Politics The Real Reason Colombia Folded What does Trump’s first energetic foray in Latin America tell us about his foreign policy?   The first major international challenge to Donald Trump’s deportation plans came on Sunday, when Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro refused to allow a military plane of manacled illegal intruders on American soil to land and disgorge its fettered cargo. Petro denounced the repatriation attempt and proclaimed that he would not see Colombian citizens “treated like criminals” for having violated American immigration law.  In response, Donald Trump immediately announced on social media that the U.S. would be implementing an aggressive wave of retaliatory measures: Petro’s denial of these flights has jeopardized the National Security and Public Safety of the United States, so I have directed my Administration to immediately take the following urgent and decisive retaliatory measures: -Emergency 25% tariffs on all goods coming into the United States. In one week, the 25% tariffs will be raised to 50%. -A Travel Ban and immediate Visa Revocations on the Colombian Government Officials, and all Allies and Supporters. -Visa Sanctions on all Party Members, Family Members, and Supporters of the Colombian Government. -Enhanced Customs and Border Protection Inspections of all Colombian Nationals and Cargo on national security grounds. -IEEPA Treasury, Banking and Financial Sanctions to be fully imposed.  These measures are just the beginning. We will not allow the Colombian Government to violate its legal obligations with regard to the acceptance and return of the Criminals they forced into the United States! The full suite of coercive tools Trump employed was breathtaking both in its scope and its immediacy. The United States is a major trade partner for Colombia, and the application of massive tariffs and sanctions would devastate the economy. Still, the economic threats are par for the course for Trump, who has long made a habit of using the power of the American economy as a tool for making political bargains.  More interesting yet was the immediate suspension of Colombian visas, a direct strike against the Colombian political class. The United States is the playground for the wealthy and well-connected in the region—they vacation here, many have family and important business and political connections here, and most importantly, their children are educated here. Economic punishments, politicians can sell to the public as imperialist bullying by the United States—it might even play well to some sections of the populace. But the suspension of visas directly and immediately harms the most important and influential people in, around, and behind every Latin American government. A glance at the headlines circulating among Colombia’s well-to-do confirms the facts. At time of writing, the top story of El Espectador consists of an article reassuring its audience that visa status is shortly to be normalized; the paper has run five additional stories on visas in the past two days, significantly more attention than was garnered by the potential tariffs threatened by the president. Much the same holds true for the other major paper of record in the country, El Tiempo: multiple major stories about visas, comparatively fewer about tariffs. Petro responded on social media with a characteristic rambling, emotional response that accused Trump of wanting to kill him before defiantly asserting that “they inform me that you [President Trump] are placing a tariff of 50% on the fruit of our labor entering the U.S., and I will do the same.” The threatened tariff war was not destined to take place. Faced with an internal crisis over the cancelled visas and looming economic threats, the Colombian government folded just one hour later and subsequently sent flights to pick up their erstwhile compatriots in return for avoiding sanctions and ending restrictions on visas and travel. Both sides ended by declaring a moral victory: Trump, that his administration had cowed the Colombian government into accepting repatriation flights, and Petro, that his government had picked up the Colombians in a manner that respected their dignity as Colombian citizens (though not before his social media assault unleashed a crisis in his government). Trump has shown the world how serious he is about ensuring what he sees as American interests are respected, and that he’s willing to deploy what in previous administrations would have been considered overwhelming and disproportionate force to achieve it. Colombia provided a useful example, and despite Petro’s claims that he ultimately got what he wanted, other governments—in Latin America and elsewhere—will think twice about challenging the Trump administration on similar grounds. After all, they want to be able to keep their kids at Harvard, too. The post The Real Reason Colombia Folded appeared first on The American Conservative.

