Russia will get them free of the yoke of China, would actually lessen their threat to Europe and would contain China globally. What is there not to like?

Again this is obvious to me and like clockwork an article surfaced in Fox Business that makes the same points. It is “Trump’s Russia play isn’t about Ukraine, it’s about China” by Tanvi Ratna, August 17^th https://www.foxbusiness.com/fox-news-opinion/trumps-russia-play-isnt-about-ukraine-its-about-china

Ratna, who is an expert in these matters in contrast to me, concludes “Trump has already recast U.S. foreign policy around the China challenge. His Russia play is part of that same framework. The Alaska meeting is best understood not as a betrayal of Ukraine or a gift to Putin, but as a strategic bid to reshape the board so the U.S. can fight — and win — the contest that truly matters.” Of course, that is the contest with China.

Importantly, a US-Russia partnership would break up the axis of evil: the alliance of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

Lastly, Zelenskyy would be a fool if he believes that Trump will provide security guarantees for surrendering the Donbas to Putin. Ukraine would lose its line of defense against the Russians in the east and would lose a vast amount of its mineral wealth. Putin might agree to the guarantee but he will violate it at his earliest convenience. Didn’t we give Ukraine a “guarantee” if they gave up their nukes? Some guarantee that was. Do you think Russia would have invaded if Ukraine still had nuclear weapons? Here is an idea for you: we will give Ukraine tactical nukes if they cede the Donbas. Then they can provide their own “guarantee.” I would also insist that Ukraine join NATO. But one thing is for sure: I would not trust the United States and I sure as hell would not trust Donald Trump.

More on the BLS debacle

(Or the perils of shooting off at the mouth before considering the facts)

The President’s pick of A. J. Antoni to head the Bureau of Labor Statistics to jimmy the data to make him always look good is running into criticisms from economists at conservative organizations. An economist at the American Enterprise Institute said Antoni’s “work at Heritage has frequently included elementary errors or nonsensical choices that all bias his findings in the same partisan direction.” Oops. Another economist, this one at the American Institute for Economic Research said I’ve been on several programs with him at this point and have been impressed by two things: his inability to understand basic economics and the speed with which he’s gone MAGA.” Double oops. An economist at the Manhattan Institute said in part “Mr. Antoni is unqualified for the labor market data collection and analysis role he was nominated to.” Another Manhattan Institute economist said that Antoni “appeared not to know that the BLS’ measure of import prices did not account for the impact of tariffs.” You can read the article in Axios at https://www.axios.com/2025/08/12/trump-bls-ej-antoni-economists

There were the expected criticisms from the left but those from the right are particularly damning. Who is going to believe anything now coming out of the BLS? Maybe they should just eliminate the “L”.

Now Antoni whose PhD is not from Harvard but is from Northern Illinois University is probably a fine economist. But the question is whether he is a fine statistician with special knowledge of those series reported by the BLS. Apparently not. Let’s hope he is a fast learner. It will be interesting to see how he is treated by both republicans (who are scared of Trump) and by democrats (who all hate Trump) at his senate confirmation hearings. His predecessor Dr McEntarfer was confirmed with only nine “no” votes. If Collins, Murkowski, Tillis, McConnell, Paul and Curtis vote “no” then Antoni will not be confirmed – because of course every democrat will vote against him.

The job numbers are lousy and getting worse. The monthly revisions have lowered the job numbers dramatically each month. May’s went from 144,000 to 19,000. June’s went from 147,000 to 14,000, meaning the average gain over the past three months is now only 35,000. Trump fired the BLS director for reporting the July jobs number at 73,000. Note that he fired her for the numbers reported looking so dismal. Wait until he sees the revision. What is the real number? We will have another Trump hissy fit? Also recall that most all of the growth has been in state and local government jobs. Note: My cousin who was fired as a probationary employee at Oak Ridge landed a job with a county government in Georgia. He is in the July statistics. I said at the time of the BLS firing that Trump did a really dumb thing. From the looks of the critiques of Antoni, that dumb thing may have just gotten dumber.

