Turkey descent into full-blown banana republic status continued on Sunday morning, when the country’s police formally arrested President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s main political rival, a decision that will trigger even more market turmoil and protests across the country. Ekrem Imamoglu, Istanbul’s mayor, was jailed on corruption charges days after being detained by police; he was also officially suspended as mayor of Istanbul, sparking an unprecedented political crisis in Turkey which may urgently require another fake coup by Erdogan as he slowly loses control.

The case – which the “Democratic” western media would be screaming about… if only it didn’t involve the second largest army in NATO – has the potential to keep Imamoglu, who denies the charges, behind bars for years and prevent him from running against Erdogan in the next elections. He is the most prominent person to be ensnared in a recent wave of detentions and investigations against opposition figures.

WATCH moment Turkish police spray angry protesters with pepper spray after boos ring out

Arrested Istanbul mayor wants MORE protests in country https://t.co/wULT2xgJKo pic.twitter.com/94X6d9UST7

— RT (@RT_com) March 23, 2025

Imamoglu’s detention on Wednesday came a day after authorities revoked his university diploma, which Turks need to run for the highest political office. The Istanbul court hearing the allegations on Sunday decided against a formal arrest on separate terror charges, but Imamoglu will remain in jail over the corruption probe.

Protests against the arrest of Istanbul mayor Imamoglu are escalating all over the country

In Bursa, police and protestors are engaging in mutual violence https://t.co/emS5SUGwZj pic.twitter.com/kfKFhnyWEa

— RT (@RT_com) March 23, 2025

Imamoglu was scheduled to be declared his party’s candidate on Sunday for the next presidential vote, scheduled for 2028. The cancellation of his university degree and decision by Turkish authorities to put him behind bars leave his political future unclear.

“We’ll together remove this black stain put on our democracy,” Imamoglu said in a statement shortly after his arrest. “I stand tall, I will never bow.”

He repeated the popular campaign slogan he used in municipal elections: “All will be good.”

His arrest suggests that Turkish authorities won’t be deterred by mass protests that have broken out in cities including Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. Erdogan and his officials have accused the main opposition party of trying to sow chaos by calling people onto the streets. Of course, the opposition party wouldn’t be trying to sow chaos if its leaders hadnt’ been arrested.

WATCH moment Turkish police spray angry protesters with pepper spray after boos ring out

Arrested Istanbul mayor wants MORE protests in country https://t.co/wULT2xgJKo pic.twitter.com/94X6d9UST7

— RT (@RT_com) March 23, 2025

The 54-year-old mayor’s popularity has risen nationally since 2019, when he defeated Erdogan’s handpicked candidate in local elections. He repeated his success at the ballot box against another Erdogan ally last year, helping the main opposition Republican People’s Party, known as the CHP, inflict an unprecedented defeat on Erdogan’s AK Party.

The arrest will surely trigger a renewed selloff of Turkish assets, which cratered last week and saw the lira plunge to a now record low. The country’s stocks and currency experienced the biggest drops globally while the government’s local-currency bond yields surged. That was despite state lenders selling at least $9 billion to try to calm markets.

In an attempt to contain the collapse, Turkey’s central bank unexpectedly hiked a key overnight lending interest rate in an unscheduled meeting on Thursday. It convened executives from the nation’s top lenders on Sunday in another attempt to stem the fallout, Bloomberg reported citing people with direct knowledge of the matter.

Likely making matters even worse, the Turkish markets regulators has officially banned short-selling. Which, as we have seen in practice literally dozens of times across various moments of crisis… has never actually done anything to stop a market’s descent (and in fact often makes matters worse).

Erdogan, who had long championed low interest rates to boost economic growth, swallowed his pride and brought back former ally Mehmet Simsek as finance minister. Simsek, who used to be a Merrill Lynch bond strategist, oversaw a period in which the central bank raised interest rates to 50%, the highest since Erdogan began ruling Turkey in 2003, and kept them there long enough to attract billions of dollars of inflows from foreign investors.

Inflation, still as high as 75% last May, was finally showing signs of slowing after years of hyperinflation pushed many Turks into poverty and pushed them away from Erdogan’s ruling party.

While some of Erdogan’s critics say he’s simply trying to weaken the opposition, a charge the government has denied, saying that Imamoglu’s detention has nothing to do with the president or his party others argue Erdogan is using the shifts in the global balance of power to maximize his gains at home: he has a good rapport with Trump, who he hopes to visit at the White House next month, and enjoys close ties with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. More importantly, Turkey’s expanding military footprint makes Erdogan a key power broker in regional conflicts from Ukraine to Syria, and a useful ally for the European Union as the bloc frets about a possible US retreat.

The Turks taking to the streets over the past four days have defied various bans on protests. Istanbul’s governor placed restrictions on travel into and out of the city to stop the rallies from spreading.

Turkish authorities also immediately demanded that X bans over 700 accounts amid the unrest, to which Musk’s company responded, the demand is “unlawful” adding that the company “will always defend freedom of speech”.

For now Erdogan, the main focus of the anti-government protesters’ ire, appears unfazed. As was the case in 2013 during months of anti-government protests that began in Istanbul and spread throughout much of Turkey, the president has gradually become more confrontational.

“It’s a dead-end street,” Erdogan said after the main opposition party called on followers to organize mass protests. “The days when street terror set the direction for politics is now in the past, just like the old Turkey.”

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In his new role as head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin has proposed changes that would fundamentally alter government regulation of America’s energy and transportation industries—if the changes can survive legal challenges from environmental groups. 

On March 12, Zeldin announced what he called “31 historic actions in the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history.”

“We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S., and more,” Zeldin said in an official statement. 

These changes, he said, would “roll back trillions in regulatory costs and hidden ‘taxes’ on U.S. families” and make it “more affordable to purchase a car, heat homes, and operate a business.”

The announcement sparked both applause and condemnation.

“The EPA’s recent deregulatory shift reflects a philosophy of regulatory humility and away from Washington micromanagement,” Sarah Montalbano, energy and environmental policy expert at the Center for the American Experiment, told The Epoch Times. “The EPA is reconsidering unworkable greenhouse gas regulations on power plants.

