Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Dietary guidelines that are set to be issued by the federal government later this year will recommend Americans eat “whole food,” Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on May 14.

The Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are working on a new set of guidelines that will be in place through 2030.

“We are about to reissue the dietary guidelines, and we’re going to do it very quickly. We have until January, but … I think we’ll have it done even before August,” Kennedy said in Washington while testifying to a House of Representatives committee.

The current dietary guidelines, published in December 2020, run 164 pages. They say that people should eat a healthy diet and limit sugary foods and drinks.

Health and agriculture officials in late 2024 received a draft of updated guidelines from an advisory committee that spans 421 pages and proposed instructing Americans to eat less meat, avoid full-fat dairy products, and ingest more plant-based proteins such as lentils.

Kennedy said on Wednesday that the 2024 update was “clearly written by industry” and driven by the “kind of carnal impulses that put Froot Loops at the top of the food pyramid.” In the past, some members of the advisory committee have been found to have links to corporations, including Kellogg.

Kennedy told lawmakers: “We are changing that. So we’re going to have four-page dietary guidelines that tell people essentially, ‘eat whole food, eat the food that’s good for you.’”

The purpose of the guidelines is to outline what Americans should eat and drink to get enough nutrients, stay healthy, and prevent disease, according to the government. The guidelines are updated every four years and are “written for a professional audience, including policymakers, healthcare providers, nutrition educators, and Federal nutrition program operators.”

The guidelines influence nutrition standards for federal programs, including the school lunch program.

Kennedy said that simplifying the guidelines would help Head Start, a program that provides childcare to lower-income families. He said he’s been touring Head Start facilities and has seen children eating packaged foods that are loaded with sugar and chemicals.

“We’re poisoning this generation,” he said.

The public comment period for the 2025–2030 guidelines closed in February, and the USDA and HHS said in March that they would release the final guidelines by the end of 2025.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told a House panel earlier in May that the new guidelines might be completed by early fall.

The guidelines will “be very simple” and “speak directly to the American family,” Rollins said.

Later on Wednesday, Kennedy told a Senate committee that the four-page guidelines will focus on foods that “can be locally sourced,” which he said will affect school lunches.

Cocoa futures surged as much as 7.9% on Friday to $11,068/ton in New York, approaching record levels once again, as mounting supply-side risks reignite upside price action. Persistent drought conditions across key West African growing regions—despite recent rain—continue to pressure the global production outlook, raising concerns over both mid-crop and main-crop harvests. The deteriorating weather backdrop and slowing port arrivals in top producer Ivory Coast have also reintroduced upward pressure on prices. 

Analysts from BMI, a unit of Fitch Group, wrote last week that bullish price action “continues to be driven by concerns about weather conditions in West Africa weighing on the size and quality of the ongoing harvest.” 

Data from the African Flood and Drought Monitor showed that droughts still cover at least 33% of Ghana and the Ivory Coast, sparking fears about production.

According to a Rabobank note, the Ivory Coast’s mid-crop has been of poor quality so far due to a lack of rain. The mid-crop, the smaller of the country’s two annual cocoa harvests and typically beginning in April, is now projected to reach 400,000 metric tons—down around 9% from last year’s 440,000 MT. 

Traders are monitoring cocoa arrivals at Ivorian ports as the slowdown in shipment volumes raises concerns that already tight global supplies could face further pressure. So far this season, deliveries remain about 11% above last year, but the pace of arrivals has noticeably decelerated, signaling supply constraints ahead. 

In New York, cocoa contracts erupted on Friday…

Cocoa prices jumped 18.5% during the week, the largest weekly gain since Nov. 15, 2024. 

Higher cocoa prices will only bring forward demand destruction amongst consumers. 

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Some bright spark has decided that a Falklands War landing craft is the perfect thing to slap rainbow Pride colours all over to once again mark the LGBTQ event for the entirety of June.

The move has angered veterans, who describe it as “entirely inappropriate” adding “Our Falklands dead will be turning in their graves.”

What On Earth Has This Got To Do With Pride? https://t.co/0Rlx2sSzRh “The drum doesn’t need banging any more.”