I asked an attorney friend if an illegal were entitled to legal representation and subject to due process. He referred me to his legal assistant, Grok AI who says “A person in the U.S. illegally and detained for deportation is entitled to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which ensure fair treatment and protection against arbitrary government action.” Well I guess that settles that! Thanks Mike. BTW, I thought Grok was a retired NFL tight end.

Random thoughts #66

I just finished the last of my venison. My dog got her last bit of it as well. I give her, like I did all my others, raw venison mixed with her kibble. The last time I ran out I substituted very lean ground beef and she wouldn’t eat it. I  had not bought beef in a couple of years and when I saw the grocery prices, I was stunned. $6.50 a pound! There was no avian flu in cattle so why are the prices this high? Is the US cattle herd shrinking. Shouldn’t we import more beef from Canada and Mexico and waive the tariffs? Surely this qualifies as a national emergency.

I was watching a Toronto Blue Jays versus Chicago Cubs game from Toronto and one of the advertisements said “Pizza Nova, 100% Canadian Owned and Operated.” Think that’s a result of Trump’s war on Canada?

I wonder what was the reception by the Canadian fans to the playing of the US National Anthem? I know that the anthem was booed earlier at hockey matches.

I know Canadians are boycotting American products so I was wondering what consumer products from Canada are imported into America besides Canadian bacon and Canada Dry? And what’s with Canadian “bacon” anyway?

I wish we would put a 1,000% tariff on Canadian geese.

Trump wants Intel to fire its CEO who he thinks is too cozy with China. Does Trump wants to be CEO of Intel too?

He also wants Goldman to fire its chief economist because he doesn’t like what the economist has said about Trump’s (illegal) tariffs. Trump as chief economist? 

Trump’s family’s crypto empire has generated $1.5 billion since the election. Just imagine what the real number is if indeed Don Jr is getting kickbacks from the tariff shakedowns.

Trump has now got his guy to head the Bureau of Labor Statistics, E. J. Antoni from the Heritage Foundation who apparently doesn’t know very much about labor statistics. I bet you could sell tickets to his senate confirmation.

Trump held a press conference with charts produced by Stephen Moore (who should know better) showing how the BLS statistics made him look bad (or is it worse?). Moore’s statistics were immediately critically critiqued by other statisticians. Who to believe? Again it is a lesson in how to lie with statistics. I guarantee you that if Trump wanted Moore to produce charts showing just the opposite then he could have done that too. I have respect for Moore but that respect is wavering.

Are you going to believe the next set of numbers produced by Antoni’s BLS? Want to bet that they make Trump look good? What Antoni needs to do is to firm up the survey responses. Make those surveyed respond or get some new respondents. Hey, just make Trump threaten those who are not responding. He’s good at that.

Trump has taken over DC. Is he now Mayor Trump too?  If crime is the issue I wish he could invent an excuse to take over the policing in Chicago. 

Trump after waging war on the Kennedy Center – didn’t he anoint himself chairman (Chairman Trump) – has decided to take on the Smithsonian. Mind you, the African American museum although wonderful in many ways was hopelessly biased in others. When I visited there some years ago it did not even mention Clarence Thomas. It omitted all the conservative black thinkers throughout our history. It had a decidedly progressive bent and did not tell all our history. I agree that the Smithsonian’s museums present a biased view of our history from the left. It needs balancing but Trump’s ordering the Smithsonian to submit its exhibits for his approval is a bit much. (Chief curator Trump?). Why doesn’t Trump just appoint a panel to view the proposed exhibits? Victor Davis Hanson comes to mind. Does the First Amendment apply to government sponsored enterprises?