“This rule would have forced reliable coal plants to retire and impeded new natural gas plant construction unless they capture 90 percent of their emissions by 2032. It’s great news for utilities and American consumers that reliable generation like coal and natural gas can stay on the table and avert devastating blackouts.”

Environmental groups saw it differently.

“Mr. Zeldin seems to have lost sight of the mission of the Environmental Protection Agency,” Jason Rylander, legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, told The Epoch Times. “EPA’s job is to protect the environment and public health, not to promote American industry. 

“EPA’s rules already reflect a balance that more than takes into account the interests of America’s automakers, power plants, and manufacturers.”

The Endangerment Finding

Of all the changes that Zeldin has proposed regarding EPA regulation, “the greatest one by far is the ‘Endangerment Finding,’” Dan Kish, policy expert at the Institute for Energy Research, told The Epoch Times. “It’s the entire premise of the regulation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant, which is the underpinning of everything that the government has targeted” regarding climate action, he said.

This concerns whether or not carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) can be regulated as a pollutant under the 1970 Clean Air Act.

In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that GHGs, including CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, and others, were pollutants that the EPA had the authority to regulate under the Clean Air Act. In 2009, during the Obama administration, the EPA relied on this ruling to implement its “Endangerment Finding,” which declared that current and projected concentrations of GHGs “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations” by causing global warming. 

This provided the foundation for the EPA, the Energy Department, and other federal agencies to impose climate-related regulations over auto emissions; power plant emissions; airline emissions; the production of oil, gas, and coal; and other GHG-emitting industries.

Environmental groups now say that any moves by Zeldin to reverse the classification of GHGs as pollutants will face lawsuits in court.

“Instead of protecting communities reeling from the havoc caused by climate disasters, Trump and Zeldin seek to shatter the foundation that undergirds our climate safeguards,” Joanne Spalding, legal director at the Sierra Club, stated on the environmental organization’s website. “Sierra Club has been expecting and preparing for this unlawful action, and we will use every legal means available to challenge it.”

Legal challenges would likely go through the District of Columbia Circuit Court, according to Steve Milloy, senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environment Legal Institute and a critic of many climate-related policies.

“There’s some probability, if not a likelihood, that the D.C. Circuit will try to stop the Trump EPA,” Milloy told The Epoch Times, noting, however, that he expects the Supreme Court will likely side with the Trump administration upon appeal.

“Federal courts have a policy in effect that they don’t review science; they defer to the agencies. But now that Chevron has gone away, that deference will be gone.”

Key Supreme Court Rulings

In a 1984 case, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the Supreme Court ruled that federal agencies had broad leeway to interpret the mandates given to them by Congress. This became known as “Chevron deference,” and set a precedent for courts deferring to agencies regarding the extent of their authority and the content of their regulations.

But a 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturned Chevron deference and limited agency authority to what was specifically granted to them by Congress. 

In addition, in a 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court referenced what is called the “major questions doctrine,” which states that for issues of major significance to the American public, authorization from Congress for an agency to act must be explicit.

“Under this body of law, known as the major questions doctrine, given both separation of powers principles and a practical understanding of legislative intent, the agency must point to ‘clear congressional authorization’ for the authority it claims,” the majority opinion stated. 

“There’s no doubt that preservationist activist groups will challenge [Zeldin’s] changes, and I’d need a crystal ball to see how it will shake out,” Montalbano said. “Recent Supreme Court decisions like 2022 West Virginia v. EPA will be a likely avenue for the administration to argue that the EPA was never granted ‘clear congressional authorization’ to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act.”

These recent court decisions will likely put a stronger burden on lawsuits against Zeldin’s EPA, both to convince the courts that Congress authorized the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions and to provide a compelling scientific case that CO2 is causing harm. 

What Does the Science Say?

Experts have differing opinions on whether science will support Zeldin’s point of view.

“Mr. Zeldin is going to have a very hard time reversing the Endangerment Finding,” Rylander said. “Since EPA first found that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases contribute to climate change and harm public health, the science has only gotten stronger.

“EPA would have to refute an overwhelming scientific consensus and reject the government’s own findings across multiple presidential administrations to reverse the finding. Courts are going to find that about-face arbitrary and capricious.”

Read the rest here…

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

More than 530,000 immigrants who entered the United States under the former Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program will have their legal status revoked late next month, according to a notice by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on March 21.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem stated in the notice that the department will end the two-year parole program, known as CHNV program, launched in 2022 by then-President Joe Biden to allow entry of people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, who had U.S. sponsors.

Noem said that DHS will revoke the parole status of those immigrants on April 24, or within 30 days of the notice’s publication in the Federal Register. The notice is scheduled for formal publication on March 25.

“Parolees without a lawful basis to remain in the United States following this termination of the CHNV parole programs must depart the United States before their parole termination date,” she stated.

The notice states that Noem may terminate parole if she determines that “neither urgent humanitarian reasons nor significant public benefit warrants the continued presence of the alien in the United States” or when “the purpose for which it was authorized has been accomplished.”

Biden launched the CHNV parole program for Venezuelans in October 2022 to reduce illegal border crossings by flying eligible immigrants directly to the United States. It was expanded in January 2023 to include immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua.

The program allows up to 30,000 immigrants from the four countries into the United States each month, provided they meet certain conditions, including having a sponsor in the United States who will provide them financial support.

According to the DHS notice, about 532,000 immigrants have been allowed entry into the country under the CHNV parole program since 2022, but it remains unclear how many still hold valid parole status.

In August 2024, the Biden administration paused the parole program after authorities discovered fraudulent information in thousands of application forms filed by sponsors.

An internal report by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) uncovered sponsors using fake Social Security numbers, Social Security numbers of dead people, and false phone numbers.

Later that year, the Biden administration barred CHNV parole recipients from extending their legal status but continued accepting new applications for the parole program.

After taking office on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed several executive actions to deter and prevent illegal immigration, including increasing deportations and terminating the CBP One app service, which was established by the Biden administration to allow those without legal entry papers to schedule appointments at U.S. ports of entry.

Following Trump’s order, acting DHS secretary Benjamine Huffman issued a directive to end “the broad abuse of humanitarian parole” and phase out any parole programs that do not align with Trump’s policy.

