Category: Pocket Padding

Trump Says Venezuela Oil ‘Money Will Be Controlled by Me’

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he would personally control revenues from Venezuelan oil sales following the U.S. invasion of Venezuela on Saturday, which resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. In a Truth Social post, Trump stated he would oversee the sale of 30 to 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil at market price, declaring “that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America.” Trump instructed Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute the plan immediately, with oil to be transported by storage ships to U.S. unloading docks.

Trump explicitly tied the military invasion to resource extraction and corporate profit, stating the day after the operation that the administration’s priority was to “fix up the oil” and “have total access” to Venezuela’s resources. He indicated that oil companies had been alerted to his plans prior to the invasion, saying “They want to go in and they’re going to do a great job for the people of Venezuela and they’re going to represent us.” Trump acknowledged that major oil company investments would be required to rebuild Venezuelan infrastructure, positioning private corporations as the primary beneficiaries of military intervention. Trump has separately indicated that U.S. taxpayers may reimburse oil companies for reconstruction costs.

The announcement directly contradicts Trump’s stated rationale for the invasion—that military action was undertaken to benefit the Venezuelan people—by placing personal control of oil revenues in presidential hands rather than under Venezuelan governance or international oversight. Oil stocks surged immediately following Trump’s declaration that his administration would “run” Venezuela for the foreseeable future, signaling market confidence in corporate access to Venezuelan resources.

The Trump administration has simultaneously expanded U.S. military presence across Latin America and the Caribbean through security agreements, enabling armed operations under the pretext of counternarcotics efforts while simultaneously conducting resource extraction operations.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-says-hes-selling-venezuelas-oil-and-that-the-money-will-be-controlled-by-me/)

TACO strikes again: Italian pasta becomes the latest product to have tariffs slashed by Trump

President Donald Trump’s administration slashed proposed tariffs on Italian pasta manufacturers in January 2025, reducing rates from 92 percent to between 2 and 14 percent for specific companies and 9 percent for others. The Department of Commerce had initially accused 13 Italian pasta makers of unfair trade practices and “dumping” products below market rates, with La Molisana and Garofalo cited for failing to cooperate with pricing investigations. Italy’s government contested these allegations through its embassy in Washington, D.C., and the companies’ cooperation prompted the dramatic reversal.

Italy’s Foreign Ministry characterized the tariff reduction as recognition of the companies’ “constructive willingness to cooperate,” according to Reuters. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had expected her alignment with Trump to shield Italian companies from steep levies, making the initial high tariff proposal a source of political embarrassment. Italy’s pasta exports totaled approximately $4.7 billion in 2024, with the United States accounting for roughly $800 million of that revenue.

The pasta tariff reversal represents another rollback in Trump’s tariff regime, following a pattern critics label “Trump Always Chickens Out” (TACO). The administration delayed furniture and kitchen cabinet tariffs for one year on New Year’s Eve, removed tariffs from over 200 agricultural products in November, and announced a 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs affecting Canada and Mexico earlier in 2025.

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett defended the reversals to CNBC and ABC News in November, claiming the policy shifts do not indicate failure and attributing price increases to factors beyond tariffs. The Trump administration maintains its tariff strategy remains intact despite the recurring delays and rollbacks.

Polling data demonstrates widespread consumer concerns about pricing: more than one-third of Trump’s own voters reported the cost of living as the worst they have experienced, according to a November Politico survey. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing whether Trump’s claim of emergency powers to impose tariffs by executive order is constitutional, with Trump warning the court in November against “serving hostile foreign interests” ahead of its ruling.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-tariffs-italy-pasta-taco-b2893225.html)

How Did DOGE Disrupt So Much While Saving So Little? – The New York Times

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency claimed to have made over 29,000 federal cuts and slashed billion-dollar contracts, yet federal spending increased rather than decreased under DOGE’s oversight. The group failed to achieve its stated goal of reducing federal spending by $1 trillion before October, contradicting Musk’s core promises about the agency’s mission.

A New York Times analysis of hundreds of federal records found that 28 of DOGE’s top 40 largest savings claims were inaccurate, with the 13 largest claims all proven wrong. Two Defense Department contracts—one for information technology and one for aircraft maintenance—were listed as terminated with claimed savings of $7.9 billion, but both contracts remain active and the savings were fabricated. A U.S.A.I.D. contract with Accenture showed DOGE claiming $312 million in savings by reducing the contract ceiling, despite actual spending patterns making that figure implausible by the original 2033 end date.

