Pope Francis, sensing he is close to death, moves to protect his legacy (Updates as they come in)

...Even if Francis survives his latest illness, observers see this as a likely turning point as Francis shifts focus from making headway on reform to locking it in. “He may not die now but of course he eventually will,” said one Vatican official. “We all die — and he’s an 88-year-old man with lung problems.”

Read the rest here.

Update: The Vatican reports that the Pope has double pneumonia. This is in addition to his previously diagnosed polymicrobial infection. Given his age and history of health problems, I think this must now be regarded as a serious medical situation. 

Update II: Via Rorate a report that RAI (Italy's public broadcasting giant) has placed it's Vatican broadcast service under alert for a potential major news announcement. 

Update III: Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has visited the Pope and says he is alert and in good spirits.

Update IV: The Vatican reported on Wednesday evening a "slight improvement" in the Pope's condition.

Moving Fast, Breaking Things, and the Oath of Office

In a remark that might seem to sum up Congress’s current approach to its oversight role, Sen. Thom Tillis (R‑NC) acknowledged the other day that the Trump administration’s opening moves to cut spending and do away with agencies without congressional approval were in some cases not lawful, but said, “Nobody should bellyache about that.” In particular, he said, “That runs afoul of the Constitution in the strictest sense. But it’s not uncommon for presidents to flex a little bit on where they can spend and where they can stop spending.” (I briefly summarized the ongoing lawbreaking spree in this space on Monday, and further likely illegalities have come to light since then.)

One group of thinkers who were given to bellyache when officials acted in unconstitutional ways were the framers of the Constitution, who had in recent memory the “long train of abuses and usurpations” committed in the name of the British crown. To guard against a repeat, they provided in Article II, Section 1, that the president take the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” In Article VI, along with declaring that the Constitution “shall be the supreme law of the land,” they provided that Sen. Tillis, along with all his legislative colleagues, “be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution.” 

A lot of good that seems to have done. 

Read the rest here.

Trump Wants Ukraine as a US Colony

Donald Trump’s demand for a $500bn (£400bn) “payback” from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country’s critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky’s office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked “Privileged & Confidential’ and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that “hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine”.

The agreement covers the “economic value associated with resources of Ukraine”, including “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)”, leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. “This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles,” it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of “all new licences issued to third parties” for the future monetisation of resources. There will be “a lien on such revenues” in favour of the US. “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children’,” said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that “for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals”. Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine’s commodity and resource economy. The fund “shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions” of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

Read the rest here.

I think we now what Trump's "peace plan" is. It is the partitioning of Ukraine between Russia and the US. Reminds me of the Hitler-Stalin Pact in 1939.

Sunday of the Prodigal Son

In a rare coincidence Pascha (Easter) falls on the same day this year, April 20th, for both Orthodox and Western Christians. It will not happen again until 2034. Today also marks the beginning of "meatfare" week.

Quote of the day...

“He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.” 

 -Widely attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte and just posted by President Donald Trump on his social media account.

‘Canada First’ Conservatives primed for Trump fight

OTTAWA — Canada’s Conservative leader used a rally in Ottawa on Saturday to deliver a message to Donald Trump. “Let me be clear: We will never be the 51st state,” said Pierre Poilievre, warning that he is prepared to defend Canadians against the president at all costs.

“We will bear any burden and pay any price to protect the sovereignty and independence of our country,” he said.

The populist leader had been long favored to win Canada’s next federal election, which could come as soon as spring. But the race has been complicated by the arrival of Trump and by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to step down as soon as his Liberal Party chooses a new leader next month.

Poilievre, who has appealed to Canadians by tackling complex issues with pithy slogans, used a Flag Day rally to reset his campaign in response to tariff threats that have scrambled the political landscape.

Trump has pledged to slap Canada with 25 percent tariffs in response to a growing list of grievances. It started with complaints about what Canadian leaders say are small amounts of fentanyl and illegal migration entering the U.S. from Canada, but has since expanded to include banking, and the trade deficit.

“We are slow to anger and quick to forgive. But never confuse our kindness for weakness,” Poilievre said about Canada. “We are mild-mannered and made of steel.”

