It was an ugly macro week…

Source: Bloomberg

…and worse still, ‘growth’ surprises disappointed significantly while ‘inflation’ surprises surprised to the upside significantly…

Source: Bloomberg

Soaring inflation expectations sent rate-cut expectations to new cycle lows…

Source: Bloomberg

…pushing yields higher across the board (led by the long-end)…

Source: Bloomberg

But, stocks didn’t care about any of that because a handful of mega-cap tech stocks’ earnings were awesome (except META) – and that’s what matters (for now)…

Source: Bloomberg

Nasdaq outperformed, up 4% on the week (its best week since the start of Nov 2023). The Dow was the laggard on the week but all the majors had a decent week…

Not the best week for some observers…

Traders 1: Marko 0 https://t.co/T6PHjRSrMF

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 26, 2024

This week saw the biggest short-squeeze since the first week of March…

Source: Bloomberg

And the basket of Magnificent 7 stocks soared over 5% this week, its best week since the first week of November (Fed Pivot) – but it was noisy as TSLA surged, META tumbled, and then GOOGL/MSFT lifted the lid…

Source: Bloomberg

Tech and Discretionary outperformed on the week with Energy and Materials lagging (but all sectors ended the week green)…

Source: Bloomberg

5.00% remains the Maginot Line for the 2Y Yield…

Source: Bloomberg

Interestingly, the dollar ended the week practically unchanged – despite a lot of noise…

Source: Bloomberg

…despite the seventh straight week of declines in the yen vs the dollar as it appears the BoJ and MoF have given up…

Source: Bloomberg

Gold was dumped this week – its worst week since the start of December 2023. Spot prices did find support at $2300 though…

Source: Bloomberg

After two down weeks, oil prices rallied this week, with WTI back above $83…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, intraday volatility has picked up dramatically in the last couple of weeks…

Source: Bloomberg

…as the distribution of possible rate outcomes has picked up significantly. Don’t forget next week’s QRA and FOMC as Yellen and Powell get ‘back to work’.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

Former President Donald Trump praised the first witness in his New York City “hush money” trial, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, as he is scheduled to deliver more testimony in the case on Friday.

“He’s been very nice. David’s been very nice. He’s a nice guy,” President Trump said on Thursday, responding to a question about Mr. Pecker’s testimony over the past week or so.

During cross-examinations Thursday, Mr. Pecker detailed how he obtained potentially damaging stories about the candidate and paid out tens of thousands of dollars to keep them from the public eye.

But when it came to the seamy claims by adult performer Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, the former National Enquirer publisher said he put his foot down.

“I am not paying for this story,” he told jurors Thursday at President Trump’s trial, recounting his version of a conversation with President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen about attempts to suppress allegations that prosecutors claim amounted to election interference in the 2016 campaign. Mr. Pecker said that he remembers saying he “didn’t want to be involved in this.”

President Trump has maintained he is not guilty of any of the charges, and says the stories that were bought and squelched were false.

“There is no case here. This is just a political witch hunt,” he said before court in brief comments to reporters on Thursday.

Ms. Daniels was eventually paid by Mr. Cohen to not speak about her claim of a 2006 sexual encounter with President Trump. The ex-president denies it happened, while his lawyers have said that she is using the claims to make money and bolster her fame.

Although he did not buy her story, Mr. Pecker told Mr. Cohen that someone should make a move to suppress the claims from going public.

“I said to Michael, ‘My suggestion to you is that you should buy the story, and you should take it off the market because if you don’t and it gets out, I believe the boss will be very angry with you,’” he said.

Later, Trump defense attorney Emil Bove opened his cross-examination by asking Mr. Pecker about his recollection of specific dates and meanings. He appeared to be laying further groundwork for the defense’s argument that any dealings President Trump had with the National Enquirer publisher were intended to protect himself, his reputation, and his family, not his campaign.

At one point on Thursday, Mr. Pecker said that when he spoke to President Trump about the former president reimbursing Mr. Cohen for paying Ms. Clifford, the former president told him that he had no idea what Mr. Pecker was referring to. He specifically testified that the former president “had no idea what [he] was talking about” when he asked about reimbursing Mr. Cohen.

