All Quiet On The Western Ports… Is This The Calm Before The Trade War Storm? All is quiet on the American front as the week comes to a close, even as Korea JoongAng Daily reports that a high-ranking Chinese trade official from the Ministry of Finance was spotted at the U.S. Treasury Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. earlier today. The meeting between Chinese and U.S. officials comes on the eve of a trade war shock now ripping across the Pacific, with the Port of Los Angeles set to be the first hit. High-frequency data suggests the impact will begin at some point next week and intensify with each passing week. On the eve of a trade war shock, data from Port Optimizer—a tracking system used by vessel operators—shows that scheduled import volumes into the Port of Los Angeles are set to begin plunging next week and could collapse by mid-month. Goldman analyst Jacob Malmstrom has a few charts for us to end the week: Geopolitical tensions easing leading markets higher for the week but where the effective tariff rate currently is the highest it’s been in 100 years. With globalisation the trade growth has grown substantially in the last 60 year but looking at current U.S. imports from Europe they have hovered around 15% in recent decades. World trade growth has increased dramatically in the period of globalisation In markets, Malmstrom warned: Difficult to come up with a fundamental bull-case from here longer term. Still need to see any of these four conditions met for a sustainable recovery: 1) Attractive valuations ,2) Extreme positioning easing, 3) Policy Support, 4) Sense that the second derivative of growth is improving. When looking at valuations in the U.S. they look more justified when comparing to ROE. Banks sold-off in the beginning of the year but has rebounded whereas Mega-cap tech has continued its decline. Finally earnings so far has been in-line with the historical average.  Our coverage details the events that have unfolded this month in trigger the trade war shock—one that’s already hitting China and is now set to wash ashore momentarily in the U.S.:  Amazon Cancels Orders, Walmart Pulls Forecast As Tariffs Take Hold Are China Road Traffic Indicators Set To Collapse As Tariff War Cancels Factory Orders Chinese Sellers On Amazon Panic After Trump’s Tariff Bazooka Liberation Day Fallout: China’s Port Volumes Sink After Trump’s Tariff Blitz Chinese Plastics Factories Face Mass Closure As U.S. Ethane Supply Evaporates “Our Export Orders Disappeared”: Chinese Factories Shutting Down, Laying Off Workers, FT Finds First Tariff Shock Set To Hit Port Of Los Angeles, With Ripple Effects Across The Broader Economy Walmart Opens Channel For Battered Chinese Exporters To “Quickly Expand” In Domestic Market Trade War Shock Looms For Port Of Los Angeles As Goldman Identifies Most-Impacted Products High-frequency data from the Port of Los Angeles suggests a substantial impact on Chinese exports to the U.S. will begin next week, mainly due to the lag between factory shutdowns or halted shipments in China—triggered by the 145% tariffs—and the time it takes for containerized freight to cross the Pacific on massive cargo ships. The bulleted list above outlines what might come next: downward pressure across the trucking industry in Southern California and the Empire Inland warehouse district. As Goldman noted earlier, inventories for many companies are in the 2–3 month range but could be depleted quickly if panic buying sets in once consumers become aware of Port of Los Angeles disruptions. There could even be a short-term spike in inflation this summer, though it would likely prove transitory.  Tyler Durden Fri, 04/25/2025 – 23:34

Epstein Victim Virginia Giuffre Dies By Suicide According To Family Jeffrey Epstein’s most prominent victim, Virginia Giuffre, died by suicide on Thursday according to her family – weeks after she said she had ‘days to live’ and was in renal failure following a collision with a bus. Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew of sexual assault, has died, her family said. Pic: Reuters The 41-year-old died in Neergabby, Australia, where she had been living for several years. “It is with utterly broken hearts that we announce that Virginia passed away last night at her farm in Western Australia,” he family said in a statement to NBC News. “She lost her life to suicide, after being a lifelong victim of sexual abuse and sex trafficking.” “Virginia was a fierce warrior in the fight against sexual abuse and sex trafficking. She was the light that lifted so many survivors,” the statement continues. “In the end, the toll of abuse is so heavy that it became unbearable for Virginia to handle its weight.” Giuffre was one of the earliest Epstein abuse survivors to come out publicly and call for criminal charges against the convicted pedophile, who himself died while in custody awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges – while cameras were mysteriously malfunctioning and guards had ‘fallen asleep.’ Six years ago, Giuffre proclaimed “I am making it publicy known that in no way, shape or form am I sucidal,” adding “If something happens to me- in the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them.” I am making it publicy known that in no way, shape or form am I sucidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP- If something happens to me- in the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quiteted 🦋 https://t.co/8463mPR6YU — Virginia Giuffre (@VRSVirginia) December 11, 2019 Raised in Florida, Giuffre said she was sexually abused by a family friend, and was eventually groomed by Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. Giuffre was abused by Epstein and pals between 1999 and 2002, when she was trafficked to Epstein’s powerful friends, including Prince Andrew and French modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel.  Giuffre took legal action against Epstein in 2015, claiming that she was sex trafficked at the age of 16 at various locations – including Epstein’s Little St. James island (aka Pedo Island), his New Mexico compound, and Maxwell’s home in London, where a notorious photo of her was taken with Prince Andrew – which the Andrew and supporters claim was fabricated. Maxwell – a former British socialite whose father was a suspected agent for Mossad, was found guilty on five counts of sex trafficking in 2021 for her role in recruiting girls to be abused by Epstein and his network. Giuffre isn’t the first deceased Epstein victim: REPORT: Epstein Victim Who Testified Against Ghislaine Maxwell Found Dead.. MEDIA SILENT.. Carolyn Andriano, a key witness in the case against Jeffrey Epstein’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell, has passed away. Her death occurred earlier this year, and it WAS NOT marked by an… pic.twitter.com/5u22velaPC — Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) November 21, 2023 Giuffre sued Prince Andrew in 2021, alleging that he sexually abused her when she was 17. Andrew agreed to settle the case for an undisclosed amount in 2022, and denied all allegations. Brunel, meanwhile, was charged with sexual harassment and rape of a minor in December of 2020. He ‘died by suicide’ in his jail cell in February 2022 – months after Giuffre appeared in court to advocate for Brunel’s victims. “I wanted Brunel to know that he no longer has the power over me,” Giuffre said, adding “that I am a grown woman now and I’ve decided to hold him accountable for what he did to me and so many others.” Giuffre moved to Australia with her husband before Epstein’s 2019 arrest. The couple has three children. Her brother, Danny Wilson, told NBC News she “pushed so hard to snuff the evil out” of the world. “Her biggest push was, ‘If I don’t do this, nobody’s going to do it,'” he said, regarding her advocacy. “She was in real physical pain — suffered from renal failure. But I think that the mental pain was worse.” -NBC News And for Epstein’s network of abusers who are still running around uncharged, another loose end has been tied up. *  *  * Psst! – click here for a sneak peek at new offerings at ZeroHedge Store ahead of our official announcement… Tyler Durden Fri, 04/25/2025 – 21:58

Is DOGE Creating A “Master Database” To Track And Deport Illegals? The Trump Administration’s efforts to finally put controls on the illegal immigration crisis made a substantial impact, but many conservatives feel the process is still not moving fast enough.  ICE has arrested and deported an estimated 100,000 -150,000 illegals in the past four months.  This is a far cry from the President’s call for 1 million deportations in 2025.  The true success story has been the southern border – Illegal crossing have plummeted 95% since 2024 and many migrants have chosen to self deport rather than be arrested.  Border encounters are currently at 8000 per month, which Border Patrol officials say is the lowest number since records began in the year 2000 and might be the lowest since 1968. The true scale of self-deportations, however, is not clear.  This leaves an estimated 17 million illegals still in the US (probably more given Biden’s border blitzkrieg since 2021).  A vast majority of these people reside in Democrat run sanctuary states and sanctuary cities where welfare programs are plentiful and protection from federal authorities is assumed.  Without state and federal coordination the ability of the White House to achieve 1 million deportations per year is limited.   