Authored by David Stockman via the Brownstone Institute,

The following is Chapter One of David Stockman’s latest book, “How to Cut $2 Trillion: A Blueprint From Ronald Reagan’s Budget Cutter to Musk, Ramaswamy and the DOGE Team.”

The DOGE $2 trillion budget savings goal is crucial to the very future of constitutional democracy and capitalist prosperity in America. In fact, the soaring public debt is now so out of control that the Federal budget threatens to become a self-fueling financial doomsday machine.

Recall this sequence.

When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980 on a call to bring the nation’s inflationary budget under control, the public debt was $930 billion and about 30 percent of GDP.

By the time Donald Trump was elected the first time it had erupted to $20 trillion, which has now become $36 trillion and 125 percent of GDP. Moreover, by the end of this decade the Federal fiscal equation will be going supercritical without sweeping budget reductions at the level of the DOGE target. Thus, by FY 2034 the annual baseline deficit according to CBO will total $2.9 trillion and 7 percent of GDP.

Yet even these enormous figures are based on a Rosy Scenario fairy tale. Namely, that Congress will never again adopt another spending increase or tax cut, including the impending $5 trillion extension of the expiring 2017 Trump tax cuts. It also conveniently assumes there will be no recessions, no inflation recurrence, no interest rate flare-ups nor any other economic crises for the remainder of this decade and forever thereafter.

Furthermore, it presumes that these surging red ink totals and soaring debt service expenses would be copacetic in the bond pits just the same. That is, CBO inexplicably projects that 7 percent of GDP deficits and annual interest expense of $1.7 trillion or 4.1 percent of GDP by 2034 would be compatible with a weighted average yield on nearly $60 trillion of public debt of just 3.4 percent.

Yes, and if dogs could whistle the world would be a chorus! Give the average yield just another 250 basis points, however, and now you have $3.1 trillion of annual debt service expense and a $4 trillion annual deficit by 2034. In short, there is a doom-loop building inside the Federal fiscal equation and nothing short of the DOGE target of $2 trillion of annual budget savings by the end of this decade can reverse its explosive materialization in the years beyond.

If sweeping budget retrenchment does not occur soon, in fact, soaring interest expense will ignite a veritable fiscal wildfire. On paper, the public debt would power upward unabated to $150 trillion or 166 percent of GDP by mid-century (2054) under CBO’s current Rosy Scenario projections. Of course, long before the debt actually hits this staggering figure, the whole system would implode. Every remnant of America as we now know it would go down the tubes.

So we need to be clear that the DOGE team of Musk and Ramaswamy must focus on savings of $2 trillion per year commencing relatively soon. That’s because the nation’s fiscal doomsday machine will be accumulating interest expense so fast as to make $2 trillion of savings spread over a longer period–such as a decade–little more than a rounding error. To wit, Federal interest expense has already passed the $1 trillion per year mark, will exceed $2 trillion per year in the early 2030s and would top $7.5 trillion per year at minimum by our calculations by mid-century.

Stated differently, if something drastic is not done now—like a $2 trillion annual budget savings by the end of Donald Trump’s second term—America will be paying more interest on the public debt within 25 years than the entirety of today’s Federal budget. That’s right: Debt service will exceed current outlays for Social Security, defense, Medicare, education, highways, the national parks, Head Start, interest, and the Washington Monument, too.

Obviously, the sprawling Federal government and its prodigious expanse of spending and debt literally defies easy comprehension and graspable solutions. After all, the current annual budget of $7 trillion amounts to Federal spending of nearly $20 billion per day and $830 million per hour. And when you talk about the 10-year budget outlook, comprehension literally fades away completely: The current CBO spending baseline for 2025-2034 amounts to $85 trillion or just shy of the annual GDP of the entirety of planet Earth this year.

So based on experience we suggest that the DOGE team needs to build its $2 trillion case around a target year and several big buckets of savings by broad type. The latter can then be used to fashion a detailed but comprehensible blueprint for arraying and conveying the desperately needed housecleaning of the Federal budget that the DOGE has been tasked with accomplishing.

In that context, FY 2029 makes the most sense as a target year since it would represent the 4th and outgoing Trump budget; and also one which would give sufficient time for phasing in some of the sweeping cuts that will be needed, but not so far in the distant future as to be largely irrelevant to the here and now of fiscal governance during Donald Trump’s second term.

We’d also suggest three big buckets of savings, which we would short-hand as follows:

• Slash the Fat… by eliminating unnecessary and wasteful agencies and bureaucrats wholesale.

• Downsize the Muscle… by curtailing national security capacities and functions that have grown up during the Forever Wars but are not needed for an America First foreign policy.

• Cut the Bone… by reducing low-priority entitlements and subsidies that the nation cannot afford, and which a reasonable view of societal equity does not require.

Needless to say, when it comes to the vast wasteland of the Federal budget there are innumerable ways to skin the cat. But based on our own experience of more than a half-century of familiarity with the Federal budget as both a participant and an informed observer, we judge the following mix to be the most plausible and balanced way to get to the $2 trillion of annual savings by FY 2029.

