“How White Of Me”: NPR CEO Can’t Remember Posting All Sorts Of Racist Crap, Claims No Bias At Network
Got a few minutes?
Today’s entertaining exchange comes from NPR CEO Karoline Maher, who claimed that the network is unbiased, and somehow couldn’t remember a series of anti-white posts she made on social media when questioned by Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) during a a House DOGE (Delivering on Government Efficiency) subcommittee hearing titled: “Anti-American Airwaves: Holding the Heads of NPR and PBS Accountable.”
REP. BRANDON GILL: OK. Do you believe that white people inherently feel superior to other races?
KAROLINE MAHER, NPR: I do not.
REP. BRANDON GILL: You don’t? You tweeted something to that effect. You said, “I grew up feeling superior—ha, how white of me.” Why did you tweet that?
KAROLINE MAHER, NPR: I think I was probably on what it was to be—to grow up in an environment where I had lots of advantages.
REP. BRANDON GILL: It sounds like you’re saying that white people feel superior.
Watch:
Incredible: She told Congress she never read this article, even though she said she took an entire day off to read it. She either lied to score some virtue points in 2020, or lied to avoid looking like a mindless Robin DiAngelo replica in 2025. https://t.co/DrAd8gyF1R
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) March 26, 2025
Shortly before this exchange, Rep. Pat Fallon (R-TX) also laid into Maher, slamming the network over the Russia collusion hoax, interviewing Adam Schiff (D-CA), their use of “far-right” to describe conservatives vs. “far-left,” and more.
Watch:
REP FALLON: “In 2020, NPR branded Hunter Biden’s laptop story a ‘waste of time.’ Do you know how many times NPR interviewed Adam Schiff about the Russia Collusion hoax?”
NPR CEO: “Idk.”
REP FALLON: “25 times. How many times did NPR interview Chairman Comer about the Biden… pic.twitter.com/EoOGHAZrPW
A federal law granting broad immunity to vaccine administrators and others does not preempt charges that a mother’s constitutional rights were violated when her son was given a COVID-19 vaccine without her consent, the North Carolina Supreme Court has ruled.
Emily Happel and her teenage son can proceed with a lawsuit against their local school board and a medical organization, according to the March 21 ruling. Happel’s son, Tanner Smith, who was 14 at the time, was given a COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 even though administrators did not obtain parental consent.
Lower courts found that a federal law, called the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), preempted claims brought by Happel and Tanner. However, North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul Newby wrote for the majority that the law only provides immunity in situations typically involving tort law, such as serious injury, and not constitutional violations.
The PREP Act, signed in 2005, is triggered when the federal government issues a declaration during a health emergency, which it did during the COVID-19 pandemic. The act says that under a declaration, covered people such as vaccine administrators are protected from “all claims for loss,” with few exceptions.
Courts have generally found that the immunization preempts a range of state-level claims, while the top court in North Carolina concluded that it does not shield people who violated constitutional rights.
“The literalist interpretation defendants urge us to adopt today defies even the broad scope of the statutory text. Under this view, Congress gave carte blanche to any willful misconduct related to the administration of a covered countermeasure, including the State’s deliberate violation of fundamental constitutional rights, so long as it fell short of causing ‘death or serious physical injury,’” Newby said.
That interpretation, he said, would let a covered person vaccinate an unconscious patient or a nurse at a public school to intentionally exaggerate the benefits of a treatment. “The fundamental and paramount constitutional rights to bodily integrity and parental control would be discarded without second thought,” Newby wrote. “That simply cannot be what Congress intended.”
Definition of ‘Loss’ Under PREP Act
Congress, in the PREP Act, provided immunity to “all claims for loss.” Happel argued that her claims did not meet the definition of loss, which Congress detailed to include death and loss of property. The examples listed in the law are all associated with tort law, the North Carolina Supreme Court majority said.
“Because ordinary tort loss is distinct from constitutional loss, the tort-based examples included in the PREP Act suggest that Congress did not intend for the immunity to block state constitutional claims,” Newby said.
Workers with the Old North State Medical Society vaccinated Tanner, despite his refusal and a lack of consent from his parents, at a clinic promoted by the Guilford County Board of Education. The defendants had argued the conduct was immunized by the PREP Act, citing other cases in which courts concluded similar conduct was shielded by the federal law.
