iftttwall

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made it an agency’s mission to reverse the chronic disease epidemic by implementing the “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, which aims to eliminate toxic food dyes and processed foods from the nation’s food supply chain. In response to the incoming HHS policy, one of the world’s top players in the spices, herbs, and seasonings industry has announced plans to reformulate its products to align with the MAHA agenda.

“We are seeing a tick-up in reformulation activity,” McCormick & Co. CEO Brendan Foley told analysts in an earnings call. He said the company’s initiative was occurring “across our customer base, but also a lot of new product activity, too.”

The Hunt Valley, Maryland-based spice company is known for its black pepper and paprika products and iconic brands like Frank’s RedHot, Old Bay, and Cholula.

McCormick’s surge in reformulation activity only suggests that the company is getting ahead of RFK Jr.’s incoming MAHA policies, which focus on removing artificial dyes and other harmful ingredients from the food supply chain. 

Foley also told investors that McCormick has been well underway with reformulation work and has moved to reduce sodium, which aligns further with the MAHA movement. 

Earlier this year, McCormick removed toxic Red No. 3 from its products in anticipation of a planned ban by the Food and Drug Administration. 

RFK Jr. recently met with big food executives from PepsiCo, Kraft Heinz, General Mills, Tyson Foods, WK Kellogg, and JM Smucker to discuss the productive first steps to rid foods of the worst ingredients and reverse the chronic disease epidemic.  

Via Middle East Eye

Israel’s Knesset has passed a bill enabling greater political control over the appointment of judges, effectively diminishing the Supreme Court’s power.

The measure, which will come into effect after the October 2026 general elections, marks the first time in Israel’s history that the selection process for judges will be controlled by politicians.

It will change the composition of the nine-member committee that selects judges, comprising judges, lawmakers, and bar association representatives, overseen by the justice minister.

The bill will see representatives of the Israeli Bar Association replaced with lawyers appointed by the ruling coalition and the opposition, and give politicians veto power over lower court appointments. It will also remove any influence of the three judges who sit on the committee overseeing appointments to the Supreme Court.

The committee is currently handling petitions against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s dismissal of Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar, and the reappointment of Itamar Ben Gvir as national security minister.

The bill was passed almost unanimously after the opposition boycotted the vote, with 67-1 in favor of the legislation.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin will bar the committee from naming new judges until the law comes into effect, leaving the country with only 11 supreme court justices – short of the full complement of 15.

Knesset opposition leaders condemned the legislation, saying that its sole aim is “to ensure judges are subjected to the will of politicians”.

“This is happening while 59 hostages are still held in Gaza. Instead of focusing all efforts on bringing them home and healing the divisions in the nation, this government is once again engaging in the very legislation that divided the public before October 7,” they added.

A ‘dangerous direction’

A flurry of petitions against the bill were filed by opposition parties and a government watchdog to the High Court of Justice shortly after its approval. In one of them, opposition leader Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid Party stated that the law’s approval “is not an amendment, but the eradication of an entire system“.

National Unity party chairman, and former member of the war cabinet, Benny Gantz, warned lawmakers ahead of the vote that the nation was headed in a “dangerous direction”.

Meanwhile, thousands of Israelis gathered outside the Knesset to protest the legislation.Before October 2023, the Netanyahu government pushed a package of bills seeking to overhaul the judicial system, sparking mass protests across the country.

On January 1, 2024, the Supreme Court nullified controversial legislation passed by the government in July 2023 that eliminated the court’s ability to overturn government decisions.

The legislation eliminated the Supreme Court’s reasonableness clause, a power given to the court to overturn government rulings deemed unreasonable.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political party, Likud, called the court’s decision unfortunate and said it opposed “the will of the people for unity, especially during wartime”. Netanyahu is currently on trial for corruption. Since being indicted in 2019, he has railed publicly against the justice system, calling it biased against him.

A ‘coalition of the willing’ is mulling a European army which would be deployed to Ukraine in a ‘peacekeeping’ capacity, except that French President Emmanuel Macron has also admitted these Western forces would be ready to join the conflict if provoked.