To be sure, even this relatively judicious mix is sure to ignite firestorms on the banks of the Potomac like never before, but it can be strongly justified and defended for the reasons we will lay out in detail below.

Annual DOGE Savings Targets by Component:

• Slash the Fat: $400 billion or 20 percent.

• Downsize the Muscle: $500 billion or 25 percent.

• Cut the Bone: $1.1 trillion or 55 percent.

Suffice it here to say that the first bucket alone would leave them screaming to high heaven in the swamplands of DC. But even that $400 billion savings could be accomplished only by eliminating 16 agencies entirely, slashing another nine departments by 50 percent, cutting the balance of the nondefense payroll by 34 percent, terminating $40 billion per year worth of wasteful farmer subsidies, cancelling entirely $60 billion per year of energy boondoggles including all EV credits, and eliminating $150 billion per year of all other forms of corporate welfare and subsidies embedded in the budget and tax code.

We will amplify the details of this $400 billion of inherent Federal budget fat and waste in the chapters below. But suffice it here to say that attacking the usual shock effect lists of outrageous studies, stupid foreign aid projects, or even payments to dead people, as is often used to illustrate wasteful spending, will get you barely a fractional decimal point of the savings target, as desirable as eliminating this nonsense might be in its own right.

For instance, a recent “outrageous spending” list showed $4 million was wasted on “Dr. Fauci’s Transgender Monkey Study” and $6 million on a “USAID Fund to Boost Egyptian Tourism,” among countless more absurdities. Still, eliminating these two items would contribute only 0.0005 percent to the $2 trillion savings target.

Even some of the larger ideas of this sort, such as timelier elimination of dead people from the Social Security rolls, would not get you very far, either. To be sure, 1.1 million Social Security recipients pass on to their rewards each year, while departing beneficiaries would be receiving an average benefit currently of $1,907 per month. So one extra month of dead people on the rolls costs the not inconsiderable sum of $2.1 billion.

At the present time, however, not much excess dwell time actually happens. The rolls are purged every month based on newly filed death certificates, and this encompasses the termination of payments to anyone who died during the course of the month, including the last day. So the average duration on the rolls of Social Security decedents is 15 days, which computes to $1.050 billion of payments.

Of course, if the Musk and Ramaswamy team could come up with some more super-duper software to monitor, report, calculate final month benefits and then terminate decedents in real time, it might reduce dwell time by two-thirds. In turn, this means that getting dead people off Social Security 10 days faster would generate a savings of $700 million per year or about 0.04 percent of the $2 trillion target. That is to say, there is undoubtedly room for efficiency improvements and elimination of outright waste and stupidity everywhere in the Federal budget, but it unfortunately adds up to rounding errors.

Stated differently, if it doesn’t “scream and bleed” politically it won’t likely make a dent in achieving the $2 trillion goal. There is just plain nothing antiseptic about slashing the Federal budget.

For instance, even a thundering 50 percent cut in the current nondefense Federal headcounts of 1.343 million would save just $100 billion annually by the target year of 2029. And that’s a comprehensive figure based on the current average cost per Federal employee of $100,000 in pay per year plus $44,000 in average benefits and fringes–-escalated for inflation to $160,000 per bureaucrat by FY 2029.

Accordingly, to reach $2 trillion of annual savings will require a deep dive into the three buckets listed above. In the next five chapters we will lay out the most plausible and judicious route to the $400 billion of “Slash the Fat” savings, followed by the details and an America First rationale for cutting $500 billion per year of unneeded muscle from the national security budget in Chapter 7. Chapter 8 will then delve into $1.1 trillion per year of cuts from the bone of entitlement and domestic welfare that would be needed to reach the $2 trillion DOGE savings target.

But one thing should be clear from the outset. Lists of outrageous anecdotal items provide color about the stupidity and waste that is rampant in the Federal government. But they have nothing whatsoever to do with the fact-based analysis and philosophical U-turns that will actually be required to complete the DOGE mission successfully.

Over 13 million families in the U.S. have two children living at home.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, illustrates the income needed to raise a family of four in each state. GOBankingRates compiled the data as of December 2024.

Methodology: GOBankingRates analyzed 2023 Consumer Expenditure Survey data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to estimate annual living expenses for a family of four across all 50 states. Costs included housing, groceries, utilities, healthcare, and transportation.

Hawaii and Massachusetts at the Top

A six-figure household income is required to raise a family of four in 26 states.

High taxes, strict land-use rules, and shipping costs make Hawaii the priciest state for families. The state is followed by Massachusetts and California at the top of the list.

At the bottom, West Virginia, Alabama, and Mississippi are the cheapest states to raise a family. In comparison, a family in Hawaii ($259,000) needs to earn more than three times what a family in West Virginia ($82,000) needs to raise a family of four.

If you enjoyed this post, be sure to check out this graphic, which shows what the average American household’s monthly budget looks like, including savings, taxes, and all other expenditure.

