#U.S. president Donald Trump
Text
US targets companies selling Iranian petrochemicals in fresh sanctions
New Post has been published on https://www.timesofocean.com/u-s-targets-companies-selling-iranian-petrochemicals-in-sanctions/
US targets companies selling Iranian petrochemicals in fresh sanctions
Washington (The Times Groupe)- The United States has imposed fresh sanctions on Chinese and Emirati companies and a network of Iranian firms for helping export petrochemicals from Iran.
On June 16, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed penalties on two Hong Kong-based companies, three Iranian companies, and four UAE companies, as well as two Chinese and one Indian company.
The Treasury Department attributed the moves to negotiations to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.
“The United States is seeking to achieve a mutual return to compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action through meaningful diplomacy,” said Brian Nelson, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
“Without a deal, we will continue to impose sanctions on Iran that limit the export of petroleum, petroleum products, and petrochemicals,” Nelson said.
In exchange for relief from U.S., European Union, and United Nations sanctions, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear program.
In 2018, then-U.S. president Donald Trump pulled out of the deal and restored U.S. sanctions, causing Iran to begin violating the restrictions. Efforts to revive the agreement have so far failed.
It was reported in March that a revised deal was close, but talks in Vienna abruptly stalled in April as Iran and Washington blamed each other for not taking the necessary political decisions to settle remaining issues.
There were disagreements over whether Washington would remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) from its list of designated foreign terrorist organizations.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has long denied attempting to secretly develop nuclear weapons. It claims its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. Despite the collapse of the deal, Tehran has vastly expanded its nuclear work. iranian petrochemicals
#Brian Nelson#china-us relations#export petrochemicals from Iran#iran nuclear program#Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)#Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)#sanctions on Chinese and Emirati companies#Terrorism and Financial Intelligence#The Times Groupe#Times Of Ocean#U.S. president Donald Trump#U.S. Treasury Department#UAE companies#Unravel News#US Sanctions#us-india releations#us-uae relations#Politics
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Chinese Scientists Are Leaving the United States! Here’s Why That Spells Bad News For Washington.
— By Christina Lu and Anusha Rathi | July 13, 2023 | Foreign Policy
A view of Building 10 on the campus of Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the United States on March 12, 2020. Maddie Meyer/Getty Images
Facing an increasingly suspicious research climate, a growing number of Chinese scientists are leaving the United States for positions abroad, the latest indicator of how worsening U.S.-China relations are complicating academic collaboration and could hamstring Washington’s tech ambitions.
Chinese scientists living in the United States have for decades contributed to research efforts driving developments in advanced technology and science. But a growing number of them may now be looking elsewhere for work, as deteriorating geopolitical relations fuel extra scrutiny of Chinese researchers and Beijing ramps up efforts to recruit and retain talent. Between 2010 and 2021, the number of Chinese scientists leaving the United States has steadily increased, according to new research published last month. If the trend continues, experts warn that the brain drain could deal a major blow to U.S. research efforts in the long run.
“It’s absolutely devastating,” said David Bier, the associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute. “So many of the researchers that the United States depends on in [the] advanced technology field are from China, or are foreign students, and this phenomenon is certainly going to negatively impact U.S. firms and U.S. research going forward.”
From semiconductor chips to artificial intelligence, technology has been at the forefront of U.S.-China competition, with both Washington and Beijing maneuvering to strangle each other’s sectors. Cooperation, even in key sectors like combating climate change, has been rare.
From 2010 to 2021, the number of scientists of Chinese descent who left the United States for another country has surged from 900 to 2,621, with scientists leaving at an expedited rate between 2018 and 2021, according to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Nearly half of this group moved to China and Hong Kong in 2010, the study said, and a growing percentage of Chinese scientists have relocated to China over the years.
