Politics

House Republicans Advance Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” After Weekend Of Negotiations

Following a Friday fracas on Capitol Hill which saw House Republicans fail to advance President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” out of the House Budget Committee, Republicans on said Committee did just that after several GOP deficit hawks relented. And while the bill still has a couple of stops before it can hit the House Floor, passage to the Senate could come as early as the end of this week.

The measure passed narrowly, 17-16, with all Democrats opposed and four Republicans; Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma – voting “present” after voting “No” on the bill in a 16-21 vote just two days earlier. The sudden turnaround followed a weekend of furious negotiations that remain largely behind closed doors.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) met with fellow lawmakers shortly before Sunday’s vote and told reporters that there had been “some minor modifications,” several sources posted on X. Johnson said the bill, which includes making Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent and reforming Medicaid, is now “on track” for a House floor vote toward the end of this week.

The vote was a big win for Johnson and Trump, coming just two days after Republican opposition torpedoed the bill’s first attempt at committee passage. Despite this procedural victory, the legislation must still clear the House Rules Committee and secure a vote on the House floor, where Republicans hold only a razor-thin majority, Axios reports.

Norman, one of the Republicans who shifted his position, said he was “excited about the changes” in the works for the bill.

Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) confirmed during the Sunday night session that “most likely there would be some changes” to the measure before it reaches the floor – but he couldn’t comment on specifics or any side deals that might have been struck.

The panel’s reversal came after it initially rejected the legislation Friday, setting off a scramble to renegotiate terms with holdout Republicans. One of the most contentious elements has been the GOP’s proposed Medicaid overhaul, with conservatives pushing for deeper structural changes and moderates raising concerns about the political risks.

Even if the package passes the House, Senate Republicans are expected to propose their own revisions. To that end, Johnson has also been working to secure buy-in from blue state Republicans by exploring a compromise on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction cap.

On Friday, Trump did his usual shit-talking to pressure Republicans into line – posting on Truth Social; “We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE!”

*  *  *

You can support ZeroHedge by picking up a waxed canvas hat
Click hat… add to cart… check out… receive awesome hat…
Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/19/2025 – 00:00…

Tattoos May Be Linked To Cancer – Here’s Why…

Authored by Zena le Roux via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

“I got tattooed during a time in my life when I wasn’t fully informed about what was going into my body or what I was allowing onto my skin. Back then, it was about art, self-expression, and creative identity.”
Witthaya Prasongsin/GettyImages

“Today, I see it differently. Tattoos are not harmless,” Ellie Grey a book author, wrote on Facebook.

Like Grey, many people choose to get tattoos as self-expression, acts of remembrance, or transformation. But even when the meaning runs deep, tattoos can have consequences—some only now coming to light.

The Link Between Tattoos and Cancer

Many tattoo inks contain chemicals that have been classified as carcinogenic—or cancer-causing—by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

A 2024 study by Swedish researchers found that 21 percent of participants with malignant lymphoma had tattoos compared with 17 percent of controls. The risk was highest—an 81 percent increase—among those who got their first tattoo within two years of diagnosis.

“We know that tattoo ink often contains toxic chemicals and that a significant portion of the injected ink is transported away from the skin by the immune system, which perceives it as a foreign substance,” Christel Nielsen, associate professor and lead author of the study, told The Epoch Times.

Once ink enters the dermis, the layer of skin beneath the outer layer, the immune system attempts to clear it, sending pigment particles to nearby lymph nodes and, potentially, other organs. This may disrupt immune function and trigger systemic inflammation. Over time, the persistent presence of ink in lymphatic tissue could contribute to abnormal immune activity and increase the risk of cancers such as lymphoma and skin cancer.

Are some tattoos more harmful than others?

Does Size Matter

Nielsen’s study found no clear link between the size of a tattoo and lymphoma risk.

“We did not observe an increased risk with larger tattoos, which was unexpected,” Nielsen said. “That does not mean such a link doesn’t exist—only that our study design may not have been able to detect it.”

However, Nielsen noted that a January study published in BMC Public Health on the same topic found a different pattern, suggesting that larger tattoos may indeed be associated with a higher cancer risk. The study proposed that larger tattoos might have a stronger effect due to greater overall ink exposure or prolonged exposure from tattoos acquired over time.