Somewhat under the radar is what’s happening at the US Commission on Civil Rights (I was a member of the Tennessee Commission on Civil Rights). The US Commission is a bipartisan board with eight members, four appointed by the president, two by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and two by the Speaker of the House of Representatives. No more than four Commissioners can be of the same political party. With the concurrence of a majority of the commission’s members, the President designates a chair and a Vice Chair. The staff director is also appointed by the President with the concurrence of a majority of the Commissioners. Well Trump has designated Commissioner Peter Kirsanow (term ends in December) to be the new chairman and Commissioner Stephen Gilchrist (term ends in November) from South Carolina to be the vice chair. They are already on the commission and both are black republicans. Trump has also designated Carissa Mulder to be the new staff director of the commission. But none of this has taken place because the commission itself must approve Mulder, Kirsanow and Gilchrist and the current chairman Rochelle Garza has refused to have a meeting where the approvals would have taken place. Will she schedule a meeting in September and if not what can Trump do about it? Her term as a commissioner doesn’t end until 2028. Stay tuned.

Random thoughts and wild speculations

Mortgage rates fell last week. I thought the Fed left rates unchanged? What’s up with that? A 30-year fixed rate mortgage is at 6.58%, it’s lowest level since October 2024. A 15-year fixed is at 5.83%. So if the Fed didn’t lower rates, then how can this miracle occur? Its because the mortgage rates are more influenced by long term Treasurys than by the short term Fed funds rate and the poor jobs numbers were met will falling bond yields. Hence, lower mortgage rates. ATTENTION: The Fed doesn’t “control” interest rates. Markets do. If those mortgage rates look attractive to you then you had better move fast. The inflation numbers are starting to come in and they show prices going up. Fears of inflation will cause bond yields to go up. So refinance now!

Two republican senators, Grassley of Iowa and Curtis of Utah have been captured by the wind industry. Do you mean that wind bags are in cahoots with windmills? So it seems. Both Grassley and Curtis have put a hold on some of Trump’s nominees because they want to protect tax credits for wind projects that have been authorized but not funded. Apparently these sweetheart projects are in Iowa and Utah. Grassley and Curtis obviously have no shame.

The Trump’s administration rollback of the fleet milage standards with a penalty of zero has ended the fuel credit gravy train subsidizing EV manufacturers. Just in case you had forgotten, the EV companies get millions of dollars from fuel credits paid by the automobile companies.  Auto manufacturers are required to produce a certain number of so-called zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). These carmakers are required to have a certain amount of regulatory credits each year. If they can’t meet the target, they have to buy them from companies that have excess credits. Since Tesla, Rivian and Lucid only make electric vehicles, they always have excess regulatory credits and sell them to the other car makers. Because Trump ended the EV penalty, Rivian says it will cost them $100 million in lost “revenue”. Lucid has only said that it will suffer a significant lost. Tesla has said that it expects to “lose” about $1.2 billion from the loss of “revenue” from selling the credits to other car companies. Mind you, the car companies have been losing billions on making EVs and that loss has been compounded by their not being able to sell enough vehicles to get out of having to pay Elon Musk, et. al. even more money. Even at that Rivian reports losing $39,000 per vehicle which is significantly down from losing over $100,000 per vehicle two years ago. Lucid loses $300,000 per vehicle. Rivian now expects an overall loss of $2.5 billion for the year.

Reports are that on average 22 percent of the tariffs have been passed on to consumers. Projections are that number will soon be 67 percent. Some of this has caused the producer price index to rise in the past month. The annual rate is 3.3 percent and rising. More troubling is that a good deal of the rise is in services and not in goods. This is a bad sign. It also means that the Fed, which was widely expected to cut the Fed funds rate by 50 basis points, may now cut 25 basis points if at all. See Trump go even more out of his mind – if that is possible. Also troubling is that prices are going up faster than wages meaning a decline in real wage growth. A lot of people voted for Trump because of Biden’s inflation and now if his policies continue the republicans will pay the price for Trump’s tariffs at the midterms.

