Politics

The Real New World Order

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

🧵 WHAT YOU’RE NOT HEARING: The Chinese cannot replace the U.S. market. Without it, the Chinese economy collapses.

Here’s why… China’s entire economic miracle was built on ONE thing – being America’s cheap manufacturing hub. 

The “Chinese miracle” playbook was simple: 

• Open markets to the West 

• Offer dirt-cheap labor 

• Ignore safety standards 

• Let Western companies rake in profits 

This worked for decades. But China forgot something crucial: others can do this too.

MASSIVE MISCALCULATION: Beijing thought the American leaders they made rich would protect them forever. They believed these corporate puppet masters would never let the US stand up to China.

WRONG. Along came Donald Trump, who owes them nothing.

The numbers don’t lie 

• US exports to China: $143.5B 

• Chinese imports to US: $438.9B 

They flood our markets while closing or restricting THEIR markets. 

But Trump said: NO MORE

Meanwhile, countries like India, Vietnam, and Bangladesh are CELEBRATING. They’re ready to take China’s place, AND open their markets to the U.S. – and Trump’s willing to deal.

HERE’S what the Enemedia WON’T tell you: 

Chinese exporters are PANICKING 

• Abandoning shipments mid-voyage 

• Factory orders FROZEN 

• Container volume DOWN 90% 

And this is just the beginning. China can’t replace the U.S. market that made it rich.

Reports flooding in: 

• Factories shutting down 

• Amazon canceling orders 

• Stores closing 

• Warehouses overflowing 

The house of cards is falling. But the Enemedia gives you nothing but Chinese propaganda.

CRUCIAL FACT: America buys 3X more than Japan (China’s next biggest customer). 

Without us, they’re FINISHED. And they were already on the ropes.

Will this affect US consumers? Sure, briefly. You might struggle to find cheap plastic junk for a few months. 

But other countries will step up. And TRILLIONS in new investment are flowing into America, while countless factories LEAVE China.

Will this affect US consumers? Sure, briefly. You might struggle to find cheap plastic junk for a few months. 

The bottom line: China picked a fight they can’t win. While America adjusts, the CCP will face the consequences of their refusal to truly open their own markets, or to abandon aggression against their neighbors. 

Game over. The decoupling is under way.

