NY Times Seems Upset That Trump Made A Big Deal With The EU

One would think that Democrats and the NY Times would be happy for America to get a great trade deal. Nope

Europe Cuts a Trade Deal With Trump, Worried About Other Global Issues

Survive and advance.

That phrase, favored by sports teams in big tournaments, sums up Europe’s approach to the trade negotiations it just wrapped with the Trump administration.

For Europe, surviving in the first year of President Trump’s second term means reaching an agreement on a trade deal that almost certainly won’t help the continental economy — but isn’t as bad as it could have been.

Advancing means keeping Mr. Trump engaged in the foreign policy issues that have preoccupied many European leaders more this summer than their own domestic economic struggles. Those issues include the fate of the Iranian nuclear program, the conflict and humanitarian crisis in Gaza and, most important, Ukraine’s ongoing war against Russia’s invasion.

The trade deal is centered on a tariff of 15 percent on most goods imposed by the United States on imports from the European Union. It reflects a sort of risk aversion from leaders like Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission; Friedrich Merz, the chancellor of Germany; and Emmanuel Macron, the president of France.

I hope at some point the Times says what America gets

Europe could have fought Mr. Trump longer, hoping for better terms. E.U. members had already agreed to a set of retaliatory tariffs on about $100 billion in American exports to Europe, which they could have decided to trigger if Mr. Trump had followed through on his threat to tax European exports at 30 percent starting on Aug. 1. Mr. Trump had pushed similar deadlines back before.

It’s almost like the Times wanted Europe to go hardcore on the U.S., where the Times is based and full of US citizens in a city full of US citizens, hurting the US because Orange Man Bad.

Trump Reaches Historic Trade Deal with EU: Europe to Buy $750 Billion in U.S. Energy

President Donald Trump announced a sweeping trade agreement with the European Union (EU) on Sunday, setting a baseline 15 percent tariff on European imports — including automobiles — while keeping existing 50 percent duties on steel and aluminum in place. As part of the deal, the EU committed to purchasing $750 billion in U.S. energy products.

The EU will purchase three-quarters of a trillion dollars in U.S. energy, while also investing $600 billion into America on top of existing investments. Additionally, EU countries will be setting tariffs on U.S. goods at zero percent, and Europe agreed “to purchase a vast amount of military equipment,” Trump said.

Remember, EU nations placed all sorts of tariffs on American goods for decades, making it harder and more expensive for American companies, big and small, to import their goods into Europe.

“So we have a tariff of 15% we have the opening up of all of the European countries, which I think I could say were essentially closed,” Trump said. “I mean, you weren’t exactly taking our orders, you weren’t exactly taking our agriculture, and then you would have smaller things, but for the most part, it was closed, and now it’s open.”

That’s what Trump wants: the ability for Americans to sell their goods in Europe at a reasonable price. Commerce. With who are supposed to be our allies.

(Politico) It locks in U.S. tariffs of 15 percent on most imports from the EU. Von der Leyen and Co. had succeeded in fending off Trump’s threat to raise tariffs on most EU goods to 30 percent on Aug. 1. The agreement is likely to boost the European economy, which is still lagging behind much of the rest of the world and is struggling to pick up after the Covid pandemic.

Really, Europe does need the US more than the US needs Europe. Regardless, this is what it’s all about: re-balancing trade for the US to give Americans a better deal around the world.

Read: NY Times Seems Upset That Trump Made A Big Deal With The EU »

The Atlantic: Summers Are Like Winters, With Americans Stuck Inside

Well, I guess if you’re soft and weak like the barking moonbat Warmists at the Atlantic you avoid a little weather

American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter

Americans have a long history of enduring heat waves by going outside. In a 1998 essay for The New Yorker, the author Arthur Miller described urbanites’ Depression-era coping mechanisms: People caught the breeze on open-air trolleys, climbed onto the back of ice trucks, and flocked to the beach. In the evenings, they slept in parks or dragged their mattresses onto fire escapes.