“The Biden-Harris Administration abused the humanitarian parole program to indiscriminately allow 1.5 million migrants to enter our country,” Huffman stated on Jan. 21. “This was all stopped on day one of the Trump Administration.”

Karen Tumlin, founder and director at Justice Action Center (JAC), a nonprofit organization advocating immigrant rights, called the Trump administration’s move to end the CHNV program “reckless” and “cruel.”

Tumlin said in a statement that the DHS’s sudden revocation of the legal status of CHNV parole recipients could cause “needless chaos and heartbreak for families and communities across the country.”

“Justice Action Center will continue to stand alongside beneficiaries and their sponsors to protect humanitarian parole in court, where we will defend humanitarian parole on Monday at 11 a.m. in Boston,” Tumlin said.

JAC is representing a group of beneficiaries, sponsors, and the Haitian Bridge Alliance in a lawsuit filed against the Trump administration on Feb. 28, challenging the termination of the humanitarian parole program and efforts to halt all pending applications.

Renewed conflicts are popping off in Gaza, in Yemen, and possibly next in Lebanon once again. US Central Command has this month restarted air raids against Houthi positions in Yemen, having launched at least three successive waves of attacks last week, in operations which soon after were dubbed ‘continuing’.

Now the Pentagon is beefing up the Navy’s warship presence in the region. The Associated Press has reported that “Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a rare move, is beefing up the Navy warship presence in the Middle East, ordering two aircraft carriers to be there next month as the US increases strikes on the Yemen-based Houthi rebels, according to a US official.”

Typically there is only one carrier in the region, with two signifying a much greater war-readiness. As part of the move Hegseth signed orders to keep the USS Harry S. Truman in the Middle East for an additional month.

This despite the Houthis (Ansarallah movement) seeking to target the carrier as it traverses the Red Sea and regional waters. The Pentagon has yet to ever say that the carrier has been hit, or been close to getting struck – though the Houthis have claimed some five attempted recent drone and missile attacks on it.

“And Hegseth has ordered the USS Carl Vinson, which has been operating in the Pacific, to begin steaming toward the Middle East, which will extend its scheduled deployment by three months,” the AP report continues.

“The Vinson is expected to arrive in the region early next month. It had been conducting exercises with Japanese and South Korean forces near the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan and was slated to head home to port in San Diego in three weeks,” it adds.

This new carrier show of force in the Middle East region came within days of President Trump freshly warning that the Houthis will be completely annihilated if they don’t immediately halt their drone and missile attacks in the Red Sea, and also as CENTCOM confirmed it is engaged in “continuous operations against Iran-back Houthi terrorists.”

Below is a map showing the current distribution of US naval assets around the globe, courtesy of Stratfor.

Trump’s warning on Truth Social had continued, “Tremendous damage has been inflicted upon the Houthi barbarians, and watch how it will get progressively worse — It’s not even a fair fight, and never will be. They will be completely annihilated!”

Yet the Houthis have vowed they will not back down. According to an earlier Houthi statement in response to American military action:

“After engaging with our armed forces, US aircraft carrier retreated as far as 1,300 km north of the Red Sea,” Ansarallah leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi said on Monday.

“We are confronting US aggression by targeting its aircraft carrier, warships, and naval vessels, with greater escalation options if it persists. If the situation and responsibility require us to take a bigger step or bigger action, we will not hesitate, and we are ready for this option,” Houthi said during a televised speech.

The Defense Minister in the Ansarallah-led National Salvation Government, Major General Mohammed al-Atifi, also confirmed that the YAF “[is] ready to develop the confrontation in a manner commensurate with the scale of the challenge and any emergency.”

“The naval battle against the Israeli enemy, following its violation of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza, is not like before,” Atifi said.

🚨🇺🇸SECOND U.S. AIRCRAFT CARRIER SENT AS MIDDLE EAST ERUPTS

The Pentagon is sending the USS Carl Vinson to join the Harry S. Truman in the Middle East, boosting firepower as war spreads beyond Gaza.

Trump says the Houthis will be “completely annihilated” and warned Iran of… https://t.co/8EhW119Bym pic.twitter.com/S1uCpX31TI

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 22, 2025

One question for Americans which remains is: where’s Congress? One regional Mideast publication has observed there’s a growing divide in Trump’s base over the Yemen response – ‘Discordant’ How Trump’s attacks on the Houthis split his Republican base.

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

Worry More About “Certainty” than “Uncertainty”

Uncertainty seemed to be the word of the week on Wall Street. Uncertainty this. Uncertainty that. Everywhere you turned, it was about uncertainty.

We should be more worried about certainty than uncertainty.

Uncertainty seemed to give courage to the bulls, who seem to claim that everyone is bearish, yet I see little evidence of that (we will tackle that at the end of today’s report).

April 2nd is now being designated as Liberation Day.

Presumably, we will get “certainty” on Liberation Day of what the U.S. tariff strategy is, and then markets can “rally” as we will now have “certainty” and a plan.

As much as that would be nice if true, there are a LOT of reasons to doubt that “certainty” will be a good thing. It reminds me very much of trading through the GFC and the European Debt Crisis. The market would focus on an issue. The government (or central bank) would finally get around to addressing that issue or concern. Yet, the relief rally, if any, would be muted since the market had already moved on to the next issue.

If Liberation Day gets watered down, I can be more aggressive on taking risk, but for now, the “certainty” of what we get may force us to really think through it, and I suspect many will start leaning towards more downside risk to markets even if the plans work out over time (which I think, is a big IF).

We Already Have Some Evidence that the Plan Isn’t Well Thought Out

There are many things we could point to, but let’s just take a look at tariffs with Canada and Mexico.
The tariffs were going to be 25% across the board, but tariffs on energy were only 10% (makes some sense, though if you subtract Canada’s energy exports to the U.S. from the total, Canada is a net importer from the U.S., but we can ignore that).

