Beneath city streets and suburban neighborhoods, a vast network of pipes and wastewater treatment systems is reaching the end of its life. This subterranean infrastructure is already suffering tens of thousands of failures per year, while exposing millions of Americans to contamination risks.
Utilities, plumbing experts, and environmentalists warn that the scope of the problem has expanded rapidly in recent years. As of 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated that $630 billion in wastewater infrastructure investment would be needed to repair and replace deteriorating systems. At the same time, extreme weather events and growing populations were putting additional strain on America’s aging pipes.
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in its 2025 report card, gave U.S. wastewater infrastructure a D-plus, which the group largely attributed to a lack of funding to meet the needs of communities with failing systems.
Meanwhile, average utility prices for wastewater consumers increased from $35 per month to nearly $65 per month between 2010 and 2020, ASCE researchers found. Even still, they said, rising utility prices aren’t “keeping pace with the growing costs for utilities to provide routine operation and maintenance.”
Paradoxically, as household water and sewer bills increased more than 24 percent between 2020 and 2025, wastewater infrastructure renewal and replacement rates for large-scale projects actually decreased over the past decade, from 3 percent to 2 percent, according to the ASCE analysis.
The scope of the problem becomes clearer when considering the sheer volume of sanitary sewer overflows. As of April 2025, the EPA estimated there were between 23,000 and 75,000 overflow incidents per year, and that didn’t include sewage that backed up into buildings or residential homes.
Some of the reasons for these spills included blockages, line breaks, design defects, and overloaded treatment systems.
A spokesperson for the EPA told The Epoch Times that the agency is “committed to accelerating investments in water infrastructure by stewarding federal funding appropriated by Congress.”
Recent funding highlights from 2025 include the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, which committed $13 billion for infrastructure improvements in communities across the nation, according to the EPA spokesperson.
When asked about the staggering volume of sewer overflows per year, the agency representative emphasized the value and importance of this network.
“EPA estimates that our nation’s sewers are worth a total of more than $1 trillion,“ the representative said. ”The collection system of a single large municipality is an asset worth billions of dollars and that of a smaller city could cost many millions to replace.
“Ongoing maintenance and rehabilitation can add value to the original investment by maintaining the system’s capacity and extending its life. The costs of rehabilitation and other measures to correct [sanitary sewer overflows] can vary widely by community size and sewer system type.”
The United States’ wastewater pipe network is a part of the national infrastructure that has been neglected for years and suffers “chronic underinvestment,” according to the Association of State Floodplain Managers.
The country has roughly 800,000 miles of sewer pipes, according to ASCE’s 2021 report card. For perspective, the National Highway System only covers an estimated 164,000 miles, according to the Department of Transportation.
Within that sprawling web, the average age of sewer pipes is around 45 years, ASCE’s 2021 report found. But in some American cities, sewer systems date back a century or more: in the city of St. Louis, for example, some sewer lines were built in Civil War days. And parts of Philadelphia’s working sewer system date back to 1800, Municipal Sewer and Water reported in 2025.
“Wastewater treatment systems are meant to act as a barrier to disease both for public health and environment,“ Laura Underwood, director of digital water solutions for Locus Technologies, told The Epoch Times. ”If you have overflows or failures, these events can release pathogens into waterways and increase the risk of gastrointestinal illnesses, skin infections, and contamination of recreational or drinking waters.”
Underwood has worked within the utility space as a compliance director for water and wastewater treatment operations. She didn’t sugarcoat the reality of what further delays in upgrades will cost Americans.
“You will continue to see more frequent overflows and plant bypasses. These spills and untreated discharge events can lead to degraded waterways with increased contamination risks to the public and environment,” she said.
This isn’t some speculative future problem. In January, more than 250 million gallons of sewage entered the Potomac River near Washington. The event marked one of the worst incidents of its kind in U.S. history; President Donald Trump called it a “massive ecological disaster.”
In an account published on the American Rivers website, a witness to the Potomac River disaster, Gary Belan, recalled arriving at the site of the sewage overflow and seeing “several massive pumps” diverting raw waste into the C&O canal area, which runs parallel with the river.
Belan said the area is a “popular spot to walk, bike, and access the river for fishing and boating.” He said he’s been taking his kids there since they were toddlers.
“There is a literal river of sewage flowing open along the towpath that parallels the canal,” he wrote. “The estimated repair time is going to be 9 [to] 10 months, disrupting the communities nearby. This doesn’t include time for the environmental remediation.”
Some industry insiders say surface water contamination is far from the only hazard of aging sewer system failures.
“The biggest challenge I see on the ground is aging pipes, specifically the catastrophic failure of cast iron and clay sewer laterals that connect individual properties to the main municipal line,” master plumber Steven Morgan told The Epoch Times. “These pipes were installed 50 [to] 80 years ago and are now collapsing, cracking, and being invaded by tree roots.”
Morgan is the head of technical training and development at 24hr Supply and deals with the ugly truth of America’s antiquated wastewater network regularly. He said a lot of people don’t understand how aging sewer infrastructure can cost them directly and dearly.
“Homeowners don’t realize they’re responsible for the section from their house to the street, and when it fails, they’re looking at $8,000 [to] $25,000 in emergency repairs,” he said.
Morgan believes the real problem is that these failures create blockages and backups that force raw sewage into basements during heavy rains.
“Multiply that across an entire neighborhood with aging infrastructure, and you’ve got a public health crisis waiting to happen,” he said.
“The pipes aren’t just old, they’re fundamentally incompatible with modern water usage patterns and climate realities like increasingly intense storms.”
Direct contact with contaminated water spills in places such as basements, lawns, streets, or recreational areas can cause serious health concerns. Contaminated water can contain bacteria, viruses, parasites, worms, and industrial chemicals such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS or “forever chemicals.”
Official data put the number of Americans affected by waterborne pathogens annually at 7.15 million, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Within that group, about 118,000 are hospitalized and 6,630 die from related illnesses.
Leaky pipes take on a whole new dimension when it’s toxic sludge entering rivers and other water resources. Groundwater contamination is prevalent at 85 percent of EPA Superfund project cleanup sites.
