Upcoming shows
Real News

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Real News with David Knight

9:00 am 12:00 pm



Maga First News

Upcoming Shows

Join The MAGA Network on Discord

0 0

Ukraine’s action man president faces voters’ judgment

FILE PHOTO: Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko poses for a picture with servicemen during a rehearsal for the Independence Day military parade in central Kiev
FILE PHOTO: Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko poses for a picture with servicemen during a rehearsal for the Independence Day military parade in central Kiev, Ukraine, August 22, 2018. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko/File Photo

March 27, 2019

By Pavel Polityuk

KIEV (Reuters) – The bodyguards were nervous, fingers poised over the triggers of their automatic weapons, as Ukraine’s president inspected the site of a rocket attack from separatist territory which had killed 10 people that day, one of many visits to the front line.

“His security detail fill their boots with sweat whenever he goes,” said Iryna Gerashchenko, deputy speaker of the Ukrainian parliament and an ally of President Petro Poroshenko.

Visits to attack sites like the one in 2015 have helped secure Poroshenko’s reputation as a robust defender of Ukrainian statehood against Russia, which annexed Ukraine’s Crimea region in 2014 as well as supporting the separatists in the east.

But Poroshenko, a multi-millionaire businessman, has not shaken off allegations he puts business before matters of state. Corruption allegations have tainted his entourage, reforms have been fitful and price rises have eaten into living standards.

Ukrainians voting in a presidential election on Sunday must decide whether Poroshenko’s resolute defense of their nation overrides these other considerations.

(For a graphic on ‘Ukraine presidential election’ click, https://tmsnrt.rs/2EEQ22R)

“His greatest weakness is that he values money over everything else,” said Mustafa Nayyem, a former member of Poroshenko’s faction in parliament.

The presidency responded by saying Poroshenko had demonstrated his priorities by his actions, shoring up the army, ratifying an association agreement with the European Union and breaking Russia’s hold over gas supplies and Ukraine’s church.

“This is the most pro-European president in Ukrainian history,” it said. “And no one in power has achieved such results. It is clear that this causes an increase in malice from his opponents and leads them to make unfounded statements.”

Poroshenko’s main challenger is Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a comedian whose ridiculing of Ukraine’s pervasive corruption appeals to voters fed up with politics-as-usual.

Zelenskiy leads Poroshenko in most opinion polls, which suggest the president will face him in a second round run-off in April.

RETREAT HALTED

Poroshenko’s man-of-action credentials propelled him to power back in 2014. A confectionary magnate sometimes referred to as “the Chocolate King”, he had held ministerial posts in successive governments.

When protests broke out against pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovich, he stood on top of a bulldozer with a bullhorn to try to prevent violence between police and protesters.

Elected president in May 2014, he faced a country in chaos. Separatists, backed by Russia, controlled a swathe of territory in the east and Ukraine’s security forces were dysfunctional. Arms stores had been looted and some units could not reach the fighting because they had no spare parts for their vehicles.

Under Poroshenko the army, backed by volunteer militias, pushed the separatists out of several towns and contained them. The military was re-equipped and morale lifted. Poroshenko is frequently seen dressed in camouflage fatigues visiting front-line units.

With some deft diplomacy, Poroshenko persuaded Washington to maintain its backing for Kiev and not ease up on sanctions on Russia, even after President Donald Trump came to power promising a detente with Moscow.

Kiev’s association agreement with the European Union in 2017 allowed visa-free travel for Ukrainians and locked their country into the Western orbit, and billions of dollars in loans from the International Monetary Fund stabilized the volatile economy.

In exchange for the loans his government had to implement reforms, one of which, a hike in retail gas prices, has caused widespread anger.

Ukraine’s gas still partially comes from Russia, but since Ukraine receives it via the EU, it is now harder for Moscow to turn off the taps in any financial dispute as it previously did.

And this year’s granting of autonomy for the Ukrainian branch of the Orthodox Church from Russia by the spiritual head of Orthodox Christians worldwide was a political coup for Poroshenko.