• Almost immediately, there was a carve out for the auto industry. Anyone with any scant bit of knowledge about the North American auto industry could have foreseen that. Yet the government didn’t.
• Shortly after, the exemption was for anything USMCA compliant. Since this was a reasonably newly signed deal and one signed by the current president, it seems logical that this exemption would make sense. Why wasn’t it caught?
• The USDA Expediting $10 Billion in Direct Economic Assistance to Agricultural Producers. I missed this announcement on March 18th. The stated rationale, by Secretary Rollins, is that “Producers are facing higher costs and market uncertainty.” What is the cost? As one example, out of many possibilities, let’s look at potash. Using Grok (since it seems most likely to be aligned/used by the administration) it turns out that the U.S. imports about 90% of its potash, with 85% to 90% of that coming from Canada.
  • Is this aid just circular? The farmers pay the government tariffs (yes, the importer does pay the tariff) and then the money works its way through the system and gets paid back to the farmers via this aid? But wasn’t the point of tariffs to raise money? Wasn’t the point of DOGE to cut government spending? Not saying any of this is wrong, but it does seem like there could have been better planning around this.
  • How much potash is available in the U.S.? No idea, and no idea what cost it comes at. With 25% tariffs, will it be better to find it domestically? Maybe, maybe not. Domestic sources certainly won’t be ready for this year, and will it even be ready (if feasible) by next year? This will be another theme/concern that plays out regularly today. Could some come cheaper from Ukraine? Presumably, but I have no idea who their potash is contracted to (though maybe existing contracts may get overridden by the minerals deal once signed?). Also, I have to wonder how it gets transported here efficiently, at the best of times, let alone when the entire world might be scrambling to change supply chains?

We know in theory what the tariffs are supposed to do, but in the early, simplest round, it is far from clear that they worked. To me, at least, there is evidence that they haven’t been planned out as well as they could have been. See last weekend’s section on Steel.

Short Staffed, 100 vs 1, on 3 Fronts

The president has been able to get his secretaries confirmed at a good clip. Yet many undersecretaries are yet to be confirmed, and it is unclear whether all of the staff positions have been filled. As good of a job as this administration has done at getting up to speed, they are still a bit understaffed and have many who are just getting familiar with their roles, and the tools at their disposal. Normally this is not an issue, as administrations ease into their first 100 days, but that is not the case here.

With Reciprocal Tariffs, there is some element of “negotiation” at work. But every country we are targeting presumably has a team to analyze the tariffs they impose and any that the U.S. imposes. In a one versus one negotiation I’d have complete confidence that we understood the tariffs, what mattered, and what didn’t, as well as the other side. Heck, if the U.S. was negotiating with 3 or 4 countries, I’d expect the U.S. to have as much insight into the existing scenarios as the other countries. But every country on earth? The risk that countries “give” concessions on things that don’t really help the U.S. (things the U.S. doesn’t make, or doesn’t make for that market, or even with tariffs, isn’t really competitive) is high. And vice versa. There is a lot of talk out of D.C. about holding cards, but you need to at least look at the cards and it might be very difficult when playing 100 hands simultaneously.

The 3 fronts as I see them are:

• Peace/War. Syria. Iran/Israel and the proxies. Russia and Ukraine. I won’t address these today as we’ve covered them quite a bit at Academy Securities, but they do take time away from senior government officials and are impacting how the world sees the U.S.
• DOGE. We all know what DOGE is intended to do, but how it is playing out is somewhat curious. We will examine this later today as it is a key part of our overall concern.
• Tariffs. We’ve already hit on this, but will come back for more.

Price Levels, not Inflation, Matter

While we all talk about inflation, and the Fed (and even the administration) seems to think very academically about the subject (rate of change), I don’t think that is how it plays out in the real world. We can talk about “inflation” from tariffs as being “transitory,” and that is correct, but the changes to price levels will be anything but transitory. A bunch of economists quietly celebrating the transitory nature of tariffs may well be missing the point, and that could be making them overly optimistic about the economy.

Keeping the Current Tax Rates is NOT a Tax Cut

If the administration fails to keep the existing tax code from sunsetting. that will be a tax HIKE. Extending is not the same as a tax cut for the economy. No one is out there spending less today because they are worried that their take home pay next year might decline. That might happen if it looks like the extension won’t occur.

A big part of the need to get the deficit down and to extend the tax rules in place is only to keep the status quo.

I think this is incredibly important when thinking about the deficit and the economy.

The Middle Class is not the Stock Market

The administration has been very consistent on their messaging. If you wrote it as a computer program it would look something like this.

1. Make the Middle Class Great Again.
2. Tariffs to encourage manufacturing to return to the U.S. and to raise revenue.
3. If 1 has been achieved go to step 5.
4. If 1 has not been achieved go to step 2.
5. Celebrate.

Nowhere is there a “check the S&P 500 level” before going back to step 2. The messaging seems clear to me:

• We believe our policies will work.
• If they don’t work initially, they will eventually work.
• If they don’t eventually work, then we didn’t do enough.

I have absolutely no problem with their goal and support it wholeheartedly!

My problem is that while I still see some possibility of the policies working as advertised, I’m increasingly seeing paths to a much worse outcome.

DOGE, Immigration, and Jobs

We labelled this “front” as DOGE, but it might be easier to think of DOGE, Immigration, and Jobs on one level.

• The Federal government is firing people. The number remains a bit of a mystery, but this is occurring.
• Immigration is down and presumably some illegal immigrants have left or are not working in the same capacity as they were before.

I find it difficult to believe that many of the government workers will fill jobs that had been filled by illegal migrants. The skill sets don’t match very well.

So, one thing that will weigh on the economy is that in this job market, many of those let go may have difficulty in finding new jobs easily with similar pay in the same geographic location.

Having jobs freed up because people not eligible to work in the U.S. have left seems in line with the goals of this administration.

But who will fill those jobs?

• Probably not people getting laid off from “white collar” jobs.
• Can we get the labor participation rate higher? It hovered above 66% from 2000 until the GFC. Only after the GFC did is start declining, but it was above 63% coming into COVID. It is currently just 62.4% so there is room to get people back into the labor force.
  • Do you entice them with higher wages? Presumably, these jobs would have been available to citizens or those here legally, but people chose not to fill those jobs. So, the “carrot” would be higher wages, increasing inflation.
  • Do you “force” people into the job market by cutting benefits? The “stick” side of the equation would be to slash benefits because it seems likely that there are some people who choose benefits over work. By reducing benefits, it would force people back to work. That would be very much in line with the efforts by DOGE.

