Tag: strait of hormuz
Hannity Resumes Coverage Of Iran War -- And Urges More 'Credit' For Trump

Hannity Resumes Coverage Of Iran War -- And Urges More 'Credit' For Trump

Sean Hannity, an avid hawk and sycophant to President Donald Trump, had largely abandoned discussions of the floundering Iran war in recent weeks. But on Wednesday night, he engaged with the conflict on his Fox primetime show for the first time since late July — and lamented that Trump is not getting sufficient “credit” for his purported success there.

Trump’s administration has spent the past several months in negotiations premised around the U.S. giving Iran sufficient economic benefits to convince them to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, with the Iranian nuclear program that was theoretically the crux of Trump’s decision to launch the war in the first place relegated to nebulous future discussions. With those negotiations apparently going nowhere and Trump himself moving on from them, Hannity has decided to move straight to celebrating Trump’s purported victory.

“Under President Trump’s strong leadership, America is once again leading on the world stage,” Hannity introduced the segment. “By the way, it never gets credit — Iran will never have a nuclear weapon thanks to Donald Trump. Does anyone ever give him credit for that?” (Then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard submitted testimony in March that Iran had no nuclear enrichment capability, and a U.S. intelligence assessment reportedly found in May that the war had not affected “the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon.”)

Hannity claimed that “Iran has suffered yet another economic setback” via the United Arab Emirates’ announcement that it was cutting off trade ties, saying that Trump “expressed optimism over the situation with Iran” earlier that day. He then aired a clip in which Trump responded to a question about whether he planned to reopen stalled negotiations with Iran by saying: “Maybe at some point, but right now, I think the situation is so good, but maybe at some point. Look, it's very simple.”

The Fox host added, “They are breaking financially. But Iran is not the only regime that the president is holding to account. As he indicated, a meeting with North Korean supreme leader — he's back — little rocket man, Kim Jong-un could come later this year.”

Hannity did not explain how Trump was “holding to account” the North Korean regime by gifting its dictator with a personal meeting after ordering the curtailment of planned U.S.-South Korean joint naval exercises on the grounds that those exercises were “very insulting” to Kim, who the president said “likes me.”

The host then turned to Kevin Corke — who is nominally a news correspondent — to deliver an upbeat report on Trump’s “busy” foreign policy with Iran, North Korea, and Canada. Corke concluded: “And I want you to consider this, Sean, consider all of that that I just shared and compare it to the previous president. And it is unmistakable that we have a president now who is clearly very hard at work for all of us, Sean.”

Hannity’s on-air push to attack Iran reportedly helped sway Trump’s decision to launch the war in February. The Fox host had promised his audience that the fight would be quick and easy, predicting on his March 30 radio show that “it’s going to be on the verge of wrapping up no later than three weeks from today.”

But since July 23, when Hannity predicted Trump was about to order a massive assault on Iran — only for Trump to pull back — the host had pulled back his coverage of the war. Hannity’s only extensive discussion of the Iran war on his Fox show between that segment and Wednesday’s show came during an interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu he aired on July 28, according to a review of the Nexis database.

While Hannity was addressing the ongoing war in the Middle East only in passing mentions on his Fox show, Trump again threatened a massive attack before again backing down; transits through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital channel for global trade, remained limited; Iran and Oman closed in on a deal that would impose transit fees for passage through the strait; and reports circulated about poor living conditions on a U.S. aircraft carrier that were due in part to successful Iranian strikes on a U.S. base in Bahrain.

Meanwhile, Fox's Hannity devoted 11 segments and 46 minutes of coverage to the WNBA between July 28 and August 19, according to a Media Matters review.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Is The Trump Administration Using Media Leaks To Manipulate Oil Markets?

Is The Trump Administration Using Media Leaks To Manipulate Oil Markets?

The Trump administration on Wednesday appears to have leaked a story to its favorite Iran war stenographer at Axios that the military has created a secret shipping corridor out of the Strait of Hormuz, helping to escort 15 to 20 oil tankers through the narrow passageway per day.

