Wednesday, March 11, 2026

Huey Lewis, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Barbra Streisand, Smokey Robinson, The Go-Gos


Remember Huey Lewis & The News?  They had a nice run in the 80s.  Fraser Lewry (LOUDER SOUND) notes:

As anyone who watched Stevie Ray Vaughan perform at the Reading Festival in 1983 can attest, no one was ever better at turning an ambivalent or hostile audience into a crowd of mind-boggled believers. But this wasn't always the case.The following year, Huey Lewis and the News set out on the US leg of their Sports tour, and Lewis picked Vaughan to open the shows. "Stevie Ray's manager at the time asked for more money than they were worth," Lewis wrote on social media this week, retelling the story. "My agent said, 'This is ridiculous. We can't pay them this kind of money. They're not worth anything. We're just helping them by putting them on the tour. They should be paying us. Blah, blah, blah.'
"I said, 'Forget about it. Just pay him. Trust me. You'll be glad you did.'"The first show of the tour was at the 7000-capacity Zoo Amphitheatre in Oklahoma City, OK, where Lewis watched horrified from the wings as his crowd ignored the Texan genius altogether."They were just killing it," says Lewis. "Then the song ended, and there was a moment of dead silence. Then the audience started chanting, 'Huey, Huey, Huey, Huey.'Gene Triplett, covering the show for The Oklahoman, confirmed Lewis's analysis. "His scrambling, incredibly articulate riffs and solos recalled all the gifted blues-rock heroes of a bygone era (Hendrix, Michael Bloomfield, the heydays of Johnny Winter and Eric Clapton), but few people seemed to care, and he wasn't called back for an encore," wrote Triplett. "Much of the crowd seemed more concerned with the long lines at the beer taps." After Double Trouble finished their set, they dejectedly retreated to their tour bus, where Lewis found them and gave a rousing speech.
"Look, fellas, you're tremendous," he told them. "Here's the thing, the audience is invested in us. They know our music. They play the record on the way to the venue. No matter how good you are, they're bound to think that we're going to be much, much better. There's no way you're going to score here. What's going to happen is, when they go home tonight, they're going to say, 'Hey, you know what? That first band was pretty good.'"
 

Everyone knows of Stevie Ray Vaughan today.  And pretty much everyone also knows Barbra Streisand's big number one hit "The Way We Were" from the film of the same name.  Joe Matera (GUITAR WORLD) reports:

Carol Kaye’s bass lines have graced countless iconic albums and singles, TV themes and film soundtracks of the 1960s and early 1970s. Her work can be heard on classic tracks running the gamut from Sonny & Cher’s “The Beat Goes On” and the Beach Boys’ “Good Vibrations” to “River Deep – Mountain High” by Ike & Tina Turner and Joe Cocker’s “Feelin’ Alright.”
With more than 10,000 recordings to her credit, Kaye is considered the most recorded bass guitar player of all time, but she actually started out as a session guitarist in the late 1950s. That’s her playing rhythm guitar on Ritchie Valens’ 1958 classic “La Bamba.” She also played electric guitar on the Beach Boys hits “Surfing’ U.S.A.” and “California Girls.”
[. . .]
Looking back over her career Kaye recalls one memorable session in 1973 for Barbra Streisand’s hit single — and signature song — “The Way We Were,” the title track to her film and album of the same name. The date illustrates the importance of Kaye’s role in any session she was hired for.
As she recalls, the session for the December 1973 recording was huge. It included both a band and full orchestra, with Streisand herself singing live.
“For the first time in years, you saw everybody you had been recording with. All the string players, horn players were there, and it was fantastic to all play together in that large studio.”
But Kaye had no room to develop her own bass lines.
“Marvin Hamlisch, the songwriter, didn't want me to change any part of his written-out bass line in his arrangement,” she reveals.
As the session got underway, it was clear the song had legs.
“You knew it was going to be a biggie hit,” Kaye says.
But as the hours dragged on, nothing good was coming of it.
“Streisand, being a top pro, did about 33 straight takes,” the bassist recalls. “Nothing was wrong; we just hadn't hit that ‘hair-raising’ hit-take yet. The tune was sort of losing its potency.”
Kaye decided to try something different.
“I thought, To heck with playing the part as it was written. I just started playing. I was inventing on the bass.”
Drummer Paul Humphrey glanced over at Kaye.
“He smiled and changed his drum part too,” she recalls.
“And boom! The take came to life.
"I remember looking over at the booth where Barbra was, and she was holding a long note, while I was filling with arpeggios on the bass part, our eyes met and it was electricity. You knew this was the take. Man, was that fun.”

Also on Barbra Streisand, Geca Flores (PARADE) reports: 

After 49 years, “Evergreen” reached No. 1 on the Billboard chart for three consecutive weeks, running from March 5 to 19, 1977.

Composed by the singer-actress along with songwriter Paul Williams, the romantic ballad became a major hit after it was featured in the film A Star Is Born, starring Streisand and Kris Kristofferson.
It was her second number-one single to reach the top spot, with the first being “The Way We Were” in 1974 and the third being the 1980 song “Woman in Love.”
Over the years, “Evergreen” has continued to endure its timeless touch, appearing on compilation albums such as the 2002 The Essential Barbra Streisand.
Beyond the chart-topping success, the love song also received notable recognitions, including the Golden Globe and the Grammy Award for Best Pop Vocal Performance for Female and Song of the Year.

Barbra's third number one wasn't "Woman In Love."  Her third number one was "You Don't Bring Me Flowers Anymore" - -her duet with Neil Diamond.  Then she had her fourth number one with "Enough Is Enough (No More Tears" -- her duet with Donna Summer.  Her fifth and final number one (so far anyway) is "Woman In Love." 

Let's go back to the sixties for the next one, Isabella Torregiani (PARADE) reports:

Did you know one of Motown’s most iconic songs almost didn’t exist? “Ooo Baby Baby,” the beloved hit by Smokey Robinson & The Miracles, started as a spontaneous onstage improvisation — and ended up on Rolling Stone’s “500 Greatest Songs of All Time.” 
In 1965, The Miracles were performing at the Howard Theatre in Washington, D.C. Smokey Robinson typically sang a medley of love songs by other artists, but one night he spontaneously added the line “Ooo baby baby.”
“The guys, we were so in tune to each other, they just started to harmonize with that, and the people went crazy. So, we decided we would just do a song,” Robinson recalled to WaxPoetics.
The R&B group soon released “Ooo Baby Baby,” taken from their Going To A Go-Go album. Written by Robinson and Warren “Pete” Moore, with Robinson producing, the song features a plea from the lead singer asking his partner for forgiveness after cheating. 
The single, featuring strings from the Detroit Symphony Orchestra, reached No. 4 on the Billboard Hot 100 and became a fan-favorite track for the band. It also ranked #266 on Rolling Stone’s 2003 edition of “The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time.”  

Now let's move up to the 80s, Grace Galante (PARADE) notes:

Beauty and the Beat by The Go-Go’s hit No. 1 on the Billboard album chart 44 years ago today!

On March 6, 1982, The Go-Go’s debut album reached the top spot after steadily climbing the charts following its release on July 14, 1981.

With Beauty and the Beat, The Go-Go’s became just the second girl group, after Diana Ross & The Supremes, to reach No. 1 on the albums chart. It was also the first debut album by an all-female group to reach No. 1, and remains the only album by an all-female pop/rock group to top the chart.
Of all girl groups to achieve No. 1 albums on Billboard, Beauty and the Beat holds the record for the longest run at the top, spending six consecutive weeks at No. 1.

The album’s success was fueled by hit singles like “We Got the Beat” and “Our Lips Are Sealed.” 44 years later, Beauty and the Beat is considered a cornerstone album of American new wave music, selling over 3 million copies and becoming one of the most successful debut albums of all time.


Closing with C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"


Wednesday, March 11, 2026.  Chump continues to blunder through the war he and Netanyahu started with no clear goals or aims, the GOP works on 'messaging' for their immigration spiel, Senator Patty Murray calls out the ICE shootings, and much more. 

 

Waging war with no fixed purpose means victory can be declared at any point. Donald Trump’s motives for launching Operation Epic Fury against Iran were incoherent at the start. They are no clearer now that he has declared it “very complete, pretty much”.

US and Israeli bombs have caused death and destruction, shaking but not toppling the government in Tehran. Among the targets was the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. He has been replaced by his son – an “unacceptable” candidate in the US president’s evaluation.