North Carolina Supreme Court justices said the rulings did not persuade them because they either did not deal with constitutional claims or did not separate alleged constitutional violations from other state law claims.
The new decision overturns rulings by a trial court, which sided with the defendants in 2023, and a state appeals court, which upheld that ruling the following year.
The appeals court said that it was “constrained to conclude the PREP Act preempts the protections” provided by state law.
The North Carolina Supreme Court remanded the case back to the appeals court, instructing it to decide on constitutional issues raised by the parties.
The state’s top court did affirm the lower court’s dismissal of battery claims brought by Happel and her son.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Philip Berger Jr., joined by Justice Tamara Barringer, said that the PREP Act immunity may appear limitless but “it is difficult to concede that the PREP Act confers immunity for outright wrongful acts.”
Dissenting Opinion
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Allison Riggs, joined by Justice Anita Earls, pointed out that the PREP Act says “the sole exception to the immunity from suit and liability” is “death or serious injury caused by willful misconduct.”
“It is not possible to square the majority’s reading with the purposes of the PREP Act and the almost uniformly broad language used to effectuate it,” Riggs said. She added later, “I would hold any constitutional claims raised by plaintiffs to be preempted by the PREP Act, rendering the defendants immune from suit.”
Riggs also wrote that the immunity only applies to civil suits and liability, not criminal charges or discipline from licensing bodies.
Parents Rights Implications
A lawyer for Old North State Medical Society declined to comment. The Guilford County Board of Education and one of its attorneys did not return inquiries by publication time.
Steven Walker, an attorney representing Happel and her son, told The Epoch Times in an email: “We are very pleased with the Court’s ruling. While we would have, of course, loved to see the battery claim reinstated as well, we believe that the Court decision was very favorable in the main on the case and have no real complaints.
“I believe the case is important even outside the issue of the PREP Act in that the Court gave its clearest explanation to date concerning the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children under the North Carolina constitution,” Walker said.
“The PREP Act has a purpose, and that purpose is to provide immunity protections in situations when it might be difficult to determine the safety of a countermeasure during a time of crisis. It was never intended to allow the government to trample on the clear constitutional rights of its citizens.”
Watch: Dumbest Anti-Musk Activist Yet, Rams ATV Into Bulletproof Cybertruck
We present readers with what may be one of the dumbest, most brainwashed, unhealthiest, lowest IQ, and unhinged Democrat yet—a morbidly obsessed activist who slammed his ATV into the driver’s side of a Tesla Cybertruck, an incident likely linked to radical far-left political grievances captured by the vehicle’s Sentry Mode security cameras.
Tesla investor Sawyer Merritt wrote on X, “This guy was arrested today after ramming his mini four-wheeler into a Cybertruck,” adding, “Little did he know that the Cybertruck has 1.8mm bulletproof stainless-steel doors capable of taking some heavy hits. He was charged with one count of felony criminal mischief & failure to identify.”
This guy was arrested today after ramming his mini four-wheeler into a Cybertruck.
Little did he know that the Cybertruck has 1.8mm bulletproof stainless-steel doors capable of taking some heavy hits. He was charged with one count of felony criminal mischief & failure to… pic.twitter.com/acludqm3tq
On Saturday, the FBI released a statement warning about the “nationwide incidents—arson, gunfire, and vandalism targeting Tesla EVs, dealerships, and charging stations in 9+ states, linked to political grievances.”
🚨PSA: FBI warns of nationwide incidents—arson, gunfire, and vandalism targeting Tesla EVs, dealerships, and charging stations in 9+ states, linked to political grievances. The #FBI urges vigilance and awareness around Tesla locations. https://t.co/1i97kbOgKBpic.twitter.com/jwWUKpvxoM
Democrats are being caught on camera destroying Tesla vehicles nationwide, and this is an optically displeasing look for the party, which is imploding with ratings at record-low levels.
The destruction of private property by unhinged Democrats will haunt the party of Marxist radicals in the next election cycle because the ‘America First’ party will put all these clips into a montage of stupidity and remind the nation of who committed violent acts of domestic terrorism…
There have been over a dozen violent attacks on Tesla stores and service centers across the U.S. that include shootings, arson and bombings.
The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force is now investigating a firebomb attack on Tesla’s Las Vegas facility after a suspect torched cars with Molotov cocktails and fired into vehicles.
