-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Trump Nudges Greene Away from Senate Bid with Quiet but Strategic Polling Push
Trump Nudges Greene Away from Senate Bid with Quiet but Strategic Polling Push Former President Donald Trump played a behind-the-scenes role in dissuading Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from launching a Senate campaign in Georgia, according to sources familiar with internal discussions. Trump shared polling data with Greene that showed she would lose a potential 2026 race against incumbent Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff by a wide margin—18 points in the general election—even though she could likely win a Republican primary. The poll was conducted by Trump’s longtime pollster Tony Fabrizio, and the results were not released publicly. According to people familiar with the matter, the Trump team was keen to steer Greene away from entering the race, viewing her as an uncompetitive candidate in a state that has proven to be politically unpredictable. While Greene remains a popular figure in her deep-red district, GOP strategists feared that her hardline politics and combative public persona would not resonate across Georgia's broader, more moderate electorate. “The same people telling Trump I can’t win a general [election] are the same people that get filthy rich off consulting on as many campaigns they can get the president to endorse,” Greene said in a statement to The Wall Street Journal. She confirmed that Tony Fabrizio, the pollster behind the numbers, had declined to work with her, claiming a conflict of interest. “To my knowledge, a lot of this was private conversation, and apparently is being leaked,” she added. Despite Greene's strong support for Trump during and after his first term, including her vocal defense of his false 2020 election claims and repeated efforts to impeach President Joe Biden, Trump's team appears to be taking a more calculated approach to upcoming races. “You need someone who’s more appealing,” said Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina. “I think she’d be a solid primary contender, but the state’s a lot like North Carolina, could be a challenge at the statewide level.” Greene fired back: “Nobody cares about Tillis because he represents everything wrong in the Senate, and he has his own problems in North Carolina.” Trump’s decision to share the poll illustrates a quiet but deliberate effort to shape the 2026 election map, especially in key states like Georgia where Republicans are eager to reclaim lost ground. Trump narrowly lost Georgia in 2020, but regained it in 2024, intensifying Republican hopes to flip Ossoff’s seat and bolster their slim 53-47 Senate majority. Advisers say Trump is focused on maintaining congressional control during his term to prevent Democrats from derailing his legislative goals or pursuing impeachment. Other potential GOP candidates for Ossoff’s seat include Representative Buddy Carter and Georgia Insurance Commissioner John King. Trump’s team is keeping an eye on the field while reportedly remaining silent on some contests, such as in Texas. Internally, the strategic preference leans toward candidates seen as more broadly electable. Greene’s profile has dimmed within her own party over the past year. She was expelled from the House Freedom Caucus after calling fellow conservative Rep. Lauren Boebert a “little bitch,” and her effort to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson failed. She has also drawn criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, and was stripped of her committee assignments in 2021 due to her promotion of conspiracy theories. Asked how Greene might fare against Ossoff, Georgia’s other senator, Raphael Warnock, laughed and said simply, “Come on, man.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from WSJ 2025-05-17 -
0
Trump’s Gulf Tour: Golden Camels, Cybertrucks, and Trillion-Dollar Courtships
Trump’s Gulf Tour: Golden Camels, Cybertrucks, and Trillion-Dollar Courtships During a four-day tour of the Gulf, former and current U.S. President Donald Trump was treated like royalty by the region’s wealthiest states, greeted with displays of staggering extravagance in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. The elaborate welcome was not only a show of hospitality but a calculated gesture underscoring how deeply Gulf leaders value their relationship with a business-oriented American president. From the moment Trump landed in Riyadh, the tone was set. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman personally welcomed him on the tarmac, a rare departure from royal protocol. In Doha, Trump’s motorcade was flanked by bright red Tesla Cybertrucks and riders on horseback. In Abu Dhabi, UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed awarded Trump the Order of Zayed, the country’s highest civilian honor. As Trump approached Qatar’s presidential office, the Amiri Diwan, he was met by a parade of elite royal camels. Trump's Art of the Deal in action in Saudi Arabia “The optics of the U.S. leader’s Middle East visit were strong,” one observer noted, “showcasing the larger-than-life opulence of the region’s richest petrostates — and how much of that wealth they are willing to spend to deepen their ties with the U.S.” Tarik Solomon, chairman at the American Chamber of Commerce in Saudi Arabia, summarized the sentiment: “The Gulf has always gotten along better with business-first presidents, and President Trump fits that mold perfectly.” According to Solomon, “He still symbolizes fast money, big defense, and access to American tech. So, if cozying up to him helps secure a seat at the table of the next world order, the Gulf is bringing the gold-plated chair.” Indeed, the numbers tied to Trump’s visit were historic. Qatar signed a $1.2 trillion “economic exchange” with the United States. Saudi Arabia committed to investing $600 billion in the U.S., while the UAE formalized a ten-year, $1.4 trillion investment framework. Qatar’s deal included a record-setting order of 210 Boeing jets, and Saudi Arabia inked a $142 billion arms agreement—the largest weapons deal ever signed. Though many of these agreements may take decades to materialize, the message was clear: Gulf leaders are making a long-term bet on a deep U.S. partnership, and Trump is the preferred partner. At the U.S.-Saudi Investment Summit in Riyadh’s luxurious Ritz-Carlton, Trump and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman exchanged warm praise. Top American business figures including Elon Musk, Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, and BlackRock’s Larry Fink attended, cementing the event as a meeting of immense financial and political significance. In the UAE, Trump’s visit marked the first by a U.S. president since George W. Bush in 2008. He and Mohammed bin Zayed highlighted both their personal bond and the enduring five-decade alliance between their nations. The contrast with recent visits from Biden administration officials—marked by tension and cautious diplomacy—was striking. The UAE seems to already be reaping benefits. Reports indicate a preliminary U.S. agreement allowing the Emirates to import 500,000 Nvidia H100 chips annually—the most advanced AI chips America produces. This would supercharge the country’s efforts to become a regional hub for artificial intelligence. “Trump’s trip to the Gulf reflects the increasing personalization of geopolitics,” said Taufiq Rahim, principal at 2040 Advisory and author of Trump 2.5: A Primer. “The region’s leaders have responded accordingly, putting on an ornate display for the visiting president. Flattery and compliments become as important to the announcement and substance of deals.” Rahim added, “Sure, a lot of it is theater. But in this region, signaling ambition is half the game. Even if only 50% sticks, it’s still an impactful play.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNBC 2025-05-17 -
0
Public Safety at Risk as Nearly Half of Recalled Prisoners Deemed Too Dangerous for Release
Public Safety at Risk as Nearly Half of Recalled Prisoners Deemed Too Dangerous for Release Concerns over public safety have intensified following revelations that nearly half of all prisoners recalled to jail are considered too dangerous to be released, even as the government moves ahead with emergency legislation to ease pressure on overcrowded prisons. The latest figures show that 45 percent of offenders recalled to custody in 2023-24 were denied re-release by the Parole Board due to the threat they pose to the public—yet many of these individuals could soon benefit from a new policy capping their recall period at just 28 days. Sir Keir Starmer defended the controversial decision, saying he had “no choice” but to introduce the 28-day limit due to the acute lack of prison capacity. “I don’t want to be put in this position, but it’s been pushed to crisis point where we simply don’t have the prison places for the prison population we’ve got because of the gross negligence of the last government,” Starmer said. “We are rectifying that at pace, which is why we’re now seeing prison builds. But as you’ll appreciate you can’t build a prison in a matter of months.” Projections indicate that prisons in England and Wales could be entirely full by November. There are currently 13,583 recalled prisoners, accounting for 15 percent of the overall prison population, many of whom remain incarcerated pending Parole Board approval. The new recall rule, introduced by Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, will apply to offenders serving sentences between one and four years. But watchdogs, victims’ advocates, and former senior justice officials have expressed alarm over the move. Baroness Newlove, the victims commissioner, has demanded an urgent meeting with the justice secretary, calling the change “unacceptable.” In