That said, rumors are swirling that Elon Musk and DOGE are building a “Master Database” to track and remove migrants from the country using correlated data obtained from multiple agencies from the IRS to the Health Department to Social Security and beyond.  CNN recently claimed they have multiple sources familiar with the plans, though these sources are not named.     “If they are designing a deportation machine, they will be able to do that,” a former senior IRS employee with knowledge of the plans told CNN. The database would also make it easier for the Trump Administration to block illegals from access to public housing and other public programs, which would take away incentives and compel migrants to exit the country. The idea of data tracking for illegals seems to have a number of Democrats worried.  Democratic lawmakers have slammed the plan, claiming DOGE is “rapidly, haphazardly, and unlawfully” exploiting Americans’ personal data.  But the concept of mass tracking of citizens (rather than illegal migrants) didn’t bother Democrats during the pandemic scare.  They fought for years to create a database to track the vaccination status of all Americans.  Why are they suddenly bothered by the notion of a database to track people that are in the country illegally? It’s obvious that the open border policies of the Biden Administration were at least partially intended to secure a voting majority in the near future; expanding the Democrat base by paying off illegal migrants with government subsidies and eventual amnesty.  A number of blue cities and counties have tried to institute voting rights for illegal residents, despite the fact that the media calls immigrant voting a “conspiracy theory”.  By extension, the mere presence of millions of illegals in blue states adds to their census numbers, which then translates to more seats in Congress.   Remove the illegals efficiently and in large enough numbers and the Democratic Party loses leverage in the House.  Is this the reason why activist judges have been obstructing DOGE access to agency data at nearly every turn?   One could make a case for a “slippery slope” if data collected on a meta-scale was used against legal US citizens (as if this has not already been happening); we all saw how Democrats pushed for such a precedent during Covid and the results would have been disastrous had they gotten what they wanted.  But it’s hard to make a case for similar privacy protections for migrants who have broken the law and are, by every measure, foreign invaders.   Tyler Durden Fri, 04/25/2025 – 21:45

Trump: Israel Won’t Drag Us Into War With Iran ‘But I’ll Lead The Pack’ If No Deal Made Iran’s top diplomat Abbas Araghchi is in Oman preparing for the next round of nuclear talks with the United States, which will mark the third direct engagement, after President Trump just made an unexpected overture. Trump in a newly published Time interview says he is open to meeting Iran’s supreme leader or president, as the two sides have made clear they are open to achieving peace on the question of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. “I think we’re going to make a deal with Iran,” Trump said to Time. The US president was then questioned over whether he is open to meeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei or President Masoud Pezeshkian, to which he responded: “Sure”. Via Associated Press Officials involved in the Iran dialogue have presented that “very good progress” has been made. This comes after last month Trump warned that Tehran can choose inking a peace deal or possibly face American bombs.  “Ultimately I was going to leave that choice to them, but I said I would much prefer a deal than bombs being dropped,” Trump described in the interview. “We can make a deal without the attack. I hope we can.” There have been recent reports and fears that Prime Minister Netanyahu is seeking to drag the White House into waging preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear sites. But Trump has said he’s not worried that Israel would drag him into war. But that’s when he warned that, “I may go in very willingly if we can’t get a deal. If we don’t make a deal, I’ll be leading the pack.” Below is the key section of the Time interview transcript regarding Israel, Iran and US policy: You reportedly stopped Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites.  Trump: That’s not right.  It’s not right? No, it’s not right. I didn’t stop them. But I didn’t make it comfortable for them, because I think we can make a deal without the attack. I hope we can. It’s possible we’ll have to attack because Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. But I didn’t make it comfortable for them, but I didn’t say no. Ultimately I was going to leave that choice to them, but I said I would much prefer a deal than bombs being dropped. Are you worried Netanyahu will drag you into a war?  No.  