Beyond inflated major claims, the overwhelming majority of DOGE’s cuts involved minimal amounts, with 80 percent of contract and grant cancellations claiming savings of $1 million or less. Of approximately 29,000 total cuts reported, 8,611 claimed zero savings, while only 11 claimed savings exceeding $1 billion, demonstrating that DOGE’s disruption of federal operations produced negligible fiscal results.

The analysis demonstrates that DOGE’s extensive disruption of federal programs, grants to small businesses, and foreign aid functioned without corresponding budget reductions. NASA workforce cuts exceeded 20 percent and misinformation campaigns targeted the Social Security Administration, yet these actions produced neither the promised savings nor policy improvements. DOGE’s track record reveals systematic exaggeration masking a failure to deliver on its central mission.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/23/us/politics/doge-musk-trump-analysis.html)

‘This is truly insane’: Trump stuns with eye-popping multi-million-dollar purchase – Raw Story

President Trump personally purchased between $1 million and $5 million in Intel corporate debt between August and October, according to financial disclosures released in November. This transaction occurred simultaneously with the Trump administration’s decision to secure an $11 billion government stake in Intel, giving the U.S. a 10% ownership position in the company.

Trump has also purchased up to $6 million in Boeing corporate bonds, with a separate purchase of $500,000 to $1 million in Boeing bonds made in September, close to Boeing receiving an $877 million Defense Department contract. Since January, Trump has purchased a minimum of $185 million worth of bonds across multiple companies.

The administration characterizes its broader corporate investment strategy as driven by national security interests, committing over $10 billion in taxpayer funds to minority stakes in at least nine companies involved in steel, minerals, nuclear energy, and semiconductors, with the majority of deals struck in October and November. Journalist Molly Jong-Fast stated this purchase pattern would constitute “a huge scandal” in a normal administration, while journalist Ryan Grim called the situation “truly insane.”

Trump’s personal investments in companies receiving substantial government contracts and funding directly conflict with federal ethics standards prohibiting self-dealing and conflicts of interest. The lack of mainstream media coverage of these transactions has drawn criticism, with observers noting the administration’s pattern of leveraging taxpayer resources to benefit the president’s personal financial interests.

(Source: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2674341799/)

Trump Administration Is Taking Billions in Stakes in Firms Like Intel – The New York Times

The Trump administration has invested over $10 billion in taxpayer funds to acquire minority ownership stakes in at least nine private companies across steel, minerals, nuclear energy, and semiconductors within the past six months, with the bulk of deals occurring in October and November. The Commerce Department became the largest shareholder in Intel after an $8.9 billion investment, while the Defense Department took stakes in mining companies including MP Materials and Trilogy Metals. Trump personally purchased between $1 million and $5 million in Intel corporate debt shortly after the government secured its stake, according to financial disclosures released in November.

The administration justified the equity strategy as addressing national security vulnerabilities and reducing reliance on China for critical resources, with officials claiming targeted stakes ensure taxpayers receive fair value. However, multiple analysts and former officials directly contradicted this rationale. Aaron Bartnick, a former Biden White House official, stated that without a clearly articulated strategy, the intervention “could just devolve to arbitrary deals that favor friends or disfavor foes.” William A. Reinsch of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said Trump appeared to invest “by whim” rather than following a coherent plan, noting officials arranged several stakes in weeks while Biden officials took months for due diligence.

Darrell M. West of the Brookings Institution found that many investments involved high-risk areas with “almost no serious review,” putting taxpayer money at risk with no guarantee of profitability. Many target companies face financial headwinds and could require years to become profitable. Additionally, industry executives reported reluctance to meet with Trump officials out of fear the government would pressure them into surrendering company ownership, while Intel agreed to the equity deal only after Trump called for its chief executive’s firing over alleged China ties.

The approach contradicts traditional Republican free-market ideology but aligns with emerging bipartisan support for industrial policy driven by China’s dominance in strategic industries. The Commerce Department, led by former New York financier Howard Lutnick, has adopted investment-bank practices to facilitate the equity portfolio. The Defense Department’s Office of Strategic Capital and the Energy Department leveraged existing loan programs to expand stake acquisition across critical mineral and semiconductor sectors.

