Victoria Fox's Blog, page 264
March 20, 2023
The Supreme Court wrestles with questions over the Navajo Nation’s water rights
Enlarge this image The Colorado River flows by the historic Navajo Bridge on June 23, 2021 in Marble Canyon, Ariz. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that could alter the already intense battle over water rights in the parched American Southwest.
For more than 20 years, the Navajo Nation has fought for access to water from the lower Colorado River, which flows directly alongside the reservation’s northwestern border.
The Navajo Nation reservation stretches across 27,000 square miles in Arizona, Utah and New Mexico. Almost a third of the 170,000 people who live there do not have access to clean, reliable drinking water, the tribe says.
Thousands who live without running water must drive for miles to refill barrels and jugs to haul water home for drinking, cooking, bathing and cleaning. Others rely on unregulated wells.
But the issue of access to the Colorado River is extremely contentious.
A decades-long drought, exacerbated by climate change, has created the driest conditions that the American Southwest has seen in centuries. The region’s water supply is dwindling as its population and agricultural output have boomed.
The river, which provides water for 40 million people across the entire Southwest, is already overtapped. The seven states that rely on the river have long been embroiled in litigation over the body of water. Recently, they have struggled to reach an agreement on how to cut back on their water use.
But the Navajo Nation says it has not been able to fully represent its own interests in disputes over water. Instead, they say they’ve been blocked in court by the U.S. federal government, which says it represents tribal interests in water disputes.
The tribe’s claim stems from federal policies that forcibly relocated tribes and their citizens westward and onto reservations, including the Navajo Treaty of 1868, said Heather Tanana, a law professor at the University of Utah.
“When they established these reservations, that came with the promise that those lands would be permanent homelands for the tribe and their people,” said Tanana, who is a citizen of Navajo Nation. “And I think everyone would agree you can’t have a homeland of any kind without water.”
Both the tribe and the U.S. government agree that Indian reservations, including the Navajo Nation, have a right to water.
Now, the Supreme Court must decide how far the federal government’s responsibilities go in reserving that right.
“Is the federal government the trustee and the Navajo Nation the beneficiary, such that ordinary trust law principles can be applied?” said Gregory Ablavsky, who specializes in federal Indian law at Stanford Law School. Ordinarily, he explained, a beneficiary can sue a trustee for mismanaging the trust — in this case, water.
Sympathy for the tribe’s position came from Justice Neil Gorsuch, a frequent supporter of Native rights who has often split from his fellow conservatives on cases involving Indian treaties.
“Could I bring a good breach-of-contract claim for someone who promised me a permanent home, the right to conduct agriculture and raise animals if it turns out it’s the Sahara Desert?” Gorsuch asked during Monday’s oral arguments. (No, the government’s lawyer replied.)
The U.S. has argued that a broad ruling in favor of the Navajo Nation could force the federal government to conduct an assessment of the tribe’s water needs and build water supply infrastructure. Those responsibilities belong to the tribe, the government says.
“Just as the 1868 treaty didn’t impose on the United States a duty to build roads or bridges, or to harvest timber, or to mine coal, the 1868 treaty didn’t impose on the United States a duty to construct pipelines, pumps or wells to deliver water,” said Frederick Liu, an assistant to the solicitor general, addressing the court.
Several of the court’s conservatives, including Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, appeared sensitive to that concern during Monday’s hearing, which prompted assurances from Shay Dvoretzky, the attorney arguing on behalf of the Navajo Nation.
“The government hypothesizes a parade of horribles where the government would have to be building pipelines across miles and miles and miles of territory,” Dvoretzky said. “We’re not talking about anything like that.”
States that rely on the Colorado River — including Arizona, California and Nevada — also oppose the tribe’s efforts, saying that diverting water to the reservation would come at the expense of their states’ populations and economies.
A favorable ruling would not immediately solve the tribe’s water access issues, experts said. But it would allow the tribe’s legal efforts around the Colorado River and other waterways to move forward.