But since air conditioning went mainstream, in the 1960s, the easiest way to beat the heat has been by staying indoors—at home, the office, the mall—where cool air is a constant and blinds are often drawn to prevent homes from overheating (and electric bills from skyrocketing). For this convenience, Americans sacrifice the benefits of sunshine and the opportunities for fun it creates. As climate change turns up the temperature, summers in America are coming down to a choice between enduring the heat and avoiding it—both of which might, in their own ways, be making people sick.

In cities across the country, summers are, on average, 2.6 degrees hotter than they were some 50 years ago. In Phoenix, where a 95-degree day is a relief, schedules are arranged around the darkness; Jeffrey Gibson, an accountant who works from home, takes his eight-month-old daughter out for walks before 6:30 a.m.; after that, it’s so hot that she flushes bright red if they venture outside. He spends the rest of his day indoors unless leaving is absolutely necessary. It’s like this from April to October. Gibson recently told his wife, “Man, I think I’m a little depressed.”

Good grief, if you cannot take 2.6F more than 50 years ago you should probably replace your panty shields. It was 96 here today, I washed the car and did the windows inside. Big whoop.

The DSM-5 categorizes SAD as a type of major depression with a seasonal pattern, with symptoms such as sadness, feelings of worthlessness, and low energy. Usually, it presents in the winter, though scientists don’t agree on why. Some suspect that it’s because a lack of sun exposure may contribute to decreased levels of serotonin, a hormone that regulates mood, as well as vitamin D, which helps stimulate serotonin activity. Another theory links low exposure to sunlight with unusually high levels of melatonin, a hormone that helps regulate sleep.

Maybe the Warmists could go outside for a bit? Maybe go to the pool or the beach? Down to the lake? But, come on, these people are deranged.

Read: The Atlantic: Summers Are Like Winters, With Americans Stuck Inside »

Good News: Trump Admin Immigration Policies Transforming US-Mexico Border

Well, not good news to the LA Times, which supports illegal immigration

Self-deportations. Factory layoffs. Military zones. How Trump is transforming the U.S.-Mexico border.

Juan Ortíz trudged through 100-degree heat along the U.S.-Mexico border, weighed down by a backpack full of water bottles that he planned to leave for migrants trying to cross this rugged terrain.

Only there hadn’t been many migrants of late.

When Ortíz started water drops in this especially dangerous stretch of desert near El Paso nearly two years ago, he sometimes encountered dozens of people trying to reach the U.S. in a single afternoon. Now he rarely sees any. Border crossings began falling during the final months of President Biden’s term, and have plunged to their lowest levels in decades under President Trump.

Oh, lord, they’re actually trying to give Biden credit. The illegals knew the Trump admin was soon going to shut it down

These borderlands surrounding El Paso were long a place of risk but also opportunity. Migrants chasing the American dream crossed by the tens of thousands annually, sometimes dodging federal agents and often seeking them out to ask for asylum.

But Trump’s immigration crackdown — a total ban on asylum, a mass deportation campaign and the unprecedented militarization of the border — has altered life here in myriad ways.

Across the Rio Grande from El Paso in the Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez, shelters once hummed with life, rich with the smell of cooked stews and the chatter of people plotting their passage to the U.S.

Today those shelters are largely empty, populated by migrants stranded in Mexico when Trump took office, and others who were in the United States but decided to leave, spooked by policies designed to instill fear.

I mean, seriously, this is what happens when the Executive Branch uses the laws on the books and dissincentives people from around world to cross the border and/or declare (fake) asylum.

The Pentagon, which made the designations, has deployed some 9,000 active-duty troops to the border as part of Trump’s directive to expand the military’s role in reducing migrant crossings. Migrants who enter the new “national defense” zones while crossing the border are being detained by U.S. troops, charged with trespassing and turned over to immigration authorities.

Applause! Of course, for the LA Times it is a long, long, whiny piece about how mean it is for the Trump admin to enforce federal law.