Rod Martin, 

Founder and CEO Martin Capital

Epoch Times on Tariffs

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

WASHINGTON—As part of a bold shift in U.S. trade policy, President Donald Trump has ramped up tariffs on Chinese goods, aiming to revive domestic manufacturing and hold Beijing accountable for its decades of market-distorting practices. 
At the April 2 “Make America Wealthy Again” event in the White House Rose Garden, Trump unveiled the contours of his global tariff plans, including a 34 percent reciprocal levy on Beijing. The president pointed to China’s currency manipulation and other non-monetary trade barriers. 
This decision effectively raised the total new tariffs on China to 54 percent, including the 20 percent levies previously imposed to pressure Beijing into reducing the flow of fentanyl into the United States. 
This move will impact the approximately $600 billion in annual trade and bring tariffs on nearly all Chinese goods close to the 60 percent rate Trump had previously promised during his campaign. 
Trump believes that the United States holds leverage over other nations, including China, due to its status as the world’s largest and wealthiest consumer market. 
“Foreign nations will finally be asked to pay for the privilege of access to our market, the biggest market in the world,” Trump said during his Rose Garden speech. 
China quickly hit back, announcing that, starting April 10, it would impose 34 percent tariffs on imports of all U.S. goods. This move was part of a broader set of retaliatory actions, including tightening export controls on various rare earth elements and adding U.S. companies to the government’s “unreliable entities list.” 
Beijing also filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO), following through on a threat earlier this week. 
Trump pushed back at the Chinese regime after announcing its retaliatory response. 
“China played it wrong, they panicked—the one thing they cannot afford to do,” the president said in a post on social media platform Truth Social. 
Trade Distorting Practices
Despite joining the WTO in 2001, China did not evolve into the fully-fledged market economy that the United States had anticipated. 
China’s economic growth has accelerated dramatically since the country joined the WTO. However, the Chinese Communist Party’s trade-distorting practices, such as intellectual property theft, massive state subsidies, currency manipulation, wage suppression, and labor rights violations, have led to the closure of many U.S. manufacturers and the loss of millions of U.S. jobs. 
There is a bipartisan view in Washington on the need to address China’s market-distorting practices. 
Before the November election last year, President Joe Biden’s National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, defended tariffs against China. 
“Previous efforts to build a China policy on changing China have not succeeded,” Sullivan said on Oct. 24. 
As a result, he argued, the United States must adopt a new set of strategies based on the current geopolitical and economic realities. 
During his first term, Trump imposed tariffs on more than $300 billion worth of Chinese goods in response to various unfair trade practices, including intellectual property theft. 
The Biden administration chose to maintain those tariffs and even announced additional tariffs on products such as electric vehicles (EVs), solar panels, medical equipment, lithium-ion batteries, steel, and aluminum. 
Both administrations have used tariffs to level the playing field for domestic manufacturers and protect American workers. 
However, Trump’s latest move represents an even bolder step in attempting to contain China and hold it accountable for its longstanding trade-distorting practices. 
Nick Iacovella, executive vice president for the Coalition for a Prosperous America, an organization that represents domestic producers and workers, said that these tariffs will address the decades of deindustrialization in the United States. 
“It is incredibly important that those tariffs actually stay in place,” he told The Epoch Times. 
For decades, there has been a disconnect between Wall Street and Main Street, Iacovella added, commenting on the market reaction. 
“When automakers moved their jobs to Mexico, their stock prices went up, but car prices didn’t decrease for American consumers,” he said. 
Adam Savit, China policy director at America First Policy Institute, argues that China has less leverage, despite Beijing’s retaliatory actions. 
“The U.S. has much less exports to China than China exports to the United States. So inherently, they’re at a disadvantage,” he told The Epoch Times. 
​​He stated that charging 54 percent tariffs on Chinese goods is an appropriate response to an adversary, and it will help in the strategic decoupling from China. 
Bargaining Chip 
On April 4, Trump extended the deadline for TikTok to divest from its Beijing-based parent company by 75 days. 
The president made the announcement in a post on Truth Social, just ahead of the original April 5 deadline. 
Trump stated that he would continue working in “good faith” with China. Previously, he suggested that tariffs could be used as a bargaining chip to pressure China into approving the sale of TikTok’s U.S. operations from ByteDance, which several U.S. officials have warned has ties to the Chinese Communist Party. 
“You have a situation with TikTok where China will probably say: ‘We’ll approve a deal, but will you do something on the tariffs?’” Trump said on April 3. “We could use tariffs in order to get something in return.” 
Nathan Worcester, Jacob Burg, Terri Wu, and Andrew Moran contributed. 
Emel AkanEmel Akan 

Tucker On Tariffs

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

Well said.

Commentary 
Does the Left Support Worker Exploitation?
It’s no secret that the stock market has reacted poorly to the Trump administration’s “Liberation Day” tariffs. It makes sense why. Investors hate uncertainty, and America ushering in an entirely new economic vision, regardless of what that vision is, was always going to cause a shock. 

One of the conglomerates experiencing a nosedive is Nike. According to Schaeffer’s Investment Research, the company’s stock sank to a six-year low after the tariff announcement and now carries a 23.5% year-to-date deficit. 

The reason for this is straightforward. Nike uses cheap foreign labor to create its products, exploiting international markets to get away with paying its workforce a fraction of what American laborers would require. This is no secret. Nike reportedly employs 108,000 Chinese workers, paying them an average annual salary of $10,000. Its American employees, by contrast, tend to make nearly seven times that sum. 

This makes Washington’s new effort to incentivize companies to manufacture their products in the U.S. a bad situation for Nike. And they’re not the only ones. Reutersreported on Thursday that “Shares in Nike, Adidas, and Puma dropped sharply after Vietnam was targeted with a 46% tariff rate, Cambodia with 49%, Bangladesh with 37% and Indonesia with 32%, while Trump hiked tariffs on China by an extra 34 percentage points, following the earlier 20% tariffs.” 

