Zerohedge

Authored by David Bruce Smith via RealClearPublicAffairs,

John and Abigail Adams envisioned an America with a school in every neighborhood and a well-informed citizenry that was adept in languages, literature, and music, as well as science, history, and religion. Their vision was practical until the ages recast it, little by little.

Then sometime between Joseph McCarthy and Joan Baez, the status quo of the educational system came undone.

Students who had been accustomed to a traditional 50/50 split between the humanities and the sciences were capsized academically by the surprise Sputnik launch in 1957. The U.S.’s race to space sent higher education into a tizzy, becoming fixated on improving science education above all. In the succeeding seven decades, resources have consistently risen for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), which has been to our benefit. But this has come at an unnecessary cost: the humanities have been downplayed, devalued, and dodged.

That uneven ratio has bestowed an unfortunate historic illiteracy on three generations. Most people, for example, do not know the philosophical roots of the Declaration of Independence, their rights as laid out in the Constitution, or the civic virtues their teachers should have taught them. For these three reasons, many Americans do not vote in local, state, or national elections.

Even amid this crisis of civic illiteracy, only about 18% of colleges and universities nationwide require the study of history and government in their general education programs. In years past, when the architecture of academe was different, a plethora of institutions, such as Harvard, Rice, Notre Dame, Johns Hopkins, and William & Mary, proffered requirements for focused classes in American history. But their phase-out – begun in the 1960s – was practically completed by 2000.

According to a report from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, nowadays, at Columbia University, “Students must take at least nine courses to graduate with a B.A. in history. Of these courses, four must be in a chosen field of geographical, chronological, or thematic specialization, and three must be outside of the specialization, including one course removed in time and two courses removed in space.” In other words, the major requires exposure to a variety of histories – none of which need touch on America.

That gap in Columbia’s history major requirements is deeply troubling, though it at least has a Contemporary Civilization requirement in its signature core curriculum for undergraduates that addresses founding documents and key concepts of United States government. Meanwhile, at Colgate University, which has no such option in its general education requirements,

“Students choose one of two pathways to graduate with a B.A. in history. Both require nine courses. The Field of Focus (FoF) Pathway requires one history workshop, seven electives….. The FoF Pathway allows students to devise individualized, intellectually coherent specializations. Possible fields of focus include environmental history, gender and sexuality, and race and racism.”

This reorientation away from the study of American history – even as a point of reference for students who are focusing their studies on other parts of the world – is now the norm in the American academy. In the 2020–21 academic year, 18 of the top 25 public universities did not have a wide-ranging American history requirement for students seeking a B.A. in history in the major or core curriculum, nor did 24 of the 25 best national schools.

Even the legendary linchpins of the liberal arts – Amherst, Swarthmore, Vassar, Smith, Williams, and Pomona – fared poorly: 21 out of 25 colleges examined did not have an American history requirement.

The consequences of forgoing the study of American history have a powerful effect on the population. Much of what is not learned – or stays uncorrected – turns into the misinformation that is so damaging in a free and democratic society.

When 8th graders were asked in 2011 to choose a “‘belief shared by most people of the United States,’ a majority (51 percent) picked ‘The government should guarantee everybody a job,’ and only a third chose the correct answer: ‘The government should be a democracy.’”

In 2015, 10% of college graduates believed Judy Sheindlin – TV’s “Judge Judy” – was a member of the Supreme Court.

In 2019, ACTA found that 18% of American adults thought New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was the architect of the New Deal, a package of programs introduced by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933. Twenty-six percent believed Brett Kavanaugh was the current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, along with another 14% who identified Antonin Scalia, although he had been dead for two years at the time of the survey. Only 12% knew the 13th Amendment freed the slaves in the United States. And 30% thought the Equal Rights Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.

In 2024, an ACTA survey of college students showed that fewer than half identified ideas like “free markets” and “rule of law” as core principles of American civic life. The survey also found that 60% of American college students failed to identify term lengths for members of Congress. A shocking 68% did not know that Congress is the branch that holds the power to declare war. Seventy-one percent did not know when 18-year-olds gained the right to vote.