Meanwhile

US government is building a 5,000-person immigrant detention camp in west Texas

The U.S. government is building an immense 5,000-person detention camp in west Texas, government contract announcements said, sharply increasing the Trump administration’s ability to hold detained immigrants amid its ever-growing mass deportation efforts.

A Defense Department contract announcement on Monday said Acquisition Logistics, a Virginia-based firm, had been awarded $232 million in Army funds to build the facility, which would be used for single immigrant adults.

Procurement documents called it a “soft sided facility,” a phrase often used for tent camps.

And they can all avoid being put there by self-deporting.

Read: Good News: Trump Admin Immigration Policies Transforming US-Mexico Border »

If All You See…

…is an Evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Independent Sentinel, with a post on the easy citizenship tests getting revamped.

Let’s make it an easy bikini week.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another fine day in Returned America. The Sun is shining, the birds are singing, and the ankle is getting better day by day. This pinup is by Dietz, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. The Right Scoop: BREAKING: Democrats receive LOWEST rating from voters in 35 years
  2. Victory Girls Blog: Gatorade: Let the WNBA Be Barefoot and Preggers in the Kitchen
  3. The Last Refuge: FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino “shocked to his core” over FBI’s recent corruption discoveries: ‘I’ll never be the same’
  4. The Gateway Pundit: Mollie Hemingway: Media Not Reporting New Russiagate Developments Because ‘They Were Complicit’ in Original Crime (VIDEO)
  5. The First Street Journal: If you are not calling on Hamas to surrender and release the hostages, your cries about people suffering in Gaza are worthless.
  6. The American Conservative: Trump Administration Greenlights Chevron’s Venezuela Oil Drilling
  7. Powerline Blog: Macron v Owens
  8. Pacific Pundit: Ilhan Omar is demanding that the United States abolish all nuclear weapons
  9. Outside They Beltway: A Bullish View of AI That’s Not So Bullish
  10. Newsbusters: PBS’s Expert on Campus Anti-Semitism: Columbia Settlement Was ‘Ransom’ to Trump
  11. Moonbattery: Moonbat Attack on Blue Angels
  12. Legal Insurrection: U.S. Withdraws from Jewish-History-Denying, Islamic-Supremacist-Promoting UNESCO … Again!
  13. Jihad Watch: Germany: 18-year-old Muslim migrant tortures 13-year-old victim for hours on film, gets probation
  14. Irons In The Fire: About that land some of my ancestors, very happily, got the hell out of
  15. And last, but, not least, Geller Report has Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: The Stealth Islamization of America

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014, so, most are hosted internally). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your Pinups for Vets calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me. I’ve also mostly alphabetized them, makes it easier scrolling the feedreader

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Two great sites for getting news links are Liberty Daily and Whatafinger.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

And Here We Go: Excitable Alex Padilla Introduces Bill To Make Most Illegals Legal

Is this worse or better than Republican Rep Maria Elvia Salazar’s? Or, are both horrendous and a giveaway to illegals which will entice more illegals to come

Sen. Alex Padilla introduces legislation for pathway to lawful permanent residency for immigrants

Amid weeks of federal immigration enforcement activity in the Southland, U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., announced on Friday legislation intended to expand existing pathways for immigrants to obtain lawful permanent residency.

His bill would update the Immigration Act of 1929, also referred to as the Registry Bill.” The law provides the Secretary of Homeland Security the discretion to register certain individuals for lawful permanent resident status if they have been in the country since a certain date, among other requirements.

The act was established in 1929, and Congress has modified it four times — most recently during the Reagan administration in 1986.

Since then, no changes have been made. According to Padilla’s office, the Registry Bill currently allows immigrants who have lived in the U.S. since Jan. 1, 1972, to apply for and obtain a green card.

Under the proposal, immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for at least seven years, do not have a criminal record and meet all other current eligibility requirements could apply to receive a green card.

So, it would count for those who haven’t been convicted, just charged? Remember, they already broke federal law by crossing the border illegally or overstaying their visas.