Since Trump is getting rid of the temporary protected status, 259,000 Ukrainians are in danger of being deported. I previously mention the same was true for the Afghans who fled here under that program. Are we sending these people back? I know some progressives who would say “well he is sending the Haitians back, so why not some white or semi-white folk too?”

By the way, when did white cease being a color? Saying “people of color” excludes white people. At the Westminster Dog show the categories of cocker spaniels are black, black and tan, parti-color (two or more colors one of which must be white) and ASCOB (any color other than black). Maybe we ought to do the same and have a ASCOW category.

I previously wrote about Trump shaking down countries and companies. Now he was a piece of Intel. Not content in trying to oust their CEO, now the government wants a financial stake in the company. Good grief. Why doesn’t Trump just get Taiwan Semiconductor to move all its operations here in exchange for us guaranteeing total protection of the island.

Speaking of Taiwan, I also mentioned that China could be doing a rope-a-dope and actually has its sights on Upper Manchuria and Siberia. It makes infinitely more sense to put 100,000 troops on the border and walk into those countries rather than trying to negotiate the 100 miles of the Taiwan Strait. Do you think that China might be worried that in the Trump-Putin only talks that the fate of Siberia might be discussed. I have wonder why Trump has been soft on Russia. It has imposed punitive tariffs on our one allies and all of the world save Russia. Trump has been putting tariffs on Russia’s trading partners – like India – but not on Russia itself. He has been saying that if Russia doesn’t agree to a truce on Ukraine that he will be REALLY REALLY MAD and will hit them with REALLY REALLY BIG TARIFFS! So he is going to negotiate a true without Ukraine being in the room? Shades of Neville Chamberlain. Does this mean that if the Ukraine doesn’t agree to whatever truce is negotiated in their absence that he will impose REALLY REALLY BIG TARIFFS on Ukraine. JD Vance has already said that the US may stop shipping arms to Zelenskyy via Europe. Of course Trump doesn’t like Zelenskyy in the first place and even less when he said that no cease fire can exist if Ukraine has to cede territory to Russia.

Again way back when I wondered why Russia would invade Ukraine. It is obvious – at least to me – that it was to capture the vast riches of the country especially its oil and rare earth minerals. The territory that the Russians are demanding as a condition of a cease fire, the Donetsk Oblast, is sitting astride $5.7 trillion in rare earth minerals.

Trump said that he was meeting Putin in Russia. “You know, I’m going to see Putin. I’m going to Russia on Friday.” If Biden had said that, the MAGAs would have been loudly questioning his mental acuity. Not so with Trump. Now consider that Trump negotiates a “truce” totally unacceptable to Ukraine and ceases furnishing weapons, leaving it all up to the Europeans who are also excluded from the talk. if Trump makes an alliance with Putin, then the Chinese will be upset because of the possibility that the US would also aid Russia in repelling any Chinese aggression in Siberia and Manchuria. Also the Europeans would be left out to dry. The only reason the Europeans pay any respect to the Americans is that we keep the Russians at bay and pay for the privilege of defending them.. A Putin-Trump alliance would devastate Europe even more that the ridiculous 39% tariff on Switzerland. Vance went over there and chided the Europeans about their behavior. Trump has shown distain for virtually every European leader except Italy’s Meloni, Hungary’s Orban and Poland’s Duda.

So there are obvious benefits with an alliance for the Russians but what about for the United States. Little was said about the talks that Marco Rubio had with his Russian counterparts in London. But Rubio talked about the “extraordinary opportunities,” economic and geopolitical, that the United States and Russia could both seize once the war in Ukraine was over.” Trump also said that he was “trying to do some economic development deals” with Moscow. Russia was once a place to do business, despite all the pitfalls, mainly because of its energy sector. However, America is now the major competitor in the world with Russian energy. Trump is talking about “economic development deals”. Will that be enough for a Putin-Trump pact? I don’t know but I do know that such a deal would only last while both are in office. Just like Trump’s handshake deals with companies and countries, once he is gone all that goes away. I also can guarantee that Trump’s dominance also goes away once he leaves office. But a Putin-Trump alliance would really be interesting. Wouldn’t it?