All of these results were based on multiple-choice questions. All the respondents had to do was select the correct option out of four possibilities.  

The late Bruce Cole, chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities from 2001 to 2009, admonished, “Unlike a monarchy, a democracy is not automatically self-perpetuating. History and values have to be renewed from generation to generation.” Our failure to educate future citizens for informed civic participation compromises the country. Institutions need to take ACTA’s findings to heart and, starting with their requirements for the history major, embrace their obligation to address the crisis in civic education.  

David Bruce Smith is the founder of the Grateful American® Foundation and co-founder of the Grateful American® Book Prize.

Futures spiked, moving back to session highs and forgetting all about the bitter taste from disappointing results from Amazon and Apple, following news from Bloomberg that China was “assessing the possibility of trade talks with the US” the first sign since Donald Trump hiked tariffs last month that negotiations could begin between the two sides.

China’s Commerce Ministry said in a Friday statement that it had noted senior US officials repeatedly expressing their willingness to talk to Beijing about tariffs, and urged officials in Washington to show “sincerity” towards China.

“The US has recently sent messages to China through relevant parties, hoping to start talks with China,” the ministry added. “China is currently evaluating this.”

Of course, the Chinese spin is one in which the Trump admin reached out first, and which the US pro-China media will promptly use to hammer Trump with, resulting in an even quick denial by the president and thus, China, thereby erasing any hope of an overture, one which won’t come until both sides are quite desperate.

For now, however, the reaction to the flashing red headline was stark as &P 500 erased early losses in Asia while a gauge of regional equities also turned positive after the statement. The offshore yuan edged stronger, while the Australian dollar, a China proxy, also extended gains.

The statement signals the stalemate between the world’s two largest economies could shift, after Trump hiked US tariffs to the highest level in a century and Beijing retaliated in kind.

Trump has repeatedly said President Xi Jinping needs to contact him in order to begin tariff talks and earlier this week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said it’s up to Beijing to take the first step to de-escalate the dispute; China has done the same.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

The State Department recently instructed employees to report workers who exhibited anti-religious bias, including bias against Christians, according to a cable obtained by The Epoch Times.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the April 11 cable directed State Department employees to a reporting form and instructed them to provide “information regarding any Department or individual practices involving anti-religious bias during the last presidential administration (2021-2025); and recommendations to the Secretary of State to remedy any anti-religious bias at the Department.”

The cable was obtained by The Epoch Times via a Freedom of Information Act request.

Employees could provide information anonymously, Rubio said.

The submitted information would be collated, he said, to help the department contribute to an interagency report required by President Donald Trump’s February order aimed at halting anti-Christian discrimination.

“It is the policy of the United States, and the purpose of this order, to protect the religious freedoms of Americans and end the anti-Christian weaponization of government,” Trump wrote in the order, which alleged that during the Biden administration, government officials “engaged in an egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians, while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses,” such as bringing charges against people who demonstrated outside facilities that perform abortions.

Rubio said that while the order focused on anti-Christian bias, targeting anyone for their religious beliefs violates the Constitution, so people can report other instances of anti-religious bias.

The cable listed examples such as being mistreated for requesting religious exemptions from mandatory vaccination or observing religious holidays; being forced to remove displays of religious faith from desks and clothing; and being mistreated for refusing to participate in activities with themes that ran counter to religious beliefs, such as those “related to preferred personal pronouns.”

The State Department declined to say whether any employees have been fired or otherwise disciplined for exhibiting bias against Christians. “As a general practice, we do not comment on internal personnel matters,” a spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email on April 30.

Last week, Rubio participated in the first meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias in the federal government, which was created by a Trump executive order.

During that meeting, Rubio raised some of the reported allegations of bias, including claims that Christian Foreign Service officers who homeschooled their children were either reported to the IRS or threatened with a child abuse investigation, according to a Department of Justice readout.

He also disclosed that State Department employees were called “murderers” and “troublemakers” for opposing the government’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds.

