Donald Trump is holding a gun to the head of Volodymyr Zelensky, demanding huge reparations payments and laying claim to half of Ukraine’s oil, gas, and hydrocarbon resources as well as almost all its metals and much of its infrastructure.

The latest version of his “minerals deal”, obtained by The Telegraph, is unprecedented in the history of modern diplomacy and state relations.

“It is an expropriation document,” said Alan Riley, an expert on energy law at the Atlantic Council. “There are no guarantees, no defence clauses, the US puts up nothing.

“The Americans can walk away, the Ukrainians can’t. I’ve never seen anything like it before.”

Read it all.

Trump now threatens Europe with assisting Putin in rebuilding his war machine if Zelensky doesn’t sign over Ukraine’s resources.https://t.co/jhRH9B0aeE

— Jay in Kyiv (@JayinKyiv) March 27, 2025

Donald Trump has already raised the average tariff on America’s imports by about twice as much as he did in his entire first presidency. Just as damaging, though, has been the uncertainty about what comes next.

After April 2nd—“Liberation Day”, Mr Trump calls it—there will be another round of levies. The president promises 25% tariffs on all imported cars and country-by-country “reciprocal” tariffs based on how much his administration objects to a counterparty’s trade and tax policies. Will these plans change? Who knows? Mr Trump’s use of emergency powers means that he can do as he pleases.

This freedom may suit him. It does not, however, suit America’s businesses, which have no idea how bad the trade war will get; nor its consumers, who fear future inflation. The liberation America needs is from the paralysing uncertainty brought about by Mr Trump’s chaotic approach.

Since the president came to office, hefty tariffs on Canada and Mexico have twice been announced only to be mostly postponed. A long-threatened 10% levy on China has doubled in size.

Read it all.

The unpredictability of Trump’s tariffs will increase the painhttps://t.co/pstoI6GTl7

— Dennis Kendel (@DennisKendel) March 27, 2025

Rapturous applause and a sea of phones in the air greeted President Trump as he walked on stage and declared, “The golden age of America has officially begun.”

He was barely a month into office when the Saudi-backed investor conference in Miami captured the optimism. “The Nasdaq is up nearly 10% in just a few months,” Trump said, ticking through a list of economic indicators. “The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 2,200 points.” On the same day, Feb. 19, the S&P 500 hit an all-time high.

But as Trump unleashed an on-one-day, off-the-next tariff fight with America’s largest trading partners, those gains unraveled. In just a few weeks, the S&P lost $4 trillion in value driven by his whipsaw trade policy, receding optimism about an artificial-intelligence boom and souring consumer sentiment caused by threats of higher prices and weaker growth. A measure of consumer sentiment fell in March for the fourth straight month to the lowest level since January 2021, the Conference Board, a business-research group, said Tuesday.

Markets in the past week have recovered some losses, but Trump is preparing his next shock: an April 2 “liberation day” suite of reciprocal tariffs he said will be applied on any trading partner that charges tariffs or imposes other trade barriers on U.S. products.

Read it all.

Required reading from @NickTimiraos
It's not just uncertainty. It's uncertainty paired with powerlessness. Business leaders now feel vulnerable.https://t.co/mUnpNDYA3V

— Peter Atwater (@Peter_Atwater) March 26, 2025

Credit rating group Moody’s has warned on the US fiscal outlook, saying President Donald Trump’s trade tariffs could hamper the country’s ability to cope with a growing debt pile and higher interest rates.

The rating agency said on Tuesday that America’s “fiscal strength is on course for a continued multiyear decline”, having already “deteriorated further” since it assigned a negative outlook to America’s top-notch triple A credit rating in November 2023.

While Moody’s highlighted the “extraordinary” economic resilience of the US and the role of the dollar and the Treasury market as backbones of the global financial system, its analysts also warned on Tuesday that the policies of the second Trump administration — including sweeping tariffs and plans for tax cuts — could do more harm than good for government revenues.

“The potential negative credit impact of sustained high tariffs, unfunded tax cuts and significant tail risks to the economy have diminished prospects that these formidable strengths will continue to offset widening fiscal deficits and declining debt affordability,” Moody’s said.

Read it all.

Moody’s warns on deteriorating outlook for US public finances https://t.co/xE1wjdoa8u

— Financial Times (@FT) March 25, 2025

Buried in China’s latest government budget were some numbers that add up to an alarming trend. Tax revenue is dropping.