While this number represents a small fraction of the Chinese scientists in the United States, the uptick reflects researchers’ growing concerns and broader apprehension amid a tense geopolitical climate. After surveying 1,304 Chinese American researchers, the report found that 89 percent of respondents wanted to contribute to U.S. science and technology leadership. Yet 72 percent also reported feeling unsafe as researchers in the United States, while 61 percent had previously considered seeking opportunities outside of the country.
“Scientists of Chinese descent in the United States now face higher incentives to leave the United States and lower incentives to apply for federal grants,” the report said. There are “general feelings of fear and anxiety that lead them to consider leaving the United States and/or stop applying for federal grants.”
The incentives to leave are twofold. Beijing has funneled resources into research and development programs and has long attempted to recruit scientists, even its own, from around the world. For one of its initiatives, the Thousand Talents Plan, Beijing harnessed at least 600 recruitment stations worldwide to acquire new talent. “China has been really trying to lure back scientists for a long time,” said Eric Fish, the author of China’s Millennials.
But this latest outflow of Chinese scientists accelerated in 2018, the same year that then-U.S. President Donald Trump unveiled the China Initiative, a controversial program that was aimed at countering IP theft—and cast a chill over researchers of Chinese descent and collaborations with Chinese institutions. In 2020, he also issued a proclamation denying visas for graduate students and researchers affiliated with Chinese universities associated with the military.
Although the Biden administration shut down the China Initiative, experts warn that its shadow still looms over Chinese scientists. More than one-third of respondents in the PNAS survey reported feeling unwelcome in the United States, while nearly two-thirds expressed concerns about research collaboration with China.
“There is this chilling effect that we’re still witnessing now, where there is a stigma attached to collaboration with China,” said Jenny Lee, a professor at the Center for the Study of Higher Education at the University of Arizona.
The challenges are emblematic of how the breakdown in U.S.-China relations has thrown universities into a geopolitical firestorm, particularly as some states’ lawmakers pressure them to sever ties with Chinese counterparts. On the U.S. side, interest in Mandarin language studies and study abroad has plummeted over the years, largely the result of worsening ties, Beijing’s growing repression, and the coronavirus pandemic. Today, while there are roughly 300,000 Chinese students in America, only 350 Americans studied in China in the most recent academic year. If interest continues to recede, experts warn of spillover effects that could hamper Washington’s understanding of Beijing.
“We’re losing a generation of people who are knowledgeable about China,” said Daniel Murphy, the former director of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University. “I’m concerned that the United States is going about this issue in a way that excessively focuses on risks of the academic relationship, without due consideration for the benefits. And I think we see this in a whole host of arenas, and that it’s bipartisan.”
At the same time as a growing number of Chinese scientists exit the United States, new students appear to be facing higher barriers to entry as student visa denials and backlogs reach record high levels. According to a blog post by the Cato Institute, student visa denials peaked at about 35 percent in 2022—the highest rate recorded in two decades.
Student visa denial data is not available by nationality, but Bier, the Cato Institute expert who wrote the piece, said that there is a high degree of correlation between denial rates for B-visas, or tourist visas, and student visas. “Having reviewed the B-visa denials in China, it’s pretty clear that the Chinese overall visa denial rate has increased significantly over the last few years and is at a level now where it’s the highest it’s been in decades,” he said.
Just as some Chinese scientists are looking abroad, these challenges are pushing a growing number of international students to turn elsewhere for academic opportunities. Students are increasingly heading to countries like Canada, Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom, all of which are opening their doors to high-skilled workers and researchers. To attract more talent, the United Kingdom has issued “Global Talent” and “High Potential Individual” visas, which allow scholars from top universities to work there for 2-3 years and 1-5 years, respectively.
Universities are being impacted “by geopolitical tensions, by political agendas, and so it’s certainly inhibiting U.S. Universities’ ability to attract the best and brightest,” Lee said.
— Christina Lu is a Reporter at Foreign Policy. Anusha Rathi is an Editorial Fellow at Foreign Policy.