To combat far-left domestic terrorists, Tesla quietly updated the Cybertruck’s webpage to include a new Sentry Mode feature. These updates for Tesla vehicle owners are expected shortly.
Meanwhile…
Anti-Musk NGO Behind Color Revolution Against Tesla “Mass Deletes Content Off Website” After Being Exposed https://t.co/D6t3WanLJo
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s Health and Human Services Secretary, is pushing a plan to ban pharmaceutical ads from television. He’s right to push for it—and not just because the U.S. is one of only two countries on earth that allows such advertising (the other being New Zealand).
America’s health system isn’t just flawed; it’s harming public health, distorting journalism, and fueling Big Pharma’s malignant influence over our daily lives.
Let’s start with the obvious: TV drug ads aren’t designed to inform—they’re designed to manipulate. The formula is always the same. Cue soft lighting and sappy piano music. A sad, listless person pops a pill and suddenly life is vibrant again. They’re running through fields, laughing with family, walking dogs across idyllic bridges.
Then, in a breathless voiceover, the side effects come tumbling out like a legal disclaimer roulette wheel—stroke, heart failure, suicidal thoughts. The goal? Make viewers want a drug before they even talk to their doctor. It’s emotional coercion dressed up as health education.
This completely inverts how medicine is supposed to work. Health care decisions should be made inside the exam room, not in a 60-second marketing spot. Patients should go to their doctors with symptoms, and those doctors—armed with clinical training and knowledge of the patient’s full health profile—should decide whether a drug is even necessary.
Many issues could be better addressed through lifestyle changes, diet, supplements, or preventative care. But instead, America has normalized a pill-for-everything culture, supercharged by the fact that doctors are often nudged by patients demanding whatever drug they saw advertised last night during a commercial break.
This isn’t just bad medicine—it’s dangerous. And it’s no accident.
Big Pharma isn’t spending billions on advertising because it cares about your health. It’s doing it because the return on investment is enormous. Studies estimate the ROI on direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug ads ranges from 100% to 500%, depending on the drug. In 2025 alone, pharmaceutical companies are projected to spend over $5 billion on national linear TV ads, according to iSpot.tv. That number balloons even higher when you include digital and streaming. Just a handful of blockbuster drugs—like Skyrizi, Jardiance, and Ozempic—are burning through tens of millions in TV ads every month.
This revenue isn’t just padding Big Pharma’s pockets—it’s quietly buying influence in the media. Nearly 31% of ad minutes on major nightly news broadcasts in 2024 came from pharmaceutical brands. That means a huge portion of media budgets depend on the very companies they should be holding accountable. And surprise, surprise: when Big Pharma misleads the public, many news outlets are either silent or hesitant to report critically. The financial conflict of interest is baked in.
We saw the worst-case version of this during the COVID-19 pandemic. The novel mRNA shots—rushed to market under emergency use—were sold to the public as miracle solutions. Government officials and media outlets claimed these vaccines would “stop infection,” “prevent death entirely,” and “end the pandemic.” Younger, healthy individuals were told they needed them for everyone’s safety, despite already low statistical risk. None of these claims held up. As the data evolved, we learned the vaccines offered some reduction in severe disease, but not sterilizing immunity. Yet the media rarely corrected course.
Why would they? Pharma ads were paying the bills. Meanwhile, federal workers were mandated—and many private sector employees coerced—into getting injections under false pretenses. Billions of dollars flowed to Big Pharma. The American public was misled.
This pattern of deception is not new. Pfizer alone has paid billions in legal penalties over the years for unethical marketing, off-label promotion, and other violations. The most infamous: a $2.3 billion settlement in 2009—the largest health care fraud settlement in U.S. history at the time. Yet companies like Pfizer, AbbVie, and Johnson & Johnson still enjoy a polished image on TV, thanks in part to relentless ad spending and regulatory leniency.
RFK Jr.’s plan, while legally uphill, is not without precedent. In 1970, President Nixon signed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, which banned tobacco ads from TV and radio. Cigarettes were legal, yet too dangerous to promote on air. The same principle should apply here. Just because a drug is FDA-approved doesn’t mean it should be marketed like soda. Approval doesn’t equal infallibility—just ask anyone who took Vioxx or OxyContin.
