• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

And POTUS is stating he will be making a Very-Important-Message in the near future. No idea what it will entail.

Wonder if its the Pharma cost plan that was talked about over the weekend?
 
POTUS had this to say,

So funny to watch old timer Martha Raditz on ABC Fake News (the Slopadopolus show!) this morning, blurt out that, effectively, Pope Leo’s selection had nothing to do with Donald Trump.

Reminds me of something I read years ago about another individual,

He was the corpse at every funeral, the bride at every wedding, and the baby at every baptism.
 
Mod edit for political name calling.
Nothing possibly going wrong here at all.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/0...7804&user_id=8d7d6aec56e938bb0d8c632c51238996

Trump Administration Live Updates: White South Africans Given Refugee Status Arrive in the U.S.​

The first plane carrying white South Africans who received refugee status from the Trump administration landed at Washington Dulles International Airport on Monday morning, according to a flight tracking website.

The arrival marks a drastic reversal in the United States’ refugee policies, which have long focused on helping people fleeing war, famine and genocide. President Trump essentially halted all refugee admissions programs on his first day in office before creating a pathway for Afrikaners, a white ethnic minority that ruled during apartheid in South Africa, to resettle in the United States.

The group that arrived Monday on a U.S.-funded Omni Air International charter flight say they have been discriminated against, denied job opportunities and have been subject to violence because of their race. Forty-nine Afrikaners boarded the flight on Sunday, according to a spokesman for South Africa’s airport authority, after more than 8,000 people expressed interest in the program. There are scant details available about the individuals who arrived in the United States.

The South Africans who reached the United States on Monday had received expedited processing by the Trump administration — waiting no more than three months. Refugee resettlement before the first Trump administration took an average of 18 to 24 months, according to the American Immigration Council, an advocacy group for immigrants.

Mr. Trump said on Monday that the United States was extending citizenship to these individuals, who he said were victims of a genocide.

“Farmers are being killed,” he told reporters. “They happen to be white. Whether they are white or Black makes no difference to me. White farmers are being brutally killed and the land is being confiscated in South Africa.”

Police data does not support the narrative of mass murder. From April 2020 to March 2024, 225 people were killed on farms in South Africa, according to the police. But most of the victims — 101 — were current or former workers living on farms, who are mostly Black. Fifty-three of the victims were farmers, who are usually white.

The refugee program has exacerbated tensions between the United States and South Africa, whose government has rejected the Trump administration’s claim that the Afrikaners are eligible for refugee status.

“It is most regrettable that it appears that the resettlement of South Africans to the United States under the guise of being ‘refugees’ is entirely politically motivated and designed to question South Africa’s constitutional democracy,” Chrispin Phiri, a spokesman for South Africa’s foreign ministry, said in a statement.

Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff who has overseen the administration’s immigration policy, said the situation in South Africa “fits the textbook definition of why the refugee program was created.”

“This is persecution based on a protected characteristic — in this case, race,” he said, “This is race-based persecution.”

In February, Mr. Trump signed an executive over suspending all foreign assistance to South Africa and announced his administration would work to resettle “Afrikaner refugees” because of the South African government’s actions that “racially disfavored landowners.”

Mr. Trump was referring to a law, known as the Expropriation Act, which allows the government in some cases to acquire privately held land in the public interest without paying compensation. But that step can be done only after a justification process subject to judicial review.

Ronald Lamola, South Africa’s foreign minister, has likened the law to eminent domain in the United States. Analysts say the law has many checks and balances to prevent abuse. The most likely application, analysts say, will be to take land that is not in use.

The Trump administration has also criticized the South African government for its condemnation of Israel over the war in Gaza and its close relationship with Iran. South Africa has brought a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.
If what occurred over the last 40yrs in Zimbabwe is an indication of the wrong way to deal with farmers controlling large (highly productive) farms and lots of disgruntled individuals looking for a piece of land to grown enough food to survive on, then this shouldn't be coming as a surprise to anyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mod Edit for politicians name calling.
Nothing possibly going wrong here at all.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/0...7804&user_id=8d7d6aec56e938bb0d8c632c51238996

Trump Administration Live Updates: White South Africans Given Refugee Status Arrive in the U.S.​

The first plane carrying white South Africans who received refugee status from the Trump administration landed at Washington Dulles International Airport on Monday morning, according to a flight tracking website.

