 |
| Tiny Dick on a hot flat roof.... |
August 07, 2025
Practice for Broadway production "Tiny Dick on a hot flat roof...."
Sir, why are you on the roof?
Weirdest White House Moment Yet Leaves Critics Baffled
The president's critics have some ideas for what he was doing on the roof.
By Ed Mazza
Reporters yelled questions, and Trump shouted back some answers.
“Sir, why are you on the roof?” one called out.
“Mr. President, what are you doing up there?” shouted another.
Trump said he was “taking a little walk” and that walking is “good for your health.”
Asked what he might build up there, Trump made some gestures and said “something beautiful.”
“What does that mean?” another reporter shouted.
“We’ll show you,” he said. “It’s just another way to spend my money for the country.”
Trump has been making renovations to the White House, funding some himself. He recently added a pair of giant flagpoles and announced plans for a massive ballroom.
So what was he doing on the roof?
Trump’s critics had some theories:
"If Joe Biden was standing on the White House roof yelling at reporters and pacing back & forth like this, the republicans would have had him committed to a mental institution that day
This is a full on Dementia episode"
Governor Newsom Press Office
"President Stephen Miller gave Trump a juice box and told him to play outside."
PaulleyTicks
"Now, I can see why no one comes up here! There's nothing up here... it's just a barren wasteland!"
CALL TO ACTIVISM
"Donald Trump appears to wander onto the White House roof “to take a walk.” He just started answering reporter’s questions and is shouting down answers. He can barely be heard and he makes no sense.
Is something wrong with Trump’s brain?"
Is there ever a non-bizarre moment?????????
The bizarre moment Trump shouts at reporters from roof of White House
By Lauren Sforza
President Donald Trump was spotted wandering on the roof of the White House Tuesday morning—marking the latest bizarre moment of his presidency.
Trump‘s walk on top of the White House briefing room drew questions and laughs from reporters who peppered him with questions. After being spotted on the roof, reporters asked Trump what he was doing up there and asked if his walk had something to do with the upcoming renovations to the White House.
The video from CSPAN shows Trump walking with a large group of people before Trump takes a break to wave to the press. One reporter yelled, “Sir, why are you on the roof?“ while another shouted, ”Mr. President, what are you doing up there?“
 |
| Tiny Dick Dummy Donny |
“Hi Peter!” Trump yelled, sparking a round of laughter from the journalists.
Trump continued to make odd gestures with his hands before reporters began to ask him about any planned renovations. Trump critics mocked the president’s impromptu visit to the White House rooftop while MAGA supporters praised the move.
“There’s a senile old man in orange makeup wandering around on the roof of the White House making weird hand gestures,” Trump critic Ron Filipkowski wrote on X.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) press office also roasted the president on X.
“President Stephen Miller gave Trump a juice box and told him to play outside,” the press office wrote, referring to deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.
Meanwhile, MAGA pundits loved Trump’s latest stunt.
“Once in a lifetime president,” pundit Benny Johnson wrote on X.
The White House last week announced plans to build a 90,000 square foot ballroom that will cost $200 million.
It will be the latest change introduced to what’s known as “The People’s House” since the Republican president returned to office in January. It also will be the first structural change to the Executive Mansion itself since the addition of the Truman balcony in 1948.
Trump has substantially redecorated the Oval Office through the addition of golden flourishes and cherubs, presidential portraits and other items, and installed massive flagpoles on the north and south lawns to fly the American flag. Workers are currently finishing up a project to replace the lawn in the Rose Garden with stone.
Hey, Stupid... He said he was going to fuck you over, now he is... Don't complain stupid...
Congress looks to ease veterans' use of health care outside the VA
By Tony Leys
John-Paul Sager appreciates the care he has received at Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics, but he thinks it should be easier for veterans like him to use their benefits elsewhere.
Sager, a Marine Corps and Army veteran, uses his VA coverage for non-VA treatment of back injuries stemming from his military service. But he said he sometimes must make several phone calls to obtain approval to see a local chiropractor. "It seems like it takes entirely too long," he said.
Many veterans live hours from VA facilities, or they need health services that aren't readily available from the VA. In such cases, the department is supposed to provide a referral and pay for private care. Some veterans' advocates say it often hesitates to do so.
Republicans controlling Congress aim to streamline the process of obtaining what is known as community care.
Two Republican senators have introduced legislation that would make it easier for rural veterans to seek care at local hospitals and clinics. The proposals would build on VA community care programs that started under Democratic President Barack Obama and were expanded in Trump's first term.