He also said that he purchased the rights to former model Karen McDougal’s story as well but he stipulated that President Trump never told him to purchase that story—only that he and Mr. Cohen were concerned about the McDougal story from emerging.

Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen arrives at the district attorney’s office to complete his testimony before a grand jury in New York City on March 15, 2023. (Yuki Iwamura/AFP via Getty Images)

A conviction by the jury would not preclude President Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. The charge is punishable by up to four years in prison, although it’s not clear if the judge would seek to put him behind bars.

For the charges to be a felony, prosecutors have to prove their allegations that President Trump falsified business records in the furtherance of another crime. They have argued that the alleged falsification efforts were tantamount to election interference.

But the former president and his lawyers have said that they were simple legal expenses. They have also cast the credibility of Mr. Cohen into doubt, noting that he spent time in prison on fraud and other charges, and have noted that he has currently made a career out of criticizing President Trump in the media and on social media.

Mr. Cohen on Thursday wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, that he would stop commenting on the Trump trial.

“Despite not being the gagged defendant … I will cease posting anything about Donald on my X account or on the Mea Culpa Podcast until after my trial testimony. See you all in a month (or more),” he wrote.

On Friday morning, President Trump did not speak to the media before he entered the courtroom. However, he wrote a Truth Social post at around 9:20 a.m. criticizing the level of security at the Manhattan court.

“I’m at the heavily guarded Courthouse. Security is that of Fort Knox, all so that MAGA will not be able to attend this trial, presided over by a highly conflicted pawn of the Democrat Party. It is a sight to behold! Getting ready to do my Courthouse presser. Two minutes!” he wrote.

Earlier this week, he called on his supporters to peacefully protest the trial against him.

On Friday Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing, which brought to a close the US top diplomat’s three day visit to China. 

Blinken warned the Chinese leader of another potential “downward spiral” in relations and the two sides agreed this should be avoided, however, there were plenty of not so subtle barbs, warnings and threats exchanged.

AFP/Getty Images

President Xi in comments underscored that Beijing and Washington “should be partners rather than adversaries” – a familiar theme of top Chinese officials of late. “The world is big enough to accommodate the simultaneous development and prosperity of both China and the United States,” he said according to a Chinese Foreign Ministry readout.

But he added the caveat that US-China relations will only stabilize once the US takes “a positive and constructive view of China’s development.” 

“I proposed three major principles: mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation. They are not only a summary of past experience, but also a guide to the future,” the Chinese leader was quoted as saying.

Blinken responded in a statement to reporters by emphasizing “We want China’s economy to grow” but it remains that “the way China grows matters.”

“That means fostering a healthy economic relationship where American workers and firms are treated equally and fairly,” he continued, highlighting the Biden admin talking point of China’s unfair trade practices and the potential for certain US sectors being overrun with Chinese products.

During this second trip to China in less than a year by Blinken, the Secretary of State also called out China related to Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“Russia would struggle to sustain its assault on Ukraine without China’s support,” Blinken claimed provocatively, while also asserting China is the “top supplier” of Russia’s defense industrial base – albeit not in terms of lethal aid (but instead “dual use” technologies).

Blinken threatened punitive against on China if it continues to give support to Russia amid the Ukraine onslaught…

🇺🇸 Footage of Blinken threatening action against China if it continues to support Russia. pic.twitter.com/spt9AxMHFb

— S p r i n t e r F a c t o r y (@Sprinterfactory) April 26, 2024

This alleged support to Russia’s defense industry additionally constitutes a “medium to long-term threat that many Europeans feel viscerally that Russia poses to them,” Blinken continued.

He warned that the Biden administration is ready to introduce more sanctions against China if dual-use goods and technologies continue to be sent to Russia, including things previously listed such as: semiconductors, machine tools, chemical precursors, ball bearings, and optical systems.

As expected, China’s foreign ministry hit back at the commentary and accusations, saying Blinken is “unreasonably criticizing the normal trade and economic relations between Russia and China” – at a moment it’s pouring billions into one side of the war: Ukraine… while refusing to press for peace negotiations. “This is a very hypocritical and irresponsible approach,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbing told reporters later in the day Friday.

The so-called ‘party of science’ has decided to abandon its plan to save millions of lives (of mostly African American youth) by choosing not to ban Menthol cigarettes after all…

In October 2023, the FDA said it was looking to ban menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars due to concerns these tobacco products are harming American youth.