Regime change was the plan, but Trump finds it easier to change plans than regimes. What began as a long-haul commitment to roll back decades of Islamic revolution has become a “short-term excursion” to neutralise Iran’s military capabilities.

Trump has not quite declared “mission accomplished”. He says he has won, but also that he has more winning to do. This is the familiar stage of rhetorical climbdown, indicating dawning awareness that a problem is more complicated than the president initially thought. Complexity resists his whim. It bores him.

Iran turns out to be unlike Venezuela, except in a superficial analysis as energy-exporting countries with a history of hostile relations with Washington. The model of regime decapitation and coercion that saw Nicolás Maduro kidnapped from Caracas and replaced with his compliant vice-president earlier this year whetted Trump’s appetite for an Iranian sequel. But the Islamic Republic has reserves of ideological and institutional resilience. It can also spook international markets by menacing trade in the Gulf.

The White House seems not to have anticipated the predictable economic repercussions of war in the Middle East – soaring oil prices, falling stock markets, disrupted supply chains feeding inflation and choking growth.


Yesterday, Aaron Blake (CNN) wondered if Donald Chump even knew what was going on with Iran:

On Saturday, President Donald Trump claimed it was Tehran that struck an Iranian elementary school early in the war, killing scores of children.

On Monday, he admitted he basically had no idea what he was talking about when he said that, then went on to suggest other countries, including Iran, use Tomahawk missiles, the type of munition that appears to have hit the school. Iran does not have Tomahawks.
When pressed at a news conference why nobody else in his administration was making the same claim about Iran being responsible (and instead pointing to an investigation), Trump said,“Because I just don’t know enough about it.”

He added that he would respect the findings of the investigation.

Just to put a fine point on that: Trump not only says he shared this claim despite appearing to know little about the situation; he’s also saying he didn’t know much about perhaps the single most controversial strike of the war.

It’s a strike that had become a huge international story by the time he weighed in — and one that even some Republicans fear could do real damage to the war effort, if the US was indeed culpable. (The US military was likely responsible, according to a CNN and expert analysis of evidence, and new video has emerged that appears to show a US missile targeting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps naval base adjacent to the school.)
But apparently, Trump was out of the loop.

This is hardly the only example of the president seeming to have a loose grasp of what’s happening on the ground in Iran.

Trump has often had a complicated relationship with the truth, but it’s striking to see that play out in the context of a war.

The school strike wasn’t even the only example from Monday’s press conference.

At another point in his introduction, Trump seemed to claim that Iran’s Gulf neighbors had joined the war effort against Tehran alongside the United States and Israel.

“Their neighbors were largely neutral — or at least weren’t going to be involved — and they got attacked,” he said. “And it had the reverse effect. The neighbors came onto our side and started attacking them, and actually quite successfully. If you look at Saudi Arabia, you look at UAE, Qatar and others.”

But this does not reflect reality.



Chump's avoided reality throughout his war of choice.  That includes insisting that the US government is not short on weapons when they are.  That's why Chump met with weapon manufacturers in the White House on Friday.  It's why he's moving weapons.  Ellie Cook (NEWSWEEK) reports:

The United States is moving one of its critical anti-ballistic missile air defense systems from South Korea to the Middle East, a sign of the strain 11 days of strikes across the region is putting on U.S. troops and its allies despite officials downplaying stockpile concerns.
U.S. forces deployed in South Korea have transferred parts of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system from the peninsula, local media reported.

The Pentagon has also reportedly pulled interceptor missiles for the ground-based, U.S.-made Patriot air defense system from other regions, including the Indo-Pacific. The Department of Defense declined to comment when contacted by Newsweek.

The U.S. has used up vast amounts of munitions since it started striking Iran on February 28, upping the ante on Tuesday as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said American forces would unleash their most powerful strikes yet.

You don't do that unless you're running short on supplies.  So, yes, that is what's happening.  




As Ben notes in the video above, FOX "NEWS" is wondering where the Iranian uprising is?

Donald Chump bombed a school.  Girls were killed.  No one in Iran's rushing to embrace that.  Chump should have grasped that and they should have taken real care with strikes.  But they didn't and now they still don't grasp the importance of 'hearts & minds.'  Chump only makes things worse by lying and claiming it might have been the Iranian government that attacked the school.


Today on MORNING JOE, Mika and Joe spoke with career diplomat Richard Haas.




Richard Haas: It took one country to start the war -- that's us.  It's going to take three to stop it. Israel wants to continue for some time.  Israeli goals and American goals are not aligned here, they are not aligned.  Israel has much more far reaching goals and is not nearly as concerned about the knock-on effects.  Iran gets a serious vote and, yes, Iran is much weaker but Iran can continue.  All it's going to take is one mine in a passage way and no one's going to insure a tanker for months or longer until you can prove it's safe again.  All it's going to take is one drone hitting this or that target.  So we can talk about these goals -- and by the way, we have zero ability to ensure what the future leadership of Iran is -- who it's going to be, what it's policies are going to be -- but this is a classic case, that we did not -- we didn't begin to play chess here in thinking through what the moves of our rival would be here.



This war is not going the way Chump hoped, to put it mildly.  Rhian Lubin (INDEPENDENT) notes:


Some of President Donald Trump’s advisers have warned him in private to find a way to end the war with Iran over fears of political backlash, according to a report.

In recent days, aides have urged Trump to make the case that the U.S. military had mostly achieved its objectives and told the president to communicate an exit plan for the joint American and Israeli bombing campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter.
His advisers are reportedly concerned that a drawn-out war could “deplete” Trump’s support among his conservative base as the conflict has already split his MAGA following and prompted some Republicans to speak out, though largely anonymously.

The reported closed-door discussions follow Trump’s public remarks Monday, where he said the war could end “very soon” and it was “very complete, pretty much.”

But will Chump listen to them or continue to listen to Netanyahu?  Netanyahu is nowhere near ready to pack it in. So will Chump listen to his advisors or to Netanyahu?  

He's refused to listen to the American people so far.  Steve Benen (MS NOW) notes:

The latest national Quinnipiac University poll found:

Fifty-three percent of voters oppose the U.S. military action against Iran, while 40 percent support it. … Seventy-four percent of voters oppose sending U.S. ground troops into Iran, while 20 percent support it.

‘Voters are unenthusiastic about the air attack on Iran and there is overwhelming opposition to putting American troops on Iranian soil to fight a ground war,’ said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy.

The same survey data also found that 55% of Americans agreed that Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the United States, the White House’s dubious claims notwithstanding; 59% said the president should have gone to Congress to approve the mission; and 62% concluded that the administration had not provided a clear explanation of the reasons behind military action against Iran.




And, yet again, Chump's screwed over the American farmers.  Jesus Mesa (NEWSWEEK) reports:

As the U.S.–Israeli bombardment of Iran continues with no end in sight, the economic shockwaves are already hitting American farmers, with some struggling to buy fertilizer and gasoline prices rising.

The war zone sits at the crossroads of the world’s fertilizer supply. Since the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran a week ago, maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has ground to a near standstill. The waterway moves roughly 20 percent of the world’s daily oil and a quarter of its nitrogen fertilizer.

Chet Edinger, a corn and soybean farmer from Mitchell, South Dakota, saw it coming. As soon as the news broke, he rushed to lock in one last load of urea, the most widely used nitrogen fertilizer, the morning the strikes began. He paid 22 percent more than he had late last year, the highest price he had ever seen.

Days later, the market froze entirely.

“You can’t even buy it right now if you wanted to,” he told Newsweek. “Because all the supplies are tied up with their existing customers.”
[. . .]
Tariffs. Economic uncertainty. And now war. For many farmers, the Iran conflict is not a shock so much as the latest entry in a long list of crises they did not choose over the past 15 months.

Farmers had already grown critical of the administration over a deal that quadrupled Argentine beef imports, undercutting domestic producers at a time when the U.S. cattle herd sat at a 75-year low. Farm bankruptcies filed under Chapter 12 are up 46 percent compared to 2024.

Dan Osborn, an independent Nebraska Senate candidate who has spent months talking to farmers across the state, said the rot set in long before the first strike on Iran. He recently spoke with a soybean farmer who told him the administration’s $12 billion relief package would cover seed, chemicals, and fuel for next year, but nothing for the losses already suffered this year.

“A lot of our farmers are just out,” Osborn told Newsweek. “And now, with the increasing prices of fertilizer and fuel, that bailout is going to fall even more short.”






Senate Democrats on Tuesday rebutted President Donald Trump's claims that the in Iran may soon be over, warning that the U.S. risks getting dragged into another prolonged conflict in the Middle East.