Critics worry that steering veterans to private care facilities drains federal money from the VA hospital and clinic system. But supporters say veterans shouldn't be forced to travel long distances or wait months for the treatment they could obtain at local hospitals and clinics.
"My main concern is for veterans, not for the VA," Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told KFF Health News. "I don't believe we have an obligation to sustain the bureaucracy."
A 400-mile drive to a VA hospital
About 9 million veterans are enrolled in the VA health system. Last year, about 3 million of them — including 1.2 million rural veterans — used their benefits to cover care at non-VA facilities, according to data provided by the department.
Cramer sponsored a bill that would allow veterans who live within 35 miles of a rural, "critical access" hospital to use VA benefits to cover care there or at affiliated clinics without referrals from VA staff.
Cramer, who serves on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, noted his state has just one VA hospital. It's in Fargo, on the state's eastern border, which is more than 400 miles by car from parts of western North Dakota.
Many North Dakota veterans drive past multiple community hospitals to get to the VA hospital for treatment, he said. Meanwhile, many rural hospitals are desperate for more patients and income. "I kept thinking to myself, 'This doesn't make any sense at all,'" Cramer said.
Cramer said previous laws, including the VA Mission Act, made it easier for veterans to use their benefits to cover care at community hospitals and clinics.
But he said veterans still must fill out too much paperwork and obtain approval from VA staffers to use non-VA facilities.
"We can't let the VA itself determine whether a veteran is qualified to receive local care," he said.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano of California, who is the top Democrat on the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, said he sees the need for outside care for some veterans. But he contends Republicans are going overboard in shifting the department's money to support private health care facilities.
The VA provides specialized care that responds to veterans' needs and experiences, he argues.
"We must prevent funds from being siphoned away from veterans' hospitals and clinics, or VA will crumble," Takano said in a statement released by his office. "Veterans cannot afford for us to dismantle VA direct care in favor of shifting more care to the community."
Protecting the VA
Some veterans' advocacy groups have also expressed concerns.
Jon Retzer, deputy national legislative director for the Disabled American Veterans, said the group wants to make it easier for veterans to find care. Female veterans and veterans living in rural areas can have a particularly tough time finding appropriate, timely services at VA hospitals and clinics, he said.
But Disabled American Veterans doesn't want to see VA facilities weakened by having too much federal money diverted to private hospitals and clinics.
Retzer said it's true that patients sometimes wait for VA care, but so do patients at many private hospitals and clinics. Most delays stem from staff shortages, he said, which afflict many health facilities. "This is a national crisis."
Retzer said Disabled American Veterans favors continuing to require referrals from VA physicians before veterans can seek VA-financed care elsewhere. "We want to ensure that the VA is the primary provider of that care," he said.
Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins has pledged to improve the community care program while maintaining the strength of the department's hospitals and clinics. The department declined a KFF Health News request to interview Collins.
Marcus Lewis, CEO of First Care Health Center, which includes a hospital in Park River, North Dakota, supports Cramer's bill. Lewis is a Navy veteran who uses the VA's community care option to pay for treatment of a back injury stemming from his military service.
Overall, Lewis said, the community care program has become easier to use. But the application process remains complicated, and participants must repeatedly obtain VA referrals for treatment of chronic issues, he said. "It's frustrating."
Park River is a 1,400-person town about 50 miles south of the Canadian border. Its 14-bed hospital offers an array of services, including surgery, cancer care, and mental health treatment. But Lewis regularly sees a VA van picking up local veterans, some of whom travel 140 miles to Fargo for care they're entitled to receive locally.
"I think a lot of folks just don't want to fight the system," he said. "They don't want to go through the extra hoops, and so they'll jump in the van, and they'll ride along."
Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.), chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, said veterans in some areas of the country have had more trouble than others getting VA approval for care from private clinics and hospitals.
Bost helped gain the House's approval for Trump's request for $34.7 billion for the community care program in 2026. Although spending on the program has gone up and down in recent years, the appropriation represents an increase of about 50% from what it was in 2025 and 2022. The Senate included similar figures for next year in its version of a military spending budget that passed Aug. 1.
Bost also co-sponsored a House bill that would spell out requirements for the VA to pay for community care.
Sager hopes the new proposals make life easier for veterans. The Gulf War veteran lives in the northeastern Iowa town of Denver. He travels about 15 miles to Waterloo to see a chiropractor, who treats him for back and shoulder pain from injuries he suffered while training Saudi troops in hand-to-hand combat.
