Searchable News & Info From Reliable Online Sources.
Latest Real News From 140 News Sites Updated Every 15 Minutes.
- Australia has some of the world’s costliest homes. Will scrapping tax brea...
The government hopes reforms will help young people enter the market, while critics say it will stifle supply. [TheTopNews] Read More.2 weeks ago - Trump’s Redistricting Push Could Cost Republicans More Than It Gains
Last week was the best one President Donald Trump has had in months. Trump reminded Republicans who’s boss by ousting Indiana lawmakers who defied his redistricting demands, saw Democrats’ attempt to gerrymander Virginia blocked by the state Supreme Court and received a far-better-than-expected April jobs report. Perhaps best of all for the pre-adolescent-in-chief, he breezily rode his motorcade atop the covered reflecting pool on the National Mall. It was enough to make his party forget what’s coming in November — and how little he cares about their long-term prospects. However, those twin realities are why Republicans should start looking out for themselves and not let Trump further exacerbate the damage he’s done to their brand since returning to office. The convergence of his successful intimidation campaign in Indiana and the Supreme Court’s termination of majority-minority districts will tempt the GOP to lunge for more seats. But they do so at their own risk. Not only may Republicans unwittingly create more competitive races for their own members, they will energize Democrats and set back their party in ways that will linger beyond this president. To you Republicans coveting new seats and considering whether to move forward: caveat emptor. Let’s give Trump his due, though: Thanks to his singular style and the failures of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the president forged a 2024 coalition that breathed new life into the GOP. He made inroads with younger voters and expanded his base of working-class whites to include more racial minorities of modest means. Had Trump installed a cabinet and pursued an agenda to retain these voters, he would’ve remade the Republican Party and shattered the Democratic Party. Of course, that’s not what happened and was never going to happen given who he is. Trump spent much of 2025 letting Elon Musk upend the federal government, and the president’s only major legislative initiative in the first year, the crucial period for any new president, was a bill anchored around extending the high-end tax cuts passed eight years earlier. Then in the first months of this year, Trump frittered away the critical advantage he had on perhaps the two biggest issues of 2024 — immigration and inflation. His success securing the border was engulfed by images of Stephen Miller’s deportation policy and Trump’s unbending fixation on tariffs and a legacy-seeking war in Iran have sent prices soaring. Meanwhile, nobody around the president dares tell… [TheTopNews] Read More.3 weeks ago - Oil Prices Rise As U.S., Iran Disagree On Peace Proposal
While the Strait of Hormuz remained largely closed, keeping global energy supplies tight, oil prices jumped $4.16 to $105.45 a barrel on Monday. [TheTopNews] Read More.3 weeks ago - ‘Affection And Sympathy’: Kevin Warsh’s Friends See Threats All Around HimPALO ALTO, California — You might expect Kevin Warsh’s colleagues at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution to be elated for him as he prepares to take over as chair of the Federal Reserve. Some of them are feeling a different sentiment: pity. “Kevin Warsh is the dog who caught the car,” said John Cochrane, a senior fellow at Hoover, Warsh’s intellectual home and soon-to-be-former employer. “I say that with great affection and sympathy.” Cochrane helps organize the institution’s annual monetary conference, where this year, right-of-center economists, former Fed staffers and others spent the day dissecting potential threats to the central bank’s political independence — a sobering reminder of all the ways Warsh’s new job might stop being fun pretty quickly. Is the Fed insulated from political pressures? Will the federal debt get so large that the central bank eventually has no choice but to set interest rates in ways that minimize the government’s interest burden? Did the recent spike in inflation result in a dent to the central bank's credibility? These ideas, which a younger Warsh wrestled with as risks to the Fed 16 years ago, are all now highly pressing matters that he will face in the job he has wanted for many years. Many of these concerns are far fresher than they were when Warsh meditated on them, as inflation and government debt and political threats to the central bank have ballooned all at once. And so I found, as Warsh ascends to the Fed’s top job, that the free-market scholars who make up the Hoover community are watching the task he faces with real anxiety. And it goes beyond President Donald Trump. Cochrane said Trump’s threats to the central bank put the Fed’s autonomy “back on the radar screen,” but “it’s been simmering.” In fact, he sees the growing U.S. debt as the bigger danger to the Fed’s long-term independence than Trump, whose attacks “seem to be, if anything, counterproductive” for the president. After all, U.S. central bankers have continued to have flexibility to make their own policy decisions, but the debt trajectory of the U.S. is on a steep climb, with no sign that the government plans to change course. It’s true that, so far, the president’s legal threats against the Fed have worked against him. Outgoing Fed chief Jerome Powell is staying in his board seat as a “low-profile” regular governor after his chairmanship ends May… [TheTopNews] Read More.3 weeks ago