BLURRED LINES

Campaigning for president back in 2014, Poroshenko was explicit about what he would do with his confectionary business if elected: “I will sell.”

Five years later, he has not sold, leaving him vulnerable to accusations that his administration — like others before it — is blurring the line between Ukraine’s interests and the financial interests of powerful oligarchs.

One of his close associates stepped aside from a senior government role late last month pending a corruption investigation involving his son. Both father and son deny the allegations, of involvement in smuggling military equipment from Russia and selling it to local armed forces at inflated prices.

A law criminalizing illicit enrichment was thrown out in February, sparking sharp criticism, especially from the United States. Poroshenko has denied he or his friends were enriching themselves, and urged patience on anti-corruption measures.

“If you sow potatoes and dig them up straight away, you’ll get nothing,” he said two years into his presidency. “We’ve taken the first steps, we’ve sown.”

(Writing by Christian Lowe; Editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Source: OANN

0 0

Exclusive: Citgo, Valero try to return Venezuelan oil following sanctions: document

FILE PHOTO: Crude oil tankers are docked at Isla Oil Refinery PDVSA terminal in Willemstad on the island of Curacao
FILE PHOTO: Crude oil tankers are docked at Isla Oil Refinery PDVSA terminal in Willemstad on the island of Curacao, February 22, 2019. REUTERS/Henry Romero

March 11, 2019

By Marianna Parraga

(Reuters) – The top U.S. buyers of Venezuelan oil are in the unusual position of trying to return millions of barrels of crude they need but cannot accept because of U.S. sanctions on the South American nation and its state-run energy firm PDVSA.

PDVSA’s U.S. refining subsidiary Citgo Petroleum Corp and Valero Energy are proposing to return 2 million barrels of crude loaded before sanctions, while a third U.S. oil company, Chevron Corp, has sought so far unsuccessfully to legally pay for 4.3 million barrels, according to an internal PDVSA document seen by Reuters.

In effect, more than 6 million barrels of Venezuelan crude remain in limbo as a result of U.S. sanctions imposed on Jan. 28 by Washington in an effort to oust President Nicolas Maduro. The United States and dozens of other nations recognized opposition leader Juan Guaido as the nation’s legitimate leader.

To comply with U.S. sanctions, Valero, Citgo and others are not allowed to pay PDVSA. Guaido’s administration has yet to establish its own bank accounts to receive proceeds from oil sales to U.S. customers, leaving those shipments stranded.

Overall oil exports from the OPEC member state dropped by about 40 percent in the first full month of sanctions, as the U.S. sought to cut oil revenue to Maduro, who presides over a nation beset by a years-long economic crisis, with millions fleeing for a lack of food and medicine.

PDVSA, Citgo and Valero did not reply to requests for comment. Chevron does not comment on supply and trade matters, a spokesman said.

STRANDED TANKERS

The standoff has stranded some 6.4 million barrels of Venezuelan heavy crude onboard 11 tankers originally destined for the United States, as they have not been authorized to set sail. The vessels fell into limbo because PDVSA demanded prepayment for the cargos after sanctions were imposed, which U.S. firms cannot do.

Chevron, the second-largest U.S. oil firm by market value, wanted to take the oil shipments in lieu of loans and dividends stemming from joint ventures with PDVSA, a person close to the matter said. The cargoes were loaded at Venezuelan ports ahead of sanctions, but they remain undelivered, according to the document, and it is unclear if PDVSA would accept that offer.

Valero proposed to pay PDVSA for 1.05 million barrels of Venezuelan oil, but that request was rejected by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which oversees sanctions, the documents said.

The Houston-based Citgo cut ties with its parent company in compliance with U.S. measures that halted its purchases of PDVSA’s oil, the documents said.

A U.S. Treasury spokesperson declined to comment on the requests to pay PDVSA for the cargoes.

As of March 8, the 11 loaded vessels remained anchored off ports in Venezuela. Two other Chevron-chartered cargoes were stuck off the U.S. Gulf Coast and a third was returned to Venezuela’s Amuay terminal, according to Refinitiv Eikon vessel-tracking data.