“Failing sewer lines or poorly maintained [wastewater] lagoons can allow untreated sewage to seep into groundwater. However, this is typically a smaller-scale localized contamination,” Underwood said.
“I would say there is a larger contamination risk with [treatment] plant bypasses where a portion of untreated wastewater is discharged to a surface water outfall.”
A 2023 study from the University of Parma observed that leaky sewers negatively impacted not only surface and groundwater but also subsurface aquifers.
“Sewer pipeline ruptures are a severe risk to groundwater quality. When sewerage deterioration conditions occur, aquifers can be contaminated by contaminants contained within sewer water,” the study said.
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration unlawfully pulled the plug on nearly a million asylum-seekers who were temporarily allowed to live in the U.S. thanks to the Biden-era CBP One app.
Fox News reports that the app was used by then-President Joe Biden’s administration beginning in 2023 to allow migrants to schedule appointments with immigration officials with many of the migrants being paroled into the U.S. for up to two years.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs invalidated the Trump administration’s decision to end the immigration parole status of migrants who entered the country under the Biden-era CBP Home policy.
🚨BREAKING: Obama-appointed Judge, Allison Burroughs, ruled President Trump must RESTORE the legal status of over 985,000 migrants ordered to leave through the CBP app.
Burroughs said the administration acted “unlawfully” when they sent a notice on the app that read:
— Patriot🇺🇸Newswire (@NewswirePatriot) April 1, 2026
In her ruling, Burroughs wrote, “When Defendants terminated the impacted noncitizens’ parole without observing the process mandated by statute and by their own regulations, they took action that was ‘not in accordance with law,’” the judge added, “The regulations do not give the agency unfettered discretion to terminate parole.”
According to CBS News, under the CBP One system, more than 900,000 migrants from countries across the globe were allowed into the U.S. at official ports of entry along the southern border.
It’s unclear how many of those migrants will be affected by Burrough’s ruling as some of them have already been deported or gained another lawful status since the Trump administration repurposed the CBP One app a year ago, allowing paroled migrants to self-deport.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced in April 2025 that it was terminating the parole status of those processed under the CBP One program, arguing that the Biden administration did not have authority to create such a program.
DHS officials, at that time, said that the app violated U.S. immigration law by allowing hundreds of thousands of migrants to enter the country outside of the traditional legal immigration system.
The statement released yesterday following the judge’s ruling read as follows: “We disagree with this blatant judicial activism undermining the President’s Article II authority to determine who remains in this country. The Biden Administration abused the parole authority under the disastrous CBP One program to allow millions of illegal aliens into the U.S. which further fueled the worst border crisis in U.S. history.”
The Justice Department is likely to appeal the ruling.
Johnson Caves To Thune On DHS Funding: Accepts Senate’s Partial Bill That Ditches Voter ID, Leaves ICE Out In The Cold
In a clear concession announced April 1, 2026, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) yielded to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and agreed to advance the Senate-passed bill funding most of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – explicitly excluding ICE and key CBP enforcement operations – while moving long-term immigration enforcement and border security funding to the partisan reconciliation process.
This is the same bill that Johnson and House R’s rejected for over a week.
“We appreciate and share the President’s determination to once and for all bring an end to the Democrat DHS shutdown.
“In the coming days, Republicans in the Senate and House will be following through on the President’s directive by fully funding the entire Department of Homeland Security on two parallel tracks: through the appropriations process and through the reconciliation process.
“We appreciate that Senator Graham and the Senate Budget Committee have already initiated the process of developing a budget resolution that will ensure border security and immigration enforcement will be funded for the balance of the Trump Administration and insulated from future attempts by the Democrats to defund those agencies.
“We operated under a belief that while our country is in the midst of an international armed conflict, Democrats might finally come to their senses and understand that defunding our homeland security agencies is beyond reckless and very dangerous. While we hoped they would accept the 60-day CR to fund the Department entirely so that bipartisan negotiations could continue, it is now abundantly clear that Democrats place allegiance to their radical left-wing base above all else — including their own power of the purse — which means open borders and protecting criminal illegal aliens. That is not acceptable to Republicans in Congress, nor is it to the American people. We cannot allow Democrats to any longer put the safety of the American public at risk through their open border policies, so we are taking that off the table.
“In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited. In return, Democrats will once again demonstrate to the American people their support for open borders and keeping criminal illegal immigrants in America.” –Speaker Johnson, X
The impasse began after House Republicans passed a full DHS bill with strong ICE/CBP funding. Senate Democrats blocked it, triggering a partial shutdown in mid-February that idled TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, and CISA while leaving ICE/CBP on prior-year funds. On March 27 the Senate passed its stripped-down version by unanimous consent; House GOP initially rejected it as “garbage” and countered with a 60-day full CR that Schumer killed. Trump ultimately backed the two-track Senate approach.
🚨 Good on paper, Thune… but we’ve heard this song before. President Trump demanded FULL border security — that means funding ICE + Border Patrol AND passing the SAVE America Act to STOP non-citizens from voting in our elections. Without the SAVE Act, this is just half a win.…
— Donald J Trump The Service Dog (@Donnie4Veterans) April 1, 2026
This deal also leaves the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act – the House-passed bill requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration – completely untouched and stalled in the Senate. Trump and GOP hardliners had demanded it be attached to any DHS package; it was not included in the Senate bill or the immediate appropriations track.
Leaders may try elements in the reconciliation package for ICE/CBP funding, but the Byrd Rule makes non-budgetary policy changes difficult. Many conservatives on X are already blasting Johnson and Thune for failing to deliver the SAVE Act now.
What Happens Next
House expected to pass the Senate bill within days, reopening TSA/FEMA/Coast Guard and paying workers.
Senate Budget Committee advances reconciliation resolution to lock in three years of enforcement funding, protected from future Democratic defunding.
The SAVE Act fight is deferred, setting up another round of intra-GOP tension.
The agreement ends the immediate partial shutdown but guarantees continued immigration battles heading into the 2026 midterms.