Sager, who remains active in the Army Reserve, also visits a Waterloo outpatient clinic run by the VA, where his primary care doctor practices. He appreciates the agency's mission, including its employment of many veterans. "You just feel like you're being taken care of by your own," he said.
He believes the VA can run a strong hospital and clinic system while offering alternatives for veterans who live far from those facilities or who need care the VA can't promptly provide.
The local VA doesn't offer chiropractic care, so it pays for Sager to visit the private clinic. But every few months, he needs to obtain fresh approval from the VA. That often requires several phone calls, he said.
Sager is one of about a dozen veterans who use the community care program to pay for visits at Vanderloo Chiropractic Clinic, office manager Linda Gill said.
Gill said the VA program pays about $34 for a typical visit, which is comparable to private insurance, but the paperwork is more burdensome. She said leaders of the chiropractic practice considered pulling out of the VA program but decided to put up with the hassles for a good cause. She wishes veterans didn't have to jump through so many hoops to obtain convenient care.
"After what they've done for us? Please," she said.
This is stupid... But that's normal now........
Trump calls for U.S. census to exclude for the first time people with no legal status
Hansi Lo Wang
With preparations for the 2030 census already underway, President Trump said Thursday he has instructed his administration to start work on a "new" census.
According to a social media post by Trump, that census would exclude millions of people living in the country without legal status — an unprecedented change to how the country has conducted population tallies since the first U.S. census in 1790.
 |
| Tiny Dick Dummy Donny |
It's unclear if Trump — who, according to the Constitution, does not have final authority over the census — is referring to the regularly scheduled national head count in 2030 or an earlier tally.
Trump said he's instructed the Commerce Department, which oversees the Census Bureau, to "immediately begin work" on a census using "the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024." It's unclear why the election results would matter to the census.
The press offices for the White House, Commerce Department and Census Bureau did not immediately respond to NPR's requests for comment.
Article 1 of the Constitution empowers Congress — not the president — to carry out the "actual enumeration" of the country's population in "such manner as they shall by law direct." In Title 13 of the U.S. Code, Congress directed the secretary of commerce to follow a once-a-decade census schedule.
Under that same law, the commerce secretary can conduct a mid-decade census, in 2025, but the results can't be used for redistributing each state's share of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and votes in the Electoral College. The law also sets a long-passed deadline for reporting to Congress the question topics for a 2025 census.
Still, while the Constitution has required a census every 10 years for the once-a-decade redistribution of congressional seats, it's not clear whether the results of a mid-decade population tally using a different census date can be used for reapportioning each state's share of House seats and Electoral College votes.
A House bill that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia, introduced last month appears to align with Trump's new census call. That bill calls for not only excluding noncitizens from the apportionment numbers, but also a new census and round of congressional redistricting before the 2026 midterm election.
Asked about the bill, Trump said, "It's going to get in. It's going to pass, and we're going to be very happy."
This year, other Republicans in Congress have reintroduced bills that call for excluding either people without legal status or all people without U.S. citizenship, including green card holders, from the regularly scheduled 2030 apportionment counts.
Trump's census comments on Thursday also come after his vocal push for the Republican Party to attempt to pick up more seats in the U.S. House after next year's midterm election through redistricting. The GOP's gambit to redraw the congressional map in Texas has set off a national political battle, with Democrats in other states preparing potential responses, including their own partisan gerrymandering.
The Census Bureau is in the middle of a years-long process to gear up for the 2030 census. Last month, it released the first version of its operational plan for that count, and it has been scheduled to start recruiting this fall for temporary workers to carry out the "2026 Census Test," a major field test for its 2030 plans that's set to take place in six areas in the South and West.
Trump's 2020 census bid to exclude people without legal status was stopped
Trump's latest push renews similar efforts from his first administration that sparked legal battles. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately stopped a question about a person's U.S. citizenship status from being added to 2020 census forms but declined to rule on whether people without legal status can be, for the first time in U.S. history, excluded by the president from apportionment counts.
Former President Joe Biden affirmed the longstanding practice of including the total number of persons residing in the states in those tallies with a 2021 executive order, which Trump revoked on the first day of his second term.
Using the census to ask about a person's immigration status has yet to be tested by the Census Bureau.