PDVSA does not expect Citgo or Valero to accept the cargos and intends to “commercially reallocate the volumes onboard so tankers can be freed,” a Feb. 21 trade and supply document showed. The same document expressed worry over demurrage fees – the daily cost for storing the oil on tankers – which have been accumulating for over a month.

PDVSA SCRAMBLES TO AVOID EXPORT SHORTFALL

Separately, a days-long blackout across the country has halted exports from Jose port, the nation’s primary crude export terminal. PDVSA on Monday was trying to restart operations.

The Venezuelan company has been forced to redesign its production and export logistics in recent weeks to avoid halting operations, including formulating new crude blends, swapping a large portion of its oil for imported fuel, selling through intermediaries and finding new customers.

But the efforts have not been enough to avoid an export decline. The OPEC-member country’s oil shipments fell to some 920,000 barrels per day (bpd) in February according to Refinitiv Eikon data.

PDVSA exports could fall further due to a lack of imported naphtha, a light distillate, needed to dilute its extra heavy oil as the company has been able to secure only two 500,000-barrel cargoes versus 2-3 million barrels per month needed, according to the document.

If it cannot import enough naphtha to formulate its oil for export, PDVSA plans to start mixing other domestic fuels to ready oil for export.

Lack of maritime crews to take PDVSA tankers idled due to unpaid shipping fees is also hampering oil deliveries between domestic ports and to the Caribbean, where PDVSA stores and ships much of its export barrels.

Some shipping firms’ reluctance to work in Venezuela after sanctions have stopped PDVSA from using leased tankers to ease storage bottlenecks at its Orinoco Belt’s joint ventures. The ones willing to work with PDVSA are charging high prices and extra fees, the document added.

On March 4, PDVSA completely shut output at its Corocoro oilfield, which was producing some 12,000 bpd, due to lack of storage capacity. Its Pedernales oilfield could follow due to similar issues, according to the report. The four Orinoco upgraders were working at minimum on Monday.

(GRAPHIC: Venezuelan crude exports to U.S. refiners link: https://tmsnrt.rs/2t4ullS).

(Graphic: Top importers of Venezuelan crude link: https://tmsnrt.rs/2RYGk2E).

(Reporting by Marianna Parraga; additional reporting by Leslie Wroughton in Washington and Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

Source: OANN

0 0

Powell gets the heat, but all Trump Fed appointees backed rate hikes

FILE PHOTO: Federal Reserve Board building on Constitution Avenue is pictured in Washington
FILE PHOTO: Federal Reserve Board building on Constitution Avenue is pictured in Washington, U.S., March 19, 2019. REUTERS/Leah Millis/File Photo

April 4, 2019

By Howard Schneider

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump may feel he is “stuck” with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, whom he has blasted for engineering four interest rate hikes since Trump appointed him, but none of Trump’s other Fed appointees has stood in the way of the tightening campaign and at least one has said even higher rates may be necessary.

The voting records and public statements of Trump’s Fed appointees, who now form a solid majority of the Fed’s Washington-based board of governors, show not only consensus around the recent increases, but no support so far for the rate cuts Trump has demanded.

A possible upcoming nominee to the Fed, economic commentator Stephen Moore, has said he agrees with Trump that rates should be cut and had earlier called for Powell’s ouster. Trump has mulled whether he could fire Powell, but in a March 8 phone call, reported by the Wall Street Journal, acknowledged he was “stuck” with the Fed chair for Powell’s full four-year term that runs to February 2022.

If Moore does take a seat alongside Trump’s appointees at the Fed, at this point he would be the outlier.

“I am comfortable with the current stance of our policy,” Trump’s newest appointee, Fed Governor Michelle Bowman, said in February in her only comments about monetary policy to date.

Bowman joined the Fed in November, when the administration was growing agitated about rising volatility in financial markets. She voted for the December rate increase that has become a particular target of Trump’s ire and point of blame for, in his view, holding back the economy.