Poilievre had focused his “change” campaign on overturning Trudeau’s carbon policy. However since the start of Trump’s trade war a new ballot box question has emerged: Which Canadian leader will best defend their interests against the U.S.?

At his “Canada First” rally, Poilievre tackled the question head-on, laying out his vision for the country should he become prime minister, while leaning heavily on Canadian symbols and its history. He promised to “end cancel culture,” restore national monuments and make it a criminal offense to deface them, to expand Canada’s military and to update the citizenship oath with more patriotic language.

“Sometimes it does take a threat to remind us what we have, what we could lose and what we could become,” Poilievre said, pointing to an upsurge in patriotism.

The Conservative leader said Trump has two options: Work with Canada, or lose it as a friend.

As he defined the choices, Poilievre spoke directly to Americans, saying their “energy-hungry future” can not exist without Canada or its oil, gas and critical minerals. He argued that America’s defense is dependent on Canada’s North.

“Carry out the unprovoked attack on our economy and your consumers will pay more and your workers will make less,” Poilievre said. “Gas prices will skyrocket. You will turn a loyal friend into a resentful neighbor, forced to match tariff with tariff and to seek friends elsewhere. Both our economies will weaken, leaving less money for defense and security and our enemies will grow stronger.”

Read the rest here.

When you manage to p*** off Canada, you know you have accomplished something. And oh my but they are not happy. Canadians are boycotting American goods, cancelling vacations to the US and booing our national anthem at sporting events. Since the Second World War the Unites States has managed to accumulate a staggering amount of good will globally. I'm not sure what their objective is, but the current administration with it's bullying behavior and rhetoric seems intent on pouring gasoline all over that and tossing a match. 

More Admirals than Ships?

Pope Francis Hospitalized

Pope Francis, who was admitted to a hospital in Rome for bronchitis, is in “fair” condition with a “respiratory tract infection,” the Vatican said Friday in what is the latest in a string of ailments that have raised concerns about the 88-year-old pontiff’s health.

Earlier on Friday, the Vatican said Pope Francis was admitted to Agostino Gemelli Polyclinic in Rome. He was there “for some necessary diagnostic tests and to continue in a hospital setting treatment for bronchitis that is still ongoing,” the Vatican said. They later confirmed he was in the facility, and that he had canceled his meetings for the next three days.

Francis has made a number of visits to the hospital in recent years, and received abdominal surgery in 2023. He has been struggling with bronchitis in recent weeks and has asked aides to read speeches and addresses.

Read the rest here.

The Principled Resignation

Take notes please. This is how it's done.

What we have here is a Justice Department using its prosecutorial powers and discretion as an instrument of political extortion. The DOJ should be sanctioned. The Attorney General, and all those involved in this affront to the rule of law, should be disbarred for official misconduct and corruption. As much as I think Mayor Adams was very probably guilty as sin, the judge should dismiss all charges against him with prejudice to prevent any further abuse of power by the DOJ in that direction. Whether or not these orders originated in the White House is unclear. Unfortunately, with this Congress no investigation is likely to be undertaken. 

Trump Names His Price

American support for Ukraine has a price tag: $500B worth of mineral riches, said U.S. President Donald Trump. In the second part of an interview with Fox News that aired late Monday, the Republican said the U.S. should get a slice of Ukraine’s vast natural resources as compensation for the hundreds of billions it has spent on helping Kyiv resist Russia's full-scale invasion. “I told them [Ukraine] that I want the equivalent like $500B worth of rare earth. And they've essentially agreed to do that so at least we don’t feel stupid,” Trump said.

Read the rest here.

I love my country, though there are a few aspects of America's distant past that do not exactly fill me with pride. I expect that is broadly true everywhere. And of course, we all have the routine differences in political matters. But until quite recently, and conceding the exception of legalized abortion on demand, I have never felt outright shame for my country for anything it has done in my lifetime. This is a new, and altogether unwelcome sensation. 

Breaking: Trump to Order DOJ to Cease Enforcement of Federal Bribery Law

President Donald Trump is set Monday to sign an executive order directing the Department of Justice to pause enforcing a nearly half-century-old law that prohibits American companies and foreign firms from bribing officials of foreign governments to obtain or retain business.