Trump To Declare Iran War Wind-Down As Iranian President Issues Open Letter To Americans
Summary
Trump to declare Iran war is winding down and others need to resolve Hormuz
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has released an open letter to the American people, questioning whether Washington is truly putting “America First” or merely acting as a “proxy for Israel” willing to fight “to the last American soldier.”
Air defenses have been activated in Dubai, taking out 5 ballistic missiles and 35 drones launched from Iran
Iran’s new Ayatollah tweets “I emphatically declare that the consistent policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, following on the path of Imam Khomeini and the martyred Leader, is to continue supporting the Resistance against the Zionist-US enemy.”
“Not true”: Iran rejects Trump claim that the “new regime president” asked for ceasefire (which has been Pezeshkian since 2024)
UAE mulls becoming first Gulf country to directly joint US-Israeli war against Iran, lobbies for firm UNSC security resolution.
Trump to Reuters: will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” and could return for “spot hits” if needed. Also says he’s open to exiting ‘paper tiger’ NATO after Iran war is over, angry over lack of help in Hormuz crisis.
Oil tanker leased to QatarEnergy was struck by an Iranian cruise missile in Qatari waters Wednesday.
IRGC has newly vowed to keep attacking with “full intensity and power” – suggesting this is far from over, as ceasefire talks remain theater lacking in much substance. Ayatollah praises Hezbollah in written statement.
Trump To (almost) Declare “Mission Accomplished”
Trump will use his primetime 9pm ET Oval Office address Wednesday night to declare – against a backdrop of deteriorating poll numbers -that the month-long war in Iran is winding down, and that others need to resolve the Strait of Hormuz blockade, Politico reported. The president telegraphed that message in interviews, social media posts and public comments over the past 24 hours, laying the groundwork for a speech that is expected to claim that all military objectives have been met, according to six people familiar with the planning and granted anonymity to speak candidly. He also intends to slam NATO allies for the biggest unresolved matter of the war, Iran’s ongoing restrictions of shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Steve Bannon, Trump’s former White House chief strategist, said the president will essentially declare victory, laying out what he’s achieved in Iran and what he will do before the U.S. leaves along with “dumping on the NATO allies – it’s their issue. Two, three weeks, definable objectives. ‘I came, I saw, I conquered’ — and we are hanging around a couple of weeks to conquer some more — maybe even then a ceasefire, while reiterating that the Hormuz situation is the Gulf Emirates’ and the Europeans’ to solve, and declare victory,” he added.
With the conflict ongoing, the speech offers Trump an opportunity to lay out the war’s objectives, what amounts to victory and how he intends to move forward if ceasefire talks sputter. The president’s decision to deliver a major address about the war’s endgame, coming as an additional 2,500 U.S. Marines make their way to the region, may be primarily an attempt to assuage voters’ concerns and Wall Street’s unease about energy markets and the knock-on effects of the strait closure.
“This is a big challenge for President Trump because it’s not his natural environment. It cannot be confrontational. It needs to be reassuring,” one of the people familiar said. “It needs to be very direct because he’s not just communicating with the American people but the Iranians, our allies in the region and our allies in Europe.”
The president’s first primetime address since the war began comes about two weeks ahead of an oft-repeated four-to-six-week timeline for military operations in Iran.
Although Trump has made several public statements declaring that indirect talks with Iran are making progress, there is still little evidence that the two countries are anywhere close to an agreement – and some in the Iranian regime continue to insist that no talks are happening at all. In a social media post Wednesday morning, Trump asserted that Iran “has asked…for a CEASEFIRE!” But he added a key condition for accepting: “We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear.”
* * *
Iran President Releases Open Letter To American People,
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has released an open letter to the American people, questioning whether Washington is truly putting “America First” or merely acting as a “proxy for Israel” willing to fight “to the last American soldier.”
In the Wednesday message, which traces the roots of US-Iran tensions back to the 1953 coup while condemning recent bombings of Iranian infrastructure, Pezeshkian notes that Tehran harbors no enmity toward ordinary Americans. Instead, he urges the U.S. populace to look past “manufactured narratives,” arguing that the perceived Iranian threat is an invention of the military-industrial complex and Israeli political interests.
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
To the people of the United States of America, and to all those who, amid a flood of distortions and manufactured narratives, continue to seek the truth and aspire to a better life:
Iran—by this very name, character, and identity—is one of the oldest continuous civilizations in human history. Despite its historical and geographical advantages at various times, Iran has never, in its modern history, chosen the path of aggression, expansion, colonialism, or domination. Even after enduring occupation, invasion, and sustained pressure from global powers—and despite possessing military superiority over many of its neighbors—Iran has never initiated a war. Yet it has resolutely and bravely repelled those who have attacked it.
The Iranian people harbor no enmity toward other nations, including the people of America, Europe, or neighboring countries. Even in the face of repeated foreign interventions and pressures throughout their proud history, Iranians have consistently drawn a clear distinction between governments and the peoples they govern. This is a deeply rooted principle in Iranian culture and collective consciousness—not a temporary political stance.
For this reason, portraying Iran as a threat is neither consistent with historical reality nor with present-day observable facts. Such a perception is the product of political and economic whims of the powerful— the need to manufacture an enemy in order to justify pressure, maintain military dominance, sustain the arms industry, and control strategic markets. In such an environment, if a threat does not exist, it is invented.
Within this same framework, the United States has concentrated the largest number of its forces, bases, and military capabilities around Iran—a country that, at least since the founding of the United States, has never initiated a war. Recent American aggressions launched from these very bases have demonstrated how threatening such a military presence truly is. Naturally, no country confronted with such conditions would forgo strengthening its defensive capabilities. What Iran has done—and continues to do—is a measured response grounded in legitimate self-defense, and by no means an initiation of war or aggression.