Take a step back and ask yourself what this really means. A $10,000 salary is not a livable wage. It equates to less than $5 an hour, and that’s if the worker doesn’t take a single minute off all year. No vacations. No sick days. Nothing. Just a life of thanklessly slaving away in his employer’s overheated mines. 

Among other things, the White House’s pursuit of “fair trade” aims to end that inhumanity. The U.S. should not reward companies for treating human beings like soulless cogs, easily replaceable and whose hours are worth nothing more than five measly dollars.

Is that what American neoliberals want? Whether they realize it or not, Democrats complaining about the Trump tariffs are by definition advocating for the West’s continued exploitation of effective slave labor. They may attend pride parades and post social justice graphics on social media, but they quickly jump ship as soon as a policy that will drive real change threatens their precious wallets. 

Emphasizing this could be a good way for Republicans to regain the high ground in our country’s economic debate. Will the tariffs create jobs? They should. Do they put America first? Without a doubt. But they’re also moral. America is no longer interested in subsidizing the treatment of workers as worthless servants. Companies that refuse to oblige? Fine. Enjoy your big, beautiful tariff.

JD Vance Says the Right thing

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

Even when he is out of the spotlight.

Even in Private, JD Vance Puts America First
A key detail from Atlantic Magazine’s story on the Trump administration accidentally leaking its plans to bomb Yemen is being overlooked.

The content of JD Vance’s messages.

In case you haven’t seen the report, administration officials accidentally included Atlantic’s editor-in-chief in a Signal chat dedicated to discussing this month’s airstrikes in Yemen. This gave the journalist unprecedented access to the government’s process that led to the attacks, pulling back the curtain on what America’s most powerful figures are really like behind closed doors. 

The chat included well-known power players like Pete Hegseth, Mike Waltz, Marco Rubio, Stephen Miller, Tulsi Gabbard, and yes, Vice President Vance. It reveals why Vance was such an excellent choice to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. 

“Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake,” he messaged in response to the group’s gung-ho sentiments about launching the strikes. “3 percent of US trade runs through the [Suez Canal]. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

Vance also argued for delaying the attacks for a month and lamented the fact that, as usual, America was doing Europe’s dirty work for them. 

“I just hate bailing Europe out again,” he added a few minutes later.

Let’s take a step back. Yes, the Vice President’s hesitations may seem insignificant because the strikes wound up happening anyway. But they’re not.

Firstly, the dialogue shows that real, substantive policy debates are happening inside the administration. Its highest members are not afraid to spar with one another over issues that matter. The chat was not an echo chamber. Dissent is allowed.

Even more importantly, the messages reinforce the fact that the Vice President and likely future commander-in-chief is genuinely wired to want to avoid American interventionism rather than recklessly drop bombs all around the world to flex his manhood like so many of his predecessors. That doesn’t mean the Yemen strikes were examples of such recklessness. It shows that Vance’s antennas were up to make sure they weren’t and that his anti-war messaging isn’t just a public front.

Imagine what would have happened if previous Republican VPs currently held the post. Would Mike Pence have pushed back against the strikes? Please. Dick Cheney? He probably would have been furious they hadn’t happened already. But not Vance.

America could have avoided its disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan if the Vice President’s kind of thinking was present inside the Bush administration. The same goes for Korea and Vietnam. As the world plunges deeper into its nuclear era, it’s a relief to know Vance is where he is. He may wind up saving us all.

Tucker on Kamala

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

Something about Kamala Harris’s concession speech felt off.

It wasn’t her language; the vice president said roughly what you’d expect of someone in her position. It was the vibe.

The media billed the address as the second coming of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 speech after her electoral defeat, but the two spectacles were completely dissimilar. As a former first lady, senator, and secretary of state, Clinton carried an aura that at least felt grand, leading most listeners, even the former Democrat candidate’s detractors, to conclude that she would at a minimum remain somewhat pertinent in America’s public discourse. 