“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is looking to ban menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars due to concerns these tobacco products are harming American youth.

The agency estimated there were 18.5 million menthol cigarette smokers aged 12 and above in the United States in 2018, with “particularly high rates of use by youth, young adults, and African Americans and other racial and ethnic groups.”

Them in December 2023, after what some called a ‘blacklash’, White House officials were reportedly taking more time to review their sweeping ban plan, despite the science’s awful warnings:

“The federal agency estimates a ban on the flavor additive could prevent 300,000 to 650,000 smoking deaths over several decades.

They claim most of the preventable deaths would be among minority groups and Americans of African descent, who disproportionately smoke menthol cigarettes.”

And now, April 2024 (around six months before the election and with Biden’s poll numbers in the proverbial toilet), The Wall Street Journal reports that the Biden administration is reversing course on its plan to ban menthol cigarettes, after the White House weighed the potential public-health benefits of banning minty smokes against the political risk of angering Black voters in an election year.

Some Black community leaders had fought the measure, saying a ban would expand the illicit market for cigarettes and lead police to racially profile Black smokers.

The American Civil Liberties Union and some members of the Congressional Black Caucus expressed similar concerns.

The administration is expected to announce its decision as soon as Friday afternoon, according to people familiar with the matter.

So, to sum up: The White House is willing to ignore the potential (science-driven data) death of 650,000 mostly African American voters to improve its chances in November?

This couldn’t possibly have anything to so with the fact that minorities in America are starting to look for alternatives to the Democrats they have been indoctrinated to vote for all their lives… or the fact that swing-state polls shows black voters abandoning Biden in favor of Trump is huge numbers…

Gotcha, “science” indeed!

Officials at the Port of Baltimore opened a fourth, 35-foot deep, temporary channel through the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge, allowing cargo ships trapped at the port to exit. 

According to Bloomberg‘s ship tracking data, four of seven ships trapped at the port navigated the new temporary channel and are sailing down the Chesapeake Bay. 

On Thursday, the Balsa 94, a bulk carrier sailing under a Panama flag, transited the temporary channel for Saint John, Canada. Three other ships, including the Saimaagracht cargo vessel, the Carmen vehicle carrier, and the Phatra Naree bulk carrier, were also able to exit. 

The general cargo ship Balsa 94 becomes the first ship to use the @portofbalt‘s 35-foot-deep Limited Access Channel promised by the @USACEHQ by the end of April. The ship had been stuck in the harbor since the March 26 collapse of the Key Bridge.

Updated story here:… pic.twitter.com/LZeE9o5rne

— gCaptain (@gCaptain) April 25, 2024

The new 35-foot depth channel is a massive increase compared to smaller channels opened several weeks after the Dali container ship slammed into the bridge one month ago, toppling the bridge and paralyzing the port. 

“While this is a significant achievement, we have a long way to go, and Unified Command is committed to fully opening the channel by the end of May,” US Coast Guard Cmdr. Baxter Smoak told reporters. 

Next week, salvage crews expect to refloat Dali, which will then be pushed back to port by tugboats for inspection. Once Dali and all debris are removed, the main shipping channel could reopen next month. 

However, Ben Schafer, an engineering professor at Johns Hopkins University, told AP News that a new bridge could take five to seven years to be rebuilt. 

“The lead time on air conditioning equipment right now for a home renovation is like 16 months, right?” Schafer said. 

He continued: “So it’s like you’re telling me they’re going to build a whole bridge in two years? I want it to be true, but I think empirically it doesn’t feel right to me.”

Let’s remember that the bridge was critical for the port and a critical feeder to the Interstate 95 highway network up and down the mid-Atlantic area. Local supply chain snarls will persist for years. 

Via Middle East Eye

The Arabic language spokesperson of the US State Department has resigned over Washington’s Gaza war policy, in the third senior level resignation from the department since the war began.

Hala Rharrit, a Palestinian-American, posted her resignation on the LinkedIn social media site, stating: “I resigned April 2024 after 18 years of distinguished service in opposition to the United States’ Gaza policy.”

Hala Rharrit, Arabic language spokesperson for the State Department, has quit in protest. Image: State Dept.

