Trump hosts patriotic parade as Democrats plan silly protests against ‘kings.'
Trump hosts patriotic parade as Democrats plan silly protests against 'kings.' | Opinion The left has tried for years to paint Donald Trump as a Hitler-style strongman whose authoritarian instincts threaten democracy itself. Clearly, that argument has failed. Yet, they persist.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Army Golden Knights parachute team practices for military parade
The Army's Golden Knights parachute team has been preparing for months to perform at the 250th anniversary military parade.
I've never liked parades.
Even growing up, they struck me as boring and kind of corny. How many fire trucks and floats does one need to see rolling down the street at a snail's pace?
But a lot of people do enjoy them, and they can be a good way of bringing communities, large and small, together.
Parades have dominated the headlines of late because President Donald Trump is holding one to celebrate the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary. The spectacle, which will feature tanks and soldiers, among other displays of our country's military might, will take place June 14 in our nation's capital.
The date also happens to be Trump's 79th birthday.
In a video previewing the parade, he invited Americans to attend the 'unforgettable celebration," calling it – in Trump fashion – 'one like you've never seen before.'
'For two and a half centuries, the men and women of America's Army have dominated our enemies and protected our freedom at home,' the president said. 'This parade salutes our soldiers' remarkable strength and unbeatable spirit. You won't want to miss it. Just don't miss this one. It's going to be good.'
Opinion: Hey, Democrats, LA riots make Americans like me glad Trump is president
That all sounds quite patriotic to me, and it's in line with Trump's longstanding desire to properly mark the country's 250th birthday in 2026.
In his first term, Trump fashioned the 1776 Commission to help prepare the celebration and remind Americans what the Founding Fathers envisioned when creating our republic.
Democrats shout 'dictator' and plan ridiculous protests
Democrats, however, are freaking out (what's new, right?).
Sen. Adam Schiff of California, pompous progressive extraordinaire, called the planned event a 'dictator-style military parade,' putting Trump on par with global bad guys like Russia's Vladimir Putin, North Korea's late Kim Jong Il and China's Xi Jinping.
For years, the left has tried to paint Trump as a Hitler-style strongman whose authoritarian instincts threaten democracy itself. Clearly, that argument has failed. Yet, they persist.
Opinion: Can you be legally punished for misgendering someone? Colorado says yes.
Liberals love nothing more than a rowdy protest, so that's what many are planning for the same day to show their outrage at the president.
'No Kings Day' is one of the most prominent anti-parade 'movements,' with at least 1,800 events planned nationwide. It has received financial support from the likes of Walmart heiress Christy Walton and a host of progressive groups.
'People from all walks of life support No Kings because our country was founded on the idea that presidents answer to the people – not to authoritarian overreach or violence,' said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, a No Kings partner organization.
That is rich coming from Weingarten, who helped orchestrate the devastating and needless school shutdowns during COVID-19 that harmed millions of children.
The 'No Kings' name is also ironic, considering Trump first got the idea to hold a big parade in 2017 when he attended France's Bastille Day celebration. The holiday marks a pivotal point in the French Revolution that overturned the monarchy and ushered in the country's democracy.
Not to be outdone with the silliness, the Women's March (remember the pink 'pussyhat' marchers from 2017?) is trying to revive itself by hosting circus-themed 'Kick Out the Clowns' protests, purportedly more than 300 events countrywide.
Activists will wear clown costumes to show their outrage at the Trump administration's 'clown-show fascism.' They have a 'goal' of setting the record for the most circuses in one day.
'We need to kick out the clowns, and end the greatest shitshow on earth,' the Women's March website proclaims.
I wish I were kidding … but I'm not.
Clowns aside, should we be worried about a military parade?
Back briefly to Trump's parade. Should we be worried? Is it a symbol of the president's devious machinations?
It's helpful to consider what's happened in the past. While military-style parades aren't common in the United States, they aren't unprecedented, either. USA TODAY has referred to them as 'retro.'
Opinion: Democrats waste $20 million to learn why they lost men. Here's my free advice.
'I see it like most things in American politics today,' David Dulio, distinguished professor of political science at Michigan's Oakland University, told me via email. 'Many observers would like to reduce this to something simple when, in fact, it's complex. Are military parades in the U.S. common? No. But are they unprecedented? Also no.'
The most recent such parade was in 1991, under President George H.W. Bush to commemorate the end of the Persian Gulf War. The inaugurations of former Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy also featured parades with military elements.
The fact the Army's anniversary falls on Trump's birthday is leading to a lot of Democrats' consternation.
