[snakeoil]

Few have done more to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials than the late Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Indiana, who passed away in April. Our current generation of lawmakers must not take the legacy of bipartisan leadership he left behind for granted – it is in grave danger.

Despite progress made at four Nuclear Security Summits between 2010 and 2016 to address the existential threat of nuclear terrorism, a new report from Harvard University’s Managing the Atom Project warns that “High-level political attention to nuclear security and overcoming obstacles has largely faded, international mechanisms for fostering nuclear security action and cooperation have not managed to fill the gap created by the absence of nuclear security summits, and political disputes continue to impede efforts to sustain or expand cooperation in crucial areas.”

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/0 ... ef=d-river

There’s a dangerous threat to United States security. It’s widely acknowledged by many top officials in the Trump administration. But the government remains stuck in neutral, paralyzed by a fear of offending the president.

This is the story of Russian electoral interference, but it is also the story of white racist violence. In the face of a verified—and lethal—threat, President Donald Trump has been slow to deal with the threat of domestic extremist violence inside the U.S., The New York Times reports, because aides are nervous about bringing it up. The problem of domestic terror has new relevance now, after the massacre in El Paso, Texas, but already the president’s attention has wandered to other topics.

The problem is, at heart, political correctness. Although that epithet is most often lobbed at the left by conservatives, it fits Trump’s behavior. Discussion of domestic terrorism and white violence has become politically incorrect within the president’s vicinity. The problem is not factual inaccuracy—it’s that bringing the issue up triggers Trump’s sensitivities so seriously that speaking the truth becomes taboo.

“Officials at [DHS] have felt they could not broach topics like domestic terrorism and white supremacist violence with Mr. Trump because he was not interested in those concerns,” the Times reports. Aides are right to be nervous. Trump has shown in the past that he has little patience for aides who tell him hard truths he doesn’t want to hear.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/0 ... ef=d-river

he trade war between the US and China is heating up again, with the US president, Donald Trump, abruptly announcing plans to impose a 10% tariff on the $300bn (£248bn) worth of imports from China that he had so far left untouched. The Chinese authorities then allowed their currency, the yuan, to fall below the symbolic threshold of seven to the dollar. The Trump administration promptly responded by naming China a “currency manipulator” – the first time the US had done that to any country in 25 years. Pundits declared a currency war and investors immediately sent global stock markets lower.

The US assertion that the recent depreciation of the yuan amounts to currency manipulation is not true. It would be more correct to say that the Chinese authorities gave in to market pressure – the immediate source of which was none other than Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs.

Economic theory says that tariffs do not improve a country’s trade balance in the way their proponents think they do. When an exchange rate is market-determined, it automatically moves to offset the tariff. Intuitively, if tariffs discourage American consumers from buying imported Chinese goods, then demand for the yuan weakens and the currency’s price falls.
Global trade disruption is a symptom of a deeper malaise
Mohamed El-Erian
Read more

The task of evaluating whether the US’s trading partners manipulate their currencies lies with the US Treasury Department, which uses three criteria. Two of the three coincide with internationally agreed yardsticks for manipulation under the articles of agreement of the International Monetary Fund: persistent one-sided intervention by the country to push down the value of its currency and a large current-account surplus. Neither of these apply to China today.

Since the US Congress assigned this task to the Treasury in 1988, the department has fulfilled its mandate professionally, regardless of who was in the White House. The sudden decision to label China a currency manipulator, despite it not meeting the criteria, is yet another case of Trump heedlessly running roughshod over established norms, professional expertise, the long-term credibility of US institutions and even the plain meaning of the law.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... de-dispute


https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/0 ... ef=d-river

[johnforbes]

If ya read the Guardian -- which has for a very long time been Left Wing in its outlook -- of course you would think Trump was a president you didn't like.

But he really is the president, even if words like "imitation" can't be spelled properly.

Unemployment is at half-century lows, and unemployment figures have NEVER been better for blacks, Hispanics, or women.

The U.S. has been losing the trade war for 30 yrs, but not fighting it. Now the U.S. is seeking a more level field of play.

These are good things, and the Left's frantic calls of "racism" are as fake as the phony dossier used by Mueller to investigation Trump for 2 yrs.