Critics, including the Wall Street Journal, have framed RFK’s proposal as a personal vendetta. That’s both lazy and misleading. In reality, there’s wide bipartisan and public support for reining in pharma ads. The American Medical Association called for a ban back in 2015. A STAT/Harvard poll found that 57% of Americans support banning TV drug ads. Even hosts on CNBC—hardly anti-business—agreed the ads are unnecessary. “Don’t you think doctors should prescribe it if you need it?” asked Joe Kernen. Exactly.
The pharmaceutical industry’s defenders like to invoke the First Amendment, claiming that banning ads would be unconstitutional. But commercial speech does not enjoy absolute protection. Under the Central Hudson test, the government can regulate ads if it has a substantial interest, the regulation directly advances that interest, and the restriction is narrowly tailored. Protecting public health from misleading pharmaceutical marketing clears all three hurdles. Even if a full ban doesn’t survive, tighter restrictions—like banning ads for certain drug classes, or requiring full price transparency—could pass muster.
More importantly, even the threat of a ban could pressure drugmakers to change course voluntarily. They did it before in 2008, when criticism led to updated self-regulatory guidelines. If Kennedy’s push forces them to rethink their practices, that alone is a win.
Pharma companies will no doubt fight this tooth and nail. But that’s not a reason to back down—it’s a reason to press harder. We’ve allowed an industry with an immense profit motive to shape our health decisions for too long. The result? A country drowning in prescriptions, mired in chronic disease, and confused about who to trust.
Enough is enough. RFK Jr.’s proposal to kick drug ads off TV isn’t radical—it’s responsible. And it’s long overdue.
Four Missing US Army Troops In Lithuania Found Dead: NATO
An unusual and alrming headline is emerging out Europe, as a major search was underway since yesterday for four US Army soldiers who had gone missing in Lithuania. The Associated Press in a breaking headline is now reporting they are dead:
NATO CHIEF SAYS 4 MISSING US SOLDIERS WERE KILLED: AP
The incident of the missing personnel and military search operation was first reported by Lithuanian public broadcaster LRT and subsequently picked up in European media. They first disappeared on Tuesday, along with a military vehicle, and belonged to the US Army’s 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division.
“A possible scene has now been identified, and a search and rescue operation is underway,” the Lithuanian military said in a statement hours prior to the announcement of their deaths.
The troops had been undergoing tactical training at the time the went missing. According to The Guardian:
The Lithuanian public broadcaster LRT reported that four US soldiers and a vehicle were reported missing on Tuesday afternoon during an exercise at the General Silvestras Žukauskas training ground in Pabradė, a town located less than 10km (6 miles) from the border with Belarus.
The Belarus angle and the proximity of the border could be alarming, given the US essentially considers it an ‘enemy’ state given its support to the Russian side of the Ukraine war.
“A search operation is currently under way, involving military personnel, rescue services, and firefighters. Lithuanian police also have launched an investigation,” US state-funded RFERL writes. According to further statements and details:
Lithuanian officials have given few details, with Gintautas Ciunis, a military spokesman, confirming only that “these are foreign soldiers.”
US Army Europe and Africa on March 26 confirmed that the soldiers had gone missing, saying in a statement that they were “conducting scheduled tactical training at the time of the incident.”
“I would like to personally thank the Lithuanian Armed Forces and first responders who quickly came to our aid in our search operations,” said Lt. Gen. Charles Costanza, the V Corps commanding general.
US intelligence agencies have reaffirmed that there’s no evidence Iran is developing nuclear weapons or that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has reversed his 2003 fatwah that banned the production of weapons of mass destruction.
“The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003,” Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
Gabbard’s comments were based on the annual threat assessment, which is released by the ODNI with input from all US intelligence agencies. The report did note that there have been more calls inside Iran to reverse the ban on nuclear weapons, which have grown in response to Israeli aggression in the region.
“In the past year, there has been an erosion of a decades-long taboo on discussing nuclear weapons in public that has emboldened nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision-making apparatus,” the report reads.
“Khamenei remains the final decision maker over Iran’s nuclear program, to include any decision to develop nuclear weapons,” it notes.
The threat assessment comes amid increasing US sanctions and threats of military action over Iran’s nuclear program. Iranian officials have rejected the idea of talks with the US in the face of President Trump’s “maximum pressure campaign,” but have said the door is open for indirect negotiations.