The concerns from Democrats who attended a bipartisan classified briefing with military brass on Tuesday stand in stark contrast with the president, who on Monday suggested the U.S. may be nearing the completion of its operation. Trump's statements sent slumping markets soaring and cratered oil prices that had skyrocketed in recent days.
The senators were briefed as the Trump administration continues to whipsaw between explanations, goals and timelines for the war that has seen eight U.S. service members killed in action and left the longtime leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, dead.

"What I heard is not just concerning, it is disturbing," Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, whose members were briefed. "I'm not sure what the endgame is or what their plans are. ... And if he does want to put us in a forever war, which it seems like he does, he needs to come out and let us be able to have that discussion.

"Do you think because he thinks he waves some magic wand that everything just stops? ... It's not going to stop just because he wishes it to be so," Rosen said.

The pessimism from Democrats on an eventual U.S. end for the war it started with Israel against Iran comes as Congress awaits a potential supplemental funding request to finance the offensive. The effort has burned through billions of dollars of U.S. munitions, which will have to be refilled. 

7 US service members have been killed so far and AP notes, "The Pentagon, meanwhile, offered its first tally of American wounded, saying about 140 U.S. troops have been injured, 8 severely."  Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali (REUTERS) place the number of troops injured at 150. 





US Speaker of the Closet Mike Johnson put Congress on a holiday as he rushed to be in Florida with Donald Chump and assorted other Republican members of the House of Representatives.  Kate Santaliz (AXIOS) reports what took place there:

White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair privately urged House Republicans on Tuesday to stop emphasizing "mass deportations" and instead focus their messaging on removing violent criminals, according to sources in the closed-door briefing.

Why it matters: Mass deportations were central to the GOP's 2024 campaign message.
Nearly half — 49% — of Americans say Trump's mass deportation campaign is too aggressive, including 1 in 5 voters who backed the president in 2024, a Politico poll from January found.
State of play: Blair delivered the message during a policy listening session with House Republicans at their annual retreat in Doral, Florida.

He encouraged members to focus on deporting violent offenders rather than defending the broader concept of mass removals.
The advice signals a recalibration by the White House — and reflects growing concern among some Republicans that Democrats are successfully framing Trump's immigration policy as overly sweeping and indiscriminate.



More than one year into the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, there’s little to suggest White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller has achieved his goal of boosting the U.S.-born workforce by closing borders.

A National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) policy brief published this month noted from February 2025 to February 2026, labor force participation for U.S.-born workers aged 16 and older actually fell from 61.4% to 61%, citing jobs data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
That dip in the U.S.-born labor force—part of a larger labor market slowdown that saw just 181,000 jobs added to the U.S. economy in 2025—coincided with a swath of actions meant to curb immigration. This included roughly $170 billion in immigration enforcement funding, counting $75 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement through 2029, outlined in President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB).

The crackdown appears to have had its intended effect in driving out immigrants and those considering coming to the U.S. The Brookings Institute estimated the U.S. saw between 10,000 and 295,000 people leave the country in 2025, reaching negative net migration for the first time in about half a century. NFAP’s analysis found a decline of 596,000 foreign-born workers in the U.S. since January 2026 and a total of 1.01 million workers since the number of foreign-born workers in the U.S. peaked in March 2025.
While efforts to slash the foreign-born workforce were efficacious, they did not succeed in bolstering jobs for U.S.-born workers, according to labor economist and NFAP senior fellow Mark Regets.

“Most economic research shows that immigration increases employment opportunities for the U.S.-born, so it would not be surprising if reducing immigration harms American workers,” Regets said in the report.

Regets previously told Fortune an immigrant workforce can help boost productivity and justify hiring more workers, as well as encourage U.S. firms to take advantage of a domestic workforce instead of offshoring jobs. Greater immigration can also encourage consumer spending to stimulate economic activity.

“A company unable to find the workers it needs for some roles could shut down operations rather than continuing,” Regets said. 



Turning to the ongoing Epstein scandal, Leigh Kimmins (DAILY BEAST) notes:

Howard Lutnick is facing a fresh Epstein files headache as two organizations have teamed up to call for his head, with a former White House ethics czar bashing his muddled excuses.

The watchdogs, Democracy Defenders Fund (DDF) and Public Citizen (PC), have demanded the commerce secretary’s resignation in an open letter, seen first by the Daily Beast.
They cite his murky messaging over a relationship with fellow billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, which persisted for years after he was convicted of sex crimes. The saga has put Lutnick in the spotlight, risking Trump’s ire as he tries to distance himself from the ongoing Epstein saga.

Norm Eisen, former White House ethics czar and ambassador to the Czech Republic under President Barack Obama, told the Daily Beast that Lutnick’s alleged behavior is “a direct assault on every American who does everything right and still gets less.”
“Government corruption has a price—and the American people are the ones paying it, in the form of their hard-earned money and a destabilized economy," Eisen, who also co-founded DDF, said.

“We have now learned that a top economic official concealed his financial and personal ties to Jeffrey Epstein while testifying under oath, and buried evidence of his own fraud.”

Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former CNN legal analyst, added: “That is a profound betrayal of the public trust. When the well-connected get to play by a different set of rules, it is not only unfair, but is a direct assault on every American who does everything right and still gets less.”

Eisen is one of Trump’s most persistent legal foes, and he made repeated manoeuvres to force the DOJ and FBI to cooperate and release files relating to Trump’s own relationship with Epstein.

Noting that Lutnick’s relationship with Epstein “did not end until at least 2018,” 10 years after he was convicted in Florida of soliciting a minor for prostitution, another DDF director said he “can’t be trusted.”
 “He appears to have lied about his relationship with a child predator and faces serious allegations both from his time in the private sector and as Commerce Secretary,” said Virginia Canter, chief counsel and director of ethics and anti-corruption at Democracy Defenders Fund.











Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:

Senator Murray: “The painful reality is that in addition to the tragic killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good which—rightfully—got national attention, there are other cases where ICE and Border Patrol shot people, with no clear cause, and lied about it afterwards. We have to put an end to this alarming pattern—and that means we cannot let Republicans ignore it.”

***WATCH: Senator Murray’s Recap of Violent ICE Shootings***

Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, released a video about the numerous violent shootings we are seeing from Trump’s reckless ICE and CBP agents across the country—and the urgent need to rein in these rogue agencies. Senator Murray highlighted the stories of Marimar Martinez, Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, Carlos Jimenez, Francisco Longoria, and Carlitos Ricardo Parias—all of whom were shot by ICE or CBP agents. Throughout the video, Senator Murray calls out the egregious use of force from federal agents, their lies that don’t hold up in court, and the extreme danger they are putting families and communities in by recklessly using firearms. Senator Murray also called out Republicans for refusing to negotiate serious and common sense measures to rein in ICE and CBP. Last week, Murray pushed to pass legislation that would fund every agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—except ICE, CBP, and the Office of the Secretary—while negotiations continue to rein in ICE and Border Patrol, but Republicans blocked her effort.

“Republicans are so far refusing to do things as simple as requiring the masks to come off and requiring ICE to follow the same basic standards that local police follow every day when it comes to things like use of force, or getting an actual judicial warrant before bashing someone’s door in and dragging them away. Republicans would rather shut down DHS than pass a funding bill with basic oversight. I don’t know how Republicans can look at what happened to Renee Good and Alex Pretti, or see the videos of peaceful protesters getting tear gassed and tackled, or see lawful observers getting their windows smashed and getting dragged out of their cars, and think—this is fine,” said Senator Murray. “I want to make the problem just a bit more clear to Republicans here in the Senate who are trying to sweep it under the rug, by discussing some other ICE and Border Patrol shootings you may have missed. Because the painful reality is that in addition to the tragic killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good which—rightfully—got national attention, there are other cases where ICE and Border Patrol shot people, with no clear cause, and lied about it afterwards. We have to put an end to this alarming pattern—and that means we cannot let Republicans ignore it. So, I am putting a spotlight on some of the details of other shootings ICE and Border Patrol do not want the American people to hear about.”

WATCH HERE: The Shootings ICE Doesn’t Want You To Know About…

“I know these stories are very upsetting—especially when Republicans want to try so hard to ignore what is happening. But I want to make sure you also know—we are not powerless. And the stories I’ve been sharing don’t just show how bad things have gotten, they are also a reminder about how we all can fight back in this country—with our voice and our votes,” continued Senator Murray. “These survivors are not staying silent. And we cannot be silent either—we have to keep speaking up. We have to keep making clear to people what is happening and demanding Republicans work with us to hold ICE and Border Patrol accountable. Republicans are hoping this will all just blow over—but that’s not up to them—it is up to us. Elections are just around the corner this fall. Remember that. So, I am going to keep using my platform here in D.C. to shine a spotlight on this, and I am going to keep using my position to demand accountability. And I hope all of you will keep using your voice out there as well.”