Relations between Iran and the United States were not originally hostile, and early interactions between the Iranian and American people were not marred with hostility or tension. The turning point, however, was the 1953 coup d’état—an illegal American intervention aimed at preventing the nationalization of Iran’s own resources. That coup disrupted Iran’s democratic process, reinstated dictatorship, and sowed deep distrust among Iranians toward U.S. policies. This distrust deepened further with America’s support for the Shah’s regime, its backing of Saddam Hussein during the imposed war of the 1980s, the imposition of the longest and most comprehensive sanctions in modern history, and ultimately, unprovoked military aggression—twice, in the midst of negotiations—against Iran.
Yet all these pressures have failed to weaken Iran. On the contrary, the country has grown stronger in many areas: literacy rates have tripled—from roughly 30% before the Islamic Revolution to over 90% today; higher education has expanded dramatically; significant advances have been achieved in modern technology; healthcare services have improved; and infrastructure has developed at a pace and scale incomparable to the past. These are measurable, observable realities that stand independent of fabricated narratives.
At the same time, the destructive and inhumane impact of sanctions, war, and aggression on the lives of the resilient Iranian people must not be underestimated. The continuation of military aggression and recent bombings profoundly affect people’s lives, attitudes, and perspectives. This reflects a fundamental human truth: when war inflicts irreparable harm on lives, homes, cities, and futures, people will not remain indifferent toward those responsible.
This raises a fundamental question: Exactly which of the American people’s interests are truly being served by this war? Was there any objective threat from Iran to justify such behavior? Does the massacre of innocent children, the destruction of cancer-treatment pharmaceutical facilities, or boasting about bombing a country “back to the stone ages” serve any purpose other than further damaging the United States’ global standing?
Iran pursued negotiations, reached an agreement, and fulfilled all its commitments. The decision to withdraw from that agreement, escalate toward confrontation, and launch two acts of aggression in the midst of negotiations were destructive choices made by the U.S. government—choices that served the delusions of a foreign aggressor.
Attacking Iran’s vital infrastructure—including energy and industrial facilities—directly targets the Iranian people. Beyond constituting a war crime, such actions carry consequences that extend far beyond Iran’s borders. They generate instability, increase human and economic costs, and perpetuate cycles of tension, planting seeds of resentment that will endure for years. This is not a demonstration of strength; it is a sign of strategic bewilderment and an inability to achieve a sustainable solution.
Is it not also the case that America has entered this aggression as a proxy for Israel, influenced and manipulated by that regime? Is it not true that Israel, by manufacturing an Iranian threat, seeks to divert global attention away from its crimes toward the Palestinians? Is it not evident that Israel now aims to fight Iran to the last American soldier and the last American taxpayer dollar—shifting the burden of its delusions onto Iran, the region, and the United States itself in pursuit of illegitimate interests?
Is “America First” truly among the priorities of the U.S. government today?
I invite you to look beyond the machinery of misinformation—an integral part of this aggression—and instead speak with those who have visited Iran. Observe the many accomplished Iranian immigrants—educated in Iran—who now teach and conduct research at the world’s most prestigious universities, or contribute to the most advanced technology firms in the West. Do these realities align with the distortions you are being told about Iran and its people?
Today, the world stands at crossroads. Continuing along the path of confrontation is more costly and futile than ever before. The choice between confrontation and engagement is both real and consequential; its outcome will shape the future for generations to come. Throughout its millennia of proud history, Iran has outlasted many aggressors. All that remains of them are tarnished names in history, while Iran endures—resilient, dignified, and proud.
* * *
Air Defenses Activated in Dubai
Stocks were spooked with 90 minutes to go in Wednesday trading, as this morning’s Trumpian optimism melted like a popsicle in July. Not only has fighting intensified throughout the day, the UAE Ministry of Defence officially stated that air defense systems intercepted 5 ballistic missiles and 35 drones launched from Iran.
🇦🇪 فيديو الدفاع الجوي الإماراتي يقول “الهدف تم تدميره” .. ما أقدر أتجاوزه!
يرسل قشعريرة في القلب لما نشوف الفريق يشتغل بكفاءة عالية لحمايتنا. فخورين جداً. 💪
I simply can’t get over this video of UAE air defense saying “Target Destroyed”. It sends chills to my heart seeing our… pic.twitter.com/XgatfMNopp
US, Iran Discussing Ceasefire In Exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormu: Axios
Ahead of Trump’s address tonight at 9pm ET, Axios reports citing three sources that the US and Iran are discussing a potential deal that would involve a ceasefire in exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz “The officials did not say whether those discussions had taken place directly or only through mediators, and they cautioned that it was unclear whether a deal could be reached. But the officials said President Trump was discussing the possibility with officials inside and outside the administration.”As a reminder, earlier in the day Trump claimed on Wednesday that Iran had asked the U.S. for a ceasefire, but stressed he would only consider it if the strait was reopened. In response, Iran countered that it had not requested a ceasefire.
🚨Three U.S. officials told me discussions are taking place about a possible ceasefire with Iran in return for the reopening of the Hormuz strait. The officials said it is unclear if a deal can be reached https://t.co/an8vwqcEj6
Iranian Supreme Leader Vows To “Continue Supporting The Resistance Against The Zionist-US Enemy”
Amid speculation that he is dead or badly wounded, moments ago Iran’s new supreme leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei said on X that he “emphatically declare that the consistent policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, following on the path of Imam Khomeini and the martyred Leader, is to continue supporting the Resistance against the Zionist-US enemy.”
* * *
Iran: Not True that Iran Requested a Ceasefire
Iran has again rejected Trump’s narrative, after he hours ago claimed that “Iran’s New Regime President” has just “asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!” Iran’s Foreign Ministry has responded by saying “there is no truth” to “Trump’s statements that Iran requested a ceasefire.” The Iran FM spox statement continues:
“No decision has been made yet. We have many considerations. Our conditions for ending the war are very clear. We do not accept a ceasefire; We seek a complete end.”
As a reminder, President Masoud Pezeshkian has been Iran’s president since July 2024 – and he’s made public appearances in Tehran, even over the last days. There is not a “new regime president”.
Additionally, Trump is now threatening to bomb Iran “back to the stone age” if Hormuz is not reopened, but just yesterday suggested he’s fine with it staying closed and that ultimately others should open it.
