Civil War Breaks Out Among Democrats After Schumer Folds On GOP Funding Bill

 Congressional Democrats are in full revolt after Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) folded like a wet paper napkin and agreed to vote 'yes' on the House-passed government funding measure that effectively ends the shutdown fight as long as six more Democrats join Schumer and Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) who's a 'yes' as well.

As it stands, the Senate will vote this afternoon to overcome a filibuster of the House's continuing resolution, which funds federal agencies through Sept. 30 at current 2024 levels, but also includes approximately $13 billion in cuts to nondefense programs, and $6 billion in additional military spending. It's unclear what time the vote will occur, as both sides are working to secure an agreement to allow senators to finish before the midnight shutdown deadline and head home for a weeklong recess.

Schumer claims he has no choice, saying that a shutdown would be a "gift" to the Trump administration, and "the best distraction he could ask for from his awful agenda."

"It is deeply partisan. It doesn’t address far too many of this country’s needs. But I believe allowing Donald Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option," he said Thursday on the Senate floor.

On Thursday night, Schumer went on MSNBC to pretend he was outraged, but just had to pass the bill (and call Republicans 'bastards.')

"It's much, much better not to be in the middle of a shutdown, which should divert people from the number one issue we have against these bastards, sorry, these people, which is not only all these cuts, but they're ruining democracy," he said.

President Trump congratulated Schumer, posting to Truth Social:

Congratulations to Chuck Schumer for doing the right thing — Took “guts” and courage! The big Tax Cuts, L.A. fire fix, Debt Ceiling Bill, and so much more, is coming. We should all work together on that very dangerous situation. A non pass would be a Country destroyer, approval will lead us to new heights. Again, really good and smart move by Senator Schumer. This could lead to something big for the USA, a whole new direction and beginning! DJT

Democrats In Disarray

House Democrats huddled at their annual strategy retreat in Northern Virginia on Thursday, where they bombarded their Senate colleagues with calls and texts urging them to nuke the GOP bill.

That said, Democrats didn't have the cards...

Let’s be blunt here: Democrats picked a fight they couldn’t win and caved without getting anything in return. -Punchbowl

House Democrats also oppose the spending cuts contained in the GOP bill, warning that they will erode critical public services (grifts), and that fact that the GOP bill excludes specific language to limit what Elon Musk and DOGE can do as the Trump administration continues to slash federal agencies and programs unchecked by Congress, The Hill reports.

But Schumer rejected their demands.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (a performance artist herself) led the charge against Senate Democrats, after House Democrats united against the GOP bill in the lower chamber.

"There is a deep sense of outrage and betrayal," said AOC. "And this is not just about progressive Democrats, This is across the board — the entire party."

"Just to see Senate Democrats even consider acquiescing Elon Musk — I think it is a huge slap in the face," she continued. 

"It’s an awful decision," said Rep. Joseph Morelle (D-NY). "People are angry. We were almost to a person in unison [on the House vote]. … And a significant percentage of their caucus is voting to allow the Republicans to do whatever they want to do."

"Right now, they are openly saying that they will take this money that is in this bill and then they will just appropriate it for whatever they want," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA).

"People have to know what Democrats stand up for, and they’ve got to see us fighting for them," she added. "And if we’re just the same, and we’re just going to enable Republicans to do what they’re doing, I think that’s obviously why people are frustrated."

Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX) - head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that the GOP bill is specifically designed to let Trump and Musk keep 'plundering.'

"First and foremost, Senate Republicans should back down from screwing over their own constituents," he said. "And then second, Senate Democrats should do the same thing House Democrats did, which is fight for our constituents and block this bill."

"Democrats were elected to fight for working people, not put up a fake fight."

Speaking of fake fights...

It's all an act...

Rep. Thomas Massie says it's all an act... a "fake fight" in the House that "will become obvious when the Senate Democrats vote for this stinker."

As Punchbowl notes in its post-mortem...

There’s a reason Republicans put Democrats in this position – because they know Democrats would eventually cave. And they did.

During this whole fight, Democrats never managed to put Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Trump in a tough spot. There are plenty of policies House Democrats could’ve asked for in the CR — more money for certain programs, for instance — that would’ve placed Republicans in a bind. But they never made the case publicly for anything like that.