The arrival marks a drastic reversal in the United States’ refugee policies, which have long focused on helping people fleeing war, famine and genocide. President Trump essentially halted all refugee admissions programs on his first day in office before creating a pathway for Afrikaners, a white ethnic minority that ruled during apartheid in South Africa, to resettle in the United States.

The group that arrived Monday on a U.S.-funded Omni Air International charter flight say they have been discriminated against, denied job opportunities and have been subject to violence because of their race. Forty-nine Afrikaners boarded the flight on Sunday, according to a spokesman for South Africa’s airport authority, after more than 8,000 people expressed interest in the program. There are scant details available about the individuals who arrived in the United States.

The South Africans who reached the United States on Monday had received expedited processing by the Trump administration — waiting no more than three months. Refugee resettlement before the first Trump administration took an average of 18 to 24 months, according to the American Immigration Council, an advocacy group for immigrants.

Mr. Trump said on Monday that the United States was extending citizenship to these individuals, who he said were victims of a genocide.

“Farmers are being killed,” he told reporters. “They happen to be white. Whether they are white or Black makes no difference to me. White farmers are being brutally killed and the land is being confiscated in South Africa.”

Police data does not support the narrative of mass murder. From April 2020 to March 2024, 225 people were killed on farms in South Africa, according to the police. But most of the victims — 101 — were current or former workers living on farms, who are mostly Black. Fifty-three of the victims were farmers, who are usually white.

The refugee program has exacerbated tensions between the United States and South Africa, whose government has rejected the Trump administration’s claim that the Afrikaners are eligible for refugee status.

“It is most regrettable that it appears that the resettlement of South Africans to the United States under the guise of being ‘refugees’ is entirely politically motivated and designed to question South Africa’s constitutional democracy,” Chrispin Phiri, a spokesman for South Africa’s foreign ministry, said in a statement.

Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff who has overseen the administration’s immigration policy, said the situation in South Africa “fits the textbook definition of why the refugee program was created.”

“This is persecution based on a protected characteristic — in this case, race,” he said, “This is race-based persecution.”

In February, Mr. Trump signed an executive over suspending all foreign assistance to South Africa and announced his administration would work to resettle “Afrikaner refugees” because of the South African government’s actions that “racially disfavored landowners.”

Mr. Trump was referring to a law, known as the Expropriation Act, which allows the government in some cases to acquire privately held land in the public interest without paying compensation. But that step can be done only after a justification process subject to judicial review.

Ronald Lamola, South Africa’s foreign minister, has likened the law to eminent domain in the United States. Analysts say the law has many checks and balances to prevent abuse. The most likely application, analysts say, will be to take land that is not in use.

The Trump administration has also criticized the South African government for its condemnation of Israel over the war in Gaza and its close relationship with Iran. South Africa has brought a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.

No surprise... following Zimbabwe's (bad) example:

South Africa Legalizes Land Grabs​


Imagine hearing a knock on your door in the middle of the night. A crowd of people tell you to collect your belongings and vacate the premises. They tell you that your land and everything on it belongs to them now.

Such invasions have been happening in South Africa, and for over 3,000 white farmers, they have been deadly. White farmers are regularly attacked and even killed as frenzied blacks illegally take the land they believe rightfully belongs to them. On January 23, the government made these land grabs legal. Now those knocking on the door might be backed by the full weight of the South African government.

Despite the all-too-common farm attacks, South Africa had operated on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis since 1975. But the new Expropriation Act, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa, allows for the expropriation of any property—land, cash, movable property or corporate shares—without compensation.

Vincent Magwenya, the president’s spokesperson, said that under the law, the state “may not expropriate property arbitrarily or for a purpose other than … in the public interest.”

Who determines whether a land grab is in the public interest? The South African government.

If the land has been abandoned, underutilized or is used for purely speculative purposes, the government can grab the land. If it decides building on the property would cost more than the property is worth, it can grab the land.

This law gives the minister of public works and infrastructure the power to expropriate any piece of land on behalf of the state, without compensation. All the government has to do is arbitrarily justify it .

According to South African journalist Robert Duigan, the Expropriation Act simply continues on a discriminatory foundation:

The Constitution already provides that discrimination is legal, so long as it is “fair,” and fairness is defined precisely on the grounds of race in this country, and has been for some time, provided the race of the person being discriminated against is white.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NYT: "Police data does not support the narrative of mass murder. From April 2020 to March 2024, 225 people were killed on farms in South Africa, according to the police. But most of the victims — 101 — were current or former workers living on farms, who are mostly Black. Fifty-three of the victims were farmers, who are usually white."
Good old NYT. How many people are typically killed on farms in various countries, and how high does the number have to be to embarrass "not much to see here"?
 
