Articles & Videos

Washington has already hit Canada and Brazil with new levies, amplifying global trade uncertainty.

Leftist Twitch streamer Hasan Piker says “I’m a suit guy now.” The reason is simple, he explains: “Moms and dads are watching.” Piker has said that when he wears suits, people’s grandmas think he’s serious, respectable, and handsome. And because he’s trying to maximize the reach of his political message, well, that means putting on a tie. He has joked that “wearing a suit is lingerie for old conservative ladies,” and if he’s in quality menswear “they’re a lot more receptive to what I have to say. This is how we spark the revolution.”

A new report further links fossil fuel emissions to extreme weather events. States are trying to make polluters pay.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth just lowballed the Iran war to the tune of about $62.5 billion.Hegseth, alongside officials including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine, appeared before the Senate Appropriations Committee Tuesday to update lawmakers on the state of the war and to request nearly $88 billion more for “urgent needs” in the war effort.About 15 minutes into Hegseth’s testimony, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin asked if he had a new estimate for how much the war in Iran has cost so far. “Senator, the estimate we have as of today is $37.5 billion,” the defense secretary replied.In reality, both U.S. intelligence officials and independent analysts are putting the total cost of the war upward of $100 billion. That’s at least $62.5 billion more than Hegseth claimed.“It’s my understanding that this whole supplemental funding request is $87.6 billion,” Durbin continued. “We are told the Department of Defense still has $75 billion in un-obligated funding from last year’s reconciliation package. Is that true?”Hegseth stammered about his predecessor, Lloyd Austin, and replied that he couldn’t offer “specific numbers” as to where that extra $75 billion in defense spending had gone. At the start of the month, Popular Information’s Stephen Semler published an independent review of U.S. expenses in the war so far, including $28 billion in mobilization, administrative, and immediate combat costs; $46.7 billion on missiles, interceptors, and bombs; $20.3 billion on damaged or destroyed military assets; $2.9 billion on Israel’s bombs and interceptors; and an additional $4.8 billion on war costs to nonmilitary U.S. agencies. Put that together, and you have a whopping $102.7 billion—not counting repairs and replacements for the 42 U.S. aircrafts that have been lost, damaged, or destroyed.Hegseth’s testimony came only days after the U.S. military announced the deaths of at least three more American service members in the war, bringing the official death toll to 17. (A fourth service member is still missing.) The secretary is calling the request for more funding part of his national defense strategy, “peace through strength.”The Trump administration’s war in Iran is wildly unpopular, and Republicans know it. Maybe Hegseth thinks lowballing the price tag will distract the American people with a discount rate.

President Donald Trump’s advisers aren’t so sure that another round of tariffs is a good idea. According to a report Tuesday by the Financial Times, Trump is preparing to let loose a “barrage” of fresh tariffs on dozens of countries this week, just before his temporary 10 percent global tariff expires on Friday. More tariffs, on top of energy prices already skyrocketing in response to the Iran war, risk “inflaming voter frustration over the high cost of living,” the Times reports.Trump’s seemingly endless tariff campaign is unpopular with voters across the political spectrum. A new Washington Post-Ipsos poll puts Trump’s overall approval rating at just 37 percent, dragged down by his handling of the economy and the war in Iran. Two-thirds of Americans now disapprove of how Trump is handling affordability. Republicans, staring down the fast-approaching midterm elections in November, are shaking in their boots. Trump, on the other hand, either hasn’t noticed or doesn’t care—just Monday, he announced new 50 percent tariffs against Canada. These tariffs are potentially retaliation for the wildfire smoke that drifted across America’s northern border last week.“We are holding Canada responsible for the fact that they are not properly maintaining their Forests, and Brush therein,” the president wrote on Truth Social Friday. “This is Willful Negligence … which cost of this pollution must of necessity be added to the TARIFFS Canada is currently paying.” A senior administration official has since denied any relation between the wildfires and the new tariffs.Even if Trump can’t see it, White House insiders know that another round of tariffs is a bad look. “Behind the scenes, senior officials have been counseling the president to maintain stability with trading partners and honor the deals that Washington struck with them to reduce their tariffs … according to two people familiar with the matter,” the Financial Times reports.“If candidates are not talking about the economy, if candidates are not talking about affordability, if they’re not talking about how they’re going to make people’s lives at home cheaper and less expensive, then they’re not talking about the issues that voters care about,” Paul Shumaker, a veteran Republican strategist told The Washington Post Monday. Republicans know that resurrecting Trump’s trade war, not only with Canada but with the rest of the world, is a recipe for disaster. The question is: Do they have the guts to stop it?

By putting their own balance sheets and brand names behind these deals, banks are validating the very underwriting they’ve spent months criticizing for being full of cockroaches.