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, essentially tried to have it both ways. They spent the last few days — which included three long and contentious lunch meetings — warning each other in private about the grave dangers of forcing a government shutdown. But in front of TV cameras, they were trashing the House GOP CR and insisting they wouldn’t vote for the funding measure. This won them praise from progressives, activist groups and House Democrats.

Schumer, who didn’t take a public position until last night, fired a warning shot on Wednesday when he said Republicans didn’t have enough Democratic votes to pass the CR, basically threatening a filibuster. In the meantime, Senate Democrats pushed for a short-term CR intended to buy time for a bipartisan funding deal that was never going anywhere.

This set up the Democratic base for disappointment for seemingly no reason.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/democrats-furious-after-schumer-folds-gop-bill

Will Canada Join The European Union?

 By Bas van Geffen, senior macro strategist of Rabobank

Brussels’ response to Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs has put the European Union in the US president’s crosshairs. Europe announced a 99-page list of American-made goods that may be subject to rebalancing tariffs from April 1, including motor cycles, food & agriculture products, and clothing.

President Trump, of course, was not amused. He claims that the EU has imposed “a nasty 50% tariff on whisky,” adding that the US will shortly counter this with “a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS” unless the EU removes its tariffs immediately.

Such a response was to be expected, after Canada’s earlier run-in with the American president. In his tariffs aimed specifically at Canada, President Trump had included a carve-out for energy imports, which would ‘only’ face a 10% tariff. That’s entirely in the US’ interest, as certain states rely heavily on Canadian energy. But Ontario also knows just how interconnected the US and Canadian power grids are. So, when Trump announced steel and aluminium duties earlier this week, Ontario threatened to levy export duties on electricity provided to the US.

The US President was equally dismayed at the Canadian response, threatening an additional 25% tariff on Canadian steel and aluminium. Both sides backed down eventually, and neither the Ontario’s export duty, nor the additional US tariff went into force. However, Canada’s counterbalancing tariffs on US imports remain into force.

Canadian and US officials had a “constructive” meeting yesterday, but the talks ended without any concrete results. Both sides will meet again next week.

As Trump alienates both the EU and Canada, the President’s two targets are getting more aligned. EC President Von der Leyen called for greater cooperation with “like-minded countries, such as [...] Canada,” and according to one poll, Canadians see the EU overtaking the US as the country’s primary global ally in the next three to five years.

In fact, 44% of respondents, believes Canada should join the European Union. Brussels is “honored” by the poll, but added that it is a non-starter: only European states can apply for EU membership. But if Trump can rename bodies of water, who is to say where Europe begins or ends? The Eurovision Song Contest also includes Israel and even Australia!

All joking aside, is a hypothetical EU membership the safeguarding that Canada seeks? Yes, the European bloc has quite some power when it comes to trade and the size of its internal market. As long as the conflict remains purely trade-related, at least.

If Trump presses on with retaliatory tariffs in response to Europe’s rebalancing tariffs on the US’ original tariffs, there’s a good chance that Europe may respond to those 200% tariffs. Such a tariff supernova is bad, but what is Europe to do if Trump decides to, say, withdraw military support until the trade dispute is settled to his liking?

Rearming Europe is easier said than done, especially when Europe is in the midst of a trade war with the US. Even without that headwind, European procedures and regulation already make this a Herculean task. The urgency may be clear for European politicians, but members of national parliaments are still struggling with the costs involved with the European Commission’s plans– both in monetary terms, and the fear that it could encroach on countries’ sovereignty.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/will-canada-join-european-union

Will Putin Agree To A Ceasefire?

 by Andrew Korybko via substack,

There are five compelling arguments for either scenario.

Ukraine just agreed to a month-long ceasefire after talks with the US in Jeddah, but it’s conditional on Russia agreeing to the same, which remains uncertain. Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to pay his second trip to Moscow in just as many months later this week, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz plans to speak to Russian officials soon, while Trump said that he hopes to talk to Putin by Friday. All three will try to convince Putin to silence the guns. 