Here’s a clue that the new president of Iran has not in fact begged for a CEASEFIRE:
President Trump has issued new words to Reuters on his highly anticipated speech tonight (9pm ET):
The United States will be “out of Iran pretty quickly” and could return for “spot hits” if needed, President Donald Trump tells Reuters, hours before he was scheduled to make a primetime address to the nation.
Trump also says he would state in the speech that he is considering withdrawing the US from the NATO alliance.
There’s expected to be heavy focus on chastising NATO. If this is indeed the Bush-style ‘mission accomplished’ moment, it may be that he’s ready to blame Western allies for the closure of the Hormuz Strait – a problem which didn’t exist before Operation Epic Fury.
Trump: Iran President has Asked for Ceasefire
President Trump on Truth Social has claimed the US has been directly asked for ceasefire; however, he coupled this with the typical threat of bombing Iran “back to the Stone Ages!!!” Here’s what he said (note: Iran does not have a new president):
Iran’s New Regime President, much less Radicalized and far more intelligent than his predecessors, has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE! We will consider when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!! President DJT
And yet the Hormuz question lingers, after just yesterday Trump strangely said the vital energy shipping waterway would “automatically open”. Oil prices initially dumped on the Trump message, and quickly rebounded – perhaps based on the latter part of Trump’s statement. A lot would have to happen – for one Washington is likely to require that Tehran giving up charging a some $2 million fee for tankers to make safe passage. Oil unimpressed…
First Gulf Country to Directly Join War?
The small but wealthy country of United Arab Emirates appears to be edging toward open confrontation, with Arab officials saying it is preparing to join the US and allied powers in forcibly reopening the Strait of Hormuz after absorbing Iranian strikes. If so, the move would mark the first time a Persian Gulf state formally enters the conflict as a combatant. Behind the scenes Abu Dhabi is reportedly pushing hard at the UN, lobbying for a Security Council resolution to legitimize military action, while simultaneously urging Washington and its European and Asian partners to assemble a coalition willing to act, according to The Wall Street Journal.
At the same time, the UAE is quietly assessing what it can bring to the fight, from mine-clearing operations to broader logistical and naval support aimed at securing the vital shipping lane. But the ambitions don’t stop there, amid an opportunity to settle old grievances and a territory dispute. Gulf sources say the Emiratis are also floating a far more aggressive idea: that the US should seize key islands in the waterway, including Abu Musa – held by Iran for decades but claimed by the UAE.
However, the fine print is important here…
Headline: The UAE is “ready to join the fight” to open Strait of Hormuz!
In an interview with The Telegraph newspaper, the president described the alliance as “paper tiger” and, when asked if he would reconsider American membership in the bloc, Trump responded: “Oh yes, I would say [it’s] beyond reconsideration.”
“I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way,” he said, in the remarks published Wednesday. He’s of course angry at refusal of allies to join a military campaign to force back open the Strait of Hormuz.
“Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic,” he continued. “We’ve been there automatically, including Ukraine. Ukraine wasn’t our problem. It was a test, and we were there for them, and we would always have been there for them. They weren’t there for us.”
And here’s what Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Al Jazeera on Monday: “If NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked but then denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement. That’s a hard one to stay engaged in and say this is good for the United States. So all of that is going to have to be reexamined.”
Oil Tanker in Qatari Waters Struck; Kuwait Airport Hit Again
A tanker leased to QatarEnergy was struck by an Iranian cruise missile in Qatari waters on Wednesday, in another escalation spilling directly into critical energy corridors. According to Qatar’s defense ministry, three missiles were launched from Iran, with two intercepted but the third slamming into the Aqua 1 fuel oil tanker. While there were no casualties and damage remained above the waterline, the hit came just 17 nautical miles off Ras Laffan, home to the world’s largest gas facility, as Reuters has detailed. Bloomberg has noted, “Since the start of the war in Iran, UKMTO has reported 16 attacks on vessels operating in the Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman.”
Elsewhere, Kuwait reported a “large fire” at fuel tanks near its international airport following another Iranian strike. This marks the seventh time of the war that the international travel hub was hit, and the last time it took emergency crews well over two days to put out the fires.
The Pentagon continues moving thousands of Marines, Special Forces, and Airborne troops into the region. This is not enough for a full ground invasion force, but could be preparation for a campaign to cut Iran from its strategic islands, such as oil export hub Kharg Island…
As I said here during this term, whenever Trump builds up forces in a region, it leads to escalation despite whatever conflicting statements he makes. Right now, we’re seeing a buildup for ground ops targeting Iranian islands, and I still believe we’re moving in that direction. https://t.co/lzjb6aKBYk
Meanwhile, diplomacy continues to look like theater. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he has “no faith” in talks with Washington, confirming that while messages have been exchanged – but that “no negotiations are under way.” On the battlefield, Iran’s IRGC claims its latest barrage – spanning more than 100 heavy missiles, attack drones, and roughly 200 smaller rockets – hit targets across Israel and US military positions in the Gulf. Installations in Bahrain and Kuwait have also been hit, the group said, claiming that US helicopter was destroyed. The IRGC has newly vowed to keep attacking with “full intensity and power” – suggesting this is far from over.
Ayatollah Breaks Silence with Message Praising Hezbollah
The new, younger Ayatollah Khamenei – who may have been wounded in the early days of US-Israeli strikes, hasn’t been seen in any public way, not even on TV, throughout the war. There have not so much as been any official recent images of him circulated.
But Mojtaba Khamenei has apparently been issuing some limited written statements, mainly encouraging foreign proxies in their joining the war against US and Israeli forces in the region. State media has indicated he’s not making public appearances given the ongoing relentless bombing campaign and the Islamic Republic’s wartime footing.
The 56-year old Khamenei has on Wednesday praised Hezbollah for joining the war against Israel. Hezbollah has been launching hundreds of rockets on northern and central Israel, amid an emerging ground campaign in southern Lebanon, also as Israel bombs Beirut from the air. In the new words carried by Iranian state media, he praised Hezbollah for its “perseverance, steadfastness and patience” against “the most ruthless enemies of the Islamic world.”