Those farmers are going to be a neat gain for the US, I have met a lot of Rhodesians and South Africans Whites, say what you want they are a hard working bunch.
 
It’s not particularly clear what the U.S. has gained in its relationship with China relative to before this all began. They certainly haven’t on-shored consumer goods manufacturing - all the stuff made in China is largely still seeming made in China. The U.S. introduced considerable uncertainty, which businesses don’t exactly love. There’s nothing really indicating there won’t still be a huge trade deficit with China. China still has the rare earth metals industry by the short hairs…

I’m looking and trying to get a good grip on this. I’m not seeing anything yet that says the U.S. didn’t simply realize they really screwed up, saw a whole lot of bad economic numbers and supply chain issues staring them in the face, and blinked.

What the U.S. HAS definitely achieved is to show everyone else that they’re much less reliable than previously believed, and that trade diversification away from the U.S. is strategically desirable. I don’t see any way that serves to benefit the U.S.
 
No surprise... following Zimbabwe's (bad) example:

South Africa Legalizes Land Grabs​


Imagine hearing a knock on your door in the middle of the night. A crowd of people tell you to collect your belongings and vacate the premises. They tell you that your land and everything on it belongs to them now.

Such invasions have been happening in South Africa, and for over 3,000 white farmers, they have been deadly. White farmers are regularly attacked and even killed as frenzied blacks illegally take the land they believe rightfully belongs to them. On January 23, the government made these land grabs legal. Now those knocking on the door might be backed by the full weight of the South African government.

Despite the all-too-common farm attacks, South Africa had operated on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis since 1975. But the new Expropriation Act, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa, allows for the expropriation of any property—land, cash, movable property or corporate shares—without compensation.

Vincent Magwenya, the president’s spokesperson, said that under the law, the state “may not expropriate property arbitrarily or for a purpose other than … in the public interest.”

Who determines whether a land grab is in the public interest? The South African government.

If the land has been abandoned, underutilized or is used for purely speculative purposes, the government can grab the land. If it decides building on the property would cost more than the property is worth, it can grab the land.

This law gives the minister of public works and infrastructure the power to expropriate any piece of land on behalf of the state, without compensation. All the government has to do is arbitrarily justify it .

According to South African journalist Robert Duigan, the Expropriation Act simply continues on a discriminatory foundation:



Notwithstanding that there are shitty things happening in South Africa, there are shitty things happening in many countries and we have yet to see an Executive Order and open arms issued to them. In many cases, quite the opposite.
 
No surprise... following Zimbabwe's (bad) example:

South Africa Legalizes Land Grabs​


Imagine hearing a knock on your door in the middle of the night. A crowd of people tell you to collect your belongings and vacate the premises. They tell you that your land and everything on it belongs to them now.

Such invasions have been happening in South Africa, and for over 3,000 white farmers, they have been deadly. White farmers are regularly attacked and even killed as frenzied blacks illegally take the land they believe rightfully belongs to them. On January 23, the government made these land grabs legal. Now those knocking on the door might be backed by the full weight of the South African government.

Despite the all-too-common farm attacks, South Africa had operated on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis since 1975. But the new Expropriation Act, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa, allows for the expropriation of any property—land, cash, movable property or corporate shares—without compensation.

Vincent Magwenya, the president’s spokesperson, said that under the law, the state “may not expropriate property arbitrarily or for a purpose other than … in the public interest.”

Who determines whether a land grab is in the public interest? The South African government.

If the land has been abandoned, underutilized or is used for purely speculative purposes, the government can grab the land. If it decides building on the property would cost more than the property is worth, it can grab the land.

This law gives the minister of public works and infrastructure the power to expropriate any piece of land on behalf of the state, without compensation. All the government has to do is arbitrarily justify it .