The decline means that China’s national government has less money to address the country’s serious economic challenges, including a housing market crash and the near bankruptcy of hundreds of local governments.

Weak tax revenue also puts China’s leaders in a box as they square off with President Trump, who has imposed 20 percent tariffs on goods from China and threatened more to come. Beijing has less spare cash to help the export industries that are driving economic growth but could be hurt by tariffs.

The drop in tax collections leaves China’s leaders in an unfamiliar position. Until the last several years, China enjoyed robust revenue, which it used to invest in infrastructure, a rapid military buildup and extensive industrial subsidies. Even as economic growth has slowed gradually over the past 12 years, taking a dent out of consumer spending, tax revenue held fairly steady until recently.

Read it all.

China’s Government Is Short of Money as Its Leaders Face Trump https://t.co/ElmQsX47Dt

— Michael Standaert (@mstandaert) March 21, 2025

President Trump said the US and Russia are already talking about dividing “assets” as part of a push to end the fighting in Ukraine, the latest sign that he may be preparing to sacrifice Kyiv’s interests when he speaks with Vladimir Putin on Tuesday.

One objective of the call is expected to be getting the Russian president to agree to a 30-day ceasefire that Trump proposed this month and Ukraine has agreed to. Putin has been noncommittal so far, saying he accepted the idea in principle but wants certain conditions to be met.

“Tomorrow morning I will be speaking to President Putin concerning the War in Ukraine,” Trump said Monday evening in a social media post. “Many elements of a Final Agreement have been agreed to, but much remains.” Those remarks, along with Trump’s comments to reporters Sunday night that the two sides were already talking about how to divide assets, suggest that many decisions have already been made — with or without Ukraine.

Read it all.

President Donald Trump said the US and Russia are already talking about dividing “assets” as part of a push to end the fighting in Ukraine, the latest sign that he may be preparing to sacrifice Kyiv’s interests when he speaks with Vladimir Putin https://t.co/VssbS4Uy1T

— Bloomberg (@business) March 18, 2025

Some firms may even intend to quietly pare back their investment plans. In 2017 Foxconn, a Taiwanese maker of electronics, vowed to spend $10bn on a plant in Wisconsin that would employ 13,000 people. Mr Trump visited the proposed site, proclaiming it the “eighth wonder of the world”. Yet after much watering down of plans, the company said last year that it had spent just $1bn on the project, and created only 1,000 jobs.

Faced with American tariffs, some foreign companies could instead direct their attention elsewhere. That has been the case with Chinese firms, which bore the brunt of the duties imposed during Mr Trump’s first term. The flow of greenfield FDI from China to America slid from $8.2bn in 2016 to $6.5bn last year. According to Morgan Stanley, listed Chinese firms generated around a quarter of their foreign sales in America in 2024, down from roughly a half in 2016. Instead, they have turned to the fast-growing economies of the global south.

If Mr Trump’s objective is to encourage foreign businesses to build in America, there are more effective policies at his disposal than tariffs. On the campaign trail the president also promised to slash red tape. Tortuous planning processes have long held back American manufacturing. For foreign firms, fixing those would be far more motivating. 

Read it all.

Will Trump’s #tariffs turbocharge #foreign #investment in America?
Companies from #Asahi to #TSMC are expanding production in the country—for nowhttps://t.co/ga2y1Ryoxw pic.twitter.com/kNAGIbbRpA

— pebbleone (@TACITWR) March 17, 2025

The sell-off shows no sign of stopping. America’s S&P 500 index dropped by another 3% on March 10th, leaving the world’s most watched stockmarket down by almost 9% since its peak last month. The NASDAQ, dominated by tech firms, has fallen by 13%. It is not quite the bold new era of American growth that President Donald Trump had in mind.

His unpredictable trade policies got things going. Tariffs of 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico—which were instituted on March 4th, before being suspended for a month on March 6th—top investors’ list of concerns. But after years of impressive growth, the future of the American economy is a growing source of anxiety, too, with worries provoked by a steady drip of discouraging data. Such news is beginning to undermine belief in American exceptionalism: after all, investors have seen much better returns in China and Europe this year. And as is often the case when markets fall, each development has revealed fresh things to lose sleep over.

Read it all.