But, is that what the bill really says? Padilla’s press release links to here as The Bill. Go read it. It will take you 30 seconds. See if you see anything about criminal record. I don’t. But, it could be buried in the government-speak of 8 U.S. Code § 1259, but, could be deemed under 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens. They can’t be unhealthy. Things like “assets, resources, and financial status” are to be taken into consideration, ie, they need to stand on their own two feet, not be wards of the state.

Oh, weirdly, in 6(A)(1): An alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, or who arrives in the United States at any time or place other than as designated by the Attorney General, is inadmissible. So, illegals are not eligible? Did Alex think this through?

Of course, there is zero chance it will pass the GOP controlled House or Senate. If the Dems take control in 2027, it won’t survive the 60 vote threshold.

Read: And Here We Go: Excitable Alex Padilla Introduces Bill To Make Most Illegals Legal »

If All You See…

…is a horrible fossil fueled tractor, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on the return of Brett Kimberlin.

Read: If All You See… »

TDS: CNN Says Trump Is Fleeing To Scotland Over Washington Happenings

I certainly understand trying to make one’s headline different from all the others out there, but, this is moonbat

Trump flees Washington controversies for golf-heavy trip to Scotland

Fleeing Washington’s oppressive humidity and nonstop questions over heated controversies, President Donald Trump is once again taking weekend refuge at his golf clubs — this time more than 3,000 miles away in Scotland.

While the White House has called his five-day trip a “working visit,” it’s fairly light on the formal itinerary. Trump is poised to hold trade talks Sunday with the chief of the European Union and is scheduled to meet with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday.

But he’s expected to spend most of his trip out of public view at two of his golf resorts – Trump Turnberry in the west and Trump International about 200 miles away in the north, near his mother’s ancestral homeland.

Presidential trips like this rarely happen on the spur of the moment, especially when there are meetings planned with foreign leaders. Also, where was CNN when Biden was fleeing to one of his homes in Delaware, usually Rehoboth Beach, or Camp David, virtually every weekend of his presidency?

Nearly every time Trump has spoken with reporters in recent weeks, he’s been pressed with new questions about the Epstein scandal, many of which are fueled by deep suspicions that he and his followers have been stirring for years. New revelations about his personal ties to the disgraced financier have kept the matter alive. (snip)

Authorities in Scotland have spent weeks preparing for Trump’s arrival. Assistant Chief Constable Emma Bond told reporters the security operation would be the largest the country has mounted since the death of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022, including local officers, national security divisions and special constables.

Weeks. Meaning this trip was planned before that, hence, prior to the whole Epstein thing CNN is claiming is making Trump flee Washington. Notice that Trump was actually still taking questions, while Biden would just dodder off. Well, except when he was taking the questions his staff gave to reporters. And still messing them up.

Seriously, the whole thing is a piece of Orange Man Bad. And then the media wonders why they are called partisan.

Read: TDS: CNN Says Trump Is Fleeing To Scotland Over Washington Happenings »

Californians Worried About Climate Crisis (scam), But, Don’t Want To Pay For It

Well, really, do not want to pay more for it, because they’re already paying quite a bit in money, loss of freedom, and loss of life choices. Reminds me of this piece by The Hill. I had another one at the Washington Post, but, forgot to get it from my Pocket account, and Pocket is closing. Maybe I can get it via export? Meh. You don’t need to know that. This you do

Californians Are Worried About Wildfire and Growing Costs of Climate Change

Californians are most likely to name wildfires as the top environmental issue facing the state and are very concerned about the rising costs associated with climate change, according to a survey released this week by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Although Californians understand climate change poses a personal and financial risk to their lives and generally want state and local governments to do more to address it, when asked if they’re willing to spend more money on renewable energy, most respondents said “no.”

This marks a continuing decline. In 2016, 56% of respondents were willing to spend more. Today, just 40% are.

Sniffle

While renewable energy is generally cheaper than oil and gas, investing in the infrastructure to transition from a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy economy is pricey. That includes the costs like installing high-speed EV chargers and reinforcing the electric grid. How to fund those projects is a conundrum for policymakers.