“In one instance, an ambassador yelled at an employee, accusing the employee of wanting to kill the ambassador’s mother despite her being back in the States,” the readout stated.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said in an April 22 statement that “Biden’s Department of Justice abused and targeted peaceful Christians while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses,” adding, “Thanks to President Trump, we have ended those abuses, and we will continue to work closely with every member of this Task Force to protect every American’s right to speak and worship freely.”

A China politics expert warns that the communist regime shows signs of potential collapse, driven by a worsening economy exacerbated by Trump’s aggressive tariff policies.

“At a time when China needs friends because it’s not selling goods to the U.S., it is going out of its way to antagonize not just the Philippines, not just Taiwan, but also South Korea and Australia,” Gordon Chang, senior fellow with the Gatestone Institute, told the Fox Business Network.

“This shows that… this is end-of-regime conduct, because Xi Jinping, he can’t appear to be giving in to the U.S.,” he added. “This is really very perplexing behavior, and it shows that something is very, very wrong in Beijing right now.”

Trump has shown little sign of backing down from his trade war with China, slapping a 145% tariff on Chinese imports. Beijing retaliated with 125% duties on U.S. goods. Trump insists his administration is actively negotiating with Beijing officials, but China’s Foreign Ministry has flatly denied any talks, accusing the U.S. of spreading “baseless rumors.”

The White House argues these tariffs are necessary to protect American workers and counter China’s unfair trade practices, while critics warn of skyrocketing prices, empty shelves, and a looming recession.

The Wall Street Journal reported over the weekend that Chinese authorities have quietly waived some of the 125% retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. imports, including semiconductors, chipmaking equipment, medical products, and aviation parts. This move signals Beijing’s concern about the economic fallout from the ongoing U.S.-China trade war. While China has not publicly confirmed these exemptions.

Gordon Chang sounds alarm over Chinese aggression: ‘This is end of regime conduct’ https://t.co/uvAXbOsmdc @MorningsMaria @FoxBusiness pic.twitter.com/ibSp6e0K73

— Maria Bartiromo (@MariaBartiromo) April 28, 2025

As we reported earlier:

On Tuesday morning, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick provided clarity on the highly anticipated auto tariff relief, confirming it will apply to all U.S.-built vehicles.

Lutnick said tariffs will apply to those produced by foreign automakers with plants in the US. He added that the relief would be phased in over three years, giving manufacturers time to shift their supply chains back to the U.S.

The Wall Street Journal offered details regarding how relief would resemble:

The decision will mean that automakers paying Trump’s automotive tariffs won’t also be charged for other duties, such as those on steel and aluminum, according to people familiar with the policy.

The move would be retroactive, the people said, meaning that automakers could be reimbursed for such tariffs already paid. The 25% tariff on finished foreign-made cars went into effect early this month.

The administration will also modify its tariffs on foreign auto parts—slated to be 25% and effective May 3—allowing automakers to be reimbursed for those tariffs up to an amount equal to 3.75% of the value of a U.S.-made car for one year. The reimbursement would fall to 2.5% of the car’s value in a second year, and then be phased out altogether.

Ford CEO Jim Farley lauded the move, providing the following statement to WSJ: “Ford welcomes and appreciates these decisions by President Trump, which will help mitigate the impact of tariffs on automakers, suppliers and consumers. We will continue to work closely with the administration in support of the president’s vision for a healthy and growing auto industry in America. Ford sees policies that encourage exports and ensure affordable supply chains to promote more domestic growth as essential.”

Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

This week, my wife and I have traveled Amtrak’s route to and from Bakersfield, California, with the Amtrak line running down the state’s Central Valley past cities like Fresno and Modesto. As our train sped down the tracks at speeds of up to 83 mph, we could see construction of the much-hyped boondoggle known simply as the California Bullet Train.

Much has been written about the proposed (and proposed really is an understatement) project, which is supposed to run entirely by electricity created from renewable resources. In 2008, California voters approved a bond issue of $9.9 billion to determine the feasibility of the proposed high-speed railroad that would link San Francisco and Los Angeles with a then-$33 billion price tag. I have weighed in myself on this project and its spiraling costs (the present estimated total cost being $135 billion…and rising), writing:

If one tries to make sense of an exercise in spending billions of dollars for a Train to Nowhere, one cannot use conventional financial logic. There is a logical process at work, but it is a logic of a different sort than what appeals to a typical reader of this page. Political logic, especially in a state like California where progressive politics dominates, veers sharply from economic and business logic.