“There isn’t enough water. But that doesn’t mean that the Navajo Nation does not have valid rights that should be enforced, that they should have the ability to develop their water and then play on the same level with every other stakeholder in the basin,” said Tanana of the University of Utah.
What France’s revolt over raising the retirement age says about the attitude to work
Enlarge this image A protester participates in a demonstration in Marseille on March 18 after the French government pushed a pensions reform through parliament without a vote. Clement Mahoudeau/AFP via Getty Images
Clement Mahoudeau/AFP via Getty Images
France has revolted against President Emmanuel Macron’s move to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64. The protests offer some insight into how the French view work and life.
Who is he? The President of France — aka public enemy #1 for French workers across the country.
Thousands have marched in the streets in recent weeks against the move, while public transport workers, teachers and garbage collectors have all striked en masse to show their disapproval. It comes alongside a worldwide trend of workers feeling unsatisfied with their labor conditions, says Marc Loriol, a sociologist and the research director at the French National Center for Scientific Research.
A protestor holds a sign reading “Who sow misery, harvest anger” during a demonstration in Nantes on March 18. Loic Venance/AFP via Getty Images
Loic Venance/AFP via Getty Images
What’s the big deal? Raising the retirement age has been widely unpopular since the measure was put forward in January.
Then, last Thursday, when it became apparent it would not pass through France’s parliament, Macron used a constitutional power to force through the change without a vote. The fierce opposition to the idea is in part thanks to France’s work culture; one that places a heavy emphasis on quality of life, work-life balance, and a comfortable retirement. Reporter Lisa Bryant told Morning Edition: “The French are fiercely protective of their universal health care and generous pensions. And it’s a choice society has made: Work hard, pay high taxes, but also retire at a relatively young age with a high standard of living.” France’s current retirement age of 62 is low compared to other European countries. Macron has long talked about raising it because of the country’s demographic changes: There are more and more older people and comparatively fewer workers to fund the government pension. Loriol told NPR how the French attitude towards work had also changed over time: “Work is very important for French people, but since about 20 or 30 years ago, a lot of jobs have become precarious. [Before], people were hired in an enterprise and if the job was good, they climbed the ladder, and they could obtain a higher position in the company. Now, it’s more and more difficult because people are not hiring [employees] for life. It’s something that has changed in France particularly, because that was tradition before. So [now], people say, ‘I can’t think my work is my only goal in my life.'”Have work and jobs on your mind? Listen to the Consider This episode on how to prepare a personal recession toolkit .
Trash has been piling up the street amid a bin collectors’ strike against the pension changes. Lou Benoist/AFP via Getty Images
Lou Benoist/AFP via Getty Images
What are people saying?
Loriol on how French people find meaning in their work:
When they think that they do not have enough time, have enough means to do a good job, to produce good quality work, good products and good service, they find it is not a good job, because they can’t recognize this kind of job.
Since about 30 years ago, the pace of work has been getting higher and higher in a lot of jobs, even for blue collar and white collar workers.
Once [people] work from home [because of the pandemic], they think about the meaning of their jobs, and they think that their job is not good enough.
Macron, in February, according to the Associated Press.
People know that yes, on average, you have to work a little longer, all of them, because otherwise we won’t be able to finance our pensions properly.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leftist leader and founder of the France Unbowed party, according to The New York Times:
Since the process of parliamentary censorship has not worked, it is time to move on to popular censorship.
A woman poses by a burning barricade during a demonstration in Nantes on March 18. LOIC VENANCE/AFP via Getty Images
LOIC VENANCE/AFP via Getty Images
So, what now?
On Monday afternoon, a no confidence motion against Macron’s government was put forward in the National Assembly. If passed, it would have undone the move. It was narrowly rejected, meaning that the law will pass.Macron’s popularity has been rapidly dropping in the last two months, and the manner in which the new retirement age was pushed through was deemed “unjustified” by roughly 80% of the population, according to an IFOP poll cited by CNN.Protesters, along with political opponents, have vowed to keep fighting the changes and exploring avenues to have it wound back.Learn more:
Older Americans are increasingly unwilling — or unable — to retireAmerica, we have a problem. People aren’t feeling engaged with their workThe economics behind ‘quiet quitting’ — and what we should call it insteadLinah Mohammad contributed to this report.