But research by the bureau shows that using the once-a-decade tally by the federal government to ask the question "Is this person a citizen of the United States?" is likely to produce faulty self-reported data and discourage many households with Latino or Asian American residents from getting tallied in official population totals, which are also used for dividing up trillions in federal funding for public services in communities across the country.
The bureau's researchers have also warned that attempting to produce neighborhood-block level citizenship data with a new census question would be "very costly," harm the quality of other demographic statistics the census produces and yield "substantially less accurate" data than information available from existing government records about people's citizenship status.
The Supreme Court found the first Trump administration's stated justification for a census citizenship question — to better enforce the voting rights of racial minority groups — appeared "contrived." As a result, Trump issued a 2019 executive order that spelled out other reasons for producing citizenship data that would be more detailed than the estimates the bureau already releases.
They included informing immigration policy and eligibility rules for public benefits, and coming up with a count of people in the U.S. without legal status. Another reason the order outlined was allowing state and local governments to draw voting districts that do not account for children and non-U.S. citizens. That radical departure from current standard redistricting practices would be "advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites," a 2015 report by a Republican redistricting strategist concluded. Its legality is an open question before the Supreme Court.
A 2020 presidential memorandum ultimately confirmed another goal for Trump's first push for a citizenship question — data that would allow for the unprecedented exclusion of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status from what are known as the congressional apportionment counts.
Trump's latest census push could spark more lawsuits
The action also follows sweeping executive orders by Trump aiming to curb illegal immigration and expand requirements for proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote.
The Trump administration's latest push to change the census is expected to be challenged with lawsuits.
Additionally, if Trump is referring to the 2030 census, legal experts say that Trump's successor or Congress may — in 2029 — have an opportunity to get rid of any added question about a person's immigration status before it's printed on paper forms for the 2030 census.
The Trump administration's renewed focus on excluding U.S. residents without legal status from the census, however, could fuel public reluctance to participate in the national count, particularly among immigrant communities and Latinos.
While officials in the first Trump administration often emphasized that some past national head counts have asked about people's U.S. citizenship status in some way, census records going back to 1820 show that Trump's proposal bucks centuries of precedent. The federal government has never before used the census to directly ask for the citizenship status of every person living in every household in the United States.
Rates cut to lowest level
Interest rates cut to lowest level in more than two years
Dearbail Jordan
The Bank of England has cut interest rates to 4%, taking the cost of borrowing to the lowest level for more than two years.
The cut, from the previous rate of 4.25%, is the fifth since August last year, but was only narrowly backed by the Bank's policymakers who took two votes to reach a decision.
Lower rates will reduce monthly mortgage costs for some homeowners but it could also mean smaller returns for savers.
The unprecedented second vote by policymakers suggests further interest rate cuts will be finely balanced amid concerns over rising prices, although the Bank's governor told the BBC the path for rates continues to be "downwards".
Inflation is now expected to peak at 4% in September, the Bank said in its Monetary Policy Report. That is twice the Bank's target rate and above the 3.8% rate it predicted in its May report.
However, while inflation is higher than the Bank would like - which would not normally lead to a rate cut - the economy has been struggling to grow and there are fears about the jobs market.
Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, said the decision to cut interest rates was "finely balanced".
"Interest rates are still on a downward path," he said. "But any future rate cuts will need to be made gradually and carefully."
Speaking to the BBC he said the course of future rate cuts "is a bit more uncertain frankly".
Businesses told the Bank that "material increases" in National Insurance Contributions and the national living wage since April have added up to 2% to food prices.
The Bank said global adverse weather conditions had also lifted the cost of goods such as beef, coffee beans and cocoa.
But companies told the Bank that they expected UK labour costs "to continue to push up food prices in the second half of the year", and in order to mitigate costs, they were having to cut staff.
They also reported shoppers were "trading down" by purchasing own-label items as opposed to branded products, and buying "cheaper cuts of meat".
Mr Bailey told the BBC the Bank did not expect higher inflation to persist, "but we have to watch this very carefully".
On the other hand, UK employment is "softening" he said, with data showing job vacancies are continuing to fall and wage growth is slowing.
Mr Bailey said he is "very conscious" that inflation affects the cost of living.
"Food is a particularly important issue here because for those on the lowest incomes, food [is] a larger share of their consumption because it is the essential of life so we have to be very focused on this," he said.
A Line chart showing interest rates in the UK from Jan 2021 to August 2025. At the start of January 2021, rates were at 0.1%. From late-2021, they gradually climbed to a high of 5.25% in August 2023, before being cut to 5% in August 2024, 4.75% in November, 4.5% in February 2025, 4.25% in May, and 4.0% on 7 August.