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) May 17, 2025

The Telegraph reports:

Foxtrot 8, which landed Royal Marine and Parachute Regiment soldiers on the South Atlantic archipelago, has been coated in a rainbow vinyl wrap.

Portsmouth Historic Quarter, which owns it, commissioned the decoration to mark the 25th anniversary of the ban on homosexuality within the Armed Forces being lifted. But the decoration has been criticised as disrespectful by veterans.

A retired senior Royal Navy officer said: 

“To paint a landing craft that was used in the Falklands War in pride colours is entirely inappropriate.

“What next? Nelson’s flagship HMS Victory in rainbow colours?”

Rear Adml Chris Parry, a Falklands veteran further described the display as “quite divisive”.

“Frankly, this battle was fought and won 25 years ago when gays were openly allowed in the Armed Forces,” he said, adding “In fact, the first gay officer in the Navy was in my ship. He was allowed to come out quite openly.”

“This is something that has been fought and won. The drum doesn’t need banging any more,” Parry further urged.

Reform UK MP Lee Anderson remarked “Pride flags have no place on naval ships, in our classrooms, or flying above Government buildings.”

“Let’s stop making everything about what you like to do in the bedroom and get back to work,” Anderson added.

This is yet another example of the demented demand for anything and everything to be gay or trans for no explicable reason.

For example, imagine being a police officer in the UK and having to drive around in this:

Clownworld plod. https://t.co/wRq25Go1c7

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) May 17, 2025

Perhaps it’s all coming down from Alphabet HQ:

Meanwhile, at Alphabet HQ… https://t.co/5KbXp2tf8c

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) May 17, 2025

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

China has steadily expanded its global trade footprint and now surpasses the U.S. as the leading trading partner in many regions around the world.

In Africa, for instance, China overtook the U.S. as the continent’s top trading partner back in 2009—a position it continues to hold today.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes whether each African country trades with the U.S. or China more in 2003 versus 2023.

Data comes from the Observatory of Economic Complexity and UN Comtrade via the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 2023 or the latest data available was used.

African Countries Are Choosing China over the States

Below, we show which country (U.S. or China) each African country traded with more in 2003 versus 2023.

In 2003, China was the preferred trading partner over the U.S. for 18 African countries or 35% of the continent.

Fast forward 20 years, 52 out of the 54 African countries (97%) trade more with China than with the U.S. as of 2023.

China-Africa trade climbed to $295 billion in 2024, marking a 6% year-on-year increase.

Beyond trade, China has also increased its foreign direct investment (FDI) into the continent, with annual FDI flows rising from about $75 million in 2003 to nearly $4 billion in 2023, focusing on sectors like agriculture, light manufacturing, and services.

China has proactively sought to improve China-Africa relations through major initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), which are designed to boost trade by investing in infrastructure, streamlining trade processes, and strengthening African value chains.

However, China has also faced criticism for alleged “debt-trap diplomacy,” a practice in which it is accused of providing loans to countries that may struggle to repay them, including many of Africa’s poorest countries.

To learn more about China’s trade relations, check out this graphic that visualizes the country’s exports by region from 2000 to 2022.

Via Remix News,

In recent months, a ban of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) appeared to be inching closer and closer, but now a key voice has clearly spoken out against such a move.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz has now said that voting on an AfD ban in the Bundestag is not the right path, saying it “smacks too much of the elimination of political rivals.” 

He said he does not believe the current evidence is sufficient.

He has even gone a step farther, stating that former Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, an SPD politician with far-left sympathies who wrote for Antifa Magazine, was wrong to classify the AfD as “confirmed” right-wing extremist in the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) report. 

Critics indicate that she rushed the report out at the last minute of her tenure, despite the BfV having no president and despite a lack of any expert review, which she had previously promised would happen.

Speaking to Die Zeit, Merz said; “Working ‘aggressively and militantly’ against the free democratic basic order must be proven. And the burden of proof lies solely with the state. That is a classic task of the executive branch. And I have always internally resisted initiating ban proceedings from within the Bundestag. That smacks too much of political competition elimination to me.”