These jobs, with a combination of tactics, might get filled with little inflation pressure. There is likely to be some, but part of the bargain of creating a strong middle class is to not provide as much support to those who could work but aren’t.

Having said all that, it doesn’t really create new jobs, it just changes who is getting the jobs, so there won’t be a lot of new spending, just different people spending. Which tells me that if the economy is going to benefit, it is from the reduced government spending side that lets the administration fund other projects (like tax cuts).

Any way I cut it, I see weakness for the economy in the coming months and I don’t think that we see any benefits unless we can really change taxes with the savings, and we can get actual tax cuts rather than just extensions.

Housing Gluts!

Housing gluts! I don’t think that is a term that has been in a macro report in a long time. But there seems to be some evidence that the number of listings are increasing dramatically in some areas, even to pre-Covid levels. The FRED database (courtesy of the St. Louis Fed) has a lot of data on home listings. The link I included is to Florida, which is now higher than pre-Covid, rising from 35,000 available 3 years ago, to almost 170,000. If you spend any time on social media you can see any number of locations that seem to be “for sale.” We discussed this in Where the Economy is Headed.

There are likely a lot of factors at work here, but it does seem likely that the changes in immigration rules and enforcement could be one of those factors.

I’m torn on what this means:

• On the one hand, more affordable housing would ease the burden for many families.
• On the other hand, for many families, their biggest asset is their home’s appreciation, and that might be problematic for the economy.
• I suspect that there were a number of “buy to rent” type of properties out there (based on where inventory is increasing the most) which might then hurt the pocket of investors who were involved, but overall, it will benefit the communities as affordable housing helps.

Again, I haven’t got a strong opinion on this, but it is a new dynamic, and one we need to digest.

Tariffs

Here is why I’m increasingly nervous (terrified) about the tariffs:

• It is far from clear that we have a coordinated plan to maximize the benefits without hurting the economy (see the early examples).
• It will disrupt global supply chains, hurting everyone. With over 1/3 of the S&P 500 earnings coming from overseas, there is a risk purely on the economic side.
• I don’t see evidence of excess capacity in the U.S. Whether it was steel last weekend, or any other product we wind up discussing, there is very little evidence that there is a lot of excess capacity that can get turned on. For big things, the timeframe is years not months, to build out manufacturing at scale in the U.S. Anything that has a hope of being competitive will need to be done at scale and will require a lot of resources (including advanced robotics). These are not done quickly. It will take a leap of faith by even the most aggressive companies to spend massively in the U.S. based on tariffs – especially if the global economy is shaky. Jobs will be created during the build out, if that occurs, which would be good.
  • This might be the lynchpin of my concern with the government plan. If we see rapid efforts to build plants, those jobs alone could get us through the hump (along with the tariff income), but I think neither the global economy, nor the domestic economy will warrant that. It would help on the regulatory front (in particular, but also on many fronts) to get Congress to pass legislation rather than relying so heavily on executive orders.
• This is all predicated on the American Brand not being materially damaged. I highly recommend reading last weekend’s When Jeans Were a Symbol of Freedom. This is likely another area where I differ from the bulls. I think the brand has been damaged and that has consequences in terms the of buying of American brands and Capital flows into America. I doubt the EU implements the Anti-Coercion Instrument but it might give a taste of what is to come.

According to Grok, global GDP was $110 trillion in 2024 – which lines up with World Bank estimates. US GDP is almost $30 trillion and far bigger than any other country. But the administration doesn’t seem to be picking a fight with any one country, it seems to be going against them all. That is a risk.

Domestic Politics

I’m loath to bring this up, but domestic politics are likely to play a role in the success of these programs. If there was bipartisan support to get the U.S. through the difficult times (that even those who fully believe the strategies will work admit to), then seeing a positive outcome would be easier. There will be much dissent as the politicians continue to divide and much of the country is divided. While the electoral college win was large, many key states came down to the wire, so we will also have to watch how public support plays out, from those “middle” voters who went Republican in the last election. While there may not be a Trump Put for the stock market, there might be one on the political popularity side.

Again, much of this comes down to the “how” and not the “what,” but this time around the “how” may really affect the “what” (which it didn’t really do during Trump 1.0).

Remembering Japan

I remember growing up being worried about Japan “dominating the world” – at least economically. Their brands were soaring in popularity. Car brands that you had never heard of suddenly were all over the road. Allegedly better quality at a lower price.

Their TVs were everywhere (I believe that TV glass is still priced in YEN, despite the fact that the manufacturing of TVs is heavily dominated by China and South Korea now).

What the heck happened to Japan?

I’m not as bearish as this graph implies, but it deserves at least a moment of your time.

Did anyone wake up on January 1st, 1990, thinking – it is over for Japan?

Was it obvious at the time that the market would fall 60% in 2.5 years? Sure, there were some big bounces, but the declines were quite ugly and relentless. Would anyone have bet on January 1, 1990, that it would take over 30 years to recoup the losses?

Maybe it was “obvious” in hindsight, but I suspect not.

So here we are, trying to change the world order in supply chains, and domestic government spending, in a short time and we have no fear that we are overstating our power and ability?

I’m not lying awake at night thinking about this, there are plenty of other things keeping me awake at night, but it does crop up in my mind periodically.

U.S. Stocks So Oversold!

I’m not sure how to make the title of this section ooze with sarcasm, so I will just run with it.

We were at an all-time, like highest level ever, as recently as February 19th. The S&P 500 is down 5.7% in a month and 3.5% year to date.

Check out the shares outstanding of these funds

We chose to start at August 31st, as there was enough time for the Democratic Convention in Chicago’s “halo” effect to wear off.