The White House on Tuesday announced Bowman would be renominated for a full 14-year term to follow the end next January of the short, partial term she was appointed to fill.

Trump’s hand-picked vice chair, Richard Clarida, voted for the December increase and the one before it in September, which was approved shortly after he joined the Fed board.

Randal Quarles, who was the first appointment Trump made to the Fed as his presidency took shape in 2017, voted for five rates hikes from December of that year to December 2018, and his most recent comments show the wide and sometimes paradoxical gap between the president’s view of what the Fed should be doing, and those of the people he has chosen to oversee the central bank.

In what amounted to a bullish defense of where the economy is heading, Quarles last week said in fact that rates may need to move higher precisely because Trump’s tax cuts and policies may produce a “persistent” boost to productivity and growth.

“Further increases in the policy rate may be necessary at some point, a stance I believe is consistent with my optimistic view of the economy’s growth potential and momentum,” Quarles said in remarks at the Manhattan Institute last week.

For now the Fed intends to hold rates steady, a position it reached both as Trump publicly called for a halt to rate increases, but also – and what Fed officials say mattered to them – as economic and financial data globally indicated a broad slowdown from the faster-than-expected growth of 2018.

Trump blames the weaker data on what he called in a tweet on Thursday the Fed’s ‘destructive’ rate hikes. Others see a number of causes, including Trump’s trade policies, and feel growth is likely to continue though at a tepid pace.

“We had this synchronized acceleration of growth a couple of years ago. Now it is synchronized deceleration and a slowing momentum across the spectrum,” International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde said in Washington on Tuesday. “Nobody wins a trade war.”

RULE BY CONSENSUS

Unanimity among Fed board members is largely the norm. The Fed strives to be a consensus-driven organization, led, but not dictated to, by a chair whose job is to canvas and shape opinion among as many as 18 other policymakers split between the seven-member board based in Washington and 12 regional bank heads.

The regional bankers, five of whom each year have a formal vote on interest rates even as all 12 participate in Fed debates, are part of a now century-old system meant precisely to guard against too much power residing with the board and the chair in Washington.

There are currently two open board seats.

Even as Fed officials have begun to speak more frequently and openly in public, formal dissents against any given policy action have in general declined since the 1970s. The last one by a board member was in 2005 by then Governor Mark Olson against a rate increase.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean conformity inside the room when the Federal Open Market Committee meets every six weeks. Opposition to some of the extraordinary policies put in place to fight the 2007 to 2009 financial crisis, for example, led former Governor Kevin Warsh to resign even though he never dissented, maintaining a unified face for the Fed during a treacherous time.

Yet with the current group of appointees there is little sense of the sort of behind-the-scenes warfare that occurred, for example, when a group of governors tried to revolt against the recession-inducing steps pushed by 1980s-era Fed Chairman Paul Volcker to curb runaway inflation.

Transcripts of recent Fed meetings won’t be released for five years, but the summary minutes of sessions last fall show the central bank sifting through data, coming to grips with developing risks, and shifting their stance as a result.

By January, “all participants expressed the view that it would be appropriate for the Committee to maintain” the existing interest rate, the minutes stated.

“Several” said continued growth might warrant higher rates eventually.

There was no mention of support for a rate cut.

(Reporting by Howard Schneider; Editing by Dan Burns and Andrea Ricci)

Source: OANN

0 0

White House rejects Democrats’ demands for information on Trump-Putin talks: reports

FILE PHOTO: Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands as they hold a joint news conference after their meeting in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger/File Photo

March 21, 2019

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The White House has rejected a request by Democratic lawmakers to provide information about President Donald Trump’s communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to media reports on Thursday.

The White House sent its denial in a letter to Congress, according to reports by The Hill newspaper and CNN.

U.S. Representatives Adam Schiff, Eliot Engel and Elijah Cummings, the chairmen of the House of Representatives Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees, respectively, had asked the White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in early March for documents and interviews about Trump’s conversations with Putin.

The lawmakers expressed concern about media reports that Trump seized notes on at least one meeting with the Russian leader and tried to destroy records about those talks.