Macron is currently hosting the leaders of nearly 30 countries plus NATO and European Union chiefs at a Paris summit – where as we described earlier they are pushing back on US-backed peace plans by ruling out sanctions relief for Russia.

Most importantly, Macron said Wednesday that a proposed European armed force to enforce a future Ukraine peace deal could “respond” to a Russian attack if Moscow launched one.

“If there was again a generalized aggression against Ukrainian soil, these armies would be under attack and then it’s our usual framework of engagement,” Macron said.

“Our soldiers, when they are engaged and deployed, are there to react and respond to the decisions of the commander in chief and, if they are in a conflict situation, to respond to it,” the French leader explained.

Of course, this is precisely why the Kremlin has rejected any plan which calls for NATO country forces to be present in Ukraine. President Putin sent his army into Ukraine in February 2022 as in large part a reaction to constant NATO expansion to Russia’s doorstep.

France and the United Kingdom are leading the way in putting together what they’ve dubbed a “reassurance force” for Ukraine.

The forces would have the “character of deterrence against any potential Russian aggression,” Macron said further – which comes dangerously close to simply saying he wants to send NATO troops into the conflict to fight Moscow forces.

More billions have also been committed: “Macron committed to a further 2 billion euros ($2.16bn) in French military support on Wednesday, including missiles, warplanes and air defense equipment. Zelenskyy said other partners could announce aid packages on Thursday,” international outlets have reported.

Meanwhile, Moon of Alabama has highlighted the latest flip-flopping from NATO’s top leadership on the question of peace, and eventual restoration of positive relations with Russia:

NATO Chief Says Russia Relations Should Be Restored Post War – Bloomberg, Mar 14 2025

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said relations with Russia should eventually be normalized once the fighting ends in Ukraine, while stressing the need to keep pressure on Moscow to ensure progress in ceasefire negotiations.

“It’s normal if the war would have stopped for Europe somehow, step by step, and also for the US, step by step, to restore normal relations with Russia,” Rutte said in an interview on Bloomberg TV Friday.

Just twelve days later …

‘This is not the time to go it alone,’ NATO’s Rutte tells U.S. and Europe – Reuters, Mar 26, 2025

While welcoming Trump’s push for peace in Ukraine, Rutte said there would be no normalisation of relations with Russia once the war had ended.

“This will take decades because there is a total lack of confidence. The threat is still there,” he told reporters.

Given all of this, the prospect of peace doesn’t actually seem close, despite the continued optimistic statements coming from the White House. President Trump has aimed to achieve peace within the some first one hundred days of his presidency, but that’s looking increasingly unrealistic at this point. 

Authored by Paul Weston via X:

A few harsh realities to consider: 

1) The hard-left has infiltrated all Western institutions and actively seeks to undermine and subvert all Western nations – regardless of which particular puppet politician is in power. 

2) Most countries within Western Europe will see their native young become a minority well before 2050. 

3) Western countries currently operate on the principle that foreign people and foreign cultures are intrinsically good, whilst European culture and people are irredeemably evil. 

4) This sets up the neo-Marxist agenda of the oppressed and the oppressor which copies the early 20th century revolutionary ideology of Marxist-Leninism where the working class was designated as the oppressed, and the bourgeoisie the oppressor. 

5) The result of this was the murder of 100 million people deemed the “oppressor” in Communist Russia and Communist China. 

6) Islam is currently designated the “oppressed” by all Western institutions, regardless of the fact that Islam is a supremacist ideology with a 1,400-year history of imperial expansion and warfare. Europeans are designated the “oppressor” even as they yield to every edict of “diversity” ladled upon them. 

7) Islam will politically control much of Western Europe before 2050 as a result of rapidly declining native demographics, coupled with rapidly expanding Islamic demographics and single-minded bloc voting for Islamic political parties. 

8) Few politicians or journalists (none in England…) will talk about this, let alone state what should be done to halt the overthrow of Western Europe. People who do talk about it are liable to be arrested for Hate Crime and imprisoned. 