- I Helped Craft the 25th Amendment. It Was Never Meant to Oust a President.The 25th Amendment has been mentioned in public debate over the past eight years — often as a mechanism for removing a president from office. That is a fundamental misunderstanding. Adopted in 1967 in the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the amendment was designed not as a tool of removal, but as a practical framework to ensure continuity of presidential power. Its purpose is limited and precise: to address presidential inability and fill a vacancy in the vice presidency. It was not meant to address political dissatisfaction with a president. I know the history and intent of the amendment: I was given an opportunity to assist Congress in its development because of an article I wrote for the Fordham Law Review in 1963. The article detailed the history of the Constitution’s presidential succession provision and stated that an amendment on the subject was long overdue. Invited by the American Bar Association and leaders of Congress to become involved in this reform, I ultimately helped in the crafting and ratification of the 25th Amendment and in its implementation. In the decades since, I have studied and written extensively on its meaning and legislative history. Three of its sections have been implemented since adoption of the Amendment in 1967, and they are not controversial. It’s Section 4 — which empowers the vice president and the president’s Cabinet to declare a president disabled and enables Congress to resolve a case where the president disagrees with their declaration — that receives the attention. And it’s this section that has been at the center of the misunderstanding. In fact, what I see today is a gap between what the amendment was intended to do and how it is understood. As the world becomes more polarized and political parties more divided, the 25th Amendment is increasingly seen as a tool for presidential removal without a full understanding of its provisions and limitations. Quite the contrary, the 25th Amendment was intended to deal only with the discharge of the president’s powers and duties by the vice president, with details respecting the president’s four-year term in office. It is practical and consistent with the principle of separation of powers. Its purpose, carefully defined at the time of its adoption, remains narrower than discussions today suggests.The Constitution states that “in case of the removal of the president from office, or of his death, resignation or inability to… [TheTopNews] Read More.3 weeks ago
« Previous
1
…
106
107
108
109
110
111
Next »
The government hopes reforms will help young people enter the market, while critics say it will stifle supply. [TheTopNews] Read More.
2 weeks ago
Last week was the best one President Donald Trump has had in months. Trump reminded Republicans who’s boss by ousting Indiana lawmakers who defied his redistricting demands, saw Democrats’ attempt to gerrymander Virginia blocked by the state Supreme Court and received a far-better-than-expected April jobs report. Perhaps best of all for the pre-adolescent-in-chief, he breezily rode his motorcade atop the covered reflecting pool on the National Mall. It was enough to make his party forget what’s coming in November — and how little he cares about their long-term prospects. However, those twin realities are why Republicans should start looking out for themselves and not let Trump further exacerbate the damage he’s done to their brand since returning to office. The convergence of his successful intimidation campaign in Indiana and the Supreme Court’s termination of majority-minority districts will tempt the GOP to lunge for more seats. But they do so at their own risk. Not only may Republicans unwittingly create more competitive races for their own members, they will energize Democrats and set back their party in ways that will linger beyond this president. To you Republicans coveting new seats and considering whether to move forward: caveat emptor. Let’s give Trump his due, though: Thanks to his singular style and the failures of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the president forged a 2024 coalition that breathed new life into the GOP. He made inroads with younger voters and expanded his base of working-class whites to include more racial minorities of modest means. Had Trump installed a cabinet and pursued an agenda to retain these voters, he would’ve remade the Republican Party and shattered the Democratic Party. Of course, that’s not what happened and was never going to happen given who he is. Trump spent much of 2025 letting Elon Musk upend the federal government, and the president’s only major legislative initiative in the first year, the crucial period for any new president, was a bill anchored around extending the high-end tax cuts passed eight years earlier. Then in the first months of this year, Trump frittered away the critical advantage he had on perhaps the two biggest issues of 2024 — immigration and inflation. His success securing the border was engulfed by images of Stephen Miller’s deportation policy and Trump’s unbending fixation on tariffs and a legacy-seeking war in Iran have sent prices soaring. Meanwhile, nobody around the president dares tell… [TheTopNews] Read More.