Trump: The Art of the Shakedown

What is this pay-for-play capitalism that Trump is engaging in? Is he trying to take full advantage of the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity by engaging in what looks like bribes and kickbacks in his shakedowns of countries and businesses. The media is now calling this State Capitalism. Of course, I named it American Socialism. Again it is anti-market and is used to enhance the power of the executive. I wonder if Trump got any tips from Chairman Xi? Consider the following:

1. In the trade deal with Japan Trump said that Japan will invest $550 billion into the United States and that U.S. will “receive 90% of the profits.” Of course Trump will decide on how the 90 percent will be distributed. BTW, this “deal” has got to be with funds from the Japanese government because no company would agree to these outrageous terms.
2. Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices have agreed to give Trump 15% of their AI chip sales to China. Mind you this is on sales and not profits. After extorting this agreement, Trump then announced that tech companies that invest in the US would be exempt from his 100% tariffs on chips. Note that the agreement allows Nvidia to sell to China its Hopper chip and not its more advanced Blackwell chip. The chip isn’t advanced enough to quickly train large language AI models, “but is useful for inference functions, or the processes by which models that have already been trained can draw conclusions from new data.”
3. Don’t forget the so-called “golden share” of US Steel as a condition for Trump agreeing to allow Nippon Steel to acquire US Steel. This gives the president the power to appoint a board member and have a say in company decisions that affect domestic steel production and competition with overseas producers. So Trump is making the CEO of US Steel get his approval for operations?
4. Trump has gone after the CEO of Intel demanding his resignation. The Chips Act gifted Intel with $8.5 billion giving Trump the leverage to try to run this company as well.
5. Then there is the $1.5 trillion that has been extorted in the trade deals in monies supposed to come to the US as investments that Trump himself will personally direct their use.
6. In a push for rare earth minerals the Treasury department is taking a 15% share in a rare earth mining company MP Materials. Does Trump get a board seat here too?
7. Trump has used executive orders, the “Justice” Department and regulatory powers against media companies, banks, law firms and companies he doesn’t like, while rewarding those who toe the line. Don’t you think that this is fertile ground for kickbacks and bribes? No wonder Don Jr and the family are raking it in. What about the Big Guy? Oh, he is immune from prosecution.
8. Trump has said that the “investments” allow countries to “buy down” their tariffs. Trump told CNBC “They [The European Union] bought down the tariffs from 30% to 15%. That’s a gift, not a loan” adding he could invest in anything he wants. Quote: “The details are $600 billion to invest in anything I want.” Anything.

Congress did not give Trump this power to use trillions of dollars as he sees fit. No treaties were negotiated. These are handshake agreements that can be changed on a moments notice as Trump sees fit. None of this is legally binding. Again, this is further evidence that Trump is anti-market saying that he is determines where the “investments” go rather than the market. I don’t know if this is illegal but it sure is shaky with bad optics. Do you think that our gutless congress will tell Trump to stop this nonsense? Fat chance.

Gerrymandering: What hath Texas wroth?

With Texas emulating states like Illinois in gerrymandering its congressional districts, other states like California have threatened to redistrict to get more democrat seats. Two can play this game. But first a bit of history. Eldridge Gerry was born in Marblehead, Massachusetts and was a founding father and James Madison’s vice president. Marblehead’s place in history is recounted in the wonderful Indispensables, Patrick O’Donnell’s thrilling history of its sailors and their role in rowing Washington across the Delaware at the battle of Trenton. Gerry signed the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. Initially he refused to sign the Constitution because it did not contain a bill of rights. When he was governor of Massachusetts Gerry approved a revision of the state’s voting districts that benefitted his own party. Hence the name gerrymandering. Incidentally, Gerry pronounced his name “Gary” and he lost his race for re-election.