After years of impressive growth, the future of the American economy is a growing source of anxiety. If the president wants to turn things around, which does not yet appear to be the case, it may take something big https://t.co/sGcNyWtmqB

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) March 11, 2025

In his speech to Congress on March 4th President Donald Trump painted a fantastical picture. The American Dream, he declared, was surging bigger and better than ever before. His tariffs would preserve jobs, make America richer still, and protect its very soul. Unfortunately, in the real world things look different. Investors, consumers and companies show the first signs of souring on the Trumpian vision. With his aggressive and erratic protectionism, Mr Trump is playing with fire.

By imposing 25% tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico, also on March 4th, Mr Trump is setting light to one of the world’s most integrated supply chains. Although he belatedly delayed duties on cars by one month, plenty of other industries will suffer. He has also raised tariffs on China and has threatened the European Union, Japan and South Korea. Some of these duties may also be deferred; others may never materialise. Yet in economics as in foreign relations, it is becoming clear that policy is being set on the president’s whim. That will cause lasting damage at home and abroad.

When Mr Trump won the election in November, investors and bosses cheered him on. The S&P 500 rose by nearly 4% in the week after the vote in anticipation of the new president lighting a bonfire of red tape and bringing about generous tax cuts. His protectionist and anti-immigration rhetoric, investors hoped, would come to nothing. A stockmarket correction or a return of inflation would surely curb his worst instincts.

Alas, those hopes are going up in smoke….

Read it all.

La copertina del nuovo Economist. Gli Art Director non hanno mai avuto tanta materia prima. pic.twitter.com/rnuMWWYaN1

— Jeanne Perego (@jeperego) March 7, 2025

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”.

Read it all.

Revealed: Trump’s confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold

Panic in Kyiv as US president demands higher share of GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations.https://t.co/3rFDHydtCd

— Ruchir Sharma (@ruchirsharma_1) February 18, 2025

Cartels are deeply entwined with the Mexican economy. Many of the tomatoes, bell peppers and cucumbers consumed in the U.S. are grown in the Mexican state of Sinaloa, where many farmers pay the cartel for water for their fields. Businesses such as mining companies and avocado growers are widely believed to pay extortion money to cartels.

“For better or for worse, this will likely force Mexican businesses and the Mexican government to confront pervasive cartel influence,” said Andrew Kaufman, an international lawyer who is counseling Mexican and multinational firms on the expected FTO designations.

Trump’s executive order took note of the cartels’ vast reach. The order gives the secretary of state—in consultation with other cabinet members—14 days to determine which Mexican cartels should be designated as FTOs. Then, key members of Congress have seven days to comment before the designation takes legal effect.

The order accuses the Mexican cartels of infiltrating governments and destabilizing countries across the Americas.

Read it all.

President Trump wants to deploy a blunt new tool to fight Mexican cartels that flood the U.S. with drugs, by adding them to a list of terrorist groups that includes the likes of al Qaeda and Hamas https://t.co/pZ2amUzOxO

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) February 5, 2025

In his own inimitable style, President Donald Trump has identified something he dislikes and approached it with a wrecking-ball. Deprived of American funding by an executive order, aid programmes around the world are on the brink of collapse. But for the intervention of a judge at the 11th hour on January 28th, large parts of America’s federal government might have suffered a similar fate.

However, when it comes to another kind of cutting—of rules, rather than spending—Mr Trump is part of a global trend. From Buenos Aires and Delhi to Brussels and London, politicians have pledged to slash the red tape that entangles the economy. Javier Milei has wielded a chainsaw against Argentine regulations. Narendra Modi’s advisers are quietly confronting India’s triplicate-loving babus. Rachel Reeves, Britain’s chancellor, plans to overhaul planning rules and expand London’s Heathrow Airport. Even Vietnam’s Communists have a plan to shrink the bureaucracy.

Done right, the anti-red-tape revolution could usher in greater freedom, faster economic growth, lower prices and new technology. For years excessive rules have choked housebuilding, investment and innovation. But Mr Trump risks giving deregulation a bad name. His impulse to start by demolishing essential functions of government before reinstating the ones he likes is a formula for human misery and economic harm. The question is how to make reform bold enough to count, but coherent enough to succeed.

Read it all.