At 4%, interest rates are now at their lowest level since March 2023. This will boost some mortgage-holders and borrowers, but it is likely to mean smaller returns for savers.
People with tracker mortgages, which are loans that track the Bank's base rate, should see an immediate reduction in monthly repayments. There about 600,000 people who have one.
The latest cut in rates means repayments on an average standard variable rate mortgage of £250,000 over 25 years will fall by £40 per month, according to financial information company Moneyfacts.
'We are still a little bit anxious about the future'
However, there are many homeowners who are having to remortgage this year at rates higher than deals they struck several years ago.
Adam Christie has just had to re-fix his mortgage rate - moving from a five-year fixed term with a 1.8% interest rate, to a two-year term with a rate of 3.8%.
"It was quite a significant jump, but not as much as we were fearing," he tells the BBC.
He had been prepared for a £200-300 per month increase - but instead his repayments have risen by about £100.
While he describes this as "the best of a bad situation", he adds there is still uncertainty about the future.
"We are still a little bit anxious about the future and what it might hold. They might go up again... but I suppose only time can tell," he says.
The Bank's nine member Monetary Policy Committee was split on the decision to cut rates. Four members wanted to cut rates, four wanted to hold and one - Alan Taylor - wanted a steeper reduction in borrowing costs.
Some economists had been expecting a further interest rate cut at the Bank's meeting in November, but the tightness of the latest vote has led some analysts to cast doubt on whether this will happen.
"Bank of England policymakers are still playing a highly cautious hand," said Susannah Streeter, head of money and markets at Hargreaves Lansdown.
"Although the Bank has opted for a cut, the chances of another reduction by the end of the year have receded sharply," she added.
Ruth Gregory, deputy chief executive at Capital Economics, said the Bank "appears in no rush to cut again".
She said the policymakers' analysis of risks to the economy "raises the chances that the Bank will skip a cut later this year".
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the drop was "welcome news, helping bring down the cost of mortgages and loans for families and businesses".
However, shadow chancellor Mel Stride said interest rates "should be falling faster", adding: "Rates are only coming down now to support the weak economy Rachel Reeves has created."
Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesperson Daisy Cooper said the cut "would have happened months ago if the government was not acting as a roadblock to growth".
The Bank now forecasts that GDP figures for the April-to-June quarter, due to be published next week, will show a sharp slowdown to just 0.1% growth.
That compares to 0.7% expansion in the first three months of this year.
It also said the impact of US tariffs on the UK is not expected to be as much as it thought back in May.
However, tariffs are expected to dent economic growth to the tune of 0.2%.
Rare earth independence
How Europe is vying for rare earth independence from China
Jonathan Josephs
For almost 80 years rare earth metals have been pumped out of this industrial plant in La Rochelle on France's west coast.
But as the materials become more and more crucial to the global economy, chemicals firm Solvay is expanding its processing plant next to the glistening Atlantic Ocean to meet surging demand across Europe.
This group of 17 metals are essential to huge amounts of modern technology such as smartphones, electric vehicles and wind turbines and MRI scanners.
However, around 70% of rare earths mining, and 90% of refining, happens in China, as a result of years of support from the Chinese government.
Europe, like many other parts of the world, is trying to reduce its dependence on importing these key metals from China. The future of Solvay's plant will be critical to those ambitions.
"This is a market that is growing fast, and, also, there is a greater demand for shorter supply chains," says Solvay's CEO Philippe Kehren.
The Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine have made companies and politicians try to remove some of the vulnerabilities in their supply chains.
"When you have a material that is coming almost 100% from one specific location, if you are dependent on this, you want to diversify your sourcing. This is what we can offer," explains the boss of the Belgian chemicals giant.
That is why the EU's Critical Raw Materials Act came into force last year. It sets targets for reducing dependence on imports for the extraction, processing and recycling of the most important substances by 2030.
Europe only has two rare earth processing facilities, one in Estonia and this one in western France. It is the only plant outside of China that can process all 17 different rare earths.
The increased investment in the facility comes as it is moving away from focusing on supplying rare earths for catalytic convertors, to instead focus on soaring demand for the magnets that are essential to electric car batteries, advanced electronics and defence systems.
For now the focus is on recycling rare earths that are already in Europe. "We think that we can probably produce 30% of the rare earths needed by Europe just by recycling end of life motors and other equipment," says Mr Kehren.