But what does the Central Valley have to do with linking the two California cities, both of which are on the Pacific coast far away from the likes of Bakersfield and Fresno? 

There already exists a rail link between LA and San Francisco, but it is the slow-moving Amtrak that must make its way through the Coastal Range that runs down the western part of the state. 

(An aspiring rail rider would board a CalTrans train from San Francisco to San Jose, then hop aboard Amtrak’s Coast Starlight there as it passes through once a day).

It seems that the promoters of the Bullet Train also are having to bow to the state’s varied geography, which brings us back to construction in the Central Valley. As we looked out the window in the brand-new Amtrak passenger cars recently manufactured for the San Joaquins route, we saw huge concrete viaducts in various stages of completion between Bakersfield and Merced—and that was all the construction we would be able to see, since there is no construction anywhere else on the proposed route.

Understand that no private firm would build a railroad like this because it could never recoup its original costs. 

The current projected outlay of $135 billion almost surely will grow, as the project continues to miss its goals and run into more difficulties. It will be mathematically impossible for the rail line ever to turn a profit, even if it ever is completed—which is highly doubtful.

This leaves us with the line between Bakersfield and Merced, which is not scheduled for completion before 2030 and probably won’t be available until 2033. To understand the absurdity of the whole thing, one should remember that this original Bakersfield-Merced line is being built first because it has the friendliest geography—the Central Valley being flat—which means the trains can run for miles on straight tracks, avoiding the hairpin turns through the mountains that would be a feature elsewhere in the state.

(I have ridden Amtrak many times in California, including going over the Sierra Nevada and in and around the Coastal Range south of San Jose. High-speed rail could not function in these places).

But, even given the flat terrain, much of the Bakersfield-Merced line will have to run on huge concrete viaducts that are extremely costly and will take years to complete. To put it another way, if the lowest-hanging fruit for a rail line has been extremely costly, think what will be the case if they ever try to carve a path around and through the mountains that surround Los Angeles.

To put it another way, as we looked at the ongoing construction of this rail line, we were not looking at success, but rather a huge governmental failure. One would think this would be obvious to nearly everyone, but when California Governor Gavin Newsom and local politicians dedicated this rail line, the rhetoric was so delusional that it was comical. Here are some snippets:

Members of the community and Gov. Gavin Newsom gathered in Kern County where the initial operating segment is taking place. Leticia Perez, chairwoman of the Kern County board of supervisors, said that this project is important for residents of California’s rural Central Valley, providing a 171-mile system from Merced to Bakersfield.

“What is represented today is a game changer, a transformative moment for the Kern County workforce – our access to UC Merced, our access to other parts of the state,” Perez said.

“As a resident of Fresno County, the high-speed rail built right here in the valley has been a dream come true,” said Structures Superintendent Anthony Canales who has been working on the project since 2015. “This is not just a transportation program; it’s a transformation project.”

However, the Central Valley already has passenger rail courtesy of Amtrak and if what we saw on our trip with near-empty cars is an indication of the Amtrak ridership of that area, one seriously doubts that high-speed rail—while a curiosity—will make a difference for people in that valley. The local political rhetoric notwithstanding, even if this monstrosity is completed, it won’t be a “game changer” but rather a conversation piece at best.

The longevity of this failed project is a testament both to political inertia and to the love affair that progressives have with both central government economic planning and especially the high-speed rail. It is a massive malinvestment that is saddling California with huge debts that its taxpayers—most of whom will gain no benefit from the bullet train—will have to shoulder in the future. Those politicians and politically-connected contractors most responsible for this boondoggle will gain the benefits (and get to ride for free), while the victims will have to pay.

