Do you remember just recently when this massive and quite intimidating bridge was constructed in China? The bridge called Hongqi Bridge was built in Maerkang which is located in Sichuan Province (southwest China). The bridge is approximately 758 meters long and had been completed only months earlier. It looked like this: It even boasted a Restaurant inside the tallest peak: Now just shortly after opening, the bridge has suffered a collapse. It is a PARTIAL collapse only, but it looks horrific. Watch this stunning Before/After video: Here’s a quick summary of all we know so far: What is verified A bridge called Hongqi Bridge in Maerkang, Sichuan Province (southwest China), suffered a partial collapse. The bridge is approximately 758 meters long and had been completed only months earlier. Local authorities reported that slope instability / mountain terrain shifting was observed near the bridge prior to the collapse. No deaths were reported. The part that failed was the approach span and roadbed, not the full main span. What the authorities claim caused it Officials state the cause was “mountain slope failure” — meaning the ground supporting part of the approach section moved, leading to a collapse of that section.This is effectively the same as saying landslide-triggered structural failure.However, this does not settle whether: The design accounted for known slope instability, Construction quality was adequate, Or the geological survey was flawed. Those questions are typically examined only after a formal investigation. Key clarifications It was a partial collapse, not the entire bridge falling. The timeline — “opened recently, collapsed months later” — is accurate. The explanation of geotechnical failure is plausible on its face, especially in mountainous Sichuan, which is known for unstable slopes and seismic activity. Whether this was engineering negligence or unpredictable terrain movement is still not determined. Bottom line The event did happen, the location and timeline are accurate, and officials are attributing it to mountain slope failure.But the deeper question — was this a natural slope collapse or preventable design/engineering failure? — remains unresolved until the investigation concludes. If this story seems familiar, that’s because this is far from the first time this has happened recently in China. This video does a great job summarizing all the other recent bridge collapses: Reuters added these details: Part of a recently opened bridge collapsed in China’s southwestern province of Sichuan along a national highway linking the country’s heartland with Tibet on Tuesday, local authorities said, but there were no reports of casualties. Police in the city of Maerkang had closed the 758-metre-long Hongqi bridge to all traffic on Monday afternoon, after cracks appeared on nearby slopes and roads, and shifts were seen in the terrain of a mountain, the local government said.

President Trump just took aim at Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene over recent comments she made about his presidency. While speaking to reporters, President Trump called Marjorie “a nice woman” who has sadly “lost her way.” He also accused her of “catering” to the left. Watch for yourself: President Trump on MTG: “I don’t know what happened to Marjorie. She’s a nice woman, but I don’t know what happened. She’s lost her way I think… I’m surprised at her. When you’re president, you have to watch over the world, otherwise you could be dragged into it.” My… pic.twitter.com/GMxCTnbUFv — MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) November 10, 2025 President Trump on MTG: “I don’t know what happened to Marjorie. She’s a nice woman, but I don’t know what happened. She’s lost her way I think… I’m surprised at her. When you’re president, you have to watch over the world, otherwise you could be dragged into it.” My Thoughts: First ask yourself what MTG is criticizing. Do you agree with what she’s saying? Then you have to decide whether or not she is a good or bad person who maybe lost her way; or maybe she’s highlighting things Trump simply can’t optically. Same with Tucker, Matt Gaetz, and others. Just think about it… Backup here: Recently, MTG has become somewhat of a polarizing figure among MAGA conservatives. She’s broken with Congressional Republicans on several issues, including the Epstein files, Israel, and the government shutdown. Last week, she criticized President Trump for, in her words, focusing on foreign affairs and “not helping Americans.” AP News provided some additional context: President Donald Trump on Monday said that key Republican ally Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene had “lost her way” by saying that he’s spending too much time on foreign affairs and should be more focused on inflation. The dispute reflects a fundamental challenge within Trump’s coalition after last week’s off-cycle elections, in which voters in the New Jersey and Virginia governor races flocked to Democrats in large part over concerns about the cost of living. The White House has recognized that it needs to do more to sell its efforts to address inflation to the wider public. But Trump — who is investing significant time in his second term on foreign policy — defended his approach. The president has been claiming that he’s already beaten the problem of high prices. “I don’t know what happened to Marjorie, nice woman,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on a day centered around meeting Syria’s leader and swearing in a new ambassador to India. “She’s lost her way, I think.” Greene, a Trump advocate in Congress, told NBC News last week that “watching the foreign leaders come to the White House through a revolving door is not helping Americans.” She said prices remain too high and the president needs to focus on that rather than his recent emphasis on foreign affairs. “It’s not reducing the cost of living.” Greene said. “It’s doing nothing about health insurance premiums. It’s doing nothing to solve the problems that