Donald Trump is a ‘non-traditional' president
Ms Leavitt said Donald Trump is a 'non-traditional president'.
'He likes to see results on behalf of the American people.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
5 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Beef order appears to come with side of appeasement
It will take a lot to convince me that relaxing long-standing, science-based biosecurity protections on US beef is anything other than political appeasement toward Donald Trump (' Albanese accused of appeasing Donald Trump with move to allow US beef in ', July 24). How can we now be confident we will stand firm to protect our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme against the same bullying interference? After that, what next? Meanwhile, we continue to pay billions in the deluded hope nuclear submarines and some filtered intel will defend us in 20 years' time. This behaviour in a romantic relationship (rather than a political one) would probably be deemed 'coercive control' and wise heads would be encouraging us to distance ourselves from it. We are probably better off spending our time, money and energy with more respectful, less self-serving partners. Mark Sapsford, North Turramurra Let us hope it's just a coincidence that Australia's removal of the US beef ban has occurred just days before President Trump's latest tariff deadline. It would be disappointing if the government was appeasing the Trump administration in any way that threatened Australia's biosecurity. No more coincidences before August 1, please, Mr Prime Minister. Paul McGee, Springwood As tempting as it may seem, giving in to a spoilt toddler who consistently wants their own way may seem like a good idea at the time, but let me tell you, it's simply not. It'll only reinforce negative behaviours and impede healthy development. The toddler will become increasingly demanding and objectionable. Setting clear boundaries for the toddler is essential. You need to show that there are consequences for their demands and tantrums. The toddler needs to learn to manage their emotions to truly appreciate what they have already. Albo, you need to be strong and not be a pushover for that out-of-control child. Kathleen Molloy, Thornleigh Maybe I'm economically naive, but why does Australia need to both sell beef to the US and buy their beef? Surely this just adds to the costs for both countries and to our carbon footprint. And, for most of us, one cow tastes much the same as another, even if they are raised in different countries. It seems to me that trade in all goods should simply be selling our excess, and buying things we don't produce enough of ourselves. Judy Christian, The Ponds I would rather heed the advice of the Farmers Association biosecurity committee chair as to what is safe for us. At least he knows which end of the beast to feed, rather than the stuff from the other end possibly being fed to us at ministerial level. David Sayers, Gwandalan Metal misdeeds It was interesting to read in Stephen Bartholomeusz's analysis that US domestic producers are using the price rises on imported products resulting from Donald Trump's tariffs to opportunistically raise the prices of their locally produced goods (' Trump sparks a $6.4 billion wipeout for a US icon ', July 24). The example given was of US steel and aluminium producers increasing their prices by 16 per cent to match the imported metals, dealing a huge blow to US manufacturer General Motors and adding to America's rising inflation. Great economic management, Trump. Mark Berg, Caringbah South Trump's panic over the Epstein files could not be more obvious (' Trumps accuses Obama of 'treason' ', July 24). He is jumping from conspiracy to conspiracy in a vain attempt to distract from these files. However, accusing Obama of treason is a stretch even for him. Trump in panic mode is not a pretty sight. He is unable to maintain focus and his speech becomes garbled. He accused Obama of being 'sedatious' (seditious). His latest attempt to distract from the Epstein files may bring cheers from the usual toadies, such as Fox News, but will have the opposite effect on those seeking transparency and truth. If Obama had even a minor misdemeanour on his record, Trump would have pounced on it long ago. Dare we hope that Tump may finally get his comeuppance? Graham Lum, North Rocks I, too, have had letters printed in the Herald that were critical of Trump and was a tad nervous about how far the US Homeland Security tentacles reached when we arrived at US customs in May (' Trump is becoming the Basil Fawlty of American tourism ', July 24). Having lived in Pennsylvania, and having made multiple visits over the decades, we stayed with friends and family, all booked and paid for before Trump was re-elected. It's