Around the world, an anti-red-tape revolution is taking hold. Done right, it could kick-start economic growth. In the wrong hands, it risks giving deregulation a bad name https://t.co/pxJS1MAXDP pic.twitter.com/PhAZtAt7Nq

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) January 30, 2025

According to Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase and king of Wall Street, bankers were elated upon Donald Trump’s election victory. Many chafed under Joe Biden’s presidency, as mergers and bank fees faced additional scrutiny, and new capital-market rules came thick and fast. Now, with the inauguration of Mr Trump imminent, American financiers will discover just how much cause they have for celebration.

The industry will certainly experience an abrupt change in how it is overseen. America’s regulatory agencies will take a permissive approach in banking and beyond, with new priorities when enforcing securities laws. Crypto is about to go truly mainstream. And looser rules could enable the consolidation of America’s banking system, home to a vast number of small and mid-sized lenders. The only danger, from Wall Street’s perspective, is that the Trump team’s MAGA instincts and chaotic approach prevent a deregulatory boom.

Read it all.

My first piece in the new gig. Will Trump unleash Wall Street?

Banks and PE have good reason to be excited. But the sector that has by *far* the most to gain is crypto, which is about to be treated as part of mainstream finance for the first time.https://t.co/QFUDd1YeUc

— Mike Bird (@Birdyword) January 15, 2025

Scott Bessent spent the past 40 years studying economic history. Now, as Donald Trump’s choice to lead the Treasury Department, he has the chance to make his mark on it.

As a hedge-fund manager, first at George Soros’s firm and later at his own, Bessent specialized in macroinvesting, or analyzing geopolitical situations and economic data to wager on big-picture market moves. He generated billions of dollars in profits betting on and against currencies, interest rates, stocks and other asset classes around the world.

He was motivated to step out from behind his desk and get involved with Trump’s campaign in part because of a view that time is running out for the U.S. economy to grow its way out of excessive budget deficits and indebtedness.

Read it all.

Scott Bessent Sees a Coming ‘Global Economic Reordering.’ He Wants to Be Part of It. ⁦@WSJ⁩ https://t.co/qkvP5PVnVG

— Jennifer Ablan (@jennablan) November 25, 2024

Donald Trump is projected to return to the White House next January, according to the Associated Press, and is poised to spur the most dramatic reimagining of the staffing of government in more than a century.

That’s because Trump has vowed to revive Schedule F, a controversial abortive effort at the end of his first term to strip the civil service protections of potentially tens of thousands of career federal workers in “policy-related” positions, effectively making them at-will employees. Trump and many of his former staffers have frequently bemoaned that “rogue bureaucrats” inhibited his policymaking power during his first stint in the White House.

Though President Biden quickly rescinded Schedule F when he took office in 2021—before any positions could be converted out of the federal government’s competitive service—that hasn’t stopped Trump and his allies from working on the initiative in absentia. Both the Heritage Foundation and America First Policy Institute, which have organized dueling unofficial transition projects have endorsed reviving Schedule F, going so far as to creating lists of upwards of 50,000 current career civil servants to strip of their removal protections and threaten with termination.

Read it all.

What Trump’s win means for the federal workforce https://t.co/rCiwJi8BUN

— Nextgov/FCW (@NextgovFCW) November 6, 2024

While there were unsuccessful assassination attempts, incidents or plots targeting George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama during or after their terms, Mr. Trump was the first current or former president wounded in an act of violence since Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981 by a would-be assassin trying to impress a Hollywood actress (NYT).

She spent the previous weekend reading the Constitution, poring over the 12th Amendment and Title 3 of the U.S. Code. She wanted to understand exactly what they said about Congress’ power in the coming vote to certify electors.

It wasn’t confusing. Their role was ceremonial.

If we don’t follow that, she thought, we aren’t a nation at all.

She could not go along with the president and much of her party.

Mace had long ago learned some things about courage. Her father was a brigadier general, a war hero, the most decorated living graduate of The Citadel.

But nothing fueled her courage like a day when she was 16 years old. A friend and classmate sexually assaulted her. Afraid and ashamed, she’d blamed herself. She’d feared what other people would think.

She dropped out of high school. Her fire faded.

But then, she rediscovered her courage, a new and stronger kind, one that didn’t blame herself and wouldn’t bend to fear of what other people thought. She returned to school, earned her diploma and, in 1999, became the first female to graduate from The Citadel’s Corps of Cadets.