Here’s why he might not agree to do that:

1. Russia Wants To Liberate All The Occupied Territories

Putin declared last June that he’d only agree to a ceasefire if Ukraine withdrew from the entirety of the four regions that voted to join Russia in September 2022 and publicly abandoned its plans to join NATO. That was shortly before Ukraine invaded Russia’s universally recognized Kursk Region. Agreeing to a ceasefire now with no guarantee that it’ll lead to the liberation of those five regions could result in the indefinite occupation of at least some of them if the front lines harden into a Korean-DMZ.

2. The Front Lines Might Soon Collapse To Russia’s Benefit

It’s obvious that one of the primary reasons why Ukraine agreed to a month-long ceasefire conditional on Russia agreeing to the same, apart from resuming the US’ previously cut military and intelligence aid, is to prevent the front lines from soon collapsing to Russia’s benefit. Aware of this, Russia might decide to carry on – perhaps advancing while negotiating additional terms to the proposed ceasefire – in order to take full advantage of this, thus raising the chances of speedily liberating all the occupied territories.

3. Russia Wants To Scare Away Western Peacekeepers

European peacekeepers might enter Ukraine during the month-long ceasefire, or some of their “mercenaries” who are already there might simply switch uniforms to then take on this role instead, which Russia already said would be absolutely unacceptable and make them legitimate targets. Keeping the conflict going might therefore scare them away from this and thus ensure that de facto NATO forces are kept as far away from Russia’s western border as possible.

4. Some Of The Russian Public Don’t Want A Ceasefire

A significant share of the Russian public, including veterans of the special operation, are thought to be against any ceasefire since they’d consider it to be stopping halfway instead of finishing the job after all the sacrifices that were paid to get this far. The authorities are sensitive to public opinion on the conflict, especially from veterans, so their opposition to this might be taken into consideration more than outside observers expect and could thus push Putin a lot closer to rejecting a ceasefire than most other factors.

5. Putin Might Really Believe That Trump Is Bluffing

And finally, the most decisive factor might be that Putin truly believes that Trump is bluffing about “escalating to de-escalate”, whether economically-financially through the strict enforcement of secondary sanctions against India, China, etc., and/or militarily by going all-in backing Ukraine. If that’s the case, then it follows that Putin only entertained negotiations to see whether he could achieve his maximum goals through diplomatic means, absent which he’d continue pursuing them militarily.

There’s also the chance that Putin agrees to a ceasefire, which could be explained in the following ways:

1. Russia Wants To Avert Disproportionate Dependence On China

Trump’s tweet last Friday suggested that he plans strict secondary sanctions enforcement against India and China if Putin rejects a ceasefire, which could lead to the first complying and thus placing Russia in the position where it would become much more dependent on the second. Russia has thus far relied on India as its friendly counterbalance vis-a-vis China, but if Putin is informed that this might no longer be the case if Russia keeps fighting, then he might opt for peace to avoid becoming China’s junior partner.

2. It Also Wants To Beat China To The Chase With The “New Détente”

Putin wouldn’t just be rejecting a ceasefire, but also a “New Détente” with the US, which could lead to China replacing Russia in this arrangement if Trump travels to China next month like the latest reports claim and then negotiates a deal for ending their trade war. The recalibrated triangulation that might follow wouldn’t be in Russia’s interests, especially if the US gets China to comply with sanctions in order to coerce Russia into peace, so Putin might agree to a ceasefire in order to avert this scenario as well.

3. The “New Détente” Could Geopolitically Revolutionize The World

Putin might calculate that beating China to the chase with the “New Détente” and becoming more of a strategic partner to the US than the EU are worth pragmatic compromises on Ukraine since these two outcomes could geopolitically revolutionize the world to Russia’s grand strategic advantage. If that’s what he’s thinking, then he might defy popular expectations to boldly agree to a ceasefire, after which publicly financed media would explain the rationale to Russia’s supporters at home and abroad.

4. Additional (& Even Secret) Terms Might Be Attached To The Ceasefire

Building upon the above, additional (and even secret) terms might be attached to the ceasefire for guaranteeing that Western peacekeepers won’t enter Ukraine and that the US won’t maximally rearm it during that period, which Russia could get the US to agree to via creative resource diplomacy. Giving the US privileged access to Russian energy and minerals, especially the rare earth ones that it needs for competing with China, might be all that it takes for Trump to put the kibosh on those two aforesaid fears.