Tattoo risks also include infections and allergic reactions that may be difficult to treat, Dr. Bruce Brod, clinical professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, told the Epoch Times. Such risks may be amplified by the amount of ink used or how deeply it’s deposited—factors more likely in larger or multiple tattoos.

Does Color Matter

Another factor to consider is the color of the tattoo. In a matched analysis comparing individuals with similar characteristics, those with black or grey tattoos had a 23 percent higher risk of lymphoma. Those with both black and colored tattoos had a 21 percent higher risk compared to…

‘Pandemonium’: Sailors Go Flying As Mexican Navy Smashes Into Brooklyn Bridge

Approximately 20 people were injured when a Mexican navy ship carrying at least 200 people collided with the Brooklyn Bridge Saturday night, snapping its three masts and sending crew members flying through the air – with some left swinging in harnesses for ‘at least like 15 minutes’ according to an eyewitness.
Nelson Slinkard/X

The vessel, the Cuauhtémoc, is a sail training vessel that was about to leave New York for a goodwill tour to Iceland when the incident occurred. Video showed heavy traffic on the bridge during the collision.

On the scene was 23-year-old Nick Corso, who whipped his phone out to capture the action – telling AP it sounded like a “big twig” had snapped, and that the scene was “pandemonium.”

“I didn’t know what to think, I was like, is this a movie?” he told the outlet.

A massive pirate ship just hit the Brooklyn Bridge pic.twitter.com/eWRvh8Ognn
— Corso (@Corso52) May 18, 2025

The Mexican Navy tall ship Cuauhtémoc sailed into New York Tuesday, with 277 sailors aboard.
This is the same ship that crashed into the Brooklyn Bridge tonight.
More:pic.twitter.com/nflRPALTTW
— Marla Hohner (@marlahohner) May 18, 2025

Just watched the Brooklyn Bridge get smoked live by a boat with a massive Mexican flag pic.twitter.com/R8eJKwJaJ2
— Nelson Slinkard (@TheWillieNelson) May 18, 2025

The ship was secured by a tugboat between the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges following the collision.

At least 19 people were injured, including four with “serious” injuries, according to New York City Mayor Eric Adams – while the Mexican navy puts the count at 22 injured, 19 of whom needed medical treatment.

NEW: Video shows sailors on the masts of the Mexican Navy ship Cuauhtémoc before it hit the Brooklyn bridge. #PuenteDeBrooklyn #Barco #boat pic.twitter.com/gW5GXBfp1a
— Noteworthy News (@newsnoteworthy) May 18, 2025
“We saw someone dangling, and I couldn’t tell if it was just blurry or my eyes, and we were able to zoom in on our phone and there was someone dangling from the harness from the top for like at least like 15 minutes before they were able to rescue them,” a bystander, Lily Katz, told AP.

Opened in 1883, the Brooklyn Bridge has a main span of nearly 1,600 feet, supported by two masonry towers. Over 100,000 vehicles and an estimated 32,000 pedestrians use the bridge every day, according to the city’s transportation department.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/18/2025 – 07:35…

China Set To Become Top Nuclear Power Source By 2030

China has approved plans to build 10 new nuclear reactors for 200 billion yuan ($27.7 billion), positioning it to surpass the U.S. as the world’s largest nuclear power producer by 2030, according to Nikkei Asia.

The decision, made at a State Council meeting last month, includes eight Hualong One reactors—developed by state-owned firms based on U.S. and French designs—and two CAP1000 units, based on Westinghouse’s AP1000 model. The reactors will add about 12,000 megawatts of capacity.

Construction will take place along the coast in Shandong, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, and Guangxi, with state-owned companies like China National Nuclear Corp., China General Nuclear Power Group, and China Huaneng Group operating the plants.

China paused new nuclear projects after Japan’s Fukushima disaster in 2011 but resumed approvals in 2019, accelerating to around 10 reactors per year since 2022. President Xi Jinping is promoting nuclear power to reduce air pollution, curb oil dependence—China imports about 70% of its crude—and meet climate goals. In 2020, Xi pledged to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve net-zero by 2060.

Nikkei Asia writes that by the end of 2024, China had 57 reactors generating 59,760 MW, ranking third globally behind the U.S. and France. Capacity is projected to hit 110,000 MW by 2030, making China the global leader if current trends continue. Nuclear power made up 4.7% of China’s energy mix in 2024, with projections reaching 10% by 2040.