Read it all.

Nancy Mace’s first 100 hours in Congress: threats, violence and challenging Trump https://t.co/o7dxc57XFg

— Joe Bruno (@JoeBrunoWSOC9) January 8, 2021

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

PELLEY: And when you say things, people listen. And Wall Street didn’t want to hear that this was going to take longer than their hopes indicated?

POWELL: I was really calling out a risk that I think is an important one for people to be cognizant of, and that is the risk of longer-run damage to the economy. And really, the good news is that we have the tools to limit that longer-run damage by continuing to provide support to households and businesses as we get through this. And that was really my message.

PELLEY: It was meant to be a signal to Capitol Hill to tell lawmakers the economy needs a great deal more support?

POWELL: That was a part of my remarks this morning. I also wanted to just talk more at length about the longer-run dangers and commit the Fed to really stay in this fight as long as we need to as well….

PELLEY: Has the Fed done all it can do?

POWELL: Well, there’s a lot more we can do. We’ve done what we can as we go. But I will say that we’re not out of ammunition by a long shot. No, there’s really no limit to what we can do with these lending programs that we have. So there’s a lot more we can do to support the economy, and we’re committed to doing everything we can as long as we need to.

Read it all.

“We’re not out of ammunition by a long shot. No, there’s, there’s really no limit to what we can do with these lending programs that we have”

Full transcript is worth a readhttps://t.co/aVGXNyfPP9

— Jonathan Ferro (@FerroTV) May 17, 2020

This is important. There’s no U.S. data yet on what the right side of the curve will look like, but the best available evidence from other countries suggests that the descent will be slow. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has said “the worst is over” and “we’ve reached the peak.” He should have followed with “now comes the long wait.”

This shouldn’t be surprising. All our efforts to stay inside and separated –- except for essential activities such as shopping, and except for those who must work –- serve only to slow the spread, not stop it. If you’re hoping for the somewhat symmetrical China curve, forget it. We’re not quarantining people at gunpoint. It’s like someone took the worst-case-scenario curve and pushed it forward in time, without making the area under the curve smaller.

Here’s an analogy. Imagine a plow spreading out a big pile of snow in the street. If it keeps the blade higher, the pile will be taller and won’t spread out very far. If it lowers the blade to a few inches off the ground, the snow will be more manageable but also spread out much farther. The better it does the job – the thinner it spreads the snow — the longer it will take.

If people stick with measures to contain the virus, death rates will eventually trickle down to zero, but only after a lot more people have been infected, assuming they are then immune. If we’re lucky, we’ll slow things down enough to never truly overwhelm the hospitals, and if we’re really lucky we’ll slow things down long enough to benefit from a vaccine or a treatment.

Read it all.

This Isn’t the Flattened Curve We Were Promised

“It’s like someone took the worst-case-scenario curve and pushed it forward in time, without making the area under the curve smaller.”https://t.co/8ls11iV2i5

— Jack Posobiec, IWO (@JackPosobiec) April 17, 2020

1. How do issues with testing impact governors’ ability to meet the benchmarks laid out in the guidelines?

Testing remains one of the biggest problems with containing the coronavirus and allowing places to move toward recovery. Despite Trump’s boasts, testing is still not widespread in the U.S. Not everyone who wants a test can get one. Only people with symptoms are getting them — and not all of them are — and asymptomatic people are able to spread the disease. That means no one really knows just how widespread the virus is. And without a vaccine or known treatment, there’s the risk of more outbreaks….

Read it all.

Coronavirus Latest: Despite Trump’s Optimism, There’s Still A Long Road To Reopening https://t.co/nXzLU7fbqj

— NPR Health News (@NPRHealth) April 17, 2020

In his Tuesday afternoon briefing with the coronavirus task force, President Trump couched earlier comments about the need to reopen the U.S. economy within weeks, emphasizing the decision would ultimately be data-driven and made in consultation with public health experts.

The president said he still wants Americans working again by Easter Sunday, something he first said during a virtual town hall with Fox earlier in the day. But he was much more circumspect over whether that would be possible from a medical standpoint.

His previous comments about reopening the economy prompted alarm among public health experts across the country, who said it’s far too early. Trump seemed to much more carefully toe the line during his briefing as he talked about “carefully and responsibly reopening the country.”

