Pirates, Thomas Jefferson, and the First Battle of the Barbary Wars
In a letter to Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, the American consul in Lisbon, Edward Church, wrote:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's planned 100% computer chip tariff sparks confusion among businesses and trading partners
President Donald Trump's plans for 100% tariffs on computer chips that aren't made in the U.S. are stoking confusion among businesses and trading partners — boosting stocks for leading semiconductor companies while leaving smaller producers scrambling to understand the implications. The U.S. imports a relatively small number of chips because most of the foreign-made chips in a device — from an iPhone to a car — were already assembled into a product, or part of a product, before it landed in the country. 'The real question everybody in the industry is asking is whether there will be a component tariff, where the chips in a device would require some sort of separate tariff calculation,' said Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Trump said Wednesday that companies that 'made a commitment to build' in the U.S. would be spared the import tax, even if they are not yet producing those chips in American factories. 'We'll be putting a tariff of approximately 100% on chips and semiconductors,' Trump said in the Oval Office while meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook. 'But if you're building in the United States of America, there's no charge.' Wall Street investors interpreted that as good news not just for U.S. companies like AMD, Intel and Nvidia, but also for the biggest Asian chipmakers like Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company that have been working to build U.S. factories. But it left greater uncertainty for smaller chipmakers in Europe and Asia that have little exposure to the AI boom but still make semiconductors inserted into essential products like cars or washing machines. These producers 'probably aren't large enough to get on the map for an exemption and quite probably wouldn't have the kind of excess capital and margins to be able to add investment at a large scale into the United States,' Chorzempa said. The announcement came more than three months after Trump temporarily exempted most electronics from his administration's most onerous tariffs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of computer chips increased the price of autos and contributed to higher inflation. Chorzempa said chip tariffs could again raise prices by hundreds of dollars per vehicle if the semiconductors inside a car are not exempt. 'There's a chip that allows you to open and close the window,' Chorzempa said. 'There's a chip that is running the entertainment system. There is a chip that's kind of running all the electronics. There are chips, especially in EVs, that are doing power management, all that kind of stuff.' Much of the investment into building U.S. chip factories began with the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act that President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022, providing more than $50 billion to support new computer chip plants, fund research and train workers for the industry. Trump has vocally opposed those financial incentives and taken a different approach, betting that the threat of dramatically higher chip costs would force most companies to open factories domestically, despite the risk that tariffs could squeeze corporate profits and push up prices for electronics.
Miami Herald
23 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Trump administration, TSA propose new rule expanding drone usage
The U.S. Transportation Secretary and the TSA have unveiled a new proposed rule for drones that would make it easier for companies to use drones for farming, deliveries, manufacturing and more, called Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS). Touted by Secretary Sean P. Duffy as "unleashing American drone dominance," the new BVLOS rule does away with individual waivers or exemptions for drone operators to use their drones without a visual line of sight. Traditionally, they were approved by the FAA on a case-by-case basis. "From drones delivering medicine to unmanned aircraft surveying crops, this technology will fundamentally change the way we interact with the world," said Duffy. "Our new rule will reform outdated regulations that were holding innovators back while also enhancing safety in our skies. Thanks to President Trump, America – not China – will lead the way in this exciting new technology." The new rule requires drone traffic-management services and exempts drones from operating within airspace of places like airports, space ports and other similar locations. Operations, according to the new rule, would take place at or below 400 feet, and would be allowed to occur above people. Drones would not need traditional FAA airworthiness certificates; instead of the FAA creating the standards for drone safety and security, the industry standards would become the FAA's standards for allowing drone operations. According to the release, the FAA is welcoming the public to comment on the rule for the next sixty days in the Federal Register. However, the Federal Register only shows Trump's executive order on the issue, not the proposal. Detractors will surely point to worries over personal safety, surveillance and the potential for drones to reduce the American workforce by automating some jobs. The Federal Register also shows the work of the Biden Administration in researching and working with industry partners to create the BVLOS rule, as far back as 2022 and 2023. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Los Angeles Times
23 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Undermining economic data is no way to realize Trump's vision
The Trump administration stands on the cusp of something potentially transformative. If President Trump succeeds in unleashing a new era of energy abundance and securing America's leadership in artificial intelligence, the economic gains will be profound. Lower energy costs, faster innovation and greater industrial dynamism would provide a powerful tailwind to American productivity and growth. But if the president continues to treat disagreement as disloyalty — especially from vital, independent agencies such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Congressional Budget Office — then Trump's second term could leave a dark mark on the country. He has been bullying the chair of the Federal Reserve for months. The president and his proxies launched nonstop attacks on the CBO during the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' debate. And now, Trump has fired the head of the statistics bureau in response to its latest jobs report. It's ugly business. Some of these agencies are not just recordkeepers of past economic activity; they are part of the infrastructure of a modern, data-driven economy. From job seekers and entrepreneurs to homeowners and policymakers, nearly every consequential decision in modern America depends on the credibility and quality of the numbers these agencies produce. In an era shaped by artificial intelligence, energy transformation and digitized commerce, the United States needs a statistical system that is modern, agile and protected from political interference. To be sure, these agencies are far from perfect. I have been a strong critic of many of them. The CBO's budget models rest on questionable assumptions and routinely underestimate the effects of rising debt on interest rates and investment. The office projected that the debt burden would reach 166% of GDP or higher, and yet its projection of annual inflation stays around 2% as if unaffected by the rising debt. Such projections would be laughable, if they weren't so dangerously disconnected from fiscal reality. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also deserves criticism. The headline unemployment rate masks labor-market weakness by overlooking discouraged workers and those stuck in part-time jobs. The agency has also been slow to adapt its methods to reflect the modern economy and has struggled to capture the rise of gig work, hybrid jobs and other emerging trends. It has resisted using real-time administrative and private data that could improve the speed and accuracy of its reporting. Add to this a bureaucratic culture defined by wariness of reform, overly rigid job classifications and methodological opacity, and it's easy to see why critics on both sides of the aisle push for change. The issue has drawn the administration's ire, however, is the bureau's increasingly erratic employment estimates followed by significant downward revisions — which the president and his allies see as evidence that the system is rigged. It's not rigged, but there is no doubt that it's broken. According to John Podhoretz at Commentary magazine, during the last 30 months 'there have been 30 revisions. ... Twenty-five of them have been downward revisions, and five of them have been upward revisions.' And some of these revisions have been extremely large. One reason the jobs reports have become less reliable is the sharp decline in the monthly employer survey response rates, which have fallen from around 60% pre-COVID to just 43% today. This drop has made it significantly harder to accurately measure employment. Still, flaws are different from bad faith. While I am glad the administration is drawing attention to the need for reform at the bureau, it's going about it the wrong way. First, firing the commissioner, as Trump did last week, won't fix the system. Second, as Dominic Pino pointed out in National Review, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently disbanded the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee, an expert advisory group that was actively working on this accuracy problem. Composed of unpaid professionals from academia and industry, the committee had been helping the bureau and other statistical agencies explore ways to improve data quality by boosting response rates — drawing on lessons from the U.K., Canada and Germany. Its elimination was not a cost-saving move but a decision that undercuts ongoing efforts to strengthen the integrity of federal economic data, even as the administration publicly expresses frustration with the quality of those same data. Firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because the agency produced a revised — and hence more accurate — number that told an inconvenient truth won't help the administration either. The administration's political replacement may not be taken seriously, especially if employment numbers improve. Trump wants to restore American economic dynamism. But he should begin by restoring confidence in the institutions that help measure and guide it. That means respecting their independence, even when their findings complicate his message. It also means pursuing real reform, not political retaliation, when they fall short. Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.