The Authoritarian Checklist

What are the Core Attributes of Authoritarianism?

• Rejecting established democratic rules and norms.
• Denying the legitimacy of opponents.
• Tolerating or encouraging political violence.
• Curtailing the civil liberties of opponents.
• Breaking down social cohesion to divide and rule a society.

What are the Top 11 Elements of the Authoritarian Playbook?

• Divide and rule: Foment mistrust and fear in the population.
• Spread lies and conspiracy theories: Undermine the public’s belief in truth.
• Destroy checks and balances: Use legal or pseudo-legal rationales to gut institutions, weaken opposition, and/or declare national emergencies to seize unconstitutional powers.
• Demonize opponents: Undermine the public’s trust in those actors and institutions that hold the state accountable. Intimidate or suppress news/media outlets that fail to demonstrate sufficient loyalty to the regime.
• Undermine civil and political rights for the unaligned: Actively suppress free speech, the right to assembly and protest and the rights of minority groups.
• Blame minorities, immigrants, and “outsiders” for a country’s problems: Exploit national humiliation while promising to restore national glory.
• Reward loyalists and punish defectors: Make in-group members fearful to voice dissension.
• Encourage or condone violence to advance political goals: Dehumanize opposition and/or out-groups to justify violence against them.
• Organize mass rallies to keep supporters mobilized against made-up threats: Use fearmongering and hate speech to consolidate in-group identity and solidarity.
• Make people feel like they are powerless to change things: Solutions will only come from the top. 
• Place fanatical loyalists in charge of the armed forces, law enforcement and all other aspects of state security. Their loyalty is to the regime/leader, not the rule of law or the constitution.

At this point, I believe the Trump Administration meets most, but not quite all of the above criteria.

Trump, Vance Question Authority of the Courts

WASHINGTON (AP) — Top Trump administration officials are openly questioning the judiciary’s authority to serve as a check on executive power as the new president’s sweeping agenda faces growing pushback from the courts.

Over the past 24 hours, officials ranging from billionaire Elon Musk to Vice President JD Vance have not only criticized a federal judge’s decision early Saturday that blocks Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury Department records, but have also attacked the legitimacy of judicial oversight, a fundamental pillar of American democracy, which is based on the separation of powers.

“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” Vance wrote on X on Sunday morning.

That post came hours after Musk said overnight that the judge who ruled against him should be impeached.

“A corrupt judge protecting corruption. He needs to be impeached NOW!” said Musk, who has been tasked by President Donald Trump with rooting out waste across the federal government.

Read the rest here.

The constitutional crisis is accelerating, almost by the minute.

We Are in a Constitutional Crisis

In his first term, President Trump seemed to relish ripping through the norms and standards of self-restraint that his predecessors had respected. Three weeks into his second term, hand-wringing about norms seems quaint.

Other presidents have occasionally ignored or claimed a right to bypass particular statutes. But Mr. Trump has opened the throttle on defying legal limits.

“We are well past euphemism about ‘pushing the limits,’ ‘stretching the envelope’ and the like,” said Peter M. Shane, who is a legal scholar in residence at New York University and the author of a casebook on separation-of-powers law. The array of legal constraints Mr. Trump has violated, Mr. Shane added, amounts to “programmatic sabotage and rampant lawlessness.”

Mr. Trump has effectively nullified laws, such as by ordering the Justice Department to refrain from enforcing a ban on the wildly popular app TikTok and by blocking migrants from invoking a statute allowing them to request asylum. He moved to effectively shutter a federal agency Congress created and tried to freeze congressionally approved spending, including most foreign aid. He summarily fired prosecutors, inspectors general and board members of independent agencies in defiance of legal rules against arbitrary removal.

More than two dozen lawsuits have been filed so far challenging moves by the Trump administration, though many overlap: At least nine, for example, concern his bid to change the constitutional understanding that babies born on U.S. soil to undocumented parents are citizens.

Courts have temporarily blocked that edict, along with his blanket freeze on disbursing $3 trillion in domestic grants from money Congress appropriated. And a federal judge has temporarily blocked the transfer of a transgender federal inmate to a male prison, pausing a move in line with one of Mr. Trump’s executive orders.