It's true that our reality TV president has a flair for the dramatic. And it's obvious he holds himself in high esteem.
It's also possible that Trump loves the country, too.
Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@usatoday.com or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Israel, Iran trade strikes as Trump weighs US military involvement
Israel and Iran traded strikes on Friday as President Trump weighs the possibility of U.S. involvement and European officials seek to revive nuclear negotiations with Tehran. Israel said it hit 60 Iranian aircrafts early Friday morning along with the headquarters of the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research, which carries out nuclear weapons research, according to the Associated Press. Iranian media said Israel's strikes also hit the city of Rasht on the Caspian Sea early Friday. Reuters reported that at least one Iranian missile struck Beersheba, Israel's largest southern city, early Friday, ripping off the facade of at least one apartment complex and leaving a crater in a residential area. CNN reported it struck close to a tech park that houses a Microsoft office. Iran also struck near civilian sites in Haifa, injuring more than a dozen people and sending residents running for cover in a shopping mall, CNN reported. That followed an Iranian strike on Thursday that struck a hospital in Beersheba, wounding at least 80 patients and medical workers, according to Israeli officials. Israel's defense chief accused Iran of war crimes and said Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be held accountable for the attack. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) launched overnight bombings in the heart of Tehran, along with the cities of Tabriz and Kermanshah, hitting 'missile storage and launch infrastructure components,' according to the AP. 'We are strengthening our air control in the region and advancing our air offensive,' Israeli military spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin told reporters, according to the AP. 'We have more sites to strike in Tehran, western Iran and other places.' Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, met with Britain's foreign secretary on Thursday to discuss diplomatic efforts to end the conflict. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is slated to meet with European leaders in Geneva to discuss a new nuclear deal. Iran earlier this month rejected U.S. proposals to effectively end its nuclear program, and move enrichment facilities outside the country. The White House on Thursday released a statement from President Trump saying he would decide within two weeks on whether to join Israel's war. Israel is pressuring the U.S. to deploy it's 'bunker buster' bombs on Iran's Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which is key to its nuclear program and buried deep inside a mountain. While Trump has been publicly non-committal on resuming talks with Tehran, Araghci said Thursday the U.S. is pushing for diplomacy behind the scenes. 'It is the Americans who want talks,' he said, according to AP. 'They've sent messages several times — very serious ones — but we made it explicitly clear to them that as long as this aggression and invasion continue, there is absolutely no room for talk or diplomacy. We are engaged in legitimate self-defense, and this defense will not stop under any circumstances.' Earlier this week, Trump urged civilians to evacuate Tehran immediately, as the U.S. ordered a third U.S. Navy destroyer to the eastern portion of the Mediterranean Sea. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking near the damaged Beersheba hospital, said he trusted that Trump would 'do what's best for America.' 'I can tell you that they're already helping a lot,' he added.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
An inflation surge could swamp Trump's presidency. This one investment will keep your money safe.
America's financial outlook has darkened under President Donald Trump's leadership. All three major credit-rating agencies now rank U.S. federal debt one notch below triple-A, and Jamie Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase JPM, has warned of a crack in the U.S. bond market. With the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield BX:TMUBMUSD10Y at 4.4% on Wednesday and the 30-year rate BX:TMUBMUSD30Y at 4.9%, holders of nominal U.S. debt should be prepared for significant real losses. The principal risk is not U.S. sovereign default, but rather unexpected increases in medium- and long-term interest rates, owing to market expectations of higher inflation. Fiscal policy under Trump is unsustainable, as it was under former President Joe Biden — but even more so if the Trump administration's 'big, beautiful' budget passes in anything like its current form. 'I'm at my wit's end': My niece paid off her husband's credit card but fell behind on her taxes. How can I help her? Why the biggest-ever 'triple witching' options expiration could deliver a jolt to Friday's trading Israel-Iran clash delivers a fresh shock to investors. History suggests this is the move to make. 