Let’s talk about some of the issues with universities— By the way, he may go into a war. But we’re not getting dragged in.  The U.S. will stay out of it if Israel goes into it?  No, I didn’t say that. You asked if he’d drag me in, like I’d go in unwillingly. No, I may go in very willingly if we can’t get a deal. If we don’t make a deal, I’ll be leading the pack.  We detailed before that within the administration there is an emerging divide on Iran between the hawks and those that want a peaceful resolution. It seems Trump has been favoring the doves, also given the obvious negatives of the US getting bogged down in another Middle East quagmire. On the eve of the 3rd round of US-Iran talks, Trump says negotiations have been “very successful,” with a “very positive decision” possible—one that “could save many lives.” To Time: “We’ll make a deal with Iran. No one else could’ve done this.” Meet Iran’s leader? “Absolutely” pic.twitter.com/nokJXeOlY0 — Sina Toossi (@SinaToossi) April 25, 2025 A fresh nuclear deal might also east the pressure facing US naval forces in the Red Sea, amid the ongoing anti-Houthi campaign, given the Houthis have long been considered Tehran’s proxies. Better US-Iran relations could serve to silence the missiles and drones over the Red Sea. Tyler Durden Fri, 04/25/2025 – 21:20

The Thankless Life Of Elon Musk Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), There’s a Tesla in my neighborhood with a bumper sticker that seems to be begging people not to key the car. “I bought this car before I knew that Elon was crazy,” it says. Elon Musk looks on during a Cabinet Meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., on March 24, 2025. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images Fascinating message there. Is it a protest, plea, or both? The car is brilliant, obviously and the guy loves it. But these days, driving a Tesla comes with implied messaging, due entirely to Musk’s political actions. Elite liberals were buying this car for years as a status symbol of their love of the planet. Then everything changed. Now they are experiencing something like an existential crisis. That’s because a movement has emerged among elites who have turned against it. Then began a campaign of violence against property. Marauding gangs have attacked dealerships and vigilantes have vandalized cars and trucks all over the country. It’s revealed a point about the political left that has heretofore been only suspected: it harbors a violent streak that is alarming, even terrifying. This idea that we are what we buy—that our purchases are not just about the products but a judgment for or against the companies that make them—seems rather new as a mass phenomenon. We saw it in the mass consumer boycott of Bud Light. These violent actions, however, go far beyond a buyers’ boycott. No one in a free enterprise system objects to declining to buy. It’s another matter to lash out at others for their decisions. The political actions of the CEO dragged the company into a difficult relationship with the main customers of the product. There seems to be no question that this is the reason for the dramatic fall in both sales and the company’s stock price. EV sales otherwise seem to be on the rise, while Tesla has experienced disproportionate losses at the tail end of a very contentious election followed by the CEO’s actions that have attempted to gut the civil service. The fall has been so stinging that Elon is stepping back from politics to focus again on bolstering his company and reputation. Certainly he seems to have become less outspoken than he was a few months back. The markets seem to have humbled him into going back to business and staying out of the political muck. His project called DOGE will live on, and I suspect that he will ultimately be vindicated. For now, however, he is taking it on the chin. His early estimate of saving $2 trillion with cuts kept being pared back given court judgements and impossible bureaucracy. It now stands at $150 billion, much of which will be lost in litigation fees. It’s a terrible realization: if Musk could not do it, even with the full confidence of the U.S. president, can it even be done? Ever since Musk distinguished himself as the most prominent corporate voice against lockdowns, I’ve paid careful attention to his political migration. He was a conventional corporate liberal not too long ago, say 10 years ago. His experience during COVID changed him. This was when governments around the country and the world said they and they alone would decide which companies would open and which would close. Understandably, he came to believe that civilization was under attack and swore he would do something about it. He promised to keep his factories open even as the rest of the world was shutting down. He moved his company out