In his response, White House counsel Pat Cipollone said a president’s communications with foreign leaders are confidential and protected by executive privilege.

“The president must be free to engage in discussions with foreign leaders without fear that those communications will be disclosed and used as fodder for partisan political purposes,” Cipollone wrote in the letter to the committee chairmen, according to The Hill.

The request for information about communications with Putin followed the powerful House Judiciary Committee’s demand for documents from a who’s who of Trump’s turbulent world, targeting 81 people, government agencies and other groups in an investigation of possible obstruction of justice or abuse of power.

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Bill Trott)

Source: OANN

0 0

U.S. top court undermines Google settlement in internet privacy case

FILE PHOTO: The Google logo is pictured at the entrance to the Google offices in London
FILE PHOTO: The Google logo is pictured at the entrance to the Google offices in London, Britain January 18, 2019. REUTERS/Hannah McKay

March 20, 2019

By Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cast doubt on a $8.5 million settlement Google had agreed to pay to end an internet privacy dispute, directing a lower court to review whether plaintiffs who accused the search engine operator of wrongdoing in a class action lawsuit were legally eligible to sue.

The justices threw out the lower court’s ruling that had upheld the settlement and directed it to take a fresh look at whether the plaintiffs had actually been harmed by Google and had the necessary legal standing. The plaintiffs had argued that Google violated federal privacy law by allowing other websites to see users’ search queries.

Google is part of Alphabet Inc.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

Source: OANN

0 0

Trump and Conservatives: It’s Complicated (But It’s Working)

X

Story Stream

recent articles

Donald Trump is not a conventional conservative. Far from it. He’s a populist of the right. His strong appeal to conservatives lies in his nationalism, tax cuts, deregulation, and appointment of originalist judges.

Unlike Ronald Reagan, who had well-formed political ideas, Trump’s notions about public policy come from gut instincts, reinforced by cheering crowds. Their common thread is "Don't tread on me."

Trump’s disdain for tradition is the opposite of orthodox conservativism. It is most visible in the wrecking ball aimed at NATO and other allies. If you are rich enough and want our military protection, he says, then pay up or forget it. Prove you deserve our protection. Show us the money.

Trump’s threat to walk away is more credible than that of previous presidents because he is instinctively closer to Robert Taft’s isolationism than to Arthur Vandenberg’s internationalism. The Taft-Vandenberg debate in the late 1940s settled Republican foreign policy for the next 60 years. Vandenberg, who chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led bipartisan support for President Harry Truman’s policies, including the Marshall Plan and forming NATO. The party’s stance was sealed in 1952 when Dwight Eisenhower defeated Taft for the presidential nomination.

Republicans remained internationalist on both security and trade throughout the Cold War, the “Unipolar Moment” of the 1990s, and the Global War on Terror after 9/11. That consensus shattered in the endless mess of Afghanistan and Iraq and the hollowing out of U.S. manufacturing employment. The Democratic Party backed away from those policies even sooner.

As a result, there is no consensus today on America’s proper role in the world. Our allies know it and are understandably nervous. Trump, a tough negotiator, is exploiting their anxiety to strike better deals for American defense support. That only works if allies believe he might actually pull back. They do, and so do internationalists in both parties. They are also worried about trade policy, where his strategy is similar.

Trump’s personal style adds to those worries, including those of conservatives. Many are repulsed by his crudity, thin-skinned nature, and vitriolic personal attacks. They fret as he shreds established norms. They oppose his micro-interventions in the economy (“don’t close that GM plant”), which are the opposite of free-market economics.

But—and this is crucial—conservatives and many independents recognize Trump’s biggest achievement, beyond strengthening the economy and rebuilding the military, is his persistent effort to roll back the administrative state, with its endless regulations and executive orders. The agencies that make the rules also enforce and adjudicate them. The result is fiat law—undemocratic, unaccountable, and unbearably expensive to fight. (If you think that’s also a major popular complaint about the European Union, you are correct.)