When the BfV first labeled the AfD “certainly right-wing extremist,” calls came from the left, including the Greens, Left Party, and SPD, to immediately begin proceedings to ban the party in the Bundestag. Even a large portion of the CDU backed the move.

Now, the BfV has temporarily removed the designation pending a court appeal, and as Remix News reported, this removal may have been in large part possible due to pressure from the United States.

Merz also expressed his displeasure with Faeser’s move to release the report on her last day of work.

He told Zeit he was “not happy with the way this process is being conducted.”

“The old government presented a report without any factual review, and it was also classified as confidential,” he added. 

As Remix News reported, the 1,100 page report contained only public statements from the AfD, and it has already been leaked and published by the German press. 

Remix News, in a report published earlier today, notes that the BfV is likely sitting on huge amounts of private surveillance data related to AfD members, but due to the unsavory mass surveillance methods used to obtain this data, it is likely withholding this from any official report.

“I don’t know the content of this report, and frankly, I don’t want to know it until the Federal Ministry of the Interior has made an assessment of it,” said Merz. 

He said that it would take several weeks and even months for the interior ministry to make such an assessment.

Read more here…

Following a Friday fracas on Capitol Hill which saw House Republicans fail to advance President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” out of the House Budget Committee, Republicans on said Committee did just that after several GOP deficit hawks relented. And while the bill still has a couple of stops before it can hit the House Floor, passage to the Senate could come as early as the end of this week.

The measure passed narrowly, 17-16, with all Democrats opposed and four Republicans; Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma – voting “present” after voting “No” on the bill in a 16-21 vote just two days earlier. The sudden turnaround followed a weekend of furious negotiations that remain largely behind closed doors.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) met with fellow lawmakers shortly before Sunday’s vote and told reporters that there had been “some minor modifications,” several sources posted on X. Johnson said the bill, which includes making Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent and reforming Medicaid, is now “on track” for a House floor vote toward the end of this week.

The vote was a big win for Johnson and Trump, coming just two days after Republican opposition torpedoed the bill’s first attempt at committee passage. Despite this procedural victory, the legislation must still clear the House Rules Committee and secure a vote on the House floor, where Republicans hold only a razor-thin majority, Axios reports.

Norman, one of the Republicans who shifted his position, said he was “excited about the changes” in the works for the bill.

Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) confirmed during the Sunday night session that “most likely there would be some changes” to the measure before it reaches the floor – but he couldn’t comment on specifics or any side deals that might have been struck.

The panel’s reversal came after it initially rejected the legislation Friday, setting off a scramble to renegotiate terms with holdout Republicans. One of the most contentious elements has been the GOP’s proposed Medicaid overhaul, with conservatives pushing for deeper structural changes and moderates raising concerns about the political risks.

Even if the package passes the House, Senate Republicans are expected to propose their own revisions. To that end, Johnson has also been working to secure buy-in from blue state Republicans by exploring a compromise on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction cap.

On Friday, Trump did his usual shit-talking to pressure Republicans into line – posting on Truth Social; “We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE!”

*  *  *

You can support ZeroHedge by picking up a waxed canvas hat

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

Did President Putin really change the game by proposing the resumption of negotiations on the proxy war in Ukraine in Istanbul – over three years after the first ones were scotched by NATO?

It’s complicated. And depends on which “game” we’re talking about.

What the Russian move instantly accomplished was to throw into total disarray the European warmongering Three Stooges (Starmer, BlackRock chancellor, Le Petit Roi) Cocaine Express.

Irrelevant Europe was not even at the table in Istanbul – except via extensive previous briefing of the low-rent, shabby-dressed Ukrainian delegation. That was compounded by the noisy barking threat in the sidelines advocating “more sanctions” to “pressure Russia”.

In March 2022 in Istanbul, Kiev could have stopped the war. Every one of us who were in Istanbul at the time could foresee that Kiev would eventually have to be forced to the table all over again.