• VOO – is a $620 billion S&P 500 ETF. Steady like a rock in terms of inflows (the recent spike likely due to annual contributions to 401k accounts as it is less of a trading vehicle than others).
• SPY – a $585 billion S&P 500 ETF has barely budged in terms of share count.
• QQQ – a $301 billion Nasdaq 100 ETF has seen some small outflows, but pretty negligible and still more shares outstanding than before the election.
• TQQQ – a $21 billion 3x Nasdaq 100 ETF has seen inflows surge. I do have to give the “degens” who trade TQQQ (I use the term affectionately) credit for selling out during the rally, but they are showing the exact opposite of capitulation. People seem to want to mock this fund, despite it controlling $63 billion of Nasdaq 100 risk in a risky form, while celebrating the potential for pension fund rebalancing, which is a similar size. Just because something is weird and quirky, doesn’t mean it isn’t useful.

I understand all the hopes for a big rally and some of the rationale, but it seems like a lot of people are long risk “because everyone else is short risk” when the evidence that everyone else is short or underweight isn’t as compelling as I’d like to see.

Bottom Line

Too Much, Too Fast, Too Poorly Planned.

I guess I could have saved you a lot of time and just written that for today’s T-Report (though I hope walking through what is behind that synopsis is helpful).

I’m now bearish on global risk. I won’t be as bearish on the U.S. because I’m being convinced by so many people that we are due for a big bounce, but I think for now, risky assets across the globe are likely to suffer (though I still lean long China as they seem poised to benefit from the disruption in global supply chains). Probably a different story if China was targeted by itself, but that’s not what we’ve got so far.

Difficult to hate rates here, when I’m this bearish on the economy, but given my concern about global capital flows and the ability to drive the deficits down by finding purely wasteful spending or increased income from tariffs, I cannot love the 10-year at 4.25% either. I still think the range is 4.1% to 4.5%.

Maybe everyone will love the “certainty” when we get the Liberation Day announcement (though I expect we will see hints dropped all week on Truth Social), but I think we should be careful what we wish for.

When we transition from speculating what could happen, to figuring out the likely consequences of what happened, I expect another round of selling pressure on equities – likely across the globe.

If Liberation Day gets watered down, I can be more aggressive on taking risk, but for now, the “certainty” of what we get may force us to really think through it, and I suspect many will start leaning towards more downside risk to markets even if the plans work out over time (which I think, is a big IF).

On that positive note, hopefully you are crushing it in your NCAA brackets!  I’m looking forward to this week as we hit Dublin, London, and Paris and should get a good take on their perspectives on what is happening.

The Tesla-focused blog Not a Tesla App reported that following last week’s Q1 2025 All-Hands Meeting, Tesla quietly updated the Cybertruck’s webpage to include a new Sentry Mode feature that plays loud music as a deterrent against unhinged individuals—particularly Democrats—attempting to damage the vehicles.

The new feature appeared on the lower half of Cybertruck’s About page. The text reveals Sentry Mode will soon be able to play loud music when it’s triggered: 

Enable Sentry Mode to monitor your unattended vehicle or trailer, and automatically activate the alarm, increase the touchscreen brightness, and play music at max volume if a threat is detected.

Not a Tesla App provided more color on this new feature set to be rolled out shortly:

This latest change appears to build on that, leveraging the Cybertruck’s Superhorn and external speaker, which can already play music when parked via the Boombox feature. We suspect this feature won’t rely on the internal speakers, as the music would have to be extremely loud in order to be heard outside the car.

And given how loud the Superhorn and external speakers are—powerful enough to function as a proper horn—this could be an effective deterrent for vandals or intruders.

As some users have pointed out, Tesla does have a feature that Sentry Mode will play Bach on the internal speakers if the alarm is triggered while Sentry Mode is activated. It’s not completely clear whether that’s what Tesla was referring to on the new Cybertruck page, but it seems like it could be something different.

The new feature comes as crazed Democrats have targeted Tesla vehicles and firebombed Tesla showrooms, service centers, and Supercharger networks. 

🚨🇺🇸FBI NOW PROBING TESLA ARSON AS TERRORISM

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.

Trump has vowed to treat Tesla vandals as… https://t.co/awbZITbhvF pic.twitter.com/vHCs5TYzgv

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 19, 2025

There have been over a dozen violent attacks on Tesla stores and service centers across the U.S. that include shootings, arson and bombings.

Are we witnessing a rise in trans terrorism?

Subscribe and watch my new video: pic.twitter.com/euOQuqpjMg

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) March 21, 2025

Meet Adam Lansky, who identifies as trans and firebombed a Tesla.

20 years in a MALE prison isn’t going to be the most affirming. He won’t be using the female bathroom in there. pic.twitter.com/zrrDIKOeAJ

— L G B (@L__G__B) March 22, 2025

Anti-Tesla extremist is facing felony charges after allegedly vandalizing a Tesla dealership in Buffalo Grove, Illinois.

Erin L. White goes by “She/They” and is accused of spray painting “F*ck Elon Musk,” and “Trans Rights are Human Rights.”

This domestic t*rr*rism has to stop. pic.twitter.com/bb7JndgRi5

— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) March 17, 2025

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/1i97kbOgKB pic.twitter.com/jwWUKpvxoM

— FBI (@FBI) March 22, 2025

Kash Patel’s FBI must race against time to counter the radical, Soros-funded non-profit Indivisible as it prepares for a multi-city color revolution against Tesla. 

Rogue Soros-Funded NGO Plots Multi-City Assault On Tesla As Domestic Terrorism Escalates https://t.co/fWK6bxZTfg

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 20, 2025

Who had it in their 2025 bingo cards that Democrats would be supporting and facilitating domestic terrorism against an American company? 

Tesla Takedown Organizers Plan Color Revolution To “Kill” Brand & “Death Spiral” For Investors https://t.co/JIf80uPeEt

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 21, 2025

. . . 

Authored by John Carpay via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Bank of Canada has made no secret of its efforts to explore a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), a “digital dollar” issued and controlled by the central bank. The Bank of Canada is not alone. To date, 134 countries and currency unions have explored a CBDC, and 66 countries are already in advanced stages of implementation.

In 2023, cash accounted for a mere 11 percent of total payments made by Canadians. Consumers increasingly tap their credit and debit cards at checkouts, send e-transfers, or use online banking to pay bills, make investments, and donate to charities. For many Canadians, metal coins function less like a currency and more like a locker or shopping cart token; paper bills are for birthday cards, not for “serious” transactions. New legislation in Quebec empowers law enforcement to presume that cash sums of $2,000 or more are the proceeds of unlawful activity.

