“Donald Trump says he stands behind Pete Hegseth, our entirely unqualified secretary of defense, a former Fox News weekend morning-show clown and future Brylcreem model who is in the habit of treating sensitive military information as though it were knitting-circle gossip. Hegseth has chatted about upcoming military actions with everyone and his brother — literally, his brother, as well as his wife — through an app that is in and of itself not sufficiently secure but which is even more insecure when it is being handled by tech-illiterate doofuses (and the Trump administration is full of these) who, in a related instance, accidentally copied the editor of The Atlantic on the conversation. The president says he has complete confidence in Hegseth. So, he’s probably cooked.” (04/23/25)
“[A]rguing about tariffs has a long American pedigree, dating back to the administration of the first president, George Washington. There are three important lessons we can learn from this early American tariff debate. The first and most important lesson is that each system proposed in the 1790s, like all centralized systems of industrial policy and tariffs, allowed government to choose winners and losers. Second, at a time when some form of mercantilism was still the default position for nearly all Americans, there was still vigorous debate. And third, tariffs are fundamentally a moral issue.” (04/23/25)
“Intimidating lawyers has become a key component of the Trump administration’s overall strategy, and this is especially true with respect to mass deportations. Immigrants detained for lacking documentation are more than 10 times more likely to get a favorable outcome if they have an attorney than if they don’t. Trump officials are certainly aware of this. During Trump’s first term, Attorney General Jeff Sessions decried ‘dirty immigration lawyers,’ claiming they were encouraging their clients to ‘make false claims of asylum, providing them with the magic words needed’ to get relief. There were also multiple incidents of DHS targeting immigration attorneys, advocates, and journalists with criminal investigations or by flagging their passports for extra scrutiny if they left and reentered the country. But this time around, they’re ratcheting up the pressure.” (04/23/25)
“As I write this, it’s been about two weeks since the ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs were announced. While nobody expects political economic models to be stellar (see the myriad of ‘economic impact studies’ that come out for any project that just happen to coincide with what the local politician wants to hear), the model released by the USTR/CEA stands out. I, and many others, have already written about its numerous faults. It reads like an undergrad essay thrown together at the last minute following a furious run through Google Scholar rather than a considered scientific recommendation. Further defense by Council of Economic Advisers chair Stephen Miran has been inadequate as well as he continuously misapplies citations and uses discredited models to advance the plan. These are post hoc justifications for a desired policy rather than a policy crafted to solve a real problem.” (04/23/25)
“Did you know the Libertarian Party was founded over five decades ago in response to a corrupt Republican president using his executive authority to violate free market principles? … Trump’s tariffs create the same need for a strong Libertarian Party that Nixon’s wage and price controls did.” (04/23/25)
“In 1977, millions of American tempers flared against the treaty giving Panama control of the canal that bisects its country. A bemused senator said: My state’s residents are of different races, ethnicities, religions and politics but are united in white-hot attachment to the canal, which until now they had not thought about since hearing of it in third grade. Today, there are widespread laments about the diminishment, perhaps to extinction, of the Education Department, although the lamenters cannot connect it with educational improvements since its founding nearly 46 years ago; there having been few, if any. Although the department has been often slathered with high-minded devotion, it was born from a banal political transaction between a notably pious politician and one of the principal causes of the subsequent decline in K-12 education quality.” (04/23/25)
Source: Foundation for Economic Education
by Daphne Posadas
“President Claudia Sheinbaum unveiled Vive Saludable, Vive Feliz, a health initiative that includes a ban on the sale of candy, salty snacks, and sugary drinks in schools. The Internet quickly dubbed her Mexico’s ‘almond mom’ — referencing the diet-obsessed parents often mocked online. Images of empty shelves and beverage refrigerators stocked exclusively with bottled water flooded social media as the policy took effect on March 29. The ban has even extended to university cafeterias, impacting students who are legal adults. Several campuses have reported sharp declines in snack and beverage sales, with some establishments considering shutting down altogether to avoid fines or financial losses. Is this prohibition really the solution to Mexico’s obesity problem?” (04/23/25)
“I’m puzzled by Democratic politicians’ decision to turn Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal [sic] immigrant and alleged member of a violent gang who’s been deported from Maryland to El Salvador, into their latest cause célèbre. Four Democratic House members landed in the capital city of San Salvador on April 21 to appeal for his return to the United Sates … Just days earlier, Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland made the same journey to meet with Abrego Garcia, who is being held in a Salvadoran prison. The Supreme Court has ruled that the deportation was illegal, and the Trump administration was instructed to return Abrego Garcia to the United States. But the Justice Department contends that it doesn’t have jurisdiction because he’s being held by a foreign government.” (04/23/25)
“‘Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.’ ‘I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.’ — James Madison … I just thought I’d throw those two quotes above out there so you’d know what James Madison, the ‘Father’ of our Constitution, the guy who wrote most of it, thought about a government welfare state. There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the right to spend one thin dime, much less trillions, on charity, even to their own constituents, much less to foreigners. But, it’s really a moot point; nobody in Washington, D.C., especially in Congress, pays the least bit of attention to what the Constitution authorizes them to do.” (04/23/25)
Source: The American Conservative
by W James Antle III
“The long knives are out at the Pentagon. We have in recent days seen the ouster of some of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s top aides, including at least one leading voice for foreign-policy restraint within recent days. But the real target is clearly Hegseth himself. ‘If Mr. Hegseth is wise,’ the Wall Street Journal editorial board advises, ‘he’ll use the staff shakeup to hire some loyal grownups who know the building, instead of the self-promoting isolationists he first brought in.’ The end result of the shake-up could be that Hegseth is isolated himself. … President Donald Trump’s support is, and will continue to be, decisive.” (04/23/25)