are really plaguing vulnerable segments of our population, especially young people.” Trump said he sees the presidency “as a worldwide situation” that requires a broader focus. “We could have a world that’s on fire, where wars come to our shores very easily, if you had a bad president,” said Trump, stressing that he “did not devote a lot of my time” to foreign affairs. He said Greene was “catering to the other side” and he was “surprised by her.” MTG also chastised President Trump for meeting with the President of Syria today. She posted on X: The new leader of Syria is a former Al Qaeda terrorist wanted by our government who is meeting with President Trump today at the White House on the U.S. Marine’s 250th anniversary. He rose to power in Dec 2024, sanctions were lifted off Syria in June, and many Christians and… pic.twitter.com/El20YKN9VZ — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) November 10, 2025 The new leader of Syria is a former Al Qaeda terrorist wanted by our government who is meeting with President Trump today at the White House on the U.S. Marine’s 250th anniversary. He rose to power in Dec 2024, sanctions were lifted off Syria in June, and many Christians and minority groups have been killed before and after sanctions were lifted. Syria is the oldest home of Christianity outside of Israel. The apostle Paul met Jesus on the road to Damascus. I pray the persecution ends, not only in Syria, but all around the world. However, I would really like to see nonstop meetings at the WH on domestic policy not foreign policy and foreign country’s leaders. Start by hauling in the health insurance company’s executives and let’s start formulating our Republican plan to save America from Obamacare and ACA tax credits that have skyrocketed the cost of health insurance! In response to President Trump blasting her, MTG responded unapologetically. NBC News shared her, very brief, statement: Asked about Trump’s comments, Greene said in a statement: “I haven’t lost my way. I’m 100% America first and only!” Patriots are divided over MTG’s comments. Many folks are agreeing with some of the points she has been making lately, while others agree with President Trump that she has fallen off the bandwagon. Check out some of these replies: She’s never said anything bad about Donald Trump. She is strictly talking s*** about Congress and them not working together to pass Trump’s agenda. I don’t blame her man.. a lot of what she’s been saying lately makes sense.. I stand by her. Mj, you bring up some good analysis… — RILLA (@Rick_ATL_) November 10, 2025 Unfollowed her a long time ago….funny how she thinks she can make it without MAGA — Dr. Wonder Woman (@amandalaurenm) November 10, 2025 I was gonna rip MTG at first, but now I’m sitting back and watching for this reason. I think she is speaking on topics that Trump won’t. I don’t know yet completely if it’s a good thing or not. But It’s interesting. — American Advocates (@American_Advo) November 10, 2025 The $25 MM she has somehow made since being in Congress has poisoned her. She has literally become who she once detested. — johnah (@johnah_1) November 11, 2025 This guy made an excellent point: Marjorie is simply voicing what many prominent MAGA figures are too afraid to acknowledge aloud. Emphasizing affordability is not divisive; it is practical and benefits all Americans. The media, however, is eager to turn it into a nonexistent conflict. — T.t (@tosino007) November 10, 2025   What are your thoughts?

In a huge win for women, the Olympics is moving to ban biological men from competing in women’s events. Why now, you may ask? Well, this is kind of hilarious. The International Olympics Committee cited the discovery of “scientific evidence of advantages to being born male.” Yes, really. As if that weren’t obvious. Check it out: BREAKING: Transgender athletes are to be banned from female competition at the Olympics following a review of evidence about the sporting advantages of being born male. The new policy may also bar female athletes with ‘differences of sex development’, possibly including… pic.twitter.com/ymKdRnT3C0 — The Telegraph (@Telegraph) November 10, 2025 BREAKING: The Olympics is set to BAN transgender athletes from women’s events upon discovering “scientific evidence of advantages to being born male.” You discovered it JUST NOW?! pic.twitter.com/D9QLHeLe2N — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 10, 2025 The ban on so-called “transgenders” in women’s Olympic events is set to go into effect under the committee’s new president, Kirsty Coventry, who has vowed to protect women. It’s not official yet, but the policy change is set to be announced ahead of the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles. We can also thank President Trump for playing a part in this. Another reason the IOC wants to ban transgenders is because of President Trump’s executive order targeting biological men in women’s sports. The Times reported: The International Olympic Committee is set to announce a ban on transgender women in female competition early next year after a science-based review of evidence about permanent physical advantages of being born male. The IOC’s guidance to Olympic sports has until now been that transgender women can compete with reduced testosterone levels but leaves it up to individual sports to decide. That is now set to change under its new president, Kirsty Coventry, who has promised to protect the female category. The committee’s medical and scientific director, Dr Jane Thornton, last week presented to IOC members at a meeting in Lausanne the initial findings of a science-based review into transgender athletes and competitors with differences of sexual development (DSD) competing in female sport. Sources said the presentation by Thornton, a Canadian former Olympic rower, stated that scientific evidence showed there were physical advantages to being born male that remained with athletes, including those who had taken treatment to reduce testosterone levels. “It was