But those obstacles so far have been rare in Mr. Trump’s blitzkrieg, which has raised the question of whether, in his return to office, he and his advisers feel constrained by the rule of law.

This week, Mr. Trump moved to effectively dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development and fold its functions into the State Department, making Secretary of State Marco Rubio its acting director. He had already crippled U.S.A.I.D. by imposing a “temporary” freeze on disbursing foreign aid that Congress appropriated, which as time passes is increasingly at odds with the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

Since the first Congress, it has been the legislative branch — not the president — that decides how to structure the executive branch, creating departments and agencies, giving them functions and providing them with funds to carry out those missions. And Congress has enacted laws that say U.S.A.I.D. is to exist as an “independent establishment,” not as part of any executive department.

No matter. On Monday, Mr. Trump was asked whether he needed an act of Congress to do away with the agency. He dismissed that suggestion and insulted the officials who work there.

“I don’t think so, not when it comes to fraud,” Mr. Trump said. “If there’s fraud — these people are lunatics — and if — if it comes to fraud, you wouldn’t have an act of Congress. And I’m not sure that you would anyway.”

Rumors abound that Mr. Trump is weighing executive actions to at least partly dismantle the Education Department, another component of the government that Congress has mandated exist by law.

Mr. Trump and his appointees have also been firing people in naked defiance of statutes Congress enacted to protect against the arbitrary removal of certain officials, like civil servants or board members at independent agencies.

For example, Mr. Trump shut down three agencies by ousting Democratic members before their terms had ended. That effectively hobbled the agencies, the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, because they were left with too few officials to have a quorum to act.

Congress created those agencies to be independent of the White House, and all three have been understood to have forms of protections limiting the president’s ability to remove their leaders without a good cause, like misconduct, although only the labor board statute says that. Regardless, Mr. Trump flouted the limit.

Read the rest here.

Bret Stephens: Is This the End of Pax Americana?

Back in the 1990s, it was fashionable to complain about what Hubert Vedrine, then the French foreign minister, called American hyperpuissance, or “hyperpower.” The left-leaning diplomat believed the “question at the center of the world’s current powers” was the United States’ “domination of attitudes, concepts, language and modes of life.” What was needed, he argued, was a “balanced multipolarism,” which might counteract American “unilateralism,” “unipolarism” and “uniformity.”

With President Trump, Vedrine has finally gotten his wish, though probably not in the way he would have imagined, much less liked.

It isn’t exactly easy to make sense of the Trump administration’s foreign policy after its first bombastic weeks in office. Does it have a governing concept, beyond a taste for drama and the assertion, based on scant evidence, that this or that neighbor or ally has treated us “very unfairly”?

In an intriguing guest essay in The Times this week, Rutgers University historian Jennifer Mittelstadt made the case that Trump was a “sovereigntist,” a tradition she dated to 1919 and the Republican rejection, led by Henry Cabot Lodge, of U.S. membership in the League of Nations. Sovereigntists, she noted, also looked askance at U.S. membership in NATO, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act and especially the Carter administration’s decision to relinquish the Panama Canal.

That seems about right. Sovereigntism means a country doing what it wants to do within only the limits of what it can do. It means the end of self-restraint within a framework of mutual restraint. It means an indifference to the behavior of other states, however cruel or dangerous, so long as it doesn’t impinge on us. It means a reversion to the notorious claim, uttered (according to Thucydides) by the Athenians before their sacking of the neutral city of Melos, that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Read the rest here.

Own Goal

The proprietor of the Gedling Inn recently offered a free pint (beer) for every goal scored by local favorite Nottingham Forest soccer club during the game with Brighton. Soccer (the Brits call it football) is not typically a high scoring game. Alas, this turned into a very generous act when the match turned into an unusual 7-0 blow out for the Reds. Apparently, a very good time was had by all. The total cost to the establishment was estimated at near ₤1,500. But the owner, a Mrs. Webster, was a good sport declaring how thrilled she was that the team was doing well. 

Source

Because no one should have to face capitalism alone

Trump Launches Trade War with China, Mexico & Canada (JP Morgan Chase Stockpiles Gold)

President Donald Trump has signed tariffs on goods coming into the U.S. from Canada, Mexico and China, the White House said Saturday, raising the risk of a trade war with America’s closest trading partners and threatening to drive up prices on everything from cars to avocados.