GOP threatens to suspend prosecutor as Trump indictment looms
WASHINGTON — Republicans’ defense of former President Donald Trump has taken a surprising turn: They’re threatening to pull the prosecutor.
For years, Trump and his fellow GOP candidates have pilloried progressive Democrats for promoting a “defund the police” movement that seeks to divert funds from traditional law enforcement to community services aimed at reducing criminality.
The progressives’ slogan proved a strong enough weapon for Republicans against Democrats that Joe Biden felt compelled during his 2020 campaign to call for additional federal spending on police.
But now, as Trump plans to be indicted over allegations he illegally paid money to adult film star Stormy Daniels as part of his successful 2016 bid for president, Republicans in the House are threatening to fund the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. More broadly, the GOP seeks to weaken prosecutors whose campaigns were backed by liberal billionaire George Soros.
“Your decision to pursue such a politically motivated prosecution – while embracing progressive criminal justice policies that empower “career criminals” [to] run[ ] the streets of Manhattan – requires careful congressional scrutiny of how public safety funds appropriated by Congress are implemented by local law enforcement agencies,” said Jim Jordan, R-Ohio , James Comer, R-Ky., and Bryan Steil, R-Wisconsin, wrote to Bragg on Monday.
The three lawmakers, respectively chairmen of the Judiciary, Oversight and Administrative Committees, invited Bragg to testify before them and demanded that he turn over “all communications” between his office and other local and federal agencies responsible for law enforcement. They also requested all communications from his office regarding the use of federal money.
Their letter follows President Kevin McCarthy’s weekend tweet pledging to “investigate whether federal funds are being used to subvert our democracy by interfering in elections with politically motivated prosecutions.”
Trump is the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
The Department of Justice provides money to state and local prosecutors’ offices through various grant programs — including those designed to tackle violent crimes, hate crimes and sexual assault — but they represent only a small portion of the Manhattan District Attorney’s budget.
Yet Michael Steele, a former Republican National Committee chairman who has become a vocal critic of his party, said GOP lawmakers would be outraged if Democrats wanted to investigate federal funding of a local prosecutor based on an ongoing case.
“Now you have Republicans talking about ‘we want to take your money,’” he said. “If a Democrat behaved this way, these same people would lose their s—. It’s as simple as that.”
Former President Donald Trump at the NCAA Wrestling Championships in Tulsa, Okla., Saturday. Sue Ogrocki/APIn an interview on Fox News on Monday, Jordan dodged a question about what Congress would do regarding federal funding for the attorney’s office.
“It’s a concern for us,” he said, focusing on his interest in obtaining records of all of Bragg’s communications with other law enforcement agencies.
But in another twist, it was political money — not federal money — that dominated much of the GOP discussion of possible indictment.
Since Trump announced on Saturday — without apparent evidence — that he was likely to be indicted on Tuesday, he and other Republicans have targeted the support Soros-backed entities have given to progressive candidates for elected prosecutorial positions.
“I have no interest in getting involved in a circus fabricated by a Soros-DA,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is Trump’s main rival for the GOP presidential nomination, said in his first public remarks. since Trump postulated that he would be indicted. this week.
Trump and his allies were outraged on Monday at what they saw as a weak defense of the former president in which DeSantis also repeated allegations made against him. But the repetition of Trump’s own attacks on Soros and Bragg has momentarily — and curiously — put the two leading GOP presidential candidates in the position of sharing a common declared enemy.