a very scientific, factual and unemotional presentation which quite clearly laid out the evidence,” one source said. Another IOC insider said there had been hugely positive feedback from IOC members about the presentation. It is understood the IOC is likely to announce its new policy early in the new year, possibly around the IOC session at the Milan-Cortina winter Olympics in early February. Some work remains to be done to ensure the new policy is legally watertight. Until now the IOC’s policy has been based on recommendations and guidance to sports rather than actually being part of its eligibility rules. The ban is expected to come into force before the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics. That would avoid any clash with the US president, Donald Trump, who has signed an executive order that prevents transgender women from competing in female categories. Trump has claimed it would mean the US would deny visas for transgender athletes trying to compete in LA. Of course, this new rule also comes after last year’s very controversial Olympics. Telegraph noted: The stricter new IOC policy could also include athletes with differences of sex development, known as DSD. The most high-profile example is Caster Semenya, who won 800 metres gold at London 2012 and Rio 2016. Two boxers – Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting – won controversial gold medals at the Paris Olympics last year despite allegedly failing to meet gender eligibility criteria at the Boxing World Championships. According to World Athletics data, there have been 135 DSD finalists in elite female athletics competition this century. In a presentation at the World Athletics Championships in Tokyo this year, Dr Stephane Bermon, the head of health and science, estimated that 151.9 times more DSD athletes had made finals than the DSD incidence in the general population. World Athletics introduced mandatory sex testing ahead of this year’s World Championships, a move Bermon said was necessary because of an “over-representation” of DSD athletes among finalists. The IOC is expected to update its gender policy next year, with officials mindful of the legal ramifications. Governing bodies in the UK, including the Football Association and the England and Wales Cricket Board, introduced a ban on transgender athletes in the female category earlier this year but the ECB is now facing a legal challenge over its policy change. Kudos to Kirsty Coventry for pushing for this change. Still, this is just incredible. It took them this long to realize something that should have been common sense. Ah yes, scientific evidence. Like your eyes. — Walt (@WaltIsHereNow) November 10, 2025  

President Donald Trump issued a Truth Social post on Monday that centered on a major Supreme Court case that could reshape the limits of presidential power over U.S. trade policy. President Trump warned that the U.S. Supreme Court “was given the wrong numbers” regarding the economic stakes of the pending tariff case. He stated that if the Court rules against him, the resulting “unwind” of the tariff system — reversing investments, refunds, and related measures — would exceed $3 trillion. He characterized that scenario as an “insurmountable National Security Event,” warning it could devastate the U.S. economy and threaten the country’s sustainability. Trump’s statement is both an economic and political message, emphasizing that the stakes of the Supreme Court’s decision extend well beyond trade law. He suggests that an unfavorable ruling could require returning massive tariff revenues collected under his administration’s 2025 “reciprocal tariffs,” potentially exceeding $3 trillion when including lost investment and refunds. This would unwind a significant source of federal revenue and destabilize fiscal planning. Trump is also framing tariffs as essential to protecting U.S. manufacturing and reducing dependence on foreign suppliers. Therefore, reversing them would not only hurt the economy but also compromise U.S. national security. By calling it a “national security event,” Trump connects trade policy to his broader presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), arguing that tariffs are a legitimate tool for addressing threats tied to trade deficits and foreign economic influence. Trump’s claim that the Supreme Court “was given the wrong numbers” implies he believes the economic consequences have been understated to the justices, a move aimed at shaping public perception and potentially influencing the Court’s understanding of the stakes. The Supreme Court case, Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., consolidates challenges to Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose wide-reaching tariffs without explicit congressional approval. The Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. Lower courts have ruled against Trump, saying that IEEPA does not authorize open-ended tariffs and that such economic measures require a clear congressional delegation. If the justices affirm those rulings, it could force the government to refund hundreds of billions — possibly trillions — in tariff payments, upend trade contracts, and reshape the executive’s emergency powers. On the other hand, if the Court rules in favor of the administration, it will dramatically expand the president’s authority to set trade policy under emergency declarations. The federal government collected about $213 billion in tariffs through September 2025, with monthly records of more than $31 billion in late summer.  Some forecasts project around $3 trillion in tariff revenue over a decade. The Congressional Budget Office estimates these tariffs reduce deficits by $2.8 trillion over ten years but slightly dampen GDP and increase inflation by 0.4% by 2027. According to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, tariffs haven’t driven up consumer prices as much as some critics have predicted, because businesses want to see where tariff rates settle before they adjust their prices.