3 weeks ago
While the Strait of Hormuz remained largely closed, keeping global energy supplies tight, oil prices jumped $4.16 to $105.45 a barrel on Monday. [TheTopNews] Read More.
3 weeks ago
PALO ALTO, California — You might expect Kevin Warsh’s colleagues at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution to be elated for him as he prepares to take over as chair of the Federal Reserve. Some of them are feeling a different sentiment: pity. “Kevin Warsh is the dog who caught the car,” said John Cochrane, a senior fellow at Hoover, Warsh’s intellectual home and soon-to-be-former employer. “I say that with great affection and sympathy.” Cochrane helps organize the institution’s annual monetary conference, where this year, right-of-center economists, former Fed staffers and others spent the day dissecting potential threats to the central bank’s political independence — a sobering reminder of all the ways Warsh’s new job might stop being fun pretty quickly. Is the Fed insulated from political pressures? Will the federal debt get so large that the central bank eventually has no choice but to set interest rates in ways that minimize the government’s interest burden? Did the recent spike in inflation result in a dent to the central bank's credibility? These ideas, which a younger Warsh wrestled with as risks to the Fed 16 years ago, are all now highly pressing matters that he will face in the job he has wanted for many years. Many of these concerns are far fresher than they were when Warsh meditated on them, as inflation and government debt and political threats to the central bank have ballooned all at once. And so I found, as Warsh ascends to the Fed’s top job, that the free-market scholars who make up the Hoover community are watching the task he faces with real anxiety. And it goes beyond President Donald Trump. Cochrane said Trump’s threats to the central bank put the Fed’s autonomy “back on the radar screen,” but “it’s been simmering.” In fact, he sees the growing U.S. debt as the bigger danger to the Fed’s long-term independence than Trump, whose attacks “seem to be, if anything, counterproductive” for the president. After all, U.S. central bankers have continued to have flexibility to make their own policy decisions, but the debt trajectory of the U.S. is on a steep climb, with no sign that the government plans to change course. It’s true that, so far, the president’s legal threats against the Fed have worked against him. Outgoing Fed chief Jerome Powell is staying in his board seat as a “low-profile” regular governor after his chairmanship ends May… [TheTopNews] Read More.
3 weeks ago
The 25th Amendment has been mentioned in public debate over the past eight years — often as a mechanism for removing a president from office. That is a fundamental misunderstanding. Adopted in 1967 in the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the amendment was designed not as a tool of removal, but as a practical framework to ensure continuity of presidential power. Its purpose is limited and precise: to address presidential inability and fill a vacancy in the vice presidency. It was not meant to address political dissatisfaction with a president. I know the history and intent of the amendment: I was given an opportunity to assist Congress in its development because of an article I wrote for the Fordham Law Review in 1963. The article detailed the history of the Constitution’s presidential succession provision and stated that an amendment on the subject was long overdue. Invited by the American Bar Association and leaders of Congress to become involved in this reform, I ultimately helped in the crafting and ratification of the 25th Amendment and in its implementation. In the decades since, I have studied and written extensively on its meaning and legislative history. Three of its sections have been implemented since adoption of the Amendment in 1967, and they are not controversial. It’s Section 4 — which empowers the vice president and the president’s Cabinet to declare a president disabled and enables Congress to resolve a case where the president disagrees with their declaration — that receives the attention. And it’s this section that has been at the center of the misunderstanding. In fact, what I see today is a gap between what the amendment was intended to do and how it is understood. As the world becomes more polarized and political parties more divided, the 25th Amendment is increasingly seen as a tool for presidential removal without a full understanding of its provisions and limitations. Quite the contrary, the 25th Amendment was intended to deal only with the discharge of the president’s powers and duties by the vice president, with details respecting the president’s four-year term in office. It is practical and consistent with the principle of separation of powers. Its purpose, carefully defined at the time of its adoption, remains narrower than discussions today suggests.The Constitution states that “in case of the removal of the president from office, or of his death, resignation or inability to… [TheTopNews] Read More.
3 weeks ago
The Searchable USWebDaily.com and TheTopNews NewsBank Helps You Be Better Informed, Faster! Spread The Word.
