All the food - presumed excellent - was thrown in the waste bin after a shooter interrupted the White House correspondents' dinner. The food could not be redistributed I am told. More Trump waste. More Trump chaos. This would not have happened if Trump was not president. He attracts chaos. We don't know the motivation behind the shooting but to me it seems to be Trump motivated by which I mean an attempt to get at Trump. What other reason is plausible?
Trump engenders chaos. He is an arch disruptor. Many Americans wanted politics to be disrupted but I am sure they did not want what Trump has brought to the White House. You'd be mad to want that.
Why couldn't the food be distributed to dog rescue shelters to feed the dogs?
-----------------
P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.
When the courts ruled that a major set of U.S. tariffs had been imposed without proper legal authority, it didn’t just end a policy — it created a huge administrative mess. The decision means companies that paid those duties can now claim refunds, and the total bill could run into the tens or even hundreds of billions. But getting that money back isn’t simple.
Every tariff payment is tied to a specific shipment, date, importer, and customs entry. That means millions of individual records have to be checked, verified, and matched to the right business. Customs and Border Protection has opened a new portal to handle claims, but trade experts say the workload is enormous. Processing refunds for years’ worth of imports will take time, staff, and painstaking paperwork.
Industry groups and legal analysts have described the situation as a “massive administrative unwind” — far more complicated than imposing the tariffs in the first place. When a policy is later ruled unlawful, the clean‑up is always harder: systems have to be reversed, records re‑examined, and money redistributed entry by entry.
For businesses, the refunds are welcome. For the government agencies handling them, it’s a long, resource‑heavy job created by a policy that didn’t stand up in court. The result is a national exercise in re‑processing, re‑checking, and refunding on a scale rarely seen in U.S. trade administration.
This huge administrative headache has been caused by Trump's bad decision making. He is a serial bad decision maker. This refund will bog down administrators for years when they could be doing something more productive to improve the lives of American citizens. Trump is a ghastly failure at the moment and I don't see him improving.
The failure of the Iran war he started - allegedly illegally - is an even worse example of waste. It is costing Americans $35 billion at this time (25th April 2026) just in munitions. Then add in the cost of living crisis caused or exacerbated by this war and you can how bad Trump is.
----------
P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.
Russia is entering a moment of rare political unease. Two developments, seemingly separate, now illuminate the same underlying truth: the country’s leadership is looking backwards while the pressures on society are pushing forwards. The result is a widening gap between the Kremlin’s self‑image and the lived reality of its citizens.
For years, observers have noted that President Vladimir Putin’s governing style draws heavily on the political psychology of the Soviet strongman era. Analysts describe a worldview shaped by suspicion, centralisation of authority, and a belief in the necessity of a powerful state standing firm against internal and external threats. This is not a literal revival of Stalinism, but it does echo the logic of an earlier age: the conviction that stability comes from control, that dissent signals weakness, and that history’s verdict can be rewritten through force of will.
This restorationist instinct has long been visible in the Kremlin’s rhetoric. The collapse of the Soviet Union is repeatedly framed as a geopolitical tragedy, and Russia’s modern trajectory is cast as a mission to reclaim lost stature. Yet this vision sits uneasily with the country that actually exists today—a society younger, more urban, more digitally connected, and less shaped by Soviet memory than the leadership that governs it.
That tension was thrown into sharp relief this week when Gennady Zyuganov, leader of the Communist Party, issued a stark warning in the State Duma. “Revolution is in the air once more,” he declared, arguing that the economy has deteriorated so sharply that the conditions resemble those that preceded 1917. Zyuganov is no radical outsider; his party functions as a loyal opposition, and he has spent decades operating within the system. For him to invoke the spectre of revolution is therefore not a prediction but a signal—an admission that the economic strain is becoming politically dangerous.
The pressures are real. Inflation is eroding household budgets, the ruble has weakened significantly, and military spending now dominates the federal budget. Independent economists estimate that the cost of basic goods is rising far faster than official figures suggest. For many Russians, the promise of stability—the cornerstone of Putin’s legitimacy—feels increasingly fragile.
Zyuganov’s intervention also reflects a deeper structural problem. A leadership oriented toward the past is confronting a population whose concerns are rooted firmly in the present. Younger Russians, in particular, show little appetite for imperial nostalgia or the revival of old geopolitical myths. Their priorities are economic security, opportunity, and a future not defined by historical grievance.