The comfortable political ground for all Republicans is to attack the Liberals, Democrats and big city prosecutors they elect. This helps explain the House GOP’s insistence on investigating federal funds that flow to the Manhattan District Attorney. The other obvious reason is that it gives them an entry point to seek testimony and records from a local prosecutor, since Congress oversees federal money. It’s perhaps worth noting that House Appropriations Chair Kay Granger, R-Texas, whose panel is in charge of spending, did not sign the letter.
DeSantis and other Republicans have long targeted Soros for backing prosecutors who promote policies not to enforce certain crimes — in part because the same philosophy is at the heart of the “defund the police” movement. The billionaire’s name appears eight times in DeSantis’ recent book.
In one passage, he contrasts the non-enforcement desires of some Soros-backed officials in Florida with “a prosecutor’s duty to prosecute.”
A McCarthy aide provided a copy of House Republicans’ 2022 “Pledge to America” agenda in response to a question about the difference between defunding the police and defunding a prosecutor. In it, Republicans promise to “oppose all efforts to defund the police” and to “crack down on prosecutors who refuse to prosecute crime.”
But, flipping the argument, Republicans are now pushing for a prosecutor to avoid indicting Trump.
Steele said the party had coiled around an axis trying to defend its former and possible future leader.
“Here’s the kicker,” he said. “Donald Trump wouldn’t have had to pay a porn star $130,000 if he hadn’t had an affair with her while his wife was delivering his son. So chew that GOP.
Trump denied having an affair with Daniels. Her youngest son was born in March 2006, months before Daniels said he had sex with Trump.
Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Rep. Clyde to use Congressional Review Act to block gun splint rule
Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) is expected to introduce a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution this week in an effort to block the ATF’s AR gun stabilizer brace rule.
On January 14, Breitbart News reported that the ARC had provided Congress with a means to block the ATF’s latest rule.
The CRA was set up in the 1990s as part of President Newt Gingrich’s ‘Contract with America’ (right). It grants Congress the ability to review a major rule and vote to block the rule’s implementation or effectiveness.
The United States Government Accountability Office explains the ARC on its site. “The CRA allows Congress to review ‘major’ rules enacted by federal agencies before the rules go into effect,” it says. “Congress can also disapprove of new rules, causing the rules to have no force or effect.”
Breitbart News published an exclusive interview with Rep. Clyde on Feb. 10 in which he stated his intention to use the SHORT Act and the CRA to block the rule.
Clyde said he would “introduce a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Overhaul Act to undo the illegal excesses of the Biden administration.”
On Monday, FOX News pointed out that Clyde’s introduction of an ARC resolution is imminent.
Clyde said, “Congress must act quickly to block the ATF’s unconstitutional gun strap rule because this misguided measure transforms millions of law-abiding gun owners, including many disabled veterans, into criminals for the mere possession of legal firearms with stabilizing straps.”
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC) stands shoulder to shoulder with Clyde in attempts to block the rule.
Hudson said, “This rule jeopardizes the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners and disabled veterans. I am proud to lead the fight to block the ATF’s unconstitutional gun splint rule.
AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the author/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is a political analyst for Armed American Radio and an ambassador for Turning Point USA. AWR Hawkins holds a Ph.D. in military history, with a focus on the Vietnam War (Brown Water Navy), the United States Navy since its inception, the Civil War, and early modern Europe. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange. Contact him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
breitbart
Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Bettors react to March Madness bad beat at TCU-Gonzaga
It’s not over until it’s over.
Even when the game was decided.
Damion Baugh’s 3-pointer at the buzzer for TCU on Sunday night didn’t beat Gonzaga but it cost a lot of bettors making the final score 84-81.
Vitally important to the gaming world, Gonzaga was a 4.5-point favorite.
At Circa Sports in Las Vegas, fans reacted as if the stunt won or lost the game – because it meant winning or losing for their wallets.
Some players could be seen with their arms raised in triumph, while others put their hands on their heads in disbelief.
Hunter Sallis had two free throws with 0.7 seconds remaining to give No. 3 seed Gonzaga an 84-78 lead.
