Search This Blog

Friday, June 27, 2025

Mamdani’s rap video played during live interview: ‘Didn’t think it would be on CNN’

 That was not music to his ears.

Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani’s 2019 rap video reached a national audience Thursday night — during an incredibly awkward moment on a live CNN interview that left the New York City mayoral hopeful visibly uncomfortable.

Mamdani appeared on “Erin Burnett OutFront” and the eponymous host used the C-grade hip-hop video as an introduction to the 33-year-old lefty pol who performed under the name “Mr. Cardamom.”

A shirtless Zohran Mamdani wears an apron during a 2019 rap video.

The Queens assemblyman grimaced and flinched as the video began to play — attempting to laugh off the reminder of his blush-inducing attempt at a music career.

“Once you do it, it’s out there,” Burnett said to Mamdani.

“It’s there. Didn’t think it was going to be on CNN,” Mamdani said through a wincing smile.

Burnett then pressed Mamdani, offering him a chance to respond to critics who suggest he is “not ready now” to be mayor of the Big Apple.

“I would say a campaign offers a glimpse into what an administration would look like, and we built a campaign the likes of which the city has not seen in a long time,” Mamdani replied, eliding Mr. Cardamom’s performance entirely.

Mamdani dances to the song during a portion of the video.
A group of children stand in the food truck during the rap video.

Mamdani’s vanilla rhetoric Thursday was a far cry from the spicy bars he would drop under his sobriquet — including some songs which gave outright endorsement of groups who supported the terror group Hamas.

In the 2017 track “Holy Land Five,” the presumptive Democratic mayoral candidate praised five men — known as the “Holy Land Five” — from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development who were convicted in 2008 of donating more than $12 million to Hamas.

“My love to the Holy Land Five. You better look ‘em up,” Mamdani as Mr. Cardamom sang in a song called “Salam.”

The Queens assemblyman grimaced and flinched as the video began to play — attempting to laugh off the reminder of his blush-inducing attempt at a music career.

Those five men — Shukri Abu Baker, Mohammad El-Mezain, Ghassan Elashi, Mufid Abdulqader and Abdulrahman Odeh — were convicted by the US Justice Department on 108 counts including supporting terrorism, tax fraud and money laundering.

Mamdani and his paltry rapping chops got an ego-check from a real New York rapper — 50 Cent — who offered the socialist $258,000 to drop out of the race and leave New York for good.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/27/us-news/nyc-mayoral-candidate-zohran-mamdani-rap-video-plays-on-live-cnn-interview/

Apollo economist who ripped Trump admits prez may have ‘outsmarted all of us’ on tariffs

 A prominent Wall Street economist who had slammed President Trump’s tariffs earlier this year now says that the president may have “outsmarted all of us” with his controversial trade policies.

Torsten Sløk, chief economist at investment giant Apollo Global Management, said that while the uncertainty surrounding trade policy has already started to weigh on the economy, Trump could lower tariffs on most of the US trading partners while using the levies to boost federal revenue.

Sløk suggested in a recently posted analysis that the administration’s approach may be more strategic than previously thought.

The optimistic outlook stands in stark contrast to his earlier position.

President Trump may have “outsmarted all of us” with his tariff policies, according to a senior Wall Street analyst.AP

In April, Sløk warned that Trump’s tariffs could trigger a recession by summer, particularly harming American small businesses and potentially halting the flow of goods from China to the US, leading to layoffs and a broader economic slowdown.

This time around, Sløk suggested that one potential move could be to keep 30% tariffs on Chinese imports while imposing 10% tariffs on all other countries — offering them a 12-month window to reduce non-tariff barriers and liberalize trade access.

“Extending the deadline one year would give countries and US domestic businesses time to adjust to the new world with permanently higher tariffs,” Sløk wrote.

“It would also result in an immediate decline in uncertainty, which would be positive for business planning, employment, and financial markets.”

Beyond calming volatile markets, Sløk notes that such a move could deliver a sizable boost to US government revenue. He estimates the plan could generate $400 billion in annual tax revenue — a figure that could help offset budget deficits without raising domestic taxes.