Texas is going to get five new republican seats. Currently there are 25 republicans and 13 democrats. The new map is slated to produce 30 republicans and 8 democrats. This follows the gerrymandering of California with 52 congressional seats while only 9 are republican. The Texas democrats fled to Illinois to avoid a quorum. Illinois only recently gerrymandered its districts to eliminate two republican seats resulting in only 3 republican seats out of 17. California’s Gavin Newsom has threatened to overturn the state’s committee entrusted with mapping congressional districts to generate 5 new democrat seats. Illinois is threatening to gerrymander even more to get rid of both republican seats. New York has said that it might do so as well. Almost comically, Massachusetts governor Maura Healey, who is a few fries short of a happy meal, said that she might too gerrymander. Then someone reminded her that her state already is 8-0 democrat.

On the other hand, the republican controlled states of Missouri, Ohio, Florida and Indiana could get rid of democrat seats. In all, the political pundits say that the democrat controlled states might squeeze out another seat or two but essentially they have tapped out. Republicans on the other hand have not, meaning that republicans are likely to win the gerrymandering wars.

Along with the redrawing of congressional maps, the topic of the census inevitably arises. The census counts people and not citizens. Trump tried to get the census changed in his first term and failed. Now he has issued an executive order to have the census count only citizens. Look for a barrage of lawsuits from the democrats. Why? The republicans contend that one of the reasons why Biden left the border open was to attract more illegals which would then be counted in the census. The democrats must agree or else they would not sue. Vice President Vance has said that California “has way more House seats than it should, because they have such a high population of illegal aliens. So they get rewarded for welcoming illegal aliens into their state, giving them federal benefits, actually asking the taxpayers of states like Ohio to give subsidize them, and then those same taxpayers in Ohio and Indiana and elsewhere, they have fewer congressional representatives, because of what California has allowed to happen.” Vance says that while 17 percent of the California delegation is republican, the party gets 40 percent of the votes in the state. Vance contends that because the census counts people if it only counted citizens the republicans would have 10 more seats. Some others have gone as far as contending that the democrats have 22 more seats In the House by taking the number in a congressional district (761,000) and dividing that into the number of illegals supposed to be in the country, 16.8 million. 

Far be it for me to question the math prowess of our vice president since he went to the Ohio State University but he just might be overstating the issue. First, illegals cannot vote in federal elections. Yes I know there can be shenanigans but bear with me. Let us assume that a certain number of citizens move out of a California district to Texas and are replaced one for one with illegals. Although it is possible that California would keep the same number of seats, there is no guarantee since Texas would be gaining population both from citizens moving from California and illegals who reside in the state. So Texas by increasing its population while California’s is stagnant would result in California losing a seat and Texas gaining one. Second, statistics like republicans get 40 percent of the vote so they should have 40 percent of the seats doesn’t make any sense. Suppose the republicans are concentrated in only a few select districts? Or suppose they are scattered equally around the state and lose each district being outvoted 60% to 40% which in politics is a landslide. Then they would win 40 percent of the vote and have zero seats. That was the case with Louisiana where the courts ordered a racial gerrymandering to create a second majority minority district. More on that later. Third, Vance and others like him are assuming that the illegals migrate predominately to democrat run states like California, Illinois and New York. But what about Florida and Texas? Also, ATTENTION JD: 39 of California’s 52 congressional districts are majority minority. That is 75 percent. Yet whites make up 44% of the California population. Have California whites been racially gerrymandered? Shouldn’t whites have 44 percent of the seats (23) rather than the 25% (13) they have now? Aren’t the whites in California being denied adequate representation based on race? Hum?

How can one tell if the illegals are affecting congressional seats? One would have to look at each congressional district while maintaining the 435 seats in the House of Representatives. The Pew Research Center did that type of analysis and said of the 2020 census that if illegals were excluded then there would be a shift in three seats. California, Texas and Florida would lose a seat while Alabama, Ohio and Minnesota would gain a seat.  So if the republicans were to win all the seats, they would only increase their count by three not 22. By the way, the Cato Institute – a libertarian think tank – found that illegal migration has benefitted republican controlled states more than democrat ones between 2019 and 2023 with 1.2 million going to republican states and 72,000 to democrat states. Oops. Maybe the republicans should have looked at the numbers before they started their whining.