5. Putin Might Really Believe That Trump Is Serious

And finally, the most decisive factor might be that Putin truly believes that Trump is serious about “escalating to de-escalate”, in which case he might prefer not to risk a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis that could hypothetically end with Russia compromising on much more than if it agreed to a ceasefire. Putin is a pragmatist who prefers managing tensions instead of exacerbating them, with the only recent exception being the decision to use the Oreshniks as explained here, so he might take Trump up on this.

Everyone will soon find out whether or not Putin agrees to a ceasefire, but whichever decision he makes, the five reasons that were shared for each scenario would compellingly explain his choice. It’s anyone’s guess what he’ll do since each scenario’s arguments are persuasive and he knows that this is his most fateful decision since the special operation. Putin might therefore ask their respective Kremlin proponents to debate amongst themselves in front of him one last time before making up his mind.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/will-putin-agree-ceasefire

Beijing Fumes Over BlackRock's Panama Port Deal With CK Hutchison

 China's top office on Hong Kong affairs reposted sharp criticism of Hong Kong-based conglomerate CK Hutchison Holdings Ltd.'s deal with a BlackRock-led consortium to purchase Panama Canal ports. The commentary from the local paper Ta Kung Pao cited netizens who called the billionaire founder of the holdings company "spineless" and questioned which "side he should stand on," according to Bloomberg.

It said that social media users have accused the conglomerate founded by billionaire Li Ka-shing of "spineless groveling," ignoring China's interests and "selling out all Chinese people" in the quick deal announced last week.

...

Faced with such a major event and a matter of great justice, the relevant companies should think twice, think carefully about the nature and crux of the issue, and think carefully about what position and side they should stand on," the commentary said. -BBG

Last week, the BlackRock-led consortium agreed to purchase a controlling stake in CK Hutchison's Panama ports for $19 billion. The Trump administration had highly publicized the Chinese-owned ports as a national security risk to US supply chains and the US military. Additionally, Panama holds a strategic position for Trump as he begins to revive hemispheric defense across the Americas.

David Blennerhassett, an analyst at Quiddity Advisors, noted that the BlackRock deal with CK Hutchison is a "massive complex deal, one that may take the better part of 2025 to complete; therefore gyrations in the share price will occur as deal specifics and various regulatory approvals are addressed."

On Friday, CK Hutchison shares dropped 7% in Hong Kong trading.

Local paper Ta Kung Pao continued: "Faced with such a major event and a matter of great justice, the relevant companies should think twice, think carefully about the nature and crux of the issue, and think carefully about what position and side they should stand on."

Bloomberg noted the port deal "involves only overseas assets" and is "unlikely to need Beijing's sign-off." 

Bloomberg Intelligence infrastructure analyst Denise Wong said the port deal is "widely perceived as commercially favorable for the company, valuing the port assets at the higher end of the industry range."

CK Hutchison's market capitalization has only increased by $5 billion following last week's initial news release—just a fraction of the $19 billion the firm is expected to receive when the port deal is completed.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/beijing-fumes-over-blackrocks-panama-port-deal-ck-hutchison

Akebia price target raised to $6 from $4 at Piper Sandler

 Piper Sandler raised the firm's price target on Akebia (AKBA) to $6 from $4 and keeps an Overweight rating on the shares

https://www.tipranks.com/news/the-fly/akebia-price-target-raised-to-6-from-4-at-piper-sandler

Pfizer’s Pipeline Pruning Ends Early-Stage STING Trial

 

Pfizer was studying PF-07820435, an orally available agonist of the STING protein, for solid tumors.

Pfizer has terminated a Phase I trial of its investigational STING therapy in advanced solid tumors, according to an update to the study’s clinicaltrials.gov page on Thursday.

The move to discontinue the trial of PF-07820435 was based on “strategic business reasons,” according to the webpage. “The decision was not based on any safety and/or efficacy concerns.”

BioSpace has reached out to Pfizer to confirm the discontinuation and will update this space accordingly.

The Phase I trial was testing PF-07820435, with or without the PD-1 inhibitor sasanlimab, in nine patients with confirmed diagnoses of solid tumors. The main objective of the study was to establish the safety of PF-07820435 and detect early signals of efficacy, as well as determine the drug’s recommended dose for further studies. The study was initiated in February last year.