It is unclear when the tariffs will take effect.

Canadian energy products would have a lower tariff rate of 10%.

Trump said he was imposing the tariffs because he claimed the countries were allowing fentanyl to come into the U.S. More than 107,000 people died from drug overdose in 2023, with nearly 70% of those deaths from opioids, including fentanyl. Trump also said the tariffs were in response to a trade deficit between the U.S. and the three countries because the U.S. imports more from them than it exports.

Economists across the political spectrum expect tariffs to increase what consumers pay for a range of goods, including vehicles, electronics, produce and lumber. Tariffs are paid by companies importing goods into the U.S., similar to a tax.

Read the rest here

Meanwhile, JP Morgan Chase is airlifting $4 billion in gold bullion to its New York vaults.

Richard Williamson Has Died

The schismatic former SSPX Catholic bishop (and antisemite/Holocaust denier) was 84. 

Kyrie eleison. 

Even Progressives are Starting to Worry About the Debt

The 119th Congress began, as it so often has in recent years, with calls from Republican politicians for wrestling down the national debt, which is near a record level relative to the size of the economy.

But this time, the G.O.P. had company: Progressive economists and budget wonks, who have often dismissed finger-wagging about debt levels as a pretext for slashing spending on programs for the poor, are starting to ring alarm bells as well.

What’s changed? In large part, long-term interest rates look unlikely to recede as quickly as had been hoped, forcing the federal government to make larger interest payments. And the Trump administration has promised to extend and expand its 2017 tax cuts, which will cost trillions if not matched by spending reductions.

“I find it easier to stay calm about this threat when I think the interest rate is low and steady, and I think in the past year or so that steadiness has been dented,” said Jared Bernstein, who led the Council of Economic Advisers in the Biden administration. “If one party refuses to raise revenues, and the Democrats go along more than is fiscally healthy, that’s also a big part of the problem.”

To be clear, conservative warnings on the debt have generally been met with little action over the past two decades. A paper by two political scientists and an economist recently concluded that after at least trying to constrain borrowing in the 1980s and 1990s, Republicans have “given up the pretense” of meaningful deficit reduction. Democrats and Republicans alike tend to express more concerns about fiscal responsibility when their party is out of power.

Read the rest here.

Bret Stephens- D.E.I. Will Not Be Missed

In December 2015 the Obama administration decided to allow women to serve in all combat roles. “There will be no exceptions,” Ashton Carter, then the secretary of defense, announced. Women would be accepted as “Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy SEALs, Marine Corps infantry,” among other demanding roles previously open only to men.

As for physical standards, those would not change: “There must be no quotas or perception thereof,” Carter said.

In some ways, the policy has produced inspiring results. More than 140 women have completed the Army’s elite Ranger School, and a few have passed the Marines’ Infantry Officer Course (though none, as yet, have become SEALs). Women serve with distinction in other combat roles, including as fighter pilots and tank commanders.

In other ways, however, the policy has realized the worst fears of its early critics. Though it has elevated women who meet the same physical standards as their male counterparts, it has also led to an erosion of standards. From the initial laudable goal — equality of opportunity for all, regardless of gender — the military has been sliding toward something else: equality in outcomes. That is what today is usually meant by the word “equity,” at least in the context of diversity, equity and inclusion, or D.E.I.

Take the Army’s efforts to create gender-neutral fitness requirements, known as the Army Combat Fitness Test. The test, developed over a decade, was designed to be rigorous, requiring soldiers of either sex to meet physical standards appropriate to the roles they might perform — with the toughest requirements for jobs like artillery soldiers, which require a lot of muscle.

But that caused a problem: Women were failing the test at noticeably higher rates, according to a RAND study. Among active-duty enlisted soldiers, the fitness test had a pass rate of 92 percent among men but only 52 percent among women. (Female officers did better, with a pass rate of 72 percent.) Democratic senators, including New York’s Kirsten Gillibrand, were also putting pressure on the Army to delay implementation of the test, arguing, as The Washington Post reported in 2020, that it “could undermine the goal of creating a diverse force.”

The Biden administration yielded to this complaint.

Read the rest here.