a great pity that this beautiful country is being trashed by its leader. Despite not encountering problems, we will not be visiting again in the foreseeable future. Sally Spurr, Lane Cove Sub-normal behaviour The second AUKUS payment takes Australia's contribution to $1.6 billion (' Australia quietly pays US another $800 million for AUKUS despite review ', July 24). The problem with this is that there is no guarantee AUKUS will continue. Given the state of the federal debt, I believe both sides of politics should seriously consider pulling out of the venture and putting the money into more productive endeavours such as housing and health. These submarines will not be ready until at least 2040, and given the past issues with building these things, that date is probably very optimistic. Given the advances with warfare technology, my view is that they will almost obsolete by 2040. Just look at the way cheap drone technology is reaping havoc in Ukraine and the Middle East, costing, in comparison, practically nothing. Just image how easy it will be to detect submarines and blow them out of the water with the rapid pace of technology. The reality is the next big conflict will be all over before a submarine can get into position to do any good. Norman Arnott, Forestville The article in the Herald says it all. Just like a dog that always gets a kick, we are always there for the US, our tails wagging. What a nice present Scottie from marketing left for the current government. Joe Weller, Mittagong Rabbi off the mark Rabbi Marcus Solomon expressed shock in his article, and I am shocked at his response (' When I visited Sydney, I was shocked by the antisemitism I encountered ', July 24). He was happy to receive sympathy for antisemitism in Ireland from the Irish couple, but not happy to receive political criticism of Israel from the man he asked directions from. Apparently, he is unable to distinguish the latter from antisemitism. He seems to be calling Australian critics of Israel 'idiots'. Here was an opportunity for an Australian Jew to express horror at the carnage being inflicted on Gazans by the Israeli government, but he didn't follow it up. To simply describe it as a 'tragedy that has befallen the Palestinian people' doesn't go nearly far enough. I am sorry he was shocked by the father calling out 'Free Palestine', but he needs to reflect on how other Australians view morality. Bob Hinchcliffe, Wahroonga Richard Abram writes that Jewish Australians don't deserve persecution for the actions of a foreign state, namely Israel (Letters, July 24). That's certainly right, but they do deserve criticism if they support the actions of that foreign state, which is engaged in the mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. Gay O'Connor, Manly One size definitely does not fit all in the voting-age argument (Letters, July 24). During my long teaching career I have taught many outstanding 16-year-olds who are mature, responsible and thoughtful, with an understanding of political issues and problems. I have also taught many who are virtually the opposite, with either zero interest in politics or else an impressionable, superficial or misinformed one. Our commendable mandatory voting system would give these young, easily influenced people political power, which could be easily abused or misdirected. Listen to their concerns and perspectives by all means, but the vote needs a few more years of life experience behind it. Robert Hickey, Green Point If the voting age is lowered to 16, the curriculum should include a mandatory civics unit in year 10. While some teenagers are passionate about issues such as the environment, all would benefit from understanding how our political system works. A school trip to Canberra at a younger age is merely sightseeing. Learning about the roles of the different levels of government and the election process (special shout out to Taswegians) closer to the action would be more likely to attract their attention and help inform their decisions. Judith Campbell, Drummoyne While we're discussing changes to the voting age, can we consider removing compulsory votes for aged care residents? My 95-year-old mother is bright and engaged for her age; however, she informs me that it's difficult to engage in intellectual conversations as most residents in her non-dementia section have some degree of dementia, or are simply not following the political debate. This leaves them vulnerable to undue influence. It would also make life easier for aged care residents and carers. Anne Matheson, Gordon Bad gas … deal Chevron's exit from Barrow Island has left WA taxpayers with a $500 million clean-up bill – all because of a deal most people have never heard of (' Taxpayers face $500 million bill to clean up Chevron's WA oil field ', July 