The start of this week began badly for the Pentagon, as it revealed it had ‘lost’ a fighter jet in the Red Sea amid the ongoing Yemen bombing campaign. A US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet “fell overboard from the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier while it was being towed on board” – the US military said, and supposedly while the large carrier was making an evasive turn amid inbound Houthi drones or missiles.

The Houthis have been celebrating this as a ‘win’. But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has on Thursday put Iran on notice, alleging close support from Tehran to the Houthis, saying it ‘will pay’.

Hegseth addressed the Iranians in a fresh message on X, saying: “We see your lethal support to the Houthis. We know exactly what you are doing.”

“You know very well what the US military is capable of — and you were warned. You will pay the consequence at the time and place of our choosing,” he continued.

Hegseth as part of the message shared a screenshot of a prior Trump post on his Truth Social, originally written in mid-March, in which the president charged that Iran is “dictating every move” the Houthis make as well as providing arms and intelligence. 

“Every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of Iran,” the president wrote at the time.

But the Islamic Republic has firmly rejected the accusations, highlighting that the Houthis are a political and military movement which acts independently and makes its own decisions, especially on the battlefield.

“Ansar Allah (the Houthis), as the representative of the Yemenis, makes its own strategic decisions, and Iran has no role in setting the national or operational policies of any movement in the resistance front,” Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander Hossein Salami said soon after the US renewed its bombing campaign on March 15.

The Houthis have pledged not to stop attacks on Western warships in the Red Sea as well as Israel, so long as Israel’s military remains active in Gaza. The Red Sea conflict started again almost immediately after the Hamas-Israel ceasefire and hostage exchange deal collapsed.

International shipping through the vital water-way has been essentially blocked for well over a year, and the industry has been forced to adjust. Russian and Chinese commercial vessels have been allowed safe-passage by the Houthis.

https://t.co/DKl55mmFaT pic.twitter.com/vsVttencfH

— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) May 1, 2025

Hegseth’s fresh threat toward Iran strongly suggests the Iran debate is still alive and well within the administration. Trump has been urging Iran to sign a fresh nuclear deal or else face possible bombing campaign by the US, and likely Israel. Hegseth has previously been reported to be on DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s side – against the hawks and desiring climb-down in terms of Iran tensions. 

Authored by Alex O’Donnell via CoinTelegraph.com,

Tether plans to launch a stablecoin product in the United States as soon as this year, the stablecoin issuer’s CEO, Paul Ardoino, said in an April 30 CNBC interview.

Tether’s flagship stablecoin, USDt, is already the US dollar’s top “exporter,” Ardoino told CNBC. 

It has a market capitalization of nearly $150 billion, according to data from CoinGecko. 

Now, Tether is preparing to expand into the US market “by the end of this year or early next year, at the fastest,” Ardoino said, adding that the timing depends on US lawmakers’ progress on stablecoin legislation.

The stablecoin issuer is working to woo US regulators by proactively collaborating with law enforcement and highlighting USDt’s benefits for the US economy.

“We are just exporters of what we believe to be the best product the United States ever created — that is, the US dollar,” the CEO said.

Tether’s USDT has 66% of the stablecoin market share. Source: Nansen

Market leader

As of April 25, USDt commanded a roughly 66% market share among stablecoins, according to Nansen, a Web3 researcher. 

Tether is also the most profitable stablecoin issuer, logging a net income of nearly $14 billion in 2024. 

It earns revenue by accepting US dollars to mint USDt and then investing those dollars into highly liquid, yield-bearing instruments such as US Treasury bills. Still, USDt’s popularity is largely limited to users outside of the United States, where rival stablecoin USDC is dominant.

Tether designed USDt “for the people that live in small villages in Africa… [or] a shop owner in Istanbul,” Ardoino told CNBC, adding that Tether is developing a “different product” for the US.

Adoption of USDC has accelerated in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s November election win, Nansen said in an April 25 report. Circle’s USDC has a market capitalization of more than $60 billion, CoinGecko data shows. 

However, USDt is still likely to maintain its leading position in the stablecoin market.  “Despite the potential dispersion in stables, we inevitably believe this is a ‘winner-takes-most’ market dynamic,” the Web3 researcher added. 