of California and his corporate registrations out of Delaware in protest against what was happening. The sudden dawning of his political enlightenment mutated into a serious attack on a range of government and corporate policies that mitigate against merit in hiring and promotion. He turned on “woke”—also in part due to private family struggles that hurt him deeply. Elon eventually put his money where his mouth was. He decided to buy a heavily censored and deeply propagandistic Twitter and turn it into the much freer X that drove forward public narratives which contributed mightily to Trump’s victory in 2024. In so doing, he fired 4 out of 5 employees in the wildly bloated staff and dramatically changed the platform to become the world’s most popular news and social media application. Those actions earned him a great deal of influence over policy in the new administration. He was tasked with doing to the government what he had done at Twitter: clean it up, refresh it to become more effective and efficient, and bring some degree of transparency to government finance. Musk had some success. That said, changing government is much harder than changing a private company over which you are CEO. He has had wide influence within the Trump administration, but not as much as perhaps he had hoped. He wanted budget cuts and worked within established parameters to get them, even fully gutting several terrible sources of corruption like USAID. My judgment on his role is that Musk’s activities here have been absolutely heroic. He helped restore free speech. He has cleaned up some waste and fraud. He has streamlined some processes of government. He has set a new standard for accounting, personnel, and accounting. DOGE will go on without him. Also, it is not generally understood how xAI or Grok broke an emergent monopoly in artificial intelligence, shattering OpenAI’s hopes for a monopoly once it let go of its non profit status. Grok made that impossible. Even now, Musk’s Grok AI engine ranks very high in all side-to-side comparisons of AI tools, and certainly excels in its user interface. Musk is very easily the leader in autonomous driving, which could revolutionize transportation on many fronts. And he does it all with open-source technology. I’m not a Tesla owner and I’ve written many articles with grave doubts about EVs in general. That said, I’m for consumer choice. If you think he makes a better car, great. Buy it and drive it. He has been very clear, too, that he is against all mandates, subsidies, and even patent protections, which is quite remarkable. In general, I would say that he has behaved throughout with notable scrupulosity. Further, he threw himself into politics with the best of motives. He wanted to end censorship. He wanted to stop the corruption. He wanted to fix government finances. He has been sincere throughout and performed extraordinary deeds. He was not only not paid for his service; he has been punished financially for what he has done. This entire episode prompts a kind of reflection on the role of public life, courage, and doing what is right. Musk truly attempted to make a difference. He was courageous. He took on huge financial risks in buying Twitter that seem to have paid off. He risked the status of all of his companies when he threw in with Trump’s campaign. He could have played it safe but chose a different path. Why did he risk it all? Because he strongly believed it was the right thing to do. This is a beautiful thing to see in our cynical times. There is an element of tragedy in how his sacrifices have not been rewarded but rather punished. What message does this send to the business culture at large? It says: do not stick your neck out to stand up for what is right. Instead, be more compliant and agreeable with whomever or whatever is in power. That’s the best way to protect the bottom line. This is an unfortunate signal for business in general. It’s extremely rare that someone so accomplished in enterprise would stand up for what is right and true. He deserves the gratitude of everyone who believes in free speech and freedom generally. Arguably, his actions saved both from grave danger. He was and is paying a heavy price for doing this. What might he have done differently? He might have some thoughts on that but the general theme is that he did the right thing when it mattered the most. I seriously doubt that he would change anything about his big decisions. As for the bumper sticker on the Tesla that attacks Musk, it’s truly pathetic, an act of cowardice, whatever the motive. In multiple ways, he has been the benefactor of us all. Is every hero doomed to live a thankless life in these times? Maybe. But they will prevail in the end. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Tyler Durden Fri, 04/25/2025 – 20:55