So in essence we are back to the same negotiation – with the same top Russian negotiator, competent historian Vladimir Medinsky, heading a delegation composed by pros, but with Ukraine now facing over a million dead; deprived of at least four regions – more on the way; what’s left of its mineral wealth de facto controlled by the US; and a horrendous black hole that passes for an “economy”. We are talking about country 404 territory.

During the negotiations on Friday, Medinsky went straight to the point:

“We don’t want war, but we are ready to fight for a year, two, three – as long as it takes. We fought with Sweden for 21 years [the Great Northern War, 1700-1721, as it is known in Russia]. How long are you ready to fight?”

That’s the geopolitical/military state of things for Kiev and their “to the last Ukrainian” warmongering backers: either you capitulate, or we’re going to hurt you even more.

What’s the point of these negotiations?

Turkiye under uber-opportunist Sultan Erdogan in fact hosted a P.R. meeting between Moscow, Kiev and itself – with the Ukrainians unleashing a blitzkrieg of infantile tantrums only designed to influence global public opinion. In sharp contrast, the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, did his best to put a positive spin on the proceedings.

Istanbul 2.0, Dmitriev asserted, achieved a large exchange of prisoners (1,000 on each side); ceasefire options to be presented by both sides; and a continuation of dialogue.

That’s not much. Well, at least they discussed in the same language: Russian. Nothing was lost in translation.

A serious case can be made that to propose the resumption of these negotiations, under this format, was meaningless. There’s no evidence in the horizon both parties might touch the fundamental issue anytime soon: the whole geopolitical strategic equation in Eastern Europe, from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea and beyond – leading to an “indivisibility of security” new deal with global repercussions.

That implies that whatever track these negotiations may follow further on down the road, they are an objective impossibility. Meanwhile, the proxy war in Ukraine – and the SMO – will go on.

That would also suggest that the Moscow security establishment considers the neo-nazi instrumentalized goons in Kiev at best as a re-enactment of the 6th Army of Paulus, with which you negotiate the end of a battle, but not the end of the war.

Even NATO semi-realists as retired Commodore Steven Jermy have been forced to admit that “Russia is in the driving seat” and clueless Europeans “appear to believe that the losers should dictate the terms of ceasefire or surrender.”

All the barking by the – European – chihuahuas of war cannot disguise the fundamental geopolitical/military fact: a massive NATO humiliation. Trump’s humongous problem is that he has to manage it – and sell it to domestic public opinion and the global public opinion as some sort of “deal” he struck with Putin.

It’s enlightening once again to go back to Grandmaster Lavrov, always the uber-realist, back in September 2024: “In April 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators reached agreement in Istanbul. If that agreement had been observed, Ukraine would have preserved part of Donbass. But every time another agreement, always accepted by Russia, is broken, Ukraine shrinks in size.”

The (Great) Game, revisited

Now back to the (Great) Game. Kiev negotiators eventually admitting Ukrainian capitulation means a NATO capitulation and an Empire of Chaos capitulation. That’s the ultimate anathema for the US ruling classes. Even an ultra-negotiated, carefully managed Ukrainian surrender will be an impossible sell – not to mention Washington under Narcissus Drowned Trump acknowledging a strategic defeat.

Because that will mean the Empire of Chaos losing Eurasia for good: the ultimate Mackinder/Brzezinski nightmare. Coupled with the consequential solidification of the multi-nodal, multipolar world.

The Russia-China stategic partnership is very much aware of every nook and cranny in this larger-than-life process. Beyond the current Turkish kabuki, they clearly understand the Big Eurasia Equation.

Beijing is fully aware NATO’s real goal was always to confront it via Russia.  Ukraine was NATO’s pawn to take down Russia then get to China from the West. The goal of the US ruling elites as they configured their thalassocratic empire remains to blockade China from the West by land and sea, using Russia; then use Taiwan as a staging area to blockade China from the East by sea. No wonder control of Taiwan is a Chinese strategic imperative.

Enter Mackinder panic – all over again: the China-Russia strategic partnership can beat NATO hands down – and Russia, by itself, is already doing it. Xi and Putin once again discussed the chessboard in detail, in person, prior to the Victory Day parade last week in Moscow.