To curtail this administrative overreach, Trump needs to downsize the permanent bureaucracy, pass laws that require congressional approval for major regulations, and keep appointing judges who will rein in bureaucratic excess. Eliminating specific regulations is not enough. The next Democratic president will simply reimpose them.

Trump’s progress on judges is obvious—and consequential. That’s why Democrats are fighting so tenaciously. The latest battle, after Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court appointment, was Neomi Rao’s nomination to the D.C. Circuit. She proved her commitment to deregulation while heading the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Now she sits on the appellate court that hears those cases.

Trump’s determination to claw back Washington’s bureaucracy is beloved by conservatives, but it poses a curious dilemma. It took eight decades to ratchet up the government’s mammoth size and scope. Rolling it back swiftly and dramatically is what conservatives want substantively. But abrupt changes are what conservatives hate procedurally. They favor incremental change.

“Build on what we already have,” say these procedural conservatives. “That’s the surest foundation for improvement.” No one can anticipate the effects of large, disruptive changes. They might be disastrous. Edmund Burke first made that argument in 1790. His devastating critique of the French Revolution set the template for modern conservativism.

Unfortunately for modern conservatives, that kind of incrementalism would hardly dent America’s huge, intrusive government. It would do nothing to stop its regrowth after Trump leaves. That’s why “substantive conservatives” want to pare down the state now. The opportunity might be fleeting.

These are meaningful differences among conservatives. Yet they will fade to insignificance when Democrats nominate another big-government candidate. Faced with that alternative, conservatives of all stripes will back Trump. The only exceptions are those who despise him.

The president’s shortcomings offer Democrats a real opportunity. They seem determined to fumble it. Most candidates are sucking up to the left-wing base and arguing for huge, structural changes, everything from packing the Supreme Court to abolishing private health coverage. Their most daring ideas, such as the Green New Deal and “Medicare for All,” are recipes for fiscal apocalypse and totalizing government control. Their intolerance of dissent has made them the Party of Social Justice Church Ladies.

More centrist candidates are drifting left, too. Their reorientation may appeal to primary voters, but it will be a huge impediment in November. Ultimately, they are still selling Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, now with more programs, more funding, and more taxes to pay in support of them. The ideas are stale, but there are two bigger defects: They cost too much and advocates cannot explain why the old programs failed.

If that’s what the Democrats have on offer in 2020, they won’t just lose conservatives and right-of-center independents. They’ll lose the election, unless there’s a recession.

If Trump wins, he will continue doing what no president has even attempted since Franklin Roosevelt: fundamentally shrinking the vast, centralized power of the administrative state. It’s a monumental task. But, for conservatives, none is more important.

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he is founding director of PIPES, the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

0 0

Trump: Special Counsel Mueller Acted Honorably

Special Counsel Robert Mueller acted honorably, President Donald Trump said on Monday, days after the fellow Republican wrapped up his Russia probe with no evidence of criminal collusion between Trump's campaign and Moscow.

Asked if he thought Mueller acted honorably, Trump told reporters at the White House "yes."

But Trump also warned that there are a "lot of people out there that have done some very evil things, I would say treasonous things against our country” and voed that they “certainly be looked at.”

“I’ve been looking at them a long time,” Trump said. "You know who they are."

“We can never let this happen to another president again,” he added.

He also said that it’s “up to the attorney general” to decide whether to make Mueller's report public, adding that “it wouldn’t bother me at all” if that happened.

Source: NewsMax Politics

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Real News with David Knight

9:00 am 12:00 pm



Avengers fans gather at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood to attend the opening screening of
Avengers fans gather at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood to attend the opening screening of “Avengers: Endgame” in Los Angeles, California, U.S., April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Mike Blake

April 26, 2019

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Marvel Studios superhero spectacle “Avengers: Endgame” hauled in a record $60 million at U.S. and Canadian box offices during its Thursday night debut, distributor Walt Disney Co said.

Global ticket sales for the film about Iron Man, Hulk and other popular characters reached $305 million for the first two days, Disney said.