The hype over Iran’s nuclear program revolves around the enrichment of some uranium at 60%, the highest level Iran has achieved but still lower than the 90% needed for weapons-grade. Iran first took the step to enrich at 60% in response to a 2021 Israeli sabotage attack against its Natanz nuclear facility, which was meant to sabotage talks between the Biden administration and Tehran.
Iran is still a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has told the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it won’t enrich uranium beyond the 60% level.
Still, more of this alarmism is coming out…
BREAKING: “Iran has reduced the time required to produce sufficient weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear device from 10-15 days to presumably less than one week.” — U.S. STRATCOM
Amid increasing US and Israeli threats about its nuclear program, Iran has recently pointed out that Israel has a secret nuclear weapons stockpile, and its nuclear program is not subject to IAEA inspections since Israel is not a signatory to the NPT.
Nintendo Shares Jump After Goldman Sees Switch 2 Unlocking Dormant Users
Nintendo shares in Tokyo posted their biggest gain in months after Goldman analysts Minami Munakata and Haruki Kubota resumed coverage of 11 Japanese companies in the games, entertainment, and internet sector. The analysts noted that “the global games market re-entered a growth phase since 2024” and forecasted “the number of active consoles to continue renewing fresh highs globally from 2025.”
Munakata expects the near-term rollout of Nintendo Switch 2 (the successor to the Nintendo Switch) will “unlock dormant hardware and dormant users” and send “the number of active consoles to continue to renew record highs.”
“Nintendo plans to launch the Switch 2 in 2025, with details due to be announced on April 2,” the analyst said, adding the reason for increased demand for Switch 2 is because of its “unique feature” that allows “and friends to play games together in person either as a home console or as a portable console.”
Tune in tomorrow, March 27th, at 7 a.m. PT for a livestreamed #NintendoDirect, featuring around 30 minutes of upcoming games for Nintendo Switch. There will be no updates about Nintendo Switch 2 during this presentation.
10 best-selling Nintendo Switch first-party titles as of Dec 2024
Munakata also pointed out that the global games industry entered into a growth phase in 2024:
Munakata reinstated coverage of Nintendo with a buy rating and a 12-month price target of ¥13,600, representing a 26% upside from Tuesday’s close. Shares in Tokyo closed up 5%.
It all comes down to console growth—which is the main reason why Munakata is bullish on gaming stocks, including both platform providers and publishers:
Among game platformers, we recommend Sony Group (Buy), which has unique entertainment drivers such as anime streaming platform Crunchyroll in addition to its games business, and Nintendo (Buy), for which we expect a further expansion of the active user base after the launch of the Switch 2. We see scope for valuations at both to rise as the market prices in their robust fundamentals amid a supportive games market environment.
Among game publishers, we are Buy-rated on Bandai Namco, Capcom and Konami as beneficiaries of the favorable market environment for console + PC games, and are Sell-rated on Square Enix and Nexon, for which we consider valuations stretched amid our outlook for earnings momentum to slow.
We are Neutral on Oriental Land, which operates physical entertainment businesses, and on three internet sector stocks (Recruit Holdings, CyberAgent and LY Corp) in light of the market climate and limited upside/fair valuation.
Separately, the release of Rockstar’s Grand Theft Auto VI later this year is expected to provide additional tailwinds for the gaming industry, which had been stuck in a rut for years but appears to have entered a renewed growth trajectory in 2024.
Fuller Signal Chat Is Published As Dems Call For Hegseth, Waltz To Resign
The Atlantic has published the fuller chat thread from the Signal group that journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was ‘inadvertently’ included in. This comes after the top Trump officials involved denied that they shared secret “attack plans” in an unsecure, unclassified setting. The President has downplayed it, defending both national security adviser Mike Walz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, has called for both Hegseth Waltz to either resign or be fired from their top national security posts.
“When the stakes are this high, incompetence is not an option,” Warner wrote on social media Tuesday. “Pete Hegseth should resign. Mike Waltz should resign.”
And in a a letter to President Trump, House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries has urged Hegseth’s termination, calling him “unqualified” and a national security risk.