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump said on Jan. 25 that he wants Egypt, Jordan, and other Arab nations to accept more Palestinian refugees from the Gaza Strip, with the goal of moving out enough of the war-torn area’s population to “just clean [it] out” and create a virtual clean slate of the Palestinian territory.

Trump made the comments during a 20-minute question-and-answer conference with reporters on Air Force One Saturday. He said he lifted former President Joe Biden’s hold on sending 2,000-pound bombs to Israel, which was intended to lower civilian casualties in the Israel–Hamas War, now paused during a fragile cease-fire deal.

Trump said he released the bombs that day, “They’ve been waiting for them for a long time.”

When asked why he lifted the ban, Trump said, “Because they bought” the bombs.

The president has backed Israel for much of his political career. Regarding his goals for Gaza, Trump described a call earlier in the day with Jordan’s King Abdullah II and said he would speak with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi on Sunday.

“I’d like Egypt to take people,” Trump said.

“You’re talking about probably a million and a half people, and we just clean out that whole thing and say, ‘You know, it’s over.’”

During his call with Abdullah, Trump said he complimented Jordan for taking in Palestinian refugees and told the king, “I’d love for you to take on more, cause I’m looking at the whole Gaza Strip right now, and it’s a mess. It’s a real mess.”

The resettling or displacement of Gaza refugees would likely spur pushback from Palestinians, who hold a connection to the region. Trump said the area has experienced “many, many conflicts” for centuries and that resettling could be “temporary or long term.”

“Something has to happen,” the president said. “But it’s literally a demolition site right now. Almost everything’s demolished, and people are dying there.”

“So, I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations, and build housing in a different location, where they can maybe live in peace for a change,” he added.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office did not issue an immediate response to Trump’s remarks.

After his inauguration on Jan. 20, Trump said Gaza has “really got to be rebuilt in a different way.”

”Gaza is interesting. It’s a phenomenal location, on the sea. The best weather, you know, everything is good. It’s like, some beautiful things could be done with it,” he added.

The response from the Hamas terrorist group and its aligned groups was swift, with the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad calling Trump’s idea “deplorable.” The group told AFP that the plan encourages “war crimes and crimes against humanity by forcing our people to leave their land.”

The Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, has fought alongside Hamas and other allied Palestinian groups throughout the Israel-Hamas war. It is the second-largest militant group in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. The U.S. State Department designated it as a terrorist group in 1997.

Bassem Naim of Hamas’s political bureau told AFP that Palestinians would foil those plans, just as they have with other ideas “for displacement and alternative homelands over the decades.”

He added that Gazans would not “accept any offers or solutions, even if their apparent intentions are good under the banner of reconstruction, as proposed by U.S. President Trump.”

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, an opponent of the Gaza truce deal, called Trump’s idea of seeking relocation for Gazans a “great idea.”

“Only out-of-the-box thinking with new solutions will bring a solution of peace and security,” he said.

Trump’s resumption of large bomb deliveries is a break from Biden, who stalled their delivery in May to limit an all-out assault on Rafah, the southern Gaza city. Israel took control of the city a month later after a majority of Rafah’s one million residents that had lived or taken shelter in the city had been removed.

At the time, Biden had also paused 1,700 500-pound bombs that were packaged in the same shipment, but delivered those weeks later.

Trump’s latest move comes amid his celebrations of the first phase of the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. Fighting is paused, and Hamas released some of the hostages it took in return for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisons.

However, negotiations in the cease-fire’s second phase have not yet begun, which would result in all Hamas-held hostages being released.

The Israeli government has threatened to resume its war with Hamas—which began after the terrorist group massacred Israeli civilians on Oct. 7, 2023—if the remaining hostages are not released.

If a president has the power to unilaterally approve and fund DEI programs within the federal government, then any future president also has the power to unilaterally shut those DEI programs down.  This is how executive orders work, but Democrats think when it comes to Donald Trump legal restrictions apply. 

Woke activist politicians are up in arms this week after Trump signed orders effectively shutting down all DEI related offices within the government and placing employees on paid leave pending inevitable pink slips.  The usual suspects including House Minority leader Hakeem Jeffries and Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar held a press conference to voice their outrage over the fast-paced elimination of DEI. 

Jeffries arguments in particular were loaded with fallacies in an attempt to rewrite what Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives actually are.  According to the House Minority Leader, America has always embraced DEI.

Dollar Store Obama is mad DEI is getting packed up by the Trump Administration

pic.twitter.com/CKG3GtfAmG

— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) January 25, 2025

First we have to clarify that DEI is not and never will be America.  It is a communistic policy which places the group over the individual.  Meaning, the merit of the individual is dismissed as irrelevant in favor of diversity hiring for the sake of appearances.  Inevitably, this leads to the discrimination of certain people (namely straight white men and conservatives), because DEI operates on a victimhood totem pole which places certain groups above others depending on their ethnic or sexual status.  