Baugh, who had 15 points and eight rebounds in the game, let the ensuing inbound pass cross midfield before picking it up and nonchalantly hitting an improbable 3-pointer.
ESPN’s Scott Van Pelt, who does a “Bad Beats” show, tweeted, “Ohhhhh! What a 3 from TCU! Wonderful achievement. #MeaningfultoSome.
Jordan Schultz, NFL Insider for theScore, tweeted: “Possibly the worst Bad Beat I’ve seen all year. Insane TCU coverage.
Gonzaga advances to play UCLA’s No. 2 in the Sweet 16 on Thursday, while TCU heads home.
“The basket counts, WHATEVER…”
17 years ago today: Chris Duhon covers the spread for Duke bettors (+2.5) at the Final Four buzzer against UConn
The 38ft uplift that lives in the Betting Hall of Fame
pic.twitter.com/qj8iRZC9Ti
— Action Network (@ActionNetworkHQ) April 3, 2021
It was the second bad beat for the players on Sunday.
At the end of Florida Atlantic’s 78-70 win over Fairleigh Dickinson, FAU’s Alijah Martin missed a dunk in the closing seconds.
The over/under of the match was 148.5.
One of the most infamous bad beats in NCAA tournament history came in 2004, when Duke’s Chris Duhon hit a long 3 at the buzzer in a 79-78 win at Connecticut in which the line was 2, 5 dots.
nypost
Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Xi promotes China as peacemaker in first trip to Russia since Ukraine invasion
HONG KONG — Frustrated by what it sees as the United States’ determination to thwart its rise as a global superpower, China is continuing its efforts to promote a new international order that has Beijing at its center.
In recent weeks, China has spoken more forcefully about the prospect of conflict unless the United States changes course and rejoices in a major diplomatic victory in the Middle East. Now its leader, Xi Jinping, is heading to Moscow on Monday to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin, signaling Beijing’s growing embrace of its rise to prominence on the world stage and the possibility of it further deepening the conflict with states. United and its allies.
Xi’s visit to Russia, his first since Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last February, could serve as an even greater show of solidarity after the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for the Russian leader on Friday. , accusing him of being responsible for war crimes in Ukraine. . Neither Russia, nor China, nor the United States are members of the tribunal.
In an article published Sunday in People’s Daily, the flagship newspaper of the ruling Chinese Communist Party, Putin said he had high hopes for the visit of his “good old friend” Xi, with whom he had declared a partnership. “without limits” a few weeks before the invasion of Ukraine last year. The Russian leader, who made a provocative visit to occupied eastern Ukraine over the weekend, also hailed China’s willingness to make a “significant contribution” to resolving the conflict.
Xi followed up on Monday with a post promoting China’s peace plan for Ukraine, saying it “reflects the international community’s broadest common understanding of the crisis.” The 12-point proposal, part of China’s effort to project itself as an international peacemaker, has been dismissed by the West as too favorable to Russia.
Xi said his trip to Russia was aimed at strengthening the strategic partnership between the two countries in a world facing “damaging acts of hegemony, domination and intimidation”.
“The international community has recognized that no country is superior to others, that no model of governance is universal and that no country should dictate the international order,” he said in the article from Rossiiskaya Gazeta, a daily published by the Russian government, according to an English translation carried by Chinese state media.
Wang Yi, center, China’s top diplomat, meets senior officials from Saudi Arabia and Iran in Beijing on March 10.Anadolu Agency via Getty ImagesAs US-China relations seem stuck in a downward spiral, Xi and his top officials are sharpening their rhetoric. In a speech this month to delegates at the annual meeting of China’s ceremonial legislature, where he officially received an unprecedented third term as president, Xi said the United States was waging a campaign of ” containment, encirclement and repression” against China which had created “serious challenges” for China.
China’s new foreign minister, Qin Gang, later echoed Xi’s remarks, warning that “confrontation and conflict” between the world’s two largest economies was inevitable unless Washington eased policy.