'I prepaid our mom's rent for a year': My sister is a millionaire and never helps our mother. How do I cut her out of her will? I'm 75 and have a reverse mortgage. Should I pay it off with my $200K savings — and live off Social Security instead? The January 2025 Financial Report of the United States Government makes this clear. The U.S. ratio of federal debt held by the public to GDP at the end of the 2024 fiscal year was around 98%, although $4.7 trillion of the $28.3 trillion in federal debt was held by the Federal Reserve — meaning it is erroneously categorized as held by the 'public,' when really the central bank's accounts should be consolidated with those of the federal government. Under current policy and based on the report's assumptions, federal debt held by the public would reach 535% of GDP by 2099. Stabilizing the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio requires that the annual primary federal deficit (excluding interest payments) fall by an average of 4.3% of GDP over the next 75 years. And yet, the federal deficit and primary deficit were 6.4% and 3.3% of GDP, respectively, in fiscal-year 2024 — far above what can be justified with the economy near full employment. Read: America's debt is at a breaking point — Trump's tax bill might just push it over the edge With the U.S. Congress so dysfunctional, no one has any faith that it will deliver the required deficit reduction. Democrats do not do permanent spending cuts, and Republicans do not do permanent tax increases. The federal government does own about 28% of U.S. land (roughly 640 million acres), as well as other real commercial assets that could yield significant additional nontax revenues if properly managed. But neither party — nor even the misnamed Department of Government Efficiency — appears to have considered this option, so the federal deficit as a share of GDP is likely to rise over the next few years. With no foreseeable improvement in fiscal policy, there are two possible outcomes. First, the U.S. government could default. There has long been a small, but recurrent, risk of a technical, short-lived default if Congress fails to raise, suspend, extend, revise or abolish the federal debt ceiling on time. Fortunately, it has averted this scenario 78 times since 1960, and we expect it to continue doing so. As matters stand, the debt ceiling (including debt held by federal agencies) is set at $36.1 trillion, and debt subject to the limit is also $36.1 trillion. If needed, the Treasury has a highly liquid asset (the Treasury General Account held with the Fed) worth $332.9 billion that it can use to meet its obligations, and it may temporarily use 'extraordinary measures to continue to borrow additional amounts for a limited time.' The second, more likely possibility is that the Fed will monetize enough federal debt to prevent default. Since U.S. federal debt is serviced in dollars, 'printing money' is always an option. But, as the Fed well knows, a large-scale monetization of federal debt would result in significantly above-target inflation. We believe the Fed will do this without its operational independence being revoked by Trump. To get the Federal Open Market Committee to do something it does not want to do, the president would need to control the majority of its 12 voting members. These include the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and five (out of 12) regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents who vote at any given FOMC meeting. Neither the president nor Congress can appoint or fire Federal Reserve Bank presidents. The Board of Governors must approve them, and only the board can remove them. The president nominates board members, but the Senate must confirm them. Board members' current term limits imply that, assuming none are fired, Trump will have the opportunity to nominate only two new members. True, with the power to fire board members 'for cause' — meaning 'inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance' — Trump could try to replace a majority of the members with loyalists. But this seems unlikely. Whether the 'for cause' criterion has been met will be contested in the courts, and the Senate would have to confirm Trump's appointees. Read: Trump's pick to replace Fed Chair Powell could rock your mortgage and retirement. Buckle up. Similarly, Congress could revise the Federal Reserve Act to replace the Fed's monetary-policy objectives with a mandate to buy or sell sovereign debt according to the wishes of the Treasury. But this, too, is unlikely. And the same goes for a scenario in which the Treasury sets a rapidly depreciating exchange-rate target for the dollar DXY that can be achieved only through large-scale Fed purchases of U.S. public debt that generate high inflation. However, fiscal dominance — indeed, fiscal capture — is very likely, because the need to avoid a domestic and global financial crisis will force the FOMC's hand. It will do whatever is necessary to prevent a U.S. government default, because the Fed's financial-stability mandate (the Financial Stability Act of 2010 mentions the Fed 179 times) undoubtedly trumps its monetary-policy mandate of maintaining maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates. The Fed cannot credibly threaten to refuse to monetize debt and deficits to compel fiscal retrenchment by the Treasury, let alone Congress. Thus, the Fed will have no choice but to engage in sovereign-debt purchases that it knows to be incompatible with its monetary-policy objectives. With nominal interest rates for medium- and long-term U.S. sovereign debt far below the levels consistent with realistic expectations of future inflation, serious capital losses on nominal debt instruments (public and private) are likely. The inflation surge could be no more than three years away. As the prospect of fiscal capture comes into view, investing in Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS) and other indexed public and private debt instruments will become increasingly attractive. Willem H. Buiter, a former chief economist at Citibank and former member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England, is an independent economic adviser. Anne C. Sibert is professor emerita of economics at Birkbeck, University of London. This commentary — 'U.S. Debt Holders Should Brace for Impact' — is published with the permission of Project Syndicate. Read: 'You are going to panic,' Jamie Dimon tells regulators about what will happen when the bond market cracks More: What's at stake if world's most powerful market finally buckles after decades-long U.S. debt splurge 20 companies in the S&P 500 whose investors have gained the greatest rewards from stock buybacks Israel-Iran conflict poses three challenges for stocks that could slam market by up to 20%, warns RBC I'm 51, earn $129K and have $165K in my 401(k). Can I afford to retire when my husband, 59, draws Social Security at 62? 'It might be another Apple or Microsoft': My wife invested $100K in one stock and it exploded 1,500%. Do we sell? Why the stock market will be performing a high-wire act over the summer, according to UBS