There aren’t enough high level black, indigenous or trans aerospace engineers in the US to fill positions at agencies like NASA.  So, DEI officials hire unqualified or lesser qualified workers by default.

Furthermore, “equity” and “equality” are not the same thing, and Hakeem Jeffries knows this. 

Equality is about equal treatment and equal opportunity.  Under equality, merit still applies. 

Equity is about forcing equality of outcome and giving special treatment to people based on their perceived or fabricated social disadvantages.  Under equity there can be no such thing as merit because the most useless people will always rise to the top based on who can pretend to be the most “oppressed”.     

America has never embraced equity; it is a poisonous ideology that destroys excellence and progress.  America will always strive for equality based on merit.  If you have the chops to do the job at a top level, your skin color or bedroom activities don’t matter.  If you’re lazy, entitled and incompetent, then no amount of victim group status earns you a job.

Ilhan Omar attempted to reinforce the equity claim in her arguments, asserting that the public is “misinformed” about what DEI is and what DEI hiring entails.

Omar seems to assert that DEI is not about hiring people based simply on their diversity.  This is a lie. Regardless of how Democrats gaslight, in practice DEI has always been about hiring people based on their supposed oppression status.  It’s about filling out that perfect inclusion pie chart that leftists venerate so much, and this is done at the expense of skill and experience.  It is also designed to slowly but surely weed out conservatives from government and exclude them from participation. 

Given a choice between a conservative and a woke activist, who is a DEI bureaucrat going to hire first?     

Hakeem Jeffries goes on to threaten an ‘avalanche of righteous litigation’ by Democrats in response to Trump’s DEI shutdowns, claiming that the action is outside of the President’s power and is unconstitutional.  It’s unlikely that such litigation will go far or accomplish much other than to serve as a distraction.  DEI offices are federal creations which means they are subject to presidential executive orders.  There’s nothing Dems can do about it.

Authored by Huw van Steenis via WEForum.org,

• Investors and businesses have an optimistic outlook for the US while pessimism hangs over Europe’s lagging productivity, innovation and competitiveness.

• US banks are capitalizing on strong profits and regulatory adjustments, with billions being freed up for lending, mergers and acquisitions or buybacks.

• Amid more tariffs, policymakers are rethinking how to frame their portfolios and placing much of tech, rare earths and the energy transition under this umbrella.

Rarely have I found the Davos attendees so split in their investment outlooks.

American investors and business leaders were giddy over a possible “Golden Age,” though most were bracing for what promised to be a rollercoaster ride. Meanwhile, Europeans were moping about their economies, red tape and lack of innovation. And the Chinese delegation was the smallest in years.

Conversations revolved around the big challenges investors and corporates are trying to solve right now, from pivots in US policy to the languishing state of Europe and China, artificial intelligence market concentration, the risks of tariffs, what pessimism or optimism had already been priced in or where private markets might head next.

Sitting across 40 private meetings and panels, I better understood the mindset of businesses, investors and policymakers. Here are three of my takeaways.

1. The US vibe shift goes global but will Europe pick up on it?

US exceptionalism has been a driving force in markets for years. The dominant theme at Davos was whether the new administration would amplify this and diverge even more from Europe and Asia.

Meanwhile, US corporates are realigning their priorities fast. Their confidence means they are adding new initiatives whilst they “war room” what the administration’s first moves could mean for them.

However, the realignment also exposes weaknesses in large European markets. The largest European economies appear trapped in a prolonged economic malaise, outpaced by the US in productivity and technological innovation while losing ground to China in manufacturing competitiveness.

The bloc’s economic heavyweights, Germany and France – and in different respects, the UK – grapple with stagnation and mounting debt pressures. That said, much pessimism is already priced into Europe and much optimism in the US.

Every businessperson or investor I met believed that Europe needed a wake-up call on its approach to regulation, preventing it from tapping into private funding sources.

Consider Trump’s announcement this week of Stargate, a massive investment in data centres; as I pointed out in my recent Financial Times op-ed, Europe “straight-jacketed insurers from playing a larger role in financing the real economy via private credit or through buying senior tranches of securitizations.

“US data centre securitisations have totalled $35bn since 2018, according to JPMorgan Chase, while the EU has yet to see its first such transaction.”

So, will Europe roll back regulations? Businesses and investors seemed unconvinced, as the crisis isn’t big enough. That said, Davos can often be a trailing consensus.

In a conversation with Dan Murphy on CNBC, I shared an example from Nicolai Tangen, CEO of Norwegian sovereign wealth fund NBIM, when debating the biggest successes of the last five years – which in the United States is perhaps Space-X chopsticks landing or the launch of ChatGPT.

In Europe, Tangen argued it was the rebuilding of Notre Dame, “Because they were allowed to disregard almost all regulations and rules. It is unbelievable what Europe can achieve if they are allowed to.”

Perhaps US exceptionalism and the new administration will pressure Europe to pivot. But Davos folk fret European policymakers remain out of step with what Sir Niall Ferguson calls the “new global vibe shift.”