The same cannot be said for the vice president.

No one had ever heard of Harris until 2018 when she became an establishment darling by harassing Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings. The then-senator’s attempt to capitalize on her newfound stardom fell flat, however, when her subsequent presidential campaign failed so miserably that she ran out of money and dropped out before the first primary.

Then, despite being the past target of Harris’s thinly veiled racism allegations, Joe Biden tapped the Californian as his running mate because, as Biden repeatedly said, he wanted “a woman to be vice president.”

A qualified woman? A woman who would be an effective president? No. Just “a woman.”

Next, Harris’s vice presidency went as one would expect for any affirmative action hire thrust into a position for which she was deeply unprepared: Disastrously. Harris oversaw the federal government’s biggest dereliction of duty in history at the southern border, unpromptedly baited Russia into invading Ukraine, and perpetually humiliated herself with mind-numbing media appearances that portrayed her as a babbling and incoherent halfwit.

Kamala’s performance as vice president made it abundantly clear that she was not destined for a promotion to the Oval Office, and despite her party’s 100-day push to brainwash the country into believing otherwise, she will not receive one. 

She’ll also no longer receive media inquiries, celebrity treatment, or any attention when she weighs in on the country’s biggest issues. No one will care.

With Harris’s impromptu presidential bid over, some Democrats will be surprised to see how quickly she reverts to inconsequential obscurity. They shouldn’t be. Harris isn’t suddenly returning to being irrelevant. She was never really relevant in the first place.

The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

Too many people talk around or ignore the dangers of illegal immigration.

1. Unvetted migrants.

2. Increase in crime.

3. Possible terrorists entering our country.

4. Forcibly changing demographics.

5. Cheap labor.

6. Lower wages.

7. Less jobs for Americans.

8. Increase in welfare expenses.

9. Drugs crossing the border.

10. 300 k Unaccounted for minors in our country

Now we look at who benefits.

1. Drug Cartels/ smugglers.

2. Corrupt politicians on both sides of the border.

3. Child and human traffickers.

4. Democrats condoning this and Republicans not stoping it.

5. Drug producers in Mexico.

6. Government funded NGO’s.

7. Foreign governments who want their jails emptied.

8. Companies wanting cheap labor.

9. The welfare state.

10 The deep state.

I could go on for hours but this will give you a Segway to finding information regarding this crisis and with a little research you can find out who really benefits. Our forefathers came here with no welfare state and no free anything from the taxpayers. They had to work hard and earn it or they went hungry, so the comparisons leftists make between now and then are not relevant.

We should not blame these immigrants for coming, what is happening is not their fault. it is the fault of politicians not enforcing our immigration laws for nefarious reasons.

Here are Some Clues

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

Thank you Ralph. “Things you must know to be informed”

*YES, THE GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN USED TO WORK FOR GEORGE SOROS.*

*YES, CALIF GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM IS NANCY PELOSI’S NEPHEW

* YES, ADAM SHIFF’S SISTER IS MARRIED TO ONE OF GEORGE SOROS’ SONS.

* YES, JOHN KERRY’S DAUGHTER IS MARRIED TO A MULLAH’S SON IN IRAN.

* YES, HILLARY’S DAUGHTER CHELSEA IS MARRIED TO GEORGE SOROS’ NEPHEW.

* YES, ABC NEWS EXECUTIVE PRODUCER IAN CAMERON IS MARRIED TO SUSAN RICE, OBAMA’S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER.

* YES, CBS PRESIDENT DAVID RHODES IS THE BROTHER OF BEN RHODES, OBAMA’S DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS.

* YES, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT CLAIRE SHIPMAN IS MARRIED TO JAY CARNEY, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY.

* YES, ABC NEWS AND UNIVISION REPORTER MATTHEW JAFFE IS MARRIED TO KATIE HOGAN, OBAMA’S FORMER DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY

* YES, ABC PRESIDENT BEN SHERWOOD IS THE BROTHER OF ELIZABETH SHERWOOD, OBAMA’S FORMER SPECIAL ADVISER.

