Authored by Julianne Geiger via OilPrice.com,

The U.S. Treasury just gave Chevron Corp. a short 30-day eviction notice from Venezuela, cutting off its ability to pump and sell crude from the sanctioned country. 

The decision, following Trump’s vow to reverse Biden’s oil concessions to Nicolás Maduro and the cancellation of a sanction waiver just days ago, is a seismic shift that could slam both Venezuela’s already fragile economy and U.S. refiners relying on its heavy crude.

The standard wind-down period is 6 months, according to Bloomberg.

For Chevron, this is a hard stop after years of carefully maneuvering U.S. sanctions. The oil giant was responsible for about 20% of Venezuela’s total production, providing a rare source of economic stability and desperately needed hard currency. That revenue—estimated at $6 billion—was one of the few things keeping the country from total collapse.

The Biden administration had allowed Chevron to ship 240,000 barrels per day of Venezuelan crude to U.S. refineries, a lifeline for Gulf Coast refiners designed to handle heavier crude grades. 

But Trump’s crackdown means those barrels are off the table come April 3. 

Markets reacted immediately – Chevron shares fell 1.3%, while WTI crude slipped to $67.36 and Brent dropped to $70.24 as traders recalibrated expectations.

Florida Republicans have long argued that any U.S. dealings with Venezuela only prop up Maduro’s regime, calling for tougher measures. 

Trump echoed that sentiment, posting on social media that he was “reversing the concessions Crooked Joe Biden gave to Nicolás Maduro.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio piled on, vowing to “terminate all Biden-era oil and gas licenses that have shamefully bankrolled the illegitimate Maduro regime.”

Venezuela, unsurprisingly, is calling the move “harmful” and predicting it will cause “damage to the U.S., its people, and its companies.” 

Meanwhile, with Chevron gone, Venezuela may revert to shadowy oil deals with Iran and China—a return to the “ghost tanker” days of lost revenue and sanctions evasion.

The bigger question? Where will U.S. refiners turn for heavy crude now—and at what price?

Looking to rail against DOGE and come up with signs of efficiency from the Department of Education? Try this one on for size.

Texas middle schoolers secretly tattooed each other in classrooms using a shared needle while teachers remained unaware, sparking outrage among parents, according to the NY Post.

Officials said the students used temporary ink, raising fears of potential disease exposure.

“How is it that these kids are getting tattoos in class and not one teacher noticed it?” one mother, Ashley Armstrong, asked.

Armstrong’s 11-year-old son, Jordan, used a shared needle to scrape “I heart my lord” on his forearm and “JC” on his hands during class at Travis Intermediate in Greenville, Texas.

Jordan said a classmate offered him a tattoo, and the same needle was “shared several times from one class to another,” Armstrong told the outlet. A school nurse alerted Armstrong, urging immediate blood tests, which fortunately came back negative.

The NY Post writes that Armstrong scolded Jordan, saying “he knows better,” but criticized the teachers for allowing it. “It’s with the needle, so I don’t care if it’s temporary ink or not,” she said. “This can affect him, seriously affect him. I’m not letting up on any of that.”

Greenville ISD confirmed the incident and suspended several teachers as an investigation continues.

“Greenville ISD is aware of an incident at Travis Intermediate School where students gave each other tattoos using temporary ink and the same needle,” the school district said in a statement. 

Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Supreme Court seemed skeptical of Mexico’s argument on March 4 that gun manufacturers should face liability for violence committed by cartels.

Multiple justices asked questions indicating that Mexico’s lawsuit lacked information to allege a certain level of wrongdoing on the part of gun companies.

Justices Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett asked about whether Mexico could name red flag dealers that were allegedly part of the flow of guns for illegal purposes.

“You haven’t identified them that I can tell from the complaint,” Barrett told an attorney for Mexico. Justice Elena Kagan similarly told Mexico’s attorney that her side didn’t name particular dealers.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Mexico’s attorney about the economic consequences of its theory of liability. “That’s a real concern for me,” he said.

The case, Smith & Wesson v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which ruled last year that members of the American firearm industry could face a lawsuit under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

That law generally protects firearms companies from lawsuits based on criminals misusing their products but contains an exception that the First Circuit said was met in this case. More specifically, the law allows companies to face lawsuits if they knowingly violated state or federal law and that violation was a proximate cause of a given harm.