23). It turns out that once production stops, the company actually gets its gas royalties refunded. For years we were told gas would be a win for the economy. But now we're not just stuck with the environmental mess – we're literally paying the companies back after they've made their money. And this isn't some one-off blunder. It shows just how much influence the gas industry has had over governments for decades. These kinds of deals don't get made out in the open – and they certainly don't get made with public support. But they happen anyway because the industry has always been able to get what it wants. Barrow Island makes it clear: we've never really known what we're getting out of these gas projects. What we do know is what we're left with – and it's not looking like a great deal. Karen Lamb, Geelong (Vic) Finish the job Completing the partially built station in Woollahra is in line with my view that the government should first utilise sites it already owns before imposing rezoning on residential and other land whose residents or owners do not want it – even with the prospect of an uplift in the value of their asset (' NSW Libs wicked problem: Housing ', July 24). In my own municipality of Ku-ring-gai, which is under pressure to change low-rise dwellings into high-rise, there are several cuttings on the rail line big enough to be developed. This would help to reach the housing target and avoid aggravating residents. For this to happen, the government needs to create a platform for such development to occur. Similar opportunities can be found all over Sydney. Peter Thornton, Killara Alexandra Smith's article overlooks one of the biggest contributors to the housing crisis – population growth. Surely the time has come when we can discuss population without being called xenophobic, racist or selfish. Given Australia's low fertility rate of 1.5, and the 50,000 or so people who leave every year, there is still good scope for refugees, essential workers and family reunions in a migrant intake of about 100,000. Returning to our pre-COVID growth rate of 1.6 per cent would mean we shall have 100 million people in 90 years' time. Our disastrous environmental record over the past 130 years, with an average population of some 10 million, is surely another reason to have a proper talk about population. It's not only the housing crisis but also many aspects of our environmental and social future that are at stake. Ignoring the effect of exponential population growth on future generations really is selfish. John Burke, Wahroonga A new investment When looking at government handouts and the effect on productivity, let's not forget the handout of negative gearing (Letters, July 24). It encourages investment in a totally non-productive area and denies permanent homes to millions. Let's get the money invested in real estate, propped up by this insidious form of welfare, back into the economy where it can be effective, and the government money saved back into social housing, so people can live in our major cities and start economically producing. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga Decent proposal Ross Gittins correctly identifies the elephant in the room ('HECS cuts the least PM should do', July 23). Gittins correctly identifies one of the main hurdles in overcoming the 'fair go' that most Australians aspire to – 'by making a percentage cut, rather than a flat dollar amount'. In the current proposal for a cut in HECS, 20 per cent of $100,000 is much more than 20 per cent of $5000. It would be fairer if the government instead took 20 per cent of the median debt and subtracted that amount from all debts. Some people would even get a refund. With tax reform on the table, all changes similar to this should be scrutinised for who benefits the most. Philip Jirman, Wallabi Point Once upon a time, many Australians were able to attend university free, in some cases even receiving an allowance for books or childcare (Letters, July 24). I was one of them; so were many of my 'mature age student' friends who were already parents. We studied nursing, teaching and social work, and worked and paid taxes for the next 30 years or more. Thanks, Gough. Margaret Wilkie, Peregian Beach (Qld)
Sky News AU
5 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Douglas Murray praises Trump for pulling out of UNESCO
Author Douglas Murray has chimed in on the Trump administration's decision to pull the United States out of the UN cultural agency UNESCO. A US spokesperson has cited the UN's anti-American and anti-Israel leanings as the reason for departing. Mr Murray claims bodies such as UNESCO, UNRWA and the UN Human Rights Council do not represent or further the interests of the American taxpayer. 'Why exactly should the American taxpayer be funding them?' he said.