US Firm Takes Control Of One Of The “World’s Largest” Cobalt Producers
An American company has secured control of one of the largest cobalt producers outside Chinese ownership, delivering a strategic boost to U.S. efforts to compete with Beijing over critical minerals, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The buyer, Virtus Minerals, completed its acquisition of Congo-based Chemaf for $30 million, along with a pledge to invest roughly $720 million. The deal caps a years-long push, spanning both the Biden and Trump administrations, to ensure U.S. access to cobalt resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Chemaf’s mines can supply about 5% of global cobalt output—a key material used in fighter jets, smartphones, and electric vehicle batteries. Virtus says future production will be directed toward American and allied buyers.
Despite its value, Chemaf proved difficult to sell. U.S. companies were wary of its heavy debt—around $1 billion—along with reputational concerns and the challenges of operating in Congo, including weak infrastructure, corruption risks, and labor issues.
The company has a controversial history. Its Mutoshi mine has faced repeated problems with unsafe working conditions and incursions by informal miners. In earlier years, child labor and bribery allegations also surfaced. Although some reforms were attempted, informal and hazardous mining has since returned.
WSJ writes that Virtus itself is a small, eight-person firm founded in 2022 by Phil Braun, a former Green Beret, and Andrew Powch, a Naval Academy and Harvard Business School graduate. Backed by U.S. government support, the company positions the deal as part of a broader national security effort to rebuild supply chains.
Financing for the acquisition includes $200 million from Virtus and its operating partner, India’s Lloyds Metals and Energy, along with $475 million from Orion Resource Partners and additional funding. The firm has also reached an agreement with Trafigura, Chemaf’s largest creditor.
Chemaf was put up for sale after cobalt prices fell sharply in 2023. Significant additional investment—estimated at up to $300 million—is still required to upgrade facilities and increase production capacity.
The deal faced competition from China. In 2024, Chemaf had agreed to sell to Norin Mining, a subsidiary of a Chinese state-owned defense company, for $920 million. That agreement collapsed after failing to gain approval from Congolese authorities, opening the door for Virtus.
The acquisition highlights the broader geopolitical contest over Congo’s vast mineral wealth. The country produces nearly three-quarters of the world’s cobalt, and Chinese firms have already invested heavily in its mining sector.
Still, questions remain about whether Virtus can successfully operate the assets. The company has a previous investment in Congo that remains stalled due to a legal dispute, and its partner’s experience is largely outside cobalt. Even so, Lloyds expects to begin work soon and complete upgrades within about a year.
President Donald Trump’s speech in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, was not an official act and is thus not covered by immunity, a federal judge said in a March 31 decision.
“President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled.
Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, 2021, was given to a rally at The Ellipse, about 1 mile from the U.S. Capitol.
Lawmakers and others sued Trump, claiming his speech incited the crowd to go to the Capitol and riot.
Trump had sought a dismissal of the lawsuits, arguing he is entitled to immunity for official acts as president and that the speech was an official act.
Supreme Court justices ruled in 2024 that presidents enjoy immunity for core official acts, and presumptive immunity for acts within the outer perimeter of duties, but that unofficial acts are not covered.
Mehta said that contextual facts, such as that White House personnel were not involved in planning the Jan. 6 rally, besides securing an exception for the placement of the stage, supported the position that Trump’s speech fell outside his presidential duties.
The speech was made as then-Vice President Mike Pence and members of Congress met in a joint session to certify the results of the 2020 election and featured Trump urging them to consider alternate slates of electors and saying he, not Joe Biden, had actually won the election.
Mehta said the speech was focused on promoting his alleged 2020 victory, rather than on carrying out official duties, such as ensuring the faithful execution of laws.
“The content of the Ellipse Speech confirms that it is not covered by official-acts immunity,” he wrote.
Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is representing some of the plaintiffs in the consolidated case, said in a statement that “today’s ruling affirming that Donald Trump is not immune from civil liability is a monumental victory for the rule of law, affirming that no one, including the president of the United States, is above it.”
He added, “The court rightly recognizes that President Trump’s actions leading to the January 6 insurrection fell outside the scope of presidential duties.”
Lawyers for Trump did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.
The ruling denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case and means the litigation will proceed, although the judge did agree to a request from the president’s lawyers to certify certain issues for appeal, including the new decision.
Embattled Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., who has long demanded that President Donald Trump release the Epstein files, now faces scrutiny as the FBI prepares to release documents tied to its investigation into his alleged ties to a Chinese intelligence operative.
The scrutiny comes after Swalwell demanded Monday that FBI Director Kash Patel refrain from declassifying the potentially damaging files, which could shed light on his relationship with Christine Fang, the suspected Chinese spy also known as “Fang Fang.”
On X, critics highlighted what they called blatant hypocrisy, pointing to Swalwell’s prior demands that Trump release the Epstein files.
One widely shared X post from July 2025 read, “Trump has the files. Why won’t HE release them,” in reference to the Epstein files.
On Sept. 25, Swalwell himself replied to a post from Patel, writing, “Blah blah blah. Where are the Epstein Files?”
On Oct. 7, Swalwell again pressed Patel, adding, “Where are the Epstein Files?”
Just 10 days later, Swalwell escalated further, branding House Speaker Mike Johnson the “pro-pedophile Speaker” and again demanding the Epstein files be released.
I refer to Johnson by his more accurate description, the pro-pedophile Speaker.
Swalwell conveyed his opposition in a cease-and-desist letter to Patel, urging that his own FBI files are not released.
“The congressman has never been accused of wrongdoing in that matter and your attempt to release the file is a transparent attempt to smear him and undermine his campaign for governor of California,” the letter said, as quoted by the leftist Washington Post.
It added, “Your actions threaten to expose you, others at the FBI, and the FBI itself to significant legal liability.”
The Post reported over the weekend that Patel had deployed agents to California to review the documents ahead of a potential public release.