2. Banks return as private credit pivots

US banks are back – three of them had pop-up shops on the high street – the most I recall since before the financial crisis.

They are emboldened by a strong 2024 – the second-best profit year ever for the top six US banks – and thrilled that new global banking regulations (the Basel III endgame) may be reframed as “capital neutral,” with no net increase in capital requirements.

Morgan Stanley Research estimates this could free up $86 billion in surplus capital for lending, mergers and acquisitions, or buybacks.

Whether emboldened banks will be better able to fend off private credit was a hot topic this year. Traditional private credit markets are becoming more crowded and are likely to become increasingly picked over by banks as they put more capital to work in large loans for acquisitions.

Some leading private credit players are, therefore, striking out for greener pastures. They are pivoting to become less dependent on mid-market lending and acquisition finance and to become financiers of the huge capital expenditures needed for data centres, energy transition and other hard assets.

One hot debate at Davos was the growing partnerships between insurers and private credit. Such insurance capital is transforming the type of projects private credit can back.

For example, insurers prioritize steady 7-9% returns that align well with the needs of long-duration infrastructure financing. In some ways, this represents a return to an older financing model.

After the Second World War, large insurers financed and even owned transformative infrastructure projects and utilities.

I also observed a profound shift from my conversations about how banks are thinking of working with private credit.

As I wrote last year, “What we are seeing is the re-tranching of the banking system where banks parcel the riskiest slice to private credit, providing less risky lending themselves. Private credit could be the Ozempic to help banks on yet another diet.”

The dieting has now started in earnest.

3. Navigate tariffs via a national security umbrella

Policymakers worldwide are rethinking how they manage the economy. “Modern mercantilism” emphasizes national security, self-reliance and strategic sectors – a painful paradigm shift for many.

Tariffs, the most visible example of this shift and a major topic at Davos, are part of a broader strategy to curb trade deficits, bolster domestic industries and safeguard national champions.

Investors and corporates remain uncertain about how to navigate these changes. Many investors are pricing in “surgical tariffs” over broad-based ones, betting that US inflation concerns will limit sweeping measures, though policymakers and business leaders were less optimistic.

Some investors I met are reshaping portfolios around “national security.” This increasingly includes data centres (given tech’s priority), elements of the energy transition, rare earths (China processes 90% globally), reshoring industrial capacity and defence investments.

While US policymakers may look to “escalate to de-escalate,” keeping supply chains largely global, risks of some breakage and realignment remain real. Expect to hear more about national security-focused portfolios as tariffs and mercantile policies take centre stage.

The rest and the next

As always, at Davos, there were many other topics of discussion. AI was ubiquitous, with CEOs predicting 10-20% productivity gains.

The Ukrainian conflict and whether Russia’s funds should be confiscated for Ukraine’s reconstruction were also hotly debated. While consensus has shifted significantly over the past year, many European policymakers remain in denial about the scale of defence spending likely required.

Otto von Bismarck once said, “If revolution there is to be, let us rather undertake it than undergo it.”

The question for policymakers at Davos is not whether to try to respond to the US vibe shift but how and for investors and corporates to place their bets accordingly.

There is an urgent need to repair national security following four years of globalist control in the White House, which resulted in an illegal alien invasion through the southern border. This prompted President Trump to deploy thousands of US troops to the border last week, including the 101st Airborne Division, also known as the “Screaming Eagles.” 

On Saturday, Fort Campbell soldiers with the 101st Airborne Division were deployed to the southern border, according to a press release from the Army.

“Fort Campbell Soldiers departed today en route to the U.S. southern border, in support of U.S. Northern Command’s mission to protect the territorial integrity of the United States,” the service wrote in a statement. 

Here’s more:

Soldiers assigned to the 716th Military Police Battalion, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) will integrate with military forces already along the border and work together with the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection.

Prior to their departure, the 716th MP element conducted a “patching ceremony,” donning the historic 101st Airborne Div. “Screaming Eagle” patch as part of ongoing Army Structure and force modernization efforts at Fort Campbell.

Lt. Col. Phillip Mason, commander of the 716th Military Police Battalion, wrote in a statement, “We are trained and ready to support this important mission,” adding, “Our Soldiers are committed to protecting all Americans and supporting our civilian partners in defending the territorial integrity of the United States. We’re also proud to mobilize for this mission wearing the Screaming Eagle patch, which has significant relevance to the 716th.”

A soldier heading to the border just sent a message to all Americans.

“I love this country. I’m gonna protect it.”

President Trump has infused a new level of patriotism in our troops in less than one week. pic.twitter.com/NAZpRIvarJ

— George (@BehizyTweets) January 25, 2025

On Monday, Trump declared a national emergency at the southern border through an executive order. By late last week, reports indicated that his administration prepared to deploy at least 10,000 troops.

BREAKING: The United States Marines have arrived at the Southern Border to help stop the illegal immigrant invasion.

1,500 troops, including 500 Marines from Camp Pendleton, were deployed to the US border by the Trump administration.