News.com.au
5 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Australian cattle industry reacts to US beef imports relaxation
Australian beef leaders believe that the future of our $75 billion industry depends on the federal government's decision to relax import laws on US beef being a correct choice. Cattle Australia has called for an independent review into the bombshell decision, announced on Thursday, saying there was 'simply too much at stake' for the nation's biosecurity. Industry figures were 'unsurprised' at the call and don't expect much demand for American beef, with one likening it to 'selling ice to the Eskimos'. The decision came after a '10-year process' and was not directly linked to ongoing tariff negotiations with the US, despite Donald Trump criticising the beef trade imbalance between the two nations, the government said. US beef has been allowed into Australia since 2019 but now cattle born in Canada and Mexico will also be available for import after a biosecurity assessment. Cattle Australia chief Will Evans told ABC radio on Thursday the body had to trust the government's process, stressing bureaucrats 'made the assessment themselves'. 'When you have a $75 billion industry relying on them not making this mistake, I am sure they have been cautious in their decision-making,' he said. But Mr Evans in a statement also said it was 'a little disappointing' the government did not 'provide industry with the full details' before making the announcement. Later on Thursday afternoon, Cattle Australia called for an independent scientific panel to review the government's decision. 'While we have been given assurances … we believe an independent scientific assessment is a sensible and prudent way forward. This must occur before imports commence,' he said. 'There is simply too much at stake when it comes to Australia's world-leading biosecurity status not to get a second opinion. 'Given the Minister's confidence she should have no issue appointing an independent panel to take the highest level of precaution in protecting the Australian beef industry.' Mr Evans earlier said Australia's beef industry was self-sufficient and any imports of US beef were 'unlikely to have any effect on the market', stressing that the US 'cannot currently meet its own needs, with Australia exporting almost 400,000 tonnes of beef to the US in 2024'. In fact, US beef prices have been hitting record levels domestically with a nine per cent growth since January alone. Ground beef is retailing at about US$9 for one pound (450g). Despite the Australian government's protestations otherwise, the Trump administration has heralded the move as a 'major trade breakthrough' gained through the President's tariff agenda. In a statement titled 'Make Agriculture Great Again Trade Wins: President Trump Secures Greater Ag Market Access to Australia for American Beef', US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins congratulated Mr Trump. 'This is yet another example of the kind of market access the president negotiates to bring America into a new golden age of prosperity, with American agriculture leading the way,' she said. James Jackson, a beef and cattle farmer and ex-president of NSW Farmers, told he 'can't think of a reason' why Australian businesses would import more expensive US beef. 'There may be sort of bespoke restaurants, you know, guaranteed American (beef) … Texan steak or something like that,' he said. 'People may do it, but I seriously doubt it. 'The main reason there wasn't beef coming into Australia was that the economics of it weren't there, and the Americans didn't tidy up their traceability enough.' Previously, concerns over mad cow disease prevented the import of beef products from cows born in Canada and Mexico – which were regularly brought into US supply chains. The US now says it can trace all cattle to the farm and through the supply chain, after its farmers had long resisted more stringent regulations. Mr Jackson said the timing of the announcement was a 'bit suspicious' when Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was hoping to negotiate on aluminium tariffs with the US, but did not believe there would have been any compromise on biosecurity. Tammi Jonas from the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance also said the timeline made it appear the government was 'kowtowing to Trump' but added she did not foresee much impact. 'I suspect that it's more about filling seasonal gaps,' she said. 'So if we have massive drought here you'll see an increase in imports from the US, I would imagine. 'But the only ones who stand to benefit from this, of course, are the major processors, the multinationals.' Agriculture Minister Julie Collins told reporters in Canberra on Thursday the decision was 'the culmination of what has been a 10-year process'. 'The US has been able to bring beef into Australia since 2019. In 2020 they asked (for) expanded access. 'This process now is at conclusion and has taken around five years to conclude, purely based on science and a rigorous assessment by my department.' She said the risk assessment was conducted by experts and 'Australia's biosecurity system is world renowned for a reason'. Mr Trump was also US President in 2020, near the end of his first term after winning the 2016 election. Nationals Leader David Littleproud said on Thursday afternoon he was 'gobsmacked' at the move and suggested there was a 'real risk' to health and biosecurity. 'It's a huge call from our Federal Government to come out with something like this,' he said. 'And I guess it exposes us, I think it exposes us immensely. It's of immense concern. 'I don't know how what's changed apart from probably some political pressure from the US?' Tim Ryan, chief of the Australian Meat Industry Council, said the move was 'not necessarily a surprise' and the council had been engaged in the process for several years. 'We raised previous concerns with what was on the table. The assurances we gain from the government as part of this decision have met those concerns that we previously raised,' he said. But Mr Ryan said he the commercial drivers of US beef arriving in Australia were 'pretty limited'. 'We're not expecting really any beef to arrive in Australia from the United States,' he said. 'At the end of the day, Australia produces the best beef in the world. We're an efficient producer of product like that. It's a bit like selling ice to the eskimos, but that said, we still need to follow the rules of trade. 'We rely on reciprocal treatment when we send our products all around the world, us accepting the United States' beef along the same terms is really a win for rules.'