The forthcoming release of the files could provide clarity on the FBI’s investigation into Swalwell’s early political career. He joined Congress in 2013 after serving three years on the Dublin City Council.
The probe centered on Fang’s alleged efforts to act as a Chinese intelligence operative by cultivating relationships with up-and-coming politicians.
Swalwell has not definitively denied having a sexual relationship with Fang. He purportedly cut off contact with her after being briefed by the FBI.
What Swalwell knew about Fang, and what he told the FBI, has largely remained speculative, but that could change if the files were released.
Odds Of SCOTUS Striking Down Trump’s Birthright Citizenship EO Spike
Update (1240ET): Odds are not looking good for President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship, as two conservative justices now seem skeptical amid today’s oral arguments.
As journalist Eric Daugherty notes on X, “SCOTUS Justice John Roberts is VERY skeptical of President Trump ending birthright citizenship, repeatedly firing back at Trump’s top lawyer,” noting that Roberts paid no mind when US Solicitor General John Sauer brought up the fact that China has 500 birth tourism companies that bring people to the US to have children.
“That has no impact on the legal analysis…it’s a new world, it’s the same Constitution,” said Roberts.
🚨 JUST IN: SCOTUS Justice John Roberts is VERY skeptical of President Trump ending birthright citizenship, repeatedly firing back at Trump’s top lawyer
This would mean we require Amy Coney Barrett for a shot at 5-4.
Update (0950ET): President Trump dropped by the Supreme Court on Wednesday for oral arguments in the high-profile Trump v. Barbara challenging his executive order restricting birthright citizenship – making him the first sitting US president to attend Supreme Court oral arguments.
BREAKING
President Trump has just arrived at the Supreme Court as the Justices hear oral arguments in the Birthright Citizenship case. pic.twitter.com/gc1jUdclki
The line has already formed outside of the Supreme Court for Wednesday’s oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, which will determine the legality of Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. People at the front of the line told me they got here yesterday. pic.twitter.com/OnXAWzhKsz
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 1 will consider whether President Donald Trump’s executive order excluding the children of illegal immigrants and legal temporary visitors from automatic birthright citizenship is constitutional.
Trump, who has frequently used the term “anchor babies” to refer to children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents, issued Executive Order 14160 on Jan. 20, 2025, in hopes of ending the practice. His order, which is about to be considered by the justices, was blocked by lower courts.
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said in the government’s petition that automatic citizenship “operates as a powerful incentive for illegal migration,” presents national security concerns, and “has spawned an industry of modern ‘birth tourism,’ by which foreigners travel to the United States solely for the purpose of giving birth here and obtaining citizenship for their children.”
About 8 percent of all births in the United States in 2023 were to illegal immigrants and legal temporary visitors.
The Center for Immigration Studies estimated in February 2025 that in 2023, up to 250,000 babies were born to illegal immigrants, and about 70,000 babies were born to legal temporary visitors. Slightly under 4 million births took place in the United States in 2023, the Centers for Disease Control estimated.
Landmark Precedent
Since the Supreme Court’s landmark 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the federal government has recognized that almost all persons born in the United States are U.S. citizens at birth.
Wong was born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese parents who were legally residing permanently in the United States. Because his parents were not serving in a diplomatic or official capacity for the then-Emperor of China, the court held that he was a U.S. citizen by birth.
Trump’s executive order uses a different interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
The order said that, even though the clause adopted in 1868 “rightly repudiated” Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which misconstrued the Constitution to exclude people of African descent from citizenship based on race, it was never interpreted to bestow citizenship on everyone born in the United States.
The amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship individuals who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” said the order, adding that Section 1401 of Title 8 of U.S. Code, enacted in 1952, which generally mirrors the 14th Amendment, did the same.
The order states that “the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.”
According to the order, an individual born in the United States is not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” if that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the country and the individual’s father was not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of the person’s birth.
Trump said on March 30 that the country’s current birthright citizenship policy was created to grant citizenship to freed slaves and their children, not to children born to temporary visitors.
Opposing Positions
A federal district court in New Hampshire temporarily blocked the executive order, finding it likely contradicts the 14th Amendment, Supreme Court precedent, and Section 1401.
The federal government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, but did not wait for a ruling, and asked the Supreme Court to intervene. In the meantime, the appeals court upheld a preliminary injunction blocking the executive order in a separate case.
The high court granted the government’s petition in Trump v. Barbara on Dec. 5, 2025. Sauer said in the petition that the executive order restores the clause’s original meaning which was “to grant citizenship to newly freed slaves and their children—not to those of temporary visitors or illegal aliens.”
The government argues that the citizenship clause and Section 1401, which reinforces it, do not give citizenship to children of temporary visitors or illegal immigrants.
The text of the clause, its history, and the way it was originally understood, and Supreme Court rulings, agree with the idea that the clause applies to children who are “completely subject” to the “political jurisdiction” of the United States, which means they owe “direct and immediate allegiance” to this country and may claim its protection.
The court held in Wong Kim Ark that children of citizens, as well as those with “‘a permanent domicile and residence in the United States,’ meet that criterion,” according to the petition.
Historical evidence supports the idea that citizenship does not extend to children of parents who were temporarily present in the country “for health, or occasional business.”
During congressional debates over the 14th Amendment, lawmakers said the clause would not give citizenship to anyone “born here of parents from abroad temporarily in this country,” the petition said.
Wong Kim Ark recognized that the clause guarantees citizenship not just to children of U.S. citizens, but also to children of aliens “enjoying a permanent domicil [sic] and residence” in the United States.
Those challenging the executive order argue that Wong Kim Ark was correctly interpreted by the high court to “specifically foreclose the government’s parental domicile argument.” The president’s executive order violates both the clause and Section 1401 by attempting to add a parental status requirement, they say.
The court’s analysis of the clause found that foreign nationals temporarily present in the country for “business or pleasure” are “‘amenable to the jurisdiction of the country.’”
While ambassadors may be immune from jurisdiction and are treated as if present in their home countries, “there is no such fiction for ordinary foreign nationals” present in the United States who are “completely subject to its jurisdiction,” they said in a brief.