#Chinese Scientists 🇨🇳#United States 🇺🇸#Suspicious Research Climate#U.S.-China Relations#David Bier#Cato Institute#National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)#Federal Grants#U.S. President Donald Trump#Jenny Lee#University of Arizona#Daniel Murphy#Global Talent#High Potential Individual#Visas#Political Agendas#Geopolitical Tensions#Christina Lu
0 notes
Note
Hypothetically what do you think would have happened if the january 6 rioters had gotten to pence or pelosi before they got safe?
At this point, I almost dread answering questions like this anymore because I know the kind of hate mail it will unleash for the next few days, but it's important to keep talking about what happened on January 6, 2021 since so many people are trying to normalize it. That includes many people whose lives were in danger that day, as well as the former President who tried to hold on to power by encouraging his supporters to launch a violent insurrection and is now referring to those who have been brought to justice for attempting a coup as "patriots" and "hostages".
I genuinely believe that there were people in that crowd who would have killed Vice President Pence, Speaker Pelosi, and certain Congressional leaders if they had reached them on January 6th. I think there are people in that crowd who were ready to hold lawmakers hostage. Why else did they have handcuffs and zip ties? To help the Capitol Police maintain order? (Oh yeah...that's right, thanks for reminding me: they violently attacked the police -- some even beat police officers with the "Blue Lives Matter" flags that they brought with them.) Now, I do not think that everybody who was at the Capitol on January 6th -- or even the majority of those who took part in the insurrection -- were willing to go that far. I think a lot of them got swept up in what was happening and went with the flow. That doesn't excuse what they did. The flow that they got swept up in was still a fucking insurrection, and anyone who took part in that deserves to be held accountable. But I think there were certain elements embedded throughout that crowd that were much more organized and prepared to fully execute their plans for a coup after disrupting the certification of the Electoral College votes.
I actually think Vice President Pence was probably in more danger than even Speaker Pelosi or some of the Democratic leaders because Trump was so actively calling him out in the days and hours before the insurrection. I think that's why Pence is so adamant now about not supporting Trump. I mean, think about how disgustingly loyal and subservient Pence was to Trump throughout those four years until basically the first few days of January 2021. But even as other Republican leaders are crumbling and offering their allegiance to Trump again in 2024, Pence is standing by his decision not to endorse or support Trump, and I think that's because he realizes that Trump absolutely almost got him (and his family, who were with him in the Capitol on that day) killed on January 6th. Shit, even Mitch McConnell has folded and endorsed Trump again despite the fact that Trump has spent the last three years not only insulting him but also making racist attacks and questioning McConnell's wife's loyalty to the United States all because Elaine Chao had the audacity to resign from Trump's Cabinet in the wake of the insurrection. Yet Mike Pence -- who spent the better part of four years following Trump around like Paul Heyman follows Roman Reigns...
...THAT same Mike Pence is steadfastly refusing to endorse Trump because he has personal experience about how real of an existential threat Trump is. Some of those people at the Capitol were very serious about following through on their chants to "Hang Mike Pence", and not only does Pence realize that, but he also knows now that Trump -- who refused to take actions that would have helped clear the Capitol more quickly -- said "he deserves it" when hearing about those chants.
That's what is so scary about the insurrection, its aftermath, and the Trump Republican Party's redefinition of what happened that day. It almost worked. They stormed the United States Capitol and invaded both chambers of Congress. They carried Confederate flags into the United States Capitol -- even the fucking Confederate States of America didn't successfully invade Washington, D.C. and plant their flag in the Capitol. They were willing to hurt and probably kill some of America's elected leaders. And the people who helped plan and instigate the events of January 6th have spent the three-plus years since then learning from their mistakes and figuring out how to be successful next time. And guess what? "Next time" is only a few months away.