The endgame, once again, is clear: the US losing the entire Eurasian land mass. Ukraine, under these immense geopolitical imperatives, is only a sovereign-deprived pawn in the (Great) Game.

As for the tantrum-addicted clown in Kiev, he is merely an actor with no authority whatsoever, negotiations included. He is completely dominated by Ukrainian neo-Nazis who will kill him if and when the war is over. He merely fronts for them and gets paid off. And that’s why – enthusiastically supported by inconsequential London, Paris and Berlin – he’s obsessed to continue a Forever War destroying the very nation he claims to represent.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Authored by Samantha Flom via RealClear Politics (emphasis ours),

We were told mifepristone is “safer than Tylenol” by pro-abortion activists. Now women are discovering how lethal that lie really is.

“Abortion care is healthcare!”

The oft-repeated claim of the abortion lobby emerges whenever someone dares to question whether an elective procedure with the goal of ending a human being’s life really qualifies as medical “care.”

But with explosive new research by the Foundation for the Restoration of America exposing that more than one in 10 women who have a chemical abortion experience serious adverse side effects – including death – the time has come to revisit that argument.

If chemical abortion is healthcare, why do the women who choose that path suffer at an alarming rate, and why have we never heard this before?

The short answer: Medical providers have no federal obligation to tell us.

While most states enforce some form of mandatory abortion reporting, there is no national requirement that they report that data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). And as states set their own reporting standards, what little information that gets voluntarily provided to the CDC amounts to a jumbled mix of demographics with too many holes to paint a clear picture.

The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute reports that just 28 states require public health reporting on any complications that arise from abortions. In the case of mifepristone, the first pill in the two-drug chemical abortion regimen, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledges that those complications could include such life-threatening conditions as sepsis, hemorrhage, uterine rupture, ruptured ectopic pregnancy, and even death.

Despite those known risks, chemical abortion has become the most popular method for pregnancy termination in the United States, accounting for 63% of all abortions – or about 642,700 abortions – in 2023, according to Guttmacher.

Yet the Foundation for the Restoration of America’s review of insurance claims data for 2017 through 2023 revealed an average adverse event rate of 10.9% for every chemical abortion – a risk rate 22 times higher than the FDA admits.

That means more than 70,000 women likely experienced at least one serious adverse health event from a chemical abortion in 2023.

Suddenly, ProPublica’s Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting last year on the supposed dangers of restricting abortion seems woefully incomplete… and dangerously misleading.

The outlet framed the 2022 deaths of Amber Nicole Thurman, 28, and Candi Miller, 41, as the result of delayed care due to Georgia’s ban on most abortions after roughly six weeks of pregnancy.

In Thurman’s case, her symptoms reportedly progressed from typical cramping to severe bleeding that worsened over the course of several days. Five days after taking the first pill, she vomited blood and passed out. It was only because her boyfriend found her and called 911 that she even made it to the hospital, where doctors eventually diagnosed her with acute severe sepsis.

While the doctors undeniably waited too long to perform the dilation and curettage procedure necessary to remove the remaining tissue from Thurman’s uterus and save her life, there is no evidence to suggest Georgia’s abortion law played a role in that decision. In fact, the law includes an exception for procedures performed to save the life of a mother, and Thurman’s life was clearly at risk.

The truth is, even if her doctors were hesitant to intervene, it wouldn’t change the source of Thurman’s deteriorating health: the abortion pills.

Miller, like Thurman, suffered an incomplete abortion and neglected to seek emergency care as her symptoms grew increasingly severe. After spending several days moaning in agony, she was found unresponsive in her bed.

An autopsy later revealed that Miller still had fetal tissue in her uterus and a lethal combination of painkillers in her system, including fentanyl. But would she have taken the painkillers if the abortion pills had worked as intended? Probably not.

ProPublica downplayed the complications both women experienced as “rare” side effects of the chemical abortion regimen. But as the latest evidence suggests, they are anything but rare.