Axios’ Barak Ravid reported: “The U.S.-led operation is mitigating one of the most painful aspects of the war: the disruption to oil supplies that sent crude prices soaring. While the amount of oil coming out of the strait is still below pre-war levels, it is making a discernible difference in global supplies, officials say.”

U.S. officials claimed to Axios that the operation was allowing the movement of “[a]bout 10 million barrels of oil a day.”

Commodity experts, however, are more than skeptical that this secretive operation has taken place, and wonder if this—like apparent past attempts by the Trump administration—is just an effort to manipulate oil prices to try to bring down the cost of gasoline.

“That’s a lot of oil, and much more than we’re currently seeing,” oil commodity expert Rory Johnson wrote in a post on X on Wednesday, adding that oil trackers have only seen 5 million barrels of oil leaving the strait per day, half of what the government claimed to Axios.

“We’re likely undercounting actual transits, but it feels like a stretch that they’re managing to get *double* that volume out entirely undetected—no sign of loadings, or where these ships may be landing on the other end,” he continued.

Tanker Trackers, a maritime intelligence firm that analyzes the amount of oil being shipped globally, also cast doubt on the Axios report.

“Maybe U.S. officials mean ten million barrels per convoy transfer and not per day. Industry consensus is much lower than that,” the company wrote in a post on X, giving the Trump administration the benefit of the doubt that they do not deserve.

If the Trump administration were using Axios to manipulate the oil markets, it wouldn’t be the first time.

Early on in the war, Ravid frequently reported right before oil futures markets opened that a peace deal was imminent, which would lead oil commodity prices to fall. However, they’d typically spike right back up when it became clear that there was no peace deal to be had.

Nearly six months later, there is still no resolution to the war, with Iranian leaders continuing to use the Strait of Hormuz to inflict pain on the global economy in the hopes they can get Trump to fold on his demands that they drop their nuclear ambitions.

Indeed, as the persistently high price of fuel is spiking inflation, Trump’s approval rating has fallen and is threatening his Republican Party with massive midterm losses.

Even Trump is showing public signs of frustration, threatening to “bomb the shit out of” countries that cross him.

What’s different about Axios’ report now is that it seems traders have wised up to the apparent manipulation efforts.

Oil prices rose again on Thursday. The average price per gallon of gasoline in the U.S. is now at $4.10, according to AAA—up nearly $1 per gallon from a year ago.

Johnson, the oil commodity expert, revisited Axios’ story again on Thursday morning, saying he is even more convinced now that the report isn’t accurate.

“What’s fascinating is just how aligned ~every ship tracker is right now on Hormuz exit flow,” Johnson wrote in a post on X. “There’s a *strong* incentive for someone to break from the pack and to be the tracker who confirms the WH numbers. And yet.”

And yet, indeed.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos




The World's Most Powerful Man, Still Stuck In America's Most Stupid War

The World's Most Powerful Man, Still Stuck In America's Most Stupid War

As the "memorandum of understanding" that was supposed to herald the end of Donald Trump's war on Iran expires, so may the American public's patience with his tragic clowning on the global stage. The world's leaders lost patience with Trump long ago, except for American adversaries like Vladmir Putin and Xi Jinping, who benefit enormously from his incompetence and malice.

What the expiration exposes, as if everyone had not already worked this out, is that Trump's impetuous warmaking has boxed the United States into a diplomatic and military cul-de-sac, leaving us and our allies in a worse position without achieving any of his stated goals.

The only initiative that Trump appears capable of accomplishing is to make a truly historic debacle even worse — by threatening, as he told a Fox News reporter, to "bomb the shit" out of our allies in the Gulf state of Oman, who have tried to serve as a negotiating conduit with Iran. Evidently Trump is frustrated by the Omani inability to solve his self-imposed conundrum, and angry that, like our other allies in the region, they feel growing pressure to find a way to open the Strait of Hormuz. They were probably not comforted to see Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth puffing himself up to declare that we can keep the strait blocked "indefinitely."