#History#Insurrection#January 6#January 6th Insurrection#Traitors#Donald Trump#President Trump#Mike Pence#Vice President Pence#2020 Election#Electoral College Certification#U.S. Capitol#Storming of the Capitol#Capitol Riot#Politics#MAGA Insurrection#Trumpism#Trump Cult#Congress#Shitshow at the Fuck Factory#I'm impressed by my own ability to squeeze a WWE reference into that answer
75 notes
·
View notes
Text
Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to immediately step in to decide whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for his actions seeking to overturn the 2020 election.
"This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office," Smith wrote in the court filing.
Smith said it was "of imperative public importance" that the high court decide the question so that Trump's trial, currently scheduled for March, can move forward as quickly as possible.
The Supreme Court decides which cases it hears, so it is not required to take up the case.
In a brief order issued just hours after Smith's filing, the court asked Trump's legal team to respond by Dec. 20. The court also said it would consider on an expedited basis whether to hear the case, an indication that it takes Smith's request seriously.
The Trump campaign issued a statement saying that Smith was attempting to interfere in the 2024 election.
"As President Trump has said over and over again, this prosecution is completely politically motivated. There is absolutely no reason to rush this sham to trial except to injure President Trump and tens of millions of his supporters," the statement said.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the election interference case, denied Trump's motion to dismiss his indictment on presidential immunity and constitutional grounds, prompting Trump to appeal and ask for the case to be put on hold.
In order to prevent a delay, Smith is seeking to circumvent the appeals process by asking the Supreme Court to take up the case and decide the issue on an expedited basis.
Smith asked the court to order Trump to respond by Dec. 18 and then immediately act on his request. Under the timeline proposed by Smith, the court — if it decides to step in — could hear arguments and issue a ruling in a matter of weeks.
There is precedent for such an outcome, with Smith citing the 1974 U.S. v. Nixon case, in which the court ruled on an expedited basis that President Richard Nixon had to hand over tape recordings sought during the Watergate scandal probe. Nixon resigned soon after the ruling.
More recently, the court has on several occasions taken up cases at an early stage of litigation to decide issues of national importance, such as the Biden administration's vaccine mandate for businesses and its plan to forgive student loan debt. The Justices ruled against Biden in both cases.
The court has a 6-3 conservative majority that includes three Justices appointed by Trump. But since he left office in January 2021, the court has not been receptive to filings brought by the former president, including over his separate legal fight concerning presidential documents he stored at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.
Trump’s lawyers argue that his role in questioning the result of the election was within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibilities as president, a phrase that appears in a 1982 Supreme Court ruling, also involving Nixon, about presidential immunity. Therefore, under Supreme Court precedent, he is immune from prosecution, the lawyers say.
Smith disputes that argument, saying that the 1982 case, Nixon v. Fitzgerald, concerned only presidential immunity in a civil case. He also noted in the court filing that the long-held view of the Justice Department that the president cannot be prosecuted refers only to sitting presidents.
"Like other citizens, he is accountable for criminal conduct," Smith wrote.
In an effort to hedge in case the high court doesn't take the case, Smith also asked for an expedited appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C. The court asked for Trump to respond to Smith's motion by 10 a.m. Wednesday, and Smith's reply to their argument by 10 a.m. the next day.
A federal grand jury in Washington indicted Trump on four charges in August: conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction, and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted. Trump pleaded not guilty at his arraignment hearing.
Prosecutors allege Trump used “dishonesty, fraud, and deceit” to subvert the 2020 election won by President Joe Biden with “pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud." Trump was indicted after a sprawling investigation that included testimony from dozens of White House aides and advisors ranging in seniority up to former Vice President Mike Pence.
In a separate filing in the criminal case Monday, Smith's office said it plans to call three expert witnesses to testify at trial. The three unnamed experts will testify on location data history for people who were in the crowd on Jan. 6, the use of that data in the government’s investigation and the use of Twitter on Trump’s phone on Jan. 6, Smith's office said.
Trump is facing three other criminal cases but remains the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination.