Xi’s comments were the strongest and most direct anti-American comments by any Chinese leader in decades, said Ian Bremmer, chairman of Eurasia Group, a New York-based consulting firm. By making the comments himself, he said, Xi was expressing his displeasure with Washington “in a very public way.”
While President Joe Biden has a personal relationship with Xi and has underscored the potential for bilateral cooperation, the way US politicians talk about Chinese issues – from trade in Taiwan to TikTok – gives Beijing the impression that “everything is contradictory,” Bremmer said.
“They think it’s deeper than anything that can be resolved with the two leaders just talking,” he said.
The Biden administration says that while it views China as a strategic competitor, it does not seek conflict. Biden, who has spoken with Xi several times by phone and met him in November, said last week he expected to have a phone call with Xi “soon.”
In the meantime, Xi is continuing a flurry of diplomatic activity aimed at offering a Chinese alternative to the US-led world order – one that emphasizes “mutual respect” and “non-interference”. and avoids the Western framework of democracies versus autocracies. Its ambitions for China as a responsible great power were advanced this month with the surprise announcement of a deal it brokered to restore relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran for the first time in seven years.
“It’s a low-risk, high-reward move that bolsters Chinese legitimacy and prestige and Xi Jinping in particular as someone who Chinese sources say facilitated this detente,” said Diane researcher Tuvia Gering. and Guilford Glazer Israel-China Policy Center at the Tel Aviv Institute for National Security Studies.
Fan Hongda, a professor at the Institute of Middle East Studies at Shanghai International Studies University, said he did not believe the deal alone would upend the world order.
“But to some extent, it is indeed a testament to China’s growing influence,” he said. “Therefore, the United States will likely take China more seriously.”
Xi’s frequent contact with Putin, underscored by his state visit this week, contrasts with his relationship with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, with whom he has not spoken since the start of the war. China’s Foreign Ministry has not confirmed reports that Xi may hold a virtual meeting with Zelensky after his trip to Moscow.
Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing earlier this month. Xie Huanchi/Xinhua News Agency via Getty ImagesChina has tried to portray itself as neutral in the conflict, refraining from condemning Russian aggression while calling for negotiations and taking care to avoid violating international sanctions. He denies Washington’s allegations that he plans to provide Moscow with lethal military assistance, arguing that the United States and its allies are fueling the conflict by sending weapons to Ukraine.
“So far, China has had the luxury of being able to sit and watch the war to see who emerges victorious,” said Keir Giles, senior consultant for the Russia and Eurasia program at Chatham House, a London think tank. . .
Xi’s trip to Russia could have a wide variety of outcomes, he said, including definite moves back and forth, such as deciding to offer Putin direct support in the conflict or explicitly calling on him to end it.
Both would be “an indication that China has made a decision about how the war will affect the balance of power between Russia and the West in the long run,” Giles said. “None of these cases may happen, and we will continue to hear words of partnership not backed by visible action.”
Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
March 19, 2023
New York Community Bank agrees to buy a large portion of Signature Bank
Enlarge this image A branch of Signature Bank is photographed, late Sunday, March 12, 2023, in New York. New York Community Bank has agreed to buy a significant chunk of the failed Signature Bank in a $2.7 billion deal, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., said late Sunday, March 19, 2023. Bobby Caina Calvan/AP
Bobby Caina Calvan/AP
NEW YORK — New York Community Bank has agreed to buy a significant chunk of the failed Signature Bank in a $2.7 billion deal, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said late Sunday.
The 40 branches of Signature Bank will become Flagstar Bank, starting Monday. Flagstar is one of New York Community Bank’s subsidiaries. The deal will include the purchase of $38.4 billion in Signature Bank’s assets, a little more than a third of Signature’s total when the bank failed a week ago.
The FDIC said $60 billion in Signature Bank’s loans will remain in receivership and are expected to be sold off in time.
Signature Bank was the second bank to fail in this banking crisis, roughly 48 hours after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. Signature, based in New York, was a large commercial lender in the tristate area, but had in recent years gotten into cryptocurrencies as a potential growth business.