9) This represents an existential crisis which threatens our very survival as a people, a culture, and an entire continent. We are a dwindling demographic deemed the oppressor by our own Traitor Class, even as a growing demographic with a supremacist belief system is forced upon us by the Traitor Class – which maintains our potential future masters are the oppressed. The history of Lenin, Stalin and Mao with regard to the oppressed and the oppressor does not bode well for the European people. 

10) We have little time left, but most people cling to the naïve belief that we can somehow vote our way out of this terrible situation. I don’t entirely discount this possibility, but I do believe that should the AfD in Germany or Marine Le Pen in France threaten to win an election in a landslide, they would never be allowed to take power. The EU criminals in the Commission – and they really are criminals – have already intimated they will ban “far-right” parties capable of winning elections – and recently did just that in Romania.

All in all then, not good, as Jerry Seinfeld might say. I’m sorry if people find this depressing, but I do think it is a matter of crucial importance that our situation be properly understood. After all, if we don’t realise how bad things are, we will be unable to plan any possible salvation.

It looks like Ferrari is ready to try and stick it to President Trump and his newly imposed auto tariffs…

The automaker put out a press release late Wednesday/early Thursday that said it would “update its commercial policy, based on the preliminary information currently available regarding the introduction of import tariffs on EU cars into the USA”. 

“While reaffirming its commitment to maximum client attention and protection and with the goal to provide certainty to them: The commercial terms will remain unchanged for orders of all models imported before April 2, 2025 and for orders of the following three families – Ferrari 296, SF90 and Roma – regardless the import date,” it said.

“For the current remaining models, the new import conditions will be partially reflected on pricing, up to a maximum 10 per cent increase, in coordination with our dealer network,” the release said. 

Ferrari announced it will hold prices steady on vehicles imported before April 2. After that, pricing for the 296, SF90, and Roma models will remain unchanged, but its more in-demand models — including the Purosangue SUV, 12Cilindiri, and limited-edition F80 — will see hikes of up to 10%. That means an extra $43,000 on the $430,000 Purosangue and over $350,000 added to the $3.5 million F80, CNBC added. 

As we wrote this morning worries over tariffs hit markets on Wednesday, with the S&P 500 halting a three-day win streak to close down 1.1%. 

“Tariffs are front and center on people’s minds,” said Arun Sai, senior multi-asset strategist at Pictet Asset Management. “We all know that tariffs are stagflationary and markets have been trying to price that to different extents. What we don’t know yet is what’s the ultimate lasting impact.”

“If the European Union works with Canada in order to do economic harm to the USA, large-scale Tariffs, far larger than currently planned, will be placed on them both in order to protect the best friend that each of those two countries has ever had!” Trump wrote on his social media platform Trump wrote late Wednesday/early Thursday morning.

On Wednesday, Trump signed an order imposing a 25% tariff on all auto imports—a move he believes could reverse decades of disastrous industrial policy that have hollowed out the core of the country. The order takes effect next week, in addition to the ‘reciprocal tariffs’ set for April 2. 

Bloomberg reported earlier that the EU is preparing countermeasures. France has asked the European Commission to consider using the anti-coercion instrument to strike back against Trump’s escalating trade war. 

In the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump told reporters that reciprocal levies would be lower than expected: “We’re going to make it all countries, and we’re going to make it very lenient. I think people are going to be very surprised. It’ll be, in many cases, less than the tariff that they’ve been charging us for decades.”

For an in-depth look at how tariffs could effect the industry and markets across the global, premium subscribers can read this note that we published earlier this morning. 

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

A compromise is possible whereby the Europeans are pressured by the US into stockpiling their Ukrainian-destined arms in Poland and Romania for swift shipment across the border if hostilities re-erupt sometime after a ceasefire, armistice, or peace treaty is agreed to.

The official Kremlin readout from Putin’s most recent phone call with Trump shared Putin’s demand that “a complete cessation of providing Kiev with foreign military aid and intelligence must become the key condition for preventing an escalation of the conflict and making progress towards its resolution.” Trump’s temporary suspension of such assistance proves that he has the political will to shut it off for good if he gets what he wants from negotiations with Putin, but the Europeans are a different story.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Trump during a Cabinet meeting on Monday before the end of the 12-hour-long Russian-US talks in Riyadh that day that “You’ve [promoted despite] despite impediments from other countries”, which was arguably an allusion to the Europeans’ warmongering. Although deliberately vague, he might very well have been referring to the EU’s and UK’s plans to continue arming Ukraine in spite of Putin’s demand that this cease as one of his most important conditions for peace.