A reevaluation of foreign assistance programs and an America First policy directive to Secretary of State Marco Rubio were among the 46 executive orders President Trump put his Sharpie to on Inauguration Day. Section 2 of the ”America First Policy Directive to Secretary Rubio” states, As soon as practicable, the Secretary of State shall issue guidance bringing the Department of State’s policies, programs, personnel, and operations in line with an America First foreign policy, which puts America and its interests first. Trump’s order on foreign assistance mandates a now widely reported on “90-day pause” on foreign development assistance, during which time  a determination will be made by the director of the Office of Management and Budget (which by that time will likely be the eminently sensible Russ Vought) together with the responsible department heads as to whether or not the administration will “continue, modify, or cease” these assistance programs. At a White House briefing on Tuesday, spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said the pause is “about being good stewards of tax dollars.” Perhaps so. Yet chaos has reigned in the days since the orders were signed thanks to the intercession of a Biden-appointed judge in US District Court in Washington, DC who put a hold on the order until February 3. Following that, the White House has compounded the confusion by issuing and then rescinding a memo from OMB relating to the freeze. Leavitt, however, insists that the EOs on federal funding will “remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”  Got that? Well, if the rollout has been less than stellar, the larger point the administration is making is unmistakable. These orders are also in line with a number of bills that have been introduced by congressional Republicans in recent years. This past October, Florida’s Republican Rep. Greg Steube introduced the Securing Taxpayer Assistance during Natural Disasters (STAND) Act, which would suspend US foreign assistance during the first 60 days of a Presidentially declared disaster. Prior to that, in August 2023, five congressmen associated with the House Freedom Caucus introduced H.R.5108 which sought to abolish the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The authors of the bill accused USAID of meddling in “local elections, promoting the interests of ‘women, youth, and other traditionally marginalized groups’ ahead of the interests of the other nations’ citizenry” and called for the agency’s abolition.  Washington being what it is, the bill went nowhere. So Trump’s recent EOs are a step in the right direction; they are certainly in keeping with the president’s campaign promise of crafting a more America-centric foreign policy.  But for real change to happen, the Trump administration will have to also take on the nexus of federally funded non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that have been weaponized to foment regime change around the globe. Such operations, funded at taxpayer expense, are often laundered through NGOs that claim to exist in order to promote democracy, free speech, and independent media outlets overseas. The Trump administration should begin a series of audits on these programs with an eye toward dismantling for good the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department’s Center for Global Engagement. Federally funded and ostensibly “independent” NGOs, including the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, Freedom House and the Millennium Challenge Corporation should likewise be defunded. For too long, NGOs have been tools of the national security bureaucracy, fronts by which we interfere with the political systems of other countries. Yet these projects have often backfired, leaving the U.S. open, quite understandably, to charges of hypocrisy and worse.  Examples abound. U.S. government–funded NGOs have been credibly linked to attempts at undermining and toppling regimes in Honduras (2009) Egypt (2011), Ukraine (2004, 2014), Georgia (2003, 2024) and many more besides. In the aftermath of the Arab Spring, a New York Times report titled “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings” noted, A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6th Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the IRI, the NDI, and Freedom House. In Armenia, the American-funded NGO Civitas, which publishes the online news outlet CivilNet, played a leading role in advocating for the overthrow of Armenian leader Serzh Sargsyan in 2018. Readers may also recall the embarrassment USAID cooked up in Cuba when, in 2010, it covertly launched what Foreign Policy magazine described as a “Twitter-like service” with the aim of setting off a “Cuban Spring” to “help bring about the collapse of the island’s Communist government.” But the project notoriously backfired when it was infiltrated by the Cuban government, which used the platform to gather intel on the 40,000 Cubans dissidents who subscribed to the service. Mission not accomplished. Withal, a wholesale rethinking of the way America engages with the world is sorely needed. The Trump administration might go further when it comes to foreign assistance and tie it directly to the amount of aid the U.S. budgets to assist its own people; after all, USAID’s budget for foreign assistance FY2024 was $32 billion, while FEMA’s entire budget was $1.98 billion.  If America First is to mean anything, discrepancies like these will have to be remedied. Politics End the Aid Charade Trump and Rubio put foreign assistance under the microscope. Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images The post End the Aid Charade appeared first on The American Conservative.

The following article, Op-Ed: Whining, was first published on Conservative Firing Line. Guest post by Brent Regan, Kootenai County, Idaho, GOP Chairman The Trump victory has resulted in a seismic shift in the direction of the country. Domestic, regional, international and economic policies have taken a new direction for the better. Trump has accomplished more in the first 100 hours of his administration than other presidents accomplish … Continue reading Op-Ed: Whining ...

At just 30 years old, Avery has faced severe consequences including osteoporosis and osteopenia after using the drug for weight loss, not diabetes or obesity management as intended. Source: https://old.bitchute.com/video/mjVBS6iu1vgM/

Missed gems. The post Cher picks out two of her most overlooked s: “It broke my heart” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Laying the groundwork. The post Cut Copy: Australia’s overlooked revolutionaries first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Will Trump 'Derangement' Keep Damaging Trust in Media?