The appeals court said Mexico’s lawsuit had adequately alleged that the firearm companies had aided and abetted “the sale of firearms by dealers in knowing violation of relevant state and federal laws.”

It added that “the Mexican government’s expenditure of funds to parry the cartels is a foreseeable and direct consequence” of dealers selling guns to buyers with illegal intentions.

At one point, Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested that Mexico hadn’t done enough to show that the gun companies took some affirmative action to participate in a scheme that furthered wrongdoing.

After Sotomayor’s exchange with Mexico’s attorney, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson told the attorney that she thought the PLCAA required lawsuits like Mexico’s to do more to show violations of law.

Jackson also seemed to worry that Mexico’s arguments would invite unwarranted judicial intervention.

“All of the things that you asked for in this lawsuit would amount to different kinds of regulatory constraints that I’m thinking Congress didn’t want the courts to be the ones to impose,” she said.

Justice Clarence Thomas similarly seemed to express concern that the lawsuit didn’t show a violation of particular laws. He also asked whether Mexico would run into due process issues in alleging violations of federal law by certain individuals when they hadn’t been charged with that violation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

The headquarters of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation may be sold off as part of a massive purge of ‘nonessential’ government properties.

According to a website for the General Services Administration – the agency which manages the government’s office space, a listing of “buildings and facilities that are not core to government operations” now includes the DOJ and FBI headquarters, along with the federal courthouse in Los Angeles, according to The Independent.

Other buildings on the list include the Office of Personnel Management’s Theodore Roosevelt Building HQ, the building used to house offices of the United States Trade Representative, the headquarters of the American Red Cross, and the Old Post Office building, according to the report.

The GSA has also designated its own headquarters – along with the headquarters of the Department of Labor, the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Transportation as unnecessary and potentially for sale, the report continues.

Outside of Washington, GSA has also marked for potential sale the headquarters of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Social Security Administration in Woodlawn, Maryland, the headquarters of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Rockville, Maryland, and buildings used by the Food and Drug Administration in nearby Silver Spring, Maryland.

The Trump administration also wants to dispose of the John F Kennedy Federal Building and the Thomas P O’Neill Federal Building, both located in Boston, and the Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center in Georgia, the largest single federal building in the southeast which currently houses the Federal Railroad Administration. Federal courthouses in Florida, Georgia, and Indiana would also be up for sale under the GSA proposal. -Independent

The sales would mean that the vast majority of cabinet departments and other agencies would lose their headquarters buildings, in what the GSA says could potentially save more than $430 million in annual operating costs.

In a statement posted to its website, the GSA said that its Public Buildings Service was behind the plan to sell off most of the cabinet department headquarters buildings.

“Decades of funding deficiencies have resulted in many of these buildings becoming functionally obsolete and unsuitable for use by our federal workforce. We can no longer hope that funding will emerge to resolve these longstanding issues. GSA’s decisive action to dispose of non-core assets leverages the private sector, drives improvements for our agency customers, and best serves local communities,” reads the statement, which adds that the Public Buildings Service was exploring “creative solutions, including sale-lease backs, ground leases and other forms of public/private partnerships to drive the full optimization of our space while delivering our federal employees the high quality work environments they need to fulfill their missions.”

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Department of Defense (DOD) has identified more than $80 million through Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team that it says is wasteful spending, a spokesperson confirmed on March 3.

In a video release on social media platform X, Pentagon press secretary Sean Parnell said that some of the funding was primarily dedicated to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and climate change programs.

“This stuff is not a core function of our military … this is a distraction,” Parnell said. “We believe that these initial findings will probably save $80 million in wasteful spending.”

As examples, Parnell said that the U.S. Air Force allocated $1.9 million for “holistic DEI transformation and training,” $6 million went to the University of Montana to “strengthen American democracy,” and $1.6 million went to the University of Florida to study “social and institutional detriment of vulnerability in resilience to climate hazards in African Sahel.”

Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell on initial @DOGE findings at the DOD. pic.twitter.com/cqybKFcEdw

— DOD Rapid Response (@DODResponse) March 3, 2025

Parnell said that the DOD is working “hand in glove” with DOGE to identify programs to pare back, with more cuts coming.

Created by President Donald Trump in an executive order in January, DOGE has gone from agency to agency to identify what it considers wasteful or abusive spending and to propose ways to downsize the federal workforce.