Poland, Romania, and the Black Sea in descending order serve as the entry points for foreign weapons into Ukraine, none of which the US has full control over. It jointly operates the Rzeszow logistics hub in southeastern Poland through which an estimated 90-95% of all weapons to Ukraine pass but this facility can continue functioning even if the US pulls out. The situation is similar with Romania’s newly built “Moldova Highway” for facilitating the shipment of arms from Greek ports to Ukraine.

The US military only jointly operates local port facilities in Alexandroupolis while having no direct influence over the “Moldova Highway”, both of which can also continue functioning without it. As for the Black Sea, the new grain deal that the US is negotiating with Russia could either lead to international checks on cargo for detecting arms trafficking or create a plausible cover for this trade. In any case, just like the preceding two, the point is that others besides the US can rely on this route too.

Trump is unlikely to threaten economic sanctions against nominal NATO allies whose countries continue to arm Ukraine even if his own decides to cut it off for good as part of the series of pragmatic compromises that it’s negotiating with Russia for sustainably ending the conflict. The only scenario in which he might rally Congress to pass another arms package is if Russia significantly expands its ground campaign beyond the regions that it claims as its own as was discussed here.

As long as that doesn’t happen, then the US’ Biden-era aid will soon run out and Ukraine will then be entirely dependent on European aid, but it’s unclear whether that drastic curtailment in aid (also keeping in mind their already greatly depleted stockpiles) would suffice for Russia to cease hostilities. Putin might agree to it as part of the series of pragmatic compromises that he’s negotiating with Trump, or he could still lean on his counterpart to exert more pressure on the Europeans to follow in his footsteps.

Trump’s hands would be tied in the second scenario as was just explained, but he could also lead from the front by suggesting that the Europeans instead stockpile the equipment that they want to send to Ukraine in Poland and Romania per their “security guarantee” commitments to Kiev. These refer to the bilateral pacts clinched last year whereby major countries like the UK, France, Poland, Italy, and the US itself basically agreed to resume their existing level of support for Ukraine if hostilities re-erupt.

Whatever weapons the Europeans might still send to Ukraine wouldn’t compensate for the cut-off of US aid so they’d be transferring their equipment to be destroyed for no purpose other than delaying the inevitable political resolution of the conflict, by which time Russia could even gain more ground. Putin might of course prefer for NATO not to stockpile anything in proximity to Ukraine’s borders for swift shipment across if there’s a continuation war, but Russia can’t control what they do on their territory.

Trump and his team would therefore do well to convey these points to the Europeans in order to facilitate the Ukrainian peace process. Putin might not agree to a ceasefire or armistice so long as the Europeans continue arming Ukraine, which would be futile on their part in any case, while they’d just be wasting their weapons that could otherwise be put to better use if hostilities re-erupt and the US thus restores its prior level of support for Ukraine. This proposed compromise might lead to a breakthrough.

Authored by Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump has withdrawn the nomination of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Trump announced the move on Truth Social on March 27, citing the narrow majority the GOP has in the House.

“As we advance our America First Agenda, it is essential that we maintain EVERY Republican Seat in Congress. We must be unified to accomplish our Mission, and Elise Stefanik has been a vital part of our efforts from the very beginning,” he wrote.

“I have asked Elise, as one of my biggest Allies, to remain in Congress to help me deliver Historic Tax Cuts, GREAT Jobs, Record Economic Growth, a Secure Border, Energy Dominance, Peace Through Strength, and much more, so we can MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

“With a very tight Majority, I don’t want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise’s seat.”

Trump said Stefanik will join his administration “in the future.”

The GOP has a narrow majority in the House as it looks to pass Trump’s legislative agenda.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Stefanik’s office for comment.

Stefanik served as the House GOP conference chairwoman. She stepped down from the role due to Trump nominating her to be ambassador to the U.N. She was succeeded by Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.). Trump said Stefanik will rejoin House GOP leadership. It is unclear which role she would be in.