While most consumers seem to appreciate the convenience of an increasingly digital economy, a CBDC is a radical change from using credit cards and online banking apps. A CBDC would likely lead to a cashless economy, in which all financial transactions can be monitored and controlled by government. A cashless economy would create severe hardship for people who are homeless, technologically illiterate, or without ready access to the internet.

For Canadians who look after their finances electronically, cash remains essential to protect their rights and freedoms, including their privacy, security, and autonomy. In a cashless economy, all transactions are digital, subject to surveillance, and ultimately subject to government control. CBDC opens the door for governments to reward or penalize Canadians for their personal choices on how to live, where to go, and what to do with their own money.

Governments can use CBDC to restrict when, where, and what people are allowed to buy, leading to a level of control resembling communist China’s notorious “social credit” system. China uses “social credit” to reward citizens who support the Communist Party and its rules and policies. Those who criticize the Party can find themselves unable to board a train, plane, or subway, denied a bank loan, or prevented from enrolling their children in the best schools and universities.

Cash means privacy and confidentiality.

If I use cash to pay for gas for my car, then no bank, credit card company, or government will know that I was (for example) at the Shell station on Southland Drive in Calgary at 8:45 a.m. on Monday, March 10, 2025. Nor will anyone know how much I spent on gas that morning (other than the gas station’s staff, who likely won’t know my name). If, three hours later, I use cash to pay for a meal at a restaurant in Edmonton, no corporation or government will know that I travelled from Calgary to Edmonton that morning. I don’t have to be doing anything sinister or illegal in Edmonton to care about my privacy. Why should I be subjected to surveillance simply because I exist?

If a CBDC is imposed and the economy goes cashless, government will know, at all times, about every purchase, sale, investment and donation made by every Canadian. A government, once armed with this knowledge, can exercise stringent and detailed control over many aspects of the life of a citizen.

Many Canadians don’t care about their privacy being violated when banks and credit card companies acquire vast amounts of information about the habits, movements, and preferences of consumers. However, governments are radically different from private corporations. By definition and by their very nature, governments exercise coercive power over citizens. Using coercive power is good when governments enforce Criminal Code prohibitions against murder, theft, and terrorism. However, governments can also use their coercive power to violate human rights, civil liberties, and constitutional freedoms, always on the basis of some nice-sounding pretext. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, hence our constitution is intended to protect citizens from tyranny.

Some argue that we will never see communist Chinese “social credit” in Canada. But it already happened here in February 2022, when the federal government froze the bank accounts of hundreds of Canadians who had not broken any law or committed any crime. These Canadian citizens were punished by the state for having donated money to a peaceful protest movement that was hated by the prime minister of the day. They had no opportunity to challenge, dispute, or appeal the severe penalty which government imposed on them without warning.

Cash alone made it possible for these victimized Canadians to buy groceries, pay their heating bills in winter, and secure other necessities. If Canada’s economy had been cashless in February 2022, the government’s freezing of bank accounts would have inflicted far more harm.

When governments made the new COVID vaccine mandatory in 2021, imposing the penalty of second-class citizenship for non-compliance, governments used QR codes to turn personal, private medical records into quasi-public documents that needed to be shown to complete strangers working at restaurants, gyms, and movie theatres. With this track record of violating the privacy of citizens, why would governments hesitate to control what Canadians spend their money on?

In theory, a CBDC can exist without governments violating human rights and constitutional freedoms. In theory, a CBDC could be designed without programmable restrictions, just like cash is printed without such restrictions. (After all, paper bills don’t spontaneously combust when exchanged for the “wrong” kinds of things.) Likewise, a CBDC could be designed to maximize the privacy and anonymity of users. But in practice, what government (or what politician or bureaucrat) would resist the temptation to use a CBDC as a tool to control citizens? If cash is outlawed and replaced with a CBDC, the government has a powerful tool to exercise ultimate—and very intimate—control over the life of every Canadian.

A digital dollar provides politicians, bureaucrats, and bankers with intimate access to our inner lives. Therefore, a CBDC poses a grave threat to Charter rights and freedoms. It’s up to Canadians to make CBDC an issue in the coming election. Voters should urge their MPs and their provincial representatives to pass laws that protect cash and the right to use it.

John Carpay, B.A., LL.B. is President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which has released a new report that explains CBDC’s potential impact on Canadians’ rights and freedoms, including privacy, autonomy, security, equality, and access.

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

Immense controversy and backlash has been unleashed in Ukraine after the country’s defense ministry decided to make a fresh recruitment video on TikTok, bizarrely using the ‘lure’ of McDonald’s. The clip appeared this week on the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense’s official channel.

Desperately seeking to gain more young recruits into the army’s depleting ranks, also at a moment that disturbing videos showing conscription officers yanking Ukrainian men off the streets and shoving them into vans are going viral, the new video clip informs Ukrainians how many cheeseburgers they can afford at McDonald’s by joining the fight against Russia.

A man in civilian clothes walks out of a local McDonald’s and poses, “How many cheeseburgers can be bought for 1 million hryvnas ($24,000)?” The man then says that 15,625 burgers can be bought for that amount, and that any person between the ages of 18-24 who signs up for military service can get it. Currently the military is offering “special contracts” for new volunteers, promising the equivalent of $24,000 for a year’s service, with $5,400 paid up front. One commenter on X has quipped, “Imagine getting yourself shot in the trenches for a happy meal.” Watch the controversial and strange video below, with translation and captions:

Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense is now trying to lure 18-24-year-olds with McDonald’s on TikTok.

Imagine getting yourself shot in the trenches for a happy meal…..
😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/EPI9vf4ksK

— Richard (@ricwe123) March 21, 2025

*  *  *

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Justice Department announced Friday that it has opened a criminal investigation into a leak of classified intelligence regarding the Tren de Aragua gang—information that was reported by The New York Times and appears to challenge the legal foundation for President Donald Trump’s recent deportation efforts targeting the violent transnational gang.