Musk, the founder of Tesla and SpaceX and the owner of the social platform X, has delivered regular updates on DOGE’s work as well as warnings to federal employees through his X account, which has tens of millions of followers.

Over the weekend, Musk wrote that every federal agency is working with DOGE and confirmed that a second round of emails asking employees what they did in the last week was sent out.

For the State Department, the Pentagon, and several other agencies, “supervisors are gathering the weekly accomplishments on behalf of individual contributors,” Musk wrote in a post on March 1.

Separately, Musk said that “anyone working on classified or other sensitive matters is still required to respond if they receive the email, but can simply reply that their work is sensitive.”

An email that was sent to Pentagon civilian employees over the weekend and seen by The Epoch Times advised employees on how to respond to the “what you did last week” email and directed them to respond within 48 hours.

“A response to this email satisfies all OPM requirements for the past two weeks,” the Pentagon email said.

Democratic lawmakers and labor unions have criticized DOGE, saying that widespread cuts could hamper crucial government functions and services. Unions and groups of federal employees, meanwhile, have filed dozens of lawsuits against DOGE, the Trump administration, the Office of Personnel Management, and Musk, with some seeking to clarify the billionaire’s role in the organization.

In Trump’s first cabinet meeting this past week, Musk told department heads that the email asking what employees did is needed to determine if that person is a real federal employee.

“What we are trying to get to the bottom of is we think there are a number of people on the government payroll who are dead, which is probably why they can’t respond,” he said.

On Tuesday, X user ‘Western Lensman’ posted a video of 22 Democrat Senators releasing identical propaganda videos in response to claims by President Trump, prompting conservatives to ask who was behind the astroturf’d campaign.

So far there are a total of 22 Dem Senators who have released the identical, cringe “Sh*t that ain’t true” video.

Democrats are convinced that “messaging” — not policy — is their problem.

This is apparently their attempt to address that 🤣 pic.twitter.com/IH7p5u7w8S

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) March 4, 2025

BREAKING – 3 democrat Senators Schumer, Warren, and Booker have been caught plagiarizing the same script word-for-word. pic.twitter.com/QmjgaiEwyZ

— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) March 4, 2025

When people began asking questions, Elon Musk offered to ‘buy a Cybertruck for anyone [who] can provide proof of who wrote this particular piece of propaganda.”

Now we’re up to 22 Dem senators all doing the same cringe video simultaneously!

I will buy a Cybertruck for anyone can provide proof of who wrote this particular piece of propaganda.

First person to post proof in the replies to this post gets the truck! https://t.co/ILdATEXXTn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 4, 2025

Which X user and deep-dive researcher @CodeMonkeyZ quickly uncovered as – Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ):

The propaganda was written by Cory Booker, who is now the chair of the Democrat Strategic Communications Committee. https://t.co/0OAbi0mHGIhttps://t.co/rOVxRcisbE pic.twitter.com/1VpS1XeXOv

— Ron (@CodeMonkeyZ) March 4, 2025

Booker then fessed up, telling Musk to “Keep your truck.”

Clearly you are triggered by the truth.

It was me. Keep your truck. https://t.co/Ub99KTjfFa

— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) March 4, 2025

A well-worn strategy, as we saw from European leaders after Trump booted Zelenskyy from the White House last week.

Coordinated messaging strategy is expected.

Ham fisted execution of cringe repetition like this is telling. There is so much wrong here.

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) March 4, 2025

And remember, this is the same party that hired an ABC producer to literally ‘produce‘ the Jan. 6 hearings in 2022. 

Is anything they do authentic?

*  *  *

Know what IS authentic? IQ Biologix Astaxanthin – a super potent antioxidant (read more here).

Update (1630ET): First there were the Trump Tariffs… then the Retaliation. Then as Europe closed, chatter about a possible Ukraine minerals deal started to gain momentum lifting stocks to the highs.

With a few minutes left in the day, a large MoC sell imbalance sent stocks back down hard…

But, just as we predicted here…

For those who already forgot the first Trump trade war, we are nearing the time when everyone turns apocalyptically bearish and the White House leaks a bullish “trade war deal” trial balloon.

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 4, 2025

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick spoke on Fox Business, offering the dovish olive branch: 

“Both the Mexicans and the Canadians were on the phone with me all day today trying to show that they’ll do better, and the president’s listening, because you know he’s very, very fair and very reasonable,” Lutnick said in an interview with Fox Business. 