I think what is more significant than the gerrymandering brouhaha is something that few are reporting on. That is the Supreme Court case of Louisiana v. Callais, reported in passing by Jeffrey Blehar in his National Review piece “Liberation Day Comes to Washington, D.C.” 

https://www.nationalreview.com/carnival-of-fools/liberation-day-comes-to-washington-d-c/

The court has put this on its docket for September. This is a case of racial gerrymandering in the state of Louisiana to create a majority minority district giving the state two based on race rather than one. Previously in Robinson vs Landry a state district court ruled that having only one majority minority district in the state violated Section 2 of the Voters Rights Act. Needless to say the district is anything but compact and uniform. It literally runs diagonally through the state to get enough blacks to make the new district majority minority. The redrawing resulted in the defeat of the white republican congressman by a black democrat. The losing congressman and his white constituents sued claiming that redistricting solely on the basis of race is unconstitutional and violated the Equal Protection clause and is a racial gerrymander. If the Supreme Court were to rule with the plaintiffs it would overturn Section 2 of the Voter Rights Act and imperil democrat seats in Georgia, Alabama and South Carolina. Ruling Section 2 unconstitutional would be an earthquake would be an understatement. Such a ruling would result in demonstrations throughout the country, likely on an unprecedented scale. I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that a colorblind reading of the Constitution may be at odds with the Court’s prior interpretation of the enforcement of the 14^thand 15^th Amendments. But then, maybe not. I am anxious to see what happens in this case.

Finally, if the courts only intervene in racial but not political gerrymandering, then couldn’t it be argued that blacks are not being racially gerrymandered since 90+ percent of them are democrats? Just saying.

Trump: Vengeance is mine!

Remember the interview that Trump had with Fox’s Bret Baier? When asked if he would be seeking retribution if elected, Trump replied “our ultimate retribution is success.” Trump then said “I’m not going to have time for retribution. We’re going to make this country so successful again, I’m not going to have time for it.” Well he lied. Knowing Trump and his proclivities I think few if any of us believed him. In fact, retribution began almost from the first day in the White House when he revoked the security clearances of those 50 former intelligence officers who showed “misleading and inappropriate political coordination” with Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign. 

That was only the beginning. He then had his AG Pam (Blondie) Bondi “to seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who oppose him and sue him in court. This includes immigration lawyers. This has forced several law firms to end their relationships with illegal immigrant groups trying to defend illegals against deportation. The “Justice” department even started going after small independent lawyers who had defended illegals. One legal expert said “Would DOJ, under normal circumstances, move for sanctions against a lawyer who sought to protect their client from removal in this kind of a context? I don’t think so.”

To say that this has a chilling effect is an understatement. Small lawyers can not stand up to DOJ. Even the large law firms cannot meaning that the illegals lose legal representation because of the might of the Department of “Justice”. I know some Trump defenders will argue that the illegals should not have legal counsel but I strongly disagree. I am of the let them have the best defense possible before we deport them camp.

Trump then started going after law firms that had litigated cases against him. he issued an executive order regarding the firm Perkins Cole that had filed lawsuits against the administration. The order said that the federal government was barred from working with the firm or using contractors who work for it. Employees at the firm—including 1,200 lawyers and 2,500 workers who are not involved in Perkins Coie’s legal cases—would also be barred from entering federal buildings and their security clearances would be suspended. Talk about chilling! Of course a federal judge almost immediately issued a temporary restraining order halting Trump’s penalties, which she said were retaliatory. Trump’s order even barred Perkins Cole’s clients with government contracts from working with the firm. Vengeance is mine!