Planned Parenthood and its media defenders claim that chemical abortion is “safer than … Tylenol.”

Let’s put that claim to the test with federal reporting requirements.

If abortion in general is truly as safe and effective as the procedure’s advocates claim, they should have no problem with medical providers collecting and reporting the data to prove it.

Women have a right to know the risks of any medication they might consider taking. Setting aside the cavernous divide on the morality of killing an unborn child, one would hope we can at least all agree that women deserve better from the pharmaceutical industry than a one-in-10 chance of ending their own lives, too.

Samantha Flom is a senior investigative researcher for Restoration News. Her work has also appeared in The Epoch Times and on the Right Side Broadcasting Network website.

You know times are getting tough when grocery stores resort to good ole’ fashion ripping off customers via mispricing.

Shoppers at Kroger-owned stores may be unknowingly paying more at checkout due to pricing errors, according to a Consumer Reports investigation with The Guardian and the Food and Environment Reporting Network.

Even if you don’t shop at Kroger, similar issues have been found at other retailers, according to Consumer Reports and NBC affiliate KCRA.

Investigators found expired sale tags on over 150 grocery items, leading to overcharges on products like beef, salmon, coffee, juice, vegetables, cough medicine, and dog food. “Imagine picking up an item on sale only to be charged full price at checkout. That’s exactly what Consumer Reports says is happening at Kroger-owned stores across the country.”

The investigation began after Kroger workers in Colorado, currently in union talks, reported widespread pricing problems. CR recruited shoppers to check 26 Kroger-owned stores in 14 states and D.C., finding overcharges averaging $1.70 per sale item, or 18.4% more. Workers blamed staffing cuts and reduced hours, saying it’s impossible to keep up with thousands of discount tags.

The KCRA report says that Kroger is testing digital price tags, promising “better accuracy,” and says its “Make it Right” policy lets employees fix mistakes immediately. In a statement, Kroger said it is “committed to affordable and accurate pricing” and conducts weekly price checks reviewing “millions of items.”

Kroger isn’t alone. In 2022, a Walmart shopper sued over 15% overcharges, and last October, Safeway, Albertsons, and Vons paid nearly $4 million to settle a similar lawsuit.

Consumer Reports advises shoppers to take photos of sale tags, check receipts before leaving, and demand refunds if prices don’t match. An internal Kroger audit found nearly 6% of items had wrong tags—far above its 1% error policy.

“Kroger is committed to affordable and accurate pricing, and we conduct robust price check processes that reviews millions of items weekly to ensure our shelf prices are accurate. The complaint noted by Consumer Reports included a few dozen examples across several years out of billions of customer transactions annually. While any error is unacceptable, the characterization of widespread pricing concerns is patently false,” Kroger said in its response.

The company continued:

Kroger’s “Make It Right” policy ensures associates can create a customer experience and addresses any situation when we unintentionally fall short of a customer’s expectations. Connecting regular technology upgrades and our “Make It Right” policy to price accuracy is incorrect.

It is also inaccurate to say the company reduced standards or labor hours. We have not done so, and in fact, the standards we set in 2017 remain the same today.

We intentionally staff our stores to keep them running smoothly while creating an enjoyable place to shop. Our staffing decisions are data-driven to balance workload and schedules.

For nearly two decades, Kroger’s business model has been rooted in bringing down prices to attract more customers to our stores – and this is not changing. We respect our associates and our customers, and we conduct our business accordingly.”

The Department of Justice announced a settlement with Rare Breed Triggers (RBT) on Friday, ending a multi-year legal battle over Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs). The agreement aligns with President Trump’s Executive Order protecting Second Amendment rights and follows guidance from the Attorney General’s Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force.

Department of Justice Announces Settlement of Litigation Between the Federal Government and Rare Breed Triggers

🔗: https://t.co/dRraTKE0q8 pic.twitter.com/jonhWQlDv3

— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) May 16, 2025

The legal settlement marks a significant reversal of the Biden administration’s efforts to weaponize the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in its crackdown on FRT-15s—a trigger mechanism for AR-platform rifles that increases the rate of fire.