a letter to Mahmood, she warned that “many of the offenders whose recalls will now be converted to fixed term will already have had their cases considered by the Parole Board — and not been directed for release.” She added, “In each case, the board will have applied the public protection test and concluded that it remained necessary to keep the individual in custody to protect the public.” She also noted that the policy could benefit individuals convicted of violent and sexual offences, and those with repeat offending histories. The figures show that of the 3,270 decisions made last year on recalled prisoners serving fixed-term sentences of up to nine years, 1,469 were refused re-release due to safety concerns. Typically, Parole Board hearings for recalled offenders occur four to five months after their return to custody—well beyond the proposed 28-day limit. Martin Jones, the chief inspector of probation, issued a stark warning about the practical consequences of the move. “There are some people amongst this group that remain a significant risk to the public,” he said. “What you may now see is somebody that would previously have been recalled to custody and would stay in custody until the Parole Board consider their case, may be in and out constantly... So they’re just bouncing around the system with nothing really happening to address the fundamental reasons why you’re getting that behaviour—such as drug addiction, alcohol problems, homelessness and all those issues.” Nick Hardwick, former chief inspector of prisons, echoed these concerns. “The reason for doing this is very unclear,” he said. “If it’s thought that these prisoners are dangerous, then why are they being released before they’ve had a proper parole hearing and they’re risk assessed?” He further argued that for low-risk offenders, the new policy would be counterproductive, undermining rehabilitation efforts by disrupting housing, employment, and addiction support services. “All the work that will have been done before they left prison... will be completely wasted and the system will need to start all over again,” he said. “Either they’re dangerous, so don’t release them until they’re properly assessed, or they’re not dangerous, in which case don’t recall them. This seems to serve neither purpose.” One of the most harrowing examples cited in the debate is that of Jordan McSweeney, who was released in 2019 after serving a sentence under four years for burglary and driving offences. Within six months, he murdered Zara Aleena, a 35-year-old law graduate. Under the new rules, McSweeney would have been eligible for automatic re-release within 28 days had he been recalled. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-05-17 -
0
Albania Snubs Starmer after Rejecting UK Migrant Return Hubs
Sir Keir Starmer has encountered a diplomatic roadblock after Albania publicly rebuffed his proposal to create “return hubs” for failed asylum seekers. The Labour Prime Minister made the announcement during his first official visit to Tirana, where he outlined a plan to begin negotiations with countries willing to host migrants who had exhausted all legal options to remain in the UK. But the idea was swiftly and firmly rejected by Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama. At a joint press conference, Rama left little room for misinterpretation, declaring that Albania’s involvement in such schemes was exclusive to its agreement with Italy. “I have been very clear since day one when we started this process with Italy that this was a one-off with Italy because of our very close relation but also because of the geographical situation, which makes a lot of sense,” Rama stated. “We have been asked by several countries if we are open to it and we said no because we are loyal to the marriage with Italy.” Reporter demands Starmer APOLOGISE to Albanians during press conference Albania already hosts two migration detention centres for migrants arriving from Italy, and British government sources had previously floated the country as a likely candidate for Labour’s offshoring strategy. However, the Albanian leader’s blunt remarks have left Starmer’s proposal floundering, casting doubt over whether any Balkan nation will agree to host the return hubs. The plan is part of a broader effort by the UK government to manage illegal immigration and deter Channel crossings, which have already exceeded 12,000 this year—a 40 percent rise compared to 2024. Starmer told GB News that the hubs would target individuals “who have been through the system in the UK” and needed to be returned effectively. “So that’s what the talks are about,” he explained. “I would say in this area no single measure is going to be the measure that is, if you like, a silver bullet. By putting it all together — arrests, seizures, agreements with other countries, returning people who shouldn’t be here, and return hubs, if we can through these talks to add to our armoury, will allow us to bear down on this vile trade and to make sure that we stop those people crossing the Channel.” Other countries under consideration include Serbia, Bosnia and North Macedonia, though no formal agreements have been announced. Any such deal would require the UK to pay host nations for each relocated asylum seeker. The strategy has not escaped criticism, drawing immediate comparisons to the Conservative Party’s now-defunct Rwanda deportation scheme, which Labour had previously opposed. Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, acknowledged that return hubs might offer some utility but warned they failed to address the root of the issue. “If he can secure return hubs that would be very welcome. It’s not the answer to the problem and it would be dealing with the symptoms but not the cause,” Farage said. “If you could send failed asylum seekers away that would be a good thing but it doesn’t get round the problem that even those that do fail are still going to have all sorts of lawyers claiming Article 8 rights. It’s fine to discuss all of these things, but you have to be able to actually deliver them. The human rights element of all this makes it very, very difficult to work. Removing ourselves from the ECHR is the only way to deal with this.” The government has suggested the hubs could help preempt attempts by migrants to exploit Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a private and family life. The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said, “This will basically apply to people who have exhausted all legal routes to remain in the UK but are attempting to stall using various tactics, whether it’s losing their paperwork or using other tactics to frustrate their removal.” Despite Albania’s rejection, the government remains hopeful that other nations might be more amenable. For now, however, Starmer’s ambitions for external processing hubs face an uphill climb — one that begins with overcoming diplomatic resistance from key potential partners. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-05-17 -
0
Germany Aims to Build Europe’s Most Powerful Army, Says Chancellor Merz
Germany Aims to Build Europe’s Most Powerful Army, Says Chancellor Merz Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz has signaled a dramatic shift in the country’s military posture, announcing that Germany must develop the most powerful conventional army in Europe and pledging to meet former U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand for NATO allies to spend 5 percent of GDP on defense. Speaking before the German parliament in his first major address, Merz declared, “We must make all the means available that the Bundeswehr needs so that it can become the strongest conventional army in Europe.” The declaration represents a bold step away from Germany’s historically cautious military stance, rooted in the trauma of its Nazi past. By setting the ambition to outpace not only France and Poland, but also the United Kingdom, Germany is embracing a leadership role in European security not seen in decades. Johann Wadephul, Merz’s foreign minister, confirmed the government’s commitment, stating that Berlin would support the 5 percent defense spending benchmark urged by Trump, saying, “We will follow him there.” While Trump has long criticized NATO allies for underfunding their militaries, only a few countries, such as Estonia and Poland, have pledged to reach the 5 percent mark. The United Kingdom, by contrast, is targeting 2.5 percent of GDP on defense by 2027. Merz’s announcement comes amid Germany’s broader effort to reassert itself as a military power, a response driven largely by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. For decades, Germany allowed its military capability to atrophy, symbolized by soldiers once using broomsticks during NATO exercises due to equipment shortages. Former Chancellor Olaf Scholz attempted to reverse this decline with a special €100 billion fund aimed at modernizing the Bundeswehr. Merz has gone even further, lifting strict fiscal constraints on defense projects, permitting unlimited spending on any initiative that exceeds 1 percent of GDP. The government is also weighing a return to conscription—abolished in 2011—if a new volunteer service scheme fails to attract sufficient recruits. Germany’s rearmament plans are ambitious, requiring a surge in troop numbers and a ramp-up in the production of military hardware such as Taurus missiles, Leopard 2 tanks, and IRIS-T missiles. Infrastructure improvements will also be necessary, including renovations to barracks and enhancements to the transportation network, which experts fear is currently too dilapidated to move troops and equipment quickly in an emergency. The Bundeswehr currently fields around 180,000 regular troops, compared to over 135,000 in the UK. Including reservists, Germany claims nearly one million personnel, a holdover from its era of national