After Silicon Valley Bank failed, depositors became nervous about Signature Bank’s health due to its high amount of uninsured deposits as well as its exposure to crypto and other tech-focused lending. By the time it was closed by regulators, Signature was the third largest bank failure in U.S. history.
The FDIC says it expects Signature Bank’s failure to cost the deposit insurance fund $2.5 billion, but that figure may change as the regulator sells off assets. The deposit insurance fund is paid for by assessments on banks and taxpayers do not bear the direct cost when a bank fails.
China’s Xi Jinping flexes his diplomatic muscle with a visit to Moscow
Enlarge this image Chinese President Xi Jinping, right, and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands during an awarding ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, on June 8, 2018. Xi is traveling to Moscow to show support for Putin. Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
China’s leader Xi Jinping lands in Moscow on Monday to show support for Russian leader Vladimir Putin and probe possible steps toward peace in Ukraine.
After the three-day visit to Russia, Xi is expected to have talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The conversation would be the first since the start of the war. Analysts say the likelihood of a big breakthrough on Ukraine is slim because Russian and Ukrainian negotiating positions remain so far apart.
For Xi, who this month locked up a rare third term as China’s president, the Russia trip offers a chance to strengthen relations with a key neighbor and partner-of-convenience. At the same time, the trip could help burnish China’s credentials as a global heavyweight.
“He can cast his visit to Moscow in the context of some grand international diplomacy, [yet] he doesn’t actually have to achieve much to accomplish this goal,” said Paul Haenle, a China expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former director on the National Security Council under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
On the eve of the Ukraine invasion a year ago, Russia and China declared a “no limits” friendship. And while many believe China’s leadership was caught off guard by the full-scale invasion of Ukraine that followed, Beijing has refused to condemn the move, instead trumpeting the strength of Beijing-Moscow ties.
Xi says the relationship has grown “more mature and resilient”
Enlarge this image Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping pose for a photograph during their meeting in Beijing, on Feb. 4, 2022. Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images
Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images
Ahead of his visit to Moscow, Xi wrote in the state-owned Russian Gazette newspaper that the two countries have “cemented political mutual trust and fostered a new model of major-country relations.”
“The bilateral relationship has grown more mature and resilient,” Xi declared. On the Ukraine crisis, Xi urged all parties to “embrace the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, and pursue equal-footed, rational and results-oriented dialogue and consultation.”
China’s steadfast support of Moscow throughout the war has dented its image in western Europe, where Beijing is keen to forge deeper relations.
Rana Mitter, a professor of Chinese history and politics at the University of Oxford, says China may hope the Moscow trip will help persuade some in Europe “to take a more America-skeptic position on questions of security and economic cooperation.”
“If the case is that [China] actually can talk to Putin and try and mediate some of the difficulties with Russia that those of you in Western Europe simply cannot,” he said, “that’s a proposition that at least some leaders in the region might listen to.”
For its part, Beijing appears keen to foster the image of peacemaker.
Earlier this month, China helped finalize a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran on re-establishing diplomatic relations. The Chinese government in February published a 12-point “position paper” laying out broad principles for resolving the Ukraine conflict. And on Friday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said China would “play a constructive role in urging peace and promoting talks.”
“The mood has been set. The framework has been set. The idea of China potentially as the peacemaker that goes where other countries can’t has been set. But the actual solution still looks in some ways much, much more vague, much more fluid,” said Mitter.
The Chinese are not really aiming to be “the real problem solver here,” according to Yun Sun, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington, D.C.
She said, with Xi visiting Moscow, “they know that there will be these critical questions on China, about what China plans to do on the war in Ukraine. I think that political position [paper] and the framing of China as a peace broker is to serve that political purpose.”
China’s past mediations showed its limitsChina’s role as a mediator in the past suggests limits to what it may achieve when it comes to Ukraine.