STING, which stands for “stimulator interferon genes,” is a protein that plays a central role in a patient’s anti-cancer immune response by activating type I interferons and other inflammatory players. An orally available drug, PF-07820435 belongs to a class of drugs called STING agonists, which work by triggering the STING pathway and promoting immune activity against cancer cells.

As of this writing, PF-07820435 remains on the pharma’s pipeline page.

If Pfizer does eventually decide to completely drop PF-07820435, it will be the latest casualty in the pharma’s push to trim its pipeline and refine its business strategy.

In December 2024, Pfizer turned its back on Sangamo Therapeutics and its gene therapy candidate giroctocogene fitelparvovec, which the companies were previously developing for hemophilia A. Phase III data released in July 2024 showed that 84% of patients treated with giroctocogene fitelparvovec maintained factor VIII activity above 5%, and majority achieved factor VIII levels greater than 15% of normal.

Pfizer and Sangamo were supposed to file a Biologics License Application for giroctocogene fitelparvovec this year. The termination of the companies’ partnership will take effect on April 21, after which the pharma will transition the hemophilia A program back to Sangamo.

Last month, Pfizer announced it was pulling its hemophilia B gene therapy Beqvez from markets worldwide—a decision the company pinned on “the limited interest patients and their doctors have demonstrated in hemophilia gene therapies.”

Pfizer, in September 2024, likewise withdrew Oxbryta, an oral hemoglobin S polymerization inhibitor that won the FDA’s approval in 2019 for sickle cell disease. The drug has since been linked to a higher occurrence of complications and death.

https://www.biospace.com/business/pfizers-pipeline-pruning-ends-early-stage-sting-trial

FDA Makes Flu Vaccine Recommendations Without Convening Advisors

 

The recommendations were made in a closed session with representatives from CBER, the CDC and Department of Defense.

The FDA on Thursday released the list of virus strains to be included in influenza vaccines for the upcoming 2025-2026 flu season.

These strain recommendations were made in a closed, interagency meeting with several representatives from the agency’s Center for Biologics Evaluation (CBER) and Research and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as well as one attendee from the Department of Defense. The government experts backed the use of trivalent shots for an H1N1, an H3N2, and a Victoria-lineage subtype, using standard industrial production, as per a brief meeting summary.

Traditionally, strain recommendations are voted on by the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), a panel of external experts that the agency convenes periodically to review the literature on vaccines and make non-binding recommendations to the regulator. Members of the VRBPAC are what the agency calls “science-oriented professionals” and are outside experts in their respective fields. Panelists typically include statisticians, public health experts, physicians and researchers.

Late last month, however, news broke that the FDA had cancelled without explanation the VRBPAC meeting where panelists were scheduled to vote on the flu vaccine strains. The Committee was originally scheduled to convene on Thursday. A separate subcommittee meeting had also been cancelled, a VRBPAC member told Reuters at the time.

The regulator has forwarded these recommendations to companies that manufacture FDA-approved flu vaccines. The agency expects supply to be “adequate and diverse” for the coming season, according to the meeting summary. Influenza, a vaccine-preventable but highly transmissible respiratory condition, last month hit its highest level in the U.S. since 2015, according to CDC data. Rates have since gone down but remain “elevated nationally,” as per the agency.

In his confirmation hearing last week, Marty Makary, whose nomination for FDA commissioner is up for full Senate vote soon, showed lukewarm support for the VRBPAC. Makary promised that under his leadership, the vaccine advisors would be able to continue convening, though he did not commit specifically to rescheduling the canceled meeting.

Makary also noted that he would “re-evaluate which topics deserve a convening of” the VRBPAC, “and which may not require a convening.”

Vaccine advisors for the CDC also had their meeting postponed last month. The experts were supposed to discuss immunization recommendations for various infectious diseases, including influenza. Also on their agenda were new vaccine formulations, including Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and GSK’s meningococcal shot Penmenvy.

These high-level meeting disruptions follow the confirmation of vaccine critic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

https://www.biospace.com/policy/fda-makes-flu-vaccine-recommendations-without-convening-advisors