Senator Murray has spoken out forcefully and constantly throughout this year against the Trump administration’s cruel and counterproductive mass deportation campaign and the egregious treatment by ICE and DHS of American citizens, legal immigrants, and undocumented immigrants. Murray called attention to the violent assault of Wilmer Toledo-Martinez in Vancouver, Washington and she successfully advocated for his release from the Northwest ICE Processing Center (NWIPC). Wilmer was lured out of his home under false pretenses, violently detained by federal agents, and mauled by an attack dog despite not resisting arrest or attempting to flee. Murray also recently called attention to the case of Jose Paniagua Calderón, whose foot was run over by agents in Vancouver.

In November, Senator Murray joined 48 of her colleagues in the Senate and House of Representatives in introducing the Restoring Access to Detainees Act, which would mandate that DHS allow people who have been detained to contact their legal counsel and families. In February 2025, Senator Murray signed onto a letter led by Senators Martin Heinrich (D-NM) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) demanding that DHS end wrongful searches and interrogations of Tribal members, and continued to push for answers from DHS on the matter last December. Last year, Murray also reintroduced her Stop Shackling and Detaining Pregnant Women Act. She and Senator Richard Blumenthal led 27 of their Senate colleagues last year in a letter expressing concern with prevalence and treatment of pregnant, postpartum, and nursing women in ICE detention, and she also joined a letter led by Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) calling for ICE to end the misuse of solitary confinement in immigration detention.

In Washington state, Senator Murray has been conducting oversight of the Northwest ICE Processing Center (NWIPC), despite the Trump administration’s efforts to block Congressional oversight of federal immigration detention facilities. After a protracted legal battle over Washington state’s ability to enforce health and safety standards at NWIPC, a federal appeals court ruled in August that the state should be allowed to enforce such standards at the detention center, and that failure to comply could result in fines of up to $10,000 per violation. In December, Senator Murray led Members of the Washington state Congressional delegation in a letter to Acting Director of ICE Todd Lyons expressing grave concerns with conditions at NWIPC in Tacoma, Washington and demanding answers to a long list of questions regarding overcrowding and lack of access to medical services, food, and legal counsel for individuals detained at the facility. 

Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:

“Hey everyone, Senator Patty Murray here.

“Before I begin, first, a note to everyone watching: We are going to be discussing instances where people were shot, and seriously hurt. So keep in mind: these stories, and some of the images from them, may be disturbing.

“You may have heard about the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security.

“The gist is: Funding has run out for DHS, and before passing any new funding, Democrats are insisting on putting in place reasonable accountability measures for ICE and Border Patrol after the horrific killings and overreach we have seen.

“But Republicans are so far refusing to do things as simple as requiring the masks to come off and requiring ICE to follow the same basic standards that local police follow every day when it comes to things like use of force, or getting an actual judicial warrant before bashing someone’s door in and dragging them away.

“Republicans would rather shut down DHS than pass a funding bill with basic oversight.

“I don’t know how Republicans can look at what happened to Renee Good and Alex Pretti, or see the videos of peaceful protesters getting tear gassed and tackled, or see lawful observers getting their windows smashed and getting dragged out of their cars, and think—this is fine.

“But I am not budging. We have a rogue agency—and we need to rein it in. 

“DHS officials even testified to Congress that filming their activities in public is perfectly legal. Yet they threaten citizens with arrest and take their pictures for unknown purposes. Sometimes they spray them in the face point-blank with pepper spray. Sometimes they gang-tackle them and shoot them in the back ten times.

“So today, I want to make the problem just a bit more clear to Republicans here in the Senate who are trying to sweep it under the rug, by discussing some other ICE and Border Patrol shootings you may have missed. Because the painful reality is that in addition to the tragic killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good which—rightfully—got national attention, there are other cases where ICE and Border Patrol shot people, with no clear cause, and lied about it afterwards.

“We have to put an end to this alarming pattern—and that means we cannot let Republicans ignore it. So, I am putting a spotlight on some of the details of other shootings ICE and Border Patrol do not want the American people to hear about.

[MARIMAR MARTINEZ]

“Marimar Martinez is a U.S. citizen, and a teacher’s assistant in Chicago. Last year, a Border Patrol agent rammed her car and then shot her five times. And what happened next? The agent texted his colleagues bragging about it. He drove the vehicle immediately from Chicago to Maine. And the Trump Administration tried to label Martinez a domestic terrorist.

“But those lies came face-to-face with reality in court. And the charges against Martinez were dropped by the Department of Justice when the story DHS made up was completely contradicted by the evidence. They said officers were forced to fire when Martinez tried to run them over. But surveillance video does not show that at all.

“According to Martinez’s lawyer, the government’s own evidence showed one bullet hit the rear passenger window and another traveled from the back of the vehicle to the front. Not through the windshield like these agents claimed. They said that the Border Patrol vehicle was ‘boxed in’ by 10 cars. Again, the surveillance video shows—there were not 10 cars boxing them in.

“In fact, you can see there was no car in front of them and no car beside them. They tried to hide behind the fact Martinez had a gun in the car. One she has a permit for. One that she did not touch. And one that the government acknowledges was not even visible to agents when all of this went down.

“And last, but not least—DHS tried to say Martinez rammed Border Patrol agents. Well, we now have body cam footage from inside the Border Patrol vehicle. And it seems pretty clear from that video, the agent who shot Martinez, is the one doing the ramming. You can see him turn his wheel sharply to the left—where Martinez was driving. Followed by the impact. 

“The dishonesty here is shocking—and honestly, scary. This woman—again, an American citizen—is lucky to be alive—and she has been bravely speaking out about what happened to her. And the same week the body cam footage from her shooting was released, lies from DHS in a different case in Minnesota also started falling apart.

[JULIO CESAR SOSA-CELIS]

“In January, ICE claimed a DoorDash driver, Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, was shot in the leg after attacking ICE agents with a shovel. Fast forward a month, and—ICE completely reversed course, and said two of its officers were being investigated for quote: ‘Untruthful statements.’ The district attorney said new evidence was ‘materially inconsistent’ with the allegations made by the ICE agents.

“So how did we get here? Because, after ICE shot this man in the leg, Secretary Noem tried to say the officer was ‘ambushed and attacked,’ said this was ‘attempted murder.’ A few problems with that story. The officer was not ambushed—he was chasing Julio and another man—mistakenly thinking they were someone else.

“Second, the officer said in his own statement to FBI investigators, that he fired as the men ran away from him, towards a house. And perhaps the biggest problem: Julio, and other witnesses at the scene—say he never attacked ICE agents. And they say the agent actually shot him through a door. I mean, how is it self-defense to shoot blindly at someone through a door?  

“And, of course—what did DHS do initially? Well the same night the shooting took place they swept the building where it happened and detained several witnesses. They even detained Julio’s partner, and sent her to Texas—and then New Mexico. A judge had to step in to prevent them from deporting witnesses and tell them to stop moving these people around.

“But even as ICE was rounding up witnesses and moving them as far away as they could. There was other evidence they could not hide. Like the recording of the 911 call after the shooting—where you can hear a woman tell the operator someone was shot through the door.

“And there’s one more obvious hole in ICE’s story—that is the bullet hole in the door itself. At first, law enforcement tried to say they couldn’t find any bullet holes in the house. But then this photo was released, lo-and-behold, there is very clearly a bullet hole in the door. And there’s actually another hole from the bullet inside. Because the bullet traveled through the front door, and into the wall, before it stopped between a child’s bed and a crib.

“Talk about reckless! ICE should not be firing blindly through doors and putting kids in danger. Will Republicans finally join us to rein in this kind of behavior?

[CARLOS JIMENEZ]

“And another shooting in California further underscores ICE’s complete disregard for how their actions might affect kids. Carlos Jimenez is an American citizen, who works at a food bank. Last year, he saw some federal agents pulled over near a bus stop for a local elementary school. According to his attorney, he pulled up to let them know they are blocking a school bus stop, and there will be young kids gathering soon so they might want to wrap it up.