According to South African journalist Robert Duigan, the Expropriation Act simply continues on a discriminatory foundation:



I worked in Prague back in ‘95 with a Rhodesian fellow my age (mid 20s) back then who grew up in SA. He told me the story of one day around 1980/81 his father went ‘missing’ from the family farm for a week or so and then one day his Uncle came by the farm early one morning and helped his family pack up everything into their cars and onto the tractor and some cart and they drove off mid afternoon. The Uncle was the last lève on the tractor and cart. My friend said that he looked back after about 5mins or so and saw nothing but black smoke behind them. He said that the Uncle had set the house, barn and everything else on fire and then left. He said that his father had gone ‘missing’ because a few days earlier some ‘locals’ had turned up and he threatened the family, in particular him. The father took it seriously and had left for SA first and had asked his brother to arrange moving his family and burning the farm to the ground.
This fellow from Rhodesia/South Africa that I worked with in turn had left SA around 1991 when he was about to be called up for Military service and had not been back home to see his family in the 1995/97 time period that I worked with him as a result.
 
No surprise... following Zimbabwe's (bad) example:

South Africa Legalizes Land Grabs​


Imagine hearing a knock on your door in the middle of the night. A crowd of people tell you to collect your belongings and vacate the premises. They tell you that your land and everything on it belongs to them now.

Such invasions have been happening in South Africa, and for over 3,000 white farmers, they have been deadly. White farmers are regularly attacked and even killed as frenzied blacks illegally take the land they believe rightfully belongs to them. On January 23, the government made these land grabs legal. Now those knocking on the door might be backed by the full weight of the South African government.

Despite the all-too-common farm attacks, South Africa had operated on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis since 1975. But the new Expropriation Act, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa, allows for the expropriation of any property—land, cash, movable property or corporate shares—without compensation.

Vincent Magwenya, the president’s spokesperson, said that under the law, the state “may not expropriate property arbitrarily or for a purpose other than … in the public interest.”

Who determines whether a land grab is in the public interest? The South African government.

If the land has been abandoned, underutilized or is used for purely speculative purposes, the government can grab the land. If it decides building on the property would cost more than the property is worth, it can grab the land.

This law gives the minister of public works and infrastructure the power to expropriate any piece of land on behalf of the state, without compensation. All the government has to do is arbitrarily justify it .

According to South African journalist Robert Duigan, the Expropriation Act simply continues on a discriminatory foundation:




I dunno… that website looks dodgy…


Owned by this outfit.

 
Notwithstanding that there are shitty things happening in South Africa, there are shitty things happening in many countries and we have yet to see an Executive Order and open arms issued to them. In many cases, quite the opposite.
The "pull" system is inconsistent. The "push" system - refugees make their own way and claim refugee status - seems to work well enough. If you can get into the US and plausibly face death or serious liability if deported back to your home country, large numbers of activists, lawyers, and judges will work to try to prevent that.
 
It’s not particularly clear what the U.S. has gained in its relationship with China relative to before this all began. They certainly haven’t on-shored consumer goods manufacturing - all the stuff made in China is largely still seeming made in China. The U.S. introduced considerable uncertainty, which businesses don’t exactly love. There’s nothing really indicating there won’t still be a huge trade deficit with China. China still has the rare earth metals industry by the short hairs…

I’m looking and trying to get a good grip on this. I’m not seeing anything yet that says the U.S. didn’t simply realize they really screwed up, saw a whole lot of bad economic numbers and supply chain issues staring them in the face, and blinked.

What the U.S. HAS definitely achieved is to show everyone else that they’re much less reliable than previously believed, and that trade diversification away from the U.S. is strategically desirable. I don’t see any way that serves to benefit the U.S.
I will argue, they both blinked, it was going to go badly for both sides.
 
I suspect if you're looking for gains, you would only need to look as far as the portfolios of Trump and insiders, after he manufactured a >20% drop in the stock market long enough for everyone to invest, and is now manufacturing it....

I don't know if I said it on this forum, but I definitely said it outloud in my personal life while continually second-guessing whether this was actually what was happening. The more this continues, the more I think it actually was all nothing but Trump taking advantage of the fact that he can use Twitter to manipulate markets in a predictable manner, a power he learned he had in his previous term.
 
Yes. I expect we will see the inevitable food crisis in 3-5 years when farm productivity plummets just like it did in Zimbabwe.
 
Yes. I expect we will see the inevitable food crisis in 3-5 years when farm productivity plummets just like it did in Zimbabwe.
Might take longer than that.

I think that the SA wine industry could easily be completely gutted. Capital/Investment will flee the country. Chinese influence will soar. And in the West, nothing will be said about it at all.

But hey, Canada can most likely recruit alot more SA medical staff in order to address our overall shitty managing of our own problems.
 
Back
Top