#us politics#news#nbc news#republicans#conservatives#donald trump#jack smith#department of justice#us supreme court#immunity#presidential immunity#Judge Tanya Chutkan#U.S. v. Nixon#Watergate scandal#President Richard Nixon#Nixon v. Fitzgerald#U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington DC#jan 6 investigation#2023
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
#2024 election#tr*mp#b*den#gift of foresight#u.s. elections#u.s. politics#u.s. presidents#crimes#old men fighting#polls#voting#tumblr polls#democracy#joe biden#donald trump#apollo#prophecies
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Remember that CLASSIFIED Pentagon 9/11 CLASSIFIED SKY Defense.gov CLASSIFIED Weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION Day in 2001?!?!?!
WELCOME BACK HOME IMMORTAL [HIM] U.S. MILITARY KING SOLOMON-MICHAEL HARRELL, JR.™
i.b.monk [ibm] mode [i’m] tech [IT] steelecartel.com @ quantum harrell tech llc
eye 1921steelecartel.tech TITAN of SIRIUS [U.S.] gullahgeecheemilitary.tech WEALTH @ quantum harrell tech llc
UH OH... y'all in trouble
yup... I've been patiently waiting for this day
eye bring insight 2 the visually impaired
directed 6g sky energy weapons of mass destruction llc?!?!?!
MICHAEL'S [JEHOVAH'S] SPIRITUAL ENERGY WARFARE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?!?!?!
OH SKY LAW'D MICHAEL [JEHOVAH]!!!
1968 6G MILITARY SKY GOD PATENTS from 2001?!?!?!
UH OH... NOT MICHAEL'S [JEHOVAH'S] MILITARIZED 6G... 9/11/2001 SKY DEFENSE.gov WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION TECH?!?!?!
MICHAEL'S [JEHOVAH'S] LARGEST 2024/2025 WEALTH TRANSFER EVER RECORDED!!!
get ready 4 2024!!!
AHA!!! FOLLOW OUR STOLEN BLACK ATLANTEAN TECH [BAT] PATENT WEALTH!!!
EYE REMEMBER!!!
WE WORTH TRILLIONS & QUADRILLIONS!!!
EVEN QUINTILLIONS?!?!?! OH BLACK ATLANTEAN SKY [BAS] LAW'D OF INFINITE WEALTH!!!
© 1698-2223 QUANTUM HARRELL TECH LLC All Pentagon DotCom defense.gov Department Domain Rights Reserved. | © 1698-2223 QUANTUM HARRELL TECH LLC All LOST ANCIENT [L.A.] ATLANTEAN DNA [A.D.] DotCom [A.D.] Domain [A.D.] Name Rights Reserved.
#9/11#harrelltut#king tut#u.s. michael harrell#quantumharrelltech#kemet#mu:13#quantumharrelltut#this is my 9/11#o michael#harrelltut.com#under surveillance#twin towers#world trade center#world trade organization#9etherpentagonelites#9etheraluhumanunnaqi#9etherlightshipatlantis#donald trump#president trump
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Filosofa Is Brain-Dead
Friends, I’m tired tonight. Not sleepy-tired, but just brain-tired, the kind of tired that comes from … overload, overthinking. My mind is shutting down. I want to write about so many things: House Speaker Johnson’s willingness to put his own career on the line to ‘do the right thing’ for Ukraine; the press’ responsibility to balance their duty to inform with their integrity; freedom of…
View On WordPress
0 notes
Text
#politics#michigan news#minnesota news#missouri news#wisconsin news#indiana news#illinois news#iowa news#ohio news#pennsylvania news#north carolina news#georgia news#florida news#texas news#colorado news#arizona news#nevada news#california news#oregon news#washington news#new york news#maine news#new hampshire news#virginia news#u.s. house of representatives#president donald trump#elon musk
0 notes
Text
youtube
Bernie Sanders lays down the stakes in clear and simple terms. If you’re frustrated about student loans, or Gaza, or healthcare, or housing, and thinking of sitting out this election or that your vote doesn’t matter, you need to watch this.