(Reporting by Lisa Richwine; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Funeral of journalist Lyra McKee in Belfast
Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn attends the funeral service for murdered journalist Lyra McKee at St Anne’s Cathedral in Belfast, Northern Ireland April 24, 2019. Brian Lawless/Pool via REUTERS

April 26, 2019

LONDON (Reuters) – The leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, said on Friday he had turned down an invitation to a state dinner which will be part of U.S. President Donald Trump’s visit to Britain in June.

“Theresa May should not be rolling out the red carpet for a state visit to honor a president who rips up vital international treaties, backs climate change denial and uses racist and misogynist rhetoric,” Corbyn said in a statement.

He said maintaining the relationship with the United States did not require “the pomp and ceremony of a state visit” and he said he would welcome a meeting with Trump “to discuss all matters of interest.”

(Reporting by Andy Bruce; Writing by William Schomberg)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Libyan Minister of Economy Ali Abdulaziz Issawi speaks during an interview with Reuters in Tripoli
Libyan Minister of Economy Ali Abdulaziz Issawi speaks during an interview with Reuters in Tripoli, Libya April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Hani Amara

April 26, 2019

By Ulf Laessing

TRIPOLI (Reuters) – Libya’s U.N.-recognized government has budgeted up to 2 billion dinars ($1.43 billion) to cover costs of a three-week-old war for control of the capital, such as treatment for the wounded, to be funded without new borrowing, the economy minister said.

Ali Abdulaziz Issawi suggested the government hoped for business to continue more or less as usual despite the assault on Tripoli, in the country’s northwest, by forces tied to a parallel administration based in the eastern city of Benghazi.

Once Africa’s third largest producer of oil, Libya has been riven by factional conflict since the fall of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, with the country now broadly split between eastern-based forces under Khalifa Haftar and the U.N.-backed government in Tripoli, in the west, under Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj.

Still, with Haftar’s Libyan National Army forces unable so far to pierce defenses in Tripoli’s southern suburbs, normal life and business activities continue in much of the capital and western coastal towns.

Issawi, in an interview with Reuters in his Tripoli office, also said Libya’s commercial ports and wheat imports were still functioning normally, although some roads have been blocked.

He said the Serraj government estimates it will spend up to 2 billion dinars extra on medical treatment for wounded, aid for displaced people and other “emergency” war costs.

He said this was not military spending but analysts believe that the sum will also cover expenditures such as pay for allied armed groups or food for fighters.

“We could actually spend less,” he added, in comments that gave the first insight into the economic impact of the fighting.

Issawi said the Tripoli government, which controls little territory beyond the greater capital region, would not incur new debt to fund the war costs, sticking to a plan to post a 2019 budget without a deficit.

Tripoli derives revenue largely from oil and natural gas production, interest-free loans from local banks to the central bank, and a 183 percent surcharge on foreign exchange transactions conducted at official rates.

But with centralized tax collection greatly diminished, public debt has piled up – to 68 billion dinars in the west, including unpaid state obligations such as social insurance.

Some analysts expect Serraj’s government will be forced to raise new debt if the war for control of Tripoli drags on.

With much of Libya dominated by armed factions that also act as security forces, the public wage bill for both the western and eastern administrations has soared as fighters have been made public employees in efforts to buy their loyalty.

The east has sold bonds worth 35 billion dinars outside the official financial system as the Tripoli central bank does not fund the parallel government apart from some wages.

Despite its limited reach, the Tripoli government still runs an annual budget of around 46.8 billion dinars, mainly for public salaries and fuel subsidies.

“This year we cannot finance via debt…we will not borrow (by agreement with the central bank),” Issawi said.

According to International Monetary Fund data, Libya’s central government debt-to-GDP ratio is 143 percent, making it one of the most heavily indebted in the world on that measure.

Issawi declined to say what parts of the budget would be trimmed to support the extra outlay for war costs.

However, with some 70 percent of the budget allocated to public wages, fuel subsidies and other welfare benefits, a portion devoted to infrastructure is most likely to be axed.

Widespread lawlessness has meant there have been no major infrastructural projects since 2011, when a NATO-backed uprising overthrew dictator Muammar Gaddafi, leaving schools, hospitals and roads in acute need of restoration.