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wall Street reports 65% chance that U.S. will intervene in Iran—Goldman Sachs says OPEC will be key buffer in oil volatility
Rising tensions between the U.S., Iran, and Israel have fueled speculation about possible U.S. military intervention, with Wall Street reporting a 65% chance of action against Iran by July, leading to increased oil price volatility and shipping costs, especially around the critical Strait of Hormuz. However, OPEC+'s substantial spare capacity is seen as a key buffer against major supply disruptions, while the surge in oil prices has also strengthened the U.S. dollar amid global uncertainty. Questions are continuing to mount about how far tensions in the Middle East will spiral, with President Trump refusing to rule out U.S. intervention between Israel and Iran. Indeed, the rhetoric out of the White House is stoking theories that America may take military action in the Middle East, with Goldman Sachs now placing the probability as more likely than not. Overnight White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested the Oval Office will take a view in the coming fortnight, relaying to reporters a direct message from the president: 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' President Trump has kept spectators largely in the dark about his intentions, saying Wednesday 'I may do it … I may not. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' In a note Wednesday—published by Goldman ahead of Leavitt's announcement yesterday—commodities researchers Daan Struyven, Ephraim Sutherland and Yulia Zhestkova Grigsby wrote there is a 65% of U.S. military action against Iran by July, citing a Polymarket survey. That being said, the analysts left the chances of a U.S.-Iran deal this year at 50%. As a result, the trio write 'the term structure of implied volatility, and call skew suggest that oil markets believe that much higher prices are likely in the next few months, but see limited changes to the long term outlook.' The note seen by Fortune adds: 'Our global indices of oil shipping rates have increased over the past week as increased risks have lifted rates for Middle Eastern routes.' Per Goldman's research, the rate in U.S. dollars per barrel increased in the recent-term from $4.5 to $5.5 for clean stock and approximately $2.8 to $3.1 for dirty. The projected volatility in Middle Eastern shipping costs comes down to the Strait of Hormuz, located on the southern border of Iran. The oil flow through the strait accounts for about 20% of global petroleum liquids consumption, writes the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Iran has—in the past—threatened to close the strait in a bid to curb Western intervention into its affairs, with reports already emerging about shipping companies avoiding the waters. This, in turn, has ramifications for costs given the lag in delivery times and the use of less efficient routes. Trump's threatened intervention into Iran has gone as far as saying he knows where the nation's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is hiding. Trump posted on Truth Social on Tuesday: 'He is an easy target, but is safe there. We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.' However the conflict plays out, strategists at Macquarie expect oil prices to continue to shift over the coming weeks, writing in a note earlier this week seen by Fortune: 'We expect oil prices to remain volatile with an upward trend for the next few weeks as both Iran and Israel maintain their military intensity. 'Regardless of military or diplomatic progress, we expect Brent to rally towards the low $80 level before hitting a plateau as the perceived risk of actual oil supply disruption becomes largely discounted.' Goldman also said OPEC+ could provide a much-needed buffer amid the volatility, undoing some of the cuts it has announced previously. Reports have already surfaced that OPEC+ is considering a large production increase, with members considering potentially increasing output of 411,000 barrels a day (bpd) in July. 'While the exact magnitude is uncertain, we believe that above-average global spare capacity (worth around 4-5% of global demand) is the key buffer to Iran-only disruptions via larger-than-otherwise unwinds of OPEC+ production cuts,' added the Goldman analysts. Already the volatility has lit a fire under the U.S. dollar, which has been caught in a tug-of-war between better-than-expected inflation expectations and a flee to safety amid rising geopolitical tensions. As Antonio Ruggiero, senior FX and macro strategist at Convera wrote in a note to Fortune yesterday: 'Behind the façade of safe-haven appeal lies the true driver of the dollar's rebound: rising oil prices, now hovering near a five-month high. 'Since most global oil trades are settled in U.S. dollars, surging crude demand tends to drive additional demand for USD. This rebound in sentiment is also reflected in the options market, where—for the first time since April—traders have backed off from bearish dollar positions.' This story was originally featured on