“So I think he’s going to work something out with them — it’s not going to be a pause, none of that pause stuff, but I think he’s going to figure out: you do more and I’ll meet you in the middle some way and we’re going to probably announcing that tomorrow.”

As Bloomberg reports, Lutnick did not explicitly say what President Donald Trump was considering after imposing an across-the-board tariff on all goods from Canada and Mexico that went into effect overnight. 

Lutnick said that the tariffs would likely land “somewhere in the middle” with Trump “moving with the Canadians and Mexicans, but not all the way.”

Lutnick discounted the notion that the tariffs would be fully rolled back, pointing instead to the US-Mexico-Canada trade pact negotiated during Trump’s first term.

“If you live under those rules, then the president is considering giving you relief,” Lutnick said.

“If you haven’t lived under those rules, well, then you have to pay the tariff.”

and lifted US equity futures higher after the close…

And the Peso and Loonie are also bid with both hands and feet…

So, the Trump 1.0 tariff playbook analog continues.

*  *  *

Asian markets closed lower, European stocks are in the red, and US equity futures are trending lower this morning as worsening global trade war concerns weigh on risk sentiment.

On Monday, President Trump reiterated that he would impose tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico starting Tuesday, stating that there was “no room left” for negotiation. He also noted that an additional 10% levy would be applied to imports from China.

Fast-forward to Tuesday morning. Trump’s 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada took effect, prompting Canada to retaliate with 25% tariffs on $100 billion worth of US imports. Mexico is expected to respond later.

Trump also introduced an additional 10% tariff on Chinese imports early Tuesday, bringing the total tax to 20% following a similar increase last month. China swiftly retaliated with tariffs on US food and agricultural products and an export ban on some defense firms. 

According to an announcement by the Chinese Ministry of Finance, Beijing imposed new duties of 10% to 15% on US food and agricultural products. 

Here’s an excerpt from the announcement: 

• 15% tariff will be imposed on chicken, wheat, corn, and cotton.

• 10% tariff will be imposed on sorghum, soybeans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables, and dairy products

• For the imported goods listed in the appendix originating from the United States, corresponding tariffs will be levied on the basis of the current applicable tariff rates. The current bonded and tax reduction and exemption policies remain unchanged, and the additional tariffs will not be reduced or exempted

• Goods that have been shipped from the place of departure prior to March 10, 2025, and imported from March 10, 2025 to April 12, 2025, shall not be subject to the additional tariffs prescribed in this announcement

Commenting on China’s retaliatory tariffs, Lynn Song, chief economist for Greater China at ING Bank, told clients: “The measures are still relatively measured for now. I think this retaliation shows China remains patient and has refrained from ‘flipping the table’ so to speak despite the recent escalation.”

“China’s hit-back isn’t exactly aggressive — a 15% tariff on US agricultural goods, but nothing broad-based on tech or autos, suggests to me they’re leaving room for negotiation,” said Billy Leung, an investment strategist at Global X ETF, adding, “That’s probably why Chinese stocks are rebounding instead of selling off harder.”

Dilin Wu, a research strategist at Pepperstone Group Ltd., said, “The immediate impact of these new tariffs on China remains manageable — the measures are currently concentrated in specific areas.”

“Should Beijing roll out additional pro-growth measures — such as large-scale fiscal stimulus or targeted support for high-tech industries and domestic consumption — it could further bolster market confidence,” Wu said. 

Sea of red for global equity futures across most regions. 

China’s Ministry of Finance warned:  “The US’s unilateral tariff increase damages the multilateral trading system, increases the burden on US companies and consumers, and undermines the foundation of economic and trade cooperation between China and the US.” 

Should Trump respond with retaliatory tariffs, the risk of sentiment continuation could continue. In the US, the growth outlook has dimmed as the troubling narrative of “growth scare and tariffs” takes center stage. 

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Adviser to President Donald Trump, Elon Musk, said Saturday that some federal agencies will respond on behalf of employees to an email asking what federal workers did in the past week and that all agencies are cooperating with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which was created last month to cut waste, fraud, and excess spending.

“All federal government departments are cooperating with DOGE,” he wrote.

For the Departments of State, Defense Department, and “a few others, the supervisors are gathering the weekly accomplishments on behalf of individual contributors,” Musk wrote on his social media platform, X.

Over the weekend, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent out a second round of emails to multiple agencies asking all federal employees to list five things they accomplished that week.