Bernie Sanders interview starts at 33:50 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9-aNsg-yOE&t=2030s
0 notes
Text
"Twenty men have served as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs since the position was created after World War II. Until Milley, none had been forced to confront the possibility that a President would try to foment or provoke a coup in order to illegally remain in office. A plain reading of the record shows that in the chaotic period before and after the 2020 election, Milley did as much, or more, than any other American to defend the constitutional order, to prevent the military from being deployed against the American people, and to forestall the eruption of wars with America's nuclear-armed adversaries. Along the way, Milley deflected Trump's exhortations to have the U.S. military ignore, and even on occasion commit, war crimes. Milley and other military officers deserve praise for protecting democracy, but their actions should also cause deep unease. In the American system, it is the voters, the courts, and Congress that are meant to serve as checks on a President's behavior, not the generals."
#History#The Atlantic#Jeffrey Goldberg#Mark Milley#General Milley#Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff#U.S. Military#U.S. Constitution#President Trump#Donald Trump#Trump Administration#January 6th Insurrection#2020 Election#Politics#Law#Democracy
116 notes
·
View notes
Text
He’s doing side quests now
1 note
·
View note
Text
Trump Pledges Opposition to Federal Reserve's Digital Currency in Presidential Bid
In a bold move during his 2024 presidential campaign, former U.S. President Donald Trump pledged to oppose the creation of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) by the Federal Reserve. Speaking in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on January 17th, Trump emphasized his commitment to safeguarding Americans' freedom, categorically stating he would "never allow" the introduction of a CBDC. His stance resonates with other Republican leaders, such as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, highlighting broader concerns within the party about potential government overreach in personal finance.
Trump's concerns center around the notion that a government-controlled digital currency poses a threat to freedom and privacy. He contends that such a currency could grant excessive power to the government over individuals' financial matters, potentially enabling unauthorized interventions.
#NFTs#U.S. President#Donald Trump#Central Bank Digital Currency#Federal Reserve#2024 presidential election campaign#anti-CBDC stance#Republican leaders#Cryptotale#cryptocurrency#crypto market
0 notes
Text
U.S. Senators and Representatives Demand Ending U.S. Designation of Cuba as State Sponsor of Terrorism
On January 2, the two U.S. Senators from Massachusetts (Elizabeth Warren and Edward Markey) and five U.S. Representatives from that state (Jim McGovern, Ayanna Pressley, Lori Trahan, Seth Moulton and Stephen Lynch) released a letter (dated December 14, 2023) they had sent to President Biden demanding the cancellation of the U.S. designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism.[1]
That letter…
View On WordPress
#Colombian National Liberation Army (ELN) guerrillas#Colombian President Gustavo Petro#Cuba#Cuban economic problems#Cuban migration to U.S.#Presdient Donald Trump#President Joe Biden#President of Mexico#State Sponsors of Terrorism#U.S. Representative Ayanna Pressley#U.S. Representative Jim McGovern#U.S. Representative Lori Trahan#U.S. Representative Seth Moulton#U.S. Representative Stephen Lynch#U.S. Senator Edward J. Markey#U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren
0 notes
Text
Treasury Money a New Era in Finance
The Impact of Trump’s Executive Order 13772
Executive Order 13772, titled “Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System,” signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on February 3, 2017, marked a significant shift in the regulatory approach towards the financial sector. This order, the eighth executive action in Trump’s first 100 days, set out fundamental principles intended to…
View On WordPress
#President Donald J. Trump#President Donald Trump#President Trump#Treasury Department#Trump#U.S. Treasury#U.S. Treasury Department
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
daynghekimhoan
Daynghekimhoan
h311-arcanenox
Mommy's Little Devil
brokersd
Untitled
drewbiker
Andrew McIrvine
toastyghostcriticalblog
my Critical blog