Torsten Sløk, chief economist at investment giant Apollo Global Management, suggested there may be a method to Trump’s madness.Bloomberg via Getty Images

“This would seem like a victory for the world and yet would produce $400 billion of annual revenue for US taxpayers,” he wrote.

“Trade partners will be happy with only 10% tariffs and US tax revenue will go up. Maybe the administration has outsmarted all of us.”

Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson, told The Post via email: “President Trump was right all along? Many such cases!”

Trump announced on Friday that the US has signed a new trade agreement with China. The full text of the agreement has not been made public, and details remain limited.

Trump said on Friday that the US and China have signed an agreement on trade — though details were scant.AFP via Getty Images

At the same time, the Trump administration faces a looming July deadline as its 90-day pause on tariffs with several global trading partners nears expiration.

Talks are ongoing with 18 nations, including the European Union, Japan, India, Vietnam and Malaysia. Some progress has been reported, such as a framework deal with the UK and early-stage agreements with Vietnam and India, though most deals are not finalized.

If negotiations fall through, the US is prepared to reimpose or raise tariffs. Analysts are skeptical that meaningful deals can be completed on such an aggressive timeline, warning that most trade pacts typically require years of negotiation.

With uncertainty mounting, the administration may push discussions beyond the July cutoff — possibly into early September — while attempting to stabilize global trade relationships.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/27/business/top-economist-says-trump-may-have-outsmarted-all-of-us-on-tariffs/

Standing up to bullying, unscientific transgender activist mob

 by Douglas Murray

Almost no one does wicked things in the knowledge that what they are doing is wicked. It is a truth that should be universally acknowledged that in order to do something truly evil, a person needs to believe that what they are doing is good.

Until somebody steps in and says “no.”

This week there was an extraordinary development in one of the great medical and social scandals of our time.

Alex Byrne is a professor of philosophy at MIT. This week he outed himself as one of the authors of the review published last month by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Or rather he outed himself after being hounded and exposed by demonic maniacs online.

The review goes over treatments of so-called “gender dysphoria” in minors.

The fact that the authors of the DHHS review even tried to remain anonymous tells us a lot about the toxicity of this whole debate.

The review itself is considerate and moderate. It weighs up the actual evidence and simply suggests that American authorities should align with the emerging consensus among experts and politicians in Europe. Which is that things have been done in the name of treating “gender dysphoria” are a medical and ethical nightmare.

For over a decade now, the “be kind” brigade has been insisting that “trans” should be the next civil rights issue of our age.

No less a graveyard of thought than Time magazine had a cover in 2014 saying that transgender issues should be “America’s next civil rights frontier.”

That is a very loaded way to present a complex issue.

After all, talk about “civil rights” brings two particular struggles to mind. The first is the struggle to ensure that ethnic minorities — in particular African-Americans — have equal rights to everyone else in the United States. That issue was addressed and answered by force of moral argument six decades ago.

The second issue that it brings up is the fight for gay rights, which also started some six decades ago. Since that time, the moral argument of the gay rights movement has also been accepted.

Nobody today wants to be a bigot who removes rights from black Americans or gay people.

But by presenting the complex issue of trans as the inevitable next step in a campaign for ever more rights, our societies in the West took a mad turn.

After all, the acceptance of other arguments were based on the idea that the people getting their rights were equals — and that society would not need to change itself or alter its fundamentals in order to grant these rights.

The moral force of both movements were founded on the basis of “Just like us.” And that is how they succeeded.

The “trans-rights” movement, by contrast, turned everything completely on its heads. They insisted not just that some people feel that they have been born in the wrong body, but that nobody is born with any discernible biological sex.

They insisted that because some people feel a confusion about their sexual identity nobody has a fixed biological identity. That — as some of us said from the start — was madness.

It would be like the gay rights movement saying “We’re here, we’re queer — and as a result there is no difference between men and women.” I doubt the gay rights cause would have succeeded if that was the track that campaigners chose.

But that was where the trans movement went. And of course the landmine which they trod on — and which was gone along with for far too long — was the explosive issue of children.