“The response he got for that notice? Well, an officer drew his gun, pointed it directly at Carlos’s face, and told him to ‘get the F out of here.’ So, Carlos backs up his vehicle to start turning around, he pulls forward to leave like he was told, and then he is shot in his shoulder.

“Now the DHS version of events is once again ridiculous. They say that officers fired at him after he tried to run them over. Though—as with so many other cases—there is basically no evidence of that so far. The bullet went in through the rear passenger window, as he started to pull forward to drive away. They arrested him at the hospital before he could get full treatment. They hand cuffed him, they dragged him back to the scene of the shooting, gave him a bag to puke in, slapped on what his lawyer describes as essentially a band-aid, and started interrogating him.

“And something else notable—this case happened just half an hour away from another ICE shooting that happened previously. 

[FRANCISCO LONGORIA]

“Francisco Longoria and his teenage sons were driving through a San Bernadino neighborhood when they were pulled over by an unmarked car and suddenly surrounded by masked men—one with his gun already drawn. Mind you he was doing nothing but driving when this happened.

“They did not show a warrant or anything. And when Francisco refused to roll down his window without some answers—they smashed it in. So he drove away, which is when an agent behind him fired three shots—at the passenger side of the vehicle. That is—they fired shots at the side his teenage son was sitting on.

“You already know what comes next: A bunch of disgusting lies from the Trump Administration that this person was attempting to run over officers, followed by video evidence that completely debunks those lies. You can see from cellphone footage inside the car—there is no one in front of Francisco as he drove away. You can also see from cellphone footage outside the car—that there is no one in front of the vehicle.

“And there is still another California shooting that I really have to talk about.

[CARLITOS RICARDO PARIAS]

“Last year, in LA, Carlitos Parias, also known as RichardLA18 on TikTok where he streams local breaking news, was shot by a federal agent after having his car boxed in. An officer was also injured by the ricochet. To no one’s surprise, DHS blatantly lied about the incident and said Carlitos was shot after he ‘weaponized his vehicle and began ramming the law enforcement vehicle in an attempt to flee.’

“But in court the government dragged its feet during discovery, only releasing the body camera footage five days after the deadline! So what did the footage show? Federal agents box Carlitos in, officers walk up and smash in his windows, and an officer swears after his gun goes off accidentally while he is switching hands to open the passenger door. Warning, the following clip is disturbing.

“There is a huge world of difference between an accidental discharge and a firing in self-defense. And there is just no world where the original DHS story has a shred of honesty here. A few weeks after the footage was released—a judge dismissed this case with prejudice, and noted the Government not only failed to comply with court deadlines—but deprived Carlitos of access to his lawyer.

[CONCLUSION]

“The pattern in these cases is clear and alarming. ICE and Border Patrol agents are charging into our communities with guns blazing. They are shooting people with zero justification, and then the Trump Administration is lying about it, slandering innocent people, and covering up the facts for as long as they can get away with.

“It is deeply alarming—and there are so many more examples that deserve more attention. Like the man who nearly died after he had eight fractures in his skull, and ICE tried to say it was from running into a wall on purpose. Or there’s one of the men who died in ICE detention after being asphyxiated by facility staff. DHS said it was a suicide—but an autopsy found it was a homicide. Or there’s a blind refugee, who died after immigration officials dumped him alone at a Tim Horton’s five miles away from home, once they realized they had no grounds to deport him.

“If there’s an example you think people need to hear about, need to talk about, or need to know about—please share it in the comments. Let people know! We need accountability. We need to rein in ICE and Border Patrol. That is what Democrats are insisting on, common sense measures to protect Americans from out-of-control masked federal agents. But Republicans would rather shut down DHS than rein in ICE.

“I know these stories are very upsetting—especially when Republicans want to try so hard to ignore what is happening. But I want to make sure you also know—we are not powerless. And the stories I’ve been sharing don’t just show how bad things have gotten, they are also a reminder about how we all can fight back in this country—with our voice and our votes.

“Carlitos used his TikTok reporting to keep his community informed about ICE activities. Francisco Longoria’s son-in-law came here to D.C. alongside Marimar Martinez, and Renee Good’s brother to share their stories with lawmakers. Marimar is not just speaking out—she fought to make sure the evidence in her case became public, and she announced she is suing DHS. And do you know what Carlos Jiminez did a few days after he was shot by federal agents? He went to vote in California’s special election.

“These survivors are not staying silent. And we cannot be silent either—we have to keep speaking up. We have to keep making clear to people what is happening and demanding Republicans work with us to hold ICE and Border Patrol accountable.

“Republicans are hoping this will all just blow over—but that’s not up to them—it is up to us. Elections are just around the corner this fall. Remember that.

“So, I am going to keep using my platform here in D.C. to shine a spotlight on this, and I am going to keep using my position to demand accountability.

“And I hope all of you will keep using your voice out there as well.”

###




The following sites updated:

Posted by at

Tuesday, March 10, 2026

George Michael, Grace Slick, Stevie Nicks

Owen Myers (GUARDIAN) reports:


A long lost film centered on George Michael’s landmark 1988 Faith tour is set for cinema release later this year, in addition to a new album of previously unheard live performances.

George Michael: The Faith Tour is being lined up for a global big screen rollout, with footage taken from a previously unseen 14-camera shoot of Michael’s performance at Paris’ Bercy Arena in 1988. A press release bills the project as a tour de force in archival film-making, celebrating Michael’s ambition and artistry at its peak.

The film will be directed by the singer’s longtime collaborators Andy Morahan and David Austin. The project comes from George Michael Entertainment and Mercury Studios, with release date and distribution details yet to be revealed.

 

George Michael emerged in the eighties, first with Wham and then solo, and became one of the three pop artists to emerge in the 80s that were truly great artists -- the other two being Prince and Madonna.  George Michael became a great songwriter.  FAITH was the album and tour that launched his solo career.  Dan Clarendon (QUEERTY) adds:

More than a dozen 35mm cameras were rolling over as Michael performed two nights in 1988 as part of an international tour supporting his debut solo album.

Alongside the concert footage, George Michael: The Faith Tour is also slated to include a short film by photographer Mary McCartney, daughter of a certain Beatle.

The short film will boast narration from Michael—taken from a previously-unheard interview—plus newly-released images by photographer Herb Ritts and a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the “Faith” music video.

[. . .]

Michael, who died at age 53 in 2016, still ranks as one of the world’s best-selling musicians, with eight No. 1 hits and 15 Top 10 songs on the Billboard Hot 100 and two Grammy Awards to his name. And his Wham! era gave him another three No. 1 hits and seven Top 10 songs.


Moving over to Grace Slick who is now a talented painter but was once a leading voice in music.  Paulina Subia (FAR OUT) reports:


Before she was heralded as ‘The Acid Queen’ of the 1960s, Grace Slick was a burgeoning artist, finding her voice in the haze of the 1960s.

The “original great rock diva”, as professed in her memoir, Somebody To Love?, had not fully realised making a possible career out of being a musician, spending her early 20s working various odd jobs and indulging her creative side when she composed a song for a short film directed by her then-husband, Jerry Slick. 

Her last job before leading a life of rock ‘n’ roll was as a model, working at the I Magnin department store in San Francisco. During this time, in 1965, she would be introduced to her future when she, her husband, Jerry and his brother, Darby, went to the nightclub The Matrix to see the band Jefferson Airplane.

“I went to see them, and I thought, ‘Wow, that’s way better than what I’m doing because I have to stand on my feet all day. And they get to hang around and smoke dope and play songs for a couple hours a night?’,” she remembered in an interview with Plum.

As she recalled in Somebody to Love?, she realised that the members of Jefferson Airplane were making more money playing one gig than she was, working a week of modelling at I Magnin. Almost immediately, she and the Slick brothers began conceptualising the formation of a band of their own.

The three formed The Great Society, progenitors of San Francisco’s acid rock scene alongside Jefferson Airplane, and would produce two songs that, ironically, would later define Jefferson Airplane’s legacy: Grace’s ‘White Rabbit’, a psychedelic trip inspired by the mythical literary world of Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, and Darby’s ‘Somebody to Love’, sung by and later taken with Grace once she joined Jefferson Airplane. 

And Callum MacHattie (FAR OUT) notes Stevie Nicks:

But Nicks didn’t join the band, happy to just be a deal sweetener. No, she was an artist of her own, coming to the studio armed with a chest of ideas that would completely transform the sound and success of the band.

She wasted absolutely no time and delivered the two standout songs on the band’s 1975 self-titled album, which served as the debut record for this new iconic lineup. ‘Landslide’ and ‘Rhiannon’ showed both sides of Nicks’ songwriting, with the former being one of the band’s most heartfelt ballads, proving her acute ability to narrate the transient experiences of life.