As demand continues to grow that will change, and more virgin material will be needed from countries such as Brazil, Canada and Australia.
There are no operational rare earth mines in Europe. Projects in Norway and Sweden are amongst the most advanced, but its likely to be another decade before they are ready.
"I think it's absolutely necessary to have our own mines, not necessarily a lot of them, because we can have a mix, but it's important to have our own sourcing," says Mr Kehren.
It is a complex process to turn those materials into the powders that are the end product of this plant.
It requires approximately 1,500 processes, and given the unique capabilities of this facility, outsiders are rarely allowed in. This is due to concerns about rivals potentially gaining some of the knowledge that is currently otherwise concentrated in China.
However we've been granted special access to one of the separation rooms that are a vital part of the closely-guarded know-how built up since this plant started operating in 1948.
"The objective of the liquid separation unit will be to purify cerium on one side, lanthanum on the other side," explains production manager Florian Gouneau as we walk up a flight of metal stairs.
"It's basically like if you have a multi fruit juice with orange juice, apple juice, pineapple juice, the objective of the liquid separation unit will be to separate apple juice on one side, orange juice on the other side, and so on."
The room itself is about the size of a football pitch, and home to row after row of huge metal vats within which chemical reactions force the different rare earths apart.
This 40-hectare site employs more than 300 people. A vast collection of industrial buildings are joined together by an array of metal pipes moving substances through the processes.
Significant amounts of chemicals are stored in cylindrical tanks, and give the facility a distinct smell that is similar to a freshly-cleaned hospital ward.
I ask Mr Gouneau if he's used to it after working here for three years. "What smell?" he jokingly replies.
The site is also distinctly noisy and warm as vents continually hum. They expel hot air into an atmosphere that is also punctuated by seagulls unaware that they have a unique view of one of the most important frontlines in the global economy.
The French government is supporting this facility with about €20m ($23m; £17.4m) in tax credits.
"Having a dependency on a single source – it is dangerous because you cannot know what will happen to this source for various reasons," says Benjamin Gallezot, who is President Macron's adviser on strategic minerals and metals.
"It can be a geopolitical reason, but it can also be, you know, natural disaster or whatever."
In the blazing sun he won't be drawn on the impact of China trying to restrict access to its rare earths exports, a subject at the heart of continuing US China trade talks.
But Mr Gallezot does say: "I think economic cooperation is clearly more powerful than just only pure competition."
The European Parliament wants the European Commission to do more to reduce that dependence on Chinese rare earths. It says Beijing's controls are "unjustified" and "intended to be coercive".
On a recent visit to Germany, China's foreign minister Wang Yi said it was his country's "sovereign right", as well as being "common practice", to control exports of goods that have both commercial as well as military uses.
That stance explains why securing access to raw materials has been at the heart of recent EU trade deals, such as the one it signed with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay last year.
Western firms in the rare earths sector say they need more government support if they are going to catch-up with their Chinese rivals.
Rafael Moreno, the CEO of Australia's Viridis Mining, says this backing, both regulatory and financial, "is the key right now". His business is developing a vast rare earths mine in Brazil, which hopes to provide as much as 5% of the world's rare earths.
One reason China has forged ahead of the rest of the world regarding rare earths is that it has been more willing to handle the radioactive pollution that can be caused by the mining and processing.
Solvay also has rare earth operations in China, and Mr Kehren says "there are solutions to do it in a very responsible way without polluting". He adds: "It costs a bit of money, so you need to be ready to pay a little bit more."
Pricing is key to the future of the expanded La Rochelle plant, he says. He needs his customers, who supply carmakers and big tech firms, to commit to buying certain volumes of rare earths at certain prices.
The EU has written its targets for lowering imports into law, but he wants to see how they make them happen. "Are there going to be [financial] incentives, for example, for the different players in this value chain to source rare earth elements from Europe?"
Doing so would, he says, be good for the continent's economy.
Damage at Russian bases
Satellite images show damage at Russian bases, and Lebanon strikes verified
Paul Brown
A recent break in heavy cloud cover has revealed evidence of two claimed Ukrainian attacks on Russian air bases in recent days, thanks to satellite imagery.
On 2 August, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) said it had targeted a storage and launch site for Shahed drones at Primorsko-Akhtarsk in the southern region of Krasnodar.