As the DHHS review notes, the whole idea of “gender affirming care” (note how manipulative that phrase is) was based on unbelievably weak evidence.

Even before you get to issues of life-changing surgery, there was the imposition of “puberty blockers.” These could be handed out after minimal consultation to any child who simply felt concern about the onset of puberty and worried about the changes to their body. They were handed out with no long-term studies of their effects.

Too few professionals warned that these medications could cause lifelong sexual disfunction, infertility and much more. The ones that did raise alarms or even questions were hounded by the dementors of our age — both online and off.

But how did anyone think a child could make an informed decision about such a measure?

Studies from Sweden, the Netherlands, Britain and other countries have confirmed what many of us said, which is that young people — including those who might grow up to just be gay — would be “trans-ed” by the health industry. And live to deeply regret it.

“Gay conversion therapy” may have become a taboo. But converting gay people into approximations of the opposite sex became deemed “progressive.”

We were told that if a child who had “gender dysphoria” was not medicated with cross-sex hormones, or did not have a double-mastectomy then a range of things would happen. We were told that “trans children” (another fallacious category) would “kill themselves.” Or that any criticism of such procedures was “disappearing” or even “genociding” trans people.

I have lost count of the number of American parents I have spoken to who were told by doctors that they had to “trans” their child and were given the slogan if, say, the child was a biological male, “Would you rather have a trans daughter or a dead son?”

Parents were literally bulldozed into agreeing to life-altering surgeries and medical experiments being run on their children.

Now a smidgen of sanity has been brought to the debate.

Future generations will look back at this period and marvel at what we allowed. They will coo with amazement that we gave life-altering drugs and performed life-altering operations on young people not old enough to vote, drive or drink alcohol.

But we can already tell why it happened. It happened because pseudo-science was waved by crazed progressives bullies, who in the name of “kindness” did things that were wicked beyond words.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/26/opinion/standing-up-to-bullying-unscientific-transgender-activist-mob/

Cuomo staying on NYC mayoral election ballot — as critics slam ex-gov as ‘spoiler’

 Andrew Cuomo is staying on the New York City mayoral election ballot — a move that prompted critics to slam the ex-governor as a “spoiler” candidate.

Sources confirmed that Cuomo will not decline to run on an independent ballot line, ahead of a Friday deadline to pull his name from the November ballot.

Cuomo’s defiant stance comes after his stunning loss to socialist contender Zohran Mamdani in Tuesday’s Democratic primary.

Andrew Cuomo giving a concession speech at his mayoral primary election night event.
Andrew Cuomo will not decline to run on an independent ballot line, sources confirmed.John Angelillo/UPI/Shutterstock

The former governor conceded Mamdani’s win that night, but played coy on whether he would continue to run on his “Fight and Deliver” ballot line in the general election.

A campaign source Friday confirmed that Cuomo — who faced a deadline of 5 p.m. to effectively withdraw from November’s ballot and growing calls to drop out — will not decline his independent line.

It remains unclear whether Cuomo will actually mount an active general election campaign.

Even if he doesn’t, staying on the general election ballot could siphon votes from Mayor Eric Adams, who will also be running on an independent line.

“If Cuomo stays in the race, he splits the anti-Mamdani vote and helps Mamdani,” said state Conservative Party chairman Gerard Kassar, a Dyker Heights resident.

“He’s playing the spoiler — 100 percent. He has no chance of winning and only takes votes from Adams and Curtis,” Kassar said, referring to GOP nominee Curtis Sliwa.

Zohran Mamdani and Brad Lander at a New York City mayoral primary election party.
Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks on stage with fellow candidate Comptroller Brad Lander at his primary election party.AP

Lawyer Jim Walden is running as an independent candidate in the general election, too.

Cuomo pulled a similar maneuver during his last stinging electoral defeat in 2002 — when he was trounced in the Democratic gubernatorial primary by Carl McCall.

He backed McCall in the general election that year, but stayed on the Liberal party line. 

https://nypost.com/2025/06/27/us-news/andrew-cuomo-staying-on-nyc-mayoral-election-ballot/