The Epoch Times has reached out to McClain for comment.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Stefanik will be invited to rejoin House GOP leadership. What the role will be is unclear.

“It is well known Republicans have a razor-thin House majority, and Elise’s agreement to withdraw her nomination will allow us to keep one of the toughest, most resolute members of our Conference in place to help drive forward President Trump’s America First policies,” he wrote in a post on social media platform X.

“There is no doubt she would have served with distinction as our ambassador to the United Nations, but we are grateful for her willingness to sacrifice that position and remain in Congress to help us save the country. I will invite her to return to the leadership table immediately.”

During her nomination hearing, Stefanik denounced what she said is the “anti-Semitic rot” at the U.N., given its stance toward Israel.

“The U.S. is the largest contributor to the U.N. by far,” she said. “Our tax dollars should not be complicit in propping up entities that are counter to American interests, anti-Semitic, or engaging in fraud, corruption, or terrorism.”

The committee advanced her nomination to the Senate floor by voice vote on Jan. 30.

Stefanik has been one of Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress. She was the first member of Congress to endorse his 2024 campaign.

She was first elected to represent New York’s 21st Congressional District in 2014. At that time, she was the youngest woman elected to Congress in U.S. history.

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge on March 26 denied the Trump administration’s motion to dissolve her order that prevents the Pentagon from blocking transgender people from enlisting in the military, which was scheduled to go into effect on Friday.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes filed a memorandum opinion and order on Wednesday denying the administration’s request to dissolve, or stay pending appeal, her March 18 preliminary injunction halting the new military policy.

The government filed an appeal after Reye’s Wednesday order.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness” on Jan. 27 that says individuals “expressing a false gender identity” do not meet the standards for military service and that “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle.”

On March 18, Reyes ruled that Trump’s order likely violates the constitutional rights of transgender-identifying active-duty service members who challenged the order and could cause them irreparable harm. She agreed to stay the preliminary injunction until March 21 to give the administration enough time to appeal.

“Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender service members have sacrificed—some risking their lives—to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them,” Reyes stated in a 79-page ruling.

During a March 21 hearing, Reyes requested that the Department of Defense delay its original March 26 deadline for instituting the policy.

The government filed a motion to dissolve the injunction on March 21 and argued that the policy is not an overarching ban on transgender-identifying people but rather “turns on gender dysphoria–a medical condition–and does not discriminate against trans-identifying persons as a class.”

The administration also asked that if the motion to dissolve is rejected, the court should stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. It also cited new guidance issued on March 21 that clarified that “the phrase ‘exhibit symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria‘” only applies to “individuals who exhibit such symptoms as would be sufficient to constitute a diagnosis.’”

Reyes said she preferred to give additional time for the appeals process and said she had previously granted enough time to appeal her last opinion, stopping the ban from going into effect. She also acknowledged that the government’s cited guidance was new but that the defense’s argument was not.

“Defendants re-emphasize their ‘consistent position that the [Pentagon] Policy is concerned with the military readiness, deployability, and costs associated with a medical condition,’” Reyes wrote.

“Regulating gender dysphoria is no different than regulating bipolar disorder, eating disorders, or suicidality. The Military Ban regulates a medical condition, they insist, not people. And therein lies the problem.

“Gender dysphoria is not like other medical conditions, something Defendants well know,” Reyes wrote. “It affects only one group of people: all persons with gender dysphoria are transgender, and only transgender persons experience gender dysphoria.”

Aldgra Fredly contributed to this report.

Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative will be an epic failure. 

That’s the message from the latest forecast by the “non-partisan” Congressional Budget Office which projected staggering increases in federal budget deficits and debt over the next 30 years, coupled with a collapse in population growth and productivity, largely due to surging interest costs – the same soaring interest costs we have been warning about for years – as it laid out a dismal economic picture for the twilight days of the United States.