While the latter was a stirring rock track, it allowed her new bandmates to support her songwriting style that celebrated all of the weird and wonderful of her mythical ideas. “It was all about this girl who becomes possessed by a spirit named Rhiannon,” the Fleetwood Mac vocalist explained. “I read the book. But I was so taken with that name that I thought, ‘I’ve got to write something about this. So, I sat down at the piano and started singing this song about a woman who was all involved with these birds and magic.”

These tales weren’t lightly picked from the netherworld and then introduced into Nicks’ songwriting for fun, she deeply felt the sentiment of what they represented. And so whenever she stepped foot on stage to perform ‘Rhiannon’, Nicks ensured she left nothing out there, in honour of the possessed girl. 


On the 1975 album FLEETWOOD MAC, Stevie's composition "Crystal" also appears.  Because Lindsey Buckingham sang lead on the song, it's often wrongly assumed that he wrote the song.  He did not. 

Closing with C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"


Tuesday, March 10, 2026.  Chump's illegal war rages on with no end in sight. 


Tara Suter (THE HILL) reports, "President Trump’s job approval has dipped by 3 points since March 2025 among registered voters, according to a new poll. In the NBC News poll, 44 percent of respondents said they either “strongly” or “somewhat” backed Trump’s job performance, down from 47 percent in March 2025. Fifty-four percent of poll respondents said they were “strongly” or “somewhat” not in favor of his job performance, up from 51 percent last year."  Martha McHardy (DAILY BEAST) emphasizes a different part of the poll:

A damning new poll is rattling the Trump camp, showing the president facing steep public disapproval and putting Republican prospects in the midterms on shaky ground.
The latest NBC News poll, conducted between February 27-March 3 among 1,000 registered voters, shows that Democrats lead the Republicans by 6 points, with 50 percent to the GOP’s 44 percent, in the fight for control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterms.
It comes as Trump is underwater on a range of key issues critical to midterm voters, including the economy and inflation, as well as immigration and the war in Iran.
According to the poll, on the economy, Trump faces his toughest ratings yet.


And polling on his war of choice is also not going well.   Lily Boyce and Ruth Igielnik (NEW YORK TIMES) note:


In the days after President Trump launched U.S. forces in an attack against Iran, support for the strikes is far lower than what it has been at the beginnings of previous foreign conflicts.

So far, polls have found that most Americans oppose the Iran attacks. Support ranges from 27 percent in a Reuters/Ipsos poll to 50 percent in a Fox News poll. The wide variation suggests that public opinion is still taking shape as more Americans learn details of the attacks and the aftermath.

But even the highest level of public support for this conflict falls far lower than that at the start of most other conflicts, including World War II, the Korean War and the Iraq War.



He's destroyed the economy, he's destroyed our rights in the US with his war on immigrants, he's destroying the Middle East with his war on Iran.  And he's hiding so much.  Taylor Delandro (NEWS NATION) reports:

The White House has reportedly halted a federal security bulletin warning law enforcement across the United States of a heightened threat potentially tied to the conflict with Iran.

A Trump administration official, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity to discuss internal government matters, said the bulletin — prepared by the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and National Counterterrorism Center — was intended for local law enforcement agencies nationwide.
[. . .]
The Daily Mail reported on Friday that the White House blocked the release of the bulletin, which contains specific details about how Iranian proxies could potentially carry out attacks inside the U.S.

The five-page document, reviewed by the outlet, warns of “elevated threats by the government of Iran to US military and government personnel and facilities, Jewish and Israeli institutions and their perceived supporters, and Iranian dissidents and other anti-regime activists in the United States.”


The administration keeps whispering that the Kurds will help them overthrow the government in Iran.  They mean the Kurds as a body in the Middle East -- that's in Iran, in Turkey and in Iraq.  I've noted, whenever we've noted those rumors here, that's not happening with regards to Kurds in Iraq.  David S. Cloud (WALL STREET JOURNAL) reports:

The war in the Middle East is pushing the U.S. military back into combat in Iraq against an old foe—Iran-backed militia groups that two decades ago battled American troops on the streets of Baghdad.

Iraqi militias have attempted dozens of small-scale drone and rocket attacks since the war began in a show of support for Tehran, including against a U.S. military base and consulate in northern Iraq and a State Department facility at the Baghdad International Airport. On Saturday, rockets targeted the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, which Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani called a “terrorist act” by “rogue groups.”

The U.S. said Sunday it has been carrying out attacks against the militias, acknowledging that the war in Iran is spilling over into neighboring Iraq and drawing American forces back into a place where they spent years fighting insurgents and endured heavy casualties after the 2003 invasion that deposed Saddam Hussein.


The Kurds in Iraq were sold out by the US government.  That's reality and it didn't happen just once.  It goes back to the days of Henry Kissinger.  There's no reason for the Kurds to trust the US.  If they could trust the US, the Kurdish issues would have been settled in 2007 -- look at Article 140 of Iraq's 2005 Constitution, for example. That was under Bully Boy Bush.  Things did not improve under Barack Obama.  In fact, the 2010 disputed elections found the US siding with the clear loser Nouri al-Maliki and they came up with The Erbil Agreement that would please all sides.  Kurds were trusting.  Article 140, they were told, would finally be implemented.  It wasn't implemented by Nouri in 2007 but the US was gong to make sure that it was this time.  Only they didn't.  Nouri got sworn in for a second term and he refused to implement it and then he called the entire Erbil Agreement flawed and illegal.  When the Kurds attempted to put the issues of self-determination before the Kurdish people in a non-binding vote?  The US turned on them and attacked them for 'daring' to think that they had a right to self-determination.

So, no, they're not going to trust the US on this.  And the Kurdish family dynasties in Northern Iraq -- the Kurdistan -- have ties to the Kurds in Iran and to rulers in Iran.  That's how the Talabanis kept Jalal Talabani in place as president of Iraq for nearly two years after he was rendered unable to actually rule via a stroke.  His widow Hero Talabani was constantly traveling to Iran to give real reports on Jalal's lack of progress.  

So much of what we are told by the White House about Iran doesn't line up with reality.  BARRON'S notes:

The longer the conflict in Iran lasts, the higher gasoline prices will rise. Several industry experts estimate gas prices ranging from $5 to $5.50 a gallon if the price of Brent crude oil hits $150 a barrel. Crude futures surged 20% Sunday evening, topping $100 a barrel.

For gasoline, that’s an increase of around 50% from the current national average of $3.36, according to Gas Buddy. While $150 a barrel oil may sound far-fetched that price was even floated by Qatar’s energy minister, Saad El-Kaabi last week.Macquarie analysts cite the possibility of $150 oil, given the disruptions, notably the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway that transports 20% of the world’s oil. Without a swift resolution, the crude market will break in days, and not in weeks or months, they said.One way to game out the potential impact that an extended war could have is by comparing the current situation to the summer of 2022. That’s when gas prices hit a record high after Russia invaded Ukraine and the U.S. sanctioned oil from Russia.It took 110 days from Russia’s Feb. 24, 2022, invasion for gas prices to peak at $5.01, and crude didn’t exceed $130 a barrel back then. It takes time for oil prices to influence the retail price of gas, which has to be refined, blended, and transported.


Group of Seven leaders fell short of reaching an agreement to contain soaring oil prices that are shaking global stock markets and pushing up prices at the pump, as the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran marks its 10th day.

G-7 leaders opted to hold off on tapping emergency oil reserves but signaled they may soon release that crude into the marketplace. Their meeting appeared to help calm stock markets, which by Monday afternoon recovered some of their early losses.
“We’re not there yet,” said French Finance Minister Roland Lescure, speaking to reporters in Brussels after the meeting. “We’ve agreed to monitor the situation very closely.”

World leaders are growing increasingly concerned that oil prices will continue to climb. Further increases could trigger broader inflation at a time when many U.S. consumers are already concerned about affordability.


On the G7, though, WASHINGTON POST's two reporters don't note what BARRON'S did:

Reports suggest leaders of the Group of Seven nations—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S.—are considering a coordinated release of crude stockpiles to ease the immediate impact of $100 oil, but with OPEC members around the region slashing production, and the Strait of Hormuz still unpassable, that is only likely to have a temporary impact.

To say nothing of the willingness of some G-7 states, whose trade pacts have been ripped-up and replaced by a universal 15% tariff, to support the political efforts of President Donald Trump over the longer term.That’s the thing about playing with oil. It gets slippery, dirty, and creates a bit of a mess.