Concerns about the strategy include opacity in deal selection, potential favoritism and corruption, market distortion, and loss of taxpayer funds. The administration has discussed establishing price floors for minerals and taking cuts of export revenues alongside equity ownership. One deal involving Vulcan Elements, a rare earth magnet startup, raised questions given that the company received investment from 1789 Capital, where Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. is a partner.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/25/us/politics/trump-intel-steel-minerals-china.html?unlocked_article_code=1.308.BF-g.V_G-1OC57dmV&smid=nytcore-ios-share)

Kash Patel Girlfriend Receives Controversial FBI Security Detail

Kash Patel, currently serving as FBI Director, has drawn intense scrutiny following the assignment of an elite FBI security detail for his girlfriend, country singer Alex Wilkins. This unprecedented move has raised serious ethical concerns as it showcases a misallocation of government resources. The protection unit, previously part of a SWAT team in Nashville, is unable to fulfill their primary duties in their designated area, including responding to significant threats like mass shootings, potentially compromising public safety.

The unusual decision marks a historic first in which a high-ranking FBI official’s non-spousal partner receives such extensive security, drawing criticism from seasoned law enforcement professionals. Christopher O’Leary, a former senior FBI agent, openly condemned the action as an “abuse of position,” emphasizing that there exists no reasonable justification for this allocation of resources, especially given Wilkins does not share a residence or city with Patel.

This controversy sharply contrasts the Trump administration’s recent decisions to revoke security for several political figures under threat, such as former Vice President Kamala Harris and ex-national security adviser John Bolton. This inconsistency in security protocol exposes a blatant disparity in protecting individuals based on political affiliations and imperils the integrity of national security measures.

Moreover, Patel has faced additional backlash regarding his reported use of a $60 million FBI jet to attend Wilkins’ performance at Penn State University. His dismissive response to the criticism, labeling it as “noise from uninformed internet anarchists,” demonstrates a troubling dismissal of public concerns regarding accountability and responsible use of federal assets.

The continuous controversies surrounding Kash Patel’s leadership raise significant concerns about the politicization of the FBI under his oversight. His management has prompted fears of preferential treatment within the agency, further straining the credibility of law enforcement institutions during politically charged times.

DHS Bypasses Bidding to Fund Ads for Noem Allies

A recent investigation by ProPublica has revealed troubling practices within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Secretary Kristi Noem’s office invoked a “national emergency” at the southern border to circumvent competitive bidding regulations for a substantial $220 million advertising campaign. This maneuver raised serious ethical questions, particularly due to the involvement of a Republican consulting firm linked to Noem.

DHS justified this ad initiative by claiming it was essential for addressing a perceived “national border emergency.” This rationale allowed them to bypass standard bidding protocols and expedite contracts to certain firms without transparency. One notable advertisement, filmed during a government shutdown, featured Noem on horseback at Mount Rushmore, proclaiming punitive measures against lawbreakers.

ProPublica discovered that the agency’s primary contractor engaged the Strategy Group, a political consulting firm closely connected to Noem’s previous gubernatorial campaign. However, a lack of visibility around this firm’s federal contracting records raises significant concerns about accountability and integrity in government spending.

The bulk of the advertising budget, approximately $143 million, was allocated to a newly established Delaware entity named Safe America Media, with its subcontractors remaining undisclosed. The Office of Public Affairs at DHS, which is led by Noem’s spouse Tricia McLaughlin, is indicated as the funding source for these controversial contracts, intensifying accusations of impropriety.

Former Wartime Contracting Commission member Charles Tiefer criticized the entire situation, labeling it as “corrupt” and prompting calls for investigations by the DHS inspector general and Congressional Oversight Committees. Tiefer’s comments highlight a troubling trend of favoritism and lack of transparency in DHS’s contracting process, affecting taxpayer confidence in how their money is spent.

Trump Launches Wine Brand at Coast Guard Stores Raising Ethics

Donald Trump has launched a line of wine and cider now available at Coast Guard-run stores in Washington, D.C., and Virginia, raising fresh ethical questions surrounding the First Family’s business dealings. These exchanges offer tax-free shopping to military members and their families, showcasing Trump’s products prominently. The revelation emerged from an anonymous whistleblower identified as a Homeland Security employee, who shared photographic evidence on social media.

Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin confirmed that the Trump products are indeed being sold at these stores, stating that “the brave men and women of the USCG are pleased to be able to buy Trump wine and cider tax-free.” However, this situation invites criticism regarding the appropriateness of military exchanges selling goods associated with a sitting president, potentially undermining the perceived neutrality of military institutions.

Jordan Libowitz from the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington remarked that while there might not be any legal violation, the ethical implications are concerning. He emphasized that military establishments should refrain from appearing to endorse a particular administration’s commercial interests, raising the question of whether similar offerings will support future presidents.

Trump, who is well-known for his extensive range of branded products despite being a lifelong non-drinker, has seen his wine business valued at approximately $44 million. This decision appears to exploit his position as president to enhance his already vast financial portfolio, further exemplifying his inclination to merge personal business interests with political power.

Moreover, Trump’s business practices continue to draw scrutiny, especially given his family’s substantial income derived from various ventures, including cryptocurrency. As this unsavory connection between business interests and presidential power unfolds, it serves to highlight Trump’s persistent strategy of utilizing his office for financial gain, as underscored by his past promises to avoid exploiting the presidency for personal profit.

Trump Expands Business Empire with Saudi Corruption

The Trump Organization has expanded its controversial dealings in Saudi Arabia by partnering with London-based Dar Global to develop a $1 billion project called “Trump Plaza Jeddah.” This venture represents yet another instance of the Trump family’s unethical business practices, continuing a pattern that prioritizes profit over American values.

Announced by Dar Global, the Jeddah project aims to create a “Central Park Inspired” complex featuring luxury residences, office spaces, and exclusive townhouses along the Red Sea coast. This initiative follows the unveiling of Trump Tower Jeddah last December, solidifying the family’s entrenched presence in Saudi Arabia amidst growing criticism of their ties with authoritarian regimes.

Eric Trump, Executive Vice President of the Trump Organization, proclaimed that the new development will set a standard for “prestige and innovation.” However, this rhetoric masks the underlying corruption associated with the deal, as the Trumps continue to populate their coffers through dubious foreign investments that undermine American sovereignty and ethical business practices.

Critics of this expansion have pointed out that Trump’s business dealings often coincide with important political ties, raising serious ethical questions about the motivations behind such partnerships. This expansion into the Saudi market is particularly alarming in light of the country’s human rights abuses, making the Trumps complicit in supporting totalitarianism for profit.

As the Trump family deepens its financial ties with the wealthy elite in Saudi Arabia, it raises the stakes for democracy in America. With each new deal, they reinforce a narrative that places corporate greed above the welfare of the American people, furthering a dangerous trend in the intersection of business and politics.

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric Fuels Fear and Division in Europe

During a recent visit to Scotland, President Donald Trump made alarming comments regarding immigration, asserting that a “migrant invasion” is causing severe consequences in Europe. This rhetoric plays into his pattern of inflammatory claims aimed at furthering a xenophobic agenda. Trump’s remarks included harsh advice for European leaders to “get your act together” and defend their nations against what he described as an existential threat from immigration.

Upon his arrival at Glasgow Prestwick Airport, Trump was received by thousands, including Scottish Secretary Ian Murray. He met with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whom he praised, while simultaneously promoting his own business interests, including his luxury golf resorts. This underscores the troubling mixture of personal gain and national dialogue that has characterized much of Trump’s public engagement.

Trump’s ongoing fixation on immigration is not just rhetoric but aligns with the authoritarian trends seen in Republican policies, creating an atmosphere of fear and division. By framing migrants as an invasion, he signals support for extreme and inhumane immigration measures that threaten the rights and dignity of individuals seeking refuge or a better life.

Additionally, Trump made disparaging comments about windmills, falsely claiming they are damaging the environment. Such statements illustrate a disregard for factual information and demonstrate his enduring commitment to denying climate change—a stance that has dire implications for environmental policy and public health.

This visit serves as a stark reminder of Trump’s persistent divisive tactics and the dangerous political discourse he champions, benefiting from fearmongering in an attempt to solidify his political influence while undermining democratic values across the globe.

1 2 3 … 16