A US Defense Strategy Is Coming, Just Not From the President
I'm talking about strategy as the likes of Carl von Clausewitz thought about it: the definition of clear and big political goals, and the alignment of the available means with those ends.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Factbox-Some key Brazilian exports spared from Trump's new 40% tariff
By Brendan O'Boyle (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday imposing a 40% tariff on Brazilian exports, bringing the country's total tariff amount to 50%. Some of Brazil's major exports, however, were exempted from the tax. Notable exemptions include products already covered by other specific tariffs, like passenger vehicles, iron and steel products, and a large number of parts and components used in civil aircraft. Below is a list of the products exempted from the tariff hike: PRODUCTS ALREADY SUBJECT TO PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED SECTORAL TARIFFS * Iron and steel (raw and derivatives) * Aluminum products (raw and derivatives) * Passenger vehicles (sedans, SUVs, minivans, etc.) and light trucks * Parts for passenger vehicles and light trucks * Semi-finished and intensive copper derivative products AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD PRODUCTS * Brazil nuts * Orange juice (frozen and not frozen) and orange pulp CIVIL AIRCRAFT, PARTS, AND COMPONENTS * Civil aircraft, including airplanes, helicopters, unmanned aircraft (drones), balloons, and gliders * Aircraft engines (piston, turbojets, turbopropellers) and their parts * New, retreaded, and used pneumatic tires for aircraft * Undercarriages and other aircraft parts * Aircraft seats * Navigational instruments, radios, and radar apparatus for aeronautical use * A wide range of other components specified for civil aircraft use ENERGY AND MINERAL PRODUCTS * Crude petroleum, various petroleum oils, and fuel products * Natural gas (liquefied and gaseous) * Coal and related products (lignite, peat, coke, tars) * Electrical energy * Iron ore and tin ores * Silicon metal and metallurgical grade alumina (aluminum oxide) * Crude mica and worked building stone METALS AND METAL PRODUCTS (GENERAL EXEMPTION) * Nonalloy and alloy pig iron * Ferroalloys, including ferronickel and ferroniobium * Tin waste, scrap, oxides, and chlorides PRECIOUS METALS * Silver bullion and dore * Gold bullion and dore WOOD AND PAPER PRODUCTS * Various types of chemical and semi-chemical wood pulp * Sawn or chipped tropical wood * Paper and paper pulp products CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS * Various mineral or chemical fertilizers * A specific list of industrial chemicals, including potassium hydroxide and certain chlorinated hydrocarbons OTHER GENERAL EXEMPTIONS * Donations intended to relieve human suffering (e.g., food, clothing, medicine) * Informational materials (e.g., publications, films, music, artworks) * Binder or baler twine made of sisal or agave fibers
New York Post
26 minutes ago
- New York Post
Forget Canada, Trump should make the UK the 51st state!
Finally, a politician has told us Brits the truth about our country. At last a political leader has had the guts to tell us our migrant crisis is out of control, the Net Zero eco-death cult we've signed on to is nuts, and Sadiq Khan is the worst mayor London has ever had. Who was this brave soul dropping truth bombs all over my nation? It was Donald Trump. That's right, it took an American president flying into the UK for a game of golf to tell us what we needed to hear. The Donald's visit to Trump Turnberry, his luxury golf resort in Scotland, was equal parts hilarious and refreshing, as he repeatedly made our prime minister squirm. President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer hold a bilateral meeting at Trump Turnberry golf course in Turnberry, Scotland, Britain, July 28, 2025. TOLGA AKMEN/POOL/EPA/Shutterstock The minute Trump landed he was busting out the honesty: He hadn't even left the tarmac at Glasgow Prestwick Airport before he was saying the UK needs to 'get its act together' on illegal immigration. If you don't halt this 'horrible invasion' of unvetted men, he told us, 'you're not going to have Europe anymore.' His words must have chimed with Brits who are sick of seeing gangs of men pour over our borders. Thousands of these blokes from regressive cultures arrive in small boats every week. On one Saturday in May, 1,195 of them turned up. 'Worst form of energy' And who's paying for them to stay in the UK? We are. Our taxes are splashed on putting the illegal aliens up in hotels where they enjoy full bed and board. Indeed, just days before Trump's arrival, the UK was rocked by protests outside these 'migrant hotels.' People hit the streets to say enough is enough. They must have nodded vigorously when Trump said the migrant 'invasion' is 'killing' Britain — while wondering why it took a man from 3,000 miles away to speak so honestly about this once-great land. The president turned the heat up further at Trump Turnberry, where he hosted PM Keir Starmer and his wife, Victoria. It was an extraordinary spectacle: The leader of the UK shifting nervously in his seat as a visiting dignitary told him what's what — and all of it aptly taking place in The Donald J. Trump Ballroom. Trump took aim at wind power, calling it 'the worst form of energy.' As for those huge windmills — they're 'ugly,' they're 'made in China' and they 'kill the birds,' he said. All true. Greenie Keir was lost for words. Donald Trump walks backdropped by wind turbines during an opening ceremony for the Trump International Golf Links golf course, near Aberdeen, Scotland, Tuesday, July 29, 2025. AP The next day Trump upped the ante on our dumb environmental policies, posting that Starmer's shutdown of the North Sea — where the government has madly banned all new drilling — was wasting a 'TREASURE CHEST' of oil and gas. He's right. Our energy bills are spiraling, all because our leaders have fallen under the spell of the carbon-neutral cult which views fossil fuels as demonic. There's a 'VAST FORTUNE TO BE MADE' from the North Sea, Trump bellowed on Truth Social — and greater energy independence would lead to 'lower energy costs' for ordinary Brits, he added. Again, millions of people here will have been wondering why a foreign president cares more about cutting our bills and improving our lives than our own leaders do. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters The thing that made me crack a smile was when Trump reignited his feud with Sadiq Khan, London's pipsqueak woke mayor. In the DJT ballroom he said Sadiq is a 'nasty person' who's done a 'terrible job' in London. At this point, even gormless Sir Keir felt compelled to chip in. 'He's a friend of mine, actually,' he protested, in his lawyerly nasal whine. It wasn't enough to stop Trump, who carried on bashing the mayor he once called a 'stone-cold loser' and the 'twin' of the 'very dumb and incompetent' Bill de Blasio — 'only half his height.' Great political divide Between truth-spitting Trump and gray-faced Starmer, we glimpsed the great divide in modern politics. On one side, a populist president who bristles at wokeness, is wary of globalism and loves economic growth. On the other, a lame-duck PM who worships supranational institutions like the EU, refuses to dig for oil and can't even say what a woman is. This is the fork in the road for the West. One path, the one Trump has taken, promises a return to moral sanity and economic revival. The other, where Starmer lurks, promises only more political correctness and suicidal greenism. Brits are asking: Why aren't our own politicians speaking as plainly about our problems as Trump did for the four days he was here? Maybe he should take us under his wing. Annex Britain for its own sake. Make us America's 51st state. How about it, Donald? Trump Turnberry could be your seat of power, from which you can continue spilling truths to grateful Britons — and start turning us back from our self-destruction. Brendan O'Neill is chief political writer for the British online magazine spiked.
CBS News
26 minutes ago
- CBS News
The Trump administration's misconduct complaint against Judge Boasberg and what happens now
The Trump administration filed a complaint Monday against Judge James Boasberg, an unusual move that follows clashes in court between the D.C.-based federal judge and the government over President Trump's deportation policies. It's rare for the Justice Department to formally accuse judges of misconduct. The move will kick off a long, complex review process — though some legal experts say the Trump administration could have a difficult time demonstrating that Boasberg violated judicial rules. The complaint accuses Boasberg of "making improper public comments" about Mr. Trump, and criticizes the judge's rulings in a high-profile case involving Venezuelan migrants who were deported to El Salvador, according to a copy obtained by CBS News. Much of the complaint focuses on a March session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, a panel of federal judges led by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts that weighs in on how the judicial branch is run. The Justice Department accused Boasberg of speaking up during one part of the biannual meeting to warn that the Trump administration could "disregard rulings of federal courts," leading to a "constitutional crisis." The source of those quotes is unclear, but they were first reported earlier this month by The Federalist, a conservative digital outlet that says it obtained a memo summarizing the meeting. CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department for further details. Those comments, the government argues, violated rules requiring judges to avoid publicly comment on cases and to "act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary." The complaint also takes issue with Boasberg's handling of Venezuelan migrants who were rapidly flown to a Salvadoran prison under the wartime Alien Enemies Act in mid-March, less than a week after the Judicial Conference meeting. Boasberg verbally ordered the government to return the migrants to the U.S., even if officials needed to "turn the planes around," but the deportees were still sent to El Salvador. Since then, the judge has accused the administration of defying his orders, and has threatened to hold the government in contempt. The Justice Department argued Monday that Boasberg "rushed the government through complex litigation, sometimes giving the Trump Administration less than 48 hours to respond." "Judge Boasberg publicly forecasted his baseless predictions of presidential lawlessness, then issued erroneous rulings based on that preconceived notion," says the complaint, which was signed by Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff, Chad Mizelle. In April, the Supreme Court halted a ruling by Boasberg blocking deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, deciding the lawsuit should have been brought in Texas, not Washington, D.C. Several legal experts told CBS News the complaint could face a tough path. Federal law defines judicial misconduct as "conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts." That covers everything from harassment to making partisan statements and treating