Hegseth's vow would appear to contradict Trump's frequent public lying about that waterway, which he has described as "open" thanks to the U.S. military presence. Neither Hegseth's boasting nor Trump's prevaricating has assuaged the pain of rising energy costs for everyone, including American consumers. As voters, they must be wondering how best to punish this feckless and foolish leadership, whose pitiful record now includes their failure to provide decent living conditions for our sailors on the ships patrolling the Mideast waterways on extended missions.

Bereft of any strategic capacity on his own, and surrounded by clowns and frauds in top national security positions, the president of the United States, the most powerful man in the world, can find no way out of the ongoing crisis that he alone created.

The end of the ceasefire, according to the White House, will shortly result in additional "crushing" sanctions against Iran, which will feel familiar to the Iranians and seems unlikely to accomplish anything beyond that same tactic's failure so far. Nor are any of the other choices available to Trump very promising.

He can start bombing Iran again, which doesn't seem to move the regime toward meeting any of Trump's demands. He can try to resume negotiations, with the full knowledge that the Iranians are not going to meet his maximal demands on their disarmament and nuclear program. Or he can simply walk away, as Nate Swanson, an Iran expert at the Atlantic Council, hinted Trump might do — and then try to explain to the nation and the world why we wasted the lives of Iranians and Americans, as well as a vast treasure and a military stockpile, for nothing.

Like Trump himself, we have no idea what will come next in this disastrous misadventure. We do know that the Russians and the Chinese, our authoritarian adversaries, have profited mightily from this president's bumbling, stumbling, megalomaniacal conduct of foreign and economic policy.

What we also know is that this diplomatic dead end was perfectly predictable by anyone who has paid attention. Without any particular expertise in Iranian or Gulf affairs, I predicted it last April, when an earlier ceasefire expired and Trump sent his envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, to negotiate with the Iranians.

"Even if Donald Trump had actually written The Art of the Deal' (he didn't write a word of that bestseller, his first big fraud), it would be foolish to expect that the president or his hapless envoys can deliver a viable agreement with the Iranians anytime soon. Taken together, they lack all the qualities required to achieve the complex diplomatic resolution required in this crisis — like the (nuclear) agreement that Trump so cavalierly discarded in 2017...

"The problem isn't only that Trump and his team of morons neglected to fashion any plan for their sudden urge to attack a faraway country with a million men under arms, a big weapons arsenal, and a long history of ideological resilience. That was a historic and particularly stupid mistake, characteristic of Trump's shallow intellect — but now, after inflicting massive damage on Iran, the world and our own economy, he and his government are evidently stuck in the quagmire they created."

In these circumstances, being right is seriously overrated. I would far rather have been wrong.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024). The paperback version, with a new Afterword, is available wherever books are sold.

Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Donald Trump’s rhetoric on Iran oscillates wildly from day to day, sometimes from hour to hour. But Trump has run out of military options that don’t involve huge war crimes, so we seem to be heading for a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz on Iran’s terms. And that includes the imposition of de facto tolls, whatever they are called.

There is no mystery about Trump’s surrender: He’s desperate to end the war because he is paying a steep political price for high gasoline prices, and the midterms are only four and a half months away.

But can Trump rehabilitate his standing with American voters by throwing in the towel? Probably not, for both economic and political reasons. I would argue that there are four points of slippage between Trump’s political goals and what is likely to happen.

The state of the Strait: Even if the war is truly over, it will take time to return world oil supplies to normal levels. First, there has been substantial damage to the Persian Gulf’s infrastructure, which will take months, if not years, to repair. Second, many oil tankers are now in the wrong place and it will take weeks or months to move them. Third, some shipping channels are at risk from stray mines. Lastly, the world met the Hormuz crisis in part by running down oil inventories, which will now need to be rebuilt.

It’s true that a surge in Iranian oil exports has begun thanks to the lifting of the U.S. blockade. This will add to global oil supplies but will also strengthen the regime. But despite this surge of Iranian shipments, prices of oil futures — promises to buy or sell oil on specified dates — indicate that the oil markets expect oil prices to decline at only a slow rate for the rest of this year:

west texas intermediate oil price

Rockets and feathers: There is a well-documented pattern to how the price of gasoline responds to changes in the price of crude oil. When there is a global shock that causes the price of crude oil to soar, gasoline prices rise like a rocket. But when the crisis is over and crude prices plunge, the price of gas declines only gradually ­— it drifts down like feathers.