According to officials, this is likely just… pic.twitter.com/SPbV9wobQw

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 24, 2025

By Tuesday, Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s border czar, confirmed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents launched nationwide large-scale raids targeting criminal illegal aliens, marking a significant shift in immigration policy. He stated that “public safety threats” will be prioritized.

Dear Democrats,

I don’t want to hear jack sh*t from you about ICE raids and mass deportation. For the past 4 years, you stayed silent and allowed the Biden-Harris administration to infest neighborhoods of hard-working Americans and immigrants with rap*sts, gang members, k*llers,… pic.twitter.com/jAqFKfACom

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) January 23, 2025

Then, on Friday, the first military deportation flight of criminal illegal aliens began… 

Recapping the week on the immigration front:

• Trump To Issue Flurry Of Border & Immigration EOs, Along With DEI, Trade, Energy And TikTok

• Trump’s Border Czar: ICE Raids Targeting Criminal Illegal Aliens “Already Started”

• “Just The Beginning”: Trump Plans 10,000 Troops On Border To Restore National Security

• New Flight Data Shows Guatemala Received Trump’s First Jumbo Jet Load Of Illegals

The ‘Trump Effect‘: Migrant encounters at border ports of entry have dramatically declined since Trump took office on Monday. Imagine that—the Biden-Harris regime had the ability all along to slow or stop the migrant invasion but chose not to, suggesting the crisis may have been intentional. The American people must hold the Democratic Party accountable at the ballot box in future elections for years of chaos. 

Bye-Bye… 

NEW: Haitian man says “F*ck Trump, Biden forever,” gets arrested by ICE’s elite Boston unit to be deported.

The ultimate FAFO.

The arrest was part of a Boston raid on the “worst of the worst” criminal illegal aliens, as reported by @BillMelugin_.

“It’s a frigid five degrees in… pic.twitter.com/83XgPMgNlt

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 23, 2025

Democrats’ worst nightmare is unfolding as their future voters—those who violated border laws by illegally entering the US—are being deported en masse. Many of these migrants are unvetted and pose national security risks. The US is a nation of laws, without them, there is no nation, and restoring law and order while securing the border was a very clear mandate given to President Trump by the American people. 

Far-left corporate media, radical leftist billionaire-funded non-profits, and progressive lawmakers still have not figured out the nation’s vibe has drastically shifted to demanding law and order and border security – not Marxist DEI – not the gender game – and no more to wokeism. Make meritocracy great again.

Authored by Chris Power via RealClearPolitics,

The latest spotlight on the crisis in American manufacturing may be on steel, but our nation has traded its manufacturing might for financial gains across all sectors – making the same fateful mistake that has befallen great civilizations throughout history. As a founder, CEO, and advocate for American industrial renewal, who’s building the world’s most advanced, efficient factories to counter China’s chokehold on manufacturing, I can tell you that America has just three years – not 10 – to rebuild our industrial base before falling critically behind.  

The vice president and many of the new administration have demonstrated passion for reindustrializing the country and creating a jobs boom that has not been seen in this country for decades. 

This is not just an economic challenge – it’s a moral imperative to secure our nation’s future while being good stewards of our resources, which include the people of this great country. 

The good news is that American innovation and determination can overcome these challenges. In my own company, we’ve developed systems that can transform someone who’s never set foot in a factory into a highly productive team member in weeks, not years. We pay well, offer equity, and provide meaningful work contributing to national security. This isn’t about replacing American workers with automation – it’s about empowering them with technology to manufacture for America faster and better than ever before, creating new and better jobs along the way. 

Likewise, the Trump administration’s commitment to reindustrialization, American manufacturing and our workforce can begin on Day One. To regain our competitiveness, we need the incoming administration to take four broad steps: 

First, we must dramatically reform our permitting process for strategic manufacturing facilities. While China can build a factory in months, American companies often wait years for permits. This regulatory burden is crushing our ability to rapidly scale the production of critical components. 

Second, we need to level the playing field against China’s predatory practices. This means addressing everything from raw material costs to energy rates to shipping subsidies. These artificial costs squeeze what American companies can pay their workforce.  

When Chinese manufacturers can access materials and energy at a fraction of what American companies pay, we’re not competing on merit – we’re competing against a government-subsidized adversary that has been intentionally de-industrializing the U.S. for 30 years. Americans can compete, but not against the Chinese Communist Party making everything from energy to raw materials free. One hundred billion dollars of currently offshored manufacturing business from American companies sourcing in China could return overnight as a result of a more level playing field, creating a jobs boom unlike anything we’ve seen since the ’40s. 

Third, we must ensure that manufacturers who receive government subsidies or revenue from the Department of Defense (DOD) make their supply chain 100% American. Too many of our tax dollars end up being outsourced to China and other competitive nations for 20% cheaper components from bad supply chain incentives. Tariffs will help, but we need a mandate to “make in America if you want to get paid by American taxpayers!” 