None of this means Russia stands on the brink of upheaval. The state’s security apparatus remains powerful, dissent is tightly controlled, and public protest carries severe consequences. But the warning from within the system should not be dismissed. When economic pressure intensifies and political imagination narrows, societies become brittle.
Russia’s challenge is not simply economic or political. It is generational. A country cannot move forward if its leadership is anchored in a past that fewer and fewer citizens recognise as their own.
-----------------
P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.
If you’re planning a trip to Europe with your dog or cat, there’s an important rule change you need to know about. From 22 April 2026, EU pet passports are no longer valid for people who live in Great Britain. Even if your pet has an EU‑issued passport from years ago, you can’t use it to enter the EU anymore. Instead, you must get an Animal Health Certificate (AHC) before every trip.
This change closes a long‑standing loophole. After Brexit, UK pet passports stopped being accepted by the EU, but many British travellers continued using EU‑issued passports obtained through vets in France, Spain, or Belgium. These passports allowed repeat travel for years. The EU has now tightened the rules so that only people whose main home is inside the EU can use EU pet passports. If you live in Great Britain, you must use an AHC instead.
An AHC must be issued by an authorised vet within 10 days of travel. It confirms your pet is microchipped, has a valid rabies vaccination, and is fit to travel. Each certificate is single‑use, meaning you need a new one every time you leave Great Britain for the EU. Once you’ve entered the EU, the certificate stays valid for up to six months for onward travel and for returning to the UK, as long as rabies vaccinations remain valid.
If you try to travel with the wrong paperwork—such as an EU pet passport—your pet may be refused entry, sent back to the UK, or placed in quarantine. Border officials check documents on arrival, not afterwards, so it’s essential to get the certificate before you go.
The good news is that holidays with your pets are still very possible. You just need to plan ahead, book a vet appointment in good time, and make sure you have the correct paperwork for every trip.
-------------
P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.
The UK Prime Minister, Sir Kier Starmer, is an insecure man, in my opinion. He might even suffer from imposter syndrome. Imposter syndrome is the persistent belief that your achievements are accidental, fragile, or undeserved. You feel like a fraud waiting to be exposed, even when evidence shows you’re capable. It creates self‑doubt, anxiety, and a tendency to minimise success, pushing you to overwork while never feeling genuinely competent.
Why do I believe this? Because he clings to political associates and friends and refuses to sack them (but fastidiously sacks civil servants to pass the buck). The classic is the Mandelson affair in which he appointed Mandelson against all rational assessments because he was friendly with Mandelson and wanted a friend on the other side of the 'pond' to deal with the impossible Trump.
Starmer insisted on Mandelson's appointment before vetting against advice. The whole affair has been extensively reported. The world knows the gory details.
And he hired his cabinet members because he is friendly with them and he refuses to sack them - the chancellor, Reeves, comes to mind - when they are screwing up. He is robustly loyal to his cabinet members. He must know that Reeves has to go but refuses to countenance it. Update: in order to save himself there is talk that he will sack Reeves after the May 7th bloodbath. He does like to sack people to save his own skin - to divert responsibility.
He stays loyal because he needs them as much as they need him. He needs them to reassure him. To create a buffer to the real and now hostile British public who have largely given up on Starmer. He is a dead duck. A dead man walking. A dud.
Note: the Mandelson problem has strained his relations with cabinet members, perhaps to breaking point in some instances.
Starmer is deeply unpopular with the British public. UK pollsters (YouGov and Statista), both reporting –45 as his latest net favourability/approval score. Polling organisations report Starmer’s popularity using net approval ratings, which currently sit around the mid‑negative range. Surveys show more people express unfavourable than favourable views, producing consistently negative net approval scores that indicate widespread public dissatisfaction at this point in time.
Several UK polling trackers note that Keir Starmer’s current net approval rating is lower than Liz Truss’s rating at the end of her premiership, which was typically reported in the –30s to –40s depending on the pollster.
He is attacked daily, hourly in fact. He was insecure before becoming the PM and now it is worse.
-------------------
P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins. Also, sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified. And, I rely on scientific studies but they are not 100% reliable. Finally, (!) I often express an OPINION on the news. Please share yours in a comment.