Earlier on Saturday, Musk said in a separate X post that responding to the email “is mandatory for the executive branch” and that “anyone working on classified or other sensitive matters is still required to respond if they receive the email, but can simply reply that their work is sensitive.”

An email that was sent to Defense Department civilian employees, seen by The Epoch Times, provided guidance to the “what you did last week” email and said employees must respond to it within 48 hours. “A response to this email satisfies all OPM requirements for the past two weeks,” the email to Pentagon employees added.

Musk, with Trump’s backing, has pressed for the emails as a means to hold workers accountable and as a “pulse check” to make sure all federal employees on the payroll actually exist.

The emails are part of broader efforts by Musk and DOGE to downsize the federal government and reduce spending. Musk and Trump have said that the organization is needed to find and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Democratic lawmakers and labor unions have criticized DOGE, saying that widespread cuts could hamper crucial government functions and services.

Musk and DOGE have been targeted by multiple lawsuits seeking to block them from accessing government systems and confidential data. The suits allege that Musk and DOGE are violating the Constitution by wielding the kind of vast power that only comes from agencies created through the Congress or appointments made with confirmation by the Senate.

At the first Trump Cabinet meeting held last week, Musk explained the role that DOGE will play. He also addressed the mass emails that were sent to federal employees.

“I think that email perhaps was misinterpreted as a performance review, but, actually, it was a pulse check review,” Musk said, adding that “this is not a high bar.”

“What we are trying to get to the bottom of is we think there are a number of people on the government payroll who are dead, which is probably why they can’t respond,” he said.

Shortly before the first round of emails were sent out last month, Trump had called on Musk to “get more aggressive” with spending cuts and reform to the government. After they were sent out, Trump told reporters in the White House, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, that those who do not answer the email are at risk of termination.

Musk is not a Cabinet-level official and has been listed as a presidential adviser to Trump with a special government employee status. The Trump administration has given conflicting statements on the exact role that Musk plays within DOGE or whether he actually heads it.

In court papers last month, a senior White House official said that Musk is not in charge of DOGE, nor an employee of the department. Trump later said that Musk is effectively leading the organization.

Reuters contributed to this report.

As trade wars accelerate and the ‘Bidenomics’ hangover unfolds, several companies sounded the alarm this week over President Trump’s expanding tariff policies, warning of higher prices and gloomy consumer sentiment. Target cited concerns over tariffs and consumer uncertainty. Now, Best Buy has followed suit. 

Goldman analysts Kate McShane, Mark Jordan, and others told clients that consumer electronics retailer Best Buy’s fourth-quarter earnings and revenue exceeded expectations, while its full-year guidance for FY26 was in line with consensus.

BBY reported 4Q25 adj. EPS of $2.58, above the GS estimate of $2.45 and consensus (Refinitiv) of $2.40. Sales decreased -4.8% y/y to $13.9bn and enterprise comparable sales increased 0.5% y/y, above the GS estimate of -0.3% and consensus of -1.3%. Domestic online comparable sales increased 2.6% y/y and accounted for 39.5% of domestic sales, up from 38.0% during the prior year. Adj. EBIT margin decreased 7 bps y/y to 4.9%, above GS estimate of 4.8% and consensus estimate of 4.7%.

Management provided 1Q26 guidance for a comparable sales to be slightly down y/y (vs. consensus of +0.41%), and for adj. EBIT margin to be ~3.4% (vs. consensus of 3.7%). BBY also provided FY26 guidance, including revenue of $41.4bn-$42.2bn (vs. consensus of $41.82bn), comparable sales of 0.0%-2.0% (vs. consensus of +1.71%), adj. EBIT margin of 4.2%-4.4% (vs. consensus 4.29%), and adj. EPS of $6.20-$6.60 (vs. consensus of $6.55). Further, BBY expects capital expenditures to be $700mn to $750mn, and an effective tax rate of 25.0%. The company expects comp growth to be 2H weighted based on timing of product launches and initiatives.

Separate from the Goldman note, Best Buy CEO Corie Barry warned investors during an earnings call that tariff wars will send prices higher for consumers:

“Trade is critically important to our business and industry, the consumer electronic supply chain is highly global, technical and complex.

“We expect our vendors across our entire assortment will pass along some level of tariff costs to retailers, making price increases for American consumers highly likely.”