Rharrit, who joined the State Department as a political and human rights officer, was also the department’s Dubai regional media hub deputy director.

When asked about the resignation, a State Department spokesperson told Reuters on Thursday that the department has channels for its staff to share views when they disagree with government policies.

In late March, Annelle Sheline, a foreign affairs officer in the State Department’s human rights bureau, stepped down in protest over the Biden administration’s support for Israel, saying it had made her job promoting human rights “almost impossible”. 

Earlier, veteran State Department official Josh Paul, a former director overseeing US arms transfers, resigned over Biden’s “destructive, unjust” supply of arms to Israel just days after the war on Gaza began.

In January, a senior Palestinian-American official in the US Education Department, Tariq Habash, resigned from his post, saying he could no longer “stay silent as this administration turns a blind eye to the atrocities committed against innocent Palestinian lives.”

Despite mounting international criticism of Israel’s offensive that has reportedly killed more than 34,300 people and flattened swathes of Gaza, the Biden administration has continued to provide its ally with a steady stream of weapons. Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that the White House was eyeing an additional $1bn weapons deal with Israel.

On Wednesday, the US Senate joined the House of Representatives in passing an aid bill that will provide $26bn in aid for Israel and Palestine, with $4bn set to replenish Israel’s missile defense system and roughly $9bn slated for humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in Gaza.

There have been reports of internal dissent within the Biden administration as the death toll in Gaza continues to mount. In November, more than 1,000 officials at USAID, the State Department’s international aid organisation, signed an open letter calling for an immediate ceasefire. Cables criticizing the administration’s policy have also been filed with the State Department’s internal “dissent channel”.

The war has also sparked widespread anti-war demonstrations across the United States, with protests in recent weeks escalating across US universities. Student-led protests have seen encampments set up on major campuses demanding divestment from companies involved in Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and “genocide” in Gaza. 

Egypt is attempting a last ditch effort to reach a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel at a moment IDF shelling of Rafah has intensified, in what are seen as ‘softening’ operations ahead of an imminent ground offensive, despite international calls to cancel the operation.

The Egyptian government on Friday dispatched a high level delegation to Israel led by top intelligence official Abbas Kamel. The Associated Press reported he is presenting a “new vision” for prolonged ceasefire.

But key to a breakthrough is agreement on the remaining Israeli hostages being released, and the two sides seem no closer to achieving that. The Wall Street Journal cites that “Egyptian officials familiar with the negotiations say the talks toward a hostage deal have little chance of success, but hope to use the meetings to buy time for the U.S. and regional powers to pressure Israel to pause its plans to attack Rafah.”

While things heat up in the south of the Strip, the IDF has reportedly allowed many displaced Palestinians to return to their homes in northern Gaza “with minimum restrictions”.

According to more via WSJ: “The main stumbling block in the negotiations now is Hamas’s demand that any deal include a credible path to a permanent cease-fire, rather than a temporary pause in the fighting, according to Egyptian and other officials familiar with the negotiations.”

As for Egypt, it is bracing for a likely massive refugee influx across its border and into Sinai should an all-out Rafah assault be unleashed. Both Egypt and Israel have been establishing camps; however, these would likely reach and overflow in capacity within 24 hours of a Rafah ground operation.

One top Hamas official told international media correspondents that Hamas is willing to agree to a truce of five years or more with Israel. But Hamas has stuck by its key demand of a full Israeli military withdrawal from the Strip. At the same time Prime Minister Netanyahu has vowed to see through his vow of eradicating Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorists.

Hamas has also said it is willing to lay down its weapons if Israel vows to uphold a two-state solution. Some European countries have also called for this, and have pushed for Palestine to become a full-fledged member of the United Nations.

On Friday at least five more Palestinians have been reported killed by the intensified shelling in Rafah. Currently, more than half of the total Gaza Strip population of 2.3 million are believe to be packed into the southern city. Humanitarian aid organizations are warning of an impending disaster if there is a full military ground offensive. The past weeks have seen dozens killed in similar shelling attacks.

A large segment of the Israeli population believes that Prime Minister Netanyahu is launching into a Rafah operation full-steam for the sake of his political survival. One fresh Haaretz headline, for example reads: “Fearing the End of His Coalition, Netanyahu Edges Toward Rafah Operation Over Hostage Deal”.