In a statement issued March 21, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is investigating what he called the “selective leak of inaccurate, but nevertheless classified” intelligence about Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang that the State Department has designated a foreign terrorist organization.

The gang has become a key focus of Trump’s immigration and national security agenda. On March 15, Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act—a rarely used wartime law—to declare members of Tren de Aragua “alien enemies” invading the United States in coordination with the Venezuelan regime.

The proclamation allows for their immediate arrest and deportation without standard due process protections. However, this move has faced legal challenges and public scrutiny.

The New York Times reported Thursday that a leaked intelligence document dated Feb. 26 challenges the legal basis for Trump’s designation of the criminal group as “alien enemies.”

According to the document, analysts assessed with “moderate confidence” that the gang is not acting under the direction or in coordination with the Venezuelan government—a key assertion in Trump’s proclamation. The Epoch Times has not independently verified the leaked report.

Trump’s proclamation described the group as part of a “hybrid criminal state” conducting a “predatory incursion” into the United States.

Blanche strongly condemned the leak, calling it a politically motivated effort by elements of the “Deep State” to derail Trump’s crackdown on Tren de Aragua’s criminal activities in the United States and his efforts to quickly deport dangerous terrorists.

“We will not tolerate politically motivated efforts by the Deep State to undercut President Trump’s agenda by leaking false information onto the pages of their allies at the New York Times,” Blanche said.

“The Alien Enemies Proclamation is supported by fact, law, and common sense, which we will establish in court and then expel the TDA [Tren de Aragua] terrorists from this country.”

Responding to the DOJ’s launch of an investigation, a New York Times spokesperson defended the newspaper’s reporting, citing the importance of press freedom.

“Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of democracy and critical for citizens to hold their government accountable. Leak investigations are meant to chill communications between journalists and sources, and undermine the ability of a free press to bring out vital information that may otherwise be hidden,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

“Our story raised fundamental questions about whether the American people were getting a straight story about an important national security issue,” the spokesperson continued. “That is precisely what journalists should be doing, no matter which party is in office.”

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced March 21 that 68 Tren de Aragua members had been arrested in less than a week. The agencies credited the arrests to Trump’s designation of the gang as a foreign terrorist organization, enabling a whole-of-government response.

“Tren De Aragua is a terrorist organization whose members are rapists, drug traffickers, and murderers. We will continue to make sure these dirtbags are removed from America’s streets and face justice,” a DHS spokesperson said in a statement.

In the past 100 days, the administration says it has arrested 394 suspected Tren de Aragua members, a gang infamous for brutal crimes including human trafficking, kidnappings, and the murders of nursing student Laken Riley and 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray.

Meanwhile, the FBI announced on March 19 that it is expanding its counterterrorism mission to aggressively target transnational criminal organizations, including Tren de Aragua.

“Border security is essential to protecting our country and providing safer communities for our citizens,” FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement.

“We’re expanding the watchlist to include cartel and gang members from newly designated foreign terrorist organizations. This change will assist our law enforcement and Intelligence Community partners as we all work together toward the goal of crushing violent crime within our borders.”

This shift builds on the State Department’s recent designation of eight major gangs and cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and specially designated global terrorists—including Tren de Aragua. The designations enhance the federal government’s ability to freeze assets, impose financial sanctions, and deny visas to individuals affiliated with these groups.

Failed 2024 Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz was forced to embarrassingly walk back his unhinged comments about rooting for the death of Tesla Motors after realizing that more than a million Minnesota residents held shares of Elon Musk’s technology company through their state-run retirement accounts. 

“This guy bugs me in a way that is probably unhealthy. And um, so, but, but I have to be careful about being a smart ass because I was making a joke … And I said something I probably shouldn’t have about a company,” Minnesota Gov. Walz told the audience at a town hall event in Rochester, Minnesota, on Saturday. 

NEW: Tim Walz says he was totally joking when he celebrated Tesla stock going down, says Elon Musk makes him unhealthy.

The comment came after Walz apparently didn’t realize his own pension plan owns Tesla stock.

“I have to be careful about being a smartass. I was making a… pic.twitter.com/w1QHAYyvco

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) March 23, 2025

Last Wednesday, Walz told Democrats at a town hall in Eau Claire, Wisconsin: “I was saying, on my phone, I know some of you know this, on the iPhone. They’ve got that little stock app. I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day.” 

He excitedly yelled: “$225 and dropping …”

Fox News reporter Bill Melugin found that the state of Minnesota had 1.6 million shares of Tesla in its retirement fund and 211,000 shares of Tesla in its non-retirement fund. 

As Gov. Walz gloats about Tesla stock dropping, records from the Minnesota State Board of Investment show that as of 6/30/24, the state of Minnesota had 1.6 million shares of Tesla in its retirement fund, and 211,000 shares of Tesla in its non-retirement fund. I’ve reached out to… https://t.co/W0EA0cPASS pic.twitter.com/r1obVBpfU7

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) March 19, 2025

Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary appeared on CNN NewsNight shortly after and blasted Walz:

Kevin O’Leary nails it on multiple points here:

1. Anyone who lights a car on fire should go to jail, no exceptions

2. Tim Walz is a moron because Minnesota’s pension plan is backed by Tesla stock pic.twitter.com/x5bEBgIGov

— Nick Adams (@NickAdamsinUSA) March 20, 2025

Perhaps other lawmakers in states controlled by far-left politicians who wish death on Tesla should first check whether their state’s retirement funds hold Tesla stock before attacking the most American-made car company

Meanwhile, leftists have been firebombing Tesla showrooms, service centers, and Supercharger networks as the party aligned with socialism and Marxism implodes into chaos, unleashing revolutionary-style violence against Musk’s Tesla.

DEVELOPING: Video provided to the Review-Journal shows several @Tesla vehicles engulfed in flames after Las Vegas police say they were set on fire by an individual early Tuesday morning.
UPDATES→ https://t.co/sZQr9j1E5A pic.twitter.com/uXeLsdpTVl

— Las Vegas Review-Journal (@reviewjournal) March 18, 2025

At the same time, the Trump administration is racing against the clock to dismantle the command-and-control centers of rogue NGOs plotting a multi-city assault on Tesla.