people in a "demonstrably egregious and hostile manner." Several law professors say that the parts of Monday's complaint that focus on Boasberg's handling of the deportation case are misdirected. In general, if a party in a federal case has issues with how a judge has ruled, they're expected to file an appeal — not a complaint against a judge — said Jeffrey Bellin, a law professor at Vanderbilt University who has served as a judicial ethics investigator. "You're not supposed to use the misconduct process to complain about the judge's behavior in the case that you're involved in," Bellin told CBS News. The parts of the complaint that criticize Boasberg for warning the Trump administration may defy court orders are less straightforward, says Charles Geyh, an Indiana University law professor. The government accused the Obama-appointed judge of violating a section of the code of conduct for federal judges that says they "should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court." Geyh said that in some circumstances, Boasberg's comments could be "a potential problem." But he still doesn't believe Boasberg deserves disciplinary action. He said courts have been "overwhelmed" by Trump-era executive actions, "many of which are of dubious constitutionality," and need to figure out how to preserve their legitimacy and ensure their rulings are followed. "They need to talk about it somehow," said Geyh. Also, while public comments about cases aren't allowed, if Boasberg's remarks were made in a session of the normally private Judicial Conference, "you could make a pretty good argument, I think, that that is something different," Geyh said. Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said remarks at Judicial Conference meetings typically aren't meant for public consumption. She also argued Boasberg's alleged comments about the risk of the Trump administration skirting court orders are based on "very real concerns." "This is not a novel issue being raised by one particular judge about, 'what if the administration doesn't comply,'" said Levenson. It's a complicated process that can take months. When a complaint is filed, the first step is usually for the region's chief appellate court judge — in this case, Judge Sri Srinivasin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — to review the issue and decide how to proceed. In the vast majority of situations, the misconduct complaint is dismissed at that stage, Geyh said, noting that many complaints are from "disgruntled litigants who don't like how their case went, and so they kvetch about what went on in their case." The appeals court judge can also privately take corrective action before the issue escalates. For example, they can encourage the judge to admit their mistake, said Geyh. If the appellate judge decides a complaint has merit, they can refer it to a special committee of judges to conduct an investigation and make recommendations. Then, the region's judicial council — yet another committee of judges — decides whether to punish them. "The quickest thing is if they dismiss it," Bellin said. "If they don't dismiss it … we won't hear about it for a while." First off, district court judges can't be fired — unless they're impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, which requires two-thirds of senators to vote in favor. "It's very hard to discipline a sitting federal judge because they have life tenure," said Bellin. Short of that, a judge found to have engaged in misconduct can be publicly censured or reprimanded, or barred from taking on any new cases. The judicial conference can also choose to refer a judge to Congress for impeachment proceedings. They're not unheard of, though punishments are rare. Last year, Boston-based U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor was the subject of a misconduct complaint after he criticized Supreme Court Justice Alito in a New York Times op-ed. An appellate judge didn't take further action because Ponsor apologized. Bellin said it's "pretty common" for parties in cases to file complaints about judges, but "these are not usually done by people who are professional litigators." Instead, most attorneys just work their issues with judges into their appeals. It's especially unusual for the Justice Department to file complaints. "You just don't have a history of the Justice Department having an acrimonious relationship with the judiciary," said Geyh. "Historically, it's just a dumb thing to do. You want an amicable relationship with the judges who are going to be deciding your cases. You don't want to be suing them. You don't want to be filing complaints against them." Still, Mr. Trump has been more openly critical of judges than his predecessors. Besides Boasberg, the Trump administration filed a misconduct complaint in February against D.C. District Judge Ana Reyes, accusing her of "hostile and egregious misconduct" during a hearing. The D.C. appeals court has not addressed the complaint. The administration also sued every judge in Maryland over a standing order in that court district blocking the immediate deportation of migrants challenging their removal. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump and his staff have lashed out at judges who have ruled against the government. The president has called for Boasberg to be impeached. "It strikes me as a bit of posturing, as an aggressive pushback by the administration against the federal judges," Levenson said of the complaint against Boasberg. "I think it's a real uphill battle for the administration, but the mere filing of the complaint is sort of the shot across the bow."Jacob Rosen contributed to this report.