Lawrence DeMonico, president of RBT, has explained countless times that the FRT-15 is not a “machine gun” because it does not fire more than one round per single function of the trigger—an essential distinction under the definitions outlined in the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act. As “Forced Reset” implies, spring tension and a mechanical assist reset the trigger after each shot.

The DOJ outlined key terms of the settlement with RBT, including the following provisions:

The Department’s agreement with Rare Breed Triggers avoids the need for continued appeals in United States v. Rare Breed Triggers and continued litigation in other, related cases concerning the same issue. The settlement includes agreed-upon conditions that significantly advance public safety with respect to FRTs, including that Rare Breed will not develop or design FRTs for use in any pistol and will enforce its patents to prevent infringement that could threaten public safety. Rare Breed also agrees to promote the safe and responsible use of its products.

Gun rights groups that joined RBT’s lawsuit against ATF hailed the settlement as a major victory.

“This is one of the most stunning victories in the history of the gun rights movement. We didn’t just beat the ATF — we put them in a submission hold, and they tapped out,” said Dudley Brown, President of the National Association for Gun Rights, adding, “This decision marks a new era of holding the DOJ and ATF accountable when they trample the rights of law-abiding gun owners. We made them give back what they took, and that’s a precedent they’ll never forget.”

IT’S OFFICIAL!! The DOJ/ATF just officially laid down their arms. Three cheers for the rule of law, the Second Amendment, and Rare Breed Triggers! pic.twitter.com/YCcVIbABGz

— Hannah Hill (@hannahhill_sc) May 16, 2025

RBT’s DeMonico stated, “This victory is a landmark moment in the fight against unchecked government overreach. The ATF and DOJ tried to silence and bury us not because we broke the law, but because I refused to bend to the will of a tyrannical administration.” 

“With the support of the National Association for Gun Rights and renewed leadership at the DOJ under President Trump, we fought the machine and won. I made a promise to see this battle through to the end, no matter the consequences, and today I am proud to say… Promise kept!” DeMonico said. 

Let’s revisit our multi-year reporting of the United States v. Rare Breed Triggers

• ATF Now Labels FRT-15 A Machine Gun, Turning Law-Abiding Citizens Into Criminals

• Rare Breed Triggers Fires Back At ATF, Says “Will Not Comply” ​​​​

• Rare Breed Triggers Responds To Alleged Leaked ATF Memo To Seize FRT-15s From Dealers

• ATF Declares Some FRT-15 Triggers “Prohibited Machineguns”

• Rare Breed Triggers Cancels Customers’ Orders After “ATF Raided Vendor”

• “Were You Expecting Us?”: ATF Agents Go ‘Door To Door’ To Confiscate FRT-15 Triggers

DeMonico added: “This is a complete and total vindication of Rare Breed Triggers and everyone who stood up for the Constitution. We refused to fold — and we won.” 

TOTAL VICTORY OVER THE ATF 🚨
FORCED RESET TRIGGERS ARE BACK 🔫

The DOJ has settled in our case, NAGR v. Garland -conceding on ALL points.
🔴 Return ALL seized triggers.
🔴 Drop their appeal in the 5th Circuit and all other cases.
🔴 Pledge not to touch FRTs in the future. pic.twitter.com/lioBevidle

— National Association for Gun Rights (@NatlGunRights) May 16, 2025

Gun blogger Mrgunsngear provided additional color on the RBT settlement. 

Big win for all forced reset trigger owners, manufacturers, and Americans in general here 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/hIN7z3upHw

— Mrgunsngear (@Mrgunsngear) May 17, 2025

In our view, DeMonico and the gun rights groups should not have settled with the Trump administration but instead pushed the case to a final ruling that could have established lasting legal safeguards. While settling isn’t inherently negative, the core issue is the absence of long-lasting protections. Without codified legal barriers, a future Democratic administration—and its network of shady anti-gun groups funded by far-left billionaires—could once again weaponize the ATF, dragging the industry into the same crisis experienced during the Biden-Harris regime era.