“Affordability and cost of living are generally the top issues that Californians say the state is facing,” said Lauren Mora, a survey analyst at the Public Policy Institute of California.

Most of the poll shows that Californians are super concerned about ‘climate change’ and wildfires, and that both the State and Federal government are not doing enough. That doom is coming.

But, they do not want to pay more. Can’t have it both way, cultists.

Despite their concerns about rising costs, 55% of Californians surveyed believe that stricter state environmental regulations are worth it. (Generally, environmental regulations can cause some short-term loss of profit for businesses but pay for themselves with healthier people, averted hospital visits and fewer premature deaths.)

They get what they pay for. And pay more and more, because the cost of good, energy, and services keep rising. Votes do have consequences.

Read: Californians Worried About Climate Crisis (scam), But, Don’t Want To Pay For It »

Oops: BBB Includes Provision Blocking Federal Funds From Sanctuary Jurisdictions

Usually the GOP goes all squishy, but, they slipped an interesting tidbit into the BBB and Democrats never noticed

Federal Funds for Local Obedience: Immigration Clause Puts Dems in Bind

A little-noticed provision in the “Big Beautiful Bill” forces blue states and cities to make a tough choice: Comply with federal immigration law or lose federal money for criminal justice aid.

President Trump’s signature piece of legislation allocated $3.3 billion to the DOJ, some of which will go toward the Byrne-JAG Grant Program, a federal initiative created in 2005 which provides support for local law enforcement and criminal justice efforts. To access the new funds, which supplement the $499 million already appropriated for the Byrne-JAG program in 2025, localities must comply with a section of federal immigration law that forbids them from restricting communication between their law enforcement entities and the Department of Homeland Security regarding an individual’s immigration status. This provides an incentive for localities to share their information with federal immigration authorities, helping the Trump administration implement its immigration enforcement agenda, but it also runs the risk of misallocating federal support.

This condition poses a dilemma for Democrats: Do they accept the demands of the Trump administration in return for money they need to run their cities and localities? Or do they maintain their longstanding opposition to deportation and turn it down?

Suddenly Democrats start realizing that depending on Los Federales for tons of their funding was a Bad Idea. That perhaps federal taxes should be low enough to fund the specific things outlined in the Constitution and nothing else, and States should fund what they want to fund.

But sticking with this position means their constituents won’t benefit from the additional funding that other localities will be able to use to lower their local fiscal burden and make their communities safer.

In effect, millions of dollars in federal justice system aid could flow to low-crime, less liberal suburbs and rural areas, while high-crime cities are left behind for defying federal immigration demands. Specifically, cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and Memphis, which lead the nation in homicide rates, could be prevented from receiving funding.

Well, it’s not like the liberal cities are doing a good job with the federal money to start with, eh? I mean, will they really miss it, considering how messed up their cities are, and that they pass policies which make crime more prevalent?

In a statement to RealClearPolitics, Sen. Dick Durbin, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, argued that “Putting unnecessary stipulations on this funding is harmful and unproductive.” “Blocking funds for this purpose,” Durbin continued, “totally misses the mark.”

In response, White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson argued that “If Dick Durbin is truly focused on the safety and security of American communities, he should encourage cities and states to comply with federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities only provide sanctuary to illegal criminals, and Americans – like the CBP agent who was just shot in the face by two criminal illegal aliens – are forced to pay the price.”

They have the choice. What will they do?

The first Trump administration also attempted to tie Byrne-JAG grants to compliance with federal immigration law in 2017. At the time, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that such restrictions were not within the power of the executive branch (City of Chicago v. Sessions). Now, the Department of Justice has explicit congressional authorization to make the grant conditional, creating a more favorable legal landscape for the Trump administration.

Well, now what? I’m sure the Dems will find some friendly federal judge to rule in their favor, but, it won’t stand, as Congress has the power of the purse, not the Judiciary.

Read: Oops: BBB Includes Provision Blocking Federal Funds From Sanctuary Jurisdictions »

Pirate's Cove