And finally, we need to stop missing crucial opportunities and take big, bold bets on American manufacturing to signal to the CCP that we are serious about any offensive moves in Europe or the Pacific Theatre.  

Take shipbuilding. In 2022, China built 800 commercial ships, while America built just one. Last week, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its independent analysis of the U.S. Navy’s shipbuilding plan, warning that the number of battle force ships will decrease from 295 today to 283 ships in 2027, reducing the fleet’s firepower. Further, CBO predicts that over the next 30 years, “…the nation’s shipyards would need to produce substantially more naval tonnage than they have produced over the past 10 years. The rate of production of nuclear-powered submarines, in particular, would need to increase significantly.” Thankfully, President Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, recognized the urgent need for shipbuilding in his confirmation hearing this month, signaling industrialization as a top priority of the next administration. In short, we need many more ships, and we need to build them now.  

But what did President Biden do? He nixed a Navy proposal called the Shipyard Accountability and Workforce Support (SAWS) initiative that would have allowed U.S. shipbuilders to invest in their workforce and suppliers, stem the rising cost of submarine production through technological innovation, and allow 17 more boats to be built. SAWS achieves this by using taxpayer dollars more effectively without Congress having to appropriate another nickel. 

Instead, Biden asked Congress for nearly $6 billion dollars as a Band-Aid to fix the problem.  

SAWS represents an immediate, comprehensive approach to revitalizing American shipbuilding. On Day One, it will provide wage increases to 45,000 shipyard workers across the nation while smartly using authorities in the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act to fund both these wages and critical, cutting-edge shipyard technologies, helping our major primes and new market entrants build faster, smarter, and more efficiently. Through streamlined processes that will speed up ship and submarine production, along with careful resource management, SAWS is projected to save taxpayers over $20 billion while strengthening our industrial base and has a real chance to both fix our current issues and make a technology-driven manufacturing leap over the CCP ahead of the looming 2027 Pacific timeline. 

In his first week, President Trump can pick up the ball the outgoing administration has dropped and send a signal to the CCP that he will not wait to rebuild American manufacturing strength. President Trump’s nominee for the White House Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought, gets this. In 2020, he backed expanding the Navy. And today, the stakes couldn’t be higher. We have the innovation, the workforce, and the determination to succeed. What we need now is leadership that understands the urgency of our challenge and is willing to take bold action. Working together – government, industry, technology, and the American people – we can restore our God-given right to be the world’s industrial superpower – and ensure that the 21st century remains an American century. 

The time for action, the time to start reindustrializing America, is now. 

Chris Power is founder and CEO of Hadrian, an advanced manufacturing company, and is a co-founder of the New American Industrial Alliance (NAIA).

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

The Trump administration has placed a freeze on many federal health agency communications with the public until at least the end of the month.

In a Jan. 21 memo, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Acting Secretary Dorothy Fink told agency staff officials that an “immediate pause” had been ordered on announcements, press releases, social media posts, regulations, and guidance until those communications were approved by an appointee.

Agencies that are affected include HHS-supervised agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and many others. The pause is in effect through Feb. 1, according to the memo.

The pause announced by Fink includes anything that may be published in the Federal Register, as well as in the CDC’s publication, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, which offers studies and alerts on a range of health-related subject matter. Nothing has been published in the CDC publication since Jan. 16, or four days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Fink said in the memo that some exceptions would be made for communications that affect “critical health, safety, environmental, financial or nation security functions.” However, such statements would have to be reviewed beforehand, she said.

On Jan. 21, the FDA posted notices about warning letters sent to companies. The CDC posted several statements, announcements, and research papers on its website on Jan. 21 and Jan. 22.

Fink, an endocrinologist and career civil servant who had led the HHS Office on Women’s Health, was selected by Trump as his interim HHS secretary on the afternoon of Jan. 20, according to a notice published by the White House. She will remain in that position until Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the president’s choice to lead the agency, is confirmed by the Senate.

Hearings for Kennedy, formerly an independent presidential candidate before dropping out and endorsing Trump last year, will start in the Senate as soon as the paperwork is sent to the upper chamber, a senator from Louisiana confirmed to local media outlets.

“I’m told the paperwork might come today, at which point we can schedule the hearings,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) told the Shreveport Times on Jan. 21.

Long a critic of certain vaccines, Kennedy has endorsed a Trump-related slogan, “Make America Healthy Again,” while Trump said at a pre-election rally in New York City that he would have Kennedy “go wild” on U.S. health agencies. During a conference last year, Kennedy said he wanted to fire 600 people working at the NIH, which oversees vaccine research, and replace them with 600 new hires.

“We need to act fast, and we want to have those people in place on Jan. 20, so that on Jan. 21, 600 people are going to walk into offices at NIH and 600 people are going to leave,” Kennedy said.

To lead the CDC, Trump has chosen former Florida Republican Rep. Dave Weldon, a medical doctor. Trump also selected Johns Hopkins surgeon Marty Makary to lead the FDA.