While high construction costs have stalled nuclear projects in the U.S. and Europe, China’s state-owned enterprises continue building efficiently, controlling costs and boosting expertise.

Recall, last week Axios reported that The White House is poised to issue executive orders aimed at accelerating the deployment of nuclear reactors across the United States. The White House actions are expected to leverage the Departments of Defense and Energy to expedite reactor deployment, potentially circumventing delays from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

These developments are part of a broader trend toward revitalizing the U.S. nuclear energy sector.

The ADVANCE Act of 2024, signed into law in July, aims to streamline the licensing process for advanced nuclear technologies, reduce regulatory costs, and promote the development of next-generation reactors.

Additionally, in a rare show of bipartisan agreement, the Biden administration had formerly expressed intentions to triple the nation’s nuclear power capacity by 2050, recognizing nuclear energy’s role in achieving carbon-free electricity goals.

The anticipated executive actions reflect a concerted effort to modernize the U.S. energy infrastructure, with nuclear power playing a central role in ensuring energy security and meeting future demands.

As of early 2025, 411 nuclear reactors operated worldwide with a combined 371-gigawatt capacity. Amazon, investing over $1 billion in nuclear projects, is exploring small modular reactors, while Meta and Google are also considering the emerging technology.

As we have continued to report, accelerating power demand growth from AI data centers has sparked a nuclear power revival in the US. For those who missed it, in our note “The Next AI Trade” from April 2024, more than one year ago, we outlined various investment opportunities for powering up America, most of which…

Mile High Marxist Bernie Sanders Proves There Is No Climate Emergency

Authored by Larry Behrens via RealClearPolitics,

Give the devil his due: Senator Bernie Sanders never misses an opportunity to remind Americans about our planet’s supposed peril. In a 2023 MSNBC op-ed, he whined: “The climate crisis is not just an environmental issue. It is a matter of justice, of health, of economics, and of national security.” According to Sanders, climate change is a moral and existential threat demanding sweeping government intervention and dramatic changes in personal behavior.

Except, of course, when it comes to how he lives his own life.

Sanders’ recent “Fighting Oligarchy” tour paints a very different picture. While crisscrossing the country decrying the evils of capitalism, Sanders traveled by—you guessed it—private jet. According to a new analysis from Power The Future, the senator’s 16-stop tour spewed an estimated 62.15 metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

To put in context, that’s more than the average American produces in five years.

In fact, Sanders’ emissions from just one tour equal the annual emissions from 15 gasoline-powered cars. It’s the carbon equivalent to driving a gas-powered SUV 150,000 miles, or more than 6 times around the Earth at the equator. And this from a man who wants to regulate what kind of stove you use in your kitchen.

When questioned about the blatant hypocrisy, Sanders didn’t offer contrition. He doubled down. “You think I’m gonna be sitting on a waiting line at United… while 30,000 people are waiting?” he snapped at Bret Baier.

This isn’t the first time Sanders’ climate preaching has clashed with his jet-setting lifestyle. During the 2020 Democratic primary, his campaign shelled out over $1.2 million on private jet travel. Then, as now, the justification was the same: it’s okay when Bernie does it because his cause is righteous.

Let’s call this what it is: Mile High Marxism. Sanders flies high above the rest of us, belching carbon into the atmosphere while demanding working families pay more for energy and drive electric vehicles. He insists there’s a climate emergency but behaves like there’s no emergency at all.

The green movement is filled with elites just like Sanders—people who use the language of crisis to amass power while living above the consequences of their policies. They want to ban gas cars, restrict domestic energy production, and ration electricity, but they’ll never give up their jets, SUVs, or lakefront mansions. It’s not about saving the planet. It’s about control.

Consider this: if the planet were truly teetering on the edge of climate catastrophe, would the loudest alarmists be the least willing to change their own behavior? If climate change were the existential threat they claim, wouldn’t they at least attempt to lead by example? Instead, we get moral lectures from the tarmac.

In Bernie Sanders’ perfect world, Americans brace for rising utility bills, submit to EV mandates, and prepare for lifestyle sacrifices in the name of “climate justice.” But the hypocrisy is impossible to ignore. Jet fuel for Bernie. Unreliable solar panels for you. We get limits, they…