“I want to assure Americans that we have a team of public health experts … also economists and other professionals working to develop a sophisticated plan to reopen the economy as soon as the time is right, one based on the best science, the best modeling and the best medical research there is anywhere on earth,” he said.

Trump stressed that this is a “medical crisis, this isn’t a financial crisis.”

Read it all.

President Trump on Tuesday afternoon couched earlier comments about the need to reopen the U.S. economy within weeks, emphasizing the decision would be data-driven and made in consultation with public health experts.https://t.co/r3mjI0Kf7S

— NPR (@NPR) March 24, 2020

…Modi’s record on religious freedom since becoming the leader of India has not been something to be proud of. His silence when minorities in India have been targeted and lynched by right-wing mobs has been telling. The worst sufferers of the wrath of extreme Hindu nationalists have been India’s Muslims—the targets of cow vigilantes and much hate speech—but Christians have not been far behind. The fundamental freedoms promised by the constitution of India to religious minorities are being constantly eroded, and persecution is a daily reality for many Christians in India.

Radicals affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) movement and its family of organizations—including Modi’s BJP—have been making concerted efforts to attack Christians both physically and socially. Groups such as Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, which believe in the ideology of Hindutva as promoted by the RSS, have disrupted worship services in churches, beat up pastors and other Christians, engaged in vandalism and destruction of property, and have pressured many Christians to recant their faith and forcibly convert to Hinduism.

The lack of police action, and in too many cases the cooperation of the police with the radicals, has resulted in a culture of impunity, emboldening the oppressors to attack without fear of any consequence. This has resulted in a sense of insecurity felt by many Indian Christians. It does not help that responsible leaders of Modi’s party, including state and union ministers, routinely engage in hate speech against Christians and other minorities. This only bolsters the radicals, who view this as open encouragement to target minorities.

According to the Religious Liberty Commission of the Evangelical Fellowship of India (EFI), which has been documenting incidents of persecution against Christians since 1998, incidents targeting Indian Christians have risen steeply since 2014, when Modi came to power. The commission recorded 147 verified cases of persecution in 2014; 252 cases in 2016; 351 in 2017; and 325 in 2018. The EFI commission will soon release the data for 2019.

Read it all.

This week, President Trump said that Indian prime minister Modi was “incredible” on religious freedom and that he wants “the people to have religious freedom and very strongly.”

Why these words were so disappointing to this Indian Christian leaderhttps://t.co/QlXuIE1OwS

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) February 29, 2020

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

President Donald Trump won impeachment acquittal Wednesday in the U.S. Senate, bringing to a close only the third presidential trial in American history with votes that split the country, tested civic norms and fed the tumultuous 2020 race for the White House.

With Chief Justice John Roberts presiding, senators sworn to do “impartial justice” stood at their desks to state their votes for the roll call — “guilty” or “not guilty” — in a swift tally almost exclusively along party lines. Visitors, including the president’s allies, watched from the crowded gallery. Roberts read the declaration that Trump “be, and is hereby, acquitted of the charges.”

The outcome followed months of remarkable impeachment proceedings, from Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House to Mitch McConnell’s Senate, reflecting the nation’s unrelenting partisan divide three years into the Trump presidency.

Read it all.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump won impeachment acquittal Wednesday in the U.S. Senate, bringing to a close only the third presidential trial in American history with votes that split the country, tested civic norms and fed the tumultuous 2… https://t.co/TuzfRGQpBC

— WAND TV News (@wandtvnews) February 5, 2020

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

Donald Trump is impulse-driven, ignorant, narcissistic and intellectually dishonest. So you’d think that those of us in the anti-Trump camp would go out of our way to show we’re not like him — that we are judicious, informed, mature and reasonable.

But the events of the past week have shown that the anti-Trump echo chamber is becoming a mirror image of Trump himself — overwrought, uncalibrated and incapable of having an intelligent conversation about any complex policy problem.

But in the anti-Trump echo chamber, that’s not how most people were thinking. Led by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, they avoided the hard, complex problem of how to set boundaries around militias. Instead, they pontificated on the easy question not actually on the table: Should we have a massive invasion of Iran?