FOREX SURCHARGE

Issawi said the government planned to raise as much as 30 billion dinars by the end of 2019 from hard currency deals after imposing in September a 183 percent surcharge on commercial and private transactions done on the official rate of 1.4 to the U.S. dollar. That fee has effectively devalued the official rate to 3.9, much closer to the black market equivalent.

Some 17 billion dinars have been raised since then, with hard currency allocated for import credit letters now issued without delays, Issawi said. The forex fee has helped the government forecast a budget in the black for 2019.

Despite the narrowing spread between the two rates, the black market continues to thrive. Dozens of traders remained at their favorite spot behind the central bank headquarters in Tripoli when Reuters reporters visited it last week.

But traders said it could take time for the Serraj government to register the extra forex receipts as official banking channels were taking up to six months to approve import financing, keeping the black market in play for dealers.

Issawi said authorities planned to lower the forex fee from 183 percent, without saying when. The black market rate has dropped from 6 to around 4.1 since September but it has hardly moved of late as demand for black market cash remains high.

The Tripoli government has stopped subsidizing food and bread, which used to be cheaper than drinking water in Libya. Wheat imports are now being arranged by private traders and there are surplus stocks of flour at the moment, Issawi said.

(Reporting by Ulf Laessing in Tripoli with additional reporting by Karin Strohecker in London; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!

Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., threatened possible jail time for White House officials refusing to comply with subpoenas to testify before the House Oversight Committee.

Connolly, a member of the House panel, made his comments during an interview on CNN on Thursday. He said that “if a subpoena is issued and you’re told you must testify, we will back that up.”

He added: “And we will use any and all power in our command to make sure it’s backed up — whether that’s a contempt citation, whether that’s going to court and getting that citation enforced, whether it’s fines, whether it’s possible incarceration.”

“We will go to the max to enforce the constitutional role of the legislative branch of government.”

His comments came after three officials have refused to comply with congressional requests to testify, CNN noted.

Trump told The Washington Post that his staff should not testify on Capitol Hill, explaining that the White House cooperated fully with special counsel Robert Mueller and “there is no reason to go any further, especially in Congress where it’s very partisan.”

Source: NewsMax Politics

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!

“Outdated laws” need fixing to deal with the surge in illegal immigrant families crossing the U.S. border with Mexico, a top Border Patrol official said Friday.

Migrant families face no consequences if apprehended trying to cross the border illegally under present law, Border Patrol chief of Operations Brian Hastings claimed during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

“We need a change in the current outdated laws that we’re dealing with for this current demographic and this crisis that we have,” he said.

Hastings said as of Thursday there have been 440,000 apprehensions along the southwest border. There were 396,000 apprehensions all of last year.

SOUTHERN BORDER AT ‘BREAKING POINT’ AFTER MORE THAN 76,000 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TRIED CROSSING IN FEBRUARY, OFFICIALS SAY

And those numbers continue to rise, he said.

Historically 70 to 90 percent of apprehensions at the border were quickly returned to Mexico, Hastings said.

Now, 83 percent of those apprehended have come from the Central American northern triangle which includes Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, and of those 63 percent are “family units” and children who cannot be returned, he said.

“There are no consequences that we can apply to this group currently,” Hastings said. “We’re overwhelmed. If you look at agents there doing a tremendous job trying to deal with the flow.”

The law dictates children have to be released after 20 days of detention.

FLORIDA SHERIFF ON BORDER CRISIS AFTER MAJOR DRUG BUST: ‘IT MAKES ME ABSOLUTELY CRAZY’

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., says that has forced immigration officials to release entire families because “you don’t want to separate families.”

Recently, he said he is drafting legislation that would allow children to be detained for more than 20 days.

Hastings said agents are frustrated with the situation but are doing the best they can with the resources they have.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“Up to 40 percent of our agents are processing at any given time,” he said. “That should say that in and of itself is pulling from those border security resources.”

Source: Fox News National

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Current track

Title

Artist