Everyone can see the disaster unfolding before our eyes.  Chump went into war because Netanyahu wanted to (and Senator Lindsey Graham coached Netanyahu on how to sell it to Chump).  No real planning took place.  Which is why Chump met with weapons makers last Friday at the White House -- the US's stockpile is already low.  It's why American citizens are trapped in the region -- and being told not to go to the local US embassies which might be attacked by Iran.  It's why there's no plan for victory, no benchmarks for success.  There is nothing.  This is a forever war in the making.  Amie Parnes (THE HILL) notes:


The Iran war has given former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg an opening to lean hard on his military background, blasting President Trump’s “war of choice” in a series of public appearances.  

As one of the few potential 2028 Democratic presidential contenders with combat-zone experience, Buttigieg is emerging as one of Trump’s loudest critics as foreign policy returns to the forefront.
In appearances on television and a popular podcast, social media posts and on his own Substack platform, Buttigieg has tied Trump’s military action in Iran directly to the war in Iraq — which became a defining issue for former President George W. Bush in the early 2000s. 

“This nation learned the hard way that an unnecessary war, with no plan for what comes next, can lead to years of chaos and put America in still great danger,” Buttigieg said in a social media post.

After the strikes began Feb. 28, all the potential Democratic 2028 candidates put out statements denouncing the administration and various aspects of the war. But Buttigieg, who served in the Navy Reserves and was deployed to Afghanistan, was able to wade in not just politically but from personal experience.

In an interview on the podcast “MeidasTouch,” Buttigieg was able to talk about his perspective as a veteran in the Middle East, when he noted the six Americans at that time who had been killed in the new war. 


At THE NEW REPUBLIC, Timothy Noah notes the financial costs of Chump's illegal war:

With “affordability” the Democrats’ watchword of the moment, I’m surprised more haven’t pointed out that President Donald Trump’s undeclared war on Iran costs more than Americans can afford. By this I don’t mean American soldiers killed (seven thus far), which of course is the greatest concern. Nor do I mean how many other people will be killed (1663 so far, according to The Independent, including 175 at a girls’ school struck by one of our Tomahawks and another 83 children in Lebanon, according to that country’s health ministry).
Rather, I’m thinking about the secondary but nonetheless urgent matter of dollars and cents. 

Five days before the war began I pointed out that Trump’s Treasury was, as Kris Kristofferson would say, busted flat in Baton Rouge. Already Trump’s “big, beautiful” reconciliation bill had pissed away $4.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years, nearly doubling the budget deficit. The Supreme Court’s cancellation of Trump’s illegal 10 percent tariffs on all foreign products meant Trump might end up tripling the budget deficit over the next decade. Trump is trying to recoup his tariff losses by imposing temporary tariffs under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. But Trump’s own lawyers have argued in court that such an application is illegal, a conclusion with which 24 Democratically-controlled states agreed in a lawsuit filed March 5.

Worries about the budget deficit already had the bond market raising the cost of government borrowing. The outbreak of war pushed the 10-year yield on Treasuries even higher as the price of oil shot past $100 per barrel thanks to the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. This is a president, you may recall, who won in 2024 on the strength of his promise to lower inflation. Instead, we’re getting an oil-driven inflation spike. On top of that, last week the Bureau of Labor Statistics released an unexpectedly poor jobs report showing the loss of 92,000 jobs in February. The simultaneous occurrence of an oil-price spike and a possibly-faltering economy means we may get our first serious bout of stagflation since the 1970s.

Did I mention the stock market has been tanking since the war began? So much for Pam Bondi’s “The Dow is 50,000” deflection. The Dow closed Monday at 47,740.80.



As the criminal US-Israeli war on Iran entered its second week, the Trump administration vowed to continue the bombardment and refused to rule out sending ground troops or implementing a military draft—even as it has failed to overthrow the Iranian government or compel surrender.

“We have won in many ways, but not enough. We go forward more determined than ever to achieve ultimate victory that will end this long-running danger once and for all,” US President Donald Trump declared at the House Republican policy retreat at his Doral resort in Florida on Monday.

Asked if the war would end this week, he said flatly: “No.” Hours earlier, in a desperate effort to calm oil and stock markets, Trump had told CBS News that the war “is very complete, pretty much” and that US forces are “very far ahead of schedule.”

Trump has acknowledged that more American troops will die. “And sadly, there will likely be more before it ends,” he said in a Truth Social address on March 1 after the first three US service members were killed. “That’s the way it is. Likely be more.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a “60 Minutes” interview aired Sunday, stated the administration’s war aims with unvarnished brutality. “This is only just the beginning,” Hegseth declared. “The only ones that need to be worried right now are Iranians that think they’re gonna live.” Asked about limits on the operation, he said: “You don’t tell the enemy, you don’t tell the press, you don’t tell anybody what your limits would be on an operation.” On Monday, the Pentagon’s official social media account posted an image of a launched missile with the words “No Mercy” and the caption: “We have Only Just Begun to Fight.”

The administration is taking increasingly desperate and escalatory actions amid its failure to achieve its stated aims. In January, the administration sought to exploit mass protests as the vehicle for regime change; when that failed, it turned to the targeted assassination of Iran’s leadership, killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the first day of the war. Iran’s Assembly of Experts appointed Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the slain supreme leader, on Monday in defiance of Israeli threats to kill any successor.

The administration has adopted the Gaza model: the genocidal destruction of Iranian society itself, reducing the country to rubble until it physically cannot resist. Trump made this clear when he said that his demand for “unconditional surrender” is “where they cry uncle or when they can’t fight any longer and there’s nobody around to cry uncle.”



Moving over to The Epstein Scandal, Alison Durkee (FORBES) reports:

The Justice Department released additional documents in the Epstein files last week concerning decades-old sexual assault allegations against President Donald Trump, with the Post and Courier confirming some aspects of the accuser’s background, but key details and documents concerning the bombshell allegations still remain unreleased, missing or uncorroborated.

The government’s files on financier Jeffrey Epstein include allegations from an unnamed accuser, who alleges she was forced to perform oral sex on Trump while underage in the 1980s, and he “punched [her] on the side of [her] head” after she “bit him on the penis.”

NPR and journalist Roger Sollenberger first reported that documents related to the accusations were apparently withheld from the Epstein files, prompting the DOJ to release memos documenting three interviews with the alleged victim last week.
The DOJ claimed the files were not released because they had been incorrectly marked as being duplicates, but NPR reports 37 pages have still not been released.

The Charleston, S.C., Post and Courier confirmed numerous details about the unnamed accuser’s life and background that match what she told FBI agents, according to the notes the DOJ released last week.

The publication did not corroborate the allegations against Trump, and the White House disputes the allegations as having “zero credible evidence” and being “from a sadly disturbed woman who has an extensive criminal history,” and Trump has more broadly denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.





William S. Becker (THE HILL) likens the Epstein Files to the Pentagon Papers and notes:


Last November, with nearly unanimous bipartisan approval, Congress passed, and President Trump signed, the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires the Justice Department to publicly release all unclassified materials related to these allegations.  However, the department subsequently ignored the law’s deadline, releasing only 3 million documents that did not fully comply with the law’s instructions.
That puts Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel in direct violation of the law. They are preventing justice for dozens of women and girls, some as young as 14, who were allegedly trafficked, raped or brutalized. The Justice Department’s failure to investigate thoroughly and prosecute spans several presidencies, both Republican and Democratic.

Raskin, who has seen many of the files, reports that Trump’s name appears “more than a million times.”  Because the president’s personal history is already riddled with allegations of inappropriate and unwanted sexual conduct with women, the Justice Department’s behavior leaves doubts as to whether the remaining files would “totally exonerate” him of wrongdoing in Epstein’s orbit, as he claims. If that is truly the case, he could remove any doubt by ordering the department to release them all now.
Congress’s credibility is now on the line. It must assert its oversight responsibility, and review the documents to determine whether there are legitimate reasons to withhold them from the public.

The Justice Department’s behavior already constitutes grounds for impeaching Bondi, Blanche and Patel. We shouldn’t assume that impeachment and conviction would be futile with Congress under Republican control. What member of Congress wants his or her legacy tarnished by helping to cover up sex crimes at the highest levels of society?  

With the entire House of Representatives and a third of the Senate facing reelection in eight months, who is willing to go on record as a co-conspirator in the Justice Department cover-up? Who wants to be on record that rich and powerful men are above the law, while children are unprotected from the vilest of crimes? And who wants to show that the Republican Party is loyal to, or afraid of, predators? 


Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and US House Reps Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Ro Khanna discuss The Epstein Files with MS NOW in the three videos below. 






Lets wind down with this from Senator Ron Wyden's office:

Rudd lacks “familiarity with basic constitutional rights” on surveillance of Americans

Watch a video of Wyden deliver his remarks here

As prepared for delivery

I rise to speak in opposition to the nomination of Joshua Rudd to be Director of the National Security Agency.

During his confirmation hearing, General Rudd demonstrated a lack of familiarity with basic constitutional rights, which should be a bare minimum qualification for this extremely powerful position. His responses to questions about privacy and transparency were simply unacceptable. I asked the nominee if he would pledge to not secretly violate existing public guardrails on NSA surveillance, and he refused.

Few Americans understand the incredible scope of NSA’s surveillance operations or the broad authorities under which the NSA operates. The agency plays a central role in conducting surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA gets all the attention from the American public and from Congress because it’s a public law and because Congress debates the reauthorization of FISA Section 702 every few years. But the NSA also conducts extensive intelligence and surveillance operations outside of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and pursuant only to Executive Order 12333. And when NSA operates entirely under that executive order, there is no judicial oversight, not even from the secret FISA Court. And congressional oversight is often dependent on what the executive branch wants to disclose. The potential for abuse is enormous. I was here in 2005, when the New York Times revealed that the NSA had conducted an illegal warrantless wiretapping program. For four years, the program had been hidden from the American people. It was also hidden from Congress. I was a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee then, as I am now, and even we were not told about the program.

This was one of those infamous “Gang of 8” situations where the Intelligence Community informs only the Committee’s two leaders and instructs them not to tell other members or staff. So when the Committee’s Vice Chair, Jay Rockefeller, was told about the program, he hand-wrote a letter to Vice President Cheney saying he had concerns but that, on his own, he couldn’t fully evaluate the program. And so the program continued on for years, with no oversight and no opportunity for Congress to address it through legislation. This history demonstrates what happens when the NSA’s enormous capabilities are abused by administration officials who are willing to break the law. And, unfortunately, that is an accurate description of this Administration.

It is indisputable that constitutional rights are under attack right now. For example, we only recently learned that, nine months ago, the Administration secretly decided that the government doesn’t need a judicial warrant to break into a private home.

In other words, this Administration thinks it can just ignore the Fourth Amendment. And, if the Administration will ignore the Fourth Amendment to break down doors, what assurance could we possibly have that they won’t also tap Americans’ phones without a warrant? And why should we believe that they wouldn’t do it secretly, hidden from the American people, from the full Congress, or even the full intelligence committees?

When it comes to surveillance, I subscribe to Ben Franklin’s principle that those who would give up liberty for security will lose both and deserve neither. We need both. That’s not a partisan proposition. Refusing to promise to not violate the Constitution does not make us safer.

That is why I was particularly focused on General Rudd’s understanding of the constitutional limitations on the NSA’s operations. So I asked General Rudd whether, if he were directed to target people in the United States for surveillance, he would insist that there be a judicial warrant. I told him in advance that I was going to ask the question. Then, at the hearing, I offered him the opportunity to answer with a yes or a no. I didn’t get an answer.

So I tried to cut him some slack and encouraged him to just offer general thoughts on the matter, but I still got nothing of substance. I did everything in my power to allow him to demonstrate some understanding of the basic guardrails of NSA’s authorities and got only vague assurances that he was interested in following the law.

Given the history of NSA abuses, and this administration’s clear contempt for the Constitution, General Rudd’s inability to answer this question in any meaningful way would have been enough for me to oppose his nomination.

But there were other topics on which General Rudd’s responses were troubling. He wouldn’t associate himself with the NSA’s previous commitment to not buy and use Americans’ location data. Then-NSA Director Nakasone made this commitment in a public letter in 2023. But General Rudd would not stand by that public policy.

Location data, which is bought and sold by sleazy data brokers, can reveal extremely sensitive private information about Americans, including what medical clinics they go to, what houses of worship they visit, what stores they shop at, what protests they attend, and which friends and family they are seeing.

The threat to Americans’ privacy is even more serious when you stop to consider how artificial intelligence can be used against enormous amounts of commercially available data, including location information on Americans. So it is deeply troubling that General Rudd refused to endorse the NSA’s past commitment not to collect and use all this sensitive data on Americans. General Rudd also refused to say whether the government should mandate backdoors into encryption used by Americans. Encryption is the code that protects your messages, pictures and private data from predators and criminals.

For years, officials have argued that the government should force tech companies to build back-doors into their encryption products. But if you talk to security researchers, or cryptographers, they’ll tell you there’s no way to create encryption backdoors that only the government can use. Once you weaken encryption, it is inevitable that foreign spies and criminals will exploit that vulnerability. As hacking has gotten more and more sophisticated, the threat that our adversaries will use any and all cyber vulnerabilities against us has gotten more and more obvious.

In fact, the constant headlines about successful hacking campaigns are probably the reason why we’re not hearing as much these days about weakening encryption. So this question for General Rudd should have been easy, particularly since the job to which he is nominated includes responsibility for the nation’s cyber security. But, again, he refused to take a position. General Rudd’s responses related to transparency were especially troubling. In addition to laws and the Constitution, NSA is bound by numerous policies and procedures which are publicly available. These public policies and procedures are especially important because they provide some guardrails on NSA’s surveillance and intelligence activities under Executive Order 12333, which, again, are not governed by FISA and not reviewed by the FISA Court.

To take just one example, if the NSA is going to conduct a search of its 12333 collection for an American’s communications, it generally needs the Attorney General to determine that there is probable cause that the American is an agent of a foreign power.

This is not a law. It is a policy that has been made public by successive administrations so that Americans could better understand the guardrails that apply to the NSA’s surveillance activities. The NSA is supposed to be hunting for terrorists and spies. It is not supposed to be hunting for Americans who simply do things that the president doesn’t like, such as criticizing their government or buying abortion medication online.

So I asked General Rudd what I thought was another easy question: If he were directed to operate in violation of those public policies and procedures, would he inform the American people? He refused to make that commitment. I also asked him whether, if the administration secretly decided to withdraw or change any of these public policies, he would ensure that the public sees the new policies? He wouldn’t make that commitment either.

Let me be clear. The operational details of the NSA’s operations are sources and methods and must absolutely be protected. National security is at stake. Lives are at stake. But I did not ask General Rudd about sources and methods. I asked him whether Americans can rely on the NSA to conduct its operations within the guardrails that the government has already made public. Based on his response, it’s not clear that they can. And when Americans can no longer trust whether intelligence agencies are respecting their own public policies, it’s bad for Americans, bad for democracy, and bad for the intelligence agencies.

General Rudd was even asked whether, if the President secretly decided not to follow these public policies, would he at least immediately inform the Senate Intelligence Committee. General Rudd wouldn’t even answer that question with a clear yes, which makes me wonder what abuses even the intelligence committee won’t ever hear about

I have great respect for General Rudd’s many years of military service, but, besides his troubling statements about constitutional rights, he is simply not qualified for this job. We are now in the second week of this catastrophic and reckless war that Donald Trump started. This war and its global fallout have created new and serious threats to U.S. national security. The country needs an NSA Director with experience in U.S. signals intelligence activities around the world. General Rudd does not have that experience.

The Director of NSA has another job, that of Commander of U.S. Cyber Command. The demands of this job are mind-boggling. The cyber threat to the United States cannot be overstated. And, as SALT TYPHOON demonstrated, our adversaries have succeeded in inflicting serious damage to U.S. national security. Just last week, the government acknowledged ongoing hacking of U.S. government agencies. And now we are at war and are facing an incredibly complex set of cyber threats and options.

The country needs someone who is prepared from day one to protect this country from cyber adversaries, including Iran as well as China and Russia.

The Commander of CYBERCOM needs to have a deep and sophisticated understanding of this threat and how it is evolving. He or she needs to be able to see this threat in its geopolitical context and to fully grasp the technical capabilities and the policy options that might help NSA and CYBERCOM counter the threat. We are at war, and we cannot afford to promote someone who lacks the experience for the job.

General Rudd’s predecessors in this job had that experience. They came up through CYBERCOM. They were ready. General Rudd is not. And, when it comes to the cybersecurity of this country, there is no time for on-the-job learning. The threat is just too urgent for that.

For all these reasons, I oppose this nomination, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

###



The following sites updated:

Posted by at
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)