The U.S. House of Representatives passed (245-164) Rep. John Joyce’s (R-PA) H.J. Res.88, a resolution blocking the Biden Environmental Protection Agency’s waiver that would let California ban petrol-powered cars and trucks and force dystopian electric vehicle mandates nationwide. 

H.J. Res. 88 seeks to overturn a Biden-era EPA decision that granted California a waiver to ban the sale of new petrol-powered vehicles by 2035. This mandate would’ve had massive ripples far beyond the progressive state’s borders, forcing automakers to comply nationwide with EV mandates, thus leading to a surge in driving costs for all working families. Without intervention, California’s toxic climate policy could effectively dictate EV mandates nationwide. 

“Today, the House passed RepJohnJoyce’s H.J.Res.88 to reverse a Biden-era regulation that requires all of the vehicles in America to be emission-free,” House Republicans wrote on X, adding this repeal would be some of the first steps in “reversing Biden’s disastrous EV mandates and giving power back to consumers to decide which cars they want to drive.” 

Today, the House passed @RepJohnJoyce’s H.J.Res.88 to reverse a Biden-era regulation that requires all of the vehicles in America to be emission-free.

House Republicans are reversing Biden’s disastrous EV mandates and giving power back to consumers to decide which cars they… pic.twitter.com/lc63WUKD4h

— House Republicans (@HouseGOP) May 1, 2025

As of May, eleven U.S. states have adopted California’s plan to phase out the sale of gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles. These states include New York, Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington, Vermont, New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia. Together, these states account for about 40% of the U.S. auto market.

“Proud to see my bill to protect consumer choice in the automobile market pass the House in a bipartisan fashion,” Rep. Joyce wrote on X.

The Republican representative from Pennsylvania noted, “Congress cannot allow California to set national policy. I urge my Senate colleagues to pass this legislation so @POTUS can protect the freedom of the open road for the American people.”

Proud to see my bill to protect consumer choice in the automobile market pass the House in a bipartisan fashion.

Congress cannot allow California to set national policy. I urge my Senate colleagues to pass this legislation so @POTUS can protect the freedom of the open road for… pic.twitter.com/1S5QDg3Ywm

— John Joyce, M.D. (@RepJohnJoyce) May 1, 2025

Dismantling California’s EV mandates is a top priority for President Trump. This week, the Western world was served a sobering reminder of the consequences tied to the aggressive march toward net zero death: 

NatGas Generators Rescued Spain From Net Zero Death After Power Collapse https://t.co/NAthNQjTJY

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 30, 2025

Action on the measure now moves to the Senate.

Authored by Janice Hisle and Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

The man arrested by immigration authorities in Milwaukee – despite a Wisconsin judge’s alleged attempt to shield him – is being held in a neighboring county’s jail as controversy continues to swirl around the case.

Eduardo Flores Ruiz, 30, was locked up in the Ozaukee County Jail awaiting further court action as of April 30.

He is accused of injuring three people in a recent domestic dispute, online records show.

The Mexico native is the defendant whom Judge Hannah Dugan is accused of assisting in an April 18 incident at the Milwaukee County Circuit Court.

Flores Ruiz appeared at the court for a hearing on that date, but it didn’t proceed, federal authorities say, after Dugan allegedly took actions to thwart Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers who were poised to arrest the defendant and begin deportation proceedings.

Federal officials accuse the judge of helping Flores Ruiz and his lawyer to exit through a restricted-use door. Officers, however, were able to arrest him after a foot chase outside the courthouse.

He was previously deported to his home country in 2013, before being accused in the domestic violence case that was assigned to Dugan, officials said.

The state Supreme Court suspended Dugan while she contests charges of concealing Flores Ruiz and obstructing ICE.

Dugan, who was arrested on April 25, is set for her next court hearing as a defendant on May 15 in Milwaukee federal court.

This 2016 photo shows Judge Hannah Dugan in Milwaukee, Wis. Lee Matz/Milwaukee Independent via AP

Milwaukee County court and police records reveal more information about the incident that landed Flores Ruiz in Dugan’s court on three domestic abuse-battery charges.