IMPORTANT — It could take 14 years to clear debris in #Gaza

An estimated 37 million tonnes of debris has been left by #Israel’s war on Gaza’s widely urbanised, densely populated territory.

Source — Pehr Lodhammar, senior officer at the United Nations Mine Action Service… pic.twitter.com/VwpKyPmE8u

— Hala Jaber (@HalaJaber) April 26, 2024

Below are some fresh Associated Press headlines detailing the latest developments Friday…

Ship comes under attack off coast of Yemen as Houthi rebel campaign appears to gain new speed
Satellite photos show new port construction in Gaza Strip for US-led aid operation
Some campuses call in police to break up pro-Palestinian demonstrations, while others wait it out
Chef José Andrés says aid workers killed by Israeli airstrikes represented the ‘best of humanity’
UN report says 282 million people faced acute hunger in 2023, with the worst famine in Gaza
EU military officer says a frigate has destroyed a drone launched from Yemen’s Houthi-held areas
North Gaza still headed toward famine, UN food agency says
Israel masses military vehicles along Gaza border

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in the New York Post on yesterday’s oral arguments on presidential immunity. As expected, with the exception of the three liberal justices, the Court appears to be struggling to find a more nuanced approach that would avoid the extreme positions of both parties. Rather than take a header off either cliff, the justices seem interested in a controlled descent into the depths of Article II.

Here is the column:

Writer Ray Bradbury once said, “Living at risk is jumping off the cliff and building your wings on the way down.”

In Thursday’s case before the Supreme Court on the immunity of former President Donald Trump, nine justices appear to be feverishly working with feathers and glue on a plunge into a constitutional abyss.

It has been almost 50 years since the high court ruled presidents have absolute immunity from civil lawsuits in Nixon v. Fitzgerald.

The court held ex-President Richard Nixon had such immunity for acts taken “within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.”

Yet in 1974’s United States v. Nixon, the court ruled a president is not immune from a criminal subpoena. Nixon was forced to comply with a subpoena for his White House tapes in the Watergate scandal from special counsel Leon Jaworski.

Since then, the court has avoided any significant ruling on the extension of immunity to a criminal case — until now.

There are cliffs on both sides of this case.

If the court were to embrace special counsel Jack Smith’s arguments, a president would have no immunity from criminal charges, even for official acts taken in his presidency.

It would leave a president without protection from endless charges from politically motivated prosecutors.

If the court were to embrace Trump counsel’s arguments, a president would have complete immunity.

It would leave a president largely unaccountable under the criminal code for any criminal acts.

The first cliff is made obvious by the lower-court opinion. While the media have largely focused on extreme examples of president-ordered assassinations and coups, the justices are clearly as concerned with the sweeping implications of the DC Circuit opinion.

Chief Justice John Roberts noted the DC Circuit failed to make any “focused” analysis of the underlying acts, instead offering little more than a judicial shrug.

Roberts read its statement that “a former president can be prosecuted for his official acts because the fact of the prosecution means that the former president has acted in defiance of the laws” and noted it sounds like “a former president can be prosecuted because he is being prosecuted.”

The other cliff is more than obvious from the other proceedings occuring as these arguments were made. Trump’s best attorney proved to be Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

If the justices want insight into the implications of denying any immunity, they just need to look north to New York City.

The ongoing prosecution of Trump is legally absurd but has resulted in the leading presidential candidate not only being gagged but prevented from campaigning.

Alvin Bragg is the very personification of the danger immunity is meant to avoid.

With cliffs to the left and the right, the justices are looking at a free-fall dive into the scope of constitutional and criminal law as they apply to presidential conduct.

They may be looking not for a foothold as much as a shorter drop.

Some of the justices are likely to be seeking a third option where a president has some immunity under a more limited and less tautological standard than the one the DC Circuit offered.

The problem for the court is presidential privilege and immunity decisions are meant to give presidents breathing room by laying out bright lines within which they can operate.

Ambiguity defeats the purpose of such immunity. So does a test that turns on the motivation of an official act.

The special counsel insists, for example, Trump was acting for his personal interest in challenging certification and raising electoral fraud since he was the other candidate.

But what if he wasn’t on the ballot — would it have been an official function to raise such concerns for other candidates?