An image from Planet Labs, taken yesterday, shows a series of sizable burn marks in grassy areas around the taxiway. There is no obvious damage to any buildings, or the main runway, but the images are quite low resolution which makes it tricky to make a firm assessment.
Burn marks at Primorsko-Akhtarsk air base captured in satellite imagery
Similar burn marks are evident in four locations in occupied Crimea, where the SBU said it had struck five Russian fighter jets at the Saki airfield, leaving one "completely destroyed" on 4 August.
There is no evidence of that in these images - possibly because of the resolution, or because sufficient time has passed for any damaged aircraft to be removed.
We'll await better quality images to make an assessment.
A waste.....
Why Trump-Putin talks unlikely to bring rapid end to Ukraine war
Laura Gozzi, Vitaliy Shevchenko
The war in Ukraine, sparked by Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, shows no sign of abating.
In the east of Ukraine, Russia presses on in a grinding and bloody advance. Deadly aerial strikes are a nightly occurrence across the country, while Russia's refineries and energy facilities come under regular attack from Kyiv's drones.
 |
| Tiny Dick... |
Three rounds of talks between Russia and Ukraine held at his behest between May and July have failed to bring the two sides any closer to peace, and Trump may hope that taking the situation into his own hands could finally result in a ceasefire.
But the gulf between Kyiv and Moscow is so large that even Trump-mediated talks could make it difficult to bridge.
In a memorandum presented to the Ukrainians by Russia in June, Moscow outlined its maximalist demands for a "final settlement" of the conflict. They include the recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Ukrainian regions of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson as well as Ukraine agreeing to demilitarisation, neutrality, no foreign military involvement and new elections.
Getty Images Firefighters and rescuers sift through the rubble of a destroyed buildingGetty Images
Firefighters and rescuers sift through the rubble following a Russian cruise missile attack on a residential building in Kyiv last week
"The Russian side can frame this in a dozen different ways, creating the impression that Moscow is open to concessions and serious negotiation," wrote Russian political analyst Tatiana Stanovaya. "But the core position remains unchanged: Russia wants Kyiv to surrender."
Following a meeting between Putin and US envoy Steve Witkoff, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday that Washington had a better understanding of the conditions under which Russia would be prepared to end the war.
We don't know if those conditions have changed. However, only last week Putin – likely referencing the memorandum – said Russia had made its goals known in June, and that those goals had stayed the same.
Therefore, despite the Kremlin agreeing to a Trump-Putin meeting, there is no reason to believe Moscow is ready to budge on its tough preconditions.
So why would Putin be agreeing to talks at this stage?
One possibility is that it hopes engaging in dialogue could fend off the secondary sanctions Trump has threatened to impose on Moscow's trading partners as soon as Friday. The Kremlin may also feel it could convince Trump of the merits of its conditions to end the war.
Getty Images Trump and Putin shaking hands in front of a lectern reading "Helsinki". American and Russian flags are in the backgroundGetty Images
Trump's comments following his meeting with Putin in Helsinki in 2018 left many stunned
At the start of his second term in office, Trump appeared to be more aligned with Russia than Ukraine, labelling Zelensky a "dictator" and suggesting he was to blame for the war with Russia.
Although he has since signalled his impatience with Putin – "he's just tapping me along", he said in April – Trump has also refused to say whether he felt the Russian leader had been lying to him over his readiness to move towards a ceasefire.
Whether because of personal affinity or an aligned worldview, Trump has been reluctant to ever fully condemn Putin for his actions.
When the two met in Helsinki in 2018 – during Trump's first term as president - many were left stunned to see Trump side with the Kremlin over accusations of Russian meddling in the 2016 US election and take responsibility for the tense state of US-Russia relations.
It is perhaps partly to fend off the possibility of Trump being swayed by Putin that Kyiv wants to be involved in any ceasefire talks.
Through his envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump has also suggested holding a trilateral with Putin and Zelensky. But the Russian president has batted off these suggestions, saying the conditions for a meeting are still far off.
Now some in Ukraine are concerned a Trump-Putin meeting may result in the US president giving in to Putin's demands.
Ukrainian MP Iryna Herashchenko said it was becoming evident that demands for territorial concessions by Ukraine would be made and added being absent from the negotiating table would be "very dangerous" for Kyiv.
"Ukraine is not afraid of meetings and expects the same bold approach from the Russian side," Zelensky said on Thursday.
But the gulf between Russia and Ukraine remains.