* YES, CNN VP VIRGINIA MOSELEY IS MARRIED TO TOM NIDES, FORMER HILLARY CLINTON’S DEPUTY SECRETARY.

THIS IS WHAT YOU CALL A “STACKED DECK”. IF YOU HAD A HUNCH THE NEWS MEDIA WAS SOMEWHAT RIGGED AND YOU COULDN’T PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT, THIS MIGHT HELP YOU SOLVE THE PUZZLE.

Now you know why no one is investigated. They all have their hands in the cookie jar!  You might remember James Comey who investigated the Clinton email scandal and the Clinton Foundation, and made the final decision to not recommend prosecution by the DOJ.

It turns out that the Clinton Foundation was audited by the law firm DLA Piper. One of the executives there was in charge of the Clinton Foundation audit.

Who was it? Peter Comey, James Comey’s brother. Peter Comey held an executive position with the Washington law firm that did the audit of the Clinton foundation in 2015.   Peter Comey was officially DLA Piper “Senior Director of Real Estate Operations for the Americas,” in 2015 when the Clinton Foundation scandals first broke and Hillary was preparing her Presidential campaign.  Not only was DLA Piper, the firm where Comey’s brother worked involved in the audit of the Clinton Foundation, but according to the foundation’s donor records, DLA Piper has given between $50 – 100k to the Foundation

It gets even cozier. DLA Piper executive Douglas Emhoff is taking an extended leave of absence from the firm. Who is Douglas Emhoff?   He is the husband of KAMALA HARRIS! Just a coincidence?   Amazing if it is. You can’t make this stuff up!

 This “Family Tree” will make your head spin ..

Dominion (voting machine provider) serves 40% of the US market. It is in 30 states – – The state of Texas rejected the machines.


– Admiral Peter Neffenger is on Biden’s transition team.
 
– Neffenger was the President of the board of Smartmatic
 
– Smartmatic (another voting machine supplier) entered into an agreement with Dominion in 2009
 
– Smartmatic counted votes in Venezuela
 
– Smartmatic is connected to Philippine voter fraud
 
– Smartmatic is run by Lord Mark Malloch Brown who works for George Soros (-he and Brown are life-long friends)
 
– Brown chairs the Boards of a number of non-profit boards including the Open Society Foundation,
 
– Brown chairs the Centre for Global Development.
 
– Open society of course is owned by George Soros
 
– Smartmatic partnered with DLA Piper Global
 
– Douglas C. Emhoff works at DLA Piper Global
 
– Douglass C. Emhoff is Kamala Harris’s husband
 
– Guess who owns Dominion? – -Blum Capital Partners, L.P.
 
– Guess who is on the board for the company? — Richard Blum.
 
– Richard C. Blum is Dianne Feinstein’s husband.
 
– Nancy Pelosi’s husband is also a major investor
 
– An aide to Nancy Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, was hired by Dominion Voting Systems
 
And it goes on…..
 
– Dominion Voting Systems is listed on the Clinton Foundation website.
 
– Dominion Voting is listed as a $25,000 -$50,000 donor to the Clinton Foundation in 2014 by The Washington Post
 
– Georgia Governor Kemp used Dominion Voting after Texas and Florida rejected them
 
– Dominion has a lobbyist named Jared Thomas
 
– Jared Thomas was Governor Brian Kemp’s chief of staff and press secretary from 2012 to 2015
 
– You must remember the Feinstein-Kavanaugh-Soros connections to understand this next information
 
– Debra Katz (Christine Ford’s lawyer) worked for George-Soros at the Open Society Foundation.
 
– Debra Katz (Christine Ford’s lawyer) also worked at Project on Government Oversight (POGO).
 
– POGO is funded by Soros’s Open Society Foundation.
 
– POGO is the co-signer of the letter Diane Feinstein presented against Kavanaugh’s nomination.
 

– Kamala Harris did not prosecute OneWest Bank for their fraud when she had the authority – Soros owned OneWest Bank.

Now you know why a woman who placed 7th in own her State when running for President is now VP (and soon to be president?)!