A great cry went up from the echo chamber. We’re on the brink of war! Trump is leading us to more endless wars in the Middle East! We’re on the precipice of total chaos! This was not the calibrated language of risk and reward. It was fear-stoking apocalyptic language. By being so overwrought and exaggerated, the echo chamber drowned out any practical conversation about how to stabilize the Middle East so we could have another righteous chorus of “Donald Trump is a monster!”

This is Trump’s ultimate victory. Every argument on every topic is now all about him.

Read it all.

“This is Trump’s ultimate victory. Every argument on every topic is now all about him,” writes @nytdavidbrooks. https://t.co/HOrfdbKyDv

— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) January 10, 2020

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

Perhaps the most provocative thing Iran could do is carry out a terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland or attempt to kill a senior U.S. official of Soleimani’s stature. This would be much more challenging for Iran to pull off than an attack on U.S. interests or personnel overseas but may be deemed by Iran as appropriately proportional. The last time Iran is known to have attempted an attack in the United States was in 2011, when American law enforcement and intelligence agencies foiled a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington by blowing up a restaurant. In that case, the plot was detected early on and easily foiled because of poor Iranian tradecraft. The episode suggested that Iran is much less capable outside the Middle East than inside it, an assessment that is buttressed by foiled Iranian bombing attempts in Denmark and France this year. So while Iran may try to conduct an attack inside the United States, it would need to get lucky to succeed.

If the Trump administration is smart, it will do all that it can to harden U.S. facilities and protect Americans while absorbing some of the inevitable blows to come. It should also reach out to Iran through U.S. partners that have good relations with the country, such as Oman, to try to de-escalate while also setting clear redlines in private to avoid an Iranian miscalculation. Finally, Trump should be satisfied to declare victory and boast that he got the upper hand on Iran by killing Soleimani—not take further military actions. But this type of restraint appears to run counter to Trump’s very nature. And even if he shows uncharacteristic self-restraint in the coming weeks, the desire for revenge in Iran, and the political momentum that desire is already beginning to generate, may inevitably draw the United States and Iran into a major conflict.

Read it all.

The United States has taken a highly escalatory step in assassinating one of the most important and powerful men in the Middle East. @ilangoldenberg considers what comes next after the death of Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani:https://t.co/FeYQMNrbAA

— Foreign Affairs (@ForeignAffairs) January 3, 2020

First, then, the flag. Numerous reporters have asked whether the ministry supports what was stated in the editorial. Was Mark Galli speaking on behalf of the institution? CT does not have an editorial board. Editors publish under their own names. Yet Galli has stood in the trenches for men and women of faith for over three decades. He has been an outstanding editor in chief. While he does not speak for everyone in the ministry—our board and our staff hold a range of opinions—he carries the editorial voice of the magazine. We support CT’s editorial independence and believe it’s vital to our mission for the editor in chief to speak out on the issues of the day.

As an institution, Christianity Today has no interest in partisan politics. It does not endorse candidates. We aim to bring biblical wisdom and beautiful storytelling both to the church and from the church to the world. Politics matter, but they do not bring the dead back to life. We are far more committed to the glory of God, the witness of the church, and the life of the world than we care about the fortunes of any party. Political parties come and go, but the witness of the church is the hope of the world, and the integrity of that witness is paramount.

Out of love for Jesus and his church, not for political partisanship or intellectual elitism, this is why we feel compelled to say that the alliance of [some of] American evangelicalism with this presidency has wrought enormous damage to Christian witness. It has alienated many of our children and grandchildren. It has harmed African American, Hispanic American, and Asian American brothers and sisters. And it has undercut the efforts of countless missionaries who labor in the far fields of the Lord. While the Trump administration may be well regarded in some countries, in many more the perception of wholesale evangelical support for the administration has made toxic the reputation of the Bride of Christ.

Read it all.

Following CT’s editorial on Trump, our president @TimDalrymple_ answers some questions about our ministry and why we see this discussion as so important.

We are planting a flag and setting a table. Fellow evangelicals, we invite you to join us. https://t.co/2rvz2WDXzu

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) December 22, 2019

I think one can clearly state the nature of the myth of some kind of monolithic evangelical support for President Trump.

The evangelical movement is quite broad and diverse and comprises nearly ¼ or so of the USA population.

In this movement in terms of the last election (2016) there were four groups.

In the first group are evangelicals who voted for Hillary Clinton with varying degrees of enthusiasm, either for her policy or party stance in terms of things like support for the disenfranchised. This also includes also a number who voted for her because they saw no choice but to vote against Donald Trump.