Three people told police that Flores Ruiz injured them during a March 12 verbal and physical altercation, after which two of them sought hospital treatment.

Miguel Mendoza-Figueroa alleged that Flores Ruiz “intentionally … struck him multiple times in his body and face, causing pain and scratches during a verbal argument about loud music,” the police report says. 

The man reported being punched about 30 times.

When Deyci Torres Sierra, identified as Miguel’s girlfriend, tried to intervene, Flores Ruiz “struck her multiple times in her head” with his fist, inflicting pain, the report says.

A second woman, Maria Sierra Chihuahua, said she, too, tried to break up the fight, and Flores Ruiz “elbowed her in her upper left arm.”

Police said that, when questioned at the scene, Flores Ruiz described the incident as “a mutual fight” between himself and Mendoza-Figueroa, a court record shows.

The defendant is set to appear on the three charges in the county court again on May 14. Each of the charges is a Class A Misdemeanor, punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to $10,000 and nine months behind bars.

Dugan remains in online records as the judge assigned to his case, despite her temporary suspension from duty. The Epoch Times was unable to reach the court’s chief justice for clarification.

The Epoch Times sought comment from Flores Ruiz’s lawyer, Mercedes de la Rosa, and the local prosecutor handling the case, Kylan Reilly, and received no reply prior to publication.

Ahead of Apple’s earnings report this afternoon, which concludes the results from big 4 group of the Mag 7 (including MSFT, META and AMZN) UBS said that sentiment was a 5/10, with the bank’s analyst expecting some pull-forward offsetting soft demand, while creating tougher 2H compares with the consensus too optimistic. UBS, which has a $210 price target, reiterated its $210 price target (Neutral) warnings that although the rich valuation remains a perennial overhang, sentiment is more cautious given the ongoing tariff and market share headwinds. The bottom line: with the mild short bias ahead of the print, there was a decent chance for a tactical bounce due to pull-ins, but probably not enough to alleviate the ongoing concerns.

And sure enough, 30 minutes after AMZN disappointed with lackluster AWS profit margins and a soft operating profit forecast, it would be 2 for 2 for the bears, with AAPL stock sliding on disappointing China sales even as tariff fears sent iPhone purchases across the world into overdrive. Here are the details:

• Adjusted EPS $1.65 vs. $1.53 y/y, beating estimate $1.62
• Total revenue $95.36 billion, +5.1% y/y, beating estimate $94.59 billion
• Products revenue $68.71 billion, +2.7% y/y, beating estimate $67.84 billion
  • IPhone revenue $46.84 billion, +1.9% y/y, beating estimate $45.94 billion
  • Mac revenue $7.95 billion, +6.7% y/y, beating estimate $7.75 billion
  • IPad revenue $6.40 billion, +15% y/y, beating estimate $6.12 billion
  • Wearables, home and accessories $7.52 billion, -4.9% y/y, missing estimate $8.05 billion
• Service revenue $26.65 billion, +12% y/y, missing estimates if $26.72 billion – this was the first red flag.

The second, and even bigger, red flag was the usual suspect: China, where revenues unexpectedly slumped, sliding 2.3%, while Wall Street was expecting a mid-single digit growth

• Greater China rev. $16.00 billion, -2.3% y/y, missing estimates of $16.83 billion

Going down the line:

• Total operating expenses $15.28 billion, +6.3% y/y, higher than estimate $15.17 billion
• Gross margin $44.87 billion, +6.1% y/y, higher than estimate $44.58 billion
• Cash and cash equivalents $28.16 billion, -14% y/y, missing estimates of $32.73 billion
• Cost of sales $50.49 billion, +4.1% y/y, higher than estimate $50.23 billion

And so on:

Looking at a breakdown of sales by product category it was a generally solid report, although that was to be expected as a result of pulled forward demand for iPhones ahead of tariffs which would likely push prices sharply higher. Here are the details: .