Commenting on the full-year outlook, Best Buy CFO Matt Bilunas stated:

“We believe consumer behavior will be largely similar to last year – remaining resilient but still dealing with high inflation that is driving expenses up across their lives, making them value focused and thoughtful about big ticket purchases. And, at the same time, we continue to see a consumer that is willing to spend on high price point products when they need to or when there is technology innovation.” 

Remember that the guidance does not account for the impact of the additional 10% tariff on China, plus 25% duties on goods from Mexico and Canada. CEO Barry pointed out that 60% of the cost of its goods comes from China and Mexico. 

Here’s everything readers need to know about broadening tariff wars, the unfolding Bidenomics hangover, and the growth scare narrative. 

• Trade Wars Begin: All You Need To Know

• China & Canada Retaliate Against Trump’s Tariff War As Global Stocks Slide

• Consumer Health “Remains Cautious” As Bidenomics Hangover Begins

• “Growth Scare & Tariffs” – The Troubling Narrative Continues Brewing

Mood waning. 

the mood out there pic.twitter.com/cDHK9sXcnL

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 4, 2025

Enough economic gloom has spurred rate traders to price three interest rate cuts by the end of the year. 

*TRADERS ADD TO FED EASING BETS, FULLY PRICE THREE CUTS IN 2025

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 4, 2025

It seems like it is all part of the plan. 

BESSENT: WE’RE SET ON BRINGING INTEREST RATES DOWN-FOX NEWS INTERVIEW https://t.co/myf6n3tgMX

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 4, 2025

More here:

If you didn’t already understand the current White House’s approach from their budget, Bessent is telling you 🔊 loud & clear, if you care to listen👂.

This is what he is saying in plain English:

– They want to slow demand in the real economy & hence slow inflation, by… https://t.co/6GKUIekITj

— Cem Karsan 🥐 (@jam_croissant) March 3, 2025

*tweet

Authored by Matt Margolis via PJMedia.com,

The Democratic Party has once again shown us exactly where their priorities lie – and it’s not with protecting women and girls. 

On Monday, Senate Democrats banded together to block a common-sense bill to keep biological males from invading women’s sports.

The Republican-led Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome the Democrats’ filibuster. Every single Democrat who voted opposed the bill. Sens. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) didn’t even bother to show up. Apparently, protecting girls and women from having to compete against biological males with inherent physical advantages isn’t important enough for Democrats to support.

The bill, introduced by Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Alabama) and backed by over 40 cosponsors, would have simply codified President Trump’s recent executive order into law, affirming what most Americans already know to be true—that biological sex is “recognized based solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.” 

“Female athletes who work extremely hard should not have their future in athletics hindered because they are forced to compete against biological males. Instead of standing up for women and girls, Democrats voted to cosign Joe Biden’s attempted assault on Title IX,” Bill Cassidy, (R-La.), the chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), said in a statement. 

“I will continue working with President Trump and my Republican colleagues to preserve Title IX, ensuring every woman and girl has the chance to succeed.”

President Trump ran on this issue and won in a landslide. Why? Because approximately 70% of Americans agree with him that men don’t belong in women’s sports or locker rooms. 

“Through an amendment to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, this bill would expressly recognize what is already federal law—that it is an illegal act of discrimination for a man to participate in a federally funded athletic program or activity designated for women or girls,” Tuberville’s office said in a statement.

But instead of listening to the American people, Democrats chose to side with radical gender ideology. They’d rather force our daughters to compete against biological males who have larger hearts, lungs, muscle mass, and bone density than stand up for women’s rights.

Democrats countered with the absurd argument that this issue should be left to local communities. 

Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) claimed, “I, for one, trust our states, our leagues, our localities to make these decisions without interference from Congress.” 

We know that’s not true. Democrats don’t believe states have the right to ban men from women’s sports—they simply want the fight to play out in the courts, where they know it’ll be easier to dismantle state and local protections than to overturn federal law.

The hypocrisy is staggering. 

The so-called party of women’s rights is actively destroying them.

They preach about equality while watching girls lose scholarships, championships, and hard-earned opportunities to biological males. 

They turn a blind eye as young women see their privacy and dignity (and fairness) stripped away—all in the name of a radical agenda the vast majority of Americans reject.

The American people see through this charade. Women’s sports deserve protection, and Democrats have shown yet again they’re too beholden to radical activists to provide it. 

*  *  *

Choose real media over fake news with the purchase of a ZeroHedge Multitool…

Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.

*  *  *