The CBO’s latest long-term budget projections show federal deficits accelerating to 7.3% of the economy in fiscal year 2055 from 6.2% in 2025. That is up from the 30-year average from 1995 to 2024 of 3.9%. In other words, the CBO is giving zero credibility to DOGE’s stated mission of slashing US spending and deficit. Just earlier today, Elon Musk said that his Govt Efficiency Department aims to finish $1 trillion in cuts by the end of May. Needless to say, the CBO disagrees.

But where it gets really scary is the CBO’s update of what is arguably the scariest chart in the world: that of US public debt which is now seen rising alarmingly, to 156% of GDP in 2055 from 100% in 2025.

“Mounting debt would slow economic growth, push up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt and pose significant risks to the fiscal and economic outlook,” the Long-Term Budget Outlook: 2025 to 2055 stated. 

Of particular note, government interest payments on its ballooning debt were projected at 5.4% of GDP in fiscal year 2055, up from the anticipated 3.2% in the current fiscal year that ends on September 30. 

That too is overly optimistic: as we noted previously, interest on the debt will surpass social security spending as the #1 outlay as soon as 2027 unless interest rates tumble or debt is drastically reduced. Neither is likely to happen.

Breakdown of US spending by category: Interest on the debt will surpass social security as the #1 outlay by 2027 unless i) rates tumble; ii) debt is drastically reduced https://t.co/CYpYVPg9nJ pic.twitter.com/wuNBq59P6e

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 12, 2025

At least the CBO acknowledges that interest costs are projected to be even larger than spending on the government’s “discretionary” programs, such as military operations, air traffic control, law enforcement and nutrition programs. Altogether, those will comprise 5.1% of GDP in 2055.

The “non-partisan” CBO quickly showed its partisan colors by advocating implicitly for a resumption of Biden’s illegal alien acceptance policies. According to the forecast, the aging US population will push spending on Social Security benefits to 6.1% of GDP in fiscal year 2055, up from 5.2% in 2025.

The CBO also forecast slower U.S. population growth over the next 30 years than during the past three decades largely due to reduced immigration. That will slow economic output in a shrinking labor force. Without mentioning Trump, it added: “Without immigration, the U.S. population would begin to shrink in 2033.”

Annual deaths are projected to exceed the number of births in the US just eight years from now, at which point net immigration would drive population growth. Last year, the CBO estimated the US population would begin to shrink in 2040, but that was thanks to Biden hoovering up every Venezuelan murdered-cum-illegal alien in hopes they would vote for him.

According to Bloomberg, the projection “showcases the risk of imposing draconian immigration policies at a time when the Trump administration has been implementing sweeping actions to curb the inflow of non-native-born people. Measures have included restricting deportation protections and sharply tightening border security. Border crossings in February were 94% lower than they were a year prior, according to US Customs and Border Protection data.”

Net immigration would “increase the size of the overall population in coming years and boost the share of people in age groups that have higher rates of labor force participation,” the CBO said in its outlook. What the CBO forgot to add is net ILLEGAL immigration, which has been the primary source of net immigration in the past decade.

Because how will the US ever survive without continuing to import every Latin American criminal?

Overall, the CBO projected real economic growth, forecast at 2.1% in 2025, slowing to 1.4% in 2055.

At the same time, net immigration would “increase the size of the overall population in coming years and boost the share of people in age groups that have higher rates of labor force participation,” the CBO said in its outlook.

The silver lining to the economic slowdown is that it will keep rates on 10-year Treasury notes largely flat over the 30 years, “reflecting upward pressure from increases in federal borrowing and downward pressure from slowdowns in the growth of the labor force.”

But things could get much worse. The CBO bases its projections on current law, which could change significantly in the short-term. That is due in part to the push now underway by President Trump and Republicans to slash federal spending and the government’s workforce, while also extending tax cuts that are due to expire at the end of this year under current law.

“As bad as this outlook is, it represents an ‘optimistic scenario,’ because policymakers are currently considering adding trillions more in tax cut extensions, which would add to the debt,” said Michael Peterson, head of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, which advocates fiscal policy reforms.

There are estimates that extending those tax cuts for a decade could add around $4.6 trillion to deficits and debt. House Republicans have proposed spending cuts, including to federal healthcare programs, to achieve some savings.