service. While France and Poland maintain slightly over 200,000 active soldiers each, Germany’s armored capability has already outpaced Britain, with 296 battle tanks compared to Britain’s 213—of which fewer than 150 are believed to be operational. Poland leads Europe with 614 tanks, while France has 215. Despite these developments, experts note that the British military retains an edge in combat experience and training quality. Britain also possesses a robust nuclear deterrent through its Trident program, with an estimated 60 nuclear missiles. Germany, by contrast, lacks its own nuclear arsenal and relies on U.S. nuclear weapons stationed on its soil—estimated at 20, though Berlin has no operational control over them. In naval strength, Britain also leads with 52 warships and nine submarines, compared to Germany’s estimated fleet of 30 to 40 warships and six submarines. Germany’s military ambitions are also becoming more visible in its leadership of Task Force Baltic, a new NATO initiative focused on securing the Baltic Sea against potential Russian sabotage, especially threats to undersea cables. Rear Admiral Stephan Haisch of the German navy described Russian discomfort with German military activity in the region as a “good sign.” However, not all German leaders are convinced the public is psychologically prepared for this renewed military role. Former German President Joachim Gauck recently expressed concern over the national mindset. “What concerns me is not just a military weakness but a mental one, that we are not sufficiently prepared—not just technically, but in terms of emotion, morality and politics. We need a new seriousness,” he said. His words reflect the tension between Germany’s evolving military ambitions and a society that has known peace and prosperity for generations. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-05-17 -
0
Trump Mocks France Over WWII Commemorations, Urges Greater U.S. Recognition
Trump Criticizes France Over WWII Commemorations, Urges Greater U.S. Recognition Former President Donald Trump stirred fresh controversy during a speech at the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar by mocking France’s recent commemorations of the 80th anniversary of the Allied victory in Europe during World War II. Speaking to American troops, Trump downplayed France’s role in the war and insisted that the United States deserves far more recognition for its contributions. “We love France, right. But I think we did a little more to win the war than France did, do we agree?” Trump said, drawing laughter from the audience. He continued, “You know, I don't want to be a wise guy. But when Hitler made his speech at the Eiffel Tower, I would say that wasn’t exactly ideal.” Recalling a conversation he had with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump claimed he had been surprised by the extent of the European celebrations. “Good guy, by the way,” Trump said, before imitating Macron’s accent and words: “‘Donald, we are celebrating our victory over the Germans.’” Trump added sarcastically, “Oh, that’s wonderful. Now, we don’t take credit for what we do. And I said, what the hell? Every country I’ve spoken to in the last week is celebrating the war but us. Isn’t that terrible?” Victory in Europe Day, or V-E Day, is observed on May 8 in France and the United Kingdom, marking the date in 1945 when Nazi Germany formally surrendered to the Allied forces. Russia observes the occasion a day later, on May 9, due to time zone differences and the treaty’s late signing. Trump expressed frustration that while other nations mark the day with ceremonies and national pride, the United States seems to downplay its own pivotal role in the Allied victory. “Russia was celebrating, France was celebrating, everybody was celebrating but us. And we’re the ones that won the war. We won the war,” he said emphatically. He went further, asserting that without American intervention, the outcome of World War II might have looked very different. “And they helped, but without us they don’t win the war. We’re all speaking German. You know that, right? Without us, they’re speaking German, maybe a little Japanese too. We won the war. And we’re the only ones that didn’t celebrate.” Trump’s remarks underscore a long-standing theme in his public speeches, in which he frequently criticizes allies for what he sees as a lack of acknowledgment of American leadership and sacrifice. His tone, often sarcastic and provocative, has previously caused tension with international partners, and his comments about France's war-time efforts are likely to attract renewed scrutiny. As of now, the French foreign ministry has not publicly responded to Trump’s statements. Newsweek confirmed it reached out to their press office via email for comment. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Newsweek 2025-05-17
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
Recommended Posts