And should the Kremlin eventually agree to a trilateral meeting, Moscow's demands for a ceasefire have proven so intractable that it is unclear what bringing Zelensky and Putin face-to-face might achieve.
Voter regret
Trump voter regret might be setting in – slowly
Aaron Blake
Early in President Donald Trump’s second term, plenty of ink was spilled on the question of whether his 2024 voters regretted their votes. The verdict – including my own – was generally that this theory was overblown.
 |
| Tiny Dick...... |
There were anecdotes, yes, but it didn’t seem to be an especially measurable phenomenon.
More than six months in, that could be changing, at least somewhat.
It’s probably still too simple to say that lots of Trump supporters regret their votes. But to appropriate a phrase you might have heard from your parents once upon a time: Many Trump voters aren’t mad (or fully regretful); they’re just disappointed.
A new poll from the University of Massachusetts Amherst is one of the best gauges of this to date.
It found just 69% of 2024 Trump voters agreed that they are “very confident that I made the right choice.”
That’s fewer than the 78% of Kamala Harris voters who said the same of her. It’s also down slightly from the 74% of Trump voters who said they were very confident in their vote back in April.
That doesn’t mean the other 31% of Trump voters are full of regret. Indeed, most of them (19% of the total) said they’re still “confident” in their votes but that they had “some concerns.”
But about 1 in 10 Trump voters said either that they regretted their votes to some degree, had “mixed feelings,” or wish they hadn’t voted. That group has grown slightly since April.
And all told, 14% of Trump voters said if they could redo their 2024 votes, they would either vote for Harris (6%), vote third-party (5%) or not vote at all (3%). That’s more than the 8% of Harris votes who would have picked a different option than their candidate.
It’s just one poll, but the numbers do make sense in context. And other data gestures in this direction, too.
Since many of those stories were written earlier this year, Trump’s popularity has continued to wane – to the point where he now owns the worst early first-term and second-term approval ratings in modern history, according to Gallup.
And recently, Trump and his administration have taken a number of actions that seemed to test the tolerance of even his most devoted supporters.
That includes his military strikes on Iran (which many influential MAGA types initially balked at), his increasing support for arming Ukraine (which polls suggest Republicans have opposed nearly 2-to-1) and passing a historically unpopular agenda bill featuring Medicaid cuts (a bill that CNN polling showed only 30% of Republicans strongly supported).
Many Republicans have also questioned Trump’s tariff policies and said he’s not focused enough on inflation.
But perhaps Trump’s most problematic episode with his base is his administration’s ongoing Epstein files fiasco.
The UMass poll shows just 38% of Trump voters said the administration has handled the situation well, and 33% say it’s hiding information. That’s 1 in 3 Trump voters who think there’s a cover-up, to some degree. These numbers echo other data that suggest this is by far Trump’s worst issue with his base.
All of it has combined to lead some prominent influencers who had supported Trump to distance themselves from him.
In other words, there’s increasingly plenty for his supporters to dislike, depending upon what’s important to them. His approval ratings on a series of issues include small but significant GOP defections. Last month I called it a “looming malaise.”
And the idea that a small but significant number of Trump voters are at least having second thoughts about their votes tracks with other data.
Multiple polls, for instance, have shown an especially sharp drop in Trump’s approval among young adults. A recent CBS News-YouGov poll showed adults under 30 have gone from 55% approving of Trump in February to 28% last month.
CBS data last month also showed 16% of Republicans said Trump is doing different things than he promised on the campaign trail – which could certainly signify discontent.
And finally is a Yahoo News-YouGov poll last month. Rather than ask about personal voter regret, it asked people whether they knew other people who regretted their votes. It found 17% of Trump voters said they knew a regretful fellow Trump voter. (That was double the 8% of Harris voters who said they knew a regretful Harris voter.)
Why is that significant? Well, for one, it suggests there are enough publicly regretful Trump voters that nearly 1 in 5 Trump voters have at least encountered one.
But more than that, it might actually be a better measure of voter regret than straight-up asking people about their own views.
People, after all, don’t love the idea of admitting they personally made a mistake. Some political scientists believe questions like this are better at unearthing hidden trends, because they allow people to hint at their own views while keeping the sentiment at arm’s length. “I don’t regret my vote, but I know people who do,” might suggest the person in question has some qualms of their own.
Whatever the case, it’s certainly something worth watching right now. There’s plenty of reason to believe Trump voters could be somewhat more disillusioned about their votes than they were a few months ago. And the data suggest that might indeed be the case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)