“Even in the Iran-Saudi deal, China was not a peace broker. I think China exploited an opportunity that ripened,” Sun said. “Those two countries actually wanted to improve their relations, but I don’t think that condition exists between Russia and Ukraine — at least not now and at least not for the foreseeable future.”
Haenle, of the Carnegie Endowment, says during the Six Party Talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, in which he took part, Beijing excelled at bringing negotiators to the table. But he says Chinese officials rarely pressed any of the parties to move the ball down the field.
“We always had the sense that the United States, South Korea, Japan, we were really aggressively trying to find a way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, where the Chinese were really looking for a process to manage the North Korean nuclear issue,” he said.
“Whether they’ll play an active role in ending the Ukraine conflict, I think, is probably something that we will not see here in the near term,” Haenle said.
Instead, the focus of Xi’s Moscow trip will be on strengthening China-Russia relations. And for Xi, that means it will most likely be a win, says Suisheng Zhao, a professor at the University of Denver.
China frames its foreign relations within the context of its superpower rivalry with the United States. Xi’s trip to Russia is no exception.
“The benefits will definitely weigh over the costs,” Zhao said. “His most fundamental foreign policy objective now is [to] try to defend China’s interests against American confrontation.”
Miami Beach sets curfew to control spring break crowds after 2 shootings
Enlarge this image Spring break crowds, seen in 2021 in Miami Beach, Fla., are once again making the annual pilgrimage to the South Florida destination. Concerned about managing unruly crowds, city officials this year imposed an overnight curfew for Sunday night. Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
The city of Miami Beach has imposed an overnight curfew during spring break to prevent violence and “unruly crowds” after two fatal shootings took place over the weekend.
The curfew largely applies to the city’s South Beach district, a popular nightlife destination for spring breakers. It takes effect at 11:59 p.m. on Sunday night to 6 a.m. on Monday, the city said in a news release. More curfew restrictions are planned for Thursday through Monday, the city said, but that it will evaluate future curfew restrictions after the initial window.
The restrictions, which included a state of emergency, were set “in response to the two shootings and the excessively large and unruly crowds, and to mitigate dangerous and illegal conduct,” the city said.
The two shootings, one on Friday night and another early Sunday, left two people dead, according to a separate news release.
It’s the third consecutive year that Miami Beach has set a curfew and issued a state of emergency during spring break festivities. Last year, city officials imposed restrictions after five people were injured in shootings. In 2021, restrictions were implemented over coronavirus fears.
The price of eggs is so high that Dollar Tree pulls them completely from the shelves
Dollar Tree pulled eggs from store shelves as prices soared, the company said.
Egg prices have risen 60% over the past year, prompting the popular discount store to withdraw eggs without being able to make a profit, Reuters reported.
The majority of merchandise at Dollar Tree sits at $1.25, though the store also offers other items for $3 and $5.
“Our main price at Dollar Tree is $1.25. The cost of eggs is currently very high,” company spokesman Randy Guiler said, according to the Washington Examiner.
Although the eggs are pulled, they will likely return to shelves when “costs are more in line with historic levels.”
Dollar Tree operates approximately 8,000 locations in the United States and Canada.
Consumer egg prices dipped slightly last month, but still registered a 55% increase year-on-year compared to the same month a year earlier.
A dozen large Grade A eggs cost an average of $4.21 in February, down from $4.82 in January, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
As Easter approaches, prices could rise further.
Dollar Tree prices the majority of its merchandise at around $1.25, which is well below the rising price of eggs.REUTERS/Erin Scott/File Photo
“Wholesale prices continue to rise, indicating that retail egg prices have not peaked. The faltering flock numbers couldn’t come at a worse time for consumers,” David Anderson, Texas A&M University AgriLife Extension, Bryan-College Station, told The Poultry Times. “USDA’s January Egg Report showed prices were flat or slightly lower than December, but annual egg prices often peak each spring due to egg hunts and holiday cooking. Easter.”
Dollar Tree did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
nypost
Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor.
Victoria Fox's Blog
- Victoria Fox's profile
- 137 followers