“The so-called secretary of defense recklessly and casually disclosed highly sensitive war plans — including the timing of a pending attack, possible strike targets and the weapons to be used — during an unclassified national security group chat that inexplicably included a reporter,” Jeffries wrote. “His behavior shocks the conscience, risked American lives and likely violated the law.”
The newly published messages were sent on March 15 and purport to be from an account identified as Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Amid the ongoing controversy, Golberg and The Atlantic are seeking to present a ‘smoking gun’ of sorts.
The messages include times of strikes and the types of aircraft being used in attacks on Yemen’s Houthis, who have for many months been sending drone and missiles against Red Sea shipping, including American warships and even at times a carrier.
The Atlantic wrote as part of the Wednesday release of the fuller messages, “There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared.”
The magazine further stated, “If this text had been received by someone hostile to American interests – or someone merely indiscreet, and with access to social media – the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what was meant to be a surprise attack on their strongholds. The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic.”
Below is a key message from the Signal group, seen among top national security officials as well as Jeffrey Goldberg:
This Signal message shows that the U.S. secretary of defense texted a group that included a phone number unknown to him—Goldberg’s cellphone—at 11:44 a.m. This was 31 minutes before the first U.S. warplanes launched, and two hours and one minute before the beginning of a period in which a primary target, the Houthi “Target Terrorist,” was expected to be killed by these American aircraft. If this text had been received by someone hostile to American interests—or someone merely indiscreet, and with access to social media—the Houthis would have had time to prepare for what was meant to be a surprise attack on their strongholds. The consequences for American pilots could have been catastrophic.
The Hegseth text then continued:
“1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)”
“1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier ‘Trigger Based’ targets)”
I’m not going to pretend to care whether the US Govt is ably hiding its secrets — a journalist’s job is to unearth them, not help hide them — but if Goldberg had published all of this before Yemen bombing began, would the Trump WH have said: “no problem; it’s not classified?” https://t.co/UHaMxn21qr
And more from the ‘debrief’ portion or aftermath of what was apparently the first round of strikes:
At 1:48 p.m., Waltz sent the following text, containing real-time intelligence about conditions at an attack site, apparently in Sanaa: “VP. Building collapsed. Had multiple positive ID. Pete, Kurilla, the IC, amazing job.” Waltz was referring here to Hegseth; General Michael E. Kurilla, the commander of Central Command; and the intelligence community, or IC. The reference to “multiple positive ID” suggests that U.S. intelligence had ascertained the identities of the Houthi target, or targets, using either human or technical assets.
Six minutes later, the vice president, apparently confused by Waltz’s message, wrote, “What?”
At 2 p.m., Waltz responded: “Typing too fast. The first target – their top missile guy – we had positive ID of him walking into his girlfriend’s building and it’s now collapsed.”
Vance responded a minute later: “Excellent.” Thirty-five minutes after that, Ratcliffe, the CIA director, wrote, “A good start,” which Waltz followed with a text containing a fist emoji, an American-flag emoji, and a fire emoji. The Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry reported that at least 53 people were killed in the strikes, a number that has not been independently verified.
Fresh reaction from Vice President JD Vance:
It’s very clear Goldberg oversold what he had. But one thing in particular really stands out.
Remember when he was attacking Ratcliffe for blowing the cover for a CIA agent? Turns out Ratcliffe was simply naming his chief of staff. https://t.co/BUGbX6gZDZ
The Atlantic, after coming under attack from people within the US administration, has urged, “People should see the texts in order to reach their own conclusions.”
* * *
But this is ultimately the bigger issue which very few are talking about, as Washington embarks on more military adventurism in the Middle East…
The most “DC” thing ever is to reflexively twist the Signal chat story into a scandal over “classified information” and “OPSEC,” rather than a scandal over a military operation that was launched on highly dubious pretenses by people such as Hegseth, who is clearly frothing for a war to command, and communicates his desires in the most simple-minded cliches. Nobody ever applies consistent principles to the retention or transmission of “classified information,” and pretending to care about the sacrosanct nature of such information above all else is just standard DC pablum.
Never again tell me that this was an emergency that required immediate military action without congressional authorization. pic.twitter.com/G2v43h1X9E
The most telling thing in the whole fiasco were the emojis. War is just a game to these people. A spectator sport.