Exempting foreign nationals from U.S. jurisdiction would be “inconvenient and dangerous to society, and would subject the laws to continual infraction, and the government to degradation,” the brief says, quoting Wong Kim Ark.
What Does the ‘Subject’ Phrase Mean?
How the justices rule may turn on what “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the citizenship clause means.
Michael O’Neill, legal affairs vice president at Landmark Legal Foundation, said the order correctly interprets the phrase.
Evidence shows “the ratifiers of the 14th Amendment intended it to apply to political jurisdiction, rather than territorial jurisdiction,” O’Neill told The Epoch Times.
“Mere presence” isn’t enough, he said. “You need to owe some political allegiance to the United States of America in order for you to have birthright citizenship today.”
Chris Hajec, deputy counsel at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, suggested the executive order was “95 percent” constitutional but went too far in excluding the children of temporary workers on visas and foreign students.
Surely, children of people who have resided here for years while working or attending school would be citizens, he told The Epoch Times.
David Super, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, suggested the executive order overreached.
Someone born at a foreign embassy would not be subject to U.S. power under international treaties concerning diplomats, “but everyone else is subject to U.S. power whether they acknowledge it or not,” Super told The Epoch Times.
Jim Burling, senior legal counsel at Pacific Legal Foundation, said the government has a “really huge burden.”
The actual text makes it “clear that if you’re born here, you’re subject to the jurisdiction, and pretty much everybody here is,” he told The Epoch Times.
Illegal immigration wasn’t a public concern when the clause was adopted, but nowadays, supporters of the executive order are putting a “historical gloss on the interpretation of a constitutional provision based on future history,” Burling said.
Trump May Pull Out Of ‘Paper Tiger’ NATO After Starmer Stiffs Strait Support
In a blistering exclusive interview with The Telegraph, President Trump has declared he is “strongly considering” pulling the United States out of NATO, branding the 77-year-old alliance a “paper tiger” after European allies – including the UK under Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – refused to join America’s military campaign against Iran or help reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump told the newspaper the decision was now “beyond reconsideration,” adding: “I was never swayed by Nato. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and Putin knows that too, by the way.” He singled out Britain, mocking its naval capabilities and Starmer’s green-energy focus: “You don’t even have a navy. You’re too old and had aircraft carriers that didn’t work… All Starmer wants is costly windmills that are driving your energy prices through the roof.”
The row erupted after Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz – through which 20 per cent of the world’s oil flows – in response to US-Israeli strikes launched on February 28. Allies have been reluctant to deploy warships, prompting Trump to accuse NATO of operating a “one-way street.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the president on Fox News, warning that America would have to “re-examine” its NATO membership once the Iran conflict ends. “If Nato is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked, but them denying us basing rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement,” Rubio said. Trump later told The Telegraph he was “glad” Rubio had spoken out.
Starmer Fires Back: “This Is Not Our War”
Starmer moved quickly to reaffirm Britain’s commitment to NATO while drawing a firm line on the Iran conflict. “This is not our war, and we’re not going to get dragged into it,” he told The Telegraph, describing the alliance as “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen.” He signalled a pivot toward closer European cooperation “whatever the noise” from Washington.
Absolute humiliation for the White House. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer publicly brushes off Donald Trump’s threats to leave NATO. He explicitly states that despite massive pressure from Washington, Britain will never be dragged into this disastrous war on Iran. pic.twitter.com/vkniEBVSW5
The UK’s military vulnerabilities have only added fuel to the fire. On Tuesday, the First Sea Lord admitted the Royal Navy was not ready for war. Four of Britain’s six destroyers were out of service at the conflict’s start, forcing London to borrow a German warship to meet NATO obligations in the North Atlantic.
Any formal US withdrawal would require Congressional approval under 2023 legislation co-sponsored by Rubio himself. However, experts note Trump could still gut American participation by pulling troops, bases, and command support – effectively hollowing out the alliance without a full exit.
Trump is expected to deliver a national address on Wednesday evening outlining the Iran war’s status and, according to Reuters sources, to voice further disgust at NATO’s lack of reciprocity.
As oil prices spiral and recession fears mount, the standoff over the Strait of Hormuz has exposed raw fractures in the Western alliance. Whether Trump’s latest broadside is negotiation theatre or the beginning of America’s strategic retreat from Europe remains to be seen — but the “paper tiger” label has already left its mark.
“Finish This Thing, Finish It Right”: JPM CEO Jamie Dimon Weighs In On Iran War
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon appeared on Fox & Friends on Tuesday, covering everything from artificial intelligence to the economy to the continuing exodus from radical-left blue states. More notably, he offered his views on the U.S.-Iran war, which this week entered its fifth week and has remained at the center of the news cycle.
Dimon was first asked about the energy shock from the US-Iran conflict and whether surging fuel prices would impact the American economy.
“Look the markets are unpredictable and it’s hard to for me to tell you exactly what,” Dimon said of a potential impact.
“But I think they’re just looking at, is there a chance something can go wrong now? We should all hope nothing goes wrong. We should all hope that … we win this thing and clean up the straits and that Iran is no longer a threat to everybody. The markets will be concerned until it’s over.”
Dimon added, “It’s much more important that this be successfully completed than what the market does.”
He noted, “Yes, I hear people say they were not an imminent threat. But these people have been engaged in violent acts for 47 years, killing people, killing Americans, and funding Hamas. Several Americans were killed on October 7. They have fought proxy wars and threatened people. A ballistic missile can travel 3,000 miles. These are bad people who needed to be stopped. I do not know what the military and the president know, but we have to finish this thing and finish it right.”
Layered on top of Dimon’s comments yesterday is a broader geopolitical framework laid out earlier this month by Zoltan Pozsar of Ex Uno Plures.
In Pozsar’s view, the Trump administration is “methodically building a portfolio of assets” from Venezuela to the Panama Canal to Iran’s oil flows and the Strait of Hormuz, a strategy aimed at reasserting American dominance, securing the empire for years to come, and tightening the screws on Beijing after last year’s rare earths stunt.