When pressed on the line between official and nonofficial conduct, the special counsel just dismissed such concerns and said Trump was clearly acting as an office-seeker not an officeholder.

Likewise, the special counsel argued the protection for presidents must rest with the good motivations and judgment of prosecutors.

It was effectively a “Trust us, we’re the government” assurance. Justice Samuel Alito and others questioned whether such reliance is well placed after decades of prosecutors’ proven abuses.

Finally, if there is no immunity, could President Barack Obama be prosecuted for ordering the killing of a citizen by drone attack and then killing his son in a second drone attack?

The government insisted there is an exception for such acts from the murder statute.

In the end, neither party offers a particularly inviting path. No immunity or complete immunity each holds obvious dangers.

I have long opposed sweeping arguments of immunity from criminal charges for presidents. The devil is in the details, and many justices are struggling with how to define official versus nonofficial conduct.

The line-drawing proved maddening for the justices in the oral argument. The most they could say is similar to the story of the man who jumped off a building. As he passes an office window halfway down, another man calls out to ask how he’s doing. The jumper responds, “So far so good.”

As the justices work on a new set of legal wings, anything is possible as the nation waits for the court to hit ground zero in the middle of the 2024 presidential election.

There have been emerging reports Friday that Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir has been hospitalized after a serious car accident.

Regional media outlet The Cradle writes that “Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir has been hospitalized after his car overturned in Ramla while leaving the scene of a stabbing attack.”

Video of the flipped car of Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, circulating on Israeli telegram channels pic.twitter.com/SjPV1muqgE

— Michael A. Horowitz (@michaelh992) April 26, 2024

Axios correspondent Barak Ravid also confirms that the cabinet minister was in a government car which was in an accident and flipped over.

Ben Gvir has reportedly been injured, and images and footage from the scene shows what appears to be a very serious accident. Unconfirmed reports say that “According to Israeli media, his car had run a red light before the accident.”

The incident comes as the country is deeply divided over the Netanyahu government’s Gaza policy. Ben Gvir is considered among the most ‘extreme’ ministers in the governing coalition, also having ties with internationally sanctioned settler movements which engage in attempts to cleanse West Bank areas of any Palestinian presence.

Israeli media is already spotlighting controversial elements surrounding Ben Gvir and the Friday car crash, with Haaretz reporting the national security minister’s driving habits have been flagged as dangerous. According to machine translation of the Hebrew report:

The Shin Bet contacted the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of National Security following several cases in which Minister Itamar Ben Gabir’s car was driven in violation of traffic laws, Haaretz learned.

According to security sources, the minister’s security guards complained to their superiors in the ministry that the minister was ordering his drivers to commit offenses. Traffic, including passing a red light at traffic lights, driving at excessive speed and driving on the side of the road.

Images from the scene show that Ben Gvir’s injuries might be quite serious (though some reports suggest only minor injuries)…

Earlier this month Ben Gvir stirred more controversy when he deeply criticized Netanyahu’s ‘limited’ retaliatory attack on Iran, calling it ‘lame’ and implying that the response was weak and should have been much bigger and stronger.

Currently there is a lot of reported infighting even among the top decision-makers on Gaza wartime policy. The Wall Street Journal recently featured a headline that underscored Israel’s war leaders don’t trust one another. This comes as they are dealing simultaneously with the operation in Gaza, repelling Hezbollah daily drone and missile attacks in the north, and of course the new tit-for-tat crisis with Iran.

Pro-Palestine pundits took to social media and immediately began speculating over the apparent serious car accident…

The Americans tried to off Ben Gvir today 😂 https://t.co/6zHNcsvexw

— Sharmine Narwani (@snarwani) April 26, 2024

“Long-simmering grudges and arguments over how best to fight Hamas have soured relations between Israel’s wartime decision makers—Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and the former head of the Israeli military, Benny Gantz,” the publication wrote. 

Amid contrasting reports, public broadcaster Kann news says the minister was “lightly injured” in the accident.

#BREAKING: Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir was injured in a car accident, he was taken to hospital after he was lightly injured pic.twitter.com/99FmEwQbKF

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) April 26, 2024

“The three men are at odds over the biggest decisions they need to make: how to launch a decisive military push, free Israel’s hostages and govern the postwar strip.”