“Kill a bunch of kids? Who cares. They shouldn’t have been born in a country that pisses us off.” https://t.co/fDDqy0iWFj
WTI Tops $70 – 3-Week Highs – After Across-The-Board Inventory Draws
Oil prices are higher this morning (with WTI topping $70 for the first time in three weeks) following an across the board inventory draw reported by API overnight. Additionally, concerns over supply strained by U.S. sanctions on Iran and Venezuela are also supporting the commodity.
“Although the immediate market impact might be minimal, apart from supporting additional short covering from underinvested hedge funds, this action indicates a definite change, potentially signalling the White House’s willingness to sacrifice low oil prices to achieve wider strategic objectives-isolating Iran and Venezuela and increasing pressure on China,” Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank, noted.
The upside for oil prices from the U.S. actions is likely limited by coming supply additions as OPEC+ will begin to return 2.2-million barrels per day of production cuts in 18 monthly tranches starting in April, while supply from countries outside of the cartel are also on the rise.
Will this morning’s official data confirm the API drawdowns…
API
Crude -4.60mm (-2.50mm exp)
Cushing -600k
Gasoline -3.3mm
Distillates -1.3mm
DOE
Crude -3.34mm (-2.50mm exp) – biggest draw since Dec 2024
Cushing -755k
Gasoline -1.45mm
Distillates -421k
The official data confirmed API”s report – with drawdowns across all cohorts with crude stocks dropping most since mid-December…
Source: Bloomberg
Despite the 286k barrel addition to the SPR, total crude inventories still tumbled notably…
Source: Bloomberg
US Crude production pushed back near record highs as drill-baby-drill prompts a pick up in rig counts…
Source: Bloomberg
Is Trump cracking down on Iran and Venezuela to make more room for US production?
Trump cracking down on Venezuela and Iran oil production (~5MM bpd) while backchanneling with Saudis/UAE to allow OPEC+ to boost overall output in April, and leaving some space for US producers. https://t.co/flVwSmEUKr
WTI topped $70 for the first time in three weeks ahead of the DOE data…
Energy appears to be attracting investors fleeing the problem areas of the market, like tech and consumer discretionary stocks.
Being the “best house on a bad block” can lead to outperformance, but in this case it looks fleeting.
The main stocks still tend to trade with oil prices, which look shaky. Starting next month, OPEC and its allies will start to restore some production that they had been holding off the market to boost prices. Even Goldman Sachs, which has been steadily bullish about oil prices, is less upbeat.
With “recession risks rising and elevated spare capacity, medium term risks to our price forecast remain to the downside,” wrote analyst Callum Bryce.
As discussions over who said what over Signal swirled among US politicians and journalists — on Signal — US consumer inflation expectations leaped to 6.2% y-o-y, which is hardly the anchored level the Fed keeps telling us is the signal they are receiving. Worse, prices paid in the Philly Fed services survey hit 36, the highest since November 2023, with a plunge in activity to -32.5, the lowest since May 2020 in Covid lockdown. In other words, sinking like an anchor. As is a lot else.
The US insists a Russia-Ukraine Black Sea ceasefire has been agreed, lifting restrictions on Russian agri and fertiliser exports in response, even as Russia says it first wants the full lifting of sanctions on its banks in SWIFT, which would require EU approval. If that’s forthcoming, where does it leave EU statecraft: buying Russian gas again, or –sarcasm– Russian weapons? If Europe says no, what if the US is even more incentivized to just leave and leave Europe the bill, as we saw from that Signal chat? Worse, reports also have US intel saying Russia and Ukraine may prefer a longer war to a quick settlement unsatisfying to either; the US also still sees a risk that Russia may resort to nuclear weapons. In which case, it’s on Europe again.
One point that didn’t get enough emphasis in the “make Europe pay for the Houthis” hoo-ha was that EU strategic autonomy is about more than just guns for Ukraine: it also needs a blue-water navy equal to its global trade ambitions. As we’d warned in our recent report on EU economic statecraft, even the 1.5% of GDP fiscal space for defence spending just agreed isn’t enough if geopolitics isn’t helpful, e.g., requiring an EU Army, Airforce, and Navy all at once.
The US has this military statecraft power, and there’s been a bomber build-up in Diego Garcia, a base for past strikes on the Middle East, which looks more than needed for the Houthis. That doesn’t leave much to the imagination in terms of potential targets. What does is if this is the Ukraine-for-Iran ‘Noxin’ strategy or just a deliberate US signal to Tehran. Relatedly, local word is the US remains deadly serious about a Saudi-Israel peace deal, and soon, and has conveyed that re: time limits on new fighting in Gaza.