In the second group are evangelicals who voted for a third party, or stayed at home and didn’t vote because even though they opposed a number of the Democratic nominee’s proposals they were horrified by Donald Trump’s character and modus operandi and could not in good conscience support him.

In the third group were people who were adamantly opposed to a number of Hillary Clinton’s proposals, but who reluctantly concluded that the only way they could influence public policy was to vote for one of the two people who were going to win. They therefore held their nose and voted against Hillary Clinton but very much thinking that they were worried about Trump as a person and what his character would do to the office.

In the fourth group were people who enthusiastically supported Donald Trump. The reasons for this support vary a great deal under the surface, one of the most interesting being a who number felt that the culture war had been shoved down their throat during the Obama years, and actively wanted a person who would enable a kind of payback, even with his modus operandi.

The main distortion comes from the NEARLY COMPLETE FOCUS on group four, and even a minority of leaders among group four. There may be an occasional nod to group three, but often it is falsely implied that group three are enthusiastically behind the current President, whereas they are not at all but saw no alternative given the American two party system. Groups one and two are hardly even talked about.

Therefore the picture given of the movement as a whole is entirely false. I would like to say personally how sorry I am for the Hispanic, African American, and mainly younger evangelicals whose voices are nearly entirely silenced by the false picture–KSH.

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

Let’s grant this to the president: The Democrats have had it out for him from day one, and therefore nearly everything they do is under a cloud of partisan suspicion. This has led many to suspect not only motives but facts in these recent impeachment hearings. And, no, Mr. Trump did not have a serious opportunity to offer his side of the story in the House hearings on impeachment.

But the facts in this instance are unambiguous: The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president’s political opponents. That is not only a violation of the Constitution; more importantly, it is profoundly immoral.

The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.

Trump’s evangelical supporters have pointed to his Supreme Court nominees, his defense of religious liberty, and his stewardship of the economy, among other things, as achievements that justify their support of the president. We believe the impeachment hearings have made it absolutely clear, in a way the Mueller investigation did not, that President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath. The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president’s moral deficiencies for all to see. This damages the institution of the presidency, damages the reputation of our country, and damages both the spirit and the future of our people. None of the president’s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character.

Read it all.

From Christianity Today’s editor in chief https://t.co/NVdQjg4odC

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) December 19, 2019

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

“Any time you impeach a president, it’s a historic moment,” said Aimee Brewer, 49, a nurse from Monticello, Florida, who voted for Trump in 2016. “Being impeached is bad, but I don’t know if it’s going to be just a blemish or something bigger. Either way, I’m going to support him.”

She said of the Democrats: “They never really made a decent case against him. We needed a little more proof; it was all circumstantial.”

Concerning her support for Trump, she said: “I don’t necessarily like listening to him and reading his tweets, but I like everything else he’s doing.”

Mark McQueen, 46, is an informational technology engineer with the state government and a Democrat. “We are divided as a society,” he said. “Tensions are high across the land. I think people risk losing faith in the political process.”

Read it all.

Among public, a great divide at moment of Trump impeachment https://t.co/SqMNkzAJzR #KMOV pic.twitter.com/izVmYZ5ufH

— KMOV (@KMOV) December 19, 2019

Among Christians, however, Ms. White is a divisive figure. Her association with the belief that God wants followers to find wealth and health — commonly called the prosperity gospel — is highly unorthodox in the faith and considered heretical by many. And experts on religion in politics said that Ms. White’s ascendancy was unlike any other relationship between a president and a faith adviser in modern times.

“I never would have guessed that Paula White and Donald Trump would be the preacher-president duo people remember like Billy Graham and Richard Nixon,” said Kate Bowler, a professor of Christian history at Duke Divinity School.

“Paula White survived scandal and little support from the religious right to become one of the only stand-alone women in the male-dominated world of televangelism,” Dr. Bowler said. “She has done what no one thought she could do, scraping out a place for an unpopular theology beside an unpopular president.”

Read it all.

Paula White, a Florida televangelist, is being brought into the Trump administration to help shore up his evangelical base. Among Christians, her association with the “prosperity gospel” has made her a divisive figure.https://t.co/SetBa8y5Kp

— The New York Times (@nytimes) November 2, 2019

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.