⚡️The moment Ben Gvir got into the accident pic.twitter.com/uxF3OVgzhn

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) April 26, 2024

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Conservative states across the country—Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, and Oklahoma—are taking border security matters into their own hands, proposing or passing legislation targeting illegal immigration.

(Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock, Getty Images)

The Oklahoma legislature just passed a bill designed to prohibit illegal immigrants from entering or living in the state.

HB 4156 states: “A person commits an impermissible occupation if the person is an alien and willfully and without permission enters and remains in the State of Oklahoma without having first obtained legal authorization to enter the United States.”

The bill passed the state House and Senate by wide margins and Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, is expected to sign it into law.

The legislature declared the issue a crisis in the state and stated in the bill: “Throughout the state, law enforcement comes into daily and increasingly frequent contact with foreign nationals who entered the country illegally or who remain here illegally.

“Often, these persons are involved with organized crime such as drug cartels, they have no regard for Oklahoma’s laws or public safety, and they produce or are involved with fentanyl distribution, sex trafficking, and labor trafficking.”

Under the new law, a conviction related to “impermissible occupation” would be considered a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in a county jail, a fine of up to $500, or both.

Subsequent offenses are felonies, punishable by up to two years in prison, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.

Illegal immigrants who are barred from the country or have been issued a removal order by an immigration judge, and then enter Oklahoma will face a felony charge carrying a possible sentence of up to two years in prison, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.

In all instances, those found guilty must leave Oklahoma within 72 hours of being convicted or released from custody.

A prison cell block at the El Reno Federal Correctional Institution in El Reno, Okla., on July 16, 2015. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

The law requires police to collect fingerprints, photographs, and biometric data, which will be cross-checked with Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation databases.

“The failure of the federal government to address this issue … has turned every state into a border state,” said bill sponsor state Rep. Charles Mr. McCall said in a statement.

“Those who want to work through the process of coming to our country legally are more than welcome to come to Oklahoma; we would love to have them here. We will not reward [illegal immigration] in Oklahoma, and we will protect our state borders.”

U.S. border authorities have apprehended more than 9 million illegal immigrants nationwide under President Joe Biden, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data.

Under the administration’s catch-and-release policy, many have been released into the United States and have taken up residence all over the country.

Texas’ law, Senate Bill 4, makes it a state crime to enter Texas outside legal ports of entry.

The new law was set to go into effect in March, but has been blocked and is currently tied up in the courts.

New Iowa, Tennessee, and Georgia Laws

Earlier this month, Iowa’s Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed Senate File 2340 into law.

The new law, which goes into effect July 1, makes it a misdemeanor to be in the state or attempt to enter the state after being deported, denied admission to the United States, or if an individual has an outstanding deportation order.

Being in the state illegally becomes a felony under certain circumstances such as the accused having two or more misdemeanor convictions involving drugs or crimes against a person.

As with the Texas law, it gives judges the discretion to drop the charges if the illegal immigrant agrees to return to the country from which he or she entered the United States.

“Those who come into our country illegally have broken the law, yet Biden refuses to deport them,” Ms. Reynolds stated in a news release.

“This bill gives Iowa law enforcement the power to do what he is unwilling to do: enforce immigration laws already on the books.”

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a new law this month that requires law enforcement agencies to communicate with federal immigration authorities if they discover people are in the country illegally, requiring in most cases cooperation in the process of identifying, catching, detaining, and deporting them.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott holds a press conference at Shelby Park in Eagle Pass, Texas, on Feb. 4, 2024. (Sergio Flores/AFP via Getty Images)

The law takes effect July 1.

“When there is an interaction with law enforcement, it’s important that the appropriate authorities are notified of the status of that individual,” Mr. Lee, a Republican, told reporters after signing the bill into law. “I think that makes sense. So, I’m in support of that legislation.”

Members of the Tennessee House blamed President Biden’s lack of border enforcement for the necessity of the law.

“President Biden’s administration has delivered this pain to our doorsteps,” Tennessee state Rep. Chris Todd said on the House floor.

In Georgia, lawmakers passed House Bill 1105 that would require jailers to check the immigration status of inmates.

The bill is part of an ongoing political response to the February slaying of nursing student Laken Riley on the University of Georgia campus, allegedly by an illegal immigrant from Venezuela.