Will that happen this time? Gasoline and, to a lesser extent, diesel, have fallen considerably in price from their peak:

oil price

They are, however, still well above their prewar levels, and by more than you would expect given the commonly used rule of thumb:

$10 on price of crude = $0.25 on price of gasoline

Crude oil prices are $10-$15 a barrel higher than they were prewar, which would point to gasoline prices $0.25-$0.37 higher per gallon. Yet gasoline is currently almost $1 a gallon higher than it was before the war.

So if the “rockets and feathers” pattern continues to apply, gasoline prices will be elevated for months to come, thwarting Trumpist hopes of quick political relief from capitulating to Iran.

Prices beyond gasoline: As you can see in the chart above, the war on Iran sent the price of diesel fuel soaring by significantly more than the price of gasoline. Unlike gasoline, which is mainly purchased by consumers, diesel is mainly used by businesses, for trucking and industrial uses. So the surge in diesel prices led to a surge in business costs rather than a direct burden on consumers.

True, businesses do eventually pass higher costs on to consumers. The key word, however, is “eventually.” This means that there is probably substantial Iran war-induced inflation still in the pipeline.

Nor were soaring prices of diesel the only cost the war imposed on businesses. The Persian Gulf is normally a key supplier of many chemicals, whose prices soared when the Strait of Hormuz was closed. For example, the price of urea, a key fertilizer with industrial uses as well, temporarily rose by 75 percent when the Strait was closed. Again, some of the effect of these cost shocks still hasn’t hit consumer prices.

Moreover, the economy is delivering inflationary shocks independent of the war. Notably, the AI/datacenter boom has driven a rapid rise in electricity prices and huge increases in the prices of memory chips, which are used in almost all consumer electronics, from smartphones to laptops to game consoles. The AI boom has also pushed up interest rates on mortgages and consumer loans. Oh, and Trump’s cuts to Obamacare subsidies are causing many Americans’ health insurance costs to soar.

So while consumers are getting some relief at the gas pump, they’re facing persistent sticker shock on many other goods. It’s safe to predict that consumers won’t be in a celebratory mood on D-I [defeat by Iran] Day. Instead, they are likely to feel that any claims of victory are Pyrrhic at best.

The cost of broken promises: We have just endured the second big gasoline price shock of the past five years. The previous shock, during the Biden years, briefly sent average prices of gasoline above $5 a gallon. Like the recent price spike, the 2022 run-up in gas prices was largely caused by a war — the war between Russia and Ukraine. That wasn’t a war that the U.S. president launched on a whim. Regardless, the price of gasoline fell rapidly after June 2022:

Inflation also fell rapidly, especially if you exclude the price of shelter, which as measured tends, for technical reasons, to lag far behind market prices:

So what did cheaper gas and rapid disinflation without a recession do for perceptions about President Biden’s handling of the economy? Almost nothing. The Roper Center published an analysis of trends in Biden’s economic approval rating, and found hardly any improvement when gas prices and overall inflation plunged:

You may argue that this was unfair because Biden was punished for a global inflation shock that wasn’t his fault. Furthermore, his overall economic management was in fact very good. In fact, that’s what I have argued, and a majority of Americans now say that the economy was better under Biden than under Trump. However, that argument is beside the point for analyzing the effect of the Trump surrender. The point, instead, is that once a leader has lost the public’s economic trust, that trust doesn’t come back just because gasoline prices have receded.

I would add that it may be especially hard for the Trumpists to make the case that things have turned around when they were never willing to admit that anything was wrong in the first place, insisting even as prices soared that we were living in a “golden age.”

So will Trump’s surrender to Iran rescue him and his party from a blue wave in November? It’s very unlikely. I suggest they find themselves some lifejackets.

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former professor at MIT and Princeton who now teaches at the City University of New York's Graduate Center. From 2000 to 2024, he wrote a column for The New York Times. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Paul Krugman.


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World