Then there are the actions taken by the “Justice” Department against New York attorney general Letitia James and California senator Adam Schiff. This is just an opening salvo. James is being investigated for trying to throw Trump in jail over trumped up charges whose stature of limitations had expired. Trump now says that her office violated his rights by bringing a civil lawsuit against him and his business. Do tell? This is a federal offense? Schiff is accused of mortgage fraud by claiming a home in Maryland as his primary residence in order to get a favorable mortgage rate. But we know the real reason is that Schiff chaired the House Intelligence Committee when it investigated Trump’s Russian hoax charges and was a member of a House committee probing the Jan. 6, 2021 “insurrection.” Schiff used his notoriety to get elected to the senate and now Trump aims to get him. Trump would also like to go after Bennie Thompson, Liz Cheney and the entire January 6^thcommittee, but Biden gave them all immunity before he left office.

Do you think that Tulsi Gabbard’s release of the Russia hoax documents implicating Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, James Comey, James Clapper, Jack Smith, Peter Strzok , Lisa Page was anything but a personal vendetta and retribution?  They are just an ever growing cast of thousands that Trump is out to get. It extends to the multitude of federal workers who have been terminated as Trump exacts his vengeance against the Deep State. But what about Fani Willis and Alvin Bragg or Michael Cohen? They are probably next. 

Yep, Pam (Blondie) Bondi has enough to keep her busy for the rest of Trump’s term.

Can Trump “bend the Fed to his will?”

When Fed governor Kugler resigned the Wall Street Journal which should know better had the headline “Trump Just Got a Fresh Shot at Bending the Fed to His Will.” No such thing, Wall Street Journal. Trump currently have two appointees, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman both of whom apparently want to be named chairman which induced them to vote for a cut in the Fed funds rate at the last Open Market Committee Meeting. Bowman has since gone public and says that she will vote for again for a cut at the September meeting. Expect Waller to do so too. Trump just named his Council of Economic Advisors chief Stephen Miran to fill Kugler’s term. But he likely bwill not be confirmed in time for the September meeting and may not even be confirmed by the time Kugler’s term expires in January if the senate democrats keep dragging their feet on Trump’s nominees.

But Miran may be an indicator of what type of person that Trump will ultimately chose although I think it is a mistake to nominate someone now and have to nominate some other person later. Miran is all in on Trump’s tariffs which landed him the job at the Council of Economic Advisors. Miran also feels that the reserve status of the dollar keeps it overvalued leading to trade imbalances. Of course, this argument would only apply to large developed countries that are trading partners and not to places like Syria and Myanmar. So Miran wants to devalue the dollar so as to weaken its status as a reserve currency. He has also advocated putting a tax on foreign holdings of Treasury securities. I am not going to dissect all this except to say that I thought Trump liked the dollar’s reserve status which allows the US to borrow at lower rates. Trump has also threatened to impose punitive tariffs on the BRICS nations if they attempt to counter the US dollar. That seems contrary to Miran’s positions.

But will a new fed governor allow Trump to “bend the Fed at his will?” Not hardly. The Journal must have been inflicted by the President’s poor math. Another appointee gives him three seats on the Open Market Committee. The committee has twelve members, the seven governors, the president of the New York Fed and four rotating reserve bank presidents. So even if the three appointees bend to Trump’s demands they will be outvoted 9-3. Also, I bet that after Trump names his choice for chairman that Bowman and Waller will again assert their independence from the president. 

I know the Fed. If somehow Trump were to install a lackey who had no independence from the president, I almost could guarantee that that person would face open resistance from the rest of the committee. Now that should really shake up markets! The president may then try to fire the other governors. But he will fail – just see the decision on the National Credit Union Administration board members. He could try to fire the reserve bank presidents. However, the authority to remove them rests with each reserve bank’s board of directors or with the Board of Governors itself. Neither would be likely.

So the Journal’s headline is misleading and is indicative of the growing sloppiness and inaccuracy in reporting of that once venerable newspaper.