VP Vance is also going to visit a US military base in Greenland on Friday, following his wife’s tourism lead, which some local politicians call “aggressive.” Given Greenland’s small population and military, if enough White House staff visit, and stay, the power balance there would already be tipped. The signalling here should be clear too.
In US economic statecraft, we are waiting to see if the 25% additional tariff on those who buy oil from Venezuela is implemented next week. It’s hard to prove this is happening given such oil is blended offshore to disguise its origins, but the customers are known. Indeed, the US can still choose to add 25% on China on top of the recent 10% + 10% and the pre-existing 25% in places because it says it’s buying Venezuelan oil – and the statecraft messages will be clear: 1) “China”; 2) Monroe Doctrine; 3) “Energy dominance.”
Meanwhile, more market attention is on US trade actions versus Canada and Mexico, despite our latest global strategy piece, “Fortress America”, arguing the headline-grabbing statements we are getting there could actually be about China if one thinks about strategically.
Also note the US just added around 70 Chinese entities to its export control blacklist to prevent them helping Chinese AI and military development.
Moreover, the White House nominated an ex-navy staunch advocate for rebuilding the US merchant marine to lead the US Maritime Administration MARAD, suggesting more impetus towards US shipbuilding despite industry complaints about the USTR’s proposed port fees on Chinese-built and operated ships, and quotas for carrying US exports on US-flagged, crewed, and built vessels. (More USTR feedback sessions will be held on that today.)
On things fiscal:
President Trump signed an Executive Order enabling the Treasury to modernize its payments systems to reduce waste, fraud and abuse (and another making US election day just that). Naturally, both will end up in court.
Australia’s budget has just seen pre-election tax cuts and populist spending increases, such as more energy rebates; and no sign of any economic statecraft telling us what its GDP is *for*, other than ‘trying to win an election’. Aussie monthly CPI today was slightly weaker than expected at 2.4% y-o-y headline and 2.7% trimmed mean, which despite being way above the Reserve Bank’s 2% target, and against an expansionary budget, and signs of rising global inflation, and looming tariffs, naturally had some cock-a-hoop at the idea of, you guessed it, “Rate cuts!”. After all, what is any national GDP for if not its property market?
The UK will today have a gloomy Spring Budget Statement filled with austerity, because “the world has changed.” Yes – largely towards military Keynesianism elsewhere, if not in the UK for all the recent Churchillian narratives. (And, meanwhile, an apparently existential UK-EU defence agreement is being held by over French demands over fishing rights in UK waters. It smells fishy, but it’s apparently true.)
Summing things up, HSBC says “globalization as we knew it is over”, news to those thinking asset prices go as high as smoothly as they used. Showing politics and markets as we knew them are certainly over too in some respects, the Trump family are offering a stablecoin backed by US Treasuries to go with their meme coins backed by their surname.
“From 2009 to 2017, I served first as deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs and then as US trade representative. During that time, I consistently warned my Chinese counterparts that the benign international environment that had enabled China’s success would disappear unless Beijing modified its predatory economic policies. Instead, China largely maintained its course of action. If anything, it doubled down on its approach… Without any semblance of reciprocity, the relationship deteriorated…Washington may have forged the open, liberal rules-based order, but China has defined its next phase: protectionism, subsidization, restrictions on FDI, and industrial policy. To argue that the US must reassert its leadership to preserve the rules-based system it established is to miss the point. China’s nationalist state capitalism now dominates the international economic order. Washington is already living in Beijing’s world… Washington having failed to convince Beijing to change its predatory economic policies or to move forward with an alternative trading bloc to counterbalance China, was left with one option:the US had to become more like China.”
However, Branko Milanovic in this week’s ‘What comes after globalisation?’ qualifies as follows: in the US, the emerging statecraft pattern is domestic neoliberalism and external mercantilism, while in China the model is domestic mercantilism and external neoliberalism.
What is Europe’s proposed path then?So far, the signals aren’t clear even as the potential noises over its head are. Muddling through piecemeal style without a conceptual grand macro strategy, or a military one, is hardly ideal. Things may have to change much more than people think.