Trump also has ordered tough border security measures and efforts to deport immigrants that experts see potentially denting the economy as a result of labor shortages.

Another unknown factor is the outcome of court challenges to Trump policies that already are pending. The CBO does not include any consideration of the outcome of those court cases in its long-term projections. The report also does not factor in the potential impact on the U.S. economy from a broad range of tariffs Trump is implementing against foreign goods.

There was some good news: for now, the risk of a fiscal crisis “appears to be low,” but it’s not possible to reliably quantify the danger, the CBO said.

“In the agency’s assessment, no tipping point can be identified at which the debt-to-GDP ratio would become so high that it would make a crisis likely or imminent,” the report said. “Nor is there a specific tipping point beyond which inter­est costs would become so high in relation to GDP that they were unsustainable.” Uhm, maybe they should take a look at their debt forecast chart again.

But it’s not just DOGE that the CBO dissed: it also threw the entire AI bubble under the bus. You see, despite all the current fervor over the application of artificial intelligence, the CBO is projecting weaker productivity gains over coming decades. That’s in part due to slower investment because of a crowding-out effect from massive public-sector borrowing.

“Increased federal borrowing is projected to reduce the resources available for private investment,” the CBO said. Declines in federal investment relative to GDP are also seen as a drag on so-called total factor productivity — a term to describe efficiency gains.

Well if only the previous administration hadn’t listened to the CBO’s cheerful forecasts years ago when the “nonpartisan” budget office said to do… precisely what was done and lo and behold, here we are. And now the CBO wakes up?

The bottom line, however, is that the CBO has openly declared war on Musk and is daring him to shutdown whole swaths of the government, and if there is anything Elon lives for, it’s a dare. It sure would be ironic if the completely useless and thoroughly partisan CBO itself were to be the next to be eliminated.

Source: CBO

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge on March 27 ordered government officials to try to preserve their Signal messages about an attack on terrorists in the Middle East earlier this month.

“Defendants shall promptly make best efforts to preserve all Signal communications from March 11–15, 2025,” U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said in a minute order.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other top officials, who were part of a chat group on messaging platform Signal discussing the attack, must file a status report by March 31 on steps they’ve taken to preserve the messages, the judge said.

The order will expire on April 10 “in the event that Defendants’ measures are satisfactory to the Court,” Boasberg wrote.

The order was handed down after a hearing involving government lawyers and the watchdog group American Oversight, which sued the officials this week over their recently disclosed chat on Signal.

The mid-March discussion on Signal involved Hegseth, Secretary of State and acting Archivist Marco Rubio, and others. It centered on strikes in the Middle East against Houthi terrorists. Its existence was revealed after Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added.

American Oversight said in its complaint, which was filed in federal court in Washington, that Signal is not authorized to preserve federal records, and at least one or more messages sent in the recent chat were deleted, violating the Federal Records Act (FRA).

American Oversight earlier this year submitted Freedom of Information Act requests to agencies headed by the defendants, including the Pentagon, seeking Signal records. Because the messages are not forwarded to official email accounts, American Oversight and other requesters are barred from obtaining the records, the suit states.

An attorney for the government told the judge during the hearing that the government was “certainly looking to fulfill its obligations” in regard to the chats.

The attorney also said the agencies were looking to preserve the records they have, and that an order by the judge was unnecessary because the government was already working toward that goal.

She cautioned that the government was still in the process of determining which messages it possesses.

U.S. government lawyers had said in a filing to the judge that American Oversight’s allegation that officials have not taken measures to prevent the destruction of Signal messages, and are therefore violating the Federal Records Act, is not reviewable by the court under court precedent.

“Even if the claim were reviewable, it is belied by Defendants’ declaration submitted herewith. That declaration establishes that Defendants are taking steps to locate and preserve the Signal chat, and that at least one of the agencies has located, preserved, and copied into a federal record keeping system a partial version of the Signal chat,” they said.

The case was assigned to Boasberg, who recently blocked the government from deporting suspected and confirmed members of the Tren de Aragua gang under a wartime law that President Donald Trump invoked unless authorities had other reasons for the deportations.

The assignment was random, according to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Stacy Robinson contributed to this report.