• IPhone revenue $46.84 billion, +1.9% y/y, beating estimates $45.94 billion but much of this was due to pulled forward sales ahead of tariffs
• Mac revenue $7.95 billion, +6.7% y/y, beating estimates of $7.75 billion, same logic here
• IPad revenue $6.40 billion, +15% y/y, beating estimates of $6.12 billion
• Wearables, home and accessories $7.52 billion, -4.9% y/y, big miss to estimate $8.05 billion

Bottom line, while most segments came in stronger than expected, much of this will likely reverse in Q3 when tariffs push prices higher (because tariffs are inflationary right), meanwhile, Apple’s wearables segment (where one can find the Vision Pro disaster) remains a big disappointment, and the new low-end AirPods and hearing features for the AirPods Pro apparently did not draw much interest.

Here is the full revenue breakdown by product:

But if iPhone sales was solid (if transitory) the devastation that is China sales was catastrophic: contrary to expectations for a modest rebound, as China sales declined for a seventh consecutive quarter, down 2.3%, and printing at only $16BN, below the $16.9BN estimate.The rest of the world saw growth, modest in the Americas at 8.2%, and stronger in Japan and APAC, while Europe barely grew.

And in dollar terms:

Needless to say, China continues to be a very weak spot for Apple and the company hasn’t done much to push new products, pricing and initiatives in that market — or other emerging areas — to offset the issues.  The weakness there, which Apple will try to explain away in its conference call, is because of a combination of nationalism and interest in local products, whose designs are getting better. The local players are also trying new things like foldables while Apple continues to use the same design it rolled out five years ago. Oh, and Trump’s trade war which is getting worse by the day, isn’t helping.

The result: revenues declining now for an unprecedented 7 quarters!

There was more: Service revenue, which for many years was the only golden goose left in AAPL’s roster, is starting to sputter, and even though it rose to a new record $26.65 billion, this missed estimates of $26.72 billion and the growth rate was the lowest in two years.

The company has been contending with multiple challenges, beyond just the looming tariffs. Apple is playing catch-up in artificial intelligence, forcing it to shuffle management in recent weeks. It’s also under mounting regulatory pressure in the EU and its home country. On Wednesday, a federal judge demanded that the company open up its App Store to third-party payment options and stop charging commissions on outside purchases.

But tariffs remain one of the biggest question marks. Though Apple is likely to sidestep the 145% China levy that the administration originally proposed, new tariffs on electronics are still coming. The turmoil threatens to upend the company’s supply chain and potentially force it to raise prices. Already, Apple is looking to make more of its US-bound iPhones in India rather than China. Ironically, it was tariffs that helped the company revenues beat estimates as customers flooded Apple retail stores to buy new iPhones and other products out of fear that price hikes were coming.

In the press release, CEO Tim Cook tried hard to stay positive, but failed.

“Today Apple is reporting strong quarterly results, including double-digit growth in Services,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “We were happy to welcome iPhone 16e to our lineup, and to introduce powerful new Macs and iPads that take advantage of the extraordinary capabilities of Apple silicon. And we were proud to announce that we’ve cut our carbon emissions by 60 percent over the past decade.”

The bigger problem is what he said on the conference call, where it said that he hadn’t seen excess pull forward demand in Q1 (it did)…

• COOK: DIDN’T SEE EXTRA DEMAND IN MARCH QUARTER ON TARIFFS

…  and pretended not to know what the tariff impact will be:

• COOK: NOT SURE WHAT TARIFF IMPACT WILL BE AFTER JUNE QUARTER

Trump’s tariff policy may be unclear to Cook, but what is clear to everyone, is that growth for AAPL is slowing fast:

• *APPLE CFO: Q3 REVENUE TO GROW LOW TO MID-SINGLE DIGITS YOY

Which was the same guidance as the current quarter, and the market is starting to realize Cook isn’t sandbagging… instead the debate what is the right multiple on a company that has now officially flatlined. To be sure the kneejerk reaction was not happy, with AAPL stocks sliding about 3% after hours, the second consecutive quarter in which the market punished AAPL earnings, to just above $206 after closing today at the highest price since Trump’s Liberation Day.

Not even the news that the iPhone maker authorized a new $100 billion stock buyback and boosted its quarterly dividend 4% to 26 cents a share, was enough to prop up the stock.