The Epoch Times contacted the FDA, CDC, and HHS for additional comment on Jan. 22.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey said she supports the arrest of illegal immigrant criminals in her state, but reaffirmed an earlier promise that state police will not help in mass deportation efforts.

The Trump administration has intensified immigration enforcement since taking office, including via a Department of Justice memo that directs federal prosecutors to investigate state and local officials who obstruct federal immigration efforts. The memo raises questions about whether the U.S. attorney for Massachusetts could prosecute local officials who refuse to comply with the president’s orders.

When asked at a Wednesday press conference if she was concerned about the DOJ memo, Healey said she “has no reason to be concerned.”

“We’re not a sanctuary state,” she said, adding that she’s not planning to get in the way of federal immigration agents doing their jobs.

Eight Massachusetts cities, including Boston and Cambridge, have proclaimed sanctuary status, which include local laws to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement to shield illegal immigrants from deportation.

That said…

Immediately following Trump’s reelection, Healey pledged that Massachusetts State Police would “absolutely not” assist the administration with its promised mass deportation efforts. That pledge still stands, she said, noting there is a difference between “civil immigration enforcement” and addressing crimes committed by those in the country illegally.

“When it comes to criminal activity, alleged criminal activity, or the apprehension of those who have committed crimes—whether they are people from Massachusetts or people who come to Massachusetts, cooperation by my administration through the state police, by others in local law enforcement, will continue with our federal authorities,” she told the reporter.

“We want to make sure that we’re always supportive of law enforcement when it comes to investigating, prosecuting, pursuing, holding accountable, and—in the event you’re talking about a person who is undocumented—the removal, the deportation of that individual.”

On Thursday, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell issued a joint statement with her counterparts from 12 other states, condemning the DOJ directive as unconstitutional for trying to compel states to enforce federal laws.

The attorneys general said they will uphold laws of their own states and won’t be “distracted by the president’s mass deportation agenda.” They also said they will challenge any prosecutions of local officials.

“The President has made troubling threats to weaponize the U.S. Department of Justice’s prosecutorial authority and resources to attack public servants acting in compliance with their state laws, interfering with their ability to build trust with the communities they serve and protect,” the statement said.

Amid the legal debate, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been swift in executing the administration’s agenda, prioritizing illegal immigrants with criminal records. In a span of two days, the agency has arrested more than 1,000 illegal immigrants across the country, including in self-proclaimed “sanctuary cities” such as New York and Boston.

One high-profile arrest in Boston involved 25-year-old Wisteguens Jean Quely Charles, whom ICE identified as a member of a Haitian street gang with 17 criminal convictions.

According to ICE Boston, Charles entered the United States legally in 2013, but later “violated the terms of his lawful admission.” His convictions include multiple drug, weapons, and assault and battery crimes.

The US Army’s 3rd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division, recently tested General Motors Defense’s Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV), built on the chassis of a Chevrolet Colorado truck, in the snowy Bavarian mountains of Germany. 

GM Defense’s mobility solutions team designed the ISV with commercial off-the-shelf parts. ISV is based on the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 midsize truck platform, using a 2.8L Duramax turbo-diesel engine with an advanced 12-module battery pack. 

“The testing occurred during the annual Combined Resolve 25-1 exercise, where the Army’s 3rd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division, maneuvered the vehicle across various operational scenarios, demonstrating its adaptability and effectiveness in challenging terrains,” Interesting Engineering wrote in a note, adding, “The trial emphasized ISV’s capabilities in advanced reconnaissance missions, which are crucial for troops to collect and transmit vital battlefield intelligence, especially in adverse conditions.” 

During #CombinedResolve, the U.S. Army is implementing its Transformation in Contact initiative, utilizing new technologies and systems designed to enhance its warfighting readiness and ability to respond to crisis or conflict.#ThisIsUSAREURAF #TiC #TransformationInContact pic.twitter.com/dI84f3g0tt

— U.S. Army Europe and Africa (@USArmyEURAF) January 22, 2025

In 2021, the Army selected the ISV to enhance its operational capabilities. The ISV incorporates 90% commercial off-the-shelf parts and is designed to carry nine infantrymen. The vehicle’s adaptability for air transportability allows it to be deployed via military aircraft, including C-130 to UH-60 Blackhawk. 

By 2024, the ISV completed trials with the United Arab Emirates Armed Forces, testing the vehicle’s offroad capabilities in a 1,250-mile journey across highways, dunes, soft sand tracks, and rocky walls while carrying maximum payload capacities. 

The Army has replaced some of its aging Humvees with the newer Joint Light Tactical Vehicles. Still, the service aims for a smaller vehicle—larger than the Polaris MRZR but similar in size to the Humvee.

The ISV is the big brother to the ultra-light Polaris MRZR that Special Forces have used for years. MRZRs and aging Humvees are occasionally auctioned off on Gov Planet for civilians to purchase. 

A defense firm has recently introduced a complete armor package for the Tesla Cybertruck. 

We wonder what Tier 1 operators think of these new high-tech vehicles with massive lithium battery packs.