The man, Jose Antonio Ibarra, was arrested in February on murder and assault charges in the death of the 22-year-old.

Immigration officials say Mr. Ibarra, 26, crossed into the United States illegally in 2022. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed to Sen. Lindsey Graham(R-S.C.)  that Mr. Ibarra was paroled into the country illegally due to “capacity problems” at border detention facilities

The Georgia bill was sent to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp’s desk on April 3 and awaits his signature, at which time most measures would take effect immediately.

Louisiana, Arizona, New Hampshire

Texas’ neighbor, Louisiana, is considering the passage of SB 388, a GOP-led bill that would allow state police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants within the state.

The law passed the chamber on April 8 along party lines and headed to the House, also controlled by Republicans.

“Louisiana is one step closer to securing our border and addressing our illegal immigration crisis,” Republican state Sen. Valarie Hodges, the bill’s sponsor, posted on X.

A National Guard soldier looks across the Rio Grande to Mexico on the border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on May 23, 2022. (Allison Dinner/AFP via Getty Images)

The battleground state of Arizona passed a law similar to Texas’ HB 4, but its Democratic Gov. Katy Hobbs vetoed it.

That inspired the Legislature to draft a ballot measure to be put to voters in November that would require businesses to use E-verify. E-verify is a voluntary federal online service for employers to check an employee’s eligibility to work in the United States against Department of Homeland Security and Social Security records.

New Hampshire, which is Republican-led, passed SB 504 allowing police to bring criminal trespassing charges against people suspected of illegally entering the United States from Canada. The measure must be approved by the House to advance.

Cities and Counties

Cities and counties in red and blue states are also pushing back in creative ways to stop illegal immigrants from coming into their jurisdictions.

“They’re basically dumped on their doorstep,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, a “pro-immigrant, low-immigration” think tank.

In June 2023, New York City under Democratic Mayor Eric Adams sued more than 30 New York local governments alleging they issued unlawful executive orders prohibiting temporary housing for illegal immigrants in their jurisdictions.

Counties such as Orange and Rockland in upstate New York were successful in using local zoning laws to stop the mayor from busing illegal immigrants to live in their hotels.

The state Supreme Court granted Rockland a temporary restraining order against the mayor’s plan after the county argued that local zoning laws bar hotels from operating as shelters.

Orange County was granted a similar ruling.

Likewise, zoning was used by the city of Taunton, Massachusetts, to stop illegal immigrants from living in hotels, Ms. Vaughan said.

In May 2023, the state was paying millions of dollars to house some 120 homeless and migrant families at a local hotel long-term.

A bus carrying illegal immigrants from Texas arrives at Port Authority Bus Terminal in New York City on Aug. 10, 2022.

Taunton city leaders filed a lawsuit against the hotel, claiming it violated its occupancy limit for nearly four months. The city aims to collect $114,600 in fines.

Residents in these small communities often struggle with housing and obtaining services that illegal immigrants get for free, Ms. Vaughan noted.

“Now paying taxes, essentially, to support these illegal migrants in their town. The schools have to accommodate them. And that’s a huge cost on the local taxpayers,” she said.

In Colorado’s Mesa County, commissioners passed a resolution in February declaring the county a “non-sanctuary county,” and denying shelter and services to illegal aliens sent there by the state or federal government, she said.

Commissioners also passed a resolution to send a letter to Denver Mayor Mike Johnston informing him the county doesn’t plan to help the city deal with its illegal immigrant surge.

Ms. Vaughan said that she believes other states are waiting to see what happens with some of Texas’ laws, such as SB 4, which are aimed at deterring illegal immigration.

“I think the feeling among most state and local officials that I’ve talked to about it is that they are watching and waiting and hoping that the court will draw some boundaries for them on what they can and cannot do,” she said.

Florida’s Laws

When it comes to making life more difficult for illegal immigrants through legislation, Florida has proven as aggressive as Texas.

Besides beefing up law enforcement to help the U.S. Coast Guard spot migrants and sending the Florida National Guard to Texas, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has approved laws to deter illegal aliens from staying in the Sunshine State.

The Republican governor signed SB 1718 in 2023, which was criticized by the left as one of the most anti-illegal immigrant pieces of legislation in the country.

Read more here…